Is anyone here familiar with this guy? I find it pretty interesting that the dates he gives out just happen to match up with possible dates where turnings are likely to change (2029 for when computers pass the Turing Test and 2045 for when we are likely to start merging with computers). He mentions that since at least 1890 (the 1st US census), computer power has increased exponentially and that every time the end of one paradigm is reached, another begins that keeps this growth going further and further, faster. He says that we can even extend it as far back as the beginning of human civilisation with various inventions coming about and how we are evolving faster and faster due to our use of technology (in a general sense) extending our reach (both mentally and physically).

What do those of you here think of Mr Kurzweil and how do you think his theories might apply to W & S' generational theories?

I personally think that the crisis we're in will end at an unknown date but by the 2030s we will be able to figure out when it ended (likely before 2030), how it began, and what was the catalyst (or catalysts?). 2029 may just be that date when we're sure the crisis has ended and till 2045+ we figure out how to best utilise the technology (we'll likely be in the nanotech paradigm) we will have at that time. If what Kurzweil says winds up being true about 2045 or so, then that can set us up for the 2nd turning which might have to do with wondering how else can we benefit and improve our lives since we will have already tackled the basic stuff (perhaps resource management & healthy living) from 2029 to 2045.

Never heard of him, but I don't care for the idea of humans merging with computers at all. I keep imagining something like the Borg.

Bri2k

Originally Posted by Bri2k

Never heard of him, but I don't care for the idea of humans merging with computers at all. I keep imagining something like the Borg.

Bri2k

There is already work under way to attach "memory extensions" to our brains. A melding is bound to happen at some point. Thankfully, I will be worm food by then.

Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon

There is already work under way to attach "memory extensions" to our brains. A melding is bound to happen at some point. Thankfully, I will be worm food by then.

I'm beginning to identify with my Missionary grandparents, who would shake their heads and say quietly, "I'm glad I won't be around to see "this" play out." "This," of course being whatever was happening that they didn't approve of.

My Republican grandparents viewed the election of a Roman Catholic president in 1960, as the end of civilization as they knew it.

Well, Ray is alright I guess, nice guy and all, but the man is also completely off his rocker. In his 1999 book The Age of Spiritual Machines this is what he predicted the world would be like in 2009:
http://www.acceleratingfuture.com/mi...9-predictions/

He makes the classic science fiction mistake of placing his vision much too close to the present. Of course, anyone could have told him back then the world of 2009 would look almost indistinguishable from the one a decade earlier. Simply a matter of extrapolating the trend of progress slow down apparent for the last 30 years or so, but what can I tell you. The man likes to sell books.

He claims a lot of credit for products that are not the best in the industry. I have helped sight challenged folks with improving their lives using much better technology products. There are many people who could have written his books about the same time. In recent years he appears to be more of a parasite than a mainstream developer.

IMO he does a diservice to the folks who are working on intelligent devices to replace arms, legs, etc. for the service men and wormen who are severly injured.

Here's another trans-humanism figure that is popular today, whether people think it or not. He embodies the machine/man future that might happen faster than people think.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_Man

Kurzweil

singularity

I'm very much into Transhumanism, as many of you know. IMO a major theme of the next awakening will be sapient AI personhood, there will be a lot of fearful, bigoted types who will never accept that a "machine" can be a person. Along with that will be those for and against life extension, "cyborg" type enhancement, and the genetic manipulation of one's own body and gametes.

Welcome to the Future.

Originally Posted by Odin

I'm very much into Transhumanism, as many of you know. IMO a major theme of the next awakening will be sapient AI personhood, there will be a lot of fearful, bigoted types who will never accept that a "machine" can be a person.

Speaking for all of us fearful "bigoted types" out there I guess, sapient AI is nevertheless all about consciousness and how it is achieved. It's one of the great mysteries of modern science intrinsically linked to what is known as qualia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qualia

Now, the only thing we currently are aware of that can produce qualia and thus consciousness (and in some utterly unknown and undefined way at that) are those chemical machines known as carbon based lifeforms. But I have yet to see a single artificial "intelligence" concept that deals with sensations rather than calculations, and chemicals and neurotransmitters rather than metal and silica and I doubt that we will anytime soon.
Perhaps it will be possible to create artificial consciousness in a couple of centuries, although IMHO most likely not in time for the next Awakening, Spielberg's movie "Artificial Intelligence: AI" notwithstanding.

To take it a step further, related to the consciousness and qualia debate in turn is of course the whole Near Death Experience conundrum, the only way for the scientific establishment hitherto to deal with it having been denial of empirical observation. Yet granted, that is a whole different paradigm entirely.

Originally Posted by Odin

I'm very much into Transhumanism, as many of you know. IMO a major theme of the next awakening will be sapient AI personhood, there will be a lot of fearful, bigoted types who will never accept that a "machine" can be a person. Along with that will be those for and against life extension, "cyborg" type enhancement, and the genetic manipulation of one's own body and gametes.

Welcome to the Future.

I wouldn't have an issue with cybernetic artificial limbs as replacements for those lost in accidents (like Lee Majors' Six Million Dollar Man)... though cloned biological replacements would be far preferable. However, if a Borg-like "transhuman" assimilation scenario ever comes to pass within my lifetime, I'll fight them with whatever means I have at my disposal. And with my dying breath, take as many of its purveyors out with me as I can.

Originally Posted by Roadbldr '59

I wouldn't have an issue with cybernetic artificial limbs as replacements for those lost in accidents (like Lee Majors' Six Million Dollar Man)... though cloned biological replacements would be far preferable. However, if a Borg-like "transhuman" assimilation scenario ever comes to pass within my lifetime, I'll fight them with whatever means I have at my disposal. And with my dying breath, take as many of its purveyors out with me as I can.

Ditto. Prosthetic limbs are one thing, Borg & Number 12 Looks Just Like You scenarios are another thing entirely.

~Chas'88

Originally Posted by Roadbldr '59

I wouldn't have an issue with cybernetic artificial limbs as replacements for those lost in accidents (like Lee Majors' Six Million Dollar Man)... though cloned biological replacements would be far preferable. However, if a Borg-like "transhuman" assimilation scenario ever comes to pass within my lifetime, I'll fight them with whatever means I have at my disposal. And with my dying breath, take as many of its purveyors out with me as I can.

From my perspective society is ALREADY akin to to Borg (The Public to Aspie: "Your nonstandard cognition is unacceptable. You WILL be assimilated, resistance is futile!" ). My Transhumanism is in part an extension of my pro-Neurodiversity sentiment, that is, non-biological sapients are people, too, just like cognitively unusual humans like myself are people. The fact that one day soon there will be an AI as smart as us is something we MUST deal with, since that day is inevitable, especially because those AIs are likely to be the targets of bigotry from others, treated as slaves, or worse, all because of anthropocentric notions of personhood and outdated religious superstitions about "incorporeal souls" that many religious people will assume that sapient AI do not have.

IMO the "Borg" fear is misplaced, it is derived from a Boomer reaction to the Mega-High mentality of their parents and grandparents (in fact the idea of the Borg itself may be actually be a part of that reaction, since Roddenberry was a GI/Silent cusper sympathetic to the Blue Awakening). It is based on Silent and Boomer concerns about the GI's technological collectivism.

Gotta go to work, I'll finish my thought's on this later.

Originally Posted by Odin

From my perspective society is ALREADY akin to to Borg (The Public to Aspie: "Your nonstandard cognition is unacceptable. You WILL be assimilated, resistance is futile!" ).

Depends upon whom you talk with.

My Transhumanism is in part an extension of my pro-Neurodiversity sentiment, that is, non-biological sapients are people, too, just like cognitively unusual humans like myself are people.

The fact that one day soon there will be an AI as smart as us is something we MUST deal with, since that day is inevitable, especially because those AIs are likely to be the targets of bigotry from others, treated as slaves, or worse, all because of anthropocentric notions of personhood and outdated religious superstitions about "incorporeal souls" that many religious people will assume that sapient AI do not have.

Non-biological sapients at the moment is a science fiction that science is no where near delivering, and it's something I don't perceive it delivering within my lifetime.

IMO the "Borg" fear is misplaced, it is derived from a Boomer reaction to the Mega-High mentality of their parents and grandparents (in fact the idea of the Borg itself may be actually be a part of that reaction, since Roddenberry was a GI/Silent cusper sympathetic to the Blue Awakening). It is based on Silent and Boomer concerns about the GI's technological collectivism.

Yes, most of the Greatest cuspers were like that, Rod Serling was also, hence the reference I gave to "Number Twelve Looks Just Like You".

~Chas'88

Kurzweil again

At Norwescon 33, Vernor Vinge discussed non-Singularity futures

Norwescon 33 & Vinge

Concievable ways a super intelligence might appear:

1. A biological approach - a super genius

2. Chips in our many appliances/machines are interconnected in terms of communications

3. An artificial intelligence built from the ground up. Think Colossus, or HAL.

4. Uploading a human mind into a super computer.

5. Some method of Intelligence Ampflication for human minds. Kurtzweil suggests nano-computers wired into human brain cells

6. An ensemble intelligence.

One thing I don't believe is that the Internet will become a super intelligence-I have seen too much bickering.

World Wide Mind The Coming Integration of Humanity, Machines, and the Internet by Michael Chorost.

The book examines emerging technologies that may result in direct brain/computer interfaces. The author predicts that such an interface may allow a hyperorganism, using such interfaces and the Internet.

Originally Posted by Chas'88

Ditto. Prosthetic limbs are one thing, Borg & Number 12 Looks Just Like You scenarios are another thing entirely.

~Chas'88

I'm glad someone resurrected this thread. So you mentioned, Number 12, Chas. Is this a Cylon Battlestar reference? LOL

Originally Posted by Chas'88

Depends upon whom you talk with.



Non-biological sapients at the moment is a science fiction that science is no where near delivering, and it's something I don't perceive it delivering within my lifetime.



Yes, most of the Greatest cuspers were like that, Rod Serling was also, hence the reference I gave to "Number Twelve Looks Just Like You".

~Chas'88

Oh...you answered my question before even seeing it

Originally Posted by millennialX

Oh...you answered my question before even seeing it

Glad I could be of help.

~Chas'88

The Intelligent Universe by James Gardner"In The Wisdom of Crowds, James Surowieki recounts the novel approach used by a naval officer named John Craven to locate the final resting place of a missing American submarine, the USS Scorpion: " 'First, Craven concocted a series of scenarios - alternative explanations for what might have happened to the Scorpion. Then he assembled a team of men with a wide range of knowledge, including mathematicians, submarine specialists, and salvage men. Instead of asking them to consult with each other to come up with an answer, he asked each of them to offer his best guess about how likely each of the scenarios was.... And so Craven's men bet on why the submarine ran into trouble, on its speed as it headed to the ocean bottom, on the steepness of its descent, and so forth.'"As Surowieki notes, while none of these factors would definitively indicate the location of the lost sub, their summed totality, if reasonably accurate, might offer a valuable clue:" 'Needless to say, no one of these pieces of information could tell Craven where the Scorpion was. But Craven believed that it he put all the answers together, building a composite picture of how the Scorpion died, he'd end up with a pretty good idea of where it was.'"The group's collective estimate of where the lost submarine had come to rest turned out to be uncannily accurate: The wreck of the Scorpion was found 220 yards from where Craven's ensemble of betting men predicted it would be. Although no single individual in the group had selected the favored location, the crowd in its collective wisdom had focused, laser-like, on the right spot on the ocean floor. Miraculously, it had done so on the basis of very little data. ' What's astonishing about this story is that the evidence that the group was relying on in this case amounted to almost nothing.... No one knew why the submarine sank, no one had any idea how fast it was traveling or how steeply it fell to the ocean floor. And yet even though no one in the group knew any of these things, the group as a whole knew them all.'"The eerie success of John Craven's unorthodox approach is scarcely the only evidence that a suitably structured and properly motivated crowd will inevitably display a level of group intelligence that vastly exceeds the wisdom of even the smartest individuals with the group. As The Wisdom of Crowds documents in exhaustive detail, the phenomenon of the emergence of what is essentially superhuman group intelligence is undeniable."

What Technology Wants by Kevin Kelly"Someday we might meet other intelligences in the galaxies. But long before then we will manufacture millions of new kinds of minds on our own world...increase the diversity of minds."...Planetary-scale problems will require some kind of planetary-scale mind; complex networks made of trillions of active nodes will require network intelligences; routine mechanical operations will need nonhuman precision in calculations. Since our own brains are such poor thinkers in terms of probability, we'd really benefit by discovering an intelligence at ease with statistics."What technology wants is increasing sentience. This does not mean evolution will move us only toward one universal superminc. Rather, over the course of time the technium tends to self-organie into as many varieties of mind as is possible."

The Intelligent Universe"...human intelligence amplification (or IA) approach, rather than an exponential growth in raw computer processing capacity, is the technological superhighway that will lead most quickly to greater-than-human intelligence, at least in the view of Vernor Vinge:" 'When people speak of creating superhumanly intelligent beings, they're ususally imagining an AI project. But...there are other paths to superhumanity. Computer networks and human-computer interfaces seem more mundane than AI, and yet they could lead to the Singularity. I call this contrasting approach Intelligence Amplification (IA). IA is something that is proceeding very naturally, in most cases not even recognized by its developers for what it is. But every time our ability to access information and to communicate it to others is improved, in some sense we have achieved an increase over natural intelligence....'It's very likely that IA is a much easier road to the achievement of superhumanity than pure AI. In humans, the hardest development problems have already been solved. Building up from within ourselves ought to be easier than figuring out first what we really are and then building machines that are all of that. And there is at least conjectural precedent for this approach. Cairns-Smith has speculated that biological life may have begun as an adjunct to still more primitive life based on crystalline growth. Lynn Margulis...has made a strong argument that mutualism is a great driving force in evolution.' "

This of course assumes that production capacity goes into making computers, as opposed to, say, enhanced radiation thermonuclear warheads and particle beam weapons.