Why should a mere journalist question Kurzweils conclusion that some of us alive today will live indefinitely? Because we all know its wrong. We can sense it in the gaping, take-my-word-for-it extrapolations and the specious reasoning of those who subscribe to this form of the singularity argument. Then, too, theres the flawed grasp of neuroscience, human physiology, and philosophy. Most of all, we note the willingness of these people to predict fabulous technological advances in a period so conveniently short it offers themselves hope of life everlasting.
This has all gone on too long. The emperor isnt wearing anything, for heavens sake.
The singularity debate is too rarely a real argument. Theres too much fixation on death avoidance. Thats a shame, because in the coming years, as computers become stupendously powerful, really and truly ridiculously powerful, and as electronics and other technologies begin to enhance and fuse with biology, life really is going to get more interesting.
More than likely I will die. But substantially later than someone 200 years ago would. Life expectancy [wikipedia.org] has been going up and up. I disagree, the life expectancy incorporates the infant mortality rate. 200 years ago, even 100 years ago people were living to 60,70,80 years old, but because of the infant mortality rate the life expectancy was much lower over all.
Here's a news flash. Survival instinct is pretty much a coded response, there is no need to have sentience to have it. If you do not program an AI with a "survival instinct", there won't be a competition between them and us.
* Technology will continue to improve exponentially (it is right now - see Moore's law) Damn I hate when people mis-quote things. Moore's law has nothing to do with Technology as a whole, it's only with regards to microprocessors and chip technology. Most of the existing technology we have is not improving any where near as fast. In fact it's safe to say that the beginning of the 20th century had more technological progress than the latter half.
Slashdot Mirror
So this guy get's modded down for being right? Man, some moderators just aren't the brightest bulbs on the tree.
says it all
End of lineHere's a news flash. Survival instinct is pretty much a coded response, there is no need to have sentience to have it. If you do not program an AI with a "survival instinct", there won't be a competition between them and us.