Category Archives: Transhumanist

Carrion is a reverse horror game in which you play as an amorphous creature of unknown origins.The game received universal acclaim from players and critics for its clever power-fantasy premise, as well as satisfying traversal and combat mechanics, which allow for gameplay that can be both strategic and chaotic.

The team behind the game is Polish developer called Phobia Game Studio, whose members previously shipped 2D platformer Butcher.

We caught up withKrzysztof Chomicki, game and level designer on Carrion, to discuss what it took to create the ultimate monster simulation experience of 2020. What follows below is the text version of the video interview that took place on August 13.

Krzysztof Chomicki, game and level designer onCarrion

Oleg Nesterenko, managing editor at GWO: Krzysztof, a couple of words about yourself and the studio, please.

Im the game and level designer at Phobia Game Studio. Were a very small development team based in Poland. We all work remotely. Im based in Krakow, Sebastian Krokiewicz, who is the brains behind the whole studio and our project, lives in Warsaw. Our sound designer, Maciej Niedzielski, is based in Zielona Gra, which is next to the German border. And on Carrion, video game and film composer Cris Velasco joined our team, hes from LA. He did the music for the game.

Carrion team.From left to right:project leadSebastian Krokiewicz,game/level designerKrzysztof Chomicki, composerCris Velasco,sound designerMaciej Niedzielski

How did you first meet with Sebastian and decide to form a studio?

We both got hired a couple of years ago by Transhuman Design. Its a company set up by Michal Marcinkowski. His studio is behind Soldat and Soldat 2, King Arthurs Gold, and Trench Run. He hired Sebastian for a particular project, which eventually got scrapped, but at the time Sebastian was working on his own game called Butcher, and Michal liked it enough to decide to produce it as Transhuman Design and publish it.

Eventually, they decided to expand the team behind Butcher. They were looking for a level designer, and thats how I got on board. At some point, Maciej joined the team as a composer. We liked working with each other so much that we decided to form our own studio, and thats how Phobia and the core team behind Carrion came to be.

Its been three weeks since you unleashed Carrion onto the world. Whats going on at the studio right now?

Weve just published a major patch, which is live on Steam and Xbox already. It should be live on Switch fairly soon. We are also thinking about some updates, like workshop support for the Steam version.

But mostly, we just want to get the post-release support done and maybe the PlayStation port and then to take some time off.

The last couple of weeks was pretty intense. Especially since it was a multi-platform release, which we didnt have previous experience with because Butcher was ported to consoles not by us, but by Crunching Koalas.

Just like Carrion, Butcher also had players kill people as an antagonistic entity, and it was a relative success. Does it mean that Carrion was a relatively low-risk project and you were confident that theres a demand for this formula?

Its not like we knew that a game about an amorphous meat blob would sell. When Sebastian started prototyping the monsters movement and eating mechanics, he shared some gifs on Twitter. They clicked incredibly well, especially compared to what we had with Butcher. Soon after this, publishers started approaching us and asking about the game. Yes, its still too early, they said. But once you have a vertical slice and some proper prototype demo, come back to us and well see what we can do.

Thats when we knew that theres definitely a potential in this project.

You said before that early in development, you used real-time feedback on Twitter to help shape Carrion. How did it work?

At first, we werent sure what kind of game we wanted to make, other than it being loosely inspired by The Thing (1982). We were just exploring the controls for this amorphous creature. We also had the general idea for the eating mechanic, which is that you grow larger and more powerful as you eat more people. And that was pretty much the only thing set in stone from the very beginning.

Everything else we experimented with, posting some gifs on Twitter, and whatever resonated best with people clued us in on which direction we should follow.

Does the player control just one monster? Should there be more monsters? Should we make it an RTS game, with you commanding multiple creatures?

Interestingly enough, we didnt implement any of the mechanics we were testing on Twitter. So, the core of the game has not changed since the very beginning. Twitter comments just validated our intuition, which led us to this kind of metroidvania-based exploration / puzzle platformer without platforming.

Carrions engine is built on the MonoGame framework. Would you please explain your choice of the tech behind the game?

Actually, Butcher, our previous game, was done in Unity. At the time we shipped Butcher and started looking into Carrion, Unity had its both advantages and disadvantages. The advantage was that you could get something up and running very quickly. However, optimizing it, finding bugs and general quirks of the engine wasnt that easy. I dont know if its still the case with the latest version.

For Butcher, Sebastian even developed his own 2D lighting system instead of using what Unity had built in. And it gave us a massive performance boost.

So Sebastian figured out that for the game to feel good on low-spec hardware, while having at least 60 FPS, with no frame drops, it would be easier for him to write something from scratch. He was doing it anyway. The engine was just giving us some unnecessary overhead.

Sebastian looked into MonoGame, liked it enough to decide to go with it, and we are pretty proud of how the game works on relatively crappy computers.

And there is also no fee for using MonoGame, which is always a bonus. I wouldnt, however, recommend building your own engine for everything. It requires a particular set of skills. Sebastian being a very talented programmer, it worked out pretty well in our case. But Im definitely not surprised that many teams are sticking with Unity, Unreal or GameMaker.

Unity and Unreal make most sense if you want realistic graphics. If you could have afforded it for Carrion, I wonder if you would have gone for the same level of gore and violence that you now have in the game?

To be honest, I dont think it would have worked with extremely realistic graphics. It wouldve lost a lot of its charm and even comedy. Carrion is one of those games that might act as if they are dead serious, but they arent. With all the screams and everything being so over the top, it works very well in the pixel art style.

And Im not sure it would be a good idea to do it either in high-def 2D or 3D. It would probably turn into an actual horror game, and we didnt want our game to be scary to the player. You are the one whos making NPCs scared, but you yourself should feel exhilarated running around as the monster. So I think this level of abstraction that pixel art gives us is very beneficial in this case.

Physics simulation creates all sorts of fun incidents, but it also takes away from the precision of controls. Like you try to gently close the door, but instead you rip it off! Or you occasionally expose one of your blobs. Did you struggle with that when designing the game?

90 or 95% of the monster is physics-based and procedurally generated. Theres a couple of sprites, like the mouths or the eyes. Obviously, it did pose some problems in terms of responsiveness. We did our best to give the players as much control over the creature as possible, given its nature. But its always a tradeoff.

There were also some quirks in level design. Especially with the monster in its largest form, we had to be very careful. For example, if you pull this switch and some door closes, it can cut you in half because some of your blobs just happened to be there, half a screen away. Things like that dont happen in other games with regular-sized characters, which only fit two tiles. It was pretty tough for us.

As for somewhat loose controls, I think it actually works pretty well onthe narrative level, because even if you want to remove a soldier or a scientist from a group and you just end up killing everybody, well, what can you do it? Just one of the disadvantages of being a monster, I suppose.

Yeah. Narratively and thematically, it fits, so its not a major problem. No ludo-narrative dissonance. Controls dont need to be uber-precise since the monster is kind of messy.

You could do a crossover between Butcher and Carrion. Combine two very different types of gameplay with the cyborg from Butcher being very precise and the monster being sloppy and messy.

That would not be impossible to doButImnot confirming any crossovers!A good point, though, about Butchers controls being very precise. In Butcher, we had pixel-perfect precision when it comes to movement. And all the arenas and the platforms were designed with extremely smooth and precise movement in mind. Carrion is the opposite because the monster isnt that precise and it doesnt even require any platforms because it can just go anywhere it wants.

Technology versus nature. Anyway, I also like how many of Carrions systems are interconnected. The roar button, for example, lets you roar, which is fun in itself. At the same time, it allows you to locate a savepoint. But it also alerts NPCs on the level, which you can tactically use. Did you specifically design stuff like that to serve multiple purposes? Or did it just organically come together as the game evolved?

I think its a bit of both, depending on which system we are talking about. Some things were planned and some just came naturally as the game was evolving.

We knew quite early on that wed lock particular skills into particular sizes of the monster. We call it the mass-based class system. This system allowed us to come up with more creative puzzles than in most metroidvanias, in which solving puzzles is just a matter of obtaining the right skill.

The mass-based class system also added more variety to combat because there isnt one single winning strategy for all encounters. Puzzles force you into changing your size so you have to constantly adjust your tactic.

Thats something we knew pretty much from the get-go and something that was entirely planned. Other things kind of evolved along the way, like the echolocation. Initially, it was just a roar button and it didnt have the echolocation functionality. Thats something that was added later on.

In general, we are big fans of things that serve multiple purposes and add some depth without adding unnecessary complexity. The fewer buttons to remember, the better.

What does it mean to create levels for a monster to navigate as opposed to those designed for humanoid characters?

Its just a nightmare in many ways. One thing you dont really think about is how important gravity is in most games, especially in action adventure platformers. Its pretty much the most common obstacle other than having to fight enemies or open doors. You have to get somewhere high or avoid falling down. Gravity is something you take for granted, and once you take it away from the game, suddenly you have to figure out a completely new way of setting up challenges, obstacles and puzzles for the monster.

Asthe monster, when you see some place, you can just go there by pointing your mouse or analogue stick. It really flipped everything on its head. We couldnt have actual outdoor segments because the monster could just go everywhere. So theres always a ceiling, even in the most outdoor-ish chambers. Obviously, its a lot of work.

And also the sheer speed at which the monster moves is a major problem for level design. In most games, half of the time you just walk from point A to point B. In Carrion, though, its a matter of seconds to go from the beginning of the map to the end, if there are no obstacles, no enemies. So we had to get very creative.

You may have noticed that in flashback sequences, when youre controlling the scientists, their movement is totally different, despite utilizing the same environments. A chamber that would take a second or two to traverse as the monster takes you half a minute to get through. So it amplifies the sense of what the monster is capable of and how frightening it is to the humans who move so slowly and are very limited in their traversal abilities.

So the metroidvania-like design was born out of your ambition to step up the challenge for the monster?

It wasnt so much about upping the difficulty. We just wanted to give the game more depth, boost its exploration aspect. As soon as we figured that throughout the game the monster would be learning new skills that it could use to unlock new areas, to solve puzzles, it was just our natural instinct to go for a more or less metroidvania-like approach. Although its not really your ordinary metroidvania with everything respawning everywhereand every puzzle being extremely simple. We didnt want to respawn every single object in the environment. We wanted to maintain this feeling of the horror that the monster is bringing on humans, so you need to see your havoc. Everything that you broke, everyone you killed and everybody you spared stays there for the whole game.

So despite Carrion having those core principles of metroidvania (not being able to go there yet, first needing to acquire the new skill), we kind of streamlined it. You dont have to do an awful lot of backtracking in our game. Which is why, once you enter a new area, its locked off, and you are restricted to this contained area you have to work through. It lessens the confusion because it helps avoid situations in which someone would approach a puzzle and start wondering whether they can solve that puzzle or not yet. Because sometimes you backtrack to the very beginning even though you were actually able to solve this or that puzzle. It was just a matter of coming up with the right solution.

I did get lost a couple of times exploring the dungeons. And apparently, other people did. I saw folks posting their maps of the facility on Reddit to help their fellow players. In retrospect, do you feel like an in-game map might have been a good idea?

Im fairly confident that some reviewers would have given us higher scores, if there was an in-game map. I still think it would really detract from the experience. It would make the game genuinely worse. Its like with Demons Souls and Dark Souls, those games being vastly misunderstood at first by the majority of reviewers. Especially Demons Souls didnt review all that well because the game didnt explicitly tell you what to do. Those games didnt have any maps. But eventually a few people figured out what those games were about. They were just hearkening back to times when games respected the player a bit more and didnt do any kind of handholding.

In fact, you still have this conversation going on 10 years later, like should Sekiro have an easy mode? No, it shouldnt.

And I think its kind of similar with Carrion. Games nowadays make people expect a map to guide you everywhere, even if its not really necessary. Players are so used to having a map that they stop paying attention to environmental clues or directions that the game gives them.

The original Metroid didnt have a map and it was totally fine and nobody complained. Back in the day, even games that did have maps still required you to pay attention to the environment. In Morrowind, for example, the quest log only gave you the general directions, like go North, find this rock, and then turn right and hope for the best. Its something that Oblivion totally ruined for me. It just points you in the right direction or you can simply fast-travel, theres barely any sense of exploration and discovery in post-Oblivion RPGs. If more developers decided to focus on just environmental clues, people would stop expecting to have the map available at all times.

Im very happy, though, that people are making their own maps to help each other, it strengthens the community.

Both Butcher and Carrion allow users to integrate their own custom levels. Is it a feature that you consciously put in your games?

In the case of Butcher, we used our own in-game level editor while making the game. It was relatively easy to adapt it to the general public. We just figured, why not? Anyway, it wasnt very popular with fans, even though some people did make maps. And in the case of Carrion, its actually the total opposite. This time, we used a third party tool called Tiled, which is a map editor used in various games. Once we posted the alpha sneak peek demo back in October last year, someone asked what we were using for editing levels. When I told them it was Tiled, people started coming up with their own maps, using the demo assets. We didnt lock any functionalities away from people. People are still making maps. The most dedicated modder in our community has already made a custom campaign, which should take around two hours to beat or so, and its very cool. So its something we want to capitalize on, which is why were looking into the workshop support, as I mentioned.

We definitely want to make creating and downloading custom maps easier. Its not so hard right now, you need to download a level file and the script file and put them in the corresponding folders. But nowadays its expectedthateverything should be just a single click away, so were looking into our options in making the whole experience smoother.

A couple of words about music and sound design. How did it feel for you guys to work with Cris Velasco?

It was great. Cris did music for Overwatch, Mass Effect, Borderlands, God of War, Resident Evil 7, and Bloodborne. What he brought to the table is the sheer knowledge of working on those AAA titles. In fact, we wanted to orchestrate the whole soundtrack. We pretty much had everything set up for an actual orchestra recording. But the pandemic messed up our plans and we ended up recording soloists only a violinist and a cellist.

Funnily enough, it was Cris who approached us after seeing some of our gifs on Twitter. He found Sebastian on FB and said he would like to write the soundtrack for Carrion. After seeing his portfolio, we obviously decided to let him!

When the credit rolled, I counted 16 voice actors in the game without a line of dialogue. How come?

Its all screams. We told our sound designer Maciej that theres a limit on every sound. Theres only this many sounds for door breaking, wood cracking or the monster roaring. But there was one sound that didnt have a limit on the quantity and variety of it. It was screaming. We wanted to have as many screams as possible. When we revealed the game at an E3, we didnt have all those recorded yet, and people actually complained about having to listen to the same samples over and over again. Its something we went all in on.

Finally, any words of wisdom to your fellow devs?

Never make games in which the character is amorphous and you never know how large and how long it gets. Stick to your fixed-sized character. Its for your own sanity.

***

You mignt wantto check out the extended video version of the interview with Krzysztof:

Read more:
Carrion game/level designer Krzysztof Chomicki on managing amorphousness, gravity and screams - Game World Observer

A paper published recently in the Journal of Medical Ethics explores the relationship between disability and enhancement, and the importance of social context and environment in how they get defined. According to the group of authors, led by Nicholas Greig Evans, a Professor of Philosophy at the University of Massachusetts Lowell, the most popular ways of thinking about disability and impairment often either discount certain types of disability or patronize the person with the impairment.

Going further, the authors explain how popular accounts tend to ignore how social stereotypes about disability can impact even those who do not identify as disabled or impaired themselves:

the tendency to focus on specific and often paradigmatic cases of disability and elide discussion of enhancement has a serious downside: it has the potential, among other things, to keep us from understanding cases of disability and impairment that are less apparent and well recognized. Aside from limiting our knowledge and understanding, it also keeps us from making interventions or undertaking further research that might concretely assist those populations . . .

There have been many different models of disability proposed over time, ranging from models based on social factors and human rights to those that link disability to technology. Recent events, like the Covid-19 pandemic and the associated economic and climate disasters, moreover, serve as ongoing reminders of how our abilities to act freely as individuals are always shaped by the broader socioeconomic dimensions of our lives. This insight echoes what critical psychologists have been saying for decades.

According to Evans and the other authors, most people thinking seriously about these issues agree that disability is a widely heterogeneous set of phenomena, so much so, they note that some have argued it to be a meaningless category in the abstract. For them, most existing models dont account for the way assumptions about disability are intertwined with assumptions about enhancement, insofar as both are shaped by which skills happen to be considered most valuable in a given social setting.

How we define either disability or enhancement, they propose, depends on how we compare the behaviors of a specific individual with a statistically relevant cohort group. Cohort group studies track changes in behavior and expressed capacities over time across individuals who live under similar conditions.

With this in mind, the authors suggest it could be useful to think about human abilities in general in terms of the concept of capacity space, which they define as the dynamic relationship between an individual person and their social and environmental milieu. From this perspective, phenomena we tend to call disability are inherently dynamic because they change over time, and they are relational because they are constituted through interactions between persons and the social tools (e.g., digital technology) they have available.

The concept of capacity space, the authors propose, provides a useful starting point for understanding the full variability and breadth of disability as a ubiquitous characteristic of the human species. To help illustrate this, they present a series of case studies that depict experiences of disability and enhancement that are often overlooked in the literature.

For example, they point to certain dysgenic effects in soldiers after WWI, where a high number of casualties left young men who were previously considered physically unfit among the only individuals available for military service.

In this instance, individuals who had been considered disabled relative to other soldiers before the war could have become normal, or even enhanced, simply because the cohort group against which they were judged had changed. This, the authors explain, is an example of how ones capacity space can be transformed even when ones individual abilities remain relatively consistent.

Another example they discuss is the many different variations of chronic pain. This is true both within the same individual as well as across different individuals. Some days are, of course, better than others, with factors ranging from diet, climate, and social contact, possibly having some effect on how chronic pain is experienced and managed at any given time.

Symptoms related to a diagnosis of Ehlers-Danlos syndrome (EDS), a hypermobility condition, for instance, might be relatively mild when compared to other individuals who are diagnosed with the same condition:

At times, the person is simply more flexible and mobile than their cohort, making them a better spokesperson. At other times, their joints dislocate unexpectedly, and they are incapacitated in significant ways. Is this person enhanced, disabled, or both, relative to their cohort?

Thinking about disability as something that any human can experience under the right set of conditions, and in entirely personal ways, represents a clear departure from approaches like welfarism, which posits a clearly defined line between disability and ability.

The authors define welfarist approaches to disability as those that posit a stable physiological or psychological property of a subject S that leads to a significant reduction of Ss level of well-being in some circumstance. From this perspective, disability is defined not according to how an individual can perform socially, but according to how the individuals sense of well-being is impacted by one of their personal traits.

Enhancement, by contrast, would be defined under welfarism by any stable property of a person that leads to a significant increase in that persons well-being. By focusing on psychological well-being, rather than social structures or medical status, the authors suggest, welfarist approaches to disability and enhancement account for something important that other models tend to ignore.

And yet, by framing disability as something intrinsic to each individual person, and defining welfare solely in terms of well-being, welfarist accounts risk marginalizing the consequences of prejudice and institutional discrimination for those who do not conform to conventional social expectations. They also fail to adequately account for the ways disabilities have different social implications across time and space, beyond individual well-being.

Such dimensions, the authors claim, are essential to experiences of disability. With their concept of capacity space, they underscore how time and space are not abstract categories; like disability itself, they are complex social realities that shape what individuals consider possible for themselves and others.

The authors are also cautious not to discount sociohistorical accounts of disability. Instead, they describe their project as complementary to such accounts. And yet, the importance of economics and social factors related to race and gender are given relatively little attention in their article.

It is hard to imagine how a cohort, or any other social group, for that matter, could be considered relevant to a persons lived-experience without accounting for the way self-image and self-performance are assigned value today largely in terms of capital.

Under current conditions of global capitalism, social networks are unavoidably shaped by the technologies, information, and capital that its members have access to. Indeed, enhancement and technology are so obviously linked in todays hyperconnected world that it would make little sense to propose a concept of one that cannot account for the other.

While statisticians have the luxury of selecting cohort groups based on analytic convenience, this is not true for those whose embodied natures fail to align with the skills deemed most valuable in todays information-based markets. These are issues that movements like transhumanism and posthumanism have been engaging with for decades, but they are, unfortunately, not given much attention by the authors of this paper.

****

Evans, N. G., Reynolds, J. M., & Johnson, K. R. (2020). Moving through capacity space: Mapping disability and enhancement. Journal of Medical Ethics. (Link)

Read more here:
Rethinking Our Concepts of Disability to Meet Our Changing Social Worlds - James Moore

Image: Screen shot from That Hideous Strength: C.S. Lewis's Prophetic Warning against the Abuse of Science.

Editors note: Published on August 16, 1945,C. S. LewissThat Hideous Strengthis a dystopian novel that eerily reflects the realities of 2020, putting into a memorable fictional form ideas expressed in Lewiss non-fiction work, The Abolition of Man. To mark the former books three-quarter century anniversary,Evolution Newspresents a series of essays, reflections, and videos about its themes and legacy.

James A. Herrick is the Guy Vander Jagt Professor of Communication at Hope College in Holland, MI. His books include The Making of the New Spirituality: The Eclipse of the Western Religious Tradition.

This post is adapted from Chapter 10 ofThe Magicians Twin: C. S. Lewis on Science, Scientism, and Society, edited by John G. West. See also,

Not surprisingly, contemporary Transhumanism has attracted a number of informed critics. I will briefly review two prominent voices in the opposition camp who reflect concerns at the heart of C. S. Lewiss own case. Hava Tirosh-Samuelson, a skeptic as regards the Transhumanist vision, echoes one of the central arguments of The Abolition of Man biotechnology now threatens to exercise control of nature itself:

Due to genetic engineering, humans are now able not only to redesign themselves but also to redesign future generations, thereby affecting the evolutionary process itself. As a result, a new posthuman phase in the evolution of the human species will emerge, in which humans will live longer, will possess new physical and cognitive abilities, and will be liberated from suffering and pain due to aging and diseases. In the posthuman age, humans will no longer be controlled by nature; instead, they will be the controllers of nature.1

The question of altering human nature also remains at the center of the developing case against Transhumanism and related proposals. Famed historian Francis Fukuyama, for example, has argued that contemporary biotechnology raises the possibility that it will alter human nature and thereby move us into a posthuman stage of history. This possibility poses a real danger to individual rights and threatens the foundation of democratic institutions:

This is important because human nature exists, is a meaningful concept, and has provided a stable continuity to our experience as a species. It is, conjointly with religion, what defines our most basic values. Human nature shapes and constrains the possible kinds of political regimes, so a technology powerful enough to reshape what we are will have possibly malign consequences for liberal democracy and the nature of politics itself.2

Though the deeper dangers of biotechnological alterations of humans have not yet manifested themselves, Fukuyama adds, one of the reasons I am not quite so sanguine is that biotechnology, in contrast to many other scientific advances, mixes obvious benefits with subtle harms in one seamless package.3 The essential correctness of Lewiss case is evident in the duration of major components in his rebuttal to Bernal, Stapledon, Haldane, Shaw and other enhancement proponents of his own day.

C. S. Lewis exhibited remarkable prescience in The Abolition of Man. Was there anything that he failed to see? Writing in the war years of the early 1940s, Lewiss perspective was understandably shaped by present circumstance and personal experience. As a result, he did not anticipate certain cultural and historical developments that have become critical to the rise of posthumanity thinking.

As noted, Lewis harbored a deep antipathy for faceless state institutions where atrocities are plotted out according to cost-benefit pragmatism and inhuman schemes are hatched in dingy meeting rooms. In such settings was the banality of evil expressed in war-torn Europe. Lewis does not appear to have anticipated the postwar power of the large corporation, the modern research university, and sophisticated mass media. Such shapers of 21st-century American culture, not the cumbersome state agencies of mid-century Europe, have taken the lead in developing the biotechnologies, educational techniques and persuasive prowess Lewis cautioned against. The user-friendly smile of the high-tech firm, not the icy stare of a government department, is the face of the new humanity. Moreover, justifications for enhancement research are not hammered out in centralized planning meetings, but tested on focus groups and winsomely presented in entertaining public lectures. Financial support for posthumanity comes not come from Big Brother bureaucracies but from Silicon Valley boardrooms.

The scope of research related to human enhancement is incomprehensibly vast and accelerating at an incalculable rate. Hundreds and perhaps thousands of university and corporate research facilities around the world are involved in developing artificial intelligence, regenerative medicine, life-extension strategies, and pharmaceutical enhancements of cognitive performance. An ever-increasing number of media products including movies, video games and novels promote Transhumanist and evolutionist themes. Each technological breakthrough is promoted as a matter of consumerist necessity despite the fact that personal electronic devices and the companies marketing them are increasingly intrusive and corrosive of personal freedoms. Innovative educational organizations such as Singularity University are forming around the Transhumanist ideal. Indeed, so immense, diverse and well-funded is the research network developing enhancement technologies that the collective financial and intellectual clout of all related projects is beyond calculating. Suffice it to say that the enhancement juggernaut is astonishingly large and powerful.

Tomorrow, Science and Scientism: The Prophetic Vision of C. S. Lewis.

Read more from the original source:
CS Lewis and Critical Reactions to Transhumanism - Discovery Institute

Editors note: Published on August 16, 1945,C. S. LewissThat Hideous Strengthis a dystopian novel that eerily reflects the realities of 2020, putting into a memorable fictional form ideas expressed in Lewiss non-fiction work, The Abolition of Man. To mark the former books three-quarter century anniversary,Evolution Newspresents a series of essays, reflections, and videos about its themes and legacy.

James A. Herrick is the Guy Vander Jagt Professor of Communication at Hope College in Holland, MI. His books include The Making of the New Spirituality: The Eclipse of the Western Religious Tradition.

This post is adapted from Chapter 10 ofThe Magicians Twin: C. S. Lewis on Science, Scientism, and Society, edited by John G. West. See also,

C. S. Lewiss prophetic appraisal of certain scientific trends in The Abolition of Man finds confirmation in todays discourse of our biotechnological future. The vision of technologically enhanced posthumanity arises out of a synthesis of scientific cultures most robust mythologies progress, evolution, the superman, and the power of collective intellect. Technology will conquer death, space, and human nature, and deliver us into the future as highly evolved demigods. The Internet is humanitys first major step toward a unified web of consciousness Teilhard de Chardins noosphere that will first blanket the earth and then pervade the universe.1 The objections of bio-conservatives will be silenced through popular argument and public art, and the way opened to unlimited progress, miraculous technologies and visionary ethics. Then comes posthumanity and Bertrand Russells world of shining beauty and transcendent glory.2 Transhumanism affirms that the time has arrived to make good on such prophecies by crafting a technologically enhanced, globally connected and immortal race Stapledons splendid race.

Contemporary Transhumanism draws inspiration from Utopianism, Renaissance Humanism, Enlightenment Rationalism, nineteenth-century Russian Cosmism, New Age Gnosticism, science fiction, speculative techno-futurism, and apocalyptic themes in the Judeo-Christian tradition. Nick Bostrom, Oxford University philosopher and one of the founders of contemporary Transhumanism, captures the movements fundamental orientation:

Transhumanists view human nature as a work-in-progress, a half-baked beginning that we can learn to remold in desirable ways. Current humanity need not be the endpoint of evolution. Transhumanists hope that by responsible use of science, technology, and other rational means, we shall eventually manage to become posthuman, beings with vastly greater capacities than present human beings have.3

Evolving humanity, long a theme in popular scientific writing and science fiction, has now emerged as a major topic in bioethics, philosophy and religion.4 Ongoing evolution will eventually produce a unified cooperative organization of living processes that spans and manages the universe as a whole.5 Evolution is now a process in which human beings may actively participate by technological means. The present human being is not the crown of evolutions creative work as a step toward something grander the posthuman. But, even posthumanity is not the ultimate goal. Inexorable evolution is producing, by means of its human and posthuman surrogates, ever more advanced technologies as part of its plan to achieve omniscience and omnipotence. Ambitious evolution is merely using us and our descendents as its cats paw to snatch technological divinity from the cosmoss chaotic flames.

The specific characteristics of posthumanity are debated; what is crucial is the conviction that the posthumans are near, that they will represent a profound improvement over our present condition, and that we ought to work diligently for their arrival. One Transhumanist advocate affirms:

Trust in our posthuman potential is the essence of Transhumanism. We trust that we can become posthumans, extrapolating technological trends into futures consistent with contemporary science, and acting pragmatically to hasten opportunities and mitigate risks. We trust that we should become posthumans, embracing a radical humanism that dignifies the ancient and enduring work to overcome and extend our humanity.6

The posthuman future is not limited by biology but will involve human beings merging with machines, at first by simply mechanically augmenting the body but eventually by depositing human consciousness in mechanical devices. Thus will we achieve immortality, universal knowledge, and unified global consciousness.

The process of creating posthumanity is fundamentally evolutionary, but with an important difference when contrasted to the old Darwinian model. As Lewis speculated in The Abolition of Man, biotechnologies will permit us to be active participants in our own evolution.7 Transhumanist leader James Hughes writes that we must accommodate the posthumans that will be created by genetic and cybernetic technologies.8 This vision, in broad strokes, affirms Oxfords Bostrom, is to create the opportunity to live much longer and healthier lives, to enhance our memory and other intellectual faculties, to refine our emotional experiences and increase our subjective sense of well-being, and generally to achieve a greater degree of control over our own lives. According to Bostrom, the aggressive pursuit of biotechnology is a radical reaction against current convention, an alternative to customary injunctions against playing God, messing with nature, tampering with our human essence, or displaying punishable hubris.9 Efforts to coax the public to embrace the ideology of posthumanity, however, will surely provoke a contest. Thus, Hughes predicts that the human races use of genetic engineering to evolve beyond our current limitations would be a central political issue of the next century.10

More may be ahead than domestic political debate, however. According to some experts, the near future will usher in a global culture enabled by a massively more powerful Internet. Computer engineer Hugo de Garis takes as simple matters of fact that the exponential rate of technical progress will create within 40 years an Internet that is a trillion times faster than todays, a global media, a global education system, a global language, and a globally homogenized culture which will constitute the basis of a global democratic state. This new order of things, which de Garis calls Globa, will rid the world of war, the arms trade, ignorance, and poverty.11 The coming transformation of the human race and the world it inhabits is nothing short of an apocalypse the Kingdom arrives via the Internet.

What was previously sought through magic and mysticism, writes Hughes, will now be pursued technologically.12 Bostrom imagines a utopia in which posthumans enjoy aesthetic and contemplative pleasures whose blissfulness vastly exceeds what any human being has yet experienced. The new people will experience a much greater level of personal development and maturity than current human beings do, because they have the opportunity to live for hundreds or thousands of years with full bodily and psychic vigor. He continues:

We can conceive of beings that are much smarter than us, that can read books in seconds, that are much more brilliant philosophers than we are, that can create artworks, which, even if we could understand them only on the most superficial level, would strike us as wonderful masterpieces. We can imagine love that is stronger, purer, and more secure than any human being has yet harbored.13

Bostrom and Hughes strike a winsome note in their predictions of the posthuman future. However, at what cost does the New Era arrive? Will we forego individual rights, as Lewis feared, in the pursuit of a greater collective good? Science writer Ronald Bailey contends that democratic majorities often oppose avant-gardes minorities. If the transhuman future we are all hoping for is to be achieved, it may require efforts more aggressive than those suggested by Bostroms irenic reverie. Regrettably, democracy often has placed limits on cutting-edge scientific research. Bailey argues that in some benighted jurisdictions promising research agendas can be stopped in their tracks by majoritarian tyranny. Despite the apparent lessons of history regarding programs for improving humanity, Bailey looks hopefully toward the day when an emerging posthuman race will transform the world that is, if democracy doesnt get in the way.14 Perhaps Lewiss fears about religious devotion to inevitable processes were well founded.

Considerably more reassuring to wary audiences is the central figure in the contemporary human enhancement movement, inventor Ray Kurzweil, best known for his theory of exponential technological progress culminating in the Singularity. At a moment in time not more than a few decades away, a technological explosion will change everything permanently. Kurzweils vision of a transformative human future has recently captured public attention in books such as The Singularity Is Near and movies such as Transcendent Man.15 He confidently affirms that exponential progress in the biological sciences will soon allow us to reprogram the information processes underlying biology.16 While the idea here is vague and expressed for a lay audience, the planned reprogramming of foundational human biology is the specific goal of Lewiss Conditioners. For Kurzweil and other techno-futurists, the future will reveal unimaginable improvements to the human condition. Nature will yield to technology; the battle will have been won.

Kurzweil has become the public face of human enhancement, an affable front man with an accountants demeanor. The heavy theoretical lifting, however, is done by others. Philosopher John Harris, among the four or five leading apologists for human enhancement, argues that assisting evolution is a moral obligation. He writes, The progress of evolution is unlikely to be achieved accidentally or by letting nature take its course. Joining Savulescu in urging the necessity of enhanced evolution, Harris argues that if illness and poverty are indeed to become rare misfortunes, this is unlikely to occur by chance It may be that a nudge or two is needed: nudges that will start the process of replacing natural selection with deliberate selection, Darwinian evolution with enhancement evolution.17 While Harriss metaphor suggests a gentle technological push along coordinates of improvement already plotted out by nature, it would be wide of the mark to imagine that science has identified such an evolutionary trajectory for future humanity. It is more likely that educated guesses grounded in hopeful narratives about progress substitute for actual knowledge in this and similar scenarios.

An inevitable force with motives of its own, evolution is central to the techno-futurists vision of the posthuman future. Evolution produced us and through us, technology. It, not God and not the Tao, is also the source of the moral principles that have brought us to the point of transformation as a species, and that will ensure our continued evolution. Computer scientist Hugo de Garis affirms that because of our intelligence thats evolved over billions of years, we are now on the point of making a major transition away from biology to a new step. You could argue that maybe humanity, is just a stepping stone.18 Physicist Freeman Dyson agrees we will be transformed as many opportunities for experiments in the radical reconstruction of human beings present themselves.19 But there is more to our posthuman future than simply improving our lot here on earth: The new humanity, toward which the present human race represents a mere step along the way, will propagate itself throughout the cosmos. This was the cosmic vision of scientific planners and science fiction authors that prompted Lewiss skepticism about space exploration. Sounding a theme reminiscent of Wells, Dyson writes that when life and industrial activities are spread out over the solar system, there is no compelling reason for growth to stop.20 Technologically assisted evolutionism is becoming, as Lewis warned, a comprehensive narrative of an inevitable forces ultimate universal triumph.

Human enhancement advocates focus attention on four technologies nanotechnology, biotechnology, information technology and cognitive science, or NBIC. But technology is not the whole story of the turn toward Transhumanism. The NBIC technologies, writes Hughes, will change how we work, how we travel, how we communicate, how we worship and how we cook.21 Whereas work, travel, and communication are perhaps expected in this list, and cooking seems trivial by comparison, how we worship is arresting. Traditional religion has been the bte noir of enhancement advocates, an anti-technological and anti-futurist force to be actively opposed. Hughess comment, however, hints at a new approach the re-imagining of religion along Transhumanist lines. For some in the movement posthumanity and advanced technologies are objects of worship, hope in the Singularity a religious faith. The new wine of Singularity religion will require the new wine skins of innovative religious expression; techno-futurism will discover transcendence in techno-religion.

Tomorrow, C.S. Lewis and Critical Reactions to Transhumanism.

View original post here:
CS Lewis and Contemporary Transhumanism - Discovery Institute

This Friday, at 3 p.m. Pacific Time, Elon Musk will unveil mind-blowing, game-changing results from Neuralink, his much-hyped and hugely secretive brain-implants startup.

If all goes according to plan, that is.

Then again, it could be like the time Musk claimed to have developed a super strong Tesla truck, and to demonstrate its strength got an engineer to throw a steel ball at it, which promptly smashed a window. Famously, he did it again, with the same result.

Musk and his acolytes have claimed that his Brain Machine Interface (BMI) technology could help the disabled walk, those with paralysis control phones with their thoughts, and the addicted and depressed to recover mental wellness.

In an April 2017 interview with Wait but Why, Musk went as far as to say that the company was interested in treating brain disorders and, within the next decade, enabling telepathy through neural implants.

His supporters hope that the billions of dollars Musk is pouring into Neuralink may be a step on the path to enable humanity to one day fulfill one of the core goals of the larger transhumanist movement by allowing humans to attain mental and physical superpowers and transcend the imperfect operating system we were born withaka the body.

Musk, the tech showman extraordinaire, has certainly not sought to damp down the feverish excitement around Fridays Neuralink event, which, like anything he does, generates in some corners of the internet. Indeed, hes used his Twitter account to stoke the frenzy.

When one user asked if the implant could re-train part of the brain linked to depression and addiction, Musk retweeted the question and replied: For sure. This is both great & terrifying.

It will blow ur mind haha, he wrote in one post with another promising, Will show neurons firing in real-time on August 28th.

It has his base fired up, even if some Ph.D. students are not that impressed.

However, an intriguing new report from STAT News, which says it interviewed four former employees, says the Neuralink project, based in Fremont, California, has a chaotic internal culture and has been plagued by conflict, because Musks rushed timelines and move fast and break things attitude have clashed with the more patient and painstaking approach of career scientists.

The conflict between mechanical engineers and academic neuroscientists has created a pressure cooker atmosphere within the company, STAT News says, adding that many key figures have left the project. The company is reportedly now down to just two of its eight original founding scientists.

As further evidence of what it characterizes as Musks haste, STAT News reports Neuralink has even discussed the idea of potentially bypassing U.S. regulations by starting BMI human studies in China or Russia. The site quotes the testimony of two former employees, who are not named, as the sourcing on this ethically troubling idea.

Neuralinks demanding timelines have pushed employees to forgo the slow, incremental approaches typical in the field in favor of running experiments they arent yet ready for, STAT reports.

In 2017, the report states, the company pushed forward with an effort to implant 10,000 electrodes on an array into the brains of sheep in one surgical procedure, according to a former employee, instead of first trying steps such as implanting a smaller number of electrodes. The experiment failed.

The fate of the sheep is not disclosed.

Were it not for the fact that Musk has revolutionized space travel, invented an electric car brand that came from nothing to be valued at more than Toyota, and isthis month at leastthe fifth richest man in the world, it would be easy to dismiss his vision for Neuralink as just one more example of a tech bro with a god complex.

But Musk may yet pull something extraordinary out of the bag; for example, Neuralink has previously said that it aims to enable people who are paralyzed to operate smartphones and robotic limbs with their thoughts, before ultimately augmenting humans with artificial intelligence. Musk on Twitter mused on this prospect as: AI symbiosis while u wait.

Industry insiders suspect, however, that the biggest breakthrough that might realistically be announced Friday is that human testing is underway. This would mark a huge step forward for the Neuralink project.

Neuralink responded to STAT News, saying many of its claims were inaccurate and urging it to wait for the demonstration on the 28th before publishing its story or risk looking foolish.

The Daily Beast has contacted Neuralink for comment and is awaiting a reply.

Read this article:
Elon Musk's Neuralink Has Its Big Reveal Friday, but Insiders Say the Company Is Plagued by Internal Conflict - The Daily Beast

explainers,

One of the most important elections in our times happens in just over 10 weeks. It is, of course, the election to be the President of the United States plus elections for the two houses of Congress. The winner of the presidential election will invariably be called the most powerful man on earth - and man it will be this time as every time before. It will take place on November 3 (by law, it's the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November, four years after the previous election). The presumptive Republican candidate is Donald Trump, the incumbent, and the presumptive Democratic Party candidate is Joe Biden. Presumptive because technically Mr Trump isn't the candidate until he is endorsed by this week's Republican Convention - but Messrs Trump and Biden will be the candidates. Plus more than 20 others from the Libertarian Party to the Legal Marijuana Now Party to the Transhumanist Party. And the rapper Kanye West who announced his campaign on Twitter on July 4. Many of these candidates are not running in all states. They're not going to be President of the United States of America. They might. If the race is very tight, votes taken from Biden or Trump may be crucial. In 2000, for example, the Democrat Al Gore lost Florida by 537 votes to George W Bush and that cost Gore the presidency. The perceived left-winger, Ralph Nader, received 97,421 votes there. Studies indicate that Nader's votes would have tended to have gone to Gore had Nader not been standing. No. The American system is based on an "Electoral College". Each state has a certain number of votes in the college and usually casts all those votes for one candidate, no matter what the split of the vote in that state. That can mean that the winner of the election is not the person for whom most Americans voted. In 2016, Donald Trump won 2.87 million fewer votes than Hillary Clinton but he won in the Electoral College by 304 electoral votes to 227. There will also be elections for all 435 seats in the House of Representatives and for 33 seats (a third) in the Senate. This matters immensely because many public appointments have to be ratified by the Senate. In particular, judges on the Supreme Court have to be approved. At the moment, the ideological balance among the nine Justices tilts to the Right, with five conservative judges against four "liberals". One of the liberals - Ruth Bader Ginsburg - is 87 and has survived several bouts of cancer. You might think courts are devoid of politics but that's not true of the US Supreme Court. Issues like access to abortion, access to government health care, the ease or difficulty of voting, particularly by black people, may all come before the court and be decided in a partisan way. It's hard to think of any other American election which has been so polarised. The Democrats say this election is for "the soul of the nation". Candidate Joe Biden and his running mate, Kamala Harris, have both used the phrase. They and a few Republicans argue that Mr Trump has authoritarian tendencies which must be stopped. Mr Trump's supporters say it is still about "making America great again". Nobody doubts that the choice is stark. Issues such as access to health care, attitudes to Russia, attitudes to NATO, attitudes to alliances, including that with Australia will all turn on the outcome. There is no doubt that Mr Trump's record will figure, particularly his handling of the epidemic. While the stock market isn't doing that badly, unemployment is around 10 per cent of the workforce. Age may become an issue. Joe Biden turns 78 in November and Donald Trump is 74. Already Republicans are implying that Mr Biden is senile or going that way. Democrats mocked Mr Trump's uneasiness on his feet when he walked down a slope. A poll by Pew Research found that people likely to vote Democrat were more likely to mail in their votes. "Most registered voters who support Trump or lean toward supporting him would rather vote in person in the presidential election (80 per cent), either on Election Day (60 per cent) or earlier (20 per cent); only 17 per cent prefer to vote by mail. "By contrast, a majority of voters who support or lean toward supporting Biden say their preference is to vote by mail in the presidential election (58 per cent)." The USPS has told the state of Pennsylvania that some mail-in ballots might not be delivered to voters on time because "the state's deadlines are too tight." READ MORE: So funding for the USPS is now an issue. Democrats accuse President Trump of blocking money which would enable the service to make sure the votes arrive in time. Left-wing Senator Bernie Sanders said: "What you are witnessing is a President of the United States who is doing everything he can to suppress the vote, make it harder for people to engage in mail-in balloting at a time when people will be putting their lives on the line by having to go out to a polling station and vote." If we knew that ... The atmosphere changes completely when an election gets into full swing. Small incidents get magnified. Nate Silver whose FiveThirtyEight polling organisation is widely respected said: "Joe Biden still has a comfortable lead over President Trump in our national polling average and is favoured to win the election in our forecast. "But remember, Trump still has a meaningful chance of winning - even though the polls are stable now, that doesn't mean they will stay that way."

https://nnimgt-a.akamaihd.net/transform/v1/crop/frm/silverstone-feed-data/96f936ce-2df5-4acd-beaf-24e9cd176d10.jpg/r0_74_800_526_w1200_h678_fmax.jpg

EXPLAINER

August 24 2020 - 4:00AM

One of the most important elections in our times happens in just over 10 weeks.

It is, of course, the election to be the President of the United States plus elections for the two houses of Congress.

The winner of the presidential election will invariably be called the most powerful man on earth - and man it will be this time as every time before.

It will take place on November 3 (by law, it's the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November, four years after the previous election).

The presumptive Republican candidate is Donald Trump, the incumbent, and the presumptive Democratic Party candidate is Joe Biden.

Presumptive because technically Mr Trump isn't the candidate until he is endorsed by this week's Republican Convention - but Messrs Trump and Biden will be the candidates.

Plus more than 20 others from the Libertarian Party to the Legal Marijuana Now Party to the Transhumanist Party.

And the rapper Kanye West who announced his campaign on Twitter on July 4.

Many of these candidates are not running in all states. They're not going to be President of the United States of America.

They might. If the race is very tight, votes taken from Biden or Trump may be crucial.

In 2000, for example, the Democrat Al Gore lost Florida by 537 votes to George W Bush and that cost Gore the presidency.

The perceived left-winger, Ralph Nader, received 97,421 votes there. Studies indicate that Nader's votes would have tended to have gone to Gore had Nader not been standing.

So whoever gets the most votes becomes President

No. The American system is based on an "Electoral College". Each state has a certain number of votes in the college and usually casts all those votes for one candidate, no matter what the split of the vote in that state.

That can mean that the winner of the election is not the person for whom most Americans voted.

In 2016, Donald Trump won 2.87 million fewer votes than Hillary Clinton but he won in the Electoral College by 304 electoral votes to 227.

Anything else happening on November 3?

There will also be elections for all 435 seats in the House of Representatives and for 33 seats (a third) in the Senate.

This matters immensely because many public appointments have to be ratified by the Senate.

In particular, judges on the Supreme Court have to be approved. At the moment, the ideological balance among the nine Justices tilts to the Right, with five conservative judges against four "liberals".

One of the liberals - Ruth Bader Ginsburg - is 87 and has survived several bouts of cancer.

You might think courts are devoid of politics but that's not true of the US Supreme Court.

Issues like access to abortion, access to government health care, the ease or difficulty of voting, particularly by black people, may all come before the court and be decided in a partisan way.

Why is this election special?

It's hard to think of any other American election which has been so polarised.

The Democrats say this election is for "the soul of the nation". Candidate Joe Biden and his running mate, Kamala Harris, have both used the phrase.

They and a few Republicans argue that Mr Trump has authoritarian tendencies which must be stopped.

Mr Trump's supporters say it is still about "making America great again".

Nobody doubts that the choice is stark.

Issues such as access to health care, attitudes to Russia, attitudes to NATO, attitudes to alliances, including that with Australia will all turn on the outcome.

What may turn the election?

There is no doubt that Mr Trump's record will figure, particularly his handling of the epidemic.

While the stock market isn't doing that badly, unemployment is around 10 per cent of the workforce.

Age may become an issue. Joe Biden turns 78 in November and Donald Trump is 74. Already Republicans are implying that Mr Biden is senile or going that way. Democrats mocked Mr Trump's uneasiness on his feet when he walked down a slope.

Where does the US Postal Service fit in?

A poll by Pew Research found that people likely to vote Democrat were more likely to mail in their votes.

"Most registered voters who support Trump or lean toward supporting him would rather vote in person in the presidential election (80 per cent), either on Election Day (60 per cent) or earlier (20 per cent); only 17 per cent prefer to vote by mail.

"By contrast, a majority of voters who support or lean toward supporting Biden say their preference is to vote by mail in the presidential election (58 per cent)."

The USPS has told the state of Pennsylvania that some mail-in ballots might not be delivered to voters on time because "the state's deadlines are too tight."

So funding for the USPS is now an issue. Democrats accuse President Trump of blocking money which would enable the service to make sure the votes arrive in time.

Left-wing Senator Bernie Sanders said: "What you are witnessing is a President of the United States who is doing everything he can to suppress the vote, make it harder for people to engage in mail-in balloting at a time when people will be putting their lives on the line by having to go out to a polling station and vote."

The atmosphere changes completely when an election gets into full swing. Small incidents get magnified.

Nate Silver whose FiveThirtyEight polling organisation is widely respected said: "Joe Biden still has a comfortable lead over President Trump in our national polling average and is favoured to win the election in our forecast.

"But remember, Trump still has a meaningful chance of winning - even though the polls are stable now, that doesn't mean they will stay that way."

Read the original post:
Why this US election could be the most important of our times - The Canberra Times

@nooniesNoonies

The Tech Industry's Greenest Awards. Public Nominations Are Open. Voting Starts Aug 13.

Among the 2,000+ deserving humans nominated across 5 categories for over 200 award titles, we discovered Sergey Baloyan from Russia, whos has been nominated for a 2020 #Noonie in the Future Heroes and Technology categories.

Without further ado, we present to you, our big techy world, from the perspective of Sergey.

I'm entrepreneur, I work with the most innovative companies in the crypto industry. I speak a lot at the conferences, and I host a podcast about future and technologies (on Russian, though there's one episode on English :))

I'm interested about how crypto can change the world after all hype. How governments is starting to use it. Also, I'm super interested in tech overall. And transhumanism, biohacking and things like that.

Not much really, but less travelling and less speaking at the conferences

Biotech / Genetic engineering

Oura Ring app, Brilliant, Kindle, Food delivery 🙂

Machine Learning course, VC funding course, Game Theory

Shane Parrish, Naval, Sam Harris, Daniel Bourke

For much the same reasons Hacker Noon decided not to put good ideas behind pop-ups or paywalls nor abuse your personal data to target you with creepy ads we also decided that you dont have to be a #thinkfluencer or have 50k followers on Twitter to earn the recognition that comes with a 2020 Noonie Nomination.

Make somebodys day and nominate them to be recognized in the internets most independent and community-driven awards: NOONIES.TECH.

Subscribe to get your daily round-up of top tech stories!

More:
"Good And Evil Are Two Sides of The Same Coin" - Sergey Baloyan, 2020 Noonie Nominee - hackernoon.com

The family of the lateHarry Hains recently released the animated video for his first posthumous singleGood Enough transporting viewers into the world of ANTIBOY, one free of societal constraints and labels. Good Enough, released under Harrys artist nameANTIBOY, is the first track from his forthcoming concept albumA Glitch in Paradise, due out later this year. Check out the video below.

A multi-dimensional and compelling musician, actor(most noted forAmerican Horror StoryandThe OA,) artist, and model,Harry didnt define himself by the constructs surrounding us, and his concept ofANTIBOYoffers a portal into an age of existence where there is complete unparalleled freedom to live without preconceptions and societal labels. At a time when society is rising up to break down old systems and demanding equality for all (and on the heels of Pride), Harrys extraordinary perspective, found at the intersection of our conversations on sexuality, gender, race and self-expression, endures because of its cultural relevance as society focuses on conversations and more importantly actions surrounding racial injustice, Black Lives Matter, LGBTQ rights, systemic oppression, and equality.

In a digital utopia where there is no inequality, prejudice, or toxicity,Harry (as the genderless transhuman being ANTIBOY)imagines a world in which the human mind and the bionic body merge. Harry lived this through his own identity, which was gender fluid, shapeshifting and open to interpretation just like his music. The focus on the merger of the human consciousness with artificial intelligence, of non-binary existence opens up a conversation about what the future of our species should and could be. PRESS HEREto watch the ANTIBOY trailer. An amalgamation of rock, electronica and gothic pop,A Glitch In Paradiseexplores the virtual world of ANTIBOY as he re-lives his mistakes in order to try to correct them and find happiness. ButANTIBOYexperiences glitches and gets stuck in an endless loop of heartache, inspired by Harrys relationship with then partner Mike.Good Enough is the first tase of this heartache a song that questions being good enough for a partner.

Jason Price founded the mighty Icon Vs. Icon more than a decade ago. Along the way, hes assembled an amazing group of like-minded individuals to spread the word on some of the most unique people and projects on the pop culture landscape.

Read the original here:
ANTIBOY: The Family of Harry Hains Unveils Animated Video For Good Enough Single - Icon Vs. Icon

Human fascination with robots has long been fused with fear. The first widespread use of the term came a century ago in a Czech play about robots manufactured to serve and work for people. The catch? The bots turn on their masters.

That plot has played out in fiction countless times since. Meanwhile, the real world has created ever more advanced versions of mechanical servants. Todays artificial intelligence (AI) is more sophisticated than anyone could have imagined decades ago, and its already influencing our lives in incredible ways even if the robot masses have not (yet) revolted. Google CEO Sundar Pichai recently said AI is more profound than fire or electricity in its impact on humanity.

But like fire, AI can burn us too. Todays Sunday magazine takes stock of where we are, where the technology is headed and the pitfalls that lie ahead with AI. There is much to celebrate, loads to fear and even more to question about a future in which machines join humans in striving for a better world.

Friends With Benefits. Imagine robots did all the cooking, cleaning and dog-walking around your house. They ferry you around town, care for a sick parent, teach kindergarten to your child, deliver packages, perform your favorite hit songs and have sex with you. Guess what? Many of those kinds of robots are already available, and will only get better at human-like tasks in the coming years.

What About My Job?We should not necessarily be thinking of AI and robotic technology as an adversary in the workplace. For manual labor, think wearable exoskeletons that can improve efficiency and reduce injury. For knowledge work, it can be a powerful assistant that helps us do our jobs better, one that reduces our own cognitive load and frees us to work on higher-order tasks and more interesting and creative things. Plus, some jobs that we dont think of being that creative today, like project manager, could get a major human makeover. The project managers of the future will have to make sophisticated decisions to get the best out of both humans and machines. Hear more on OZYs Future of X podcast.

Product Enhancement. Transhumanists cyborg is so pass explore the symbiosis of man and machine, going so far as to upgrade parts of their bodies. Think supercharged ears or a bionic arm to replace an amputated one. And then theres professional mad genius Elon Musk, who wants to fuse human brains with computers to create super-intelligent beings, and has dedicated his company Neuralink to the task. But at what point do we cease being human? Were a long way from drawing that line.

When Do I Get My Self-Driving Car?In many areas, AI has not yet lived up to the hype. Despite overly optimistic predictions, fully autonomous cars are still only in use in certain trial programs. It often can exacerbate racial bias. And the technology has not yet made a dent in complex fields such as accounting, law, engineering and health care. These disappointments are breeding the technologys many doubters. Read more on OZY.

COVID-Accelerated. Some AI trends are getting a boost amid the pandemic and economic turbulence. Fast food chain White Castle is hiring Flippy, a burger-flipping robot, later this year to reduce human contact with the food. AI is being pressed into service to identify the next pandemic. But the crisis has also exposed AIs limits: When our behavior went haywire in response to the virus, machine-learning systems for inventory management, streaming recommendations and other areas couldnt keep up.

Arms Race. By 2030, a third of the combat capacity of Russia is expected to be driven by AI including AI-guided missiles with the ability to change their target mid-flight. Israel has adopted a targeting network to aid the Israel Defense Forces in remotely patrolling the many contentious regions under their control. The U.S. is building a robotic submarine system that will detect underwater mines and other anti-submarine enemy action. But its China that appears to be one robotic step ahead, with its massive domestic surveillance program and military drones that can ferry passengers. Read more on OZY https://www.ozy.com/the-new-and-the-next/which-military-has-the-edge-in-the-a-i-arms-race/358014/

Global Gears.Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison has received a prototype, developed by Boeing Australia, of a jet-powered drone to flank and protect its manned combat aircraft. Brazil and India have set up panels for their militaries to work with cutting-edge labs on developing AI. The U.K.s Ministry of Defence has launched its own AI lab, as has the South Korean army, which has also used a sentry robot in the demilitarized zone along the border with North Korea.

Quiz: Which country has touted its work on mini-robots that can slide under enemy tanks? The answer is at the bottom of this story.

Do Killer Robots Dream?There are corners of the internet that scream about bloodthirsty bots already enacting takeovers. But an increasing number of serious people are expressing concern about malicious AI. From the U.S. and other major militaries refusing to sign a treaty against fully autonomous weapons to the time Facebook had to shut down its chatbots because they created their own language, runaway robots should concern us all. Read more on OZY.

Sins of the Flesh. As with many technological advances, the sex industry is on it. Functional sex robots are hitting the market (if you can afford to pay up to $10,000), but experts are raising the alarm about moral questions, with reports that the bots can be programmed to reenact a rape scenario or resemble children. But would child sex dolls actually prevent pedophilia?

You Tell Us. Would you ever have sex with a robot? If not, why not? If so, whom would you design your robot to resemble? Take our Twitter poll.

L Is for the Way You Look at Me. These robotic relationships may well become about more than sex. Many experts believe that humans will fall in love with robot companions as they advance, in part because our brains are not equipped to parse those emotions. In fact, a growing number of people identify as digisexuals attracted to androids.

Algorithmic Soul Mate. AI is being put to use to make real-life connections as well. One service called AIMM promises to both find you a mate and then coach you through the courting process, with all sorts of questionable, at times sexist assumptions that remind us that AI is only as good as the people creating it. Read more on OZY.

Incredible Shrinking Surgeon.Robot-assisted surgery is becoming more widespread and affordable by the day. Eager for the next big leap? Watch out for Boston-based Vicarious Surgical, which recently won recognition from the Food and Drug Administration as a breakthrough device for using virtual reality and tiny robots to perform surgeries inside your body guided by the surgeon on the outside. Read more about robot-assisted surgery on OZY.

Diagnostic Test. Reports of the demise of the radiologist were greatly exaggerated, but AI is getting better at diagnosis. Google recently announced that its AI system often but not always matches or outperforms humans in diagnosing breast cancer. And machine diagnosis is another trend thats seeing a pandemic surge, as the need to swiftly identify coronavirus outbreaks is a matter of life and death.

Nursing Aide. Robots are already popping up at hospitals, performing tasks like delivering medication. And their capabilities are starting to get more complex, such as feeding patients who cannot feed themselves. Its just another example of how baby boomers not millennials are the target demographic for the next era of AI. Read more on OZY.

The Robot Is In.With chatbots getting more advanced, AI is increasingly becoming more involved in your mental health. Apps like Youper can engage with you on a human level with a friendly chat anytime, anywhere that can provide a critical mental lift. Read more on OZY.

Would you rather spill your guts to a bot or a real-life therapist? Tag us on Instagram and let us know.

Robot Prejudice.It may be easier than we thought for autonomous machines to develop one of humanitys less attractive features: prejudice. Why? New research using computational simulation models suggests that prejudice requires only limited intelligence and cognitive ability to develop and spread in populations of artificially intelligent machines. Are we consigned to a future of robot Archie Bunkers? What happens if the outsiders theyre biased against turn out to be us? Read more on OZY.

In Living Color. AI has a well-documented race problem: It struggles to recognize Black faces, among myriad other problems stemming from the fact that there are too few Black faces in the industry itself. Given the newfound enthusiasm for people investing in historically Black colleges and universities in the wake of racial justice protests, how about a woke Silicon Valley type offers up $50 million or so to seed AI research and development at Howard University to help offer balance.

All Rise for Chief Justice Robot!Judges are like umpires, U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts declared at his 2005 confirmation hearings. But if being an appellate judge is really just a matter of calling balls and strikes, then isnt that a job that could be performed more thoroughly and precisely by a computer, and without political or personal bias, age or infirmity, or ugly confirmation battles? If justice is blind, does it still need to have eyes? Read more on OZY.

AI for the Defense. Overworked and underfunded public defenders in the U.S. have enormous caseloads, which makes competent legal representation difficult. But thanks to initiatives like the Tubman Project, AI is being deployed to help public defenders keep up by doing things like auto-filling forms and reviewing hours of police body-camera footage. How long before AI is also helping negotiate plea deals and more?

Electoral Disruption. Upstart political candidates are turning to AI tools to take on electoral machines and theyre winning. Companies on the left and right are using advanced tech to streamline fundraising and better scale targeted ads, or uncover granular details about how messaging campaigns can best influence voters based on their foundational beliefs. Can a bot make you change your vote? Read more on OZY.

Reining Them In. Part of the problem is that AI powers cant agree on the rules of the road. Last month, Chinese search giant Baidu left the Partnership on AI, an American-led consortium of tech companies, nonprofits, research groups and more, designed to develop ethical guidelines around AI. Baidu was the groups only Chinese member and its departure comes amid a worsening relationship with the U.S. For now, AI governance remains inconsistent across and even within countries: California, for example, has banned facial recognition technology for local law enforcement, while its commonplace in Florida.

Quiz Answer: Iran released images in October of miniature robots that can slide under enemy tanks.

See the article here:
What No One Will Tell You About Robots - OZY

How did you spend *your* fourth of July holiday? Probably not like the frontrunner for the Virginia GOPs 2021 gubernatorial nomination, Amanda Chase, who was hanging out in Richmond yesterday with her buddies including right-wing extremist groups, a gun club and white supremacists. Chase was also busy opining that Confederate monuments despite all historical evidence to the contrary are NOT symbols of hate. By the way, since the media didnt report this key information, for whatever reason(s), Chases rally yesterday was as she herself posted on Facebook in honor of Duncan Lemp. Who was Duncan Lemp, you ask? Heres the Wikipedia entry on his fatal shooting by police:

On March 12, 2020, Duncan Socrates Lempwas fatally shot at his home inPotomac, Maryland, during ano-knockpolice raidby the Montgomery County Police DepartmentsSWATteam.Lemp was astudentand asoftware developerwho associated himself with the3 Percenters, a far-right paramilitary militia group

Lemp associated himself with the3 Percenters, a far-right paramilitary militia group, and set up websites for other such organizations.He also frequented the4chanandRedditmessage boards, sites popular withinternet trolls.He was a member of theUnited States Transhumanist Party, having joined on September 6, 2019.A week before the raid, Lemp posted a picture of two people armed with rifles onInstagram, with text referring to boogaloo, a term used by theboogaloo movementas coded language for an anticipated war against the government or liberals.

Thats a pretty important piece of information youd think the media would have reported, by the way, butnope, that might take a minute or two of using Google or whatever. And god forbid they actually give their readers the full context of whats going on. Ugh.

Anyway, so what was the reaction from the Virginia GOP to State Senator Chases rally with white supremacists in honor of a former member of a far-right paramilitary militia group? So far, as Del. Jay Jones (D) pointed out a few minutes ago the silence is deafening here. And its not like Virginia Republicans werent tweeting yesterday; see the Virginia GOP Twitter feed, which has tweets on their U.S. Senate candidate, handing out Trump yard signs, etc. But anything on Chase and her white supremacists rally in Richmond yesterday. Nope, nada. Theres also nothing from the VA Senate GOP Twitter feed either on Chases Fourth of July festivities. Cat got the Virginia GOPs tongue? Do these folks actually *approve* of Chases behavior, are they just terrified of her, or both? Or, ultimately, do they realize that if they condemn Chase, theyd have to also condemn Trump and others in their own party, and thats something they cant bring themselves to do?

Read the rest here:
2021 Frontrunner for the VA GOP's Gubernatorial Nomination Rallies in Honor of Far-Right Paramilitary Group Member; As Del. Jay Jones Points Out, the...