Why hasn't the Singularity gone mainstream (yet?) (quality, power, electric)
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.
One of the things I talk about with the singularity is how computers will change the way we live. Well here is yet another example of this so I decided to post it:
Autonomous robots are plumbing the ocean’s depths with increasing regularity. This hurricane season, a research project coordinated by Rutgers University (GliderPalooza) deployed over a dozen sea drones to take a snapshot of the mid-Atlantic ocean.
Ocean-going robots can go where humans can’t. They’re cheaper than ships and more dynamic than buoys. Combined with these and other traditional data sources, like satellites, scientists are piecing together an increasingly complex map of the ocean.
I have only read about 10 pages of this thread including the most recent few, and here are my thoughts..
Singularity is an interesting concept however there are physical limitations to everything. I am not a computer scientist or engineer but it seems like computing power has already showed signs of slowing down. More powerful processors have run into heating limitations and scientists/engineers are trying to implement novel ways of cooling. There is only so much they can do. The shift now is towards nanotechnology and we are still making significant strides there. However there will inevitably be physical constraints as well. You can't have sub-sub-molecular processing?
Singularity is an overly optimistic and unrealistic view of exponential growth. You are basically taking a growth curve and saying, "Wow this curve will grow and continue forever!" However, physical limitations such as the actual size of molecules will pose a larger and larger challenge to overcome. I guess your argument would be that singularity/transhumanism would occur before this limitation occurs.
Also, Ray Kurzweil may be a genius but he is highly delusional. He became acutely aware of his mortality when he nearly developed diabetes in his 30s. It was at this time that he began taking >100 supplements daily to "reprogram" his "biochemistry." It was also around this time, that he became a proponent of singularity and made his controversial futurism predictions.
Conveniently, by 2030-2045, he will be in his 80s and 90s. Just in time for him to achieve immortality and conveniently escape the confines of human mortality.
Now I guess you could argue that while Kurzweil is a nut, his ideas may still be valid. I just cannot take a guy seriously who uses science non-objectively for self-serving reasons just to cope with his own mortality.
I have only read about 10 pages of this thread including the most recent few, and here are my thoughts..
Singularity is an interesting concept however there are physical limitations to everything. I am not a computer scientist or engineer but it seems like computing power has already showed signs of slowing down. More powerful processors have run into heating limitations and scientists/engineers are trying to implement novel ways of cooling. There is only so much they can do. The shift now is towards nanotechnology and we are still making significant strides there. However there will inevitably be physical constraints as well. You can't have sub-sub-molecular processing?
What you are actually describing is the current paradigm, the integrated circuit. It will run out of steam sometime in the 2020's and that will be the end of the integrated circuit. However we will just move to the next paradigm, 3D self organizing molecular structures, and computers will continue to advance exponentially.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Swack
Singularity is an overly optimistic and unrealistic view of exponential growth. You are basically taking a growth curve and saying, "Wow this curve will grow and continue forever!" However, physical limitations such as the actual size of molecules will pose a larger and larger challenge to overcome. I guess your argument would be that singularity/transhumanism would occur before this limitation occurs.
People have made the singularity more out to be then it is. The basic definition is when man mergers with computers to a point that it changes life dramatically. Then trans-humanism is the term refereed to people once they have merged with computers. You can see it starting today and by 2030 it will be in full swing as computers the size of blood cells have thousands of times more processing capability then all of NASA in the 1960's. However its not this cosmic event that from the surface I know it can sound like.
To use a past example its almost like when the industrial revaluation started. I am sure there were people who said this won't change life much yet it did and people live a lot longer today then they did in the 1700's. The big difference is today the change is occurring faster then it has ever occurred before so its not the fact that we are changing that is new but how fast.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Swack
Also, Ray Kurzweil may be a genius but he is highly delusional. He became acutely aware of his mortality when he nearly developed diabetes in his 30s. It was at this time that he began taking >100 supplements daily to "reprogram" his "biochemistry." It was also around this time, that he became a proponent of singularity and made his controversial futurism predictions.
Conveniently, by 2030-2045, he will be in his 80s and 90s. Just in time for him to achieve immortality and conveniently escape the confines of human mortality.
Now I guess you could argue that while Kurzweil is a nut, his ideas may still be valid. I just cannot take a guy seriously who uses science non-objectively for self-serving reasons just to cope with his own mortality.
Ray Kurzweil is a genus but this is not happening because of Ray Kurzweil. He was just one of the first people who was able to figure it out. Now he does have a lot of great accomplishments in science and is now the director of engineering at Google so he is far from a nut he is just not this profit that some people make him out to be. For example once the first computer was built in 1890 society was on the path to the singularity and that was many decades before Ray Kurzweil was born.
Last edited by Josseppie; 11-26-2013 at 04:11 PM..
You mean sub atomic. I hope human will one day be able to use quantum fields to do things. Anyways there are quite a few things that can come after we are done with silicon. Quantum computer, 3d, optical computers ,ect
Quote:
Originally Posted by Swack
I have only read about 10 pages of this thread including the most recent few, and here are my thoughts..
Singularity is an interesting concept however there are physical limitations to everything. I am not a computer scientist or engineer but it seems like computing power has already showed signs of slowing down. More powerful processors have run into heating limitations and scientists/engineers are trying to implement novel ways of cooling. There is only so much they can do. The shift now is towards nanotechnology and we are still making significant strides there. However there will inevitably be physical constraints as well. You can't have sub-sub-molecular processing?
Singularity is an overly optimistic and unrealistic view of exponential growth. You are basically taking a growth curve and saying, "Wow this curve will grow and continue forever!" However, physical limitations such as the actual size of molecules will pose a larger and larger challenge to overcome. I guess your argument would be that singularity/transhumanism would occur before this limitation occurs.
Also, Ray Kurzweil may be a genius but he is highly delusional. He became acutely aware of his mortality when he nearly developed diabetes in his 30s. It was at this time that he began taking >100 supplements daily to "reprogram" his "biochemistry." It was also around this time, that he became a proponent of singularity and made his controversial futurism predictions.
Conveniently, by 2030-2045, he will be in his 80s and 90s. Just in time for him to achieve immortality and conveniently escape the confines of human mortality.
Now I guess you could argue that while Kurzweil is a nut, his ideas may still be valid. I just cannot take a guy seriously who uses science non-objectively for self-serving reasons just to cope with his own mortality.
What you are actually describing is the current paradigm, the integrated circuit. It will run out of steam sometime in the 2020's and that will be the end of the integrated circuit. However we will just move to the next paradigm, 3D self organizing molecular structures, and computers will continue to advance exponentially.
People have made the singularity more out to be then it is. The basic definition is when man mergers with computers to a point that it changes life dramatically. Then trans-humanism is the term refereed to people once they have merged with computers. You can see it starting today and by 2030 it will be in full swing as computers the size of blood cells have thousands of times more processing capability then all of NASA in the 1960's. However its not this cosmic event that from the surface I know it can sound like.
To use a past example its almost like when the industrial revaluation started. I am sure there were people who said this won't change life much yet it did and people live a lot longer today then they did in the 1700's. The big difference is today the change is occurring faster then it has ever occurred before so its not the fact that we are changing that is new but how fast.
This is exactly what I was referencing. Nanotechnology and micro-computing is the next technological shift. There will be many more advances in the years to come, perhaps even exponentially. I think we both agree on this. What we disagree on is the endpoint. I do not think there will be some sort of infinite growth. In the history of mankind, there have been multiple paradigm shifts. The invention of the wheel, electricity, internet, etc. I don't think any of these were really predicted. Also, none of these paradigm shifts compare to the scale of what is suggested by technological singularity. What you are describing, if it happens, will be the greatest paradigm shift in human history. This change will make us question what it is to even be human. Not only that, but the greatest paradigm shift of humankind was somehow conveniently "predicted."
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josseppie
Ray Kurzweil is a genus but this is not happening because of Ray Kurzweil. He was just one of the first people who was able to figure it out. Now he does have a lot of great accomplishments in science and is now the director of engineering at Google so he is far from a nut he is just not this profit that some people make him out to be. For example once the first computer was built in 1890 society was on the path to the singularity and that was many decades before Ray Kurzweil was born.
Kurzweil IS a genius and has been a great asset to humankind. I do not question his achievements and most of his contributions. However my description of him taking supplements to reprogram himself, was meant to show how imperfect and human he really is. Here is one of the greatest minds of our time who cannot even rationalize his own mortality. He attempts to use his great intellect to convince himself that he will soon be immortal. Alas, even the great Kurzweil will die one day and no, his consciousness will not be uploaded and preserved forever. I predict that at the time of his death, nanotech will have advanced greatly and maybe even have some significant changes to our everyday lives, but not to the point where we will have "merged" with computers.
You mean sub atomic. I hope human will one day be able to use quantum fields to do things. Anyways there are quite a few things that can come after we are done with silicon. Quantum computer, 3d, optical computers ,ect
Yes, sub-atomic. I know we are barely scratching the surface with molecular-level nanotechnology and I am genuinely excited for what the future holds. However, I stated sub-sub-molecular processing to illustrate the absurdity of extrapolating infinitely. I could keep saying sub-sub-sub-sub-sub-molecular computing. The point is, the buck will stop somewhere.
This is exactly what I was referencing. Nanotechnology and micro-computing is the next technological shift. There will be many more advances in the years to come, perhaps even exponentially. I think we both agree on this. What we disagree on is the endpoint. I do not think there will be some sort of infinite growth. In the history of mankind, there have been multiple paradigm shifts. The invention of the wheel, electricity, internet, etc. I don't think any of these were really predicted. Also, none of these paradigm shifts compare to the scale of what is suggested by technological singularity. What you are describing, if it happens, will be the greatest paradigm shift in human history. This change will make us question what it is to even be human. Not only that, but the greatest paradigm shift of humankind was somehow conveniently "predicted."
I do agree that the paradigm shift will be the biggest in human history and will cause us to question a lot of things. Even the meaning of life itself. That is why I am doing so much research and studying it so I can understand it to the best of my ability.
Now the things you used in your example are not forms of information technology thus could not be predicted. The one exception is the internet and it was predicted by people like Ray Kurzweil.
Look at this and keep in mind this has nothing to do with Ray Kurzweil:
Computers have been getting smaller and closer to our faces since their very beginning.
First they were in big rooms, then they sat on desktops, then they sat on our laps, and now they're in our palms. Next they'll be on our faces.
When computers get to this point and can fit in our brains they will enhance our intelligence, immune system and more things we can't understand now. That will be the singularity in my opinion. Based on current models that will be by 2030.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Swack
Kurzweil IS a genius and has been a great asset to humankind. I do not question his achievements and most of his contributions. However my description of him taking supplements to reprogram himself, was meant to show how imperfect and human he really is. Here is one of the greatest minds of our time who cannot even rationalize his own mortality. He attempts to use his great intellect to convince himself that he will soon be immortal. Alas, even the great Kurzweil will die one day and no, his consciousness will not be uploaded and preserved forever. I predict that at the time of his death, nanotech will have advanced greatly and maybe even have some significant changes to our everyday lives, but not to the point where we will have "merged" with computers.
The problem that Ray Kurzweil faces is one that most people face in his generation. They are right at the cusp of the singularity and if they want to live to see it they will need to make sure they live extra well and get some luck. I am in what I call the luckiest generation because we will not need to take the extra steps he has to see it. For example I am 40 now and by the time things start to kick in I will still be in my 50's and in today's standards is still young. That does not mean I am guaranteed to see it, we are all day to day, but on average people in my generation should live to see it.
I guess we can agree to disagree. The reality of singularity is not as obvious and palpable to me as it is to you.
I think Google Glass is a far cry from having computers in our brains. It would be fun to revisit this thread in 17 years to see where we stand
I'm not sure when you first heard of the singularity but keep in mind I have been studying this for a few years now. When I first heard of it I had a similar reaction you did as this is a difficult concept to fully understand.
The key to this happening by 203 is how computers and information technology advance exponentially. That is not something we are programmed to think about so it seems odd to us.
I'm not sure when you first heard of the singularity but keep in mind I have been studying this for a few years now. When I first heard of it I had a similar reaction you did as this is a difficult concept to fully understand.
The key to this happening by 203 is how computers and information technology advance exponentially. That is not something we are programmed to think about so it seems odd to us.
I guess we can't agree to disagree
I first heard of singularity several years ago after watching a documentary on Ray Kurzweil. I understand the concept completely. It is actually quite simple. As I pointed out before, it is logically flawed and is an overly generous take on exponential growth. There is no way to tell if the growth curve will continue or plateau. If you look at recent growth, (i.e. the last 50 years), then yes you can say things may grow to the point of singularity. However if you look at historical growth (over the last several hundred thousand years), this type of growth has never been sustained. The industrial revolution was what..50 years? Modern micro-computer circuits..(1970-2020) 50 years? Cell phone/nanotechnology..(1990s to 2040s?) another 50 years?
What is the end point of the current paradigm? Computers and circuits in everyone's brains? Completely autonomous robots who can think independently? A fusion of human and artificial consciousness? We are already 20 some-odd years into the current paradigm and we are nowhere close to any of this.
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.
