Declaration Of Evolved Existence

[Eclogite]

Just to confirm a couple of points, then Snax:

 

1. You actually believe that the exchange placed in post #24 does not make you sound pompous?

2. You actually believe that Buffy's interpretation of the difficulty of what you are attempting is misguided?

3. You don't actually think you're full of ****?

 

Simple yes [ /i]or no answers will suffice.

[cal]

Just to confirm a couple of points, then Snax:

 

1. You actually believe that the exchange placed in post #24 does not make you sound pompous?

2. You actually believe that Buffy's interpretation of the difficulty of what you are attempting is misguided?

3. You don't actually think you're full of ****?

 

Simple yes or no answers will suffice.

They won't tho.

 

1. Only as pompous as you sounded.

2. No? Like I said, I've dropped the pursuit of this proposal because it can't handle multiple cells. <implying a single cell still isn't an immensely useful resource.

3. You do? How is what I've proposed that unreasonable? I mean, how many times do I also have to say that there are people already doing it?

 

Since it's already been started, I don't see how you can claim that it cannot be done, as it is being done. You're just wrong to say otherwise.

Edited May 8, 2013 by Snax

[Rade]

....my proposal would lead to a real living organism, albeit digital.

Snax, could you please expand on this interesting suggestion.

 

No need to bother with 'real' since non-real living organisms are hard to find outside the human mind, however I would like to better understand how your proposal leads to an independent living organism that would exist outside the human mind.

 

First, why term a digital entity an organism, why not machine ? But OK, let's use your term if you wish.

 

Next, how will your digital living organism (let us call it DLO) reproduce itself without human interaction ? If your DLO requires humans to survive and reproduce and evolve then it becomes a living parasite, not an independent living organism, correct ?

 

More information would help me better understand your proposal. At this time I am skeptical that your proposal would lead to an independent living organism, perhaps a non-living digital machine parasite with intelligence yes, individual living organism, no. Looking forward to your argument to defend your position.

Edited May 15, 2013 by Rade

[cal]

YES! This is the first big thing I am trying to push with the whole proposition, I'm only throwing in the way to cure diseases because that's what makes it feasible (and sexier to get funding for), but the first thing that actually matters is the breakthrough of organic AI. The second big thing is being able to fully understand the human mind to the point where we are the masters of it, brain manipulation becomes easy after we have a fully-functioning person's brain to pause and copy/paste etc.

 

I'm glad you see the potential here, despite everyone's objection to the idea. HOKAI, so since it's become apparent that I'm going to have to retype the entire original post, I'm going to start here, and section it off correctly.

 

No need to bother with 'real' since non-real living organisms are hard to find outside the human mind, however I would like to better understand how your proposal leads to an independent living organism that would exist outside the human mind.

So these point-cloud data pieces we use to represent individual atoms, modelling a single cell out of them (preferably a human embryo so it will develop into a person), all have real physics, and can be given (programmed with) an interaction-table so the Hydrogen atoms react accordingly with Helium and accordingly with Carbon etcetera and vice versa with all of them back to Hydrogen. Programming that part is not hard to do, game developers do it for breakfast (literally, they sometimes forget to eat in order to program class tables for in-game objects), the hard part is building the cell environment as accurate as possible before the system is rendered and set in motion, but that's why I said biologists/embryologists would be needed.

 

Once we model the cell environment (and place it in water or whatever the fluids inside a womb are lol) with regularly spawning proteins and necessary nutrients in it's fluid medium (like in-game spawning objects) then we can just "hit play" and let it render in real-time like all other video games. Viola, yahtzee, mazltoff, Buchowski, we have the world's first ever to-scale human cell existing in a digital environment.

 

My os decided to reboot for no reason whatsoever right here as I was typing this... So I'm probably skipping some stuff this second time around, I apologize if the flow of dialogue seems disjointed. >.>

 

 

First, why term a digital entity an organism, why not machine ? But OK, let's use your term if you wish.

If you think a human cell is a machine, then why do we call ourselves organisms and not machines?

 

 

Next, how will your digital living organism (let us call it DLO) reproduce itself without human interaction ? If your DLO requires humans to survive and reproduce and evolve then it becomes a living parasite, not an independent living organism, correct ?

I like that acronym DLO btw. But to answer your first question, how do normal human cells reproduce without human interaction (barring synthesized stuff, I think you know what I mean by human interaction)? As to your second question, if you're arguing that a digital organism relies on humans because humans programmed the environment and therefore is a parasite to the humans, then humans are a parasite to Earth as we rely on Earth.

 

 

More information would help me better understand your proposal. At this time I am skeptical that your proposal would lead to an independent living organism, perhaps a non-living digital machine parasite with intelligence yes, individual living organism, no. Looking forward to your argument to defend your position.

You're saying some weird things here. I don't know any scientific definitions of intelligence that don't also include a living organism as a prerequisite to host the intelligence. Maybe you are talking about the programming version of "intelligence" but that version doesn't seem applicable because the program itself is not what's creating the intellect here, it's what the real-time organic rendering is producing that creates the intellect (note I am using organic differently here, "organic" meaning the outcome is not necessarily predetermined).

Edited May 16, 2013 by Snax

[blamski]

i was just reading this transcript of a talk by craig venter and a particular paragraph caught my attention and reminded me of this thread.

 

"Science can go much further now, and there is an exciting paper out of Stanford with a team led by Markus Covert and that included John Glass from my institute using the work on the mycoplasma cell to do the first complete mathematical modeling of a cell. But this is coming out in Cell next week. It's going to be an exciting paper. We can go from the digital code to the genetic code, and now modeling the entire function of the cell in a computer, going the complete digital circle. We are going even further now, by using computer software to design new DNA software to create a new synthetic life."

 

this is pretty much what you were talking about, right? or at least the scaled down version of it.

 

venter's institute are doing some remarkable things, although i always have the feeling that they 'over-hype' their achievments a little, making claims that the layperson might interpret incorrectly. they haven't created a completely synthetic life-form, for example, despite the way they reported the implanting of a synthetic genome into a parent cell made it appear so.

 

so maybe there is an amount of venter-hype in this claim too. probably worth checking out, all the same.