... then the future is indeed bright. It means technological advance will not be abated while we scramble for new energy infrastructure. It means that the Kurzweilian Singularity is indeed near.
The Talosians can simulate anything. But developing their mental powers was "a trap" it trapped them on their own planet able only to live in illusions. Will that be a VR utopia?
Not without addressing fundamental problems interfacing the virtual and physical worlds. Just one issue is the competition of resources between a virtual and physical society. Even a virtual society needs hardware to run on.
Well, good point. Power availability really is the over-riding concern. But I think you understand what I'm driving at... it's about the scarcity and competition of these resources. We can't remove Iron from the Earth for free.
I don't see Kurzweil describing post-singularity existence as utopian, however. Merely way different from the material existence we have today. It's as if he is simply warning us of changes to come, and to make a best effort to prepare for them. A very good point. It is merely Kurzweil's over ardent followers that seem to think that the Singularity means utopia. That is a very important distinction I should acknowledge.
Kurzweil's conjecture has hit me upside the head. As far as I can tell, it's a real phenomenon. I have read all Kurzweil's books. I believe him. I believe the singularity is real. Yes. Whole heartedly yes.
But, We are all operating on the premise that the economic and social freedom we have today to pursue these new technologies will continue to exist. This is not true. Today's freedom is an aberration of history that is fragile and must be protected.
It is not without historical precedent that governments have squelched the seeking of scientific truth or the teaching of scientific fact. The great light of modern technology can be plunged into a dark age by powerful and ignorant people. And, the people who feel abused and exploited by the advance of capitalism that has fueled our glorious technological advances can, have, and will rebel to try and stop it.
Because, if you and I who live continuously in the thick of technological advance can experience future-shock. How much harder do you think future shock will strike the people of rural Afghanistan? How will they react?
Why so much resistance to the inevitable future?
The real barrier for the singularity is not just the physical but it is psychological as people react to this new world some will try and fight it. Look at the RIAA and MPAA fighting the inevitable future of media. Even this simple change only in distribution is met with such resistance!
Stupidity can stop the technological singularity. I would not be surprised to see the singularity delayed for a hundred years or more based solely on laws forbidding research into sacred grounds.
Things like R&D get sacrificed on the altar of practical needs and profit margin all the time. Just because you are a computer doesn't mean you get to ignore physical reality and real-world physics. That means you don't get a free computational ride... ever.
I concede once Kurzweilian singularity gives rise to a Von Neumann replicator machine all bets are off. But then. That would be the singularity Kurzweil can't see past wouldn't it? I can't see past it either.
But I can see how laughably wrong we were about the future in the 1950's and I can't help but think that we are also laughably wrong now. We thought in the 1950's people would have flying cars by now. Where are they? Turns out people can barely drive in 2D let alone 3D!
I'm almost certain limitations we fail to consider today will present themselves in the next twenty years. Just as certain as I am certain many barriers perceived as insurmountable now will be surprisingly easy to get over. And in the wash the singularity will not be what we think and it will not come when we want. And it will have that unfortunate taste of things that are grounded in reality. It will be less and more than what we thought. Just as all utopias must be.
Petroleum and iron in the computer cases. Doesn't count. You don't get to ignore real world economic problems yet. The meat people may still want to take your iron to build shields and clubs.
I don't particularly believe in the singularity, but I can see their argument here-- we don't necessarily need to design the eco-data center, we just need to build a computer that can design it for us... And that's a perspective I can support. But you don't get to ignore meat-world just because you are transcendent ultra people. What happens if the meat people resent the ultra people and use the power to run their women's electric leg shavers instead?
But if we uploaded our minds into hardware, and let them expand, we Could in a short time do a thousand years of human research in something measured in a unit less than years. Yes. If we get that far. It will be utopia if we do. But there will be problems in this perfect world.
For example simulations only tell us how our model will perform. It is physical observation that tells us if our model is correct. So you are assuming our techno-naughts have a perfect model of the universe.
Even the god-like super human transcendent ultra people will have to conduct real world experiments using real world materials to see if their theory plays out in the real world. And that will have to be done in real world clock cycles.
And the transcendent ultra people will care about me pulling the plug on their server farm so I can use the power to run the machines to milk my cow. In fact they'll probably want me to do things like blow-out the server farm for dust bunnies from time to time... okay maybe not.
And then don't even get me started on the computability problems. Computers aren't magical and just because you are inside a computer doesn't make you magical and all powerful. More important than the laws of physics are the laws of computability and those are even less forgiving than physics. Physics lets us cheat from time to time... computation never does.
The short answer is that Hofstadter and Kurzweil are both wrong. I think Kurzweil's technological development arcs (all those need exponential curves) probably are disturbingly correct. And Hofstadter is probably right about souls being far more complex things than what Kurzweil believes.
So they are both right in ways and wrong in ways. The real rub is that Kurzweil's future is probably farther away but not for the reasons that Hofstadter thinks. The real reasons are probably based in bad technology decisions we made in the last century or two.
We (humanity) have made several technological platform choices that are terrifyingly hard to change now. These choices drove us down a path that we may have to abandon and thus suffer a massive technological set back. In specific the choices were oil, steel, and electricity.
Oil (fossil fuels) will run out. Steel (copper too) is growing scarcer. Electricity is too hard to store and produce (and heats silicon rather inconveniently). Data centers today are built with steel and located near power plants that often produce power using fossil fuel. That means even a Data Center driven life will be affected by our platform limitations.
When we start hitting physical limits to what we can do with these, how much of these supplies we can get, then we will be forced to conserve, change, or stop advancing. Those are very real threats to continued technological advancement. And they don't go away if you hide in Second Life.
Show me a Data Center built with ceramic and powered by the sun or geo-electric sources and I'll recant.
The truly 'leet hide their 'leet-ness behind a bamboo curtain to misdirect the non-'leet. Truly 'leet masquerade as neophytes. So that from this secreted stance they might strike a more devastating blow.
In summary it is my belief that while China may claim to lack the m@d sk1llz to h@x0rz USian b0x3n they probably do have d4 1337 sk1llz... but on the same token it is unfair to lay blame. Because there are plenty of 3v1l l33t out there.
All joking aside... We still live in a world where a small team of highly skilled computer programmers and networking experts acting on their own can wreak havoc. It is possible that not even higher ups in the Chinese government realize that they have this capability... or can hire it...
After all, seriously, what does it take to do this? Millions of dollars? A few skilled people? Finding a few skilled people willing to sell their skills to the highest bidder? An Internet connection? You're telling me China can't rally that? Of course they can...
Honestly, "at worst we are a bad case of Eczema to the Earth" (Jon Stewart I believe) and the Earth will be just fine with out us. When we "fight" Global Warming/Climate Change we are fighting for our way of life and lives. We might change the biosphere enough that we can't live in it anymore in the numbers and the quality of life that we have enjoyed.
I'm honestly not worried about the grander scheme of life. Life will find a way. Even if we make the planet Venus-like... life will find a way. But, maybe without us.
The moment they begin to ask the big questions, like is there any other life in space, we show up and lord over them how much more advanced we are. That's pretty much my plan. You know what I like best about this plan? For once someone else would have to say:
If there's any R&D forbidden on Earth you could do it on the Moon. Hopefully you could fund the R&D with money made from mining the moon's abundant supplies of... eh... what's there a lot of on the moon that's worth lots of money per kilogram?
Maybe there's oil on the moon... left over from the moon dinosaurs... the moonosaurs?
It's offtopic, but I actually agree fully... I'd love to see Slashdot's moderation system go to much higher numbers, and a few more mod points (but not too many more) be given out. e.g. Go to 15 instead of 5 as a maximum, and give out roughly twice as many mod points as currently. That way, each individual act of moderation has about 1/3 the value that it used to, but more people are given a "voice" in valuing posts.
It would also allow for finer grained modifiers - I currently have Friends and Fans at +1, but under the system I propose here, I'd put fans at +1 and friends at +3.
How about additional dimensions? +5 funny, +3 insightful, +7 interesting, -1 off topic, 0 overrated, -3 troll
The result could be plotted on a 3D graph attached to each comment.
Company 1 comes up with idea and puts a "patent hold" on it. No one else can find out about it.
Company 2 comes up with the same / similar idea and puts its own "patent hold" on it. Again, no one finds out.
Company 1 finishes its product and takes it to market. Company 2 is informed.
Companies 1 and 2 are given patents on the idea. No more companies may put a "hold" on the patent.
Company 1 and 2 battle it out, creating competition, but with some market stability.
I like it. Sort of a non-blocking "pre-patent" that isn't finalized until a real product is at market. Sort of like saying there can be no standard without a working implementation... nice.
Slashdot Mirror
... then the future is indeed bright. It means technological advance will not be abated while we scramble for new energy infrastructure. It means that the Kurzweilian Singularity is indeed near.
I for one am hopeful but skeptical.
Mine works great for this... I have the older model but I've used this product from 100 feet away from a laptop in a presentation.
... I think mine might be a very early version.
http://www.gyration.com/
http://www.gyration.com/p-56-m2000-travel-air-mouse.aspx
There's a great Star Trek episode:
The Menagerie
The Talosians can simulate anything. But developing their mental powers was "a trap" it trapped them on their own planet able only to live in illusions. Will that be a VR utopia?
Not without addressing fundamental problems interfacing the virtual and physical worlds. Just one issue is the competition of resources between a virtual and physical society. Even a virtual society needs hardware to run on.
Well, good point. Power availability really is the over-riding concern. But I think you understand what I'm driving at... it's about the scarcity and competition of these resources. We can't remove Iron from the Earth for free.
But, We are all operating on the premise that the economic and social freedom we have today to pursue these new technologies will continue to exist. This is not true. Today's freedom is an aberration of history that is fragile and must be protected.
It is not without historical precedent that governments have squelched the seeking of scientific truth or the teaching of scientific fact. The great light of modern technology can be plunged into a dark age by powerful and ignorant people. And, the people who feel abused and exploited by the advance of capitalism that has fueled our glorious technological advances can, have, and will rebel to try and stop it.
Because, if you and I who live continuously in the thick of technological advance can experience future-shock. How much harder do you think future shock will strike the people of rural Afghanistan? How will they react?
Why so much resistance to the inevitable future?
The real barrier for the singularity is not just the physical but it is psychological as people react to this new world some will try and fight it. Look at the RIAA and MPAA fighting the inevitable future of media. Even this simple change only in distribution is met with such resistance!
Stupidity can stop the technological singularity. I would not be surprised to see the singularity delayed for a hundred years or more based solely on laws forbidding research into sacred grounds.
Things like R&D get sacrificed on the altar of practical needs and profit margin all the time. Just because you are a computer doesn't mean you get to ignore physical reality and real-world physics. That means you don't get a free computational ride... ever.
I concede once Kurzweilian singularity gives rise to a Von Neumann replicator machine all bets are off. But then. That would be the singularity Kurzweil can't see past wouldn't it? I can't see past it either.
But I can see how laughably wrong we were about the future in the 1950's and I can't help but think that we are also laughably wrong now. We thought in the 1950's people would have flying cars by now. Where are they? Turns out people can barely drive in 2D let alone 3D!
I'm almost certain limitations we fail to consider today will present themselves in the next twenty years. Just as certain as I am certain many barriers perceived as insurmountable now will be surprisingly easy to get over. And in the wash the singularity will not be what we think and it will not come when we want. And it will have that unfortunate taste of things that are grounded in reality. It will be less and more than what we thought. Just as all utopias must be.
Petroleum and iron in the computer cases. Doesn't count. You don't get to ignore real world economic problems yet. The meat people may still want to take your iron to build shields and clubs.
For example simulations only tell us how our model will perform. It is physical observation that tells us if our model is correct. So you are assuming our techno-naughts have a perfect model of the universe.
Even the god-like super human transcendent ultra people will have to conduct real world experiments using real world materials to see if their theory plays out in the real world. And that will have to be done in real world clock cycles.
And the transcendent ultra people will care about me pulling the plug on their server farm so I can use the power to run the machines to milk my cow. In fact they'll probably want me to do things like blow-out the server farm for dust bunnies from time to time... okay maybe not.
And then don't even get me started on the computability problems. Computers aren't magical and just because you are inside a computer doesn't make you magical and all powerful. More important than the laws of physics are the laws of computability and those are even less forgiving than physics. Physics lets us cheat from time to time... computation never does.
The short answer is that Hofstadter and Kurzweil are both wrong. I think Kurzweil's technological development arcs (all those need exponential curves) probably are disturbingly correct. And Hofstadter is probably right about souls being far more complex things than what Kurzweil believes.
So they are both right in ways and wrong in ways. The real rub is that Kurzweil's future is probably farther away but not for the reasons that Hofstadter thinks. The real reasons are probably based in bad technology decisions we made in the last century or two.
We (humanity) have made several technological platform choices that are terrifyingly hard to change now. These choices drove us down a path that we may have to abandon and thus suffer a massive technological set back. In specific the choices were oil, steel, and electricity.
Oil (fossil fuels) will run out. Steel (copper too) is growing scarcer. Electricity is too hard to store and produce (and heats silicon rather inconveniently). Data centers today are built with steel and located near power plants that often produce power using fossil fuel. That means even a Data Center driven life will be affected by our platform limitations.
When we start hitting physical limits to what we can do with these, how much of these supplies we can get, then we will be forced to conserve, change, or stop advancing. Those are very real threats to continued technological advancement. And they don't go away if you hide in Second Life.
Show me a Data Center built with ceramic and powered by the sun or geo-electric sources and I'll recant.
The truly 'leet hide their 'leet-ness behind a bamboo curtain to misdirect the non-'leet. Truly 'leet masquerade as neophytes. So that from this secreted stance they might strike a more devastating blow.
... but on the same token it is unfair to lay blame. Because there are plenty of 3v1l l33t out there.
Or in 'leet speak:
d4 1337 b3 h1d3z d4 h@x0rzn' an b3 sh@d1n' d4 n00bz f0 wh00pin' y0 @zz! th@n d4 1337 s3z: Ah n0 n00b! 0u+ w1d d4 p0wn@g3!
In summary it is my belief that while China may claim to lack the m@d sk1llz to h@x0rz USian b0x3n they probably do have d4 1337 sk1llz
All joking aside... We still live in a world where a small team of highly skilled computer programmers and networking experts acting on their own can wreak havoc. It is possible that not even higher ups in the Chinese government realize that they have this capability... or can hire it...
After all, seriously, what does it take to do this? Millions of dollars? A few skilled people? Finding a few skilled people willing to sell their skills to the highest bidder? An Internet connection? You're telling me China can't rally that? Of course they can...
... Chuck Norris throws-down on lawsuits!
I'm glad filters have altered your perception of reality in a pleasant way.
Nah. I still write long
Honestly, "at worst we are a bad case of Eczema to the Earth" (Jon Stewart I believe) and the Earth will be just fine with out us. When we "fight" Global Warming/Climate Change we are fighting for our way of life and lives. We might change the biosphere enough that we can't live in it anymore in the numbers and the quality of life that we have enjoyed.
I'm honestly not worried about the grander scheme of life. Life will find a way. Even if we make the planet Venus-like... life will find a way. But, maybe without us.
Are you running for president (of the US)?
Yes but how does that make me rich?
I for one welcome our new alien overlords.
If there's any R&D forbidden on Earth you could do it on the Moon. Hopefully you could fund the R&D with money made from mining the moon's abundant supplies of ... eh ... what's there a lot of on the moon that's worth lots of money per kilogram?
Maybe there's oil on the moon... left over from the moon dinosaurs... the moonosaurs?
Yeah --- and then when you create your account here, you define your own projection down to one dimension so you can still sort threads!
See! simple, easy, and to the point. Just make sure it's disruptive and keeps people from having a community experience.It's offtopic, but I actually agree fully... I'd love to see Slashdot's moderation system go to much higher numbers, and a few more mod points (but not too many more) be given out. e.g. Go to 15 instead of 5 as a maximum, and give out roughly twice as many mod points as currently. That way, each individual act of moderation has about 1/3 the value that it used to, but more people are given a "voice" in valuing posts.
It would also allow for finer grained modifiers - I currently have Friends and Fans at +1, but under the system I propose here, I'd put fans at +1 and friends at +3.
How about additional dimensions? +5 funny, +3 insightful, +7 interesting, -1 off topic, 0 overrated, -3 trollThe result could be plotted on a 3D graph attached to each comment.
- Company 1 comes up with idea and puts a "patent hold" on it. No one else can find out about it.
- Company 2 comes up with the same / similar idea and puts its own "patent hold" on it. Again, no one finds out.
- Company 1 finishes its product and takes it to market. Company 2 is informed.
- Companies 1 and 2 are given patents on the idea. No more companies may put a "hold" on the patent.
- Company 1 and 2 battle it out, creating competition, but with some market stability.
I like it. Sort of a non-blocking "pre-patent" that isn't finalized until a real product is at market. Sort of like saying there can be no standard without a working implementation... nice.
To quote King George III: "They wrote it down? Don't they know they'll be awash in lawyers?"Only in America.
I don't understand the world. It's only prior art if the prior artist can hire a lawyer.