Our muscles will atrophy as we climb the Kardashev Scale

When I was in the US military, we all complained about the Body Mass Index standards. They were based on the WWII era "normal". Men were smaller. Less muscle mass. Shorter. If the average fit American young man tried to fit into a pilot's cockpit from the 1950's, it would feel quite cramped. Like it was built for much small people. It was.

We have certainly climbed the Kardashev scale since the 1950's. To what degree is a matter of contention. But, all would agree that we have moved up the scale.

Muscle atrophy has not been correlated with the growth. The opposite seems true. The average American, both male and female, has more muscle mass than in 1924. A 2024 person spends significantly more time on average in a gym pushing their muscles to hypertrophy than in 1924.

In addition, it is likely that the romantic picture of the average laborer "bodybuilding" is fictive and ignores how muscle atrophy and hypertrophy works. Most laborers are NOT doing activity that leads to hypertrophy. They are staying well within cardiovascular zones of muscle activation. Hence, bodybuilders as we know them are largely a modern phenomenon. And they are certainly WAY more muscular.

Seems the model that underlies this claim is built on seemingly demonstrably false premises.

That's different than subsistence farming, where you're doing a lot of work at sub max levels most every day. You may get strongish, but you won't get large.

Consider a modern day elite marathon runner, who works out >10 hours/week. They can only do so at sub max levels of effort. The top end are prone to injury (overtraining), and the training itself limits muscle development.

The majority of us are getting weaker and fatter. A few of us are still testing the limits of human physiology. The difference is you have a choice to be whatever part of the spectrum you want to be. Most choose "weak and fat".

Much of this is tied to nutrition, which I don't think is talked about in the fine article. Same story, we have a choice to eat the best for us food, or to eat crap. That wasn't always the case for the subsistence farmer.

1. Myostatin inhibitors are already in development. We're already using a drug that stops us from getting fat, why would we not use a drug that prevents atrophy?

2. This is entirely focused on what would be efficient at a global scale, while decisions are made on individual's desires. People (in general) want to look muscular and fit; it's as hardcoded into our reproductive desires as anything else is. Given increasing resources, is it reasonable to assert that people will choose to totally forgo their biological body? Why is it impossible for them to have the same productive advantages while retaining a physical body for when they want it?

Human desire trumps production, even in the long term, or at least medium term. I could eat monkey chow every day and never have to do dishes or cook ever again, and save an extra 10 hours a day. I could wear the same thing every day so a machine can fold it. I can put my brain in a jar to avoid commuting. But no matter how much technology advances, if I still spend 8 hours working with my brain implant or whatever then I'm still doing at worst 24% as good as the guy working 24/7. Why would it ever be worth giving up such basic human pleasures as eating or sex just for 4x the salary?

The brain, however, is well developed and draws on a high proportion of the body's blood supply. It is a mystery as to how this creature can sustain itself without external support."

The above quote is information you get from studying deceased bodies of a particularly advanced alien race in the original X-COM game, released in 1994.

(The X-COM in-universe explanation for the aliens' physiology is more psionic than cybernetic, as OP suggests. This makes OP a bit more credible than the Microprose writers, at least if your object is a discussion about plausible aliens or far-future humans in the real world within the known laws of physics. The aliens' psionic powers are kinda terrifying AF, so the Microprose prose does just fine for its intended purpose: Good storytelling for a computer game that makes no attempt to be fully real-world plausible / "hard" SF.)

Because it's nice to have the strength when you need it. Also, it protects your body. I developed a bulged disc in my neck from decades of spending too much time at a computer. Muscular balance and variety of movement is critical to maintaining a healthy body. Not to mention benefits like lessening injuries from accidents.

This stands to reason once you mentally discard exercise as a pre-requisite of strength. An elephant is strong, not because it exercises, but because of the biological mechanisms e.g. genetics that says: grow big, grow strong, and the effect size of those mechanisms are much much larger than individual differences due to exercise. It is clear, at least to me, that the need for exercise for adjusting strength has more to do with not spending extra energy building a body that has high upkeep if it isn't needed for survival.

Kardashev Scale - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40327782 - May 2024 (28 comments)

Kardashev Scale - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27067895 - May 2021 (5 comments)

Classifying Civilisations: An Introduction to the Kardashev Scale - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26108947 - Feb 2021 (1 comment)

The Kardashev Scale - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24084021 - Aug 2020 (1 comment)

Nikolai Kardashev (of Kardashev scale fame) died - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20619494 - Aug 2019 (1 comment)

Kardashev Scale - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20603386 - Aug 2019 (31 comments)

Kardashev scale - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2183106 - Feb 2011 (15 comments)

We'd naturally fork, because that future sounds like a dystopic hellscape to many (if not the overwhelming majority).

And indeed once we reach the point of being able to reliably colonize other planets, large scale splintering (both physical and cultural) will begin near immediately. You'll have libertarian planet, Islamic planet, even the Mormons will finally have their planets! And so on.

And the people who want to sacrifice their bodies to go enter the machine will certainly have their own little slice of the universe as well.

* frequent starvation or food insecurity among anyone but the high class, not good for overall physique,

* high parasite load sucking you dry from within - read up something on how massive infestation with hookworm can sap big, adult men of power,

* infections like tuberculosis.

I would be surprised if a 16th century peasant had more muscle than a 21th century student who does at least some sports. They would be a lot more used to physical work, yes, but that is not the same as "our muscles have atrophied".

If anything, we might have weaker sinews, but not muscle per se, and our bones are almost certainly stronger, as we lack neither calcium nor important vitamins.

I think that the major way humans cope/tackle this is via specialisation. While not for everyone, most people seem to find a job in a field, and the work in that field helps us support a more complicated society than we can fathom. Most people can't memorize all the stuff from multiple domains, or they would burn out. Most people don't understand how truly complex a semiconductor is, or how electricity and power is generated, or how to design a car. These are just basic examples but I'd argue a really good example of how humans have chosen a specific domain or thing and over time developed better understandings of the field and topic. The average person could do any job I'd argue.

We are not as physical as we used to be, we have "engineered" ourselves replacements. The tractor, the car; both replaced horses but at the cost of needing someone who understood the principal of the new technology.

Be it robot workers replacing amazon warehouse employees, or the tractor that improved the farmers ability to harvest or plant crops; both required smart people to not only develop them but to maintain them.

I'd argue while we really are less physically active, due to technology and general advancements we have made over the years; this comes at the cost of mental strain. We mentally must process and think more than ever before, pushing our brains to keep up so we can stay relevant.

Arm wrestling is a poor indicator of strength. Technique and experience account for much more than most people would think. Compare bench press, squat, deadlift numbers instead.

When we are all immersed in the substrate of AI, will there be a gym equivalent for the intellectual?

Skeleton crew or robots to maintain physical world while a majority of humanity living in the matrix. Controlling machines from far away lands (or galaxies).

See "No-communication theorem": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No-communication_theorem

I already find myself instinctively throwing any errors I can’t immediately figure out myself into a chatbot

I think there is much less angst regarding the idea of upgrading humanity piecemeal, a la the Ship of Theseus, than there is to fully discarding one's body for a digital existence. This has already sort of happened over the last few hundred years with the concept of transplantable organs. Prior to the widespread acceptable of the interchangeability of organs, it was not uncommon to think that your self and body are unified and linked in a way that implied organ transplation was problematic or undesirable.

And on that note - is it just me, or are biological visions of humanity's future fairly scarce in sci-fi and in futurism (another name for sci-fi)? My guess is because such topics seem dominated by software engineers, physicists, etc. that are less interested in biology.

Similarly, my understanding of the history of yoga in India is that it was introduced because of the sedentary lifestyle of the Brahmin caste, and much like with office workers today in the USA, it served to keep them in decent physical shape.

We could choose to let go of it, like we recently chose to let go of ravenous hunger with GLP drugs.

I find it amusing that somehow resources would still be constrained as we go closer to be a Kardashev I civilization.

We already have exercise mimetics in pre-clinical trials. If you can keep yourself fit with zero expenditure of time, why wouldn't you?

Traditional office culture makes it very difficult to get a proper workout in while, at the same time, confining you mostly to your chair, hunched over a desk (and/or craning over a small screen), to view things on a screen that eats away at your eyes by default.

WFH made this worse. I've worked with so many people that start work at 0700 and end at 1700 or later.

Add shitty, cheap food, 2.5 kids and a partner in there, and you're basically on an express train to bad hips, bad knees, poor health markersa and immobility at (not so) old age.

"Work out during your lunch hour," you say. The author spends a lot of time on muscle use. Powerlifting workouts require lots of rest between sets, especially as you get stronger. Spending 2h on a workout is normal in powerlifting. Not happening during lunch hour, not like this matters because someone will just schedule a meeting over it anyway.

"But I wake up at 0400..." No. Just no. (A) A parent with two and a half kids is not getting up at ass o clock in the morning to chase that pump (or work out to stay healthy) when their kids are gonna wake them at 0640, and (b) this is an awesome way to either sleep like shit forever or incinerate the last fledglings of your social life.

All this aside, the farmer life is a super hard way to live, . Overuse injuries are very common. However, we went the complete opposite direction in building today's office culture, and it's a real shame.

Sometimes I hear people say strength is useless nowadays but I couldn’t disagree more. In emergency situations I have been able to push stranded cars uphill to a safer spot, carry injured people and animals to safety, move large furniture and car parts myself, etc. Being more attractive to romantic partners is no downside either, nor is being able to eat a lot and not get fat. Strength makes modern life easier and more fun.

Isn't that the ultimate hubris?

Because I have the physical energy to, I take that body to the ocean for a swim, to the park for a cycle, and to anywhere with a nice view for a run. Depending on the day. Oh and the gym is a pleasant 12 minute walk from home, so I do that a few times a week as well.

Sorry to burst your bubble OP.

No, no it's not. There is nothing redeeming to be found here, it's nonsense. It's historially ignorant trad-pilled vibes about the past combined with bizarre techbro mumbo jumbo about the future. Neither have any meaningful grounding in reality, nor anything interesting to say about the world.

Capitalism is keeping us locked into the “Business As Usual” model that will bring us to civilization-destroying climate change by the middle of the century, and with tropics-denying lethally high wet bulb temperatures that will get well into the temperate zone by the end of the century. Think most of CONUS being uninhabitable for multiple days to weeks every year, with or without AC.

This means I'm advanced.