1: Do you experience an accelerated development like I do, or do you think it is a more or less steady development.
2: What do you think it will lead to? Will we ever get the brain-computer interface? Will we ever be able to bypass our nervous system and plug
ourselves into virtual worlds?
Thanks for your answers. I am not really looking for groundbreaking ideas here, just for likeminded souls who ponder the same questions I do. Maybe
we´ll get a healthy discussion out of this.
It really depends on the field you're in, I think.
At one time we thought we could measure technical level of advancement by the proliferation of computers one could see in a room.
Now, it's more akin to measuring technical level of advancement by the amount of processing power and bandwidth in use NOT SEEN in the room.
Phones, for instance; each of these, even the cheap/free/"disposable" phones carry more processing power than the entire NASA Moon program from
start to finish, or even from the inception of NASA up to the Space Shuttle all combined.
The amount of processing power in just a phone is just astounding compared to anything even pre-2000.
And we use it to launch birds at naughty monkeys and pigs.
Sure, "smarter" computing is on the way, especially so in assisting a growing a demographic enabled by technological conveniences that are
bogglingly incapable of finding things out on their own or doing anything for themselves.
We see it here on ATS where people start threads asking a Google question when they could just use Google?
Yes, there will be smarter computers for more stupid(er) people.
At the same time too, we'll have innovations in prosthetics, and eventually we'll even have innovations in cognitive prosthetics to assist with
patients who may suffer from brain function loss due injury or disease.
Eventually this medical prosthetic could become an augmentation if found to assist people in remembering/processing more, faster. In any business
market, if there's means by which to get workers performance up, and it can turn a profit in doing so, then, certainly there will be more office
buildings seeing more workers plugging into augment systems to perform their jobs more efficiently.
On the pure machine front, once we get practical AI capable of even marginally outperforming a human being on a consistent and reliable basis, humans
will by necessity have to self augment just to keep tabs on our own AI "children".
We can give AIs all sorts of responsibilities from managing our market portfolios to even dealing with eliminating huge swaths of Government and
business Bureaucracy as well as attending to many of the mindless jobs occupied by so many people.
The problem with that, however, is oversight and accountability. If the AIs are 'smarter', even just marginally so, they'll need some kind of
supervision, and for that to effectively occur, people would need augment to keep up.
The whole question is the sort that can't be adequately tackled, talked about, argued and debated by any one branch of science either. The
implications of AI itself can affect the whole planet on near every level, especially if there's AI proliferation which could lead to self guided
runaway evolution without benefitting the progenitor human species.
It's fun to think about, but, humorously enough, we probably lack the facility in clock speeds and bandwidth to adequately discuss this at any level
of merit it requires.