Singularity: Last Man

Free download. Book file PDF easily for everyone and every device. You can download and read online Singularity: Last Man file PDF Book only if you are registered here. And also you can download or read online all Book PDF file that related with Singularity: Last Man book. Happy reading Singularity: Last Man Bookeveryone. Download file Free Book PDF Singularity: Last Man at Complete PDF Library. This Book have some digital formats such us :paperbook, ebook, kindle, epub, fb2 and another formats. Here is The CompletePDF Book Library. It's free to register here to get Book file PDF Singularity: Last Man Pocket Guide.

Already we are exploring other planets in our solar system using artificial explorers.

The History of the Singularity

Will we find planets where the biological beings are gone and only AI remains? Destruction of Humans by the Machines. How would a planet that started with people end up with only machines? This is a popular theme in science fiction that has come out since, ranging from The Terminator to The Matrix. Could AI really destroy us? Over scientists signed on to a document which warned of the dangers to the human race of developing AI that is both self-aware and super-intelligent which is in charge of weapons.

Should we imbue our AI with emotional intelligence as well as knowledge of the physical world? Would this make it less likely or more likely that the AI would try to destroy us?

One of the haunting aspects of a movie like Deux Machina is that the androids could appear completely human but be devoid of emotion and be indifferent to suffering — a trait in humans which is associated with a psychopathic personality. The transhuman movement seems to be all about merging technology with biology. Star Trek has always been ahead of its time. The first interracial kiss on broadcast TV happened on TOS as well and was boycotted by many stations in the south.

Continue the Discussion. Rizwan Virk October Rizwan Virk April 9. Rizwan Virk March These improvements would make further improvements possible, which would make further improvements possible, and so on. The mechanism for a recursively self-improving set of algorithms differs from an increase in raw computation speed in two ways. First, it does not require external influence: machines designing faster hardware would still require humans to create the improved hardware, or to program factories appropriately. While speed increases seem to be only a quantitative difference from human intelligence, actual algorithm improvements would be qualitatively different.

Eliezer Yudkowsky compares it to the changes that human intelligence brought: humans changed the world thousands of times more rapidly than evolution had done, and in totally different ways. Similarly, the evolution of life had been a massive departure and acceleration from the previous geological rates of change, and improved intelligence could cause change to be as different again.

There are substantial dangers associated with an intelligence explosion singularity originating from a recursively self-improving set of algorithms. First, the goal structure of the AI may not be invariant under self-improvement, potentially causing the AI to optimise for something other than was intended. While not actively malicious, there is no reason to think that AIs would actively promote human goals unless they could be programmed as such, and if not, might use the resources currently used to support mankind to promote its own goals, causing human extinction.

Carl Shulman and Anders Sandberg suggest that algorithm improvements may be the limiting factor for a singularity because whereas hardware efficiency tends to improve at a steady pace, software innovations are more unpredictable and may be bottlenecked by serial, cumulative research.

Why the Singularity is Not a Singularity

They suggest that in the case of a software-limited singularity, intelligence explosion would actually become more likely than with a hardware-limited singularity, because in the software-limited case, once human-level AI was developed, it could run serially on very fast hardware, and the abundance of cheap hardware would make AI research less constrained. Some critics, like philosopher Hubert Dreyfus , assert that computers or machines cannot achieve human intelligence , while others, like physicist Stephen Hawking , hold that the definition of intelligence is irrelevant if the net result is the same.

Psychologist Steven Pinker stated in There is not the slightest reason to believe in a coming singularity. The fact that you can visualize a future in your imagination is not evidence that it is likely or even possible. Look at domed cities, jet-pack commuting, underwater cities, mile-high buildings, and nuclear-powered automobiles—all staples of futuristic fantasies when I was a child that have never arrived. Sheer processing power is not a pixie dust that magically solves all your problems.

University of California, Berkeley , philosophy professor John Searle writes:.

We design them to behave as if they had certain sorts of psychology , but there is no psychological reality to the corresponding processes or behavior. Martin Ford in The Lights in the Tunnel: Automation, Accelerating Technology and the Economy of the Future [53] postulates a "technology paradox" in that before the singularity could occur most routine jobs in the economy would be automated, since this would require a level of technology inferior to that of the singularity.

This would cause massive unemployment and plummeting consumer demand, which in turn would destroy the incentive to invest in the technologies that would be required to bring about the Singularity.

  • The Mother of God: The Encounters with Jesus Series: 10?
  • Login to your account.
  • Log in to start using My Beatport!.
  • Die Bogenschützin: Roman (German Edition)!
  • Search form.
  • The Zephyr Song;
  • El bulevar del miedo (13/20) (Spanish Edition).

Job displacement is increasingly no longer limited to work traditionally considered to be "routine. Theodore Modis [55] [56] and Jonathan Huebner [57] argue that the rate of technological innovation has not only ceased to rise, but is actually now declining. Evidence for this decline is that the rise in computer clock rates is slowing, even while Moore's prediction of exponentially increasing circuit density continues to hold.

This is due to excessive heat build-up from the chip, which cannot be dissipated quickly enough to prevent the chip from melting when operating at higher speeds. Advancements in speed may be possible in the future by virtue of more power-efficient CPU designs and multi-cell processors. Others [59] propose that other "singularities" can be found through analysis of trends in world population , world gross domestic product , and other indices. Andrey Korotayev and others argue that historical hyperbolic growth curves can be attributed to feedback loops that ceased to affect global trends in the s, and thus hyperbolic growth should not be expected in the future.

In a detailed empirical accounting, The Progress of Computing , William Nordhaus argued that, prior to , computers followed the much slower growth of a traditional industrial economy, thus rejecting extrapolations of Moore's law to 19th-century computers.

Installation — Singularity container documentation

In a paper, Schmidhuber stated that the frequency of subjectively "notable events" appears to be approaching a 21st-century singularity, but cautioned readers to take such plots of subjective events with a grain of salt: perhaps differences in memory of recent and distant events could create an illusion of accelerating change where none exists. Paul Allen argued the opposite of accelerating returns, the complexity brake; [23] the more progress science makes towards understanding intelligence, the more difficult it becomes to make additional progress.

A study of the number of patents shows that human creativity does not show accelerating returns, but in fact, as suggested by Joseph Tainter in his The Collapse of Complex Societies , [64] a law of diminishing returns. The number of patents per thousand peaked in the period from to , and has been declining since.

Related eJournals

Jaron Lanier refutes the idea that the Singularity is inevitable. He states: "I do not think the technology is creating itself. It's not an autonomous process. If you structure a society on not emphasizing individual human agency, it's the same thing operationally as denying people clout, dignity, and self-determination Economist Robert J. Standard of Living Since the Civil War , points out that measured economic growth has slowed around and slowed even further since the financial crisis of — , and argues that the economic data show no trace of a coming Singularity as imagined by mathematician I.

In addition to general criticisms of the singularity concept, several critics have raised issues with Kurzweil's iconic chart. One line of criticism is that a log-log chart of this nature is inherently biased toward a straight-line result. Others identify selection bias in the points that Kurzweil chooses to use.

The Path of the Law: Toward Legal Singularity

For example, biologist PZ Myers points out that many of the early evolutionary "events" were picked arbitrarily. The Economist mocked the concept with a graph extrapolating that the number of blades on a razor, which has increased over the years from one to as many as five, will increase ever-faster to infinity.

Dramatic changes in the rate of economic growth have occurred in the past because of some technological advancement. Based on population growth, the economy doubled every , years from the Paleolithic era until the Neolithic Revolution. The new agricultural economy doubled every years, a remarkable increase. If the rise of superhuman intelligence causes a similar revolution, argues Robin Hanson, one would expect the economy to double at least quarterly and possibly on a weekly basis. The term "technological singularity" reflects the idea that such change may happen suddenly, and that it is difficult to predict how the resulting new world would operate.

While the technological singularity is usually seen as a sudden event, some scholars argue the current speed of change already fits this description. In addition, some argue that we are already in the midst of a major evolutionary transition that merges technology, biology, and society. Digital technology has infiltrated the fabric of human society to a degree of indisputable and often life-sustaining dependence.

We spend most of our waking time communicating through digitally mediated channels With one in three marriages in America beginning online, digital algorithms are also taking a role in human pair bonding and reproduction". The article further argues that from the perspective of the evolution , several previous Major Transitions in Evolution have transformed life through innovations in information storage and replication RNA , DNA , multicellularity , and culture and language. In the current stage of life's evolution, the carbon-based biosphere has generated a cognitive system humans capable of creating technology that will result in a comparable evolutionary transition.

The digital information created by humans has reached a similar magnitude to biological information in the biosphere. Since the s, the quantity of digital information stored has doubled about every 2. In biological terms, there are 7. The digital realm stored times more information than this in see figure.

Related posts

The total amount of DNA contained in all of the cells on Earth is estimated to be about 5. This would represent a doubling of the amount of information stored in the biosphere across a total time period of just years". The goal was to discuss the potential impact of the hypothetical possibility that robots could become self-sufficient and able to make their own decisions.

They discussed the extent to which computers and robots might be able to acquire autonomy , and to what degree they could use such abilities to pose threats or hazards. Some machines are programmed with various forms of semi-autonomy, including the ability to locate their own power sources and choose targets to attack with weapons.

Also, some computer viruses can evade elimination and, according to scientists in attendance, could therefore be said to have reached a "cockroach" stage of machine intelligence. The conference attendees noted that self-awareness as depicted in science-fiction is probably unlikely, but that other potential hazards and pitfalls exist. Berglas claims that there is no direct evolutionary motivation for an AI to be friendly to humans. Evolution has no inherent tendency to produce outcomes valued by humans, and there is little reason to expect an arbitrary optimisation process to promote an outcome desired by mankind, rather than inadvertently leading to an AI behaving in a way not intended by its creators such as Nick Bostrom's whimsical example of an AI which was originally programmed with the goal of manufacturing paper clips, so that when it achieves superintelligence it decides to convert the entire planet into a paper clip manufacturing facility.