|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 3/21/2008
Posts: 580
Points: 1,643
Location: Ireland
|
I know that the idea of a 'Singularity clock' has been around for a while, but I haven't heard of an actual one in operation (I've heard of Danny Hillis's 'clock of the long now' -a very different timescale  ). This may have a lot to do with the vaguries surrounding the concept of the Singularity eg. is it a process or an event, slow v hard takeoff, timescale (10 years? 100 years?). I'd like to propose an idea for a Singularity clock based on one of the fields which is set to usher in this new era - nanotechnology. Unlike the biotechnology, robotic or A.I. revolutions, nanotechnology is 'measureable' in the sense that we can see how we are shrinking components in the computer industry in accordance with Moore's Law (another topic  ). My pet theory is that once we hit the realm of molecular manafacturing - of building things with atomic percision, this will be a fundamemtal breakthrough allowing us to control matter itself, and bringing us to the cusp of the Singularity (I use caps for Singularity - it's too important a concept for a small s imho). Put simply, I think that a Singularity clock based on the progress of nanotechnology might generate public interest in the Singularity, a meme that needs spreading in my opinion. I'd like to type more about this but it's 5.30am on Easter Saturday - I'm just jazzed to have come across this forum! Ok, bed soon, bye for now!
There is no spoon.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 3/19/2008
Posts: 981
Points: 2,955
|
Thanks for the post!!! I think Ray Kurzweil once predicted 2045 for the year. I see that the domain singularityclock.com is up for grabs (currently owned but open for acquisition). Somebody should grab it. Personally, while I agree with pretty much all of the arguments about the coming singularity, I have some doubts that it will really happen. 
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 3/21/2008
Posts: 580
Points: 1,643
Location: Ireland
|
Quote:Thanks for the post!!! You're welcome. Love the site layout. Quote:I think Ray Kurzweil once predicted 2045 for the year. If I remember correctly he states in 'The Singularity is near' (a great read, folks!) that according to his projections the non-biological part of out intelligence will be a billion times greater than the biological part in 2045. I'm not sure why he focuses on 2045 in this way since I believe that we would be well past a Singularity by then. Perhaps it is to emphasise the extent that A.I. will play in the next few decades. 2030 seems to be the year that Vinge and Kurzweil are hovering around in relation to the Singularity. Quote: I see that the domain singularityclock.com is up for grabs (currently owned but open for acquisition). Somebody should grab it. Hmmm, interesting. Any more thoughts on this one? Quote:Personally, while I agree with pretty much all of the arguments about the coming singularity, I have some doubts that it will really happen. Ohh, intriguing finish.  What are your doubts, pray tell.
There is no spoon.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 3/19/2008
Posts: 981
Points: 2,955
|
Quote:Ohh, intriguing finish. What are your doubts, pray tell. In a nutshell, I think that the universe is actually pretty bio-friendly. Paul Davies book "The Fifth Miracle" presents a good case for this. I also just read a blurb about how they've found amino acids in primitive Antarctic meteorites, suggesting extraterrestrial seeds of life ( http://arxiv.org/abs/0803.0743) and furthering the panspermia theory. One of the singularity predictions is that the universe will quickly become "saturated with our intelligence" (from "The Singularity is Near", also from Frank Tipler's "Physics of Immortality") But if the universe is really that bio-friendly, it should be very likely that life formed and evolved millions of times elsewhere. To think that we would be the first to achieve a technological singularity, therefore, seems a little homo-sapien-centric to me. So, the odds should be that we will absorb the singularity saturation from some other origin, rather than create it ourselves. Although, I suppose, maybe that is what is really happening. Also, of course, I think that there is a lot of evidence that our reality is programmed, which means there might be something behind it all, the technology of which would be probably be far advanced of the singularity. Which allows the possibility of something that diverts the path of our drive toward it so that we can continue normal evolution. What do you think? I'm still sort of muddling through these ideas, but working on a couple articles about it all to make it a little more clear perhaps. Thanks for the stimulating discussion!
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 3/21/2008
Posts: 580
Points: 1,643
Location: Ireland
|
Quote:But if the universe is really that bio-friendly, it should be very likely that life formed and evolved millions of times elsewhere. That sounds plausible. Quote: To think that we would be the first to achieve a technological singularity, therefore, seems a little homo-sapien-centric to me. Good point. Maybe we should get Ray Kurzweil on here and ask his opinion :). It's interesting to note that throughout scientific history humankind's position has been reduced from Copernicus through to Dawrin on to Freud but Kurzweil argues that we are indeed at the centre on things after all. Your point above would seem to be a major challenge to this viewpoint. Food for thought. Unless perhaps this is just one of a myriad of universes. This leads us to the anthropic principle and whather our universe is 'rigged', and maybe programmed. Wow, heavy stuff! Quote:So, the odds should be that we will absorb the singularity saturation from some other origin, rather than create it ourselves. Unless we are deliberately left alone and not disturbed? Quote:Although, I suppose, maybe that is what is really happening. Wow, gotta think about that one! Feel free to enligen me more if you've time. Quote:Also, of course, I think that there is a lot of evidence that our reality is programmed, which means there might be something behind it all, the technology of which would be probably be far advanced of the singularity. Which allows the possibility of something that diverts the path of our drive toward it so that we can continue normal evolution. What do you think? I'm still sort of muddling through these ideas, but working on a couple articles about it all to make it a little more clear perhaps. This brings to mind a chat I had with a 'hardcore' (he and his missus meditate 2 and a half hours a day!) Buddhist friend in Dublin almost a decade ago. He said that this world was akin to illusion compared to higher spititual realms and cited the matrix as an analogy. At that time I haven't seen it yet. Kabbalahists have a similar viewpoint. Perhaps there is some divine force behind layers of reality. I'm sort of muddling through these ideas myself - they are deep! Fascinating though. Enjoying this so far, looking forward to more peeps joining up. P.S. Emoticons don't seem to be working at present.
There is no spoon.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 3/19/2008
Posts: 981
Points: 2,955
|
Quote:This brings to mind a chat I had with a 'hardcore' (he and his missus meditate 2 and a half hours a day!) Buddhist friend in Dublin almost a decade ago. He said that this world was akin to illusion compared to higher spititual realms and cited the matrix as an analogy. At that time I haven't seen it yet. Kabbalahists have a similar viewpoint. Perhaps there is some divine force behind layers of reality. Yes! I think the eastern philosophies are on the right track. Shamans around the globe have always had different views of what this reality is in comparison to traditional "grounded" western thought. "I do not know whether I was then a man dreaming I was a butterfly, or whether I am now a butterfly, dreaming I am a man" - Chinese philosopher Chuang Tzu, circa 300 BC
|
|
|
Guest |
