[Carlhole]

Revenge of the nerds: Should we listen to futurists or are they leading us towards ‘nerdocalypse’?

The singularity is a metaphorical term used to express the transformative moment when technology has moved so rapidly that the human race can never be the same again. This could be a good thing, according to Kurzweil, if we avoid the dangers of genetics, nanotechnology and robotics, then succeed in harnessing artificial intelligence to conquer mortality and accept the next, transhuman phase of our evolution. Or it could all go badly wrong, resulting in what some have dubbed the "nerdocalypse". In Kurzweil's estimation we should know, either way, by 2045.

It's that sense of imminence and immediacy that has made the singularity such a passionately contested proposition, and attracted interest – and investment – from extremely wealthy and intelligent individuals, as well as Google and Nasa, which have each put money into the Singularity University (co-founded by Kurzweil) near San Jose.

An early hit at the summit is biophysicist and entrepreneur Gregory Stock, who enthuses the paying audience of future-followers with statements such as "science has slammed the evolutionary process into fast forward" and "evolution is itself evolving"...

Has a list of familiar names/profiles. Like, this guy:

Demis Hassabis

Age: 34 Born London Lives London

Big idea: Hybrid Systems Neuroscience

Quote: "There are spaceships being launched all over the place right now, so how about launching a few into the mind."

Profile: Hassabis is a former child chess prodigy and videogames designer hoping to surf the revolution in cognitive neuroscience, and enable computers to not only understand a concept but to "learn, store, and flexibly use concepts". This he hopes to achieve by 2020, by pursuing an approach summed up by the equation: machine learning + neuroscience = artificial general intelligence. "I want to create an interdisciplinary lab that basically has computer scientists and neuroscientists working together."

[davep]

Hassabis is a former child chess prodigy and videogames designer hoping to surf the revolution in cognitive neuroscience, and enable computers to not only understand a concept but to "learn, store, and flexibly use concepts". This he hopes to achieve by 2020, by pursuing an approach summed up by the equation: machine learning + neuroscience = artificial general intelligence. "I want to create an interdisciplinary lab that basically has computer scientists and neuroscientists working together."

'Hoping to' sums it up. Come back when something comes of it. Sorry, but I'm highly sceptical of such endeavours. Remeber that AI bombed. Maybe, just maybe, something will come of it. Just don't bank on it.

[Carlhole]

'Hoping to' sums it up. Come back when something comes of it. Sorry, but I'm highly sceptical of such endeavours. Remeber that AI bombed. Maybe, just maybe, something will come of it. Just don't bank on it.

It's a bunch of credentialed people watching a trend (accelerating science) and making future predictions from it. Kind of like watching a depletion trend and making future predictions from that.

[davep]

'Hoping to' sums it up. Come back when something comes of it. Sorry, but I'm highly sceptical of such endeavours. Remeber that AI bombed. Maybe, just maybe, something will come of it. Just don't bank on it.

It's a bunch of credentialed people watching a trend (accelerating science) and making future predictions from it. Kind of like watching a depletion trend and making future predictions from that.

Sure, but the devil's in the detail. Let's just wait and see, eh?

Oh, and as far as predictability is concerned, it is nothing like watching a depletion trend which is bound to be correct at some point.

[Sixstrings]

Carl, why are you so obsessed with the singularity? I've agreed with you before that it's sort of interesting in a far-off future kind of way, but you seem to really be stuck on it.

And what would be so great about it, anyhow? Seems to me it will put a LOT of people out of work. Is a Blade Runner dystopia really what you want, a world where sentient software only further enables massive human suffering and poverty? How is that an improvement for the human condition? I think self-aware and intelligent software would undoubtedly be used to put millions more out of work and those jobs would never be replaced. Just more poverty and more tech-enabled profits for the rich.

And ultimately, I would think sentient software would be detrimental to our own species. Would anyone bother to become an engineer anymore, or any higher learning at all for that matter, if computers were able to do all the big thinking? Unable to compete with the computers, post-singularity humans would devolve into imbeciles within a few generations.

EDIT: And look at the first article you posted:

attracted interest – and investment – from extremely wealthy and intelligent individuals

It's not just starry-eyed techno utopians who are excited about the singularity. The money funding all this research, and therefore controlling it, comes from VENTURE CAPITALISTS. Their driving motivation Carl is more profits, simple as that -- they want this tech so they can have access to essentially FREE intellectual labor. They want to put billions out of people out of work and pocket the wages that used to be paid out to us lowly carbon based lifeforms.

Whereas you get excited by the cool factor, venture capitalists are just seeing dollar signs -- all they need is for software to get intelligent enough to talk to people, answer questions and take orders, and voila there's billions of jobs eliminated right there.

Heck, it's already become a joke that people are irrelevant in the stock market with all the algorithm robo-traders. And even a simple job like cashier, if it weren't for people stealing too much Walmart would have rolled out self-checkouts nationwide. This is an issue that's going to have to be talked about before long -- I suspect tech has begun to eliminate more jobs than it creates, and most of what remains are a lot of paper pushing cubicle and sales work. Sentient software would take all those jobs in one fell swoop.

[Carlhole]

Carl, why are you so obsessed with the singularity? I've agreed with you before that it's sort of interesting in a far-off future kind of way, but you seem to really be stuck on it.

I don't believe ANYONE can accurately predict the future but there is nothing wrong with looking at strong trends and making guesses based upon them. For example, you would not be overly suspicious of a researcher who created Hubble oil depletion curve charts, making extrapolations from them in order to make a prediction about petroleum availability in 2020 or 2030. But you can do the same thing with Sci/Tech, showing with charts and graphs how it is accelerating. It makes sense that it is accelerating because it is recursive upon itself, the globe is wired together as never before, and more people than ever are educated-for and involved-in the business of science.

Years ago, I called for a prediction as WHEN the peak of scientific and technologic progress would be seen because it sure wasn't showing any sign of slowing down at all. It still isn't. And if Sci/Tech continues to accelerate forward, the natural conclusion to reach is that we are headed towards this "singularity" idea. You sure can't have a peak oil Olduvai Gorge future if science and technology its racing ahead so fast.

Sentient software would take all those jobs in one fell swoop.

It sure would. If I had to take my best guess about the future, I would have to say that it will only be a few decades before people are routinely out-classed in a demoralizing array of capabilities. It could present enormous problems. But don't expect that to slow our progression in this direction.

I don't see any energy crunch, or decreased level of consumerism, as being potent enough to prevent genies like machine intelligence from getting out of the bottle in the near future.

Evolutionary forces are in the driver's seat, my friend.

[davep]

Evolutionary forces are in the driver's seat, my friend.

It's this kind of blind faith that discredits what you say.

Yes, it may be useful, but it's a long shot. A dose of scepticism on your part in this regard could be useful, instead of using it as some certain winner to beat doomers over the head with. It's childish, verging on trolling.

[Carlhole]

Evolutionary forces are in the driver's seat, my friend.

It's this kind of blind faith that discredits what you say.

Yes, it may be useful, but it's a long shot. A dose of scepticism on your part in this regard could be useful, instead of using it as some certain winner to beat doomers over the head with. It's childish, verging on trolling.

It's a new article in The Independent about how a lively group of rich, educated, well-funded, business/academic types sees the future.

I posted it. Sue me if you don't like it.

[davep]

Evolutionary forces are in the driver's seat, my friend.

It's this kind of blind faith that discredits what you say.

Yes, it may be useful, but it's a long shot. A dose of scepticism on your part in this regard could be useful, instead of using it as some certain winner to beat doomers over the head with. It's childish, verging on trolling.

It's an article in The Independent about how a lively group of rich, educated, well-funded, business/academic types see the future. I posted it. So sue me if you don't like it.

I quoted you, not them.

[Pops]

Personally I have a hard time figuring out the motivations and future actions of average humans I know fairly well. It seems few of us have much of a chance at guessing the actions and motivations of a superhuman [whatever].

Of course if a person can convince themselves that only good things will result... immortality, the end of acne, endless wet dreams, etc, then I suppose it's as good a fantasy as Overnight Armageddon, 72 virgins, streets of gold or smoking factory-rolled cigarettes.

But my question is, if the singularity is the unforeseeable point that technology advance turns into a self-referential feedback loop with no possible escape (like the event horizon of a black hole) how do you know what the trajectory will be for humans or if humans will even be involved or if humans will be just another biological annoyance?

It dawns on me that it's no surprise most dystopian future stories involve corporations and non-biological superhumans.

[Carlhole]

I quoted you, not them.

Evolutionary forces have ALWAYS been in the driver's seat here on Planet Earth. After a few billion years, we find ourselves arrived as human beings, for chrissakes - in great numbers, doing our thing, and pushing the evolutionary envelope with rapidly increasing knowledge in all things - including genetics and bio-engineering.

I think the evolutionary growth curve of we are a part of is exponential. We are living somewhere on the elbow of this curve.

To believe that an exponential curve of scientific progress suddenly hits a ceiling and reverses (as you seem to think) - that's the more outlier possibility. Much harder to believe. If you don't think it is hard to believe, make a prediction as to when we will see the peak in Science and what will be our last, best discovery?

[davep]

I quoted you, not them.

Evolutionary forces have ALWAYS been in the driver's seat here on Planet Earth. After a few billion years, we find ourselves arrived as human beings, for chrissakes - in great numbers, doing our thing, and pushing the evolutionary envelope with rapidly increasing knowledge in all things - including genetics and bio-engineering.

I think the evolutionary growth curve of we are a part of is exponential. We are living somewhere on the elbow of this curve.

To believe that an exponential curve of scientific progress suddenly hits a ceiling and reverses (as you seem to think) - that's the more outlier possibility. Much harder to believe. If you don't think it is hard to believe, make a prediction as to when we will see the peak in Science and what will be our last, best discovery?

Evolution for humans kind of stopped a long time ago. Making machines clever enough to achieve some sort of singularity has nothing to do with evolution, it's a mere analogy for evolution. Your thinking seems to be very sloppy.

[Pops]

If you don't think it is hard to believe, make a prediction as to when we will see the peak in Science and what will be our last, best discovery?

Man, that is your go-to argument, isn't it? Just like Short The Multi-Peaker!

If the Nova episode on our evolution in the Rift Valley is correct about humans "coming of age" in a time of constant climate change, people will never quit being curious.

What I think you are glossing over in most everyones' responses is that people need surpluses to allow them the luxury of time to make great discoveries.

In the past great scientific discoveries weren't made by subsistence farmers or bug eaters, they were made by the wealthy or people in the church with a full belly and time to kill Of late, we've had lots of surpluses so lots of people have time and you are bound too agree it's been granted by abundant fossil fuels.

Lots of people here think fossil fuels are going to become less abundant...

[Carlhole]

Evolution for humans kind of stopped a long time ago. Making machines clever enough to achieve some sort of singularity has nothing to do with evolution, it's a mere analogy for evolution. Your thinking seems to be very sloppy.

Synthetic Genomics was the first biotech company to construct an organism's DNA from scratch on a computer and implant it into a functioning and reproducing cell. Do you think this sort of science is going to sit still? Do you think it doesn't carry enormous evolutionary implications?

Joule Unlimited is using techniques of gene manipulation to imbue e. coli with photosynthetic abilities. Do you think this sort of engineering science will not advance? Of course the whole field will explode! When you have Life modifying and re-inventing Life, then you have unleashed a new evolutionary paradigm.

If you think that machine intelligence is not possible, then you must also believe that human beings are unable to understand biology. But nothing has shown us that we are incapable of understanding anything at all in biology. It's just a matter of time before neurologic systems are well-understood and applied to computational techniques. It's already being intensively researched by different scientific teams all over the world.

All of these things will affect how evolutionary forces will shape the future. And it all does NOT bode well for ordinary human beings. Don't get the idea that I advocate The Singularity as some sort of rapture. It could well spell the end of Homo Sapiens Sapiens. We'll have to think up a new name for ourselves - Homo Sapiens Borg perhaps?

[Carlhole]

Lots of people here think fossil fuels are going to become less abundant...

So do I.

But then there are all those modular nukes of various types waiting in the wings along with steady advances in a variety of other energy categories. Even so, these things don't have to take over right away because oil & gas will be with us for decades upon decades.

To believe all that doom crap, you have to hold innovation and adaptation constant. But that's not realistic at all, since you see the MOST innovation and adaptation during crises.

[davep]

Evolution for humans kind of stopped a long time ago. Making machines clever enough to achieve some sort of singularity has nothing to do with evolution, it's a mere analogy for evolution. Your thinking seems to be very sloppy.

Synthetic Genomics was the first biotech company to construct an organism's DNA from scratch on a computer and implant it into a functioning and reproducing cell. Do you think this sort of science is going to sit still? Do you think it doesn't carry enormous evolutionary implications?

Only time will tell. It may have some impact, but whether it has a significant impact on evolution is another thing entirely.

Joule Unlimited is using techniques of gene manipulation to imbue e. coli with photosynthetic abilities. Do you think this sort of engineering science will not advance? Of course the whole field will explode! When you have Life modifying and re-inventing Life, then you have unleashed a new evolutionary paradigm.

'Of course it will explode'? You don't actually know this. How about just waiting and seeing? It could be a dead end like so many others.

If you think that machine intelligence is not possible, then you must also believe that human beings are unable to understand biology. But nothing has shown us that we are incapable of understanding anything at all in biology. It's just a matter of time before neurologic systems are well-understood and applied to computational techniques. It's already being intensively researched by different scientific teams all over the world.

Where have I said machine intelligence is not possible? I think it's a huge task but you seem to think it's a shoo-in. Intensive research without results is irrelevant. Again, let's wait for some kind of breakthrough, because without one it is totally speculative.

All of these things will affect how evolutionary forces will shape the future. And it all does NOT bode well for ordinary human beings. Don't get the idea that I advocate The Singularity as some sort of rapture. It could well spell the end of Homo Sapiens Sapiens. We'll have to think up a new name for ourselves - Homo Sapiens Borg perhaps?

These things may affect evolutionary forces if the ability to simulate intelligence gets anywhere. So far there are NO results showing intelligence. So you may want to be a little more circumspect, unless you want to be seen as a trolling crank.

[davep]

To believe all that doom crap, you have to hold innovation and adaptation constant. But that's not realistic at all, since you see the MOST innovation and adaptation during crises.

Not at all. Innovation may well increase, but unless it can solve the energy problem it could well be irrelevant. Adaptation is going to have to happen, but looking at our society it will tend to be reactive. That's why we need forward-looking people to show how to adapt to a potentially energy-poor future NOW, instead of banging on about the singularity.

[Ludi]

Synthetic Genomics was the first biotech company to construct an organism's DNA from scratch on a computer and implant it into a functioning and reproducing cell.

Can you explain this process a bit? I'm not sure what you mean by "construct an organisms DNA from scratch on a computer." In what way was the DNA "constructed" on a computer?

Thanks.

[Carlhole]

These things may affect evolutionary forces if the ability to simulate intelligence gets anywhere. So far there are NO results showing intelligence.

There are NO signs of a slowdown in the rate of sci/tech advancement; nothing that would indicate any sort of civilizational collapse around the corner. One can only marvel at the possible futures these boom times for science are taking us into.

[Carlhole]

Synthetic Genomics was the first biotech company to construct an organism's DNA from scratch on a computer and implant it into a functioning and reproducing cell.

Can you explain this process a bit? I'm not sure what you mean by "construct an organisms DNA from scratch on a computer." In what way was the DNA "constructed" on a computer?

Thanks.

Craig Venter creates synthetic life form

Scientists have created the world's first synthetic life form in a landmark experiment that paves the way for designer organisms that are built rather than evolved.

The controversial feat, which has occupied 20 scientists for more than 10 years at an estimated cost of $40m, was described by one researcher as "a defining moment in biology".

Craig Venter, the pioneering US geneticist behind the experiment, said the achievement heralds the dawn of a new era in which new life is made to benefit humanity, starting with bacteria that churn out biofuels, soak up carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and even manufacture vaccines.

However critics, including some religious groups, condemned the work, with one organisation warning that artificial organisms could escape into the wild and cause environmental havoc or be turned into biological weapons. Others said Venter was playing God.

The new organism is based on an existing bacterium that causes mastitis in goats, but at its core is an entirely synthetic genome that was constructed from chemicals in the laboratory.

Although SG does not fully understand the relationships between genes and how they are responsible for phenotypic outcomes, (they are making steady progress in this area), they WERE able to construct from laboratory chemicals a DNA genome sequence based upon a particular organism. They were able to construct this sequence on a computer and implant it into a cleansed cell. The synthetic DNA began to operate as well as natural DNA.