You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: We can now design humans — but should we?

in #life7 years ago

I would have to disagree with you on the comment "A singularity would be the end of the human race." It might spell out the end of the Human Race, but in and of itself, it just defines that point in which Artificial Intelligence equals or advances beyond the computational power of all Human Brains.

For all we know, in the intervening 20-or-so-years (by about 2045, when Kurzweil predicts the Singularity to start) Humanity will right itself and become more nucleic in nature. This, of course, is the Optimistic View where we see Humans interacting on a course towards Peace and Unity, contrasting so many Pessimistic Views where AI enslaves or destroys Humanity.

I tend to slide in more at a Middle Ground (which is why I call myself a Realist). I believe, personally, that we have enough knowledge right now and are trending towards a desire for Peace; however, there are a monumental number of war-mongering/hate-filled neoplastic people that it will be very difficult for the messages of Peace to fully absorb through our Global Culture.

I do agree with you that decentralization will be an asset in resisting the more negative outcome where Humanity is enslaved or needs to fight against Robotic/AI enslavement (a la I, Robot).

Sort:  

That sounds like a very good answer, but the way I understand the singularity is that robots don't just achieve human intelligence, they surpass. This kind of thing is really no different for us than the "P = NP". The only way it could happen is if our brains cannot grasp reality. That is the direction of thinking that concludes it is the end. We could still try to fuse and become cyborgs and that would allow us to compete because our brains would work better for some time though