Singularity watch - the future is already here

[TruXta]

So, what you do is you build a nanomachine/computer that sits alongside a neuron in the brain and syncs its behaviour with that neuron, connecting via the same synapses etc. Then, when it's all bedded in, it kills the original neuron and takes over. Repeat x100 billion. Pause. Copy. Embed in simulation. Unpause. SIMPLE.

Reminds of the story of how to do artificial vision was given as a summer project at MIT in the sixties. How could it be that difficult? It's just a lens and some photoreceptors and some neurons anyway!

 

[DotCommunist]

So, what you do is you build a nanomachine/computer that sits alongside a neuron in the brain and syncs its behaviour with that neuron, connecting via the same synapses etc. Then, when it's all bedded in, it kills the original neuron and takes over. Repeat x100 billion. Pause. Copy. Embed in simulation. Unpause. SIMPLE.

greg egans jewel

 

[TruXta]

We may find out whether it is possible soon anyway.

White elephant in the making.

 

[Fez909]

White elephant in the making.

You're so optimistic

 

[TruXta]

You're so optimistic

I am actually. Not just in this particular instance.

 

[Fez909]

I am actually. Not just in this particular instance.

But even if they fail, then we should have learned something.

 

[TruXta]

But even if they fail, then we should have learned something.

Maybe. Hopefully.

 

[Cid]

Not too shabby actually. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_neuroscience#Emergence_of_neuropsychology

As for your contention that technology is advancing at an increasing rate, tell that to a doctor. Or a carpenter. Or a car mechanic. Or an electrician.

As a carpenter I can tell you that you are talking out of your arse. With the advent of CNC routers the technologies we use are effectively tied into advances in computing (obviously with a bit of lag). This affects everyone from your average site chippy to a high end furniture maker like me. Then there are advances in adhesives, finishes, health (important because wood dust and finishes are quite bad for you), joinery systems, CAD - any number of things. Yeah, the basic tools - planes, saws and chisels - are pretty much the same, we just don't have to use them that much.

As for neuroscience... fMRI.

 

[TruXta]

As a carpenter I can tell you that you are talking out of your arse. With the advent of CNC routers the technologies we use are effectively tied into advances in computing (obviously with a bit of lag). This affects everyone from your average site chippy to a high end furniture maker like me. Then there are advances in adhesives, finishes, health (important because wood dust and finishes are quite bad for you), joinery systems, CAD - any number of things. Yeah, the basic tools - planes, saws and chisels - are pretty much the same, we just don't have to use them that much.

As for neuroscience... fMRI.

Fair point, but I'm guessing the majority of the world's carpenters don't have access to CNC machines.

 

[Cid]

Fair point, but I'm guessing the majority of the world's carpenters don't have access to CNC machines.

Depends what you mean by carpentry and the rest of the world really. Western world they're pretty common, obviously not everyone has one, but you just outsource work to people that do... highly unlikely you'll ever come across a new kitchen that hasn't been through a CNC machine at some point. I imagine this is becoming the case in the rest of the world too, certainly China has an enormous amount of CNC capacity. A lot of that will be targeted at selling stuff to the west of course, but I imagine there's a pretty huge domestic given the changes in their construction industry.

Then you have companies like Ikea, which have effectively replaced 99% of the furniture making side of carpentry.

 

[TruXta]

My more general point was simply that what are seen as advances are typically very unevenly distributed. And what can prove an advance in one place can be detrimental to a different place. Making it very much not an advance.

 

[Cid]

Well yes, but the same could be said of your 100 year old advances... Developments in early neuroscience resulted in some profoundly disturbing medical practices for example. The fact that something has negative consequences doesn't mean it isn't an advance.

 

[TruXta]

Well yes, but the same could be said of your 100 year old advances... Developments in early neuroscience resulted in some profoundly disturbing medical practices for example. The fact that something has negative consequences doesn't mean it isn't an advance.

That last sentence is a bit Atomic weapons for instance were an advance? For the record, I'm of the firm opinion that technology is never value-free. On the contrary, technology wouldn't be possible if it wasn't valued. So when I say advanced I mean better, both in a more physical sense (efficiency, precision etc) and better for people (wealth, happiness, learning) etc.

 

[Ibn Khaldoun]

We need powerful quantum computing first - we can't even upload a piece of music from vinyl record to computer that's anything more than a mimicry of the original, our ears have to fill in all the rest and that's tiring.

 

[TruXta]

 

[Cid]

That last sentence is a bit Atomic weapons for instance were an advance? For the record, I'm of the firm opinion that technology is never value-free. On the contrary, technology wouldn't be possible if it wasn't valued. So when I say advanced I mean better, both in a more physical sense (efficiency, precision etc) and better for people (wealth, happiness, learning) etc.

Of course they were an advance, they were just an advance in weapon design... A field which is er... somewhat dubious. The negative consequences of that advance were profound and far reaching, but it was still an advance. It also brought together some of the greatest minds of that era and helped stimulate new developments in physics. Would the world be a better place without atomic weapons? It's impossible to say, fluctuations in a complex system. Is it even possible to have a scientifically advanced society where they haven't been discovered at some point? Seems unlikely.

My point is that you're trying to argue in absolutes when they don't exist. No advance (perhaps 'development' would be better) that results in a profound change of technology or understanding is going to be without negative consequences. Equally something that seems absolutely negative might have some consequence which today has a positive impact... Post WWII treaties, the development of human rights etc. The events that lead to these are not positive, but they are formative. As a species we react and adapt, we don't tend to plough relentlessly down a negative path or relentlessly up a positive one.

 

[TruXta]

Of course they were an advance, they were just an advance in weapon design... A field which is er... somewhat dubious. The negative consequences of that advance were profound and far reaching, but it was still an advance. It also brought together some of the greatest minds of that era and helped stimulate new developments in physics. Would the world be a better place without atomic weapons? It's impossible to say, fluctuations in a complex system. Is it even possible to have a scientifically advanced society where they haven't been discovered at some point? Seems unlikely.

My point is that you're trying to argue in absolutes when they don't exist. No advance (perhaps 'development' would be better) that results in a profound change of technology or understanding is going to be without negative consequences. Often something that seems absolutely negative might have some consequence which today has a positive impact... Post WWII treaties, the development of human rights etc. The events that lead to these are not positive, but they are formative. As a species we react and adapt, we don't tend to plough relentlessly down a negative path or relentlessly up a positive one.

I'm struggling to see where I argue in absolutes.

Also the bit in bold strikes me as self-contradictory - on the one hand you say we can't predict alternate futures, on the other you don't think atomic weapons couldn't not be discovered. Hm.

 

[Cid]

In a scientifically advanced society - you can't really be scientifically advanced without understanding atomic physics.

 

[TruXta]

In a scientifically advanced society - you can't really be scientifically advanced without understanding atomic physics.

You're arguing from a case study of one. Hardly the basis on which to make bombastic statements such as the above.

 

[Cid]

That last sentence is a bit Atomic weapons for instance were an advance? For the record, I'm of the firm opinion that technology is never value-free. On the contrary, technology wouldn't be possible if it wasn't valued. So when I say advanced I mean better, both in a more physical sense (efficiency, precision etc) and better for people (wealth, happiness, learning) etc.

This is your absolute; I'm fairly sure there has never been an advance in the way you define it.

 

[TruXta]

This is your absolute; I'm fairly sure there has never been an advance in the way you define it.

There's been plenty. The bike. Penicilin. All manner of tools, processes mechanical and chemical. Loads. Computers and satellites.

 

[Cid]

You're arguing from a case study of one. Hardly the basis on which to make bombastic statements such as the above.

I haven't stated anything except that I think you probably can't have a scientifically advanced society without discovering atomic weapons. I have no idea whether this is true or not, and I'm not trying to argue it... It's just something interesting to mull over. I don't think you could, simply because atomic physics forms such an integral part of advanced science. The weaponised bit is really a sort of side effect of understanding how the forces involved work. This is just my opinion though.

 

[Cid]

There's been plenty. The bike. Penicilin. All manner of tools, processes mechanical and chemical. Loads. Computers and satellites.

Penicillin; the formation of pharmaceutical companies, antibiotics culture and resistance, a massive advantage given to those with easy access over those without.
The bike: Think about the situation that allowed its design; a fundamental change in industry, mass manufacture of steel etc.
Tools, processes etc: most of these confer some competitive advantage, or allow a reduction in number of employees etc.
Computers and Satellites: you're joking I presume.

 

[FridgeMagnet]

So, what you do is you build a nanomachine/computer that sits alongside a neuron in the brain and syncs its behaviour with that neuron, connecting via the same synapses etc. Then, when it's all bedded in, it kills the original neuron and takes over. Repeat x100 billion. Pause. Copy. Embed in simulation. Unpause. SIMPLE.

Contains hard-AI assumptions; that the entire behaviour of neurons is computationally expressable. Or that if it isn't, it doesn't make any difference.

 

[Crispy]

Contains hard-AI assumptions; that the entire behaviour of neurons is computationally expressable. Or that if it isn't, it doesn't make any difference.

Oh I know I know. Tsh. Pshaw. Pfft.

 

[TruXta]

Penicillin; the formation of pharmaceutical companies, antibiotics culture and resistance, a massive advantage given to those with easy access over those without.
The bike: Think about the situation that allowed its design; a fundamental change in industry, mass manufacture of steel etc.
Tools, processes etc: most of these confer some competitive advantage, or allow a reduction in number of employees etc.
Computers and Satellites: you're joking I presume.

I know all that. I still consider them advances. I'm neither a luddite nor a primitivist. Nor am I a nerd-rapturist who thinks that super-intelligent robots will masturbate us into hardware heaven.

 

[Cid]

What was your point about the greatest advances being 100+ years ago and things not really having moved on in many sectors then?

 

[TruXta]

What was your point about the greatest advances being 100+ years ago and things not really having moved on in many sectors then?

That was wrt the OP - it's unlikely that the next few generations will see as massive and revolutionary advances as they saw back in the 2nd industrial revolution.

 

[Ibn Khaldoun]

'Binary' can't replicate 'analogue' - that's the main problem with AI.

Check up about quantum computing. That's the next frontier for IT, still in its infancy.

 

[FridgeMagnet]

Maybe.