Philosophy Now Forum

Heart transplants and pacemakers, synthetic valves,cochlear implants, lung and liver transplants, prosthetic arms and legs, synthetic hips and knees...

The list grows with advances in technology.

As more and more of a person’s internal workings are replaced by devices, at what point are we more robot than human?

If such people have access to all known knowledge, via Internet search, at what point can we say that a rudimentary singularity is in place?

commonsense wrote: ↑Sat Jul 21, 2018 5:20 pm
If such people have access to all known knowledge, via Internet search, at what point can we say that a rudimentary singularity is in place?

At the point where we cease to feel embarrassment on saying something that makes us appear unhinged.

What exactly do you mean by a 'singularity'?

If such people have access to all known knowledge, via Internet search, at what point can we say that a rudimentary singularity is in place?

I can't even find my old LiveJournal posts. I don't know what advanced, alien internet access you must have.

Sir-Sister-of-Suck wrote: ↑Sat Jul 21, 2018 8:09 pm What exactly do you mean by a 'singularity'?

Whatever he means, there is only one of them.

Harbal wrote: ↑Sat Jul 21, 2018 7:07 pm

commonsense wrote: ↑Sat Jul 21, 2018 5:20 pm
If such people have access to all known knowledge, via Internet search, at what point can we say that a rudimentary singularity is in place?

At the point where we cease to feel embarrassment on saying something that makes us appear unhinged.

Jim Morrison already did that...

-Imp

A singularity is just a new state of math. It's when one type of equation fails, and a new must be used.

So, how can that be used to descibe body prosthetics??

It's already here. Look at what's going on around the world and think of what looks to be controllable by humans - not theoretically but realistically. Answer: bugger all.

A machine need not be built of the usual stuff. Legal and economic systems and entities are effectively machines with many human, technological and informational components, and they now control us with interests and policies of their own, and now only controllable at the margins.

Thus, the singularity that Kurtzweil et al posit in part already happened some decades ago (at least). Our machines - both deliberate and emergent - are already completely in control. What we are discussing here is basically the consolidation of a process already well in train.

This is another example of natural emergence, akin to the machinelike structure of an ants' nest emerging from what would have originally been loose aggregations of individuals earlier in their evolution. Simply, if you cram enough things tightly enough together then thresholds are reached which change the nature of the collective - thus the star ignition, abiogenesis, magnetic fields, hives and now it seems a concentrated superintelligence is emerging.

Being superseded won't be convenient for humans, just as the emergence of human intelligence did other species no favours. However, emergence does not mean the removal of the original forms from which a new entity grows. There are still numerous single celled creatures, invertebrates, cold blooded animals, egg layers, simple plants like mosses and lichens and so on that have brought about more complex and dominating entities.

So the biosphere still is still over 50% microbes, despite the emergence of multicellularity. Most of the rest of the remaining biomass is plants despite the emergence of animals, and most of the remaining biomass are invertebrates, which were shouldered aside by chordates.

So being superseded does not men extinction, it means subjugation. Move over mere humans, a new dominant entity is coming to town

The singularity - it has been proposed by futurologists that the day will come when intelligent machines will have access to all knowledge and will be able to create better versions of themselves.

I agree with this observer: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/singular ... 0%E6%96%87

As a marketer first and futurist second, I have always had a slightly different definition of the singularity. I believe it is the time when companies and governments simply can no longer keep up with technological change.

That is, we lose control. Something else has control - the structures we built support and sustain us.

Greta wrote: ↑Sun Jul 22, 2018 12:11 am It's already here...What we are discussing here is basically the consolidation of a process already well in train.

I hadn’t quite thought of it that way, but as you say, technology controls everything.

Greta wrote: ↑Sun Jul 22, 2018 12:11 am However, emergence does not mean the removal of the original forms from which a new entity grows...So being superseded does not men extinction, it means subjugation. Move over mere humans, a new dominant entity is coming to town

But what would happen if the intelligent machines found no use for humans, or any living creatures for that matter?

Harbal wrote: ↑Sat Jul 21, 2018 8:13 pm

Sir-Sister-of-Suck wrote: ↑Sat Jul 21, 2018 8:09 pm What exactly do you mean by a 'singularity'?

Whatever he means, there is only one of them.

So true!

commonsense wrote: ↑Sun Jul 22, 2018 1:54 am

Greta wrote: ↑Sun Jul 22, 2018 12:11 amHowever, emergence does not mean the removal of the original forms from which a new entity grows...So being superseded does not men extinction, it means subjugation. Move over mere humans, a new dominant entity is coming to town

But what would happen if the intelligent machines found no use for humans, or any living creatures for that matter?

In a sense they ARE us. A similar question would be asking what happens if the ultra wealthy have no need for poor, or what happens if humans think they have no need for wildlife and other species for that matter.

The answer is perhaps the same - ignore/neglect them, but simply steamroll over any unlucky enough to find themselves in the way. Which is basically what's observed in the way institutions treat individuals today.

commonsense wrote: ↑Sat Jul 21, 2018 5:20 pm Heart transplants and pacemakers, synthetic valves,cochlear implants, lung and liver transplants, prosthetic arms and legs, synthetic hips and knees...

The list grows with advances in technology.

As more and more of a person’s internal workings are replaced by devices, at what point are we more robot than human?

If such people have access to all known knowledge, via Internet search, at what point can we say that a rudimentary singularity is in place?

1. Stick the evil transhumanism up where the sun never shines.

2. There are biological possibilities for regenerating the loss of hearing, the missing limbs, growing biological organs in the laboratory, shaping biological bones with calcium and medical glue and the rest!

Sure, "singularity" is welcome though I do not like the hysteria!

commonsense wrote: ↑Sat Jul 21, 2018 5:20 pm Heart transplants and pacemakers, synthetic valves,cochlear implants, lung and liver transplants, prosthetic arms and legs, synthetic hips and knees...

The list grows with advances in technology.

As more and more of a person’s internal workings are replaced by devices, at what point are we more robot than human?

If such people have access to all known knowledge, via Internet search, at what point can we say that a rudimentary singularity is in place?

You seem to be describing the PC path to human evolution. The belief that objective human meaning and purpose originates with a conscious source will be replaced by programming singularity in the belief that human meaning and purpose originates with the Great Beast and Man is now evolved to serve the Great Beast as programmed. No more love of wisdom. It will be programmed common knowledge so there is nothing to love. Evolved Man will be programmed what and how to love.

Nick_A wrote: ↑Sun Jul 22, 2018 3:49 pm Evolved Man will be programmed what and how to love.

Not your problem, Nick, evolution seems to have overlooked you.