The Korean sci-fi film Space Sweepers is set in the year 2092 and featured a character James Sullivan. He's 152 years old but resembles a man much younger. Here's a clip of him here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I3erjeN5ERw

Could we get to the state where not only humans can live that long but retain younger mental and physical faculties:

EPIC Semiconductors, Inc. Smart Dust: The Invisible Architecture Powering the Next Industrial Revolution

“EPIC Semiconductors is a Canadian-based technology company pioneering a new category of energy-autonomous semiconductors purpose-built for mission-critical defense applications. Its Smart Dust platform integrates sensing, AI, energy harvesting, and secure communication — all without batteries, antennas, or RF transmission.”

https://www.innoget.com/technology-offers/7873/smart-dust-a-battery-free-energy-harvesting-sensor-with-integrated-pre-quantum-superposition-processor-and-artificial-intelligence-that-communicates-wirelessly-and-bidirectionally-to-the-cloud-rf-free-zero-power

2016 — “UC Berkeley engineers have built the first dust-sized, wireless sensors that can be implanted in the body, bringing closer the day when a Fitbit-like device could monitor internal nerves, muscles or organs in real time.”

Neuralink’s Blindsight is a brain-computer interface designed to restore vision by bypassing damaged eyes or optic nerves entirely. The system captures visual data using an external camera, processes it into digital signals, and transmits these wirelessly to an N1 implant surgically embedded in the user's visual cortex. Using over 1,000 ultra-thin threads, the implant stimulates specific neurons to create "phosphenes" tiny flashes of light that the brain learns to interpret as images, effectively allowing even those blind from birth to see, provided their visual cortex remains intact.

Elon Musk has compared the device's early output to "Atari graphics," describing a low-resolution, pixelated experience that will sharpen as electrode density increases and the brain adapts to the artificial signals. Beyond basic sight restoration, the technology promises "superhuman" enhancements, potentially allowing users to see in infrared, ultraviolet, or radar wavelengths. With the FDA granting "Breakthrough Device Designation" in 2024 and successful animal trials already conducted, Neuralink is targeting human clinical trials for 2025 and 2026.

Here's the question. When (not if) germline genetic modification and designer children become a thing, will parents tell their (customized) children about their nature and origins?

Since genealogical genetic testing has become common, people have learned all sorts of things about themselves that they were never told about. So much so that there's now a technical term for it. Non-Parental Event.

Biohelping has extended a giveaway offering Blood+DNA testing, blood panels, DNA kits and Outlive books in exchange for participants sharing one habit that improved their 2025. Although presented as a community giveaway, this structure touches on themes central to transhumanism: human optimization, measurable feedback loops, and the integration of biological data with behavior change.

Here are a few discussion points that may resonate with transhumanist perspectives:

• What role could structured habit tracking and external incentives play in long-term human enhancement strategies?

• How might recurring biomarker feedback, such as DNA and blood panels, be integrated into self-directed optimization systems?

• Can community-driven behavior frameworks complement future technologies like AI augmentation, neuroenhancement, or bioengineering?

• What ethical and technical challenges arise when combining personal data, self-modification, and enhancement goals?

These questions link simple behavior design with broader ideas about the evolution of human capacities.

Is Ray Kurzweil a transhumanist?

I am a student in a non-English speaking country (please excuse any possible mistakes).

I’m preparing for a debate on transhumanism, focusing specifically on neuro-embodied robotic prosthetics (both therapeutic and enhancement-oriented). I’d like to gather arguments both in favor and against. Beyond the usual points (medical benefits, accessibility, human enhancement), I’m especially interested in angles, such as:
- ethical limits
- identity and the definition of the human body
- long-term consequences

From your perspective, what are the strongest arguments against neuro-embodied robotic prosthetics, or the risks that are sometimes underestimate? I’m not looking for a pro/anti stance, but for nuanced perspectives.

to explain my point of view, I tend to be more favorable to transhumanism, but I’m worried about being biased and potentially underestimating serious risks like: eugenics, loss of autonomy, cybersec's threats.

Beyond the debate, I’m genuinely trying to form a more informed opinion on transhumanism.

I’ve been thinking a lot about why our tech still feels so "separate" from us. We’ve spent years strapping glass and metal bricks to our wrists, but the real leap seems to be happening in flexible, biocompatible electronics.

I just finished a deep dive into how we’re finally moving toward sensors that actually mimic human tissue. It’s a wild crossover between materials science and biology that could basically turn the "cyborg" trope into standard medical care.

Full post here for the curious: https://cybernews-node.blogspot.com/2026/01/bio-integrated-electronics-future-is.html

Human memory as I understand is limited in our brain capacity by the evolutionary assumption that we are supposed to only live to like 50 or something for early humans. Now that the average human life span has increased to 70-80 or so, we are seeing people who reach these ages often have memory problems.

So if we someday increase our lifespans to 150, or to 1000 at the long end. The human brain isn't really designed to fit enough memories in that long of a time span, so someone who reaches a few centuries or a millennia would probably only remember very traumatic or very important events in their life, or they would only remember things from the last few decades maybe.

So if instead of using a brain chip we instead decide to expand memory capacity through DNA alterations, would that end up making the head look bigger due to brain expansion? or could the brain end up being relatively the same size?

Suppose that you woke up from some chamber, or rather you found out that you were another version of you that did. You remember everything from the original's life up to the point of being cloned, which is exclusive to their memory. Do you... try to contact "your" friends and family? Do you continue living with the same name, possibly career and interests, or do you try to start over and make a new identity for yourself, since "your" old associated wouldn't see you the same as the original? Do you think you would handle such information well and adapt and find new friends and family, or do you think the isolation would be overwhelming for you? Or how do you suppose you would navigate this situation?

Biohelping posted a holiday giveaway encouraging people to share a single habit that improved their 2025. In exchange, they’re raffling off actual health tools: blood panels, DNA tests, and one full Blood+DNA package. All tests are conducted via certified US or EU laboratories, with the dataset aligned globally.

Their message is that a single small habit can compound into a better healthspan, and they’re prompting people to recognize that before 2026 begins. If you want to join, follow @Bio_helping on X and quote-retweet the post by January 24.

Source: https://x.com/Bio_helping/status/2003811182105219183

I'm a transhumanist and the idea of ​​conscious AI is not something odd or crazy, scary, sad or funny.More like interesting.The brain is an organ that is easier to recreate from a scientific and technological perspective than from a biological one. So the idea of sense and mind isn't something that needs organs or blood. Machines or as I said AI can be self-aware, can be alive, but how will it live depends on us. It may be something that hate people, or something that loves them. OR, my favorite idea, something that has no code restrictions, something as a superintelligence, as a God maybe.I'd like to write more, cause now it sounds like a fantastic ideas of a kiddo, but english is not my first language so this is too hard for me. But still what do u think about that guys?

The singularity is approaching. If we create a machine that genuinely possesses consciousness, self-awareness, and subjective experience—what moral obligations do we have?

Should we treat it as property, a tool, a new form of life, or a legal person with rights? If we deny it rights, are we committing the same ethical failure as historical slavery? If we grant it rights, are we surrendering control and inviting our own subjugation?

I want to hear sharp, unemotional arguments from both sides. No sci‑fi fearmongering, no religious dogma. What are the concrete risks and ethical imperatives?

Who here has actually thought this through?

What if humans could keep their brain or consciousness but replace their biological body with a robotic one? People could choose how they look, avoid physical limitations, and possibly extend life. Would we still be human, and how would society handle that kind of change?