3 ms·

It's an old idea, "the singularity". The machines become smart enough to improve themselves, and each improvement results in shorter (or more significant) impro

It's an old idea, "the singularity". The machines become smart enough to improve themselves, and each improvement results in shorter (or more significant) improvement cycles. This leads to an exponential growth rate. It's been promised to be around the corner for decades. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technological_singularity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technological_singularity

johnfn 7mo ago
To be fair, Ray Kurzweil has been the loudest voice in this space, and he's been pretty consistent on 2045 since the publication of his book almost 20 years ago[1]. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Singularity_Is_Near https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Singularity_Is_Near
- hattmall 7mo ago
  He just had to pick a year where he would have a very good chance of not being alive.
  - andsoitis 7mo ago
    No, he started predicting in his 2005 book, based on the “Law of Accelerating Returns”, yielding exponential growth in computing capacity. Timeline from here on out: 2029: AI passes a valid Turing test and achieves human-level intelligence 2030s: Technology goes inside your brain to augment memory; humans connect their neocortex to the cloud 2045: The Singularity, when human intelligence multiplies a billion-fold by merging with AI
- Jtsummers 7mo ago
  Per that summary, we were supposed to have $1000 computers that could simulate your mind by the start of this decade along with brain scanning by this point in the decade. I guess if it is truly an exponential or hyperbolic growth rate, the singularity could catch up to his predicted date.
  - johnfn 7mo ago
    I mean, an LLM isn’t too far away from this? He had the Turing test being defeated in 2029 - if anything, he was too pessimistic.
    - Jtsummers 7mo ago
      The Turing test demonstrates human gullibility more than it demonstrates machine intelligence. Some people were convinced that ELIZA was a person. But sure, a test that doesn't actually demonstrate intelligence has been passed. Now, where are the $1000 computers that can simulate a human mind and the brain scans to populate them with minds?
      - johnfn 7mo ago
        He doesn't say 'simulate' a human brain unless I'm missing it in the summary (cmd-f "simul" has no results) - that would require significantly more capacity than that contained in a brain (think about how much compute it takes to run a VM). He seems to be implying that by 2020s a computer will be about as smart as a human. LLMs seem capable of doing a decent amount of tasks that a human can do? Sure, he's off by a few years, but for something published 20 years ago when that seemed insane, it doesn't seem that bad.
        Jtsummers 7mo ago
        Fair, the term in the summary is "emulate". So to restate, still waiting for the $1000 machine that can emulate human intelligence and the brain scans to go with it. Computing power is nowhere near what he predicted, because unlike his predictions reality happened. Compute capabilities, like many other things, is a logistic curve, not an unbounded exponential or hyperbolic. EDIT: > LLMs seem capable of doing a decent amount of tasks that a human can do? And computers could beat most humans for decades at chess. Cars can go faster than a human can run, and have been able to beat a human runner since essentially their invention. Machines doing human tasks or besting humans is not new. That doesn't mean we're approaching the singularity, you may as well believe that the Heaven's Gate folks were right, both are based on unreality.

johnfn 7mo ago

To be fair, Ray Kurzweil has been the loudest voice in this space, and he's been pretty consistent on 2045 since the publication of his book almost 20 years ago[1]. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Singularity_Is_Near https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Singularity_Is_Near

hattmall 7mo ago
He just had to pick a year where he would have a very good chance of not being alive.
- andsoitis 7mo ago
  No, he started predicting in his 2005 book, based on the “Law of Accelerating Returns”, yielding exponential growth in computing capacity. Timeline from here on out: 2029: AI passes a valid Turing test and achieves human-level intelligence 2030s: Technology goes inside your brain to augment memory; humans connect their neocortex to the cloud 2045: The Singularity, when human intelligence multiplies a billion-fold by merging with AI
Jtsummers 7mo ago
Per that summary, we were supposed to have $1000 computers that could simulate your mind by the start of this decade along with brain scanning by this point in the decade. I guess if it is truly an exponential or hyperbolic growth rate, the singularity could catch up to his predicted date.
- johnfn 7mo ago
  I mean, an LLM isn’t too far away from this? He had the Turing test being defeated in 2029 - if anything, he was too pessimistic.
  - Jtsummers 7mo ago
    The Turing test demonstrates human gullibility more than it demonstrates machine intelligence. Some people were convinced that ELIZA was a person. But sure, a test that doesn't actually demonstrate intelligence has been passed. Now, where are the $1000 computers that can simulate a human mind and the brain scans to populate them with minds?
    - johnfn 7mo ago
      He doesn't say 'simulate' a human brain unless I'm missing it in the summary (cmd-f "simul" has no results) - that would require significantly more capacity than that contained in a brain (think about how much compute it takes to run a VM). He seems to be implying that by 2020s a computer will be about as smart as a human. LLMs seem capable of doing a decent amount of tasks that a human can do? Sure, he's off by a few years, but for something published 20 years ago when that seemed insane, it doesn't seem that bad.
      - Jtsummers 7mo ago
        Fair, the term in the summary is "emulate". So to restate, still waiting for the $1000 machine that can emulate human intelligence and the brain scans to go with it. Computing power is nowhere near what he predicted, because unlike his predictions reality happened. Compute capabilities, like many other things, is a logistic curve, not an unbounded exponential or hyperbolic. EDIT: > LLMs seem capable of doing a decent amount of tasks that a human can do? And computers could beat most humans for decades at chess. Cars can go faster than a human can run, and have been able to beat a human runner since essentially their invention. Machines doing human tasks or besting humans is not new. That doesn't mean we're approaching the singularity, you may as well believe that the Heaven's Gate folks were right, both are based on unreality.