TED Community » Sean Conner

More About Me

I'm passionate about

Democratizing knowledge and access, social innovation and entrepreneurship. Relationships, mindfulness, and connectedness. The nature of time. The human experience. Human and machine consciousness.

An idea worth spreading

The best book I've ever read:
Revolutionary Wealth, by Alvin and Heidi Toffler

The most helpful book I've ever read:
The Pathfinder: How to Choose or Change Your Career for a Lifetime of Satisfaction and Success, by Nicolas Lore

The three most helpful TED talk I've see thus far:
http://www.ted.com/talks/brene_brown_on_vulnerability.html
http://www.ted.com/talks/brene_brown_listening_to_shame.html
http://www.ted.com/talks/larry_smith_why_you_will_fail_to_have_a_great_career.html

Talk to me about

The nature of the universe, the nature of life, the nature of consciousness, mythology, geopolitics, particle/astro physics.

People don't know that I'm good at

Paper art. Design. Career Coaching.

Comments

• TEDCred score: +0.10 TEDCred reflects your contribution to the TED community.

• A reply on Conversation: Discussing "The Science of Radical Life Extension" with TED Books author David Ewing Duncan

  Sep 11 2012: Thank you for your thoughts David!

• A reply on Conversation: Discussing "The Science of Radical Life Extension" with TED Books author David Ewing Duncan

  Sep 11 2012: Jessica, you have an excellent perspective. I'm very sorry to hear about your diagnosis. I'm overjoyed to hear however that it wasn't during your pregnancy. I have a friend who did experience an aggressive form of lymphoma during her pregnancy, and only by a series of miraculous scientific and medical feats did her daughter come through without harm, and very minimal mutagenic complications to herself. She is one of the most amazing people I've ever met.
  
  All of that said, I've always been conflicted by the nature of these "life challenges." On the one hand I pity the untested, unchallenged life. The life that will face no great challenges probably isn't a person with a lot of depth of character. It seems like the most interesting, empathic, daring, and accomplished people I've met have faced great challenges in their life.
  
  That said, however, I would never wish these dramatic, painful and life changing experiences on anyone. So I think this is where my conflict comes in. How should we process these experiences; as an opportunity, or as victims of a tragedy, or both, or maybe as something completely different?
  
  What do you think Jessica?

• A comment on Conversation: Discussing "The Science of Radical Life Extension" with TED Books author David Ewing Duncan

  Sep 11 2012: Hi David, thanks for your reply. I'm curious though. At one point I, like you, was unnerved by the idea of having my consciousness only existing in a machine or, even existing simultaneously in a machine and in my corporeal form. But at some point I thought about it and realized that it didn't bother me anymore. I'm not sure exactly when that was, but I think it corresponded to reading the book of short stories: "Godlike Machines" while cramped in a boat for two days floating down the Mekong River.
  
  So my question to you is, what exactly (or not exactly) do you think bothers you most about having your consciousness in a machine?

• A comment on Conversation: Discussing "The Science of Radical Life Extension" with TED Books author David Ewing Duncan

  Sep 11 2012: I think there are many good points of discussion here already, so I'll just focus my time on the question "How long do you want to live, and why?"
  
  For me, I'd like to have several phases to my life extension. First I'd like to try living in my organic form for another 50 to 60 years - perhaps with increased faculties, or small augmentations. There is a lot of experiences that the current normal life span has that I think I'd really like to experience. Such as having and raising children.
  
  Then I'd like the opportunity to transfer my consciousness to a machine, perhaps with a mechanical extension that allows me to venture into parts of the planet and solar system that are impractical and too dangerous for organic forms to go.
  
  This is getting away from the original question, but after that - maybe a 1,000 years of exploring these axises of experience - I'd like to opportunity to experience time differently, on the scale of 10s, or 100s of thousands of years.
  
  Then... I don't know what. I find it difficult to fathom what type of thoughts and desires one might have at that point, after experiencing so many things. It may be the case that the infinite complexity of the universe is enough to explore until the universe ends, or it may be the case that there is not infinite complexity and I've explored and experienced everything and there is nothing more to do, and thus end the journey there? Who can say.
  
  Fascinating question!
• +1

  A reply on Conversation: Discussing "The Science of Radical Life Extension" with TED Books author David Ewing Duncan

  Sep 11 2012: I would argue a slight variation on your theme. If one is unhappy extending their life may only be an opportunity for more unhappiness. On the other hand it may give them the opportunity to explore their bliss and find a great sense of satisfaction and happiness.
  
  I love my life, but it wasn't always this way. If my life ended at say 18 years I might have only known melancholy, frustration and disappointment - never having the opportunity to explore different aspects of myself, traveling the world, trying new things, inventing, trying out new careers. If I could do this for another 120 years for me it would be a great blessing.
  
  So while I see the point you're making, I would be inclined to say it can go either way. If you're happy more time would be a gift. If you're unhappy more time might be a curse... or it might be an opportunity to learn to be happy.
• +1

  A reply on Talk: Eric Giler demos wireless electricity

  Sep 6 2010: Mikael- you are correct. Michael Deming, I can see how you might think they are the same thing, but oscillating magnetic fields are indeed distinctly different from electromagnetic waves. An EM wave is a transverse electric and magnetic wave traveling through space in quanta we commonly refer to as a photon (where the frequency is directly proportional to the energy packet, and the frequency also has a common name; microwave, VHF, UHF, radio, etc.) A photon is (commonly) created by "shaking" an electron around in space. An oscillating magnetic field (i.e. no electric field component) is created by "shaking" a magnet.
  
  I hope this helps clarify.