No screw you paul! Booooo! Booo crytek! Booooo!
Ah I assumed he was talking about just regular need a shit. Which is pretty much a given if you intake more protein. It also makes you fart more.
Yeah extra protein in the form of shakes normally adds a deuce or two.
"You assuming that technology by the year 2060 isn't going to be adequate enough is basically the most arrogant thing ever, as you imply that you know what's going to happen by then. Not even the best scientists can predict how far our research will take us by then, what makes you so sure you know?"
I still can't understand how you come up with this stuff. You literally just refuted your own argument... If I can't predict how far research will take us. Then neither can you. Your 50 year claim is in your opinion as invalid as mine.
"DON'T NEED to know the complex processes of the brain in order to mimic its structure" You literally do not know that, because we as a race, have no idea how a brain truely works. You are repeatedly falling into this claim of computing power will override all other problems. It is flat out wrong. I mean did you even check that site. They aren't studying anything other than activity in regions of the brain. Not how consciousness actually works. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mind
"Completely disregarding convergent scientific research will get you nowhere, as by the same year we might have cultivated artificial stem cells or similar which will be inserted (or created) by nanobots. Science isn't following one specific direction for its research, and its true strength lies in how the branches interact and CONVERGE with each other."
Well done, you figured out scientists are researching multiple areas of science. And... this in no way supports any of your claims.
" I'd also advise you to change your attitude in a discussion, because you bring less than the bare minimum to the table currently."
O cut your pretentious bullshit. Like you have properly supported any of your claims.
Anyway, I've had my fun, no need to keep derailing this thread. You keep your futurism pipe dreams if they keep you happy. We will see in 50 years...
if this is max payne with time warping, might be pretty good.
http://neurologism.com/2013/12/11/wil…-to-a-computer/
"I’m a neuroscience postdoc at Boston University. I study the expression and modulation of emotion in neural circuits that center on the amygdala"
Literally took 1 sec of googling to find someone in the field saying this is unlikely if not impossible. Again. You literally don't understand or flat out are ignoring how complex a mind is and little we understand the mind.
Also what arguments or sources? You have listed none. Using that argument to refute me, refutes yourself.
I also noticed you said "but we WILL have commercial nanobots by 2060" as if nanobots are somehow a singular thing that does everything. We probably will have some form of commercial nanobot by 2060. That does not mean we will be able to beat every disease or replicate every type of cell.
Here is how insanely complicated 1 single type of cell is
The best at the moment we can create are incredibly simple motor functions with nanites. You seem to be under some kind of impression that all at once we will be able to replace the entire human body. Which isn't remotely what will happen. What will happen is we will create a few nanites that serve very specific simple functions. Things like HIV killing nanites. That isn't going to allow us to prevent the aging of the human body and the gradual death/breakdown of all cells.
Haha. Ok mate. Change your arguement. Which started with "within 50 years we will be immortal" to "we'll have the right technology to increase our longevity by at least 10-20 years". Maybe you should check the post your making agreement with before you post...
We will indeed see in 50 years and you still don't understand commercial viability...
Also as to the uploading of a brain, you clearly have little understanding again of how complex a brain is. As to the masters. cognitive science. The exact field you are debating. "essentially the same purpose". No. That isn't how a brain works, a brain is not simply a complex modern computer with AI. If you wanted to make brain dead retards then yes, you might want to try the latter. If you actually want the person who was there before you are going to need to do the former. This idea that all we need to upload a human and redownload it else where is mass computing power is incredibly naive.
bunkers are the best.
I have talked about this with my brother who did his masters in this area. We have very little understand of how the brain functions as far as in computing terms and even if we have some understanding that doesn't mean progress is going to happen quickly. Again:
This is a akin to people in the 50s claiming by 2000 we would have flying nuclear powered cars.
We understood nuclear power and flight 50 years ago right. So why don't we have flying nuclear powered cars? Because our understanding was incredibly basic. Just as our understanding of the brain is comparatively incredibly basic. It's also unlikely that nanites are going to be widely accessible in 50 years even if we have mastered the tech. We starting make prosthetic robotic limbs 30+ years ago, most people that need them still don't have access to them. Just because tech exists doesn't mean it will be commercially widespread.
And, btw writing "Going to be at least 50 years before we're at that point," to a post that states we will be able to upload our brains into computers is "say"ing that....
You clearly have little understanding of how little we understand about the brain. We are not going to be uploading an entire human consciousness in the next 50 years. You are smoking crack.
This is a akin to people in the 50s claiming by 2000 we would have flying nuclear powered cars.
50 years... no chance, try a couple hundred.
Its the same thing when it comes to E3 demos. These days almost nothing that is in an E3 demo from lighting, particles, models, bespoke anims etc doesn't get put in the full release.
Regardless of how they did it, they knew the end product wouldn't be able to be like that.
What ever do you mean. Marketing is always wonderful and definitely portrays the game the actual devs want.
Shelter is fucking fantastic. Very unique and has a more emotional story that 99% of games out there. For me its on a level with Thomas was alone.
Bloody slacker clem. 
Yeah that is pretty cool for skybox stuff/shop windows in open world games. What is the performance hit like?
Arena of hate.
They won't miss you liam...
That is what Mark is saying.
Seananners is going to fucking love this.
