Bigthink - Idea Comments Feed

Comment on: Technological Singularity: Fact? If so, why so? If not, why not?

Bigthink — Fri, 25 Jan 2008 07:44:16 +0100

Just expanding a bit on why I'm worried about carbon-based AI machines - not really driven by the imagination of sci-fi writers, but by my own imagination.

Because C-AI allows for a range of outcomes, the big-picture involving many machine-computers, becomes increasingly unpredictable. Included in the possible scenarios are many that we really don't want to become involved in, but may have no choice.

Comment on: Technological Singularity: Fact? If so, why so? If not, why not?

Bigthink — Fri, 25 Jan 2008 02:55:54 +0100

Eh, I tend to think that because everyone seems to be so scared of AI becoming too powerful (partially due to the multitudes of science fiction stories about malevolent or too-powerful AIs getting control of and exterminated/subjugating humanity) any singularity will take the direction of augmenting man.

One of the augmentation methods could possibly be carbon-based computers with human-like mental capacity created specifically to be used as extra mental processing power for humans.

Comment on: Technological Singularity: Fact? If so, why so? If not, why not?

Bigthink — Wed, 23 Jan 2008 23:19:17 +0100

Nothing to be feared from silicon-based computers. What scares the hell out of me, is the ultimate-scenario in a future filled with carbon-based computers.

Comment on: Technological Singularity: Fact? If so, why so? If not, why not?

Bigthink — Wed, 23 Jan 2008 00:26:35 +0100

Well, I see it as just different. Until I see how it turns out, I'm not going to judge, but I find it odd that you would be scared of present-day computers. They are wonderful tools of expression and are an area of study that should not be neglected by anyone.

I won't fear even super-human artificial intelligence until they start having an output beyond simply responding to an operator.

Comment on: Technological Singularity: Fact? If so, why so? If not, why not?

Bigthink — Tue, 22 Jan 2008 21:53:15 +0100

This is the kind of thing that really scares me, I've always been afraid of computers, especially when I realize that I have no real control when they break down. Yet i still use them...

This kind of relates to the history behind the Dune Chronicles with the machines and computers that were created based on the design of the human brain, but fits more with the obvious story behind the Matrix.

How could quantum computers play into this. They would definitely speed up the process...

"Machines building machines? How perverse!"
--C3PO

Comment on: Technological Singularity: Fact? If so, why so? If not, why not?

Bigthink — Tue, 22 Jan 2008 18:52:07 +0100

@Roadsurfer--
I disagree. If, for example, humans became connected brain-to-brain over worldwide networking, then it could presumably CHANGE human nature. If this were to happen, it would be appropriate to apply the term "singularity."

Comment on: Technological Singularity: Fact? If so, why so? If not, why not?

Bigthink — Sun, 20 Jan 2008 02:25:40 +0100

I've just discovered this theory and I'm in the process of reading up on it. I am wondering if it has any relation to Terence McKenna's 'novelty theory' and idea of a 'singularity of novelty'?

Comment on: Technological Singularity: Fact? If so, why so? If not, why not?

Bigthink — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 12:16:35 +0100

Ahh,Haa... the religious link.

But seriously RoadSurfer, there is no way that man is capable of planning for a future full of limitless options. Whatever we do, there always be unforeseen and unintended consequences. Personally, I'm just gonna sit back and enjoy the ride.

Comment on: Technological Singularity: Fact? If so, why so? If not, why not?

Bigthink — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 06:52:14 +0100

I think all things must be looked at in perspective. It is my opinion that even if we are capable of producing superintelligent machines, that human nature and life experience will not become unpredictable (to the point of a singularity, by definition). I do see technology becoming more invasive to the human body, and more immersive to the digital and physical world, but i think if superintelligence were to be created and turned on, it would be in pursuit of some kind of profit motive, such as curing diseases in the medical fiel, ultra-efficient energies, or other profitable/beneficial areas. I do not believe the human race could be so niave as to create a superintelligent entity without a plan or check against the proverbial "Judgement Day".

Comment on: Technological Singularity: Fact? If so, why so? If not, why not?

Bigthink — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 01:29:33 +0100

Yes, it's a thing open to interpretation. The reason I am loathe to express my ideas yet is because if I did so, many people would just read that and argue based simply on that without doing any research.

Comment on: Technological Singularity: Fact? If so, why so? If not, why not?

Bigthink — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 00:14:04 +0100

Hmmm... let me think on that one for a bit. Might be too remote from the physical definition, but it's a start. The deeper I go with this, the more I realize that there is not a consensus, and many people have many different interpretations. Let's mention 'religion' in an attempt to attract the same level of input found in other places [grin].

Comment on: Technological Singularity: Fact? If so, why so? If not, why not?

Bigthink — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 19:46:58 +0100

Haha :) Okay... well, the Singularity is defined in a few different ways. Wikipedia has a pretty good article on this (url: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technological_Singularity).
The only definition I can give with out definitively taking sides is: the Technological Singularity is the point at which technological development begins move so quickly that human history/nature is changed irrevocably.

Comment on: Technological Singularity: Fact? If so, why so? If not, why not?

Bigthink — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 07:34:26 +0100

OK... A good starting point might be to attempt a definition we might all agree upon. Any takers? I AM -- you have grasped completely the spirit of BigThink [ and I will take up your thread on 'infinity' another time [grin] ].