Tag: R. Nicholas Starr

BDYXHAX – An Interview with Russ Foxx by R. Nicholas Starr

BDYXHAX – An Interview with Russ Foxx by R. Nicholas Starr

Comments 0 Comment

R. Nicholas Starr
Russ Foxx

Editor’s Note: The event of the website which hosted this article, BDYHAX, is no longer taking place, and this article is being saved due to the risk their website may soon be taken down. Wikipedia basically describes body hacking as transhumanism with high risk-tolerance, but it is my hope as technology progresses those risks will become negligible, and the variety in form we see with our physical manifestations will be limited more by imagination than anything else.

~ Zach Richardson, Director of Publication, United States Transhumanist Party, January 11, 2024

An Interview with BDYHAX Presenter Russ Foxx

Art gives birth to scientific innovation.

In an effort to learn more about the historical origins of transhumanism and posthumanism, R. Nicholas Starr began a journey to look at the many topics popular within those communities and retraced them back to art. To continue the research he began to reach out to the artists and scientists at the forefront of exploring this relationship. While he continues to prepare his research for publication, he has decided to release the transcripts from these interviews in hopes to spark conversation and gather even more insight into how the creative mind has shaped our scientific world as we move past the limits of the human body.

R. Nicholas Starr is a multimedia artist, biohacker, researcher, and theorist. With an education in signals intelligence from the United States Air Force, and 20 years of experience creating art and performing music in the US and abroad, he has become a unique voice for the US Transhumanist Movement and American policy.

The first in this series is an interview with Russ Foxx, world-renowned body-modification and suspension artist, and fellow cyborg.

R. Nicholas Starr: When a client comes to you looking for a “body hack”, do they usually have a specific function/task in mind, or are they just exploring the possibilities?

Russ Foxx: My clients generally have a solid idea of what they want to accomplish prior to contacting me. I don’t push my own ideas on people; rather I’m a catalyst in helping people upgrade themselves to fit their desires. I’ll certainly advise if I feel that an individual may benefit from a certain type of modification in their situation, but people usually do their homework. That’s how they find me to begin with.

RNS: Have you noticed a specific trend in what people want?

RF: In terms of functional implants and human-mountable devices, I commonly work with Magnetic Vision, RFID, NFC, North Sense and Transdermal Implants. I’ve also worked with the North Star V1.0 and the Firefly V1.0.

Social media certainly plays a role in what’s popular at any given time, which gives me the opportunity to roll out new mods and ideas as I see fit. I’m currently waiting on a few different implantable devices that are in the works, so you’ll hear about them when they hit my feeds!

RNS: How much of an inspiration do you think science fiction has been for biohacking and transhumanism?

RF: Science fiction has been huge for me. Having grown up rural; Sci-Fi and horror films and literature during childhood definitely shaped my ideas from a young age. I still find inspiration from them to this day.

RNS: Do you think approaching biohacking in a more artful way, like your tattoos incorporated with the Northstar implant, will help spread the idea?

RF: Unless I’m telling a story via stage performance, I’m not really trying to “spread the idea” per se. I choose to look how I want to look and upgrade what I want to upgrade. I don’t hide my mods, so they tend to be seen a lot on the street and online.

I’ve always been a fan of mixed mediums in art, which is why I incorporated my North Star V1.0 implant into my biomech chest tattoo work. This creates a complimentary coexistence of art and technology in my body; reminiscent of Iron Man’s Arc Reactor.

RNS: What was your first cyborg influence?

RF: Outside of film, Stelarc was certainly one of my first cyborg influences. His views on the obsolete body always resonated in me and inspired me to look at my own body in a similar way. His ear-in-arm project continues to move forward, which actually brought some inspiration to a project I’m currently working on involving sound transmission in my own body. I’ve been 100% deaf in my left ear for most of my life and decided to start working on ways to increase my sound input capability using my own devices rather than limited ability hearing aids currently on the market.

RNS: A small collection of bioartists using live tissue to create art (for example Catts & Zurr’s living leather jacket). As a body artist, how could you use that technology?

RF: I really like their concept of creating victimless leather, although the current state of this experiment is unknown.

Skin grafting using stem cells has been existent in the medical field for quite some time now, which is a relative idea with functional applications in the body. It hasn’t yet been seen entering into the body modification realm, but I don’t doubt its arrival into the picture someday. It’s usually the high costs that hold back a lot of medical technology from the reach of artists.

RNS: As someone who performs with body modification, namely suspension, do you see a possibility for a functional biohacking-driven mod performance? If so, what would it look like and what would be the message? If not, why not?

RF: Stage performance has always been a means to push the limits and boundaries of my body and mind. My past performances have been very primal and visceral, often inspiring buildups of tension and suspense and sometimes even crowd members fainting.

I’ve taken some time off from performing in the last couple years to focus on my modification work, but I plan to be back on the stage soon. Moving forward I see myself putting focus on interactions between technology and biology in ways to challenge our current ideas and relationships with technology.

Keep an eye on my website and YouTube channel for updates!

RNS: In movies and comics we see huge amounts of tech crammed into a person. How much can one body support when it comes to functional implants?

RF: When it comes to implanted technology there will always be limitations in terms of implant size and functionality. Space must be created in the body where the implant is intended to go, while preserving the body’s ability to naturally function and heal. This often requires adapting one’s lifestyle to an extent.

I currently have 4 implants in my left hand alone (3 functional & 1 cosmetic). The functional implants (Magnetic Vision, RFID, NFC) are quite small and placed in locations that will not hinder everyday activities.

Keeping the implantable devices small will make them more easily accepted by the body. This supports the human body as having a vast amount of upgrade capabilities.

RNS: Through dermal piercings, would it be possible to expand current biohacking technology (biofeedback interfacing, extrasensory beyond magnets, interchangeable hardware)?

RF: Transdermal implants and dermal anchors can certainly be used as hardwired interfaces/ports to devices within the body. This idea does not work without consequence though, as it creates an access point for bacteria to enter the body even after much time has passed. As this method increases infection risks, it’s generally seen as less than ideal. Bluetooth connectivity and induction charging are proving to be more solid options in this area.

RNS: How can biohackers, as a small but expanding community, take transhumanism towards a nationally influential movement?

RF: Stay focused on personal safety and the safety and well-being of the public just as much as the progression and pioneering of new ideas. Support open-source information and resource sharing. Collaborate with others. Utilize maker spaces and support events like BDYHAX and BMXNET. Challenge yourself to think outside the box and reprogram your own mind and the world around you. Allow yourself to evolve and adapt with the times and state of the world around you. Share the love.

15-Day Exposure Period on Policy Proposals on Investigations and Emergency Declarations

15-Day Exposure Period on Policy Proposals on Investigations and Emergency Declarations

Comments 20 comments

The U.S. Transhumanist Party hereby opens a 15-day public exposure period on the proposals submitted by R. Nicholas Starr and Zach Richardson concerning investigations and emergency actions. The proposals are presented below, followed by initial feedback from USTP leadership. The public exposure period is intended to last until 12:01 a.m. U.S. Pacific Time on November 1, 2021.

During the exposure period, please post your comments on this thread. If you post comments intended to be considered in voting and/or amending any of these planks in any other electronic medium, please note that you thereby give your consent to have your comments reproduced with attribution or linked within this discussion thread, in order to direct members’ attention and consideration to them.

Given the nature of the proposals and depending on the input received regarding them, the U.S. Transhumanist Party reserves the right to put forward for a vote of the members either (1) the entirety of each proposal, (2) portions of each proposal, (3) some of the proposals but not others, or (4) none of the proposals. Also, the U.S. Transhumanist Party reserves the right to determine which document(s) of the U.S. Transhumanist Party, if any, would be open to amendment to include any of the contents of these proposals.

Proposals by R. Nicholas Starr

The following policy proposals seek to limit the power of USTP leadership during events of investigations and emergencies. I request these items are put to vote as soon as possible, after providing an appropriate exposure period for members to discuss, add, remove, or change things.

Proposal RNS-1. Guidelines for Investigations

As a data-driven political organization the United States Transhumanist Party (USTP), and its leadership acting on behalf of the USTP, must remain neutral in its official capacity during outside investigations into past, present, or future members until said investigations are complete and all facts are known and presented to USTP members. The USTP should also refrain from attempts to influence ongoing investigations or public perception while an investigation is taking place. Public statements of facts and acknowledgement of the situation is permissible, but statements must not stray into speculation. Once an investigation is complete the USTP can issue statements based solely on the facts and analysis thereof. This does NOT restrict an individual, regardless of their position in the USTP, from speaking out on an issue in their personal capacity, nor does it restrict a person from providing criticism of such personal statements in their own personal capacity.

The USTP can conduct its own investigations into matters affecting members on a case by case basis, as determined by a vote of the membership, and under the following limitations. Investigators must be impartial with no personal or professional connection to any of the parties involved in the investigation (accusers, the accused, or other individuals of interest sought for questioning in the investigation). Professional connections include but aren’t limited to current or former employees, advisors, board members, and interns for the person or organization under investigation as well as direct competitors of any party under investigation (you can’t investigate your competition). If an impartial investigator cannot be obtained, either from inside or outside our membership, then the investigation must be abandoned.

Internal investigations should not be intended to replace outside investigations and should be limited to how the incident under investigation impacts operation of the USTP. Consequences sought after the conclusion of the investigation shall be limited to administrative action available within the USTP. The USTP does not have the power to require action or consequences be made by outside organizations.

The purpose of the internal investigation shall be made known to the members with a summary of alleged offenses and what questions the investigation seeks to answer. This must be done in a professional manner, excluding personal opinion and potential bias.

Proposal RNS-2. Definitions and Restrictions on Emergency Actions

United States Transhumanist Party (USTP) leaders shall have the limited ability to declare, and act on, emergencies on behalf of its members. Such a declaration shall have no bearing on, or interfere with, applicable federal, state, and local laws.

When declaring an emergency the USTP leadership must publicly announce what the emergency is, why waiting to act would cause immediate increased harm, and the intended course of action sought by the USTP. This course of action must not deviate from, or spread beyond, the scope of the incident. Meaning any intended action must be clearly and directly related to the emergency.

An emergency shall be defined as an unexpected and immediate threat or active instance of the following, pending member further recommendations and approval by membership vote:

  • Threat to life or public safety (threats to life extension shall NOT be included unless the emergency threatens an individual placed in preservation prior to the emergency, such as cryogenics)
  • Natural disaster
  • Humanitarian crisis
  • Credible acts of violence
  • Direct malicious attack, physical or digital, of USTP property
  • Theft of USTP funds from an official account totaling over X% of the last known balance and more than $X. (Amounts to be decided based on current and future potential needs before vote)

It shall not include:

  • Personal scandal
  • Delays in research
  • Matters of outside businesses or organizations

An emergency can only be declared in cases where delayed action would clearly cause increased harm based on the available evidence. If the emergency action is to take longer than 14 days, then it requires further approval by a vote of the membership.

Feedback on R. Nicholas Starr’s Proposals by USTP Leadership

The USTP Leadership offers a point-by-point analysis of Mr. Starr’s proposals below.

Proposal RNS-1. “As a data-driven political organization the United States Transhumanist Party (USTP), and its leadership acting on behalf of the USTP, must remain neutral in its official capacity during outside investigations into past, present, or future members until said investigations are complete and all facts are known and presented to USTP members.”

USTP Leadership Response: This appears to provide a blanket power to any “outside investigation”, however motivated and by whomever conducted. Just because an outside investigation is being conducted does not guarantee the objective or impartial nature of the investigator, particularly if the investigator is retained by a party with a preconceived interest in the outcome of the investigation. If the USTP leadership is unable to point out instances of obvious bias when they exist, this hampers objectivity and the search for truth. Moreover, if the rest of the world is free to comment and speculate on the subject of the investigation while the USTP’s ability to respond is muzzled, the USTP would necessarily be placed at a disadvantage relative to those who have no compunctions about making unsubstantiated claims.

Proposal RNS-1. “The USTP should also refrain from attempts to influence ongoing investigations or public perception while an investigation is taking place.”

USTP Leadership Response: Public perception often can be influenced far more rapidly than an official investigation can be conducted or concluded. The unfortunate truth is, in a social-media-dominated age, the court of public opinion has the power to affect an individual’s fate without utilizing any reasonable standard of evidence or waiting for the facts to come out. Sometimes the damage to a person’s reputation from unsubstantiated allegations in the court of public opinion can be immense. Without voices of reason being ready to counter unsubstantiated, character-assassinating allegations right away, good people’s future prospects may be damaged or destroyed because unscrupulous voices are the only ones which are allowed to be heard.

Proposal RNS-1. “Public statements of facts and acknowledgement of the situation is permissible, but statements must not stray into speculation.”

USTP Leadership Response: The USTP does not favor unsubstantiated speculation, either, but must remain free to point out when others engage in such speculation and when such others accuse without evidence.

Proposal RNS-1. “Once an investigation is complete the USTP can issue statements based solely on the facts and analysis thereof. ”

USTP Leadership Response:  Again, this places too much power into the hands of an outside investigator, often appointed by entities with no affiliation or connection with the USTP, to determine what constitutes “facts and analysis” that are within the permissible realm of discussion. An outside investigator can easily present a selective, skewed, or biased portrayal, and the USTP should not relinquish its ability to inquire into and comment on facts and analytical interpretations that, for whatever reason, an outside investigator did not include in a public-facing report.

Proposal RNS-1. “ This does NOT restrict an individual, regardless of their position in the USTP, from speaking out on an issue in their personal capacity, nor does it restrict a person from providing criticism of such personal statements in their own personal capacity.”

USTP Leadership Response:  The USTP leadership agrees with the principle behind the statement above.

Proposal RNS-1. “The USTP can conduct its own investigations into matters affecting members on a case by case basis, as determined by a vote of the membership, and under the following limitations.”

USTP Leadership Response: Requiring a vote of the members before conducting an internal investigation may have several undesirable consequences. First, if there is an action whose damaging effect is swiftly forthcoming, then the procedural steps required for a vote to be conducted may well come about much later than the damage has already been done. Second, it is often possible to investigate certain matters discreetly without damage to the reputation of the person(s) being investigated. Once a pending investigation is publicly announced and put to a vote of the members, the members are placed in the position of (1) knowing that there is an alleged transgression or set of transgressions, and (2) deciding whether a given person or persons is sufficiently likely to be guilty of that alleged transgression or set of transgressions so as to be investigated. This in itself can damage the reputation of the person(s) being investigated, even if the investigation ultimately clears them of any wrongdoing. Having at least a preliminary private process of examining any actions within the USTP would be beneficial in enabling the vast majority of potential issues to be identified and resolved without such reputational damage, and any issues brought before the members would be of such an egregious nature that private means did not suffice to resolve them.

Proposal RNS-1. “Investigators must be impartial with no personal or professional connection to any of the parties involved in the investigation (accusers, the accused, or other individuals of interest sought for questioning in the investigation). Professional connections include but aren’t limited to current or former employees, advisors, board members, and interns for the person or organization under investigation as well as direct competitors of any party under investigation (you can’t investigate your competition). If an impartial investigator cannot be obtained, either from inside or outside our membership, then the investigation must be abandoned.”

USTP Leadership Response: The transhumanist community is small enough, and collaborations on projects by transhumanists are frequent enough, that it is difficult to find any person in the community who does not have a personal or professional connection of some sort with most others in the community. The proposal above also describes the possibility of an outside investigator; however, the outside investigator would likely need to be paid, and the USTP is an organization with extremely limited resources. Furthermore, the limitations above would create de facto immunity for someone who develops such extensive personal and/or professional connections that anyone who could possibly competently investigate that person would be precluded from doing so because of such connections.

Proposal RNS-1. “Internal investigations should not be intended to replace outside investigations and should be limited to how the incident under investigation impacts operation of the USTP. Consequences sought after the conclusion of the investigation shall be limited to administrative action available within the USTP.”

USTP Leadership Response: The USTP already has a process for actions to be taken in response to violations of our Guidelines for Community Conduct. That process does not require an independent investigation, which generally would be too time-consuming to address the most typical kinds of violations, which are at once blatant, public, and quick to have their effects. Thus, if the only consequences are any “administrative action available within the USTP”, then the internal investigation becomes an unnecessary instrument. 

Proposal RNS-1. “The USTP does not have the power to require action or consequences be made by outside organizations.”

USTP Leadership Response: While the USTP, as a practical matter, indeed cannot require another organization to take an action, the USTP does have the ability to express an opinion regarding the actions taken by any other organization and whether or not such actions align with the values and goals of the USTP, as well as whether or not such actions are beneficial to the transhumanist movement or are meritorious more generally. As an organization with definite views and definite outlooks on a large number of issues, projects, and people, the USTP is surely within its rights to express its points of view and, when needed, urge that certain courses of action be taken by other organizations and individuals. The USTP does not have the power to compel those courses of action, but expressing silence on matters that are likely to influence the future of the transhumanist movement is not advisable if by speaking out the USTP is able to make a difference in shaping public opinion.

Proposal RNS-1. “The purpose of the internal investigation shall be made known to the members with a summary of alleged offenses and what questions the investigation seeks to answer. This must be done in a professional manner, excluding personal opinion and potential bias.”

USTP Leadership Response:  Again, doing this may actually create unduly unfavorable impressions of the person(s) being investigated before the investigation is complete. There could be many conceivable cases in which, if an investigation is undertaken, those being investigated would actually prefer that the investigation be done privately and discreetly, at least as an initial approach.

***

Proposal RNS-2. “When declaring an emergency the USTP leadership must publicly announce what the emergency is, why waiting to act would cause immediate increased harm, and the intended course of action sought by the USTP. ”

USTP Leadership Response: The USTP leadership does not oppose the practice of making such a public announcement and will endeavor to do so in the future.

Proposal RNS-2. “This course of action must not deviate from, or spread beyond, the scope of the incident. Meaning any intended action must be clearly and directly related to the emergency.”

USTP Leadership Response: It would seem to be common sense that actions to address an emergency should be related to that emergency. However, there are circumstances where it may be a matter of interpretation whether a particular action is “clearly and directly related to the emergency” or somehow “deviates from” or “spreads beyond” it. If questioned on a particular action, the USTP leadership should be able to provide an explanation of its relationship to the emergency, and that explanation should be given deference unless it is completely nonsensical by any reasonable person’s interpretation.

Proposal RNS-2. “An emergency shall be defined as an unexpected and immediate threat or active instance of the following, pending member further recommendations and approval by membership vote […]”

USTP Leadership Response: The process of arranging a member vote is generally too logistically intense and time-consuming to be feasibly undertaken in cases of a genuine emergency, where swift action is required. It is possible to take a member poll after the fact of a particular major action, to determine whether or not the active portion of the membership agrees with the action that was taken. This was done, for instance, in response to the U.S. Transhumanist Party Statement of Support for Aubrey de Grey, where a member poll shows, as of October 16, 2021, 42 of the 58 members voting (72.4%) expressing agreement with the statement, 10 (17.2%) expressing disagreement, and 6 (10.3%) expressing no opinion or a neutral position. However, in a genuine emergency, such member polling should be done only when there is sufficient reprieve from the pressing need to respond to events that the poll could be accommodated without compromising the ability to actually address the emergency.

Proposal RNS-2. “Threat to life or public safety (threats to life extension shall NOT be included unless the emergency threatens an individual placed in preservation prior to the emergency, such as cryogenics)“.

USTP Leadership Response: Threats to the future and reputation of the life-extension movement and the prospect of attaining radical life extension within our lifetimes should indeed be considered grounds for declaring an emergency, particularly when such threats pertain to the possible derailment of the life-extension cause through hostile characterizations within the court of public opinion. The USTP leadership reminds members that the immutable Core Ideal 1 of the USTP is that “The Transhumanist Party supports significant life extension achieved through the progress of science and technology.” Any act, behavior, allegation, or decision which threatens the fulfillment of Core Ideal 1 and where the USTP has even a possibility of averting the threat through a swift and decisive response, should indeed be subject to potential treatment as an emergency.

Proposal RNS-2.

“Natural disaster
Humanitarian crisis
Credible acts of violence
Direct malicious attack, physical or digital, of USTP property”

USTP Leadership Response: The USTP leadership agrees that these would be valid reasons to declare an emergency.

Proposal RNS-2. “Theft of USTP funds from an official account totaling over X% of the last known balance and more than $X. (Amounts to be decided based on current and future potential needs before vote)”

USTP Leadership Response: The USTP does not currently hold an official account for funds, so this is not a situation that can arise at this time. However, in the future, if any theft were undertaken, this would be grounds for declaring an emergency if necessary. It is not clear why a threshold for doing so is proposed here, as any misappropriation of funds should be able to be dealt with swiftly and effectively.

Proposal RNS-2. “It shall not include:

  • Personal scandal
  • Delays in research
  • Matters of outside businesses or organizations“

USTP Leadership Response: The USTP leadership considers these exclusions to essentially negate any power to declare an emergency. Manufactured personal scandal is one of the easiest tactics to use in today’s cultural and social-media environment in order to damage a person’s career, livelihood, and reputation, without having sufficient evidence to do so within the criteria of any formal legal system. Tying the USTP leadership’s hands in such situations only lends additional power to those who would seek to deploy such a reprehensible tactic with impunity. Delays in research that affects life extension could be a matter of life or death for many transhumanists, and also contravene Core Ideal 1 of the U.S. Transhumanist Party; the USTP leadership should have the authority to endeavor to overcome such delays through all efficacious means, particularly by shaping public opinion if the roadblocks to the research’s continuation are cultural and attitudinal. Furthermore, if “outside businesses or organizations” engage in conduct that materially affects the future of the transhumanist movement, including public perception of transhumanism and life extension, then removing the ability of the USTP to comment on such conduct would simply remove the USTP from the ability to influence such public perception, leaving such influence solely to others, including those hostile to our movement. The USTP leadership does not understand why our organization should intentionally handicap itself when our movement’s detractors intend to do no such thing and have only escalated their attacks as the movement has been reaching various milestones of success.

Proposal RNS-2. “An emergency can only be declared in cases where delayed action would clearly cause increased harm based on the available evidence. If the emergency action is to take longer than 14 days, then it requires further approval by a vote of the membership.”

USTP Leadership Response: Again, criteria such as “clearly cause increased harm based on the available evidence” would be subject to interpretation, and a member who disagrees with the USTP leadership’s judgment as to what is likely to cause harm may then invoke such a clause to assert a veto power over USTP leadership’s actions. The 14-day threshold for a membership vote is unreasonably short, as most membership votes have historically taken longer than 14 days if one considers the prior exposure period alone, but the vote itself should also be open for a reasonably long amount of time to give any member who wishes to vote the opportunity to do so. If this is followed in the circumstances of an emergency, chances are that the rapid events, to which the USTP would need to respond, would have already taken their toll in the form of the undesirable consequences that may occur in the absence of USTP action.  Furthermore, the timing of the resolution of the emergency is contingent on a variety of external events and decisions over which the USTP leadership has no control; however, the USTP leadership can anticipate and has previously experienced situations where pressing situation can last far beyond 14 days, if, for instance, there is a standoff among the individuals and external organizations involved, or if the publication of information related to the matter in question is expected to be spread out over a longer time period (even as social-media commentary on the same matter and its consideration within the court of public opinion continue unabated). 

Proposal by Zach Richardson

Proposal ZR-1.

Proposal in Support of Decisive Executive Action in Times of Emergency:

When executive action is required in the face of a serious threat, the Chairman must have the authority to act decisively.

This proposal reasserts the Chairman’s authority to act decisively in defense of individuals, groups, or organizations by expressing the delegated support of the Party for the individual, group, or organization under assault.  The Chairman retains the authority to advocate for those individuals, groups, or organizations whose goals align with those of the Party. The Chairman is not required to seek the approval of a majority of the party membership to act on behalf of the party, nor does he have to provide justification for his support.

The authority of the Chairman to act on behalf of the party is not intended to supersede the authority of the Party to determine the Party’s position on a particular issue, nor is it intended to diminish the responsibility of the Party to take a position on a particular issue.

The Chairman will retain the authority to act on behalf of the Party, at his or her own discretion, to advocate on behalf of the Party and its members in the event of an emergency, defined as any event that may significantly impact the realization of the goals of the Party as outlined in the Platform.

The Party will seek to continuously empower the Chairman to act on behalf of its members by codifying his/her authority to do so in a manner that is consistent with the principles and standards of the Party, and is consistent with the existing authority of the Party to advocate on behalf of its members as a whole.

The Chairman is empowered to act as the Party’s representative, and to make statements on behalf of the Party, to the media and the public, to advocate on behalf of any individual, group or organization that supports the Party and its Platform, its members and the Party’s philosophy, goals and objectives, to promote the Party’s agenda, candidates and policies, and to respond to attacks on the Party, or on its members, allies or affiliates.

The Chairman has the ability to designate individuals and organizations as “allies” of the Party at his or her discretion, and to permit such “allies” to represent themselves to the public and the media as “allies” and “members” of the Party. Such “allies” are encouraged but not required to support the Platform.

Party members may not seek to compel the Chairman to retract any statement made on behalf of the Party or its allies, affiliates or members; nor may any Party member seek to compel the Chairman to retract any statement made on behalf of the Party or its allies, affiliates, or members by anyone who was so designated by the Chairman.

The Chairman and any of his designees shall ensure the following:

  1. The Party is adequately represented in all communications with the public and the media. In some cases, it may be appropriate to have two or more representatives from the Party speak on behalf of the Party.
  2. The Party is able to provide key information to the public and the media in a timely manner, through press releases, interviews, and particularly social media commentary.
  3. The Party is able to have a significant and positive impact on the outcome or resolution of the emergency.
  4. The Party is able to respond to attacks on the Party, or on any of its members, allies, or affiliates.

If any Party member seeks to compel the Chairman to retract any statement made on behalf of the Party, or its allies, affiliates or members, or any statement made on behalf of the Party by anyone who was designated an ally by the Chairman, the Chairman may assert that the member in question is acting in violation of the Party’s principles and its standards.

The Party pledges to empower the Chairman in a manner that is consistent with the principles and standards of the Party, and is consistent with the existing authority of the Party to advocate on behalf of its members and its Platform. The Party further pledges to make every effort to ensure that the Party, its members, and the Chairman are able to advocate for the Party and its members on a permanent and eternal basis.

It is in the interest of the Party to remain relevant, not only to the Party itself, but to the public, and it is in the spirit of that interest in which the Party empower the Chairman.

The Party therefore pledges to make a good-faith effort to ensure that the Chairman has the opportunity to respond to attacks on the Party, or on any of its members, allies, or affiliates, and finally to ensure that the Chairman is able to engage in the activities described in this proposal on a permanent and hopefully indefinite basis.

Feedback on Zach Richardson’s Proposals by USTP Leadership

The USTP leadership concurs with Proposal ZR-1 from Zach Richardson. Recent events have shown that the transhumanist movement is coming under increasing attack just as it is achieving new milestones in terms of publicity and acquisition of financial resources. We live in a make-or-break moment, not just for human civilization more generally, but for the transhumanist and life-extension movements in particular. It is essential for USTP leadership to have the authority to respond in defense of the values, people, and organizations which the USTP has always supported since its founding, even as those values, people, and organizations come under an unprecedented number of coordinated and insidious attacks. If we bind ourselves by excessive process, but our adversaries do not, then we set ourselves up to lose. If, however, we are able to act swiftly to resolve situations of emergency, this will afford more time to calmly and deliberatively approach most matters under the USTP’s purview, including the ability to organize more member votes on various matters if leadership’s attention is not continually occupied with how to address time-sensitive emergencies in the “procedurally correct” way. Our movement is under attack today, and we need to defend it today. In coming years and epochs, we will be thankful that we did.

The Curative Education and Research Initiative (CERI) – Proposal by R. Nicholas Starr

The Curative Education and Research Initiative (CERI) – Proposal by R. Nicholas Starr

Comments 4 comments

R. Nicholas Starr

Editor’s Note: The U.S. Transhumanist Party (USTP) has published this view by our member R. Nicholas Starr in order to invite discussion on the issues he raises, although the USTP Platform does not endorse his proposal to tax religious institutions at this time. Indeed, the USTP Platform, in Section XXXVI, states that “The United States Transhumanist Party supports the elimination of graduated taxation and income taxation more generally. Instead, the United States Transhumanist Party advocates a flat percentage-of-sales tax applicable only to purchases from businesses whose combined nationwide revenues from all affiliates exceed a specified threshold. This tax should be built into the price of goods from such large businesses and should not impede transaction efficiency in any manner. Transactions pertaining to wages, salaries, gifts, donations, barter, employee benefits, and inheritances should remain completely untaxed, as should transactions involving solely individuals and/or small businesses, for whom the establishment of a tax-reporting infrastructure would be onerous. Furthermore, all taxes on land and property should be abolished.” An income tax on religious institutions, which primarily derive their income from donations, would be a tax on donations that the USTP Platform does not support. Moreover, it would create the need for a new tax-reporting infrastructure, and the USTP Platform tends toward the opposite approach of leveraging the reporting capabilities that already exist to create a seamless tax system that is barely noticed by ordinary people as they go about their daily lives. Furthermore, in Sections XX and XXV of its Platform, the USTP indicates support for religious tolerance and openness to religious individuals who may be receptive to technological progress and therefore may be valued allies and participants in the transhumanist movement. While we agree with Mr. Starr that additional science education and improved scientific literacy among the population would be highly beneficial, we would invite discussion of other ways in which it might be achieved. Also, we would invite any religious transhumanists to respond to Mr. Starr’s article with their own perspectives. 

~ Gennady Stolyarov II, Chairman, United States Transhumanist Party, December 27, 2020

The Curative Education and Research Initiative (CERI)

Religion is the father of all existential risk. To reverse its damage, I propose a 2.5% federal income tax on religious institutions to fund public school education and scientific research. Support for this can be found throughout the USTP Platform, but specifically Sections II, VII, XII, and XXXII.

America needs more science! Not just “traditional” sciences like biology or chemistry, but social sciences and their companion the arts as well. And while the USTP has identified many areas that are lacking scientific attention or funding, we should also address scientific illiteracy, and even resentment, in the United States. New research means very little if the average American does not understand the research, results, or how it benefits them and the rest of humanity.

The US also needs to improve research and public education of social sciences. Anthropology and sociology are relegated to fringe college courses when it should help form the core of American education system. Cultural ignorance and hatred restrict the free exchange of ideas and thus future research needs. And when elementary schools glorify figures like Christopher Columbus and marginalize the indigenous people he and those who came after him oppressed, how can we expect society to move forward?

All Americans need to come together to plan for and fight against any number of issues and existential threats that science is currently researching or that may arise in the future. Racism and societal intolerance not only affect the free exchange of ideas, but also stifle research of problems in specific communities that many Americans deem “undesirable” and not worthy of study (drugs, sex work).

The biggest existential threat to humanity isn’t climate change, racism, or nuclear war. The greatest threat is the mindset that begat them. When “God” gave dominion over the planet to man, the church set climate change in motion. When holy texts tell their faction they are superior to the others, this creates habits of oppression and subjugation. In short, humanity is still paying for the fiction turned perceived fact created millennia ago. The time for it to end is now.

Science is the silver bullet to ignorance and superstition. A well-educated public gets us there.

To fund this initiative I propose a 2.5% tax on religious institutions to fund public-school education and scientific research. Payment of this tax does not grant any new access from churches into schools (school prayer, previously excluded religious clubs, proselytizing, recruitment, etc.), input or direction of scientific research being funded by these taxes, or any previously prohibited religious involvement in government. The purpose of this tax is to fund programs that benefit all people living in the United States, as decided by the scientific data, and advance social and scientific understanding in the classroom and in every day life.

Why tax religious institutions?

  • Religion in America is a 1.2-trillion-dollar untaxed industry. A 2.5% tax would add $30 billion annually in federal tax revenue. Note: enforcing property taxes on all religious institutions would provide approximately $500 billion.
  • Tax breaks for religious institutions is a form of government subsidy. This forces all tax-paying Americans to support the church regardless of their religious beliefs.
  • Religious organizations have a long history of prohibiting or stifling scientific research, something that continues to this day (e.g., with stem cells).
  • Religious organizations claim to financially support charity work, but there is no mandate to do so or requirement for how much is spent on charitable efforts. Additionally, what each organization considers charity may be detrimental to marginalized communities (LGBTQ conversion camps) and humanity internationally (missionary work overseas, historical support of slavery).
  • Religious institutions have been, and continue to be, safe havens for misogyny, racism, intolerance, and violence. They owe a debt to society for the harm caused.

What should be funded with this money

  • Public education (current federal education budget is $64 billion)
    • Science
    • Social Studies
    • Arts
  • Federal entities for science and the arts
    • National Science Foundation (NSF – current budget of $8.3 billion)
    • National Institutions of Health (NIH – current budget of $39 billion)
    • National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA – current budget of $22.6 billion)
    • National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA – current budget of $5.35 billion)
    • National Endowment for the Arts (NEA – current budget of $162 million)

As the primary objective of this proposal is to improve public education, it should be required that the largest sum of money should be put into public schools. However due to ever-changing financial needs, how this money is split shall be redetermined every two years by the legislative body. These numbers are based on the federal budget, but should this proposal be modified and adopted for state use, funding shall be sent to public education and scientific organizations that provide similar services as those noted above to the state.

This is controversial proposal. But it is also a modest tithe that can do a lot of good to change the country, and the world, for the better. Our country has gone above and beyond when it comes to supporting religious institutions and their members while asking for nothing but promises in return. It is time for these organizations to support the whole public.

Ryan Starr (R. Nicholas Starr) is a member of the U.S. Transhumanist Party and the founder of the Transhumanist Party of Colorado. 

Video of Cyborg and Transhumanist Forum at the Nevada State Legislature – May 15, 2019

Video of Cyborg and Transhumanist Forum at the Nevada State Legislature – May 15, 2019

Comments 0 Comment

Gennady Stolyarov II
Anastasia Synn
R. Nicholas Starr

Watch the video containing 73 minutes of excerpts from the Cyborg and Transhumanist Forum, held on May 15, 2019, at the Nevada State Legislature Building.

The Cyborg and Transhumanist Forum at the Nevada Legislature on May 15, 2019, marked a milestone for the U.S. Transhumanist Party and the Nevada Transhumanist Party. This was the first time that an official transhumanist event was held within the halls of a State Legislature, in one of the busiest areas of the building, within sight of the rooms where legislative committees met. The presenters were approached by tens of individuals – a few legislators and many lobbyists and staff members. The reaction was predominantly either positive or at least curious; there was no hostility and only mild disagreement from a few individuals. Generally, the outlook within the Legislative Building seems to be in favor of individual autonomy to pursue truly voluntary microchip implants. The testimony of Anastasia Synn at the Senate Judiciary Committee on April 26, 2019, in opposition to Assembly Bill 226, is one of the most memorable episodes of the 2019 Legislative Session for many who heard it. It has certainly affected the outcome for Assembly Bill 226, which was subsequently further amended to restore the original scope of the bill and only apply the prohibition to coercive microchip implants, while specifically exempting microchip implants voluntarily received by an individual from the prohibition. The scope of the prohibition was also narrowed by removing the reference to “any other person” and applying the prohibition to an enumerated list of entities who may not require others to be microchipped: state officers and employees, employers as a condition of employment, and persons in the business of insurance or bail. These changes alleviated the vast majority of the concerns within the transhumanist and cyborg communities about Assembly Bill 226.

 

From left to right: Gennady Stolyarov II, Anastasia Synn, and Ryan Starr (R. Nicholas Starr)

This Cyborg and Transhumanist Forum comes at the beginning of an era of transhumanist political engagement with policymakers and those who advise them. It was widely accepted by the visitors to the demonstration tables that technological advances are accelerating, and that policy decisions regarding technology should only be made with adequate knowledge about the technology itself – working on the basis of facts and not fears or misconceptions that arise from popular culture and dystopian fiction. Ryan Starr shared his expertise on the workings and limitations of both NFC/RFID microchips and GPS technology and who explained that cell phones are already far more trackable than microchips ever could be (based on their technical specifications and how those specifications could potentially be improved in the future). U.S. Transhumanist Party Chairman Gennady Stolyarov II introduced visitors to the world of transhumanist literature by bringing books for display – including writings by Aubrey de Grey, Bill Andrews, Ray Kurzweil, Jose Cordeiro, Ben Goertzel, Phil Bowermaster, and Mr. Stolyarov’s own book “Death is Wrong” in five languages. It appears that there is more sympathy for transhumanism within contemporary political circles than might appear at first glance; it is often transhumanists themselves who overestimate the negativity of the reaction they expect to receive. But nobody picketed the event or even called the presenters names; transhumanist ideas, expressed in a civil and engaging way – with an emphasis on practical applications that are here today or due to arrive in the near future – will be taken seriously when there is an opening to articulate them.

The graphics for the Cyborg and Transhumanist Forum were created by Tom Ross, the U.S. Transhumanist Party Director of Media Production.

Become a member of the U.S. Transhumanist Party / Transhuman Party free of charge, no matter where you reside.

References

• Gennady Stolyarov II Interviews Ray Kurzweil at RAAD Fest 2018

• “A Word on Implanted NFC Tags” – Article by Ryan Starr

• Assembly Bill 226, Second Reprint – This is the version of the bill that passed the Senate on May 23, 2019.

• Amendment to Assembly Bill 226 to essentially remove the prohibition against voluntary microchip implants

• Future Grind Podcast

• Synnister – Website of Anastasia Synn

This Was No Victory – Article by R. Nicholas Starr

This Was No Victory – Article by R. Nicholas Starr

Comments 1 comment

R. Nicholas Starr

Editor’s Note: The U.S. Transhumanist Party / Transhuman Party has published this dissenting view by our member R. Nicholas Starr, in response to the USTP’s efforts to mitigate the harms of the proposal in Nevada’s Assembly Bill 226 (AB226) to ban participation in voluntary programs for the implantation of microchips. The USTP issued a statement regarding the success of our efforts here. We would recommend that our members read both the USTP’s statement and Mr. Starr’s dissenting point of view and arrive at their own thoughts as to the extent to which, if any, AB226, as amended, would continue to pose barriers, risks, and/or inconveniences to research efforts and attempts at personal self-improvement through technology which the USTP wholly supports. It is also noteworthy that AB226 has not yet been enacted into law. It will still need to come before a vote of the full Assembly Floor Session, after which the bill would move to the Senate, where a public hearing and a Senate Judiciary Committee work session would need to be held before a full Senate vote. The public hearing in the Senate would be the opportunity of those with remaining concerns to testify on AB226. Furthermore, the Nevada Legislature website allows members of the public to submit their opinions about specific bills, and it is also possible to contact Assemblyman Richard “Skip” Daly,  the sponsor of AB226, as well as the Assembly Judiciary Committee and the Senate Judiciary Committee to express one’s views. AB226 can also be monitored on NELIS, the Nevada Legislature’s online informational system.

~ Gennady Stolyarov II, Chairman, United States Transhumanist Party, March 17, 2019

TL;DR- Nevada still intends to ban voluntary NFC/RFID implants.

On March 15, 2019, the USTP claimed victory against legislation intended to ban all “microchip” implants. And while our last-minute action produced a result, it wasn’t one of any substance. If anything we fell victim to smart political wordsmithing, and I guess we’re supposed to be happy about that.

Nevada AB226 is a bill that, when it was first introduced, banned forced implantation of RFID/NFC tags, which they like to call microchips. On March 4th the bill’s original author, Skip Daly (D – Sparks), added an amendment banning voluntary implantation as well. This bill went to an Assembly Work Session on March 15th, where the amendment was modified, accepted, and passed out of Committee for vote on a later date. But to be clear, the modification of the amendment did nothing to stop a ban on voluntary NFC/RFID implants. Let’s examine the new language, which is contained in Subsection 3.

3. For the purposes of this section “microchip implant” means a near field communication technology that allows wireless communication of electronic devices over short distances where the device is intended to act as an identification marker.
(a) The term does not include any non-transmitting device, implant or marking for medical or for self-expression purposes or;
(b) Any transmitting medical device or implant provided the transmitting medical device or implant is not used as an identification marker and records or sends only the information necessary to carry out the primary purpose of the transmitting medical device or implant.

At the top of this section we see their definition for a microchip implant; that’s a pretty standard definition. The exception for medical devices in paragraph (b) also seems fairly well-thought-out and provides no issues. Subsection A is where the problem lies. It clarifies an exemption for NON-TRANSMITTING devices, implants, or other markers for medical or self expression purposes. Why are we talking about non-transmitting implants in a bill that is specifically about transmitting implants?

It’s a clever attempt by the author to placate naysayers with something that looks like a concession, if you skim past key words. And judging by the reaction of many over the past several days, it worked. The State of Nevada doesn’t have a problem with voluntary implants that don’t transmit anything. Just visit any strip club in the state if you want graphic proof of that. What is a non-transmitting implant? Breast augmentation, silicone horns, transdermal piercings… you get the idea. Inert stuff that we have been shoving under our skin for aesthetic purposes for a very long time now. These are all already legal and have their own regulations. They didn’t need to be included in the bill. The only purpose of adding this “exception” was to distract from the fact that they still want to ban implantable RFID/NFC tags.

And lots of transhumanists have these tags, myself included! We get these tags because they transmit a signal, given power by a reader, to complete various tasks. Many of us in the Party are actively using and developing this technology, and on March 15 the Party failed them – not for valiantly trying to stop the amendment, but for claiming victory over meaningless words that changed nothing. This was not a victory, and I’m embarrassed that anyone would say so. We got played.

But you know what? This does prove something that every transhumanist should consider. Providing remarks during public comment is not enough. We need active politicians who can use legislative tools and face-to-face debate to identify and stop attempts to placate us with empty words. Force them to look at the facts and stop them from doing damage to an individual’s freedom, especially in fear-based preemptive bills like this. To take a step in that direction, I have developed a Proposal to Establish a Legislative Action Framework on which I encourage input from our members.

Ryan Starr (R. Nicholas Starr) is a member of the U.S. Transhumanist Party / Transhuman Party and the founder of the Transhumanist Party of Colorado. 

Proposal to Establish a Legislative Action Framework – Post by R. Nicholas Starr

Proposal to Establish a Legislative Action Framework – Post by R. Nicholas Starr

Comments 5 comments

R. Nicholas Starr

In light of recent legislative action pursued by the United States Transhumanist Party (USTP), and the urgent need for response on a topic that could have been identified much earlier, I propose the establishment of a legislation tracking and analysis structure as detailed below. The goal is not necessarily to write new legislation (we have no members currently serving in government positions), but to act as a think tank or watchdog organization as legislation is presented in federal or state governments.

Core requirements:

  • Compilation of a comprehensive topic/keyword database, sorted into issue groups
    • If possible, the creation of a legislative keyword tracking program made available to analysts in a cross platform or web-based architecture
  • A chain of command detailing positions and the responsibilities their responsibilities 

Chain of Command

Chairman
|
Legislative Director ————> Expert Advisors
^
/
  Issue Analysts

Issues may include, but are not limited to:

• Artificial Intelligence
• Biohacking hardware
• Biomedical research and practical application
• Computer and data sciences
• Education
• Environment and ecology
• Existential risk
• Foreign policy
• Life extension
• Privacy, surveillance, and security
• Robotics
• Science and exploration

Keywords shall be gathered for each issue, and analysts should be provided with a thorough and frequently updated list from which to search all available resources (legislation trackers, search engines, government databases, etc.). Eventually, understanding the massive amount of work this would require, we should develop our own legislation tracking system to streamline operations and increase effectiveness.

The Legislative Director would ideally have a background in law/policy making. It would be the responsibility of the Legislative Director to inform the Chairman of all relevant legislation on a state and federal level as provided by analysts or personal observation. It would also be the Legislative Director’s responsibility to identify national policy trends and make suggestions for yearly priorities. The Legislative Director should, when necessary, reach out to our expert Advisors as listed on the USTP Advisors page.

Analysts would ideally have knowledge of/passion for the issues they desire to monitor. There should be no limit to how many analysts cover any particular issue, and individual analysts can cover multiple issues if they desire. Before an analyst submits a legislative report to the Legislative Director, they must provide a link to the legislation and try to answer the following:

  • How urgent is the matter?
    • Could this cause harm to an individual’s physical/mental health or civil rights?
  • Which article of our Platform does this pertain to?
    • If none, please explain its relevance. 
  • Does this apply to other issue groups?
  • What do you propose the Party do?
    • Provide evidence to support your position.

Many of these issues will overlap each other, which is ideal, as it may provide different analyst perspectives on a particular issue. Many of these issues may also have other prominent organizations (ACLU, EFF) that may be better equipped to address a particular issue. In such cases it is important that we identify to what extent the topic impacts our platform and whether or not it relates to future technology/advancements or present-day capabilities.

This is by no means an exhaustive recommendation, and the nature of this body should be flexible to meet the USTP’s current and future needs. Please provide your comments, recommendations, and criticisms below.

Ryan Starr (R. Nicholas Starr) is a member of the U.S. Transhumanist Party / Transhuman Party and the founder of the Transhumanist Party of Colorado. 

Head in the Clouds – Article by R. Nicholas Starr

Head in the Clouds – Article by R. Nicholas Starr

Comments 0 Comment

logo_bg

R. Nicholas Starr

Editor’s Note: The U.S. Transhumanist Party has published this perspective from R. Nicholas Starr as part of the ongoing discussion about the interaction of transhumanism with other ideological frameworks, such as libertarianism and socialism. Prior perspectives in this discussion include Zoltan Istvan’s article, “Transhumanism is Under Siege from Socialism“, and B.J. Murphy’s response, “Why the Transhumanist Movement Needs Socialism“. The U.S. Transhumanist Party remains committed to the principle of transpartisanship, which means we will neither embrace any conventional political ideology, nor distance ourselves from people who hold such ideologies but wish to constructively contribute to our endeavors. Nonetheless, our inextricable embeddedness in the world of contemporary political discourse does render unavoidable the discussion of these ideologies and any logical relationships and tensions. It is hoped that such discussions can proceed in a constructive manner whereby various perspectives can be expressed and perhaps result in some creative, unconventional solutions that would further expand our movement, rather than fracturing it, and establish grounds for fruitful collaboration on endeavors that advance the next great era of our civilization. 

Do you agree or disagree with Mr. Starr’s article? Post your thoughts in the Comments section below. 

~ Gennady Stolyarov II, Chairman, United States Transhumanist Party, July 29, 2018

TL;DR – If transhumanism is to grow and gain momentum, we need to distance ourselves from libertarian elitism, and Altered Carbon shows us why.

In Zoltan Istvan’s most recent article (1) he presents, in my opinion, a misguided argument on how the transhumanist movement is breaking from its libertarian roots and morphing into a hard-left socialist agenda. When did this partisan prerequisite appear, and how has the party changed?

Zoltan Istvan’s sensational 2016 Presidential campaign brought a lot of attention to transhumanism. If it weren’t for his dramatic tour across America in a coffin bus, preaching about immortality, morphological freedom, and other transhumanist virtues, we would have never attracted the large diversity of members to the party we have today. With the vision of using science and technology to improve the human condition, we have come together to lift humanity up, not to pull it to the left or right. To bring this vision to life, we need our leadership to embrace and act on the input of all members, not just the libertarian progenitors. This is something that current transhumanist party chairman Gennady Stolyarov II, the person Istvan himself selected to lead the party as he made his departure, has done a great job with. 

Since Stolyarov took the reins, he has created an environment where every member can voice an opinion and suggest policy planks. These planks are then voted on by the entire party, giving the members direct control over its course and message. If the party going in a different direction than before, it is because the members have made the informed decision to do so, and its leadership is acting on their votes. Suggesting that transhumanists reject member input because of a perceived socialist invasion is a slap in the face of the democratic process and deters prospective members. It’s also contrary to a science-based organization.

Perception is veiled in opinion and personal bias, and humans too easily fall into its many traps. But an organization building its platform on evidence-based policy needs to stick to hard data. The available information simply doesn’t support the notion that the goals of transhumanists are changing. An analysis of the party’s Constitution (2), which contains all voting data embedded within it, provides the only measurable data available, at least as far as the American organization is concerned. Simply reading opinion pieces from the handful of us with an outlet to do so isn’t enough to suggest a radical change is on the horizon. However what could be changing are the methods of achieving these goals. This can likely be attributed to the current sociopolitical climate. As a political organization working to improve lives, we need to tailor our message to show how a future-focused message can also address their needs for today. Failing to do so leads many to view transhumanism as out of touch.

We should also consider the impact of the radical life-extension platform, the preeminent transhuman subject, and how it impacts the narrative. To be blunt, transhumanists need to tone down the rhetoric on life extension. When a large portion of Americans can’t even afford basic healthcare or life-saving prescriptions, it is incredibly callous to suggest they should be investing in radical life extension. Modern medicine has already taken huge strides in extending human life anyways, and it will continue to do so. Anyone who ignores these two facts to proselytize immortality is begging to be made a fool. To then double down and suggest that billionaires will buy into the immortality market and save us all is callow and turns a blind eye to history. No wonder many fear that only the elite will achieve immortality. We’ve never shown them how it could be accessible to them. What they have seen are countless selfish acts by sci/tech industry leaders that tear down the average citizen while building up their bank accounts. 

Zuckerberg, Bezos, Shkreli, and Trump are all current documentable examples of how the ultra-rich have publicly exploited Americans for personal and professional gain. Consumers have every right to be skeptical of corporate motives when they have been given overwhelming evidence of wrongdoing by many in those positions. And while we certainly can’t paint every tycoon with the same brush, we also can’t blindly put our trust in them. It would be foolhardy to let a handful of CEOs determine the course of future civilization without deep analysis of every product and policy they create. The libertarian opinion that “the market” will some how regulate these corporations or “generous donations” will provide all the public needs is a fantasy, especially when it comes to bleeding-edge science, medicine, and technology. Pride, greed, and ego are too easy a pit to fall into when exploring uncharted territory. To combat this there must be unrelenting third-party accountability, lest we have a world led by Bancrofts with their Heads in the Clouds. 

Richard Morgan’s novel Altered Carbon provides a perfect allegory for this situation. The entire Bancroft family are precise examples of how many see transhumanism becoming. The novel depicts a world where the ultra-rich can live forever and act without impunity simply because they can afford to do so. Even more to the point, it shows us how the wealthy use philanthropy as a means to pad their own egos. Laurens Bancroft’s humanitarian efforts to assist the plague colony are nothing short of self-aggrandizing. Distributing blankets and candy are nice things to do for victims, but they do nothing to solve the actual problem of their illness. He’s so rich that he can even afford to repeatedly resleeve himself after making himself a martyr to their plight. Nevertheless he is worshipped as a god for doing this. He could surely afford to do so much more to end their suffering by bringing them out of the shadows to get 24-hour medical care until they find a cure, or even resleeve them entirely, but he has decided a minute’s smile on their faces is enough because it’s more than anyone else is doing. This is precisely how Americans today feel about tech moguls like Mark Zuckerberg or Jeff Bezos. They have made billions turning human beings into nothing more than data and dollars signs. But all is assumed forgiven when Zuckerberg announces he is funding a “biohub” in San Francisco, a city where a staggering yearly income of $105,000 is considered low-income and his own employees are asking for help with rent (3), to develop lifesaving tools. It doesn’t take much effort to determine that this is just another money-making venture, as these are all investments he expects a return on and not outright grants. And if the biohub is successful, who will be able to afford to us the products? Amazon’s Bezos has done even less, placating followers on Twitter (4), only to turn around and bully the city of Seattle out of helping the homeless by the tune of 0.042% of Amazon’s yearly income (5,6). So when a libertarian says, “Don’t worry, the rich won’t let you down,” or “The market will correct this,” it immediately triggers justifiable skepticism and fear among the millions struggling to make ends meet. We shouldn’t hang the lives of millions on a hook of hopes and dreams. That isn’t how government, business, or real life work. A tangible and socially responsible plan is required. But while I think the fiscal libertarian position is folly, we do gain some positive aspects from libertarianism.

Social libertarianism is what I see transhumanism is truly built around. An inherent right to bodily autonomy and self-determination are the pillars that hold the rest of the transhumanist platform up. These also happen to be major components of liberal and 21st-century socialist politics. For example, reproductive rights and morphological freedom are born from the same philosophy. Free and accessible medical care enables life extension for all. Free and continued education is what allows the population to think critically and make informed decisions. We can’t create science-based policy if only a handful understand the science involved! So when self-appointed spokesmen claim that transhumanism isn’t compatible with left-wing goals because of an partisan line they drew in the sand, I have to seriously question their motives and good judgement. It’s divisive and counterproductive to positive change that any sociopolitical movement wishes to achieve. If we truly want to avoid the assorted dystopias science fiction has presented to us, then we must all heed the warnings and take actionable steps to mitigate the risk. If that falls into what some would call a socialist agenda, then fine. But for the record, I don’t see this as socialism; I see it as being an empathetic human being who wants to use science to help everyone. And that’s not a bad thing.

1- Istvan, Zoltan. “Transhumanism is Under Siege from Socialism“. July 18, 2018. Available at https://www.themaven.net/transhumanistwager/transhumanism/transhumanism-is-under-siege-from-socialism-UzA2xHZiFUaGOiUFpc0n5g/ 

2- U.S. Transhumanist Party Constitution. Available at https://transhumanist-party.org/constitution/ 

3- Bloom, Ester.”Here’s how much you have to make to be considered ‘low income’ in San Francisco“. May 12, 2017. Available at https://www.cnbc.com/2017/05/12/if-you-make-105000-in-san-francisco-youre-considered-low-income.html

4- Bezos, Jeff. “Request for ideas…” June 15, 2017. Available at https://twitter.com/jeffbezos/status/875418348598603776?s=21

5- Barrabi, Thomas. “What Seattle ‘head tax’ will cost Amazon”. May 15, 2017. Available at https://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/what-seattle-head-tax-will-cost-amazon

6- Alcula. Percentage Calculator. http://www.alcula.com/calculators/finance/percentage-calculator/

Thoughts on North Korean Diplomacy – Article by R. Nicholas Starr

Thoughts on North Korean Diplomacy – Article by R. Nicholas Starr

Comments 0 Comment

logo_bg

R. Nicholas Starr

Editor’s Note: The U.S. Transhumanist Party features this perspective from R. Nicholas Starr in accord with our strong opposition to weapons of mass destruction and to the threat of nuclear war – as, for instance, expressed in Section IV of our Platform. The U.S. Transhumanist Party thus welcomes the progress of negotiations that could considerably reduce the probability of a nuclear conflict between the United States and North Korea. 

~ Gennady Stolyarov II, Chairman, United States Transhumanist Party, June 13, 2018

I don’t like, trust, or support Trump. But his approach with North Korea might just work.

From 2004 to 2011 I was an intelligence analyst for the USAF. As such I spent a lot of time reading and briefing about North Korea, especially during my time stationed at Kadena AB, Okinawa, Japan. While most of my knowledge was focused on specific aspects and activities, if you spend enough time reading about a regime, you begin to get a sense of their point of view.

The US military spends a lot of time and money on preparing for a North Korean threat. Constant simulations on how to destroy the North are a provocation. How would you feel if someone was practicing the best way to destroy you, every year, for decades? Not only does it present a clear military threat, we must remember that there are innocent lives at risk – innocent people that live completely in the dark and don’t really know why these exercises happen, Just extremely limited information, often paired with editorial fear mongering, that is distributed through Rodong Sinmun. Any objective observer would notice that the years of sabre-rattling have not created peace, but exacerbated the issue. A promise to limit or completely end these exercises seems like a rational decision.

Treating Kim Jong-un as an equal also seems like the right thing to do. After all, he is the leader of his country, a country tired of fighting to justify its mere existence, regardless of how he stepped into the role. He isn’t his father or grandfather, even though there is significant pressure to be so. He is only playing the hand he was born into. So coming into a summit with a positive attitude towards Kim just might do the trick into diffusing international tension.

From Kim’s point of view, he likely feels weakened now that seismic activity, caused by his underground testing, has made his nuclear program unsustainable, and so he is looking to come out of the situation in the best way possible. He may also see that the work of his predecessors has not had the desired effect. Kim, much like Trump, might believe that a new course of action is necessary. So if Trump needs to lose some military and political leverage to make it happen, then fine.

HOWEVER, if Trump steps out of the strict lines of total peace toward North Korea, we risk a swift decline into war. And let’s face it, Trump has a history of saying one thing and doing the opposite. He also tells people exactly what they want to hear and does what he wants anyways. So the risk of breaking whatever agreement was made is high and very real. If ever there was a time for Trump to be honest, it is now, because Kim Jong-un will hold him to it. The fate of peace stands upon the edge of a knife. Stray but a little, and it will fail, to the ruin of all. I can’t imagine a better time for Tolkien’s wisdom than right now. This is the closest we have come to resolving the issue, and previous methods have proven ineffective. So maybe it’s worth a try.

Ryan Starr (R. Nicholas Starr) is the is the leader of the Transhumanist Party of Colorado and founder of the Transhumanists of the Sierras. 

Financing the Future – Article by R. Nicholas Starr

Financing the Future – Article by R. Nicholas Starr

Comments 1 comment

logo_bg

R. Nicholas Starr

Editor’s Note: As noted by the author, Mr. Starr, the U.S. Transhumanist Party publishes this article to motivate discussion on a topic where individual transhumanists have varying perspectives. In May 2017 the U.S. Transhumanist Party adopted the following position on taxation in its Platform in Article III, Section XXXVI, of its Constitution:

Section XXXVI [Adopted by a vote of the members during May 7-13, 2017]: The United States Transhumanist Party supports the elimination of graduated taxation and income taxation more generally. Instead, the United States Transhumanist Party advocates a flat percentage-of-sales tax applicable only to purchases from businesses whose combined nationwide revenues from all affiliates exceed a specified threshold. This tax should be built into the price of goods from such large businesses and should not impede transaction efficiency in any manner. Transactions pertaining to wages, salaries, gifts, donations, barter, employee benefits, and inheritances should remain completely untaxed, as should transactions involving solely individuals and/or small businesses, for whom the establishment of a tax-reporting infrastructure would be onerous. Furthermore, all taxes on land and property should be abolished.

~ Gennady Stolyarov II, Chairman, United States Transhumanist Party, February 6, 2018

Since 2016, the U.S. Transhumanist Party has expanded, both in membership and in policy initiatives. And while we have created an ideal foundation for how we want to change our country and our world, voting on ideas isn’t enough. We must take the next step making these ambitions a reality, and it is one step that many of us would rather avoid talking about: how do we pay for all of this?

Individual transhumanists come from all shades of the fiscal spectrum. Many believe that a techno-libertarian approach would be the best way to fund the transhumanist movement, while others look towards traditional taxation methods to provide the necessary capital. While there are many ways to skin this lab-grown bio-engineered pig, the Party as a singular entity needs to determine the best method for funding our lofty goals.

Allow me to make the first controversial suggestion.

The United States is, at this point, completely reliant on capitalism. So reliant, in fact, that we lean on it for political-decision making like the exoskeletons we hope to mass produce in the near future. It’s what holds this country up. And yet it is this political-economic system that is creating staggering wealth inequality. Corporations continue to grow massive wealth while the general public struggles to afford their products.

I propose reorganizing the tax structure so that corporations actually pay taxes and eliminate personal income taxes. By relieving this financial burden on the American citizen, it is possible to enable people to actually afford to improve their lives while increasing the amount of money running through the economy. Sadly, removing personal income tax is not enough, especially when you begin to consider that many employees will likely be replaced by automation. Simply put, corporate entities need pay up. They need to support the political system that supports them. But will that cause business to simply abandon the country all together? While technically possible, it seems unlikely. For as long as there are consumers in the country, business will always want to be located as close as possible to their target market.

There is also an option to modify the above recommendation. Automating the workforce comes with some financial burdens, this has been widely discussed. But there is another, less thought of, burden – that of computing power. How can large-scale automation be achieved without large-scale processing? So instead of shifting the tax burden entirely from individuals to businesses, we could establish a blockchain distribution of computing that businesses would pay individuals to use during times when your computer is otherwise idle. A modest portion would then be taxed to support the infrastructure that both the business and the individual are using. In essence, this is a Universal Basic Income that is supported by capitalism.

Is this an oversimplification of a complex issue? Yes. And I hope that the neglected details spark a healthy and productive discussion on the matter. This is just the opinion of one member, and not the position of the U.S. Transhumanist Party. I encourage every reader to give their thoughts on this difficult and divisive topic in the comments.

Ryan Starr (R. Nicholas Starr) is the is the leader of the Transhumanist Party of Colorado and founder of the Transhumanists of the Sierras. 

U.S. Transhumanist Party Discussion Panel on Art and Transhumanism

U.S. Transhumanist Party Discussion Panel on Art and Transhumanism

Comments 3 comments

logo_bg

Gennady Stolyarov II
Emanuel Iral
Rachel Lyn Edler
John Marlowe
R. Nicholas Starr
Leah Montalto
Kim Bodenhamer Smith
Laura Katrin Weston
Ekaterinya Vladinakova

On November 18, 2017, the U.S. Transhumanist Party invited leading artists in a variety of media and styles to a two-hour discussion, moderated by Chairman Gennady Stolyarov II and Director of Visual Art Emanuel Iral, on the subject of Art and Transhumanism, delving into how and which works of art can help inspire humans to pursue the next era of our civilization – through promoting the advancement of science and technology, rationality, and/or a more hopeful vision of the future. The panel also explored various interactions between art and technology and ways in which art can improve human connection and understanding, while also comprising the very improved functionality that emerging technologies provide.

Panelists

Emanuel Iral

Emanuel Iral is Director of Visual Art for the U.S. Transhumanist Party.

Emanuel’s artwork ranges from traditional paint and pencil work to 3D digital work. Currently he is working on his VFX and animation skills, as he is producing short films for his music. He encompasses his art under the term Prismatis – Latin for prism.  A prism refracts white light into the three primary colors: yellow, magenta, and cyan. Prismatis is all about the aesthetic of human expression, which can be separated into the art, audience, and artist.

Rachel Lyn Edler

RachelLyn Edler is an accomplished graphic designer with over 20 years of creative experience. Rachel comes from a diverse background of product development, packaging and web design. In her free time she volunteers for several scientific and secular organizations including the Planetary Society, Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason & Science and the Secular Coalition for America.

John Marlowe

John Marlowe was educated in film theory and trained in film production at UC Berkeley.  His outlook on film as a vehicle for social messaging has been largely influenced by his lifelong struggle with a genetic inborn error of metabolism, a type of disease that – until recently – was beyond the scope of medicine.  Consequently, John feels it is his onus to emphasize the artist’s responsibility in shaping the conversation regarding medical research, to create a society more amenable to scientific progress, rather than one fearful of change.

Leah Montalto

Leah Montalto is a painter based in New York City and has maintained a successfully operating painting studio in New York for the past 12 years.  Her paintings have been exhibited at the National Academy Museum of Fine Art in New York, and have been reviewed in the New York Times and the Providence Journal.  Leah’s paintings have received awards including the National Academy Museum of Fine Art’s Hallgarten Prize in Painting and the NYC Cultural Commission arts grant.  Leah is a former professor at Sarah Lawrence College, and has an MFA in Painting from Rhode Island School of Design.  Leah is not affiliated with the Transhumanist Party, but her paintings explore related themes.

Kim Bodenhamer Smith

Kim Bodenhamer Smith is a single mother of two boys living in Chattanooga, TN. She is a founding member of Southside Abbey, a Lay Missioner in The Episcopal Church, and an Outdoor Wear Business owner of Chilliheads. She is a caver, unicycler, and an aviation enthusiast and creator of #helichurch. She has a BFA in Metals and also studied Graphic Design and Political Science. *She also has many Tesla Tales to tell and is a Social Media Manipulator (different from a troll)!

R. Nicholas Starr

R. Nicholas Starr is an audio engineer and multimedia artist whose work focuses on Earth’s dystopias of past, present, and future. Also a biohacker, researcher, and theorist, he immerses himself in the subjects surrounding these worlds and has published several non-fiction articles and interviews. With an education in electronic signals intelligence from the United States Air Force, and 15 years of digital art and audio production in the US and abroad, he has become a unique voice for science fiction, the U.S. Transhumanist Movement, and American policy.

Ekaterinya Vladinakova

Ekaterinya Vladinakova is an accomplished digital painter and professional freelance illustrator. Vladinakova specializes in fantasy and science fiction work, but is also interested in editorial illustration. Vladinakova spends most of the day painting in Photoshop, creating scenes related to fantasy, or science fiction, as well as brushing up older works. Vladinakova’s paintings have been featured by the U.S. Transhumanist Party – including the “City of New Antideath” – a vision of the future which was commissioned for Mr. Stolyarov’s 30th Birthday.

Laura Katrin Weston

Dr Laura Katrin Weston is from England and studied Fine Art before going on to studying Medicine. She is a trained pathologist with a specialism in medical biochemistry and inflammation-related disease. She has used her medical knowledge and professional painting career to support Lifespan.io – one of the biggest life-extension research and advocacy charities. Laura is also vocalist for symphonic metal band Cyclocosmia – a music act that will be trying to raise awareness of transhumanist and human mortality issues in their next upcoming album.

The YouTube question/comment chat for this Q&A session has been archived here and is also provided below.

Visit the U.S. Transhumanist Party Facebook page here.

See the U.S. Transhumanist Party FAQ here.

Become a member of the U.S. Transhumanist Party for free, no matter where you reside.

Become a Foreign Ambassador for the U.S. Transhumanist Party.

…

Read More Read More

Interview with Dr. Akihiro Kubota by Ryan Starr

Interview with Dr. Akihiro Kubota by Ryan Starr

Comments 0 Comment

logo_bg

Ryan Starr
Akihiro Kubota

Preface: Art gives birth to scientific innovation.

In an effort to learn more about the historical origins of transhumanism and posthumanism, R. Nicholas Starr began a journey to look at the many topics popular within those communities and retraced them back to art. To continue the research he began to reach out to the artists and scientists at the forefront of exploring this relationship. While he continues to prepare his research for publication, he has decided to release the transcripts from these interviews in hopes to spark conversation and gather even more insight into how the creative mind has shaped our scientific world as we move past the limits of the human body.

R. Nicholas Starr is a multimedia artist, biohacker, researcher, and theorist. With an education in signals intelligence from the United States Air Force, and 20 years of experience creating art and performing music in the U.S. and abroad, he has become a unique voice for the U.S. Transhumanist Movement and American policy.

The second in this series is an interview with Dr. Akihiro Kubota from the Tama Art University, Tokyo, Japan. A special thanks to Phil Harry who assisted with the translations.

Quick note and disclaimer from the translator:

I am not a trained professional translator, and this is my first time translating something of this scope, so it may not be a perfect interpretation of the original author’s intended meaning.

 

–BEGIN QUESTIONS–

 

What are the critical processes required to create an artificial intelligence program that turns data into art?

重要なのは、AIが作品をつくれるか、ではなく、AIが鑑賞できるか、だと思っています。今日の美術にとって重要なのは、作品そのものよりもその文脈なので、鑑賞するということは、作品に多様な文脈を接続することで、それは現在のAIのフレームワーク例えば機械学習/強化学習でも可能だと考えています。

I think what’s crucial is not necessarily whether or not AI can make art, but rather whether or not AI can appreciate art. In art that’s being made today, what is even more important than the work itself, is the context of the work. In this sense artistic appreciation requires making connections between the various contexts of a work. I think the framework of modern AI, (through machine learning and reinforcement learning, etc.) allows for this to be possible.

 

How would the progression from assisted AI to autonomous AI impact AI’s artistic power?

文脈は、環境と知覚に依存するので、人間以外の知覚から生まれる新たな文脈はが、新たな芸術を生み出すでしょう。AIが人間のための芸術をつくることよりも、人間がAIのための芸術をつくることつくれるかがより重要な問題だと思います。

Because context relies heavily on environment and perception, the new contexts that arise from the perception of an entity that is other than human should lead naturally to the creation of new types of art. Rather than AI creating art for the sake of humans, I think a more important problem is the idea of humans creating art for the sake of AI, and whether or not that is possible.

 

By continuing research in AI-created art, what conclusions can we draw about sentience and sapience?

ノラ・ハラリが「ホモ・デウス」で予測するように、人間が「無用」になった時に、新たな時代が始まるのだと思います。「労働」や「学校」という概念から自由になりイヴァン・イリイチが主張したように美術や芸術の本来の役割が復活するでしょう。それこそが、人間本来の姿なのかもしれません。「ホモ・デウス」の時代の「無用層」の芸術、そこに人間の未来があります。

As Yuval Noah Harari predicts in Homo Deus, I think the point at which humans become “useless” will be the beginning of a new age. Once we are freed from the concepts of “school” and “labor” (as asserted by Ivan Illich), the original, essential role of the arts could make a revival – in effect, a revival of man’s essential nature. In the art of the “useless class”, proposed by Homo Deus’s new age – that is where the future of mankind resides.

 

Artificial intelligence is a concept that has its roots in literature and mythology. Now that AI can create its own art, have we created a mutual feedback loop?

ハラリの主張の重要なポイントは、「意識」と「知性」の分離が起こることですgreat decouplingAIで「意識」を作ろうとするのは無駄なことです。むしろ「知性」を「意識」から解放することで、「知性」を自由にすることが、大きな可能性を生み出します。擬人化という牢屋から知性を出してあげましょう。

The crucial point of Harari’s claim is the separation of “consciousness” and “intelligence” (the “Great Decoupling”) – the idea being that it is futile to attempt to create consciousness in AI. Rather, by unleashing the concept of intelligence from consciousness, this liberation will bring forth great possibilities. In this way I think we should reconsider how we think of intelligence and set it free from the confines of personification and anthropomorphization.

 

Is it possible to amplify or modify this feedback loop by interfacing AI directly with the human body?

人間が拡張することと、知性が自由になることは、本質的に無関係です。人間には理解できない知性があることを前提に、人は生きていかなければなりません。人間がAIの知性の進化を阻害することこそを懸念しなければなりません。

The advancement of mankind and the liberation of intelligence are essentially unrelated. People are going to have to get comfortable living under the assumption that there are types of intelligence that we can’t comprehend. Instead, what we should concern ourselves with is whether or not we are actively inhibiting the evolution of AI.

 

You previously acknowledged that the human body has the ability to adapt to, and capitalize on, a new bio-interface. With the current interest in neural lace and other cybernetic technology, how do you see humanity evolving after a several generations of use?

そうした中で、人間は人間としてその可能性を拡げていくことができるのか。僕は、人間はそれだけの柔軟性と可塑性を有していると思います。機械を人間に適合するのでなく、人間が機械に適合しようとすることで、その可能性を拡げていくことこそが、人間の未来を形作っていきます。

In addition to that, I wonder about the human capacity to expand on this ability. As it is, humans alone are endowed with the necessary flexibility and plasticity to do so. Rather than machines conforming to the needs of humans, by attempting to adapt to the machines, and expand our own capabilities, we will shape the future of mankind.

 

Do you predict our interactions changing with planet and space as a result?

今日の人間の一番の特徴は、個人の能力にあるのではなく、その数人口にあります。人間の「量」こそがポイントです。そういった意味からは、人間の「量」が地球自体に大きな影響を与えることは、不可避だと思います。地球の有限性が      顕在化したのです。

The greatest trait humans possess today is not our individual abilities, but our collective abilities. The emphasis here being on our “quantity” – meaning that the effect we collectively have on the very planet we live on is an inevitability. And we are beginning to see that the limits of our planet are being actualized.

 

A significant amount of your work focuses on satellite-based data collection. Why do you prefer this point of view?

芸術も科学と同様、常にフロンティア遠くを目指しています。パーソナルなテクノロジーで衛星を作れるようになった今、なぜそれを使って芸術をやらないのかARTSATプロジェクトは、極めて当たり前の行為芸術活動だと思っています。

Art and Science alike are on the cutting edge of new horizons, and constantly reaching into distant frontiers. Living in an age where we have the capabilities to create satellites using “personal technology”, using them to create art seems like a natural progression. So for me, the ARTSAT project is just an extremely obvious artistic endeavour to undertake.

 

You stated that the DESPATCH probe “composes and encodes poetry reflecting not only the sensor data but the artist’s subconscious personality”. Did the sculptural shape of DESPATCH influence the data collected and final tonal output?

最初に書いたように、芸術にとって重要なのは作品をつくることではなく、作品を鑑賞解釈することです。同じデータでも、10人の人が鑑賞すれば、そこの10個の異なる作品が生まれるのです。たとえ、受信データが単なるノイズであったとしても。

As I said before, when it comes to art, the most important thing is not the creation of a piece of artwork, but instead the aesthetic appreciation or the interpretation of the piece. In terms of DESPATCH, if you had ten different people looking at the same data, they would all interpret it in different ways, and thus give rise to ten separate pieces. And this is true even if the transmission signal’s data is merely background noise.

 

How can the average person create their own scientific lens to view and create art?

政治や経済、マスメディアがつくりだしている、虚構の人間観にとらわれず、人間本来の姿や可能性に気がつくことが必要です。労働から解放され、無用な存在になり、ゴーギャンのように『我々はどこから来たのか 我々は何者か 我々はどこへ行くのか』と問うことは、誰にでもできますし、誰もが行うべきことなのだと思います。そこには、制度としての「科学」も「芸術」も不要です。必要なのは「理性」と「知性」なのです。「感情」を偏重する今日の社会の危険性は、すでに多くの人が気づいていることだと思います。何とかしなければなりません。

Systems of government, economies, mass media, etc. – these are all man-made concepts. It is essential that we not be seized by these fabricated human perspectives in order to realize our essential nature and reach the limits of human potential. Once we are freed from the restraints of human toil and begin to occupy Harari’s “useless” existence, I think it will be possible and necessary for all people to wrestle with the existential questions put forth by Gaugin in “Where do we come from? What are we? And where are we going?”. It is in this space that the systems known as “science” and “art” will become unnecessary. What is important are “reason” and “intelligence”. I believe many people are already realizing the potential danger of overemphasizing the importance of “emotion” in today’s society, and I think we need to do something about that.

 

Ryan Starr (R. Nicholas Starr) is the is the leader of the Transhumanist Party of Colorado and founder of the Transhumanists of the Sierras. 

See Dr. Akihiro Kubota’s page of teaching achievements and activities here.

A Word on Implanted NFC Tags – Article by Ryan Starr

A Word on Implanted NFC Tags – Article by Ryan Starr

Comments 2 comments

logo_bg

Ryan Starr

TL;DR – CALM DOWN. No one is forcing you to be chipped and you can’t be tracked or hacked.

So, I’ve seen a lot of people lose their minds over a Wisconsin company, Three Square Market (32Market), implanting NFC tags in their employees. Everyone just stop and a take a deep breath. You likely have no actual understanding of what the tag is or how it works, so let me tell you. I got one last year – an xNT, the original implantable NFC tag, from the company Dangerous Things (www.dangerousthings.com). It is exactly the same as what Three Square Market is offering to their employees. I know what it is and is not capable of doing. But let’s back up for a second.

First, the company is not forcing any employee to get it. There are several companies around the world who have offered the same thing (no, they are not the first) and no one has ever been forcibly implanted. Period. EVERYONE I have come across in the biohacking community is vocal about this NOT BEING MANDATORY. It is a choice, and we want to keep it that way. Furthermore, there is a growing political movement that specifically addresses concerns about bodily autonomy and preventing implants from becoming mandatory.

Now, to the most common concerns I’ve seen:

Can your tag be tracked?

NO. It is not a GPS device or even an active piece of electronics. It is a passive chip and antenna that pulls power from the device used to read it. The tag is the size of a grain of rice, and even if we wanted to cram active electronics in there, we can’t.

Can your tag be hacked?

NO. As I said above, these are passive devices that require power from a reader. In order to do so, the reading device essentially has to be placed directly on your tag (typically implanted in the hand) and held there still for several seconds. Also, some readers don’t read very well because of antenna differences. If someone really wanted to steal your stored data, they would have to physically attack you, restrain you, and then read your tag. If that were the case, you have bigger problems than someone reading your 800 bytes of information. But in the very unlikely event that someone did try to do that to you, don’t worry, because you can password-protect your tag.

So what are they good for?

PRIVACY AND SECURITY. Yes, you read that correctly. When I first saw NFC tags being implanted, I had many of the same privacy concerns that many of you do. But then I started actually researching the technology. NFC tags (implanted or not) can be used to lock and unlock devices and are more secure than a password or a fingerprint. Of course, implanting one means you’ll never lose it, and it will never get stolen. You can unlock your android phones, unlock your doors, safes, and padlocks (with specific NFC enabled hardware), and if you’re particularly good with electronics, you can rig up many Arduino or Pi-based devices that read and respond to your tag.

There are other cool things you can do. You can store links, digital business cards, Bitcoin wallets, or just generic text. But also understand that this technology is fairly new, and associated hardware are even newer. This is ground-level development going on, and because of that we can steer the development to ensure privacy and safety for the user. There is not a greedy corporation running the industry, just passionate hobbyists who are just as concerned about privacy as you are.

If you want more information, I highly suggest just asking someone who actually has an NFC tag or visit www.dangerousthings.com.

Ryan Starr (R. Nicholas Starr) is the is the leader of the Transhumanist Party of Colorado and founder of the Transhumanists of the Sierras.