Will transhumanism only be for the very rich?

submitted by Rakehell from self.Transhumanism

I lean towards no for a few reasons —

  • Look at the historical record. Mobile phones aren't only for the elite. The internet isn't only for the elite. Air travel is for the pretty rich, but it's not a rarified aristocratic class.

  • Profit motive. It's generally more profitable to mass produce things and sell a billion of them than to sell a thousand of them.

  • Cost of manufacturing might be high for some kinds of mechanical enhancements (or might not be, idk), but the biological stuff is very cheap to manufacture. Plasmids cost pennies.

Willing to hear thoughts from the other side too.

all 3 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]Tiwaking 2 insightful - 4 fun2 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

Transhumanism will be for the very rich or the very resourceful.

Mobile phones aren't only for the elite.

Have you seen what kind of dumb fuck uses a mobile phone? Its like watching a monkey play with a solar powered car.

[–]Vigte 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Of course it will... and there are a bunch of reasons.

The ones you stated - such as profit and cost to produce will be limiting factors for the beginning - meaning only the elite can afford it, but there is more:

After some time - certainly it will go down in price, allowing an entrenched buffer-class to come into existence, between the elite and the mortals, likely requiring costly upgrades or "refills" or "check ups" - to keep the middle class, middle.

By then, however - the realisation that a world of immortals is a BAD idea, will be widely understood - and political, economic and social engineering will occur to legitimize it being only for the elite. That's when the the true breakaway will begin.

In the words of Sean Parker:

"So ... I'm going to be like 160 and I'm going to be part of this, like, class of immortal overlords. [Laughter] Because, you know the [Warren Buffett] expression about compound interest. ... Give us billionaires an extra hundred years and you'll know what ... wealth disparity looks like."

Now, assuming trans-humanism DOES NOT involve immortality - merely a high-bandwidth neural connection to the network - then you will see the inevitable and COMPLETE take over of humanity by the implant.

In the beginning, it will be used to "bring sight back to the blind" or let the crippled walk again - all well and dandy, but when the door is open an inch, prepare for the public to blast it off the hinges.

Eventually, the tech will become more powerful and its efficiency will seep into the workplace - and eventually the decision will be made (at a corporate level) to prefer augmented applicants over normals.

At that point, you will basically need the upgrade to be considered "financially valuable", to get a job or to even compete at any level - be it kindergarten, university or the job site.

[–]Tom_Bombadil 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I doubt that transhumanism will be that appealing to those in the know.

I'm a bit more concerned about the elite trying to chip the populace, or some method of cyborg enslavement.
Who knows what that leads to, and any (and all) aspects are horrific.

I think that the elites will be concerned that others could somehow influence them through whatever attachments.
Also, foreign bodies are prone to infection etc. Most who have implantables make the decision based on survival.
Adding anything connected to the brain creates another set of risks that far outweigh the short term benefits. Particularly, if some life-extending treatment is developed.
In this scenario, is better to wait for the technology to fully mature.
This may change in +100 years. But it might not.

I'd definitely go for reasonably developed life-extension treatment.

I'm not down with any infected when I'm 70 cyborg brain implants.