L’idée d’humain « augmenté » suscite des peurs chez certains, qui affirment que cela remet en cause notre identité humaine.
Cependant, à partir de quel moment pouvons-nous dire que nous sommes « augmentés » ? Ne le sommes-nous pas déjà ? Et nul besoin de songer aux derniers accessoires technologiques : cela remonte très loin dans notre histoire !
Toute une série d’articles de presse reprennent régulièrement ce thème vendeur des « robots tueurs d’emplois » : « Les robots, le chômage et les emplois de 2030 » (France Info, 10/05/2015), « Robots au travail : 3 millions d’emplois menacés en France d’ici 2025 » (La Voix du Nord, 25/05/2016)… En même temps, d’autres vont insister sur les nouveaux emplois créés (ingénieur-e-s, technicien-nes…) et soutenir qu’il n’y a pas de crainte à avoir : « Des centaines de milliers d’emplois créés par la robotique » (Monster, 16/04/2015), « La vérité sur les robots destructeurs d’emplois » (Slate, 06/06/2016).
Neo Futurism is a movement of the 21st century and developed in the area of design, Urbanism and architecture. This movement could be seen as a deviation from the postmodern attitude. Neo Futurism represents an idealistic belief in the future better. We can read The Neo Futuristic City Manifesto written by Vito di Bari.
I argued in my 2015 paper “Why it matters that you realize you’re in a Computer Simulation” that if our universe is indeed a computer simulation, then that particular discovery should be commonplace among the intelligent lifeforms throughout the universe. The simple calculus of it all being (a) if intelligence is in part equivalent to detecting the environment (b) the environment is a computer simulation (c) eventually nearly all intelligent lifeforms should discover that their environment is a computer simulation. I called this the Savvy Inevitability. In simple terms, if we’re really in a Matrix, we’re supposed to eventually figure that out.
Qu’est-ce qui différencie le vieillissement d’une maladie, au fond ? Il en a toutes les caractéristiques ! Cette question un brin provocatrice est une invitation à nous interroger sur l’arbitraire de nos catégories.
Fully-realized artificial intelligence has long been the holy grail for daydreamers and forward-thinking inventors alike. We aren’t quite there yet, but modern virtual assistants are making the case that we aren’t so very far off. Whether it’s a feature integrated into your smartphone or a standalone assistant like the Amazon Echo, digital assistants have shown great strides in the ability to recognize and parse your spoken commands and respond to them appropriately.
In movies such as The Terminator, The Matrix and so forth, self-aware AIs come into existence and soon threaten humanity. This thinking is reflected in the arguments by Musk, Hawking and others against creating strong AIs.
There are some amazing robots roving the surface of Mars. However, they are heavily dependent on their human operators. But what if we could provide them with human-like intelligence so that they could find their own way without assistance? What if we could teach them to autonomously deal with completely novel situations? IEET Contributor Danko Nikolic on the 28th of September will answer your questions.
Sometimes it feels like the Internet of Things (or IoT) is a little bit overblown. Maddening commercials like this one try to make it seem like a spiritual revolution for humankind, and you may have seen our thoughts on the emergence of the term “smart” to define objects. Furthermore, the main IoT applications that people actually seem to care about at this point are pretty much FitBits and Nest thermostats-fun Christmas presents, but not exactly groundbreaking technological concepts.
This paper reviews the key factors driving the Independent Core Observer Model Cognitive Architecture for Artificial General Intelligence specific to modeling emotions used to drive motivational and decision making processes in humans; as it relates to or inspires the ICOM motivational systems. Emotions in ICOM are key elements of the ability to be self-motivating and make decisions. Behavioral tuning research case work around motivations in ICOM, as seen in the series 4 ICOM Isolation Studies designed to validate the series 4 model versus series 3 model and used to bench mark as well as tune the ICOM emotional processing core, are presented. Detailed is the reasoning for emotions in ICOM as used as a method of tagging ideas, concepts, and experiences for evaluation. Such emotions are the driving force behind the ICOM system’s subjective experiences.
When we as a global community confront the truly difficult question of considering what is really worth devoting our limited time and resources to in an era marked by such global catastrophe, I always find my mind returning to what the Internet hasn’t really been used for yet—and what was rumored from its inception that it should ultimately provide—an utterly and entirely free education for all the world’s people.
On lit souvent des phrases telles que “Mieux vaut être très humain que transhumain !”, ou “Le transhumanisme n’est pas un humanisme, car il nous déshumanise par définition !”. Et si ces condamnations étaient en fait basées sur une imposture sémantique ?
For a woman who wants to safeguard against fetal brain damage from Zika, the surest protection may be a Zika infection that begins and ends prior to pregnancy—but questions remain about some adult risks.
Secular and reformist Muslims plead that we learn to tell the difference between analyzing ideas and attacking people.
When Islam is at question, members of the American Left and Right race into opposite corners. After the Orlando nightclub massacre, to cite one recent example, conservatives spewed anti-Muslim invective to the point that ordinary American Muslims were afraid to leave home.
Hadrien Pourbahman, étudiant en Master 2 spécialisé en droit de la santé et des biotechnologies, a effectué un stage au sein de l’AFT Technoprog. Cet article synthétise ses travaux et fournit des références pour vous permettre d’approfondir les sujets.
Societal disparity is a hot button topic sure to arouse emotions. Those who currently have or make comparatively more money as always follow heir self-interest and stick to decennia old post cold war talking points best summarized as “anyone who works hard will eventually be successful”. This is clearly a self-validating and wealth consolidating statement and it’s completely understandable from a zero sum perspective. For the lucky few at the top of the economic food chain any compelling statement that “if most people who work hard in life will not be successful”, pretty much means that society is injust and is subject to renegotiation. And we have been at a collective consensus in western society for centuries now that for statistical majorities of the population – society must be just.
Ce parallèle est-il pertinent ? Oui… et non. Dans cet article, nous tenterons d’en cerner les limites. Puis nous expliquerons pourquoi une évolution technologique (dans le cadre du transhumanisme) nous semble largement préférable.
On the 25 of September Marcelo Rinesi published his article ‘The Price for the Internet of Things will be a vague dread of a malicious world’. With this response, I want to take on the implicit challenge he poses. How can we build an internet of things that will not fill us with dread? This article will present my ideas on a ‘transparent smart chargepoint’. Let me explain what I mean by this. ‘Chargepoint’ refers to the device that is designed for charging for electric cars. ‘Smart’ refers to the fact that the chargepoint optimizes the charging process on various variables – such as the price of electricity, the congestion on the electricity grid. ‘Transparent’ means that it is designed to be open as open as possible about the algorithms that run it.
Humanism has become a necessity for Africa and for Africans particularly for young people across the region who are struggling to make sense of life and existence. Youths are critical to any human endeavor because they are the agents of hope, continuity, change and promise. Without young people, any society or initiative will go into extinction. Without young people, there is no future for humanity. So, it is with Africa and the humanist movement in the region.
A classic objection to the radical extension of life is: “But such an extension will lead to an overpopulation crisis!”
The idea is simple: as the resources and space of our planet are not unlimited, if the older generations stop dying and the newer generations continue to be born, then sooner or later, we will run out of both space and resources.
There is now an almost constant stream of articles saying what was politically incorrect to state out loud just 5-8 years ago – Technological Unemployment is certain, it is imminent and ‘something like a basic income’ will be necessary. I have said so much on this societal issue in the last ten years that it quite often feels like an obligatory rehash of the arguments in favor of a basic income. The best and most authoritative arguments are still being voiced by Martin Ford and I suggest everyone to check his level-headed and well researched presentations on the topic. In my understanding Martin blows arguments against out of the water.
Dr. Stephanie Page at the University of Washington talks about why male birth control matters.
The Centers for Disease Control declared June 13 to 19 of 2016 as “National Men’s Health Week.” If it was Women’s Health Week, media experts would be talking a lot about sexual health and, especially, how women can safeguard against ill-timed or unwanted pregnancy. But for guys, pregnancy prevention is not even on the list, which instead emphasizes sleep, tobacco, food choices, and exercise.