|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,890 Year: 4,147/9,624 Month: 1,018/974 Week: 345/286 Day: 1/65 Hour: 0/1 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: The Social Implications Of "The Singularity Moment" | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18348 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0 |
Recently, I read an article in Time Magazine titled 2045: The Year Man Becomes Immortal In it, they discuss the rapid advance in artificial intelligence, and have popularized the phrase "The singularity" as the moment when computers become capable themselves of designing more intelligent computers ad infinitum.
Time Magazine writes: It's impossible to predict the behavior of these smarter-than-human intelligences with which (with whom?) we might one day share the planet, because if you could, you'd be as smart as they would be. But there are a lot of theories about it. Maybe we'll merge with them to become super-intelligent cyborgs, using computers to extend our intellectual abilities the same way that cars and planes extend our physical abilities. Maybe the artificial intelligences will help us treat the effects of old age and prolong our life spans indefinitely. Maybe we'll scan our consciousnesses into computers and live inside them as software, forever, virtually. Maybe the computers will turn on humanity and annihilate us. The one thing all these theories have in common is the transformation of our species into something that is no longer recognizable as such to humanity circa 2011. This transformation has a name: the Singularity. Personally, I think that such an advance will free humans up to become more artistic, but I wonder how we will be able to understand and direct the technology if it progresses beyond the mathematical and technological comprehension of most of us? Social Ideas In Creation/Evolution? Mod, you decide where to put it.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18348 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0 |
jar writes: the majority of the population will simply USE the products, accept any benefits, without thinking about them, understanding them or "absorbing" the technology. It is always a minority of folks that actually want to go further. What is the purpose..the ongoing charge...for society in general, anyway? Not everyone is as excited about exploring the universe as you may be. People like to be served by technology...but few want to risk the cost of boldly going where no man has gone before.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18348 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0 |
A.P. writes: Watson's victory leads to the question: What can we measly humans do that amazing machines can't do or will never do? The answer, like all of "Jeopardy!" comes in the form of a question: Who not what dreamed up Watson? While computers can calculate and construct, they cannot decide to create. So far, only humans can. "The way to think about this is: Can Watson decide to create Watson?" said Pradeep Khosla, dean of engineering at Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh. "We are far from there. Our ability to create is what allows us to discover and create new knowledge and technology." We created Watson, after all. And whats wrong with infotainment? Humans like to play games and have fun. Its an emotional thing. Also jar, as you once pointed out, we have a unique emotion known as empathy. Could Watson even be programmed with such a thing? And if so...so what?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18348 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0 |
Straggler,replying to Crashfrog writes: One example that I can think of is the common observation that young kids are more adept and proficient at computers than most mature adults not directly involved in the field. The younger generation "gets it" much easier than the older generation. I am still bemused as to exactly what you mean by "absorbed" and how we know when a particular technology can be said to have been "absorbed" by human society. I will admit that this is not a global thing. It is true only among those of us with access to computers and awareness of their usefullness.
Straggler,to Crashfrog writes: Technological progress, to me, is a bit like the stock market. It has its ups and downs, is never linear, yet has historically averaged an increase in overall value. For the sake of this discussion, additionally, I would assume that the technological impact (if and when realized) will initially only directly affect the affluent. The poor will always be among us. Yet even as we speak, there are global movements aimed at advancing the tools needed to become involved, such as the One Laptop Per Child initiative. When the splitting of the atom led to the worlds first atomic bombs, the impact of the technology did not directly affect the entire global population, but indirectly changed the course of the world forever. If there were such an event (that could be measured) where the capability of computers, nanotechnology, and perhaps artificial intelligence were to take a quantum leap of efficiency due to the ability of the technology itself to replicate itself and advance...that would be defined as a singularity moment. I am uncertain if there actually is such a moment, however, or if the collective changes will happen over a period of time.
I disputed the mathematical certainty of the 'Singularity Moment' that you had been asserting as mathematically inevitable. It isn't mathematically inevitable at all. It is mathematically predicted if you make certain assumptions. Straggler writes: I suppose that the trend of society at large will depend on the reasons for the research. Often, wars are a reason to advance a technology. Global altruism has never been as important.
If a particular communications technology (such as the internet and it's future forms) facilitates the ability for human society as a whole to absorb technology at a greater rate then you might end up with a less tiered and more even distribution of absorption across humanity as a whole rather than the ever shrinking puddle model you predict.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18348 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0 |
Theodoric in 2011 writes: We had an interesting discussion back then, 6 years ago. Now, in a recent article in Futurism Magazine, Kurrzweil predicts the singularity moment will occur by 2045. Kurzweil Claims That the Singularity Will Happen by 2045 This month Skeptic Magazine has an article entitled "The Singularity Isn’t Even Close: Why Ray Kurzweil’s Predictions About the Future Are Flawed"The article does a great job showing the flaws of Kurzweil's Singularity and exposes it for the hooey it is. In the article,10/5/17, Kurzweil says:quote:The article elaborates: quote: Are we getting closer or farther?Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. —RC Sproul "A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." —Mark Twain " ~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith Paul was probably SO soaked in prayer nobody else has ever equaled him.~Faith
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18348 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0 |
Michio Kaku says that domestic colleges do not have students smart enough to even apply at where he works. I fear the lack of educated students in the United States is a growing problem, yet I don't see any solutions on the horizon. What do you see from your vantage point?
Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. —RC Sproul "A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." —Mark Twain " ~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith Paul was probably SO soaked in prayer nobody else has ever equaled him.~Faith
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18348 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0 |
Stile writes: What's the general status of things currently?Should the US make moves into creating more of a national standard? (Put money into political policies and hopefully a national standard) Or should the US strengthen it's individual education segments and continue as it is currently? (Put money into individual school boards) Perspective is everything. We can start by asking some basic questions regarding education in general, intelligence in general, and tie it in with human progress in general. There are many concepts, ideas, and realities that are only twenty to thirty years away. I recently watched a TED talk on one of them: The world could run out of food two decades earlier than thought (By 2027) Thus, while Kurzweil and other Sci Fi dreamers are telling us that we collectively will reach some sort of Turing moment where our collective intelligence will leapfrog, the whole concept of intelligence itself has to be defined by basic issues and problems such as how to feed ourselves or how to keep from spending money on 70 year old bombers lumbering through the skies with nuclear weapons. Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. —RC Sproul "A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." —Mark Twain " ~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith Paul was probably SO soaked in prayer nobody else has ever equaled him.~Faith
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18348 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0 |
Taq writes: They say we live in an age of information. Information, however, is more than numbers. I recently read an article that talked of the speed of the top ten world supercomputers. Top 10 supercomputers of 2017 On the face of it, being able to calculate numbers as fast as your computer or being able to access Wikipedia just like you access your memories would be pretty wild. How will these machines contribute to solving real world problems? The question is not whether humans will be replaced by computers or even whether humans can someday think as a computer. The question is whether we as a species understand the consensus as to the best use of the technology and brainpower we possess.Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. —RC Sproul "A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." —Mark Twain " ~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith Paul was probably SO soaked in prayer nobody else has ever equaled him.~Faith
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024