Re: Re: ant! experiences

Joe Jenkins (
Wed, 21 Oct 1998 09:59:11 -0700 (PDT)

---Spike Jones <> wrote:

> >> has this
> >> notion been explored in sci fi? spike

I vaguely remember a non-fiction paper called "Lillitopian Uploads"(sp?) by, if memory serves me correctly, Robin Hanson.

I may well be the only extropian who never reads sci-fi. I have a problem with "suspension of disbelief" and I consider the S/N ratio too low, so I stick with non-fiction. I believe most of the signal from sci-fi is given to me via this list anyway - thanks for the filter everyone :-)

Imagine the effect of EOC on a technology enthusiast never exposed to sci-fi. Its like the ultimate sci-fi without the fiction. Not once did I feel the need to suspend my disbelief...Nearly 100% signal and no noise....everything was feasible and sound. Put all of your sci-fi rushes together and then realize I got most of them from one book within 24 hours...even though a lot of them had to come from "reading between the lines"... Drexler is such a conservative fart. I remember that day well.

---Joe E Dees wrote:
> >awareness. Mighty Mites as mental whizzes are not merely science
> >fiction; they are irrevocably anchored in the realm of fantasy.

---Emmanuel Charpentier <> wrote:

> Unless you manage to also reduce your brain, not in terms of
functional > complexity, but in terms of mass.
> Aren't there some nanotechnologists who believe we could change
our > > > neurons with nanoneurons, still keep our same brain volume, but multiply > the number of neurones by </I>whatever</I> amount?

Go to: and scroll down about 3/4 of the way.

Side note: Anyone know how I can quickly make a tag from Netscape Navigator that allows me to save/cut/past a bookmark that points to that part of the document where you scroll down about 3/4 of the way. I know how to do this from edit mode but that involves saving the document first.

> If this amount is big enough, we would actually be able to hold
the > > world in our head, and live it all on ourself... (and as we make neurons > smaller, they also get faster, just like with microprocessors: less > > > > distance to travel for the thoughts).

There are a lot of problems with making neurons faster and staying in the physical world. If your running 100,000 times faster and want to scratch your nose, your hand will have to move nearly at the speed of light to complete the task in reasonable subjective time. So, for every increase in speed there must be a corresponding decrease in body/brain size. I hope your not too nostalgic about experiencing nature the way you know it. A wave crashing on the beach will take a month. Nature, as you currently know it, will be more like a still picture. There will be some natural phenomena that is interesting at that speed, like lightning, but all nostalgia will be lost. The only way to experience nostalgia nature after speedup would be in an Artificial Reality (AR) emulation of real reality (RR) equally sped up.

Joe Jenkins

Get your free address at