Is it cheating to say AI and humanoid robots?
Anti-aging tech, if so.
this post was submitted on 19 Jun 2025
91 points (97.9% liked)
Ask Lemmy
32640 readers
1050 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 !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com.
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 info@lemmy.world. 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 !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world or !askusa@discuss.online
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
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.
I don't think we'll be able to upload knowledge any time soon, as we're a long way from properly mapping how the brain handles this.
But visual inputs for VR/AR is much closer, as there is already some functional implants for something similar: having cameras produce neural stimuli has been a thing for a few decades now, and it's now at the stage where some blind people have been able to regain a limited form of vision despite not having functioning eyes. The tech is only going to get better, so at some point it can be used to augment normal vision.
they had an ai generate images based off thoughts or dreams or something, I imagine its further ahead now too lazy to look for more articles https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna76096
Cancer curing nanotechnology
I think we can make an oven with a tiny fire breathing dinosaur in it.
load more comments
(2 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)
fusion maybe, but in scifi, it often requires an alien race making first contact, we wont even get to things like anti-matter tech without that intervention. SG1 is more in our time frame, but with aliens already possessing advanced tech
FTL communication using quantum entangled particles.
Not possible; entanglement collapse can't be used to send information
The idea is this:
2 particles are quantum entangled. Whatever happens to one instantly happens to the other regardless of distance.
So you establish a state that means "0" and a state that means "1" and you can send binary.
At a minimum, you have quantum Morse code.
If you change one of the particles it just breaks the entanglement. If you measure one, then you instantly know the state the other will have when measured, but the result of your measurement - and therefore the other one also - is random. The only way to correlate the two measurements of the two particles is to send the results (at C or slower) to the same place and compare them. Otherwise each just looks like a random result.
(I know nothing about this)
Could you to the sub-C measurement test enough times to show that it just empirically works, and then use it on that basis? Or are you saying that the sub-C measurement would prove that it doesn't work (and it produces random noise)?
I'm not sure what you mean by 'use it on that basis'. Yes, entanglement has been proven to work, but it can't be used to communicate FTL.
Read the link posted. They already did it. In 2007. At a distance of 144km.
I read it. Doesn't mention FTL, because that's not a possibility for actually transmitting info.
Edit: I think the way these quantum encryption systems work is that basically the photons (and I assume it's polarization being measured) become the encryption key to a message that is sent conventionally.
Like the sender generates a bunch of entangled photons, sends the paired ones to the recipient, measures their photons and uses the results to encrypt the message, the receiver measures theirs and gets the same results, the sender sends the encrypted message over email or whatever, and the recipient has the same key because of entanglement.
Meanwhile an eavesdropper measuring the photons would mess them up for the recipient so the message wouldn't decrypt.
I'm familiar with quantum entanglement. It doesn't work because you have no way of affecting which state you'll measure, and thus what state the other particle will be in.
Read the link posted. They already did it. In 2007. At a distance of 144km.
No they didn't, they sent a conventional signal that was encrypted with an entangled particle. Nothing was sent ftl, this is like if I had two boxes that I know have the same thing in them, an encryption key, and traveled across the world, and sent you a message, you have the other box, the information in that box didn't go ftl you just opened it later.
there is no path to ftl communication here.
have a basic video on the topic: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9oBiS_Yb9Ac
The FTL is the sci-fi component that is the subject of the thread, the quantum entanglement communication part is the real world piece they actually got working.
load more comments
(1 replies)
That wasn't FTL
That's not the part you were trying to say couldn't be done. ;) You were trying to argue that quantum entanglement couldn't be used to communicate, clearly it can.
The FTL bit is the science fiction premise of the thread. ;)
That is indeed that bit I was saying couldn't be done. Entanglement alone can't be used to communicate; a signal has to be sent conventionally over the distance.
The FTL bit is physically impossible, so it's not really "achievable in a reasonable time-frame"
This you?
I'm familiar with quantum entanglement. It doesn't work because you have no way of affecting which state you'll measure, and thus what state the other particle will be in.
That's exactly the part they DID get working.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(10 replies)
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.
Orbital habitats with rotational gravity.
I would guess that we'll most-likely have AGI in 100 years. That's pretty futuristic and impactful.