posted on Dec, 28 2014 @ 07:15 PM
a reply to: WASTYT
From the linked
“As soon as a civilization invents radio, they’re within fifty years of computers, then, probably, only another fifty to a hundred years from
inventing AI,” Shostak said. “At that point, soft, squishy brains become an outdated model.”
Schneider points to the nascent but rapidly expanding world of brain computer interface technology, including DARPA’s latest ElectRX neural implant
program, as evidence that our own singularity is close. Eventually, Schneider predicts, we’ll not only upgrade our minds with technology, we’ll
make a wholesale switch to synthetic hardware.
I am finding myself agreeing. One caveat: What if we were created by intelligent robots? If so, why? If robotics is superior then why would they
create us? Of course, this is pulling a straw out of my hat.
It's very possible synthetic intelligence will be superior. I can imagine the abandonment of biological bodies and a rapid synthetic intelligence
evolution. This might help to explain Fermi's Paradox, except one still must ask why hte Robots do not need to mine Earths or nearby to them, thus
exposing them to detection by biological beings? And yet if they're vastly more intelligent, perhaps they find answers.
One of the things which makes me agree with the "Schneider" is I think because we're biological and biological is really all we know, I think we're
prejudiced through no fault of our own. In the past, futurists imagining hte future often projected what they knew of their world onto the future. I
think we do the same thing. We project our biological bodies onto the future, as well as a myriad of other things. However, this doesn't mean there
won't be similarities.
Where will hte similarities be? Well, I think a good example is hte social environment. In the past, meeting people face to face was a much more
common and necessary social function. In modern times, because of telephones and satellite communications and mobile devices and radio, people can
increasingly meet these social functions virtually. Arthur C Clarke officially predicted in 1963 (I believe this was the year) this would lead to
cities failing to be the principal center of social functions, instead being partially replaced by global communications systems. He speculated this
might lead to a giant suburban environment.
I've also wondered something else and I'll bring it up now. The ability to show images on tv's and digital devices has been common place for a while.
One thing which interests me are digital picture frames people can place on walls. These're electric devices with the only aim to show a picture.
They're essentially hanging pictures much like pictures before the era of tv's and computers, but they are able to show ANY picture. Now, one can take
this idea and go with it. What if more and more physical objects become virtual? What if some day one is happy with a virtual mansion, having no
desire for a real physical counterpart? So many things in life are idealistic or creative in nature, having no connection to physical/practical
IDEAlism. IDEA. That's the key. The picture on the wall is an idea...
edit on 28-12-2014 by jonnywhite because: (no reason given)