5 ms·

> There is no reason to believe in a singularity. There are reasons, and the proponents aren't shy about stating them. > Technological progress follows a sigm

> There is no reason to believe in a singularity. There are reasons, and the proponents aren't shy about stating them. > Technological progress follows a sigmoid pattern not an exponential pattern. That's true, but you don't know in advance where it will start to flatten. > No significant new physics applicable to humans has been discovered since maybe the 1970s or 80s It really depends on what you call "new physics". There are lots of discoveries related to quantum dots, graphene, high-temperature superconductivity, meta materials etc. Those aren't really "new" in the sense that they contradict the Schrödinger equation, but that was also true for Giant magnetoresistance, which was crucial for magnetic hard drives. Heck, a new form of magnetism was discovered just last year, first published in December 2024 (see https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-024-08234-x https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-024-08234-x for example).

morpheos137 2y ago
Where in nature, outside supposedly, black holes do we see singularities? Humans and all human technology are a product of nature, why should we expect abstract "intelligence" resulting from human technology to accumulate into a singularity (unregulated positive feedback) instead of being subject to limiting constraints like every other natural phenomenon? Belief in a singularity is the most irrational thing I have heard of. Supernatural things like the resurrection of Christ seem more likely than the Kurzweil/Yudkowski singularity. The idea appeals to people who don't understand what intelligence is. I first heard of it and rejected it in high school more than 20 years ago. Yudkowski didn't graduate highschool or go to college so he spent his time using his verbal skills to convince people he knew what he was talking about when in fact he is less of an authority in his field than even a moderately educated, intelligent person. The fact this stuff continues to appeal to silicon valley types just goes to show they are not in fact much different from populist conspiracy believers in fly over country. It is kind of funny actually to me, especially how these folks call themselves "rationalists..."

morpheos137 2y ago

Where in nature, outside supposedly, black holes do we see singularities? Humans and all human technology are a product of nature, why should we expect abstract "intelligence" resulting from human technology to accumulate into a singularity (unregulated positive feedback) instead of being subject to limiting constraints like every other natural phenomenon? Belief in a singularity is the most irrational thing I have heard of. Supernatural things like the resurrection of Christ seem more likely than the Kurzweil/Yudkowski singularity. The idea appeals to people who don't understand what intelligence is. I first heard of it and rejected it in high school more than 20 years ago. Yudkowski didn't graduate highschool or go to college so he spent his time using his verbal skills to convince people he knew what he was talking about when in fact he is less of an authority in his field than even a moderately educated, intelligent person. The fact this stuff continues to appeal to silicon valley types just goes to show they are not in fact much different from populist conspiracy believers in fly over country. It is kind of funny actually to me, especially how these folks call themselves "rationalists..."