danger of creating a breakaway culture in which access to life-extending and death-defying technologies is strictly apportioned to a very tiny fraction of population, not incidentally, the very same people who benefit from the suffering of others.
As opposed to the "non-breakaway" US culture, where a small portion of very rich people - coincidentally "the very same people who benefit from the suffering of others" - can afford medical procedures that the rest of the population can't?
I really don't think anyone should welcome our transhumanist overlords. And any geek here who thinks they're going to be included in this immortalist revolution is delusional.
You make it sound as if every transhumanist wished for immortality. I have strong transhumanist inclinations but I believe that immortality is a logical contradiction. How does that compute to you?
0) I doubt people are psychologically able and stable enough to _enjoy_ a mere billion years of existence. A thousand years, ten thousand years, maybe. But a billion? Now guess how long is forever.
I doubt that there is an actual possibility for any entity to live for a billion years and still to be able to consider itself "itself". Unless you have the huge storage to keep the whole personality and all the memories mostly intact, if you picked two random points in the time line, the "same" entity in those two points would most likely be two completely different ones, making the continuity sort of a moot point.
Also, you've just mentioned the reason why heaven in many religions is not far removed from hell. You get screwed either way!
...a little-known fungus called Pichia lives in healthy mouths and may play an important role in protecting us from an infection caused by the harmful fungus Candida.
I really can't help it but when I read this, it sounded to me like someone is already writing a script for the next Hollywood summer action blockbuster.
the scanned text needs to be manipulated with word processing software to reset the fonts and improve the appearance of the text
No, really, at the scale that this is happening, the scanned text actually needs to be converted into TEI using some sane heuristics. It's a world-wide problem that needs a reasonable (less-)semi-(more-)automatic solution, not millions of people unsystematically fiddling in their word processors.
Wow -- your last post said "mid to late 80s" and now it could have been up to 1996. That's more than a decade, and you can't be more accurate about when you bought what you said was your first hard drive?
Obviously, he calculated it on the Pentium box he put the disk into.
Your facebook / flickr photo galleries are not journalistic expression.
Well, you can delude yourself with that, if you want to. Meanwhile, the Supreme Court of the United States has proclaimed that "First Amendment distinction between the institutional press and other speakers is unworkable". In light of that, I'd like to see you arguing to the judge that just because I wrote my article on Google+ and posted source photos on Imgur, that somehow makes my piece of investigative reporting "not journalistic expression".
If you take a snapshot of me, and I find it on your Flickr account, I can have it taken down.
Try to do that with a newspaper photo, wise guy. Also, nobody should have this right with Flickr if it's unfeasible with other media. It's the same kind of bullshit as demanding that writers shouldn't be allowed to write a news portrait if you don't want them to. Libel aside, that used to be protected. (But yes, I'm sure politicians would jump on that.)