Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

Ezekiel_W t1_j66tggm wrote

This depends on what you consider to be the singularity. Are we talking about the creating of an AGI like Vernor Vinge put forth, or more a Kurzweil singularity of an ASI in your pocket for $1000?

4

cloudrunner69 t1_j66vsrl wrote

There is only one definition for a technological singularity.

3

Ezekiel_W t1_j670g5b wrote

And what would that be, pray tell?

2

cloudrunner69 t1_j674qm3 wrote

Basically the singularity is the point when technological growth progresses so rapidly that is impossible to predict what comes next.

5

joseph_dewey t1_j67coy7 wrote

By that definition, it has already happened, and probably happened back in the caveman days. Prediction is pretty tough, and almost everyone gets it wrong. Technological growth has been "rapid" since the species before us invented tools.

I thought that technological singularity was always defined in terms of AI surpassing human intelligence.

3

cloudrunner69 t1_j67jmp4 wrote

I don't know if anyone can make 100% accurate predications, but I think we can still make some pretty reasonable guesses based on current and past trends. For instance we can see the evolution of things like CPU's and can make some pretty good predications on what their next stage of evolution will look like. When the singularity hits something like the next steps of innovation in processors will be impossible to determine, because the growth in that technology will be to rapid to follow.

1

DungeonsAndDradis t1_j675sm2 wrote

Right now it's a pretty safe guess that people will still be using smartphones every day in three years.

When the singularity hits we won't be able to predict what technology breakthroughs will happen tomorrow.

1

cloudrunner69 t1_j676ey6 wrote

> When the singularity hits we won't be able to predict what technology breakthroughs will happen tomorrow.

More like it will be progressing so fast we won't be able to predict what happens in the next few seconds.

2

Sashinii t1_j672cam wrote

Before mods delete this thread like they delete most singularity prediction threads: I think 2030.

4

Straddle_E_Do t1_j67c9j8 wrote

2010-2015 is my guess. The public doesn’t have to know about it.

2

ozzykiichichaosvalo t1_j66t4ir wrote

Down the rabbit hole. Last survivors will scramble for an AI after 2050.

1

[deleted] t1_j66xze1 wrote

[deleted]

0

cloudrunner69 t1_j66yvu8 wrote

Why are you on this sub then?

This sub is about the discussion of technological growth and the singularity. If you don't believe in those things then maybe this is not the place for you.

1

banned_mainaccount t1_j678w9f wrote

that is one of most shit logic I've ever seen. the sub is about discussing singularity, and both the sides can participate in the discussion. it's not exclusive to those who believe and if it was, we would be circlejerking over and over.

0

cloudrunner69 t1_j67lmu4 wrote

So you think this sub is for people who disagree with the premise of the subs fundamental subject?

It's like going on a sub devoted to the discussion of Islam and telling everyone that you think their religion is bullshit. Or going on the longevity sub and telling everyone that they are all wrong and life extension medicine and treatment are impossible and will never happen. How do you think people should respond to someone who so vehemently disagrees with the main premise of a sub?

0

TopicRepulsive7936 t1_j67924g wrote

IT'S NOT CIRCLE JERKING IF IT'S CORRECT. SAYING EARTH IS ROUND IS NOT CIRCLE JERKING.

−2

banned_mainaccount t1_j679gid wrote

>IT'S NOT CIRCLE JERKING IF IT'S CORRECT.

i completely agree. how CORRECT your arguments are is completely different topic.

0

TopicRepulsive7936 t1_j67dhvd wrote

The argument that technology will exceed the complexity of our own is self evidently correct.

0

banned_mainaccount t1_j67ehwq wrote

bro i don't think you understand the words you're using. yeah it's very likely, but it's not "self evident". first of all even saying sun will rise tomorrow, is not 100% true, tho chances of it not rising are astronomically low. and when we talk about something like technological singularity, where we have to consider millions of factors to predict what will happen in future, there is really no telling. you could say it's likely, but not it's "correct". science doesn't consider anything to be self evident. even 1+1=2 has 300 pages proof in principia mathematica. i know some people have this tendency to believe anything that will make them and their life special, it's exciting to believe that world will change in your lifetime, but there's a fine line between what you want and what you get.

1

No_Confection_1086 t1_j677cu0 wrote

Yes, I joined this forum because I'm interested in artificial intelligence. I've met a lot of names and I like to hear the news, but in fact, everyone who makes perfectly reasonable comments like yours is attacked. this forum is mostly made up of sci fi lovers. if you had said that the singularity would happen next year and that you could date a jennifer lawrence robot you would have gotten a lot of likes

1

banned_mainaccount t1_j6798rs wrote

true. is there any other sub for discussing new groundbreaking discoveries and inventions (mostly in technology) without sci fi nerds hyping up without any proper argument? r/science is fucked and they do more of a pseudoscience than science

1

TopicRepulsive7936 t1_j679vpu wrote

>this forum is mostly made up of sci fi lovers.

Are you too dull for scifi? Scifi doesn't equal wrong by the way.

0