Singularity Institute

[kmguru]

Sooner or later it has to happen...got an email from a friend on the topic of "The Future of Intelligence" that led me to two sites as follows. After digesting all that any one wants to comment, you are welcome.

http://www.singinst.org/
http://yudkowsky.net/

 

[pharaohmoan]

I haven't seen the links yet but I am hoping the they are about how you need a sinluarity to occur, in order for the progress from the previous revolution inteligence to unfold into the next generations reality.

Simarly a singulaity because of the speed at which it runs at is able to process the information on a very finate and infinate scale, emphasis on the infinate.

If you need me to expand on this (excuse the pun) do please say.

 

[kmguru]

Go ahead and read the links and then come back...

 

[francois]

I've read a few of Kurzweil's books, Fantastic Voyage and The Singularity is Near. They're a bit dry in some places, but do have some good content.

Ray predicts the date of the Singularity at 2045, which he says is his pessimistic prediction. I think in the book he says that some time in the 2020's, like 2023 or something, that $1,000 worth of computers will be powerful enough to emulate the power of the human brain. Once AI reaches that level of sophistication, if the computers are allowed to proliferate, they will be able to make themselves a lot more powerful than human minds in sheer computational capacity. That completely ignores the fact that they're not limited by slow moving neurons, or the fact that to share information they won't need to talk! Where will that leave humans? Humans will be the nucleus that was swallowed by bacterium, which gave rise to the eukaryotes. They will get swallowed by a bigger pattern.

I'd say something like the singularity will happen. It's quite scary because it's going to be here soon. Maybe it's arrival will destabilize societies so they will war with each other preventing a *true* singularity from happening. Maybe its recognized arrival will cause a rift among societies, forming Luddites and futurists. Who the hell knows?

 

[kmguru]

Until we develop fusion reactors (Hot, Warm, or Cold) no singularity will happen. That is because for a growing population we need Power...more Power...(remember the movie Howard the Duck?)

There is plenty of oil and gas (in the form of methane hydride)...but that is controlled by a few...like diamonds by De Beers....so we wait.

 

[kmguru]

I think in the book he says that some time in the 2020's, like 2023 or something, that $1,000 worth of computers will be powerful enough to emulate the power of the human brain.

In the last five years computers have quadrupled in capacity. What are you doing today that is quadrupled in activity from five years ago?

You still do stuff in Word. The Word can not take video files. You can not open a PDF with embeded video. If you cut and paste a paragraph that have hard returns, there is no easy way to take them out when you post here. Your Office software is incremental and not a shift in paradigm. You still need humans to write millions of lines of code to make things go. By 2020, imagine the size of code it will become to run your computer of 64 processors. And if you have a Billion lines of code, do you know how complex it will be?

Yes, you will have a very fast hardware that can handle the video files very easily...but until the software catches up, we will go nowhere fast!

 

[francois]

In the last five years computers have quadrupled in capacity. What are you doing today that is quadrupled in activity from five years ago?

Depends on what you mean by "quadupled." Last year I bought a 500 GB hard drive for a little more than a $100. That's a lot of data I can store that would be impossible to store before for nearly as cheap. As for actual paradigm shifting stuff to do? Well, that's behind. However, revolutionary programs like Youtube wouldn't have been technically feasible 10 years ago. There wouldn't have been enough bandwidth or server hard drive space due to the technology constraints.

A lot of people think all that comes from Moore's Law is that things like cell phones and mp3 players get smaller. It's unbelievable to me that people can think that. The ramifications of ultra tiny, ultra powerful computers are huge and we're going to start seeing that soon in the way we will interact with them and with each other. There's a critical amount of power and technology needed for certain applications to be possible, like virtual reality, for instance. Sure, we have it now, but it's not quite compelling and realistic enough for mainstream adoption, just like Youtube might have been possible in some diminished and abysmal form 10 years ago. Will we ever have compellingly realistic and world-altering virtual reality which will be adopted on the mass scale? Moore's Law practically makes it inevitable.

 

[kmguru]

Will we ever have compellingly realistic and world-altering virtual reality which will be adopted on the mass scale? Moore's Law practically makes it inevitable.

Of course it is inevitable. What I asked is that what you are doing that is four times smarter, faster than you did 5 years ago such as reading a book 1/4 the time, writing a white paper 1/4 the time, understanding the business dynamics to increase your company profits 4 times usual, staying healthy for the last 5 years, getting two promotions, etc....

Just trying to find if the humans are growing as fast as the computer.....

 

[francois]

Just trying to find if the humans are growing as fast as the computer.....

We aren't. That's not to say that technology hasn't made us more productive; obviously it has. However, we're not keeping up with technology. That's because we're made of cells and neurons. But that will change when we understand how to manipulate cells and neurons as well as we do computer circuits and when when we start inserting performance-enhancing chips in our heads.

I remember reading a while ago in the booke, Genome, a study about intelligence and genetics on children. Scientists were comparing the brains of regular children with the brains of children who had IQs of 160 and higher. They were trying to spot genes for intelligence. They weren't very successful, but they did find that these super genius kids' brains were vastly more efficient at metabolizing glucose than the others.

What if in 10 or 20 years or so, we'll be able to change neuronal chemistry to make better use of glucose in normal people's brains like super genius brains naturally do? That, or something like it, seems like an inevitability. We already have nootropics (cognition enhancing drugs) available to consumers today. As with most technology, nootropics will probably get better with time.

People will get smarter, and then eventually, vastly smarter, when we will start to see humans begin to "catch up" with the computers. It's slower because we're humans who have a different physiology from computers and one that is more complex than computers; we're less likely to tamper with ourselves than with computers, because we see ourselves as more than computers; we see it as an ethical problem. (In fact, it is my prediction that there will be a resistance to the human race becoming cyborgs, which could cause a rift in the human race in the future decades, causing one side to become full-fledged cyborgs and the other side remaining unaltered human beings.)

 

[kmguru]

We aren't. That's not to say that technology hasn't made us more productive; obviously it has. However, we're not keeping up with technology. That's because we're made of cells and neurons. But that will change when we understand how to manipulate cells and neurons as well as we do computer circuits and when when we start inserting performance-enhancing chips in our heads.

One group will use chips and the other gene therapy. I prefer gene therapy. I would rather have my cells turned on to grow a new set of teeth when I am old than do mechanical tooth implant.

I remember reading a while ago in the booke, Genome, a study about intelligence and genetics on children. Scientists were comparing the brains of regular children with the brains of children who had IQs of 160 and higher. They were trying to spot genes for intelligence. They weren't very successful, but they did find that these super genius kids' brains were vastly more efficient at metabolizing glucose than the others.

There is more to it than glucose metabolism. One also needs new neural connections to optimize the decision mechanism. The whole life is about making decisions from walking through the door to catching a ball. The optimum decision making process requires assimilating vast amount of information and understanding the context. The fact that we are in a major recession and most good jobs are going overseas, says we do not have any smart people to make the right decision for the country. The fact that GM makes crappy cars and resorts to firing all employees so that they can hire the same back at half the wages says, these people do not know how to improve productivity and quality (the Japanese know).

The fact that we use 850 million trees per year to make paper and use it every year in USA yet complain about global warming says we are stupid - we do not see beyond today. Then one wonders what happens to these so called genius kids when they grow up? I have met a lot of smart kids but have yet to meet a genius adult that understands these connections.

What if in 10 or 20 years or so, we'll be able to change neuronal chemistry to make better use of glucose in normal people's brains like super genius brains naturally do? That, or something like it, seems like an inevitability. We already have nootropics (cognition enhancing drugs) available to consumers today. As with most technology, nootropics will probably get better with time.

I took nootropics for several years - do not see much difference before and after. The only time it seems to work is when I do a white paper, I can do faster with nootropics than without. Meaning it allows some concentration for the task at hand. Not a whole lot. Should I double the dose to see what happens....I am not sure. Say a Janitor takes nootropics, would he clean the toilets better? Or run off to find formula for cold fusion? Just thinking aloud....

People will get smarter, and then eventually, vastly smarter, when we will start to see humans begin to "catch up" with the computers. It's slower because we're humans who have a different physiology from computers and one that is more complex than computers; we're less likely to tamper with ourselves than with computers, because we see ourselves as more than computers; we see it as an ethical problem. (In fact, it is my prediction that there will be a resistance to the human race becoming cyborgs, which could cause a rift in the human race in the future decades, causing one side to become full-fledged cyborgs and the other side remaining unaltered human beings.

Smarter in what way? Are we getting smarter? Then why Microsoft which has tons of Indians and can afford to hire a lot of smart Americans on its payroll could not create a decent search engine? Why you can not save Word document in PDF or a new open source format with embedded video? Why we still do not have a Disaster mitigation program after Hurricane Katrina? Why Northern Mississippi is so poor that looks like Africa? Why the Military uses 50,000+ scripts to query their database? Why we still do not have a touch screen interface to our desktop computer? Why the western society uses so much toilet paper? Why the Department of Commerce does not know how to help the American business? Why the FBI does not have programs to prevent crime rather than wait for the crime to occur to solve it? Why we spend $900 Billion on health-care and climbing...if we are so smart?

The problem is even the so called smart people develop silo-based thinking. Have you seen Jay Leno "Jay Walking"...these ordinary people show their stupidity on the street. When you have silo-based thinking, you do not have all the information to make the decision. If you are smart, it is like a quad processor with no software. How smart is that?

Just some thoughts to noodle through.....

 

[francois]

One group will use chips and the other gene therapy. I prefer gene therapy. I would rather have my cells turned on to grow a new set of teeth when I am old than do mechanical tooth implant.

I kind of agree. But on the other hand, our brains are painfully limited due to its hardwiring. For example, humans can't really intuitively think in more than 3 dimensions. Some people can think in more, but only in the mathematical sense. But the reasons for this are obvious. It has been useful for us to think in 3 spatial dimensions and in no more. But imagine what new realities could be revealed with the aid computer-enhanced cognition. The potential for a much greater awareness would be perhaps unlimited. It would make our old selves look like stomach bacteria wallowing stupidly in someone's GI tract.

There is more to it than glucose metabolism.

Oh, I know. I was just throwing that out as an example as a starting point for where greater cognition might take hold.

The fact that we are in a major recession and most good jobs are going overseas, says we do not have any smart people to make the right decision for the country.

Here, I think we're having a misunderstanding. A misunderstanding when we're talking about "smart." When you talk about smart, you seem to be talking about wisdom. When I'm talking about smart, I'm simply talking about raw, unadulterated cognitive ability. That doesn't mean wise or ethical. It just plain means that you're awesome at processing information and manipulating the world.

That said, I wholly disagree that the fact that we're in a recession and most good jobs are going overseas means that we don't have smart people guiding our country. The reasons for what we are seeing can be many. Maybe they know they're not acting in our own interest, who knows? Also, simply being very intelligent doesn't make you scientifically knowledgable or literate. But I bet the people in charge, even if they're doing a bad job, are probably significantly more intelligent than most people (in terms of raw cognitive ability).

I'm going to finish this post later. I have to go do a drug screening. (New job)

 

[kmguru]

We will wait for you....drug screening...is that smart?

 

[francois]

The fact that we use 850 million trees per year to make paper and use it every year in USA yet complain about global warming says we are stupid - we do not see beyond today. Then one wonders what happens to these so called genius kids when they grow up? I have met a lot of smart kids but have yet to meet a genius adult that understands these connections.

All this means is that the people in power are not acting in a sustainable way that's not good for everyone. That doesn't mean they're not smart. Anyway, it wasn't my argument that people are smart in the first place. What my argument is, is that people are going to get smarter and smarter as technology continues to improve and as people continue to adopt it and get continually more intimate with it. And by that I don't necessarily mean they will act more responsibly, ethically and look out for the good for everyone. I just mean they will have higher cognitive ability, which will have huge ramifications. Imagine an entire population of geniuses. It's nearly an inconceivable notion, although I guess they already exist in isolated instance. (think tanks)

I took nootropics for several years - do not see much difference before and after. The only time it seems to work is when I do a white paper, I can do faster with nootropics than without. Meaning it allows some concentration for the task at hand. Not a whole lot. Should I double the dose to see what happens....I am not sure. Say a Janitor takes nootropics, would he clean the toilets better? Or run off to find formula for cold fusion? Just thinking aloud....

I've thought of that before. What if anybody could take these drugs or an operation and make themselves a genius, ala Flowers for Algernon? Then previously ordinary people would begin to overshadow the most gifted congenital geniuses as they modified themselves. There's the possibility of an ensuing arms race as people attempt to out-mod others and it spirals out of control, like what happens in the game BioShock. Therefore, there's certainly going to be regulation needed for self-enhancement.

Smarter in what way? Are we getting smarter? Then why Microsoft which has tons of Indians and can afford to hire a lot of smart Americans on its payroll could not create a decent search engine? Why you can not save Word document in PDF or a new open source format with embedded video? Why we still do not have a Disaster mitigation program after Hurricane Katrina? Why Northern Mississippi is so poor that looks like Africa? Why the Military uses 50,000+ scripts to query their database? Why we still do not have a touch screen interface to our desktop computer? Why the western society uses so much toilet paper? Why the Department of Commerce does not know how to help the American business? Why the FBI does not have programs to prevent crime rather than wait for the crime to occur to solve it? Why we spend $900 Billion on health-care and climbing...if we are so smart?

Again, it wasn't my original argument that people are "so smart." However, those things you mention doesn't mean people aren't smart. A lot of the answers to those questions have to do with politics and bureaucracy, not necessarily stupidity. Having smart people in charge does not necessarily mean everybody's going to get what they want or need.

The problem is even the so called smart people develop silo-based thinking. Have you seen Jay Leno "Jay Walking"...these ordinary people show their stupidity on the street. When you have silo-based thinking, you do not have all the information to make the decision. If you are smart, it is like a quad processor with no software. How smart is that?

Ehh, I'm not that impressed by programs like "Jay Walking" where producers make ordinary people look stupid. That's all production. They probably talk to hundreds of people and obviously they discard all of the instances where people don't make flagrant asses of themselves. That's just not funny. And what if a genius just makes a simple brain fart and was thinking abstractly about something miles away and answers "four" when Jay asks him how many sides a triangle has? Of course he's going to keep it. I bet some are even paid to answer stupidly. It's all production.

 

[francois]

We will wait for you....drug screening...is that smart?

Haha, yes. It is. If I didn't do it, I wouldn't get a job.

 

[kmguru]

My kids friends were doing drugs several years ago. They usually stay clear to take the test and then resume. But 98% of the cases people are clear as I found out from the test results from the state for office jobs in this area.

What my argument is, is that people are going to get smarter and smarter as technology continues to improve and as people continue to adopt it and get continually more intimate with it. And by that I don't necessarily mean they will act more responsibly, ethically and look out for the good for everyone. I just mean they will have higher cognitive ability, which will have huge ramifications. Imagine an entire population of geniuses. It's nearly an inconceivable notion, although I guess they already exist in isolated instance. (think tanks)

Are you saying they did not become smart in the last 15 years but will become smart? What would be the metrics we can use that can qualify your outcome? Otherwise, I can say people are getting stupider and you say they are getting smarter....we can never resolve this.

Please note that smartness should not equate with "one trick pony" outcomes.

Also, we need to differentiate between staying with "the same cognitive ability" vs. "higher cognitive ability". Unless we measure both with some reasonable criteria that we both agree on....it would be a pissing contest (drug test pun intended).

 

[francois]

Are you saying they did not become smart in the last 15 years but will become smart? What would be the metrics we can use that can qualify your outcome?

The same metrics we have always used. IQ tests and intellectual achievements.

 

[scifitm]

The same metrics we have always used. IQ tests and intellectual achievements.

I wrote a thesis in college that outlined how humans now have an unlimited amount of information at their fingertips, and how even the remotest countries are gaining the ability to connect to that same vast wealth of knowledge. Although from what I've read since then most people just use the internet to do very mudane things, and the third world countries use it to swindle money from first world countries. I had all these dreams about how many more "Einsteins" were possible per capita because of the accessibility of knowledge now - that was very hard to come by as recently as the 1980's, but I forgot that humans are still human - you can lead a horse to unlimited water, but you can't make him stop playing W.O.W. long enough to drink

 

[kmguru]

I wrote a thesis in college that outlined how humans now have an unlimited amount of information at their fingertips, and how even the remotest countries are gaining the ability to connect to that same vast wealth of knowledge.

A lot of people wrote tons of books on that theme...starting from Alvin Tofler and down the line. Then I got involved with the Chinese first...who soaked up all the ideas I have in technology, organization, strategy etc. So, I thought I could do the same with the Africans. After 2 years and several countries, I came to the conclusion that you can lead a horse to water.....

These people are stupid...and that is being kind...no singularity for them...

Another theory that I can not prove is that the Chinese are the last evolved humans from you know what and from where.....so, if any singularity happens, it will happen from that part of the world....

 

[francois]

A lot of people wrote tons of books on that theme...starting from Alvin Tofler and down the line. Then I got involved with the Chinese first...who soaked up all the ideas I have in technology, organization, strategy etc. So, I thought I could do the same with the Africans. After 2 years and several countries, I came to the conclusion that you can lead a horse to water.....

These people are stupid...and that is being kind...no singularity for them...

... did you just. Call Africans stupid?

Another theory that I can not prove is that the Chinese are the last evolved humans from you know what and from where.....so, if any singularity happens, it will happen from that part of the world....

Hmmm... are they as a matter of fact the first ones to leave Africa? Maybe you have something there, though. I've thought the same thing--but not by the same means. It seems that East Asians are more hive-like, they're more likely to embrace technology to further their race. The Chinese embrace eugenics. They're actually doing something about the dysgenics problem! Their cultures seem horribly primitive and backwards to us, but really, is it that screwed up compared to where we've been a hundred or more years ago? One of the differences is that Western civilization has become wimp liberals, whereas Asians are still tough and enterprising like we were a hundred years ago. If America was a group of liberal wimps would they ever have taken the continent from the Indians as savagely as they did? Absolutely not. Liberalism is how civilizations commit suicide. China is the opposite of liberal. They are highly enterprising and have that going for them; they're not going to let ethics get in their way. Plus, they have a shitload of smart people. When you have a shitload of smart people, no ethics to worry about, and a capitalism embracing society, you're going to have explosive growth.

 

[kmguru]

... did you just. Call Africans stupid?

Noooo...The people I was dealing with...all the government and embassy personnel and some private business people.

Hmmm... are they as a matter of fact the first ones to leave Africa? Maybe you have something there, though. I've thought the same thing--but not by the same means.

I have done several very successful projects with the Chinese. They soak up the complex multidisciplinary tacit knowledge very fast and use it to their advantage. While Africans say, they understand and then argue why the best practices would not work for them. It is like - we understand that in western society your doctors cure disease, but our witch doctor is good for us. Give us the money and we will hire witch doctors to cure our people. This is why there is a lot of rape goes on to cure AIDS.

In one case - We had a company that wanted to put a power plant in one African country. They said, give us all the information and the buyer's contract to buy the Power and then we will start the process of design and investment. The Ambassador told us...Oh! we have a lot of investors talking to us...out government is complex...I do not know who will get involved...you have to come to our country and see it for yourself (see what? dirt on the ground? )

In case of Liberia, their Ambassador said "We do not like Chinese or the Brown Indians (they are blocking Mittal Steel to do business there), we want (the Whites) to come to our country and take our Iron Ore. His mediator told us that we should go there with several swiss bank account numbers and he will set it up to suck anything out of the country.

What would be a term for these people?
(the common people probably do not know what is going on...)

Saw on the net:

WHY AFRICAN STATES IMPLODE

---------------------
"Government," as most people understand it, does not exist in many African countries. "Government” has been turned into a criminal enterprise, operated by gangsters to fleece, not to serve, the people. What exists in most African countries is "vampire state" -- a government captured by crooks and bandits, who use the instruments of the state (or government machinery) to enrich themselves, their cronies and tribesmen, excluding everybody else (the politics of exclusion). The richest persons in Africa are the heads of state and their ministers. Quite often, the chief bandit is the head of state himself. To them, “development” means developing their pockets and “foreign investment” means investing their booty in a foreign country.