TheOtherDave comments on Open thread for December 17-23, 2013 - Less Wrong

5 Post author: ciphergoth 17 December 2013 08:45PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (301)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: passive_fist 23 December 2013 12:20:23AM 3 points [-]

The problem is that human social mores seem to change on the order of 20-40 years which is consistent with the amount of time it takes a new generation of people to take the helm and for the old generation to die out. I have personally seen extreme societal change within my own country of origin, change that happened in only the span of 30 years. In comparison, Western culture over this same time has seemed almost stagnant (despite the fact that it, too, has undergone massive changes such as acceptance of homosexuality).

However, by some estimates, we are already just 20-40 years away from the singularity (2035-2055). This seems like too short a time for human culture to adapt to the massive level that is required. For instance, consider a simple thing like food. Right now, the idea of eating meat that has been grown in a lab seems unsettling and strange to many people. Now consider what future technology will enable, step-by-step:

  • Food produced by nanotech with simple feedstock, with no slow and laborious cell growth required.
  • Food produced by nanotech with household waste, including urine and feces (possibly the feces of other people as well), thus creating a self-contained system.
  • Changing human biochemistry so that waste is simply recycled inside our bodies, requiring no food at all, and just an energy source plus some occasional supplements.
  • Uploading brains. Food becomes an archaic concept.

There is likely to not be a very large span of time between each of these steps.

Comment author: TheOtherDave 23 December 2013 06:01:30AM 0 points [-]

human social mores seem to change on the order of 20-40 years which is consistent with the amount of time it takes a new generation of people to take the helm and for the old generation to die out

If there's a causal link here, then it's possible the biggest problem with social change and technological advances would be due to increased longevity, in which case it might not matter how long the time span is... even if there were decades, it wouldn't be enough.

Comment author: passive_fist 23 December 2013 08:14:36AM -1 points [-]

In some sci-fi settings they have rules where people above a certain 'age' can't directly enter politics anymore. Although I'm not sure exactly how effective that would be, since they would still hold power and influence, and human nature seems to be that we allow more power and influence to the elderly than to the young.