 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Origin >
The Singularity >
Exploring the 'Singularity'
Permanent link to this article: http://www.kurzweilai.net/meme/frame.html?main=/articles/art0584.html
Printable Version |
|
| |
|
Exploring the 'Singularity'
The point in time when current trends may go wildly off the charts--known as the "Singularity"--is now getting serious attention. What it suggests is that technological change will soon become so rapid that we cannot possibly envision its results.
Originally published in The
Futurist June 1, 2003. Published on KurzweilAI.net June 6, 2003.
Technological change isn't just happening fast. It's happening
at an exponential rate. Contrary to the commonsense, intuitive,
linear view, we won't just experience 100 years of progress in the
twenty-first century—it will be more like 20,000 years of progress.
The near-future results of exponential technological growth will
be staggering: the merging of biological and nonbiological entities
in biorobotics, plants and animals engineered to grow pharmaceutical
drugs, software-based "life," smart robots, and atom-sized machines
that self-replicate like living matter. Some individuals are even
warning that we could lose control of this expanding techno-cornucopia
and cause the total extinction of life as we know it. Others are
researching how this permanent technological overdrive will affect
us. They're trying to understand what this new world of ours will
look like and how accelerating technology already impacts us.
A number of scientists believe machine intelligence will surpass
human intelligence within a few decades, leading to what's come
to be called the Singularity. Author and inventor Ray Kurzweil defines
this phenomenon as "technological change so rapid and profound it
could create a rupture in the very fabric of human history."
Singularity is technically a mathematical term, perhaps best described
as akin to what happens on world maps in a standard atlas. Everything
appears correct until we look at regions very close to the poles.
In the standard Mercator projection, the poles appear not as points
but as a straight line. Each line is a singularity: Everywhere along
the top line contains the exact point of the North Pole, and the
bottom line is the entire South Pole.
The singularity on the edge of the map is nothing compared to the
singularity at the center of a black hole. Here one finds the astrophysicist's
singularity, a rift in the continuum of space and time where Einstein's
rules no longer function. The approaching technological Singularity,
like the singularities of black holes, marks a point of departure
from reality. Explorers once wrote "Beyond here be dragons" on the
edges of old maps of the known world, and the image of life as we
approach these edges of change are proving to be just as mysterious,
dangerous, and controversial.
There is no concise definition for the Singularity. Kurzweil and
many transhumanists define it as "a future time when societal, scientific,
and economic change is so fast we cannot even imagine what will
happen from our present perspective." A range of dates is given
for the advent of the Singularity. "I'd be surprised if it happened
before 2004 or after 2030," writes author and computer science professor
Vernor Vinge. A distinctive feature will be that machine intelligence
will have exceeded and even merged with human intelligence. Another
definition is used by extropians, who say it denotes "the singular
time when technological development will be at its fastest." From
an environmental perspective, the Singularity can be thought of
as the point at which technology and nature become one. Whatever
perspective one takes, at this juncture the world as we have known
it will become extinct, and new definitions of life, nature, and
human will take hold.
Many leading technology industries have been aware of the possibility
of a Singularity for some time. There are concerns that, if the
public understood its ramifications, they might panic over accepting
new and untested technologies that bring us closer to Singularity.
For now, the debate about the consequences of the Singularity has
stayed within the halls of business and technology; the kinks are
being worked out, avoiding "doomsday" hysteria. At this time, it
appears to matter little if the Singularity ever truly comes to
pass.
Kurzweil explains that central to the workings of the Singularity
are a number of "laws," one of which is Moore's law. Intel cofounder
Gordon E. Moore noted that the number of transistors that could
fit on a single computer chip had doubled every year for six years
from the beginnings of integrated circuits in 1959. Moore predicted
that the trend would continue, and it has—although the doubling
rate was later adjusted to an 18-month cycle.
Today, the smallest transistors in chips span only thousands of
atoms (hundreds of nanometers). Chipmakers build such components
using a process in which they apply semiconducting, metallic, and
insulating layers to a semiconductor wafer to create microscopic
circuitry. They accomplish the procedure using light for imprinting
patterns onto the wafer. In order to keep Moore's law moving right
along, researchers today have built circuits out of transistors,
wires, and other components as tiny as a few atoms across that can
carry out simple computations.
Kurzweil and Sun Microsystems' chief scientist Bill Joy agree that,
circa 2030, the technology of the 1999 film The Matrix (which visualized
a three-dimensional interface between humans and computers, calling
conventional reality into question) will be within our grasp and
that humanity will be teetering on the edge of the Singularity.
(See their essays in Taking the Red Pill: Science, Philosophy, and
Religion in The Matrix, edited by Glenn Yeffeth, 2003.) Kurzweil
explains that this will become possible because Moore's law will
be replaced by another computing paradigm over the next few decades.
"Moore's law was not the first but the fifth paradigm to provide
exponential growth of computing power," Kurzweil says. The first
paradigm of computer technology was the data processing machinery
used in the 1890 American census. This electromechanical computing
technology was followed by the paradigms of relay-based technology,
vacuum tubes, transistors, and eventually integrated circuits. "Every
time a paradigm ran out of steam," states Kurzweil, "another paradigm
came along and picked up where that paradigm left off." The sixth
paradigm, the one that will enable technology á la The Matrix, will
be here in 20 to 30 years. "It's obvious what the sixth paradigm
will be—computing in three dimensions," says Kurzweil. "We
will effectively merge with our technology."
Stewart Brand in his book The Clock of the Long Now discusses the
Singularity and another related law, Monsanto's law, which states
that the ability to identify and use genetic information doubles
every 12 to 24 months. This exponential growth in biological knowledge
is transforming agriculture, nutrition, and health care in the emerging
life-sciences industry.
A field of research building on the exponential growth rate of
biotechnology is nanotechnology—the science of building machines
out of atoms. A nanometer is atomic in scale, a distance that's
0.001% of the width of human hair. One goal of this science is to
change the atomic fabric of matter—to engineer machinelike
atomic structures that reproduce like living matter. In this respect,
it is similar to biotechnology, except that nanotechnology needs
to literally create something like an inorganic version of DNA to
drive the building of its tiny machines. "We're working out the
rules of biology in a realm where nature hasn't had the opportunity
to work," states University of Texas biochemistry professor Angela
Belcher. "What would take millions of years to evolve on its own
takes about three weeks on the bench top."
Machine progress is knocking down the barriers between all the
sciences. Chemists, biologists, engineers, and physicists are now
finding themselves collaborating on more and more experimental research.
This collaboration is best illustrated by the opening of Cornell
University's Nanobiotechnology Center and other such facilities
around the world. These scientists predict breakthroughs soon that
will open the way to molecular-size computing and the quantum computer,
creating new scientific paradigms where exponential technological
progress will leap off the map. Those who have done the exponential
math quickly realize the possibilities in numerous industries and
scientific fields—and then they notice the anomaly of the Singularity
happening within this century.
In 2005, IBM plans to introduce Blue Gene, a supercomputer that
can perform at about 5% of the power of the human brain. This computer
could transmit the entire contents of the Library of Congress in
less than two seconds. Blue Gene/L, specifically developed to advance
and serve the growing life-sciences industry, is expected to operate
at about 200 teraflops (200 trillion floating-point operations
per second), larger than the total computing power of the top 500
supercomputers in the world. It will be able to run extremely complex
simulations, including breakthroughs in computers and information
technology, creating new frontiers in biology, says IBM's Paul M.
Horn. According to Moore's law, computer hardware will surpass human
brainpower in the first decade of this century. Software that emulates
the human mind—artificial intelligence—may take another
decade to evolve.
Physicists, mathematicians, and scientists like Vinge and Kurzweil
have identified through their research the likely boundaries of
the Singularity and have predicted with confidence various paths
leading up to it over the next couple of decades. These scientists
are currently debating what discovery could set off a chain reaction
of Earth-altering technological events. They suggest that advancements
in the fields of nanotechnology or the discovery of artificial intelligence
could usher in the Singularity.
The majority of people closest to these theories and laws—the
tech sector—can hardly wait for these technologies to arrive.
The true believers call themselves extropians, posthumans, and transhumanists,
and are actively organizing not just to bring the Singularity about,
but to counter the technophobes and neo-Luddites who believe that
unchecked technological progress will exceed our ability to reverse
any destructive process that might unintentionally be set in motion.
The antithesis to neo-Luddite activists is the extropians. For
example, the Progress Action Coalition, formed in 2001 by bio-artist,
author, and extropian activist Natasha Vita-More, fantasizes about
"the dream of true artificial intelligence . . . adding a new richness
to the human landscape never before known." Pro-Act, AgBioworld,
Biotechnology Progress, Foresight Institute, the Progress and Freedom
Foundation, and other industry groups acknowledge, however, that
the greatest threat to technological progress comes not just from
environmental groups, but from a small faction of the scientific
community.
Knowledge-Enabled Mass Destruction
In April 2000, a wrench was thrown into the arrival of the Singularity
by an unlikely source: Sun Microsystems chief scientist Bill Joy.
He is a neo-Luddite without being a Luddite, a technologist warning
the world about technology. Joy co-founded Sun Microsystems, helped
create the Unix computer operating system, and developed the Java
and Jini software systems—systems that helped give the Internet
"life."
In a now-infamous cover story in Wired magazine, "Why the Future
Doesn't Need Us," Joy warned of the dangers posed by developments
in genetics, nanotechnology, and robotics. Joy's warning of the
impacts of exponential technological progress run amok gave new
credence to the coming Singularity. Unless things change, Joy predicted,
"We could be the last generation of humans." Joy warned that "knowledge
alone will enable mass destruction" and termed this phenomenon "knowledgeenabled
mass destruction."
The twentieth century gave rise to nuclear, biological, and chemical
(NBC) technologies that, while powerful, require access to vast
amounts of raw (and often rare) materials, technical information,
and large-scale industries. The twenty-first-century technologies
of genetics, nanotechnology, and robotics (GNR), however, will require
neither large facilities nor rare raw materials.
The threat posed by GNR technologies becomes further amplified
by the fact that some of these new technologies have been designed
to be able to replicate—i.e., they can build new versions of
themselves. Nuclear bombs did not sprout more bombs, and toxic spills
did not grow more spills. If the new selfreplicating GNR technologies
are released into the environment, they could be nearly impossible
to recall or control.
Joy understands that the greatest dangers we face ultimately stem
from a world where global corporations dominate—a future where
much of the world has no voice in how the world is run. Twenty-first-century
GNR technologies, he writes, "are being developed almost exclusively
by corporate enterprises. We are aggressively pursuing the promises
of these new technologies within the now-unchallenged system of
global capitalism and its manifold financial incentives and competitive
pressures."
Joy believes that the system of global capitalism, combined with
our current rate of progress, gives the human race a 30% to 50%
chance of going extinct around the time the Singularity is expected
to happen, around 2030. "Not only are these estimates not encouraging,"
he adds, "but they do not include the probability of many horrid
outcomes that lie short of extinction."
It is very likely that scientists and global corporations will
miss key developments—or, worse, actively avoid discussion
of them. A whole generation of biologists has left the field for
the biotech and nanotech labs. Biologist Craig Holdredge, who has
followed biotech since its beginnings in the 1970s, warns, "Biology
is losing its connection with nature."
When Machines Make War
Cloning, biotechnology, nanotechnology, and robotics are blurring
the lines between nature and machine. In his 1972 speech "The Android
and the Human," science-fiction visionary Philip K. Dick told his
audience, "Machines are becoming more human. Our environment, and
I mean our man-made world of machines, is becoming alive in ways
specifically and fundamentally analogous to ourselves." In the near
future, Dick prophesied, a human might shoot a robot only to see
it bleed from its wound. When the robot shoots back, it may be surprised
to find the human gush smoke. "It would be rather a great moment
of truth for both of them," Dick added.
In November 2001, Advanced Cell Technology of Massachusetts jarred
the nation's focus away from recession and terrorism when it announced
that it had succeeded in cloning early-stage human embryos. Debate
on the topic stayed equally divided between those who support therapeutic
cloning and those, like the American Medical Association, who want
an outright ban.
Karel Capek coined the word robot (Czech for "forced labor") in
the 1920 play R.U.R., in which machines assume the drudgery of factory
production, then develop feelings and proceed to wipe out humanity
in a violent revolution. While the robots in R.U.R. could represent
the "nightmare vision of the proletariat seen through middle-class
eyes," as science-fiction author Thomas Disch has suggested, they
also are testament to the persistent fears of man-made technology
run amok.
Similar themes have manifested themselves in popular culture and
folklore since at least medieval times. While some might dismiss
these stories simply as popular paranoia, robots are already being
deployed beyond Hollywood and are poised to take over the deadlier
duties of the modern soldier. The Pentagon is replacing soldiers
with sensors, vehicles, aircraft, and weapons that can be operated
by remote control or are autonomous. Pilotless aircraft played
an important role in the bombings of Afghanistan, and a model called
the Gnat conducted surveillance flights in the Philippines in 2002.
Leading the Pentagon's remote-control warfare effort is the Defense
Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA). Best known for creating
the infrastructure that became the World Wide Web, DARPA is working
with Boeing to develop the X-45 unmanned combat air vehicle. The
30-foot-long windowless planes will carry up to 12 bombs, each weighing
250 pounds. According to military analysts, the X-45 will be used
to attack radar and antiaircraft installations as early as 2007.
By 2010, it will be programmed to distinguish friends from foes
without consulting humans and independently attack targets in designated
areas. By 2020, robotic planes and vehicles will direct remote-controlled
bombers toward targets, robotic helicopters will coordinate driverless
convoys, and unmanned submarines will clear mines and launch cruise
missiles.
Rising to the challenge of mixing man and machine, MIT's Institute
for Soldier Nanotechnologies (backed by a five-year, $50-million
U.S. Army grant) is busy innovating materials and designs to create
military uniforms that rival the best science fiction. Human soldiers
themselves are being transformed into modern cyborgs through robotic
devices and nanotechnology.
The Biorobotic Arms Race
The 2002 International Conference on Robotics and Automation, hosted
by the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, kicked
off its technical session with a discussion on biorobots, the melding
of living and artificial structures into a cybernetic organism or
cyborg.
"In the past few years, the biosciences and robotics have been
getting closer and closer," says Paolo Dario, founder of Italy's
Advanced Robotics Technology and Systems Lab. "More and more, biological
models are used for the design of biometric robots [and] robots
are increasingly used by neuroscientists as clinical platforms for
validating biological models." Artificial constructs are beginning
to approach the scale and complexity of living systems.
Some of the scientific breakthroughs expected in the next few years
promise to make cloning and robotics seem rather benign. The merging
of technology and nature has already yielded some shocking progeny.
Consider these examples:
• Researchers at the State University of New York Health Science
Center at Brooklyn have turned a living rat into a radio-controlled
automaton using three electrodes placed in the animal's brain. The
animal can be remotely steered through an obstacle course, making
it twist, turn, and jump on demand.
• In May 2002, eight elderly Florida residents were injected
with microscopic silicon identification chips encoded with medical
information. The Los Angeles Times reported that this made them
"scannable just like a jar of peanut butter in the supermarket checkout
line." Applied Digital Solutions Inc., the maker of the chip, will
soon have a prototype of an implantable device able to receive GPS
satellite signals and transmit a person's location.
• Human embryos have been successfully implanted and grown in
artificial wombs. The experiments were halted after a few days to
avoid violating in vitro fertilization regulations.
• Researchers in Israel have fashioned a "bio-computer" out of
DNA that can handle a billion operations per second with 99.8% accuracy.
Reuters reports that these bio-computers are so minute that "a trillion
of them could fit inside a test tube."
• In England, University of Reading Professor Kevin Warwick has
implanted microchips in his body to remotely monitor and control
his physical motions. During Warwick's Project Cyborg experiments,
computers were able to remotely monitor his movements and open doors
at his approach.
• Engineers at the U.S. Sandia National Labs have built a remotecontrolled
spy robot equipped with a scanner, microphone, and chemical microsensor.
The robot weighs one ounce and is smaller than a dime. Lab scientists
predict that the microbot could prove invaluable in protecting U.S.
military and economic interests.
The next arms race is not based on replicating and perfecting a
single deadly technology, like the nuclear bombs of the past or
some space-based weapon of the future. This new arms race is about
accelerating the development and integration of advanced autonomous,
biotechnological, and human-robotic systems into the military apparatus.
A mishap or a massive war using these new technologies could be
more catastrophic than any nuclear war.
Where the Map Exceeds the Territory
The rate at which GNR technologies are being adopted by our society—without
regard to long-term safety testing or researching the political,
cultural, and economic ramifications—mirrors the development
and proliferation of nuclear power and weapons. The human loss caused
by experimentation, production, and development is still being felt
from the era of NBC technologies.
The discussion of the environmental impacts of GNR technologies,
at least in the United States, has been relegated to the margins.
Voices of concern and opposition have likewise been missing in discussions
of the technological Singularity. The true cost of this technological
progress and any coming Singularity will mean the unprecedented
decline of the planet's inhabitants at an ever-increasing rate of
global extinction.
The World Conservation Union, the International Botanical Congress,
and a majority of the world's biologists believe that a global mass
extinction already is under way. As a direct result of human activity
(resource extraction, industrial agriculture, the introduction of
non-native animals, and population growth), up to one-fifth of all
living species are expected to disappear within 30 years. A 1998
Harris Poll of the 5,000 members of the American Institute of Biological
Sciences found that 70% believed that what has been termed "The
Sixth Extinction" is now under way. A simultaneous Harris Poll found
that 60% of the public were totally unaware of the impending biological
collapse.
At the same time that nature's ancient biological creation is on
the decline, laboratory-created biotech life-forms—genetically
modified soybeans, genetically engineered salmon, cloned sheep,
drug-crops, biorobots—are on the rise.
Nature and technology are not just evolving; they are competing
and combining with one another. Ultimately they will become one.
We hear reports daily about these new technologies and new creations,
while shreds of the ongoing biological collapse surface here and
there. Past the edges of change, beyond the wall across the future,
anything becomes possible. Beware the dragons.
Š 2003 James John Bell. Reprinted with permission.
| | |
|
| |
Mind·X Discussion About This Article:
 |
|
|
 |
The Singularity versus Peak Oil
|
|
 |
|
Apparently Singularitarians, Transhumanists, pro-globalization economists and other advocates of exponential energy use haven't been talking to the petroleum geologists. The signs of a global fossil fuels crisis are getting increasingly hard to deny. North America is facing a potentially disastrous shortage of natural gas THIS YEAR. It's so bad that U.S Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham has called an emergency meeting with leaders in the energy industry this month to try to come up with ways to deal with it before winter causes a potential crisis. And Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan is so worried about the economic effect of diminishing natgas stocks that he's scheduled to testify about it before a congressional committee on Tuesday, June 10.
Despite fantasies about transitioning to a "hydrogen economy" in response to gentle price signals from declining fossil fuels supplies, this emergency has caught North America completely flat-footed, and there is no plan -- NONE! -- for any kind of transition to fuels based on renewable energy. Add in the Bush Administration's seizure of Iraq earlier this year, and it becomes increasingly clear that the people running things know what is happening, but they apparently either don't know how to solve it or are unwilling to change the current system as long as there's short-term profit to be made.
Look to developments in New Zealand to see what could happen in the rest of the developed world as we enter the Post-Carbon Age. While New Zealand uses a lot of hydroelectric power, it needs additional generational capacity from fossil fuels. But its main gas field is becoming exhausted, and the power companies are having to convert to coal -- a much less desirable fuel -- much of which they have to import from Australia and Indonesia because the local supply won't suffice for more than a few years. New Zealand's few resources and geographic isolation make it the "miner's canary" of our future in the U.S., showing how hard it will be to keep the electricity online at a level sufficient for a developed industrial society when fossil fuels run out. |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
Re: The Singularity versus Peak Oil
|
|
|
|
On another note, I think it somewhat immature and unfair to make a blanket statement about the mentalities of the members of an ideological group on an issue that remains very open to speculation based on the contributions of a single, if slightly zealous, member.
I concede that it is unfair. However, I do not think it is uncalled for. An observation that I have made about environmentalists is that they tend to be more like zealots—to use your own term—than like visionaries. They get locked onto one issue and push it beyond the point where it is any longer applicable. While environmentalists were worrying about overpopulation, the people who had access to the resources that could lead to overpopulation were already loosing interest in having babies. Now, environmentalists are worried about global warming, when the effect of global warming will probably never get a chance to manifest. Many of them are trying to reinterpret the issue of the singularity in terms of issues that they area already familiar with, rather than recognizing it as a completely new problem with completely new parameters. Moreover, they seem completely blind to the massive and overwhelming implications of the singularity and the stark reality that it will dominate all previous issues.
However, lest I be mistaken, I must assert that it was the efforts of environmentalists that resulted in the regulations on factory and automobile emissions that have made our air breathable; and I can’t express enough gratitude for their work in eliminating the indoor pollution we call cigarette smoke. Recently, when I was in a room where people were permitted to smoke, I was struck with the unimaginable reality we once lived with.
I once asked a pastor why the Lutheran church continued to reject the theory of evolution when the Catholics had accepted it. He said that he suspected it was a reaction to Darwinists who have argued so strongly that the theory of evolution effectively discounted the belief in anything spiritual. In my mind, both Darwinists and Christians have become too zealous in their views and both should stand back and reevaluate their motives. Like the Lutherans, I am reacting to the perceived zealousness of an organized movement. I am concerned that environmentalists will succeed in reinterpreting the singularity as a manifestation of existing environmental issues or as the mad imaginings of those who are ignorant of environmental issues. I am concerned that they will blind those who are marginally involved with the singularity to the real problem at hand, thus clouding our assessment and delaying our response. Moreover, I am concerned that they may divert all attention to environmental issues that may never manifest and take attention away from an issue that WILL manifest and could be our unwitting demise. Furthermore, I am concerned that they may, while well-intentioned, actually make the problem worse by failing to understand its true dynamics.
As I observed in another entry, environmentalists may attempt to convince people that a cure for old age and natural death will lead to overcrowding and that any such technologies should be made illegal. I have seen this view presented in movies and TV shows as if it were an accepted fact. After studying this problem, I am convinced that an end to natural death will actually result in a decrease in reproduction that will overshadow the lowered death rate. However, a simplistic evaluation of the issue could easily lead to the conclusion that the population will increase, and it would be easy to convince the ignorant that the population will increase—the mathematics seems so simple!
Now that you see where I am coming from, I must concede that it is wrong to make a blanket statement about an ideological group based on the statements of one zealous member. But my blanket statement and your response gave me an opportunity to clarify my views. For that, I am not at all apologetic.
Scott
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: The Singularity versus Peak Oil
|
|
|
|
I surmise from some of your statements that you believe it is possible to anticipate, understand and control singularity.
Past experience seems to suggest that we cannot anticipate the future. However, we may not be giving ourselves enough credit. I can’t think of a single technology that some futurist, science fiction writer, or scientist didn’t anticipate in some form years before it was implemented. No single author has ever put it all together in exactly the right way, but nearly all of the parts were there.
My feeling about anticipating, understanding, and controlling the singularity is like my feeling about any natural wonder: it is only mysterious before we study it and understand it. While it would be incongruous to attempt to predict something which, by definition, is unpredictable, my hope is that by studying the singularity we may ultimately uncover some of its mystery. If this effort proves successful, then it may no longer be appropriate to call it a Technological Singularity (though I suspect that certain qualities will always warrant that characterization).
The singularity may, by definition, be unpredictable, but there are many models for dealing with unpredictability. A football team does not know what play the other team will call, but they can practice for a variety of different plays and contingencies so that they will be ready to deal with them when they come up. Similarly, we may not be able to predict the singularity, but we may be able to construct a game plan. It is even conceivable that, although we may never guess which specific direction it will take, we may anticipate every possibility. We may accumulate and delineate a playbook of sorts, keep it on hand, and keep perfecting it up to the day of the critical event.
Very often, things that cannot be understood in terms of specifics can be understood in terms of general principles. Gene pools are a good example of this. We do not know what every gene does, but we know approximately how many genes a particular species has, and we can use this information to make statistical predictions about how fast a population could conceivably change in a designated period of time. This approach has been very helpful to population biologists. Gödel’s incompleteness theorem is another good example of this kind of approach. Gödel could not have investigated every possible mathematical structure, but he was able, through logical processes, to make a deduction that must be true over a broad range of mathematical structures. Another example from mathematics is the proof that an angle cannot be trisected. It is impossible to anticipate every possible way of attempting to trisect an angle, but it has been proven that an angle cannot be trisected using the methods of Euclidean Geometry.
I honestly cannot say how we might ultimately master the singularity, but I suspect that if we study it and keep our eyes on it, we may be ready for it when it arrives. There may never be a moment of surprise—though we may find ourselves moving pretty fast and working to our wits end as we near that asymptote. By then, many of the technologies that will make the singularity possible will already be at our disposal. We may be running massive computer simulations up to the last seconds of the human era. We may be having computers planning and running massive computer simulations and reporting back to us in only extremely conceptual terms. Who knows, we may even be employing psychics! The point is that we can do a good job of preparing for and playing this game even if there is no indication AS YET that we have any chance of winning it.
Scott
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Exploring the 'Singularity'
|
|
|
|
I would like to point out that 98% of all species which were present on earth are now extinct. Extinction often occurs when a more efficient organism arrives on the scene than it's predecessor. If, as we approach the singularity, humans begin merging with machines very rapidly, it stands to reason the old humans will be unable to compete with the new and "enhanced" variety. This evolutionary process may proceed as it has in the past-like the transition from the Wright Brothers' first airplane to the present Unmanned Aerial Vehicles capable of autonomous operations. This is the evolutionary process. When modern humans arrived on the scene some 30,000 years ago, Cro Magnon man, who had roamed the planet for 200,000+ years, mysteriously disappeared. Cro Magnon could not compete with modern man. Those humans who fail to merge with technology will also perish and a new species of humanity will rapidly take over. This isn't bad. It's nature's way.
Yes, there will be challenges, problems and opportunities. Present day humans have demonstrated short-sightedness in the areas of the environment, greed, war, and compassion for all life. It is my hope and desire that enhanced humans 20-30 years from now will be superior not only physically and intellectually to modern humans, but spiritually and co-operatively as well.
As I see it, merging of humans with machines is our only hope we have of cleaning up the global mess we find ourselves in.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Exploring the 'Singularity'
|
|
|
|
Looking at this article and reading some of the entries, the thing I am wondering is how people will react in about 15 years when technology begins to get really wild. In the very first entry after the article, I see some clues.
It is clear that this person is accustomed to thinking in terms of economy and energy. I get the impression from their opening comment about “exponential energy use” that they believe the singularity is economy and energy based. Computers don’t use much energy, and most of the advances in miniaturization that will lead to the singularity have actually reduced the energy required to perform equivalent tasks. It is clear that people are frightened by technology, but it is surprising how quickly they embrace it. I am absolutely dumbfounded at the pace with which people have embraced cell-phones. For a while, it looked like the prospect of brain cancer would be a big issue. But that has given way to concerns over the dangers of people talking and driving. None of this has slowed the trend.
If the post office attempted to implement robot delivery men, some unions might protest and there could be quite a bit of sabotage. But that won’t be the first place we see robots. They will be used to fight wars, storm dangerous criminals, explore sewers, and care for quarantined patients. As the technology gets cheaper, people will be using them in their homes to vacuum and mow the lawn. As their capabilities become more sophisticated, they will be used to do more elaborate tasks. Honda’s Asimo is already doing service in Japan. Eventually, robots will be used as backup systems in airplanes and cars—like air bags. They will start out performing peripheral tasks, but the periphery will eventually become the whole. By then, people will be so used to seeing robots that the postal robot will seem perfectly natural.
Nanotechnology in medicine is already creeping up on us. I have explained these ideas to people that do not think a lot about technology, and they are usually aghast. However, they are OK with pill-sized robots that swim through someone’s intestines taking pictures—acclimatization is a powerful force. With a good sales job, they will accept nanobots swimming through their bloodstream.
Technology won’t surprise us, but it will overwhelm us. People used to thinking in terms of ecology and economy will feel like they have been left out of the loop. They will be like anti-abortion protestors when the morning-after pill was invented. They will be like Marxists when the Soviet Union Collapsed. They will be dumbfounded and bewildered. But they are only a model of this reaction. Even the programmers advancing this stuff will wonder what to do when languages become so high level that essentially everyone with a logical mind is a programmer. An acquaintance of mine, who considers himself to be quite computer literate, still answers his email in DOS. The closer you are to the technological front, the more sharply your obsolescence is felt.
As scores of people are put out of work by machines, the government will be forced by popular consent to make welfare, social security, and unemployment more widely available. Eventually, only a handful of people will actually work and the rest will be living off of government doles or income from investments—the democratization of the market has been a notable trend.
That is when the real fear will start to set in. People will realize collectively that they are guests in the world they helped to create. I honestly doubt that anyone will starve—except perhaps in countries like old Iraq where the leaders control everything and don’t care about the people—but they will feel useless. That moment in time is the thing singularitarians need to start addressing. That moment in time will be the most dangerous of all, and it could be the point when all of this either makes or breaks the human experiment.
Scott
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Exploring the 'Singularity'
|
|
|
|
yea, see you're right that human beings won't exist anymore. We will have all evolved into something that would be insulted to be called human.
I like the point someone made about how much we have been acclimated to change in the past decades, relative to past centuries. Right now, we could probably predict what we will have created in the next 5 years with pretty good accuracy. In that time spand, we will learn of what we will be capable of from there. Just because singularity is not predictable from where we are right now does not mean that it is unpredictable from the imminent stages of singularity.
And once at this point of almost-singularity, what makes everybody think that we WON't be so much more bionically enhanced that we can still predict a reasonable distance into the future.
Look at it this way...
evolutions of 'humans' will manifest themselves within day spans at some point. But our evolved high-capacities will allow us to predict and plan for multiple days or weeks ahead of time. The point where we won't be able to handle what's coming won't ever happen...
we're talkin instant-wireless-communication of life stories and life-research continuously being sent everywhere to everyone else on a world-wide (or universal-wide :) ) network, where every split second contains thousands of new technologies... we will be fully immersed as super computer-beings, capable of so much incredible speed.
that's a singularity... where the exponential curve might as well be straight up.
The only rule that will always be followed... human beings are curious. So don't hope for some zen-like bhuddist jungle creatures who become super spiritual... human beings WILL be their own gods creating, discovering, creating over and over again.
you could try to envision a species with the human race's individuality combined with zerg's functionality capabilities (from starcraft, can't wait for 2nd one).
oh and BY THE WAY!!! nobody's mentioned 2012, the Mayan calendar predictions along with 5 other independent predictive sources from both ancient and contemporary times... predict something big happening. The Mayans (who also predictd their own downfall in the same year that the Spanish arrived in South America) roughly predict the following:
some extremely prevelant event will occur that will cause a chain reaction leading to the deaths of many people on this planet over the course of some unspecified time. However, the mayan predictions made clear that 'some will survive', and furthermore, ascend into being a 'higher conscience'.
that is the legit way they said it... not the "end of the world" crap that got around.
The way I see it, this 'event' will include some kind of biotech upgrades for humans, but with how expensive they will be, only the richest and the brightest will get a hold of these. It is this select percentage of the world that will make a huge thrust towards singularity... while most people are left behind. a classism split that the distance apart from eachother makes it even more impossible to fix the split and catch everybody up. as the upper-upper class lives for hundreds of years with technologically enhanced brains and bodies grows further apart from 'humans'... humans will eventually become expendable... the slave race that will cease to exist sooner or later.
Anyway, that's my take on this all. hope i spark some worthwhile thoughts or discussions
-Jon |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Exploring the 'Singularity'
|
|
|
|
Why, suddenly, would people wake up from their lives of leisure and protest against it.
You have given me a hard assignment. Nevertheless, I shall attempt an answer.
First of all, I could be wrong. It is entirely possible that people would not feel this way. They could be like retired folk who feel like they have earned a break and are glad to take the rest of eternity off.
However, I see a problem with this. For the most part, throughout recorded history, those who have retired have been able to expect to live in a world at least remotely like the one they grew old in. Even if they were not able to master all the new technologies, they were fairly confident that the money they put away in the bank would continue to earn interest in the way that it had been doing for most of their lives. My retired mother, for example, has experienced some frustration learning how to use a computer, but she must realize that her survival doesn’t depend on it. The problem is that my mother has never thought of the singularity. When I was a child, and both my mother and I were much younger, I insisted that computers would one day be more intelligent than persons. She would respond with the usual argument that was popular at that time: “A computer with as much memory as a human brain would stretch from Los Angeles to New York.” We all know what happened to that argument!
In fifteen years, it will be much easier to convince people that a computer as intelligent as a person is possible. Moreover, the people that might need convincing will be much closer to understanding why. They will be accustomed to talking to computerized bank tellers that seem like they could pass the Turing test and they will be accustomed to playing interactive video games with simulated opponents that seem just a tad too sneaky. Furthermore, we will already have passed a significant number of landmarks like the defeat of Gary Kasparov by Deep Blue. One by one, bastions of human superiority will fall. A Computer will be installed in a car that can win an automobile race. Robots, perhaps offshoots of the Asimo line, will be built that can defeat any human at tennis. It will be possible for the average human to grasp that if all of these abilities could be combined into one machine, a machine would exist that can outperform a person at every designated task. The average human may not put two and two together, but they will be primed to make the intellectual leap.
Now, we introduce the journalists. Their audience will be primed, but it will be the journalists that push them past the threshold. Their audience will be ready to understand that if two is put together with two a sufficient number of times, eventually any predetermined digit will be achieved. The journalists will put two and two together for them, and we will have a population that understands that superhuman intelligence is not merely possible, but probably inevitable.
Next will come the TV special. It will be a TV special like “The Day After”, except that the topic, instead of nuclear war, will be the singularity. Somehow, the producers will find a way to make the singularity tangible. They will film it in such common surroundings, with such seamless special effects, and using technologies that are so familiar, that the average person will finally understand. Also, they will use many of the tactics that were used to present “The Day After”, like having it introduced and discussed by their regular news anchors. Starting from familiar territory, they will take their audience step by step through the events of the singularity, leaving no gaps for disbelief, until they reach some previously unimaginable and possibly terrifying result. To their audience, the singularity will no longer be an abstract idea that they heard mentioned in some boring news clip while they were channel surfing. It will be real, immediate, and personal. Most of all, they will understand that it is certain. Instead of being like pictures of starving children in a distant country that they couldn’t find on a map, it will be like the house payment they have to come up with by the end of the month to avoid repossession.
The fear will not come from ignorance. It will come from understanding. It will come from the cold hard realization that when you buy something on credit you eventually get the bill. They will have a picture in their heads of the world being transformed over night into something completely alien. They will see scenes like scenes from the movie Matrix, but with one vital difference: they will be in the scene, it will be all around them, and there will be no green fluorescent exit sign at the corner of the theatre. There is a saying: no matter where you go, there you are. But in their minds, they will already be there.
When this happens, people will start talking earnestly with pastors, ministers, priests, psychologists, techno-savvy neighbors, and close friends: “What are you doing to prepare for the singularity?” It will be like that odd short-lived experience right before the advent of the year 2000 when otherwise normal people were buying lots of canned food and emergency candles. The major difference will be that no one will know what to buy. How does one prepare for the Apocalypse? There will be news specials and talk shows that capitalize on this new interest. Talk show hosts like Oprah Winfrey will be interviewing singularitarians who think they know the answer. A fair number of them will undoubtedly come right out and say that there is no answer. Others will say that there is no need to be concerned about the singularity because the antichrist will be along any minute now to start putting marks on people’s heads.
We will have a bunch of confused, frightened, neo-survivalists with a LOT of free time on their hands. The old adage about idle hands being the devils workshop will take on a new meaning. Actually, if one could watch from a distance, it might be amusing to see how these little animals react when they are caught in the eye of a hurricane and have absolutely no idea what to do. A lot of them will be wondering if it would be better to die or risk being involuntarily uploaded. Others will decide that they simply must stop the singularity from coming. Many will protest but many others will turn to sabotage and terrorism—terrorism performed with state of the art weapons and state of the art “things” that were never meant to be used as weapons. We could have a lot of supercharged Theodore Kaczynski’s running around. This may or may not send the rest into panic: who knows what people will do in the face of such uncertainty. The end of life as we know it has never been done before. The problem is that the threat will not be certain death as in the movies WHEN WORLDS COLLIDE or ON THE BEACH. It will be the probability of something much stranger and possibly much worse. Star Trek’s Borg come to mind, but I can think of worse fates and I’m sure that the producers of popular science fiction will do better still. Death is strange, but strange is terrifying.
Oddly, it is not any of the aforementioned people that concern me. The simply frightened can be consoled and terrorist can be kept in check. The ones that really terrify me are the genuinely well-meaning and supposedly enlightened individuals that will think they know what is best for the rest of us. They will peddle old untested arguments that a cure for aging and natural death will result in a population explosion that will quickly fill the universe with people. Perhaps they will find a way to designate nearly all extraterrestrial matter as parkland, making the exploration and colonization of space unduly difficult. As a result, instead of enlightened hopeful people who expect a long life expanding in a sensible manner across the galaxy, we could have a lot of overcrowded short-timers who don’t believe in the future and just want to have a lot of unprotected sex. Perhaps, by resorting to the very issues that those interested in superhuman intelligence have raised, these well-meaning individuals will convince a sufficient percentage of humanity that superhuman intelligence is an environmental hazard. If they succeed, they may prevent us from finding key solutions to environmental and overcrowding problems just when we need them the most. Instead of superhuman intelligence being developed by responsible well supervised institutions, it will be developed by the very worst people: outlaws who, by definition, do not respect such restrictions. This could be the very way that superhuman intelligence gets out of hand and leads to something like the gray goo problem.
Like I said at the beginning, maybe none of this will happen: no one knows how people will react in the face of such uncertainty. All I am sure of is that this is an experiment that will be done only once in the history of the world—possibly in the history of the universe—and there are absolutely no precedents.
Scott
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: The Singularity versus The Location of Memory
|
|
|
|
I have been thinking of the idea of merging whatever's left of humanity into a single collective, or there being artificial intelligence which surpasses that of humans and makes humans inferior. BUT, some important questions arise, which are rather hard to adress and to even imagine a higher intelligence actually performing.
Think of the idea of logic. The machine needs very simple (and I mean as simple as on/off, yes/no, 1/0) impulses which are fed into logical circuits which determine the next course of action based on how the logic interpretation has been predetermined by the creator. For those who have studied how a computer works from the ground up, you'll know exactly what I'm talking about. From these circuits spring up interfaces which go higher and higher in levels and allow complex low level instructions to be executed with a very simple one. With this we get the higher, simpler, and less fussy interfaces which allow for rather general thinking and computation to occur. Seems reasonable right? The machine should think for itself if we can keep building levels and creating logic on each level which feeds the one above and eventually something human can be created, where the lower level layers are independent, such as bodily function (you don't remind yourself to inhale/exhale or tell your heart to beat..unless you're seriously ill, and I hope nobody here is!).
Eventually a level higher than that of human will be reached, where as mentioned, many calculations more can be done at once than a human brain can tollerate. At this point we have a superior being, but do we really?
I've noticed one thing about humanity: As we evolve into a higher state of human evolution, where we think clearer, put wars aside, and look for new battlefronts, we tend to lose the natural emotion which makes us "human" in the first place. For those who seek knowledge, many wind up unhappy with the "magic" of a field of interest when they learn all there is about it (or all that made them excited about it in the first place) which means that humans themselves will eventually be stripped of all emotion, and will approach what we describe as the singularity. For a superior mind to exist, emotion needs to be put aside, and humanity needs to be lost. The imagination will be fueled by the self need to know and understand, and will become artificial in a way that it's driven by need rather than will.
The problem with the machine is that it cannot imagine. It followed pre-determined instructions which simulate how a mind works. Sure the humans operate on electrical impulses, but there is something that we don't know as to what drives these impulses which still keeps the secret of our existance and purpose from us (and thus the meaning of life).
I think the singularity doesn't have to come from the machine world, but it will come from the human world. With each new generation of children, there is less and less focus on emotional development, and most children are pushed to succeed in life which is given to them, to become the best, the brightest, the richest, the smartest. All of these things take away time from emotional development, and it's already pretty observable with today's children that emotion is slowly starting to be replaced with the need for pleasure, and entertainment. Basically, humans become the machines themselves, and considering that the capitalistic world favors this for its own gains, it's no wonder that this is a direction we're heading towards.
Someone mentioned that our existance would become empty once singularity's level is reached, and that might not be far from the truth. If anyone observes themselves, they'll notice that there is a desire towards something that brings them happiness. If all of these desires are filled, and exhausted, there's nothing left to look forward to, and considering humans are pleased with overcoming challenge, then in singularity's case, all challlenged will be overcome in time, and in the end existance itself will become unneccessary, which will be self induced by the logic that makes it up (this is where the crap from the begining ties in) will decide that all has been a ccomplished. If all is accomplished, and there is no reason to exist, then existance itself will become unneccessary and such a mind would shut down/self destruct, or become destructive in a sense that everything that exists needs to dissappear for the final stage of existance (which is non-existance) to be completed, and for the singularity to stop.
A destructive side is certainly not beneficial in any way to anyone, not to the singularity itself, but even this property can once again be traced back to the humans. If you observe history, it contains much much human destruction. Wars have plagued us for millenia where a person in power can make a decision for thousands of men and send them to their deaths, sometimes just for their sheer amusement. That's mostly evident with the Roman Empire, and even today, where reality TV in all it's glory is showing people being arrested, their lives publically destroyed for the sake of entertainment, etc. which goes to show that there's a demand for human suffering for the sake of entertainment, and that humans feed on watching others suffer. This says something very bad about us as a collective, we've become incredibly destructive! Rather than taking pride in something we create and help perpetuate humanity's evolution, we take pleasure in all that's wrong for the reasons of being destructive. If the humans don't evolve to the point of singularity, they will deslf destruct. If this happens, there's the idea of complete chaos consuming all that's left of the human mind because higher desires have overcome the conscious and the subconscious, or there's the possibility of overcoming this early enough where such a realization will fuel an evolutionary state in the opposite direction, and either avoid the destruction of ourselves, reach singularity, or take a whole new unexplored path.
These are a few thrown-together and not very well thought through ideas to think about, but they are here to suggest singularity being our human state of evolution which will come next which will shun emotion and use the lack of it to become a more efficient being as one, or as a collective.
I can't really imagine some of the ideas some people here have presented (as in picture it mentally) but logically such an evolutionary step seems proper, just a matter of how long it will take to arrive, and how it will affect our future, whether humans will become obsolete, and the idea of the Matrix movies becomes a reality (perhaps the humans will "wake up" and fight to retain what's assumed to be ours, possibly even working against themselves, if the singularity really IS the right way for us to end up).
Vlado |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: The Singularity versus The Location of Memory
|
|
|
|
Oh yeah, forgot to post this a while ago, but here goes anyways.
According to one of my recently developed theories, the singularity fits in as a time when we will become like "gods". What do I mean by this? One of my theories of "existence" (just to make you happy :D) goes on to say that once we gain a full understanding of the universe, then we've learned everything there is to learn. When we know how everything works in our physical and mental realm, then we've reached the state of "perfection" where there is nothing left to uncover and ultimately live for.
When this happens, perhaps we trancend into the next upper state of being, which is that of our creator. This would help explain the idea behind the immortals that people keep ranting about on the boards here, and would open up doors to other impossibilities which only seem possible once we understand everything that IS possible in our reality.
Not only would we trancend into this greater being, but that world will then seem very natural to us, and would ultimately give us a whole new set of challenges to uncover. Once that world or reality has been completely understood, then we move on up again.
I also thought about something that popped up in my question regarding volumes of integrals in calculus with my proffessor, and he mentioned when you make a cut along an axis in the 4th dimension, you get a 3 dimensional object back (picture cutting a 4-d sphere to get a segment at point x, you'd get a 3d object back...same works with 3d, cut it, and you get 2d object back, cut 2d, and get 1d object back..etc). This "loosely" gave me the idea of these higher states. Perhaps we cannot percieve what the next world of upper existence is until we're there, and since it's higher up, we can't even visualize it or understand it (just like we can't even imagine what a 4th dimensional set of vectors looks like even if it's right in front of us, our minds just don't work that way).
Since we don't understand this state, we need to make sure we can understand everything there is about our current state of being and all that influences it, to be able to make solid imaginable ideas on what comes next...sorta like trying to see into the future with infinite factors affecting it.
Anyways, considering that this "singularity" idea is trying to say that our ability to discover at half the time it took us to do the same ammount of discovery and technological evolution than before, then eventually we'll reach a point where everything will be known (sort of like a function approaching an asymptote). Perhaps this is the time when everyone and everything molds and trancends into the next reality, thus our creator's reality.
Anyways, just some food for thought. I'd love to actually explain this in detail using all of my life knowledge to make it seem more possible and why it seems like it's something even imaginable, but last time I did that it turned into a 2.5 hour discussion, and typing all that out would leave my wrists crippled for life :D Might as well be a bastard and just give you some bait to think on ;) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: The Singularity versus The Location of Memory
|
|
|
|
Wow, a reply a year and a half later to a post I'd completely forgotten!
Anyway, I continue to find the notion of fields (which physics cannot explain) a fascinating field of study (no pun intended) and can't help but wonder if those "stored retrievable patterns" might not be accessible in ways we don't yet understand. If so, then it could explain a great many things that we presently cannnot.
I'm an empiricist, by the way, and not given to psycho-babble. But as so much remains unexplained when it comes to consciousness, memory, intelligenc e, etc., that I expect we'll be surprised by the answers -- which we will one day discover, I feel certain, perhaps on the other side of the Singularity.
In any case, good luck with your work! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
)