Is it cheating to say AI and humanoid robots?
Anti-aging tech, if so.
this post was submitted on 19 Jun 2025
104 points (99.1% liked)
Ask Lemmy
32861 readers
1191 users here now
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either [email protected] or [email protected].
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email [email protected]. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try [email protected] or [email protected]
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Fully autonomous humanoid robots. Unfortunately with out-of-control AGI they will probably kill me.
It would have been cool to have a benign C3-PO or R2D2.
I would guess that we'll most-likely have AGI in 100 years. That's pretty futuristic and impactful.
Direct brain interfaces for, like, VR. So instead of a screen strapped to your face, your visual cortex is just stimulated so you see the game using your own "hardware." A literal Matrix type environment for your mind.
This is either gonna be cool and fun, or scary and evil. But it will exist.
load more comments
(2 replies)
I think we can make an oven with a tiny fire breathing dinosaur in it.
load more comments
(2 replies)
Artificial stem cells seem like the next thing to really revolutionize medicine.
Quantum computers for brute force hacks seems doable in 100.
Eye tracking pointer devices will likely be more convenient than mice within a dozen or two years. This will probably be widely available for people who are paralyzed first.
Diamond processors are always 10 years away, but I think we can do it in 100. This would revolutionize the amount of power we can put through a chip without worrying about cooling.
Quick charge capacitor replacements for standard rechargble batteries
Low yield fusion plants. I'd like to think of them as capable of high yield, but it's much harder than initially thought. Some ideas are quite promising for low yield.
load more comments
(3 replies)
I suspect we will see a human brain to digital interface. I don't think it will be "downloading minds" or anything, but I could see someone finding a way to plug a specialized camera or mic in to have a full functioning robotic replacement part.
I'm pretty sure they already have the beginning pieces to this, but its too specialized and expensive to do anything commercial with it yet.
load more comments
(4 replies)
FTL communication using quantum entangled particles.
Not possible; entanglement collapse can't be used to send information
load more comments
(16 replies)
Not FTL though. Slower than light, causality preserving version? Sure.
Huh?
Basically, physics says that nothing, not even information can actually travel faster than the speed of light. It's a universal limit that shows up when you do the math on relativity. This concept is called "causality".
Because of this, FTL communication is probably impossible. Quantum entanglement seems like it could provide a loophole, but it doesn't actually work that way. To actually use quantum entanglement for communication, it actually needs a confirmation message, which would have to be delivered by a different means (every quantum message needs a non-quantum confirmation). That confirmation would be bound by the speed of light, thus preserving causality.
This is a very very rough description based on my memory, so some details may be a little off, but it should cover the gist. This article goes into more detail:
https://bigthink.com/starts-with-a-bang/quantum-entanglement-faster-than-light/
Edit: After reading, the answer is more that attempting to impart information onto the entangled particles to send a message necessarily breaks the entanglement and thus does not transmit the information to the other side. Entangling the particles makes their states related to each other, but only at the time of entanglement, and anything that changes either particle (including measuring it) will break the entanglement going forward.
Yup. You just summed up the start of the conversation I had with ChatGPT to figure out exactly what we were talking about Here and why the fact that even if we can’t directly send coherent information, if it appears that a change in particle A directly causes a change in particle B, and it appears that that causation happened Instantaneously, we can’t ever prove it or measure it or know it for certain, because the proving measuring and knowing would have to have occurred at instantaneously themselves in order to actually be proof at all. The even more fascinating part I wound up with is discovering the Holographic Principle, as discovered by Beckenstein and later expanded on and proven by Stephen Hawking, that says that all information in the 3-D world is actually encoded into a 2-D framework. That one blew my mind and I’m gonna be thinking about that for a while.
The holographic principle is fascinating, though a quick nitpick: I'm pretty sure we've only proven it for contracting spacetimes (as opposed to our expanding one), but a lot of people imagine it does apply to ours as well (I certainly suspect it does)
load more comments
(1 replies)
Exceeding FTL (and breaking causality) is basically a sci fi trope at this point with about as much credibility as psychics. To have at least some credibility you need one of: a testable hypothesis, or an unexplained phenomenon. Right now we have neither. At best, we have some equations, that work below light speed, where we can extrapolate past light speed and see how the math works. The problem is: none of these equations are testable as they all contain infinities or other asymptotic features that prevent passing light speed itself. So, if there's no viable math to get from sublight to FTL, and there's no unexplained phenomena, then what we're left with is nothing.
Even quantum entanglement, which is a darling of sci fi whenever they need a plot device (hello Le Guin and the ansible), has categorically been shown to obey causality and the light speed limit in every lab test.
At some point it's like asking for negative mass, antigravity, or other things that the math would allow. Except our universe doesn't.
I've got a wormhole to sell you ;)
Obviously if we were to exceed light speed we would turn into lizards and mate with each other and have lizard babies. I thought this was common knowledge.
load more comments
(2 replies)
external gestation...a womb with a view
severe genetic manipulation... designer babies
digit/limb/organ regeneration
Seems entirely reasonable that a Gattaca future is achievable. Whether desirable is the other question. Somewhere CJ Cherryh is being worshipped as a prophet.
Artificial wombs are something that's often presented as dystopian, but I would imagine would actually be a very good thing. Beyond the obvious help it would be to infertile couples that desired children, they would if commonly adopted eliminate the danger of birth and pregnancy complications, and discomfort associated with the process. Probably not everyone would want to use it, but I'd bet even having the option would mean a lot to a lot of people.
And then all of this gave birth to the terrorists known as the Naturalists™...
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
Portable communicators. It would be slick to have a USB c tricorder though.
...you mean phones?
Hold up. I'm pretty sure things that already exist don't count.
load more comments
(2 replies)