[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.
[/QUOTE] Yea I understand that AI now aren't that great but so far I haven't seen anything that shows that it can't get better or something about how humans think that simply can't be copied eventually. Even if there is some fundamental problem with machines that can't copy biological brains scientists are trying to see if they can make biological brains work with computers.
[editline]11th September 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=cccritical;32241227]It can't remember what it told you two sentences ago either.[/QUOTE] Actually some calculators do.
[QUOTE=Lankist;32241251]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.[/QUOTE]
Kurzweil really doesn't know what he's talking about. Biologists have said he's talking shite, and I wouldn't be surprised if Joseph Smith had a better record of predictions coming true.
[QUOTE=imasillypiggy;32241456]Actually some calculators do.[/QUOTE]
He's referring to Cleverbot, which can't remember anything it said past a sentence or two ago, and a calculator doing simple arithmetic isn't the same thing as something as complex as language.
[QUOTE=Capitulazyguy;32241471]Kurzweil really doesn't know what he's talking about. Biologists have said he's talking shite, and I wouldn't be surprised if Joseph Smith had a better record of predictions coming true.[/QUOTE]
Yes because enhanced cognitive functions are bullshit. That's why you have access to the entire world's information at your fingertips right now.
[QUOTE=imasillypiggy;32241456]
Actually some calculators do.[/QUOTE]
I'm talking about Cleverbot.
[QUOTE=Capitulazyguy;32240584]Bear in mind you're taking to a lawyer.[/QUOTE]
Good for you, come back when you're a scientist.
[QUOTE=Lankist;32239506]Yeah artificial implants don't get rejected like that. The whole Neuropozene thing in Deus Ex was just a plot point, not a plausible possibility. Citing fiction when you're talking about scientific revolution is not a good idea. By that same logic we should never develop artificial intelligence because goddamn haven't you SEEN terminator?[/QUOTE]
Not saying we shouldn't.
But WHO KNOWS? Could actually happen.
[QUOTE=dass;32241625]Not saying we shouldn't.
But WHO KNOWS? Could actually happen.[/QUOTE]
I could randomly grow a unicorn horn out of my freaking forehead, and it would still be more likely. artificial implants do not get rejected unless they're put in by an imbecile, if you make it out of titanium or put silicon around it it will work fine.
[QUOTE=Crimor;32241618]Good for you, come back when you're a scientist.[/QUOTE]
He was talking about me and how good I am with the words and the semantics
[QUOTE=Lankist;32241544]Yes because enhanced cognitive functions are bullshit. That's why you have access to the entire world's information at your fingertips right now.[/QUOTE]
The internet's just a giant database, what the hell are you talking about.
[QUOTE=Capitulazyguy;32241843]The internet's just a giant database, what the hell are you talking about.[/QUOTE]
Trans-humanism is about the integration of technology into human evolution.
Do you think you're going to be interfacing with computers using your sticky, uncoordinated fingers for the rest of time?
We already have the technology to have mass information available anywhere. The only thing needed for integration is an interface.
All I know is that we're bound to hit huge problems with this stuff.
No one of us is an actual scientist to say that this is only good/only bad/good and bad and there might be lots of things we don't know about it.
What I am sort of sure is that the ammount of people here who'd rather be a robot instead of what they are is rather alarming. Love yo'selves people :smith:
[QUOTE=dass;32241910]What I am sort of sure is that the ammount of people here who'd rather be a robot instead of what they are is rather alarming. Love yo'selves people :smith:[/QUOTE]I would be more concerned if people here thought they couldn't be improved upon.
[QUOTE=Lankist;32240552]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]
no you literally said
[quote]Singularity, by very definition, is unpredictable.[/quote]
then you cite a guy who tries to make predictions
if your idea cannot be used to make predictions and it can't be falsified then it isn't proper science
[QUOTE=DainBramageStudios;32242286]no you literally said
then you cite a guy who tries to make predictions
if your idea cannot be used to make predictions and it can't be falsified then it isn't proper science[/QUOTE]
Kurzweil makes predictions about events that precede Singularity. Everything that happens after is speculation.
I'm not even talking about his predictions, I'm talking about the speculation.
[QUOTE=Lankist;32242416]Kurzweil makes predictions about events that precede Singularity. Everything that happens after is speculation.[/QUOTE]
fair enough then.
[QUOTE=DainBramageStudios;32242286]no you literally said
then you cite a guy who tries to make predictions
if your idea cannot be used to make predictions and it can't be falsified then it isn't proper science[/QUOTE]It uses historical evidence, where it can be seen that the growth of technology has continued to increase constantly over time. Like he said, its all about what leads up to it.
[QUOTE=Nerts;32242068]I would be more concerned if people here thought they couldn't be improved upon.[/QUOTE]
I'd start thinking about the money they'd have to shit before getting anything fancier than a hand.
[QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;32242513]It uses historical evidence, where it can be seen that the growth of technology has continued to increase constantly over time.[/QUOTE]
no but that's the thing. the singularity means that historical data cannot be used to predict what happens after. it's a paradigm shift basically
think of a black hole, or before the beginning of the universe. our current laws of physics completely break down once you go past those event horizons, so it's useless trying to extrapolate.
[QUOTE=dass;32242516]I'd start thinking about the money they'd have to shit before getting anything fancier than a hand.[/QUOTE]Considering we know nothing about the potential cost at this stage, I wouldn't. You have no information to go on.
I wish I had kevlar skin.
[QUOTE=DainBramageStudios;32242551]no but that's the thing. the singularity means that historical data cannot be used to predict what happens after. it's a paradigm shift basically
think of a black hole, or before the beginning of the universe. our current laws of physics completely break down once you go past those event horizons, so it's useless trying to extrapolate.[/QUOTE]Its about a trend of technological growth that continues until it hits a point at which it becomes incomprehensible in any current form because said growth appears almost instantaneous.
[QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;32242628]Its about a trend of technological growth that continues until it hits a point at which it becomes incomprehensible in any current form because said growth appears almost instantaneous.[/QUOTE]
if it's incomprehensible then how do you know that?
[QUOTE=DainBramageStudios;32242551]no but that's the thing. the singularity means that historical data cannot be used to predict what happens after. it's a paradigm shift basically
think of a black hole, or before the beginning of the universe. our current laws of physics completely break down once you go past those event horizons, so it's useless trying to extrapolate.[/QUOTE]
Historical reference is only to predict the when, why and how. Basically it only looks at the trends of technological development and the rapidly increasing pace of our technological infrastructure to take a guess at when shit starts getting weird.
The singularity itself is more of a change in the way we think. Either a gradual change in ethics or culture to be more accepting of new ideas, a redefinition of "humanity," Human-controlled Intelligent Design (i.e. controlling our own evolution and the evolution of everything around us), etc. etc. What happens after the fact is the business of the future-folk. And possibly hyperintelligent mollusks.
It predicts how we'll get smarter, not what we'll think when we are smarter.
Of course the wacky end goal is probably always going to be complete comprehension of the universe, but that probably won't mean the same thing in a hundred years as it does now.
[QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;32242576]Considering we know nothing about the potential cost at this stage, I wouldn't. You have no information to go on.[/QUOTE]
Considering the times we're in, I'd say a fucking lot.
[QUOTE=Lankist;32242678]Historical reference is only to predict the when, why and how. Basically it only looks at the trends of technological development and the rapidly increasing pace of our technological infrastructure to take a guess at when shit starts getting weird.
The singularity itself is more of a change in the way we think. Either a gradual change in ethics or culture to be more accepting of new ideas, a redefinition of "humanity," Human-controlled Intelligent Design (i.e. controlling our own evolution and the evolution of everything around us), etc. etc. What happens after the fact is the business of the future-folk. And possibly hyperintelligent mollusks.
It predicts how we'll get smarter, not what we'll think when we are smarter.[/QUOTE]
So kind of like in 2001 where the apes learn to use tools and the rival apes get raped because they don't understand? That makes sense I guess.
Speaking of which, this is relevant:
[url]http://ieet.org/index.php/IEET/more/2181[/url]
[QUOTE=DainBramageStudios;32242714]So kind of like in 2001 where the apes learn to use tools? That makes sense I guess.[/QUOTE]
Exactly.
Neil DeGrasse Tyson had some interesting thoughts on human intelligence, not entirely relevant to Singularity but still relevant to the discussion:
(Paraphrasing)
We are 2% genetically different from chimpanzees. In that two-percent is the difference between the smartest members of the species learning basic, limited sign language and building the Hubble Telescope. Most people think that is a huge difference, but what if it isn't? To us, that 2% difference is far enough to look down at monkeys as cute little animals. What would we look like, exactly, to a lifeform that is 2% different from us in the same direction that we are different from chimps? What if our accomplishments thus far are not all that extraordinary, and what if the science and mathematics people spend their lives learning today were completely intuitive to something else from birth?
We would look like morons.
[QUOTE=dass;32242516]I'd start thinking about the money they'd have to shit before getting anything fancier than a hand.[/QUOTE]Electronics are cheap and only get cheaper, and you don't need to amputate anything, it's much simpler to implant extra things than it is replace parts.
[QUOTE=Nerts;32242837]Electronics are cheap and only get cheaper, and you don't need to amputate anything, it's much simpler to implant extra things than it is replace parts.[/QUOTE]
Arms aswell?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
