= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
V_V comments on The basic argument for the feasibility of transhumanism - Less Wrong Discussion
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (36)
As opposed to beating random people with a stick, for instance? Try not to worry about unlikely things
Point taken. But the repercussions of EMP disruption of augmented humans aren't akin to playful beatings with sticks: an augmented eye short-circuiting, an augmented arm rendered considerably heavy dead weight, an artificial heart stopped.
Unless of course you meant stick-beatings of a fatal or maiming nature, in which case I would not call them tricksters but thugs. Sorry if my diction misled.
'playful' beatings with sticks?
Indeed. Messing with people's implanted devices, whether it is a standard pacemaker or sci-fiesque medical nanotech, would be a severe act of assault, not a prank.
What puzzles me is why you care about this particular type of assault, since other types seem much more likely.
That was the only way I could reconcile 'beating random people with a stick' and 'tricksters'; 16th century vagabonds in London, for instance, may have found it an amusing pastime.
EMP assaults come (or came, if it indeed would not prove problematic) across as the largest obstacle in ensuring augmentation's safety from malicious attacks, as it would be difficult to identify a guilty party in a crowd, and attacks might, if the technology develops to allow for it, be relatively easy to carry out.
What types of assaults do you consider having a higher probability?