Submitted by Golfer345 t3_11a21we in singularity
For example , there’s a lot of computer science/programming terms. The definitions on Google fly right over my head too
Comments
timespender t1_j9pba1v wrote
Nah just read the book as is there is no technical jargon to comprehend at all. I own it.
Golfer345 OP t1_j9phx6e wrote
Lol , I’m reading it now and I’m on Chapter 3 “Achieving the Computational Capacity of the Human Brain “. It’s talking about using quantum mechanics, DNA and molecules for computers . Kurzweil has to totally lost me at this point
Terminator857 t1_j9q4j53 wrote
Are you saying you don't understand any of those terms?
DNA?
Quantum mechanics = Science of doing these at the smallest scale.
None of that is necessary for understanding the main concept of the book, which is: soon we will have very smart computers.
Golfer345 OP t1_j9qbj65 wrote
Of course I know the basic concept of all those things, I’m referring mainly to how Kurzweil seems to continuously talk about how somehow computer parts as we know them today such as computer chips will be replaced with biological parts that have been harnessed for computational purposes . He went in depth talking about how the different states of the subatomic particles can be treated in the same fashion as 1s and 0s computer code.
At least this is what I gathered from reading Chapter 2 and Chapter 3. Am I right ? Correct me if I’m wrong . If I’m right , how in laymen terms could this work? All his detailed explanations on this fly over my head
phunkjunk t1_j9rlyil wrote
The way you explain it here means that you do understand it in laymen’s terms. You could go deeper but then you’re going beyond the laymen.
quantummufasa t1_j9qbh5g wrote
I haven't read it in like a decade but quantum effects aren't relevant at that scale
Terminator857 t1_j9qhf4x wrote
For a thinking machine a smaller machine is more efficient than a larger machine, so yes quantum effects are very relevant and used in design of today's microchips. For example: the problem of quantum tunnelling.
quantummufasa t1_j9qzvt1 wrote
For microchips yes, but is it relevant for neurons?
Terminator857 t1_j9rf3ht wrote
I thought the context was artificial neurons, which are executed in microchips.
quantummufasa t1_j9rnn14 wrote
One transistor is loosely analogous to one neuron but definitely not the same.
But then to have enough transistors to simulate all the neurons needed you will need to consider quantum effects to design them, nvm.
Brashendeavours t1_j9qrto6 wrote
Read the post as there is no technical jargon to comprehend that OP already has the book….
phriot t1_j9ppu4c wrote
I don't like the way Kurzweil writes at all. I didn't really have trouble understanding any of his books that I've read (Age of Spiritual Machines, The Singularity is Near, and Fantastic Voyage), but I found them all to be tedious reads. Honestly, if you listen to a long-form interview with him, you'll probably get like 80%+ of what's in any of the books. What you'll miss out on is mostly his ideas around sex in the future, opinions that I could care less about.
That all said, if you want to make it through, the best thing you can probably do is to sit down and read it with an open web browser in front of you, and a notebook and pen beside you. It will take you quite a bit longer, but you start at Wikipedia with any term you don't understand, and keep working your way down with understanding until you don't care about the detail anymore. Writing stuff down will help you remember it and/or let you look up terms later, if you decide you'd rather just get the gist of any given section, first.
dasnihil t1_j9semvv wrote
i felt exactly that reading his book. nothing much innovative.
abc-5233 t1_j9qrsjh wrote
One thing I don't like about Kurzweil's take on the Singularity, is that he attributes it to "The Law of Accelerating Returns", that is not an actual law, but something I think he invented.
For a much more scientific and thorough explanation of why the increased complexity will lead to the Singularity I recommend "The Romance of Reality" by Bobby Azarian, where he explains how it is the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics (entropy increases in closed systems), is the one that predicts the increased complexity in open systems.
It is far more scientific and accurate.
TFenrir t1_j9pff6n wrote
Ironically, I think the best way to deal with terms in the book you don't understand is to just ask chatgpt to explain it to you. Either by giving it an excerpt, asking it to define a word, or asking it about the book, eg "in the singularity is near, what does Kurzweil mean by algorithmic improvements outpacing hardware?"
Btw this is ChatGPTs answer:
> In "The Singularity is Near," Ray Kurzweil argues that we are approaching a point in the future where machine intelligence will surpass human intelligence, an event he refers to as the "Singularity." Kurzweil suggests that this rapid advance of technology will be driven by two major factors: the exponential growth of computing power and the development of more advanced algorithms.
> Regarding the concept of "algorithmic improvements outpacing hardware," Kurzweil is referring to the fact that the speed and power of computers are not the only factors that determine their capabilities. The software, or the algorithms that run on the hardware, also play a crucial role in what computers can accomplish.
> Kurzweil argues that as we continue to develop better algorithms, we will be able to do more with the same amount of computing power, or even less. This means that even if we reach a point where we cannot continue to improve the hardware, the development of more advanced algorithms will still enable us to create machines that are more intelligent and capable.
> Therefore, Kurzweil's idea of "algorithmic improvements outpacing hardware" suggests that the development of better algorithms will be a key factor in driving the progress of machine intelligence, even if we reach limits in terms of hardware capabilities.
Baturinsky t1_j9qh5uy wrote
Speaking of that, I haven't noticed much algorithmic improvement in past couple of decades, except maybe some niche cases. If anything, less optimised algorithm are used now, because hardware can handle that.
Terminator857 t1_j9q43z3 wrote
Ask here, and you shall receive.
Golfer345 OP t1_j9qh23h wrote
What does Kurzweil mean by “three-dimensional computing”
Terminator857 t1_j9qi0z4 wrote
Microchips of the past were mostly 2d. Like a printed circuit board. Today and more in the future they are more 3 dimesional, like a circuit board that has circuits at multiple levels. If my memory and understanding is correct, current state of the art flash memory chips are 100 levels deep. Can we make that a 1000? CPU chips aren't taking advantage as much of this multi level architecture. Same with GPU (graphic processor units) or TPU (tensor processing units) chips.
3d comes in multiple flavors. Here is an example of stacking the chips: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-dimensional_integrated_circuit
An analogy is cities. Today's cities are mostly 2d. Traffic happens at the ground level. In the future we will have cities were commuting can occur at multiple vertical levels and we can call them 3d cities.
Golfer345 OP t1_j9qleef wrote
Whoa just like as in the movie Minority Report lol!! (The movie depicts vertical commuting as you called it)
Oh ok thanks , that was a good explanation. That Wikipedia article came up when I googled my question but I wasn’t sure if the article was relevant or not
headypete42033 t1_j9pbmj2 wrote
Kind of off topic but I read the "Singularity is Near" then "Guns Germs and Steel" and then "Food of the Gods." Kind of covered a lot of the bases on where we came from and where we are going. Didn't even plan it out but it worked out that way.
FomalhautCalliclea t1_j9qh7ur wrote
Your reading list sounds like a slow descent into dementia and faulty reasoning.
Frumpagumpus t1_j9pq8c9 wrote
if you want to start from the bottom you could play the nandgame
grimjim t1_j9vkiq0 wrote
Ideally, enough physics to now when Kurzweil is resorting to handwavium when presenting an argument.
SalishSeaview t1_j9zuiqc wrote
If you want a science-fictional approach to the subject to lay out context, read “The Continuing Time” series of novels and short stories by Daniel Keys Moran. In particular the second novel in the series, The Long Run, delves into quite a bit of what Kurzweil talks about for a future. The Long Run was published in 1988, but holds up today. AFAIK, neither Moran nor Kurzweil had any effect on the others’ writing, but they line up pretty well.
Pegatul t1_j9s4ocq wrote
Das Kapital. It will help you understand why Kurzweil is living in a fantasy world.
NanditoPapa t1_j9sjkja wrote
A book from 1867, talking about 19th century problems, has little place outside of being a curiosity in 2023.
Edit: And no, conditions are not "exactly the same" as 156 years ago in terms of society, technology, culture, or economics. That's a stupid statement.
Borrowedshorts t1_j9zly5c wrote
This is actually wrong. As someone who has read it in full, Das Kapital will tell you exactly the conditions that will take place as they are the same conditions happening now.
ImpossibleSnacks t1_j9pm0is wrote
Why not use ChatGPT to explain anything you don’t get?