Quoted Text

Signs of the Singularity
Hints of the singularity's approach can be found in the arguments of its critics
By VERNOR VINGE  /  JUNE 2008
Share on print Share on email Share on facebook Share on twitter Share on stumbleupon Share on google_plusone Share on reddit More Sharing Services
23
Page 123 // View All
This is part of IEEE Spectrum's SPECIAL REPORT: THE SINGULARITY

Image: Bryan Christie Design
I think it's likely that with technology we can in the fairly near future create or become creatures of more than human intelligence. Such a technological singularity would revolutionize our world, ushering in a posthuman epoch. If it were to happen a million years from now, no big deal. So what do I mean by ”fairly near” future? In my 1993 essay, ”The Coming Technological Singularity,” I said I'd be surprised if the singularity had not happened by 2030. I'll stand by that claim, assuming we avoid the showstopping catastrophes--things like nuclear war, superplagues, climate crash--that we properly spend our anxiety upon.
In that event, I expect the singularity will come as some combination of the following:

The AI Scenario: We create superhuman artificial intelligence (AI) in computers.

The IA Scenario: We enhance human intelligence through human-to-computer interfaces--that is, we achieve intelligence amplification (IA).

The Biomedical Scenario: We directly increase our intelligence by improving the neurological operation of our brains.

The Internet Scenario: Humanity, its networks, computers, and databases become sufficiently effective to be considered a superhuman being.

The Digital Gaia Scenario: The network of embedded microprocessors becomes sufficiently effective to be considered a superhuman being.

The essays in this issue of IEEE Spectrum use similar definitions for the technological singularity but variously rate the notion from likely to totally bogus. I'm going to respond to arguments made in these essays and also mine them for signs of the oncoming singularity that we might track in the future.
Philosopher Alfred Nordmann criticizes the extrapolations used to argue for the singularity. Using trends for outright forecasting is asking for embarrassment. And yet there are a couple of trends that at least raise the possibility of the technological singularity. The first is a very long-term trend, namely Life's tendency, across aeons, toward greater complexity. Some people see this as unstoppable progress toward betterment. Alas, one of the great insights of 20th-century natural science is that Nature can be the harshest of masters. What we call progress can fail. Still, in the absence of a truly terminal event (say, a nearby gamma-ray burst or another collision such as made the moon), the trend has muddled along in the direction we call forward. From the beginning, Life has had the ability to adapt for survival via natural selection of heritable traits. That computational scheme brought Life a long way, resulting in creatures that could reason about survival problems. With the advent of humankind, Life had a means of solving many problems much faster than natural selection.
In the last few thousand years, humans have begun the next step, creating tools to support cognitive function. For example, writing is an off-loading of memory function. We're building tools--computers, networks, database systems--that can speed up the processes of problem solving and adaptation. It's not surprising that some technology enthusiasts have started talking about possible consequences. Depending on our inventiveness--and our artifacts' inventiveness--there is the possibility of a transformation comparable to the rise of human intelligence in the biological world. Even if the singularity does not happen, we are going to have to put up with singularity enthusiasms for a long time.
Get used to it.
In recent decades, the enthusiasts have been encouraged by an enabling trend: the exponential improvement in computer hardware as described by Moore's Law, according to which the number of transistors per integrated circuit doubles about every two years. At its heart, Moore's Law is about inventions that exploit one extremely durable trick: optical lithography to precisely and rapidly emplace enormous numbers of small components. If the economic demand for improved hardware continues, it looks like Moore's Law can continue for some time--though eventually we'll need novel component technology (perhaps carbon nanotubes) and some new method of high-speed emplacement (perhaps self-assembly). But what about that economic demand? Here is the remarkable thing about Moore's Law: it enables improvement in communications, embedded logic, information storage, planning, and design--that is, in areas that are directly or indirectly important to almost all enterprise. As long as the software people can successfully exploit Moore's Law, the demand for this progress should continue.
The best answer to the question, ”Will computers ever be as smart as humans?” is probably ”Yes, but only briefly”
Roboticist Hans Moravec may have been the first to draw a numerical connection between computer hardware trends and artificial intelligence. Writing in 1988, Moravec took his estimate of the raw computational power of the brain together with the rate of improvement in computer power and projected that by 2010 computer hardware would be available to support roughly human levels of performance. There are a number of reasonable objections to this line of argument. One objection is that Moravec may have radically underestimated the computational power of neurons. But even if his estimate is a few orders of magnitude too low, that will only delay the transition by a decade or two--assuming that Moore's Law holds.
Another roboticist, Rodney Brooks, suggests in this issue that computation may not even be the right metaphor for what the brain does. If we are profoundly off the mark about the nature of thought, then this objection could be a showstopper. But research that might lead to the singularity covers a much broader range than formal computation. There is great variety even in the pursuit of pure AI. In the next decade, those who credit Moravec's timeline begin to expect results. Interestingly powerful computers will become cheap enough for a thousand research groups to bloom. Some of these researchers will pursue the classic computational tradition that Brooks is doubting--and they may still carry the day. Others will be working on their own abstractions of natural mind functions--for instance, the theory that Christof Koch and Giulio Tononi discuss in their article. Some (very likely Moravec and Brooks himself) will be experimenting with robots that cope with many of the same issues that, for animals, eventually resulted in minds that plan and feel. Finally, there will be pure neurological researchers, modeling increasingly larger parts of biological brains in silico . Much of this research will benefit from improvements in our tools for imaging brain function and manipulating small regions of the brain.

Quoted Text

ave you become confused over the various descriptions of ALiens yet?  There may be a reason for that. We have been making a mistake and trying to stereotype the various races of Aliens. Just as in humans, these aliens have various descriptions of their color, physic and personality. There is a race that does have only one variant, but the 'grays' are not one of them. Grays can be found from one foot to even seven foot. Some have mushroom-white skin, others with brown and even others with black skin. There are grays whose large eyes have a thin membrane which can extend across the eyes, grays with wispy fine small amounts of hair on their heads, grays with four fingers, others with three or four fingers and another finger positioned where the human thumb would be and there even those whose finger end with suction-cup-like tips.  There has been reports of the aliens having a large process of folds along the back of their heads, a series of deep creases or crevices along the top of the head, sloping down forward towards the front, and with a strongly pronouced brow-ridge above the eyes.
There are believed to be actually twelve different variants of this one race . Possibly, like humans, the variants are based on their evolution in different climactic zones on their planet. Another possibility is that the grays have left their genotype through the cross-breeding of other alien cultures  throughout the various star systems. on some planet.  We are just in the process now of filtering information on this species. Anyone that does have the answers is not giving it out to the public, so we must for now rely on our own ingenuity for seeking truth.  Below I have tried to sort out some of the information I have come across. Anything you may want to add to this would be appreciated. Just contact us at Burlington UFO and we will happy to add your information to our data files.


The Greys.   It seems that they are trying to save their dying race by using mankind  through absorbtion. Instead of destroying mankind, they imbred their kind into ours, thus through generations of imbreeding they become  us and we them. To reproduce, the grays must obtain host females (containers). since utilizing the native population of humans currently carries little risk of interdiction, and no requirements for maintaining the host, this method is preferred. Specialized grays (taller and slender) developed specifically to work in genetic engineering labs, oversee these operations as well as the effort to cross-breed their race with humans in an effort to overcome their built-in limitations. Females are taken, the DNA evaluated, and if acceptable, the female is tagged for future recovery. Males are also evaluated and if found suitable may be used to impregnate current stock of host females in order to assure the transfer of desirable traits to future hosts females. Other activities involve evaluating the nervous and other systems and tissues in order to optimize the ongoing development of the cross-breed's capacities.

Quoted from 55tbird

Still didn't stop a lot of advances in the last 100 or so years based from THIS Country, did it?
BTW, evolution IS a theory, there is no way to absolutely prove it or disprove it. Even a scientist will admit it when you pin him down on it.
Evolution = Theory based on scientific evidence, there are parts of this theory that science has not yet explained with evidence.
Creationism = Theory based on faith

BOTH are theories.

Quoted from 55tbird

Religion is handicapped by one major thing.. It cannot evolve. There are factions inside of the money part of religion that want it to for pure financial survival. If it does evolve, then the original premise is invalid.

Science on the other, has the advantage of simple observation over time. That excuses all mistakes of the past. A scientist can just say, new research suggests this...just like the ice age scare of the 70's. it's a great religion. How many times have we heard eggs are safe, no they're not, yes they are, no they're not...

I see you singled out Christianity...Since your party is the party of inclusion, I wonder if you have some quotes out of the Koran or Hebrew bible you could share with us....after all, if we going to slam religion, we should do it to all, not just ones where were we feel we have lost their votes....

Quoted from Box A Rox

NOTHING that can fly has four feet.

Quoted from Box A Rox

Although many religions believe in various "creation stories" only the CHRISTIANS use their "creation stories" as
if they were SCIENCE.

If you want Science go to a Science book.
If you want Religion go to a religious book.

Those two options are not interchangeable.  

Quoted from 1975

Quoted from Box A Rox

Although many religions believe in various "creation stories" only the CHRISTIANS use their "creation stories" as
if they were SCIENCE.

If you want Science go to a Science book.
If you want Religion go to a religious book.

Those two options are not interchangeable.  

Quoted from 55tbird

Religion is handicapped by one major thing.. It cannot evolve. There are factions inside of the money part of religion that want it to for pure financial survival. If it does evolve, then the original premise is invalid.

Science on the other hand, has the advantage of simple observation over time. That excuses all mistakes of the past. A scientist can just say, new research suggests this...just like the ice age scare of the 70's. it's a great religion. How many times have we heard eggs are safe, no they're not, yes they are, no they're not...

I see you singled out Christianity...Since your party is the party of inclusion, I wonder if you have some quotes out of the Koran or Hebrew bible you could share with us....after all, if we going to slam religion, we should do it to all, not just ones where were we feel we have lost their votes....

Quoted Text

Quotations:

One reality; two viewpoints:

     "Today, there are two religions in the Episcopal Church. One remains faithful to the biblical truth and received teachings of the Church, while the other rejects them." Concerned Clergy and Laity of the Episcopal Church 1

     "There are a growing number of places in the church were lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) persons are welcomed, affirmed in their ministries and blessed in their committed relationships. They are, however, many more places where they are still not fully included in the life of the church." Julie Wortman, et al. 2


Overview:

The Episcopal Church, USA is one province in 38 provinces in the world-wide Anglican Communion. Other provinces are the Anglican Church of Canada and the Church of England.

The Episcopal Church (USA), along with the Presbyterian Church (USA), and the United Methodist Church are probably experiencing the greatest amount of conflict over equal rights for their gay and lesbian members. More liberal Christian denominations have already largely accepted homosexuality as simply another normal, natural, and morally neutral sexual orientation. More conservative denominations have retained the historical Christian belief; they condemn all same-sex behavior, regardless of the nature of the relationship.

The core problem is a disagreement over religious truth. In general, Anglicans consider six factors when they develop and change their religious beliefs and policies:

     Specific biblical references, often literally interpreted. In the case of same-gender sexual behavior, these are often called the six "clobber passages"
     Actions of biblical leaders -- not really applicable in this case.

     General biblical themes -- justice, fairness, love...

     Church traditions

     Scientific findings

     Personal experience.
Conservatives within the denomination tend to stress the factors near the top of the list. Most conclude that same sex behavior is among the most serious of sins. Liberals tend to stress the bottom factors, and conclude that the three sexual orientations -- heterosexuality, homosexuality and bisexuality -- are all morally neutral. They regard the real sins to be homophobia, and sexual acts which are unsafe, non-consensual, manipulative and/or without committment.

Two sexually related topics are currently placing extreme stress on the Episcopal Church, USA, the Anglican Church of Canada, and the rest of the Anglican Communion:

     Whether qualified gays and lesbians in committed relationships should be eligible for ordination as priests and consecration as bishops, and

     Whether a church ritual recognizing and blessing committed same-sex unions should be available.
During the 2003 General Convention, the answers to both questions in the Episcopal Church, USA appear to be a qualified "yes:"

     Delegates confirmed the consecration of Bishop Gene Robinson as bishop of New Hampshire. He is in a long term, committed relationship with another man.

     Delegates to the same convention overwhelmingly approved a compromise resolution which, in effect, has introduced a local option into the church: It recognized that some priests had already been performing blessings of gay and lesbian couples in some dioceses in the U.S.
During the 2006 General Convention, the tensions heightened.

These actions strained the Anglican Communion to a point near fracture. Provinces in Africa and elsewhere have taken a very conservative view towards the authority of the Bible and the interpretation of specific biblical passages which discuss same-sex behavior. Influenced by their culture, they regard all same-sex behavior as criminal and profoundly sinful. Other provinces, notably in the U.S., Canada and Australia, have taken a more liberal approach towards biblical authority, and have developed beliefs about homosexuality which are based on the Bible's general themes of justice and love, and the findings of human sexuality researchers. They regard loving committed same-sex relationships on a par with similar heterosexual relationships.

In the past,  the Episcopal Church, USA and the rest of the Anglican Communion has successfully survived conflicts over human slavery, contraception, female ordination to the priesthood, female consecrations to the status of bishop, and the elevation of a female bishop to primate of the province. However, hatred and discomfort of homosexuality appears to be so overwhelming that the Episcopal Church appears to have started a formal schism in 2007, which will probably intensify in subsequent years.

Quoted from Box A Rox

Although many religions believe in various "creation stories" only the CHRISTIANS use their "creation stories" as
if they were SCIENCE.

If you want Science go to a Science book.
If you want Religion go to a religious book.

Those two options are not interchangeable.  

Quoted from Box A Rox

Although many religions believe in various "creation stories" only the CHRISTIANS use their "creation stories" as
if they were SCIENCE.

If you want Science go to a Science book.
If you want Religion go to a religious book.

Those two options are not interchangeable.  

Quoted from senders

religion DOES evolve....