Hypothetical technology you couldn't adjust to.

[No social life]

My own personal nightmare scenario is when after having developed the technology to basically provide a server for a human consciousness, which I'm fine with, The technology to create a hive mind emerges and no one has the option of retaining their individuality.

 

[Johnson McGee]

I don't think I could bring myself to use a teleporter, even if it's possible. I could never be sure of whether it's really myself being transported or if I'm just being killed and a clone appears at the destination.

 

[Zorg Machine]

Cybernetics/augmentation, do not want well unless its like a replacement organ for medical reasons.

Really? I would think that most people would want to get a new pair of legs that are identical to their previous ones only they don't break down with age...and they have rockets in them.

Seriously, give me my rocket feet.

OT: I think I could adapt to almost any technology that isn't just stupid (like the replicator) but I could never bring myself to use a teleporter.

 

[Something Amyss]

This disturbs me somewhat as well. What if Valve goes out of business? Then what happens to all my games on Steam? Looking ahead at the more distant future that is, in the near future that's not likely to happen. And having a physical copy makes it really feel like you own the game to me...

What I love is that so many people take Newell at his word that they will unlock the games.

Anyway, veering back onto the original question, I have trouble picturing technology to which I cannot adapt. I still won't necessarily want to adapt to a given item, but that doesn't mean I can't.

I mean, the example in the first post, while a little creepy, doesn't really make me think I couldn't adapt. I mean, we already live in an era where much of our privacy is an illusion, anyway. Plus, anyone sick enough to want to see me naked just needs to ask. And wear the proper protective eyewear.

But then, we get to this post:

But if everyone had access to it all the time, there would surely be some laws and regulations for it. Plus, it would be nice if no one could ever lie about something and get away with it. Imagine how politics would look I think that in the long run, it would be a change for the better.

i agree with the other points: Yeah, it would be expensive, yeah, people probably wouldn't have free reign with it. But laws? We're still stuck in the seventies (and sometimes earlier) on intellectual property laws, we haven't touched a lot of the aspects of privacy regarding the internet. We have drugs that have been around for decades that we don't know how to regulate.

Not sure how your country operates, but we have a problem in the US that goes to the topic at hand: We have lawmakers who are really old and really out of touch with how things work. It's worse, because they freaking flaunt it, too. 60, 70, 80-somethings legislating the internet while saying "I'm not a nerd (and therefore don't know what you're talking about), but...." But even if they weren't bragging about being too stupid to make these decisions, they are too under-educated and too far removed from the subjects to understand the process or concept they are attempting to legislate.

It's kind of like asking a caveman to legislate firearms or the Amish to decide policies on aerospace.

 

[Zipa]

Cybernetics/augmentation, do not want well unless its like a replacement organ for medical reasons.

Really? I would think that most people would want to get a new pair of legs that are identical to their previous ones only they don't break down with age...and they have rockets in them.

Seriously, give me my rocket feet.

OT: I think I could adapt to almost any technology that isn't just stupid (like the replicator) but I could never bring myself to use a teleporter.

Id prefer just to be healed, chances are medical tech would be able to do that by the time cybernetics are up to that kind of point to be able to ''improve'' humans.

replacing a broken leg or arm with another identical one (cloned or w/e) I could live with but no robotic arms a la deus ex.

 

[Sir Thomas Sean Connery]

The only piece of tech I wouldn't wholeheartedly embrace would be robots.

Call me paranoid, but if Microsoft can't even get Vista to work, I don't even want to think of what will happen when they make an OS for millions of super-strong metal people.

 

[Whateveralot]

Right. You basically answered a part of this yourself:

Every single embarrassing and personal moment of your life is available to anyone with the inclination.

Nobody gives a fuck about me. I have nothing to hide and I don't think anyone would ever want to see anything you mentioned of me.

If they would, they're simply wierd. Or my ex girlfriend, which is basically the same thing.


I'm sorry but, I don't care if anyone does this. It propably would be amazing.

There's nothing else I can contribute. I don't think I couldn't get used to any kind of technology. It's all very hypothethical and of course, there will be an age where technology will baffle me and simply be unavailable to me because I have no need for it, like some old people have nowadays with technology.

 

[Zorg Machine]

Cybernetics/augmentation, do not want well unless its like a replacement organ for medical reasons.

Really? I would think that most people would want to get a new pair of legs that are identical to their previous ones only they don't break down with age...and they have rockets in them.

Seriously, give me my rocket feet.

OT: I think I could adapt to almost any technology that isn't just stupid (like the replicator) but I could never bring myself to use a teleporter.

Id prefer just to be healed, chances are medical tech would be able to do that by the time cybernetics are up to that kind of point to be able to ''improve'' humans.

replacing a broken leg or arm with another identical one (cloned or w/e) I could live with but no robotic arms a la deus ex.

Is there any special reason for this? I just don't understand why anyone would pass on converting their arms into grappling hooks.

 

[DoPo]

The only piece of tech I wouldn't wholeheartedly embrace would be robots.

Call me paranoid, but if Microsoft can't even get Vista to work, I don't even want to think of what will happen when they make an OS for millions of super-strong metal people.

Erm, robots exist. And they are widely used in the world. Also, for quite a while, it's not a recent thing. Well, not the "metal humans" (frankly, the whole "metallic humanoid" concept for robots always seemed flawed to me) and not all have anything that can be called intelligence, but robots exist. The reason why you haven't heard of the apocalypse is that generally, the people writing software for robots are slightly better and don't tend to leave bugs that can legally vote [http://fudzilla.com/home/item/23684-microsoft-fixes-20-year-old-bug] in their software.

Well, after soothing your fears somewhat, see this:

Spoiler: You'll just hope she is drugged

 

[winginson]

I would be OK with the no privacy time window thing. Most people would be watching celebs and politicians, not me. Anyone who wants to see me naked is seriously messed up, to the point of I don't really care what they do.

I have no problems with teleportation because as far as I am concerned, an exact mental and physical copy of me is me.

Probally full VR with ability to network with other humans. The idea that somebody else could hack into my immersive world or delete parts of my memory is scary.

 

[ElPatron]

I can't adjust myself to cellphones.

We can't live without them now, but 20 years ago we did not need them so badly.

 

[The Code]

I'd have to go with the VR hubs that were at the end of the OP. Part of the fun of visiting a foreign land is the act of getting there. I think it detracts from the joy of experiencing that new place if there's minimal to no working towards it besides turning on a machine or driving down the street to a VR parlor.

 

[HardkorSB]

Well, regardless of how they intended the technology to be used in the book, the means by which you'd actually view the past was widely available and extremely small (to the point where people got eye implants so they could watch the past whenever they desired). There was no regulation, because as far as I recall anyone could get their hands on the device. I read the book a while ago, so I'm a little rusty on specifics, but I do know that pretty much everyone and their brother had the time viewer in some form or another to the point where no one really controlled it anymore.

You know what? That would be awesome.
I mean, everyone would have access to every piece of history. We could learn how the world really was millenia ago, we could see how life began, we could see how or if the universe came to being, every single historical fact could be objectively verified etc.
Humanity would drastically change after that. The things that we care about today, our values, priorities, the current model of society, how we live our lives, that would probably change. For the better, in my opinion.

 

[Burs]

Internet in your brain. Sounds great but I will never get it until consumption driven capitalism is well and truly dead.
I'm not a raving left winger, but even the IDEA that a corporation could advertise IN MY BRAIN makes me want to vomit.
Watch the second episode of "Black Mirror" or read "Feed" if you disagree, not saying it'll sway you against brain computers, but you'll at least see what I'm so scared of.

Also could you imagine what it would be like to have a twitbook/facetter account.

"Simon de Montfort wants to be your friend!" flashing in your mind!

Headaches, concussion and seizures caused by hundreds of people poking your brain!

Chaos! Madness! Coffee!

 

[Sir Thomas Sean Connery]

The only piece of tech I wouldn't wholeheartedly embrace would be robots.

Call me paranoid, but if Microsoft can't even get Vista to work, I don't even want to think of what will happen when they make an OS for millions of super-strong metal people.

Erm, robots exist. And they are widely used in the world. Also, for quite a while, it's not a recent thing. Well, not the "metal humans" (frankly, the whole "metallic humanoid" concept for robots always seemed flawed to me) and not all have anything that can be called intelligence, but robots exist. The reason why you haven't heard of the apocalypse is that generally, the people writing software for robots are slightly better and don't tend to leave bugs that can legally vote [http://fudzilla.com/home/item/23684-microsoft-fixes-20-year-old-bug] in their software.

Well, after soothing your fears somewhat, see this:

Spoiler: You'll just hope she is drugged

I should have been more specific. I meant I, Robot style, humanoid ones with true AI and decision making built on a world wide level.

As you said, current robots are have very little in the way of complex AI. Most are just imitators at this point or controlled directly by human input.

And even the ones that have that are just a few prototypes, so I'm not worried.

 

[Dimitriov]

Your book's horrible hypothetical technology for one.

Also e-books (I hate not having a physical copy of something that I apparently own), cybernetics, true AI, and I am sure there are more.


Many people, and it seems frighteningly common in the most recent generations, have this idiotic notion that any change is progress, and therefore a good thing.

Which is bollocks (also it's a fairly recent idea largely formed by enlightenment thinkers in the 18th century, it is not some self evident truth, just a cultural idea that has been ingrained in western society for a mere 250 or so years).


I don't fear change itself, some change is always inevitable and a part of life, but that doesn't mean every change is good. You can indeed change things for the worse.

 

[Zen Toombs]

Mind control devices. I like pretending I have control over my choices and actions.

 

[fezzthemonk]

I'm looking forward to all this future technology. Though that might be because as soon as i can get into space by my self, I'm leaving this planet and exploring till i die. I have the feeling that given enough time and nanobots, i can create life.

 

[renegade7]

You can view anything from the past.

Anytime, anywhere. You know what this means? It means if your neighbour is a pervert, he can watch when you undressed last night. Rabid fans could watch their favorite stars make love. Every single embarrassing and personal moment of your life is available to anyone with the inclination.

Haven't read that but I'm pretty sure that they wouldn't let just anyone use that thing and even if they did, I imagine that it would be rather expensive (if not the equipment itself then the energy used to open that window) so unless your perverted neighbor has some shares in Apple, I don't think he could watch you.
But if everyone had access to it all the time, there would surely be some laws and regulations for it. Plus, it would be nice if no one could ever lie about something and get away with it. Imagine how politics would look I think that in the long run, it would be a change for the better.
Also, I don't care about someone watching me take a shower, or even fuck. Call me crazy but I just don't.

As for the topic, I think that I am intelligent enough to learn how to use even the most sophisticated of human inventions and I can adapt to pretty much any living conditions and lifestyle.

It's just a hypothetical....

OT: Well when the whole motion control fad started it really bugged me...I was worried that I might never again be able to relax with the controller in my lap while I played games, but would have to hold a Wii Remote or a Sony Move at an awkward angle to keep it pointed at the screen for hours on end. Fortunately my fears have now been assuaged.

 

[smithy_2045]

I don't think there's a single bit of technology I wouldn't be able to adapt to.