|
libertarians are as bad at attaining women politically as they are at attaining them romantically
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 06:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 00:02 |
|
|
gnarlyhotep posted:less wrong == more dumb It's like reading student papers from Mirror Universe Star Trek
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 06:05
|
|
|
Robo Reagan posted:yeah and unfortunately we've reached the pinnacle of medical science, especially neurology and it's all downhill from here — 
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 06:11
|
|
|
It's not a question of what recovery procedures we can invent; it's a question of what's even left to recover.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 06:12
|
|
|
Sham bam bamina! posted:A brain that goes days without oxygen and is then frozen, fracturing its tissues, has not sustained irreversible damage. Yeah but see when we invent the nanites we'll be able to inject them into rotten-rear end dead tissue and they'll just get to work with tiny screwdrivers and tubes of krazy glue like in Osmosis Jones
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 06:12
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FJoBWii2lNM
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 07:03
|
|
|
Meanwhile Slate Star Codex changed their tagline to "Go away, everybody" and is blogging about justifying murder. Well!
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 11:18
|
|
|
Justifying murder for rich people, lol
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 12:07
|
|
|
bartlebyshop posted:More the former than the latter. A lot of them think strong/Godlike AI is happening in the next century so you wouldn't have to hope your 10xth grandkid cares about you. If modern medicine advances enough that they all live to 150 then their kid would of course want to resurrect daddy. Undoubtedly they also have some tortured logic where future generations, being more perfect utilitarians, will want to resurrect the frozen dead to increase overall utilons. hey I just got around to reading this and it was pretty good, thanks
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 12:16
|
|
|
If there isn't some really huge breakthrough we have at best another 1000x increase in transistor density left. Where do they think the processing power for god AIs is going to come from?
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 13:49
|
|
|
Germstore posted:If there isn't some really huge breakthrough we have at best another 1000x increase in transistor density left. Where do they think the processing power for god AIs is going to come from? No you see transistors don't matter, technology finds a way to grow exponentially, the arc of history bends towards infinity technology  As every techno-historian knows, past performance is the guarantee of future returns. Also innovation works a lot like research points in 4X games A Wizard of Goatse fucked around with this message at 14:09 on Jan 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 14:02
|
|
|
i'm glad that the hive brain of humanity will be ready by 2040, I was a little concerned that every robot in existence is an actual retard but this graph has renewed my faith in scientific endeavour
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 14:31
|
|
|
The best possible future is someone spends tens of billions on building a warehouse sized artificial mind, tries to teach it theoretical physics so that it can improve itself, but it ignore them and produces terrible poetry instead.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 14:34
|
|
|
Crewmine posted:i'm glad that the hive brain of humanity will be ready by 2040, I was a little concerned that every robot in existence is an actual retard but this graph has renewed my faith in scientific endeavour Allow me to enlighten you with a quote by some 1940s guy saying that some day we may hope to have computers a mere tenth the size of ENIAC; this proves that the part of prognosticating about the future that makes you look dumb to future generations is the part where you are not wildly, baselessly optimistic about very specific fantasy scenarios Back for more later but I've got to take my flying car to the food pill factory on Venus
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 14:41
|
|
|
A Wizard of Goatse posted:Yeah but see when we invent the nanites we'll be able to inject them into rotten-rear end dead tissue and they'll just get to work with tiny screwdrivers and tubes of krazy glue like in Osmosis Jones It's alright, we can cover up the gaps in your brain by studying Facebook posts.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 15:17
|
|
|
I'm the logarithmic curve on a logarithmic chart. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 16:46
|
|
|
I might like this one a little better, where Kurzweil compensates for the tiny tiny sampling range of the era where computers have existed at all by showing the clear historical trend from the Cambrian era to the telephone... and beyond
A Wizard of Goatse fucked around with this message at 16:55 on Jan 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 16:52
|
|
|
When the singularity comes I'm downloading my consciousness into an anime. So long, suckers!
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 16:55
|
|
|
Sham bam bamina! posted:I'm the logarithmic curve on a logarithmic chart. Looks more like an exponential curve on a log chart, which is even "better". Playing Basilisk's Advocate: Processor density isn't the problem here, it's software. A faster computer with more memory is just a bigger dumb computer, on the other hand, if you can get a computer to "think like a human" in whatever sense, it's probably not that hard to get it to do that a few hundred or thousand times faster than a human, because its brain doesn't rely on chemicals diffusing between cells. On the other hand, a fast human with a better memory isn't the sort of omnipotent nano-god these clowns seem to think they'll get.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 16:55
|
|
|
Dzhay posted:Looks more like an exponential curve on a log chart, which is even "better". The architecture being fundamentally totally different is probably gonna be a pretty significant barrier to making a machine 'think like a human', though, you can get a more or less functional purpose-built mimic like Siri but you're not going to emulate adrenalgland.exe on transistors much more effectively than you're going to get a software-based engine simulation that'll drive you to Walgreens. Your endocrine system is not reducible to bits, nor is much of the rest of you, far as we can tell, save for isolated neurons. The singularitarian/transhumanist stuff relies totally on the belief that there is no such thing as a difference of quality, only quantity, so if you only dream up enough logic gates you will have a person, a civilization, God, etc. A Wizard of Goatse fucked around with this message at 17:08 on Jan 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 17:01
|
|
|
What's even the point of building a human-like AI anyway? Isn't the whole point of robots is that they're too stupid to care that they're trapped doing boring, repetitive work all the time? It seems like building a human AI is just an overly complicated way of accomplishing exactly the same thing humans do every time we reproduce.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 17:04
|
|
|
Applewhite posted:What's even the point of building a human-like AI anyway? Isn't the whole point of robots is that they're too stupid to care that they're trapped doing boring, repetitive work all the time? It seems like building a human AI is just an overly complicated way of accomplishing exactly the same thing humans do every time we reproduce. So nerds can fill the void left by the absence of God and, ideally, download their souls and live forever in His all-knowing benevolent embrace in technoheaven.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 17:06
|
|
|
We could produce the silicon today if we knew what configuration to create it in, but that's like saying we could dump a bunch of neurons in a protein soup and get intelligence. The only process that we know of to create intelligence took almost 4 billion years (or an omnipotent force, pbuh).
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 17:07
|
|
|
Don't nerds also believe in alien civilizations? If every civilization follows the same exponential development path, then hypothetically another species has beaten us to the AI God punch by millions of years or more. Maybe they should be praying to that guy.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 17:08
|
|
|
Germstore posted:We could produce the silicon today if we knew what configuration to create it in, but that's like saying we could dump a bunch of neurons in a protein soup and get intelligence. The only process that we know of to create intelligence took almost 4 billion years (or an omnipotent force, pbuh). We have developed intelligent artificial lifeforms and it took a shitload less time than billions of years, we were doing it just fine on a platform we know with absolute certainty can support "human-like intelligence" before we even knew what electricity was because this reinventing-the-wheel bleepy bloopy robot poo poo is for chumps who aren't interested in useful innovation and only really care about becoming immortal data. A Wizard of Goatse fucked around with this message at 17:39 on Jan 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 17:17
|
|
|
Applewhite posted:What's even the point of building a human-like AI anyway? Isn't the whole point of robots is that they're too stupid to care that they're trapped doing boring, repetitive work all the time? It seems like building a human AI is just an overly complicated way of accomplishing exactly the same thing humans do every time we reproduce. If you were a human-like AI that didn't exist yet, wouldn't you want someone to create you? It's just the golden rule. This is the same principle, incidentally, that demands that humans have as many babies as possible.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 18:38
|
|
|
Applewhite posted:Don't nerds also believe in alien civilizations? If every civilization follows the same exponential development path, then hypothetically another species has beaten us to the AI God punch by millions of years or more. Maybe they should be praying to that guy. Most of the nerds who are into strong/weakly godlike AI also believe in a simulated reality. Whether we're in one or not is open to debate, (for nerds) but basically even an alien AI would be fine because it would be able to make us comprehend it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 19:00
|
|
|
A Wizard of Goatse posted:I might like this one a little better, where Kurzweil compensates for the tiny tiny sampling range of the era where computers have existed at all by showing the clear historical trend from the Cambrian era to the telephone... and beyond I love this chart because if you put actual dates on it instead of this "years ago" stuff, you'll see that continuing the line puts us at roughly twice-annual "events" in 2015. Next year we'll have to have at least six. Everybody ready?
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 19:07
|
|
|
SolTerrasa posted:I love this chart because if you put actual dates on it instead of this "years ago" stuff, you'll see that continuing the line puts us at roughly twice-annual "events" in 2015. Next year we'll have to have at least six. Everybody ready? pieces of wearable technology will become self aware and fuse together to become insanely lame cyborgs Crewmine fucked around with this message at 19:24 on Jan 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 19:11
|
|
|
Crewmine posted:insanely lame cyborgs  
Sham bam bamina! fucked around with this message at 19:19 on Jan 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 19:17
|
|
|
Sham bam bamina! posted:But those already exist? dear god... the singularity is already upon us
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 19:24
|
|
|
SolTerrasa posted:I love this chart because if you put actual dates on it instead of this "years ago" stuff, you'll see that continuing the line puts us at roughly twice-annual "events" in 2015. Next year we'll have to have at least six. Everybody ready? It looks to me like the singularity hit when we got writing and the wheel simultaneously a few thousand years ago in a single event. I wonder how the chart would look if we split those multi-event events into their component data points.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 19:35
|
|
|
All these assholes are probably in STEM careers or areas of study and they don't know that exponential growth always hits a limiting factor? I've been raising bunnies in my backyard. Good news, by my calculations I'll be able to feed every human on Earth in 10 years!
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 19:43
|
|
|
Nolanar posted:It looks to me like the singularity hit when we got writing and the wheel simultaneously a few thousand years ago in a single event. I wonder how the chart would look if we split those multi-event events into their component data points. Is there even a source for their base data or is it just hand-wavy guessing?
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 19:47
|
|
|
As cyborg technology increases, haircut technology regresses
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 19:52
|
|
|
Germstore posted:All these assholes are probably in STEM careers or areas of study and they don't know that exponential growth always hits a limiting factor? y=ex  Seriously though the barrier to godlike AI isn't our lack of computation power, it's our lack of algorithmic understanding. We haven't reverse-engineered the brain or anything close to that - even if someone gave us a fully capable proto-brain to program we wouldn't know what to do with it. You would expect that Yudkowsky would therefore spend his days and nights laboring to find ever-more-generic methods of Machine Learning to skirt closer and closer to the limit set forth by the No Free Lunch theorem, but instead he... ... What is it that he does, anyway? I remember he said something like "if Kevin Bacon could hear about the problem I'm working on his eyes would pop right out from their sockets", what problem is it? Are other computer scientists working on it?
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 20:41
|
|
|
Triple Elation posted:What is it that he does, anyway? Whether or not Harry Potter and Voldemort should make out.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 20:56
|
|
|
How do you program an Oedipus Complex?? The singularity is bullshit
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 20:59
|
|
|
Someday there will be a computer powerful enough to translate your fanfic into film-quality visuals.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 21:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 00:02 |
|
|
Applewhite posted:Someday there will be a computer powerful enough to translate your fanfic into film-quality visuals. "Gonna have to upgrade the system...we've hit the dick limit"
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2015 21:13
|
|