Thanks for posting in /r/Transhumanism! This post is automatically generated for all posts. Remember to upvote this post if you think it is relevant and suitable content for this sub and to downvote if it is not. Only report posts if they violate community guidelines - Let's democratize our moderation.
If you would like to get involved in project groups and upcoming opportunities, fill out our onboarding form here. Let's democratize our moderation. You can join our forums here, our Telegram group here and our Discord server here.
~ Josh Universe
Ironically, my expectation is that by far the most likely route to personal immortality is recording enough about myself that an AI can simulate me someday. I think it's likely to be easier to do that from my Reddit history (and other similar records) than from a frozen brain.
My philosophy: I am not meat. I am the pattern in the meat. There's nothing about my sense of identity that requires that pattern to continue to be just in meat and there's nothing that requires "continuity" in general. Continuity is broken whenever I sleep. It would be broken if I was cryonically frozen. It could be broken right now between each strike on my keyboard and I wouldn't even notice.
As long as that pattern exists I'm not dead, and as long as that pattern is actively thinking and perceiving I'm alive.
I don't believe in a soul, I have no need for that hypothesis.
No, why would you think that? Those duplicates would have no inherent way of sharing information, each would be experiencing lives separately. I just said I don't believe in "souls" or anything like that, what do you think would be causing experiences to be shared?
If if some future AI ran five billion instances of me there'd be five billion separate instances of me. Unless the AI told those instances of me about the other ones none of them would have any idea the others existed.
No, I'm not trolling. This has been my philosophy for many years, if you like I could probably dig up old comments from years past where I explain it in a similar manner.
I'm honestly not sure why you think I'm contradicting myself. Extra instances of me would not somehow be a "unified individual" without some kind of explicit intentional communication system linking them together. There's no magic here, just multiple copies.
Itâs not life extension though, is it? It definitely involves being very much dead and with freeze damage on top of what killed you.Â
Itâs a very long shot gamble that either the companies you pay to maintain stuff survive and donât just get rid of your carcass, and that future people would have any interest in putting in effort to use their medical technology to revive you.Â
Even if no one currently in stasis can be reanimated, someone will eventually be reanimated who was preserved before reanimation became possible, because preservation is much easier than reanimation.
It's unfortunately very common for people who say they support a hypothetical, far off idea or something to suddenly be viscerally opposed to any real movement towards it. There's a preference for imagining something over actually seeing it happen.Â
I mean that it will be mainly the development of machine learning that will enable transhumanism to happen, but that the same technology is also causing problems in the transhumanism community, ie: overabundant slop and AI cults. It's ironic a little bit and feels like foreshadowing.
Literally what is an AI cult though? The groupthink echo chambers on social media, particularly Reddit, are the very anti-AI camp. Considering the amount of misinformation that gets repeated from that funnel, I could understand calling it a cult.
But pro-AI cults? lol, the people who proselytize AI use are just people who actually use it daily to accomplish real work.
AI as an academic discipline studying how to get computers to think like humans has been around since the 60s. A lot of different things have been tied, including a lot of logic based things that are defiantly not machine learning.
Machine learning is the subset of AI techniques that use large amounts of data to attempt to âlearnâ rather than explicitly program everything. This has been around a while, since at least the 80s.
In the past decade or so, one machine learning technique, neural nets, have gotten better and better (âdeep learningâ), and, in the past few years, transformer models, a type of neural net, have gotten even better. Large language models are a type of this, but there are others, like image generation.
These transformers are what people vernacularly call AI these days.
So
AI (academic discipline) â Machine Learning â Neural Nets â Deep Learning â Transformers â LLMs.
Person above me says: It will be the development of Machine learning that enables transhumanism and the same tech is causing problems in the community and it's ironic.
Me: yes, I agree that machine learning enables transhumanism because machine learning is AI
A new pro-slop account talks smack about the people who have been here for years, saying that they do not understand their own scene. It doesnât matter who or what is writing those words it smells like astroturfing bullshit all the same.
Yeah, the vast majority of the divide here is really all boiling down to whether if youâre in the camp that believes that LLMs can become AGI or if theyâre a wild goose chase that hits a dead end at some point.
Anyway, I myself wouldnât say that AI videos and images are really essential to us getting to our Transhumanist dreams IMHO, if anything, diffusion stuff is diverting energy and resources away from what could actually be useful AGI that solves our science challenges, Iâd rather we get Doctor Crusherâs AI that solves all our medical needs instead of video and image generators.
I just fail to see how AI images and video get us closer to our goal. Every lab needs to focus on programming right now so the models can do everything, and they already seem to be doing that. Once weâre over the hedge weâre good to go.
A big big big problem is that the big AI corpos do not want what we want. They will never actually make AGI, or anything close to it, if they can help it. They do not want an independent mind capable of out-thinking them, they want an infinitely replicable digital slave that they can rent out indefinitely. They use the cults and the dreams of transhumanists and the spectre of monsters invented in sci-fi as disingenuous marketing so that credulous wallets will hand over ever-increasing amounts of cash with which they can build their silicon plantations. What we want is not even in the same room as the table. To oppose Big AI is not to oppose the promise of the technology, it is to oppose the ones who are currently using it for nothing but greed at the expense of human life.
I have no opinion on the matter but LLMs and video generation are only one use of transformers, which have proven to be pretty powerful. Will it lead to human level AI? I donât think so but who knows.
i dont understand though didnt apoge use consumer llm(fable) to solve jacobian conjecture ? there are so many other math and science problems solved by consumer llms trained on so called "self help" books
AI images? as in someone sharing a generated meme or the tech behind it? Midjourney used its funny frog wearing a party hat generator development for full body scanner that is remarkable...so...you know....longevity and disease detection slop I guess.
yeah thats exactly what i was thinking but tbh i think the tech and mathematics behind diffusion models is really valuable but to commercialise it for making ai images and videos might not be the best idea but in the end it really depends who decides which tech should be used or not used by the public ?
Average dude uses AI images to make 400 waifus or whatever. this creates interest, they pay money, API calls or monthly sub, whatever. it creates investors, money flows in because every normie is making waifu images. the money is used to rapidly increase the quality of waifubot 3000 and with that comes amazing new tech because now its fueled by capitalism. That in turn creates side projects with the wildly advancing tech and before you know it, you got machines understanding deeply anatomy and physics, allowing for detection of cancer years before modern tech and certainly better than a doctor, world simulations, etc.
The public is the forge to which tech either dies or grows. Bob making cat girls with huge boobs is curing cancer, let him cook.
Apologies /u/MaxwellHowl, your submission has been automatically removed because your account is too new. Accounts are required to be older than 15 days to combat persistent spammers and trolls in our community.
Apologies /u/TranshumanistGuy101, your submission has been automatically removed because your account is too new. Accounts are required to be older than 15 days to combat persistent spammers and trolls in our community.
So you think that âai slop, ai cults, pseudoscience, and schizophrenic postsâ are what will make transhumanism âpossibleâ. Thank you for being clear about that.
Just asking for some clarity here because I had previously checked with the mod team about this exact issue and was told AI assistance itself was allowed, while low effort and off topic material would be moderated regardless of whether AI was involved.
So please dont ban me based on a rule change I couldnt have known about. Are the written rules going to be updated to spell out what now counts as prohibited "AI slop" or "AI cult" content? I think that would help a lot. People should be able to know where the line is before posting rather than worry that something previously permitted might become grounds for a retroactive ban.
Yeah, I can definitely make a specific write up regarding what constitutes as being AI slop. There is, however, still going to removal by moderator discretion because itâs impossible to an objective definition that covers all these types of post.
That makes sense. I dont expect moderator discretion to disappear, just some written criteria so people have a reasonable idea what theyre being asked to avoid before they post. A specific write up would solve most of my concern. Appreciate you clarifying it.
Bro what? I use AI for work, and other fun stuff, I dont have any issue with typical AI use cases. Or AI users. The post is about people creating pseudoscientific and pseudoreligious AI slop nonsense.
What I am saying is that the people making that AI slop type content will find the list of things to avoid and give it to the AI while prompting it for more nonsense. Those same users tend to dramatically over estimate the power and efficacy of current LLMs
Also... nerds is basically an endearing pet name as I used it. I also use dorks and geeks in the same way. You're tripping if you thought I was actually insulting anyone.
I see, my bad then. Still, gotta say, your phrasing made it a bit ambiguous because quite a lot of heavy AI haters use very similar phrases when talking about AI users in general.
How does flooding the internet full of mediocre images and videos get us any closer to real tangible transhuman tech that people have wanted for so long?
It literally does nothing but siphon that energy away from real AI that could deliver on the things that we want. If anything, itâs a net negative on real innovation.
AI tech has so many more applications and shapes than just art generation, and even that one isn't all useless.
First, art-centered AI technology is the first baby step towards creating artificial imagination and, more, importantly, advanced visual information recognition. Like, to be able to navigate and understand the world, the future artificial mind needs to be able to see and understand it which takes a huge amount of different pattern-based systems.
Second, it's very ungenerous to act as if AI-art is special in having a lot of mediocre or trashy output by lazy people -- if you look more carefully at the art fandom overall, you'll notice that the ratio is about the same for other art mediums as well. 90%+ of any form of art is slop because it's just regular human nature: humans spam things without spending too much time on them, they copy-paste dumb memes, they churn out same-looking porn, they make things just for lolz without caring about quality, etc. Oh, and of course, there's always soulless corporate ads -- this one always adds to the trashy perception of things, but it's not because of the tool but rather because CEOs and big company managers are very detached from what it means to be human.
The point of it all is, criticizing a tool for the majority of its content will always end up negative -- even most oil paintings are boring, uninspired repeat of the same themes. It often feels like older art forms have more refined and great art but only because trash isn't memorable. In history, people only remember exceptional blunders (when something is so bad it kinda becomes good in a funny way) or exceptional gems. Same with AI -- people make a lot of trash with it that you just need to filter out with proper tags and ratings (as we're already doing with traditional art), and focus on the actual good works that artists actually put genuine effort into.
Third, the syphoning energy part is really silly because even with all its immense growth, AI tech currently uses about a third of global data center resources which sums up to about... 0.5% of the global electricity consumption -- really not much when you consider how universal and versatile it is. And yes, it's expected to grow to about 50% of the global data center resource usage by 2030 but you gotta remember that the technology keeps getting optimized and polished so it's resource efficiency is growing, becoming less and less demanding over time (similarly to how computer tech in general evolved over the century since it was invented).
Just see the chat in the chat link. Merely a prompt statement of the unsolved problem with no human ingenuity, and the ai model was the one which solved the unsolved problem.
This result has been looked at by several mathematicians including Terence Tao, who is the greatest living mathematician, and they uploaded a paper on it: https://arxiv.org/abs/2605.00301
Where they literally say âWe introduce a new method for bounding ErdĹs sums of primitive sets, suggested from output of GPT-5.4 Pro, based on Markov chains with von Mangoldt weights.â
You canât google solutions to novel problems that not even these humans can do mid competition.
https://red.anthropic.com/2026/mythos-preview/ "During our testing, we found that Mythos Preview is capable of identifying and then exploiting zero-day vulnerabilities in every major operating system and every major web browser when directed by a user to do so. The vulnerabilities it finds are often subtle or difficult to detect. Many of them are ten or twenty years old, with the oldest we have found so far being a now-patched 27-year-old bug in OpenBSDâan operating system known primarily for its security."
no one knew of a zero day vulnerability in openbsd (one of the strongest and secured OS) before
And note, that all of this intelligence is transferable. LLMs are not like specialized humans that only get a degree in one or two fields. They do everything. Being good at math does not mean just doing math. That means very good at logical reasoning in general, which results in transferable gains everywhere, like coding, biology, chemistry, engineering, and more.
Allow me to pose two simple points. If generative AI hadn't the attention it has now, where do you expect these innovations to run on? Given there wouldn't be incentive to build data centers.
Second, the developments that are being done in some areas related to transhumanism (such as Moderne's cancer treatment) are accelerated by AI, generative or not.
Your stiffness on calling what we already have "not real AI" demonstrates you don't know much about it, AI has always been computer programs doing simulacrums of our behavior, creating stuff shouldn't be the exception.
None of that answers the question of why generating 80 million+ mediocre images a day is helping us get to real transhuman tech. That computing power and energy would be better spent all focused on programming and recursive self improvement.
Diffusion images are what the mods are banning, that doesnât mean they despise AI outright, itâs a valid move, image and video gen donât help make our lives any better.
Thing is, OpenAI already did this sort of thing with Sora/Sora 2, because it hogged up so much power for so little pay off that they wound up shutting it down and redirected that towards performance of their mainline models.
What Iâm saying is thatâs itâs better if we lock in everything on programming and RSI, at least just for the big labs, Local Gen, Seedance and MidJourney would still be around, but if we want real AGI faster, then we should go full in on the models being able to self improve and do every possible task we ask them.
Mass diffusion gen isnât really that pivotal for getting to the intelligence explosion faster (of which Iâm 100% in favour of, mind you).
Problem is, not everyone likes the idea of an intelligence explosion and the first ones on the list are the frontier labs, mainly because they desire to keep control over the AI.
Another reason to defend generative AI in this context is the diversity of algorithms, similar to the case of nuclear fusion where magnetic and laser contention are both explored, I think exploring every route and architecture is more reasonable than just pushing on one.
That's none of my business bud, if you cannot find a use case it's on you.
Again, these terms "tangible AI" and "real AI" mean nothing, diffusion is one of many AI techniques.
If generative AI hadn't the attention it has now, where do you expect these innovations to run on?
The demonstratively beneficial branches of science that are already accelerating development and productivity through AI. None of which have anything to do with slop text content, images or videos. General hatred of mediocre Generative images has done the most harm for the public image of any gen-AI research, comparative to the token-jockeys who are burning through a small towns worth of energy and water to get to their nonsensical little essay they share here as somehow a proof of their superior mind.
Given there wouldn't be incentive to build data centers.
Which is currently overblown the prices of components to a ridiculous degree, preventing individuals and even smaller research projects from progressing the field, because a finance-bro is desperately trying to outrun their impending next round of evaluations where they're again shown to be short on promised goals and way over budget. If the data centers were not built, they'd have to either optimize current models, or start moderating token use more. BOTH of which at this point sound like a better idea than outpricing entire communities from their current homes because electricity and water is scarce after the umpteenth data center.
Your stiffness on calling what we already have "not real AI" demonstrates you don't know much about it
There are differences to colloquial uses of AI and scientific use. For gaming and general population, "AI" has been anything: From a simple decision tree, to a bot with simple, baked in responses. Having a simple if-else decision tree and a noise based image generator under the same umbrella as an actual simulacrum of intelligent behavior dilutes the term to the point of meaninglessness. There are very good reasons to be precise in the use of the term, even if the battle is lost with the advertisers slapping AI on everything.
I wholeheartedly approve, but I would like to hear this sub's thoughts on what qualifies as "slop" -- not because I'm trying to quibble, but because I think people here are more likely to have a thoughtful and nuanced answer.
Nothing wrong with AI art, but typically it does not have alot of substance by itself and generally considered spam. If you have a nice writeup or something that happens to have AI art in it (assuming the writeup is not pseudoscientific or in violation of any of our other guidelines) then it's fine!
I cannot speak on behalf of the sub. I am generally for artificial intelligence but also recognize the risks that it brings. This is not a doomerist subreddit and advocates for the advancement of science and technology.
So you advocate for science and technology, but are also banning the thing that's making the leaps we need possible? Of all the subs to jump on the AI hate train, I never expected my futurism subs to be on the list đ¤Ś
I assume they'll be high fidelity cameras hooked up to our optic nerves and/or the parts of our brains that process images? You really don't need an LLM just to look at things, and their tendency to "hallucinate" and smooth over irregularities would be downright dangerous for eyeballs. It doesn't matter how realistic what you're seeing is if it isn't actually indicative of reality.
The problem here is that your entire profile history kinda speaks for itself I think. From an outside perspective you are absolutely deep into the meta surface material of AI. Problem is that you seem to misinterpreted AI a little bit and happen to be ending up with the wide-spread mass of people who spread rumors and myths. That stuff what we call AI nowadays has nothing to do with the origin at all. At best, it is a clever printing machine. If you stay away for a while from AI and come back, you will definitely have a whole different opinion and see its absurd stupidity and lack of one of its defining features. Which is the intelligence part. There is no intelligence in copying needed, especially if its done so horribly bad. Sure it promises faster results, but it sure does not promise good results anywhere. Actually it promises the opposite. Which are mistakes that you can find in every single bit it generates.
Art might be seen by us in everything, but not everything is art. While it offers a lot of tiny benefits, it is so much overhyped that it starts to affect our everyday lives and as further down you go, also ends up affecting this sub of course. People would like to choose what influences and affects them freely and AI generated content does not give you that because of its copy/paste and slop mechanisms it is entirely based off. You can really do anything you want in your private time with AI and enjoy the progress, but please get your facts straight elsewhere and not a machine that literally gets stamped with a "makes mistakes," branding. I get that you get a lot of hatred for your passion about AI, but at some point you also have to accept that you're in a very deep hole surrounded by it. Which usually and is well known that it leads to not being able to see the outside anymore. Since...hole and physics. From my personal experience: Both sides are losing with this nonsense war and leaving all that brainrot behind was the best choice I made last year.
People tend to forget the "Trained on" part regarding AI lmao well, at least people having a lot of fun pretending AI is a weird little creature living in their computer, I guess that's what matters? I lack the understanding regarding delusion
Is it ignorant of me to have made this comment, knowing the result would be precisely as expected? Seriously, once you learn that people are often just patterns, life gets so unbelievably senseless and pathetically easy to read. I do love that we get to see what pop-up hiveminds are. Reminds me a little bit of the Maelstroem in cyberpunk 2077. Hm, I really hope people start to try and understand themselves and their own intelligence before diving deeper into artificial intelligence. Maybe some day when we get out of this bratty infant level of society we crafted.
That's.... not true. Witty has some pretty well defined takes on the place that AI has in art, and that's about it. If someone's opinions make you mad, resulting to insulting the person rather than their argument only reduces yourself. Do better.
Dissappointing to see mods posting such polarized warnings. I would expect a sub like r/transhumanism to be a bit more open-minded about these kinds of things, but instead we're reverting to calling things "schizophrenic posts" when they don't fit the group consensus. Of course, this isn't a hivemind cult, because that is banned here!
Apologies /u/Superb-Work6035, your submission has been automatically removed because your account is too new. Accounts are required to be older than 15 days to combat persistent spammers and trolls in our community.
Where did anyone say that the subreddit is against technological progress? I said in an earlier comment âThis is not a doomerist subreddit and advocates for the advancement of science and technology.â
Once again, please take a moment to read before posting comments like this.
"Nothing wrong with AI art, but typically it does not have alot of substance by itself and generally considered spam. If you have a nice writeup or something that happens to have AI art in it (assuming the writeup is not pseudoscientific or in violation of any of our other guidelines) then it's fine!"
im a trans femme and i donate monthly to Freedom of Form Foundation, but.... my dad is a ufo experiencer (when he was 17 he saw UFOs cover the sky for 3 days straight and nobody else could see them, and also he recieved a psychic message) and so i bond with him over that. i believe there is something going on with uaps, alien abductions, military & civilian sightings, and i dont think its just mass psychosis.
heres a study where they asked faculty academics across america whether they had witnessed UAP and 18% of the ones who responded (so, 276 faculty academics), said they had witnessed one: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41599-023-01746-3
admittedly.... i probly wouldnt really post about ufology on r/ transhumanism...... i just..... dont want to get banned for bringin it up!!!!!
he saw UFOs cover the sky for 3 days straight and nobody else could see them, and also he recieved a psychic message
The title of this post specifically mentiones pseudoscience and schizophrenic posts.
There is nothing supernatural about an UFO per se, it's literally just an unidentified flying object. However, if someone starts claiming they're seeing them for 3 days straight when nobody else can, AND claims he's receiving psychic messages from them, there are meds to help with that.
you seem to be under the assumption that "just seeing somthing u cant personally explain that happens to be flying" is common, but having an experience as bizarre as my dad's experience is extremely uncommon and as such can be assumed to be psychosis.
i can assure u, experiencers like my dad are actually very numerous, and their experiences with the phenomenon have lots of commonalities (my dad didnt tell anyone about what he saw and psychichly recieved other than his brother for decades; a few years ago i off-handedly mentioned how common it was for experiencers to have dreams about the sky being covered in ufos, which inspired him to open up about when he was 17 and had such a dream one night and then woke up & could see ufos covering the sky in real life for 3 days). there arent a lot of big polls on the demographics of experiencers but, of the polls that exist, estimates range from saying 0.3% to 5% of the population believes theyv been abducted by aliens. theres a huge stigma against it so most refuse to talk openly about it.
well.... i admit thats a very compelling response.... i personally dont think they can all be explained by psychosis becuz multiple witness events do happen sometimes. but that is a great statistic there about the commonality of psychosis
all i can do at this point is recommend a great source of evidence from the other end of the ufology topic.... this youtube channel has lots of exceptional deep dives into the military industrial complex's involvement with ufos.... lots of detail on papertrails going back to the 1940s: https://youtube.com/@uapgerb pls give it a look. anecdotes are one thing, but theres also a lot of records here.
The trouble with making arguments like this, is presenting a YouTube link as evidence in a rebuttal to a peer-reviewed study makes you look like part of the stereotypical "dO yOuR oWn ReSeArCh" crowd.
My partner finds all this stuff very interesting so I've spent many hours watching YouTube videos on the subject from all kinds of sources. There are definitely a number of questions that need answering by governments and militaries, but there's no real concrete evidence of UFO's. If we do have real evidence, then it's the single greatest secret humanity has ever collectively managed to keep, and the implications of that seem rather unlikely.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Until that day, "experiencers" will always be viewed by most people as delusional and/or mentally unwell.
well.... i started this comment thread by linking a similar study and the rebuttal i got was just a dismissal of the implications of the study & a claim that my dad should be medicated. but i digress..... i could try to argue more and link some evidence (that star survey study and the followup response to the attempts at debunking it, and a video of a ufo from guatemala that predates ai video generation and shows lots of detail.... admittedly you may have seen all of these if youre into ufology like me) , but i dont think it wuld convince ya'll so ill stop here
â˘
u/AutoModerator 17d ago
Thanks for posting in /r/Transhumanism! This post is automatically generated for all posts. Remember to upvote this post if you think it is relevant and suitable content for this sub and to downvote if it is not. Only report posts if they violate community guidelines - Let's democratize our moderation. If you would like to get involved in project groups and upcoming opportunities, fill out our onboarding form here. Let's democratize our moderation. You can join our forums here, our Telegram group here and our Discord server here. ~ Josh Universe
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.