by The Rocketeer

But if you were to look at these ideas based on realistic projections from current technologies, it's much more likely that we will cease being physically anything like what we are now long before we are able to regularly visit other planets.

by liquidslave

It's unfortunate, but ideas such as resusable single-stage-to-orbit craft (SSTO), permanent colonies on other planets, faster-than-light travel (FTL), and even frequent interplanetary travel in our own solar system are just not likely with any known or currently theorized technology.

SSTO is not feasible with current or theorized tech because it would require a vehicle which is 96% fuel just based on the physics of the thing. 96%! That leaves 4% for structure and payload. And that only gets you to orbit. At that point you'd have to refuel or transfer to another ship to go anywhere else.

by Curious Expeditions

FTL is just a fantasy at this point. There are no plasubile theories on how such a thing would be possible using technologies that we may obtain in the next few centuries.

by robotography

Even interplanetary travel is pretty tough. We will probably be able to send a team to Mars in the near future, but even that is not without a very large risk. And we are not completely certain how we would shield the occupants against radiation or even land the craft once it gets there. And one mission does not mean much. The cost is so high and the returns so small, makes human exploration of the solar system is a romantic, but uneconomic idea. Robots are cheaper, faster, and fewer people care if they accidentally crash into the planet instead of landing on it.

by Jastro

In contrast, Moore's Law alone makes it a virtual certainty that a desktop computer will have greater processing power than the human brain by 2035-2045. When combined with advances in nanotech, AI, and neural interfaces (these already exist in primitive forms), it becomes very likely that we will begin merging with our technology long before we are able to send people beyond the orbit of Jupiter.

by TopTechWriter.US

The root of this is Ray Kurzwells theory that information technologies (processors, nanotech, AI, some medical tech) develop along an exponential curve, while more traditional discoveries in chemistry and physics are linear. By the middle of this century it is very likely that we will have human-level artificial intelligence and the ability to interface with it directly via a neural link. Add to that the advances in genetics and it's a certainty we won't exit this century looking anything like the way we did when we entered it.

by Roberto Rizzato

For me the interesting extrapolation from this info-tech before space-tech idea is that humans as we know them may never leave the solar system. It seems to me that we will probably completely merge with our tech and transcend our biology before we develop the capability for interstellar travel.

by blaster219

And really, interstellar travel would be alot easier with having to support a biological being. Residing within a computer means that you would not have bring along food, water, or air. You wouldn't have to limit the acceleration of the ship to a few G's for human safety. You wouldn't have to carry as much raditation shielding. You wouldn't have to worry about getting bored, or limiting travel to the range reachable within a human lifespan.

Not having bodies, or at least leaving them in storage at home, would make reaching another star system an actual possibility. Possibly even with present technology. Voyager 1 and 2 could carry a computer, were launched in 1977, and they were still functioning when they exited the solar system in December 2007.

by g-na

So I for one welcome the prospect of becoming a cybernetic organism, because it's the only way I'm going to get to see Alpha Centauri closer than this.

by novakreo

"The technological singularity is a hypothesized point in the future variously characterized by the technological creation of self-improving intelligence, unprecedentedly rapid technological progress, or some combination of the two."

It's a point in the future beyond which the prediction of events is difficult or impossible due to a fundamental shift in human society caused by "self-improving intelligence, unprecedentedly rapid technological progress, or some combination of the two".

My favorite interpretation of this event is laid out in Ray Kurzwell's The Singularity is Near. He proposes that technology, and particularly AI (artificial intelligence) will continue to improve exponentially to the point where it meets and then surpasses human capability somewhere around 2045. In his theory, we will slowly integrate with that technology along the way. It's not that on January 1, 2045 suddenly sentient robots will appear, but rather that between now and then we will integrate more and more technology into our lives and our selves to the point that we merge into it.

It starts with relatively simple things, such as implanted RFID tags for identification, or implanted systems to monitor heart rate and breathing. Over time, these systems are improved and become more active than passive. The systems that previously just monitored your organs, now actively regulates and improves them.

Pacemakers and artificial hearts already do this. Dean Kamen (who developed the Segway) is working on this prosthetic arm:

There are robotic arms used for manufacturing which can identify and move 150 items per minute. The ones in the video below are not automated in the sense that they are not told where to move to, only to visually find and organize the items that come down the belt.

How about powered exoskeletons used to lift large amounts of weight with almost no effort.

But these systems need not be entirely artificial, there are also developments in organic "replacement parts", such as arteries, hearts, bladders, and livers, built from your bodies own stem cells.

Of course the  military is interested in all of these developments too, however they had some issues with combat robots threatening friendlies, or actually killing them.

Obviously all of these things bring up ethical issues. Should we allow robots in combat? Should we allow cybernetic implants if they save our lives? What about implants used to improve our lives or improve our physical abilities? Should we allow biological alterations for the purposes of healing? What about biological alterations for the purposes of improving mental capacity or resistance to disease? Can we ensure equal access to this technology? Or will it just be the rich that are able to afford it?

Personally, I'm for anything that makes me stronger, faster, or smarter. Part of what makes us human is our capacity to change and improve ourselves mentally and socially. I don't see why we should draw the line at cybernetic implants, we've been changing ourselves and our environments for as long as we've existed, why stop now.

Plus there is no way you can argue against the cuteness of this dancing robot. If they could only find a way to implant this in me, I may actually develop a sense of rhythm.

Prendiamo anche per buona l'idea che sa tanto di ossimoro che le ere geologiche compaiano cosi', da un millennio all'altro. Siamo sicuri, come sottinteso su Ecoalfabeta e presumibilmente dai proponenti stessi, che l'"Antropocene" sia il riconoscimento dei "disastri" che l'attivita' umana starebbe arrecando al pianeta?

E se invece si trattasse della naturalissima conseguenza del fatto che siamo evoluti con un cervello ragguardevole, e che sarebbe sprecato se fossimo solo capaci di avere freddo d'inverno e caldo d'estate?

O ancora: e se l'Antropocene fosse il segno che i singolaristi alla Kurzwell possano aver ragione, e siamo quindi sull'orlo non di una catastrofe, ma di un miglioramento repentino e imponente della nostra condizione di persone?

Certo, si tratta di ipotesi, specie quest'ultima: ma comunque e' importante ricordare che le negativita' spesso vengono date alle parole come Antropocene da chi e' pessimista per moda o per natura, e non sono certo intrinseche.