SensibleInterlocutor t1_j15nj5w wrote on December 21, 2022 at 9:09 PM

You literally can't be in the midst of a singularity by definition

oldmanhero OP t1_j15o5vy wrote on December 21, 2022 at 9:13 PM

I'm not sure why you think that's true, but it certainly isn't true from the point of view of a Kurweillian singularity, which is defined by the relative rates of progress versus human capacity to keep up.

SensibleInterlocutor t1_j15oc66 wrote on December 21, 2022 at 9:15 PM

Singularities have no extension in time or space

oldmanhero OP t1_j15oq8p wrote on December 21, 2022 at 9:17 PM

That's not even necessarily true for physical singularities. There are many physicists who believe that the only places where singularities might occur (ie at the centre of black holes) have instead a "smeared" or "ring-like" construct rather than a point-like thing.

I would argue that if we have ceased to be able to keep up with and understand the changes happening in our world - and if we cannot plan for them, we do not understand them - then we are definitionally within a technological singularity.

SensibleInterlocutor t1_j15p36l wrote on December 21, 2022 at 9:20 PM

The technological singularity is a point in time at which technological growth becomes uncontrollable and irreversible, resulting in unforeseeable changes to human civilization. That is a point in time, not a span of time, which is why it is called a singularity.

oldmanhero OP t1_j15pfwt wrote on December 21, 2022 at 9:22 PM

That's not my understanding from numerous sources. Kurzweil discusses the idea of a singularity in the same sense as the aphorism that "The future is already here, just not evenly distributed".

SensibleInterlocutor t1_j15qdan wrote on December 21, 2022 at 9:28 PM

I'm afraid you won't be convincing me that the singularity is longer than one instant