September 29, 2005 4:00 AM PDT
Newsmaker: Ray Kurzweil deciphers a brave new world
See all Newsmakers(continued from previous page)
a role for intelligence that compromises privacy to prevent those types of results. There has to be a balance. There's no easy issue.
When the wealthy are augmented and others aren't, it seems to be that social divides will become more extreme. What happens when Congress enacts a law saying that nobody can live beyond 150 years until 20 percent of the population can afford a similar opportunity?
Kurzweil: When it's only exploitable by the rich, it doesn't work. When it becomes merely expensive, it kinda works. When it becomes exploitable by everyone, like cell phones, (it really works).
So you're not worried about the political fallout over some people being uplifted and others not?
Kurzweil: There's not going to be a strong isolated phenomenon. We'll get there through a lot of incremental steps that have wide support, like cell phones. They've quickly become ubiquitous.
What happens to non-uplifted humans when 90 percent of the world's population is augmented--smarter and more physically able? Are they kept as pets?
Kurzweil: People adopt technology at different rates. Relatively few people completely resist technology. How many people just don't use telephones at all? They're off the beaten track. These technologies are going to bring material wealth. People will be fairly foolish not to use them. (And even the) very few people that make no use of technology will benefit nonetheless.
Kurzweil: I don't think that's where the social unrest will occur. If, in fact, the technology were static and only the elite had it, it will lead to social unrest. But because it rapidly moves and comes down in price 50 percent a year and improves in quality, the technology reaches more people.
Even the limits that we have now on stem cell research--and I support stem cell research--the controversy and limitations are small stones in the river of progress. The river just flows around them.
As a species, our history of predictions of the future seems to be pretty poor. Whatever happened to the flying cars?
Kurzweil: I don't think it's fair or appropriate to bring up the failed predictions of others to talk about my predictions and the law of (accelerating returns). I have a very good track record over 20 years of making predictions based on these models. A lot of other futurists don't have a sound model of the exponential nature of progress.
You've indicated in your book that if there were a computer with 10^20 power IQ over humans, it should run the economy. Isn't that just central planning all over again, but this time even worse?
Kurzweil: I don't think that's the right interpretation. My view is that we'll learn from this technology. We're already collaborating with our machines. No professional could perform his function without computers. We will literally enhance our own intelligence. It's not going to turn it over to a centralized machine.
See more CNET content tagged:
hedge fund, prediction, Artificial Intelligence, project
Biologically, human is a ?machine? of things, no different from all the ?things?. As a spiritual machine, human assembled words such as Singularity, Intelligence, Strong AI and Love, Money etc, while no one really know the ?real? definition of these words. Well, these words did get your attention ? for the money in your wallet.
Inventor is nothing but an assembler. Prediction is nothing but another ?one-man opinion? for you to read while you don?t have anything else to do or think. Of course, reading grows knowledge by brainwashing your belief ? what a tricky way to control you!
Therefore, Tech will merely oscillate us with greater diverging resonance. Singularity can not be accomplished by Tech. Conclusion, Kurzweil?s prediction will fail. What?s in your belief?
but really, you have some very good points about the fallacies of language, and your argument against the concept of the singularity is correct in my opinion.
These Fundamentalists have forgotten the basis of the humanist agenda is to achieve greater well being for humanity through means such as advanced technology. Attacking it in a shallow pseudo-Marxist anti-corporate manner, and trying to always show things in the most negative manner possible in order to show off how much of a "realist" he is, just shows how far he and his pals have strayed from rational optimism.
It's too bad Ray didn't request to be interviewed by someone who could at least attempt to be objective.
What would you have asked him? Where do you see his ideas breaking down? What is your view of the future?
.
Now by “hardware capacity” he could mean almost anything, but most readers would assume computers --especially since he’s discussing machine intelligence. Moore’s law is an order of magnitude increase every 5 years so in 25 years “hardware capacity” will have increase by 10^5 not 10^9 – off by a factor of ten thousand -- assuming of course that Moore’s law (which is only empirical after all) holds that long.
Another problem is that Kurzweil shifts definitions in mid-sentence. In discussing machine intelligence he cites examples of tasks that formerly required a human but are now done by machine. Not the same thing at all – we don’t call tractors artificial horses. I’ve no doubt the future will have very capable machines – but intelligence is another matter. Kurzweil assumes such capable machines will start setting there own agendas, something that is difficult to define (why do humans do what they do?) much less implement.
Finally the choice of the singularity metaphor is interesting. Presumably this is a take on black holes. An interesting aspect of black holes is that someone falling into one never arrives – the singularity is always just ahead; yet to an outside observer the person falling in disappears rather quickly (except for the possibility of ghosts – which is another topic). So in this metaphor – the singularity will never occur (except for alien observers).
Similar to your point, if our technology could not 'simply' use H (hydrogen) as a source of power - like tree and human body, what are we talking about the much 'complex and compound'singularity?
So, if your calculations show an order of magnitude increase in 5 years, to get his number for 25 years you don't just multiply your number by 5. You say that the next magnitude increase will take,(pulling numbers out of my thin air) , 4.5 years, then 4, 3.5, 3, 2.5, 2, 1.5, 1 and pretty quickly you reach his singularity when things are increasing at an infinite rate.
BTW, if you take my numbers, in 24.5 years you have an increase of 10^7 which is still off by a factor of 100, but to reach that would only take an additional 2.5 years (or 27 all up)
My problem is that Ray in his past books has started with 'todays doubling rate' at the overly optimistic end of the range of estimates.
I think he takes todays rate of doubling as a figure of 1 year whereas 1.5-2 years would have made his calculations more in line with the common peoples understanding of Moores Law doubling rates.
First, Law(s) of Acceleration could go positive (+) or negative (-) direction.
Next, Strong AI machine(s) do exist. We (and God) call them ?Human?.
Next, if humans need AI to achieve our perfection, then how could human design a perfect AI, while an AI like human will still be ?Human?.
Next, who are going to write the code? Of course, The human alike AI = the human.
Speaking of the Code, in order to reach Singularity, therefore, we got to find out The One Line (Singularity) Code for the Universal Energy Law (UEL), then we can use it to understand how ?energy? ?process? in human brain ?structure?, then AI is done.
By the way, e=mc2 is not a Universal Energy Law, it only good for calculating material thing, not for measuring emotional = intelligent energy.
Can anyone write an equation for UEL?
As an airline pilot and testpilot I am used to do my work in between robots: autopilots connected with navigation computers, assisted by failure management systems. Currently I fly the A330, one of the most advanced planes today. Although it can land fully by itself, all systems are still "stupid". There is no intelligence at all.
If something goes wrong, common sense is what saves the day. Every day again. I have NEVER seen anything that even looks like common sense in my career. I must admit that on the other hand computers have saved the day many times. But that is because they lack common sense.
I'm not saying that common sense will never be achieved by computers, but it's my opinion that common-sense is related to quantumphysics. So only when computers are able to use quantum-events in neural nets, I'll be happy to be passenger on a plane without pilot....
Regards, Peter
Mr. Kurzweil talked about his system can predict and make a decision and consistently makes money ? 80 to 100 percent returns a year, according to Ray in the posted interview by Mr. McCullagh.
As we all know, stock investing involves Science (S) and Control (C) of emotion, where S should cover all the economic ?numbers? of the investing stock (company), while C should include the emotional ?numbers? such as how all the investors (include you and me) and analysts ?feel? ? control - about it.
S and C not only set the direction, distance, speed and acceleration for the path and pace, but also provide (reasons and results of) sudden impulses ? discrete gaps of big drop and jump - of the stock. ?Discrete(s)? often occur in the pre-market and after-hour market ? especially at the earning report day or FOMC meeting day ? are tough for average (all?) investors.
To consistently make money, Mr. Kurzweil?s system should be able to calculate both ?numbers? of S and C ? emotional factors.
Ray also mentioned that his system is not perfect yet. Well, emotional impulses (discrete nature) are particularly harder to predict. By the way, like the stock market, the occurrence of ?discrete? might just well be the limitation, boundary (the end?), and the ?pull back? of our exponential technology expansion. Whether it is a mathematical behavior or natural phenomenal, when a divergent function approaches ?near? the infinity (undefined) boundary, ?discrete? takes place. It happens and it definitely going to happen again ? how?
Besides stock investing, basically our daily life can be measured (encode and decode) by the ?energy? ?numbers? of S and C. Therefore, a Universal Energy Law can be written as Energy = nS + mC + lR. For instance, the term nS could represent Einstein?s mc2 in measuring material (with mass) of energy. Naturally, mC term is for emotional energy measurement ? how?
Again, an approval from News.com is needed to further discuss UEL.
For all the guys and girls out there, good luck for all your S and C ? including all your portfolios.
What will actually happen, as Mr. Kurzweil and many others point out, is that we will integrate ourselves with machine intelligence in a way that makes us as intelligent and competent as any artificially intelligent computer.
For example, through nanotech, we'll have millions of cellular-small mini-computers in our bloodstreams and brains, acting in concert with out neurons to make use of both our own massively parallel biological minds, as well as the lightning quick electronic speeds, and memory capacity, of computers.
The goal is to increase our intelligence as we increase the intelligence of machines: Darwinian symbiosis not cutthroat competition between man and metal.
It's easy to fear the future. But it is more empowering and more interesting to embrace it--and help to create it!
- Technology is growing Smarter
- by October 16, 2005 11:38 AM PDT
- Have you called an automated phone answering system recently? Instead of having to respond to the techno-woman voice using dial-tones, you can actually respond verbally- and it understands you!
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
(27 Comments)This software isn't magical, impossible, a long way off (or even inevitable!). Businesses demand better, smarter technology because it makes them more money. How long until our cars, computers, etc. have voice recognition? Our phones have had it (although the software is somewhat frustrating) for quite a while.
What next after voice recognition? Facial recognition will be ushered in to usage. Software will be more intelligent. It happens, it makes a lot of money for businesses, and it gets better. How often do you use a spell checker?
Who is going to create the first Google-bot? You offer it a voice command about some topic you need information about, and it googles your topic, analyzes and organizes the information, and produces a report for you in seconds. This is an example of lo-fi human intelligence enhancement.
Will computer chips get smaller? Of course they will. Moore's Law (a debateble "law") is a driving *motivation* in the industry. People PAY MONEY for faster equipment. Multi-BILLION dollar corporations are pouring money into nanotechnological research and new chip making techniques.
People want to store gigabytes of songs in their cellphone/ipod/digitalcamera/camcorder, and major corporations will provide them with this capability or certainly die trying!!!
You can't deny that things are getting better- and getting better at a faster and faster rate.
Programmable nanotechnological molecular machines are on their way. Intelligent computers are on their way. Things are going to start getting massively, massively different and soon- and we are going to be caught completely, utterly unprepared because nobody expects it.
I urge you to visit the Singularity Institute at www.singinst.org