News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Human use of high-bandwidth wireless brain-computer inter... by ben_w on Sunday April 04, 2021 @02:12PM (#26691591)
While I agree that we will have mind blowing biotech improvements in the next 50 to 60 years, I don’t believe it’s physically possible for biotech progress to be as mind-blowing as what happened in computer tech.

In the last 60 years, computers have gone from $160 billion/GFLOP to $0.03/GFLOP; transistors are now smaller and faster than synapses by the same factors that wolves are smaller and faster than hills, and the sort of computing tech that was literally SciFi in the 60s — self-teaching universal translators, voice interfaces, facial recognition — is now fairly standard.

60 years of biotech? If the next time I wake is after 60 years in a cryonics chamber[0] and was told every disease was now cured, that every organ could be printed on demand, that adult genetic modification was fine and furries could get whatever gene-modded body they wanted up to and including elephant-mass fire-breathing flying dragon, and that full brain uploading and/or neural laces a-la The Culture were standard, I would believe it. But if they told me biological immortality was solved (as opposed to mind upload followed by download into a freshly bioprinted body with a blank brain) I’d doubt the year was really only 2081 — not all research can be done in silicon, some has to be done in-vivo, and immorality would be one of them.

[0] this would be very surprising as I’ve not signed up for it, but for the sake of example

Re:Human use of high-bandwidth wireless brain-computer inter... by maxander on Sunday April 04, 2021 @03:32PM (#26692162)
If we have full-on adult genetic modification capable of the, ah, dramatic example you provide, we’ve certainly figured out a way to get around in-vivo test difficulties. For better or worse, any biomedical advance comes up against that problem sooner or later.

Therapies to slow aging have the particular problem that it could intrinsically take decades to show an effect, sure- but that’s simply reason to be a bit more ambitious and aim for therapies to reverse aging, which could be tested rapidly in already-old patients. :)

Re:Human use of high-bandwidth wireless brain-computer inter... by KaoruAoiShiho on Sunday April 04, 2021 @02:29PM (#26691718)
> But if they told me biological immortality was solved (as opposed to mind upload followed by download into a freshly bioprinted body with a blank brain) I’d doubt the year was really only 2081 — not all research can be done in silicon, some has to be done in-vivo, and immorality would be one of them.

But why, biological immortality is already here for many animals like jellyfish. Honestly seems closer to me than uploading.

Re:Human use of high-bandwidth wireless brain-computer inter... by ben_w on Sunday April 04, 2021 @04:29PM (#26692589)
Because 60 years isn’t enough time to tell if you were completely correct, or if there was something you missed.
Re:Human use of high-bandwidth wireless brain-computer inter... by ByteJockey on Sunday April 04, 2021 @08:15PM (#26694049)
Depends on if the tech is something you do to an embryo and have to wait for, or if it's something you can do to someone who is already alive.

If you apply the process to someone who is already 100 and they hit 160 with no further degradation, it would be, at the very least, a pretty good indicator your process had worked.