Technological (Kurzweil) Singularity

[OSHMUNNIES]

This is one of those topics that always excites me to the core. It can't really be confined to a single field (computer science, neuroscience, physics, maths, etc.), and its possible implications are deep and unpredictable, so the philosophy forum seemed appropriate....

 

I'm wondering if anyone has any thoughts on the concept of the technological singularity (as popularized by Ray Kurzweil); the theory that computation and neuroscience will one day be so advanced that technology and neurology will converge. Supposedly, at this singularity, all human minds will have instantaneous communicatory access to one another, as well as to the entire collective body of human knowledge. Some (including Ray Kurzweil) suggest that the singularity will occur within the 21st century; perhaps within the next 50 years or so.

 

I have my own preconceptions regarding this concept...but I'm curious about what you all have to say about it.

 

Will the technological singularity occur in the next 50 or 100 years?

 

What are its moral and practical (scientific) implications?

 

Why are some people fearful of transcendent technological advancement? Are they justified?

[Xittenn]

The idea goes well beyond our current capabilities in applied physics and from that perspective this is simply not feasible. I believe however the essence of the idea has already been achieved to an almost complete extent. Anyone can communicate with anyone at any distance and share any amount of information that they wish to. The reality is a good portion of the population is more than willing to share their story. In addition to this we all have access to vast repositories of knowledge. So ultimately should the ability arise in where we are capable of the higher physics there is no reason why more barriers couldn't be broken down.

 

I think however, that the few who do not wish to be a part of such a machine need to be considered in this analysis. Some might say that these individuals when faced with this moment will be those who choose not to evolve into something larger. Others might see these individuals as a direct threat to such a greater unified body and a very real competition. I'm in the latter category in that I see some individuals will be much stronger than any conglomeration of consciousness. These individuals will themselves form a singularity of immense power and will have the distinct advantage of a strong sense of self. Individuals who attain the same intellectual capacity as that which you have proposed will see a levee through which much war would arise.

 

These ideas are a bit much for most to conceive of rationally. I am of the opinion that the universe is often governed by the ridiculous and overwhelming as opposed to the sane, polite, and quite. I see no reason why this event wouldn't have assigned to it a probability pathway, and I could see some form of what you are contemplating being realized as a very real truth that might one day grace the planet. It really all comes down to a need to take control--a fight that never seems to end and always seems to escalate. There is/are always some idiot(s) out there willing to do something stupid . . . .

[OSHMUNNIES]

The idea goes well beyond our current capabilities in applied physics and from that perspective this is simply not feasible.

 

If that is an observational comment on the present, it seems a little redundant. Of course it (the technological singularity) is not feasible right now, it's a theoretical projection of the progression of human technological capability.

 

If you are denouncing the feasibility of the singularity in the future, then a.) you are contradicting much of the rest of your comment, and b.) it seems you should expand on your reasoning for denouncing it.

[Xittenn]

If that is an observational comment on the present, it seems a little redundant. Of course it (the technological singularity) is not feasible right now, it's a theoretical projection of the progression of human technological capability.

 

If you are denouncing the feasibility of the singularity in the future, then a.) you are contradicting much of the rest of your comment, and b.) it seems you should expand on your reasoning for denouncing it.

 

You are requesting that we make observations about a future pending certain technological feats. As it stands the answer to your question is no because the technology is very probably not going to be realized in the way described as such. The comment isn't about now, the comment is about the feasibility of then from my vantage point. But assuming that the technology somehow defied all that we know then sure! And as I concluded the process would not be brought to thorough completion and I believe this will result in a war, lots of it.