Hacker News Reader

Comment by sleepingreset | Hacker News Reader

The time for cybernetic enhancements of human minds and bodies is, reasonably, a decade or two away from becoming mainstream. Leading up to that, I wonder if there will be enough effort put into consumer protections so that it doesn't turn into a knock-off cyberpunk novel.

I don't think we live in any dystopian future or Black Mirror episode yet, but I do think that if a character in one of those episodes had a flashback to pre-cyberpunk life, it'd look quite a bit like 2024.

Are consumer protections even the right way to navigate this? Could American government reasonably handle this? Supposedly, it'd be the NIH and its peer organizations doing this, and I trust them a reasonable amount.

View on HN

While I'd love to try out cybernetic enhancements in a decade or two, as far as I know we're not even close to anything now, it's possible with an expensive MRI to see some brain activity, and cochlear implants do exist so that's something, but other than that, how would the cybernetic enhancements even connect to the brain, know what kind of information to transfer in what form, and do anything at all?

And even if we get there with something like neuralink, how big is the gap between training it for someone who is currently deficient in that limb or sense and willing to go through the rigorous and extensive mental and physical training required to master the new tool, and Joe Blow consumer?

I forget what sci fi story explored this, but society bifurcated into two branches of augments. One was what I'll call the "apple" crowd. You could get "boring" upgrades like a Inspector Gadget style hand. Or you could go black market and get cutting edge stuff that could and likely would cause you massive damage. But the drawbacks were outweighed by the advantages you could gain. So the tech companies sort of had clandestine observation reports to accelerate their own research.

Tangentially, I wonder how much of the research chemical ("legal highs") market is just companies releasing things to gather data for compounds that could be then commercialized.

This is a fun thing to think about, but commercialization of drugs is antagonistic towards the drugs working around the drug enforcement agencies that technically provide legal highs.

Cannabis is the closest thing that’s combining the two. MDMA is possible, but I can imagine can be synthesized to remove the euphoria once there has been more testing. Mushrooms, LSD, and Ketamine all show their maximum effectuation at lower doses would be taken recreationally.

> I wonder if there will be enough effort put into consumer protections so that it doesn't turn into a knock-off cyberpunk novel.

There will be zero. We’re entering the “find out” phase of the fucking around with making the government as ineffective as possible.

We're really not. The government is as effective as it wants to be.

Or rather, the government as effective as we collectively want it to be. And before somebody comes to explain about lobby and all, looking back in history there were solutions to even worse iron fists (I don't like those solutions, but they exist)

Lobbying only works because government employees allow it to work.

And government employees allow it to work because the populace allows it.

Gov employees aren't the main target or problem in lobbying. Politicians are. And people who keep on voting for politicians whose campaigins are funded by big business and billionairres.

Who have you voted lately?

I'd revise that to 50 to 100 years away. Still way sooner than we'll have superhuman AGI in silicon, anyway! ;D

>The time for cybernetic enhancements of human minds and bodies is, reasonably, a decade or two away from becoming mainstream.

Hopefully, but maybe not for us. If it gets any hotter we'll have to start migrating between hemispheres in the summer.

> we'll

we??

WE???

bro if it gets THAT bad, there'll be too much chaos. Hope you have a private jet & lots of inflation-proof assets if you're trying to prepare for something as terrible as that

>inflation-proof assets

Gold was not very valuable to the Aztecs since they had a lot of it. What exactly is "inflation proof"?

I think saying anything about the far future is just a projection of fantasy. Reality will crush such fantasies under its weight.

The majority doesnt even use most of the features they have on their smart phone. Rate of tech change does not mean people learn faster. People still take time to learn anything new. And the majority hardly have any interest in what mesmerizes and fascinates technologists. And rightly so cuz tools are meant to have purpose. Most technologists these days build shit cuz its possible to do so not cuz they have thpught to deeply about what people actually need. This gap will grow as rate of tech change increases.

> reasonably

Based on what?

The enhancement with written language already happened +10,000y ago, the enhancement with pocket calculators +50y ago. There are some bionic devices for locomotion, hearing, sight, cardio, epilepsy, but mainstream cybernetic enhancements haven't really kicked off yet. We still need to solve hard problems like durability, energy and biointerfacing.

An imagination that seems very reasonable to commenter but wildly off-base to everyone else.

I'd personally bet more on a resurgence of typewriters and film in the next decade or two over deeper integration with the increasingly contrived electronic world.

Now what makes you think that?

I don’t agree with OP at all, but I also see no indication of typewriters or film coming back, except as a retro novelty.

I am hopeful for smaller less rent-seeking software shops to get a foothold while the big players chase statistical models.

>but wildly off-base to everyone else.

Sure thing, except no. The only assertion that is wildly off-base is yours.

Have you used a typewriter or film recently? They’re terrible to use compared to electronics in practically every way and, I’m my opinion, only exist as a form of retro-fetishism.

the exponential acceleration of technology and currently-existing products such as polarized contact lenses, subdermal chips, and AR-sunglasses

I don't see how any of those technologies necessitates cybernetics, especially in the traditional sense of mimetic devices or brain computer interfaces.

It doesn't seem like a great argument for declaring these technologies, which have very little to do with the content of TFA, are imminently becoming mainstream.

It is exciting and fraught both

Reply on news.ycombinator.com