Most believers view this as the point in time when we will encounter superhuman intelligence – a merger between human and machine intelligence. Artificial intelligence (AI) with tech like Google Home is now commonplace, but by the time the singularity occurs, which is predicted by Kurzweil to be 2045, superintelligence will be much more common.
I wrote about the singularity in my article, “Too Late for the Singularity,” where I speculated that I might be too old, i.e. too late, to take advantage of life extending technologies. The year 2045 is only 27 years from now, so I’m expecting to experience some extraordinary technology in the meantime.
We all understand the idea of exponential growth in technology. Kurzweil predicts a gradual ascent to the singularity through a series of paradigm shifts brought on by technological growth. Others believe the singularity will occur quickly with technological advances becoming so commonplace, that it’s barely noticeable!
Whether it comes in quickly or slowly, do we really think the singularity will just happen, and nobody will resist it?
My theory is that a large portion of humanity will accept advanced technological changes, and they may evolve into something we may not recognize as human. But, I also believe a significant portion of humanity will resist change, and they will remain as a recognizable human community.
I call my theory “Humanity’s Resistance to Change,” or HRC. I wanted to see what would happen if I included the HRC factor in a simple exponential growth formula. A simple formula for exponential growth is f(x)=xa, where a > 1.
When we include the HRC factor, as shown in the chart below, where the letter “h” represents HRC in an exponential rate of change formula, f(x)=xa/h, the larger the “h” becomes, the more horizontal the line becomes, and the greater the deviation from the exponential growth of technology.
In his book, “The Singularity Is Near: When Humans Transcend Biology,” Kurzweil mentions that humanity may resist technological change, but I believe it will be more profound than he expects. My theory shows Humanity’s Resistance to Change and a slowing of the growth of technology as it relates to human beings.
https://www.desmos.com/calculator/d7dnmu5cuq
Although we can assume that humans will benefit from advances in genetics, nanotechnology, robotics, and computing and artificial intelligence technologies after the singularity, we will still eat, breath and interact as humans do now.
We may scrub genetic diseases from our genome, communicate entire concepts with one word, and have access to additional memory and computational resources at a thought, but we will still think and act like humans. We will feel emotions, hunger and pain. And, we will still feel love and have children.
That’s really the point of this post. I think humans will resist change and will resist becoming non-human. I believe the HRC factor will likely be high as we approach the singularity and it will likely inhibit the growth of technology that humans incorporate into their bodies and minds.
It’s scary to think about the singularity and what will happen. But, I’m positive about the future. Technology and artificial intelligence will be guided by humans, and as long as we have great minds working on it, resisting it where needed, and advancing it for the good of mankind, we’ll continue on as humans, existing and evolving!
“Beorn said something to [the dogs] in a queer language like animal noises turned into talk. They went out again and soon came back carrying torches in their mouths, which they lit at the fire and stuck in low brackets on the pillars of the hall about the central hearth. The dogs could stand on their hind-legs when they wished, and carry things with their fore-feet. Quickly they got out boards and trestles from the side walls and set them up near the fire.”
Tolkien probably considered this scene of animals setting up a feast for Bilbo and his companions completely fantastical when he wrote it in The Hobbit. Similarly, the idea of conversing with a dog like Dug in the Disney-Pixar movie Up is wonderful to imagine, but we know that it’s just fiction.
Or is it?
I’ve been thinking a lot lately about uplift as it applies to our pets. “Uplift” is a term that applies to the evolution (either natural or engineered) of animals to human-level intelligence and communication ability—think Planet of the Apes or The Island of Doctor Moreau. There is interesting work going on today focused on tapping in to our animals’ intelligence and moving them in our direction. Much of this research is aimed at working dogs—bomb sniffers, search and rescue workers, service companions—but the results will certainly expand out over time to those without jobs.
Georgia Institute of Technology is teaching dogs to talk, in a way. Project FIDO (Facilitating Interactions for Dogs with Occupations), sponsored by DARPA, has designed a canine vest furnished with various sensors. Each sensor signifies something different. The dogs are trained to use each in an appropriate context, so that, for example, a bomb sniffing dog cannot only tell its handler that it has found a bomb, it can tell the handler what kind of bomb it is.
In a search and rescue scenario, a dog can be equipped with a vest that includes a GPS transmitter. When the dog locates a person needing assistance, it will activate the sensor for the transmitter, and then stay with the person in need until help arrives. The vest has many applications for use with canine companions who assist people with disabilities.
Moving even closer in the direction of the dog, Dug, in the movie Up, the Nordic Society for Invention and Discovery is working on “No More Woof,” a headset that will translate canine thought patterns and communicate them via short sentences through a microphone. Wow! This is a combination of three technologies: electroencephalography sensors, microcomputing and brain-computer-interface software. Built-in processors analyze the dog’s brain patterns into recognizable feelings like hunger, anger or fatigue. The feelings would be verbalized with sentences like, “I’m hungry” or “What is that?”
While these examples tend to align animals to our way of thinking and communicating, other research is training us to get better at recognizing their ways of receiving messages. Neuroscientists at Eotvos Lorand University in Hungary have used MRIs to learn more about how dogs process human communication. They have discovered that canines can process both meaning (left hemisphere of the brain) and voice tone (right hemisphere). This is an interesting finding, but it may be an even more significant achievement getting these dogs to remain still inside an MRI unit, allowing analysis of brain functions while awake!
All of these achievements leave me wondering—who is doing the uplifting? While we teach our pets to think and communicate the way we want them to, we are gaining insight into how they think and communicate.
We may not reach the point where we are like Beorn, and our dogs help us entertain guests by setting tables and serving meals. Still, we are much closer to real communication with our pets than Tolkien probably ever thought we would be. Research is turning what was once strictly fantasy into reality. It’s not a stretch anymore to think about having conversations with our canine family members. I can hardly wait!
We were horrified. My father was a police officer. He worked narcotics and our nightmare was that he would not come home one day. That nightmare came true for five families in Dallas, and our hearts go out to them.
It may be hard to believe this, but the most horrifying thing that happened that evening is not that five police officers were killed, it is that the government killed a U.S. citizen with a robot. This is the first time that a robot has killed a U.S. citizen on U.S. soil.
This is a line that should not have been crossed.
Dallas PD Chief David Brown defended his department’s actions, claiming that this was the only way to keep additional police officers from dying. Chief Brown said, “Other options would have exposed our officers to grave danger.” I understand his position, and why he authorized the use of the robot to kill Micah Johnson.
However, allowing the government to kill citizens with robots is a very bad idea. Anyone who has watched The Terminator knows this is a bad idea. It’s one step away from a T-70 terminator robot. All we need to add is artificial intelligence.
All of the emotion evoked by police officers killing citizens, and citizens killing police officers, is drawing attention away from the most important thing that happened last Thursday night. A robot killed a citizen! Is this what we want in our society? The ability for robots to kill humans? I say no!
Now is the time to make Azimov’s first law in the “Laws of Robotics” a federal law. The first law reads, “A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Laws_of_Robotics
Some may say that robots don’t kill humans – humans with robots kill humans. This is where we should draw the line. Even if it puts humans at risk in the short term, robots should not kill U.S. citizens on U.S. soil.
As the years go by, and I grow older, I wonder if I will be like that old man… will I wish I had more time? Am I too late for the singularity?
The idea of the singularity originated with Irving J. Good in his 1965 book, Speculations Concerning the First Ultraintelligent Machine. The idea gained more attention with Vernor Vinge’s 1986 book, Marooned in Realtime, and in his 1993 paper, The Coming Technological Singularity: How to Survive in the Post-Human Era.
I became more interested in the singularity when I read Ray Kurzweil’s 2006 book,
The Singularity Is Near: When Humans Transcend Biology
Kurzweil brought the concept of the singularity into the main stream. He explained it in terms we could all understand, and gave us his predictions of what to expect including life extension technologies.
Kurzweil’s singularity is well documented, although controversial, and based on what he calls mathematical or astrophysical singularity. Most people associate the singularity with a black hole, or a “gravitational singularity.” That is the point at which matter has no volume and infinite density, and the curvature of space-time is infinite.
Another term commonly associated with black holes is an “event horizon.” An event horizon is the boundary near a black hole, where the pull of gravity is so strong that light or information can’t escape. Therefore, it’s impossible to know what events take place beyond the event horizon. The technological event horizon is similar. It’s the boundary nearest the technological singularity, beyond which we have no way of knowing what happens.
There are a couple of things we know about the technological singularity:
It’s coming. The rate of technological growth is increasing exponentially. Although it’s a cliché, the smartphone is the best example of the exponential growth of technology. Compared to the smartphones of today, the original smartphones appear to be crude, archaic devices.
Technology that’s impossible today, will become possible. Life extension technology is the best example of what is now impossible, but will quickly become a reality as we approach the technological event horizon.
I’ve been afraid that I’ll be just a little too late to benefit from the technology we’ll create as we close in on the event horizon. My mind buzzes with the scenarios. Can you imagine laying in your death bed, and watching a news report about the latest life extending technologies, only to realize that it’s too late for you to use them? I may be too late for the singularity, but then again…maybe not.
