Timewave Zero - Countdown to Transition

reply to post by stereologist
No. My claim was that Evolution RESULTS in increased complexity. I didn't claim there is a goal or guidance or anything of the sort. Evolution happens, more complex organisms are the result.

Yes I agree the "goal" is survival - doesn't change the fact that more complex systems arise.

I don't subscribe to the intelligent design idea but I can't rule out some sort of higher intelligence to the process. I can't believe that all this is just the result of random molecules bumping together so to speak. For one, Humans have been evolving epigenetically for the last few thousands of years - much too short a time frame for us to evolve biologically in any significant way.

I must say...I read a lot of garbage on ATS these days. There's "BREAKING" this and "SENSATIONAL" that type posts that you have to wade through to get to the good stuff. The last 10 pages of this thread, while maybe not necessarily on topic, are extremely well written by everyone involved. Thanks for the entertainment, even if it's a pissing match about evolution and obscure scientific theories, it's been compelling to say the least. Keep it up. It will be worth coming back to.

Cheers.

re acceleration of novelty- or local connected complexity: upload.wikimedia.org...




Kurrzweil's Law of Accelerating Returns:


Evolution applies positive feedback in that the more capable methods resulting from one stage of evolutionary progress are used to create the next stage. As a result, the
rate of progress of an evolutionary process increases exponentially over time. Over time, the “order” of the information embedded in the evolutionary process (i.e., the measure of how well the information fits a purpose, which in evolution is survival) increases.
A correlate of the above observation is that the “returns” of an evolutionary process (e.g., the speed, cost-effectiveness, or overall “power” of a process) increase exponentially over time.
In another positive feedback loop, as a particular evolutionary process (e.g., computation) becomes more effective (e.g., cost effective), greater resources are deployed toward the further progress of that process. This results in a second level of exponential growth (i.e., the rate of exponential growth itself grows exponentially).
Biological evolution is one such evolutionary process.
Technological evolution is another such evolutionary process. Indeed, the emergence of the first technology creating species resulted in the new evolutionary process of technology. Therefore, technological evolution is an outgrowth of–and a continuation of–biological evolution.
A specific paradigm (a method or approach to solving a problem, e.g., shrinking transistors on an integrated circuit as an approach to making more powerful computers) provides exponential growth until the method exhausts its potential. When this happens, a paradigm shift (i.e., a fundamental change in the approach) occurs, which enables exponential growth to continue.

reply to post by setAI


Kurzweil's notion is just that. It is not a law in the sense of a scientific law. It is his conjecture and nothing more. It is not proven, but suggested.

The Law of Accelerating Returns
From the section criticizing Kurzweil.

Some claim the exponential growth of technological progress may become linear or inflected or may begin to flatten into a limited-growth curve. In this model, instead of an overall acceleration of progress, technological advance jumps forward whenever there is a human "buy in" and stalls whenever there is no benefit large enough to profit the technologists. As a result, the sequence of changes never gets steep enough to become a singularity.

Here is an article from IEEE Spectrum Inside Technology
[url=]The story of the Singularity is sweeping, dramatic, simple--and wrong

www.kurzweilai.net...

with this statement in 2008- I will no longer engage in any public debate about the Singularity

we are long past speculation- in 1996 with the mass adoption of the Internet we crossed the Event Horizon [Pesce 2011] and now we can directly MEASURE and analyze the Singularity and the acceleration of complexity in terms of computational operations per second: www.artistserver.com...

reply to post by setAI


I really like the ideas you wrote about in relation to the human brain network merging with the computer network to form a singularity. Your descriptions of AR/VR are both frightening and compelling. Frightening because its an idea that's quite different and "alien" to humans who have so far existed only "within our own skulls".

Just as language can be seen as connecting to other people so can using the internet and computers be seen as the first steps in "getting out of our heads". Funny people have told me I needed to do that my whole life being an idealist and dreamer

Its really compelling though because I can imagine...almost taste the freedom of that system. Being able to instantly move your consciousness anywhere on the planet and potentially experience other people's experiences would be awesome. So much potential good could come of it as well - instant empathy for everyone! How can you hate someone when you can literally walk a mile in their shoes and see what its like for them? The entertainment/fantasy element is obviously appealing. If this was possible then it would also be possible to remotely control nanobots with our thoughts/imagination, literally being able to shape our environment at will as nanobots go about rebuilding our surroundings.

Its an interesting idea and I agree that its the way things are heading. However I do wonder how it all lines up with spiritual beliefs that we are all already connected in this way and there are places where our minds can already go but have forgotten how. It could be that all these things do already exist and by getting there using technology its "cheating" or even worse, a deliberate plot to give us access but only through controlled channels. The even darker side is that if such technology were to be developed (or has already been?) then corrupt people could use it to further stifle and control human thought/evolution.

The flip side is a teleological explanation, where our future infinitely connected selves project a "shadow" back through time which the ancient cultures picked up on and developed ideas about. And/or that through our own evolution, we actually create a network that eventually expands throughout the universe through which all life becomes connected (forwards and backwards in time), essentially creating everything that spiritualists claim to be able to contact already.

On the religious side, if we have the capacity to read people's brain-states and upload our consciousness outside of our body, then we could create Heaven - a server somewhere that people could upload their consiousness to just before they die. They then get to exist forever in a digital playground where anything is possible. This of course depends on whether there is some sort of anchor tying our consciousness to our bodies and/or whether a soul exists. Also whether that upload process transfers the soul or if it just makes a copy of the electrical signals.

There is also again the possibility of uploading our consciousness to robot bodies and a whole bunch of what ifs and ethical dilemmas attached to that.

The mind boggles, thanks for the link

reply to post by Cecilofs


One of the most mind expanding posts ive read in a while. It was the 'out of our heads' bit that hadnt dawned on me before, excellent.

Reminded me a bit of Tad Williams novel, 'Otherland', similar ideas of experiencing from another viewpoint and creating a tech heaven.

reply to post by setAI


From the link to your comments at another forum:

and that is precisely what the 'Singularity' is- it is a vast amount of unambiguous historical data and the logical application of algorithmic rules to the evolving system that shows how complexity and information increases exponentially throughout the history of earth-

After presenting yourself as some kind of whizz kid you make the following false statement.

The historical data is not unambiguous. What Kurzweil has done is to cherry pick data. He offers dates to fit his preconceived notion without considering the meaningfulness of the dates chosen.

there is no legitimate debate against Logic and the Nature of Causality

Maybe you might consider a college course in the subject.

I think that debating the Singularity is a cheat- it is an error of thinking that everything is up for debate- it is a reaction not based on the actual subject- because there IS no rational argument against the true discovery and measurement of accelerating information

This makes it clear that you do not understand the issue which falls back on the selection of the data and its interpretation. That is always important if measuring the charge of an electron, Kurzweil's claims, or predicting orbital properties of a celestial object.

Originally posted by Wobbly Anomaly
reply to post by Cecilofs

 

One of the most mind expanding posts ive read in a while. It was the 'out of our heads' bit that hadnt dawned on me before, excellent.

Reminded me a bit of Tad Williams novel, 'Otherland', similar ideas of experiencing from another viewpoint and creating a tech heaven.

Thanks

Sounds like an interesting book.

Recently, since about a week, I have been experiencing what I call " Intellectual novelty "...
I am a writer and I didn't write much this year for the first time since 2005. The best of my creativity came early, when I was 16-17.
I remember 2006 and 2007 summers as a period in which I just couldn't stop creating plots for many different books, even dreaming my characters.
In fact, I remember 2006 as my personal " mystic " year.
After my longest pause, this week I have been experiencing a surge of creativity, and I feel internally more active than ever.
This week I was developing a book about future history, when suddenly, yesterday, at the mall ( XD ) I had an idea for a plot and today night I spent 2 hours on a different new plot for a mega idea that just came to me all of a sudden.

I was indeed waiting for the late September to experience the augmented novelty...
I steel feel like the original graph was the correct one...
If it is like this, we are now experiencing the amount of novelty we should feel about the end of October...

Care to share your big idea, or are you afraid we would steal it for our own?

I would like to write as well, but I am nowhere near disciplined or talented enough, hehe.

Oh and the satellite will land on my freaking area. We just had a breaking news in Italy. We won't evacuate though.
Between tomorrow evening and Saturday morning.

Breaking! Cern claimes they have clocked subatomic particles travelling faster than light, than breaking a fundamental pillar of physics!
This would force a rethink of laws of nature!!!
Just now...

reply to post by Zagari


Yeah I just saw the speed of light thing. That would be massive if they can verify it. Any resonances on the graph? Something as significant as this I would expect to see a resonance for - perhaps with Einstein and the Manhattan Project?

I thought they didn't know where the satellite would hit. Well if it does hit Italy I hope you stay safe!

reply to post by Cecilofs


Novelty days of September 2011 are September 2, September 23 ( today ) and September 27 starts a higher level of novelty that will bring us to the most novel day of the year, being December 3 on the standard graph and October 31 on the original graph.

Here in Italy, the satellite news is all over the news and we received instructions.

I read that the faster than light thing would be another step toward sending information in the past...Who knows anyway.

reply to post by Zagari


For what it's worth I've had a similar experience this week.

I'm a visual artist and quite creative, never have a shortage of ideas. This week though, big and useful ideas have been coming to me...way more than usual.

reply to post by Zagari


This is not the first time such a claim has been raised. There have been such claims at the subatomic level as well as in astronomy. All of the claims have been shown to be subluminal. Maybe this will stand up, maybe not. Notice that no one has claimed discovery. Instead the data is being opened up so that people can review the work.

This is not the first time such claims have made headlines. It's a wait and see situation.

Here are some previous instances in which superliminal travel was suggested:
1994 Apparent Superluminal Velocity of Galaxies
1997
Signal Travels Farther and Faster Than Light

I picked a few older ones, but there have been jets in the universe and all sorts of things that have been suggested.

the 'novelty' of today was the operation Twist... to rip off the savers/investors by bringing down the already miniscule interest on 10-20-30 year bond closer to 1% than it has ever been in the history of the modern banking system


the 'novelty' of transfering wealth is not new... but the zero-interest policy for the banking cartel/money changer guild vis-a-vis the 2% long term bond interest for the $2trillion of baby-boomers IRA's... IS a Novelty...


read 'em & weep

www.youtube.com...

an excellent recent lecture about the connected present and future by Mark Pesce

according to Pesce the Singularity happened in 1996 with the mass shift to the Internet and will take about a billion seconds- a little over three decades- to complete- with the EPICENTER of the Singularity in 2012