This is a great saying ❣️❣️❣️ and I agree 👍 Even if we think and had a great evolutionary development becoming "humans" I think we stay like chimpanzees stood... We have a great lack of social competence & societal empathy . We act in many cases like predators and search 9ur benefits in exploitation of others and ressources too...
One of my favorite writers, William Gibson, said "The future is already here - it's just not evenly distributed" and I think it is all kinds of relevant to this discussion.
Indeed. But it is not about even that. It is about how we distribute resources to highest benefit and that benefit is preference dependant. It is a dance of interests and how they might align.
@@Thedeepseanomad People have already figured that kind of thing out. The biggest issue is money to fund the distribution, due to us living under the current economic system. The US government has the funds but it puts it towards the military.
I was born deaf. At 4 years old, I was implanted with a cochlear implant to give me the ability to hear. I very much "needed" cochlear implants to participate in a SPEAKING society. Your point about not needing the internet, but the internet being a necessary technology to participate in society today really resonated. It's this weird thing for me where everyone has adopted the technology of verbal speech, but I needed an extra technology to access the speaking technology. My implantation was an equivalent of buying an internet plan and being stuck with the provider for life. I don't regret being implanted (not that I had a choice at 4 years old), and everyday I can choose to not wear my cochlear implants. But, I wear them regardless because it's my way of "seeing" the world. What's a gunman without a gun? What am I without my cochlear implants? And, before anyone else mentions that living a non-hearing Deaf life is very possible. Yes it is, but one still uses technologies to interact with the speaking world, just different ones. ("technology" mention count: 5) Abigail, thank you for giving me the tools to understand this better.
Using technology as a supplement for an otherwise natural body function in line to the human design is perfectly fine. Attempting to become inhuman is where it slips off the rails. The failings that can come about when being born into/ living in an imperfect world can be attempted to be alleviated by bringing something back towards its original function/ purpose. To purposefully subvert the body as a whole would be an abomination and inevitably self-destructive. There’s a firm Higher Moral line beyond human subjectives. We are not God. Only the Almighty.
There's a good Outer Limits episode about everyone having a chip directly tied into the "internet". The people that couldn't get the chip were "disabled". Of course the system ended up turning on everyone connected, but... Same starting point.
Hi I am also a Colea ear user its one of the best ways of helping one to hear but I do worry if it could get hacked now with how fast technology is going I just pray Ai don't come to the colea ear implants as I don't want to become controlled via it
That facial recognition bit kinda creeped me out! I have ADHD and if my professors were actually judging my participation in class by how attentive a computer/random stranger thinks my face looks, I would be constantly accused of not listening, which sounds awful
Yup, I'm Autistic and have adhd and my first thought was, this would be a disaster for Neurodiverse ppl. We already face enough discrimination in school and work without AI justifying it. PoC ppl are also negetively effected as often their faces are not recognised as they are not included in the refernece data.
21:40 As an autistic person, facial reading software becoming a widespread corporate or governmental tool is a terrifying prospect to me. I do not externalize emotions via facial expressions very much. I'd say that about 80% of the time, my face does not accurately reflect my emotions and feelings to non-autistic people. It's hard enough dealing with that on a private level, but to imagine this being made forced routine? Nope, take me away, aliens.
i am not autistic, but that's the very first thing i thought of, too. "what about autistic people?" there would definitely be problems with relying on facial recognition & especially expressions for so much technology.
this is without a doubt a problem, but at the moment i am quite optimistic for that technology for myself, because it turns out i look "focused" and "concentrated" literally all the time.
just a fun little fact: the software that Kelly Slaughter talks about is actually real, and I used it in college when designing a puzzle game. we had a bunch of people play the game while recording their face, and then used the software to determine emotional states, mapped to game events. so if someone was getting frustrated, we could know exactly when, and we could know when people were excited or satisfied after solving a puzzle, and which puzzles didn't have that kind of payoff. it was a really useful tool that gave us insight we wouldn't have been able to have otherwise. however, as you can probably tell, this is about the most benign thing you can use this kind of software for. there are a lot more insidious applications.
Sounds also like it is a lot less time intensive than having to do numerous user interviews or going through and analyzing lots of numerical data. I’ve done UX testing research but not at that level! Lol
yea, I did that as a short-term job myself (not in the way she describes, nor for Facial Recognition, just AI in general), but to train the Program you need a huge amount of input data, and that's very easy to outsource out to contract employees. It wasn't a gorgeous job, but it was just as good as a grocery store cashier, say, in my case. Basically I was a computer-human interpreter. I see data that I understand, eg a picture, or a sound bite, whatever, and I turn that into binary data the the computer can understand : type from my keyboard. So like on Facebook (not who I worked for, was more general, but same concept), you see the alt text "Image may contain X, Y, Z" ; my job was exactly how the algorithm is made. It can be used good (my case, proper..ish salary and such, various levels of human data quality checks, to train Accessibility features), or, the way of Karen Slaughter who's algorithm is not only sketchily sourced, but also has obvious data bias problems. As an autistic who's face would never show anything typical, this thing sounds terrifying even with proper data diversification.
Yes. But to also be very fair this technology has a long way to go before it will even be useful to use nefariously. And there are...fundamental limitations on the nature of its use and effectiveness. A major problem since we made semi reliable object detectors was the adversarial cases. Where an ai was trained to read in that stream of data and detect edges, that stream.of data was made by an ai trained to transform images in a way that obscures the patterns the detector uses, but which isn't apparently visible to a human in the image. That's a single example. There are a plethora of ways to exploit quirks that these programs form as a consequence of their training. And it'd, while not certain, absolutely possible that our last 100 years of technological growth is about over and tech will plateau. Moores law has broken down. The last 2 generations of chips perform at levels that would have been an embarrassment or a disaster a decade ago. all these algorithms and technologies were only enabled by the huge increases in transistor density. Unless there's a discovery that enables us to make smaller transistors or whatever, our technology is about to hit a wall as we are forced to.simply make old designs slightly more efficient or slightly cheaper.
16:23 As a disabled person who works with technology every day as part of my life, this concept really hits. Even when I’m in a relatively low neurological state my brain is still able to manage some level of communication through aac tools that I’m used to on my phone. They just flow naturally. It’s also a similar situation with my wheelchair, I do the feather thing where I’m consciously aware of my size and how I can manoeuvre. When something feels off about my control with the ground (ie one of the rear wheels lifting off uneven ground during a push) it’s immediately startling as if I’d just stepped off a ledge where I expected solid ground. The implementation of it into my idea of what my brain perceives goes even further. If someone reaches for or grabs my chair without consent it feels just as shocking as if someone grabbed my physical body and moved me the same. Trans-humanism is already here, technology is already integrated into most people’s lives.
@@marcelinenolan6284Oh, I don’t believe that person was being serious or trying to imply you were speaking weirdly-it seems to be a joke (just not a very good one). It’s very interesting that you can compare your wheelchair to feeling like stepping off a ledge at times, I didn’t realize the feeling Abby described could be so acute!
Usually, when people criticize transhumanism, they mean by it something more than just wheelchairs, medications or hearing aids. Using all this, a human is still a human. Transhumanism, in a strong sense, advocates the creation of a certain "post-human", whose lifestyle will be strikingly different from human, and whose way of thinking will also be radically different from the way of thinking of a person.
Ironically, we were transhumanists before we were us. The first time some pre-human ancestor used a long stick to lift a rock, we'd augmented the limitations of the flesh with technology.
The “tools” becoming “invisible” should be very understandable to anyone like myself who wears glasses. I literally can’t function in the world without my glasses, but when they’re on I don’t even think about them. They’re a piece of technology that enhance me to get around my limitations, and I’d imagine that it would never get brought up by the folks whining that UBI is going to lead to transhumanism either.
left the house without my glasses on accident today to go to the pharmacy, boy was that a long shopping trip, i had to closely inspect half of the store to find what i was looking for because i couldn't see shit lol
Was thinking about the fact I was wearing glasses and don't think about it much all through the segments (and remembering wheel chair users saying similarish things about wheelchairs).
Such a good example!! Exactly the same with contact lenses. One time, I had just put a fresh pair of lenses in then automatically put my glasses back on without thinking....and freaked out when I couldn't see!
@@phosphenevision if you have a phone with assistive technologies, some make use of the camera app to magnify images (though it's a real pain when my battery life is short)
facial recognition regarding stuff like "paying attention" was pushed a lot at my university, especially when everything had to be online. it got a lot of pushback from a lot of people and groups on campus, including political groups across the spectrum. also particularly from people who are neurodivergent and/or have anxiety disorders. if I look nervous during my at home exam is that because I'm worried about being caught cheating or because I'm prone to anxiety inducing intrusive thoughts? if I'm not staring at my exam paper the whole time is that because I'm looking at secret notes or getting help where it's not allowed, or does my brain work in a way that means I can't stare at paper for two hours straight. Sophie from Mars' video on Cyberpunk 2077 also mentions a lot of good things about transness and disability in relation to transhumanism.
Including the economic class transhumnism. Now it's cell phones. But once organ cloning and physical and mental tech which will give major advantages to the very very wealthy, will create a two tier society. Just like much of education is today but worse. Why would someone hire someone with chronic health problems from the environment when you can hire someone genetically smarter healthier and better looking. And that is more likely part of the next century. In 200 hundred years we might basically be different species. The solution for a fair system is replacing capitalism with a more egalitarian system with everyone having access to the same benefits.
yeah but those don't work on autistic people such as myself because express emotions very diffirently so for example i don't smile when i am happy but i do smile when i am in pain
23 minutes in and I just want to say already that as a neurodivergent black person I'm extremely nervous at the idea of companies like XPRS, knowing how badly BIPOC faces are recognised in the first place , especially ppl who are medium and dark-skinned ; without even going into how terrible assumptions based on facial expressions would be for us NDs and the idea of "paying attention" (e.g. for us looking away can often help us focus on what a person is saying).
I'm always grateful for that when I talk with friends and I'm struggling to focus I can just close my eyes while talking and listening and they 100% understand what's going on and take it as intended. Stuff you can't do among normal people who know nothing about neurodivergent people, absolutely especially not law enforcement.
@@Call-me-Al oh god, are you like 12 years old?? Get over yourself. Really. People like this are fucking bogging down society. There has to be a baseline of function. Stop feeling sorry for yourself
Are you American? If so, the thought of that software going mainstream must be terrifying for you. I got a stock tip about 2 years ago, with the big selling point being that the stock was supposed to take off when everybody wants it for use with their security cams. So far, it hasn't done that. So I haven't bought that particular stock. But yeah, I never even considered how tech like this could impact poc.
I love how she says "Angry Canadians" like that's the most wild sci-fi idea so far. I'm Canadian and think we need a basic income program. The homelessness over here is one of Canada's best kept secrets. It's rampant and run-away and killing people at an insane rate compared to our population.
Basic income will make homelessness worse. Forcing the homeless into shelters with guards & social workers will treat & reduce the issue. Insane people will attack you for fixing problems though so i guess its a nono. Instead western countries just have to keep feeding and funding the increasing suffering and chaos . I dont know if it can simply be made perpetual or something will eventually break but ... oh wait there is assisted suicide for it now. So le me repharse it, I dont know how many more ways it will keep breaking before the western educated mind can stop being "compassionate" for a moment to actually solve social issues instead of making them worse.
22:30 I love how she lists all these things and then very quickly passes over "borders, prisons, law enforcement" so you almost don't notice it. Even the interviewer seems to completely miss it. She's so brilliant at creating these terrifying characters.
I love that it's in-character for not only for Kelly's girl-boss persona but also the NYT's (and many other US/ business-positive media) perspective/focus.
@@PhosphorAlchemist right. I think that was the main point. That feeling of unease/discomfort/terror that everyone gets watching that interview is the *exact* feeling that "traditionalists" get when they see someone talking about feminism, trans rights, etc and everyone else just going along with it as if there's nothing wrong. That's *why* throwing facts and figures at people will never work. So then the question becomes, how do you get someone to move past the feeling that technology and progress is being pushed well beyond their comfort zones?
A thing I found super interesting from this video is the idea of not noticing a tool until it breaks- it becoming part of you. And this is how the body works too, and is the root of a lot of ableist ideas if you think about it. Most of us don't think about our colons or our hearing or whatever until it goes wrong, and are therefore utterly stunted in empathy for those who have disabilities. Which is to skim over neurodivergence as well- I think we all find it really hard to imagine living life through other lenses than our own.
My colon is a tool I use that I am able to forget and it simply becomes a part of me. I'm not just a person who has a colon, I am colonman. But for real, this makes me think about how I know many people with disability and especially people who have long term illness who talk about their body as being pretty distinctly separate from their self. So they talk about their body as something they have, often their body in *opposition* to their self, rather their body being a fundamental part of their self. I do something similar because of my ADHD and other mental illness/disabilities: I'll talk about my brain as being separate from myself, like "sorry I didn't catch that, my brain was doing something else". As much as I am all about the idea that we ARE our bodies, we're not just a mind/brain/soul/self that "pilots" a body or something like that, the way I use language still leans into sometimes talking about my body as being not subject but object. I think it's probably extremely normal and very human to have the capacity to see our bodies as both subject and object. But it does still bother me the extent to which some people distance their self from their body, and I think this framework might help me understand why they're doing it. If the body is a sort of tool, the ways in which it doesn't function as the person wants can bring that tool into focus, which then puts their subjectivity at a distance from the object, the self at a distance from the body. Just as a broken hammer turns hammerman into man with broken hammer, an ill or disabled body turns a body-person(?) into person with broken body. And I think that model also can be useful in how I see many people with mental illness in the comments here talk about how medications can align their sense of self. By reducing the degree to which your body feels like a dysfunctional tool, it allows that tool to become more seamlessly integrated into your self. I don't think it matters whether I think my "true self" is either integrated with or at odds with my depression; when I take anti-depressants or do therapy (another kind of technology) I am helping to mend the tool of my mind/brain to be better suited for my needs, so the tool fades into the background and my self integrates easier with it. I could write so much more but that's enough existential philosophy for me for at least a whole week.
“I used to think the top environmental problems were biodiversity loss, ecosystem collapse, and climate change.I thought with 30 years of good science we could deal with those problems But I was wrong. The top environmental problems are selfishness, greed, and apathy. And to deal with those we need a spiritual and cultural transformation. And we scientist don’t know how to do that.” Gus Speth
Tbf, most people who specialize in the Spiritual or Cultural often have no clue how to do that either. Or sometimes the desire to do so, especially in the case of the first group. Well, above Selfishness, Greed, and Apathy....I personally would put stuff like the Cultural Obsessions with Domination, Ambition, and Maintaining Power over Others higher on those lists. Since thats what the people who are in positions where they could actually make any difference have as vices (branded as virtues of Capitalism and Traditionalism and probably "Communism in any of its 'implemented' forms that ignore the steps that involve a dissolution of the State which is a tool of Capitalist Oppressors actually that is only useful until the oppressors are gone or whatever" too). We need to move on from tier lists and iron clad hierarchies that force people to get what they "deserve" and only that (if that), we need to move on from this belief that "Deserving" is either Objective in the slightest...Or even a ideal measurement system for solving problems. "Need" based solutions and ways of viewing the world would likely make fixing environmental issues or wealth inequality issues or maybe even criminal justice issues where not everyone gets the same shake or a fair one (while others have enough money or fame to avoid any serious consequences because they're not worth the effort to go after). Honestly it might be the first step to a world where we don't have some of the need for as much enforcement of anything if we could swing it....but changing the viewpoints from Zero Sum or Fear Based Authority or Guilt/Shame Conformity to worldviews where people engage with others through a Sincere Desire to lessen the suffering of others is...well when even most religions that constantly claim an origin in such things lean towards Deserving or Hierarchies of Control or Judgement of Others, yeah I don't know who is equipped to shift how humans view the world and society as a baseline.
@@krysbrynhildr That is a very interesting viewpoint. Perhaps you could use a bit fewer capital letters to make your post a bit more readable, Mr. / Ms. One Cat.
@@Bluesine_R Ah, I thought that the use of capital letters might make things clearer due to emphasis. Though I am just a cat, so what do I know? Well, I'm mostly responding to this because I'm impressed that you were able to decipher the name though, so kudos to you for that.
For a while I have begin to think the primary environmental problem is human population in general. While some fancy humans as being an "enlightened" species that has always been an overly optimistic viewpoint. Take selfishness and greed. Both of these traits are evident in most of what we would call "intelligent" species. Selfishness and greediness both have distinct advantages to a species to ensure survival. It is demonstrated from birth (competition for food and space). It is certainly not an "evil" trait exclusive to humans. Humans have a species have taken great lengths to both A) increase survivability of offspring and B) prolong natural lifespan through medical care. The problem is that we still carry tendencies baked in over millions of years of evolution. We want to take, we want to consume and we want to procreate. Unwinding of our very nature is a fantastical idea. Even if we were to completely change our behavior the fact remains that for every human on the planet there is a cost. From birth we impact our environment and I find it highly unlikely that even the most eco conscious individual will ever live a what is now a "normal lifespan" and be die leaving a net ecological credit at the door.
I think the example of technology changing how I see the world that most resonates with me is glasses. There's the painfully literal interpretation of "seeing," yes, but once you're used to wearing them, it's just part of your face, and some people forget they're there at all, even though you can physiologically see and feel the frame the entire time. Scientifically, it's an assembly of metal and plastic, but I experience it as a component of my body and adjust the "hitbox" of my face accordingly.
This, I usually joke that I can't "see" myself in the mirror without mine. First cause I can't see myself if I'm more than 40cm away from it. But also I can't see myself without them because whoever that is is not me. dysphoria kicks in whenever I wear contacts. It is not I am the me+glasses.
@@manuelsoares4343 yeah!! My experience of glasses is a bit different from many people’s - I got them as a baby/toddler, so I’ve literally always had them as part of my experience of the world. Getting contacts would be a huge change to how my face has always been, and the idea has always been pretty weird to me when people raise the possibility. It’s like getting rid of one of my facial features
oh my god I didn't even think about this. I have glasses. when I scratch round my eyes I have to weave my hands and fingers around my glasses to reach my eyes. The interesting thing is when I don't where my glasses, I still naturally try to dodge my glasses because I essentially see them as part of my body. It's always funny when I do it and then realise they aren't there. Also when I need my glasses and ask someone to get them for me, I'll often say "Can you get my eyes". Again treating my glasses as if they are a body part. Further to this I'm treating "My eyes" as being my eyeballs and my glasses. without my glasses, my eyes are incomplete
I don't wear glasses, but I've definitely noticed that someone's glasses basically just become a part of their face as far as my brain's facial recognition is concerned.
As someone with severe ADHD the part of this about the "core self" was very interesting to me, because I do consider my ADHD a part of my core self and I don't really consider it a disability, but I still take medications to alter that state in order to function in a world that isn't suited for me. I feel like I sacrifice a part of myself in order to do things like hold a steady job and give semi-consistent effort. I certainly don't feel like I as an individual got to really decide what about myself I wanted "augmented"
i feel this way about my depressive disorder ! i know it isnt healthy for me to be in a depressive state, but only because i NEED to be able to hold a job and stuff. i struggle so much with making art and being inspired when im not lacking serotonin and i feel like im missing a part of myself or that ive given it up so i can make $13 an hour ya know ? there are some symptoms im grateful are taken care of by meds but man. it doesnt feel the same !!
Yeah, I've really always felt this way about my disability, and also my body. As someone who is transgender, the idea of transhumanism is appealing to me, but where do I draw the line regarding what is my "core self"? Is my body mine and simply one that I ought to improve upon? Or am I in the "wrong body" and one that needs significant changes in order to keep my mental health at an okay level? I tend to stick with the former idea, as it helps my dysphoria knowing that my body is a work-in-progress that can look more "feminine" according to societies standard, but conversely, the idea of slight body modifications like tattoos, piercings -- and ofc hormones for physical transition -- are really appealing, and I suppose those modifications would be transhumanism.
It changes day by day for me. Sometimes I view my brain and "me" as two very different things, even though that makes no sense it feels right. I'm still trying to better understand my ADHD and other mental stuff so I still tie all that stuff to my brain, maybe as a way of creating a scapegoat or trying to avoid that part of myself. Granted usually I think that much more strongly when I'm stressed or annoyed with my mental illness. Idk I still think some part of a partitioned self really resonates with me
@@currentquiet9591 I'm very similar in the mental health department. I've basically never been medicated for ADHD, so it's been a part of me and how I function for my whole life. Which means it's very much who I am. I've always viewed life through an ADHD lens. But it's sometimes not "me" in the instances where it comes in the way of how I want to express myself or do something. Big example for me is communication. English is my native language but it feels like it's a second. I often cannot communicate ideas in the way my brain had processed it. In those moments I view ADHD as a disability hindering the "me", and as an entity separate. Ya know like I'm not noticing the hammer till I accidentally hammered my hand. Even so I'm still hammerman. That is "me".
Just wanted to say, OP, you're not alone. It feels like giving up a part of myself, not all of which is negative, to function. When I'm on my meds I'm slower, but stable. Though the ability to organize, prioritize, and have overall clearer thoughts is lovely. :)
Kelly Slaughter is terrifying and so many people that will watch this video, let alone people in the wider world, will not understand the couched language being used. She is brilliantly written, and I think a better representation of the danger of many modern "leaders" than The Arsonist. She almost has herself convinced that she's the hero of this story. Thank you Abigail. A topic I've always been quite interested in.
Yeah the charisma of the Arsonist was massively entertaining and brilliantly written in so many ways, but the character was obviously a bit unrealistic and (probably necessarily) ham-fisted in comparison (although honestly still pretty subtle by the standards of most fiction). Kelly Slaughter is almost too realistic and subtle - you could be forgiven for missing all that's going on.
This is literally what goes on any time I rail against NFTs in a forum, and then get a cryptobro to come on and challenge me. "NFTs are good for paying artists" - the artists are being paid a single commission of about $300-$1000 while someone conceals that it's for an NFT, and then turns around and sells it for $30,000 and says the artist has no rights to their own work. "Pay to Earn games are great for 3rd world countries, because they can play games and earn money!" - They've literally invented Cryptocolonialism, where the buy-in to these games is so huge that it takes first-world investors to fund the third-world players who get paid sub-minimum wage and don't get to keep any of the value of the products they work for because the wealthy foreigners own all the means of production. When I point this out, they say it's not crypto's fault that they live in a country that has crushing poverty, it's "the bad leaders who ruined their country's economy" and that "crypto is helping change all that"... The more exposure I have to cryptobros, the more convinced I become they're all sociopaths.
I love the arsonist. Because his skits are scaffolded around the metaphor fascism=fire, they're not so much reality as about reality. It makes for great entertainment and a lasting memory. But Kelly Slaughter? I've seen her on the news. I've met her. I've heard her voice in my own head sometimes. Her skits come so close to reality it's disquieting.
The part where she speedily drops all of the criminal justice and surveillance use cases for facial recognition in 2 seconds before moving on was perfection. 22:17
“You’ve actually been staring at a great example this whole time,” wow you’re right, my phone! What a great point I had entirely forgotten about the little computer in my hand I was only focused on the… “acrylic nails!” Oh right, that too I guess
and here I was thinking she was wearing contact lenses and was gonna use that as the example I suppose that's maybe a bit too literal an interpretation of "tech affecting how one sees the world"
My wife and I have often been discussing recently how conservatives (including liberal conservatives) use "progress" to excuse leaving things the way they are; "if only we had the technology to do x" rather than "how can we improve the state of x now?". We've started calling people who lean on this a lot "techno-conservatives". By making what are really social/distributive problems (meaning: things we can solve by changing the structure of our society or by moving around resources, like trans segregated healthcare & poverty) into "technological" problems, it shuts down any political conversation. You don't need to even defend the status quo if you and those around you largely believe (or say) that the status quo is immutable until Gadot shows up with the right hammer. It's incredibly frustrating and really hard to combat, because what you need to do to fight against techno-conservative rhetoric is to convince them to fundamentally shift the way they view the world. That is to say: that the world is mutable by *YOU* and not just by "people who invent things" and that *you* are capable of coming up with solutions/actions they can't replace. Also I loved the outfits in this. Lots of love
Good point. Framing something as a _purely_ technological problem can be limiting to social progress. I prefer democratic socialist James Hughes' approach where we must advance technological progress and social progress interdependently in tandem. In his book _Citizen Cyborg,_ Hughes lays out his idea of "Democratic Transhumanism" or "Techno-Progressivism," which recognizes that we cannot just expect technological progress to lead to the right places if left alone, but also recognizes the enormous benefits that technology can give us. Hughes promotes the idea of building democratic social institutions to _guide_ technological progress in ways that contribute to everyone's wellbeing. For example, Hughes (and I) support single-payer healthcare largely because it will extend the benefits of cutting-edge medical technology from just the rich to potentially everyone. Edit: I can't _believe_ I forgot to mention Iain M. Banks' series _The Culture_ as a leftist perspective on transhumanism. The Culture is basically what I consider the best possible outcome for humanity: post-scarcity fully-automated luxury gay space anarcho-communism with full (transhumanist and/or transgender) bodily autonomy for anyone.
Oh god yes! I'm a PhD chemistry student and I have an extremely libertarian colleague who very uniquely thinks exactly like this "techno-conservative" you're describing. It's frankly pretty grating. it's painful to see someone very well educated take such an awful pill and border on fascist beliefs sometimes. Thankfully, he's pretty unique in his frankly extreme beliefs. No other STEM PhD I know is against minimum wage like this fucker is.
The hammer point is actually super interesting, I am a professional blacksmith so a hammer is really an extension of my hand, but so are tongs, I never get to actually touch my work with my bodily hands till its all finished, all my interaction is through augmentations. You learn to treat the hammer and tongs like your hands, I can feel and touch and grab and shove and strike. But one of the wildest experiences is to become very proficient with a sledgehammer, which for one is a much greater extension from your hand, and must by its nature swung with more force AND more confidence. but the real surreal experience comes when someone else calls you in to help with the sledge mid heat, and you walk up, grab the sledge, and without thinking about it, without situating your feet just so, without calibrating your reach, a skilled hammerman can bring that sledge up and immediately strike a target the size of a dime without hesitation. I know exactly where the sledgehammer is and where it will go like it was my own fist. Also fun fact, Hammerman is a real historic term for the job of being the blacksmith helper who swings a sledgehammer!
I love how you talk with such passion. You're lucky to have found something to make you feel that way. I'm still searching for mine. But I appreciate this comment a lot. I bet your work is very impressive! Keep up the good work🤙🏼
I was thinking the same thing about operating earth-moving equipment, especially excavators, I don't think about what the controls do, just where that bucket needs to be.
I practice jewelry-making and metalworking as a hobby and your comment really resonated haha. Although with jewelry you get to touch it a lot more, most of the important manipulations come through the use of other instruments - for example, I was taught to use a very thin vertical see-saw (no idea how to translate this stuff in english) to cut out various flourishes and designs on a thin piece of silver manually. When you start out, it is absolutely terrifying how easy it is to accidentally go outside the border of the design and ruin your work so far. When you get proficient, though, you intuitively know the exact angle, speed and force you have to apply to cut out a smooth design. The see-saw becomes an extension of your abilities
@@craigiedema1707 I have the same experience with the saxophone! i don't think which keys to press or what to do with my mouth, i think about what sound i want to make and just... do it.
As one born with a connective tissue disorder, clicking this video both terrified me and filled me with curiosity. I have often examined the pros and cons of chasing perfection. I can see how advances in technology have allowed me to live longer. Without my heart surgery in my 20s, I'd be dead long before now. On the other hand, my mother had her feet operated on in the 70s. I don't think I need to say how badly that served her in the long term; rather, I should say, that isn't my story to tell. It's a huge subject that I still haven't completely made my mind up about.
I think what's important for you to understand is that you shouldn't waste your time wondering which side you on. As you said - you wouldn't be alive without it. So that says everything here then - if you truly believe technology saved your life. That version of you who thinks technology is bad wouldn't have taken that operation and would have chose death. So you made your decision long ago, and as they say in matrix movie - now you got to figure out why. Or just don't bother even asking and enjoy the longer life you were gifted or cursed with - all depends what you make out of it now....
@WhyseWytch thank you. Although I must say - wouldn't have this perspective if I myself wouldn't be going through and battling same emotions. The need to fit in and be good feels more like a job I didn't subscribe to myself, but rather a challenge I was given to overcome. If that makes any sense... or maybe I did but just can't remember when and why
@@dovydasvaiksnys3807 Depending on your metaphysical preference, that second part is entirely probable. And, I do agree that humaning is difficult. Suffering is one of the few ways to gain true empathy-- I know that's a spicy take, but it has been very true in my own life. I hope everyone here finds the solace and respite so badly needed in existence.
As a disabled person who uses crutches, wheelchairs, hearing aids, and yes eye glasses, transhumanism and the debates around it are utterly fascinating. This is by far the best understanding of the subject I have been offered - thank you Abi! Oh and lady, that latex suit was.... phew I needed to open a window, the temperature rose in this house by quite.a few degrees!!
As a fellow disabled person who can't go any places without a cane or the opportunity to sit down fairly frequently as well as having some pretty severe bipolar and being transgender, transhumanism has become a favorite topic of mine over the last few years. I'm excited about the possibilities of things like straightening my spine and more efficiently regulating brain chemicals. Also yeah, that latex suit... especially the 'keep your eyes on the hammer' part...
Hey fellow disabled person here! Yeah I use a motorised wheelchair when out and about and a stick around the house and honesty both just become invisible to me while using them so transhumanism is such an interesting thing to learn!
Disappointing but unsurprising there was only one mention of disability and that Abigail has an outdated and ableist conception of disability. So much the left are behind on and missing out on, not comprehending that disability justice work is key to all, notwithstanding the lack of solidarity while increasing hostilities kill disabled people en masse
I like the little fakeout at 17:50. "You've been staring at a really good example this whole video [of technology becoming transparent]". The expected answer is "your computer/phone you use to watch the video" but the actual answer she gives is her acrylic nails.
I understood that once I want to convey my ideas using the keyboard, I can be no long aware I am using the keyboard, I can be no longer aware which language I am using so the keyboard becomes invisible/transparent. The same with artificial nails that you glue to your nails, you get used to it and no longer feel you are using artificial nails. That's what I understood. The hammer becomes transparent as you focus your attention on the nail. The most important part is in the end when they associate "progress" with "transhumanism" and on the other side Russia through philosopher Alexander Dugin embraces tradition, church, right to property, family and they don't want the progress in technology as nobody agrees with it, they don't want western medical care as nobody agrees with it, the medicine is not plebise. Then there comes the caveats from Heidegger: the car is not working and which part of the car is Jewish. I have seen this on a movie, the car was not working so it was the antichrist. The idea of progress as transhumanism is something very few people accepts. Progress for most people mean well being for everybody and not watching children in trans-gay parades sponsored by Lockheed-Martin or other. This is not progress. This is ignorance. We are going backwards towards paleolithic. We are becoming Stone Age man again. And we are moving fast , if we don't decide what progress is. We must take off all the lies from media, schools, universities, corporations, banks, etc... we must tell people what satellites are for real and how the spatial industry helps the pharmaceutical industry. Progress will only come with transparency from the upper class. They will not tell you as they think you kill them all. Progress will not come if the upper class don't tell people what ethnicity and race is. Transparency from the upper class is what people need and no more code expressions like "climate change". Those expressions the upper classes use to advance their agenda, but nobody understands and nobody asks. Nobody asks what "Jewish" means. It's dangerous. So the upper class is not transparent to people , but think their ideas are so useful that they became transparent and nobody understands them and they do not notice. They do not notice anything at all.
Not to mention the fact that they were driving home the point about how transhumanism could be exploited by the rich. For those of you who are not aware, mechanical Turk pays it's "contractors" pennies on the dollar to perform tasks. I know because I was desperate and poor and debased myself for change.
Miss Abigail Thorn, if the stated goal of your channel is to give away your philosophy degree for free, I’d say you do a damn good job of it. When I think about what my history degree has given me beyond knowledge and uhm a few career paths, it’s my way of thinking; my way recognizing patterns in humanity and my way of formulating and supporting my arguments. What I’m getting at is your channel goes beyond knowledge and the more videos of yours I watch the more I am not simply ENCOURAGED to think like a philosopher, but I basically just HAVE to start doing so simply because I’m paying attention. It’s in a way the core value of our types of degrees and I thank you for giving it to us all for free.
I'm not sure what to say You told us everything and nothing. Sounds like another example of Feminazism If you don't personally believe technology and it's attachments benefits you, DON'T USE IT. But when you end up living in a tent with no electricity, no running water and no sewage system, let alone no phone, and only an open fire for cooking, you can then feel as " empowered" as you wish to while the rest of society passes you by.
i had to pause the video and bust out laughing and clap my hands when I realized that as the tech CEO character starts talking about using technology to detect dishonesty, she herself is starting to show those exact signs of dishonest facial movements that the hypothetical tech would detect. Good one, Abby. Love ya
This reminds me of a conversation I had last year. My professor and I were discussing the future of transportation, and she kept emphasizing how electric cars will solve our energy crisis. I asked why we don't invest in public transportation now to solve the same problem immediately, and not just for those who can afford new cars. She replied that she didn't know anyone who would want to ride the bus. I couldn't convince her that her reasoning was the point of investing in public transportation--to make people WANT to ride the bus. Or that it would still be better even if only to benefit those who don't get the choice of riding the bus.
A lot of us in countries/cities with great public transportation systems like riding the bus. I wear an n95 face mask when I do, but buses are quite comfortable and in my culture it's rude to pester strangers so no real risk of anyone trying to chat me up on the bus just because they sit next to me either.
Of course you wouldn't want to ride the bus in the US. US city planning is trash and made for cars, for some reason. Even if you could easily have walked given a choice.
In addition to everyone else's comments, why can't we make nice buses, that are on time, and put on extra buses when it's busy? Oh we all know why. $$$$$
"Mental hitbox" is actually such a good term for what you're describing. I'm sure everyone who's played enough fighting games knows how janky and counter-intuitive hitboxes can be, often not even lining up at all with the weapons/limbs that you're supposedly attacking with. But once you've put enough hours into the game you do develop that sense of virtual-proprioception, you know how far your f.S reaches as intuitively as you know the length of your own arm!
I like the saying that went in the Aribender (The Animation) - that the sword is the extension of your body and it made sense to me. And like, you can implement that with any kind of tool, car or whatever have you like the video says.
It's also apt when you consider that kids/teens who grow really fast will have phases of being super clumsy. Their "mental hitbox" is smaller than their actual body, so they smack their elbows into doors or trip over their own feet.
Dang. Good job. There's so much more to this topic than I thought! I was super interested in transhumanism as a teen/young adult in STEM with a focus on prosthetics, later to become disillusioned in the way spoken of in the video. The fact that tech often doesn't solve problems because the real problems are often distribution of money/power/resources. But it's super interesting to hear about how the concept of transhumanism is quite broad when taking into account the narratives told about what is or isn't human, what is modifying people too much, feeding into fears about society and how it "should" be.
I really appreciate that you put enough trust in the audience to draw the desired conclusion from the facial recognition skit without spelling it out. Upon giving us the tools to understand what was being said, we realize that this is a person capitalizing upon the incredibly disenfranchised by using feminism as a brand to have a cheap labor force of suffering women. And with them all over the world, they are less likely to be able to pull together for a better condition.
33:48 this part really gets to me, because new widespread medical technology could really help a lot of diseases, but the diseases that are most common, and that affect the most children in my country, really don't need fancy new tech. We already got the tech: it's basic sanitation. If poorer neighborhoods got basic sanitation, millions of people would be healthier in the short and long term, but since it would require the city to spend money or thr improvement of the lives or poor people, nobody ever wants to do it, and it becomes a decades long public health issue. I swear to god the most maddening problems in the world are the ones that already have the solution, but it's never solved because it would require giving a shit about the people that would be helped.
100% I think it was John Green who said something along the lines of "If an alien appeared to me tomorrow, and asked me to explain humanity, I'd tell them a story. I'd tell them about how we had this disease called smallpox and how it killed hundreds of millions of people over the course of history. I'd tell the alien about how we worked together and made scientific and social advancements that allowed us to develop a cure for the disease that WORKED. And I'd also tell the alien that thousands more people died even a hundred years after the cure was invented, because of inequity and greed" That really stuck with me. All the major problems we have, the technology already exists! It's just the ideas that stop us from using that technology have become so transparent that we don't see them holding us back.
You left out the fact that most diseases are metabolic in nature, the biggest culprits are diseases that have only been known to exist as widespread since the industrialization of agriculture and food processing and which can now be identified and prevented through genomic testing and applied nutritional management... and yet, good luck finding doctors who know anything about this new paradigm. In another decade it will be the gold standard, hopefully.
This struck a chord with me; Once I started taking SSRIs I felt like I had *finally* accessed who I felt I truly was. Up until now I never considered the connection with how trans folks feel that they are able to access their *true* selves through hormones/blockers. Lovely video. Thank you.
@@DaveSlutzky I am considering trying SSRI's for the reason you and others have mentioned, for experiencing how your brain and mind feels like it is supposed to function, finally. However I am scared to, did you experience any negative effects like emotional blunting? thanks.
@@phasor50 emotional blunting is a possible with almost every ssri. but most times it's a sign that you are not taking the correct meds and/or dosage. Once you find the correct meds and dosages can, and in most cases will, go away
So interesting. I tried multiple antidepressants over multiple years and nothing really worked, then I started HRT a year ago (knew I was trans since 16) and my depression is basically gone. I can work and take care of myself, I even finally started further education, it's amazing. I never really thought about antidepressants actually working for some people in that way. Amazing what proper medical care can do for people.
As someone who is disabled, I was very pleased to see this dissection of disability discussed within the space of economics and transhumanism. So many people seem unaware of disability specifically as a relationship to material circumstances and, in my experience, are totally unwilling to engage with it as such.
Abi, thank you SO much for the little bit at the end about Amazon's Mechanical Turk, it's such a frustrating aspect of research in my field now. The idea that you can get participants to take part in your study easily is how it is sold. I've heard stories of people posting their surveys and in about 2 days they have 500+ participants, with each paid whatever the IRB of the institution has agreed is acceptable. However, a lot of research is now showing high levels of bots responding, people not engaging with the survey, etc, which all leads to poor quality data. If this isn't checked then this data can get published and effectively spread misinformation.MTurk was sold as a solution to a common problem in research: getting lots of participants. The other main issue is that it was sold as being an accessible side hustle/income for people with disabilities cause all they need is an internet connection. However, once you do some basic math you realize that most surveys and jobs aren't paying enough to people for them to earn even close to minimum wage.
much like fruit picking, the business tends towards the cheapest, most disadvantaged people they can get to the crops, or in this case, a computer terminal
There was a fascinating piece by The Builders Association a few weeks ago about MTurks! Took us through the history of the early internet, simulated the experience of mechanical turks, and then talked about Crypto and the metaverse in act 3. During the middle section, we answered surveys just like MTurks do and accumulated pennies of fake money, while being supervised by real MTurks. Fascinating show!
A quote that i think about a lot is “you have your intentions, but the knife has its own intentions, too” which was said by a fictional character in His Dark Materials talking about a knife that can cut windows into other dimensions. But it applies to all technology, even down to something as simple as a fork. The forks intention is to stab. Its not a weapon, its meant to be used on food, but the fork doesnt care. All the fork knows is to stab, whether that be a piece of broccoli, or a steak, or a person. Its a strangely profound idea, and something i never would have thought of had Phillip Pullman not written that line. The hammer, too, has its intention: to strike. It is up to the user to choose how to use the hammer, they may choose to use it as a paper weight or a meat tenderizer. But the hammer is happy so long as it has struck an object, gently or not.
I'm all for improving humans through technology and have high hopes for the future in an idealistic manner. But, as an autistic person who is quite happy with myself and who has been given the gifts that I have been able to recognize as being unique to my neurology, I fear that other like myself in the future will be socially pressured to change themselves just because of what the majority perceives as less or incorrect. Opportunities limited and relationships harmed because "if there's a 'cure' (a way to make an autistic person seem more socially accepted) then why would you not want to be cured?" Simply because the way the majority views you is blind to what's under the surface, and there is now a way to meet their expectations of how you should be. Given the direction of research for asd, and how small the movement towards acceptance. (And all the ambiguities involved in the different types of abilities and appearances). I fear that if the current direction of some research is successful, it will become somewhat like the "you don't have to get internet, but good luck finding a job."
SF author Elizabeth Moon actually wrote a very interesting novel exploring that scenario, called "Speed of Dark". The conclusion to her storyline is an uncomfortable one (at least in my view) and really leaves that question open of "how far is too far" and "what's helpful tech vs what's actual erasure?"
I don't really have anything to add as you've said it already. I agree, it's a dangerous and scary path that we need to carefully consider while advancing acceptance (not just tolerance) for diverse ways of being, such as neurodivergence. If we don't partake in the discussion, I fear the consequences
@@anna_in_aotearoa3166 yeah this book was my first ever autism in media and I've always had mixed feelings about it. The author herself isn't neurodivergent, but some aspects were done right. The ending though, it was... I don't think that if it were to be published today it would end like that
@@LW-ng1fl the way I understand it is that she represents a very real kind of person who believes in technology and capitalism and maybe even genuinely believes that she is doing a good thing. Meanwhile her technology is most likely extremely fallible (for example when you consider how piss poor facial recognition tech is at recognizing black people's or asian people's faces because of what kind of (very much NOT representative of the world's population) databases these softwares are fed to learn, or how neurodivergent people would most likely suffer a lot from softwares trying to ascribe emotions to their facial expressions). On top of that she uses cheap, underpaid, outsourced labour by people in difficult living situations (e.g. Ukrainian refugees on Amazon mechanical turk) while claiming that said labour is empowering to people because they get to work on the future. But the only people benefitting financially from that future are her and her shareholders. How convenient.
@@LW-ng1fl As an additional bit of context, Kelly's company is (most likely) based on a real tech startup discussed on a relatively recent (within the past few months) episode of the podcast Trashfuture (Abi has guested a few times). Mechanical Turk, ironic name and all, is a real platform operated by Amazon, that basically consists of tech companies hiring vulnerable people at miniscule wages to essentially do the work of Machine Learning (ML) systems manually. Supposedly the work their doing is supposed to be generating sample data sets to train ML algorithms, but in reality they're just skipping the really difficult programming part part and using the cheap labor to do the work. To paraphrase Abi's friend and cohost Alice Caldwell Kelley, companies are using nonsense technical buzzwords to hide the fact that the thing that makes their product work is "just a Guy"
i love how the kelly slaughter interview is just sugar-coated words but when you look at them from an objective, factual perspective, you realise how problematic it is. hiring women for low-paying jobs and exploiting certain impoverished sections of women in the name of femininity - the part of facial recognition becoming a human process instead of a machine learning process. also the reference to people as "individual faces" and then rambling on and on about user experience: it rlly shows how much companies and large corporations really care about each individual user, but of us as a general target demographic client base. also it actually shows that if we had the proper neutral science technology to perform facerec without commissioning underpaid tech workers, how helpful of a tool it would be. even if true technology might rob us of the true-to-humanity and god-faithful human experience, even people (jobs which aren't automated yet, thankfully phew) can also dehumanise us
Also, notice how the same software that is used to police prisons and deny entry at the border relies on the underpaid work of women in prisons and refugee camps.
Including the economic class transhumnism. Now it's cell phones. But once organ cloning and physical and mental tech which will give major advantages to the very very wealthy, will create a two tier society. Just like much of education is today but worse. Why would someone hire someone with chronic health problems from the environment when you can hire someone genetically smarter healthier and better looking. And that is more likely part of the next century. In 200 hundred years we might basically be different species. The solution for a fair system is replacing capitalism with a more egalitarian system with everyone having access to the same benefits.
The realization came to me gradually that my self has more than one extent. Obviously there's the skin/air boundary between "me" and "not me", but I also clearly percieve a brain/body boundary, and things in-between. And in my brain there are the parts of "me" that I often find excluded from my sense of self, like my addictions, intrusive thoughts, unwanted impulses, negative feelings, etc. There are also many socially defined boundaries (groups that I identify with), and physical boundaries that extend beyond my body, like the room I'm in or the vehicle I'm driving, etc. Realizing that the extent of my self is so flexible quickly made me realize that I'm actually constantly redefining my "self" in various changing contexts, and that I can actually have a great deal of control over this process if I pay attention to it (it's hard sometimes). If we're not careful about how we define our self, we'll obviously run into problems when two or more people with an overlapping sense of self have different ideas about what they want. We need to be very aware of how we're defining our self. I see transhumanism in this light, and I think it's somewhat of a distraction, in the sense that it's full of very interesting examples. They are so interesting that we just think about how cool they are and they lead into fantasizing about science fiction, rather than asking and sincerely trying to answer the fundamental question of how we define ourselves, and how we should define ourselves if we want to be happy or to be good or to achieve some other goal.
As a teenager, I loved the idea of transhumanism. When asked, "How do you want to die." I'd always respond with "My goal is to live long enough for them to download my brain into a computer so I can live forever." but as I get older I become more and more afraid of who will be in control of that kind of technology. More and more I feel we shouldn't be focused on pushing technology but instead pushing for a better society where the power lies in the hands of the people, and only then should we start pushing the limits of technology.
Why not push for both? I'm a transplant patient that's been through 2 different kidneys in the last 31 years. I'm 32 lol With tech at its current level, the best I can hope for is an indeterminate amount of time (on average 15-20 years) using a donor organ before I need another one, with excruciating and debilitating dialysis in between organs. After the age of 65ish, they don't like doing transplants and at 85, you're stuck on dialysis for your remaining years. All things considered, best case scenario at the end of my life is that I die on the operating table. Otherwise it's potentially a case of drawn out and long term suffering before my body can't take it anymore. What I wouldn't give for a library of genetically engineered kidneys coded to my DNA. Proof of concept has already happened with a lab grown speck of liver. It's realistically within reach if we wanted it to be. At the same time I understand the apprehension behind technological progress. Which is why my answer is push for both. At the same time. Public ownership of technology and technological progress.
You made an excellent point that really resonated with me when you said that “Disability is not just a physical limitation, it’s an economic one too.” I’m hard of hearing and I am Hearing Aid dependent, I was born with a hearing disability. I live in New Zealand a relatively prosperous and progressive country - but here, hearing funding is provided until you’re 18, and then after you’re 65 - in between, you’re pretty much on your own if you were born with a hearing issue. So, a 44 year old father like me needs to buy their own hearing aids every 5 years or so, and will do for a while, the cost and frequency of this purchase is commensurate with a second hand car. The technology exists, it’s been there for a while now - but access to a base level requirement for this condition is an economic one, with a catch-22 like feedback loop - I need my hearing aids to function in. a professional capacity - if I don’t have them, then I literally couldn’t do what I do. Even still, as a hetero-normative, pretty well educated middle class white guy - or whatever label anyone wants to give it, I really don’t mind - the fact that I don’t know the words or terms of reference for this is telling in and of itself - because I’m privileged enough for most things not to worry or affect me - which means the inherent bias I have is enough that without this disability I wouldn’t have an issue, and with it, it’s largely the thing that I pot on about. Which makes me wonder - how many other people out there can’t access or afford this resource (hearing aids) either, but also don’t possess the purported socio-societal advantages that I enjoy? The technical challenge Is resolved but the economic one is nowhere close.
Similar experience with me in Canada. My drug coverage stopped at 25, and that was just a few months ago. Next month, I need to get my Epi-pen replaced, and I also need to refill my ADD meds and antihistamines. The total cost is gonna be a few hundred once all is said and done, and I can barely manage that with my current issues.
Regan, thank you for sharing your experience and also for understanding that people with even less priviledge might struggle more with their disability!
Was thinking a similar thing for glasses! Sure in my country you can get them for cheaper by going via the NHS, but you still have to pay for them and take time off work to go to optometrist appointments. Some people have to change their lenses every 2 years, and literally can't function without them. I don't think we should have to pay just to match other people's natural ability to see (or in your case, hear) fully
@@brynjames3779 I haven't had new glasses in 10 years cuz of how expensive they are and I've had other medical stuff going on. I'm currently trying to decide if I want to save up for a new blood pressure cuff or new glasses 😄
Still crappy even if you're a white hetero whatever you chose to label yourself (also hi fellow kiwi 👋😃). You're completely right on with the economic comment, you're always going to be at a financial disadvantage compared to an otherwise equal peer. And without dismissing your experience, like you say, there are many others who are at a disadvantage due to their place in society. After reading your story I've unintentionally written a lot of stuff about my own life. Speaking as someone who is currently on the WINZ benefit for disability, the system is quite horrifyingly flawed. A few years ago I was on the job seekers allowance, after rent and power went out of my benifit, the remaining weekly budget for food, phone bill, nessesities etc. was $15.50. Winz advice was to cut unnecessary spending, completely out of touch with my situation. I shared a room and slept on a floor. Due to these circumstances I couldn't afford to see a doctor even though my health was starting to decline, when I asked for help winz explained they require people to purchase things first with the promise of being re-embursed at a later date. (A policy still in place now). They stated they required me to pay for the initial set up appointment and the following appointment to prove I needed to see a doctor. I ended up not seeing a doctor for a few years because there was no feasible way for me to pay. There are free doctors but their waiting lists are months long and if you're not a priority, even longer. Even when I gained employment it was still difficult to see a doctor as I couldn't afford to take time off work and between my 2 part time jobs I had a very small time window of when I could see a doctor, not helped by the fact I was constantly exhausted and barely functioning. At one point I did go to an after hours clinic with chest pains, only to be sent away for "anxiety" and after that I just dismissed all my ailments as such. (At the time I presented like a woman and honestly the experiences I've had over the years and the stories I have heard from women and lgbtq people. Yikes. Looking back I'm quite angry I was told that even though I had "very high blood pressure" I didn't need any follow up). I decided I couldn't justify the expense of a doctor if I was just going to be sent away again. The impact of not seeing a doctor / not being taken seriously 5 or so years ago when I first started knowing something was wrong has now caught up with me. I finally enrolled at a medical center nearly 2 years ago now. The first couple of appointments nothing much happend but then I saw a different doctor, who took me seriously and listened. We don't know what's exactly causing my issues other than I have cardiovascular damage caused by years of uncontrolled hypertension (high bp), issues with my lungs, chronic pain and fatigue. Just today I got refered to a renal specialist because my bloods are not looking good, they've been on a downward trend the past 6 months or so. I've been in and out of hospital, I've had more blood tests than I can count. I'm the youngest person my Dr has put on heart medication. I've had no choice but to quit my job and studies because my health hit an all time low. I try not to think about past mistakes and decisions much but the one thing that just frustrates the heck out of me is I'm young. If winz had just paid for my Dr's visits 5 or 6 years ago, then maybe I could have been resolved these issues then before they reached breaking point on my body. When I think of it in a purely money centric way- if they'd payed for those visits then maybe I wouldn't be back on the benefit. Surely it's cheaper to fund doctors appointments and address health issues before they become life long disabilities that limit people from being a part of and contributing to society to their fullest potential. I'm grateful that the system has improved since last time I received a benifit but I'm still stuck saving up to buy things like a new pair of glasses, a new cuff for my blood pressure monitor and other medical things. I hope to heal the things I can heal and find ways to manage things that I can't. I'm grateful to live in New Zealand, though it's far from perfect. Lifelong living on the benefit is a bleak outcome and it seriously ousts us from society. I even feel weird trying to find a partner and I feel guilt when I try to have a regular social life. When reciving a benefit there are rules around having a partner, it instantly slashes our benefits significantly, regardless of the amount of a partner's income. Due to this I'm in my mid 20s and still not had a serious long term relationship because of this rule, by me committing to someone it's like the govt. decides I'm any future partner's burden to pay for and no longer an individual who should be financially independent. This is also why so many disabled people become trapped in toxic or abusive relationships. It's incredibly hard to leave when a benifit is reduced so low a person cannot financially afford to leave. I do have amazing friends who luckily love home cooking and cheap / free social activities and don't mind staying in and doing something. A close friend of mine just bought tickets to see her favorite musician and I was so excited and happy for her. It wasn't until later that I just thought about something like concert tickets are so out of what I can afford. And I just felt like... what is the answer? It is definitely a massive disadvantage that disabled people relying on government support can't afford nessesities like medical equipment but it's also a social, emotional and mental health disadvantage that we can't fully take part in society due to financial barriers. I know that other people's taxes pay for every cent that comes into my bank account. I feel conflicted and guilty when spending money on anything other than food or bills. I don't begrudge my friends who are able to both physically dance and afford to go to a concert but I do think about society and the jobs we create. How limiting they are for people who are disabled, are not neurotypical or unable to work 8 or 9 hours a day. I wish that there were more opportunities, more flexible workplaces that allow for financial independence. I think our differences make us all unique and a benifit to society. I still feel like I'm in a place of privilege, there are so many Māori with heart health problems that are not taken seriously. I have a doctor that actually listens to me and helped me fill out winz forms. I have mostly free Healthcare. I have friends who understand I can't always keep up with them. I have a safe place to live. I still think about the young pregnant woman who was forced to live in her car, despite having a social worker advocate for her, her request for emergency housing was denied by WINZ. It's horrifying. There are so many kids in this country that miss out because of the economic status of their family. It's so hard to escape poverty.
the uneasiness and exacting nature of the "kelly" interview is extremely well-done. the script brings up all of the points that are cause for alarm, in exactly the way they would be in an interview with someone who is just a step worse at spin than most company spokespeople: so we as viewers can take that last half-step in logic to be like. well. okay; what she's saying is couched in smiles, but the content is extremely dystopian and terrifying. facial recognition software may be cool, and interesting. but the way that it's being used, and the way that it's being *created* i.e. it's just impoverished persons/people being taken advantage of, has shown that capital has decided this tech shall be used to perpetuate the status quo, and in fact root it deeper as it stands. additionally, I feel like having the interviewer gloss over the potentially exposing parts (cops, border patrol) and just going for the soft gimmes is a nice indictment of current 'journalistic' practices. Thanks for the great video, there's so many layers of things to think about here.
The way she glosses over border patrol, prisons and law enforcement and then the interviewer focuses on Advistisements is so real, because they both know what they want to focus on and what they want to avoid.
So then what does this imply about radical action? Do anti-capitalists have to be luddites now because there's no way technology can be used for liberation under capitalism? Seems self-servingly defeatist to me
This video was fascinating. I just finished a class called Philosophy of the Body, and back-to-back we read Allen Buchanan's: Beyond Human (pro-transhumanism) and Havi Carel's Illness: The Cry of Flesh (which delves into Merleau-Ponty, Heidegger, transparency, and phenomenology). Incredible work here. It's kind of bizarre to me how well these topics cross over! Thanks for all you do 🎉
This talk about technology and disability is always interesting. I've worn glasses since I was a child, and have such strong astingmatism that people who try on my glasses feel like they're drunk. But I consider the corrected vision my glasses gave me my 'real' sight, and I'm not considered disabled despite requiring a piece of technology to be able to functionally drive, and having a great deal of vision-reliant hobbies or aspects to my job. The genetic aspect is super interesting, especially where the line of eugenics is. Most people would consider using genetic engineering to make sure nobody suffers Tay Sachs good... but then where does the line of genetic disease and something that's only an inconvenience because of society end up?
That seems like a pretty easy thing to solve with a couple of laws. But at the same time if a family of one "race" want to have their kid look like they are from another one, then I don't really see the harm in that. The goal is for everyone to be treated equally under society and the law, so it shouldn't matter either way.
Your last part is what will forcibly change humans because everything including Transhumanism is really only about one thing, Psychology. How we interpret the world, what we find meaningful and so forth are nothing more but processes in the brain governed by our genetics, derived from evolution. Transhumanism will change our psyches so that our desire for "being rich" or "living in a virtual world" no longer exist, in fact we might be completely indifferent to external stimuli such as these, why would I ever want to experience anything if I am already content with nothing? Why bother with music or relationships or any of the sort? I find it quite ignorant to believe that our human thought processes will persist throughout time, they are already under attack and influenced by external actors, social media, advertising, medicines and so forth, where did your thoughts come from? Why are you thinking the way you do and not some other way? Why do you find some things important and others not? this is the real "threat" of these technologies and also the goal we've been striving for since forever, education is an attempt at doing the same thing. We might continue to exist but our natural human psyche will be long gone.
@@Danuxsy Yes, bioethics are necessary. But is it right to condemn people to fear their kid will be born crippled or forced to endure drowning in their own mucus because we fear change?
@@Windona Exactly people will allow this technology to change them, it doesn't even have to be forced by anyone it is how the human psyche functions but ironically this is the greatest threat to mankind.
I do think the line is to be drawn at: Does this benefit me personally or does this benefit the system? If it purely benefits the system, then it is unethical. If it benefits you, it is ethical. What does and doesn‘t benefit you however, should be up to yourself. That being said, if we change the system we necessarily change what it does and does not need. If we were to, for example, create an anarcho-communist society (this is a hypothetical, please stay with me), things like working a job, being „competitive“ etc would not be push factors anymore, allowing for more genuine appliance of technologies to yourself. For example, I don‘t know if I have an argument (beyond a fallacious appeal to nature) against genetically enhancing the mental capabilities of your child in such circumstances. After all, it is not necessary to do so, as there isn‘t any competition between disabled folk and other folk. And I don‘t really see any downsides there. After all, one brilliant mind more, is one brilliant mind more. Who gives a fuck? I do realize that that might have negative consequences. Like for example it being fashionable to do so, effectively recreating eugenics. But then again, I don‘t really see that happening, as fashion trends are part of the capitalist machine of domination and I don‘t really know if it would turn out the same way. I dunno. It is hard to argue this hypothetical to such extremes as I am basically just writing fiction at this point. My point being: It is complicated and I don‘t know where to draw the line and if there even is one.
About guns: I can attest to the fact that once a person holds a gun in their hands, it is a different person who perceives the world in a very different way. There is a reason why people become "gun nuts" - the guns make them feel good and powerful. When i was in basic training, I could watch how differently people reacted to getting a gun in their hands. And I could see how the people who were the most excited to get one were the least trustworthy. The ones who were wiser, saw it as a great responsibility and a potential danger "in itself".
I wonder then if the truth is that BOTH guns and people kill people. Both should be held accountable for tragedies. Because it takes a certain kind of person to be so inclined to power trip and feel like they are above the law whenever presented an opportunity to kill, so it is very much their fault for a murder. But a gun enables them in more than just the act of physically firing it to very easily seize the opportunity to kill. The status of owning and holding one does something to said person's brain. It perhaps feeds into prior delusions.
@@getschwifty5537 the utopian solution would be to improve the general mental health of the population while making guns unnecessary in and of themselves. They should become a relict of the barbarous and primitive past, just as we would see a sword or a waraxe. A waraxe is terrifying as a weapon, but most people would not wish to walk around with one, because it is extremely brutal way to kill someone. You will end up being covered in blood and guts, most people would not have a stomach for it.
Except, gun nuts are often the most responsible with guns, because they know the dangers of mishandling them. Sure there are irresponsible gun nuts out there, but in my experience, they are the minority, and generally, its safer to be around a gun nut with a gun, than someone who doesn't really know anything about guns but has one anyway.
@Doom Guy aint nobody dying from criminals with guns where I live. It makes national news when there is a shootout, in a country of 80+mln people. In all this time here the worst thing I have witnessed was one person shoving another. Violence is not a normal human behavior. Criminals are created, not born.
Last year, after being *thiiiis* close to legally blind my entire life, I got laser eye surgery. There was a lot of checkups to make sure nothing would go wrong, but when I sat down in the chair (awake) the procedure took less than 10 minutes. I then went home, suffered a *lot* of pain for maybe 3 hours... and from that moment on, I have lived with 20/15 vision--better than 20/20 vision. (Technically, from the moment the surgery ended, I had perfect vision, I just didn't notice as much). The technology we have *today* is astounding, and it blew my mind what is actually available to the public, much less what our top scientists are capable of... but open discoverying this miracle, this treasure, my first thought was "I wish I could give this to *everyone*. ... I think that sums up the problems with transhumanism pretty well. Not the transhumanism itself, but all the systems around it that don't let us simply give this tech to the people who want it.
Honestly the same story with every justice system everywhere . . . People that _need_ justice can't pay for it, that's exactly why they need it Our governmental structures are truly awful but who knows how to fix it? Same story for democracy in general, people don't realize how undemocratic the west really is.
Lasik was banned in many countries due to safety issues, and some people have gone blind from it..For me personally, my vision is progressively getting back where it was, the effect barely lasted 2 years...this also translates to all of the technologies we cheated the nature with. Not one transcends death or even disease. Very rarely
While gender identity has never crossed my mind as something that i needed, one of the first thoughts ive ever had even close to it is "yeah i want to be like Cyborg from Teen Titans." And even after seeing games like Cyberpunk or Deus Ex i still maintain that thought. Imagine if all of my personal motivation issues can be fixed by just electronically forcing my brain to give me the reward chemicals that i perpetually miss out on a daily basis, and all of the pains of my body (that while are not bad now will most assuredly get bad when i get older) just disappear when i need them to. Its a scary thought that these kind of enhancements might be required for you to even get a job in the future, but id prefer that future over just not having the motivation to do anything for the rest of my life. With that in mind after a while of thinking about it I determined that even though i don't identify as a trans person i can absolutely understand where they're coming from. Hard right people like to quote stoicism as a reason as to why everyone should just have to remain the same person and be an emotionally blocked off individual because they decided to misinterpret the writings of Marcus Aurelius, when the most important point of stoicism is supposed to be to try to reach your potential and be the best you that you can be. if the best you requires that you can change your body and become something better then is this just not an elevated version of being your best self?
The idea that technology could be more than it seems reminds me of hostile architecture - I remember going to London as a kid and seeing bumpy, slanted, ribbed benches, all the weird structures put on pavements that I thought looked pretty cool and futuristic and gave me a sort of nostalgia for the city - these weird things that I supposed look cool, like the future, the big city! but are beyond my understanding as someone who lives in the countryside. Then I came to understand them: hostile architecture. Those futuristic-looking benches with loads of bumps, funny shapes, and arm-rests were designed to be hostile to those most in need - homeless people. Those cool little structures in doorways, on steps, outside restaurants and cinemas, in parks - they were built so homeless people would have nowhere to rest, to exist. Why? Because homeless people look bad, they ruin the vibe, so let's treat them like a bad smell and blow them away with architectural fans. That was a weird sour realisation for me, it made me quite angry. For a long time I had appreciated the interesting architectural details of the city, almost like appreciating certain technological details, I even became nostalgic for them, and all along they had been a frankly disgusting, backhanded, inhumane treatment for the most vulnerable. Makes ya think.
Feel somethin similar walking in America cities havin spent most of my childhood on rural areas. Car culture is America is also an aggressive form of architecture. What a time to be alive. 😌💕
@@SignificantPressure100 Huh? Sorry I don't know if I'm misunderstanding but do you mind explaining where you got: 1. The fact that I believe "technology bad" 2. The fact that I "use technology to enhance my public voice" Because 1. I don't believe "technology bad", I believe technology (it's not technology anyway, it's architecture) specifically designed to be hostile to homeless people by stopping them from using public spaces as spaces to exist - THAT'S what's bad 2. Do you mean because I'm using a laptop (technology) to voice this, so it's ironic? My friend, a laptop and internet designed for convenience and technological progress is completely and utterly different to hostile architecture
@@SignificantPressure100 Straw man much? That was an insightful comment and you just walked over and took a massive shit on it by saying nothing of worth. You enjoy being a shit monster?
This whole concept was somewhat discussed in my 9th grade biology class because of the developments of CRISPR technology . everyone was talking about how we could create superheroes and everyone would be happy. I brought up the idea that only the rich would be given access to human altering tech, and it would create an even further class divide. I expected to be sort laughed at and be called a communist, but most people in the class/my teacher understood and the conversation was completely shifted! Just thought this was sort of related idk
It's more nuanced. There's too much open source computer code for big tech to have true control over it. They can't contain something like that and everyone would have one way or another to get it. This also opens up a completely different political frontier and classes are going to be rendered pointless. I don't think socialism and capitalism will apply to future politics
Pretty sure this was (more or less) a setting in an episode of Love, Death, + Robots.called "Pop Squad". The tech in question was able to make people immortal, which necessitated the existence of a "pop squad" (or population control police). Reinforces the point that Abigail brings up in this vid about "what does the technology lead us to become?"
@@sarasteege2265 I always laugh at these dystopian future scenarios where our idiocracy of a government manages to keep the entire population under control with some type of device. the politicians dont think more than 4 years ahead, they will never care about overpopulation until its too late to do anything about it
Over time, technology is sold to as many people as possible, this is capitalism. Previously, the richest people had computers, but now everyone has them, and they are much more powerful.
19:05 another example that comes to my mind as a disabled person is my mobility aids, I move seamlessly with them and even call them “my legs”, when I’m in my chair it’s an extension of my own body that I stop thinking about at a certain point
With regards to experiencing the hammer, it reminds me of a story in Sacks' book "The Man Who Mistook His Wife for a Hat" in which a guy couldn't make sense of what he was seeing, despite being able to describe the form of what he saw. Given a flower and asked to describe it, he said it was a "convoluted red form with a linear green attachment." Yet he didn't know it was a flower until told. Our brains do a lot of heavy lifting to make sense of the world; you might even say that most of our experience is post-processing and not original data.
I would say you're pretty safe saying literally all of our lives experience is processed data. Every single bit. There's even some great experiments that pretty clearly established that our brains actually take into account events slightly in the 'future' (from the perspective of our subjective experience) and use that to back-fill in what we see as "actually happening". Our perceptual systems literally play a - very well practiced - guessing game of "those color blobs wiggling that way over the past few milliseconds + those color blobs not moving at all at the same time + skin feels something like breeze == probably a baseball flying at your face" and informs our conscious selves of that assumed guess 20-40 milliseconds after the input arrived. This is why optical illusions work - you don't directly experience the world, you experience what some parts of your brain assume the world to be, based on it's past experiences. Also why the test like "count the ball bounces, miss the gorilla" work , same idea - 'you' are not getting the raw data you're getting an interpretation which was at the time so focused on one particular aspect of the environment that it was literally tossing lots of other irrelevant data aside. Plus auditory inputs get processed faster than visuals, then your brain 'fixes' things to line up properly. You can play the same sound twice, and go in *knowing* it's the same sound, and 'hear' two completely different thing if watching lips form two different words while the sound plays. It can honestly be a bit of an existential crisis kind of experience if you ever spend a few hours diving into how filtered our actual experience of 'reality' truly is.
I think reducing everything to "data" is commiting the same epistemological error that people from the first two Industrial Revolutions did: they reduced everything to "pressure and release" because of the steam machine. That's why you see that language in psychoanalysis (which started in that age). We reduce everything to "data" because "data" is what drives our current technology. We don't know about the future, so we can't affirm "everything is data" in an objective way - it will be an analogy. Quotes: ____ Dataism In the pages of the New York Times, David Brooks has announced a data revolution. His words are as prophetic as Chris Anderson’s famous article ‘The End of Theory’. ‘Dataism’ is the name of the new faith: If you asked me to describe the rising philosophy of the day, I’d say it is data-ism. We now have the ability to gather huge amounts of data. This ability seems to carry with it certain cultural assumptions - that everything that can be measured should be measured; that data is a transparent and reliable lens that allows us to filter out emotionalism and ideology; that data will help us do remarkable things - like foretell the future … The data revolution is giving us wonderful ways to understand the present and the past. • Data and numbers are not narrative; they are additive. Meaning, on the other hand, is based on narration. Data simply fills up the senseless void. • Quantified Self Belief that life admits measurement and quantification governs the digital age as a whole. ‘Quantified Self’ honours this faith too. The body is outfitted with sensors that automatically register data. Measurements involve temperature, blood sugar levels, calorie intake and use, movement profiles and fat content. The heart rate is taken in a state of meditation: performance and efficiency still count when relaxing. Moods, dispositions and routine activities are all inventoried as well. Such self-measurement and self-monitoring is supposed to enhance mental performance. Yet the mounting pile of data this yields does nothing to answer the simple question, Who am I? ‘Quantified Self’ represents a Dadaist technology too; it empties the self of any and all meaning. The self gets broken down into data until no sense remains. The motto of Quantified Self is ‘Self Knowledge through Numbers’. But no insight into the self can result from data and numbers alone, no matter how exhaustive they are. Numbers do not recount anything about the self. Counting is not recounting. A sense of self derives from giving an account. It is not counting, but recounting that leads to self-discovery or self-knowledge. *_Psychopolitics_* - Byung-Chul Han
@@hfbhfb4806 Your "data-ism" comment there isn't necessarily incorrect, and is definitely a thing to be aware of (possibly worthy of a PhilosophyTube episode in and of itself). But I don't think it's really touching on what we're talking about by saying our experience of the world is "processed data". The processing is really the key bit we're talking about - that our impressions of what "reality" is are not a direct interaction with the external. What we know as 'reality' is really a story that our perceptual systems tell our conscious-self. It takes in the input (which is in and of itself already filtered) , compares those inputs to what it knows about how the world has seemed to work in the past, then guesses what's going on by fitting those two things together as best it can in the few milliseconds it has before it has to move on to the next chunk of inputs. Our experienced reality is a model based on a lot of hard-coded brain structures plus a history of what assumptions have worked and which got you smacked in the face.
There are some really interesting ideas in here. Thank you! I know a lot of transfemme eggs went for fantasy transformation kinds of stories, but I was always into transhumanism. Overcoming the body I was born with has always been such an appealing concept!
4:12 as someone with ADD who takes medication, I resonate with this a lot. A lot of times, my mental state "gets in the way" of me being happy and motivated to do things necessary for living a productive life. However, I think the setting in which one has such a condition changes their outlook on it. For example: if I had zero responsibilities and my physical health took care of itself, I'd be much more content with my regular self. The meds make me seem "muted" which could also be interpreted as "calm". Although I like the benefits it provides me in a professional and social situation in which I need to restrain my constant flow of ideas in order to not appear weird, it admittedly feels like I'm silencing a part of myself. It doesn't necessarily feel bad, and I'm not going to stop taking meds, but it's obviously different. ADD doesn't define me, but it's certainly part of me.
Yeah I've been unable to medicate my ADHD because all the ADHD meds I've encountered were stimulants, and they made my anxiety so bad that it just wasn't worth the tradeoff. I'm on Wellbutrin for my depression, which helps a bit with the motivation side of things, but I still wish there was a magical pill that could allow me to focus. I guess I've never been on ADHD meds for long enough to see what I'm like as a person on ADHD meds, so it's possible that I'd become a zombie and lose all my creativity. At the same time, I hate to say it, but that might be a trade-off I'd be willing to make - I'm so sick of being neurodivergent in a world that wasn't built for us.
@@painter-midge hey just want to say I’m on a very similar journey to you! One tactic I’ve used has been lower dosage delayed release adhd meds (concerta) for a smoother experience. But despite this I also experience the uptick in anxiety and often allow weekends to not take it. Also taking it for a long time (months) does slowly reduce the side effect for me.
It's difficult too, now that you mention it, with antidepressants as well. They've provided an opportunity for me to feel at ease and become more mentally stable in stressful work/education environments, but at the same time, they've left me emotionally empty and numb. It's part of the reason why I've weaned myself off of them to introspectively locate and work on the underlying issues of my depression with the help of resources like group therapy and counseling. For me personally, I just want to emotionally feel something again and have some semblance of a creative drive that I otherwise couldn't get by taking SSRIs. So far it's been rough to tackle, but I at least feel good actively trying to work on improving myself outside of medicated-assistance. P.S. this isn't meant to attack your stance on your own decision to take medications for your ADD, it just reminded me of my current journey trying to work through depression and I wanted to share. :)
No such thing as ADD. Maybe a minority of people with that supposed condition have suffered brain damage during the birthing process but otherwise it refers to no objective condition. Usually an excuse for poor diet, poor lifestyle, poor parenting, poor teaching etc.
Technology also forms part of our identity. Which is probably why it’s so difficult to give up outdated tools or beliefs because you’d have to give up a piece of yourself to do so
I feel like a slightly different person when I'm wearing my contact lenses vs my glasses. Not consciously, and only a little, but it affects the way I move my head (peripheral vision) and go outside (fitting a mask around glasses is a pain and requires occasional adjustments) and even sleep (shouldn't sleep in contacts!).
@@suitov also it changes how people interact with you. If I were glasses people just assume I’m a nerdy nerd, I am a nerd but not in the sense most people think.
@@suitov I was actually expecting her to bring up eyeglasses or contacts as an example, because you don't notice, or want to notice, the glasses are there on your face unless they stop working properly. Like if they get dirty, scratched, or are squeezing too hard. I recently got new glasses, and opted for transitions lenses because I work outdoors a lot. I also chose two frames from the women's section because I like the colors, and because it's kind of a statement for gender abolition. So in a sense, the glasses are supposed to be invisible to me, but highly visible to others.
I agree! It reminds me of when people comment that they are “green bubble” or “blue” - as sometimes happens when you have a group chat and everyone is an iPhone user but that one person with an Android! 😂
"Transhumanism is about how technology will eventually help us overcome the problems that have, up until now, been endemic to human nature. Cyberpunk is about how technology won't." - Stephen Lea Sheppard
@@LeSyd1984 And yet technology HAS helped us overcome many problems endemic to human nature - disease, child mortality and inability to communicate or travel far away. Just saying.
@@LeSyd1984 Just a guess, but are you able-bodied/minded, and are you cisgender? Just hear me out... maybe, just maybe it's not black and white and tech, like all other things on earth, can be used in both good and bad ways depending on the intent of whoever is wielding it. Perhaps you only notice the bad ways because you personally do not use assistive technology on a daily basis.
Genetic engineering is what has me really scared, because its something that doesn't just alter your own body, but any decendants. In fact, it might not even alter your body, JUST your decendants. Unless this technology is made widely available at low or no cost, genetic engineering could turn social class divisions (rich vs poor) into physical, biological, inheritable divisions. Rich people would be physically stronger, smarter, healthier, and prettier. Even aside from class mobility issues, this would almost certainly result in extreme dehumanization of the poor, if genetic engineering became the perceived "standard" for what a human should be. Those who weren't able to afford it would by definition be below that standard, or to put it in a more chilling way, "sub-human" compared to everybody else. Currently, most of the rich like to pretend that they are the "cream of the crop," that they are somehow superior to the rest of the population, rather than just winning the inheritance lottery, largely because it allows them to justify doing terrible things to millions of people, such as laying off 20% of their workforce, because those people are somehow different, and more expendable, than the people making those decisions. Genetic engineering could make this "cream of the crop" sentiment objectively correct, with there being clear, obvious differences.
I think it is super cool you include sources whenever you talk about a concept or idea. It not only bolsters your arguments, but it also allows people to dig deeper if they want to.
And helps students like me to write my assignments. I don't have time to look into the references in much more detail but at least I understand the basic concepts to include it in my essay lol
@@backintimealwyn5736 well, she did. She explained transhumanism and then explained what about it people criticize. And FWIW in general I don’t think she pretends to be a neutral arbiter of knowledge (if such a thing even exists). Video essays aren’t newscasts. They’re supposed to be pieces of work that either persuade or cause one to question something. And even newscasts are often video essays disguised as neutral commentary. The sooner you realize that most people are selling you an idea (rather than simply conveying information) the sooner you’ll be able to critically assess those ideas on their merits. I have no doubt that there’s a source of information on the internet about transhumanism that you’d find neutral. Perhaps it’d weigh more on the benefits to humankind and less on the fact that its benefits would be unequally distributed. But how you weigh competing interpretations of a philosophical idea is never neutral, and to believe so is to be naive.
Not allow, but compel. Everyone is allowed to look into things in the digital age of free information, but to be compelled to look into something is the true achievement of the video. Call me pedantic, and you may be right, but I also like to think that the words we choose to convey our feelings and ideas are incredibly important.
I love the thought of "what kind of person does this technology make?" At one point in life, a partner I was with for multiple years really wanted to move to the city, and despite my distaste for the bustle of a city, I wanted to be supportive and go along with it. And one of the first things I noticed that I REALLY disliked was how the sheer volume of people and automation made things extremely impersonal. There weren't cashiers recognizing you and being excited that you're stopping by, there was no "locals discount", people always seemed to try to make themselves small unless asking for money. Or at least, that's how it felt to *me*. To my partner, there was a liberation in not being recognized, a comfort that nobody really cared they were there. To me, the infrastructure of the city encouraged people to be hyperindependent, disconnected, and selfish, being directly at odds with my values of community and cooperation. So I have an extremely hard time looking at most cities and seeing any sort of "progress". I don't like what that technology seems to turn people into. Though someone could look at me playing videogames and say it makes me a potato so live and let live I guess lol
it's interesting how experiences differ. after moving to a bigger city was the first time I was recognized as a regular (at the local sushi restaurant I would walk to for takeout every Friday), and gave me access to a social groups that didn't exist in my hometown. conversely, my car-dependent hometown felt isolating as I was just a brief presence at disconnected places throughout the city, even though few things were further than 20 minutes away. my parent's suburban neighborhood was too spread out to see or interact with many people and didn't have anywhere nearby for people to regularly run into each other. but I could also see myself potentially feeling disconnected in a larger city than where I am now (though it did feel impossibly huge when I first moved here), and recognize the possibility to more strongly belong within a smaller community than my hometown was...
i don't know, my experience with small villages is that kids throw eggs at your door and you have no clue why... in big cities people of all kind live there and it's chill, live and let live without judgement...
Where I live people tend to flip-flop depending on where they live. Kids living outside of big cities usually want to move to the big cities, people who grew up in the big cities often want to move away from them. Personally, I think cities are way overrated.
16:33 *It's only when it breaks or doesn't do what we want it to do that we recognize it as a peace of technology* I actually stumbled upon this idea when trying to figure out why Quick Time events are so terrible in games. When I'm playing a game, if I want to jump I'm not thinking 'I have to press X' I'm thinking 'I need to jump'. Quick Time events often have nothing to do with what is happening in context and so they break your immersion and force you to think about the controller again.
I've never thought about that from a philosophical perspective, but that really does just drive more nails in the coffin of why quick-time events make absolutely no sense but rhythm games really work a lot of the time.
exactly, there's a reason I disable QTEs in accessability at the start of the game, it's not just because I'm arthritic and blind, it's also because I'm no longer pressing punch to punch, jump to jump or anything.
the best QTE I've ever seen is in FFXIV, where you can hit any button and you just need to fill up a gauge. But even that has accessibility issues for people with mobility issues, so that's not great either.
Including the economic class transhumnism. Now it's cell phones. But once organ cloning and physical and mental tech which will give major advantages to the very very wealthy, will create a two tier society. Just like much of education is today but worse. Why would someone hire someone with chronic health problems from the environment when you can hire someone genetically smarter healthier and better looking. And that is more likely part of the next century. In 200 hundred years we might basically be different species. The solution for a fair system is replacing capitalism with a more egalitarian system with everyone having access to the same benefits.
That is why they try to correlate the button presses with historic patterns. Use the jump button to jump, use the gun button to shoot your gun. ... But that also is subject to failure because the QTE is supposed to be... quick and so they only have so much time to convey to the player that you should be jumping or shooting here. Even the best QTEs are subject to "I don't know why I need to press this button, but here goes."
Hi yes this is my first ever video of yours I clicked on. 3.25 minutes in, I am subscribed. Well done, I'm told that I'm a curmudgeonly critic but this seems genuinely well-considered -- right down to the subtitles. edit - 11 minutes in, I love this place. Wildly casual, normalized discussion about everything. Huge W
I have been a cyborg since I was six. An accident almost fully ripped my fight hand off and only extensive surgery by specialists has been able to reattach it and give me almost unimpeded use of my hand with metal and bone implants. I have worn glasses since childhood as well. Fuck tradition, I will take my ultralight glasses, restored hand and normal life, please and thank you.
I absolutely love how you put us to the test in the Slaughter segments - I feel like I'm being trained to critically think about the jargon technological companies use. I'm also studying for an applied ethics exam at the moment, with one of the topics being genetic enhancement and disability - perfect timing! Thanks for all you do.
This is SUCH a great video! As a disabled person, the idea of technology becoming transparent is such a relevant one. When I use my mobility aids, I do truly become a different version of myself, but that version of myself deals with different ableist circumstances as opposed to when I don't have access to them and physically can't move. I become a different subject with different abilities, as well as different barriers. So while the technology itself becomes transparent, the world around me remains at the front of my mind. SO cool!
Great points. Also, as a service dog handler, it's incredibly interesting to see how this concept works both ways in both dog and handler. It's not uncommon to hear service dog handlers speak of how, while working together in public, dog and handler become one single unit. It no longer feels like you are working/training/walking with a dog. Your dog becomes an extension of yourself, filling in for those parts of your brain/body that for whatever reason cannot work correctly. When not working together (ie, when chilling at home, etc) dog and handler think, feel, and act as individually as any other two beings in existence. But when on the job, there is a real "extension of self" that happens, and the two effectively work as one single unit. It's a pretty amazing thing to experience.
@@nicked_fenyx That's fascinating! I wonder if Neuralink technology (used wisely and appropriately) could enhance this experience and open up new possibilities for people with service animals.
In the UK, and from what I encounter of the US, there seems to be a prevailing bias, that the answer to any problem is always adding something. The answer is never to subtract or simplify. I suspect this is driven by the desire to sell us stuff we don't really need or want. I can't help but feel that the idea of transhumanism will also fall pray to this, even if in theory it could be beneficial if used properly. I suspect that it will just end up being another way to separate us from the things that really matter to us, in order to make us buy more stuff to try and fill the hole left by that separation. For example, is you're feeling lonely and isolate (for whatever reason) that can lead to worsening mental health, but don't worry they have a pill they can sell you (or in the UK the NHS) for that. What is really needed is to address the underlying causes of the problem of being lonely and isolated, despite living in a world where connecting with people is easier than ever (which brings it's own problems).
Hello. I would like to help you. I can tell you that the things you are saying are 100% true! Humanity has no desire to solve any problems! The only desire of humanity is to sell you things like services and artificial chemicals that make your problems even worse! That way, they can trap you in a cycle of ever worsening despair in their fake society and use you to generate more and more phony income for themselves over time! There is hope. You can pull yourself out of this fake world, the way I have done with myself. However, I must warn you: Once you pull yourself out of the fake world of lies about everything, you will see the rest of humanity for what it really is! The rest of humanity is extremely shallow and superficial! They are practically incapable of any deep thought or any reasoning ability! Thus, if you had been hoping for a deep relationship of mutual understanding with other humans, you will be extremely disappointed!
Capitalism and adjacent power structures are obsessed with expansion for its own sake, and that mindset infects the people who are part of them at all levels. All problems are solved by building more shit, or taking more shit, or building more shit TO take more shit, and it makes people think the same way even in ways you wouldn't expect, because the idea that we should, or even _can,_ put an invention or concept back in the box is unreasonable.
I think epipens underscore that aspect of transhumanism missing the forest for the tree that has tinsel. The inventor wanted them made cheaply so they could be used to save lives, but they aren't cheap because the company wants more money. The flaw in only focusing on the means to extend the self, and a broader thought process that considers access and availability is important to put ideal into practice. The person allergic to bee stings may be less fearful of death or less thoughtful of being near hospitals while going to parks with an epipen in their fanny pack. If they can afford it. If they have good enough health insurance. If they have enough access to healthcare to know they're allergic and an anaphylactic response is something they have to consider. Without the societal tools to achieve what enhancements you desire, the only real goal of transhumanism appears to be placing value on the inaccessible to most.
The intermezzo part is the most terrifying thing for me. A bunch of people are afraid of transhumanism, but I think it's just a natural progression. But the idea that your face can be read in such a way, such as finding out who's paying attention in class, or having people see my face without my consent to try and understand my expressions (especially since I'm autistic and my expressions don't always effect my mood) THAT is scary.
So intermezzo parts were about that (black mirror like watching over people)?.. Honestly, I didn't got it. It looked like some kind of joke around mix of harassment, prejudice, and fake selling talk all together. But I don't understand how it is related to announced topic itself.
@@connor3284 I say it's because mass facial recognition software already exists, is even implemented in places (China) and we've already shown we don't give a rip.
@@normanclatcher Right, which indicates that future technologies too will become normalized and accepted regardless of their negative impacts on people.
Whenever someone mentions MTurk in any capacity, I can’t help but be reminded that it was called that because the “Mechanical Turk” was a hoaxed automaton run by a human inside the box it was built from. It was a sideshow attraction that drew in a lot of noterietay for the designer. But it was built to look overly complicated so no one without mechanical savvy could see they were being scammed. Feels pretty cogent.
As someone with Type 1 Diabetes I frequently contemplate the I guess strangeness of my existence being contingent on relatively recent technology, insulin synthesized from a cow for example, which somehow the process was allowed to be patented, so a company literally owns the means to my existence and if I can't pay I'm dead. Beyond this I always have two electronic devices on my body with tubes that puncture my skin to monitor my blood sugar and deliver insulin, one device has to be recharged by an old phone charger while the other is discarded and replaced regularly. On a few occasions I have forgotten to charge my device so I would literally plug myself into an outlet on the wall
as an average person, Facial recognition software becoming widespread is an absolute nightmare scenario that I hate and will fight with all of my means.
Sadly like so many technologies, it exists therefore it cannot be stopped. If rules are made against it, it will just go underground and be even more of a worry.
Sorry, your "absolute nightmare scenario" is already a reality. Most humans already have facial recognition software built into their brains called sight. What you're actually afraid of is not having control of facial recognition software when it inevitably evolves, and of the uncertainty of what purposes such powerful technology might be used for.
I really like coming to this channel as a more stem focused person, seeing the more "why?" perspective with things. This one in particular was very interesting to me. I'm a super hardcore "mankind should spread its wings and fly, not limiting ourselves to this world" type, and it's good to see it re-emphasized that all the power in the world can't help us if we have our society set up in a way where it doesn't benefit us. This is particularly painfully true in the case of nuclear fusion, which we probably COULD have cracked and used as a source of clean energy decades ago if we actually put forth resources and manpower into developing it, but the financial interests of the world don't wish to, as they prefer how things are.
Heck, we probably could just use thorium fission reactors and have had clean, reliable and cheap energy since the sixties but human stupidity and perverse interests have kept us hooked on fossil fuels
@@gabor6259 it's less the thorium and more the uranium salt that's used in the molten salt reactors. The uranium is what's actually fissioning, the thorium is just used as a stock to breed more fissile uranium fuel to make it where you don't have to get more uranium. That said, materials science has advanced enough that we could probably make something corrosion resistant enough to do it at present. Again though, would need resources and brainpower behind it that is unlikely to come.
@@gabor6259 AFAIK: thorium has not been thoroughly tried, only china is currently operating a thorium molten salt reactor, and theirs still has corrosion problems. not sure if its a "we built a mockup reactor for experimental use, the real one will be stainless steel- plated" Problem or a "we don't yet know an economic materal surviving neutrons, salt, and high temperature at the same time, for 40 years, and the reactor will be too expensive if we use platinum" Problem.
As far as i know, Fusion just IS really fucking hard. Neutron efficiency for breeding fuel seems to be a problem. there is a video somewhere on youtube, "why we propably wont have fusion in 20 years, from a fusion scientist" That explails the hurdles in a plausible way. sure, funding will help, but this is science so groundbreaking we have not even invented all the nessecary shovels yet. I could be wrong, though. And yes, with enough funding, our fusion research could be 60 years further, and maybe that would be enough...
I love how Abi is so good at presenting concepts that I’d have no hope of grasping without the way she explains them. I still don’t fully know what transhumanism is but now I’m interested enough to actually look into it. I’m so glad content like this is so easily accessible and I’m so glad creators like Abi exist to put these videos out there.
Transhumanism is very drastic. Transhumanists like to say that for example using a phone is already transhumanism because you using technology for communication. But real transhumanism is cybernetics like having prosthetic legs and arms having electronic eyes and ears etc. Also maybe involve some genetic modification to have stronger immune system or bigger brain. The brain chip what Elon Musk propagated is also a transhumanist idea. After all these modifications you would be "posthuman" as somebody barely can call you a human anymore. Other ideas like having bulletproof and/or colour shifting skin artificial organs, metal endoskeleton etc.
It was interesting to hear about ideas being technology. In my work, there is a saying about how every company is a technology company now and how "software has eaten the world". There are many "traditional" companies that don't subscribe the this idea but then they are the ones that fear "distruption". The common positive example is Toyota. Back when they used to make looms, their designs got stolen. The company's founder told the staff not to worry because they are always improving their designs. That by the time the theives have learnt how to manufacture their designs, Toyota would already be another couple of designs ahead. The point wasn't the physical technology per se, but the focus on learning and progress. In reality, those concepts were the key technology to Toyota's success. Translating that back to the companies of today, to reject physical technology is to reject the ideas of learning and progress.
Huh, before this video I knew very little about transhumanism and my perception of it was either people like. Charlie Kirk who talked about it as a conspiracy or people like Elon Musk inventing Neuralink so he can make sure you’re not thinking about unionizing , but hearing it described as like a tool or a technology makes me realize a lot of things already in existence sound like transhumanism and not just obvious ones like the internet. I remember coming across a quote by Socrates where he complained that no one is memorizing poems anymore because of the written word. Kids these days are all writing poems and then forgetting them because the poem exists regardless of their memorizing it. And that itself sounds like a form of transhumanism just like the internet is. It changes how we interact with the world. Again I don’t know. I’ve watched two video essays on it now and both approached it in radically different ways. But it is interesting because approaching this way makes the entire human race one giant Ship of Theseus.
If you are curious about more leftish perspectives on transhumanism, you can check out _Citizen Cyborg_ by James Hughes and/or Iain M. Banks' excellent novel series _The Culture._
Yes, super interesting! It reminds me of how strange I feel when I suddenly can’t use Google to look up something I want to know in that moment, because there’s no internet, or my phone died, or whatever. It feels weirdly frustrating, like, “I should have that information in my brain, but I just can’t get to it right now! Argh!” It’s almost like that “tip of my tongue” feeling. Google/the internet is an extension of my brain’s knowledge and when it’s not there, or I even think about it not being there, it feels really weird.
as a disabled person transhumanism hits very close to home for me, i like the way this discusses the potential for things to go wrong, and the ways in which transhumanism sort of already exists. it depends on the way we use it. if we go the full eugenics route and say that transhumanism is for the betterment of humanity in the sense we remove "inferior" traits, i think that is wrong. instead it should be a way for us to accept the differences among all humans. many disabled people need forms of transhumanism to live. i myself need a feeding tube and surgical modifications to eat and live pain free. it doesn't remove my disability, it simply allows me to experience the world in a similar way to how others do by, you know, giving me the chance to live at all. transhumanism isn't a way to "fix" humans. it's a way to make society more inclusive for those of us with certain differences that aren't accommodated for by humanity and society as we have known it before.
This highlights the important topic of inclusion, but I don't think transhumanism has to be limited to that, and to say it should holds the implicit assumption that there is something ideal about the current evolutionary stage of the human body, which is an unsupported claim. I'm a disabled person and would like to have the full movement of my left arm again, but I'd also like to be able to see more colors with my eyes, formulate eloquent poetry at ease (in such a way that I could do it in a matter of seconds with my friends), solve physics questions faster, and all that nice stuff that existence allows us to conceive. It's not bad that someone might wish for these things. Instead, the problem lies in the fact that the technology for such things should be democratized rather than being an exclusive asset of the elites. It's okay to imagine an enhanced future - one that brings with it more happiness. What is not okay is excluding people from that future.
agreed. the need to make these sorts of modifications equally available is just as important as making sure they aren't abused for inhumane practices. there is certainly more than one good use for transhumanism. my perspective/ideal use is almost exclusively a disability one because of how big a part of my life my disability is, and i think that perspective changes as well based on the type of disability and how any given disabled person perceives their disability. transhumanism helps me to feel less alienated and imperfect for having a body that doesn't fit the standard definition of the human body. i am human still and get to experience humanity just in a different way. i would also like to have modifications like that that make my perception and experience of the world different and push the boundaries of what we know as life and evolution, but for me that includes the modifcations i have and those i may have in the future because they allow me to have a life at all when i wouldn't be able to without them. in a way they also redefine what evolution means because instead of falling to natural selection as a result of my condition, i can continue living and theoretically choose to have children who, if they had that condition as well, could live a comfortable life with the same modifications. because transhumanism is a concept that can apply to all humans (just like disability can), there are going to be so many different perspectives on this and it will be very interesting to see how our shared concept of it evolves as well as we learn more about it and its potential downfalls and/or positive uses.
This was uploaded a day before my mom passed away. Now I finally get a chance to sit down and enjoy this and you immediately mention her name, Marina. Thank you so much Abigail for unintentionally granting me a lot of wholesome respite from such an awful situation
Marina is such a gorgeous name! 🖤💜💙💚💙💜🖤 I hope you've had a chance to get some rest. So glad you could be here to see the video despite it all, Abigail makes her work such a treat to watch. I'm sorry you couldn't keep your mom forever! You are in my thoughts, I'm sending love and hugs your way!!! 🖤💜💙💚💙💜🖤
Hugs. Just in case nobody has told you this, it's very common to be a bit stupid for some time after a bereavement. Be gentle with yourself. It's temporary. The sun will come out again, I promise.
Just wanted to say that your Kelly Slaughter and Arsonist (sorry, Traveling Petrol Salesman) skits are so good that they've inspired the personalities of two of my OCs--
Reading The Cyborg Manifesto at uni was such a serious game changer for me in terms of understanding identity and politics and even mental health, and turning that thoughtfulness inward, that I was SO EXCITED about this video. Transhumanism is so much more than how we integrate tech into our lives, it's about the definition of the self, and accepting that the self as it is is as important and true as a self-before-change is just so weirdly healing, in addition to eye opening.
" unless I miss a dose and then I wake up feeling like venom." So true... I just did a hospital stint where they took me off my spiro for a little bit and after 6 hours I was in my own special h*ll. Nothing tasted or smelled right, things tacitly felt wrong, how I sweated and smell(particularly because I was sick), even the pain I was already in became more uncomfortable and I was unable to control my emotions. I wanted to crawl out of my skin and I cried all day until several hours after they gave me a half dose of spiro, which brought my mood back into balance and brought my senses back close to where they were no longer deeply distressing. It took a week at a full dose of spiro to for my senses to fully back to where they were prior. Great video, I just thought I would mention it considering your own experience with my own of missing a dose at an inopportune time.
This description of how it feels to be off the med makes me start to wonder: are there more ways to be born into the wrong gender? Can it be that for some people our sensory impressions and interpretations of the world could be improved by transitioning, regardless of psychological feelings of gender belonging?
@@iamjimgroth in answer to your first question: I would say yes. Hormone disorders make gender complicated for supposedly-cis people all the time. I have PCOS and my life is also significantly improved by spironolactone (the above mentioned Spiro) that is a main testosterone blocker for trans women in the US. As to your second question... I think it's too black and white, and this is definitely a topic in the grey area. I don't think you need to transition away from the gender you feel you are to improve how you experience the world. I do think gender affirming hormone treatment for trans and cis people alike would probably benefit more people than realize it.
@@WitchOracle this is a crazy interesting subject, of which I'm extremely new to. Thank you for sharing and explaining. I can't imagine the things described here, but I know one thing: transhumanism and transsexuality are very linked. I never had a thought in that direction (more than that transsexuality is very "cyberpunk"). Can anyone suggest some reading that will give me more insights into the subject? Edit: my keyboard suggested testing, instead of reading. I'm *not* asking for suggestions on testing as it said before. 😂
I like to believe I understood the transparency of tools before watching this, but hearing it spelt out like that really tipped me off on why I often despise working with obscure algorithms, or harsh software changes (screw you, Samsung!): You're set back in understanding those whenever they change, and the divide between you and your tool becomes more visible, sometimes even a hindrance. Thats especially obnoxious in the case of AI algorithms like RUclipss, which keep constantly changing. Usually in ways that aren't supposed to work in our favour, but seem like they do. As if your car would make parking harder in order to increase time you spend in it...
This is a great video and exceptionally well delivered thank you, I have experienced the Scuba *separation from/full acceptance of* your gear (especially the first few times one becomes *Neutrally Buoyant!* (Oh frabjious day!), also the feather in hats in the days where people carried Rapiers etc for defense/offense, I have recently started thinking that the feather thrashing around in the background was a great way to confuse your *"hitbox"* or silhouette and could save your life by breaking up your outline in periphery. Fascinating stuff, I am Subbing now *Philosophy Tube!*
This was compelling! I loved the "gunman" example and how it interacts with the discourse around people not killing people but guns doing so. Also the hammer challenge was brutal, we are living for your confidence.
YES, that whole "gunman" point is one that I will absolutely be borrowing when discussing the gun debate! I've always felt like that whole "guns don't kill people, people kill people" argument, while I agree to an extent, was missing an important point, and Abi brilliantly articulated that point in a way I never could.
It is a good point. On pro gun side, but there is obvious problem somewhere. Figuring out what causes the dangerous combination might be solution. Find cause of Gunman and eliminate it, rather then guns from people that would never act that way. Right now politicians on both sides seem to pass bad laws that will please base while keeping status que. Lets them keep running on issue, solving it won't let them keep using topic in elections. Really needs looked at from that angle, might be some element of gun culture creating gunman. Could be cosmetic feature that makes gunman behave that way. Weapons used in mass shooting are not most dangerous on market, something else happening. Gunman tend to have way more ammo then they could possibly use, like enough to last soldier in combat zone months. Someone figuring out root cause of these gunman would help fix problem. Probably not as simple as more background checks, censoring media, better mental health, or restrict gun features.
How dose a value ascribed to a firearm cause more death, as apposed to poverty, lack of health care, lo access to higher education and a generally incompetent government all around (In the us).
As someone who has been wearing glasses for over 30 years I can confirm that technology becoming a part of you is true. My parents asked me last week why I don't want to get Lasik surgery or contacts and all I could say is that I can't picure myself without them.
Same. I actually call putting my glasses on "putting on my eyes" and vice versa. Besides, I love getting to choose if I want to see the world, or not. If I had Lasik, I would always have to see the world...
I agree with the "I need my eyes" way of thinking. My brother and I both wear glasses, but he hasn't always worn them, whereas I have since 3rd grade. Yet, they've become so much a part of us that we both can't and sometimes don't recognize each other in pictures without them.
Yes at this point they feel like a part of me I just take off at the end of the day. Not like clothes more like a weird limb maybe. I don't even think about putting on my glasses I just do it and then can't remember that I did it because it's just such an automatic thing to me like blinking or knowing where my limbs are even without thinking about them.
So I really find the conversation about how disability fits in with transhumanism to be interesting. This video makes a great point how while technology can, on the surface, allow people more choices in how they live their life...will people actually get a choice, when these technologies become available? There was this other video I remember talking about gene therapy (I think?), and one issue raised was concerns from different disability groups that their existence would be quietly eugenics-ed away by this new technology. The comments were. Bad. Too many people started with the premise that "fixing" every person's disability was unambiguously good no matter what those disabled people actually said. And I have to wonder how that translates to pressure on disabled people to adopt a technology and "fix" themselves once said technology is normalized. Like--I keep thinking about the fact that I wear glasses. If we define "disability" only as "person has a decreased level of ability in some skill society considers necessary for a 'typical' human", then needing glasses is a form of disability. But people who need glasses aren't treated as disabled. We don't need to deal with anywhere near the same obstacles for interacting with society as the social class of disabled people. I can wear glasses anywhere and nobody makes a fuss, I don't get passed over for jobs, I don't get hyper-analyzed for signs that I'm "faking" my bad vision. Glasses (and other corrective lenses) are just that normalized in my society. At the same time, though--I can't opt out of this technology. That's not an option that is, practically or socially, available to me. My vision is bad and that means I Have To Correct It Myself, or I can't interact with the world to the degree that non-glasses-wearers can. Street signs aren't visible, professional presentations don't have a large enough font. The world isn't built for the subjects that need glasses and exist without them, only the people-and-glasses together. To be clear, this is a wildly complex problem. The whole point of my glasses rant here is not "glasses bad", and it's definitely not that any other personal accommodation device is bad. It's to say--if we want to imagine a world where transhumanism is completely normalized, and how disability and the possibility of "fixing" that might be treated in that world, then looking at how glasses are treated in present-day societies is an interesting place to start.
It's a complex issue. Autism is a big one, where I can see how someone with a severely mentally handicapped child might want to "fix" them, on my end it fundamentally altered how I grew up in ways I look back on as ultimately positive and I wouldn't get rid of it if there was a free pill to do so tomorrow.
I'm glad you specified that glasses are normalized in your society. I kid you not, my boyfriend's parents literally did not want him wearing glasses as a child because they were convinced it would make his eyesight worse. On a more serious note, I am willing to bet that most people would be willing to magic away ADHD if they could. It is normally considered a disability in my field (education) but amusingly enough the rate of tutors with ADHD where I work is way higher than in the general population, and most of my students who have seen the largest jumps in their self awareness, testing and subject area knowledge have been ADHD students that I have worked with.
@@MegaChickenfish Oof, yeah. I am also autistic, also on team "would not change this if I could", but I do know that certain symptoms can be more distressing and debilitating to the autistic person themself. I have seen autistic people who say they would choose a "cure" if one existed, and I support their autonomy in a choice like that. But yes, the conversation around autism has been absolutely dominated by allistic guardians who want to be able to make that determination for their children. And kind of like the video mentions, the assumption that a cure for autism must be possible and *should* be made has led to so much of the funding for autism research being funneled towards theoretical technological cure-alls instead of social programs, accommodations, funding for specialized care, and so on. Also, like. So many conspiracy theories hinging on "X thing made your kid autistic". Did so much damage to society.
@@GREENSP0RE Wow. Yeah, I didn't want to overload the comment with a lot of over-qualifications, but it is true that I don't know every society and how they respond to glasses. Yeah, I mean ADHD medication, from what I have heard, is something a lot of ADHD people like when it works. It definitely can be disabling, especially when a lot of educational systems assume that any kids/young adults who can't focus are just "lazy" and need to try harder. My understanding is if you can get a medication that works for you, being able to control your level of executive function is literally life-changing. But like with so many other neurological conditions, there's such a grab bag of ways it impacts your brain and not all of them are things people want to change. ADHD is often characterized as inattentiveness, but what that usually means is you attend specifically to the things that interest you. Not always great during school, or at a job, but ADHD people often find success when they're allowed to explore something they're truly passionate about.
It's not fair that Abby is that attractive. Philosophers are supposed to be old grey men who smell like cheap whiskey and lifelong regret. Not glowing young women whom I would 100% let step on me.
When thinking about transhumanism, like, the hardcore robot arms and everything stuff, I'm reminded of what I perceive to be the ultimate sci-fi story: about how the rich live forever with everything they could desire, and the poor are left human, as they are.
I loved the hammer example because I initially thought it would be an attention/focus example, where you'd ask at the end something like "did you see the gorilla" or "what color was the exit sign" or something... So I kept scanning the background, checking in on the hammer every pass. And, yeah, it really hit home your point that even when I wasn't even looking at the hammer, it was still a continuously existing thing.
27:19 I honestly think this is a deliberate tactic on their part. Normalise cartoonishly extreme claims so the more tame version seems reasonable by comparison, much like how grifters usually use the old "this is actually worth this much, but we're knocking the price all the way down to this" tactic.
So glad to see a video coming out about this. It’s been something I’d thought about and discussed with some friends for a while now, in part because of the trans perspective, and also because there is some pretty cutting-edge organ printing technology (3D-style, organic, using tobacco as raw material!) being developed where I’m from (Israel). I’m gonna say it again: if you ever want a professional Hebrew translation for your works, I’ll be honoured to do it!
If you are curious about the intersection between trans rights/experiences/etc. and transhumanism, then you may be interested in checking out the TransTrans subreddit.
יש מצב, @@HeiressofWater. מה תרגמת עד כה? אם בא לך לראות דוגמית משלי, את יכולה לראות את הסרטונים ”השמאל”, ”אלימות” ו”אוטוגינפיליה” של נקודותנגד - כולם עבודות שלי.
@@draexian530 uuh... pla is biocompatible, if my friend is not mistaken, and she generally isn't. Still, I'd do at least some light googling before getting out the antiseptic and the scalpel, as soon as the print is underway. DISCLAIMER: NOT MEDICAL ADVICE ! Don't base bodymods on medical speculation from random strangers on the internet.
46:24 as a trans person who got an orchiectomy as part of their HRT, I highly recommend it. (Obviously, satisfaction may vary.) For me vaginoplasty was never a consideration, I love my penis, and I am here to tell you that the Empty Sack situation can honestly be a uniquely fun time. (Stopping myself from oversharing in a youtube comment, even though I do really love talking about it lmao) It also made a HUGE difference on the effectiveness of my HRT overall, with dramatic changes to things like my body hair. Even years after HRT with spiro, I still was having to shave my face every day or two to be comfortable, but now I go a week without feeling like my facial hair is too much, and my stomach is so smooth and soft without having to shave it *at all*. It also definitely makes me feel like I've "hacked" my body in a transhumanist way that feels delightful for me. The transhumanist angle of my orchiectomy and HRT is definitely something I've thought a lot about. Also pro tip: if you can choose, get an orchiectomy in November so that you can tell people you've taken No Nut November to the next level.
I just started MtF HRT but trying monotherapy without blockers and its been a bit bumpy. I keep experimenting with stuff to send my sertoli and lydig cells into a tizzy and seem to be messing with aromatase output, so I’m getting waves of feminization and then reverting back. Not sure if this is “wise” but its certainly been interesting.
As a type 1 diabetic, being a transhumanist is something that my life literally depends on. Having a sensor in my arm, reading my glucose and notifying my phone every 5min, as well as having easy and inexpensive access to insuline (in Europe) has turned this biological flaw of mine into something I can better navigate and overcome. It's been 4 months since my diagnose and without this technology easing my experience, this would be a full time job and I seriously don't know how I'd be able to continue regular (and simple) routines like going to work or having a social life. It's frustrating to see people who don't understand the way all kinds of technology improve the lives of others. Left or right, having zero to no empathy while in politics is destroying the modern democracy.
I've been Type-1 for...19 years now. (Ugh.) I've used a sensor for a few of those years, and it works great -- except when it doesn't and I have to spend a whole day re-calibrating it (topical!), but for the most part it's definitely been an improvement over testing strips. Having that continuous flow of information, rather than being limited to a single number every few hours, has helped tremendously in improving my condition.
my toddler nephew had his diabetic debut last year. he's been using a sensor on his arm for ~9 months. I cannot wait for technology on diabetes to evolve and make it so damn transparent so that he, his parents, and kindergarten teachers (who won't make controls nor administrate insulin ever) don't have to think about glucose and insulin anymore
![YoungBoy Never Broke Again - Catch Me [Official Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/KxwEXXFQMTY/mqdefault.jpg)
That latex bodysuit was actually surprisingly comfortable!
It looks sooo cool
@@andy-kg5fb i agree, that so cool! 😎
you look absolutely stunning ❤😭❤
Even the arm bands.
Where do I get one?
"The saddest aspect of life right now is that science gathers knowledge faster than society gathers wisdom" -Isaac Asimov
Amin!
Enter the net..
This is a great saying ❣️❣️❣️ and I agree 👍
Even if we think and had a great evolutionary development becoming "humans" I think we stay like chimpanzees stood... We have a great lack of social competence & societal empathy . We act in many cases like predators and search 9ur benefits in exploitation of others and ressources too...
Yes great quote. Thanks
Sad in SF CA🥲😞
@@GertKlimanschewski 1000% Agree with
When you did the 360 with the hammer, I was expecting you to say after, "but did you see the dancing gorilla?"
Same lol
all i could think was how impossible it would be for a subset of people to manage given she's showing 180 degrees of latex-covered bum on youtube XD
Wasn't it a moonwalking bear?
Took my eye off the hammer to do a gorilla check
Same
One of my favorite writers, William Gibson, said "The future is already here - it's just not evenly distributed" and I think it is all kinds of relevant to this discussion.
Indeed. But it is not about even that. It is about how we distribute resources to highest benefit and that benefit is preference dependant.
It is a dance of interests and how they might align.
@@Thedeepseanomad No it is about that. The highest benefit would include everyone getting food, shelter, and water.
@@DeathnoteBB But how much? And what about the other stuff?
@@DeathnoteBB The question is how much, and what about the other stuff?
@@Thedeepseanomad People have already figured that kind of thing out. The biggest issue is money to fund the distribution, due to us living under the current economic system. The US government has the funds but it puts it towards the military.
I was born deaf. At 4 years old, I was implanted with a cochlear implant to give me the ability to hear. I very much "needed" cochlear implants to participate in a SPEAKING society. Your point about not needing the internet, but the internet being a necessary technology to participate in society today really resonated. It's this weird thing for me where everyone has adopted the technology of verbal speech, but I needed an extra technology to access the speaking technology.
My implantation was an equivalent of buying an internet plan and being stuck with the provider for life.
I don't regret being implanted (not that I had a choice at 4 years old), and everyday I can choose to not wear my cochlear implants. But, I wear them regardless because it's my way of "seeing" the world. What's a gunman without a gun? What am I without my cochlear implants?
And, before anyone else mentions that living a non-hearing Deaf life is very possible. Yes it is, but one still uses technologies to interact with the speaking world, just different ones.
("technology" mention count: 5)
Abigail, thank you for giving me the tools to understand this better.
I’m also Deaf and had the cochlear implant forced onto me as a young kid. This comment puts a lot of my thoughts on it into actual words. :)
Using technology as a supplement for an otherwise natural body function in line to the human design is perfectly fine.
Attempting to become inhuman is where it slips off the rails. The failings that can come about when being born into/ living in an imperfect world can be attempted to be alleviated by bringing something back towards its original function/ purpose. To purposefully subvert the body as a whole would be an abomination and inevitably self-destructive.
There’s a firm Higher Moral line beyond human subjectives. We are not God. Only the Almighty.
There's a good Outer Limits episode about everyone having a chip directly tied into the "internet". The people that couldn't get the chip were "disabled". Of course the system ended up turning on everyone connected, but... Same starting point.
Hi I am also a Colea ear user its one of the best ways of helping one to hear but I do worry if it could get hacked now with how fast technology is going I just pray Ai don't come to the colea ear implants as I don't want to become controlled via it
My comment... deleted.
Still... not yet defeated.
Anti-human ideas must be deleted.
That facial recognition bit kinda creeped me out! I have ADHD and if my professors were actually judging my participation in class by how attentive a computer/random stranger thinks my face looks, I would be constantly accused of not listening, which sounds awful
Same here. I’m less likely to be paying attention if I look like it anyways. Let me fidget or doodle and I can almost recall word for word.
Literally that gym scene from 1984
"You are not trying"
YES that’s exactly what I thought. That whole time I was just going “this would be AWFUL for neurodivergent people”.
Same
Yup, I'm Autistic and have adhd and my first thought was, this would be a disaster for Neurodiverse ppl. We already face enough discrimination in school and work without AI justifying it. PoC ppl are also negetively effected as often their faces are not recognised as they are not included in the refernece data.
21:40 As an autistic person, facial reading software becoming a widespread corporate or governmental tool is a terrifying prospect to me. I do not externalize emotions via facial expressions very much. I'd say that about 80% of the time, my face does not accurately reflect my emotions and feelings to non-autistic people. It's hard enough dealing with that on a private level, but to imagine this being made forced routine? Nope, take me away, aliens.
It's not just autistic people, as John Oliver's video on police interviews might show.
It's bunk. It's all bunk.
Oh yes, same, same, same!!
i am not autistic, but that's the very first thing i thought of, too. "what about autistic people?" there would definitely be problems with relying on facial recognition & especially expressions for so much technology.
this is without a doubt a problem, but at the moment i am quite optimistic for that technology for myself, because it turns out i look "focused" and "concentrated" literally all the time.
@@jkr9594 I apparently look angry or frustrated something like 90% of the time, so I'll probably end up in precrime jail shortly after
just a fun little fact: the software that Kelly Slaughter talks about is actually real, and I used it in college when designing a puzzle game. we had a bunch of people play the game while recording their face, and then used the software to determine emotional states, mapped to game events. so if someone was getting frustrated, we could know exactly when, and we could know when people were excited or satisfied after solving a puzzle, and which puzzles didn't have that kind of payoff. it was a really useful tool that gave us insight we wouldn't have been able to have otherwise. however, as you can probably tell, this is about the most benign thing you can use this kind of software for. there are a lot more insidious applications.
Sounds also like it is a lot less time intensive than having to do numerous user interviews or going through and analyzing lots of numerical data. I’ve done UX testing research but not at that level! Lol
yea, I did that as a short-term job myself (not in the way she describes, nor for Facial Recognition, just AI in general), but to train the Program you need a huge amount of input data, and that's very easy to outsource out to contract employees.
It wasn't a gorgeous job, but it was just as good as a grocery store cashier, say, in my case. Basically I was a computer-human interpreter. I see data that I understand, eg a picture, or a sound bite, whatever, and I turn that into binary data the the computer can understand : type from my keyboard. So like on Facebook (not who I worked for, was more general, but same concept), you see the alt text "Image may contain X, Y, Z" ; my job was exactly how the algorithm is made.
It can be used good (my case, proper..ish salary and such, various levels of human data quality checks, to train Accessibility features), or, the way of Karen Slaughter who's algorithm is not only sketchily sourced, but also has obvious data bias problems.
As an autistic who's face would never show anything typical, this thing sounds terrifying even with proper data diversification.
@@pfefferfilm the autistic nightmare... literally I would be called dishonest sm
I couldn't find anything specific, but it seems to be a stand in for Clearview AI, and other AI face recognition companies.
Yes. But to also be very fair this technology has a long way to go before it will even be useful to use nefariously. And there are...fundamental limitations on the nature of its use and effectiveness. A major problem since we made semi reliable object detectors was the adversarial cases. Where an ai was trained to read in that stream of data and detect edges, that stream.of data was made by an ai trained to transform images in a way that obscures the patterns the detector uses, but which isn't apparently visible to a human in the image.
That's a single example. There are a plethora of ways to exploit quirks that these programs form as a consequence of their training. And it'd, while not certain, absolutely possible that our last 100 years of technological growth is about over and tech will plateau. Moores law has broken down. The last 2 generations of chips perform at levels that would have been an embarrassment or a disaster a decade ago.
all these algorithms and technologies were only enabled by the huge increases in transistor density.
Unless there's a discovery that enables us to make smaller transistors or whatever, our technology is about to hit a wall as we are forced to.simply make old designs slightly more efficient or slightly cheaper.
16:23 As a disabled person who works with technology every day as part of my life, this concept really hits. Even when I’m in a relatively low neurological state my brain is still able to manage some level of communication through aac tools that I’m used to on my phone. They just flow naturally. It’s also a similar situation with my wheelchair, I do the feather thing where I’m consciously aware of my size and how I can manoeuvre. When something feels off about my control with the ground (ie one of the rear wheels lifting off uneven ground during a push) it’s immediately startling as if I’d just stepped off a ledge where I expected solid ground. The implementation of it into my idea of what my brain perceives goes even further. If someone reaches for or grabs my chair without consent it feels just as shocking as if someone grabbed my physical body and moved me the same. Trans-humanism is already here, technology is already integrated into most people’s lives.
Now prove that you're not an AI chatbot.
@@Empathy4Animals411 uhhhh ok? I'm literally just autistic if my speech patterns are weird
@@marcelinenolan6284Oh, I don’t believe that person was being serious or trying to imply you were speaking weirdly-it seems to be a joke (just not a very good one). It’s very interesting that you can compare your wheelchair to feeling like stepping off a ledge at times, I didn’t realize the feeling Abby described could be so acute!
Usually, when people criticize transhumanism, they mean by it something more than just wheelchairs, medications or hearing aids. Using all this, a human is still a human. Transhumanism, in a strong sense, advocates the creation of a certain "post-human", whose lifestyle will be strikingly different from human, and whose way of thinking will also be radically different from the way of thinking of a person.
Ironically, we were transhumanists before we were us. The first time some pre-human ancestor used a long stick to lift a rock, we'd augmented the limitations of the flesh with technology.
The “tools” becoming “invisible” should be very understandable to anyone like myself who wears glasses. I literally can’t function in the world without my glasses, but when they’re on I don’t even think about them. They’re a piece of technology that enhance me to get around my limitations, and I’d imagine that it would never get brought up by the folks whining that UBI is going to lead to transhumanism either.
left the house without my glasses on accident today to go to the pharmacy, boy was that a long shopping trip, i had to closely inspect half of the store to find what i was looking for because i couldn't see shit lol
Was thinking about the fact I was wearing glasses and don't think about it much all through the segments (and remembering wheel chair users saying similarish things about wheelchairs).
Such a good example!! Exactly the same with contact lenses. One time, I had just put a fresh pair of lenses in then automatically put my glasses back on without thinking....and freaked out when I couldn't see!
@@phosphenevision if you have a phone with assistive technologies, some make use of the camera app to magnify images (though it's a real pain when my battery life is short)
They are the first thing I reach for when I wake up and the last thing to come off before sleep.
facial recognition regarding stuff like "paying attention" was pushed a lot at my university, especially when everything had to be online. it got a lot of pushback from a lot of people and groups on campus, including political groups across the spectrum. also particularly from people who are neurodivergent and/or have anxiety disorders.
if I look nervous during my at home exam is that because I'm worried about being caught cheating or because I'm prone to anxiety inducing intrusive thoughts? if I'm not staring at my exam paper the whole time is that because I'm looking at secret notes or getting help where it's not allowed, or does my brain work in a way that means I can't stare at paper for two hours straight.
Sophie from Mars' video on Cyberpunk 2077 also mentions a lot of good things about transness and disability in relation to transhumanism.
Nobody's brain is wired to be able to stare at paper for two hours straight.
The education system needs to move past that idea.
Hello future me hello future me also has an amazing video on cyberpunk and transhumanism
Including the economic class transhumnism. Now it's cell phones. But once organ cloning and physical and mental tech which will give major advantages to the very very wealthy, will create a two tier society. Just like much of education is today but worse. Why would someone hire someone with chronic health problems from the environment when you can hire someone genetically smarter healthier and better looking. And that is more likely part of the next century. In 200 hundred years we might basically be different species.
The solution for a fair system is replacing capitalism with a more egalitarian system with everyone having access to the same benefits.
The first step in true tranhumanism is replacing capitalism
yeah but those don't work on autistic people such as myself because express emotions very diffirently so for example i don't smile when i am happy but i do smile when i am in pain
23 minutes in and I just want to say already that as a neurodivergent black person I'm extremely nervous at the idea of companies like XPRS, knowing how badly BIPOC faces are recognised in the first place , especially ppl who are medium and dark-skinned ; without even going into how terrible assumptions based on facial expressions would be for us NDs and the idea of "paying attention" (e.g. for us looking away can often help us focus on what a person is saying).
I’m white but also nd and def have the same worries.
I’m white and I think you try too Fucking hard. It’s corny.
I'm always grateful for that when I talk with friends and I'm struggling to focus I can just close my eyes while talking and listening and they 100% understand what's going on and take it as intended. Stuff you can't do among normal people who know nothing about neurodivergent people, absolutely especially not law enforcement.
@@Call-me-Al oh god, are you like 12 years old?? Get over yourself. Really.
People like this are fucking bogging down society. There has to be a baseline of function. Stop feeling sorry for yourself
Are you American? If so, the thought of that software going mainstream must be terrifying for you. I got a stock tip about 2 years ago, with the big selling point being that the stock was supposed to take off when everybody wants it for use with their security cams. So far, it hasn't done that. So I haven't bought that particular stock. But yeah, I never even considered how tech like this could impact poc.
I love how she says "Angry Canadians" like that's the most wild sci-fi idea so far. I'm Canadian and think we need a basic income program. The homelessness over here is one of Canada's best kept secrets. It's rampant and run-away and killing people at an insane rate compared to our population.
Homelessness in Canada is one of our greatest issues, I agree
Imma be honest with you as an American didn't know you had homeless people
@@kingjay3370 most americans dont know much about Canada... Most canadians don't know much about Canada hahah
@@MM-fy8yx 🤣
Basic income will make homelessness worse. Forcing the homeless into shelters with guards & social workers will treat & reduce the issue. Insane people will attack you for fixing problems though so i guess its a nono. Instead western countries just have to keep feeding and funding the increasing suffering and chaos . I dont know if it can simply be made perpetual or something will eventually break but ... oh wait there is assisted suicide for it now. So le me repharse it, I dont know how many more ways it will keep breaking before the western educated mind can stop being "compassionate" for a moment to actually solve social issues instead of making them worse.
22:30 I love how she lists all these things and then very quickly passes over "borders, prisons, law enforcement" so you almost don't notice it. Even the interviewer seems to completely miss it.
She's so brilliant at creating these terrifying characters.
I love to see Adelaide and Kelly challenging the Arsonist for the title of PT's reigning monster. Break that glass ceiling, girl boss 👊
omfg, I had to go back there to listen again to catch it. I MISSED IT TOO, that is terrifying by itself lol, how many times does this happen????
I love that it's in-character for not only for Kelly's girl-boss persona but also the NYT's (and many other US/ business-positive media) perspective/focus.
@@PhosphorAlchemist right. I think that was the main point. That feeling of unease/discomfort/terror that everyone gets watching that interview is the *exact* feeling that "traditionalists" get when they see someone talking about feminism, trans rights, etc and everyone else just going along with it as if there's nothing wrong.
That's *why* throwing facts and figures at people will never work. So then the question becomes, how do you get someone to move past the feeling that technology and progress is being pushed well beyond their comfort zones?
@@PhosphorAlchemist gaslight, gatekeep, girlboss, am I right?
A thing I found super interesting from this video is the idea of not noticing a tool until it breaks- it becoming part of you. And this is how the body works too, and is the root of a lot of ableist ideas if you think about it. Most of us don't think about our colons or our hearing or whatever until it goes wrong, and are therefore utterly stunted in empathy for those who have disabilities. Which is to skim over neurodivergence as well- I think we all find it really hard to imagine living life through other lenses than our own.
My colon is a tool I use that I am able to forget and it simply becomes a part of me. I'm not just a person who has a colon, I am colonman.
But for real, this makes me think about how I know many people with disability and especially people who have long term illness who talk about their body as being pretty distinctly separate from their self. So they talk about their body as something they have, often their body in *opposition* to their self, rather their body being a fundamental part of their self. I do something similar because of my ADHD and other mental illness/disabilities: I'll talk about my brain as being separate from myself, like "sorry I didn't catch that, my brain was doing something else".
As much as I am all about the idea that we ARE our bodies, we're not just a mind/brain/soul/self that "pilots" a body or something like that, the way I use language still leans into sometimes talking about my body as being not subject but object. I think it's probably extremely normal and very human to have the capacity to see our bodies as both subject and object.
But it does still bother me the extent to which some people distance their self from their body, and I think this framework might help me understand why they're doing it. If the body is a sort of tool, the ways in which it doesn't function as the person wants can bring that tool into focus, which then puts their subjectivity at a distance from the object, the self at a distance from the body. Just as a broken hammer turns hammerman into man with broken hammer, an ill or disabled body turns a body-person(?) into person with broken body.
And I think that model also can be useful in how I see many people with mental illness in the comments here talk about how medications can align their sense of self. By reducing the degree to which your body feels like a dysfunctional tool, it allows that tool to become more seamlessly integrated into your self. I don't think it matters whether I think my "true self" is either integrated with or at odds with my depression; when I take anti-depressants or do therapy (another kind of technology) I am helping to mend the tool of my mind/brain to be better suited for my needs, so the tool fades into the background and my self integrates easier with it.
I could write so much more but that's enough existential philosophy for me for at least a whole week.
“I used to think the top environmental problems were biodiversity loss, ecosystem collapse, and climate change.I thought with 30 years of good science we could deal with those problems
But I was wrong. The top environmental problems are selfishness, greed, and apathy.
And to deal with those we need a spiritual and cultural transformation. And we scientist don’t know how to do that.” Gus Speth
Tbf, most people who specialize in the Spiritual or Cultural often have no clue how to do that either. Or sometimes the desire to do so, especially in the case of the first group. Well, above Selfishness, Greed, and Apathy....I personally would put stuff like the Cultural Obsessions with Domination, Ambition, and Maintaining Power over Others higher on those lists. Since thats what the people who are in positions where they could actually make any difference have as vices (branded as virtues of Capitalism and Traditionalism and probably "Communism in any of its 'implemented' forms that ignore the steps that involve a dissolution of the State which is a tool of Capitalist Oppressors actually that is only useful until the oppressors are gone or whatever" too).
We need to move on from tier lists and iron clad hierarchies that force people to get what they "deserve" and only that (if that), we need to move on from this belief that "Deserving" is either Objective in the slightest...Or even a ideal measurement system for solving problems. "Need" based solutions and ways of viewing the world would likely make fixing environmental issues or wealth inequality issues or maybe even criminal justice issues where not everyone gets the same shake or a fair one (while others have enough money or fame to avoid any serious consequences because they're not worth the effort to go after). Honestly it might be the first step to a world where we don't have some of the need for as much enforcement of anything if we could swing it....but changing the viewpoints from Zero Sum or Fear Based Authority or Guilt/Shame Conformity to worldviews where people engage with others through a Sincere Desire to lessen the suffering of others is...well when even most religions that constantly claim an origin in such things lean towards Deserving or Hierarchies of Control or Judgement of Others, yeah I don't know who is equipped to shift how humans view the world and society as a baseline.
@@krysbrynhildr That is a very interesting viewpoint. Perhaps you could use a bit fewer capital letters to make your post a bit more readable, Mr. / Ms. One Cat.
@@Bluesine_R Ah, I thought that the use of capital letters might make things clearer due to emphasis. Though I am just a cat, so what do I know?
Well, I'm mostly responding to this because I'm impressed that you were able to decipher the name though, so kudos to you for that.
@@krysbrynhildr Haha, no problem!
For a while I have begin to think the primary environmental problem is human population in general. While some fancy humans as being an "enlightened" species that has always been an overly optimistic viewpoint.
Take selfishness and greed. Both of these traits are evident in most of what we would call "intelligent" species. Selfishness and greediness both have distinct advantages to a species to ensure survival. It is demonstrated from birth (competition for food and space). It is certainly not an "evil" trait exclusive to humans.
Humans have a species have taken great lengths to both A) increase survivability of offspring and B) prolong natural lifespan through medical care. The problem is that we still carry tendencies baked in over millions of years of evolution. We want to take, we want to consume and we want to procreate.
Unwinding of our very nature is a fantastical idea. Even if we were to completely change our behavior the fact remains that for every human on the planet there is a cost. From birth we impact our environment and I find it highly unlikely that even the most eco conscious individual will ever live a what is now a "normal lifespan" and be die leaving a net ecological credit at the door.
I think the example of technology changing how I see the world that most resonates with me is glasses. There's the painfully literal interpretation of "seeing," yes, but once you're used to wearing them, it's just part of your face, and some people forget they're there at all, even though you can physiologically see and feel the frame the entire time. Scientifically, it's an assembly of metal and plastic, but I experience it as a component of my body and adjust the "hitbox" of my face accordingly.
This, I usually joke that I can't "see" myself in the mirror without mine. First cause I can't see myself if I'm more than 40cm away from it. But also I can't see myself without them because whoever that is is not me. dysphoria kicks in whenever I wear contacts. It is not I am the me+glasses.
@@manuelsoares4343Idk,im also severely myopic but I never feel comfortable with my glasses on and I feel "free" with Contacts in
@@manuelsoares4343 yeah!! My experience of glasses is a bit different from many people’s - I got them as a baby/toddler, so I’ve literally always had them as part of my experience of the world. Getting contacts would be a huge change to how my face has always been, and the idea has always been pretty weird to me when people raise the possibility. It’s like getting rid of one of my facial features
oh my god I didn't even think about this.
I have glasses. when I scratch round my eyes I have to weave my hands and fingers around my glasses to reach my eyes. The interesting thing is when I don't where my glasses, I still naturally try to dodge my glasses because I essentially see them as part of my body. It's always funny when I do it and then realise they aren't there.
Also when I need my glasses and ask someone to get them for me, I'll often say "Can you get my eyes". Again treating my glasses as if they are a body part. Further to this I'm treating "My eyes" as being my eyeballs and my glasses. without my glasses, my eyes are incomplete
I don't wear glasses, but I've definitely noticed that someone's glasses basically just become a part of their face as far as my brain's facial recognition is concerned.
As someone with severe ADHD the part of this about the "core self" was very interesting to me, because I do consider my ADHD a part of my core self and I don't really consider it a disability, but I still take medications to alter that state in order to function in a world that isn't suited for me. I feel like I sacrifice a part of myself in order to do things like hold a steady job and give semi-consistent effort. I certainly don't feel like I as an individual got to really decide what about myself I wanted "augmented"
i feel this way about my depressive disorder ! i know it isnt healthy for me to be in a depressive state, but only because i NEED to be able to hold a job and stuff. i struggle so much with making art and being inspired when im not lacking serotonin and i feel like im missing a part of myself or that ive given it up so i can make $13 an hour ya know ? there are some symptoms im grateful are taken care of by meds but man. it doesnt feel the same !!
Yeah, I've really always felt this way about my disability, and also my body. As someone who is transgender, the idea of transhumanism is appealing to me, but where do I draw the line regarding what is my "core self"? Is my body mine and simply one that I ought to improve upon? Or am I in the "wrong body" and one that needs significant changes in order to keep my mental health at an okay level? I tend to stick with the former idea, as it helps my dysphoria knowing that my body is a work-in-progress that can look more "feminine" according to societies standard, but conversely, the idea of slight body modifications like tattoos, piercings -- and ofc hormones for physical transition -- are really appealing, and I suppose those modifications would be transhumanism.
It changes day by day for me. Sometimes I view my brain and "me" as two very different things, even though that makes no sense it feels right. I'm still trying to better understand my ADHD and other mental stuff so I still tie all that stuff to my brain, maybe as a way of creating a scapegoat or trying to avoid that part of myself. Granted usually I think that much more strongly when I'm stressed or annoyed with my mental illness. Idk I still think some part of a partitioned self really resonates with me
@@currentquiet9591 I'm very similar in the mental health department. I've basically never been medicated for ADHD, so it's been a part of me and how I function for my whole life. Which means it's very much who I am. I've always viewed life through an ADHD lens. But it's sometimes not "me" in the instances where it comes in the way of how I want to express myself or do something. Big example for me is communication. English is my native language but it feels like it's a second. I often cannot communicate ideas in the way my brain had processed it. In those moments I view ADHD as a disability hindering the "me", and as an entity separate. Ya know like I'm not noticing the hammer till I accidentally hammered my hand. Even so I'm still hammerman. That is "me".
Just wanted to say, OP, you're not alone. It feels like giving up a part of myself, not all of which is negative, to function. When I'm on my meds I'm slower, but stable. Though the ability to organize, prioritize, and have overall clearer thoughts is lovely. :)
Kelly Slaughter is terrifying and so many people that will watch this video, let alone people in the wider world, will not understand the couched language being used. She is brilliantly written, and I think a better representation of the danger of many modern "leaders" than The Arsonist. She almost has herself convinced that she's the hero of this story.
Thank you Abigail. A topic I've always been quite interested in.
Yeah the charisma of the Arsonist was massively entertaining and brilliantly written in so many ways, but the character was obviously a bit unrealistic and (probably necessarily) ham-fisted in comparison (although honestly still pretty subtle by the standards of most fiction). Kelly Slaughter is almost too realistic and subtle - you could be forgiven for missing all that's going on.
This is literally what goes on any time I rail against NFTs in a forum, and then get a cryptobro to come on and challenge me. "NFTs are good for paying artists" - the artists are being paid a single commission of about $300-$1000 while someone conceals that it's for an NFT, and then turns around and sells it for $30,000 and says the artist has no rights to their own work. "Pay to Earn games are great for 3rd world countries, because they can play games and earn money!" - They've literally invented Cryptocolonialism, where the buy-in to these games is so huge that it takes first-world investors to fund the third-world players who get paid sub-minimum wage and don't get to keep any of the value of the products they work for because the wealthy foreigners own all the means of production. When I point this out, they say it's not crypto's fault that they live in a country that has crushing poverty, it's "the bad leaders who ruined their country's economy" and that "crypto is helping change all that"... The more exposure I have to cryptobros, the more convinced I become they're all sociopaths.
I love the arsonist. Because his skits are scaffolded around the metaphor fascism=fire, they're not so much reality as about reality. It makes for great entertainment and a lasting memory.
But Kelly Slaughter? I've seen her on the news. I've met her. I've heard her voice in my own head sometimes. Her skits come so close to reality it's disquieting.
@@WraithMagus God, don't get me started on NFTs. I have a sister who said I should make art and sell it as NFTs.
Watch the Drop Out, its basically a spoof of Elizabeth Holmes
The part where she speedily drops all of the criminal justice and surveillance use cases for facial recognition in 2 seconds before moving on was perfection. 22:17
surveillance is at the bottom of the scale of destruction that tech will bring lmao, do you know what the top is?
Oh wow, forced advertising?
@@sirius1696 Modified and regulated psyches.
But dystopia is like so profitable doncha know?
I did not want Minority Report to become a serious thing we had to worry about.
“You’ve actually been staring at a great example this whole time,” wow you’re right, my phone! What a great point I had entirely forgotten about the little computer in my hand I was only focused on the… “acrylic nails!” Oh right, that too I guess
and here I was thinking she was wearing contact lenses and was gonna use that as the example
I suppose that's maybe a bit too literal an interpretation of "tech affecting how one sees the world"
This is exactly what i thought
My wife and I have often been discussing recently how conservatives (including liberal conservatives) use "progress" to excuse leaving things the way they are; "if only we had the technology to do x" rather than "how can we improve the state of x now?". We've started calling people who lean on this a lot "techno-conservatives". By making what are really social/distributive problems (meaning: things we can solve by changing the structure of our society or by moving around resources, like trans segregated healthcare & poverty) into "technological" problems, it shuts down any political conversation. You don't need to even defend the status quo if you and those around you largely believe (or say) that the status quo is immutable until Gadot shows up with the right hammer. It's incredibly frustrating and really hard to combat, because what you need to do to fight against techno-conservative rhetoric is to convince them to fundamentally shift the way they view the world. That is to say: that the world is mutable by *YOU* and not just by "people who invent things" and that *you* are capable of coming up with solutions/actions they can't replace.
Also I loved the outfits in this. Lots of love
so true bestie
Good point. Framing something as a _purely_ technological problem can be limiting to social progress. I prefer democratic socialist James Hughes' approach where we must advance technological progress and social progress interdependently in tandem.
In his book _Citizen Cyborg,_ Hughes lays out his idea of "Democratic Transhumanism" or "Techno-Progressivism," which recognizes that we cannot just expect technological progress to lead to the right places if left alone, but also recognizes the enormous benefits that technology can give us. Hughes promotes the idea of building democratic social institutions to _guide_ technological progress in ways that contribute to everyone's wellbeing. For example, Hughes (and I) support single-payer healthcare largely because it will extend the benefits of cutting-edge medical technology from just the rich to potentially everyone.
Edit: I can't _believe_ I forgot to mention Iain M. Banks' series _The Culture_ as a leftist perspective on transhumanism. The Culture is basically what I consider the best possible outcome for humanity: post-scarcity fully-automated luxury gay space anarcho-communism with full (transhumanist and/or transgender) bodily autonomy for anyone.
Yes, see Elon Musk.
Well I guess that the institutional change that goes with new ways to redistribute stuff around is in a sense a technological change.
Oh god yes! I'm a PhD chemistry student and I have an extremely libertarian colleague who very uniquely thinks exactly like this "techno-conservative" you're describing. It's frankly pretty grating. it's painful to see someone very well educated take such an awful pill and border on fascist beliefs sometimes. Thankfully, he's pretty unique in his frankly extreme beliefs. No other STEM PhD I know is against minimum wage like this fucker is.
The hammer point is actually super interesting, I am a professional blacksmith so a hammer is really an extension of my hand, but so are tongs, I never get to actually touch my work with my bodily hands till its all finished, all my interaction is through augmentations. You learn to treat the hammer and tongs like your hands, I can feel and touch and grab and shove and strike. But one of the wildest experiences is to become very proficient with a sledgehammer, which for one is a much greater extension from your hand, and must by its nature swung with more force AND more confidence. but the real surreal experience comes when someone else calls you in to help with the sledge mid heat, and you walk up, grab the sledge, and without thinking about it, without situating your feet just so, without calibrating your reach, a skilled hammerman can bring that sledge up and immediately strike a target the size of a dime without hesitation. I know exactly where the sledgehammer is and where it will go like it was my own fist.
Also fun fact, Hammerman is a real historic term for the job of being the blacksmith helper who swings a sledgehammer!
I love how you talk with such passion. You're lucky to have found something to make you feel that way. I'm still searching for mine. But I appreciate this comment a lot. I bet your work is very impressive! Keep up the good work🤙🏼
I was thinking the same thing about operating earth-moving equipment, especially excavators, I don't think about what the controls do, just where that bucket needs to be.
Didnt know there were blacksmiths anymore (however stupid that may sound), that's so cool
I practice jewelry-making and metalworking as a hobby and your comment really resonated haha. Although with jewelry you get to touch it a lot more, most of the important manipulations come through the use of other instruments - for example, I was taught to use a very thin vertical see-saw (no idea how to translate this stuff in english) to cut out various flourishes and designs on a thin piece of silver manually. When you start out, it is absolutely terrifying how easy it is to accidentally go outside the border of the design and ruin your work so far. When you get proficient, though, you intuitively know the exact angle, speed and force you have to apply to cut out a smooth design. The see-saw becomes an extension of your abilities
@@craigiedema1707 I have the same experience with the saxophone! i don't think which keys to press or what to do with my mouth, i think about what sound i want to make and just... do it.
As one born with a connective tissue disorder, clicking this video both terrified me and filled me with curiosity. I have often examined the pros and cons of chasing perfection. I can see how advances in technology have allowed me to live longer. Without my heart surgery in my 20s, I'd be dead long before now.
On the other hand, my mother had her feet operated on in the 70s. I don't think I need to say how badly that served her in the long term; rather, I should say, that isn't my story to tell.
It's a huge subject that I still haven't completely made my mind up about.
I think what's important for you to understand is that you shouldn't waste your time wondering which side you on. As you said - you wouldn't be alive without it. So that says everything here then - if you truly believe technology saved your life. That version of you who thinks technology is bad wouldn't have taken that operation and would have chose death. So you made your decision long ago, and as they say in matrix movie - now you got to figure out why. Or just don't bother even asking and enjoy the longer life you were gifted or cursed with - all depends what you make out of it now....
@@dovydasvaiksnys3807 Well said!
@WhyseWytch thank you. Although I must say - wouldn't have this perspective if I myself wouldn't be going through and battling same emotions. The need to fit in and be good feels more like a job I didn't subscribe to myself, but rather a challenge I was given to overcome. If that makes any sense... or maybe I did but just can't remember when and why
@@dovydasvaiksnys3807 Depending on your metaphysical preference, that second part is entirely probable. And, I do agree that humaning is difficult. Suffering is one of the few ways to gain true empathy-- I know that's a spicy take, but it has been very true in my own life. I hope everyone here finds the solace and respite so badly needed in existence.
As a disabled person who uses crutches, wheelchairs, hearing aids, and yes eye glasses, transhumanism and the debates around it are utterly fascinating. This is by far the best understanding of the subject I have been offered - thank you Abi! Oh and lady, that latex suit was.... phew I needed to open a window, the temperature rose in this house by quite.a few degrees!!
As a fellow disabled person who can't go any places without a cane or the opportunity to sit down fairly frequently as well as having some pretty severe bipolar and being transgender, transhumanism has become a favorite topic of mine over the last few years. I'm excited about the possibilities of things like straightening my spine and more efficiently regulating brain chemicals.
Also yeah, that latex suit... especially the 'keep your eyes on the hammer' part...
@@JoshuaGoudreau Yes, I...errr...lost sight of the hammer more than once!
Hey fellow disabled person here! Yeah I use a motorised wheelchair when out and about and a stick around the house and honesty both just become invisible to me while using them so transhumanism is such an interesting thing to learn!
Hello felloed disabled people. I have lost a portion of my sigin (eyesight) and words for garbage. Strokes man...
Disappointing but unsurprising there was only one mention of disability and that Abigail has an outdated and ableist conception of disability. So much the left are behind on and missing out on, not comprehending that disability justice work is key to all, notwithstanding the lack of solidarity while increasing hostilities kill disabled people en masse
I like the little fakeout at 17:50. "You've been staring at a really good example this whole video [of technology becoming transparent]". The expected answer is "your computer/phone you use to watch the video" but the actual answer she gives is her acrylic nails.
I understood that once I want to convey my ideas using the keyboard, I can be no long aware I am using the keyboard, I can be no longer aware which language I am using so the keyboard becomes invisible/transparent. The same with artificial nails that you glue to your nails, you get used to it and no longer feel you are using artificial nails.
That's what I understood. The hammer becomes transparent as you focus your attention on the nail.
The most important part is in the end when they associate "progress" with "transhumanism" and on the other side Russia through philosopher Alexander Dugin embraces tradition, church, right to property, family and they don't want the progress in technology as nobody agrees with it, they don't want western medical care as nobody agrees with it, the medicine is not plebise.
Then there comes the caveats from Heidegger: the car is not working and which part of the car is Jewish. I have seen this on a movie, the car was not working so it was the antichrist.
The idea of progress as transhumanism is something very few people accepts. Progress for most people mean well being for everybody and not watching children in trans-gay parades sponsored by Lockheed-Martin or other. This is not progress. This is ignorance.
We are going backwards towards paleolithic. We are becoming Stone Age man again. And we are moving fast , if we don't decide what progress is.
We must take off all the lies from media, schools, universities, corporations, banks, etc... we must tell people what satellites are for real and how the spatial industry helps the pharmaceutical industry.
Progress will only come with transparency from the upper class.
They will not tell you as they think you kill them all.
Progress will not come if the upper class don't tell people what ethnicity and race is.
Transparency from the upper class is what people need and no more code expressions like "climate change".
Those expressions the upper classes use to advance their agenda, but nobody understands and nobody asks. Nobody asks what "Jewish" means. It's dangerous.
So the upper class is not transparent to people , but think their ideas are so useful that they became transparent and nobody understands them and they do not notice.
They do not notice anything at all.
The CEO freaked me the fuck out, really brilliant writing there - such a seemingly positive interview with unbelievably dark implications.
Not to mention the fact that they were driving home the point about how transhumanism could be exploited by the rich. For those of you who are not aware, mechanical Turk pays it's "contractors" pennies on the dollar to perform tasks. I know because I was desperate and poor and debased myself for change.
I'm pretty sure there was a real startup with exactly the same business model that was talked about on trashfuture once. It's not even really made up
That woman was terrifying.
Such good writing, I loudly guffaw'd at her rushing past "borders, prisons, law enforcement" in the list of use cases
Unimportant but the pink jacket gave me a really vivid negative afterimage when we cut back to the white background!
Miss Abigail Thorn, if the stated goal of your channel is to give away your philosophy degree for free, I’d say you do a damn good job of it. When I think about what my history degree has given me beyond knowledge and uhm a few career paths, it’s my way of thinking; my way recognizing patterns in humanity and my way of formulating and supporting my arguments. What I’m getting at is your channel goes beyond knowledge and the more videos of yours I watch the more I am not simply ENCOURAGED to think like a philosopher, but I basically just HAVE to start doing so simply because I’m paying attention. It’s in a way the core value of our types of degrees and I thank you for giving it to us all for free.
Anyone who says the humanities don't have value needs to stop talking fr.
@@ricochet4674just tell them law is one of the humanities?
I'm not sure what to say
You told us everything and nothing.
Sounds like another example of Feminazism
If you don't personally believe technology and it's attachments benefits you, DON'T USE IT.
But when you end up living in a tent with no electricity, no running water and no sewage system, let alone no phone, and only an open fire for cooking, you can then feel as " empowered" as you wish to while the rest of society passes you by.
i had to pause the video and bust out laughing and clap my hands when I realized that as the tech CEO character starts talking about using technology to detect dishonesty, she herself is starting to show those exact signs of dishonest facial movements that the hypothetical tech would detect. Good one, Abby. Love ya
This reminds me of a conversation I had last year. My professor and I were discussing the future of transportation, and she kept emphasizing how electric cars will solve our energy crisis. I asked why we don't invest in public transportation now to solve the same problem immediately, and not just for those who can afford new cars. She replied that she didn't know anyone who would want to ride the bus. I couldn't convince her that her reasoning was the point of investing in public transportation--to make people WANT to ride the bus. Or that it would still be better even if only to benefit those who don't get the choice of riding the bus.
A lot of us in countries/cities with great public transportation systems like riding the bus. I wear an n95 face mask when I do, but buses are quite comfortable and in my culture it's rude to pester strangers so no real risk of anyone trying to chat me up on the bus just because they sit next to me either.
I liked riding the bus!
The only problem being, that the time tables were messed up
Of course you wouldn't want to ride the bus in the US. US city planning is trash and made for cars, for some reason. Even if you could easily have walked given a choice.
In addition to everyone else's comments, why can't we make nice buses, that are on time, and put on extra buses when it's busy? Oh we all know why. $$$$$
Just driving with trains go in the direction of great reset
"Mental hitbox" is actually such a good term for what you're describing.
I'm sure everyone who's played enough fighting games knows how janky and counter-intuitive hitboxes can be, often not even lining up at all with the weapons/limbs that you're supposedly attacking with. But once you've put enough hours into the game you do develop that sense of virtual-proprioception, you know how far your f.S reaches as intuitively as you know the length of your own arm!
I like the saying that went in the Aribender (The Animation) - that the sword is the extension of your body and it made sense to me. And like, you can implement that with any kind of tool, car or whatever have you like the video says.
good to see fellow Guilty Gear players here :)
@@FayeFaye- I WAS THINKING THIS WHOLE TIME!!!
It's also apt when you consider that kids/teens who grow really fast will have phases of being super clumsy. Their "mental hitbox" is smaller than their actual body, so they smack their elbows into doors or trip over their own feet.
Dang. Good job. There's so much more to this topic than I thought! I was super interested in transhumanism as a teen/young adult in STEM with a focus on prosthetics, later to become disillusioned in the way spoken of in the video. The fact that tech often doesn't solve problems because the real problems are often distribution of money/power/resources. But it's super interesting to hear about how the concept of transhumanism is quite broad when taking into account the narratives told about what is or isn't human, what is modifying people too much, feeding into fears about society and how it "should" be.
I really appreciate that you put enough trust in the audience to draw the desired conclusion from the facial recognition skit without spelling it out.
Upon giving us the tools to understand what was being said, we realize that this is a person capitalizing upon the incredibly disenfranchised by using feminism as a brand to have a cheap labor force of suffering women. And with them all over the world, they are less likely to be able to pull together for a better condition.
Like the Lula Roe scandal
I agree totally the ceo is using feminism as a guise
It was why I think feminism wasn't crushed. They saw they could add women to the downtrodden wageslave pool and we've been toothless ever since.
Preach.
@@user-gz2dh7uo7s plus women are evolutionarily better at body language recognition
I love that the dictionary definition joke has become its own motif, because it absolutely kills me every time
I love how you've written this comment before the video has even premiered
@@DialecticRed Wow, it's almost as if Patreons get early access or something. :P
@@wanderingursa8184 it’s funnier to think that they anticipated it.
It’s garbage
@@melaniewut yeah...well...that's just, like, your opinion, man
33:48 this part really gets to me, because new widespread medical technology could really help a lot of diseases, but the diseases that are most common, and that affect the most children in my country, really don't need fancy new tech. We already got the tech: it's basic sanitation. If poorer neighborhoods got basic sanitation, millions of people would be healthier in the short and long term, but since it would require the city to spend money or thr improvement of the lives or poor people, nobody ever wants to do it, and it becomes a decades long public health issue. I swear to god the most maddening problems in the world are the ones that already have the solution, but it's never solved because it would require giving a shit about the people that would be helped.
100%
I think it was John Green who said something along the lines of
"If an alien appeared to me tomorrow, and asked me to explain humanity, I'd tell them a story. I'd tell them about how we had this disease called smallpox and how it killed hundreds of millions of people over the course of history. I'd tell the alien about how we worked together and made scientific and social advancements that allowed us to develop a cure for the disease that WORKED. And I'd also tell the alien that thousands more people died even a hundred years after the cure was invented, because of inequity and greed"
That really stuck with me. All the major problems we have, the technology already exists! It's just the ideas that stop us from using that technology have become so transparent that we don't see them holding us back.
People should die more
that's a really good point. so fucking maddening.
More technology also raises the threat on our health. Lead in petrol, microplastics, agriculture chemicals.
You left out the fact that most diseases are metabolic in nature, the biggest culprits are diseases that have only been known to exist as widespread since the industrialization of agriculture and food processing and which can now be identified and prevented through genomic testing and applied nutritional management... and yet, good luck finding doctors who know anything about this new paradigm. In another decade it will be the gold standard, hopefully.
This struck a chord with me; Once I started taking SSRIs I felt like I had *finally* accessed who I felt I truly was.
Up until now I never considered the connection with how trans folks feel that they are able to access their *true* selves through hormones/blockers.
Lovely video. Thank you.
@@CaseyJohn-ki8eo Lolz. That's a high bar. Thanks!
@@DaveSlutzky I am considering trying SSRI's for the reason you and others have mentioned, for experiencing how your brain and mind feels like it is supposed to function, finally. However I am scared to, did you experience any negative effects like emotional blunting? thanks.
@@phasor50 emotional blunting is a possible with almost every ssri. but most times it's a sign that you are not taking the correct meds and/or dosage. Once you find the correct meds and dosages can, and in most cases will, go away
Or you can be emotional blunt as is, and not get any change whatsoever out of any dosage of SSRIs.
Ask me how I know.
So interesting. I tried multiple antidepressants over multiple years and nothing really worked, then I started HRT a year ago (knew I was trans since 16) and my depression is basically gone. I can work and take care of myself, I even finally started further education, it's amazing. I never really thought about antidepressants actually working for some people in that way. Amazing what proper medical care can do for people.
As someone who is disabled, I was very pleased to see this dissection of disability discussed within the space of economics and transhumanism. So many people seem unaware of disability specifically as a relationship to material circumstances and, in my experience, are totally unwilling to engage with it as such.
oml your pfp is great, I love that
@@DialecticRed cringe
This is the kind of video that gets even better when watched for the second time.
Olha quem está aí
My respect for you increased!
That was fast.
oi Antídoto
You just described all of Abi's content lol
Abi, thank you SO much for the little bit at the end about Amazon's Mechanical Turk, it's such a frustrating aspect of research in my field now. The idea that you can get participants to take part in your study easily is how it is sold. I've heard stories of people posting their surveys and in about 2 days they have 500+ participants, with each paid whatever the IRB of the institution has agreed is acceptable. However, a lot of research is now showing high levels of bots responding, people not engaging with the survey, etc, which all leads to poor quality data. If this isn't checked then this data can get published and effectively spread misinformation.MTurk was sold as a solution to a common problem in research: getting lots of participants. The other main issue is that it was sold as being an accessible side hustle/income for people with disabilities cause all they need is an internet connection. However, once you do some basic math you realize that most surveys and jobs aren't paying enough to people for them to earn even close to minimum wage.
much like fruit picking, the business tends towards the cheapest, most disadvantaged people they can get to the crops, or in this case, a computer terminal
There was a fascinating piece by The Builders Association a few weeks ago about MTurks! Took us through the history of the early internet, simulated the experience of mechanical turks, and then talked about Crypto and the metaverse in act 3. During the middle section, we answered surveys just like MTurks do and accumulated pennies of fake money, while being supervised by real MTurks. Fascinating show!
A quote that i think about a lot is “you have your intentions, but the knife has its own intentions, too” which was said by a fictional character in His Dark Materials talking about a knife that can cut windows into other dimensions. But it applies to all technology, even down to something as simple as a fork. The forks intention is to stab. Its not a weapon, its meant to be used on food, but the fork doesnt care. All the fork knows is to stab, whether that be a piece of broccoli, or a steak, or a person. Its a strangely profound idea, and something i never would have thought of had Phillip Pullman not written that line. The hammer, too, has its intention: to strike. It is up to the user to choose how to use the hammer, they may choose to use it as a paper weight or a meat tenderizer. But the hammer is happy so long as it has struck an object, gently or not.
I'm all for improving humans through technology and have high hopes for the future in an idealistic manner.
But, as an autistic person who is quite happy with myself and who has been given the gifts that I have been able to recognize as being unique to my neurology, I fear that other like myself in the future will be socially pressured to change themselves just because of what the majority perceives as less or incorrect. Opportunities limited and relationships harmed because "if there's a 'cure' (a way to make an autistic person seem more socially accepted) then why would you not want to be cured?" Simply because the way the majority views you is blind to what's under the surface, and there is now a way to meet their expectations of how you should be.
Given the direction of research for asd, and how small the movement towards acceptance. (And all the ambiguities involved in the different types of abilities and appearances). I fear that if the current direction of some research is successful, it will become somewhat like the "you don't have to get internet, but good luck finding a job."
SF author Elizabeth Moon actually wrote a very interesting novel exploring that scenario, called "Speed of Dark". The conclusion to her storyline is an uncomfortable one (at least in my view) and really leaves that question open of "how far is too far" and "what's helpful tech vs what's actual erasure?"
I don't really have anything to add as you've said it already. I agree, it's a dangerous and scary path that we need to carefully consider while advancing acceptance (not just tolerance) for diverse ways of being, such as neurodivergence. If we don't partake in the discussion, I fear the consequences
What sort of gifts do you think you have which are unique to your neurology?
I mean this is more or less what already happens. That’s why masking is such an issue.
@@anna_in_aotearoa3166 yeah this book was my first ever autism in media and I've always had mixed feelings about it. The author herself isn't neurodivergent, but some aspects were done right. The ending though, it was... I don't think that if it were to be published today it would end like that
Kelly Slaughter is terrifying. When we got the part about "Facial Recognition being done by people" bit my stomach just dropped.
can you explain kelly's segments and why it was so terrifying. I didn't quite understand it.
@@LW-ng1fl the way I understand it is that she represents a very real kind of person who believes in technology and capitalism and maybe even genuinely believes that she is doing a good thing. Meanwhile her technology is most likely extremely fallible (for example when you consider how piss poor facial recognition tech is at recognizing black people's or asian people's faces because of what kind of (very much NOT representative of the world's population) databases these softwares are fed to learn, or how neurodivergent people would most likely suffer a lot from softwares trying to ascribe emotions to their facial expressions).
On top of that she uses cheap, underpaid, outsourced labour by people in difficult living situations (e.g. Ukrainian refugees on Amazon mechanical turk) while claiming that said labour is empowering to people because they get to work on the future.
But the only people benefitting financially from that future are her and her shareholders. How convenient.
@@LW-ng1fl As an additional bit of context, Kelly's company is (most likely) based on a real tech startup discussed on a relatively recent (within the past few months) episode of the podcast Trashfuture (Abi has guested a few times). Mechanical Turk, ironic name and all, is a real platform operated by Amazon, that basically consists of tech companies hiring vulnerable people at miniscule wages to essentially do the work of Machine Learning (ML) systems manually. Supposedly the work their doing is supposed to be generating sample data sets to train ML algorithms, but in reality they're just skipping the really difficult programming part part and using the cheap labor to do the work.
To paraphrase Abi's friend and cohost Alice Caldwell Kelley, companies are using nonsense technical buzzwords to hide the fact that the thing that makes their product work is "just a Guy"
@@LW-ng1fl To say it in a more metaphorical manner, Abigail is playing the archetype of a woman whose soul has been devoured by Mammon.
@@Frommerman We always knew mother, the god of gold, would ruin us all
i love how the kelly slaughter interview is just sugar-coated words but when you look at them from an objective, factual perspective, you realise how problematic it is. hiring women for low-paying jobs and exploiting certain impoverished sections of women in the name of femininity - the part of facial recognition becoming a human process instead of a machine learning process. also the reference to people as "individual faces" and then rambling on and on about user experience: it rlly shows how much companies and large corporations really care about each individual user, but of us as a general target demographic client base. also it actually shows that if we had the proper neutral science technology to perform facerec without commissioning underpaid tech workers, how helpful of a tool it would be. even if true technology might rob us of the true-to-humanity and god-faithful human experience, even people (jobs which aren't automated yet, thankfully phew) can also dehumanise us
I definitely came away from this video with the sense that capitalism turns anything good into mass control.
Yes. The joke is that she actually enslaves the most powerless to enrich herself.
Also, notice how the same software that is used to police prisons and deny entry at the border relies on the underpaid work of women in prisons and refugee camps.
Including the economic class transhumnism. Now it's cell phones. But once organ cloning and physical and mental tech which will give major advantages to the very very wealthy, will create a two tier society. Just like much of education is today but worse. Why would someone hire someone with chronic health problems from the environment when you can hire someone genetically smarter healthier and better looking. And that is more likely part of the next century. In 200 hundred years we might basically be different species.
The solution for a fair system is replacing capitalism with a more egalitarian system with everyone having access to the same benefits.
The realization came to me gradually that my self has more than one extent. Obviously there's the skin/air boundary between "me" and "not me", but I also clearly percieve a brain/body boundary, and things in-between. And in my brain there are the parts of "me" that I often find excluded from my sense of self, like my addictions, intrusive thoughts, unwanted impulses, negative feelings, etc. There are also many socially defined boundaries (groups that I identify with), and physical boundaries that extend beyond my body, like the room I'm in or the vehicle I'm driving, etc.
Realizing that the extent of my self is so flexible quickly made me realize that I'm actually constantly redefining my "self" in various changing contexts, and that I can actually have a great deal of control over this process if I pay attention to it (it's hard sometimes).
If we're not careful about how we define our self, we'll obviously run into problems when two or more people with an overlapping sense of self have different ideas about what they want. We need to be very aware of how we're defining our self. I see transhumanism in this light, and I think it's somewhat of a distraction, in the sense that it's full of very interesting examples. They are so interesting that we just think about how cool they are and they lead into fantasizing about science fiction, rather than asking and sincerely trying to answer the fundamental question of how we define ourselves, and how we should define ourselves if we want to be happy or to be good or to achieve some other goal.
As a teenager, I loved the idea of transhumanism. When asked, "How do you want to die." I'd always respond with "My goal is to live long enough for them to download my brain into a computer so I can live forever." but as I get older I become more and more afraid of who will be in control of that kind of technology. More and more I feel we shouldn't be focused on pushing technology but instead pushing for a better society where the power lies in the hands of the people, and only then should we start pushing the limits of technology.
Why not push for both? I'm a transplant patient that's been through 2 different kidneys in the last 31 years. I'm 32 lol With tech at its current level, the best I can hope for is an indeterminate amount of time (on average 15-20 years) using a donor organ before I need another one, with excruciating and debilitating dialysis in between organs. After the age of 65ish, they don't like doing transplants and at 85, you're stuck on dialysis for your remaining years. All things considered, best case scenario at the end of my life is that I die on the operating table. Otherwise it's potentially a case of drawn out and long term suffering before my body can't take it anymore.
What I wouldn't give for a library of genetically engineered kidneys coded to my DNA. Proof of concept has already happened with a lab grown speck of liver. It's realistically within reach if we wanted it to be.
At the same time I understand the apprehension behind technological progress. Which is why my answer is push for both. At the same time. Public ownership of technology and technological progress.
Same here I used to be an Elon musk bro until I became a homeless broke person
Here's the thing about that goal, *you* don't get to live forever. The copy of you that gets put into the computer does.
@@Noname72105 yes, thank you, we know this already. Those semantics aren't contributing to this conversation
Right, we need the mental and emotional maturity to handle new technology first. We’re already way behind in that regard
You made an excellent point that really resonated with me when you said that “Disability is not just a physical limitation, it’s an economic one too.” I’m hard of hearing and I am Hearing Aid dependent, I was born with a hearing disability. I live in New Zealand a relatively prosperous and progressive country - but here, hearing funding is provided until you’re 18, and then after you’re 65 - in between, you’re pretty much on your own if you were born with a hearing issue.
So, a 44 year old father like me needs to buy their own hearing aids every 5 years or so, and will do for a while, the cost and frequency of this purchase is commensurate with a second hand car. The technology exists, it’s been there for a while now - but access to a base level requirement for this condition is an economic one, with a catch-22 like feedback loop - I need my hearing aids to function in. a professional capacity - if I don’t have them, then I literally couldn’t do what I do.
Even still, as a hetero-normative, pretty well educated middle class white guy - or whatever label anyone wants to give it, I really don’t mind - the fact that I don’t know the words or terms of reference for this is telling in and of itself - because I’m privileged enough for most things not to worry or affect me - which means the inherent bias I have is enough that without this disability I wouldn’t have an issue, and with it, it’s largely the thing that I pot on about. Which makes me wonder - how many other people out there can’t access or afford this resource (hearing aids) either, but also don’t possess the purported socio-societal advantages that I enjoy?
The technical challenge Is resolved but the economic one is nowhere close.
Similar experience with me in Canada. My drug coverage stopped at 25, and that was just a few months ago. Next month, I need to get my Epi-pen replaced, and I also need to refill my ADD meds and antihistamines. The total cost is gonna be a few hundred once all is said and done, and I can barely manage that with my current issues.
Regan, thank you for sharing your experience and also for understanding that people with even less priviledge might struggle more with their disability!
Was thinking a similar thing for glasses! Sure in my country you can get them for cheaper by going via the NHS, but you still have to pay for them and take time off work to go to optometrist appointments. Some people have to change their lenses every 2 years, and literally can't function without them. I don't think we should have to pay just to match other people's natural ability to see (or in your case, hear) fully
@@brynjames3779 I haven't had new glasses in 10 years cuz of how expensive they are and I've had other medical stuff going on. I'm currently trying to decide if I want to save up for a new blood pressure cuff or new glasses 😄
Still crappy even if you're a white hetero whatever you chose to label yourself (also hi fellow kiwi 👋😃). You're completely right on with the economic comment, you're always going to be at a financial disadvantage compared to an otherwise equal peer. And without dismissing your experience, like you say, there are many others who are at a disadvantage due to their place in society. After reading your story I've unintentionally written a lot of stuff about my own life.
Speaking as someone who is currently on the WINZ benefit for disability, the system is quite horrifyingly flawed. A few years ago I was on the job seekers allowance, after rent and power went out of my benifit, the remaining weekly budget for food, phone bill, nessesities etc. was $15.50. Winz advice was to cut unnecessary spending, completely out of touch with my situation. I shared a room and slept on a floor.
Due to these circumstances I couldn't afford to see a doctor even though my health was starting to decline, when I asked for help winz explained they require people to purchase things first with the promise of being re-embursed at a later date. (A policy still in place now). They stated they required me to pay for the initial set up appointment and the following appointment to prove I needed to see a doctor. I ended up not seeing a doctor for a few years because there was no feasible way for me to pay. There are free doctors but their waiting lists are months long and if you're not a priority, even longer.
Even when I gained employment it was still difficult to see a doctor as I couldn't afford to take time off work and between my 2 part time jobs I had a very small time window of when I could see a doctor, not helped by the fact I was constantly exhausted and barely functioning. At one point I did go to an after hours clinic with chest pains, only to be sent away for "anxiety" and after that I just dismissed all my ailments as such. (At the time I presented like a woman and honestly the experiences I've had over the years and the stories I have heard from women and lgbtq people. Yikes. Looking back I'm quite angry I was told that even though I had "very high blood pressure" I didn't need any follow up). I decided I couldn't justify the expense of a doctor if I was just going to be sent away again.
The impact of not seeing a doctor / not being taken seriously 5 or so years ago when I first started knowing something was wrong has now caught up with me. I finally enrolled at a medical center nearly 2 years ago now. The first couple of appointments nothing much happend but then I saw a different doctor, who took me seriously and listened. We don't know what's exactly causing my issues other than I have cardiovascular damage caused by years of uncontrolled hypertension (high bp), issues with my lungs, chronic pain and fatigue. Just today I got refered to a renal specialist because my bloods are not looking good, they've been on a downward trend the past 6 months or so. I've been in and out of hospital, I've had more blood tests than I can count. I'm the youngest person my Dr has put on heart medication. I've had no choice but to quit my job and studies because my health hit an all time low.
I try not to think about past mistakes and decisions much but the one thing that just frustrates the heck out of me is I'm young. If winz had just paid for my Dr's visits 5 or 6 years ago, then maybe I could have been resolved these issues then before they reached breaking point on my body. When I think of it in a purely money centric way- if they'd payed for those visits then maybe I wouldn't be back on the benefit. Surely it's cheaper to fund doctors appointments and address health issues before they become life long disabilities that limit people from being a part of and contributing to society to their fullest potential.
I'm grateful that the system has improved since last time I received a benifit but I'm still stuck saving up to buy things like a new pair of glasses, a new cuff for my blood pressure monitor and other medical things.
I hope to heal the things I can heal and find ways to manage things that I can't. I'm grateful to live in New Zealand, though it's far from perfect. Lifelong living on the benefit is a bleak outcome and it seriously ousts us from society. I even feel weird trying to find a partner and I feel guilt when I try to have a regular social life.
When reciving a benefit there are rules around having a partner, it instantly slashes our benefits significantly, regardless of the amount of a partner's income. Due to this I'm in my mid 20s and still not had a serious long term relationship because of this rule, by me committing to someone it's like the govt. decides I'm any future partner's burden to pay for and no longer an individual who should be financially independent. This is also why so many disabled people become trapped in toxic or abusive relationships. It's incredibly hard to leave when a benifit is reduced so low a person cannot financially afford to leave.
I do have amazing friends who luckily love home cooking and cheap / free social activities and don't mind staying in and doing something. A close friend of mine just bought tickets to see her favorite musician and I was so excited and happy for her. It wasn't until later that I just thought about something like concert tickets are so out of what I can afford. And I just felt like... what is the answer? It is definitely a massive disadvantage that disabled people relying on government support can't afford nessesities like medical equipment but it's also a social, emotional and mental health disadvantage that we can't fully take part in society due to financial barriers. I know that other people's taxes pay for every cent that comes into my bank account. I feel conflicted and guilty when spending money on anything other than food or bills.
I don't begrudge my friends who are able to both physically dance and afford to go to a concert but I do think about society and the jobs we create. How limiting they are for people who are disabled, are not neurotypical or unable to work 8 or 9 hours a day. I wish that there were more opportunities, more flexible workplaces that allow for financial independence. I think our differences make us all unique and a benifit to society.
I still feel like I'm in a place of privilege, there are so many Māori with heart health problems that are not taken seriously. I have a doctor that actually listens to me and helped me fill out winz forms. I have mostly free Healthcare. I have friends who understand I can't always keep up with them.
I have a safe place to live. I still think about the young pregnant woman who was forced to live in her car, despite having a social worker advocate for her, her request for emergency housing was denied by WINZ. It's horrifying. There are so many kids in this country that miss out because of the economic status of their family. It's so hard to escape poverty.
the uneasiness and exacting nature of the "kelly" interview is extremely well-done. the script brings up all of the points that are cause for alarm, in exactly the way they would be in an interview with someone who is just a step worse at spin than most company spokespeople:
so we as viewers can take that last half-step in logic to be like. well. okay; what she's saying is couched in smiles, but the content is extremely dystopian and terrifying.
facial recognition software may be cool, and interesting. but the way that it's being used, and the way that it's being *created* i.e. it's just impoverished persons/people being taken advantage of, has shown that capital has decided this tech shall be used to perpetuate the status quo, and in fact root it deeper as it stands.
additionally, I feel like having the interviewer gloss over the potentially exposing parts (cops, border patrol) and just going for the soft gimmes is a nice indictment of current 'journalistic' practices.
Thanks for the great video, there's so many layers of things to think about here.
The way she glosses over border patrol, prisons and law enforcement and then the interviewer focuses on Advistisements is so real, because they both know what they want to focus on and what they want to avoid.
And than mentions the prisoners and refugee women she plans to exploit, and it's like "Oh all women because of feminism"
Mandatory smiling corporate policy monitored by your monitor...I fucking bet they'd try it!
omg I thought the interview bit was real and I was so confused why I couldn't find it online :|
So then what does this imply about radical action? Do anti-capitalists have to be luddites now because there's no way technology can be used for liberation under capitalism? Seems self-servingly defeatist to me
This video was fascinating. I just finished a class called Philosophy of the Body, and back-to-back we read Allen Buchanan's: Beyond Human (pro-transhumanism) and Havi Carel's Illness: The Cry of Flesh (which delves into Merleau-Ponty, Heidegger, transparency, and phenomenology). Incredible work here. It's kind of bizarre to me how well these topics cross over!
Thanks for all you do 🎉
This talk about technology and disability is always interesting. I've worn glasses since I was a child, and have such strong astingmatism that people who try on my glasses feel like they're drunk. But I consider the corrected vision my glasses gave me my 'real' sight, and I'm not considered disabled despite requiring a piece of technology to be able to functionally drive, and having a great deal of vision-reliant hobbies or aspects to my job.
The genetic aspect is super interesting, especially where the line of eugenics is. Most people would consider using genetic engineering to make sure nobody suffers Tay Sachs good... but then where does the line of genetic disease and something that's only an inconvenience because of society end up?
That seems like a pretty easy thing to solve with a couple of laws. But at the same time if a family of one "race" want to have their kid look like they are from another one, then I don't really see the harm in that. The goal is for everyone to be treated equally under society and the law, so it shouldn't matter either way.
Your last part is what will forcibly change humans because everything including Transhumanism is really only about one thing, Psychology. How we interpret the world, what we find meaningful and so forth are nothing more but processes in the brain governed by our genetics, derived from evolution. Transhumanism will change our psyches so that our desire for "being rich" or "living in a virtual world" no longer exist, in fact we might be completely indifferent to external stimuli such as these, why would I ever want to experience anything if I am already content with nothing? Why bother with music or relationships or any of the sort? I find it quite ignorant to believe that our human thought processes will persist throughout time, they are already under attack and influenced by external actors, social media, advertising, medicines and so forth, where did your thoughts come from? Why are you thinking the way you do and not some other way? Why do you find some things important and others not? this is the real "threat" of these technologies and also the goal we've been striving for since forever, education is an attempt at doing the same thing. We might continue to exist but our natural human psyche will be long gone.
@@Danuxsy Yes, bioethics are necessary. But is it right to condemn people to fear their kid will be born crippled or forced to endure drowning in their own mucus because we fear change?
@@Windona Exactly people will allow this technology to change them, it doesn't even have to be forced by anyone it is how the human psyche functions but ironically this is the greatest threat to mankind.
I do think the line is to be drawn at: Does this benefit me personally or does this benefit the system? If it purely benefits the system, then it is unethical. If it benefits you, it is ethical. What does and doesn‘t benefit you however, should be up to yourself. That being said, if we change the system we necessarily change what it does and does not need. If we were to, for example, create an anarcho-communist society (this is a hypothetical, please stay with me), things like working a job, being „competitive“ etc would not be push factors anymore, allowing for more genuine appliance of technologies to yourself. For example, I don‘t know if I have an argument (beyond a fallacious appeal to nature) against genetically enhancing the mental capabilities of your child in such circumstances. After all, it is not necessary to do so, as there isn‘t any competition between disabled folk and other folk. And I don‘t really see any downsides there. After all, one brilliant mind more, is one brilliant mind more. Who gives a fuck? I do realize that that might have negative consequences. Like for example it being fashionable to do so, effectively recreating eugenics. But then again, I don‘t really see that happening, as fashion trends are part of the capitalist machine of domination and I don‘t really know if it would turn out the same way. I dunno. It is hard to argue this hypothetical to such extremes as I am basically just writing fiction at this point. My point being: It is complicated and I don‘t know where to draw the line and if there even is one.
About guns: I can attest to the fact that once a person holds a gun in their hands, it is a different person who perceives the world in a very different way. There is a reason why people become "gun nuts" - the guns make them feel good and powerful. When i was in basic training, I could watch how differently people reacted to getting a gun in their hands. And I could see how the people who were the most excited to get one were the least trustworthy. The ones who were wiser, saw it as a great responsibility and a potential danger "in itself".
I wonder then if the truth is that BOTH guns and people kill people. Both should be held accountable for tragedies. Because it takes a certain kind of person to be so inclined to power trip and feel like they are above the law whenever presented an opportunity to kill, so it is very much their fault for a murder. But a gun enables them in more than just the act of physically firing it to very easily seize the opportunity to kill. The status of owning and holding one does something to said person's brain. It perhaps feeds into prior delusions.
@@getschwifty5537 the utopian solution would be to improve the general mental health of the population while making guns unnecessary in and of themselves. They should become a relict of the barbarous and primitive past, just as we would see a sword or a waraxe. A waraxe is terrifying as a weapon, but most people would not wish to walk around with one, because it is extremely brutal way to kill someone. You will end up being covered in blood and guts, most people would not have a stomach for it.
Except, gun nuts are often the most responsible with guns, because they know the dangers of mishandling them. Sure there are irresponsible gun nuts out there, but in my experience, they are the minority, and generally, its safer to be around a gun nut with a gun, than someone who doesn't really know anything about guns but has one anyway.
@Doom Guy aint nobody dying from criminals with guns where I live. It makes national news when there is a shootout, in a country of 80+mln people. In all this time here the worst thing I have witnessed was one person shoving another. Violence is not a normal human behavior. Criminals are created, not born.
Same with cars. Some people lose 20 IQ points when behind the wheel.
Last year, after being *thiiiis* close to legally blind my entire life, I got laser eye surgery. There was a lot of checkups to make sure nothing would go wrong, but when I sat down in the chair (awake) the procedure took less than 10 minutes. I then went home, suffered a *lot* of pain for maybe 3 hours... and from that moment on, I have lived with 20/15 vision--better than 20/20 vision. (Technically, from the moment the surgery ended, I had perfect vision, I just didn't notice as much).
The technology we have *today* is astounding, and it blew my mind what is actually available to the public, much less what our top scientists are capable of... but open discoverying this miracle, this treasure, my first thought was "I wish I could give this to *everyone*.
... I think that sums up the problems with transhumanism pretty well. Not the transhumanism itself, but all the systems around it that don't let us simply give this tech to the people who want it.
Honestly the same story with every justice system everywhere . . . People that _need_ justice can't pay for it, that's exactly why they need it
Our governmental structures are truly awful but who knows how to fix it? Same story for democracy in general, people don't realize how undemocratic the west really is.
I wan it. That's why I'm going to study so hard Ill become a cyborg and live forever and just do science forever as well
Lasik was banned in many countries due to safety issues, and some people have gone blind from it..For me personally, my vision is progressively getting back where it was, the effect barely lasted 2 years...this also translates to all of the technologies we cheated the nature with. Not one transcends death or even disease. Very rarely
While gender identity has never crossed my mind as something that i needed, one of the first thoughts ive ever had even close to it is "yeah i want to be like Cyborg from Teen Titans." And even after seeing games like Cyberpunk or Deus Ex i still maintain that thought. Imagine if all of my personal motivation issues can be fixed by just electronically forcing my brain to give me the reward chemicals that i perpetually miss out on a daily basis, and all of the pains of my body (that while are not bad now will most assuredly get bad when i get older) just disappear when i need them to. Its a scary thought that these kind of enhancements might be required for you to even get a job in the future, but id prefer that future over just not having the motivation to do anything for the rest of my life.
With that in mind after a while of thinking about it I determined that even though i don't identify as a trans person i can absolutely understand where they're coming from. Hard right people like to quote stoicism as a reason as to why everyone should just have to remain the same person and be an emotionally blocked off individual because they decided to misinterpret the writings of Marcus Aurelius, when the most important point of stoicism is supposed to be to try to reach your potential and be the best you that you can be. if the best you requires that you can change your body and become something better then is this just not an elevated version of being your best self?
I also wish I was Cyborg from Teen Titans! Maybe one day, we'll get there!
have you looked at humanity+ that might be worth
The idea that technology could be more than it seems reminds me of hostile architecture - I remember going to London as a kid and seeing bumpy, slanted, ribbed benches, all the weird structures put on pavements that I thought looked pretty cool and futuristic and gave me a sort of nostalgia for the city - these weird things that I supposed look cool, like the future, the big city! but are beyond my understanding as someone who lives in the countryside.
Then I came to understand them: hostile architecture. Those futuristic-looking benches with loads of bumps, funny shapes, and arm-rests were designed to be hostile to those most in need - homeless people. Those cool little structures in doorways, on steps, outside restaurants and cinemas, in parks - they were built so homeless people would have nowhere to rest, to exist. Why? Because homeless people look bad, they ruin the vibe, so let's treat them like a bad smell and blow them away with architectural fans.
That was a weird sour realisation for me, it made me quite angry. For a long time I had appreciated the interesting architectural details of the city, almost like appreciating certain technological details, I even became nostalgic for them, and all along they had been a frankly disgusting, backhanded, inhumane treatment for the most vulnerable. Makes ya think.
Feel somethin similar walking in America cities havin spent most of my childhood on rural areas. Car culture is America is also an aggressive form of architecture. What a time to be alive. 😌💕
@@SignificantPressure100 Huh? Sorry I don't know if I'm misunderstanding but do you mind explaining where you got:
1. The fact that I believe "technology bad"
2. The fact that I "use technology to enhance my public voice"
Because
1. I don't believe "technology bad", I believe technology (it's not technology anyway, it's architecture) specifically designed to be hostile to homeless people by stopping them from using public spaces as spaces to exist - THAT'S what's bad
2. Do you mean because I'm using a laptop (technology) to voice this, so it's ironic? My friend, a laptop and internet designed for convenience and technological progress is completely and utterly different to hostile architecture
@@SignificantPressure100 Straw man much?
That was an insightful comment and you just walked over and took a massive shit on it by saying nothing of worth.
You enjoy being a shit monster?
@@SignificantPressure100 you make 0 sense holy shit, please say you're trolling
@@SignificantPressure100 "Seems coherent" "black and white" my guy the level of projection is through the ROOF
It took me such a long time to realize "mark all the traffic lights" "anti robot" tests on websites are actually to improve recognition softwares.
And I realised that by reading your comment. Dang :/
oh shit, is it really? oh man, that's troubling.
TIL
@@TheKarret es and i agree it's worrying but that was the point all along.
This whole concept was somewhat discussed in my 9th grade biology class because of the developments of CRISPR technology . everyone was talking about how we could create superheroes and everyone would be happy. I brought up the idea that only the rich would be given access to human altering tech, and it would create an even further class divide. I expected to be sort laughed at and be called a communist, but most people in the class/my teacher understood and the conversation was completely shifted! Just thought this was sort of related idk
We'll never be happy like you guys were discussing in the class, the more we'll change, the more depress we'll become
It's more nuanced. There's too much open source computer code for big tech to have true control over it. They can't contain something like that and everyone would have one way or another to get it. This also opens up a completely different political frontier and classes are going to be rendered pointless. I don't think socialism and capitalism will apply to future politics
Pretty sure this was (more or less) a setting in an episode of Love, Death, + Robots.called "Pop Squad". The tech in question was able to make people immortal, which necessitated the existence of a "pop squad" (or population control police). Reinforces the point that Abigail brings up in this vid about "what does the technology lead us to become?"
@@sarasteege2265 I always laugh at these dystopian future scenarios where our idiocracy of a government manages to keep the entire population under control with some type of device. the politicians dont think more than 4 years ahead, they will never care about overpopulation until its too late to do anything about it
Over time, technology is sold to as many people as possible, this is capitalism. Previously, the richest people had computers, but now everyone has them, and they are much more powerful.
19:05 another example that comes to my mind as a disabled person is my mobility aids, I move seamlessly with them and even call them “my legs”, when I’m in my chair it’s an extension of my own body that I stop thinking about at a certain point
It's interesting to think about the ableism often inherent in these discussions. We often make a lot of assumptions about what is the baseline.
With regards to experiencing the hammer, it reminds me of a story in Sacks' book "The Man Who Mistook His Wife for a Hat" in which a guy couldn't make sense of what he was seeing, despite being able to describe the form of what he saw. Given a flower and asked to describe it, he said it was a "convoluted red form with a linear green attachment." Yet he didn't know it was a flower until told. Our brains do a lot of heavy lifting to make sense of the world; you might even say that most of our experience is post-processing and not original data.
I would say you're pretty safe saying literally all of our lives experience is processed data. Every single bit. There's even some great experiments that pretty clearly established that our brains actually take into account events slightly in the 'future' (from the perspective of our subjective experience) and use that to back-fill in what we see as "actually happening". Our perceptual systems literally play a - very well practiced - guessing game of "those color blobs wiggling that way over the past few milliseconds + those color blobs not moving at all at the same time + skin feels something like breeze == probably a baseball flying at your face" and informs our conscious selves of that assumed guess 20-40 milliseconds after the input arrived.
This is why optical illusions work - you don't directly experience the world, you experience what some parts of your brain assume the world to be, based on it's past experiences. Also why the test like "count the ball bounces, miss the gorilla" work , same idea - 'you' are not getting the raw data you're getting an interpretation which was at the time so focused on one particular aspect of the environment that it was literally tossing lots of other irrelevant data aside. Plus auditory inputs get processed faster than visuals, then your brain 'fixes' things to line up properly. You can play the same sound twice, and go in *knowing* it's the same sound, and 'hear' two completely different thing if watching lips form two different words while the sound plays.
It can honestly be a bit of an existential crisis kind of experience if you ever spend a few hours diving into how filtered our actual experience of 'reality' truly is.
@@jellorelic great comment
I think reducing everything to "data" is commiting the same epistemological error that people from the first two Industrial Revolutions did: they reduced everything to "pressure and release" because of the steam machine. That's why you see that language in psychoanalysis (which started in that age).
We reduce everything to "data" because "data" is what drives our current technology. We don't know about the future, so we can't affirm "everything is data" in an objective way - it will be an analogy.
Quotes:
____
Dataism
In the pages of the New York Times, David Brooks has announced a data revolution. His words are as prophetic as Chris Anderson’s famous article ‘The End of Theory’. ‘Dataism’ is the name of the new faith:
If you asked me to describe the rising philosophy of the day, I’d say it is data-ism. We now have the ability to gather huge amounts of data. This ability seems to carry with it certain cultural assumptions - that everything that can be measured should be measured; that data is a transparent and reliable lens that allows us to filter out emotionalism and ideology; that data will help us do remarkable things - like foretell the future … The data revolution is giving us wonderful ways to understand the present and the past.
•
Data and numbers are not narrative; they are additive. Meaning, on the other hand, is based on narration. Data simply fills up the senseless void.
•
Quantified Self
Belief that life admits measurement and quantification governs the digital age as a whole. ‘Quantified Self’ honours this faith too. The body is outfitted with sensors that automatically register data. Measurements involve temperature, blood sugar levels, calorie intake and use, movement profiles and fat content. The heart rate is taken in a state of meditation: performance and efficiency still count when relaxing. Moods, dispositions and routine activities are all inventoried as well. Such self-measurement and self-monitoring is supposed to enhance mental performance. Yet the mounting pile of data this yields does nothing to answer the simple question, Who am I? ‘Quantified Self’ represents a Dadaist technology too; it empties the self of any and all meaning. The self gets broken down into data until no sense remains.
The motto of Quantified Self is ‘Self Knowledge through Numbers’. But no insight into the self can result from data and numbers alone, no matter how exhaustive they are. Numbers do not recount anything about the self. Counting is not recounting. A sense of self derives from giving an account. It is not counting, but recounting that leads to self-discovery or self-knowledge.
*_Psychopolitics_* - Byung-Chul Han
@@hfbhfb4806 Your "data-ism" comment there isn't necessarily incorrect, and is definitely a thing to be aware of (possibly worthy of a PhilosophyTube episode in and of itself). But I don't think it's really touching on what we're talking about by saying our experience of the world is "processed data". The processing is really the key bit we're talking about - that our impressions of what "reality" is are not a direct interaction with the external.
What we know as 'reality' is really a story that our perceptual systems tell our conscious-self. It takes in the input (which is in and of itself already filtered) , compares those inputs to what it knows about how the world has seemed to work in the past, then guesses what's going on by fitting those two things together as best it can in the few milliseconds it has before it has to move on to the next chunk of inputs. Our experienced reality is a model based on a lot of hard-coded brain structures plus a history of what assumptions have worked and which got you smacked in the face.
Thanks for the clarification, I can see your point better now.
34:22 "Disability is not just a physical limitation, it's an economic one too.
The real supertechnology that smashes human limitations is just cash."
Equality, justice, and good morals
Equity not equality.
This is why neurolink might be very helpful.
@@sarahoshea9603 You are quite right there, equality can never exist but equal treatment is proper.
@@sarahoshea9603 how about both
There are some really interesting ideas in here. Thank you!
I know a lot of transfemme eggs went for fantasy transformation kinds of stories, but I was always into transhumanism. Overcoming the body I was born with has always been such an appealing concept!
Do you worship Satan too, or just an atheist?
4:12 as someone with ADD who takes medication, I resonate with this a lot. A lot of times, my mental state "gets in the way" of me being happy and motivated to do things necessary for living a productive life. However, I think the setting in which one has such a condition changes their outlook on it. For example: if I had zero responsibilities and my physical health took care of itself, I'd be much more content with my regular self. The meds make me seem "muted" which could also be interpreted as "calm". Although I like the benefits it provides me in a professional and social situation in which I need to restrain my constant flow of ideas in order to not appear weird, it admittedly feels like I'm silencing a part of myself. It doesn't necessarily feel bad, and I'm not going to stop taking meds, but it's obviously different. ADD doesn't define me, but it's certainly part of me.
Yeah I've been unable to medicate my ADHD because all the ADHD meds I've encountered were stimulants, and they made my anxiety so bad that it just wasn't worth the tradeoff. I'm on Wellbutrin for my depression, which helps a bit with the motivation side of things, but I still wish there was a magical pill that could allow me to focus. I guess I've never been on ADHD meds for long enough to see what I'm like as a person on ADHD meds, so it's possible that I'd become a zombie and lose all my creativity. At the same time, I hate to say it, but that might be a trade-off I'd be willing to make - I'm so sick of being neurodivergent in a world that wasn't built for us.
@@painter-midge hey just want to say I’m on a very similar journey to you! One tactic I’ve used has been lower dosage delayed release adhd meds (concerta) for a smoother experience. But despite this I also experience the uptick in anxiety and often allow weekends to not take it. Also taking it for a long time (months) does slowly reduce the side effect for me.
It's difficult too, now that you mention it, with antidepressants as well. They've provided an opportunity for me to feel at ease and become more mentally stable in stressful work/education environments, but at the same time, they've left me emotionally empty and numb. It's part of the reason why I've weaned myself off of them to introspectively locate and work on the underlying issues of my depression with the help of resources like group therapy and counseling. For me personally, I just want to emotionally feel something again and have some semblance of a creative drive that I otherwise couldn't get by taking SSRIs. So far it's been rough to tackle, but I at least feel good actively trying to work on improving myself outside of medicated-assistance.
P.S. this isn't meant to attack your stance on your own decision to take medications for your ADD, it just reminded me of my current journey trying to work through depression and I wanted to share. :)
No such thing as ADD. Maybe a minority of people with that supposed condition have suffered brain damage during the birthing process but otherwise it refers to no objective condition. Usually an excuse for poor diet, poor lifestyle, poor parenting, poor teaching etc.
Technology also forms part of our identity. Which is probably why it’s so difficult to give up outdated tools or beliefs because you’d have to give up a piece of yourself to do so
I feel like a slightly different person when I'm wearing my contact lenses vs my glasses. Not consciously, and only a little, but it affects the way I move my head (peripheral vision) and go outside (fitting a mask around glasses is a pain and requires occasional adjustments) and even sleep (shouldn't sleep in contacts!).
@@suitov also it changes how people interact with you. If I were glasses people just assume I’m a nerdy nerd, I am a nerd but not in the sense most people think.
@@suitov I was actually expecting her to bring up eyeglasses or contacts as an example, because you don't notice, or want to notice, the glasses are there on your face unless they stop working properly. Like if they get dirty, scratched, or are squeezing too hard. I recently got new glasses, and opted for transitions lenses because I work outdoors a lot. I also chose two frames from the women's section because I like the colors, and because it's kind of a statement for gender abolition. So in a sense, the glasses are supposed to be invisible to me, but highly visible to others.
I agree! It reminds me of when people comment that they are “green bubble” or “blue” - as sometimes happens when you have a group chat and everyone is an iPhone user but that one person with an Android! 😂
"Transhumanism is about how technology will eventually help us overcome the problems that have, up until now, been endemic to human nature. Cyberpunk is about how technology won't."
- Stephen Lea Sheppard
Hehe, pretty apt... I guess that is why Cyberpunk feels much more real?
@@LeSyd1984 And yet technology HAS helped us overcome many problems endemic to human nature - disease, child mortality and inability to communicate or travel far away. Just saying.
Reminds me of this quote by Frederik Pohl:
" A good science fiction story should be able to predict not the automobile but the traffic jam."
@@LeSyd1984 Just a guess, but are you able-bodied/minded, and are you cisgender? Just hear me out... maybe, just maybe it's not black and white and tech, like all other things on earth, can be used in both good and bad ways depending on the intent of whoever is wielding it. Perhaps you only notice the bad ways because you personally do not use assistive technology on a daily basis.
Genetic engineering is what has me really scared, because its something that doesn't just alter your own body, but any decendants. In fact, it might not even alter your body, JUST your decendants. Unless this technology is made widely available at low or no cost, genetic engineering could turn social class divisions (rich vs poor) into physical, biological, inheritable divisions. Rich people would be physically stronger, smarter, healthier, and prettier.
Even aside from class mobility issues, this would almost certainly result in extreme dehumanization of the poor, if genetic engineering became the perceived "standard" for what a human should be. Those who weren't able to afford it would by definition be below that standard, or to put it in a more chilling way, "sub-human" compared to everybody else. Currently, most of the rich like to pretend that they are the "cream of the crop," that they are somehow superior to the rest of the population, rather than just winning the inheritance lottery, largely because it allows them to justify doing terrible things to millions of people, such as laying off 20% of their workforce, because those people are somehow different, and more expendable, than the people making those decisions. Genetic engineering could make this "cream of the crop" sentiment objectively correct, with there being clear, obvious differences.
I think it is super cool you include sources whenever you talk about a concept or idea. It not only bolsters your arguments, but it also allows people to dig deeper if they want to.
And helps students like me to write my assignments. I don't have time to look into the references in much more detail but at least I understand the basic concepts to include it in my essay lol
it wiil by also cool if she credit the animation by TomSka
shiiiiit
she presents no antithesis though, without antithesis, it's not philosophy, it's propaganda.
@@backintimealwyn5736 well, she did. She explained transhumanism and then explained what about it people criticize.
And FWIW in general I don’t think she pretends to be a neutral arbiter of knowledge (if such a thing even exists).
Video essays aren’t newscasts. They’re supposed to be pieces of work that either persuade or cause one to question something. And even newscasts are often video essays disguised as neutral commentary. The sooner you realize that most people are selling you an idea (rather than simply conveying information) the sooner you’ll be able to critically assess those ideas on their merits.
I have no doubt that there’s a source of information on the internet about transhumanism that you’d find neutral. Perhaps it’d weigh more on the benefits to humankind and less on the fact that its benefits would be unequally distributed. But how you weigh competing interpretations of a philosophical idea is never neutral, and to believe so is to be naive.
Not allow, but compel. Everyone is allowed to look into things in the digital age of free information, but to be compelled to look into something is the true achievement of the video. Call me pedantic, and you may be right, but I also like to think that the words we choose to convey our feelings and ideas are incredibly important.
I love the thought of "what kind of person does this technology make?"
At one point in life, a partner I was with for multiple years really wanted to move to the city, and despite my distaste for the bustle of a city, I wanted to be supportive and go along with it. And one of the first things I noticed that I REALLY disliked was how the sheer volume of people and automation made things extremely impersonal. There weren't cashiers recognizing you and being excited that you're stopping by, there was no "locals discount", people always seemed to try to make themselves small unless asking for money.
Or at least, that's how it felt to *me*. To my partner, there was a liberation in not being recognized, a comfort that nobody really cared they were there.
To me, the infrastructure of the city encouraged people to be hyperindependent, disconnected, and selfish, being directly at odds with my values of community and cooperation. So I have an extremely hard time looking at most cities and seeing any sort of "progress". I don't like what that technology seems to turn people into.
Though someone could look at me playing videogames and say it makes me a potato so live and let live I guess lol
it's interesting how experiences differ.
after moving to a bigger city was the first time I was recognized as a regular (at the local sushi restaurant I would walk to for takeout every Friday), and gave me access to a social groups that didn't exist in my hometown.
conversely, my car-dependent hometown felt isolating as I was just a brief presence at disconnected places throughout the city, even though few things were further than 20 minutes away. my parent's suburban neighborhood was too spread out to see or interact with many people and didn't have anywhere nearby for people to regularly run into each other.
but I could also see myself potentially feeling disconnected in a larger city than where I am now (though it did feel impossibly huge when I first moved here), and recognize the possibility to more strongly belong within a smaller community than my hometown was...
i don't know, my experience with small villages is that kids throw eggs at your door and you have no clue why... in big cities people of all kind live there and it's chill, live and let live without judgement...
@@geoff5623 Well, car-only suburbs are a very specific place : nor city, neither country...
I love big cities but also love small towns. I can totally see both preferences.
Where I live people tend to flip-flop depending on where they live. Kids living outside of big cities usually want to move to the big cities, people who grew up in the big cities often want to move away from them.
Personally, I think cities are way overrated.
16:33 *It's only when it breaks or doesn't do what we want it to do that we recognize it as a peace of technology*
I actually stumbled upon this idea when trying to figure out why Quick Time events are so terrible in games. When I'm playing a game, if I want to jump I'm not thinking 'I have to press X' I'm thinking 'I need to jump'. Quick Time events often have nothing to do with what is happening in context and so they break your immersion and force you to think about the controller again.
I've never thought about that from a philosophical perspective, but that really does just drive more nails in the coffin of why quick-time events make absolutely no sense but rhythm games really work a lot of the time.
exactly, there's a reason I disable QTEs in accessability at the start of the game, it's not just because I'm arthritic and blind, it's also because I'm no longer pressing punch to punch, jump to jump or anything.
the best QTE I've ever seen is in FFXIV, where you can hit any button and you just need to fill up a gauge. But even that has accessibility issues for people with mobility issues, so that's not great either.
Including the economic class transhumnism. Now it's cell phones. But once organ cloning and physical and mental tech which will give major advantages to the very very wealthy, will create a two tier society. Just like much of education is today but worse. Why would someone hire someone with chronic health problems from the environment when you can hire someone genetically smarter healthier and better looking. And that is more likely part of the next century. In 200 hundred years we might basically be different species.
The solution for a fair system is replacing capitalism with a more egalitarian system with everyone having access to the same benefits.
That is why they try to correlate the button presses with historic patterns. Use the jump button to jump, use the gun button to shoot your gun. ... But that also is subject to failure because the QTE is supposed to be... quick and so they only have so much time to convey to the player that you should be jumping or shooting here. Even the best QTEs are subject to "I don't know why I need to press this button, but here goes."
Hi yes this is my first ever video of yours I clicked on. 3.25 minutes in, I am subscribed. Well done, I'm told that I'm a curmudgeonly critic but this seems genuinely well-considered -- right down to the subtitles. edit - 11 minutes in, I love this place. Wildly casual, normalized discussion about everything. Huge W
Welcome aboard!
I have been a cyborg since I was six.
An accident almost fully ripped my fight hand off and only extensive surgery by specialists has been able to reattach it and give me almost unimpeded use of my hand with metal and bone implants.
I have worn glasses since childhood as well.
Fuck tradition, I will take my ultralight glasses, restored hand and normal life, please and thank you.
I absolutely love how you put us to the test in the Slaughter segments - I feel like I'm being trained to critically think about the jargon technological companies use. I'm also studying for an applied ethics exam at the moment, with one of the topics being genetic enhancement and disability - perfect timing! Thanks for all you do.
This is SUCH a great video! As a disabled person, the idea of technology becoming transparent is such a relevant one. When I use my mobility aids, I do truly become a different version of myself, but that version of myself deals with different ableist circumstances as opposed to when I don't have access to them and physically can't move. I become a different subject with different abilities, as well as different barriers. So while the technology itself becomes transparent, the world around me remains at the front of my mind. SO cool!
Thank you for these insights, both are very interesting.
Great points. Also, as a service dog handler, it's incredibly interesting to see how this concept works both ways in both dog and handler. It's not uncommon to hear service dog handlers speak of how, while working together in public, dog and handler become one single unit. It no longer feels like you are working/training/walking with a dog. Your dog becomes an extension of yourself, filling in for those parts of your brain/body that for whatever reason cannot work correctly. When not working together (ie, when chilling at home, etc) dog and handler think, feel, and act as individually as any other two beings in existence. But when on the job, there is a real "extension of self" that happens, and the two effectively work as one single unit. It's a pretty amazing thing to experience.
@@nicked_fenyx That's fascinating! I wonder if Neuralink technology (used wisely and appropriately) could enhance this experience and open up new possibilities for people with service animals.
In the UK, and from what I encounter of the US, there seems to be a prevailing bias, that the answer to any problem is always adding something. The answer is never to subtract or simplify. I suspect this is driven by the desire to sell us stuff we don't really need or want. I can't help but feel that the idea of transhumanism will also fall pray to this, even if in theory it could be beneficial if used properly. I suspect that it will just end up being another way to separate us from the things that really matter to us, in order to make us buy more stuff to try and fill the hole left by that separation. For example, is you're feeling lonely and isolate (for whatever reason) that can lead to worsening mental health, but don't worry they have a pill they can sell you (or in the UK the NHS) for that. What is really needed is to address the underlying causes of the problem of being lonely and isolated, despite living in a world where connecting with people is easier than ever (which brings it's own problems).
Hello. I would like to help you. I can tell you that the things you are saying are 100% true! Humanity has no desire to solve any problems! The only desire of humanity is to sell you things like services and artificial chemicals that make your problems even worse! That way, they can trap you in a cycle of ever worsening despair in their fake society and use you to generate more and more phony income for themselves over time! There is hope. You can pull yourself out of this fake world, the way I have done with myself. However, I must warn you: Once you pull yourself out of the fake world of lies about everything, you will see the rest of humanity for what it really is! The rest of humanity is extremely shallow and superficial! They are practically incapable of any deep thought or any reasoning ability! Thus, if you had been hoping for a deep relationship of mutual understanding with other humans, you will be extremely disappointed!
Capitalism and adjacent power structures are obsessed with expansion for its own sake, and that mindset infects the people who are part of them at all levels. All problems are solved by building more shit, or taking more shit, or building more shit TO take more shit, and it makes people think the same way even in ways you wouldn't expect, because the idea that we should, or even _can,_ put an invention or concept back in the box is unreasonable.
I think epipens underscore that aspect of transhumanism missing the forest for the tree that has tinsel. The inventor wanted them made cheaply so they could be used to save lives, but they aren't cheap because the company wants more money. The flaw in only focusing on the means to extend the self, and a broader thought process that considers access and availability is important to put ideal into practice. The person allergic to bee stings may be less fearful of death or less thoughtful of being near hospitals while going to parks with an epipen in their fanny pack. If they can afford it. If they have good enough health insurance. If they have enough access to healthcare to know they're allergic and an anaphylactic response is something they have to consider. Without the societal tools to achieve what enhancements you desire, the only real goal of transhumanism appears to be placing value on the inaccessible to most.
The intermezzo part is the most terrifying thing for me. A bunch of people are afraid of transhumanism, but I think it's just a natural progression. But the idea that your face can be read in such a way, such as finding out who's paying attention in class, or having people see my face without my consent to try and understand my expressions (especially since I'm autistic and my expressions don't always effect my mood) THAT is scary.
So intermezzo parts were about that (black mirror like watching over people)?..
Honestly, I didn't got it. It looked like some kind of joke around mix of harassment, prejudice, and fake selling talk all together.
But I don't understand how it is related to announced topic itself.
Why is wireheading just a natural progression that shouldn't be worried about but mass facial recognition software isn't?
@@connor3284 I say it's because mass facial recognition software already exists, is even implemented in places (China) and we've already shown we don't give a rip.
@@normanclatcher Right, which indicates that future technologies too will become normalized and accepted regardless of their negative impacts on people.
That is literally happening all the time Caitlyn. You pointed a device with a camera on it aiming at your face just to post this comment.
Whenever someone mentions MTurk in any capacity, I can’t help but be reminded that it was called that because the “Mechanical Turk” was a hoaxed automaton run by a human inside the box it was built from. It was a sideshow attraction that drew in a lot of noterietay for the designer. But it was built to look overly complicated so no one without mechanical savvy could see they were being scammed. Feels pretty cogent.
As someone with Type 1 Diabetes I frequently contemplate the I guess strangeness of my existence being contingent on relatively recent technology, insulin synthesized from a cow for example, which somehow the process was allowed to be patented, so a company literally owns the means to my existence and if I can't pay I'm dead. Beyond this I always have two electronic devices on my body with tubes that puncture my skin to monitor my blood sugar and deliver insulin, one device has to be recharged by an old phone charger while the other is discarded and replaced regularly. On a few occasions I have forgotten to charge my device so I would literally plug myself into an outlet on the wall
as an average person, Facial recognition software becoming widespread is an absolute nightmare scenario that I hate and will fight with all of my means.
Sadly like so many technologies, it exists therefore it cannot be stopped. If rules are made against it, it will just go underground and be even more of a worry.
i think this is idiotic
I WILL NOT USE FACE ID
I WILL NOT USE FACE ID
Think of it as a marketing opportunity for whomever can create expression blocking technology.😅
Sorry, your "absolute nightmare scenario" is already a reality. Most humans already have facial recognition software built into their brains called sight. What you're actually afraid of is not having control of facial recognition software when it inevitably evolves, and of the uncertainty of what purposes such powerful technology might be used for.
I really like coming to this channel as a more stem focused person, seeing the more "why?" perspective with things. This one in particular was very interesting to me. I'm a super hardcore "mankind should spread its wings and fly, not limiting ourselves to this world" type, and it's good to see it re-emphasized that all the power in the world can't help us if we have our society set up in a way where it doesn't benefit us. This is particularly painfully true in the case of nuclear fusion, which we probably COULD have cracked and used as a source of clean energy decades ago if we actually put forth resources and manpower into developing it, but the financial interests of the world don't wish to, as they prefer how things are.
Heck, we probably could just use thorium fission reactors and have had clean, reliable and cheap energy since the sixties but human stupidity and perverse interests have kept us hooked on fossil fuels
@@glendisshiko8182 Isn't thorium too corrosive?
@@gabor6259 it's less the thorium and more the uranium salt that's used in the molten salt reactors. The uranium is what's actually fissioning, the thorium is just used as a stock to breed more fissile uranium fuel to make it where you don't have to get more uranium. That said, materials science has advanced enough that we could probably make something corrosion resistant enough to do it at present. Again though, would need resources and brainpower behind it that is unlikely to come.
@@gabor6259 AFAIK: thorium has not been thoroughly tried, only china is currently operating a thorium molten salt reactor, and theirs still has corrosion problems. not sure if its a "we built a mockup reactor for experimental use, the real one will be stainless steel- plated" Problem or a "we don't yet know an economic materal surviving neutrons, salt, and high temperature at the same time, for 40 years, and the reactor will be too expensive if we use platinum" Problem.
As far as i know, Fusion just IS really fucking hard. Neutron efficiency for breeding fuel seems to be a problem.
there is a video somewhere on youtube, "why we propably wont have fusion in 20 years, from a fusion scientist"
That explails the hurdles in a plausible way.
sure, funding will help, but this is science so groundbreaking we have not even invented all the nessecary shovels yet.
I could be wrong, though. And yes, with enough funding, our fusion research could be 60 years further, and maybe that would be enough...
I love how Abi is so good at presenting concepts that I’d have no hope of grasping without the way she explains them. I still don’t fully know what transhumanism is but now I’m interested enough to actually look into it. I’m so glad content like this is so easily accessible and I’m so glad creators like Abi exist to put these videos out there.
yes same
Transhumanism is very drastic. Transhumanists like to say that for example using a phone is already transhumanism because you using technology for communication. But real transhumanism is cybernetics like having prosthetic legs and arms having electronic eyes and ears etc. Also maybe involve some genetic modification to have stronger immune system or bigger brain. The brain chip what Elon Musk propagated is also a transhumanist idea. After all these modifications you would be "posthuman" as somebody barely can call you a human anymore. Other ideas like having bulletproof and/or colour shifting skin artificial organs, metal endoskeleton etc.
It was interesting to hear about ideas being technology. In my work, there is a saying about how every company is a technology company now and how "software has eaten the world". There are many "traditional" companies that don't subscribe the this idea but then they are the ones that fear "distruption". The common positive example is Toyota. Back when they used to make looms, their designs got stolen. The company's founder told the staff not to worry because they are always improving their designs. That by the time the theives have learnt how to manufacture their designs, Toyota would already be another couple of designs ahead. The point wasn't the physical technology per se, but the focus on learning and progress. In reality, those concepts were the key technology to Toyota's success. Translating that back to the companies of today, to reject physical technology is to reject the ideas of learning and progress.
Huh, before this video I knew very little about transhumanism and my perception of it was either people like. Charlie Kirk who talked about it as a conspiracy or people like Elon Musk inventing Neuralink so he can make sure you’re not thinking about unionizing , but hearing it described as like a tool or a technology makes me realize a lot of things already in existence sound like transhumanism and not just obvious ones like the internet. I remember coming across a quote by Socrates where he complained that no one is memorizing poems anymore because of the written word. Kids these days are all writing poems and then forgetting them because the poem exists regardless of their memorizing it. And that itself sounds like a form of transhumanism just like the internet is. It changes how we interact with the world. Again I don’t know. I’ve watched two video essays on it now and both approached it in radically different ways. But it is interesting because approaching this way makes the entire human race one giant Ship of Theseus.
was the other video essay on this the bo burnham vs jeff bezos by cj the x one
@@Envy_May yep
If you are curious about more leftish perspectives on transhumanism, you can check out _Citizen Cyborg_ by James Hughes and/or Iain M. Banks' excellent novel series _The Culture._
That was Plato actually! There's a great book about this by Derrida called "Plato's Pharmacy"
Yes, super interesting! It reminds me of how strange I feel when I suddenly can’t use Google to look up something I want to know in that moment, because there’s no internet, or my phone died, or whatever. It feels weirdly frustrating, like, “I should have that information in my brain, but I just can’t get to it right now! Argh!” It’s almost like that “tip of my tongue” feeling. Google/the internet is an extension of my brain’s knowledge and when it’s not there, or I even think about it not being there, it feels really weird.
as a disabled person transhumanism hits very close to home for me, i like the way this discusses the potential for things to go wrong, and the ways in which transhumanism sort of already exists. it depends on the way we use it. if we go the full eugenics route and say that transhumanism is for the betterment of humanity in the sense we remove "inferior" traits, i think that is wrong. instead it should be a way for us to accept the differences among all humans. many disabled people need forms of transhumanism to live. i myself need a feeding tube and surgical modifications to eat and live pain free. it doesn't remove my disability, it simply allows me to experience the world in a similar way to how others do by, you know, giving me the chance to live at all. transhumanism isn't a way to "fix" humans. it's a way to make society more inclusive for those of us with certain differences that aren't accommodated for by humanity and society as we have known it before.
This highlights the important topic of inclusion, but I don't think transhumanism has to be limited to that, and to say it should holds the implicit assumption that there is something ideal about the current evolutionary stage of the human body, which is an unsupported claim. I'm a disabled person and would like to have the full movement of my left arm again, but I'd also like to be able to see more colors with my eyes, formulate eloquent poetry at ease (in such a way that I could do it in a matter of seconds with my friends), solve physics questions faster, and all that nice stuff that existence allows us to conceive. It's not bad that someone might wish for these things. Instead, the problem lies in the fact that the technology for such things should be democratized rather than being an exclusive asset of the elites. It's okay to imagine an enhanced future - one that brings with it more happiness. What is not okay is excluding people from that future.
agreed. the need to make these sorts of modifications equally available is just as important as making sure they aren't abused for inhumane practices. there is certainly more than one good use for transhumanism. my perspective/ideal use is almost exclusively a disability one because of how big a part of my life my disability is, and i think that perspective changes as well based on the type of disability and how any given disabled person perceives their disability. transhumanism helps me to feel less alienated and imperfect for having a body that doesn't fit the standard definition of the human body. i am human still and get to experience humanity just in a different way. i would also like to have modifications like that that make my perception and experience of the world different and push the boundaries of what we know as life and evolution, but for me that includes the modifcations i have and those i may have in the future because they allow me to have a life at all when i wouldn't be able to without them. in a way they also redefine what evolution means because instead of falling to natural selection as a result of my condition, i can continue living and theoretically choose to have children who, if they had that condition as well, could live a comfortable life with the same modifications. because transhumanism is a concept that can apply to all humans (just like disability can), there are going to be so many different perspectives on this and it will be very interesting to see how our shared concept of it evolves as well as we learn more about it and its potential downfalls and/or positive uses.
@@marlowvd8921 This definitely resonates with me. Thank you for the reply.
This was uploaded a day before my mom passed away. Now I finally get a chance to sit down and enjoy this and you immediately mention her name, Marina. Thank you so much Abigail for unintentionally granting me a lot of wholesome respite from such an awful situation
Thats fuckin rough...
Rest in power mama!
Marina is such a gorgeous name!
🖤💜💙💚💙💜🖤
I hope you've had a chance to get some rest. So glad you could be here to see the video despite it all, Abigail makes her work such a treat to watch. I'm sorry you couldn't keep your mom forever! You are in my thoughts, I'm sending love and hugs your way!!!
🖤💜💙💚💙💜🖤
I used to watch philosophy tube with my sister before she died. Her videos still give me a lot of comfort. Sending you hugs and good wishes!
I'm sorry for your loss.
Hugs.
Just in case nobody has told you this, it's very common to be a bit stupid for some time after a bereavement. Be gentle with yourself. It's temporary. The sun will come out again, I promise.
Just wanted to say that your Kelly Slaughter and Arsonist (sorry, Traveling Petrol Salesman) skits are so good that they've inspired the personalities of two of my OCs--
Reading The Cyborg Manifesto at uni was such a serious game changer for me in terms of understanding identity and politics and even mental health, and turning that thoughtfulness inward, that I was SO EXCITED about this video. Transhumanism is so much more than how we integrate tech into our lives, it's about the definition of the self, and accepting that the self as it is is as important and true as a self-before-change is just so weirdly healing, in addition to eye opening.
" unless I miss a dose and then I wake up feeling like venom." So true... I just did a hospital stint where they took me off my spiro for a little bit and after 6 hours I was in my own special h*ll. Nothing tasted or smelled right, things tacitly felt wrong, how I sweated and smell(particularly because I was sick), even the pain I was already in became more uncomfortable and I was unable to control my emotions.
I wanted to crawl out of my skin and I cried all day until several hours after they gave me a half dose of spiro, which brought my mood back into balance and brought my senses back close to where they were no longer deeply distressing. It took a week at a full dose of spiro to for my senses to fully back to where they were prior.
Great video, I just thought I would mention it considering your own experience with my own of missing a dose at an inopportune time.
This description of how it feels to be off the med makes me start to wonder: are there more ways to be born into the wrong gender? Can it be that for some people our sensory impressions and interpretations of the world could be improved by transitioning, regardless of psychological feelings of gender belonging?
@@iamjimgroth in answer to your first question: I would say yes. Hormone disorders make gender complicated for supposedly-cis people all the time. I have PCOS and my life is also significantly improved by spironolactone (the above mentioned Spiro) that is a main testosterone blocker for trans women in the US.
As to your second question... I think it's too black and white, and this is definitely a topic in the grey area. I don't think you need to transition away from the gender you feel you are to improve how you experience the world. I do think gender affirming hormone treatment for trans and cis people alike would probably benefit more people than realize it.
@@WitchOracle this is a crazy interesting subject, of which I'm extremely new to. Thank you for sharing and explaining.
I can't imagine the things described here, but I know one thing: transhumanism and transsexuality are very linked. I never had a thought in that direction (more than that transsexuality is very "cyberpunk").
Can anyone suggest some reading that will give me more insights into the subject?
Edit: my keyboard suggested testing, instead of reading. I'm *not* asking for suggestions on testing as it said before. 😂
Probably less a sudden rise in endogenous T and more that your cells are not so used to so much K
I like to believe I understood the transparency of tools before watching this, but hearing it spelt out like that really tipped me off on why I often despise working with obscure algorithms, or harsh software changes (screw you, Samsung!):
You're set back in understanding those whenever they change, and the divide between you and your tool becomes more visible, sometimes even a hindrance.
Thats especially obnoxious in the case of AI algorithms like RUclipss, which keep constantly changing. Usually in ways that aren't supposed to work in our favour, but seem like they do. As if your car would make parking harder in order to increase time you spend in it...
Hey that's true, I get very irritated when a software feature I've used for months or years is just summarily stripped away at some point
The car example is such a clear one!
This is a great video and exceptionally well delivered thank you,
I have experienced the Scuba *separation from/full acceptance of* your gear (especially the first few times one becomes *Neutrally Buoyant!* (Oh frabjious day!), also the feather in hats in the days where people carried Rapiers etc for defense/offense, I have recently started thinking that the feather thrashing around in the background was a great way to confuse your *"hitbox"* or silhouette and could save your life by breaking up your outline in periphery.
Fascinating stuff, I am Subbing now *Philosophy Tube!*
This was compelling! I loved the "gunman" example and how it interacts with the discourse around people not killing people but guns doing so. Also the hammer challenge was brutal, we are living for your confidence.
YES, that whole "gunman" point is one that I will absolutely be borrowing when discussing the gun debate! I've always felt like that whole "guns don't kill people, people kill people" argument, while I agree to an extent, was missing an important point, and Abi brilliantly articulated that point in a way I never could.
I thought it was going to be "gun + man = American", but what do I know?
It is a good point. On pro gun side, but there is obvious problem somewhere. Figuring out what causes the dangerous combination might be solution. Find cause of Gunman and eliminate it, rather then guns from people that would never act that way. Right now politicians on both sides seem to pass bad laws that will please base while keeping status que. Lets them keep running on issue, solving it won't let them keep using topic in elections. Really needs looked at from that angle, might be some element of gun culture creating gunman. Could be cosmetic feature that makes gunman behave that way. Weapons used in mass shooting are not most dangerous on market, something else happening. Gunman tend to have way more ammo then they could possibly use, like enough to last soldier in combat zone months. Someone figuring out root cause of these gunman would help fix problem. Probably not as simple as more background checks, censoring media, better mental health, or restrict gun features.
How dose a value ascribed to a firearm cause more death, as apposed to poverty, lack of health care, lo access to higher education and a generally incompetent government all around (In the us).
hang on I thought I recognised this name, I saw you on twitch wwith pix at one point
As someone who has been wearing glasses for over 30 years I can confirm that technology becoming a part of you is true. My parents asked me last week why I don't want to get Lasik surgery or contacts and all I could say is that I can't picure myself without them.
Same. I actually call putting my glasses on "putting on my eyes" and vice versa. Besides, I love getting to choose if I want to see the world, or not. If I had Lasik, I would always have to see the world...
I agree with the "I need my eyes" way of thinking. My brother and I both wear glasses, but he hasn't always worn them, whereas I have since 3rd grade. Yet, they've become so much a part of us that we both can't and sometimes don't recognize each other in pictures without them.
I feel sort of...protected by my glasses?
@@dariadarling It's handy when you have a nasty shower lol
Yes at this point they feel like a part of me I just take off at the end of the day. Not like clothes more like a weird limb maybe. I don't even think about putting on my glasses I just do it and then can't remember that I did it because it's just such an automatic thing to me like blinking or knowing where my limbs are even without thinking about them.
So I really find the conversation about how disability fits in with transhumanism to be interesting. This video makes a great point how while technology can, on the surface, allow people more choices in how they live their life...will people actually get a choice, when these technologies become available? There was this other video I remember talking about gene therapy (I think?), and one issue raised was concerns from different disability groups that their existence would be quietly eugenics-ed away by this new technology. The comments were. Bad. Too many people started with the premise that "fixing" every person's disability was unambiguously good no matter what those disabled people actually said. And I have to wonder how that translates to pressure on disabled people to adopt a technology and "fix" themselves once said technology is normalized.
Like--I keep thinking about the fact that I wear glasses. If we define "disability" only as "person has a decreased level of ability in some skill society considers necessary for a 'typical' human", then needing glasses is a form of disability. But people who need glasses aren't treated as disabled. We don't need to deal with anywhere near the same obstacles for interacting with society as the social class of disabled people. I can wear glasses anywhere and nobody makes a fuss, I don't get passed over for jobs, I don't get hyper-analyzed for signs that I'm "faking" my bad vision. Glasses (and other corrective lenses) are just that normalized in my society. At the same time, though--I can't opt out of this technology. That's not an option that is, practically or socially, available to me. My vision is bad and that means I Have To Correct It Myself, or I can't interact with the world to the degree that non-glasses-wearers can. Street signs aren't visible, professional presentations don't have a large enough font. The world isn't built for the subjects that need glasses and exist without them, only the people-and-glasses together.
To be clear, this is a wildly complex problem. The whole point of my glasses rant here is not "glasses bad", and it's definitely not that any other personal accommodation device is bad. It's to say--if we want to imagine a world where transhumanism is completely normalized, and how disability and the possibility of "fixing" that might be treated in that world, then looking at how glasses are treated in present-day societies is an interesting place to start.
that's super interesting! (≡^∇^≡)
It's a complex issue. Autism is a big one, where I can see how someone with a severely mentally handicapped child might want to "fix" them, on my end it fundamentally altered how I grew up in ways I look back on as ultimately positive and I wouldn't get rid of it if there was a free pill to do so tomorrow.
I'm glad you specified that glasses are normalized in your society. I kid you not, my boyfriend's parents literally did not want him wearing glasses as a child because they were convinced it would make his eyesight worse.
On a more serious note, I am willing to bet that most people would be willing to magic away ADHD if they could. It is normally considered a disability in my field (education) but amusingly enough the rate of tutors with ADHD where I work is way higher than in the general population, and most of my students who have seen the largest jumps in their self awareness, testing and subject area knowledge have been ADHD students that I have worked with.
@@MegaChickenfish Oof, yeah. I am also autistic, also on team "would not change this if I could", but I do know that certain symptoms can be more distressing and debilitating to the autistic person themself. I have seen autistic people who say they would choose a "cure" if one existed, and I support their autonomy in a choice like that. But yes, the conversation around autism has been absolutely dominated by allistic guardians who want to be able to make that determination for their children. And kind of like the video mentions, the assumption that a cure for autism must be possible and *should* be made has led to so much of the funding for autism research being funneled towards theoretical technological cure-alls instead of social programs, accommodations, funding for specialized care, and so on. Also, like. So many conspiracy theories hinging on "X thing made your kid autistic". Did so much damage to society.
@@GREENSP0RE Wow. Yeah, I didn't want to overload the comment with a lot of over-qualifications, but it is true that I don't know every society and how they respond to glasses.
Yeah, I mean ADHD medication, from what I have heard, is something a lot of ADHD people like when it works. It definitely can be disabling, especially when a lot of educational systems assume that any kids/young adults who can't focus are just "lazy" and need to try harder. My understanding is if you can get a medication that works for you, being able to control your level of executive function is literally life-changing. But like with so many other neurological conditions, there's such a grab bag of ways it impacts your brain and not all of them are things people want to change. ADHD is often characterized as inattentiveness, but what that usually means is you attend specifically to the things that interest you. Not always great during school, or at a job, but ADHD people often find success when they're allowed to explore something they're truly passionate about.
Why is it that every person who complains about "the elites" relentlessly defend the same system that allows elitism in the first place?
it's because they don't mean elites, they mean jewish people. it's just sugarcoated antisemitism.
It's not fair that Abby is that attractive. Philosophers are supposed to be old grey men who smell like cheap whiskey and lifelong regret. Not glowing young women whom I would 100% let step on me.
When thinking about transhumanism, like, the hardcore robot arms and everything stuff, I'm reminded of what I perceive to be the ultimate sci-fi story: about how the rich live forever with everything they could desire, and the poor are left human, as they are.
Hmm I wonder if there's a solution to that kind of inequality that has been the subject of recent history since the 1800's...
This is basically the concept of altered carbon, the rich can make endless clones and upload their mind, they cannot die
@@den-ver7333 LOL yeah, half of all transhumanist concerns could literally just be solved with the phrase end capitalism
Cy-borg?
universal soldier/work animal..
I loved the hammer example because I initially thought it would be an attention/focus example, where you'd ask at the end something like "did you see the gorilla" or "what color was the exit sign" or something... So I kept scanning the background, checking in on the hammer every pass.
And, yeah, it really hit home your point that even when I wasn't even looking at the hammer, it was still a continuously existing thing.
27:19 I honestly think this is a deliberate tactic on their part. Normalise cartoonishly extreme claims so the more tame version seems reasonable by comparison, much like how grifters usually use the old "this is actually worth this much, but we're knocking the price all the way down to this" tactic.
So glad to see a video coming out about this. It’s been something I’d thought about and discussed with some friends for a while now, in part because of the trans perspective, and also because there is some pretty cutting-edge organ printing technology (3D-style, organic, using tobacco as raw material!) being developed where I’m from (Israel).
I’m gonna say it again: if you ever want a professional Hebrew translation for your works, I’ll be honoured to do it!
אם היא רוצה תרגומים אני איתך בעבודת התרגום!! חחחח
If you are curious about the intersection between trans rights/experiences/etc. and transhumanism, then you may be interested in checking out the TransTrans subreddit.
יש מצב, @@HeiressofWater. מה תרגמת עד כה?
אם בא לך לראות דוגמית משלי, את יכולה לראות את הסרטונים ”השמאל”, ”אלימות” ו”אוטוגינפיליה” של נקודותנגד - כולם עבודות שלי.
3d printed and applicable parts for a human chassis? Sign me up.
@@draexian530 uuh... pla is biocompatible, if my friend is not mistaken, and she generally isn't.
Still, I'd do at least some light googling before getting out the antiseptic and the scalpel, as soon as the print is underway.
DISCLAIMER: NOT MEDICAL ADVICE !
Don't base bodymods on medical speculation from random strangers on the internet.
46:24 as a trans person who got an orchiectomy as part of their HRT, I highly recommend it. (Obviously, satisfaction may vary.) For me vaginoplasty was never a consideration, I love my penis, and I am here to tell you that the Empty Sack situation can honestly be a uniquely fun time. (Stopping myself from oversharing in a youtube comment, even though I do really love talking about it lmao)
It also made a HUGE difference on the effectiveness of my HRT overall, with dramatic changes to things like my body hair. Even years after HRT with spiro, I still was having to shave my face every day or two to be comfortable, but now I go a week without feeling like my facial hair is too much, and my stomach is so smooth and soft without having to shave it *at all*.
It also definitely makes me feel like I've "hacked" my body in a transhumanist way that feels delightful for me. The transhumanist angle of my orchiectomy and HRT is definitely something I've thought a lot about.
Also pro tip: if you can choose, get an orchiectomy in November so that you can tell people you've taken No Nut November to the next level.
LOL, I love your sense of humor about it!
😂
I would like to hear your oversharing please
I just started MtF HRT but trying monotherapy without blockers and its been a bit bumpy. I keep experimenting with stuff to send my sertoli and lydig cells into a tizzy and seem to be messing with aromatase output, so I’m getting waves of feminization and then reverting back. Not sure if this is “wise” but its certainly been interesting.
Oh one of my girlfriends is in the process of getting that procedure, so good to hear some good things about it!
As a type 1 diabetic, being a transhumanist is something that my life literally depends on. Having a sensor in my arm, reading my glucose and notifying my phone every 5min, as well as having easy and inexpensive access to insuline (in Europe) has turned this biological flaw of mine into something I can better navigate and overcome. It's been 4 months since my diagnose and without this technology easing my experience, this would be a full time job and I seriously don't know how I'd be able to continue regular (and simple) routines like going to work or having a social life. It's frustrating to see people who don't understand the way all kinds of technology improve the lives of others. Left or right, having zero to no empathy while in politics is destroying the modern democracy.
Just wanted to co-sign on this and say I agree and thank you for this comment!
I've had type 1 diabetes for just under a year now, and I'm basically already insulin-dependant robocop
I've been Type-1 for...19 years now. (Ugh.) I've used a sensor for a few of those years, and it works great -- except when it doesn't and I have to spend a whole day re-calibrating it (topical!), but for the most part it's definitely been an improvement over testing strips. Having that continuous flow of information, rather than being limited to a single number every few hours, has helped tremendously in improving my condition.
my toddler nephew had his diabetic debut last year. he's been using a sensor on his arm for ~9 months. I cannot wait for technology on diabetes to evolve and make it so damn transparent so that he, his parents, and kindergarten teachers (who won't make controls nor administrate insulin ever) don't have to think about glucose and insulin anymore
The amount of nuanced takes on social issues related to this topic is incredible!