Real problems for the next century

[Howard]

There's a lot of fluff and nonsense in the media right now. What are your thoughts on what are the important topics for the next while that need to be tackled on an international level?

Here's an unsorted list to give an idea of the kinds of things I'm thinking of:

Nuclear (weapons) proliferation
Human rights violations (famine/disease/ongoing violent conflict/legal infringement of rights/etc.)
Large-scale warfare/cyberwarfare (or WW3)
Large-scale loss of privacy and abuse of collected data
Increasing energy costs
Increasing food costs
Climate change influencing severity and frequency of natural disaster, etc.
Permanent losses from overexploitation (water aquifers, fish stocks, etc.)
Increasing economic inequality and resulting decreasing quality of life
Negative population growth
Fundamentalism and terrorism

How would you prioritize these, and other issues?

 

[moonbogg]

I would put brain research (and development) before all of that.

 

[Howard]

I would put brain research (and development) before all of that.

The topic is geared more towards big issues that could affect the progress of humanity in a negative way. Interesting point though. Why do you think it is so crucial?

 

[moonbogg]

The topic is geared more towards big issues that could affect the progress of humanity in a negative way. Interesting point though. Why do you think it is so crucial?

Because 95% of our problems are created by us. If we could come to a better understanding of ourselves, we could correct all of the problems at the source.

 

[SMOGZINN]

There's a lot of fluff and nonsense in the media right now. What are your thoughts on what are the important topics for the next while that need to be tackled on an international level?

Here's an unsorted list to give an idea of the kinds of things I'm thinking of:

Nuclear (weapons) proliferation
Human rights violations (famine/disease/ongoing violent conflict/legal infringement of rights/etc.)
Large-scale warfare/cyberwarfare (or WW3)
Large-scale loss of privacy and abuse of collected data
Increasing energy costs
Increasing food costs
Climate change influencing severity and frequency of natural disaster, etc.
Permanent losses from overexploitation (water aquifers, fish stocks, etc.)
Increasing economic inequality and resulting decreasing quality of life
Negative population growth
Fundamentalism and terrorism

How would you prioritize these, and other issues?

A lot of these are linked to a serious problem we are going to have to face, there is a really large 3rd world that is starting to go through a industrial revolution and our planet simply can not support that many people doing what we did to get to the lifestyle we are at. But they don't care because they want what we have and they know of no other way to get it.
We would be no different in their shoes.

 

[uclabachelor]

In no particular order:

1. Overpopulation
2. Climate change
3. Wealth gap
4. Continual depletion of natural resources / forest / environment
5. Increase in government corruption and/or erosion of civil liberties.
6. Many routine and mundane tasks will be automated by robots and computers

 

[SMOGZINN]

Negative population growth

1. Overpopulation

So, which one is it? Are we overpopulated or is negitive population growth a problem?

 

[Howard]

So, which one is it? Are we overpopulated or is negitive population growth a problem?

Overpopulation is a problem in developing countries. Negative population growth is a problem in developed countries. The two problems can, and do, exist simultaneously.

 

[Howard]

Because 95% of our problems are created by us. If we could come to a better understanding of ourselves, we could correct all of the problems at the source.

So if we came to a better understanding of ourselves, which of these international problems could be solved and how?

 

[moonbogg]

So if we came to a better understanding of ourselves, which of these international problems could be solved and how?

Increasing energy costs
Increasing food costs
Climate change influencing severity and frequency of natural disaster, etc.
Permanent losses from overexploitation (water aquifers, fish stocks, etc.)

I think these would become the focus over the others. If we come to understand ourselves and refine ourselves, the other violence and ill natured problems will dissolve on their own. But we will still have energy problems, food costs etc, environmental damage etc.
I'm referring to gene manipulation and genetic engineering to make us less violent natured by, as Christopher Hitchens put it "strengthening the prefrontal lobes and decreasing the adrenal glands" significantly, amongst other things.

 

[irishScott]

Increasing energy costs
Increasing food costs
Climate change influencing severity and frequency of natural disaster, etc.
Permanent losses from overexploitation (water aquifers, fish stocks, etc.)

I think these would become the focus over the others. If we come to understand ourselves and refine ourselves, the other violence and ill natured problems will dissolve on their own. But we will still have energy problems, food costs etc, environmental damage etc.
I'm referring to gene manipulation and genetic engineering to make us less violent natured by, as Christopher Hitchens put it "strengthening the prefrontal lobes and decreasing the adrenal glands" significantly, amongst other things.

Uh, decreasing the adrenal glands affects a lot more than the brain.

I have to admit I'd be extremely uneasy about genetic manipulation, for most of the reasons decades of science fiction have covered in detail. Who decides who gets which manipulations? Will genetic manipulation unknowingly hamstring us as a species due to unintended consequences? Are we advanced enough to fundamentally change ourselves as a species despite the fact that no human can really understand the ramifications of those changes? The list goes on.

I'm all for genetic research towards curing diseases, but enhancements.. I don't see how that doesn't lead to a distopian future of some variety. Right now we have to worry about concentration of wealth. I'd hate to imagine the world if we had to worry about concentration of intelligence or physical strength.

 

[lotus503]

actually watch a really great documentary on population growth
"BBC This World Don't Panic The Truth About Population"
"http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b03h8r1j"

In short Hans Rosling outlines why its not such a big issue.

 

[sandorski]

Because 95% of our problems are created by us. If we could come to a better understanding of ourselves, we could correct all of the problems at the source.

Most of our mistakes have to do with a lack of Knowledge about the Universe. Even if we understood the Brain/Mind 100%, you can only act on what you Know.

 

[Bowfinger]

In no particular order:

1. Overpopulation
2. Climate change
3. Wealth gap
4. Continual depletion of natural resources / forest / environment
5. Increase in government corruption and/or erosion of civil liberties.
6. Many routine and mundane tasks will be automated by robots and computers

Excellent list. Concise, but I think it encompasses the big issues very well.

 

[moonbogg]

Uh, decreasing the adrenal glands affects a lot more than the brain.

I have to admit I'd be extremely uneasy about genetic manipulation, for most of the reasons decades of science fiction have covered in detail. Who decides who gets which manipulations? Will genetic manipulation unknowingly hamstring us as a species due to unintended consequences? Are we advanced enough to fundamentally change ourselves as a species despite the fact that no human can really understand the ramifications of those changes? The list goes on.

I'm all for genetic research towards curing diseases, but enhancements.. I don't see how that doesn't lead to a distopian future of some variety. Right now we have to worry about concentration of wealth. I'd hate to imagine the world if we had to worry about concentration of intelligence or physical strength.

Like any radical new technology, they come slowly upon the people and they are gradually welcomed. We are already being enhanced. My vision is better than most people and I wasn't born that way. You get my drift. If 50 years ago you offered to fry someone's eyes with a laser beam and told them it would be a good thing, you'd have been laughed at and called a careless and dangerous idiot. This trend will continue and I'm not concerned about it at all. I am confident it will progress, and with each hurdle conquered, large stretches of rapid progress await us on the other side.

 

[irishScott]

Like any radical new technology, they come slowly upon the people and they are gradually welcomed. We are already being enhanced. My vision is better than most people and I wasn't born that way. You get my drift. If 50 years ago you offered to fry someone's eyes with a laser beam and told them it would be a good thing, you'd have been laughed at and called a careless and dangerous idiot. This trend will continue and I'm not concerned about it at all. I am confident it will progress, and with each hurdle conquered, large stretches of rapid progress await us on the other side.

No, it's not that simple and you were note "enhanced". You're equating curing a physical defect to changing the fundamental nature of a species. They aren't part of the same trend by any stretch of the imagination. It's like equating building a car to interstellar space travel.

I'm not at all confident that humans are capable of altering their own nature without massive negative repercussions, as the initial modifications would have to be made by unmodified humans.

If we had the genetic knowledge to do what you're espousing, we could also make every species on the planet sentient via similar methods.

On a related note I'm not just around to shoot down your ideas, but it's starting to seem like you're spending a little too much time looking at issues from extreme, cosmic perspectives and ignoring fundamental flaws in the theory for the sake of fascination. Just because something is mind-blowingly fascinating doesn't make it a good idea.

 

[moonbogg]

No, it's not that simple and you were note "enhanced". You're equating curing a physical defect to changing the fundamental nature of a species. They aren't part of the same trend by any stretch of the imagination. It's like equating building a car to interstellar space travel.

I'm not at all confident that humans are capable of altering their own nature without massive negative repercussions, as the initial modifications would have to be made by unmodified humans.

If we had the genetic knowledge to do what you're espousing, we could also make every species on the planet sentient via similar methods.

On a related note I'm not just around to shoot down your ideas, but it's starting to seem like you're spending a little too much time looking at issues from extreme, cosmic perspectives and ignoring fundamental flaws in the theory for the sake of fascination. Just because something is mind-blowingly fascinating doesn't make it a good idea.

You got me. I just wish I was a badass robot. I look at the issues from an extreme angle because they are extreme problems. I don't see them curing themselves when you have people chopping each other's heads off. You can't reason with such an animal and if that's what humanity is capable of, then it needs to be changed or replaced and I say good riddance. If we wait for people to become decent on their own it won't happen, so let me inject you with these special nano bots that will change your DNA structure into something more pleasant.

EDIT: Now that I got that out of my system, i'll give another answer. I think focusing on education in an extreme and urgent way is the best way forward, and best hope that we'll get it together. Educated people will want to change things and they'll have the tools to force change.

 

[pauldun170]

Water

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

I'm referring to gene manipulation and genetic engineering to make us less violent natured by, as Christopher Hitchens put it "strengthening the prefrontal lobes and decreasing the adrenal glands" significantly, amongst other things.

It's already been done.

 

[moonbogg]

It's already been done.

lol OK. Drilling a hole in someone's head is a little different than what I'm talking about.

 

[SMOGZINN]

No, it's not that simple and you were note "enhanced". You're equating curing a physical defect to changing the fundamental nature of a species. They aren't part of the same trend by any stretch of the imagination. It's like equating building a car to interstellar space travel.

That has to do with knowledge. As our knowledge increases so does our technical competence. If it is possible at all, I'm sure that there will come a day when Fathers and their teenage sons will build their own interstellar spaceships in their space garage.

I'm not at all confident that humans are capable of altering their own nature without massive negative repercussions,

I think there will be tradeoffs, but I think that we will find ones that are acceptable to our current situation. I also don't think that the knowledge of what we once were will be lost, so we can always go back. I think that if we are to survive we have to keep changing as a species. We are not the same people were four thousand years ago, and we will not be as we are now in a few hundred more years.

as the initial modifications would have to be made by unmodified humans.

Not necessarily. A lot of these sorts of hopes fall on the other side of the singularity. So the hope is that these things are created by advanced AI’s that were themselves created by AI’s that were created by unmodified humans.

If we had the genetic knowledge to do what you're espousing, we could also make every species on the planet sentient via similar methods.

Maybe. We don't really know what sentience is yet, so we can't say if we could give it to another species or not.

On a related note I'm not just around to shoot down your ideas, but it's starting to seem like you're spending a little too much time looking at issues from extreme, cosmic perspectives and ignoring fundamental flaws in the theory for the sake of fascination. Just because something is mind-blowingly fascinating doesn't make it a good idea.

I agree with your last statement, but I don’t know if the there are fundamental flaws as much as it being a matter of time scale. I think that if we don’t destroy ourselves or run out of resources, these things are going to happen. The question is: are these things going to happen in the next century or the next millennia or longer still?
Right now we are waiting to see if we can create the technology singularity, if so these things could happen next year.

 

[SMOGZINN]

I also don't think that the knowledge of what we once were will be lost, so we can always go back.

I just wanted to reply really quick to something I said.

Sometimes I sit amazed by how our technology is going to change our future. One of the things I think is going to have the most profound affects is that the age of lost knowledge is nearly (or perhaps is) over. Very soon we will have the ability to digitally store the sum total of human knowledge many times over, probably enough so that each individual can have his own copy.
If you think about this you will soon realize just how amazing this is. Most of the teachings of the ancient Greek and Roman philosophers have been lost. There is countless books and art that have disappeared forever. We have spent millions of hours of manpower relearning what was known by those ancient artists and thinkers. But in the next 2000 years a researcher will be able to pull up what an angry teenager had to say about a video game on a forum that has been gone for thousands of years.

Just think about what we will be able to learn about the human psyche when we develop systems powerful enough to analyze all that data.

 

[moonbogg]

@ SMOGZINN

Exactly. The idea is to place some hope in post singularity enlightenment, and why not? There is very good reason to do so. I'll give a crude example just for fun. Why spend countless hours trying to memorize multiplication tables when you can use a calculator? Some people think that if we can just buckle down and get serious about solving our problems, that some day they will be solved. Maybe so, but why not focus on reaching the technology that will make all of our problems seem petty and insignificant, just like relying on a calculator to do math for us? We will develop the technology, actually the minds, that will do everything we strive so hard to do, and they will do them effortlessly and far better than we could ever hope to do. If we can just get to that breaking point, we will, for the most part regarding today's problems, be totally in the clear. We will have a new set of challenges I'm sure, but they will be of a very different nature.

I want to add to this to give some of us a more clear picture of the power that we are talking about. I'm not perfect so bear with me and try to imagine the following. The time scales I give are guesses, and ignorant ones at that.
Imagine if you will, that the human brain project (its real, look it up) in 20 or 30 years time, achieves an unexpected level of success and indeed, completion. This thing has been enhanced and rebuilt and refined over the years to achieve the function of a true mind, far more capable of sound reason, logical thinking, even emotion and of course, computational abilities that you couldn't even imagine. All in real time, taking place in a single mind. Imagine the engineering this thing could do?
Now, take that mind and imagine the following. This thing is now hard at work, non stop, working on the design of it's own successor, or enhanced version of itself, designed by itself. What then do you think the resulting mind would be like? What if that process repeated again and again? You'd be faced with something as close to God as any of us will ever get on earth, and we better integrate with it, become a part of it, or you can just forget it. We're done.

 

[Agent11]

Nuclear proliferation

Overpopulation

Resource depletion/increased demand

War

Pollution

short sighted politicians and electorates

 

[Moonbeam]

Because 95% of our problems are created by us. If we could come to a better understanding of ourselves, we could correct all of the problems at the source.

The neuroscience has been done for centuries in various forms and teachings. It can be done again today through psychoanalysis. The truth of our condition couldn't be more simple or more difficult to believe. We hate ourselves because we were put down by words as children. We used language and its power to symbolize and create the possibility to think, to create monsters of the ID. We developed a machine that could concretize everything we fear and convince ourselves that YOU are the reason. We created evil in the world and called it the other and that other is the self you will not remember.

In the process of psychotherapy one can relive ones past, re-experience all of ones past terror and see it objectively for what it was. Through positive self development and destruction of the negative self, the ego, one can regain a state of unified perception, a state that is natural to man that has risen like the phoenix from his own ashes. All of this is there in the myths and religions of the world, always misunderstood, because nobody wants to know he feels like the worst person in the world. The truth always slips away. Humanity is asleep. We do not know, don't want to know, and don't want to know we don't want to know. Until we see that we will always look for the answers in the wrong place.