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.
There is also another option, that he is right but that his dates are way off, some predictions point to singularity happening in 2070, in fact in the wikipage that mentions a meeting with several computer programmers it's stated that predictions range from 5-100 years into the future. I'm also not sure if Ray has always predicted 2045 as being the singularity date because in his previous books (the ones from the 90s) he was predicting technologies beyond 2045 which would make no sense because according to him you can't predict anything after the singularity. So I'm assuming that in the 90s he had a much later date set for the singularity?
I think I finally see our difference.
We both agree the singularity is coming. However you take the "pessimistic view" of it occurring after 2045 and I take the "optimistic view" of it occurring 2030-2045. I have it in quotes because that was the best way to describe it. I suppose this is one argument no one can win till we see when it actually occurs and because of that we will agree with what will happen just not when.
I will say this. Everything hinges on what happens when the current paradigm, the intragrated circuit, runs out of steam around 2020-2022. If we move smoothly to the next paradigm, 3D self organizing molicular structures, more then likely the singularity will occur sooner as I think. If we do not move to the next paradigm and computers begin to advance slower, not exponentially, then more then likely your view of the singularity happening past 2045 will be the correct one.
We both agree the singularity is coming. However you take the "pessimistic view" of it occurring after 2045 and I take the "optimistic view" of it occurring 2030-2045. I have it in quotes because that was the best way to describe it. I suppose this is one argument no one can win till we see when it actually occurs and because of that we will agree with what will happen just not when.
I don't really see it as pessimistic, I see it more as a realist. I know that when new medications, treatments or technologies are created they go through testing phases that take years while you think they'll be available the following day.
I will say this. Everything hinges on what happens when the current paradigm, the intragrated circuit, runs out of steam around 2020-2022. If we move smoothly to the next paradigm, 3D self organizing molicular structures, more then likely the singularity will occur sooner as I think. If we do not move to the next paradigm and computers begin to advance slower, not exponentially, then more then likely your view of the singularity happening past 2045 will be the correct one.
*******
I wanted to talk about that more. I have been giving this some thought and I think this is the most important factor. I am confident the transition will be smooth keeping the singularity on the early timeline. However, if I am wrong and computers stop advancing exponentially the singularity will not occur in my lifetime.
That is why I had it in quotes. I am not as hung up on what we say it is. Just pointing out the difference. Did you see what I added after?
Yes, but I still think you should be a bit more realist.
Let's say that in 2026 they create the first microscopic nanobot; let's say the scientists are just as eager as you and they do one test on a rat and immediately decide to test it on a human. Now let's say the nanobots have some sort of glitch and they end up killing the person. Can you imagine how that would devastate the nanotechnology field simply because the scientists were so eager to get the process moving faster. Such an occurrence would devastate the field and likely hold back nanotechnology research for several years or even decades. That's why they would have to devise several experiments on simpler animals first and repeat the tests many times and then move their way up to more complex organisms again repeating the tests several times which would take years before finally declaring it safe enough to use on humans.
Edit: forgot to add that even after it's declared safe to test on humans they would probably test it on small samples of humans for a few years just to be on the safe side, before going public (like the memory implants that will be tested for 10 years before going to the public).
Last edited by Canaan-84; 06-22-2013 at 07:54 PM..
It's not going to be one big step like that which would need years if testing. It will be a series of small steps that are already occurring like with the 60 minute episode I posted. So yes it will take testing but not like what you think. I know that was a lousy way to argue it but I'm on my I phone and its harder to write out a long elegant argument. I have seen people ask Ray that and he did a good job of explaining it.
Edit: Also I understand what you are saying. That is the conventional way it has worked. However soon technology will be advancing so fast that the conventional way will no longer work. I think that will start in the 2020's and one reason I call it the pre-singularity.
Last edited by Josseppie; 06-22-2013 at 08:29 PM..
There is also another option, that he is right but that his dates are way off, some predictions point to singularity happening in 2070, in fact in the wikipage that mentions a meeting with several computer programmers it's stated that predictions range from 5-100 years into the future. I'm also not sure if Ray has always predicted 2045 as being the singularity date because in his previous books (the ones from the 90s) he was predicting technologies beyond 2045 which would make no sense because according to him you can't predict anything after the singularity. So I'm assuming that in the 90s he had a much later date set for the singularity?
It was 2099 at first, I believe…
I could be wrong…
Anyway…
What about time travel? Will the past be observable? Time travel into the future is simple, but could the other direction also be possible?
It's not going to be one big step like that which would need years if testing. It will be a series of small steps that are already occurring like with the 60 minute episode I posted. So yes it will take testing but not like what you think. I know that was a lousy way to argue it but I'm on my I phone and its harder to write out a long elegant argument. I have seen people ask Ray that and he did a good job of explaining it.
Edit: Also I understand what you are saying. That is the conventional way it has worked. However soon technology will be advancing so fast that the conventional way will no longer work. I think that will start in the 2020's and one reason I call it the pre-singularity.
I no longer have a computer, so I only use my iPhone.
I write much better on a laptop, but I can pull through like this.
Will the central bureaucracy effect the innovation curve?
I don't think so. If you look at history nothing has slowed it down or made it faster. Not the world wars where a lot of money was spent and a faster curve would of been Beneficial or during the Great Depression where very little money was spent.
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.
