[QUOTE=DainBramageStudios;32240013]I thought this was well known?
Things like pacemakers and hip replacements need to be made out of titanium (biologically inert) so it doesn't get rejected by the immune system. However it isn't practical for more complex augmentations that transhumanists dream up[/QUOTE]
Why can't the sockets be made out of titanium with insulated wiring? The only thing that'd need to actually touch your body would be titanium walls that don't actually do anything but hold the prosthetic in place and the wiring that connects to your nervous system, which I'd assume would be made of copper, which I doubt would be rejected by anyone that isn't allergic to it.
[QUOTE=DainBramageStudios;32240109]yeah im pretty sure the part about artificial superintelligences is integral to the singularity. also funny how you criticise us for citing deus ex in one post then believe a scifi author the next.[/QUOTE]
You are talking about Technological Singularity as a finite theoretical event.
I am talking about Singularity as a concept.
Two different things.
Singularity refers to the point in a black hole through which you cannot see anything from the outside. That is what technological singularity means. A point in technological development to which a previous generation could neither predict nor comprehend.
Singularity as an event refers to a stricter notion of that principle in which future humans are inordinately smarter than present humans, therefore they literally cannot be understood by a previous generation.
[QUOTE=imasillypiggy;32238033]We are talking about [b]a future without money[/b] so I don't think anyone would care if the got a human to work for free in there work force. Even though I don't think jobs like screwing in bottle caps will be popular if no one has to do it. Probably only the creative things which man could greatly help with would be left life making new foods, inventing stuff or teaching and I don't think anyone wants to really do anything that involves hard labor for no reason.[/QUOTE]
Ahahahaha
Hahahaha
HA.
Have any of you read a page of [I]The Age of the Spiritual Machine,[/I] or are you just commenting based upon what you know from reading Wikipedia?
[QUOTE=Lankist;32240283]You are talking about Technological Singularity as a finite theoretical event.
I am talking about Singularity as a concept.
Two different things.
Singularity refers to the point in a black hole through which you cannot see anything from the outside. That is what technological singularity means. A point in technological development to which a previous generation could neither predict nor comprehend.
Singularity as an event refers to a stricter notion of that principle in which future humans are inordinately smarter than present humans, therefore they literally cannot be understood by a previous generation.[/QUOTE]
There's over fifteen uses of the word "singularity" for various concepts and ideas, could you please show me some sort of source where you got that definition for the word?
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singularity[/url]
Just because the word "singularity" in a certain context would refer to Penrose–Hawking singularity theorems that doesn't mean it can't refer to another idea or concept.
[QUOTE=Lankist;32240340]Have any of you read a page of [I]The Age of the Spiritual Machine,[/I] or are you just commenting based upon what you know from reading Wikipedia?[/QUOTE]
no we're talking about what the term "singularity" in common parlance is used to describe
it may be true that the pure definition is a "point of no return", but unless you're talking about astrophysics, a singularity means "where machines become smarter than we are"
you can argue semantics or you can argue properly.
[QUOTE=CakeMaster7;32240381]There's over fifteen uses of the word "singularity" for various concepts and ideas, could you please show me some sort of source where you got that definition for the word?
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singularity[/url][/QUOTE]
[I]Age of the Spiritual Machine[/I] and [I]The Singularity is Near[/I], in both of which Kurzweil explains the sentiment and etymology of the concept of technological singularity and Technological Singularity as a finite event.
[QUOTE=cccritical;32240232]Why can't the sockets be made out of titanium with insulated wiring? The only thing that'd need to actually touch your body would be titanium walls that don't actually do anything but hold the prosthetic in place and the wiring that connects to your nervous system, which I'd assume would be made of copper, which I doubt would be rejected by anyone that isn't allergic to it.[/QUOTE]
I'm going to admit right now that I'm not an expert so I'm treading on ice here, but I'm going to assume using titanium for microscale connectors to nerve tissue is either impossible or impractical.
[QUOTE=DainBramageStudios;32240413]no we're talking about what the term "singularity" in common parlance is used to describe
it may be true that the pure definition is a "point of no return", but unless you're talking about astrophysics, a singularity means "where machines become smarter than we are"
you can argue semantics or you can argue properly.[/QUOTE]
It doesn't mean "when machines become smarter than we are."
Singularity, by very definition, is unpredictable. The only things singularitiarians even attempt to predict are the events that lead up to singularity. Everything beyond that point is speculation. The common speculation is that artificial and human intelligence can be integrated. Other speculations include comprehensive understanding of the human brain's "software" allowing transfer of minds between bodies, or complete integration with machinery.
Note: I use the word "software" lightly because the human brain doesn't have an operating system, it isn't really software. Software is simply the closest analogy to biological computing.
[QUOTE=DainBramageStudios;32240462]I'm going to admit right now that I'm not an expert so I'm treading on ice here, but I'm going to assume using titanium for microscale connectors to nerve tissue is either impossible or impractical.[/QUOTE]
why would you even bother stating your opinion if you know that you know absolutely nothing about engineering or biotech
[QUOTE=Mr. Scorpio;32240498]why would you even bother stating your opinion if you know that you know absolutely nothing about engineering or biotech[/QUOTE]
because I didnt realise the discussion about titanium would go this indepth and thought it would just go by unnoticed
oh well
[editline]11th September 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=Lankist;32240477]Singularity, by very definition, is unpredictable. The only things singularitiarians even attempt to predict are the events that lead up to singularity. Everything beyond that point is speculation. The common speculation is that artificial and human intelligence can be integrated. Other speculations include comprehensive understanding of the human brain's "software" allowing transfer of minds between bodies, or complete integration with machinery.[/QUOTE]
so it's pseudoscience then? ty
[QUOTE=DainBramageStudios;32240511]so it's pseudoscience then? ty[/QUOTE]
Not really, no.
Weird =/= pseudoscience. We've already plugged human and animal brains into machines. We've controlled machinery with brainwaves. We've translated a cat's thoughts into an image on a screen recently, literally seeing through its eyes (and disturbingly discovering cats see humans as more cat-like than we really are.)
Fringe science, maybe. But it's real science, not pseudo-religions bunk.
[QUOTE=DainBramageStudios;32240462]I'm going to admit right now that I'm not an expert so I'm treading on ice here, but I'm going to assume using titanium for microscale connectors to nerve tissue is either impossible or impractical.[/QUOTE]
hmm, I didn't even think about how they'd stay anchored to your body
yeah, I have no idea, don't know what they use now and can't come up with anything brilliant for it
[QUOTE=DainBramageStudios;32240413]no we're talking about what the term "singularity" in common parlance is used to describe
it may be true that the pure definition is a "point of no return", but unless you're talking about astrophysics, a singularity means "where machines become smarter than we are"
you can argue semantics or you can argue properly.[/QUOTE]
Bear in mind you're taking to a lawyer.
Diamond is biocompatible.
[QUOTE=Lankist;32240552]We've translated a cat's thoughts into an image on a screen recently, literally seeing through its eyes (and disturbingly discovering cats see humans as more cat-like than we really are.)[/QUOTE]
hoyl fcuk where'd you see that
[QUOTE=Lankist;32240477]It doesn't mean "when machines become smarter than we are."[/QUOTE] Even then I don't see whats so silly about thinking machines can become smarter then us. a 70cent calculator can beat us in math. Its not wishful fair tale thinking that it could beat us in other things eventually.
critical can you please stop rating me dumb because you don't like me?
[QUOTE=imasillypiggy;32240604]Even then I don't see whats so silly about thinking machines can become smarter then us. a 70cent calculator can beat us in math. Its not wishful fair tale thinking that it could beat us in other things eventually.[/QUOTE]
2+2 is always going to be 4, no matter what
machines aren't yet capable of truly abstract thought and I really doubt they ever will be
[QUOTE=Lankist;32240552]We've translated a cat's thoughts into an image on a screen recently, literally seeing through its eyes (and disturbingly discovering cats see humans as more cat-like than we really are.)[/QUOTE]
Whoa whoa whoa I'm going to need some citations please.
[QUOTE=Eudoxia;32240644]Whoa whoa whoa I'm going to need some citations please.[/QUOTE]
Sounds like something from an acid trip.
I won't even care if it's fake
I want to see a human with a cat face
Found a source: [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brain%E2%80%93computer_interface#Prominent_research_successes[/url]
[editline]11th September 2011[/editline]
Well, it's Wikipedia.
[QUOTE=cccritical;32240641]2+2 is always going to be 4, no matter what
machines aren't yet capable of truly abstract thought and I really doubt they ever will be[/QUOTE] Why? Exactly why can't we? So far we haven't found anything magical about the human brain that can't be copied. We have machines that are starting to create art and give helpful advice what makes you think it has to stop there?
[QUOTE=cccritical;32240600]hoyl fcuk where'd you see that[/QUOTE]
[url]http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/471786.stm[/url]
You're going to be disappointed if you're expecting what I think you're expecting. The experiment was a proof-of-concept in a number of fields. On one hand, it's proof that machine can interpret biological thoughts. On the other, it's proof that we (as well as other species) do not see and perceive information as it actually is, but from a human (or cat) perspective. Humans tend to humanize everything, seeing human faces in inanimate objects. Cats see distorted, disproportionate views of human faces.
It's not an experiment to see a human with a cat face.
[QUOTE=imasillypiggy;32240719]Why? Exactly why can't we? So far we haven't found anything magical about the human brain that can't be copied. We have machines that are starting to create art and give helpful advice what makes you think it has to stop there?[/QUOTE]
I'd imagine you need to be capable of giving a completely random number before you can analyze and critique art with a completely unique opinion derived without influence from another person or programming
[QUOTE=cccritical;32240663]I won't even care if it's fake
I want to see a human with a cat face[/QUOTE]
[img]http://ghostradio.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/109449_james-camerons-avatar-continues-to-break-box-office-records.jpg[/img]
[QUOTE=cccritical;32240842]I'd imagine you need to be capable of giving a completely random number before you can analyze and critique art with a completely unique opinion derived without influence from another person or programming[/QUOTE] Yea but human opinions aren't completely unique either. They come from there environment and genes just like a computer gets programs and hardware. In fact a human can't give a completely random number. The number is based on what there favorite number is or something like that which effects which number they choose.
[QUOTE=imasillypiggy;32240604]Even then I don't see whats so silly about thinking machines can become smarter then us. a 70cent calculator can beat us in math. Its not wishful fair tale thinking that it could beat us in other things eventually.
critical can you please stop rating me dumb because you don't like me?[/QUOTE]
That doesn't mean the calculator is smarter, it just has more processing power.
We're much smarter, some of the most advanced Artificial Intelligence on the entire planet can barely do things we find simple because they require billions of calulations a second to do.
Cutting edge AI is a car that can drive on it's own, and yet we find driving a car relatively simple.
Until we get intelligent and truly self aware AI we'll always bt smarter than machines, as even some of the most intelligent AI on the planet (check out Cleverbot) can't think abstractly.
Cleverbot is an AI that learns by talking to humans, and it's been around for two decades I believe, and it's had several million conversations with people that make it a surprisingly smart and realistic AI, but it can't see the relationship between the words "car" and "road."
It can't remember what it told you two sentences ago either.
[QUOTE=CakeMaster7;32241164]That doesn't mean the calculator is smarter, it just has more processing power.
We're much smarter, some of the most advanced Artificial Intelligence on the entire planet can barely do things we find simple because they require billions of calulations a second to do.
Cutting edge AI is a car that can drive on it's own, and yet we find driving a car relatively simple.
Until we get intelligent and truly self aware AI we'll always bt smarter than machines, as even some of the most intelligent AI on the planet (check out Cleverbot) can't think abstractly.
Cleverbot is an AI that learns by talking to humans, and it's been around for two decades I believe, and it's had several million conversations with people that make it a surprisingly smart and realistic AI, but it can't see the relationship between the words "car" and "road."[/QUOTE]
Which is why Singularity is typically speculated to involve the integration of the raw processing power of machines with the ingenuity and intuition of humans.
Kurzweil talks a lot about how it's easier to copy from ourselves than to create intelligence from scratch. It'd be a lot more practical to upgrade our brains than to make a brand new brain.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
