Humanity Confuses Me.

[DonQuixote]

(click to show/hide)

PARTY HARD!
                     PARTY HARD!

[Kethrian]

I expect the singularity is still 50 - 200 years off, depending on whether computer tech advancements stagnate for very long (and they will hit a lull).

@DonQuixote: If Up is your retirement plan, then all the power to ya!

[bhu]

Trust me, when one has to do some more serious research in physics, computers and medicine, singularity is the least of our worries. Software is still head-banging stupid at the best of time, people are still incredibly squishy and we develop new ways of killing and maiming ourselves much faster than we find ways of restoring our health. Also medics seem to be geting more incompetent nowadays despite their suposedly more advanced tools, as they seem unable to identify a simple cold whitout asking for a dozen expensive analyzis procedures first (and then still have no idea what's wrong with you)

Part of thats tech fatigue.  The further we advance the more certain professions need to learn and remember.  There's a point at which they'll run out of room.

[darqueseid]

Technology can be a great boon, we have come so far as a species, its exciting to me(and many others) to think about where we can possibly go.
I do think that the singularity will happen at some point.  It is only logical to assume that intelligences greater than our own will exist in the future.  I would like to point out that our intelligence(in the aggregate) is much greater than the original humans, or than even a human from 100 years ago.  Although the structure of our brains haven't changed much across 10000 years, the sheer volume of information we are putting into our brains is increasing constantly.  Our brains are constantly evolving, not physically, but in terms of new ideas and new information.
You see the human mind has made us the dominant species not because we are particularly smart at specific tasks, animals and even computers are better at certain things than we are, but because our brains are adaptable.  We may never be able to out-math a computer, but we can certainly out-learn a computer, it is this capacity for adaptation(and invention) that made us the dominant species on earth. 
It is illogical to assume that our intelligence has reached its peak, so far our brains have taken in everything that we've thrown at them and more(and we only use 5% of it right?),  I find it hard to imagine that we can't handle more advancement-I don't think we're running out of room anytime soon. 

To the larger point about technology, if you look at the evolution of technology, we have gone from the wheel to putting a man on the moon in a relatively short period of time solving a host of problems along the way(especially in terms of evolutionary scales).  There is no reason to doubt that technology can't one day solve all the problems we are currently faced with.   And considering the adaptability of the human brain, the advanced intelligences we create may in fact be our own. 

As far as living beyond a century is concerned, I fully expect to, and hope that technology will eventually allow death to become a choice, not a necessity-maybe not in my lifetime, but one day.   

Not to say that we don't have our problems as a species, or as a society; the things that we should revere are intelligence, humanity, good will towards others; instead we venerate the kardashians, and foist great wealth and fame upon silly entertainments.  How screwed up are we that we let our teachers and policemen and firemen live on food stamps, but actors get to live in the lap of luxury-we seriously need to get our priorities straight...

[oslecamo]

It is illogical to assume that our intelligence has reached its peak, so far our brains have taken in everything that we've thrown at them and more(and we only use 5% of it right?),  I find it hard to imagine that we can't handle more advancement-I don't think we're running out of room anytime soon. 

Oh for Vecna's sake, cut that one out already! It's been already proven for some time that yes, we do use our whole brains already. It's just that it's quite hard telling when neurons are working (they don't flash or make sound or produce any special substances).

To the larger point about technology, if you look at the evolution of technology, we have gone from the wheel to putting a man on the moon in a relatively short period of time solving a host of problems along the way(especially in terms of evolutionary scales).  There is no reason to doubt that technology can't one day solve all the problems we are currently faced with.   

Yes, we've solved quite a bit of problems. However there's even more problems that were left unsolved. We can  put a person in the moon , we still can't fix that person if their head is split in half. A problem worrying sages since the dawns of mankind.

And considering the adaptability of the human brain, the advanced intelligences we create may in fact be our own. 

As far as living beyond a century is concerned, I fully expect to, and hope that technology will eventually allow death to become a choice, not a necessity-maybe not in my lifetime, but one day.   

Entropy says otherwise. Everything wears down and decays one way or the other. You can't have true immortality if you can't solve entropy, and you can't solve entropy unless everything we know about physics is wrong.

Not to say that we don't have our problems as a species, or as a society; the things that we should revere are intelligence, humanity, good will towards others; instead we venerate the kardashians, and foist great wealth and fame upon silly entertainments.  How screwed up are we that we let our teachers and policemen and firemen live on food stamps, but actors get to live in the lap of luxury-we seriously need to get our priorities straight...

And now we're geting somewhere. We could feed pretty much everybody in the planet, and treat their diseases to boost. But that wouldn't bring in fat profits. Instead developed countries actually go out of their way to pay farmers to don't farm and destroy excess food stocks to keep prices high.

And yes, a goddamn football player receives much more for kicking a piece of leather than a physics doctor doing critical research while teaching students the secrets of the universe.

Because people are still individuals at their hearts, and think of themselves first. They don't need to outrun that hungry bear. They just need to outrun you and then escape while the bear chews on you. And they'll probably try to trip you if you seem faster.

So tell me, if we can't even share food, what makes you think that we would share any kind of life-extending super techs?

[veekie]

Oh yes, seconding the 5% thing. You use all of your brain, you just don't do it all at the same time, because different parts are used for different things.

If the whole thing lights up you're having a seizure.

[darqueseid]

Sharing? who ever said anything about sharing? I fully expect that the life extending technologies wouldn't be available to the poor, or those in impoverished nations.  In fact, I assume that only the wealthy elites would have access to the technology, at least at first.  Yet another reason to change who we bestow said riches upon, if jessica simpson gets to live forever, but a teacher doesn't.. your right, I'm not sure I'd want to live forever in a world like that... 

[DonQuixote]

I've also never really understood the appeal of living forever.  I mean, what are you going to DO with all that time?

[veekie]

I expect we'll find something.

[Tshern]

I've also never really understood the appeal of living forever.  I mean, what are you going to DO with all that time?

Think about living forever and retiring at 65 or so. Living on pension for a couple of centuries sounds like a real downer.

[Prime32]

I've also never really understood the appeal of living forever.  I mean, what are you going to DO with all that time?

Think about living forever and retiring at 65 or so. Living on pension for a couple of centuries sounds like a real downer.

Presumably if you're immortal you'd age slower or not at all, so retirement wouldn't come that easily.

As for running out of things to do, how many people do you know who've run out of things to do? They're coming up with new things faster than you can do them!

Besides overcrowding the biggest problem with a society of immortals is that if old people don't die, old ideas don't die either. The younger generations end up with little or no say in anything, and society becomes stagnant.

[oslecamo]

Retirement becomes an obsolete concept once immortality kicks in. Retirement only works if you've got a much bigger working population than the "retired" one. We're already experimenting that problem, since people now live healthier (and thus longer), but then they also cost more in retirement, whitout there really being an increase on the workforce to make up for it.

 Altough I guess one could implement the "sabatic" system, where you work 5 years and then get a "free" year to do whatever you fancy, then another 5 years of work and so on.

As for running out of things to do, how many people do you know who've run out of things to do? They're coming up with new things faster than you can do them!

Geting enough time to play all computer games RPGs out there sounds awfully tempting I admit.

The biggest problem with a society of immortals is that if old people don't die, old ideas don't die either. The younger generations end up with little or no say in anything, and society becomes stagnant.

Now this would indeed be a big problem. I even remember some philosopher saying that you can only change a society by teaching new things to the youngsters and waiting for the previous generation to die out.

And like some other said, the worst thing than a mad tyrant is a mad tyrant that won't even die of old age.

[bhu]

Retirement becomes an obsolete concept once immortality kicks in. Retirement only works if you've got a much bigger working population than the "retired" one. We're already experimenting that problem, since people now live healthier (and thus longer), but then they also cost more in retirement, whitout there really being an increase on the workforce to make up for it.

Part of that is changing mores too.  In the 70's or earlier you were husband, wife, and children as a family unit or society shunned you.  People don't want or believe in marriage nearly as much now, and the same goes for having 2 or more kids.  Sex for purposes other than procreation is the norm, and sexualities that include relationships that would be childless other than for adoption are becoming accepted slowly.  Plus there's abortion and the pill.  When the boomers die off this will alleviate to some extent.  Sooner if abortion is banned but then the crime rate will go up again as well.

[darqueseid]

I don't think an immortal society automatically has the problems you mentioned,
#1, the universe is rather large, hell even our local system has planets that could be terraformed or domed to sustain human life.  Sure we may not be able to colonize space right now, but this is a future society where we've halted death, I don't think space will be a limiting factor.
#2, if we're not in any immediate danger of dying, then procreation becomes far less important.  sure people may want to have children, but having hundreds of them becomes less and less imperative.  Additionally, advances in birth control could give people even greater control of when they have a child.
#3 I like the idea of the sabatic system, how do we get that instituted now?? ;-)
#4 just because somone is old doesn't mean they can't have new ideas, I would suspect that new ideas and mores, if they are genuinely better, would still come about, just without the impatience of youth.  An immortal society would eventually accept genuinely better mores and Ideas regardless, it just may take a few centuries...

[kitep]

Retirement becomes an obsolete concept once immortality kicks in. Retirement only works if you've got a much bigger working population than the "retired" one.

Thing is, the Singularity also results in A.I. and robots doing (almost) all the work.  There won't be any jobs to retire from.  This can be good if the humongous robot population is supporting the "retired" human population, bad if all the wealth goes to a handful.

[oslecamo]

Retirement becomes an obsolete concept once immortality kicks in. Retirement only works if you've got a much bigger working population than the "retired" one.

Thing is, the Singularity also results in A.I. and robots doing (almost) all the work.  There won't be any jobs to retire from.  This can be good if the humongous robot population is supporting the "retired" human population, bad if all the wealth goes to a handful.

The singularity doesn't result in anything, since it's as realist as believing that all deity pantheons exist in reality right now. Seriously it's basically a religion, but replace " divine paradise with angels" with "magic high tech world with robots", both sharing the foundation that they have no basis whatever in reality, just delusional wish-fulfilling that's been around since the dawns of history.

At best, in the very far fetched scenario that robots somehow do become better and cheaper than humans at everything, then humans themselves become obsolete, and most of us will be royally screwed because you can bet your ass that whoever's or whatever's in power has negative reasons to sustain your ass for free.

Again, we could feed everybody in the planet and cure most of their diseases. But we don't. Because for the people in charge, there's no direct gain in granting free dinners to everybody. So if they have super-magic-rainbow-fantastic robots to do their work, your best hope is to become some kind of exotic pet, and you'll have to work pretty hard to be a damn good pet to keep them entertained. More likely you'll be exterminated as a pest, or simply thrown into some forgoten corner to rot.

[Tshern]

If only a small minority of people can afford to purchase the means to be nigh-immortal (as suggested earlier), it certainly wouldn't have an impact on retirement legislation. Also, the comment was a joke more than anything else.

[Dan2]

The singularity doesn't result in anything, since it's as realist as believing that all deity pantheons exist in reality right now. Seriously it's basically a religion, but replace " divine paradise with angels" with "magic high tech world with robots", both sharing the foundation that they have no basis whatever in reality, just delusional wish-fulfilling that's been around since the dawns of history.
-snip-

There's a problem with this statement, in that it is wrong, particularly my bolded section.  Now, I will grant that the concept of a technological singularity in infeasible, perhaps even impossible for a number of reasons.  However, that does not mean that it can be disregarded as having no basis in reality, because that isn't true.  The singularity is/was a prediction of the future based on current trends in technology development.  Based on the rate at which computational power is growing, and the fact that we already have robots working and accomplishing tasks, the technological singularity can be arrived at by induction.
Now, it's probably impossible in the purest sense of the idea; where the artificially intelligent become more intelligent than humans, and use that knowledge to create even more advanced versions of themselves, possibly taking humanity along for the ride.  Eventually, that will run into hard limits one way or another.

Moving back on-topic:
Humanity surprises me in some ways, but at the same time, I can't find anything that it does surprising.  Every so often, I'll happen across a new invention, a new song or musical style, a dance I've never seen, ridiculous legislation that somehow got passed, or a video of brutality.  During those times, I am genuinely surprised.  It's hard not to form expectations about how people are supposed to act and about what we're capable of.  But then I take a step back, and I remember that people are people.  People have been making horrible mistakes and accomplishing impossible things since time immemorial.  I find it difficult to find humanity that surprising, so much as it is eminently understandable as well as delightful or horrifying.

[darqueseid]

The singularity doesn't result in anything, since it's as realist as believing that all deity pantheons exist in reality right now. Seriously it's basically a religion, but replace " divine paradise with angels" with "magic high tech world with robots", both sharing the foundation that they have no basis whatever in reality, just delusional wish-fulfilling that's been around since the dawns of history.
-snip-

There's a problem with this statement, in that it is wrong, particularly my bolded section.  Now, I will grant that the concept of a technological singularity in infeasible, perhaps even impossible for a number of reasons.  However, that does not mean that it can be disregarded as having no basis in reality, because that isn't true.  The singularity is/was a prediction of the future based on current trends in technology development.  Based on the rate at which computational power is growing, and the fact that we already have robots working and accomplishing tasks, the technological singularity can be arrived at by induction.
Now, it's probably impossible in the purest sense of the idea; where the artificially intelligent become more intelligent than humans, and use that knowledge to create even more advanced versions of themselves, possibly taking humanity along for the ride.  Eventually, that will run into hard limits one way or another.

Moving back on-topic:
Humanity surprises me in some ways, but at the same time, I can't find anything that it does surprising.  Every so often, I'll happen across a new invention, a new song or musical style, a dance I've never seen, ridiculous legislation that somehow got passed, or a video of brutality.  During those times, I am genuinely surprised.  It's hard not to form expectations about how people are supposed to act and about what we're capable of.  But then I take a step back, and I remember that people are people.  People have been making horrible mistakes and accomplishing impossible things since time immemorial.  I find it difficult to find humanity that surprising, so much as it is eminently understandable as well as delightful or horrifying.

+1,

The scariest thing about the singularity is not how much like a religion it is, its that it's actually possible even likely in some form.  If heaven or hell had as much of a likelyhood of existing you'd see alot more people in churches.

[phaedrusxy]

Entropy says otherwise. Everything wears down and decays one way or the other. You can't have true immortality if you can't solve entropy, and you can't solve entropy unless everything we know about physics is wrong.

Yes, it's true that we can't outlive the heat death of the universe. Anything short of that should be theoretically possible, though... I think I can live with that.