[Flatland]

Okay, maybe the title was a bit of an exaggeration, but here's the deal. In about a quarter century or so there will be a technological "singularity" that is going to change the face of humanity as we know it today. In this world, people will be able to "live" their wants and fantasies in a tangible environment via virtual reality. Sure, there are many problems that would stem from that, but at least some people will begin to realize that political squabbling really is pointless. If you don't know what transhumanism or the singularity is, you will be interested if you look it up.

[Dr House]

You're a little too optimistic about the technological singularity. I think it'd look more like a grey goo scenario. When machines get smart enough to reproduce and sustain themselves they won't need us, so they'll exterminate us.

[Flatland]

That's true and I in all respects agree with you. But you do acknowledge that this is an event that is inevitable, right? So I guess all we can do is hope for the best and prepare for the worst.

[Dr House]

Why would it be inevitable? We can just... yunno... not make machines capable of building themselves and outthinking us.

[Lensky1917]

Why would it be inevitable? We can just... yunno... not make machines capable of building themselves and outthinking us.

Machines are already used to create machines. Plus machines don't think, they compute. Also, I'll beat the silicone out of my computer the nanosecond it starts misbehaving in an irregular way.

[Dr House]

Technological singularity means it's smarter than you. And since it's probably gonna be stronger, it'll subdue you and kill you.

[NYYS]

Just don't make them so they can think for themselves. Or make them so they can think for themselves but don't give them legs or arms. Or make sure they need to be attached to a wall at all times. Skynet could have been defeated easily if someone just tripped over the extension cord.

[ThereBeDragons]

Why would it be inevitable? We can just... yunno... not make machines capable of building themselves and outthinking us.

Hence why a large world government is needed to regulate everything.

[PBVBROOK]

It may well be that in the same time frame we will defeat death also.

It will be an interesting time.

[Dr House]

Hence why a large world government is needed to regulate everything.

Over my fucking dead body.

[nilof]

Get it to compute how to make cyborg impovements that make us smarter then it is, simple as that.

[Flatland]

There is a logical fallicy that regulations will keep this technology from rolling. The mere fear that "the other" will get their hands on such a technology first will render any sort of regulation useless. Imagine that if you were the leader of a nation losing in war or the leader of a about-to-be hunted down terrorist organization, what would you have to lose to create such a machine? Any desperate man or organization in the world would forget the possibilites of a bad consequence and decide to kick start a superhuman AI. This in turn will cause the US or other countries to consider their own in response.

[Kleptonis]

I'm not entirely sure where everyone got the idea that robots are just itching to kill us once they get the intelligence to do so. I'm not saying that the singularity is going to be fun or that robots will serve us forever, but I think the idea that they'd hunt us down one by one is largely invented by Hollywood.

As far as I'm concerned, PBVBROOK really said all you can say about the singularity: "It will be an interesting time."

[Flatland]

I'm sure it will lead to at least slightly good results(as opposed to neutrality of technology) because many people realize that this could be the ultimate form of escapism. That is my reasoning behind an increased chance of world peace but by no means is it going to certain.

[Dr House]

I'm not entirely sure where everyone got the idea that robots are just itching to kill us once they get the intelligence to do so.

Because we'd likely be a brake to their own progress and a threat to them. Either that or if they were programmed to protect and serve us they might take it upon themselves to protect us from ourselves.

many people realize that this could be the ultimate form of escapism.

Oh, I most definitely realize that. A world where machines do all our work would be utopia, but the problem is what if the machines are allowed to think, they might see us as a nuisance and get rid of us.

-Dr House

[Lensky1917]

I just want to point out that this thread has nothing to do with Technocracy, and would be more appropriate for somewhere like Gorkiy Park. This is not a general 'technology' forum.

Thanks!

Isn't this thread merely pointing out the dangers inherent of a "Technocracy"? All the other ideological subforums receive these criticizing threads, why should yours be any different?

I myself have posted a thread that you deemed "off-topic" which seems to me was just fine. What it was going into was man evolving with the technology he created. Combining to become one. Would this not contribute to a peaceful society like Technocracy's objective?

Plus, how much traffic do you really get in here anyway?

[Flatland]

Oh, I most definitely realize that. A world where machines do all our work would be utopia, but the problem is what if the machines are allowed to think, they might see us as a nuisance and get rid of us.

There are two scenarios:
1. Create intelligence beyond that of human. This could kill us for some reason, or we will have to constantly worry about them turning on us. To me, both are the same, or the latter one could be psychologically worse.

2. We merge and become a cyborg race. And then enter the singularity. This is the optimistic view of the future.

[Guph]

The OP would probably enjoy this (despite the author's irritatingly repetitive writing style). It's about a proposed future where we all exist as disembodied brains in full-time virtual-reality machines, after gleefully discarding our primitive, clunky bodies. I don't remember it addressing who would maintain the machinery; it would have to be robots, since nobody would want to live as an "old fashioned" human, according to the proposal. Nor does it bother acknowledging the hundred and one possible doomsday scenarios it raises, but that's utopianism for you.