3 ms·

I actually think that the “singularity” in the broad sense that there will come a time in the next century or so where technology will develop too fast for huma

I actually think that the “singularity” in the broad sense that there will come a time in the next century or so where technology will develop too fast for human beings to keep up with it without radical changes to our way of life is almost a foregone conclusion, I don’t see how you can look at the past century and not think there will be radical changes ahead of us. It’s the idea that these changes will be necessarily positive, or that they will lead to the benefits that Kurzweil et al so desperately want, that is largely wishful thinking. The future will be beautiful and horrible in equal measure, and expect that while some things will get better, some things will get much, much worse.

alexandercrohde 8y ago
> is almost a foregone conclusion I agree. I think an economic singularity should be a given, based on the fact that all economic ROI is at least exponential (pe^(rt)) and has consistently performed exponentially for over 100 years. The notion that this will mean a happiness singularity, complete freedom of choice for everyone, or even human survival are up for debate.
- skybrian 8y ago
  Exponential curves have a tendency to turn into S-curves when fundamental limits are reached. Aircraft might be the most obvious example. Moore's law is looking that way as well. We can expect this to be true of other business models as well; the question is where the limits are.
Avshalom 8y ago
>technology will develop too fast for human beings to keep up with it so, I mean, what's the business model.