singularity

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

Vernor Vinge: We Can Surpass the Wildest Dreams of Optimism

by

Podcast: Play in new window | Download | Embed

Subscribe: RSS

Today, my guest on Singularity 1 on 1 is Vernor Vinge, the person who coined the term technological singularity.

Currently, Vernor Vinge is putting the final touches on the sequel to A Fire Upon the Deep. The new book is titled The Children of the Sky and is already available for pre-order on Amazon, though it is not expected to ship until October 2011.

Despite his busy schedule Prof. Vinge still managed to give us over an hour of his time, and during our conversation, I asked him to discuss issues such as: his childhood and early interest in science fiction; his desire to make sense of the universe; his definition of the technological singularity and the story behind the term; his now classic 1993 NASA paper; his favorite science fiction books and authors; major milestones on the way towards the singularity and our chances to survive such an unprecedented event.

As always, you can listen to or download the audio file above or scroll down to watch the video interview in full. To show your support, you can write a review on iTunes, make a direct donation, or become a patron on Patreon.

Who is Vernor Vinge?

Arguably the second most recognized singularitarian, Vernor Vinge spent most of his life in San Diego, California where he taught mathematics and computer science at San Diego State University for over thirty years and where he still lives today.

After retiring from teaching Vernor became widely sought as a public speaker and presenter for business, science, science fiction and general audiences. He has won Hugo Awards for several of his books such as: A Fire Upon The Deep(1992), A Deepness in the Sky(1999) and for the novella Fast Times at Fairmont High(2001).

Known for his rigorous hard-science approach Vinge first became an iconic figure both among cybernetic scientists and sci fi fans with the publication of his 1981 novella True Names, widely considered to be the visionary work behind the internet revolution. Later he gained even more public attention for his coining the term, writing and presenting about the technological singularity.

For a collection of videos of Vernor Vinge see his profile page on SingularitySymposium.com

Related articles

The Singularity is Near! What’s Next?

by

The Singularity is Near! What’s Next?

Those who look ahead three or four decades and see a technological singularity taking place confront a future in which time appears to stand still. However, few look beyond 2045 because it is near-impossible to foresee what happens post-Singularity. So although we may be certain that the Singularity is Near, we are uncertain about what’s next.

This reality differentiates Singularitarians from every other major worldview to shape human history: other groups, in looking out into the future, have always had some kind of ‘destination’, or ‘endpoint’ in mind.

Religious groups originating in the West have tended to envision ‘heaven’, or ‘hell’, as endpoints, while those in the East anticipate ‘rebirth’, and eventual nirvana. Some mythologies envision an ‘underworld’, while those not believing in an afterlife do their best to imagine death as their ultimate destination. Even those drinking Kool-Aid in hope of catching the next spaceship passing by have had a destination in mind.

After the Singularity, it is fairly certain that we will leave earth, colonize space, and keep expanding outward. Transhumanists prefer to think of humanity as a process, a species without an endpoint, emphasizing the constant change that will take place as we continue to improve ourselves with technology and transcend our limitations.

But where are we transcending to? And when we reach a point where technology will allow us to do almost anything, how do we figure out what’s worth doing? From where do we get direction?

I propose that three potential sources will impact our direction.

A first source of direction comes from the particulars of human history. In an interview on Singularity 1 on 1, Stephen Wolfram emphasizes the importance of thinking about human purpose when trying to predict the future, and that our sense of purpose, in many ways, comes from our past. He points out that “the things we think are worth doing now arose from the history of our civilization”, and that different prongs of civilization have produced different value systems. We don’t need to ‘invent’ what we find valuable in the present; to a large extent, we inherit those values from our individual and collective past.

If Wolfram is correct that our sense of purpose is largely based on history, then what we think is worth doing now will shape the direction we take post-Singularity.

Second, I propose that a great deal of direction will come from what we have to do in order to survive. From the time we were single-celled organisms, the push to survive has largely determined the direction of individual and collective lives. The will to survive will shape our future too, since in the post-Singularity era there will be new threats to our existence, and our reactions to those threats will determine the paths we end up taking.

Third, we will get direction from incidental attributes of the physical world, in particular from what we find beyond our immediate surroundings, once we expand out into the galaxy.

The Interplanetary Transport Network (ITN) provides an example of how incidental attributes of the physical world can provide direction in future situations, where there would otherwise be an infinite number of options to choose from. The ITN is ‘a collection of gravitationally determined pathways through the solar system that require very little energy for an object to follow’. In travelling the solar system, the ITN marks the path of least resistance, and so in a strictly physical sense, ‘guides the way’. Just as winding rivers directed the paths of our ancestors, influencing where they ended up, and what they came into contact with, physical realities in outer space, such as the ITN, will play a role in where we go in the future, and how we get there.

The Interplanetary Superhighway (NASA)

We have a difficult time imagining what our sense of direction and purpose will be post-Singularity, since it’s difficult to imagine what the world will look like when we have augmented intelligence, and have removed the many limitations that enforce structure upon our lives now. We don’t have a destination in mind, but we will be far from directionless and aimless post-Singularity, despite there being many more options to choose from.

About the Author:

Nikki Olson is a writer/researcher working on an upcoming book about the Singularity with Dr. Kim Solez, as well as relevant educational material for the Lifeboat Foundation. She has a background in philosophy and sociology, and has been involved extensively in Singularity research for 3 years. You can reach Nikki via email at [email protected].

 

Related articles

Elisabeth Kübler-Ross’ Five Stages of the Singularity

by

After the release of a significant documentary such as Transcendent Man, our very public and well-publicized defeat at Jeopardy by IBM’s Watson, and a growing mainstream coverage of the technological singularity, I started wondering about the potential stages of humanity’s collective emotional and other reaction towards the concept of the singularity.

Arthur Schopenhauer claims that “All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.”

So, does this relate well to the singularity?

Let’s see. Firstly, is the singularity often ridiculed?

It seems that so far, it has been predominantly ignored, though that observation is increasingly inaccurate as we receive more coverage in the media.

Secondly, has it been violently opposed?

Well, we did have the Unabomber, even though Richard Clarke’s Breakpoint-type of violent resistance has not materialized yet and we are not yet divided into Luddites and Medievalists, or Terrans and Cosmists. This could easily change however, as artificial intelligence, genetics, robotics and nanotechnology become more and more advanced.

If one thing is sure, the singularity hasn’t been popularly embraced as self-evident.

So, within Schopenhauer’s framework, we are, at best, within or around the first stage.

But is it really so pure and simple?

Perhaps Elisabeth Kübler-Ross can provide a more subtle framework for examining our emotional attitude toward the singularity.

In her 1969 book On Death and Dying she argues that there are five stages of grief: denial, anger, bargaining, depression and acceptance.

Let’s see if those can present us with a better-adapted framework of reference:

Denial: “The singularity is not a big deal” or “Anyway, the singularity is not going to happen.”

Denial is usually temporary, especially in the face of a growing body of evidence, and is eventually replaced with a heightened awareness of the risks and the stakes (of the singularity).

Anger: “Why is the singularity happening? How can it happen to me (or to us)? Who is to blame?”

Once here, the person understands that denial cannot continue. But because of anger, she is very difficult to deal with in a rational manner. Any individual who embraces technology and progress, in general, is subject to projected resentment and jealousy.

Bargaining: “Just let me enjoy myself a little more.” “All I want is to remain human for a few more years.” “Can’t we wait (and hold progress) for just a little while?”

This stage involves the hope that one can somehow postpone or delay the singularity. Usually, the negotiation for an extended “timeout” is made with a higher power in exchange for a reformed lifestyle. Psychologically, the individual is saying, “I understand the singularity is near, but if I could just have a little more time…”

Depression: “The singularity sucks!”; “We are all going to die… What’s the point?”; “The machines are so much better at everything… resistance is futile… so, why go on?”

During the fourth stage, the person begins to understand the impending singularity. Because of this, she may become silent, refuse visitors, and spend much of her time crying or grieving. This process allows the depressed individual to overcome her sense that “biology is destiny” and embrace the fact that human is a process, not a defined entity. For this reason, it is not recommended to attempt to cheer up an individual in this stage. It is essential for a person to come to terms with the fact that change is the only certain thing.

Acceptance: “The singularity is cool.”; “I can’t fight progress; I may as well prepare for it.”; “If I can’t defeat the machines, I might as well join them.”; “I can live forever!”

In this last stage, the individual begins to come to terms with the potential upsides of the singularity and focuses on them rather than the negatives.

It is important to note that Elisabeth Kübler-Ross warned that these steps do not necessarily have to come in the above order. Nor are all steps experienced by all people. (Though she believes that one will always experience at least two.) Also, people often experience several of the above stages in a “roller coaster” effect – switching between two or more stages, returning to one or more several times before working through it entirely.

Finally, it is important that futurists and techno-experts do not force understanding on others. The process is highly personal and should not be rushed or lengthened. One should merely be aware that the stages can and most likely will be worked through, and the ultimate stage of “Acceptance” will be reached.

***

So, what do you think? Can we apply the Kübler-Ross framework to the singularity? If yes, then what stage are we at currently?

If not, why not? And how about any alternatives?

The Singularity and UFOs: Can ET Teach Us Anything about the Singularity?

by

The connections between extraterrestrial life and future technology are numerous, and have been widely discussed in science fiction literature and by physicists such as Michio Kaku. There is basic logic to the connection: if life in other galaxies is able to travel to our galaxy, it is thought, then we should assume their technology is more advanced than our own and that they have already reached their ‘Singularity.’

Recently I attended the 20th Anniversary International UFO Congress in Scottsdale, AZ, which included 5 full days of presentations, special events, and films, attracting over 700 attendants. Various theorists, physicists, former military personnel, many of whom claim to have witnessed extraterrestrial life, presented ideas and stories on a wide range of topics.

I was surprised by the lack of discussion of the technological singularity at the conference. However many of the presentations provided useful insights into what a Singularity in other galaxies would entail, if the reports presented were valid.

One consistent observation coming from those claiming to have experienced UFOs was how quiet, and many say, silent, UFO spacecrafts are. At this event, the most well-respected, and in my opinion, most believable, alien abductee, Travis Walton (best known by the film based on his story Fire in the Sky), remarked on the experience of watching the spacecraft exit his vision (back in 1975), surprised that it was an experience with no sound, especially given how fast it appeared to be traveling.

Many people notice how quiet hybrid cars are compared to combustion engines. Transportation in civilizations with advanced technology appears to be almost completely silent.

Other consistent claims were the high level of design sophistication of spacecrafts, which were consistently portrayed being able to travel at very rapid speeds and maneuver with great agility.

Lloyd Pye, the man primarily associated with the infamous Starchild Skull presented recent genetic information indicating what he thinks shows that the Starchild skull is not of human origin. He bases this claim upon (reportedly) finding that the DNA of the Starchild has vastly different mitochondrial DNA(mtDNA) from human mtDNA.  Since mtDNA in humans mutates very little, he argues, the likelihood of the Starchild being a mutation he thinks is very low.

[youtube]https://youtu.be/moEYqLdupIA[/youtube]

He suggests genetic engineering from an advanced civilization as possible explanation for the Starchild Skull. He wouldn’t name the geneticists working with him and is looking for funding of $7 million to finish the DNA sequencing and make two documentaries.

Needless to say, there were presentations at the conference that were quite obviously for the purpose of taking advantage of older, and less critical thinkers. These con artist presenters, some using very obviously Photoshopped images, combined messages of vague, new-age spirituality and abduction claims for the purpose, arguably, of media publicity, and making money through book revenues.

I myself, the band hired to entertain at the conference, and a handful of others were the only attendees under the age of 30, with the average age being around 60. The popularity of aliens was, after all, at its height between 1940-1980. The lack of technical and up to date scientific knowledge on the part of the older attendees definitely allowed con artists to get further and sway more minds than they would have in a younger crowd.

There seemed to be resentment, or at least an attempt to create resentment on the part of the crowd, by the speakers towards the scientific community. Those working in more mainstream science fields tend to reject the claims of alien encounters on rational or scientific grounds, and for that were referred to in a derogatory way by many speakers, referred to as simply ‘the scientists.’

One highlight of the conference was most certainly the presentations of James Penniston and John Burroughs regarding the Bentwaters Mystery, also known as the Rendlesham Forest Incident. It is one of the more well-known and respected UFO reports to date and many people find the case convincing.

Unfortunately, if one had knowledge of the Singularity, one was easily skeptical of the central message. They claim that their experience with aliens in 1980 was actually an experience with humans  (having perfected knowledge of physics) visiting us from 40,000 years in the future. The purpose they claim for the visit was to obtain human DNA for the sake of knowledge and other things.

Penniston spoke about the time travel message during hypnosis in 1994. So, these ideas were put forth prior to our mapping and banking the human genome. Had they foreseen our doing this they may have claimed something different perhaps. In their defense, since this information was produced through hypnosis, they may not be entirely to blame for the fiction of these claims.

Off the record, Penniston was questioned by a conference attendee regarding this discontinuity. He claimed, rather defensively, that he didn’t know how to explain the need for human DNA by these future beings since we have so much of it stored now.  “I don’t know, I don’t know” Penniston remarked nervously, trying to escape the questioners.

Having knowledge of future technology trends, and being able to understand what future technology would be required for another species able to travel all the way to our galaxy (nanotechnology, advanced computational abilities), allows one to be an effective skeptic, and makes one less susceptible to UFO con artists. One could also make up better stories about the intent of aliens as well.

But there are important things that Singularitarians can learn from discourse about aliens, even the fiction.

One interesting thing to ponder is the variety seen in the description of alien encounters cross culturally. As discussed in the “Cross Cultural Patterns in Abductions” sections of the MIT Discussions, there is very little coherence in descriptions of the experiences.

Cultural perceptions of advanced technology play a role in how alleged alien encounters play out, so we can look at the descriptions of these encounters for insight into how we as a culture perceive advanced technology.

It is well known that Japanese culture has a warmer regard for robots and futuristic technology, compared with the Western culture, which is typically more fearful of it.

Skeptics argue that science fiction since the 1930s has influenced and shaped expectations of alien encounters in the West.

A 1935 issue of Amazing Stories, which featured on its cover “an illustration of a being with large eyes and a large head who was restraining a human from entering a room where another human was reclined on a table with another large-eyed creature examining her,” for instance, is thought to have influenced and shaped expectations of what an encounter with extraterrestrials might entail.

It is a common experience for those enthusiastic about advanced technology to have their views met with pessimism by those steeped in science fiction literature and films.

Most Americans believe there is intelligent life elsewhere in the universe. Many futurists agree that there is as well. Where futurists disagree is on whether or not another species has visited earth. Ray Kurzweil, for instance, in Time’s 10 Questions for Ray, argues that there is no evidence of intelligent life elsewhere that we have so far witnessed. For this reason he thinks we are likely to be the first species to reach a Singularity.

Many disagree with Ray on this. I for one find it difficult to dismiss the abduction case of Travis Walton, especially given the consistency in witness testimony, and especially after having met him and listened to him speak on the matter. Not to mention, the prevalence of alleged alien phenomenon, and famous  UFO cases witnessed by thousands such as the Phoenix Lights lead us to believe that something regarding aliens and advanced technology is in need of explanation.

The issue of extraterrestrial life raises interesting questions for those interested in the Singularity.

Should some of the stories be true, what does that tell us about our own future?  Will we very soon be doing what aliens are now doing, travelling to other galaxies to investigate more primitive civilizations?  And if alien encounters are indeed as negative as some abductees claim, will there be an intergalactic battle for mankind’s survival post Singularity as portrayed in science fiction?

About the Author:

Nikki Olson is a writer/researcher working on an upcoming book about the Singularity with Dr. Kim Solez, as well as relevant educational material for the Lifeboat Foundation. She has a background in philosophy and sociology, and has been involved extensively in Singularity research for 3 years. You can reach Nikki via email at [email protected].

Related articles

Andrew Crofts on The Change Agent, the Ghostwriter, and the Singularity

by

Podcast: Play in new window | Download | Embed

Subscribe: RSS

A couple of months ago I saw Roman Polanski’s film The Ghost Writer based on the titular bestselling book by Robert Harris. At the time, I could hardly imagine that only a couple of months after the movie premiere I will be communicating with Andrew Crofts – the archetype ghostwriter on whom Ewan McGregor’s character was most probably based upon.

Andrew wrote a popular guest article for SingularityWeblog.com where he shared the story behind his latest book The Change Agent: How to Create a Wonderful World.

The book talks about the life and ideas of Andrew’s archetype change agent – James Martin, a world-renowned futurist, computer scientist, author, lecturer, and, among many other things, the largest donor in the history of Oxford University. (Most recently, James Martin produced a pivotal documentary film called The Meaning of the 21st Century. It is based on Martin’s titular book and examines the major perils and promises that humanity faces in the 21st century such as climate change, the technological singularity, and others.)

Given the relevance of Andrew’s topic and the success of his guest blog post, I decided to ask him to do an interview for Singularity 1 on 1. We ended up having a 46-minute conversation during which we discussed a variety of interesting topics such as Andrew’s experience as a guest on James Martin’s private island; the story behind, the accuracy and the goals of Crofts’ book The Change Agent; James Martin‘s life and ideas in general and his take on the future of humanity, technology and the singularity in particular.

As always you can listen to or download the audio file above or scroll down and watch the video interview in full. To show your support you can write a review on iTunes, make a direct donation, or become a patron on Patreon.

Andrew Crofts on Singularity 1 on 1 (full video)

Who is Andrew Crofts?

Andrew Crofts has published more than 80 books over 4o years as an author and ghostwriter, many of which have become international number-one bestsellers. His subject matters and co-authors have ranged from billionaires to bonded laborers, reality television stars to the rulers of medium-sized countries, rock stars to bar girls. He is also a travel writer, a business writer and a published novelist.

Related articles

Singularities Happen: Alan Watts explains the Singularity

by

So suppose that the Singularity happens…

That’s what scientists, futurists, transhumanists, and entire conventions of science fiction writers have pondered over the years, especially since remarkable technologies have moved from science fiction to science fact.

The camps are deeply divided on what happens after the Singularity.

For instance, the Singularity has its completely negative scenarios. Think of it as the Apocalypse without the cool cars that can traverse vast stretches of desert without a fill-up. But there are those who think the Singularity will be positive. Effusively positive even. The Singularity won’t be a game changer. It will be the ultimate reality changer creating the best of all possible situations for all of us. It will be a world of immortality, abundance, physical enhancements, and, if Hollywood is correct, really brightly lit, stoically-decorated rooms.

As is often the case, though, when our imaginations reach the precipice of our current knowledge, pessimism reigns. Suppose the Singularity happens. Suppose, even further, that the positive Singularity happens. What then? What if technology could provide every need and desire? Do we sit around plugged into our 3-D Wii consoles all day and – since sleep is no longer needed – all night?

In short: will we get bored?

I’m going to let a Western zen monk answer that. And he may even lead us to new speculations about not just what the Singularity is, but, possibly, what the Singularities (note the plural) are.

Alan Watts, one of the West’s most celebrated experts on Zen Buddhism and panpsychism, wrote several groundbreaking works of philosophy, including The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are. One of his lesser known – for which I’m hard pressed to explain – pieces is called, Cosmic Drama. In it, he lays out a very similar, although more spiritually-oriented, scenario as the technological one I described above.

Alan starts out like this:

“Suppose you’re God. Suppose you have all time, eternity, and all power at your disposal. What would you do? I believe you would say to yourself after awhile,

“Man, get lost.”

For Watts, when this absolute potential meets absolute power, the result is a creative explosion. All isn’t just possible, all is probable. No doubt, the more base desires are dealt with first.

“Naturally, you could dream any span of time – you could dream seventy-five years of time in one night, a hundred years of time in one night, a thousand years of time in one night – and it could be anything you wanted – because you make up your mind before you go to sleep,

‘Tonight I’m going to dream of so-and-so.’

Naturally, you would start out by fulfilling all your wishes. You would have all the pleasures you could imagine, the most marvelous meals, the most entrancing love affairs, the most romantic journeys, you could listen to music such as no mortal has heard, and see landscapes beyond your wildest dreams.”

Eventually, though, Watts speculates that you would get bored.

“And for several nights, oh, maybe for a whole month of nights, you would go on that way, having a wonderful time. But then, after a while, you would begin to think,

“Well, I’ve seen quite a bit, let’s spice it up, let’s have a little adventure.”

What would follow would be type-A-infused fantasies. You’d imagine wars and battles. You’d dream about dramatic rescues. You’d move from the Spice channel to the Adventure channel. Eventually to the Military Channel. And maybe to Lifetime, for more domestic drama.

The end result would be you would get lost in the drama. You would forget that you created the drama.

Watts suggests that this is precisely where our civilization is headed and technology is the driver.

Remember, he wrote this decades ago, but here’s how he sees it:

“Look at it another way. The object of our technology is to control the world, to have a super electronic push button universe, where we can get anything we want, fulfill any desires simply by pushing a button. You’re Aladdin with the lamp, you rub it, the jinni comes and says,

‘Salaam, I’m your humble servant, what do you wish? Anything you want.’

And after a while, just as in those dreams I described you would decide one day to forget that you were dreaming, you would say to the jinni of the lamp,

‘I would like a surprise.’

To me, at least, this sounds exactly like the Singularity.

While it’s impossible to rule out the idea that there are further levels of development above our pale human imaginations, Watts believes that, eventually, we would get tired of this technology.

“So if our technology were to succeed completely, and everything were to be under our control, we should eventually say,

‘We need a new button.’

With all these control buttons, we always have to have a button labeled SURPRISE, and just so it doesn’t become too dangerous, we’ll put a time limit on it – surprise for 15 minutes, for an hour, for a day, for a month, a year, a lifetime. Then, in the end, when the surprise circuit is finished, we’ll be back in control and we’ll all know where we are. And we’ll heave a sigh of relief, but, after a while, we’ll press the button labeled SURPRISE once more.”

Watts points out that the cycle matches exactly the Hindu belief of cosmic destruction and creation.

“During the manvantara when the world is manifested, Brahma is asleep, dreaming that he is all of us and everything that’s going on, and during the pralaya, which is his day, he’s awake, and knows himself, or itself (because it’s beyond sex), for who and what he/she/it is. And then, once again, presses the button—surprise!”

It’s a circular thing. Coming at it from a Western point of view, it’s a weird concept. We tend to think of time as being linear. There’s a creation and eventually an end of time judgment, or an apocalypse.

The Singularity may share more with the Hindu kalpas and yugas and less with the notion of a “rapture of the nerds” or a TechnoCalyps.

So, my question to you is this:

Suppose the Singularity is near? Is this just another touch of the cosmic “surprise” button?

How do you know the Singularity hasn’t happened again and again?
…

Man, get lost!

About the Author:

Matt Swayne is a blogger and science writer. He is particularly interested in quantum computing and the development of businesses around new technologies. He writes at Quantum Quant.

A Christmas Carol: A Visit From The Post-Singularity Future

by

Scrooge cowered on his knees. The visits of the first two ghosts shook him to the core of his miserly being. He knew the Ghost of Christmas Future was next. Scrooge, after all, had been reading Malthus.

An unmistakable thud of a piano chord — probably an  E major, with reverb set on foreboding — sliced through the chilly air of Scrooge’s dark quarters. Scrooge winced. He opened his eyes slowly, expecting to see a tall, ominous, black robed figure, most likely armed with a scythe, or at the very least a sickle. Instead, he saw a rather diminutive man wearing wire-rimmed glasses and holding a palm-sized device in his hand.

“Hi. My name is Ray Kurz…”

He suddenly stopped his introduction.

“Oh, wait. That’s not the line. Let me try again.” the spirit cleared his throat. “I am the Ghost of Christmas Fuuuuuture,” he spoke in a mildly mocking baritone.

“My future?” Scrooge asked.

“Well, in the future, it’s really hard to delineate between the personal and the collective in an exponential destiny.”

Scrooge furled his brow.

“What? Anyway. Ghost of Christmas Future. It is you who I fear most of all.”

“Why? The future’s not so bad. In fact, we’ve solved a lot of problems.”

“Wait. Aren’t you going to lecture me on how my covetousness has impoverished society and instill fear in me about how my skinflint ways have robbed me of a meaningful existence?”

The Ghost of Christmas Future chuckled, “Not at all. I mean, there’s no need for greed in the future. The scarcity society has totally been replaced. Check it out.”

Instantly, Scrooge and the spirit were transported to the streets that once crisscrossed Scrooge’s bleak, sketchy neighborhood. Instead, the streets were clean.

“That’s called quantum teleportation,” the spirit whispered in Scrooge’s ear. “Not a bad little parlor trick, huh?”

Autonomous vehicles zipped along London’s streets with passengers laughing and checking out video messages on their “portable cyphering blackboards,” as Scrooge dubbed them. Other folks strolled through the streets. They looked healthy, well-dressed and well-fed.

“You see, Scrooge, with molecular manufacturing, people have access to the best clothes and best products, quickly and cheaply. You can even make food! The new economy is one based on abundance, not lack.”

As if to prove his point, the spirit snapped his finger and the two were suddenly facing a stately mansion.

“Is this mine?”

“No. No. This is the home of Bob Cratchit.”

“My penniless bookkeeper.”

“Not penniless anymore. And not a bookkeeper. In fact, once automation forced most manual bookkeepers out of work, Cratchit created a social network for former workers to crowdsource for new job opportunities. It IPOed a few years ago. I think the market cap is, like, $6 billion.”

Scrooge saw Bob Cratchit’s wife in the window. She stood next to a three-dimensional replication machine, printing out mittens for her extended brood. Just then, a young boy sprinted by. Even though Scrooge and the spirit could not be perceived by the young man, the suddenness of the approach shocked the miser.

“And who was that hooligan?” Scrooge wondered.

“That was Cratchit’s youngest, Tiny Tim.”

“But it couldn’t be. Tiny Tim is a cripple.”

“OK. So, first off, we don’t say ‘cripple’ in the future. It’s better to say, ‘handicapped.’ Or, even better, ‘artificially enhanced’ You see, Tiny Tim was able to regenerate a new leg.”

With another snap of the spirit’s fingers, Scrooge and the ghost landed in a grassy field. A few brown leaves rattled along the ground, being pushed by a howling wind. Tombstones and monuments flanked the two lone souls.

The Ghost of Christmas Future pointed firmly at a tombstone at the edge of the cemetery.

“Oh, no, spirit. Say it isn’t so.”

The spirit pointed even more forcefully. Scrooge kneeled and then crawled toward the tall, dark tablet. He strained his eyes to read the inscription. It wasn’t an inscription at all. It was a sign. “Coming Soon. Longevity Institute. Research Center for Extending Human Life Indefinitely.” Scrooge rubbed his eyes and looked again.

“No death anymore, Scrooge, my good man. You’ve got an infinite time to make amends for your rather spotty past. Decrease the surplus population, indeed.”

Scrooge woke the next morning, excited with the prospects of an exponentially growing, prosperous, healthy future. He never worried about scrimping a few quids, but instead invested heavily in the biotech and quantum computation field. He vowed to become as good a friend, as good a master, and as good a transhuman, as the good old city knew.

About the Author:

Matt Swayne is a blogger and science writer. He is particularly interested in quantum computing and the development of businesses around new technologies. He writes at Quantum Quant.

Natasha Vita-More on Singularity 1on1

by

Podcast: Play in new window | Download | Embed

Subscribe: RSS

Want to find out who, according to the NY Times, is “the first female philosopher of transhumanism”?

Today’s episode of Singularity 1 on 1 features Natasha Vita-More. (As always, you can listen to or download the audio interview above, or scroll down and watch the video recording in full.)

During our conversation with Natasha, she covers a wide variety of topics such as her personal artistic background and how she got to be interested and involved in transhumanism, as well as her take on technology, religion, death, the singularity, nanotechnology, artificial intelligence and others.

I found Natasha to be a fascinating interviewee and hope that you enjoy the interview as much as I did. As always you can listen to or download the audio file above or scroll down and watch the video interview in full. To show your support you can write a review on iTunes, make a direct donation, or become a patron on Patreon.

Who is Natasha Vita-More?

Natasha Vita-More, Ph.D. researcher, University of Plymouth, is a theorist and media designer. She has been referred to as “the first female philosopher of transhumanism” (New York Times, 2008), a “spokesperson for superlongevity” (Wired 2000) and a “superhuman object of desire” (Atlantic Unbound 1998). Natasha is best known for designing the “Primo Posthuman” future human prototype, which project applies nanotechnology, biotechnology, artificial general intelligence, robotics, neuroscience, and advanced medicine.

Natasha is a visiting lecturer at academic institutions such as Virginia Commonwealth University, University of Applied Sciences, Universität für Angewandte Kunst Wien, Centre Interuniversitaire des Arts Médiatiques, University of Quebec, and other learning intuitions such as Metanexus Institute, American Philosophical Association, Sala Parallo, Trondheim Festival, Pecci Museum, SESCE Brazil, and Lisbon Arte e Ciência Cordoaria, and Russia’s National Centre for Contemporary Arts. As the former President of Extropy Institute (2002-2005), she is currently on the Board of Directors for Humanity+, Fellow at Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies, Advisor of the Singularity University, Lifeboat Foundation, Alcor Life Extension Foundation, and Visiting Scholar at 21st Century

Her writings have been published in numerous books, she has appeared in more than twenty-four televised documentaries, and featured in magazines including The New York Times, Wired, Village Voice, Marie Claire, Harper’s Bazaar, U.S. News & World Report, Net Business, and Teleopolis. Vita-More is the author of the Transhuman Statement (1983), producer and host of “Transcentury Update” (1987-1994), and the founder of Transhumanists Arts, Sciences & Culture (1991) and H+ Lab (2005). For more see Natasha.cc

Related articles

This Article Was Written By A Robot

by

There is no one definition of robot which satisfies everyone and most people have their own. For example Joseph Engelberger, a pioneer in industrial robotics, once remarked: “I can’t define a robot, but I know one when I see one.”

According to the Encyclopaedia Britannica a robot is “any automatically operated machine that replaces human effort, though it may not resemble human beings in appearance or perform functions in a humanlike manner.” The Merriam-Webster dictionary describes a robot as a “machine that looks like a human being and performs various complex acts (as walking or talking) of a human being,” or a “device that automatically performs complicated often repetitive tasks,” or a “mechanism guided by automatic controls.”

ASIMO

A lot of people find it disturbing that humans are becoming more like robots while, at the same time, robots are also becoming more like humans. Many are philosophizing about what humans will become after we modify ourselves through genetic engineering or by implanting AI components into all parts of the body to improve our physical and mental abilities. There are concerns that such modifications will pervert us in some way and should perhaps be avoided. This is causing a lot of anxiety and some are warning that humans will stop being actually human.

I, for one, fail to see what the fuss is all about. There is a simple answer as to why the prospect of “artificial” human modification should not be a significant cause for concern.

Humans already are robots. One of my favorite quotes by Aubrey de Grey is “the human body is a very complex machine.” Yes, we are complex, self replicating and self-repairing, but we are machines never-the-less. Look at yourself, look at your hands – they are a small part of an extremely complex apparatus that is able to accomplish all kinds of sophisticated actions. Vertebrate life forms are the most complex apparatus ever developed and no definition of a robot says that it has to be man made. So what if the current life forms were created by the trial-and-error process called evolution for over 4.7 billion years?!…

It is a given that a person does look like a human and can replace other humans’ efforts and is able to perform various complex and often repetitive acts (such as walking and talking) and finally is guided by automatic controls (in our nervous system).

The human being is definitely not a perfect contraption for any mechanism can always be improved. However, the natural process of evolution that has updated humans until the start of the industrial revolution is no longer an option. Civilization needs to find a new way to improve their design. And just as humanity is transcending evolution the technology to modify the human machine will become available.

Original Ford Model T

The technology to maintain the human machine indefinitely in roughly its built condition will be fully available with the advent of regenerative medicine, as being developed by Aubrey de Grey and the SENS Foundation. In may take 20 or 30 years (or more) but the technological singularity (also estimated to take roughly another 20 or 30 years) will provide us with another way to improve the hardware we run on and build the next generation of humachines to be better then they would be by (evolutionary) chance.

Think of your body as an old car — you can keep it running in perfect condition indefinitely, for as long as you do the proper maintenance (i.e. regenerative medicine). Just like people who have an antique and perfectly working Ford Model T. Or you might want to put in a more powerful engine, an automatic gearbox and an air conditioning unit, so you can drive faster and more more comfortably. You can even turn it into a hot-rod muscle car for street racing or to impress the girls…

Ford Model T Hot Rod

Why would anyone worry about the option of modifying a robot to be a better robot?

Humans are always updating the programming of our biological CPU (through education) from the moment we are born. You are updating your programming even now – by reading this article. Further “artificial” mental and physical modifications that will be an option after the singularity will just be another hardware adjustment, not very much different from the one above. Some people want to keep their cars as if they just came off the assembly line. Others may let them wear out and go on to the scrap yard. But in my opinion, most will want to install parts that allow for better durability, performance, speed and comfort.

…I can now say that I know a robot when I see one. And that includes when I am looking at the mirror.

About the Author: Kieran Griffith is a voluntary consultant to the SENS Foundation for developing medical techniques that extend lifespan indefinitely. He has degrees in psychology, the Humanities and Space Science, and is planning a future career in the field of commercial spaceflight.

Related articles

Singularity Weblog Logo Contest

by

I am running a contest for a new Singularity Weblog logo.

Please help me pick the winner.

It is easy — just look at the proposed designs by clicking here.

Then come and post a comment after the post or email me your favorite design number and why in your opinion it deserves to win.

Thank you for your help.

Let us make Singularity Weblog better.

Logo Design Contest Update: We’ve got a winner!!!

Thank you all for your help and your input in choosing a new logo for Singularity Weblog.

There were at least 5 different design concepts that each could have won.

I had a few comments and even more emails about what your favorite design is. In the end it was a very tight race between two designs and, even though my own personal favorite design lost, I have no regrets because in all fairness I had to admit that the winner was the only one able to fulfill all the following requirements:

Simple.

Unique.

Easy to remember.

Easy to scale down to favicon and up to poster size.

Prints well in all colors.

Easy to mold and recreate in 3D physical shape.

Consistent with the Singularity Symposium branding.

I hope you like it!…

Related articles by Zemanta
Enhanced by Zemanta

James Harvey: We are Singularia

by

Podcast: Play in new window | Download | Embed

Subscribe: RSS

This is my first singularity podcast.

I intend to do many more interviews like that to spark the discussion about the singularity with the help of some of the best and brightest people I can get to do a podcast for the benefit of us all.

My guest today is Australian James Harvey.

James Harvey is the author of the thought-provoking book Singularia: Being at the Edge of Time.

***

I have to admit that I have often been called a very logical person.

Most of the time, I agree with the above characterization, but occasionally, there are exceptions.

My interview with James was an excellent example of the alternative, emotional me.

The result was that even though I didn’t agree with all of James’ arguments logically, I dare say that I felt a deep connection to him, and he managed to move me. Thus, even though this was the first direct conversation between us, I hope that I will have the privilege to talk and socialize with him more and that, eventually, one day, I can call him my friend.

I enjoyed the whole interview and believe it is well worth listening to. Though different parts will resonate better with different people, two quotes stand out as something that I will personally take away from James on this occasion:

I respect science and think it is a marvelous tool but I do not worship it!

We are Singularia

Anyway, it is best if you hear James Harvey himself, so make sure you listen to the first Singularity podcast in full:

Stay tuned for more great singularity podcast interviews coming soon to Singularity Weblog and Singularity Symposium.

As always, your input and suggestions are most welcome.

You can send me an Email here.