From: O'Regan, Emlyn (Emlyn.ORegan@actew.com.au)
Date: Fri May 21 1999 - 03:35:06 MDT
>This is how I have always imagined it. I would very much like to hear more
>of
>your thinking on this. I have always seen my future nano-self as a vehicle
>fully immersed in an omni-directional, fully synaesthetic continuum. A
>continuum that morphs and changes based on input from any imaginable source
>as
>well as how my internal constructs wish that data to be presented. Imagine
>the
>possibility of having 'sexual' and fully orgasmic experiences while one's
>mini-probes explores the unique topography of a new planet? I can't think of
>a
>better way to discover the unique nuances of a new geology as one would a new
>lover.
>
>Paul Hughes
>http://www.i2.to/
I love the idea of being able to tailor your senses as you see fit in
real time. Experiencing the world primarily through tactile senses, or
sight, adding "erotic sense" to the way you experience the mundane -
Fantastic!
This raises the problem of communication difficulties. This is not a new
idea, but one worthy in the context I think. We communicate through a
shared view of the universe, common experience - most communication
problems seem to stem from different, clashing, incompatible views.
If we are all tailoring our senses independently, choosing our view of
reality to match our moods, personalities, utilitarian necessity, or
whatever reasons, we will find it very difficult to exchange information
and ideas. Say that you are seeing infrared, for example, and someone
else is mapping visual range onto their olfactory senses. "That guy
looks a bit hot, with some interesting cool patches around the
extremities, greens and blues, don't you think so?" "No, I think he's
saltier than green, maybe a touch of lime." Or "XDFFrwe eedtfrr fdfsg
dcdsfe dees sa #$%" Or ". *FLASH* Remember!"
Imagine if you have restructured the very way your brain works, and
others have done the same, although in different ways. You start
becoming a whole culture in yourself, with cultural incompatibilities
between each individual. This is already true, but not entirely
debilitating socially. You would even be having communication problems
with your past self, your own memories. If they have come through a set
of sensory filters which have changed radically over time, and have been
processed by differing processing structures, running at differing
speeds, and with varying internal organisation, what could you make of
your past?
This topic has been covered with respect to Transhuman<->human
communication (something about humans and ants), but what about
Transhuman<->Transhuman.
Eliezer said
According to these assumptions, far from being mutually telepathic, the
future may be filled with individuals far more alone than we ever were.
This was on the topic of JBs, but I think it will apply far sooner. From
reading Steve Mann's piece on this list recently, I think he feels the
effects of communication difficulties because of his different view of
reality (although that said, his piece communicated his world
eloquently, and effected me strongly).
I was going to assume that most of you would regard human language as
far too crude for post-singularity entities. I'm learning not to assume
anything on this list. But language is something which binds our varied
personalities, helps our island sanctuaries of self to connect up, by
providing a common ground for communication. Still, it relies heavily on
shared experience for understanding, and the communication seems to be
to a large part illusory, with each party thinking they have
communicated, when in fact neither understands the other (although we
don't get any of that on THIS list, do we).
Of course we are all already quite different, and we already have
communication difficulties (!). I wonder how this will progress.
What kinds of answers are there to these problems?
- Language - crude but (in)effective? Sustain the illusion - we can both
say the word "red", even though our understandings of it would vary
wildly.
- Create universal communication formats, fundamental structures for
ideas and thoughts, which could be interchanged and processed by anyone.
Same drawbacks as normal language, but maybe with less chance of picking
up miscommunication. Plus, I challenge anyone to describe such a format
to any useful degree. Come on, you know you want to...
- Maybe advances in communications technologies and processing power and
understanding of intelligence can get us to a point where a universal
translator can be employed. Perhaps individuals can connect to each
other and use some magical (far off technological) process to tune in to
each others modes of thought, and communicate thusly. But this implies
there is some overall structure to and limitation upon the possible ways
of being sentient, and that they could all be catered for - a dodgy
proposition at best.
- Hunker down in the hills: we can all run off to our respective solar
systems, surround ourselves with mines and armadas, and shoot whatever
moves.
When we say Human, we can get a fuzzy but useful concept of what that
means. But when we say Transhuman, all bets are off. As a grouping noun,
it is about as useful as words like "natural" and "organic" when used to
describe the elements it groups.
There's a real weird world coming, and I can barely wait!
Emlyn
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:03:46 MST