fire and wheel as an example of technological progress (that came after biological). hmmm...
Wheel came only 5-10 ths yeas ago and quickly propogated among Afro-Eurasia. ok.
But fire? it came 1.5 mln years and fire were the reason of latest biological evolution of our species, with body able to support larger brain. not best example of fast technological progress.
Ah, the new form of conspiracy theory: the scientific/technologist tinfoil hat group.
The thing that makes what these different people are talking about seem so absurd is they pose theoretical situations, and ask "What If?", and then just stop right there and don't critically examine the situation at all. All the "What If?"s then drive a sort of nagging horror at all the possible negative outcomes, and then you become Ray Kurzweil.
The biggest fallacy of the Singularity is the accelerating change hypothesis. In order for accelerating change to work, you not only have to invent new things, you have to adopt & apply them. Recently there was a story posted about how it took hundreds of years after the discovery of stainless steel for it to begin to be adopted by companies and individuals. And the reasons for the lack of adoption are almost always due to one thing: limitation of the human brain.
We still don't know much about the brain. As long as everyone's brain remains stuck in this meatsack and evolves at a very slow rate, so will the social adaptation of technological change and the investment therein. And that will limit not only our ability to develop AI, but how and where we use it.
To me it's far more likely that a true AI will first be used to manufacture cheerios than control a military weapons system, even though the military weapons system is where the biggest dollar investment in AI will be. The cheerios manufacturing plant will have a practical problem that only AI can solve, meanwhile the weapons system will probably only use AI for a single task and it'll be phased out in favor of a less buggy, cheaper, more effective weapons system.
7 comments
[ 2.0 ms ] story [ 36.2 ms ] threadThe thing that makes what these different people are talking about seem so absurd is they pose theoretical situations, and ask "What If?", and then just stop right there and don't critically examine the situation at all. All the "What If?"s then drive a sort of nagging horror at all the possible negative outcomes, and then you become Ray Kurzweil.
The biggest fallacy of the Singularity is the accelerating change hypothesis. In order for accelerating change to work, you not only have to invent new things, you have to adopt & apply them. Recently there was a story posted about how it took hundreds of years after the discovery of stainless steel for it to begin to be adopted by companies and individuals. And the reasons for the lack of adoption are almost always due to one thing: limitation of the human brain.
We still don't know much about the brain. As long as everyone's brain remains stuck in this meatsack and evolves at a very slow rate, so will the social adaptation of technological change and the investment therein. And that will limit not only our ability to develop AI, but how and where we use it.
To me it's far more likely that a true AI will first be used to manufacture cheerios than control a military weapons system, even though the military weapons system is where the biggest dollar investment in AI will be. The cheerios manufacturing plant will have a practical problem that only AI can solve, meanwhile the weapons system will probably only use AI for a single task and it'll be phased out in favor of a less buggy, cheaper, more effective weapons system.
With regard to human intelligence, Augmented Intelligence has already extended human minds beyond the confines of squishy flesh bags.