BigZaddyZ3 t1_j8zzpfs wrote
Reply to comment by Wroisu in I am a young teenager, and I have just learned about the concept of reaching singularity. What is the point of living anymore when this happens. by FriendlyDetective319
No, you’re confusing post-scarcity with the singularity. Post-scarcity (if it ever happens) would occur before the singularity. The singularity is the point where technology begins to evolve itself so rapidly that humans no longer can control it anymore. Life on Earth will be forever transformed in ways that are unimaginable to the human mind. It most likely signals the end of the “human dominance” era on Earth.
The good news for OP tho, is that, since no one knows what’ll happen to humanity after that point, there’s no point in stressing over it too much.
Wroisu t1_j8zzz3h wrote
I’m not confusing them, I know my definitions. I specified post-singularity because the books I gave recommendations for are based on the premise of humanoids being in a symbiotic relationship with hyper intelligent artificial intelligences called (Minds).
Post singularity implies post scarcity, of which we already are in some aspects (like food) we just don’t distribute it properly.
BigZaddyZ3 t1_j90081t wrote
Any book claiming to know what happens post singularity is illegitimate and merely just mindlessly speculating at best tbh.
Wroisu t1_j900ex1 wrote
It’s not claiming to know, it’s doing what any good science fiction does and extrapolates what we know to logical conclusions to create interesting narratives, and do commentary on the current social, technological & political climates etc.
The culture novels are known for that, don’t knock it until you’ve read it.
BigZaddyZ3 t1_j9016fv wrote
The entire point of the singularity is that all of our current knowledge and logic will have long been rendered irrelevant at that point. Technological progression would have long surpassed human comprehension. That’s the entire point. Humans today can’t comprehend what comes after the singularity. Do you see the problem with “extrapolating” our current understanding in this scenario?
Also do you really think it’s wise to base your understanding of such a complex topic on a clearly fictional novel made most likely for entertainment purposes?
Wroisu t1_j901zs1 wrote
The point of the novel(s) is to explore those complex topics, I’m not saying that that’s what it’ll be like but that it gives a perspective on what it could be like.
Similar to star trek & it’s commentary on capitalism, or the three body problem and it’s explanation for the Fermi paradox ad infinitum.
As far as the technology beyond our comprehension, that technology as high and mighty as it may be, will still be based on physical principles we know of.
And even the technology that’s born out of principles we’ve yet to discover will come out of the unification of things we already know, like general relativity and quantum mechanics.
You could create extremely hard materials by manipulating the strong nuclear force over large distances, this would be extremely exotic by our standards but not outside the realm of possibility. Stuff like that is what the singularity would allow, is it impossible to comprehend? Not really.
BigZaddyZ3 t1_j902rqs wrote
There’s still a lot that we don’t know about the universe tho… and you’re assuming that there’s no way to change or alter the principles of the Earth as well. Say a super-intelligence system were able to develop a weapon that could alter Earth’s gravitational pull. Suddenly the current laws of physics go out the window. You’re thinking too small. Like I said, there’s still a lot that we don’t understand about the universe. Thinking the singularity will be “business as usual” is what happens when you try to base your understanding of it off fictional novels…
Wroisu t1_j9037wv wrote
For the earth, the Gravitational Binding Energy is about 2x10^32 Joules, or about 12 days of the Sun's total energy output, Mr. Big Thinker.
There’s no way an AI would randomly be able to control that amount of energy without us knowing of the mechanisms used to control such energy, let alone seeing the structures built to move that energy around in a useful way.
Not understanding how physics work & thinking that AI will suddenly rewrite it one day is what you get when you browse an echo chamber for your information on such things.
BigZaddyZ3 t1_j903o4e wrote
>>There’s no way an AI would randomly be able to control that amount of energy without us knowing of the mechanisms used to control such energy, let alone seeing the structures built to move that energy around in a useful way.
Why not? Are you dumb enough to assume AGI will never surpass human cognitive abilities? Please tell me you’re not that stupid…
Wroisu t1_j9042i4 wrote
Cognitive ability doesn’t translate to immediate R&D, you could think up a trillion ways to do something, each better than the last, but you still have to build the equipment that does the thing you want to do research on etc. for every iteration of your idea.
That doesn’t mean that it won’t be quick, but that these things aren’t magic - as you seem to be suggesting immense intellect would be.
Eventually you get to the point where Isaac Asimov’s “any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic” holds true, but that doesn’t happen over night.
BigZaddyZ3 t1_j904qxu wrote
It does happen overnight in a technological singularity tho. That’s why it’s also sometimes referred to as the “intelligence explosion”.
Iffykindofguy t1_j902h8k wrote
LOL at you claiming theres a hard timeline to any of this, much less something as absurd as post-scarcity being a requirement for a singularity
BigZaddyZ3 t1_j903fni wrote
I didn’t give a hard time line tho… A hard timeline would be me giving specific dates and shit. I didn’t. You seriously need to improve your reading comprehension skills bruh.
It’s just pretty much universally agreed on by actual experts that if we ever achieve post-scarcity, it’ll before any singularity occurs. No other order even makes sense. There’s no guarantee humans will even still be around post-singularity. And the singularity isn’t even needed in order to reach post scarcity. So do the math there genius…
turnip_burrito t1_j9044d9 wrote
Singularity can (and is looking like it will) happen before post scarcity. It may even cause post scarcity.
BigZaddyZ3 t1_j904h6v wrote
I don’t agree because we’ll more than likely reach the level of AI needed for post-scarcity before we reach the level needed for a singularity to occur.
turnip_burrito t1_j90508k wrote
I guess it depends on how quick the takeoff is. When do you think we'll see AGI?
BigZaddyZ3 t1_j9058y6 wrote
In my opinion, it’d be foolish to try and pin it to an exact date. But I’d say we’re on path to reach it maybe in the 2040s possibly.
Iffykindofguy t1_j903mrg wrote
Please provide this ample evidence by experts explicitly stating that post scarcity would occur before a singularity by requirement.
BigZaddyZ3 t1_j90473x wrote
Lmao do you actually think I care what you think enough to go through the trouble of doing that? 😂😂Fuck off, I’m literally about to go to bed. I’m not gonna write a fucking research essay for you. Go do your own research if you care that much.
tms102 t1_j90a4ws wrote
It is clear you don't know what you're talking about.
BigZaddyZ3 t1_j90au3a wrote
>>The first person to use the concept of a "singularity" in the technological context was John von Neumann.[5] Stanislaw Ulam reports a 1958 discussion with von Neumann "centered on the accelerating progress of technology and changes in the mode of human life, which gives the appearance of approaching some essential singularity in the history of the race beyond which human affairs, as we know them, could not continue". [6] Subsequent authors have echoed this viewpoint.[3][7]
>>The concept and the term "singularity" were popularized by Vernor Vinge first in 1983 in an article that claimed that once humans create intelligences greater than their own, there will be a technological and social transition similar in some sense to "the knotted space-time at the center of a black hole",[8] and later in his 1993 essay The Coming Technological Singularity,[4][7] in which he wrote that it would signal the end of the human era, as the new superintelligence would continue to upgrade itself and would advance technologically at an incomprehensible rate.
>> Some scientists, including Stephen Hawking, have expressed concern that artificial superintelligence (ASI) could result in human extinction.
>>The other prominent prophet of the Singularity is Ray Kurzweil. In his book The Singularity is Near, Kurzweil basically agrees with Vinge but believes the later has been too optimistic in his view of technological progress. Kurzweil believes that by the year 2045 we will experience the greatest technological singularity in the history of mankind: the kind that could, in just a few years, overturn the institutes and pillars of society and completely change the way we view ourselves as human beings.
>>The technological singularity—or simply the singularity[1]—is a hypothetical future point in time at which technological growth becomes uncontrollable and irreversible, resulting in unforeseeable changes to human civilization.
You were saying? How exactly can we achieve a post-scarcity human society after the singularity when the most prominent proponents of the singularity believe we won’t even be able to control technology by that point and that it will mark the end of human era in one way or another? Use your fucking brain for fuck’s sake..
Iffykindofguy t1_j91isdm wrote
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
BigZaddyZ3 t1_j92zsmz wrote
The exact type of low-IQ response I’ve come to expect from you tbh..
Iffykindofguy t1_j936bg5 wrote
Its funny because I dont think we actually disagree that much Im just annoyed by how certain you seem to think these things will be
BigZaddyZ3 t1_j938yb6 wrote
Well, in my defense, I’m just giving my opinion based on everything I’ve learned about the subject over the years. Just like we all do in this sub all the time. It’s not a crime to be confident in your opinion. And from the conversations we’ve had so far, you aren’t that much different when it comes to that.
But yeah, I was only giving my take on how things are likely to unfold. I wasn’t saying it was a 100% guarantee. If that’s what you thought then I see where some of the tension and confusion stem from. I wasn’t trying to say that it was an undeniable certainty. Just that what I described seems most likely to occur (imo).
Iffykindofguy t1_j93ufu8 wrote
We all do it yes, my point is how you communicate it is the problem. It does come off as a certainty that your word is law.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments