Welcome to Singulati: Our Singularity Weblog Forum
Singulati is a free digital forum open to both singularitarians and skeptics who come together to discuss, debate, collaborate, learn and network within a friendly, informal and rewarding atmosphere. Join us today: together we can build a better future, better you!
A A A
Log In
Register
Home
Topic RSS
5:53 pm
March 2, 2011
Offline
It has been argued that no matter how good virtual reality gets, that real reality will still have an upper hand, an appeal, an element to it that will keep us from living much of our lives in the virtual world.
What/Why do you think that is?
Once we have fully immersive virtual worlds, where there is a high level of detail and complexity, and many if not all of our senses in the simulated world are accounted for, do you think you will still prefer real reality to virtual reality?
What will you enjoy doing best in virtual reality that you can't do in real reality?
Nikki Olson
4:08 pm
November 2, 2010
Offline
I believe that reality will one day be considered less real than so-called "virtual reality."
Here's why: the brain is a reality filtering device… Not necessarily a reality expanding device.
Eventually with technology–and other techniques–we may be able to open and expand consciousness. Virtual reality will be far more expressive, expansive, and integrated. If so, the real reality may seem dull and empty.
8:23 pm
April 3, 2011
Offline
That then begs the question of what will be the status of people who have yet to make their first phone call, have no devices, have not tasted technology so far. There are many people like that in Africa and in developing countries around the world. The "have" "have not" divide could become enormous, much greater than is the case today!
The Internet is a global leveling force making us all more and more the same. But that only applies to those with Internet connection. Inequality among those with and without technology may become much greater than it is today!
5:31 am
April 12, 2011
Offline
Nikki Olson said:
What will you enjoy doing best in virtual reality that you can't do in real reality?
For full immersion:
- "Natural impulses between the body and central nervous system would need to be prevented." Wikipedia Immersion
- "The nervous system would obviously need to be manipulated." Wikipedia Immersion
Anyways, on to what I would do. I would probably be an adrenaline junkie, sex addict, compulsive eating, intergalactic conquistador with an army of glow in the dark monkey slaves to do my bidding. I would time travel so I could backhand Hitler and put a hurting on Nazis and then I would try crack. I would also try dimethyltryptamine. Even thought the last two are possible to do in reality.
5:50 pm
March 2, 2011
Offline
The limits of the mind far exceed the limits of the body 
7:46 pm
April 12, 2011
Offline
Nikki Olson said:
The limits of the mind far exceed the limits of the body
Sounds like a challenge. Think I will start by genetically engineering "glow in the dark monkey slaves" to do my bidding. They already have the glow in the dark part down, so I can skip straight to uplift.
Good monkey!
7:57 pm
March 2, 2011
Offline
I wonder how the animal rights vs 'uplift' debate will play out. Some in the Transhumanist community feel very protective of the rights of non-human animals, and there is a push to eliminate animals from meat production (produce meat by growing it in a lab) in part for animal rights reasons but also to alleviate stress on the environment. I keep forgetting about all the of hybrids etc. that we might make, too. And wouldn't it be cool to bring back the saber-toothed tiger? Scientists in Japan are looking at bring back a wolly mammoth in the next five years.
On a side note, the concept of 'uplift' is very cool!
"In science fiction, uplift is the development or transformation of animals into an intelligent race by other, already-intelligent beings. The concept appears in David Brin's Uplift seriesand other science fiction works.[1]"
"2001: A Space Odyssey implies at least cultural uplift if not outright biological uplift of humanity by the monoliths. The novel's sequels imply that, later, life forms indigenous to Europa are uplifted by the same alien technological artifacts.[4]"
8:36 pm
April 12, 2011
Offline
It is true that all of these very cool concepts originated in the mind. Science fiction has shown time and again that many concepts of the mind come to fruition in our lives.
This all makes me think about the true nature of existence. If existence is fundamentally information then what is the difference between this and a subset of this ie virtual reality? The meat of existence as a process of information would lie in subjective algorithms such as you, me, animals, spirits, artificial intelligence, whatever sentient expressions of information are possible to configure, experiencing life to the fullest.
Perhaps people are sympathetic to mind over matter because it appeals to a more fundamental aspect of existence that is endless configurations of information, information that our minds are able to manipulate, create, and play with. Another way to say it might be information over matter.
Back to the OP, Nikki. What will you enjoy doing in virtual reality that you cannot do in real reality?
8:48 pm
March 2, 2011
Offline
Tough question. (I guess I can't complain, I asked it)
I guess the simplist answer is anything that I would want to do that I would otherwise risk dying or becoming impaired from in real life, which would include some of the things you mention. Or going to a theme park that has thrilling and gravity defying rides. I'm feeling as though my imagination is stumping me right now. I'm sure there will be things way more exciting possible in virtual reality that I am not thinking of right now. Hmmmm……
12:15 am
February 3, 2011
Offline
I'm not fully onboard with virtual reality, even though theoretically we could all be experiencing virtual reality already anyway. It just seems kind of depressing. It's difficult to articulate why. Maybe it's a reflection of a limitation of my adaptability. Of course I wouldn't refuse if it was a "join or be left behind" scenario.
1:50 am
April 3, 2011
Offline
CMStewart the imponderable factor here is the concept of "unfulfilled reality". When Nancy Friday's My Secret Garden came out in the 1970s the blurb on the back cover talked about it as the ideal solution to the problem of unfulfilled reality. But this is a false premise. Days vary. On a day when you are feeling very happy it feels like there is almost no unfulfilled reality. When you are feeling sad you feel there is lots of unfulfilled reality. And yet the reality of external reality may be almost completely unchanged between the two states. It is just perception.
We are not completely blind to these contradictions within ourselves. So part of what makes the idea of virtual reality disquieting is the knowledge that what it does to improve our sense of well being could possibly also be accomplished just by waiting and time alone, by the approach "tomorrow is another day" and "time heals all".
In the future we will all have access to virtual reality, but the more naturally happy among us will use it less. It will be nice to know the option is there, even when we are quite content to stick with real reality for now.
7:20 am
April 12, 2011
Offline
Fulfillment may be a matter of chemical balances. It has been argued that drug addicts self medicate chemical imbalances. In any case research into psychology and psychopharmacology may change peoples propensity for sadness. Entire full immersion virtual reality experience programs could be developed that implement the administration of drugs to enhance activities that are experienced within specific preprogrammed simulations. The most horrible part could be unplugging
It is worth noting that there are receptors in the brain for feel good chemicals. When people flood these sites with drugs more receptor sites are formed to receive the new levels of drug the brain is exposed to. This is how tolerance occurs. Drug addicts eventually must detox because there comes a point when the constant bombardment of receptors is no longer recognized as a rewarding sensation, but the detox results in discomfort from unfilled receptor sites.
In the future it may be possible to manipulate the brains reward system in ways that completely shortcut the detox experience by manipulating the receptor sites, or to just skip the conscious aspect of the detox experience by just "sleeping" through it via anesthesia, waking up with a fresh start.
7:09 pm
February 3, 2011
Offline
"Real reality"- I think that sums up my attitude (for now). I want to live "what's real" . . or what I believe is "real." I don't want to live my life in a fantasy world, however utopian it may be. I want to face truth as I interpret it head-on. It just seems more honest. If and when the time comes that I can't or don't want to live in the "real" world, I will gladly opt for the virtual reality world of my choosing.
7:32 pm
March 2, 2011
Offline
Terrence McKenna:
McKenna: The minute I understood the concept [of virtual reality] I knew… that this would be the next great thing. As a tool of art. As a tool for leading us beyond the notion that we are a hive society of advanced primates, because that’s how we visually appear to the empirical point of view. That’s an out-of-context description of what we are. It’s like a schematic or an aerial map. What we really are is a community of mind, knitted together by codes and symbols, intuitions, aspirations, histories, hopes — the invisible world of the human experience is far more real to us than the visible world, which is little more than a kind of stage or screen on which we move. The purpose of VR is to show us aspects of reality that are not artificial, but that are fields of data not ordinarily coordinated by ordinary perception.
I see virtual reality not as a way of escaping the notion of empirical reality, but as a way of re-portraying invisible levels of the given world that are very vital and important to us: how we see flows of energy, how we understand complex economies, how we understand the fractal hierarchies of nature…
What is already co-present with three-dimensional reality is being literalized… but being literalized in timescales that make the nature of the game apparent to all but the dullest among us. I mean after all, we have always lived in virtual realities, ever since we abandoned nomadism and defined a polis and a wilderness.
12:17 am
April 12, 2011
Offline
A+ quote
1:26 am
April 12, 2011
Offline
2:38 am
April 3, 2011
Offline
simple 1248 that Ode to the Brain video by Symphony of Science is unexpectedly inspiring for an odd reason: as good as it is one could easily imagine it being much better. It is a great concept but one can imagine doing it again with better people, better words, and better music. Did you remember the tune afterwards? No, of course not. Did the montage of images and video clips seem balanced and satisfying. No, not at all. Yes it is enjoyable to watch. But imagine what it would be like if done really well! Wow!
I found it very innovative and intriguing, but then when I understood better what was being done I wished it had been done even better, while I still appreciated the innovation. For instance the analogy to a mushroom is not very accurate. The brain is not friable like a mushroom is, it has membranes the mushroom does not etc.
9:15 am
October 27, 2009
Offline
You can watch the whole Symphony of Science video series here: http://www.singularitysymposiu…..ience.html
6:08 pm
April 12, 2011
Offline
I posted the video because there are a couple of ideas that fit well in the context of a thread about full immersion virtual reality:
"Information is a form of energy, it streams in simultaneously through all of our sensory systems in a form of energy, and then it explodes into this enormous collage of what this present moment looks like, what it feels like, and what it sounds like."
Carl Sagan: "We are no longer at the mercy of the reptile brain. We can change ourselves. Think of the possibilities."
KimSolez said:
When I understood better what was being done I wished it had been done even better, while I still appreciated the innovation. For instance the analogy to a mushroom is not very accurate. The brain is not friable like a mushroom is, it has membranes the mushroom does not etc.
Illustrating the brain as a walnut or mushroom elicits a contemplation of the the brains physical qualities vs. its function. Regardless of how accurate the description might be, it successfully conveys the artists intent.
While the idea of eating a brain does not appeal to me, the idea of indulging the fruits of the tree of consciousness in all of their unimaginable complexity and beauty is tantalizing indeed.
Virtual reality? I'm there.
1:54 pm
February 3, 2011
Offline
Kurzweil gives a brief summary of his prediction for virtual reality in this video: http://bigthink.com/ideas/38115
Most Users Ever Online: 58
Currently Online:
9 Guest(s)
Currently Browsing this Page:
1 Guest(s)
Top Posters:
KimSolez: 99
CMStewart: 71
Nathan Wosnack: 67
simple1248: 35
Matt Swayne: 6
Shinjeez: 6
Member Stats:
Guest Posters: 0
Members: 78
Moderators: 1
Admins: 2
Forum Stats:
Groups: 4
Forums: 27
Topics: 152
Posts: 510
Newest Members: gufia, solankidhanesh, niesul14, neurodos, keegs440, lostnfoundation
Moderators: Nikki Olson (92)
Administrators: Socrates (108), zippykid (7)
Singularity Weblog is a journal of Nikola Danaylov's thoughts on trends, news, issues and people related to the 
