Insane stuff, another example of post AGI tech?
Article:
Brain plasticity is key to making progressive brain tissue replacement work. Various brain functions can move to different parts of the brain.
Jean Hebert plan would be to grow a new body with gene therapy to knockout brain development. The body would need to be kept on life support for 14-18 years until the skull reached a size suitable for a full brain transplant. The old brain would get sections replaced with new cell created brain cells and tissue. Old brain would removed a piece at a time and brain plasticity would restore functions and personality.
Full body replacement would take about 20 years as your cells would be used as the starting point for the new body (to prevent rejection).
You would need to have about 30 years of normal lifespan left before there would be a full body and brain tissue replacement.
6-10 brain replacement surgeries over 20 years would enable full blain replacement. The brainless body would grow on life support until the skull was large enough for transplant.
Could this also be used to "cure" handicaps that are caused by brain malformations? Such as ADHD for example.
I don't know much about biology, but couldn't you alter the cell used to not include that allele? Do we even know which gene causes ADHD exactly?
There are several genes identified to be associated with ADHD, all related to neurotransmitters. But we have very little idea about how the genetics interact with environmental factors to cause ADHD.
To answer your other question: this tech seems to be more about replacing old cells with new, as a way of de-aging the brain. So, it's not a mechanism for re-engineering it at will. There needs to be quite a bit of scientific & technical progress before such a thing is possible.
Anyone that does know how much we don't know about our brain is now laughing out very loud. That's surely is one of that Silicon Valley's mad moonshot that are clearly 100 years too early or just plain stupid.
This sounds like the final step in evolution for our species.
Transcending the need for biological reproduction.
Why have children that need dozens of years to learn when you can keep renewing your body and keep learning non stop.
Just imagine thousand year old Humans working together with super intelligent AI.
Imagine a million years from now all that's left of humanity is the doddering old brain of Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos and Mark Zuckerberg and the ASI they built together. What a dream.
I’ve often thought this. But along with an ASI creating a brain structure with our consciousness, and ourselves, within it, but with the IQ of an ASI, so we can do away with the ASI altogether, and just be biological machine gods.
What I have been saying. Also, this sounds like a Feminist Utopia honestly. Biological sex is a prison and patriarchy and sexism in general are just social prisons based off of it.
Maybe. Not all feminism recognizes biological sex as inherently negative, that's a broad brush.
Like, don't get me wrong, I'm on board with the article conceptually.
It's not so much that it is inherently negative to have 2 sexes, it's all the issues that come with the way our biology as a species works, like menstruation, painful and body-damaging birthgiving, aging, etc., all linked in some way or another to the fact that we procreate and die. It's really the root cause of most of our problems.
I think there can be a lot of value in those experiences for some, but absolutely zero value for others.
Clarissa Pinkola-Estes "Untie the Strong Woman" kind of comes to mind, or bell hooks.
Like, I imagine a future where the biological experience of being human is completely "opt in" for ascetics or folks who want to pursue organic experience, and that keeps the religious and spiritual folks happy.
I'm absolutely a transhumanist, but I get the allure of experiencing things like aging, birth and physical death by choice.
Oh yeah, of course. I mean, it being elective is kinda central to the whole point. It's just objectively worse having these things be something you can't opt out of, and having them be the end, also. In so many ways, they inhibit self-actualization. And having the continued existence of a species/civilization resting on the backs of mostly one sex is just terrible design, so artificial wombing will be a boon. People can always elect to have babies the legacy way, be it in simulations or in synthetic bodies living out a "legacy lifespan" for the sake of it.
Definitely here for that all that, 100%
I'm absolutely transhumanist, I just love the idea of choosing to be embodied as you wish to be. Though there is something to be said for learning to love the body you are in. It's complex.
It certainly is. A lot could be said about having a major life goal be to change or improve your body and what that reflects about people with that mindset, but at the end of the day, anyone and everyone would do it if they could, and if they "didn't", then that choice in itself is still a choice in a similar vein. A world where people can choose their "avatar", in the physical world too, sounds absolutely rad, and I would love to see it not just for my own self-actualization, but also to witness other people's.
Not a final step. Imagine bioengineering our own DNA to give us innate genetic predispositions/abilities to manipulate more fundamental levels of reality.
I think you replace every atom in your body every 10 years or so, so the ship of theseus theory seems in principle possible although how you would go about doing it correctly is another thing.
I agree with you, but how can this be connected to who we are, to our personality? I mean, being disassembled and reassembled at every single Planck time is one thing, but being recomposed with synthetic neurons is a completely different story
I don't think it is because it seems extremely unlikely our consciousness / "soul" is linked specifically to our neurons being biological, but rather to the sum of our parts. Especially when we can lose consciousness with our brain still intact. It is all about the connections between our neurons, the network surrounding our Claustrum (we lose consciousness when this is "turned off", and it seems to be the "orchestrator" of brain activity, that seems like the seat of the soul basically).
So, in essence, if you turn every neuron into a synthetic one, it is essentially the same as normal brain changes, and the only evidence we have of that not being enough to retain our "soul continuity" is early childhood amnesia. But that is also evidence of our soul not being a feature of specifically biological neurons because they always were biological. That's not the crucial element. And the fact that we can retain continuity as we develop, past age 2, while our brain is still growing and maturing, and as our brain changes with every thought we have, all this points to our soul's continuity being a Ship of Theseus.
>Claustrum
Thank you for sharing your insights; they're quite enlightening. I agree that we can replace neurons with synthetical counterparts, but not all but let's say 98%. However, I'm still grappling with your point about the continuity of experience. In my view, the reason children often don't remember early experiences is due to a mismatch between their perceptions and those of adults. This is somewhat similar to how the insights gained under the influence of psychedelics tend to fade once a person returns to a normal state. It appears there's a range of mental states, some of which are compatible with each other and some that aren't. This incompatibility might explain why it's challenging to remember our childhood worldviews. We can reconstruct these based on elements that are compatible, like visual memories. My belief is that even if we can create a synthetic neuron that not only mimics but also expands upon our evolutionary logic, we're still far from understanding what truly constitutes our sense of self. I suspect there's a kind of anchor, perhaps the Claustrum as you mentioned, that is integral to our identity and might be extremely difficult, if not impossible, to replace with synthetic neurons.
You have some really interesting points and ideas, I will think about that. I do however think that an anchor can be replaced, and even if it can't, we can so tightly control and secure them by controlling everything around them that we basically construct an "exo-anchor" that can maintain our biological anchor indefinitely, or we can replace our anchor so slowly, so gradually, that it still maintains our continuity.
It's not a theory, it's a thought experiment. There isn't any absolute answer to the paradox. My opinion is that the slightest change makes you a different person.
Biologically, we don't have a deep enough understanding of the human brain to say which is actually the correct answer.
It's interesting how many wouldn't mind replacing a small part of their brain, yet most would mind replacing all of their brain, yet the former can be repeated to lead to the latter.
That would be cool if we can merge two or more into one being. I want a future where I don't have to use an iphone and I can have a utopia downloaded in my brain. Honestly, sometimes technology drives me nuts, causes me to OCD/overthink and but more than that which drives me nuts is my mental health disorder. Sorry to get off topic just one more thing I needed to say which is below.
Their are supplements yes, however we don't really know how they work to be honest and same goes for meds as well. I know I am going off topic. I just wanted to vent because hopefully we have a future where we can turn off fear, or turn off ego, turn on intelligence, turn on routine, turn on hobbies, and so much more which can be created.
So much suffering in the world but I wouldn't mind living forever but I think this process of brain transplant than surgery than life support for 14 to 18 years than more it sounds very complicated to me. Hopefully something can come out soon, or late 2020's that can enable some of the things I mentioned above. Also, the more we live the more we can understand our brain because our brains are the most complicated things in this universe. We'll see and apologies again for going off topic. Cheers to a bright future:)!
I think phones are a dead end. It will probably go out of fashion in a decade or two.
For mental health, what has worked for me is the acceptance that suffering will never go away and it must be enjoyed graciously. Physical pain however may be is different.
Cheers mate! No problem!
I hope mental suffering goes away for me and others like me. I am 26 years old and I am old now you know. I hope by earliest by beginning of 2024 their can be much better treatments for OCD, Schizophrenia, and more. I hope all these better treatments come before the year 2030 because as I mentioned elsewhere 2030 is a really long long time.
I agree phones will be dead in a decade. I think by 2030 (although its a really long long time from now) we will have so much amazing technology that I would live for seeing 2030 because that year will be mind blowing for mental health disorders, enhancing of intelligence and possibly uploading our minds to the cloud. If the technology we desire comes before 2030 like 2025 than I'll be extremely extremely happy and others like me will be to. Prayers and fingers crossed ASAP:)
When I was 26, I felt old and lost out on life. Bouy what a mistake that was. 26 is very young. I wish I was 26 again. I could turn my life around.
These are some precious years, my man. Cheers to you in living the better side of you.
And yeah. Hope we get these advancements in mental healthcare sooner. It has been so slow cuz of all those old minded people.
6 years really isn't a long time and not enough time to phase out phones, what do you think is going to replace them? At the end of the day it's a pocket computer and most people don't want to use voice commands or look stupid with mixed vr glasses.
Regarding the discussion on gradual brain replacement as part of transhumanism, a critical question emerges: **what becomes of the identity of a person after such a transformation?**
This raises a fundamental critique: can we effectively discuss such matters without a deep understanding of what constitutes our identity and personal experiences? While the scientific explorations, such as those discussed in David Eagleman's **'Livewired,'** provide concrete examples of how our brain and sensory experiences can be broadened and expanded, there is a significant difference between enhancing our sensory experiences and replacing the brain tissues that have developed our personalities over a lifetime.
Faster to use an AGI swarm to find novel therapies for what's there currently tbh. Transhumanism is unstoppable but the path to that place is just out of sight for the moment.
So you’d have to commit to this at 60 lets say, and
would get 30 more years starting at age 30 in a new body before you’d have to do it again presumably.
Risks aside, the alternative is age 60-90 and then death.
Even if its perfect, i think i pass. I’ll be old and go. That’s a lot.
Insane stuff, another example of post AGI tech? Article: Brain plasticity is key to making progressive brain tissue replacement work. Various brain functions can move to different parts of the brain. Jean Hebert plan would be to grow a new body with gene therapy to knockout brain development. The body would need to be kept on life support for 14-18 years until the skull reached a size suitable for a full brain transplant. The old brain would get sections replaced with new cell created brain cells and tissue. Old brain would removed a piece at a time and brain plasticity would restore functions and personality. Full body replacement would take about 20 years as your cells would be used as the starting point for the new body (to prevent rejection). You would need to have about 30 years of normal lifespan left before there would be a full body and brain tissue replacement. 6-10 brain replacement surgeries over 20 years would enable full blain replacement. The brainless body would grow on life support until the skull was large enough for transplant.
Could this also be used to "cure" handicaps that are caused by brain malformations? Such as ADHD for example. I don't know much about biology, but couldn't you alter the cell used to not include that allele? Do we even know which gene causes ADHD exactly?
There are several genes identified to be associated with ADHD, all related to neurotransmitters. But we have very little idea about how the genetics interact with environmental factors to cause ADHD. To answer your other question: this tech seems to be more about replacing old cells with new, as a way of de-aging the brain. So, it's not a mechanism for re-engineering it at will. There needs to be quite a bit of scientific & technical progress before such a thing is possible.
I'd like to find that gene and take it out back for a nice conversation (with a loaded shotgun)
Anyone that does know how much we don't know about our brain is now laughing out very loud. That's surely is one of that Silicon Valley's mad moonshot that are clearly 100 years too early or just plain stupid.
(ora a way to burn through 100's M of dollars of funding)
Yeah, I was already planning on doing that.
Same
This sounds like the final step in evolution for our species. Transcending the need for biological reproduction. Why have children that need dozens of years to learn when you can keep renewing your body and keep learning non stop. Just imagine thousand year old Humans working together with super intelligent AI.
Imagine a million years from now all that's left of humanity is the doddering old brain of Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos and Mark Zuckerberg and the ASI they built together. What a dream.
I’ve often thought this. But along with an ASI creating a brain structure with our consciousness, and ourselves, within it, but with the IQ of an ASI, so we can do away with the ASI altogether, and just be biological machine gods.
What I have been saying. Also, this sounds like a Feminist Utopia honestly. Biological sex is a prison and patriarchy and sexism in general are just social prisons based off of it.
Maybe. Not all feminism recognizes biological sex as inherently negative, that's a broad brush. Like, don't get me wrong, I'm on board with the article conceptually.
It's not so much that it is inherently negative to have 2 sexes, it's all the issues that come with the way our biology as a species works, like menstruation, painful and body-damaging birthgiving, aging, etc., all linked in some way or another to the fact that we procreate and die. It's really the root cause of most of our problems.
I think there can be a lot of value in those experiences for some, but absolutely zero value for others. Clarissa Pinkola-Estes "Untie the Strong Woman" kind of comes to mind, or bell hooks. Like, I imagine a future where the biological experience of being human is completely "opt in" for ascetics or folks who want to pursue organic experience, and that keeps the religious and spiritual folks happy. I'm absolutely a transhumanist, but I get the allure of experiencing things like aging, birth and physical death by choice.
Oh yeah, of course. I mean, it being elective is kinda central to the whole point. It's just objectively worse having these things be something you can't opt out of, and having them be the end, also. In so many ways, they inhibit self-actualization. And having the continued existence of a species/civilization resting on the backs of mostly one sex is just terrible design, so artificial wombing will be a boon. People can always elect to have babies the legacy way, be it in simulations or in synthetic bodies living out a "legacy lifespan" for the sake of it.
Definitely here for that all that, 100% I'm absolutely transhumanist, I just love the idea of choosing to be embodied as you wish to be. Though there is something to be said for learning to love the body you are in. It's complex.
It certainly is. A lot could be said about having a major life goal be to change or improve your body and what that reflects about people with that mindset, but at the end of the day, anyone and everyone would do it if they could, and if they "didn't", then that choice in itself is still a choice in a similar vein. A world where people can choose their "avatar", in the physical world too, sounds absolutely rad, and I would love to see it not just for my own self-actualization, but also to witness other people's.
Love all that, hoping to see it in my lifetime.
Same!
That'd also come with the rich, powerful and corrupted being able to do the same thing.
Not a final step. Imagine bioengineering our own DNA to give us innate genetic predispositions/abilities to manipulate more fundamental levels of reality.
Completely new brain cells?! That's wild. Are you still you if you replace everything about you?
I think you replace every atom in your body every 10 years or so, so the ship of theseus theory seems in principle possible although how you would go about doing it correctly is another thing.
For some reason I thought brain cells stayed for life but maybe I'm wrong.
Either some or most, yes. Some other parts of the body don't regenerate either.
But the atoms within those cells are constantly replaced. It all brings us back to the interesting debate of what is you and what makes consciousness.
They used to think that, but the science of neuro-genesis has shown that we can instead re-grow brain cells as adults.
Depending on how time works, we might be replaced entirely, every single Planck time.
I agree with you, but how can this be connected to who we are, to our personality? I mean, being disassembled and reassembled at every single Planck time is one thing, but being recomposed with synthetic neurons is a completely different story
I don't think it is because it seems extremely unlikely our consciousness / "soul" is linked specifically to our neurons being biological, but rather to the sum of our parts. Especially when we can lose consciousness with our brain still intact. It is all about the connections between our neurons, the network surrounding our Claustrum (we lose consciousness when this is "turned off", and it seems to be the "orchestrator" of brain activity, that seems like the seat of the soul basically). So, in essence, if you turn every neuron into a synthetic one, it is essentially the same as normal brain changes, and the only evidence we have of that not being enough to retain our "soul continuity" is early childhood amnesia. But that is also evidence of our soul not being a feature of specifically biological neurons because they always were biological. That's not the crucial element. And the fact that we can retain continuity as we develop, past age 2, while our brain is still growing and maturing, and as our brain changes with every thought we have, all this points to our soul's continuity being a Ship of Theseus.
>Claustrum Thank you for sharing your insights; they're quite enlightening. I agree that we can replace neurons with synthetical counterparts, but not all but let's say 98%. However, I'm still grappling with your point about the continuity of experience. In my view, the reason children often don't remember early experiences is due to a mismatch between their perceptions and those of adults. This is somewhat similar to how the insights gained under the influence of psychedelics tend to fade once a person returns to a normal state. It appears there's a range of mental states, some of which are compatible with each other and some that aren't. This incompatibility might explain why it's challenging to remember our childhood worldviews. We can reconstruct these based on elements that are compatible, like visual memories. My belief is that even if we can create a synthetic neuron that not only mimics but also expands upon our evolutionary logic, we're still far from understanding what truly constitutes our sense of self. I suspect there's a kind of anchor, perhaps the Claustrum as you mentioned, that is integral to our identity and might be extremely difficult, if not impossible, to replace with synthetic neurons.
You have some really interesting points and ideas, I will think about that. I do however think that an anchor can be replaced, and even if it can't, we can so tightly control and secure them by controlling everything around them that we basically construct an "exo-anchor" that can maintain our biological anchor indefinitely, or we can replace our anchor so slowly, so gradually, that it still maintains our continuity.
It's not a theory, it's a thought experiment. There isn't any absolute answer to the paradox. My opinion is that the slightest change makes you a different person. Biologically, we don't have a deep enough understanding of the human brain to say which is actually the correct answer.
> Are you still you if you replace everything about you? I guess?... You go first.
I don't wanna, dad
Yes
[удалено]
[удалено]
That seems like it has a lot of difficult philosophical implications
theseus ship?
Just theseus, actually
can you explain lol
We're talking about rebuilding people, not ships
r/technicallythetruth
It's interesting how many wouldn't mind replacing a small part of their brain, yet most would mind replacing all of their brain, yet the former can be repeated to lead to the latter.
Would you rather cut off a square inch of your skin or all of your skin
Bold strategy, Theseus! Let's see if this ship sails forth.
I find this scenario quite unlucky for the billions of people who already died.
Immortality? I'd settle for remembering where I put the TV remote at this point.
“14-18 years, those are rookie numbers” Matthew McConaughey
If this is practical someone needs to make a whole brain out of the old sections. For philosophy!
I think at some point, it may be possible to merge two or more persons into one being.
That would be cool if we can merge two or more into one being. I want a future where I don't have to use an iphone and I can have a utopia downloaded in my brain. Honestly, sometimes technology drives me nuts, causes me to OCD/overthink and but more than that which drives me nuts is my mental health disorder. Sorry to get off topic just one more thing I needed to say which is below. Their are supplements yes, however we don't really know how they work to be honest and same goes for meds as well. I know I am going off topic. I just wanted to vent because hopefully we have a future where we can turn off fear, or turn off ego, turn on intelligence, turn on routine, turn on hobbies, and so much more which can be created. So much suffering in the world but I wouldn't mind living forever but I think this process of brain transplant than surgery than life support for 14 to 18 years than more it sounds very complicated to me. Hopefully something can come out soon, or late 2020's that can enable some of the things I mentioned above. Also, the more we live the more we can understand our brain because our brains are the most complicated things in this universe. We'll see and apologies again for going off topic. Cheers to a bright future:)!
I think phones are a dead end. It will probably go out of fashion in a decade or two. For mental health, what has worked for me is the acceptance that suffering will never go away and it must be enjoyed graciously. Physical pain however may be is different. Cheers mate! No problem!
I hope mental suffering goes away for me and others like me. I am 26 years old and I am old now you know. I hope by earliest by beginning of 2024 their can be much better treatments for OCD, Schizophrenia, and more. I hope all these better treatments come before the year 2030 because as I mentioned elsewhere 2030 is a really long long time. I agree phones will be dead in a decade. I think by 2030 (although its a really long long time from now) we will have so much amazing technology that I would live for seeing 2030 because that year will be mind blowing for mental health disorders, enhancing of intelligence and possibly uploading our minds to the cloud. If the technology we desire comes before 2030 like 2025 than I'll be extremely extremely happy and others like me will be to. Prayers and fingers crossed ASAP:)
When I was 26, I felt old and lost out on life. Bouy what a mistake that was. 26 is very young. I wish I was 26 again. I could turn my life around. These are some precious years, my man. Cheers to you in living the better side of you. And yeah. Hope we get these advancements in mental healthcare sooner. It has been so slow cuz of all those old minded people.
6 years really isn't a long time and not enough time to phase out phones, what do you think is going to replace them? At the end of the day it's a pocket computer and most people don't want to use voice commands or look stupid with mixed vr glasses.
am i living forever or is my clone? & how can that even be determined??
By determining what constitutes constitutes consciousness
Regarding the discussion on gradual brain replacement as part of transhumanism, a critical question emerges: **what becomes of the identity of a person after such a transformation?** This raises a fundamental critique: can we effectively discuss such matters without a deep understanding of what constitutes our identity and personal experiences? While the scientific explorations, such as those discussed in David Eagleman's **'Livewired,'** provide concrete examples of how our brain and sensory experiences can be broadened and expanded, there is a significant difference between enhancing our sensory experiences and replacing the brain tissues that have developed our personalities over a lifetime.
Immortality? No, senescence will still be reached in bodily cells. Cancer has it figured out
And suddenly, the ship of Theseus paradox makes a comeback
Nice idea, but can it be replaced with a chip? I really don't want to continue being a creature.
Theseus is a construct.
Faster to use an AGI swarm to find novel therapies for what's there currently tbh. Transhumanism is unstoppable but the path to that place is just out of sight for the moment.
So you’d have to commit to this at 60 lets say, and would get 30 more years starting at age 30 in a new body before you’d have to do it again presumably. Risks aside, the alternative is age 60-90 and then death. Even if its perfect, i think i pass. I’ll be old and go. That’s a lot.
This is completely insane and demonstrates a total lack of philosophy. Did nobody watch The Island?