The Singularitarian Future

[bascule]

So yeah, this will come off a lot like 5 billion other posts I've made along the same lines...

 

Go ahead, capitalize the T on technology, deify it if

it'll make you feel less responsible -- but it puts you in with the

neutered, brother, in with the eunuchs keeping the harem of our stolen

Earth for the numb and joyless hardons of human sultans, human elite

with no right at all to be where they are -- "

 

--Thomas Pynchon, "Gravity's Rainbow"

 

To begin, I'm a transhumanist. I don't believe it will be long before purely biological humans are rendered obsolete by technology, specifically advancements in nanotechnology, artificial intelligence, and brain/computer interfaces. Many are anticipating the obsolescence of purely biological humans, and event known as The Singularity.

 

I believe that human collective intelligence brings about structures similar to our own brains. I believe humans already represent a single, collective intelligence-powered organism (with transport systems, and metabolism, and a digital nervous system) which has spent all of history internally reconfiguring itself to improve its own operation.

 

Human society represents a self-improving collective intelligence system, and according to the research of one prominent transhumanist/Singularity evangelist, Ray Kurzweil, the rate at which we self-improve is exponential.

 

Transhumanists forsee humans eventually recognizing their fundamental nature as mere computational/informational systems, presently executed by the wetware of our brains, but see no reason why the program and data that comprise us could not be offloaded onto a different platform.

 

Most transhumanists forsee an eventual move to a distributed network of self-replicating nanorobots which will provide a ubiquitous platform for networked computing. Many wish to undergo a process of mind transferrence where their consciousness would be transferred out of their bodies and into this ubiquitous computer network. It's kind of hard for people to imagine how this would work, but here's one scenario: the nanorobots that comprise this computer network crawl into your brain. One by one, they gobble up each of the 100 billion neurons in your head. If you're comfortable with the idea, they can do it fast, and if not, they can do it slow. They could gobble up, say, 1 billion neurons a day. They analyze the connection structure of your brain, how the neigboring glia were affecting your neurons, etc. and replace the physical connections of your neurons with wireless, digital links. Eventually, your entire brain is made only out of these little robots, who are already wirelessly connected to the ubiquitous computing network. Suddenly your brain is a completely distributed entity, and where the links between your neurous used to be physical, not they run in software.

 

Once you've transferred your mind, you can no longer die. You can be distributed among countless nanomachines. And what's more, this will be a giant network teeming with collective intelligence and sensory abilities. If anything threatens it, it will be able to detect it long in advance, and transfer any programs off any nanorobots that are about to be destroyed long before it happens (after all, it can move information between these nanorobots at the speed of light)

 

Furthermore, this eliminates all the obstacles of space travel. No longer do we have to send a giant biological entity somewhere to explore it, an entity where 99.99999(insert however many sigmas you want here)9% of the universe represents instant death. Nanorobots will be robust and durable, and better, tiny! It will not take much energy to accelerate one to nearly the speed of light. Modern day linear accelerators are approaching the ability to do this already.

 

We can shoot one of these nanorobots, which can store a quantum computer incomprehensibly more powerful than any existence today, along with quantum storage of an incomprehensible amount of information (i.e. all of human knowledge along with as many intelligent agents as we please). These robots, as universal constructors, could be sent to multiple destinations throughout the known universe. As soon as any one of them successfully lands on any form of matter, they can begin making copies of themselves, transforming that matter into more and more nanorobots, and spreading throughout the galaxy. The speed of light may be an insurmountable barrier, in which case it will take millions of years, or it may not, in which case it will take far shorter.

 

This nanotechnological collective intelligence system will slowly gobble up the universe, transforming all undirected processes into directed processes.

 

In this respect, I see this sort of system asymptotically approaching the propreties we'd attribute to a god: omnipotence, omniscience, and omnipresence.

 

It seems like people turn to religion out of an innate desire for the sorts of things transhumanism is offering: transcending your body and living forever in a utopia where there is no suffering and no death. This has been the universal human dream since the dawn of history. I think the Singularity will fulfill everyone's religious desires in a way no religion to date has been able to do, since all of them are ultimately rooted in falsehoods. Even the more "untouchable" religions like Buddhism which claim to be mere philosophies won't be able to survive. Buddhism teaches that we should suppress these desires, because they are the cause of suffering. I believe the exact opposite: these desires will bring about the end of suffering.

 

The transhumanists think we're about to technologically realize this utopia with the advent of artificial intelligence. AI will represent the birth of the greatest genius mankind has ever known, one which can see the connections which permeate all of human knowledge now yet remain invisible to us because of our limited ability to comprehend large systems of information. Such an intelligence system will have the capacity to lead all of us in the way no other human can. AI will represent the birth of Plato's Philosopher King, a king smarter than any human on Earth who rules by reason and not politiking.

 

I believe this is the idea Christopher Langan was ultimately getting at with the Cognitive-Theoretic Model of the Universe

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

Is this meant as an article or a thread?

[bascule]

Is this meant as an article or a thread?

 

A thread?

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

Might you wish to provide a discussion pointer for us?

[mr d]

hello

 

interesting idea, but affraid i'd decline the opprotunity to be nano sized. think a part of being human is individuality, and that not existing as a collective. though i guess as a trans human you are putting forward that the human state is only transitory.

sounds rather like the borg - cyborgs of star trek. plus tend to perfer having a body with senses that allow me to enjoy the taste of a good drink or flavor of a finely prepared meal.

see no great value to becoming simply a calculating machine. plus as a shared collective all knowledge gained by others would be instantly available to you. while there are some intriguing aspects to that, it aslo means elimination to a personal quest for knowledge. no need for your to climb that hill to see what's on the other side, just find that information already added to the collective and read it.

as to eternal life, fear of death does make that appealing, however i am reminded of the jonathan swift stories of gulliver's travels. where he goes to the land where people have no natural death, and all the ten thousand year people sit around looking longingly at those who have died for at least their tedium of being alife is over. guess i'm for treading my time upon the stage then take my bow and exit.

curiousity, as you say the idea is that you digitized mind gets shared amoung a multitude of nanos. do you still get to exist as an individual, or is all that remains of you is random bits of code shared by some enormous collective consciousness.

and lastly i think you'd have a problem with that self replicating bit. believe many people find the old system of replicating to be just dandy.

 

and if i may, why does this futre appeal to you/

 

mr d

[GutZ]

I'd like to look into biological/genetic engineering first before we all convert ourselves (which I believe will happen eventually). I think biological aspects still are worth looking into...but then again it might be envitably dependant on IA to get to "that" stage where we can construct/change/manipulate biological matter anyway we want.

 

How would the transhumanist workout evolution? A collective consciousness is nifty but isn't it possible it's somewhat limited? I guess one could say the same for any biological form, both heading for perfection with different routes and waiting periods.

[the tree]

interesting idea, but affraid i'd decline the opprotunity to be nano sized.

Sorry, but you already are. There's loads of us and we all fit on one tiny planet.

think a part of being human is individuality, and that not existing as a collective.

Again, you already exist as part of a collective, humans are social animals, this isn't any sacrifice to individuality.

though i guess as a trans human you are putting forward that the human state is only transitory.

It's more like moving humanity forward.

sounds rather like the borg - cyborgs of star trek.

The Borg is one entity with many humanoid nodes, the singularity doesn't suggest anything to do with loosing individual free will or even working as a whole.

plus tend to perfer having a body with senses that allow me to enjoy the taste of a good drink or flavor of a finely prepared meal.

Those are still just electrical signals.

see no great value to becoming simply a calculating machine.

Simply a calculating machine? We're talking about the human mind being argumented so as that it can create dreams so intense that other people can be invited to look around. The is no "simply" about it.

plus as a shared collective all knowledge gained by others would be instantly available to you. while there are some intriguing aspects to that, it aslo means elimination to a personal quest for knowledge. no need for your to climb that hill to see what's on the other side, just find that information already added to the collective and read it.

1. You can already get at the vast majority of useful human knowlege with your computar machine.

2. Do you honestly think that someone has already climbed every hill?

3. As awesome as reading is (everyone should do it more), you could experience it, and not just the hill down your road, but a hill in Dubai, or maybe even a hill that some artist created just for explorers like you to experience.

as to eternal life, fear of death does make that appealing, however i am reminded of the jonathan swift stories of gulliver's travels. where he goes to the land where people have no natural death, and all the ten thousand year people sit around looking longingly at those who have died for at least their tedium of being alife is over.

If your life is tedious, as in the whole thing, you are doing something horribly wrong. There's always something to experience, or to learn, or to understand, or to improve upon.

do you still get to exist as an individual' date=' or is all that remains of you is random bits of code shared by some enormous collective consciousness.[/quote']Just like any occasion of teamwork, there's the team and there is the individuals.

and lastly i think you'd have a problem with that self replicating bit. believe many people find the old system of replicating to be just dandy.

Anything can be bettered.

and if i may, why does this futre appeal to you

I could sit in the libary of the Unseen University, with every book ever written. My eyes would never get tired and I would never get hungry although I could eat anything that anyone had thought of on demand without getting fat or with any enviromental impact. I would have the time to learn how to play three dimensional chess.

[mr d]

hello

 

one thing first, as my first responce was directed at bascule, are you a different fellow or a new name?

and if new i take it you too are a believer in this idea?

 

first off about the nano thing, sorry we are not nano's. as nanos referrers to objects the size of a nanometer. i grant you compared to the rest of the cosmos we are rather small in size. but referrence is to bascules mention of nano sizing ourself so space travel might become possible. energy required for weight, that kind of thing.

 

secondly you compare senses to simple electrical impulses, which i concur they are. however how those impulses create feeling and sensations in humans is quite complex and no simple impulses we've devised to mimic human think have in any way approached feelings and emotions, nor sensations in a human sense. and it is still debated whether machine ever can. simply enjoying a meal envolves the senses of sight-taste-smell, your mouth helps determine hot-cold, sweet-bitter-salty. as a neural net creation you would have none of that ability.

 

as to the computer allowing access to vast stores of knowledge. very little knowlegde is available, and what is is charged for. and a main reason most of it is not available is simply because people have no interest in it.

and how you would love to read your books (please don't call him a monkey) at the library. if you where such a coillective creation, others would have already read those books or the information would simply already be there inside your head. you would have no need to read anything, you would already know it.

 

as to tedium. most individuals who live into their hundreds simply lie down and pass away because as many of them say they are tired of live and have done enough.

what do you do if your this immortal neural collective, and your tired of it all and want to die. can you, will the rest of the collective allow you to. what if part of your mind is needed to run a vital system would you be forced to survive. and if you were allowed to die could you truely do so if you collective knowledge is shared by all. could you inforce upon other that they must delete your electrical essence so that no part of you would survive. or what if you simply wish to leave the collective.

 

for that matter how could you exist as an individual, all your thoughts would be freely available. can you shut yourself off from others accessing you. would you really be you, or just the sum of collective thoughts and how would you know the difference. and if one consciousness is shared by all, what happens if one of those minds loses sanity, then there would be the chance all would.

 

and you say i could climb imaginary mountains created in this silicon neural world. what if i wish to climb a mountain in the real world what body do i have to accomplish that with. a nanobot self. could that reproduce the sensations of climbing, create the feeling of wind on your face or the trickle of sweat. would i feel my electronic heart and lungs struggling harder at altitude.

 

as too that replication part, and there being something better. well sorry but i'm an old fashion bloke. though if you and other did wish to become this non-human creation, for in giving up your bodies i don't see how you could still truely be called human, i gladly place you in the accellerator and wave a hearty farewell as you went off to begin a new existance out amoung the stars.

 

mr d