Are We Cyborgs Now?

Post Reply New Topic

If you have a pace maker controlled by your cell phone then you are a cyborg.
If you have a robotic limb prosthetic, and it replaces your "original part" you are a cyborg.
So - yah some people today may already be cyborgs bot not most of us.
Just owning a cell phone doesn't count.
Having a RF id implanted under your skin doesn't count.
You have to replace a body part or function. A pacemaker in implanted AND replaces the autonomic nervous system's control of the heart beat. But a metronome-like pacemaker is not a cybernetic thing in my mind. It needs a CPU and the CPU needs to do something more than put out a clock pulse that never changes.
I met an EMT who had a hearing aid that snapped onto (and off of) an electrode which was embedded into his skull. Getting closer.

I suppose I was thinking also of mentally becoming cyborgs. We are so good at interacting with machines now, everything is computerised. Many of us are better interacting with computers now than we are with humans.

Maybe it's a 'mental switch' as well?

Older folks (who are living longer now)are getting more and more machine parts. So I agree with Fenn that we are in a sense becoming literal cyborgs (and younger folks need and get prosthetics too) as medicine gets ever more high tech and capital intensive. Back in the Sixties some Scifi writer on the Todays show predicted that someday it will be hard to tell real humans from robots.

But I get what you're saying about how we all become wired together across vast continental distances to other folks, and interact less and less with folks next door. Like we are all becoming one planetary brain. But at the same time are also becoming atomized. Thats not making us literal "cyborgs", but is a major development.

The human race is definitely evolving- physically and mentally. We have a different attitude than we did in the 20th century. We now interact with machines more than people, and go along on our own tracks not participating in the community anymore. I don't think that is necessarily good.

I think people back in history were a lot more friendly to each other- they had to be or they didn't survive the environment! The people stuck together in their tribe/village/town. I've read numerous accounts of even invaders, once they settled in, being very friendly to locals and helping them. Ironically the most friendly were the settled Norse who were very good at integrating with the locals!

Now we can get machines to do everything for us so we don't need other humans. At the moment anyway. If it all comes crashing down around us we'll need each other again.

Although survival experts say in the event of a big disaster e.g. if the power is cut off, food and water are scarce etc., the greatest threat is other humans and to keep away from them. So who knows.

Invading groups HAD to be friendly. How would they survive if they were not?
They needed the locals to help them with food etc.

Yes...but now days people aren't friendly like that anymore. We are not as friendly to the community as we used to be. We each go along on our own tracks, individually. We don't need other people because we've got computers and other machines to help us, do our bidding, make us happy.

This is why we're changing and becoming cyborgs.

I agree that we have a sort of cult of individualism that is being enabled by technology to take us further and further away from each other (even when it's pretending to bring us closer).

But perhaps it will be self-limiting? Our brains are clearly not designed for it. Mental health issues are rife, we crave society even as we reject it. Isolation is a serious problem, loneliness is a killer. We live longer lives when we interact more with others. How far can we go down this road before we can't mentally function?

I really hope you are right and it is self-limiting. Humans. Are. Social. Animals. Despite people trying to deny our animal nature, it's impossible.

I have noticed that with the possible demise of Twitter, a new social media is arising. The federated one where lots of different servers communicate with each other, instead of one big server with everyone on. I wonder if this is more normal- lots of little communities instead of one big one. It's not normal to converse with millions of people, it's more normal to communicate with a few hundred at most. We'll see.

Not everyone's a cyborg, but there are cyborgs amongst us.

● Wikipedia - Steve Mann (inventor)

Steve Mann thinks he is a cyborg. I am not so sure. He does cool stuff with tech, but does that make him a cyborg?

Also of interest:

● medicalfuturist.com - the worlds most famous real life cyborgs

● Wikipedia - Prosthesis - Robotic prostheses
● Wikipedia - Robotic arm
● Wikipedia - Open source robotics
● Wikipedia - DARwIn OP
● Wikipedia - Eyeborg
● Wikipedia - Humanoid robot

This is another thing I don't understand. Why on earth would people have things in their bodies controlled by their phones? Surely anyone could hack in and break the equipment and probably kill you.

Why do people have their whole houses controlled by their phones? For the same reason as above.

I know someone who suffered with chronic pain for years. I don't think I ever saw her smile. Now she has a pain device and a remote control to administer the right amount for any given time. I think It probably records to so that the doc can review.
Nerve/Device and Brian/Device interfaces are still experimental and I think a hand held device has its advantages as a Brain/Tech device. You are right that security and life safety should be a concern. All cars have computers in them now. Hacking in to them is practically very very hard. Doing so could be life threatening too.

Yes, all these devices are very helpful, but why use your PHONE? I'd like a separate device just for my pain relief or whatever. Not a phone which has hundreds of apps and functions on it.

The same goes for my house devices- I wouldn't use my phone to control them, phones are far too vulnerable.