Cyborg – 2015: Difference between revisions
I.Franklin (talk | contribs) |
I.Franklin (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
The Cyborgs exist, they proliferate the social sphere and manifest their self trough intelligence explosion beyond our biological understanding. The proponents of the Singularity promise immortality whilst it's critiques are warning of the possible dangerous scenarios for our humanity. The proposed approach here is that we would create a Cyborg that uses its intelligence to learn what we value, and its motivation system is constructed in such a way that it is motivated to pursue our values or to perform actions that it predicts we would approve of in the future . | The Cyborgs exist, they proliferate the social sphere and manifest their self trough intelligence explosion beyond our biological understanding. The proponents of the Singularity promise immortality whilst it's critiques are warning of the possible dangerous scenarios for our humanity. The proposed approach here is that we would create a Cyborg that uses its intelligence to learn what we value, and its motivation system is constructed in such a way that it is motivated to pursue our values or to perform actions that it predicts we would approve of in the future . | ||
Can we regulate our creativity? | Can we regulate our creativity? Can we regulate the way in which the art is uploaded on the web? Can we re-define the art and help the cyborg to identify the traditional values so that some horrible creatures we find on the web could never become alive? | ||
Can we regulate the way in which the art is uploaded on the web? | |||
Can we re-define the art and help the cyborg to identify the traditional values so that some horrible creatures we find on the web could never become alive? | |||
Perhaps, if we are not careful what we create and share on the web one day could become a living nightmare in reality. | Perhaps, if we are not careful what we create and share on the web one day could become a living nightmare in reality. | ||
Revision as of 23:29, 26 May 2015
This session challenges the creativity from artists and designers point of view and explores the ways in which humans have started to co-create and re-define themselves through the evolution from Homo sapience into Cyborgs via use of additional components added for the purpose of adapting to the new Internet environment.
Session description
The Cyborgs exist, they proliferate the social sphere and manifest their self trough intelligence explosion beyond our biological understanding. The proponents of the Singularity promise immortality whilst it's critiques are warning of the possible dangerous scenarios for our humanity. The proposed approach here is that we would create a Cyborg that uses its intelligence to learn what we value, and its motivation system is constructed in such a way that it is motivated to pursue our values or to perform actions that it predicts we would approve of in the future .
Can we regulate our creativity? Can we regulate the way in which the art is uploaded on the web? Can we re-define the art and help the cyborg to identify the traditional values so that some horrible creatures we find on the web could never become alive?
Perhaps, if we are not careful what we create and share on the web one day could become a living nightmare in reality.
Keywords
Cyborg, Artificial intelligence, Transhumanism, Evolution, Merger of biological and non-biological systems, Uncanny valley, Wearable technology, Extended mental self, Wormholes, Time-space warp, New intelligent life, Personhood, Ambient intimacy, External memory, Mobile technology, Cloud computing, Emotionally intelligent interfaces, Co-creation, Embodiment, Virtual reality, Second self, Semantic web, Haman enhancement ethics, Property rights, Existential risk, Consequentialism, Sinecracy.
Further reading
Deadline 30. April 2015
People
Iliana Franklin
Session twitter hashtag
Hashtag: #eurodigf2