Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I guess he/she/it thinks that by bringing up new/upgraded technologies that they prove <<drum roll please>> "the singularity" is approaching...
The only thing that proves the singularity is coming is how fast information technology has advanced and is continuing to advance.
I can see it in my lifetime as I have seen computers take up entire rooms in the 1970's when I was about 5 years old to today I have a I Phone 4S and want to get the Google glasses next year. When I think about the advancement I have seen in less then 40 years it amazes me and I know its not going to slow down now only speed up and we will be merging with the technology by 2030. I, also, know the implications of that will be profound and enough to change the way humans live work and play. Hence the singularity.
I agree that computers did not make the decisions. However if you look at the trend since the first computer was built in 1890 computers have advanced exponentially first doubling every 3 years in 1900 then 2 years in 1960 then 12 months in 2000 now its less then 12 months.
Geezus, this must be the 1,000,000,000 time you have brought this up, give it a break.
You seem to be under the misconception that just because XYZ had a growth pattern of ZZ that it will continue that way infinitum...
Quote:
This is because people built a generation of computers then use that generation of computers to build the next twice as fast then they use the new generation of computers to build the next again twice as fast. That is the main reason information technology advances exponentially when other technologies do not.
As has been pointed out to you on NUMEROUS occasions, humans build computers and write the firmware/software to run them. In case you are oblivious to this inventiveness in America has taken a back seat to copyright laws and lawsuits.
Quote:
There is no way to predict the future beyond how information technology will advance that I agree with 100%. However short of us destroying ourselves there is nothing that will slow down the advancement or speed it up. The bottom line is no matter how much money we would spend on R&D we can not build the computer of 2020 in 2013 that just not possible. At the same time even during this recession computers are still advancing just as fast (well faster if you consider it takes less time for a generation now then it did in 2000) which shows that there are no peaks and valleys in how information technology advances just a smooth exponential progression that it self goes up over time.
Read my previous paragraph, we are into the broken record arena once again ~bigger yawn~
Quote:
You have just described the technological singularity in 2045 and why all of the models break down. Actually because of this paragraph I can see why Ray Kurzweil sticks to his 2045 date when others say its al early as 2030. I will still go with the 2030 date simply because life will be so different I think the average person will say that is the singularity however I know have a little better understanding of what Ray Kurzweil means when he says 2045.
I just pointed out that date doing a very quick search of the wonderfully redacted Internet...
Do I have to repeat myself for the 1,000th time? THERE HAVE BEEN QUACKS, SOOTHSAYERS, CRYSTAL BALL READERS AND LEARNED SCIENTISTS OF ALL DISCIPLINES THAT HAVE BEEN WRONG OVER THE COURSE OF HUMAN HISTORY.
But it seems your sources are 100% correct...
Quote:
We are getting close as you posted we already have tiny bots. I will be honest how exactly it will be done is beyond my understanding as I am not a scientist. I understand enough to know the big picture of how it will work based on the law of accelerating returns and how computers will be the size of blood cells by 2030 and have seen interviews Ray had with people who talk about how its possible, some I have posted in this thread. However to know the details well is beyond my understanding at this time. Ironically that should change in the future once we have them and I use them to augment my intelligence.
There you go again, ~yawn~
Quote:
There is a new show on the science channel called Future Scape. Tonight it was on robots and I have yet to see it but it looks like it will get into this issue. I am hoping it does.
Ahhh the Science Channel, and I'll bet everything you see on that channel proves to you "the singularity" is approaching....
I gave up watching that channel due to the amount of BS they try to pass off as fact...
You seem to be under the misconception that just because XYZ had a growth pattern of ZZ that it will continue that way infinitum...
I will admit if computers stop advancing exponentially then we will not reach the singularity in my lifetime. However from what I have read I do not see that happening. Now would you be willing to admit that if computers keep advancing exponentially we will reach the singularity by 2030?
Quote:
Originally Posted by plwhit
As has been pointed out to you on NUMEROUS occasions, humans build computers and write the firmware/software to run them. In case you are oblivious to this inventiveness in America has taken a back seat to copyright laws and lawsuits.
Has not slowed down the advancement yet in fact information technology is advancing faster then every before.
Quote:
Originally Posted by plwhit
Do I have to repeat myself for the 1,000th time? THERE HAVE BEEN QUACKS, SOOTHSAYERS, CRYSTAL BALL READERS AND LEARNED SCIENTISTS OF ALL DISCIPLINES THAT HAVE BEEN WRONG OVER THE COURSE OF HUMAN HISTORY.
But it seems your sources are 100% correct...
You list of inventions that did not pan out shows you there are many quacks today who try to predict the future on anything other then information technology. I am not coming on here and saying what life will be like in 2030, as I have no idea, just where information technology will be at that point and on that area I am 100% certain.
Quote:
Originally Posted by plwhit
Ahhh the Science Channel, and I'll bet everything you see on that channel proves to you "the singularity" is approaching....
I gave up watching that channel due to the amount of BS they try to pass off as fact...
I like the science channel but that is a opinion question and no one is right or wrong here.
I will admit if computers stop advancing exponentially then we will not reach the singularity in my lifetime. However from what I have read I do not see that happening. Now would you be willing to admit that if computers keep advancing exponentially we will reach the singularity by 2030?
Has not slowed down the advancement yet in fact information technology is advancing faster then every before.
I am so sick of your "if this keeps on occurring" questions. Absolutely useless...
The only thing I'll agree to is that the data used by IT is being used in different ways than ever before.
Quote:
You list of inventions that did not pan out shows you there are many quacks today who try to predict the future on anything other then information technology. I am not coming on here and saying what life will be like in 2030, as I have no idea, just where information technology will be at that point and on that area I am 100% certain.
You should *understand* what you write... You have read articles by different authors that have convinced you the future is written in stone and immutable...
You should *understand* what you write... You have read articles by different authors that have convinced you the future is written in stone and immutable...
Actually I have read articles and seen people talk who say the singularity will happen and those who say the singularity will not happen. I took both opinions into consideration and decided that I agree with the arguments the pro crowd make.
Actually I have read articles and seen people talk who say the singularity will happen and those who say the singularity will not happen. I took both opinions into consideration and decided that I agree with the arguments the pro crowd make.
There is a new show on the science channel called Future Scape. Tonight it was on robots and I have yet to see it but it looks like it will get into this issue. I am hoping it does.
I was able to watch this show last night and I was very impressed. What I liked most about it was instead of trying to say what life will be like at a certain date, that is impossible, they looked at technologies we are working on today and talked to them about the impact it will have on society in the coming decades.
Last nights episode was on robots.
The show started out with a quote that I liked:
"We are getting closer to when man and machine merge and we redefine what it is to be human".
That essentially is the singularity although they never used that term.
From that point on they looked at the different emerging technologies. I was going to take notes but got to caught up in the show and forgot.
The Singularity is a fascinating concept, but I see it much further in the future than 31 years. This is based on limitations in current computer technology (lithography) and reluctance in many industrialized nations to spend resources on the research needed to approach that point. I won't even get into the resistance that will erupt from religious quarters that seem to view almost all progress as threatening.
I agree that computers did not make the decisions.
Thank you for agreeing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josseppie
There is no way to predict the future beyond how information technology will advance that I agree with 100%.
I knew common sense would eventually prevail. Thank you for agreeing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josseppie
However short of us destroying ourselves there is nothing that will slow down the advancement or speed it up.
That's a presumptuous view. There are numerous events that could potentially happen to bring eveything to a complete and utter halt, including the extinction of all life on the planet. Odds vary with among different scenarios. Some may be far off in the distant future, some could happen at any time. No one can say any of these events will happen, but rather that the potential exists. Destroying ourselves is certainly one possibility, but there are even more possible extinction events that are not caused by people that could potentially occur but we have no way of avoid or defend against.
While we do continue to progress, if the entire planet were to be wiped out, it would mean nothing in the overall picture of the universe. We're like tiny microbes that scurry around on the thin skin of the planet, who feel we can stand like towers of power destined to conquer death, the future and the entire universe by shouting out at the sky, "I AM HUMAN! HEAR ME ROAR!" Unfortunately, it's less than a squeek and the sky doesn't hear us.
Here's a link to Exit Mundi, which is a collection of possible end-of-the-world scenarios. Some are plausible, even likely, some border silliness, but none can be 100% conclusively ruled out as absolutely impossible. It's worth a look to put things into perspective in a humorous way. EXIT MUNDI, a collection of end of world scenarios
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josseppie
The bottom line is no matter how much money we would spend on R&D we can not build the computer of 2020 in 2013 that just not possible.
Thank you for agreeing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josseppie
You have just described the technological singularity in 2045 and why all of the models break down. Actually because of this paragraph I can see why Ray Kurzweil sticks to his 2045 date when others say its al early as 2030. I will still go with the 2030 date simply because life will be so different I think the average person will say that is the singularity however I know have a little better understanding of what Ray Kurzweil means when he says 2045.
What you have just described is a FAITH that things will be thus and so in the future. It's all very easy to project things as long as they're are off in the future and can't be conclusively proven at the present time one way or the other. Might as well just flip a coin. We all believe various things. It's a part of being human. After all, we aren't machines. The problem with FAITH (belief), which is often little more than just a hunch, is that it's not always reliable and is subject to change. It's also a good idea to not put so much FAITH (belief) into what one person thinks or has to say without getting too hung up on the buzz words.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josseppie
We are getting close as you posted we already have tiny bots.
I was being satirical about bots or computers the size of electrons. The bots i posted about are extremely tiny, but were not as small as a blood cell. Certain atoms (larger ones) can be manipulated in terms of positioning them, but there's not going to be any mechanical computers or bots the size of an electron (or an atom) as that's at a scale that's much too small. I would suggest you look up the subject of quantum particles. Here's a reading assignment link to give you a tiny hint of an idea as to just how small electrons are. Structure and radius of electron
And here's a humorous video about how nanotechnology could go terribly wrong. All it would take is one stupid idiot to change the course of everything.
I will be honest how exactly it will be done is beyond my understanding as I am not a scientist.
Exactly. Thank you for acknowledging your limitations.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josseppie
I understand enough to know the big picture of how it will work based on the law of accelerating returns and how computers will be the size of blood cells by 2030 and have seen interviews Ray had with people who talk about how its possible, some I have posted in this thread.
Whoa there! You just said it's beyond your understanding. What you're saying here is like looking at a single splotch of paint on a canvas without seeing anything else, and saying you know what the painting is.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josseppie
However to know the details well is beyond my understanding at this time.
Here we are back again. The details are well beyond your understanding at this time. Do you see how you're flip-flopping back and forth with this?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josseppie
Ironically that should change in the future once we have them and I use them to augment my intelligence.
What's stopping you from getting a head start on things now? When in the future would you expect to have them (I assume you mean blood cell sized computers) and use them to augment your intelligence? 2030 to 2045? Sooner? Later?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
That's a presumptuous view. There are numerous events that could potentially happen to bring eveything to a complete and utter halt, including the extinction of all life on the planet. Odds vary with among different scenarios. Some may be far off in the distant future, some could happen at any time. No one can say any of these events will happen, but rather that the potential exists. Destroying ourselves is certainly one possibility, but there are even more possible extinction events that are not caused by people that could potentially occur but we have no way of avoid or defend against.
Whoa there! You just said it's beyond your understanding. What you're saying here is like looking at a single splotch of paint on a canvas without seeing anything else, and saying you know what the painting is.
