Why hasn't the Singularity gone mainstream (yet?) (power, electric, advance)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I don't get your example but computers have been advancing exponentially for over 110 years and they show no signs of slowing down now. In fact the rate in which they are advancing is itself getting faster.
Again, increased processing speed is not the same as humans merging with computers. You are conflating the two when in fact they are not the same.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josseppie
Not with information technology. It will happen. That I am 99.9999999999% certain of. The other part is in case we get with with a asteroid that sends us back into the stone age.
That level of certainty clearly indicates you worship at the alter of technophilia. No one who is reasonable would ever be that certain about anything that's even directly observable in the present, much less something that hasn't even happened yet. Human perception is just too limited, and the observable world too complex and difficult to understand to be that certain about virtually anything. There are so many complex and unforseeable factors that determine how events will unfold that accurately predicting the future is extraordinarily difficult.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josseppie
It will be the norm by 2030 as the computers continue to get smaller and faster and that is why I call it the singularly. All the reasons you gave for it not to happen are all reasons why I call I it the singularity because most people today can not understand how and why people would want to merge with computers. So life after 2030 will be very different then life today. Plus we have not even talked about AI and by 2029 it will be as intelligent as a human today so by 2030 it will be smarter so for us to keep up we will have to merge with computers or we will be left in the dust.
Smaller and faster machines does not equal humans merging with computers. Again, you clearly have a serious boner for this technology, so you're trying ever so zealously to proselytize. Sorry, but having intercourse with a computer just doesn't do it for me. If that's what you're into, fine, good for you.
And again, people like you who are so convinced that they know how the future will transpire with such certainty are, historically almost always wrong. In 2014 we don't have flying cars, and we still get old and die. Decades ago very few futurists were able to predict the internet and PEDs, which have been the most significant developments so far in the 21st century. Again, I suggest you read "The Signal and the Noise" by Nate Silver to understand how truly difficult making accurate predictions is.
I do think it's entirely possible that AI will be able to able to absorb and process information similarly to us, but much more rapidly and accurately. But this won't necessarily make AI human. Did you see the movie her? The point of that film is that humans won't be able to relate to an AI system because it doesn't have a physical body, and advanced AI won't relate to humans because it processes information much more quickly that humans. I know it's a work of fiction, but it addresses some germane contemporary topics.
Lastly, while I like her as a person, artistically Lady Gaga is a superficial, derivative hack. Her whole approach is basically an updated version of Madonna, but with seemingly lesser ability to morph with the times. Her latest album already sounds dated. Musically, it's basically a redux of her first album, but less catchy and more pretentious. I know better than to make certain predictions, but I'm about 90% confident she'll be culturally irrelevant within ten years (probably less).
Not with information technology. It will happen. That I am 99.9999999999% certain of. The other part is in case we get with with a asteroid that sends us back into the stone age.
You either have a very bad habit of dodging things or get too distracted by trival matters that you overlook and lose the point. The point I made is that nothing stays the same. Everything changes. Exactly what those changes will produce is not always as certain as you think. It's still a flip of the coin because there can be any number of unexpected events or developments that can turn out differently than expected. Your 99.9999999999% certainty is nonsense and sheer assumption. And you think that an asteroid strike sending us back to the stone age is the only thing that would interfere? It's not about a return to the stone age, and btw, a collision by a large enough comet could completely destroy the entire planet, never mind any stone age survivors. While the odds are slim that would happen, it is a possibility. Keep in mind what happened when Comet Shoemaker-Levy 9 hit Jupiter. Such an impact with Earth would be the end of the planet. But that's not really the point. Comet Shoemaker
There are many unexpected things that could get in the way of of your scenario's timeframe, enough to cause a serious delay. Your scenario is solely based on the assumption that nothing will get in the way. And that's the weak point of your predictions because it fails to consider any other alternative. And in the link I posted earlier, Google execs say that technology is NOT a magic bullet that will solve the Earth's problems. Could it solve some? Sure. But unless we get a handle on international issues, then the utopian future you envision might not turn out to be as ideal as you think. The global economy is already a mess and not likely to get better anytime in the near future. The US is trillions of dollars in debt. That figure is so large that it's hard to comprehend, but it can be visualized. (See link for pictures of what trillions of dollars would look like.) US Debt Ceiling Visualized: Stacked in $100 dollar bills @ $16.394 Trillion Dollars
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josseppie
You are comparing music to information technology? Of course no one can predict music I would not even try as that is not information technology. I love Lady GAGA and I am going to see her in concert this summer. Now will she be around in 10 years? IDK.
Once again, you seem to overlook and fail to grasp the point because of obsession? The point was simply to say that things don't always turn out as expected. That's it. Even so, you're still wrong because everything in the universe contains information includng music and technology. Name a single thing that does not contain information.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josseppie
Paradigm is used for different things. Integrated circuit paradigm is one. Wearable computer paradigm is another. The kind of changes we are going to see in the next few years is going to be fun, at least from my perspective. But I am really waiting till I can merge with computers in the late 2020's close to 2030.
Here you're dodging and skipping the point again. You're the one that said, "The current paradigm shift is to wearable computers", then concluded with "...I can say in the mid to late 2020's the paradigm shift will be to merging with computers." I simply disagreed and said that I've been using wearable computers for the last couple of decades. As for fun in the next few years, probably, but that's nothing new. People have already been enjoying what's already been available. Your concept of "paradigm" is vague, invalid and provides no details, because if wearable computers is the paradigm then you're a little late because wearables have been around for some time now.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josseppie
It will be the norm by 2030 as the computers continue to get smaller and faster and that is why I call it the singularly. All the reasons you gave for it not to happen are all reasons why I call I it the singularity because most people today can not understand how and why people would want to merge with computers. So life after 2030 will be very different then life today. Plus we have not even talked about AI and by 2029 it will be as intelligent as a human today so by 2030 it will be smarter so for us to keep up we will have to merge with computers or we will be left in the dust.
Once again, you're making a prediction. Computers will get smaller and faster. So what? That does not describe a singularity. But if it did, then we've already arrived at the singularity because computers have already gotten smaller and faster. As for people merging with computers by 2030 (another date setting prediction), you need to define what you mean by "merging". Does merging mean "wearable computers"? That's already been around for a while. Does it mean becoming cyborgs? No, I don't think that's essential. There are plenty of other non-invasive tools that can be used without needing to be a cyborg. Again, you're descriptions are much too vague. I'm not saying you can't be enthusiastic about the prospect of what the future might hold, but you also have to balance it out with realism based on history. You can't predict the future with 100% or even 99.9999999999% certainty because you also have to give allowance for unknown events that have not yet happened or unfolded.
As for those who may not choose to "merge" with computers (to become cyborgs), to say those who don't will be "left in the dust" is pretty extreme and a bit on the elitist side. You mentioned that you've been to other parts of the world. Really? Perhaps you've been to a few other first world countries with modern conveniences, but have you ever actually spent any time in any emerging, second or third world countries? If not, then such a "left in the dust" comment is unjustified and ignorant because it implies a return of segregation among people. Your vision of the future is beginning to sound more like the world of the Eloi and Morlocks in H.G. Wells's "The Time Machine".
Again, increased processing speed is not the same as humans merging with computers. You are conflating the two when in fact they are not the same.
Yes I know the difference. However not only are computers getting faster they are, also, getting smaller. Why smartphones today are thousands of times smaller and faster then the computers that took up entire rooms in the 1970's. The same think will happen by 2030 why computers by then will be the size of blood cells and thousands of times faster then the smartphones today.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apathizer
That level of certainty clearly indicates you worship at the alter of technophilia. No one who is reasonable would ever be that certain about anything that's even directly observable in the present, much less something that hasn't even happened yet. Human perception is just too limited, and the observable world too complex and difficult to understand to be that certain about virtually anything. There are so many complex and unforseeable factors that determine how events will unfold that accurately predicting the future is extraordinarily difficult.
Then how do you explain the fact computers have advanced at the same exponential rate and that rate has itself gone up since the first modern computer was built in 1890 and why you think it will suddenly stop now?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apathizer
Smaller and faster machines does not equal humans merging with computers. Again, you clearly have a serious boner for this technology, so you're trying ever so zealously to proselytize. Sorry, but having intercourse with a computer just doesn't do it for me. If that's what you're into, fine, good for you.
I will admit I study this subject a lot that is because it is not easy to fully understand and i want to be ready for the singularity in 2030.
Here is another article that talks about it:
First off: something has to. Disruption is inevitable.
Secondly: The trend is obvious.
Computers have been getting smaller and closer to our faces since their very beginning.
First they were in big rooms, then they sat on desktops, then they sat on our laps, and now they're in our palms. Next they'll be on our faces.
And again, people like you who are so convinced that they know how the future will transpire with such certainty are, historically almost always wrong. In 2014 we don't have flying cars, and we still get old and die. Decades ago very few futurists were able to predict the internet and PEDs, which have been the most significant developments so far in the 21st century. Again, I suggest you read "The Signal and the Noise" by Nate Silver to understand how truly difficult making accurate predictions is.
I use to think like you did and for anything other then information technology I still do. That applies to flying cars. However information technology is different in that you can predict how it will advance and the gaming industry has been doing that since the 80's.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apathizer
I do think it's entirely possible that AI will be able to able to absorb and process information similarly to us, but much more rapidly and accurately. But this won't necessarily make AI human. Did you see the movie her? The point of that film is that humans won't be able to relate to an AI system because it doesn't have a physical body, and advanced AI won't relate to humans because it processes information much more quickly that humans. I know it's a work of fiction, but it addresses some germane contemporary topics.
I did see that movie and while I had some issues with it overall it was good. But what you have just described is the technological singularity. In 2029 AI will be as intelligent as humans then by 2030 they will have surpassed us so unless we merge with computers they will leave us behind. Why I plan on merging with computers. Then life as we know will never be the same.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apathizer
Lastly, while I like her as a person, artistically Lady Gaga is a superficial, derivative hack. Her whole approach is basically an updated version of Madonna, but with seemingly lesser ability to morph with the times. Her latest album already sounds dated. Musically, it's basically a redux of her first album, but less catchy and more pretentious. I know better than to make certain predictions, but I'm about 90% confident she'll be culturally irrelevant within ten years (probably less).
I never thought I would be talking about Lady GAGA in this thread lol but it fit. Rather she will or will not be around IDK my point is this is not information technology thus no one can predict it.
You either have a very bad habit of dodging things or get too distracted by trival matters that you overlook and lose the point. The point I made is that nothing stays the same. Everything changes. Exactly what those changes will produce is not always as certain as you think. It's still a flip of the coin because there can be any number of unexpected events or developments that can turn out differently than expected. Your 99.9999999999% certainty is nonsense and sheer assumption. And you think that an asteroid strike sending us back to the stone age is the only thing that would interfere? It's not about a return to the stone age, and btw, a collision by a large enough comet could completely destroy the entire planet, never mind any stone age survivors. While the odds are slim that would happen, it is a possibility. Keep in mind what happened when Comet Shoemaker-Levy 9 hit Jupiter. Such an impact with Earth would be the end of the planet. But that's not really the point. Comet Shoemaker
There are many unexpected things that could get in the way of of your scenario's timeframe, enough to cause a serious delay. Your scenario is solely based on the assumption that nothing will get in the way. And that's the weak point of your predictions because it fails to consider any other alternative. And in the link I posted earlier, Google execs say that technology is NOT a magic bullet that will solve the Earth's problems. Could it solve some? Sure. But unless we get a handle on international issues, then the utopian future you envision might not turn out to be as ideal as you think. The global economy is already a mess and not likely to get better anytime in the near future. The US is trillions of dollars in debt. That figure is so large that it's hard to comprehend, but it can be visualized. (See link for pictures of what trillions of dollars would look like.) US Debt Ceiling Visualized: Stacked in $100 dollar bills @ $16.394 Trillion Dollars
There are some things that can get in the way but just like in the 20th century nothing did and that is why the rate at which computers have advanced was not changed at all. Why people like Ray Kurzweil are not worried about the next 30 years. Honestly I wanted to put 100% but nothing is 100% why I put 99.99999%.
The debt is another issue I am not worried about but this gets off information technology so I admit I could be wrong. I am going off the fact most of the debt is entitlements and my generation will never need entitlements because we will never get old so once they go away so will most of the debt.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NightBazaar
Once again, you seem to overlook and fail to grasp the point because of obsession? The point was simply to say that things don't always turn out as expected. That's it. Even so, you're still wrong because everything in the universe contains information includng music and technology. Name a single thing that does not contain information.
“Certain aspects of technology follow amazingly predictable trajectories,” he said, and showed a graph of computing power starting with the first electromechanical machines more than a century ago. At first the machines’ power doubled every three years; then in midcentury the doubling came every two years (the rate that inspired Moore’s Law); now it takes only about a year.
Dr. Kurzweil has other graphs showing a century of exponential growth in the number of patents issued, the spread of telephones, the money spent on education. One graph of technological changes goes back millions of years, starting with stone tools and accelerating through the development of agriculture, writing, the Industrial Revolution and computers. (For details, see nytimes.com/tierneylab.)
Now, he sees biology, medicine, energy and other fields being revolutionized by information technology. His graphs already show the beginning of exponential progress in nanotechnology, in the ease of gene sequencing, in the resolution of brain scans. With these new tools, he says, by the 2020s we’ll be adding computers to our brains and building machines as smart as ourselves.
Here you're dodging and skipping the point again. You're the one that said, "The current paradigm shift is to wearable computers", then concluded with "...I can say in the mid to late 2020's the paradigm shift will be to merging with computers." I simply disagreed and said that I've been using wearable computers for the last couple of decades. As for fun in the next few years, probably, but that's nothing new. People have already been enjoying what's already been available. Your concept of "paradigm" is vague, invalid and provides no details, because if wearable computers is the paradigm then you're a little late because wearables have been around for some time now.
You wrong. Here is another article on it and this not a advertisement for a product.
First off: something has to. Disruption is inevitable.
Secondly: The trend is obvious.
Computers have been getting smaller and closer to our faces since their very beginning.
First they were in big rooms, then they sat on desktops, then they sat on our laps, and now they're in our palms. Next they'll be on our faces.
Once again, you're making a prediction. Computers will get smaller and faster. So what? That does not describe a singularity. But if it did, then we've already arrived at the singularity because computers have already gotten smaller and faster. As for people merging with computers by 2030 (another date setting prediction), you need to define what you mean by "merging". Does merging mean "wearable computers"? That's already been around for a while. Does it mean becoming cyborgs? No, I don't think that's essential. There are plenty of other non-invasive tools that can be used without needing to be a cyborg. Again, you're descriptions are much too vague. I'm not saying you can't be enthusiastic about the prospect of what the future might hold, but you also have to balance it out with realism based on history. You can't predict the future with 100% or even 99.9999999999% certainty because you also have to give allowance for unknown events that have not yet happened or unfolded.
The singularity is a point in time when AI is smarter then humans and in order to keep up we will need to merge with computers. That will be in 2030 because in 2029 is when AI will be as smart as humans then pass us up by 2030. Also by 2030 computers the size of blood cells will be thousands of times more powerful then all of NASA in the 1960's and we will merge with them and they will augment our intelligence and immune system among other things that we do not fully know yet.
This is all about information technology and it has been proven it can be predicted with complete accuracy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NightBazaar
As for those who may not choose to "merge" with computers (to become cyborgs), to say those who don't will be "left in the dust" is pretty extreme and a bit on the elitist side. You mentioned that you've been to other parts of the world. Really? Perhaps you've been to a few other first world countries with modern conveniences, but have you ever actually spent any time in any emerging, second or third world countries? If not, then such a "left in the dust" comment is unjustified and ignorant because it implies a return of segregation among people. Your vision of the future is beginning to sound more like the world of the Eloi and Morlocks in H.G. Wells's "The Time Machine".
I have been to third world countries and even they will have to merge with the technology. I mean think about the movie Her. She became so smart so fast she left us behind. Now imagine if AI and humans do that. The humans who do not merge will not be able to keep up.
Last edited by Josseppie; 04-01-2014 at 03:39 PM..
Then how do you explain the fact computers have advanced at the same exponential rate and that rate has itself gone up since the first modern computer was built in 1890 and why you think it will suddenly stop now?
...
I use to think like you did and for anything other then information technology I still do. That applies to flying cars. However information technology is different in that you can predict how it will advance and the gaming industry has been doing that since the 80's.
Computer processing speed is but one of many interactive factors related to the prediction of singularity. There are many others, i.e.: How will natural blood cells interact with with theorectical microscopic computers? How do we know the bloodstream will even accept them? There are also numerous other factors that no one can forsee because, again, human perception is limited.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josseppie
I did see that movie and while I had some issues with it overall it was good. But what you have just described is the technological singularity. In 2029 AI will be as intelligent as humans then by 2030 they will have surpassed us so unless we merge with computers they will leave us behind. Why I plan on merging with computers. Then life as we know will never be the same.
You don't sound much different than the people in the 80s who were absolutely convinced there would be a nuclear war by the year 2000. They were wrong, so why are you so convinced you won't be?
The singularity movement is uncannily similar to religion, so much so I think of it as a quasi-religion. Some singularity advocates even promise eternal life, the way most fundamentalist religions do: Instead of a deity offering eternal life, all we have to merge with technology, and then we can (theoretically) live forever! Even if that were possible, it does not appeal to me at all.
Computer processing speed is but one of many interactive factors related to the prediction of singularity. There are many others, i.e.: How will natural blood cells interact with with theorectical microscopic computers? How do we know the bloodstream will even accept them? There are also numerous other factors that no one can forsee because, again, human perception is limited.
Now you have gone beyond my abilities so I will refer you to this interview. One thing to note is he talks about it starting in the 2020's and becoming the norm in the 2030's which is consistent with what I have been posting.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apathizer
You don't sound much different than the people in the 80s who were absolutely convinced there would be a nuclear war by the year 2000. They were wrong, so why are you so convinced you won't be?
Predicting a war is not information technology thus can not be predicted.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apathizer
The singularity movement is uncannily similar to religion, so much so I think of it as a quasi-religion. Some singularity advocates even promise eternal life, the way most fundamentalist religions do: Instead of a deity offering eternal life, all we have to merge with technology, and then we can (theoretically) live forever! Even if that were possible, it does not appeal to me at all.
It has nothing to do with religion. I do not worship anyone or anything. I just look where information technology has been, is now, will be going and the impact that will have on society.
Remember if you told someone in 1964 we would have smartphones today with thousands of times more processing capability than all of NASA I am sure they would of said all the same things you tell me when I say that by 2030 we will have computers the size of blood cells with thousands of times more processing capability then our smartphones.
Last edited by Josseppie; 04-01-2014 at 05:03 PM..
There are some things that can get in the way but just like in the 20th century nothing did and that is why the rate at which computers have advanced was not changed at all. Why people like Ray Kurzweil are not worried about the next 30 years. Honestly I wanted to put 100% but nothing is 100% why I put 99.99999%.
The debt is another issue I am not worried about but this gets off information technology so I admit I could be wrong. I am going off the fact most of the debt is entitlements and my generation will never need entitlements because we will never get old so once they go away so will most of the debt.
Same old story about Kurzweil. Of course he's not "worried" about the next 30 years. For one thing he'd be 96 years old, assuming he's still living then. For another thing, he makes a load of money from books, cds, tv and public appearances. The guy has a net worth of 27 million dollars. Not the richest man in the world but he's got a pretty good thing going. I don't think he'd apt to make waves to disrupt his income. He's got to pay for all those vitamins and supplements somehow that he takes daily. Ray Kurzweil Net Worth | Celebrity Net Worth
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josseppie
“Certain aspects of technology follow amazingly predictable trajectories,†he said, and showed a graph of computing power starting with the first electromechanical machines more than a century ago. At first the machines’ power doubled every three years; then in midcentury the doubling came every two years (the rate that inspired Moore’s Law); now it takes only about a year.
Dr. Kurzweil has other graphs showing a century of exponential growth in the number of patents issued, the spread of telephones, the money spent on education. One graph of technological changes goes back millions of years, starting with stone tools and accelerating through the development of agriculture, writing, the Industrial Revolution and computers. (For details, see nytimes.com/tierneylab.)
Now, he sees biology, medicine, energy and other fields being revolutionized by information technology. His graphs already show the beginning of exponential progress in nanotechnology, in the ease of gene sequencing, in the resolution of brain scans. With these new tools, he says, by the 2020s we’ll be adding computers to our brains and building machines as smart as ourselves.
No, I'm not wrong, and you're dodging the issue which was to correct your statement about wearable computers. I said I've been wearing one for about a couple of decades. In fact, I've got it on my wrist right now.
Now you're just rehashing the same old things you've posted before about how computer were as big as rooms, etc. I didn't say anything about computers not getting smaller, so please try to come up with some fresh ideas. However to say they'll eventually be in our brains is pure assumption, not a fact, if you're talking about what most people on the planet would choose to do. Simply put, there's no real reason to, other than for certain specialized reasons. Example - a neighbor had some kind of digestive exam done and had to swallow some kind of device that was left in for 24 hours. The device was later recovered to collect the data. I have no idea if the object was removed by the physicians or if it exited as most things taken into the stomach are. Anyway, we already have small gadgets, and no doubt we have more small gadgets for specialized purposes. We've got VR headsets that are being tested (still need to be improved), not to mention things like Google Glass, etc. But if you want to be hooked up and online 24/7, then by all means feel free to have at it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josseppie
The singularity is a point in time when AI is smarter then humans and in order to keep up we will need to merge with computers. That will be in 2030 because in 2029 is when AI will be as smart as humans then pass us up by 2030. Also by 2030 computers the size of blood cells will be thousands of times more powerful then all of NASA in th 1960's and we will merge with them and they will augment our intelligence and immune system among other things that we do not fully know yet.
This is all about information technology and it has been proven it can be predicted with complete accuracy.
More rehashing about NASA's computers in the 1960's. Better hope those blood cell sized computers are made of protein or something digestable. Otherwise you might want to avoid magnets.
That it's all proved is utter nonsense. You can't prove something like that with complete accuracy because it hasn't happened yet. And you're still leaving out the possibility that some unexpected event could get in the way. Hopefully nothing drastic like that would happen, but it's unknown. We recently had a close call to being hit by a huge solar flare. If it had hit the Earth, it could make of mess of communications and electrical grids. Luckily, it missed us by a few days.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josseppie
I have been to third world countries and even they will have to merge with the technology. I mean think about the movie Her. She became so smart so fast she left us behind. Now imagine if AI and humans do that. The humans who do not merge will not be able to keep up.
No, I haven't seen the movie "Her", so I really can't say anything about it. But your view about people who choose not merge with computers will be unable to keep up is meaningless and elitist. Did it occur to you that maybe not everyone would feel a need to "keep up"?
While third world countries are not living in the stone age, the use of the kinds of technology you're talking about is far behind countries that do have it. Somehow life still seems to go on as usual. What 3rd world countries have you been to? Just so I can have a better idea as to how clear your understanding is about such countries relative to the future of technology.
Same old story about Kurzweil. Of course he's not "worried" about the next 30 years. For one thing he'd be 96 years old, assuming he's still living then. For another thing, he makes a load of money from books, cds, tv and public appearances. The guy has a net worth of 27 million dollars. Not the richest man in the world but he's got a pretty good thing going. I don't think he'd apt to make waves to disrupt his income. He's got to pay for all those vitamins and supplements somehow that he takes daily. Ray Kurzweil Net Worth | Celebrity Net Worth
Thank you for finally spelling Moore's name correctly.
And once again, you're showing yourself as a Kurzweil groupy. That's okay though. Rock stars have their groupies too.
Ray Kurzweil is the foremost expert on this. I have seen him give a lecture live once when he came to CSU Pueblo but I would not travel to see him or any other scientist speak. Why do that when I have YouTube? I have posted other interviews from other people about the singularity and I have learned a lot from them as well. In fact one thing I disagree with Ray on is he calls 2045 the singularity and I have heard other people speak and I agree with them on the 2030 date.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NightBazaar
No, I'm not wrong, and you're dodging the issue which was to correct your statement about wearable computers. I said I've been wearing one for about a couple of decades. In fact, I've got it on my wrist right now.
Now you're just rehashing the same old things you've posted before about how computer were as big as rooms, etc. I didn't say anything about computers not getting smaller, so please try to come up with some fresh ideas. However to say they'll eventually be in our brains is pure assumption, not a fact, if you're talking about what most people on the planet would choose to do. Simply put, there's no real reason to, other than for certain specialized reasons. Example - a neighbor had some kind of digestive exam done and had to swallow some kind of device that was left in for 24 hours. The device was later recovered to collect the data. I have no idea if the object was removed by the physicians or if it exited as most things taken into the stomach are. Anyway, we already have small gadgets, and no doubt we have more small gadgets for specialized purposes. We've got VR headsets that are being tested (still need to be improved), not to mention things like Google Glass, etc. But if you want to be hooked up and online 24/7, then by all means feel free to have at it.
What you are describing is different then what is being developed today. Take the meta glasses. Its like what we see on Iron Man but in real life. Now not everyone will get them and be hooked up 24/7. I will be one of them who will.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NightBazaar
More rehashing about NASA's computers in the 1960's. Better hope those blood cell sized computers are made of protein or something digestable. Otherwise you might want to avoid magnets.
That it's all proved is utter nonsense. You can't prove something like that with complete accuracy because it hasn't happened yet. And you're still leaving out the possibility that some unexpected event could get in the way. Hopefully nothing drastic like that would happen, but it's unknown. We recently had a close call to being hit by a huge solar flare. If it had hit the Earth, it could make of mess of communications and electrical grids. Luckily, it missed us by a few days.
I agree if we get hit with a major flare then things might change. Why I say its not 100% but very close. Other then something like that with information technology we can predict what will happen.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NightBazaar
No, I haven't seen the movie "Her", so I really can't say anything about it. But your view about people who choose not merge with computers will be unable to keep up is meaningless and elitist. Did it occur to you that maybe not everyone would feel a need to "keep up"?
While third world countries are not living in the stone age, the use of the kinds of technology you're talking about is far behind countries that do have it. Somehow life still seems to go on as usual. What 3rd world countries have you been to? Just so I can have a better idea as to how clear your understanding is about such countries relative to the future of technology.
As time goes on it will be harder and harder for people to not merge with the technology but i suspect some will choose not too and I would defend their right. However I will be among the first to, maybe not the first generation as I want to see the bugs get worked out but among the first.
Watch the video I posted on nano technology as it goes into more detail on how and why it will happen and finally when. 2020's and 2030's as I have been sahying.
Last edited by Josseppie; 04-01-2014 at 06:44 PM..
Predicting a war is not information technology thus can not be predicted.
So is predicting the exact course of complex technological developments: what will be practical and won't, how compatible will they be with other developments, etc.
Here's another thing to consider: There might simply be a practical limit for how small functional computers can actually be. Yes, the processing capabilities and decreasing size of computers has progressed at a stable rate. But that in and of itself does not necessarily mean this trend is infinite. At some point a minimal size limit might be reach in order for computers to function. If there is a size limit, what will it be? No one knows, but much like the fact there's a minimal size for functional internal combustion engines, it seems reasonable that there's a corresponding limit for computers.
I understand the theory and logic underlying singulartarian thinking. However, even at their best, theories are elaborate, but incomplete representations of the real world. The real world is far more complex for even the very best theory to be a perfect representation. Consequently, the future rarely transpires exactly as predicted even according to theories with the best, most accurate track record.
Think about the theory of evolution, which I'm about 95% convinced is generally true. I understand that some exact details might be somewhat inaccurate, but there's overwhelming evidence that it's general principle are consistent with objective observations.
However, can evolution precisely predict what life will look like 500, 100, or even 50 years from now? Maybe, but I would be very cautious to accept such predictions because we have no way of knowing the unforseen variables that will effect how life develops.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josseppie
Remember if you told someone in 1964 we would have smartphones today with thousands of times more processing capability than all of NASA I am sure they would of said all the same things you tell me when I say that by 2030 we will have computers the size of blood cells with thousands of times more processing capability then our smartphones.
True, more people were predicting we'd have personal jet-packs than anything like smart-phones, but that's exactly my point! Long-term predictions are very, very seldom realized. There are just too many unforseen variables that no one (or almost no one) can accurately understand.
It's entirely possible you might wind up being right. But for you to be so confident in your predictions seems arrogant to me. In "The Signal and the Noise", Silver makes and interesting observation: Generally, those who are less confident about their predictions are more accurate than those who are highly confident. This is because those who are less confident have a more thorough understanding of how complex the world actually is, and understand how are imperfect even the most accurate information is. Conversely, those who are highly confident tend to make emotionally-based predictions; that is, they have an emotional interest in the outcome. To some extent this true for most persons: however, less-confident predictors seem better able to overcome personal bias.
Now, can you honestly say you don't fall more into the latter camp?
In my opinion most of the drivers for human/computer interfaces is coming from medical research for the disabled. Implants in the brain for Parkinson, to helping the blind see again by connecting the brain to cameras, cochlear implants, robotic arms that are being moved by brain power alone.
There is a lot of interesting research going on right now that's being funded as treatments for disabilities, but the knowledge gained will be easily transferable to the common-man in the future.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
More rehashing about NASA's computers in the 1960's. Better hope those blood cell sized computers are made of protein or something digestable. Otherwise you might want to avoid magnets.
