Not "A" singularity, as in black hole. "The" Singularity.
As in: the point in time when humans become more technological than biological. Also Called the Metaverse Singularity.
Believe it or not, some of the greatest thinkers of our time believe that it will happen by 2049.
http://www.transcendentman.com/
http://www.onthemedia.org/transcripts/20 09/04/03/03
http://www.kurzweilai.net/index.html?fla sh=1
Kurtzweil, the man references by those three links predicted, accurately within a couple years, the advent and worldwide spread of the internet, that a computer would beat a human in chess, that the Human Genome would be mapped, and many other technologies. His track record, especially the precision of it, would make Nostradamus cower in shame.
So what do you think? Turing-capable computers within 30 years. Immortality, merging with computers, multiplying people's intelligence and memory by factors of thousands, mind-controlled internet, virtual reality... all within 50 years... within our (barring accident or illness) lifetime. Where Ghost in the Shell, seems both prescient and as quaint as the Jetsons.
Bring on the future!
Tis better to sit in silence and be presumed a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt.
At 4/4/09 08:59 AM, Ravariel wrote: Bring on the future!
;;;;;
I am convinced that everything has to do with perspective of the person who's living.
All I am focused on for the future is getting through the next 18 days of a very limited bland diet , with only water & watered juice drinks being consumed... But on April 23rd the chilli & hot peppers in this area wil no longer be SAFE !
Those who have only the religious opinions of others in their head & worship them. Have no room for their own thoughts & no room to contemplate anyone elses ideas either-More
I agree with the base concept of Humans affectively becoming one with technology. But I disagree with the assertation that Technology is the opposite of biological. The only way Humanity can continue to prosper if we become so dependent ont echnology is if we work on Biotech, as otherwise we'll just run out resources and nuke ourselves. If our tech is based upon renewable and biological systems then woohoo! We have a greater chance of survivial.
This does sound good and all, but how will it effect the world, like third world countries?
Answer: It won't. To say the world will be "technological" is a joke, because not all will benefit from it.
It's great for some, but not all.
New to Politics?/ Friend of the Devil/ I review writing! PM me
"Question everything generally thought to be obvious."-Dieter Rams
Why do you think "Third World" countries won't benefit from this? Specifically.
Tis better to sit in silence and be presumed a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt.
At 4/4/09 12:56 PM, Ravariel wrote: Why do you think "Third World" countries won't benefit from this? Specifically.
Take Africa, for example. Does the majority of the population have access to technology? I think not.
Point is here, the benefits will only come to those who have access to modern technology. Can you imagine a doctor performing surgery without the proper tools? He may have the right information, but not the equipment.
New to Politics?/ Friend of the Devil/ I review writing! PM me
"Question everything generally thought to be obvious."-Dieter Rams
At 4/4/09 01:06 PM, BrianEtrius wrote:At 4/4/09 12:56 PM, Ravariel wrote: Why do you think "Third World" countries won't benefit from this? Specifically.Take Africa, for example. Does the majority of the population have access to technology? I think not.
Why do you think they won't be able to gain it in the next 50 years?
Tis better to sit in silence and be presumed a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt.
I am not skeptical of the predictions, but you do have to remember that every technology is expensive at first. By 2049 it is very possible that we will have these technologies, but because of the obvious demand they will be much too costly for any except the richest of the rich.
A former rebellion is just a present conformity
http://cbp.newgrounds.com/
At 4/4/09 01:14 PM, Ravariel wrote: Why do you think they won't be able to gain it in the next 50 years?
Because of, as my father likes to say, the half life of computers.
Since computers are constantly evolving and getting better, the knowledge and technology of it only has a half life of 6 months. This means whatever you know now, half of it will be obsolete in 6 months.
So, imagine if you will, we gave everyone in Africa a Mac. Say, an iBook. But, within a short period of time, it'll become obsolete and the rest of the world is on a different standard. So even if they were to get computers, it would be outdated in no time.
New to Politics?/ Friend of the Devil/ I review writing! PM me
"Question everything generally thought to be obvious."-Dieter Rams
Is this what you meant?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/natur e/7979113.stm
A robot has now made scientific discoveries on its own !
Those who have only the religious opinions of others in their head & worship them. Have no room for their own thoughts & no room to contemplate anyone elses ideas either-More
At 4/4/09 01:19 PM, BrianEtrius wrote: So, imagine if you will, we gave everyone in Africa a Mac. Say, an iBook. But, within a short period of time, it'll become obsolete and the rest of the world is on a different standard. So even if they were to get computers, it would be outdated in no time.
Except as we advance, more advanced computers become commonplace and affordable. Also, with the growth of nanotube 3-dimensional processors and bio-implant devices like what we're researching now, the rate at which our technology grows will continue to be exponential.
What this means is that functional computing will always be affordable, and as we continue the tech will become affordable at a faster and faster rate, meaning that while the poorest of countries might never be at the forefront of the IT curve, they will gain ground via the very speeding up of our advancement. Also, what's to ay they won't, in 50 years, become the next Japan, the next Tech leader? Hell, India's catching up quite nicely as we speak.
Tis better to sit in silence and be presumed a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt.
At 4/4/09 08:59 AM, Ravariel wrote: So what do you think? Turing-capable computers within 30 years. Immortality, merging with computers, multiplying people's intelligence and memory by factors of thousands, mind-controlled internet, virtual reality... all within 50 years... within our (barring accident or illness) lifetime. Where Ghost in the Shell, seems both prescient and as quaint as the Jetsons.
Amazing! So we're finally going to get our jet packs and flying cars by then? Seriously though, this looks like a lot of change indeed, and I am hoping we can learn how to protect the environment and increase our longevitiy better this way.
You know the world's gone crazy when the best rapper's a white guy and the best golfer's a black guy - Chris Rock
We arenot turning into the Borg. Besides, it looks more like genetic manipulation is more probable anyway.
Humans: Development time - since the creation of the earth BILLIONS OF YEARS OF NATURAL STUDY AND DEVELOPMENT.
How long have we had computers, a century?
Yeah. Okay, I totally trust that.
rofl
Well, we already have functional prosthetic limbs that can move using out own neurological signals... sort of.
It's not unthinkable that one day we may have artificals lungs, heart, kidneys, maybe even liver. artificial brain? Eh... I'm not sure how that would work.
I'm not crazy, everyone else is.
At 4/4/09 06:15 PM, Korriken wrote: Well, we already have functional prosthetic limbs that can move using out own neurological signals... sort of.
It's not unthinkable that one day we may have artificals lungs, heart, kidneys, maybe even liver. artificial brain? Eh... I'm not sure how that would work.
It would work for your life time. But think about in a million years.
It's basically choosing a trait from choice rather than natural selection.
Which is dangerous and unpredictable if you know anything about science and genetics.
4 nanometer processors that can match the processing capabilities of the human brain will be hitting the market in 1-2 years. Three-dimensional nanotube processors aren't far behind, and they figure that one the size of a sugarcube can match or exceed the brain's capabilities. Pattern recognition algorithms are progressing exponentially as well. 3 years ago a computer couldn't tell the difference between a dog and a cat when shown a picture... now one can take a picture of a page of a book and read it out loud.
This shit isn't so far ahead as you might think. Please, go to the first link I posted and watch the rest of the videos (there's a small playlist at the end of the trailer)... the conference speech is a bit dense and monotonous, but ridiculously interesting.
Tis better to sit in silence and be presumed a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt.
At 4/4/09 06:19 PM, JackPhantasm wrote: It's basically choosing a trait from choice rather than natural selection.
Which is dangerous and unpredictable if you know anything about science and genetics.
Why is it dangerous and unpredictable? Do you assume that our understanding of genetics will not increase similarly to our ability to harness computational power?
Tis better to sit in silence and be presumed a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt.
There is nothing more I would like than to live long enough to see the complete merge of biology and technology. As Kevin Warwick would say, I was born a human by chance, and I'd like to transcend that.
" Show me a sane man and I will cure him for you. " - Carl Gustave Jung
hmmm i never believed that our brains were like computers
its the other way around, as in computers are like our brains.
so instead of us becoming more technological i believe technology will become more natural and organic... think of.. uhh.. the gravemind(except not as gross... or rhymie.. the motherbrain is also a good example)
It is ok to make fun of America. But if you make fun of any other country in a vague or joking way you get banned.
So it is bad to become humongous cyborgs and destroy our planet?
If you fail at failing, doesn't make you win at winning?
First off - Ghost in the shell is not premonition or amazing. In fact, it's a bucket of dildos.
Second; I HOPE it's inevitable ( i.e. possible ) and that it's within my lifetime, because I gotta say, I don't really feel like being dead, and if a machine can help that somehow, then GREAT.
I think that the computer industry is going to start leveling out soon without the advent of new technology. We'll have holographic memory soon, sure, but we're not getting faster computers without a leap into quantum computing.
I think far more will happen once we understand and can build lifeforms. Like Tri was saying, that kind of power will be more effective. Nano bots were talked about once, and there's still work being done there, but it makes more sense to do a biological nanobot built from proteins.
We'll see eventually. Connecting our heads up to computers is one thing, but its extremely hard to do as each brain is set up entirely different and is highly reliant on what you experience, eat, learn etc. No two brains are 100% alike or even really encode information the same way. Some of its similar or can be taught to a machine in a few hours, but that kind of thing won't be perfect, ever really.
At 4/4/09 08:59 AM, Ravariel wrote: Believe it or not, some of the greatest thinkers of our time believe that it will happen by 2049.
People who predict the Borg to be founded on earth by humans and come up with a stardate so accurate are not great thinkers. I mean, if it was 2050, I would consider reading it. But it says 2049, how the hell did they come up with that!?
Why do you try to explain something yet unexplainable by logic, with something absolutely illogic and by its very nature unexplainable? What's the purpose of that nonsense?
At 4/4/09 01:06 PM, BrianEtrius wrote:At 4/4/09 12:56 PM, Ravariel wrote: Why do you think "Third World" countries won't benefit from this? Specifically.Take Africa, for example. Does the majority of the population have access to technology? I think not.
Point is here, the benefits will only come to those who have access to modern technology. Can you imagine a doctor performing surgery without the proper tools? He may have the right information, but not the equipment.
The people in third world countries should have been dead long ago. But we keep feeding them cookies just to extend the duration of their misery.
Third world countries need to stop existing. The only support I'll ever send there will be in the form of euthanasia means. I might also support the clean-up crew, though the millions of dead would be good fertilizer.
We need a world-government, the end of capitalism and the end of all religions. Then we could consider this "Singularity". Which is not something I see happening in my lifetime (and I don't plan on dying any time soon, let alone in another 40 years).
Why do you try to explain something yet unexplainable by logic, with something absolutely illogic and by its very nature unexplainable? What's the purpose of that nonsense?
I think with the current path of our technological era that could be a future close to us. It could be a good thing for our planet. It would definitely move us forward.
Its all a big bucket of horse cum.
The future never comes the way people envisioned it to be, we were 'supposed' to have hover cars by now.
And I have heard of that Kurzweil guy, they guy is practically obsessed with living as long as possible, his diet, witch excludes everything delicious (besides red wine), includes "150 vitamin supplements, eight to 10 glasses of alkaline water and 10 cups of green tea" taken daily.
Not to mention his predicts come conveniently within his own lifetime. The guy is looking for the fountain of youth, something some humans have been doing for thousands of years.
Sig made by azteca89
At 4/4/09 08:26 PM, KemCab wrote:
Evolution is the genetic change in organisms through natural selection, which itself is a random process.
Look at that.
making the choices yourself
Now look at that.
Completely opposite processes. One is choice, one is random.
You cannot live without the random. It keeps things even.
Not to mention, people have been doing this forever with plants. There is a risk to it but it's not like nuclear weapons or anything.
Not forever. Blinkn of an eye. Every choice has the ultimate risk, which is your extinction.
At 4/5/09 11:29 AM, Zoraxe7 wrote: Its all a big bucket of horse cum.
Delightful.
The future never comes the way people envisioned it to be, we were 'supposed' to have hover cars by now.
Of course you've double-checked all of his previous predictions, right? You know... all the ones that came to pass. And all he does is math.
Why, aside from an argument from incredulity, and random ad-hominems, do you believe he's incorrect?
Tis better to sit in silence and be presumed a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt.
At 4/5/09 07:48 PM, KemCab wrote:At 4/5/09 11:29 AM, Zoraxe7 wrote: Not to mention his predicts come conveniently within his own lifetime.He's 61. In 2049 he'll be 101. Would he honestly expect to live that long?
He predicts that the technology to extend life and youth would occure in his lifetime, so yes, he does expect to live that long.
Sig made by azteca89
Select between 5 monster racers, upgrade your monster skill and win the competition!
4.18 / 5.00 3,534 Views
Build most powerful forces, unleash hordes of monster and control your soldiers!
3.80 / 5.00 4,200 Views
© Copyright 1995-2014 Newgrounds, Inc. All rights reserved. Privacy Policy | Terms of Use
newgrounds.com — Your #1 online entertainment & artist community! All your base are belong to us.
