AdditionalPizza t1_j16fsvk wrote on December 22, 2022 at 12:30 AM

Reply to comment by oldmanhero in Are we already in the midst of a singularity? by oldmanhero

I don't have physically have access to Kurzweil's book, but here's a YouTube link [7:39] where he agrees it's a point where everything is different after than it was before. An epoch is usually a distinctive period of time following an event that sets it off. The singularity being the "event" and post-singularity being the era. We often call it "The Singularity" but you can also refer to it as "a singularity" which further shows it is a single event, not a span of time. There will certainly be many many events that lead to that moment.

When I say event, I'm under the assumption we will probably retroactively note the approximate time (or exact time who knows, future tech could be crazy) that it happened. When either one extremely significant transformative technology makes and impact that in hindsight we couldn't predict; or several technologies converge over time and at some moment in time humanity is changed. We can only predict that time now, but it's impossible to know until it has already passed and things are different.

Honestly at this point though let's just agree to disagree. I don't see any possible convincing arguments that haven't already been made from either side.

oldmanhero OP t1_j18mt7b wrote on December 22, 2022 at 2:02 PM

I'm happy to live and let live, but I wanted to piint out that NdGT used the phrase "cutural moment", which is not normally interpreted as a literal instant but rather a period of timw with common cultural features. Like, say, exponential technological advances.

AdditionalPizza t1_j18rq98 wrote on December 22, 2022 at 2:40 PM

All I'm saying is there's events that lead up to the point of singularity, and then we are beyond it. As we've discussed it more I've cared less about the semantics haha.

Kurzweil's view of the singularity will absolutely be wrong. The process he came up with for the prediction time is solid, but he's wrong on so many levels about his expected outcome and the reality when the time comes. But his timeframes are pretty good.

He also has consistently described bldck holes incorrectly over the years, so I don't think he really went too far in depth over why people before him used the word singularity.

But either way tech is moving at an exciting pace.