Thread: Staring into the Singularity

Interesting theory, unfortunately, I saw nothing that factored in thermodynamics and the point of diminishing returns.

I do not believe the doubling can continue much longer. We are already up against some pretty serious technological issues that will most likely cause Moore's law to fail.

Moore's law calls for a doubling every 18 months I belive. I suspect we may seen this doubling maybe four more times before it hits a wall. If at that time, new technology has not been identified, this wild progress will falter.

2035, hmm, I will be in my mid 70's by then.... wonder if they will put me in a zoo or just euthanize me?

Good model of the Singularity" is an oxymoron[/b]

I though an oxymoron consisted of 2 words, not mutiple. I saw this in a fake episode of sesame street.

ANYHOW.

that's an intresting theory. I think it is total bullshit that we will all die becouse of A.I. unless we really screw up and keep all nukes in connection with a net (for instance, the internet) after the 'invention' of A.I. If we do not, the worst that could happen would be a 'crazy' A.I. that destroys all electronic devices or something. Or an A.I. that hires an actor to be his puppet towards world domination.

As for the topic.

(

Besides that, my theory on creating A.I. is: just trow alot of things that do the same as nerve-cells, that is recieve and send electronic signals. If you keep doing it randomly something will keep on doing stuff. Then, copy that good one. Hook the copies up to feet, and the ones that move away from, for instance, a red ball that if they touch explodes (or the robot just gets terminated.)

Anyhow, from there, teach the robot more and more, keep complexing it. The point is that to learn, the 'nerve-cells' should be able to get thicker and more brached. Some sort of nano-technology that makes a frequently used transmittor ('nerve-cell') better and in contact with more, like in a real bain.

That would make A.I. I think.

)

That really hurts my one hundred petaflops.

Anyway, my first impression is that I've never met anyone who could take so long and use so many examples to repeatedly state

[list]
I get the distinct impression that that entire article was an attack on people who waste time thinking about what will happen after the singularity. Anyway.

For what it's worth I can't pick any big holes in his argument. I personally think Moore's law will fail before we hit the singularity, but it's true we've passed every challenge to it up to yet.

I don't really think even if we hit the singularity and get unlimited processing power it will neccesarily mean any form of trancendence. A sports car engine wouldn't be much use before the invention of the wheel. Even with that power we'll have trouble finding ways to use it. The first way around that that springs to mind is using it to power Neuro's idea of running evolution again. On the other hand who knows what you'll end up with if you do that.

At this point it is customary to speculate about how one goes about eating, drinking, walking around. People state that they are unwilling to give up physical reality, worry about whether or not they will have sufficient computational power to simulate a hedonistic world of their wildest desires, and so on and so on ad nauseam.[/b]

Most interesting bit from a lucid dreaming viewpoint. If we had more raw processing power would we be able to create better worlds?

Originally posted by Seeker

2035, hmm, I will be in my mid 70's by then.... wonder if they will put me in a zoo or just euthanize me?

it astonishes me that no-one answered "lol" to this...

oh hell:




but anyway: WOW sounds pretty interesting, though.