Ray Kurzweil's Vision of the Singularity, In Movie Form

destinyland writes "AI researcher Ben Goertzel peeks at the new Ray Kurzweil movie (Transcendent Man), and gives it 'two nano-enhanced cyberthumbs way, way up!' But in an exchange with Kurzweil after the screening, Goertzel debates the post-human future, asking whether individuality can survive in a machine-augmented brain. The documentary covers radical futurism, but also includes alternate viewpoints. 'Would I build these machines, if I knew there was a strong chance they would destroy humanity?' asks evolvable hardware researcher Hugo de Garis. His answer? 'Yeah.'" Note, the movie is about Kurzweil and futurism, not by Kurzweil. Update: 05/06 20:57 GMT by T : Note, Singularity Hub has a review up, too.

Comments

sehr kurzweilig

[Anonymous Coward]

n/t

As Jon Stewart would put it..

[4D6963]

..this story falls in the category of "sh#t that's never gonna happen".

Re:As Jon Stewart would put it..

[Cornwallis]

Funny you should mention Stewart. We saw him perform recently and he had a good talk about how the world will end. He said that the end won't happen due to war or something liek a natural disaster. "The last thing we'll hear is some scientist saying "It works!"

Re:As Jon Stewart would put it..

[LighterShadeOfBlack]

He said that the end won't happen due to war or something liek a natural disaster. "The last thing we'll hear is some scientist saying "It works!"

So apparently the world will end when a scientist invents an incredibly loud megaphone?

Re:Homo sapiens over-rated

[IndustrialComplex]

That's a bit overboard, I think. You're basically claiming (and I'm trying not to strawman you, here) that abstract concepts can't be used to identify patterns, but instead can only be used to identify identical things. There's plenty of reason for me to label myself at time=2009 and myself at time=2007 the same person, just as we label anything else that changes but maintains identifiable and distinct patterns.

As a scientist, individual identity seems like a common and accurate label for each person's idiosyncratic tendencies

No, don't destroy my plan for the perfect crime.

"Unfortunately, the entity that killed him ceased to exist the instant after the murder occured."

I, well the guy that just said I a moment ago, except I meant me, no not that me, this me now...

*bolts and runs for the door*

Re:Homo sapiens over-rated

[Anonymous Coward]

Genetically, "Human" is 98% chimpanzee, 50% dog, 30% daffodil, etc. (I'm sure I have the numbers wrong).

Yeah, you do. It's 50% man, 50% bear, and 50% pig.

Re:Summary of Kurzweil's "ideas"

[Red Flayer]

I found your post very well-thought, and an interesting read, but one note struck me as odd:

and humans are not that far removed from the trees. We are selfish, grasping, petty animals

What the hell do the trees look like where you live? They sound like they'd scare the *shit* out of me.

Re:All about dates now.

[smallfries]

So his argument boils down to: "Lots of cool stuff has happened in the past. If we extrapolate, then OMG ponies!!!!!"

Re:Summary of Kurzweil's "ideas"

[Anonymous Coward]

Likewise, although your hypothetical neanderthal may have below-average intelligence, there is no reason to believe he would would worship our technology any more than a person with Down syndrome.

Even if exposed to Apple technology?