Not signed in (Sign In)
  1.  (1052.1)
    The title of this story gave me the worst case of future shock.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7248875.stm

    The idea of filling my body with all kinds of nano-scale tech doesn't bother me until you suggest that it might be able to think. In years to come the nano-bots in my brain will probably find this comment get all pissed off and clot all of my blood at once.
    •  
      CommentAuthororwellseyes
    • CommentTimeFeb 16th 2008 edited
     (1052.2)
    I just heard an interview with Kurtzweil early this morning on NPR, much the same material as the article. His tone was what really snuck up on me. Alot of futurists get kind of frothy, fetishistic about their predicitons. He laid it out there in a very matter of fact way. Hearing him talk about how a 2035 model human trying to talk to a person from today would be as rewarding for the futurekind as us chatting with early hominds was some heavy water for an early morning show.

    Of course, the Marxist in me immediately thought "When you have the richest people as functional immortals and superbeings, where's that leave the rest of humanity?"

    Fucked. I should say.
  2.  (1052.3)
    Lucky for us that we live in the west then?
    • CommentAuthorKosmopolit
    • CommentTimeFeb 16th 2008
     (1052.4)
    I heard this on the radio and was really excited until I heard the claim was from Ray Kurzweil, who's been proclaiming the imminent arrival of The singularity every couple of years for at least the last decade.
    • CommentAuthornleavitt
    • CommentTimeFeb 16th 2008
     (1052.5)
    On the other hand, my ipod needed reformatting after i left it playing next to the microwave. What if that happened to the nanobots in your brain?
    • CommentAuthorlex
    • CommentTimeFeb 17th 2008
     (1052.6)
    Yeah, whatever. Futurism is boring when you hear the same old horsepoo being repeated for decades.
    •  
      CommentAuthorWillow Bl00
    • CommentTimeFeb 17th 2008 edited
     (1052.7)
    nleavitt - and if you put a baby in a microwave, it needs reformatting. Part of advancement of technology is fixing such problems, or preventing them from happening.

    orwellseyes - I agree. I'm incredibly concerned about the already deepening divide between those with access to and ability to use technology. Although, thanks to the section of the general movement that occurs in garages and the fascination with creative commons, I think we have more of a chance than we've had in the past. In fact, I think I'll go start a thread on it.


    My general sticking point with this version of AI is that if we're at the knee of the curve of Kurzweil's Singularity, it would likely be with self-replicating AI (thus self-improving) - so with this article and interview, he's just advancing his case.
    I've also expressed before my views on AI, and how we're rather stuck on the idea of creating something intelligent in the way we are (or is it sentient?), which is not necessarily the most efficient route to take.
    •  
      CommentAuthorm1k3y
    • CommentTimeFeb 20th 2008
     (1052.8)
    what @Kosmopolit said

    not that i don't want to believe