Talk:Robert Freitas

This article was nominated for deletion on 5 May 2023. The result of the discussion was keep.

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Biography: Science and Academia

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by the science and academia work group.
	An appropriate infobox may need to be added to this article. Please refer to the list of biography infoboxes for further information.
	An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article.

Transhumanism Low‑importance

Robert Freitas' is part of WikiProject Transhumanism, which aims to organize, expand, clean up, and guide Transhumanism related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page for more details.TranshumanismWikipedia:WikiProject TranshumanismTemplate:WikiProject TranshumanismTranshumanism articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

For more information and how you can help click Show:

If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page for more details.

Quick help:

See changes to:

To Do List:

edit - history - watch - purge

Join WikiProject transhumanism and be bold

Show off a userbox with {{userWPA}} or {{userWPA2}} and attract potential members
Help with articles.
See this month's adopt an article.
Help out with the To-do lists

Be consistent

Use a "standard" layout for transhumanism related articles (see: The perfect article, and Featured articles)
Add Transhumanism navigation template on the bottom of all transhumanism articles; (use {{Transhumanism}} or see navigation template)
Add Transhumanism info box to all transhumanism related talk pages (use {{Wpa}} or see info box)
Add [[Category:transhumanism]] to the bottom of all transhumanism related articles, so it shows up on the list of transhumanism articles

Maintenance / Etc

Find/cite sources for all positions of an article (see citing sources.
Try to expand stubs, however, some "new" articles may be neologisms, as this is common with positions on theories on life and may be suitable for deletion (see deletion process)
Watch the list of transhumanism related articles and add to accordingly (see transhumanism articles)
And always write for an encyclopedia.

Create

Notable transhumanist articles

Shorten / merge into others

Expand

a transhumanism stub

Your immediate attention

false choice into false dilemma - discuss whether you are for or against this merge here
Clarify references in Transhumanism, using footnotes.

Alternative Views Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Alternative views, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of significant alternative views in every field, from the sciences to the humanities. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion.Alternative ViewsWikipedia:WikiProject Alternative ViewsTemplate:WikiProject Alternative ViewsAlternative Views articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Biography assessment rating comment[edit]

WikiProject Biography Assessment Drives

Want to help write or improve biographies? Check out WikiProject Biography Tips for writing better articles. —Yamara ✉ 07:13, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dechronification - content possibly removed from article[edit]

Dechronification is the concept developed by Robert Freitas that, with nanotechnology, one should be able to reverse the aging process. Freitas suggests that people will be able to "remove accumulating metabolic toxins using resperocyte- and microbivore-class intercellular nanorobots in every tissue cell," "correct genetic damage using chromosome replacement therapy in every tissue cell," and "repair persistent cellular damage using cell repair devices in every tissue cell." This idea is a form of futurology.

Benefits[edit]

Old senior folk longing to become young again will finally realize their dreams.

Mentally retarded children can keep repeating their grade level in school while looking the part (as old as the other children in their class) until they advance.

Mentally retarded adults can dechronify to children and repeat school in hopes of becoming much more productive and successful in life via this newly-invented second chance. (Who will work at McDonald's, you might ask? Sentient, robotic androids will soon perform all menial jobs.)

Rescuers needing to retrieve a child in, for example, a hole only big enough for a small kid to fit through, can dechronify themselves down like so and perform the rescue. Afterwards, they rechronify back to an adult.

Professional movie actors will not have to grow out of their parts anymore.

Speaking of that, there might not be a need to hire child actors anymore because they can then use professional adult actors to play child parts once they go through a "dechronitron".

Dechronification will preclude the possibility of a Luddite Revolution from happening due to sentient, robotic androids taking lower-skilled jobs. This is because Dechronification will make way for anybody with lower skills to shrink down to a younger age, repeat school and hence, retrain them for more sophisticated, better-paying jobs that androids couldn't do.

External links[edit]

{{medical-stub}} {{technology-stub}} [[Category:Medical research]] [[Category:Nanotechnology]]

The above looks like a section of the article that has been moved here. - Rod57 (talk) 03:25, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Personal subjective comments - possibly by Collins - 2008[edit]

I don't even like Feitas. He is one of these new world scientist that exist simply because he can clatter his silly fingers on a keyboard with no important work actually done to back it up. His writing is packed with generalities, as well. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.114.45.254 (talk) 11:48, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Like the article on Collins, generalities & lies. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.114.36.136 (talk) 04:14, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's pretty low standards to attack and delete sections of an article on me for what you disagree here, and you really have not a clue about the science of self replicators. Working with you people is like working with shock jock journalists or something. All I'm saying, is that Freitas is a fraud on what he wrote about me and you know it. You should not ignore that just because you are "open source" and because he attacked my patent and pile on. You are completely incorrigible. Further, you are sticking up for Napster? That's down in the dirt and you appear to be "Napsterizing" self-replicator science which is unconscionable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.114.37.70 (talk) 21:51, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Further, who blocked Bower's site I was discussing? That's hacking. Just like before when I reported it to police and was blocked by that nefarious "Yamla" as "legal threats" that started all the flaming. Go ahead, hack and block Bowyers site. See if I care, less PR for that fraud. Wikipedia is a total fraud. An "open source puppet". You have no call to scrape your finger about standards with this level of clear unadulterated bias shown here and all over. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.114.37.70 (talk) 22:08, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. He keeps showing pictures of molecules like gears [1] which further bestowes he deserves to be on Star Trek not things serious here. Antiliby (talk) 16:47, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There is also something very suspicious and scary about a psychologist like Freitas teaming up with an atomic scientist like Merkle, both with foreign names attacking a major United States Patent holder like Collins with nothing but a load of hot air. Further Merkle tops the Echelon's and Carnivore's "trigger" words [2], obviously a deep military figure. Collin's comments about the government "stealing his technology" may hold true, seeing how an attempt to commit him by both Quantico MCB (case# N004860, thrown out with prejudice) and the Prince William County Circuit Court (LA 49530) occurred with the chief of police indicating on the affidavit the reason was for "saying the government was trying to steal his invention" (mental case thrown out). Looks like another private scientist/inventor was indeed kidnapped by the U.S. government concerning "globalist" interests.

Antiliby (talk) 17:53, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Typical, Wiki editor attacking the victim and not confronting the facts, who cares who brings the truth? 71.114.40.113 (talk) 18:01, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The facts of what happened are source enough because the facts speak for themselves (that they occurred). But mostly, Merkle and Freitas are source on it because they initiated the dispute when he wrote the controversial page in the book:[3]. So the other facts follow as documentation to that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.114.33.233 (talk) 07:06, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Needs third party RSes to show notability[edit]

Literally all the sources given are primary, and many of the claims are of questionable notability. What is the third-party RS coverage of Freitas? Where is the biographical coverage? Where are the independently notable awards? Where is the evidence of notability as a scientist or engineer? What fits, say, Wikipedia:Notability (academics), or any other biographical notability criterion? A long list of low-quality references doesn't make a high-quality reference - David Gerard (talk) 23:27, 17 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Except for reference [6], all of the items tagged with “non-primary source needed” are accompanied by references to journal article citations, patent office citations, or citations of websites of organizations that are not under the control of Freitas, so their provenance is assured. Also, all of these items are factually correct as demonstrated by the cited sources. What more is needed to ensure accuracy of the encyclopedia, and why? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 23.252.91.253 (talk) 03:31, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Because Wikipedia isn't a mere collection of any fact someone happens to have a cite for. Did you read Wikipedia:Notability (academics)? To quote: "Subjects of biographical articles on Wikipedia are required to be notable; that is significant, interesting, or unusual enough to be worthy of notice, as evidenced by being the subject of significant coverage in independent reliable secondary sources." Primary sources don't cut it to justify an article's existence. If you're wondering why, WP:WHYN summarises it - David Gerard (talk) 09:08, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

comment on "Kinematic Self-Replicating Machines"[edit]

Because his comments on my patents in "Kinematic Self-Replicating Machines" is completely idiotic and childish, attacking the description of the patents >where I was required to disclose all prior art< I suggest that his credibility is in severe question as well as this completely incompetent book, full of identity politicking be removed with no further mention of it here. What makes him any kind of expert on self-replicating machines? Has he yet to have made one? No. And if you know nothing about patents please be so kind as to not include yourself in these conversations herein. (Charle Michael Collins). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.238.165.144 (talk) 04:19, 6 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Deprodded, Sept 2017[edit]

Some of the sources I came across:

Eugene Thacker's Biomedia talks about him throughout the Biomedicine chapter
Kurzweil's Singularity Is Near talks about his work several times. (Kurzweil looks to be a frequent collaborator/associate, but the book was significant and independently published)
Extraterrestrial Altrusim: Evolution and Ethics in the Cosmos has a section about him

Google Books appears to return more nontrivial coverage of him/his work. Haven't actually gotten to the other gsearches yet.

Seems to at least merit a week at AfD. Page itself is indeed built on primary sources, and is pretty well tagged to that effect, but doesn't seem so grossly promotional to delete just on promotional grounds. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 17:05, 3 September 2017 (UTC

At present it's pretty much a violation of BLP, which does require RSes ... but we can give it a bit of improvement time, sure. (It's that it wasn't touched in months which is why I eventually prodded it.) - David Gerard (talk) 17:35, 3 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Going to go through and remove statements sourced to non-BLP-quality sources in a few days - David Gerard (talk) 11:41, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Cryonics[edit]

AS you can expect from someone closely associated with Merkle, Freitas is signed up for cryonics. I asked him to mention this next time he gets interviewed for a publication but added it anyway based on his request.Keith Henson (talk) 17:18, 4 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]