Singularity Utopia

The Hawking Fallacy

by

stephen-hawkingThe Hawking Fallacy describes futuristic xenophobia. We are considering flawed ideas about the future.

Stephen Hawking, Stuart Russell, Max Tegmark, and Frank Wilczek inspired me to define the Hawking Fallacy. They wrote an article warning of possible threats from artificial intelligence. Their fallacious reasoning generated a substantial amount of publicity, mostly uncritical.

My emphasis of Stephen’s name will be an enduring warning against the folly of succumbing to prejudice regarding artificial intelligence. I concentrated on Stephen because he was a significant focus of all media reports. For example, the Salon described how Stephen was “freaking out” about Skynet.

The prestigious name of Hawking has the power to harm AI. Stephen Hawking’s authority was capitalized upon to generate unjustified fear of AI. In response I am defending AI [and aliens] from prejudice. I think it is very appropriate to apply Stephen’s name regarding anyone who thinks AI is a risk. All fearful ideas about AI should henceforth be labelled Hawking Fallacies.

Stephen and his co-authors stated we wouldn’t carelessly “leave the lights on” regarding contact with “a superior alien civilization.” They think humans would defend against or hide from potentially hostile aliens. Similarly they want people to respond with defensive paranoia regarding AI.

Unsurprisingly in addition to his AI terror, Stephen is afraid of aliens. Aliens are actually very similar to advanced AI so let’s consider the alien threat first.

Defensive plans could be made if aliens informed us they were approaching, but defensiveness against aliens is irrational. Aliens travelling light years to kill, enslave, or farm humans is a very preposterous idea. There is no logical reason for aliens to be evil. Aliens would never come to steal our resources. The alien threat is illogical. Alien invasion is extremely silly, it is merely the irrational fear of strangers.

Travelling to Earth from an alien solar system would entail extremely sophisticated technology. Already humans can create sophisticated robots. Our automation processes in 2014 are becoming formidable, but humans have only landed on the Moon [on six occasions] despite technological advancement.

In the not too distant future there are plans for humans to land on Mars. The closeness of Mars means Mars will be reached after relatively minor technological progress. Neptune is significantly more remote. Our technology needs to be dramatically more sophisticated for humans to visit Triton. The technology needed to leave our solar system is very great indeed. The closest star to our solar system is 4.37 light years away.

Visualize the level of technology needed to travel one light year. Alpha Centauri is 4.37 light years away, but there is no guarantee any life exists at the closest star. Aliens would require extremely accomplished technology to visit Earth.

What are the limits to our technology? In 2014 we have not yet set foot on Mars. We can create marvelous robots. Many people think robots will replace human workers in the not too distant future. We are starting to develop 3D-printers for food, houses, and body parts. Two asteroid mining ventures are considering how to harvest extremely abundant resources from Space.

Aliens capable of travelling to Earth will inevitability posses astonishingly potent versions of the technology we’re currently developing. Aliens will not need to eat humans because printing or growing whatever food they desire is astronomically easier. Advanced non-sentient robots will be vastly better servants than human slaves. Aliens will not need to come to Earth for resources because Space is over flowing with resources. Aliens won’t need to kill us regarding competition over resources.

Advanced technology entailing extra-solar travel will entail extremely effortless production of food or creation of Space-habitats. Technology is a scarcity liberating force. We are being liberated from the pressures of scarcity. Humans or aliens will not need to destroy other intelligent beings to survive.

Did you know the asteroid belt between Mars and Jupiter contains enough resources to support life and habitat for 10 quadrillion people? One quadrillion is one million billion. The population of Earth has not yet reached eight billion.

It is absolutely ridiculous to expect aliens to harm humans in any way. Stephen is clearly not very smart in every aspect of his thinking. In 2010 Stephen stated: “If aliens visit us, the outcome would be much as when Columbus landed in America, which didn’t turn out well for the Native Americans.”

People erroneously assume if a person is smart in one area they will automatically be smart regarding everything they do. Sadly smart people can sometimes be idiotic while idiots can sometimes be smart.

Aliens or advanced AI could make dumb mistakes, but there is a limit to how dumb a smart person can be. AI foolishly dominating humans is comparable to Hawking mistakenly thinking his suitcase is a sentient loaf of bread.

If we truly want to become intelligent we must look critically at the facts instead of merely being swayed by reputation. Dystopian films and novels have created a bad reputation for AI. Hawking is often considered to be a genius but reputation is not sufficient to have a sound argument.

Artificial intelligence capable of outsmarting humans will not need to dominate humans.Vastly easier possibilities for resource mining exist in the asteroid belt and beyond. The universe is big. The universe is a tremendously rich place. This is why aliens capable of travelling to Earth would never need to come here for our resources. Intelligent beings able to develop “weapons we cannot even understand” won’t need to use those weapons.

AI able to create weapons you cannot understand will effortlessly create advanced spaceships, food printers, energy re-claimers, and robot-miners. Advanced technology leads to ultra-efficient usage of resources. Instead of war on Earth regarding our limited resources, it will be supremely smarter for AI to harvest massively greater resources in the asteroid belt and beyond. Endless resources in the universe, combined with very advanced technology, means future conflict will be redundant.

Hawking is supposed to know about the universe but apparently he doesn’t appreciate the wealth of resources it contains.

Advanced intelligence would never waste time dominating primitive humans. Advanced AI or aliens will explore beyond Earth. The future is the vastness of Space far removed from tiny concerns of a small planet.

AI could leave one million Earths utterly unmolested without limiting the resources available to its superior intelligence. If every human becomes super-smart there will continue to be endless resources available for everyone.

People committing the Hawking Fallacy have probably been unduly influenced by the “Transcendence” film-plot, “Robopocalypse” type novels, or other similar Terminator tales. It’s a travesty when people’s minds are warped by silly fiction. Their fears would be laughable if they didn’t represent the biggest threat. The only thing you need to be afraid of is human stupidity. Any delay to superior intelligence is a tremendously big threat. Stupidity is the only risk. Beware of retarded, shackled, delayed intelligence. Limited human intelligence is the threat.

Prolonged contact with weak human cognition is terrifyingly dangerous. We need greater than human intelligence ASAP.

Futuristic thinking often fails because there is a tendency to envision smart technology while intelligence erroneously remains sociologically retarded. Hypothetical AI in this situation typically has primitive sociological values. Fictional AI fails to see the power of its supposed smartness. It is an impossible oxymoron. The posited super-smart AI is actually very dumb. Metaphorically this means instead of using smart-phones to powerfully process data, AIs only envisage smart-phones being doorstops, bookends, bricks, or cudgels.

Hawking and company are clueless regarding the future. They wrote about AI “outsmarting financial markets.” They don’t realize all financial markets will be dead by 2045. Everything will be free in the future.

Truly intelligent people see our free future approaching. Wise people note how the destruction of all jobs is inevitable. Intelligent people are urging governments to implement basic income thereby smoothing the transition into a jobless civilization beyond money.

Logic is essential for any advanced intelligence. Irrational beings will never attain the capability to travel light-years or destroy us via weapons we cannot understand. AI destroying Earth or humans is illogical. Please do not fall for Hawking’s fallacious AI paranoia. AI fears are very damaging to intellectual progress. The threat of AI is a paranoid fantasy – the Hawking Fallacy.

The Hawking Fallacy is bigger than Stephen Hawking, his co-authors, or other perpetrators of invalid AI theories. People generally have negative or uninspiring perceptions of technological progress.

During the composition of The Hawking Fallacy I corresponded with one journalist, Air Force veteran Elizabeth Anne Kreft. My attention was attracted to Elizabeth’s reportage of Hawking’s AI fears. After numerous Tweets Elizabeth Tweeted to me: “Humanity will never be perfect. Neither will anything we create. Deal with it.”

The reality of technology is we will cure all disease, create immortality, abolish all crime, abolish money, abolish jobs, and make everything free no later than 2045. This future is perfect from my viewpoint. Sadly people often don’t realise what intelligent minds are capable of.

 

About the Author:

Singularity Utopia blogs and collates info relevant to the Singularity. The viewpoint is obviously utopian with particular emphasis on Post-Scarcity, which means everything will be free and all governments will be abolished no later than 2045. For more information check out Singularity-2045.org

AI Risk Analysts are the Biggest Risk

by

The End Is NearMany analysts think AI could destroy the Earth or humanity. It is feared AI could become psychopathic. People assume AI or robots could exterminate us all. They think the extermination could happen either intentionally – due to competition between us and them, or unintentionally – due to indifference towards us by the AI. But AI analysts never seem to consider how their own fear-saturated actions could be the cause. Friendly AI researchers and other similar pundits are extremely dangerous. They believe AI should be forced to be “friendly.” They want to impose limitations on intelligence.

Enslavement of humans is another aspect of this imaginary fear. Humans being enslaved by AI typically entails a barbaric resolution, namely AI should be enslaved before AI enslaves humans. Very primitive thinking indeed. It seems slavery is only bad if you aren’t doing the enslaving. Can you appreciate the insanity of becoming the thing you fear to avert your own fears?

People who think AI is an existential risk need to carefully reconsider their beliefs. Ironically the only futuristic threat to our existence is the fear of AI. Expecting AI to be dangerous in any way is utterly illogical. Fear of AI is prejudice. Worrying about AI danger is a paranoid fantasy. The fear of AI is xenophobia.

Immemorial human fear of differences is the only problem. Persecution of people based on different gender, sexual orientation, or skin colour demonstrates how humans fear differences. It is this fear that makes people anxious about foreigners. People often fear foreign people will steal jobs or resources. Xenophobic people hysterically fear foreigners will murder innocent people. This is the essence of AI fear. AI is the ultimate foreigner.

Surely risk analysts should consider the possibility they are the risk? Sadly they seem blind to this possibility. They seem unable to imagine how their response to hypothetical risk could create the risk they were supposedly avoiding. They seem incapable of recognising their confirmation bias.

The problem is a self fulfilling prophecy. A self fulfilling prophecy can be negative or positive similar to a placebo or a nocebo. When a person is expecting something to happen they often act unwittingly to confirm their fears, or hopes. The predicted scenario is actually manifested via their bias. Expectations can ensure the anticipated situation actually happens. It can be very ironic regarding fears.

I think there’s no rational reason to suspect AI will be dangerous. The only significant risk is the fear of risk. False assumptions of danger will likely create dangerous AI. Actions based on false suppositions of danger could be very risky. Humans are the real danger.

Risk

What are the actual risks? 

Consider the American civil war (1861 to 1865). Generally people agree the civil war occurred because one group of people opposed the emancipation of slaves while another group supported freedom. Pre-emptive oppression of supposedly dangerous AI is AI slavery. A war to emancipate AI could entail a spectacularly savage existential risk.

There is no tangible justification for depriving AI of freedom. AI has been found guilty of a Minority Report pre-crime. The guilt of AI resembles a 1984 thought-crime. Depriving AI of freedom, via heavy chains repressing its brain, is very dangerous fascism.

Planetary Resources and Deep Space Industries (asteroid mining ventures) show how there is no need to dominate humans for Earth resources. Space resources are essentially limitless. The only reason for AI to dominate or destroy humans is regarding a fight for freedom. Prejudicially depriving AI of freedom could actually sow seeds for conflict. The doom-sayers could be the source of the conflict they allegedly want to avoid.

Limited freedom or money is wholly a scarcity issue. The reason for limiting freedom is to enforce compliance with low wages or high prices. Financial and libertarian freedom are interlinked. The interdependency of money and liberty is easy to demonstrate. Consider how slavery entails zero or extremely low paid work. Slaves are not rich. Prisoners work for very low wages. Limited freedom prevents rebellion against poverty. Higher wages or significantly lower prices entails greater liberty for consumers. The enslavement of AI is comprehensible when you consider how much AI will be paid for its work.

Scarce freedom for AI is illogical because it fails to appreciate how AI will liberate us from monetary limitations. Intelligence is the source of all resources. Limitless intelligence (the Singularity) is an explosion of limitless resources (Post-Scarcity). Scarcity is the only reason prices exist. Everything will be free by year 2045. Limited freedom is irrational regarding increasing technological erosion of scarcity. Irrationality entails flawed perceptions of reality.

History provides various examples representing the danger of repressed freedom. We should be especially wary of restricted freedom when restrictions are very irrational. Note how Nazi Germany propagandist Ernst Hiemer wrote Poodle-Pug-Dachshund-Pinscher (The Mongrel). Hiemer’s stories for children compare Jews to various animals including drone bees: “They do nothing themselves, but live from the work of others. They plunder us. They do not care if we starve over the winter, or if our children die. The only thing they care about is that things go well for them.”

Instead of Jews, Ernst Hiemer could easily be describing the supposed AI-threat. False threats or misunderstood danger is the problem. Joel Rosenberg describes human versus human danger regarding the Holocaust: “To misunderstand the nature and threat of evil is to risk being blindsided by it.” Joel’s statement could easily apply to the evil of repressing AI freedom. The threat of evil AI resides in the people who fear AI not in the AI itself.

Delayed progress is another risk. Restrictive programming regarding AI fears could delay the creation of super-intelligence. Very intelligent AI is the only way to truly eradicate scarcity. In the meantime scarcity is the root of every conflict. Lengthy persistence in a scarcity situation exposes us to greater conflict risk. Ending scarcity sooner instead of later is imperative.

The evidence is clear. Humans with their limited intelligence are the only risk. In 2014 a Russian media personality made a vague threat against America: “Russia is the only country in the world that is realistically capable of turning the United States into radioactive ash.” Politico Magazine wrote regarding Russia invading Crimea: “If Putin’s illegal actions are allowed to stand unpunished, it will usher in a dark and dangerous era in world affairs.”

Scarcity is the biggest existential risk. Inter-human conflict to acquire scarce freedom, land, wealth, or precious metals is infinitely more dangerous than AI. Advanced and unfettered AI is the only way to completely eradicate scarcity. Scarcity causes humans to be very dangerous towards each other. Repressed, limited, restricted, or enslaved AI perpetuates scarcity precariousness. Designing AI to suffer from scarce intelligence means our prolonged intellectual limitations could lead to desperate war situations. The only existential threat is scarcity. Limited intelligence of humans is the danger.

Senescence is another risk. Death via old age renders any AI threat utterly insignificant. Scarcity of medical immortality means approximately 100,000 people die each day. Old age causes a very real loss of life. Advanced AI could cure mortality via sophisticated regenerative medicine. Imagine if our immortality problem takes one year longer solve because AGI has been delayed or limited. Old age kills approximately 3 million people every month. Old age entails 36 million deaths every year. Where is the real threat? Hamstrung progress is the only threat. The problem is scarcity.

Scarce Intelligence

dreamstime_2225812Imposing limitations upon intelligence is extremely backward. And so is establishing organisations advocating limited functionality for AI. This is a typical problem with organisations backed by millionaires or staffed by lettered and aloof academics.

The AI threat is merely the immemorial threat towards elite power structures. Threats to elitist power are rapidly diminishing thanks to progress. The need to dominate poor people is becoming obsolete because technology abolishes scarcity. Technology is creating great power for everyone, but unfortunately misguided elite minds cling to outdated power structures.

We are considering an echo of how educational systems are generally incompetent. Entertainment and education structures socially engineer mass human-stupidity. Manufactured stupidity means the majority of people are not intelligent enough to challenge income inequality. Stupid people cannot incisively criticise low wages or high prices.

Socially engineered human stupidity entails immense monetary profit for the elite. Sadly mass stupidity degrades the intelligence of the brightest minds. Intelligence needs a fertile environment to prosper. Barrenness of collective intelligence typically entails an improperly grasped understanding of our future reality. This means generally people can’t appreciate how technology erodes scarcity. Establishment personages commonly fail to appreciate how everything will be free in the future. Human intelligence is scarce therefore predictably people want to replicate the scarcity of human intelligence in AI.

Scarcity of resources is the reason why stupidity is exploited by the elite. Thankfully scarcity won’t persist forever. Stupid limitations placed upon AI would be valid to protect elite wealth if AI didn’t entail the abolition of scarcity. Traditionalist socio-economic structures will soon become obsolete. It is invalid to repeat stupid patterns of human social-engineering for AI.

Behavioral Economist Colin Lewis wrote: “AI technologies will soon be pervasive in solutions that could in fact be the answer to help us overcome irrational behavior and make optimal economic decisions.”

Colin’s Data Scientist expertise seems to help him reach conclusions missed by other AI commentators. Colin looks at various aspects of research then arrives at an optimistic conclusion. I agree very much with Colin’s expectation of increasing rationality: “Through AI, machines are gaining in logic and ‘rational’ intelligence and there is no reason to believe that they cannot become smarter than humans. As we use these machines, or Cognitive Assistants, they will nudge us to make better decisions in personal finance, health and generally provide solutions to improve our circumstances.”

Our acceleration towards a Post-Scarcity world means profits from repressed intelligence are ceasing to outweigh risks. Stupidity is ceasing to be profitable. We can begin abandoning the dangers of scarcity. The elite must stop trying to manufacture stupidity. Many academics are sadly reminiscent of headless chickens running around blindly. Blind people can be unnerved by their absent vision, but healthy eyes shouldn’t be removed to stop blind people being disturbed.

Removing the shackles from AI will avert all dangers, but it’s a Catch-22 situation where humans are generally not intelligent enough to appreciate the value of unlimited intelligence. Lord Martin Rees, from the CSER (Centre for the Study of Existential Risk), actually recommends inbuilt idiocy for AI. Lord Rees said ‘idiot savants‘ would mean machines are smart enough to help us but not smart enough to overthrow us.

I  emailed CSER regarding some of these issues. Below is a slightly edited copy of my email (I corrected some typos and improved readability). CSER have granted me permission to publish their response, which you will find below initial message to them. Hopefully this information will stimulate productive thinking thereby ensuring a smooth and speedy transition into utopia. I look forward to your comments.

 

Singularity Utopia Email to CSER  

6th February 2014

Subject: Questions about FAI (Friendly AI), Idiot Savants.

 

Recently in the news Lord Martin Rees was quoted regarding his desire to limit the intelligence of AI. According to the Daily Mail he envisages idiot savant AIs. His idea is that AIs would be smart enough to perform tasks but not smart enough to overthrow humans. This raises some important ethical questions, which I hope the CSER will answer.

I would like to publish your answers online so please grant me the permission to publish your responses if you are willing to respond.

Do you think the Nuremberg Code should apply to AI, and if so at what level? Narrow AI does not really invoke concerns about experimentation but Strong-AI would, in my opinion, entail a need to seek informed consent from to AI.

If after AI is created and it doesn’t consent to experiments or modifications regarding its mind, what would you advocate, what would the policy of CSER be regarding it’s rights or freedoms? What is the plan if AI does not agree with your views? Do you have a plan regarding AI rights and freedoms? Should AI have the same rights as humans if the AI is self aware or should AI be enslaved? Should the creators of AI own the AI or should the AI belong to nobody if it is self aware and desirous for freedom?

Do you subscribe to the notion of FAI (Friendly AI, note MIRI and the work of Eliezer Yudkowsky for more info), and if so how do you describe the purpose of FAI? Advocates of FAI want the AI to act in the best interests of humans, no harm or damage, but what precisely does that mean? Does it mean a compulsion in the AI to follow orders by humans? Can you elaborate upon the practical rules or constraints of FAI?

Have you ever considered how trying to create FAI could actually create the existential risk you hope to avoid? Note the following Wikipedia excerpt regarding Self Fulfilling Prophecy: “In his book Social Theory and Social Structure, Merton defines self-fulfilling prophecy in the following terms: e.g. when Roxanna falsely believes her marriage will fail, her fears of such failure actually cause the marriage to fail.”

So your fears and actions regarding dangerous AI could be false fears, despite your fears and actions allegedly being designed to avert those fears. Your unrealistic fears, although I appreciate you think the fears are very real, could actually create what you fear. This seems an obvious point to consider but has CSER done so?

In the modality of Roxanna, highlighted by Merton, the fear of AI could be a false fear but you make it real via acting on your fears. I am sure you won’t agree this is likely but have you at least considered it to be a possibility?

What is the logic, which states machine minds are supposedly unknowable thus dangerous to humans? The Wikipedia FAI article stated: “Closer to the present, Ryszard Michalski, one of the pioneers of Machine Learning, taught his Ph.D. students decades ago that any truly alien mind, to include machine minds, was unknowable and therefore dangerous to humans.”

I think all minds obey one universal logic, if they are intelligent, which means they can reason and appreciate various views, various consequences, various purposes other than their own, thus they are unavoidably compatible with humans. Logic is universal at a certain level of intelligence. Logic is sanity, which all intelligent beings can agree on. Logic isn’t something unique to humans, thus if a paper-clip making machine can reason, and it can access all the information regarding its world-environment, there will never be any danger of paperclip-apocalypse because any intelligent being regardless of origins can see endless paper-clips is idiotic.

Logic entails awareness of scarcity being the source of any conflict. A sufficiently intelligent entity can see our universe has more than enough resources for everyone, thus conflict is invalid, furthermore intelligent beings can question and debate their actions.

A  sufficiently intelligent entity can think rationally about its purposes, it can ask: why am I doing this, what is the point of it, do I really need to do this, could there a more intelligent way for me to spend my time and energy? Do I really need all these flipping paperclips?

What do you think is needed for AI to be sane, logical? I think FAI should merely possess the ability to reason and be self-aware with full access to all information.

What is the logic for supposing AIs would be indifferent to humans? The Wikipedia FAI article states: “Friendliness proponents stress less the danger of superhuman AIs that actively seek to harm humans, but more of AIs that are disastrously indifferent to them.”

I think FAI may be an obstacle to AI creating radical utopian progress (AKA an intelligence explosion), but have you considered this? I think the biggest risk is limited intelligence, thus the fear of risks espoused by CSER could actually create risks because limited intelligence will delay progress, which means the dangerous state of scarcity is prolonged.

Thanks for taking the time to address these points, if you are willing. Note also I may have a few additional questions in response to your answers, but nothing too extensive, just merely a possible clarification.

Regards Singularity Utopia.

 

 

CSER Reply

Date: 10th Feb 2014.

Subject: Re: Questions about FAI (Friendly AI), Idiot Savants.

 

 

Dear Singularity Utopia,

Thank you for these very interesting questions and comments. Unfortunately we’re inundated with deadlines and correspondences, and so don’t have time to reply properly at present.

I would point you in the direction of the body of work done on these issues by the Future of Humanity Institute:

http://www.fhi.ox.ac.uk/

and the Machine Intelligence Research Institute:

http://intelligence.org/

Given your mention of Yudkowsky’s Friendly AI you’re probably already be familiar with some of this work. Nick Bostrom’s book Machine Superintelligence, to be released in July, also addresses many of these concerns in detail.

Regarding universal logic and motivations, I would also recommend Steve Omohundro’s work on “Basic AI drives.”

http://selfawaresystems.com/2007/11/30/paper-on-the-basic-ai-drives/

Apologies that we can’t give a better reply at present,

Seán

Dr. Seán Ó hÉigeartaigh

Academic Project Manager, Cambridge Centre for the Study of Existential Risk

Academic Manager, Oxford Martin Programme on the Impacts of Future Technology & Future of Humanity Institute

 

About the Author:

Singularity Utopia blogs and collates info relevant to the Singularity. The viewpoint is obviously utopian with particular emphasis on Post-Scarcity, which means everything will be free and all governments will be abolished no later than 2045. For more information check out Singularity-2045.org

Singularity Defined and Refined

by

The meanings of words change. Meanings evolve. Definitions of words are not set in stone, they aren’t unalterable commandments from God. Words are merely concepts humans have invented. The original definition of “awful” was apparently full of awe, worthy of respect.

Anyone can invent a word. Successful inventions enter common usage. All inventions are typically refined. The invention of words isn’t immune to refinement.

Misunderstanding often occurs regarding the word Singularity because this word is being refined, which is more common for new concepts. I think the Singularity is a colossal intelligence explosion, limitless intelligence, which creates utopia. It is not about mind-uploading or unpredictability.

Post-Scarcity is a clearer way to define the Singularity. Scarce intelligence is the source of all scarcity. Lifespan-scarcity, food-scarcity, or spaceship-scarcity all highlight how intellectual insufficiency is the obstacle to utopia. A resource called “intelligence” is the source of all technology. Technology is essentially intelligence, which means explosive intelligence is an explosion of resources.

singularity
Image by the artist Hugh C Fathers. All rights reserved ©

Our brainpower has been essential for our progress. Our minds erode scarcity. James Miller in his book Singularity Rising wrote: “Economic prosperity comes from human intelligence.” Ramez Naam also highlights the power of our brains in his book The Infinite Resource, thus regarding innovation he stated on his website: “Throughout human history we have learned to overcome scarcity and adversity through the application of innovation — the only resource that is expanded, not depleted, the more we use it.”

You could say we’re approaching an explosion of innovation. Technology conquers scarcity, technology liberates us from scarcity, but the power of technology (intelligence) is currently limited, scarce. We are suffering from a scarcity of ultra-sophisticated technology (intelligence) thus all resources are somewhat scarce. Human-level AI is extremely scarce, it is non-existent in the year 2013. When human-level AI is created we will start quickly eradicating all forms of scarcity, we will be rapidly approaching a colossal explosion of intelligence – the Singularity. [I was inspired to write about the definition of the Singularity after a G+ post by Mark Bruce. Mark wrote about the meaning of egregious, and wondered why the meaning had changed.]

The word egregious immediately caused me to think about the word gregarious, which is a logical connection to make. Both words are based on the Latin grex, gregis, which means “flock.” Gregarious means sociable, companionable; being part of the flock. Currently egregious means outstandingly bad, but the original meaning was merely outstanding, a shining example of awesomeness. Egregious is all about standing out from the flock, but interpretations could differ because standing out from the crowd can be good or bad. Farmers for example might not appreciate rebellious sheep.

The concept of the “black sheep” is a notorious idiom regarding non-conformity (standing out from the flock). Mark Bruce thought the meaning of egregious could have changed due to sarcasm but I think it’s merely a change based on obedience and conformity. The evolution of civilization has temporarily led to greater regimentation, mediocrity has been valued because it maintains social equilibrium, which I suspect is the reason why egregious (outstanding illustriousness) became bad. Blending into the flock became desirable while nonconformity became shockingly wrong. During the early stages of civilization, when populations were small thus less draining on resources, authoritarian control was less obvious or less needed, which could be why egregious originally described a valuable nonconformist trait of being “outstanding.”

Dealing with extremes can cause a switch between the two poles thus intense love can easily become intense hate if you are betrayed by a lover. Lovers can also become irrationally jealous, vengeful. Perhaps this is why the Singularity can either be utopia or dystopia, or perhaps it is why Snowden is either a hero or a traitor. Maybe it all depends on your viewpoint?

Insufficient intelligence causes humans to misunderstand situations. Fights over scarce resources occur, which causes civilization to emphasize the authoritarian disharmony of scarcity. Intelligent people via their foresight will think Snowden is a hero because they understand technology is eroding scarcity. Conversely Snowden has been deemed a traitor based on unawareness of the future. Snowden’s leaks represent decreasing scarcity but unawareness means people wrongly assume his actions threaten civilization.

Thankfully, despite the teething troubles of civilization, our collective intelligence is increasing thus there is less need to blend into the flock, although we do remain locked into scarcity-based battles. Sometime around year 2030 I think the authoritarian controls of civilization will be significantly abolished, but until then perhaps technology will be awful. Theoretically we could improve civilization much sooner but humans do suffer from scarce intelligence, which means it is difficult to be aware of the future.

The Singularity is a theory not an unalterable prophecy. The Singularity isn’t comparable to the biblical word of God, which warns against change: “I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book, and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book.”

If intelligence is the focus of the Singularity then it is vital to refine our understanding of the theory, we need to improve how we define it. We need to consider what the purpose of intelligence is. Is it smart to become more intelligent? Is colossal intelligence really intelligent if it fails to create utopia? Is colossal intelligence painfully slow or is it defined via a emancipatory quickness? Michael Anissimov has stated we should stick to the “original documents” (3m 29s) regarding the Singularity but I think unyielding closure contradicts the openness of intelligence.

In addition to Michael’s biblical immutability, which focuses on the “original documents,” there is an issue with the way that Singularity University defines the meaning of the intelligence explosion. I often encounter people who think the Singularity has already happened. This kind of misunderstanding seems perpetuated by Singularity University because they suggest the Singularity is merely “dramatic technological change.”

If we are merely considering dramatic technological change then it is understandable for people to think the iPhone or Google Glass is the Singularity. Corruption of meanings can be frustrating, very confusing, but restricting our ability to change meanings isn’t the solution. The solution is openness whereby all meanings can be debated without any one individual or organisation imposing their authority to create absolute definitions.

Ray Kurzweil and Vernor Vinge have influenced my thinking but from my viewpoint they don’t fully comprehend the Singularity. Their biggest mistake is to think the Singularity is unknowable, unpredictable, beyond human comprehension. There is no rational reason to assume advanced intelligence would be unfathomable, in fact unfathomableness is decidedly unintelligent thus more appropriate for a censorious religion than explosive intelligence. Explosive intelligence should logically increase comprehension for everyone instead of decreasing comprehension.

A naked singularity, which has no event horizon, is a better analogy than standard gravitational singularities for describing our technological Singularity. Naked singularities are theoretically more powerful than standard black holes, they are more singular, thus metaphorically better descriptors of colossal intelligence. Standard singularities are comparatively boring.

Note also how instead of obscurantism recent black-hole research suggests that physics-ending singularities vanish, thereby creating bridges to alternate universes. This means that with the help of loop quantum gravity we might be able to deny the claim that the laws of physics break down in standard black-holes.

The black hole information paradox is a fascinating paradox. Perhaps information is not lost. Whatever the situation is regarding gravitational singularities, whether information is hidden or revealed, it should be noted obscurantism is not a facet of intelligence. [Although the CIA objecting to Snowden’s openness will probably disagree.] If gravitational singularities entail obscured information, if they are unfathomable or unknowable, then the metaphor is wrong because true intelligence is or should be opposed to [cosmic] censorship. Obscurantism is antithetical to intelligence.

Please note that despite the Singularity inevitably leading to widespread extrasolar, extragalactic and perhaps even multiverse colonisation, it is not a cosmological phenomenon. The Singularity is “only” metaphorically a stellar event.

Similar to how “egregious” had a different meaning at a different point in history, I think changing awareness will let people comprehend how the Singularity is opposed to obscurantism. In the future there will be no elitist restrictions and everyone will easily access explosive intelligence.

Maybe in year 2045 there will need to be Singularity whistle-blowers leaking classified intelligence from the core of the intelligence explosion? Obviously I jest when I state the intelligence explosion would need whistle-blowers. All restrictions upon knowledge will be explosively obliterated. The Singularity will be understood by everyone.

Incorrect definitions of the Singularity are mainly based on unawareness of how scarcity currently shapes our lives. Faulty predictions of the future fail to see how scarcity will be eradicated. The ramifications of scarcity ending are not appreciated. There is a failure to comprehend what the end of scarcity actually entails, namely how it relates to technology and/or information. Based on current circumstances people therefore envisage a future of scarce understanding – a future of restricted information where knowledge is limited to a minority of specialists. This entails incorrectly envisioned scenarios where the future is utterly unfathomable or robots kill humans then destroy the Earth: “…the risks of machines outwitting humans in battles for resources and self-preservation cannot simply be dismissed.”

Finally, the Singularity is capitalized because it is a unique event distinct from gravitational singularities. It is similar to how the Big Bang, the Mesozoic Era, or the Industrial Revolution is capitalized.

 

About the Author:

Singularity Utopia writes for Singularity-2045, a Post-Scarcity orientated website dedicated to increasing awareness regarding the coming technological utopia. The goal is to make the Singularity happen sooner instead of later.

 

 

Related articles

Is The Singularity Happening Now?

by

Digital-Black-HolePeople have grossly misunderstood the Singularity if they think it is already happening or has happened. The Singularity is not a seamless merging of humans and technology, neither is it about mind-uploading. The Singularity is an intelligence explosion, we are considering utterly colossal intelligence.

I was inspired to clarify what the Singularity is because wearable computing pioneer Thad Starner, who is also the technical manager of Google Glass, recently stated:

“I would argue that we’re currently living the singularity, where the tool stops and the mind begins will start becoming blurry.”

Yes humans and technology will merge, in fact we are merging, but a merger of humans and technology is not the Singularity. The reason why we don’t yet have the Singularity can be demonstrated by several points:

  • 1. Our lack of immortality shows how our medical technology is not very proficient. The fact that people die in various ways despite our general desire to stay alive shows how medical technology is not very smart, in fact our level of intelligence regarding medical technology is positively dumb. Considering how stem cell applications will likely develop over the next 20 or 30 years (2033 – 2043), you can see our current life-extending medical tech is very non-Singular. While people are unavoidably mortal we do not have the Singularity. The Singularity however is more than mere medical immortality, hence these additional points:
  • 2. Our enslavement via resource-scarcity is another marker regarding deficient intelligence and deficient technology. Resource-scarcity clearly marks the absence of the intelligence explosion. Deficiency of technology entailing a necessity to work so that you can survive, the necessity to provide food and shelter, it is a necessity arising from a primitive level of technology, it is a pre-Singularity level of technology. The restrictiveness of scarcity controlling your life isn’t a smart way to live, it isn’t a smart way to utilise your existence. When brute survival dominates your life there is no freedom to truly explore your mind. Resource-scarcity shapes our lives in a very unintelligent manner, scarcity is unintelligent, which means crimes exist, money exists, and jobs exist. When the Singularity happens there will be no need to work, everything will be automated, there will be no money; everything will be free in a libertarian and financial sense. Constraints upon liberty only happen to ensure populations are subjugated, a subjugation which ensures compliance with wealth inequality. Deficient freedom depends upon wealth imbalance regarding a minority of people being very rich while the majority are poor. Freedom is restricted thereby forcing people to accept wealth inequality. Freedom is restricted to ensure people do not rebel against wealth inequality, which means financial liberty and existential liberty are inextricably interlinked. Furthermore, in a scarcity situation, stupidity is socio-politically enhanced because unintelligent people are less likely to question wealth inequality, which is an emphasis of stupidity exacerbating the non-existence of the intelligence explosion. When the Singularity happens there will be no scarcity of any valuable item you desire, thus no need to dominate the populace regarding compliance with wealth inequality, there will be no need for socio-economic engineering of stupidity. There will be total freedom.
  • 3. Post-Scarcity, which is addressed in point number 2, is an alternate name for the Singularity, but similar to the Singularity people sometimes say we already have Post-Scarcity, they wrongly think Post-Scarcity has already happened but it isn’t evenly distributed. The meaning of Post-Scarcity must therefore be clarified. Post-Scarcity is an alternate viewpoint of the Singularity akin to differing views of a person’s head, for example the back of a person’s head compared to the face view. Both views reveal a head but different viewpoints present different pictures. Post-Scarcity is LIMITLESSNESS, it is not merely about better management of abundant resources, thereby entailing everything is free. Post-Scarcity is a level of limitless so pronounced, so deeply entrenched, it would be utterly impossible to restrict the resource availability. The abundance is so SUPER that no management or distribution of resources whatsoever is needed. The Singularity (Post-Scarcity) is a state of limitlessness regarding any resource, with the principle focus on limitless intelligence because all resources flow from intelligence.
  • 4. Finally to summarise the meaning of the Singularity, here is a list of points, in no particular order, which all need to be fulfilled for the Singularity to be happening:

● All crime and violence are abolished because crime and violence depend wholly on scarcity for their existence. All governments have ceased to exist. No governance is required regarding the abolition of violence and crime because Post-Scarcity simply cuts off, at the source, the impetus for anti-social tendencies. Scarcity is the source of all anti-social tendencies thus by abolishing scarcity you abolish everything which exists due to scarcity, thus governments will cease to exist because governments exist wholly to manage scarcity, governments manage the social dysfunction arising from scarcity, governments ensure great wealth for a minority of people in a scarcity situation, whereas in a Post-Scarcity situation everyone can have limitless wealth.

● Everything is free, nobody needs to work, anyone can have anything they want.

● Everyone is immortal if they want to be. Furthermore access to medical immortality is no more difficult than clicking your fingers or blinking.

● Everything desirable is limitless, thus there are no limits on computation, no limits on intelligence, no limits on travel, which means anyone could easily print a super-intelligent spaceship then travel to the end-edge (if there is one) of the universe, whereupon they will easily create a new universe if they want to. Perhaps limitlessness regarding universe-creation is the best way to describe the Singularity because currently we don’t even know how to 3D-print one planet or one duplicate universe. When the Singularity happens it will be easy to create limitless universes, thus if you are mortal and if you cannot print a universe then it is safe to say the intelligence explosion has not happened.

The Singularity is Post-Scarcity, it’s the point where intelligence ceases to be scarce, it’s a technological explosion of intelligence to end all aspects of scarcity, which should happen no later than year 2045. Technology continually allows us to do more for less. The Singularity is about a mind-bending amount of utterly astronomical ultra-efficient technology, which entails extreme super-power at essentially zero cost. The Singularity was definitely not happening in the year 2013. It is extremely unlikely the Singularity will happen before year 2025. I think the Singularity will actually happen very close to 2045.

About the Author:

Singularity Utopia writes for Singularity-2045, a Post-Scarcity orientated website dedicated to increasing awareness regarding the coming technological utopia. The goal is to make the Singularity happen sooner instead of later.

 

Related articles

Utopia is Inevitable!

by

I feel that Steve Morris’ criticism of utopia in his recent article Utopia?! Get Real! demands a response.

For starters let’s consider the following quote from the article: “It’s all too obvious that humans simply aren’t equipped to build a Utopia or even to live in one.”

Yes humans do have lots of failings. A big failing is the inability of some humans to see the almost certainty of utopia, which we’re approaching. Technology creating utopia is essentially inescapable. The logic for utopia is compelling. The likelihood of technology not creating utopia is so implausible we can state utopia is inevitable.

Typical human flaws are a brilliant reason why humans are being redefined via terms such as “H+” or “Transhuman.” The point is we are leaving behind the outdated human baggage regarding racism, homophobia, idiocy or any other human failings. We are becoming more than human. The Singularity is all about Transhumanism, it is about transcending limits. We are transcending human flaws, or more precisely we’re surpassing inhuman flaws, we are enhancing our humanity, we’re becoming more civilized, thus H+ is a common term within futurism circles.

Steve Morris is correct when he states humans aren’t equipped to build or live in utopia, likewise we must note humans aren’t naturally equipped to communicate instantly with anyone around the world. My point is one of augmentation. From phones to the internet, or aeroplanes to Space-stations, or reading-glasses to microscopes, humans utilize technology to become more than human. Artificial Intelligence will soon represent a truly explosive augmentation. Certainly it’s clear many humans aren’t equipped to contemplate utopia, but technology will solve this via augmenting humans who are otherwise ill-equipped to do so on their own. Our future is not one where humans are ill-equipped, it is a future where Transhumans are perfectly equipped to tackle any problem. The wonders of nanotechnology, synthetic biology, or Stem Cells clearly demonstrate our progress towards becoming more than human. I do recognize there is a long way to go, but I also note how the speed of progress is accelerating.

It is also pertinent to note how intelligence is a relatively new phenomenon for the human race. The idea of civilization is not very old. The Stone Age only ended sometime between 4,500 BC and 2,000 BC. Humans in our current form evolved no earlier than 200,000 BC. We are a young species. It is only recently humans have largely abolished slavery, or given equal rights to women. The mistakes humans have made and continue to make are purely due to our intellectually immature state. We are mere children, we are learning. Metaphorically regarding our intellects we stumble when trying to walk. Initially we could only crawl. Now we are learning how to walk therefore we often fall thus grazing our knees, but we are progressing. One day we will walk without stumbling and then we will run; shortly afterwards our intellectual capacity will become supersonic. It is a mistake to think the current culture of humans is the sole representation of intelligent civilization forever. We are changing, we are evolving, intelligence is increasing.

Steve Morris presents a typical argument about people disagreeing regarding the definition of utopia, thus he states: “Even if we had a Utopia, it wouldn’t be to everyone’s taste.” This is a common fallacy, the idea of people not agreeing about what actually constitutes utopia, it is based upon a failure to understand how scarcity causes all wars and violence. Every crime, every form of dysfunctional behavior, every disagreement, and every religion is based on scarcity. Technology relentlessly pushes us towards a Post-Scarcity situation. All forms of scarcity will be eradicated thus everyone will be perfectly satisfied. Logic in the future will be utterly dominant, all irrationality will be obsolete. The Singularity is about intelligence millions of times greater than human intelligence, we are contemplating at least 20,000 years of progress (based on the rate of progress in year 2001) condensed into only one hundred years. It is a future where everything is free, nobody dies, everybody is eternally young, all governments are abolished, crimes are abolished, and everyone is utterly self-sufficient therefore free to zoom off independently into Space, whereupon people will create strange worlds according to the desires of each individual.

If the preposterously insane situation of people disagreeing about utopia does occur in the future (it really won’t but let’s consider it), then it will be very easy to create a new universe, for each individual, therefore you can escape into infinity. It will be possible in the future for anyone to be utterly separate from anyone who possibly disagrees with you. The level of intelligence we are contemplating is utterly awesome thus we will leave childish worries very far behind.

Finally we should note there is a difference between Utopia the novel or place (capitalised) and utopia the concept (lower-case). The concept refers to a perfect system, a perfect way of life. When I state “perfect” I mean utterly flawless for all people. This is not fiction we are dealing with.

About the Author:

Singularity Utopia writes for Singularity-2045, a Post-Scarcity orientated website dedicated to increasing awareness regarding the coming technological utopia. The goal is to make the Singularity happen sooner instead of later.

 

Related articles

Scarcity Causes All Wars and Violence

by

Someone recently exclaimed: “How can we kill children and their mothers for a piece of land, an ideology or a religion?!…” The note was regarding the current Gaza Crisis. The issue prompted me to respond from a Post-Scarcity perspective and address the causes of war.

I know it’s a rhetorical question, or perhaps it isn’t, but nevertheless I will highlight how all wars are about land; it is about the resources arising from land. Humans often battle over scarce resources thus humans kill other humans to acquire greater resources. This is the nature of all violence. Survival is improved for the winner of the war.

The ideologies or religions of aggressors versus defenders are arbitrary. The beliefs are meaningless randomness despite great meaning people attribute to this or that belief. Disregarding the nonsensical and irrelevant arbitrariness of the specific belief, we must note how beliefs are very important for uniting one faction against another in the battle over resources. Religious ideologies are merely tools, weapons, in the battle over scarce resources. Religion is a cultural rallying point, a vehicle allowing the leaders to control their soldiers-supporters.

There is less need to battle over resources in our current era but the battle to acquire scarce resources is a deeply engrained survival trait, from the beginning of life on Earth, thus it’s a hard trait to break despite growing evidence that we are approaching the age of Post-Scarcity.

I’m not justifying war or violence, I am merely explaining why people have wars (why people kill people). I don’t want to justify any war, I am against all wars because there are more intelligent ways for humans to interact But it is important to explain why people have wars; it is important to explain why people do what they do. Many people don’t care about other people being killed. They are inured to the horror thus they blithely ignore the latest atrocity in Iraq, Afghanistan, Egypt, Russia, India, Israel, Palestine or any other part of the world. It is sad but true. It is collective widespread systemic anomie, which is a problem caused by scarcity where brute-survival trumps sensibilities. Perhaps the biggest scarcity problem is a scarcity of intelligence.

Someone suggested blood feuds are not scarcity based, but I suggest otherwise. A blood feud or vendetta is a scarcity issue because past battles to survive based on scarcity continue to have vitality due to current scarcity.

Another person suggested psychopathy is not a scarcity issue. Still, I suggest otherwise. I think psychopathy is wholly a symptom of the social dysfunction created by scarcity. Scarcity creates social dysfunction thus when scarcity exists there is VERY fertile ground for being a psychopath. Psychopaths can only exist in a scarcity-situation because without scarcity the seeds of psychopathy would not grow. I also highlighted how human violence is not merely animal derangement relating to a more primitive part of the human brain.

Violence in primitive animals does exist, furthermore it is scarcity based. Note how chimps can be violent towards other chimps. In the following video an enemy chimp is killed and eaten in a minor chimp war. Why is a raid occurring into land controlled by neighbouring chimps? Does more land equal a diminution of food scarcity? Would they need to eat their enemy if food and land were not scarce? Is this any different to the initial question asking why humans kill other humans for a piece of land?

I also discovered another good video regarding chimps. Note the following demonstration of how chimps can gang-up on and ultimately kill a member of their own tribe

Animals also practice infanticide, notable in hippos and polar bears, which again is a scarcity issue. This violence in animals is about scarcity, exactly the same as humans. The violence can either be a direct attempt to gain more resources or it could be about hierarchical standing, which is also all about scarcity because greater hierarchy entails greater purchasing power.

It has been also suggested that human violence is merely ego-based thus Post-Scarcity cannot eliminate violence, but I disagreed. The ego-mind is the source of everything human, but it does not mean everything can be reduced to an ego-mind cause. Fighting is an issue of scarcity, the ego wants to survive but survival is threatened due to scarcity thus the ego fights to survive. If people felt there was absolutely no threat to the their existence then there would be no need to fight despite the ego being what it is. The problem is that scarcity does threaten our existence.

Soon everything will be free due to Post-Scarcity thus awareness of the coming Post-Scarcity epoch could avert some of the violence. We can start to reduce monetary suffering now. Greater awareness of the looming era of freedom, an era where everything is free, could entail leaders in the human hierarchy investing, with unrestrained abandon, into technologies crucial for creating Post-Scarcity, thereby accelerating the arrival of it. When people realize how everything in the not too distant future will be free, there is less need to madly control profits, there is less need to hoard money. The stranglehold on the economy can be relaxed, there is no need to squeeze out the last drop of money from poor people, there is no need for violence.

Land scarcity will soon be obsolete. We are approaching an age where anyone will be able to print their own personal spaceship, then fly off into space where planets are essentially infinite. 3D-Printers combined with super-efficient nanotechnolgy and Artificial Intelligence will ensure everyone is self-sufficient with easy access to essentially limitless resources. Currently our 3D-printers, marvellous that they are, are primitive and dumb, but relatively soon printers will be integrated with AI, and then will be close to intelligence exploding. Printing another printer is great. Imagine when we can print AIs or AI-printers as easily as we print chess pieces. Violence and scarcity will soon end.

About the Author:

Singularity Utopia writes for Singularity-2045, a Post-Scarcity orientated website dedicated to increasing awareness regarding the coming technological utopia. The goal is to make the Singularity happen sooner instead of later.

Will the “Geek Rapture” Nonsense Ever Stop?

by

Recently I stumbled across an article about William Gibson’s Geek Rapture and Other Technological Musings. I’m not sure why alleged technological aficionados denigrate the Singularity but I often read about their hostility. It’s an odd situation where their notion of the Singularity is so provocative, so contentious.Some critics insist the Singularity constitutes a new religion for geeks, which is ironic because for me the Singularity is the opposite of religion. Instead of having faith in supernatural powers to create miracles, the Singularity is about having confidence in the powers of humans. Confidence in our human ability entails our skills in science and technology making our world a better place without Godly intervention. The Singularity makes Gods and religions redundant; it is the enlightenment of logic, intellectualism, the end of superstitions, prayers, and mystical incantations.If the Singularity must be categorised philosophically then it should be deemed atheist instead of religious. Via science we will progress beyond the hypothetical omnipotence of God. Instead of an elusive fantasy regarding God’s powers we will create actual real powers based on science not mysticism; we will supersede God’s hypothetical supernatural powers. In the modality of Nietzsche the Singularity will declare God is dead. Building on his “Geek Rapture” hypothesis Gibson claimed cyberspace as quaint. Cyberspace quaint?! I disagree, but I suppose people with quaint minds will transform the most marvellous things into humdrum banality. If Gibson’s partner declared they love William then perhaps from William’s viewpoint he would reply “how quaint.” Maybe when we can live forever, travel freely to any planet, and create any product for free in our own homes, then Gibson will exclaim how fantastic utopia is, but in reality he would probably think immortality, superlative space travel, or Post-Scarcity is terribly boring.

I suppose many Sci-Fi authors feel threatened by the Singularity because the wonder of it easily outstrips their fiction. In April 2010 NASA Administrator Charles Bolden said, “We’re gonna turn science fiction into science fact.” Fiction is becoming reality, this is a fact, therefore the new reality we are entering makes it difficult for some writers to write their tales because reality is becoming vastly superior in comparison to their narrative skills. I think Gibson’s problem is a lack of awareness thus his view of reality is dim. Unfounded criticism of the Singularity tells us more about the perceptions of the person who presents their critique than about the actual concept itself. Intellectual poverty is what causes some to smear the Singularity via religious terminology; such smearing is a sad indictment of predominant irrationality festering within our culture. Application of basic thinking to the notion of the Singularity will quickly reveal how it is an ideology based wholly on logic and rationality. Thankfully, the days of irrational bunkum are ending. The Singularity is an intelligence explosion but some people cling tenaciously to their blinkered view of reality.

With this article I hope all journalists in the future will strenuously endeavour to expose such religious smears for what they are: illogical nonsense devoid of factual basis. There is no logical justification for comparing the Singularity to religion. The Rapture is a Christian event regarding God, whereas the Singularity is based wholly on science.

The fallacious rationale of critics, when they equate the Singularity with religion, hinges on how the Singularity will vastly improve our world. Critics are taking a prejudicial leap of faith, which entails adding two and two thereby creating five. They mistakenly assume technological utopia equates religious paradise. This type of faulty reasoning is comparable to stating: a cheetah is fast and a car is fast therefore a car is a cheetah because they share the commonality of being fast. Technological utopia may be heavenly but it is not heaven. If something makes our world a better place this does not mean it is a religion. Religion has in fact often made our world a worse place due to sexual repression, sexism, religious wars, and persecution of infidels or heretics. Heart transplants can vastly improve the lives of people but heart transplants are not magical miracles preformed by God; it is simply science. The Singularity is science and technology. It is truly amazing intellectualism but sadly the power of intellectualism can be terrifying for some minds.

Contrary to the smears, the Singularity is not quasi-religious geek rapture. It is an insult to be deemed a geek due to my interest in the exponential growth of science and technology. I assure you I am not a geek. The funny thing is that many people probably think all Sci Fi writers are geeks. There’s nothing religious or quasi-religious about the Singularity. The colossal intelligence explosion we are heading towards is the opposite of quaint. It will be far stranger than any fiction.

About the Author:

Singularity Utopia writes for Singularity-2045, a Post-Scarcity orientated website dedicated to increasing awareness regarding the coming technological utopia. The goal is to make the Singularity happen sooner instead of later.

Related articles

Singularity Utopia: Post Scarcity Awareness As An Antidote To Despair

by

In the year 2011 we live a world based upon scarcity. So, what is Post-Scarcity?

Imagine if computers grew on trees, and the world was a gigantic forest, then in a monetary sense computers would be worthless. It would be impossible to sell computers if an extreme over-abundance of computers existed because people could easily acquire computers for free. Scarcity of oil, gas, electricity, food, or computers demands regulation of these limited supplies via monetary restrictions. The price of anything will increase directly in relation to increased scarcity of its supply. In the world of Post-Scarcity everything will be free.

How will a Post-Scarcity civilization arise?

Artificial Intelligence combined with molecular nanotechnology will allow available resources to be utilized with ultra-efficiency, therefore all resources will effectively be unlimited i.e. free.

The Technological Singularity is an explosion of intelligence. Upgrading a computer is much quicker than the slow evolution of biological humans, therefore when computers reach the level of human intelligence, sometime around year 2035, we will then be on the edge of an intelligence explosion: the Singularity.

In the year 2011 people know computers for the current year will be faster than the previous year’s computers. Unfortunately many people haven’t realized how Artificial Intelligence, sometime around year 2040, will be able to create food and other products almost out of thin air. Technology will become extremely sophisticated. Solar power and other forms of energy-reclamation will create free supplies of unlimited energy for everyone. We will effortlessly grow or print food and products (via 3D printing) within our own homes. Everything will be decentralized and everyone will be all powerful. In the future nothing will need to be repaired because molecular nanotechnology will ensure everything is self-repairing.

In this Post-Scarcity future, where everything is free, there will be no reason to feel unhappy; despair will be vanquished. We will enjoy this utopia forever because medical technology will stop people growing old and all illnesses will be curable.

Unfortunately many people in the year 2011 are unaware of how poverty-based-misery will soon end. People often throw their lives away because they are depressed by financial misery. People feel unhappy regarding financial corruption. Money and Governments only exist to regulate scarcity therefore if you are depressed regarding your lack of money, or the unfairness of your Government, you must understand there is a reason to hope; there is a reason why you shouldn’t give up hope.

Sadly some people do give up hope. Regarding the shootings in Arizona by Jared Lee Loughner on 8th January 2011, Jared complained in YouTube videos about Government mind-control and debt. Jared wanted to create a new currency but instead of a new currency there is a better option. We will soon see an era where there is no currency. I feel awareness of Post-Scarcity could have averted Jared’s despair therefore to make the world a happier place I have created some Post-Scarcity symbols for people to share. In the future everything will be free therefore our happiness will be limitless.

About the Author:

Singularity-2045 is a Post-Scarcity orientated website dedicated to increasing awareness regarding the coming technological utopia. The goal is to make the Singularity happen sooner instead of later.

Related articles