Bryan Johnson argues that better technology doesn't guarantee better humans. He proposes a "human Moore's Law," a compounded rate of improvement that could reshape humanity over decades, but warns that assuming progress will simply happen is naive without understanding the actual rates of decay and acceleration we face.
If we say, how good is technology going to be in 20 years time without questioning it, you and I are going to agree it's better. Now, are we going to say there's nanobots in our bloodstream repairing our DNA in real time, or is it AGI? Whatever our speculations are, it has this dramatic assumption that it's better if you and I say, what are you and I going to be like in 20 years from now? We don't even question it. It's worse. We just don't know how slow or how fast the decay is going to be. But what if in the 25th century, people were talking about what humans in the early 21st century change that fundamentally altered the future of human existence? It was that humans figured out how to attach themselves to the speed, the compounded rate of improvement that we see in our technology today. So when you and I go through that second thought experiment, we say what are you and I going to be like in 20 years? We don't know. But better. Unquestionably, we believe that it's like the human Moore's Law. Affiliation.
