I can´t avoid smiling while reading such texts. I reckon that cloud robotics is the future of AI; however, there is always something embarrasing in comparing human and non human intelligences. the omputational account seems to me extremely poor to descbire human mental life (and i don´t mean that there´s "something" like a mind.
In the basement of the Northwest Science Building here at Harvard University, a locked door is marked with a pink and yellow sign: "Caution: Radioactive Material." Inside researchers buzz around wearing dour expressions and plastic gloves. Among them is Kenneth Hayworth. He's tall and gaunt, dressed in dark-blue jeans, a blue polo shirt, and gray running shoes. He looks like someone who sleeps little and eats less.
Hayworth has spent much of the past few years in a windowless room carving brains into very thin slices. He is by all accounts a curious man, known for casually saying things like, "The human race is on a beeline to mind uploading: We will preserve a brain, slice it up, simulate it on a computer, and hook it up to a robot body." He wants that brain to be his brain. He wants his 100 billion neurons and more than 100 trillion synapses to be encased in a block of transparent, amber-colored resin—before he dies of natural causes.
Drugs and digital technologies that will allow people to work harder, longer and smarter are coming soon, say scientists and ethicists, so we need to decide now how best to ensure they are used properly.
The comments are published on Wednesday in a report on human enhancement in the workplace written by experts from the Royal Society, the Royal Academy of Engineering, the British Academy and the Academy of Medical Sciences.
Human Enhancement and the Future of Work considers everything that could be said to improve a person's ability to do work, including so-called smart drugs, which can enhance memory and attention, as well as physical and digital enhancements such as bionic implants or the ever-improving computer technology to store and access information.
Genevra Richardson, a professor of law at King's College London and chair of the steering committee that produced the report, said she defined "human enhancements" as technologies that improved a person beyond the norm. "They could influence our ability to learn or perform tasks, influence our motivation, they could enable us to work in more extreme conditions or into old age," she said.
"Although human enhancement technologies may benefit societies in important ways, their use at work also raises serious ethical, political and economic questions that demand broad consideration. These questions include, how do the public view these technologies, what are the consequences of their long-term use in individuals? There's the question of coercion. And who pays? If the private individual pays, then the rich will get cleverer."