Added: 5 years ago
From: dougwolens
Views: 36,774
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (179)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • smells of bullshit numbers to me as if the average life expectancy was 25 in ancient egypt their were people in ancient greece who were helathy "had all their own teeth" in their 70's and 80's.

    i know of dogs that live older than 20 and surely even the most early humans would live longer than primates do today.

    Seems like Ray is manipulating data to fit whatever paterns he wants and makes everthing esle he says lack any credibility interesting though it is.

  • Does Ray speak French as well?

  • all the other people look so bored, one is even on his laptop haha

  • Does hofstadter speak at this summit? I know he doesn't agree with Kurzweil.

  • I won't dwell on this . . . but I'm kind of a big deal.

  • What if you could apply this artificial intelligence to word and equation recognition and have a computer take the data. Then, you get it to learn apply and iterate the formulas in the design of a specific system. Once you achieve this give it a more generalized design problem with specific requirements and hook it into a database to iterate the best possible solutions.

  • wow

  • Check out 01:42 - as a programmer, I've written a lot of code that utilized a "random" function - it's an easy trick to pull off. I always thought my "random" scripts make my programs seem more alive.

  • there exist proof that perfect antivir sofware DOESNT exist, not that perfect antivir has NP complexity, it's simply doexnt exist, like algorithm for Post problem doesn't

  • Understanding the singularity and its full potential should be enough for a person to know some capability's of a higher beings handiwork in our existence, for any person to think mankind is the first to accomplish this singularity is ignorance. The notion there will be intelligence inside a machine should lead us to reason we are intelligence inside a machine explaining how resurrection is very plausible. Science may have very well have proven the existence of God without even knowing it .

  • @Php48 Are you suggesting God and Jesus are robots? I must have missed that part of the Bible...you'd think people in the Gospels would have noticed. You make 0 sense...super-intelligent robots created by humans will, if anything, be further evidence against a God. If he made us perfect why should we have the drive, or even the ability, to create such intelligences?

  • @bernlin2000,, Sorry for making 0 sense to you. Imagine a virtual reality where artificial intelligent beings live, now imagine if those beings created a virtual reality with intelligent beings living in it and so on. By the way I hope God & Jesus are beings that have access to reality's above ours, but chances are there technologically advanced aliens that genetically engineered us so they could play as God.

  • as much i consider ray kurzweil, pranav mistry, george whiteside , craig venter & larry brilliant as modern heroes...

    the only true downside i see is not immediately in bio-terrorism but in hardwiring & hardWARE - is in war. check these two links with this point proven by a scary talk & demo by PW Singer -

  • See arthur c clarke's final dvd '3001' and any negativity towards people we

    all should revere as FAR more positive and prophetic and beneficial to humanity

    rather than ill informed medieval dogma that is sadly sweeping the news - Thankfully a handful of brave people with clout are finally speaking out - RE pope's recent UK visit. Stephen Hawking, Richard Dawkins & Christopher Hiytchens. But Ray PROVES - no prob except in the US where bloggers, zealouts & critics will be redundant globally..

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • What will we do once machines do everything for us?

  • Darn. Why youtube dont allow me to reply other's posts?

  • There's the crux, "little problems... like death."

    Could the decision to go down the wormhole of technological singularity instead of biological death be an exponential dehumanization from which one can never return?

  • who knows!...its should be a personal choice if you want to die or keep searching for answers that may or not become apparent......most ppl would die if they had reassuring answers involving some form of god who will protect you like your mother did in her arms as a baby

  • Well what people fear about machines is not accurate. Humans tend to as of right now project their own thoughts on things they really don't know much about. So watching Terminator and reading 1984 really has nothing to do with true reality. We have been giving decision making over to computers for many years now from some of the first calculators to modern GPS. AI will always need human guidance but programmed correctly this is a very positive and holistic thing to do for the human species.

  • People so readily accept the idea of machines controlling and enslaving humanity once they are capable of free thought (or, indeed, sentience). Personally (and I don't think I'm alone here), that's proposterous. Do we enslave apes and force them to do our bidding? Of course not. Furthermore, a machine thinks completely logically. Why have a human do a job that a machine can do a million times faster and more effeciently?

  • Does he have tics or is it the 150 pills a day that makes him twitchy towards the end?

  • @Singularityfication it's definitely his pressure to conclude is presentation in the amount of time.. i think he could sense he was boring the crowd, a nervous reaction as a result, whether boring or not, i enjoyed it, but i bet they've heard his shpiel before

  • categorizing this video as "Howto&Style" is pretty cheeky.

  • Kurzweil has show a logical progression of technology with proven data.

    The problem is not the systematic progression that has been presented.

    It is that people cannot adjust them selfs to an idea of such advancement.

    As most people are projecting there own Emotional opinions to technology and science and that is where there is a indifference of approach.

  • Gee another Trek thing come to pass - The Universal Translater

  • I've said it before and I'll say it again: I'm cautiously optimistic about Ray Kurzweil's future... but even if he's wrong with 90% of his predictions the other 10% are definitely worth living for. I think his success rate for the next 30 years or so will be around 65% based on absolutely nothing, but his success rate so far would be around there too.

  • As far as I am aware quite a few experts agree with Kurzweil about the nature of his predictions - it's the TIMEFRAME that seems to get the controversy started. That, and whether artificial intelligence will work to man's benefit or extinction.

  • Essential. Ronald E. Fine, M.D., Ph.D.

  • Better watch Jeff Hawkins

  • Funny how less than half of the people who started watching this never finished... sad really.

    I always like to hear experts speak about their fields.

  • didn't really interest me. Maybe if he slimed it down... by, 30 min's or so.

  • Yeah, it's a bit of a shame because going away from this i feel so empowered, so enlightened about the future. This is fantastically fascinating stuff!

    I am doing an undergrad in physics and psychology, and I will never get tired of hearing about the wonders of science and discovery

  • Exactly, this is what gives me the will to live. The hope that I will experience this progression and the impact it will have on humanity.

  • If you can manage to live for another 10 years, chances are you'll be able to extend your life indefinitely, or basically until we can achieve this transcendence.

    But either way, I believe the conscious of the dead will join the conscious of the living.

  • How does it matter? even if consciousness survives it will be free of emotions as emotions require matter. Your survival of consciousness hope stems from your fear of death, simple.

  • also sorry that the comments aren't in order, youtube unfortunately displays the latest comments first

    I'd suggest clicking "view all xxx comments" in order to read them in a coherant fashion

  • this guy talked for 5min straight. thats pretty hard

  • Stop think about how this transcends humans and start thiking about how it helps us live better lives. That's what people should be focusing on, and indeed kurzweil has dedicated a lot of his life to this pursuit. I'm a programmer and know fell well that ai and its fruits are everywhere, and it has helped a great deal. It'll help the world many times over b4 we accomplish human-level ai. All I ask is you stop thinking about the possible negative consequences and start thinking positively.

  • I'm genuinely shocked by the apparent anticipation for the so called singularity present among users here. It's as if none of you have actually stopped to ponder the implications of altering our cognitive function.

    Consciousness sharing, hive minds, the ability to alter the very mechanisms which motivate and regulate our behavior.

    I'm not going to parse it out here, but you people should really stop to consider the potential downside to this cult of yours.

  • The rationale of your argument suffers from the ad-hominem at the end.

  • I have thought about this, and I don't see a real downside. Being connected to millions of people around the world will not necessarily destroy your sense of individuality. Look at the Internet.

    You claim to have arguments, but you don't wish to "parse it out here." Well, by all means parse it out. As for the Cult comparison, that's just ridiculous. We anticipate the technological singularity so that we are ready when it happens. The best way to alleviate downsides is to anticipate.

  • you can't think of ANY possible downsides?

    either you're lying or you betray a serious lack of insight on your part

    youtube is hardly the format to go into these things, but i'll attempt to briefly explain one of several reasons I worry about the so called singularity.

    I think singularitologists are guilty of a great many unfounded assumptions concerning intelligence and its nature

    (CONT)

  • it's important to remember that our motivating drives(you might call them emotions) arose from millenia of evolution, and serve the function of keeping us alive and reproducing in a hostile environment.

    those functions would be meaningless in the context of a post-human environment, and it would be illogical to retain those emotions when they no longer serve the interests of our survival. We pathetically attempt to ascribe meaning and purpose to an existence we barely fathom...

    (CONT)

  • assuming these conceptions to be some law of nature, transcending our humanity.

    For all we know a superintelligent being might simply decide that its existence is meaningless and terminate itself. Or it may decide that it no longer wishes to experience unpleasant emotion and instead simply exist in a constant state of bliss.

    In that case the being would have no reason to do anything at all, as the end result of any human endeavor (positive emotion) would be readily available to it

    CON

  • the being would simply exist motionless, in a constant state of bliss

    i merely attempt to point out that all human behavior is motivated by a desire to maximize positive emotion and minimize negative emotion

    when the ability to control these forces at will is available, there would be little reason to every do anything of any kind ever again

    In any case this is merely a cursory overview of ONE of the assumptions made by singularity true believers

    I cant really get into it here

  • The problems we are facing is the driving force for these "decentralized" growths are centrally controlled (through gov't research/military research). Poverty and disease wouldn't be wiped out, but could be severely limited with information we have already. It is the centralized control that is the problem.

  • pretty crazy, just got done with all 3 parts, really facinating, the world will be nuts its 60 years

  • Make that twenty, bob. :)

    "AI designed to protect the humanity from all threats; in the end AI finds out that the greatest threat to humanity is humanity itself" I've read that story before somewhere hmm.. lol

    Brilliant videos!

  • "the world will be nuts its 60 years"

    Too damn optimistic. Try 100-150.

  • want to chat?

  • what is Ray Kurzweil is actually an intelligent robot from the future sent here to speed up the arrival of the singularity?

  • It doesnt matter what I believe to be right or wrong singly, what matters is humanities consciousness as a whole. If this is what people what, this is what where going to get and who knows what will be. We can only surmise, discuss and learn from each others points of view. This is how humanity is to progress through uncovering the next truth. Unfortunately, like an infant, mistakes will be made.

  • Awesome!

  • There is only one truth and thats Isaac Asimov!

    All he's predictions are coming true. Lol.

    Wiggles, if you want to change the world you will have to become a science fiction writer.

  • %-)=:):-':(|)

  • If you want to support Ray Kurzweil/Aubrey de Grey and one of their projects called "Undergrads fighting age related disease" then google for "BVVE2C", go to their project-page and nominate them please. It only takes ~3minutes to help science!

  • "Does he or does he not want to see us basically become immortal computer hybrid spirits, "liberated" from our bodies?"

    I'd rather become an immortal cyber-robot god than staying a filthy, disease-ridden human ape. Fuck humans.

  • Here's a better alternative, if you feel that way: Just kill yourself. Pick up some sleeping pills at CVS and take the whole fucking bottle, and then you won't have to wait for shit.  You'll experience the essence of transhumanism years ahead of time. I'm serious.

  • Wow.... Just...wow.

    Ok, so, you two are weird, arguing with eachother. Wiggles, I am sorry, but that was assholish. Lonecretin, please, just, if you don't want to be human, then listen to wiggles if you want. Me? I wanna be the immortal cyber-robot god.

  • Do you think that anti-transhumanist humans will ever allow "immortal cyber-robot gods" to exist? I certainly don't. The delicate infrastructure needed to support a posthuman future had better be protected in city-sized titanium vaults, and even that won't do. The "paleo-human barbarians" will have their say. Posthuman dreams will never see the light of day.

  • Maybe, but maybe not. This is a THEORY! Not a scientific fact. I would really hope that it is a correct theory, personally, though others may believe otherwise. Who am I to change that? Its clear that nothing I say will change your mind, so I'm just gonna stop responding right now.

  • Doesn't matter how much lip service these disease-souled dolts pay to being responsible with their futurism, THEY WILL NOT BE RESPONSIBLE, because the future they aspire to is ITSELF irresponsible, and if it's realized then it is DOOMED to kill our humanity, no matter how many safeguards are put in place. I'm really a good guy, I try my best anyway, and so I don't actually want to see the Djerzinskis of the world harmed. But it'd be great if Kurzweil quit and took up kite-flying not science.

  • If you suggest outlawing nanotech development, there will be more development in the destructive underground black market, accelerating the death of humanity, but by this point, we will have at least a colony on the moon to help us out.

  • Prohibition usually doesn't work, whether it's prohibiting an intoxicant or a technology. But some forms of technology obviously have to be prohibited, like nuclear weaponization. Nanotech (and all other tech related to achieving a posthuman future) might have to be prohibited in some crucial WAYS, but no I don't think it's feasible or desirable to outlaw it altogether. The moon could be a last resort, sure. But HOPEFULLY, as we grow emotionally (via culture), we'll have enough self control.

  • The formation of AI is simply the extension of our own biology. Like our forefathers, we denied the life in confinement of nature's boundaries. With the technology to finally transform humanity and break the cycle of life and death, our battle against injustice, hunger, poverty, war, crime and hate will be won. Corrupt human governments will be replaced by incorruptible machines, and eventually we will evolve in the eyes of our creation. In the end, it's all just evolution. Or... that's my view.

  • It's too bad there is very cool technology like cameras-for-the-blind and cell-phone-translators mixed in with and contaminated by his abhorrent transhumanist dream. One note: The technology which HELPS humans, which humans USE, must NOT be confused as a precursor to the kind of techno-morphic oblivion these crypto-nazis want. Final note: Kurzweil's lecture is missing something. He should have ended it with "This speech is dedicated to mankind." Crush the infamy!

  • *Sigh* you weren't listening.

    The camera-for-the-blind, and cellphone translators use AI systems, which is the core of the Technological Singularity. Let me break it down: THE SINGULARITY IS JUST THE ACCELERATING PACE OF TECHNOLOGICAL PROGRESS!

  • Technological progress isn't a fucking animal, we are. Technological progress only progresses if and how we choose to progress it. Yes, I understand that the organic hive mind of humanity is growing in IQ and exponential growth in technology is inevitable. What KIND of technology, and what FOR, is the question. Does he or does he not want to see us basically become immortal computer hybrid spirits, "liberated" from our bodies? More or less...true or false? If true, that's oblivion.

  • I don't understand how, so we'll have to agree to disagree in this case.

  • Okay, wait, how exactly is that oblivion? The implications are still very shady, so we can't look draw definite answers on what it will bring about.

  • Humans are filthy, warlike pigs and I (personally) can't wait for their inevitable obsolescence. We deserve to go.

  • Then start off with yourself and quit contributing to the problem, coward.

  • Dear Mr. Kurzweil, Some day people will turn back on the past - the not too distant past of just a couple of decades - and speak about you like a prophet. And a genius.

  • Like throwing gasoline on a fire. Don't stroke his ego too much now, he'll start wearing a robe and grow a beard.

  • People once spoke of Hitler the same way, fool.

  • I was referring to this: "Dear Mr. Kurzweil, Some day people will turn back on the past - the not too distant past of just a couple of decades - and speak about you like a prophet. And a genius." Granted, Kurzweil and his ilk are well-intentioned Hitlers. Psychopaths, nonetheless.

  • Wigglestrue, I don't know who you are and I don't care. It is probably useless to argue with you just as it is useless to argue with anyone. But what I would like to point out is the absence of logic in your words showing the fuzziness in your thinking: there cannot be any "well-intentioned Hitlers". Hitlers are by definition "mal-intentioned". You are in need of a complete paradigm shift, but that's OK. It happens to everybody once in a while.

  • Dipshit, within the deranged context of a warped Nazi worldview the "Final Solution to the Jewish Question" was well-intended, just like the transhumanist "Final Solution to the Human Question" is well-intended within the deranged context of an anti-human worldview. Monsters who perceive themselves as benefactors, as problem-solvers. The trick with the transhumanist final solution is that its inhumanity has a broader and ergo less visible scapegoat than just one group: Namely, everyone.

  • Change your vocabulary and you will gain the respect of others. Right now you don't have mine. Plus I would not bet on you being harmless. If you are less than 20, grow up. If you are more than 60, do us a favor and die fast.

  • Well, your last reply rounds the edges of the opinion I have of you. It is a good thing you claim to be non-violent, though if you really are, you could as well change your style.

  • The reason it matters how you write is that it reflects who you are inside. And whether you are right or wrong you are unlikely to convince anyone with this style. We agree on one thing though: transhumanism will not come peacefully. We had the industrialization age before, the nuclear age and we will have the singlarity.

  • Whatever happens, the transhumanist camp will win.So if you are not about to die, relax and build some wealth to use it for yourself. And if you still want to fight this, change your style, it will give more weight to your arguments. Unlike, of course, if you want to fight this like a pussy.

  • On the contrary, whatever happens -- even if the transhumanist camp wins -- the transhumanist camp will LOSE. Understood? Your advice is duly noted. Thanks.

  • wigglestrue: What are you afraid of? explain please. What would be so bad about living as long as you want, having unlimited resources and being more intelligent? Are you afraid we would lose our humanity?

  • I personally believe that technological growth, the singularity ect... is part of the next step in an evolution of increasing complexity, however I could see why some people would find it unsettling, Kurzvweil says that by the end of the century we will have made machines that are trillions of times more intelligent than us in all definitions of the word (spiritual intelligence included) frankly the singularity is going to make humans totally obsolete.

  • If so, is that "you" human? We have to wait and see.

    For the record: This is the only intellectual discussion on this whole fucking website.

  • Made a mistake. This is the full comment:

    No its not, as the machines will be capable of integrating into the human brain, or just plain replacing it.

    I look at it this way.

    You gradually replace your body as it wears out with artificial parts. Are you still you?

    If so, is that "you" human? We have to wait and see.

    For the record: This is the only intellectual discussion on this whole fucking website.

  • I think this is an issue of semantics. True we will be able to make "ourselves" smarter with machines but ultimately if we do that then the organic part of us will be the most inefficient part of the whole and the only reason we would even want to keep it is for sentimental reasons.Infact the only reason for humans at all as they exist today would be purely semantic. And the question of what is or isn't human is again semantics, but what can be sure is our organic bodies/mind will be obsolete

  • I think it would be pretty much inevitable that Humanity would go through a Transhuman phase followed by a Posthuman phase before ceasing to be "Human" at all. This is not a bad thing. The "new Humans" may be better than current Humanity in every conceivable way. Nostalgia is no reason to deny that transition. Also, robot bodies. We will become those machines that are trillions of times more intelligent. Our old biological bodies may become obsolete, but we will not.

  • I would lastly like to briefly explain the problem of collective consciousness

    the reason the intenet results in no loss of individual identity is because, as efficient as the internet is, our capacity to cognate is more greater

    in an environment characterized by direct brain to brain interfaces soon all thoughts would be shared by all people

    thus the lines between us would collapse

    a very, very, very brief overview of my thoughts on this issue

  • * more greater = much greater

    lol

  • Exactly what I am doing. Living a healthy life to live longer and I believe I will live very very long + accumulating wealth so I can buy all the cool stuff the future promises. Mostly I want my anti aging cure lol I hope I make it Im only 21.

  • Me too I'm only 17!

  • a calorie restricted diet is the way to go

  • I hope we all make it. I'm 30 so the odds are less for me.

  • If you really want insurance against death, preservation in cryonics may offer a good chance in case you die. Cryonics can actually be quite cheap if you are young and get a good life insurance plan.

  • If we can make substantial repairs on organic life today, imagine what we can do at the peak of technological advancement (i.e. the singularity). I believe even the consciousness of the dead will join the united conscience of the transcended living.

  • We human beings are so self-centered and egoistic that we claim to know everything in this universe. Your claim that there is a universal consciousness simply says that you have cracked some kind of a code in the universe? Why is it so hard for you accept that we have no f...in idea who we are? Survival of consciousness theory is a drug for you to feel better.

  • We don't claim we know everything about the universe. That's the point of our scientific endeavors, and last I checked, we're still going. We are extremely primitive compared to what we'll be at in 50 years.

    As for the united consciousness, what else would you call uploading everyone's conscience into a machine?

    You are right about one thing, most beliefs do act as a security blanket.

  • okay granted man.....my negative comment comes from my own experience...i was an atheist and a skeptical all my life but lost someone close to me....not knowing how to deal with that I relied on everything possible to seek answers. I twisted my psyche to experiment with psychic and medium shit but they sucked money out of me and gave me nothing. Eventually i went to monroe institute to induce OBEs. I have had OBEs in the past and still have it but none substantial and meaningful..

  • .then eventually I needed to know what the hell I was upto and stumbled across noetic sciences. All this survival of consciousness theory pacified me for a bit but simply based on freaking beliefs or security blanket of what you may call. With lack of evidence I just gave up on it and turned against all of this...so thats where the anger comes from....

  • Are you not worried that all this research about survival consciousness, in our civilization, could just one day simply die like how metaphysics and alchemy and all that die in the past? I mean we are hardly past our solar system now in terms of sending human nmade stuff out there which is like zero exploration compared to the size of our own galaxy and we are talking about solving the code of the universe?

  • Bro, you are the classic pessimist.

    Quit being a p*ssy and be positive.

  • An atheist is a pessimist? A non believer is a negative thinker?? Not sure how you concluded that I am a pessimist. Ask yourself why you are interested in the whole consciousness survival theory. Not out of curiosity!!!. OUt of your weakness. Because the simple truth that life is random pisses you off as you have nowhere else to go and death is the end of everything which you hate. Am I a pussy or you? And regarding women, that is everything which drives us. Survival and replication is life!

  • Yup just what I thought. You are a pessimist, your last comment just proved it.

    It is frustrating to encounter negative comments on the same site of a Kurzweil's lecture.

    If you need answers, let me know, I would be glad to help.

  • nah. I think its gotten to your ego now. Last line says Survival and replication is life. And with that premise you concluded that I am a pessimist. You will fail in a test like GMAT or LSAT with such horrendous assumptions. I definitely need help but not from someone who has an erroneous line of reasoning

  • Well at least you admitted it. Let me know when your ready.

  • I am ready oh wise sage and master of wisdom, right on your feet to seek enlightenment!!!

  • With that kind of sarcasm to be honest, you don't appear ready for the enlightenment yet.

  • With that kind of braggadocio I dont think you are ready to give me enlightenment either

  • Check back later bro.

    Peace

  • @eternallyviv I don't agree with that at all. I truly don't really give a fuck what happens when I die, I think religion is a waste of time but I believe there is something after death. I think its just another step in the overall existence of our beings. And me believing that is not out of weakness at all.

  • @eternallyviv Agreed. I'm a fellow "infidel" and think that not having a close-minded religious belief, I'm open to any and all possibilities, not being forced to think within the cramped confines of one particular belief system, which are extremely rigid and inflexible in their dogmas. I think that religion, as a whole, is a human fear response towards death, as well as a placeholder for our collective ignorance of natural systems.

  • Lets start with solving really simple things on earth first. How the hell do I pick up women, get laid and eventually find my dream girl and get married? How the hell can I find the secret to a woman's heart who is of my type?. Forget surival of consciousness for now.

  • Clean yourself up, learn to respect yourself and externalize it (not in a cocky way), get a sense of wit and charm, get out and meet people, etc.

    A secret to a woman's heart of your type? Well, if she's your type, then you ought to know. ;)

  • If you're 30, you'll make it with decades to spare...

  • Exactly, my advice is to avoid car-travel. Risk of death or permanent damage is too high with that.

  • Gotta drive in the USA :(

  • My ultimate target to which I'm looking foreward to in my life is the intergration of virtual reality technology and nano technology. Well, all of it really, but I'm thinking with my 'fun' hat right now. I can't wait to see games in 2013.

  • @LatestUFOSightings I just turned 21 and I also hope I make it but we cannot forget that humans have the tendency to fuck things up lol If we don't end up blowing ourselves back to the stone age then Hopefully this is the future.

  • @LatestUFOSightings You will the current estimate for the generation in 2012 that will gain Immortality is the 1975 through 1985 generation.

  • @LatestUFOSightings Remember it is not a cure but a exponential progress of health care technology and we are wired to think linearly.

  • @VictorphoenixDMvault I wrote that comment 3 years ago.

    I don't care about "eternal life" anymore. I want to life fast and die young. Fuck all that futurism bullshit.

  • @LatestUFOSightings  Allright.

  • whats with the people in the background? its like they dont believe/understand what he's saying. i was expecting one of them to stand up and shout bullshit :)

  • THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR POSTING.

  • Sweet, who knows what future will hold it's interesting to think about.

  • I wonder how big the cooling fan will be for your first inserted chipset in your brain.

    I picture a dude walking, holding a car battery and a fan resting on an earpeice.

    Jokes aside. I can't wait for this technology. I'll be there in line. I suck at maths. It would be awesome to suddenly just know and understand this 'language' (maths). I can't wait!

  • We will have access to unlimited knowledge by brain>nano receptors>google and everybody will have access to the same information and to everybodys thoughts. Global Unification. Our bodies will be reduced to one and wee will exist not in 3 dimension + time but 11. We explore whole Universe and wooboodooboo I will born again and go along my life again. Boring... :) somebody like my idea?

  • Is it just me or does Kurzweil always sound like he has really bad gas?

  • I am immortal, I have inside me blood of kings

    I have no rival, no man can be my equal

    Take me to the future of you all

  • Take me to your leader. To bad only a few thousand will ever recieve benifits from most of the breakthroughs.  iluminatti

  • Doesn't thhis guy make synthesizer keyboards? I remember they used those on Singled Out.

  • Yes, he started Kurzweil Music Systems, and they make excellent, if a bit expensive, synthesizers and digital pianos. Very good stuff used by some of the best musicians. He got started because he made a "reading machine" in the 70s and one of his clients was Stevie Wonder. Wonder challenged Ray to make a more realistic sounding synthesizer.. and he did.

  • That's funny, I was joking and I didn't think they were the same. Truly a Renaissance man.

  • There's a scientific consensus in support of predictions for global warming going out to 2050 and beyond. Is there a consensus for the Singularity theory? It would seem to be as apocolyptic as global warming, perhaps more so. For a time we'll all be dependent upon intelligent machines for our survival, until we end up merging with them. And then what? Scientists take global warming seriously. What about the Singularity? Is there a consensus?

  • The hope is that in the creation of an intelligent computer/sapience hybrid would have many times more intellegence than a ordinary human and would be able to come up with completley novel solutions for our problems.

  • Trying to invent our own saviour

  • wtf???

    he is talking with supporting statistics

    you moron !

  • His statistics are poorly-defined and full of holes.

    Google "AI Gone Awry: The Futile Quest for Artificial Intelligence".

  • And we'll see who's the moron.

  • sorry for addressing you as moron...

    btw, how on the earth we can be sure

    he is wrong, everyone said airplane is

    a joke during the time of its invention...

    k let me research on your google search term

  • are you purely being the devil's advocate? counting your chickens? you're safe if you take the most contrary position, then it can only turn out better.

  • You don't have to beleve any of this but don't interfere since you will die soon enough and won't have any importance to biological beings. You don't have to choose to live forever and I hope the people who are against technology won't choose it. I for one am all for living forever, and all forms of technology.

  • Most of you people who are against this or technology are just ignorant. We don't need people like you. You are nothing but defected biological beings. Somethings messed up with your DNA.

  • PurringDragon428, Sounds like Hitler talking again? You just never learn do you?

  • Technology would help in the long run. Any problem even pollution has a solution. All that is needed is appropriate selection. IF they do find a way to integrate human brains with nanotechnology I would like to be the fist to receive the treatment.

  • Get in line, punk

  • i loveeeeeeee this guy, i will buy his book

  • I believe you are right. Look what happen to the horse after the car was invented. They won't need large labor forces anymore.Noone is going to be building pyermids anymore. If you are not rich you won't see this tech.

  • Thanks for posting this. Kurzweil's predictions are very inspiring. The next twenty to thirty years are going to be quite exciting.

  • Waffle.

  • What none of you are considering is 'exponential aspects' regenerated in a 3rd dimensional context. It is this 2D to 3D aspect that 'puffs' all elements. It will happen. It is imperative even through logic.

  • well why didnt he discuss the singularity. all he said is computers and tech will get better fast.

  • Hmm I think that he is simplifying the complexity of the brain... maybe he should study some more bioinformatics and molecular biology. So much complexity that he is glossing over and simplifying... Not that I don't agree with is general claim...I just think that he is being way too simple in his judgments.

  • he is being simple in his judgements because today, we dont understand. what he is saying is that we cannot look at the technological evolution as being linear, it is exponential. and yes, strong AI will happen, its something we can predict, when it does happen, in will be self repricating meaning it can modify itself it become infinitely more intelligent as us. This is the amazing part. human integration will create our next stage of human, transhuman.

  • Scientists through nanotechnology has made a prototype of a self-replicator machine over the last 3mnths

  • the ai robuts will not need humans anymore. We are just a step.

  • When Edison invented the phonograph. He did not fully understand sound theory. He did not know the math or science behind those peaks and dips in the sound wave of human speech. IN other words he did not have the knowledge about soundwaves that a person who writes a sound editing computer software program does now. Edison just made a recorder that could play back. There are many examples of invention far ahead of the fully understood theory behind them.

  • So a simpler version. I don't think the brain has to be fully understood to be able to fully simulate one. Just like a baseball pitcher does not need to know everything about Newtonian Physics to throw an effective pitch.

  • Even if they simulated your brain it still would not be you. How do you transfer the "I" of someone?

  • I partly agree about the transferring "I" part, execpet well I don't beleive ina an "I" it's why I said "Simulate one", although for reasons too complicated to explain within 500 charactors. The semantics of talking about "I"ness when I dont believe in the common concept of identity, are tough to tread through in a short paragraph.

  • the "I"-ness is a software construct of the bra