I love Ray but idk how great his mind is now. :/ Kinda scary to see him as an old man. It's like he got 20 years older in five years. His 200 pills per day notwithstanding.
he said some pretty dumb things too..... promoting the moderna vaccine that's crap... Elon Musk would s*** on him Cure mental disease oh that's all about lifestyle mate not about f****** medication,.... Apparently poverty is down by 50% over the past 20 years but looking at the statistics of how many people overdosed on drugs and died in the past 5 years don't want to call that poverty? Ray's living in some sort of fantasy world his life is fantastic And the medical bills are bankrupting hundreds of thousands of Americans every year..... you think some medical system is operating benevolently without without a profit motive but of course ray a multi millionaire he doesn't feel the pain and suffering 1% of Americans are in prison i those who are locked up and have no freedom has doubled over the past 20 years but everything's fantastic life is improving as we get rich what kind of fantasy world is he living in And Julian Assange who revealed the truth was on the verge of assassination by the CIA are the list of problems just goes on and on and on you think life is getting better come on
Looks to me he just asked him some questions. Maybe with a degree of incredulity, but that's not a sign of disrespect. He did say his book is remarkable. High praise
The interviewer is Nick Thompson, CEO of the Atlantic and former editor of Wired. Not sure if this is his usual interview style, but I agree with everyone here that he could be more respectful.
Don't you think we should be rather aggressive towards questioning the greatest minds? Isn't that how they became so insightful in the first place - but aggressively pursuing questions. I personally appreciated Nick's style. We need more journalists like him.
I do agree that Ray is getting older. However I´ve been following Ray for more than 20 years now, he is and has been spot on the trends of computation. He is a brilliant mind that deservers so much more recognition and his work needs to be studied in more detail.
I don't know if I'd call it antagonistic. I think it might come off that way given the stark difference in their speaking styles, not to mention the fact that Ray's mic was too low, but there were some good questions in there. I have tremendous respect for Ray, but he tends to follow the same talking points every time he's interviewed, and the MC was doing a decent job of shaking that up, misinterpreted answers notwithstanding. At any rate, I'm looking forward to the new book, which I'm hoping will have some new insights.
Ray Kurzweil is a gentleman. He's low key, he's patient and he's amazingly polite in the face of the interviewer who was arrogant, disrespectful, glib, and dismissive of many of Mr. Kurzweil's ideas. In fact, it was Kurweil's sense of dignity that made the interviewer look like a jerk. The Atlantic magazine should fire that guy. He make The Atlantic look like a masthead for the worst kind techie nerd know it all with no moral compass. It was difficult for me to watch this interview because of the interviewer. I wanted to listen to Ray Kurzweil and the interviewer made is a very unpleasant experience. The Atlantic should fire that guy. He's a disaster.
@johnflood6508 - An interviewer has to ask questions ....especially like someone like Kurzweil who needs prodding to get information out of. I never felt that he was being arrogant or any of the things you accuse him of...he was just doing his job. It would indeed be boring and useless if he just fed Kurzweil back his own talking points.
@@GS-hv9rd You raise good points. Ray has talking points and that's part of the way he presents. I agree that it helps the audience to hear a presenter's points challenged to ensure that the presenter goes beyond the usual ideas and to delve into greater depth and meaning. But an interviewer should know the difference between challenging questions and arrogance.
Agree. Really disappointed with the audio on this talk throughout. They could have done more to make sure Ray's level was more balanced with the moderator. Ray, as brilliant as he is, tends to go in circles in several places - repeating the same phrases on different questions and doesn't answer many questions directly.
SUCH A SHAME. Poor ray. He is very slow in this interview. Lots of pauses and 'arhhs' etc. He seems a bit slow and lost. Shame, he's aged a lot lately. I remember he got interviewed by Joe Rogan earlier this year, and he was really slow, mumbling and a bit lost.
I enjoyed listening to Ray. I read Fantastic Voyage when it came out in 2005 and I messaged him with some questions. He was kind enough to respond and send me an autographed copy of "The Singularity is Near". I also heard him speak a few years later at the University of Arizona. I'm 65 this year and one of, if not the oldest, men on the planet with my particular type of muscular dystrophy. I won't make Escape Velocity but following his advice has likely added years to my life. Ray is one of my heroes.
SUCH A SHAME. Poor ray. He is very slow in this interview. Lots of pauses and 'arhhs' etc. He seems a bit slow and lost. Shame, he's aged a lot lately. I remember he got interviewed by Joe Rogan earlier this year, and he was really slow, mumbling and a bit lost.
Hm.....I wonder if there's AI that specialized in amplifying...I mean we got audio-to-text that clearly capture his voices and it is in the text..then just need AI agent that already have his modularity voice to produce then start generating it but of course, would try and match his lips...Then bam, we got no issues with low voice or audio issues. TH-cam should and might will in the future are going to have that check-marked to "Auto-fix low-voice audio". OR....I guess download the video then pipe it in existing project that will do that job in amplifying it. Then reupload it.
Ray Kurzweil is a hero to me. He designed some of the first OCR software for blind people. I've worked helping blind people with technology for over 20 years. That's just a small part of what he has done. I would call him a Renaissance man.
I have listened to several discussions/interviews with Anthropic's Claude and I have to say I would have no idea I was talking with an AI, except that Claude seems more erudite than most people. I think we have already passed the Turing Test. As William Gibson said "The future is already here. It's just not evenly distributed yet”.
I like how Ray didn't want to continue until the people in the audience could hear, whereas the host and SXSW were perfectly happy to leave them out, after I imagine they spent a lot of time and money to be there. It shows that Ray is actually a good guy.
what do you mean actually a good guy? hehe, im just kind of stuck on that as it seems you thought maybe something else before that with the way your comment reads
@@GS-hv9rd I mean he's actually a good guy who cares about regular people whereas those who who put on the show don't give a damn. They were totally willing to screw over the audience.
@@-taz- Oh I understand now, I was reading it as a before and after comparison of your impression of him (before the show and after) but you instead are comparing him with the show organizers an host. Gotcha. Yeah, I agree with you on that.
Yeah, I was kind of surprised he kept trying to force Ray to start anyway. Like I get these things happen live, sometimes there isn't a whole lot you can do, and nerves really kick in situations like this, but there was no reason he should've basically said "well screw all of you, I'm gonna start anyway. Go watch on TH-cam. You came here for no reason."
Yea. That was pretty bad. May be the interviewer would very much benefit from the future AGI machines to assist him with and give him a clue about how to best communicate and interact with people.
Interviewer was pretty bad. I like Ray’s optimism, I hope he’s right. I want to continue experiencing the world, even if it’s in digital form, so I’m looking forward to brain upload (eventually).
But it won’t be you. It will be your emulation, your copy. It’s like creating a statue that looks completely like you but you don’t experience life through this copy. You still cease to exist in case your physical body dies.
@@andrewrozhen513 You're more than your physical body. When your body dies, your consciousness continues in some form. Therefore, you don't cease to exist when your body dies.
@@suncat9 Put the DMT down man, lol! What the other guy said is true though. What you’re saying is entirely speculative and has zero hard evidence to suggest is even true. But say it is, whose to say we can “capture” that disembodied consciousness, to begin with? Let alone, then put this “non-material” consciousness that we somehow captured with material means and then faithfully integrate it into a machine? I mean that’s functionally the only way one could “bring a conscious mind back to life” using future technological means. Otherwise, what you are describing is also called ghosts lol
@@cadenelson891 It will be either hard copy of neural architecture into materials or the best way is to just simulate hundred billion neurons perfectly...and sensory organs... Wait no, initially even a little change would be suffering disaster...have to simulate the body perfectly...so we need nothing just enormously more computational efficiency or just intelligence burst
How will you experience anything at all if a digital copy of your brain is made? You aren’t your brain, you exist independent of a body. Ray is brilliant and many of the minds exploring AI are brilliant, but they are missing the most vital factor. Consciousness and the mind are not the same as the brain. A body part is not consciousness. I imagine a future where someone dies and an android is created to replace them. It sounds like, looks like and behaves like the person who died. But it is not the person. It’s a facsimile of the person. It’s a facsimile of love, passion, loyalty, pride, devotion, grief and anger. But it is not these things.
The interviewer makes this difficult to watch. His personality and hand gestures seem obtrusively contrived. His demeanor is gnawing and abrasive, and most of his questions are phrased in a way that sound like he is challenging Kurzweil. He sounds impatient, patronizing and self-important, like his questions are more important that Kurzweil's response.
@@andybaldman You could read a script of this without any visual or auditory cues and still see his contrived manner of phrasing questions, or his mildly condescending jokes or dismissing what ray is saying, and then there is is tone of voice, hand gestures, and facial expressions. Even in the very beginning with the audio issues... he didnt care care that ray couldnt be heard, his first thought was just to push on itll be fine. Its not anywhere near just him leaning forward, thats absurd.
the thing is you can create a digital twin (or will eventually be able to) but the subjective experience of being alive will still end for the organic original. having a computer twin doesn't mean YOU live forever (or even 500 years). It means the computer twin lives forever. you still die when your brain dies. you don't experience the subjective internal consciousness of that digital twin. as far as medical advancements that are able to combat the currently inevitable genetic "clock running down" that results in death...there's potential there. If AI aided science is able to "talk" to the DNA and modify/preserve it and thus prevent it from "running down"/aging then that will extend human life.
I wish more people understood this. But in the scfi book, "Old Man's War" they could transfer the soul (whatever that is) from one body to another newer one. I imagine AI finding out how the consciousness connects to the body and how it is formed and then be able to move it. I don't see this level of technology for a few years though.
I believe that some people would be interested in mere simulacrum as a means of carrying their unique skills and tastes forward into future generations. It's a kind of immortality that we don't get from procreation because our children are unique individuals. It could also be appealing to people who believe their unique skills or instincts could benefit their descendants.
The twin will have the same subjective expérience otherwise its not a real twin. Its will be like if you awake inside of à computer instead of your bed
And he seems pretty geriatric for 76. I'm not sure that he's going to make it at this point. As a point of comparison, Chomsky remained razor-sharp all through his 80s and only started to slow down noticeably in his 90s.
@@freddychopin I agree, Kurzweil's apparent decline over the past decade or so has been midly shocking. Especially when you consider he has access to the best health care on the planet and is laser focused on his own longevity. But I gess we all age a little differently.
@@saturdaysequalsyouth he unfortunately takes many dozens of supplements. As someone who's dabbled in biohacking for many years, it's all too easy to fuck yourself up by taking a bunch of substances without it being possible to have any idea exactly what they'll do to you in the long term. Dave Asprey, biohacker extraordinaire, is another great example: on the face of things, he's been on the cutting edge of biohacking and longevity for the past two decades. But the guy's a trainwreck, he looks like he's aged 40 years in those 20 years.
@@freddychopin I'm not convinced it's worth it at this piont. We just don't know how to do this properly yet and experiementing will all sorts of cocktails doesn't really work. If anyone asks me I just say stick to the fundamentals: eat well, sleep well, exercise well, and see trained professionals regularly.
@@saturdaysequalsyouth that's pretty much where I've settled. I take the supplement trifecta every day: omega 3, vitamin D, and magnesium. Everything else I take in moderation, and it's virtually all nutraceuticals. Lifestyle will do more for you than any supplement ever possibly could.
interview is shocking, and no disrespect to Kurzweil but his answers and thoughts didn't give me confidence that he's a current authority on AI right now. For example he talks about smartphones being slow but doesn't give the benefits of instant access to knowledge without even having to bridge a divide, he failed to communicate that knowledge will be automatic, just like memories are. This way you can develop more connections between different fields to have better insight and original thoughts.
He wasn’t that bad, if you’re looking for painful try watching him on the Joe rogan podcast… in fact I suggest you don’t watch it as it’s not really a proper interview, more a diatribe on the future from JR
It might just be me but I find his hand gestures particularly annoying. They're not designed to communicate, but assert. Not a good vibe. Came to the comments to see if other people were irritated by him.
I understand they may have had some technical difficulties on location but there's no reason they couldn't have cranked the volume up a bit for the TH-cam video. I've got my iPhone maxed out and I'm having trouble hearing in a quiet room.
I notice on the graph (*@7:30) the plateau of the 1975-91. Confirms to me that the late 70's were a depression in many ways. Then, new wave music and the curve started up again and we somehow got through the dreary plateau in a very important time ... similar to a wall. SONY and Panasonic were the only source of any sign of progress though the industry the universities were busy in the labs trying to break the logjam. I think we're definitely in the "paperless society" goal era and this has been a beautiful and beneficial rollout for pretty much everyone, ever. Lead on.
In 2014 I read Ray Kurzweil book "singularity is near", two years later I listened to Jensen Huan, CEO of Nvidia, talking about GPU's - and AI. I made immediately the connection: a brain is a massive parallel computer, GPU's are the way that will lead to AI. I bought Nvidia shares at $32 (with the 1:4 split it's at $8), Nvidia is over $900! People don't understand the repercussions on our life of the exponential acceleration. If you explain to young adults that we were living in a world without smartphone and no internet, they can't understand how our life was! All new technology advancements we've seen coming over the last 50 years, will come in the next 10 years. Defining consciousness is quite easy: free will. Our brain has no free will, it's a computer, the conscousness is not a product of our brain. That's where I disagree with Ray Kurzweil.
@@dieselphiend garbage in garbage out. Same with AI, if your data is not clean, AI will act irrationally. But free will is not the action of the brain, but the action of the consciousness passing through the filter of instincts and emotions. I compare the brain as the computer of an autonomous car, you (the passenger) tells the car where to go, the car will bring you there.
@@phvaessen I think 'free' will is just our ability to form a subjective translation of reality. It's simply not 'free' because it itself is a product of limitation. It doesn't make sense to blame the very things our will is dependent upon as the things that negate it. I mean, do you think the universe is just being read from some sort of media, like a compact disc? Or is it actually processing stuff? What more could you ask for than to be able to predict the future and build out reality with your perception? How could our will possibly be free? 'Free' is an absolute, and absolutes simply don't exist. Everything that exists is subject to everything that exists. Do not the quantum processes in your brain and within reality itself guarantee a measure of randomness? I believe that only our destination is 'determined'. How we get there, and how long it takes is determined by us. Irrationality itself is a kind of randomness. Variance is not an aspect of information but of perspective. Each of us chooses how much time and effort we put into decoding complexity. We are perfectly capable of resisting popular culture and popular narratives, and we are capable of choosing even when we feel totally ambiguous about something.
Still u will have to let go all that money when u die and can be reborn as a pauper. U guys r kids when it comes to knowledge about atma and paramatma. Stuck in maya.
💯 I do concur on the point of consciousness not being a product of the brain - perhaps it’s the other way around- everything is a product of consciousness.
Assert that consciousness is not a scientific thing is a bit short : when I love something or somebody and yes I have chemical reactions and also I am conscious that I experiment the feeling of joy deep inside myself beyond explaining it It is a direct and personal experiment that any human being can only feel and judge by himself and contemplate its nature. Its definition is beyond the computation bc you have to experiment it you can only feel it yourself directly to know what it's about. And that's what makes us different from a machine. I Don't talk about the mechanism of joy or pleasure or else here but the unspeakable nature of this feeling that you become aware of and experience directly.
Yeah, if you put him in a rocking chair, in a rest home. I was shocked to see he is just slightly younger than me, he looks far older than he is. I took him for somewhere in his eighties. If he makes it to 2029 I'd be surprised.
right? its still one of the highlights in my life whenever I ask someone if they've heard of them and I get to introduce them to him and h is over 10 year old documentary the transcendent man. The things he talks about are mind blowing then and even now but more visible. I cant wait till we have foglets and smart dust
The father of Havana syndrome and the reason your should be aware of the dangers of neurodata. Let me ask you, at the hands of these people in with all this influence and money, how much better off is our economy or health in America? Your really think it’s a good idea to give this man or anyone else in high level positions any kind of insight or remote control over your mind?
you dont have a soul. if you ACCURATELY copy all interaction of data that makes you you, it will be YOU. there is that phylosophical question of a ship which gets its blanks replaced you may know that? at which point is it not the same ship anymore? after 50% of blanks have been replaced? 90? 100%? or is it always the same ship as it was before no matter how many times you replace the blanks? in this analogy, the "soul", the individuality of the ship would be the way it gnarks when you walk over that one blank that isnt fitting perfectly, how you can only softly lean against that one reiling because its old and eroded by the sea water, maybe the wood smells like pine because of the resin in the wood that was used for the blanks that were used to build it. so if you build the "same" ship, somewhere else, its isnt the actual same, unless you ACCURATELY scan the ship to every last atom, including the eroded parts, the salt water that has sieved in and dried up, the spaces between the blanks that gnark, the resin within the wood, etc. etc. but if you do that, the ship will do EXACTLY the same as it would have, if you release it into the same environment. the entire world is CAUSAL. so yeah, if we become able to scan the brain in a single state ACCURATELY, we can upload that network data and replicate you. it doesent even have to be the same medium. data is data if its correctly transformed it doesent matter. what matters is that all components used have effectively the same attributes as before and NO information is lost. much of said information lies within relation.
@@kliersheed Well, you could in the same way replace 90% of a person's body yet as long as his brain is still there and not being replaced then his soul still exist (so I tend to believe the soul exist in the brain somewhere and somehow, it's super advanced and complex and unreachable/invisible kind of science of the soul but it exists I think), also, you compare an already soulless inanimate thing (ship) to another and a human being and animals all have souls so a duplicate of a human being 1 to 1 could maybe simulate our souls but there would still be no souls in them unless you actually would also make sure the being's brain is biological. Every one of us can tell that the experience we have in human bodies is definitely being observed by us through our senses and that we are truly aware and have true conciousness, that's the only proof we have and need to know that we are truly concious with souls/spirit or whatever you wanna call it in us that is being able to experience it on such authentic ways, it feels that there is something beyond mere materials to our mind/brain and body which would lack even in a 99.9% real like human like indistiguishable robot which is probably the soul that resides in us.
@@MrRandomPlays_1987 1. so humans souls is in the brain? but your hormones e.g. are also partly produced by your organs, and they regulate many things in your brain. if you only keep the brain, your "soul" would take a hit. 2. if animals olso have a soul ,where do you draw the border? a dog? (i would argue that it is as conscious as a human is), a cat? ca frog? a cokcroach? a bacteria? a virus (that cant even replicate by itself)? plants? whats makes them have or not have a soul? how do you think a worm that doesent have a classic brain or a sunflower makes "decisions" (in case you think- which i would assume- that they dont have a soul). how do they know where to crawl or where to move towards (to be in the sun), how do they decide if they should eat whats in front of them (the worm lol not the sunflower xd)? its simply actio and reactio, evolved over the 3 billion years of live existing. the ones who made the right decisions naturally survived, the weighting of doing that decision has naturally incrteased inside their DNA and thats that. no sould, just causal acting. 3. if there was a soul (that mattered) aka that had ANY influence on us (otherwise it might as well NOT exist). it would have to at some point interact with your brain, which is entirely made of matter. if it would interact, the moment it interacts you would be able to measure it (with whatever it interacts with). being unable to measure it, means it doesent exist.
@@kliersheed 1. I suppose then that the hormones are probably an added thing to our body+brain but its not relating to our souls (maybe indirectly but even then your feelings and experience in regard to hormones are still coming ultimately from your brain so then it still makes sense for our souls to be influenced by it in a way 2. I tend to believe all living things are having souls/spirits but are just on a different level (so their conciousness and soul is a different type of soul, some of them maybe more aware and concious than others but in different ways as well and on different scales of magnitude of awareness), I think that since they are biological then naturally they posses the feature of having a soul to some extent (depending on the creature/organism or lifeform if you will) I'd assume that those with no brains kind of lifeforms are probably having a logic system (working like a brain) on their whole body? I don't know, probably else it does not make sense for them to make decisions but then I still think they might be having a soul in a way but just a drowsy one that is in their whole body or most of it, just a guess. You could also claim that our brain is also a action reaction kind of thing so we don't have souls/spirits/awareness but we do indeed know for certain that our own individual experiences are real, hence that if we have a real awareness then we also have a soul/spirit and so despite the action reaction thing going on in our brains we are still more than just that, more than just neurons interacting with each other, it's something else that exist on top of that, else, we would have no awareness to reflect upon internally, if we were to be souless and without any true awareness then we would have zero reflection felt, it would be basically like a robot's brain, that can only simulate speech and thoughts yet it has zero feelings and zero true awareness, it is a dead material made believe to be alive. 3. I think our souls kind of snap on our brain's (and bodies maybe) and you might be thinking in the right direction that if it exists then it should be somehow be seen by its interactions or whatever it does in relation to our brain material but since we don't yet have figured out not even the slightest of bits of the souls realm science and supernatural science then we can't say for sure if we can measure it using existing devices/instruments or not, I tend to believe that it does exist and maybe one day humans would be able to measure it and even see it ETC but it's just a rather complicated kind of science that is maybe impossble to figure out, maybe using advanced AI in the future it would be possible to figure it out (the AGI/ASI would try to do a thorough research on the topic and who knows what it might be able to do).
A better example of how you can't quantify or "prove" consciousness are plants. Most wouldn't look at a plant and think of it as conscious, even though it's alive and probably conscious in some form we may never understand due to biology. Plant intelligence is already a thing people study.
Ray is 18 yrs my senior, a hero and along with Arthur C Clarke, Isaac Asimov and Gene Roddenberry, the last living Father of Futurism in the Late 20thC. Everyone else has been influenced by one of these four, regarding last century and how I believe we all want a very similar idea of the future to come to fruition. Basically, it's a version of Star Trek - not exactly like but based upon the ideals of maximising human potential that all four held as a centralising tenet; though in some works is the maypole around which utopia and dystopia dance. We are only 4 key technologies away from that ideal; warp drive, replicator manufacturing, transporter, tricorder/health treatment and the only thing needed is compute power to realize the science. OF COURSE I'm aware of the impossibilities where the laws of either Relativity or QFT are transgressed currently and within any current paradigm. These are hopes, dreams and goals to be striven for no matter how improbable the outcome I want. I could care less what/where/why the interviewer gets cred, he ain't gotr none wit' me because like most journalists, there's an agenda.
why is this interviewer an egomaniac who thinks his opinions are more important or valid than someone who literally wrote the book on this topic? He pushes the conversation into empty and meaningless conversational dead ends when Kurzweil actually has plenty to say and to communicate things that this crowd wants to hear, who even is this guy?
were he a competent interviewer and had he asked more relevant questions, I believe we could've gotten much more from Mr. Ray. A shame to say the least
Nick Thompson is exactly the kind of person I expect to meet at SXSW and is exactly why I’ve avoided it for 10+ years. Their culture is like Coachella of the South
I always enjoy listening to Ray Kurzweil. Towards the end the interviewer asked a question about the role of humans in a world where technology is already in a primary role. Ray's response was that he sees technology as an extension of the human mind which is a great answer. I would also add that the democratization of capital via capital accounts for all and a push towards employee and community ownership of larger business entities and financial institutions would definitely put humans in charge of determining how A(G/S)I is deployed and if as Ray suggests, humans will be integrated into technology and vice versa, by democratizing the economy, you just add a layer of protection and democratization of the whole realm of society to prevent unhealthy concentrations of power. In short, it enhances the likelihood that Ray's vision of a society which does not just benefit a techno-elite, but that technical abilities are given fair and equal access to all.
I'm curious about his book, not having read the previous one yet. I'm simply a curious layman, does anyone know if his older book is still worth a read, or should I just wait for his next one to be released? In any case, I believe this man is truly amazing to be able to predict so many things in such a long timeframe. I can't even imagine what the future will look 10 years from now. 10 years ago, the speed of the technological evolution was so much slower; it's not even comparable to what we will have in the upcoming years. Truly a great time to be alive
Ray's being polite because on the inside, he's relishing the fact that this interviewer is basically the archetypical lame-ass journalist that the singularity will make obsolete.
🇧🇷🇧🇷🇧🇷🇧🇷👏🏻, Ray was the one that got me into AI and told us that, we all need to get through the second bridge, so that we can achieve the third bridge! The first bridge ends in 7 years or less...
@@dieselphiend Oh, this is just such a long insight that he gave us a while back, if you look through his earlier videos you will see him explaining it and all in a better way! Basically the first bridge ends by 2030, second brigde goes from 2030 to 2045, and the third bridge from 2045 to the Singularity!
In the movies, one character can be the brilliant scientist that thinks up, implements, and evangelizes the technology - like Dr. Hammond in Jurassic Park. In reality this almost never happens. When asking Ray Kurzweil questions all across the spectrum from ethical, societal, economic, and technological standpoints there are bound to be things he can't answer completely or immediately. However, give him a book to write and make his own arguments where he's comfortable and he's brilliant. This interview makes Kurzweil come across in a way which shows we expect too much of him. This is partly his doing, as he's put himself out there as a sort of sociologist in addition to his technical expertise. Going back to my Dr. Hammond example, we shouldn't expect the person with the genius to develop a technology to also work out all the ethical or social dilemmas - these are their own areas that need a seat at the table.
Wouldn't the statement "Those who cannot hear Ray, raise your hand" be more effective, instead of asking a yes/no question where everyone is speaking at once?
You are lacking basic intelligence (bi) if you can't figure out that he meant to say artificial. You must be related to the interviewer, disrespecting a 76 year old who clearly made a simple mistake. You are brilliant, pointing out something so obvious that everyone heard and nobody felt a need to point out.
You were paying attention. Perhaps he doesn’t consider it artificial, as it has come from the whole (humanity) therefore, it is not necessarily artificial -> it reaches an automated generalization of the intelligence of the whole (humanity). That is what is needed. To think. To expand and to grow.
You can see a ceratin mental decline .. Ray had some problem following the questions and his replies were not very deep. Can Ray last till 2045 ? Unlikely .. Anyway, his incoming book will be worth reading ..
Fact Check: Recent rumours has ChatGPT4 could be already having 1.76- 100 trillion parameters. The brain actually has 100 trillion connections so we could be already very close to AGI working like brain. On average parameters are increasing in factor of 10 each year: GPT-1 (2018): 117 million parameters. GPT-2 (2019): 1.5 billion parameters. GPT-3 (2020): 175 billion parameters. GPT-3.5 (2022) : undisclosed GPT-4 (2023): undisclosed CHatGPT4o (2024): rumour 1.76- 100 trillion
Yes me too. why? 2004 I bought the book Fantastic Voyage - In it Ray & his good friend Terry laid out medical reasoning why it was possible to help your self start on that journey. I think it was either 2008 / 2009 when TRANSCEND came out. I bought that too. My book is worse for ware, but my body is so mch better for it! It gave you a practical way of staying in reasonable health until medical progreess was made, so you could benefit from those advances. I pesonally found it hard to make the changes needed, but now they are daily habits. Its a bit like leapfrog. Bridge 1 -> 2 & 2 -> 3 and so on. Once you take responsibilty for your own outcomes - again something that I found was quite hard to take on board, little by little you can see gradual changes happening.
Ray reminds me of Marshall Mcluhan -- he's eclectic and sometimes hard to agree with, but it's probably just my own limitation. Nice that he mentions Minsky.
I wish the interviewer would have asked Ray about AI hallucinations and perhaps explain why the hallucinations occur and how they can be avoided. Everything about AI is so fascinating!
I wonder what would happen if we arranged multiple LLMs into one huge network of grouped specialized LLMs where each group of LLMs is trained for a more specific object emulating how the human brain designates a part of its neural network for a specific purpose like vision, hearing, thinking, fear, etc.
I can wait to read the book!! I don't think the interviewer disrespected Mr. Ray. I really enjoyed the interview! All my respect and appreciation for Mr Ray ! I hope God will guide us only on the right paths!
Not everything, but definitely a very high success rate, probably the most successful predictive streak. I'm on board with that AGI and immortality by 2029, even earlier as he starting to think. Many do as well, we just keep speeding up in technological evolution
I choose to see the glass as half full. The way Ray gracefully waited for the issue to be resolved before starting to address the audience was commendable. I understand the interviewer's frustration, but I was happy this happened, as it allowed us to witness an act of kindness, which is an essential quality in people who are building the future.
Very exciting times. I absolutely agree with biologic simulators, and it is easily forseable. I predict the US will not be able to catch up with regulations, and people will be flying to third world countries to get treatment due to their lack of regulations. Wealthy will be first to benefit, then over time it become the norm. Great interview.
In the end, creativity is just a number. A number of many ideas. Brutforce, Ai, quantum computers will ultimately teach us who is the real boss here. Just as weapons manufacturers don't talk publicly about death rates, scientists and engineers don't talk about the threats but about the possibilities. Their own professional base is defended until their own existence is at stake. Look in the history books.
What do you think people from a hundred years from now would think about our society today compared to theirs on the measure of order vs. chaos as well as the measure of complexity on things such as international diplomacy, operations of various institutes, different types of services, and so on?
I think there is a higher probability than we would like to admit that we are living in the closest to Utopia as we will get. Which isn’t saying much. If technological advancement was in a vacuum then I’d say there is a 99.99% chance it will only get better and better at every dimension you mention. But obviously it’s not. Look up the great filter if you don’t already know of it. It’s an explanation for as to why we don’t see evidence galore of ET in the universe. Once a life form gets enough advancement in tech to become interstellar they also, by default, have the advanced enough tech to wipe themselves out in war and conflict, which they inevitably do. Unless AI helps us to become something we are not, as humans, such as help us to not have serious conflict, which may itself prevent a lot of innovation, we may never be around long enough to enjoy the fruit of our labor or AI’s labor, that is.
When Ray has a full head of hair and no longer needs that toupee, we will have reached full AGI. That's my own personal Turing test. BTW, I adore Ray and his predictions. I've been following him for many years, so don't think I'm being mean to him! I'm sure he would agree that he will grow his hair back when we have full AGI. As for the discussion about consciousness, I think Ray means that consciousness is probably an emergent property. It's also not an off/on thing. And the ridiculously dumb interviewer asked Ray whether people in this room would live to 500 years old if they could survive 5 more years and Ray said, "If they are _diligent_ they will." And the dumb interviewer scoffed, smirked, laughed, and then said, well everybody can go drink whatever they want, and they don't have to worry about decline! Ray didn't say that. He said if they are diligent. That interviewer should be ashamed of himself for speaking so arrogantly and dismissively to this great man.
at least people still get that the interviewer was an ass and the guy may be old and slow like a fossil, not quite up to date anymore when it comes to AI progress, but still deserves some respect considering his age and the possibilities he had to his time/ what he made out of that. gives me some hope.
There's a difference form consciousness and sentience. Every one's conscious, which simiply means to be aware of surroundings. consciouness is performed by any computer that receives input from the environment, simply put.
we call that english, yes :"D jokes aside, while most programming languages that are present in majority of fields are english based (which is a good indivator for english becoming the world language), it simultaneously doesent mean much once AI will be able to real-time translate any language into another (including programming languages) so everyone could theoretically speak whatever they want as long as its codified into the AI.
Kurzweil is right, Instead of calling it Large Language Models, I think the expression Large Multimodal Models seems more fitting? Multimodal means multiple types of output. Also, when he said about backup of the brain and earth blowing up so the backup being lost, that's not entirely true because Elon Musk and others are launching rockets and we might be able to have server backups of these details on other planets so we can continue even if the earth backup is lost. The principle of multiple backups and multiple locations.
agreed. multi.planet species is a good next step we should definitely work on, i admire musk for that despite everyone hating the guy xd. also agree with the "multi-modal-model" would at "that is trained on large language data bases for logical reasoning and communication". MMM for LRaC
I don't understand why many people in the comment section are saying that the interviewer was disrespectful to Ray Kurzweil, maybe at times it looked a bit almost on the edge of a bit being disrespectful towards him but not really and even then it was just a tiny bit like that but nothing serious, I watched the whole video clip and got the impression the interviewer actually respected Ray more than disrespected him, people are exaggerating it and taking it out of context.
@@MrRandomPlays_1987 maybe the overwhelming consensus is worth considering, or watch it again and look at his consistent pushy mannerisms, lack of attunement to Ray and the audience, and lack of active listening.
I came down to the comments to say that the interviewer did a great job given the terrible hand he was dealt. Ray is doddering, the audience is being infantile, and the set up was incorrect. I think he juggled those three problems really well.
I couldn’t stomach the way he interviewed one of the greatest minds
Maybe so but Ray insists on wearing obvious ugly wigs
I love Ray but idk how great his mind is now. :/ Kinda scary to see him as an old man. It's like he got 20 years older in five years. His 200 pills per day notwithstanding.
he said some pretty dumb things too..... promoting the moderna vaccine that's crap... Elon Musk would s*** on him Cure mental disease oh that's all about lifestyle mate not about f****** medication,.... Apparently poverty is down by 50% over the past 20 years but looking at the statistics of how many people overdosed on drugs and died in the past 5 years don't want to call that poverty? Ray's living in some sort of fantasy world his life is fantastic And the medical bills are bankrupting hundreds of thousands of Americans every year..... you think some medical system is operating benevolently without without a profit motive but of course ray a multi millionaire he doesn't feel the pain and suffering 1% of Americans are in prison i those who are locked up and have no freedom has doubled over the past 20 years but everything's fantastic life is improving as we get rich what kind of fantasy world is he living in And Julian Assange who revealed the truth was on the verge of assassination by the CIA are the list of problems just goes on and on and on you think life is getting better come on
Looks to me he just asked him some questions. Maybe with a degree of incredulity, but that's not a sign of disrespect. He did say his book is remarkable. High praise
@@habatone yeah I was pretty disgusted the way he was praising moderna vaccine
The interviewer is Nick Thompson, CEO of the Atlantic and former editor of Wired. Not sure if this is his usual interview style, but I agree with everyone here that he could be more respectful.
Oh so a journalist. Typical.
Don't you think we should be rather aggressive towards questioning the greatest minds? Isn't that how they became so insightful in the first place - but aggressively pursuing questions. I personally appreciated Nick's style. We need more journalists like him.
Rogan interview was a dumpster fire
@@mitchmaceachern1539 Mitch don’t know what you were listening to but this this interviewers questions were simplistic and uninformed. Very arrogant.
Lamestream media. Shoulda hired a podcaster.
Interview was antagonistic; very bizarre.
Ray is getting older but he’s a brilliant mind. He deserves deep respect.
I do agree that Ray is getting older. However I´ve been following Ray for more than 20 years now, he is and has been spot on the trends of computation. He is a brilliant mind that deservers so much more recognition and his work needs to be studied in more detail.
I don't know if I'd call it antagonistic. I think it might come off that way given the stark difference in their speaking styles, not to mention the fact that Ray's mic was too low, but there were some good questions in there. I have tremendous respect for Ray, but he tends to follow the same talking points every time he's interviewed, and the MC was doing a decent job of shaking that up, misinterpreted answers notwithstanding. At any rate, I'm looking forward to the new book, which I'm hoping will have some new insights.
Poor audio
agi can “emulate any human being” - any individual or all humans? u don’t want to be michael jordan playing baseball
AMEN to what you said.
Was the interviewer under the impression that people were there to hear from him?
plus the tickets to view that event are like $1.5k... how were they thinking not being able to hear him was ok?
@@joeysipos yea very bizarre that he didn't even try to wait for audio to be fixed. like what's the hurry. only takes a few seconds.
Ray Kurzweil is a gentleman. He's low key, he's patient and he's amazingly polite in the face of the interviewer who was arrogant, disrespectful, glib, and dismissive of many of Mr. Kurzweil's ideas. In fact, it was Kurweil's sense of dignity that made the interviewer look like a jerk. The Atlantic magazine should fire that guy. He make The Atlantic look like a masthead for the worst kind techie nerd know it all with no moral compass. It was difficult for me to watch this interview because of the interviewer. I wanted to listen to Ray Kurzweil and the interviewer made is a very unpleasant experience. The Atlantic should fire that guy. He's a disaster.
God almighty.I didn't know it was possible to roast someone as well as you did here. Well said!
@johnflood6508 - An interviewer has to ask questions ....especially like someone like Kurzweil who needs prodding to get information out of. I never felt that he was being arrogant or any of the things you accuse him of...he was just doing his job. It would indeed be boring and useless if he just fed Kurzweil back his own talking points.
@@GS-hv9rd You raise good points. Ray has talking points and that's part of the way he presents. I agree that it helps the audience to hear a presenter's points challenged to ensure that the presenter goes beyond the usual ideas and to delve into greater depth and meaning. But an interviewer should know the difference between challenging questions and arrogance.
I would like to introduce to the SXSW video team the concept of ✨editing✨
Agree. Really disappointed with the audio on this talk throughout. They could have done more to make sure Ray's level was more balanced with the moderator. Ray, as brilliant as he is, tends to go in circles in several places - repeating the same phrases on different questions and doesn't answer many questions directly.
This was great information from Ray. On a sidenote, I’ve never seen such universal agreement about the dislike of an interviewer.
Actually I thought he was fine. His style just didn't match Ray's that well.
I actually liked the interviewer. Kinda funny
Its just shows that first impression matters A LOT. He was stressed and the fine in the rest of the interview imo
SUCH A SHAME. Poor ray. He is very slow in this interview. Lots of pauses and 'arhhs' etc. He seems a bit slow and lost. Shame, he's aged a lot lately. I remember he got interviewed by Joe Rogan earlier this year, and he was really slow, mumbling and a bit lost.
I've got my volume turned all the way up and can barely hear the video...
I enjoyed listening to Ray. I read Fantastic Voyage when it came out in 2005 and I messaged him with some questions. He was kind enough to respond and send me an autographed copy of "The Singularity is Near". I also heard him speak a few years later at the University of Arizona. I'm 65 this year and one of, if not the oldest, men on the planet with my particular type of muscular dystrophy. I won't make Escape Velocity but following his advice has likely added years to my life. Ray is one of my heroes.
SUCH A SHAME. Poor ray. He is very slow in this interview. Lots of pauses and 'arhhs' etc. He seems a bit slow and lost. Shame, he's aged a lot lately. I remember he got interviewed by Joe Rogan earlier this year, and he was really slow, mumbling and a bit lost.
Why’s the audio so low? Shouldn’t we be past these issues in 2024?
I am not surprise, best mind works on AI, they are not sound engineer
yeah. when the adverts came on it almost deafened me!
Well the fact that I as a trans woman can't take a shit in a woman's only shower in 2024 should tell you all you need to know.
Post singularity, all audio will be balanced.
Hm.....I wonder if there's AI that specialized in amplifying...I mean we got audio-to-text that clearly capture his voices and it is in the text..then just need AI agent that already have his modularity voice to produce then start generating it but of course, would try and match his lips...Then bam, we got no issues with low voice or audio issues. TH-cam should and might will in the future are going to have that check-marked to "Auto-fix low-voice audio". OR....I guess download the video then pipe it in existing project that will do that job in amplifying it. Then reupload it.
Ray Kurzweil is a hero to me. He designed some of the first OCR software for blind people. I've worked helping blind people with technology for over 20 years. That's just a small part of what he has done. I would call him a Renaissance man.
I hope he can reach 2029 to live for ever
I have listened to several discussions/interviews with Anthropic's Claude and I have to say I would have no idea I was talking with an AI, except that Claude seems more erudite than most people. I think we have already passed the Turing Test. As William Gibson said "The future is already here. It's just not evenly distributed yet”.
I like how Ray didn't want to continue until the people in the audience could hear, whereas the host and SXSW were perfectly happy to leave them out, after I imagine they spent a lot of time and money to be there. It shows that Ray is actually a good guy.
what do you mean actually a good guy? hehe, im just kind of stuck on that as it seems you thought maybe something else before that with the way your comment reads
@@GS-hv9rd I mean he's actually a good guy who cares about regular people whereas those who who put on the show don't give a damn. They were totally willing to screw over the audience.
@@-taz- Oh I understand now, I was reading it as a before and after comparison of your impression of him (before the show and after) but you instead are comparing him with the show organizers an host. Gotcha. Yeah, I agree with you on that.
He is. This is why is so optimistic too.
Can't fix the audio, but the singularity is just a few years away. Checks out.
very disrespectful to the guest and the audience when you don't care the guest is heard. what is the audience supposed to do? twiddle their thumbs?
Yeah, I was kind of surprised he kept trying to force Ray to start anyway. Like I get these things happen live, sometimes there isn't a whole lot you can do, and nerves really kick in situations like this, but there was no reason he should've basically said "well screw all of you, I'm gonna start anyway. Go watch on TH-cam. You came here for no reason."
What a dil do. Seriously.
Arrogant left wing The Atlantic puppet. Ray should choose how he spend his invaluable time
...and dude, comb your hair
Yea. That was pretty bad. May be the interviewer would very much benefit from the future AGI machines to assist him with and give him a clue about how to best communicate and interact with people.
Ray Kurzweil is a god. So sorry to see him interviewed by Mandark from Dexters Lab.
Ray is in mental decline ..
You’re criteria for a god is very low
"We don't know if something is conscious" Ray K.
Hardly an endorsement that Ray is a God.
@@HodgePodgeVids1 Still better than your imaginary god who lives in heaven of clouds lol......
Interviewer was pretty bad. I like Ray’s optimism, I hope he’s right. I want to continue experiencing the world, even if it’s in digital form, so I’m looking forward to brain upload (eventually).
But it won’t be you. It will be your emulation, your copy. It’s like creating a statue that looks completely like you but you don’t experience life through this copy. You still cease to exist in case your physical body dies.
@@andrewrozhen513 You're more than your physical body. When your body dies, your consciousness continues in some form. Therefore, you don't cease to exist when your body dies.
@@suncat9 Put the DMT down man, lol! What the other guy said is true though. What you’re saying is entirely speculative and has zero hard evidence to suggest is even true. But say it is, whose to say we can “capture” that disembodied consciousness, to begin with? Let alone, then put this “non-material” consciousness that we somehow captured with material means and then faithfully integrate it into a machine? I mean that’s functionally the only way one could “bring a conscious mind back to life” using future technological means. Otherwise, what you are describing is also called ghosts lol
@@cadenelson891 It will be either hard copy of neural architecture into materials or the best way is to just simulate hundred billion neurons perfectly...and sensory organs...
Wait no, initially even a little change would be suffering disaster...have to simulate the body perfectly...so we need nothing just enormously more computational efficiency or just intelligence burst
How will you experience anything at all if a digital copy of your brain is made? You aren’t your brain, you exist independent of a body. Ray is brilliant and many of the minds exploring AI are brilliant, but they are missing the most vital factor. Consciousness and the mind are not the same as the brain. A body part is not consciousness.
I imagine a future where someone dies and an android is created to replace them. It sounds like, looks like and behaves like the person who died.
But it is not the person. It’s a facsimile of the person. It’s a facsimile of love, passion, loyalty, pride, devotion, grief and anger.
But it is not these things.
Interviewer needs to be fired. Horrible interpersonal skills.
he was just dealing with the inevitable fear that comes with topics that are meant to produce cowardice. no blame. very courageous, imo.
@@iarwainthabombadil7724 kokokooookkoooooooooookokoo
Ko
I was disgusted by his arrogance and disregard. He thinks everyone was there for him.
The interviewer makes this difficult to watch. His personality and hand gestures seem obtrusively contrived. His demeanor is gnawing and abrasive, and most of his questions are phrased in a way that sound like he is challenging Kurzweil. He sounds impatient, patronizing and self-important, like his questions are more important that Kurzweil's response.
You're mostly reacting to his body language. He's seated forward, while Ray is relaxed and leaning back.
100% this
The contrived hand gestures and self-importance are incredibly off-putting.
@@andybaldman you'd do better to learn from the OP rather than trying to correct him, his comment is more insightful than your rebuttal
@@andybaldman You could read a script of this without any visual or auditory cues and still see his contrived manner of phrasing questions, or his mildly condescending jokes or dismissing what ray is saying, and then there is is tone of voice, hand gestures, and facial expressions.
Even in the very beginning with the audio issues... he didnt care care that ray couldnt be heard, his first thought was just to push on itll be fine.
Its not anywhere near just him leaning forward, thats absurd.
the thing is you can create a digital twin (or will eventually be able to) but the subjective experience of being alive will still end for the organic original.
having a computer twin doesn't mean YOU live forever (or even 500 years).
It means the computer twin lives forever.
you still die when your brain dies.
you don't experience the subjective internal consciousness of that digital twin.
as far as medical advancements that are able to combat the currently inevitable genetic "clock running down" that results in death...there's potential there. If AI aided science is able to "talk" to the DNA and modify/preserve it and thus prevent it from "running down"/aging then that will extend human life.
I wish more people understood this. But in the scfi book, "Old Man's War" they could transfer the soul (whatever that is) from one body to another newer one. I imagine AI finding out how the consciousness connects to the body and how it is formed and then be able to move it. I don't see this level of technology for a few years though.
I believe that some people would be interested in mere simulacrum as a means of carrying their unique skills and tastes forward into future generations. It's a kind of immortality that we don't get from procreation because our children are unique individuals. It could also be appealing to people who believe their unique skills or instincts could benefit their descendants.
The subjective experience of being alive ends every night when we go to sleep. Are you afraid of falling asleep?
@@wessel5799 😂 true
The twin will have the same subjective expérience otherwise its not a real twin.
Its will be like if you awake inside of à computer instead of your bed
The audience told you the balance of microphones was wrong, but you didn't listen. The sound production could have been better
Apparently, Ray Kurzweil is only 76. But his Dad died young. I wish his treatments worked better. He is a brilliant man.
And he seems pretty geriatric for 76. I'm not sure that he's going to make it at this point. As a point of comparison, Chomsky remained razor-sharp all through his 80s and only started to slow down noticeably in his 90s.
@@freddychopin I agree, Kurzweil's apparent decline over the past decade or so has been midly shocking. Especially when you consider he has access to the best health care on the planet and is laser focused on his own longevity. But I gess we all age a little differently.
@@saturdaysequalsyouth he unfortunately takes many dozens of supplements. As someone who's dabbled in biohacking for many years, it's all too easy to fuck yourself up by taking a bunch of substances without it being possible to have any idea exactly what they'll do to you in the long term. Dave Asprey, biohacker extraordinaire, is another great example: on the face of things, he's been on the cutting edge of biohacking and longevity for the past two decades. But the guy's a trainwreck, he looks like he's aged 40 years in those 20 years.
@@freddychopin I'm not convinced it's worth it at this piont. We just don't know how to do this properly yet and experiementing will all sorts of cocktails doesn't really work. If anyone asks me I just say stick to the fundamentals: eat well, sleep well, exercise well, and see trained professionals regularly.
@@saturdaysequalsyouth that's pretty much where I've settled. I take the supplement trifecta every day: omega 3, vitamin D, and magnesium. Everything else I take in moderation, and it's virtually all nutraceuticals. Lifestyle will do more for you than any supplement ever possibly could.
I had to use a browser plugin to crank the audio up 600%.
I'm listening on my phone on less than half volume and I can hear Ray perfectly well.
2:23 Where are we today
23:55 next 20 years
37:00 Singularity
48:52 What now ?
This interviewer is terrible! Long live Kurzweil.
interview is shocking, and no disrespect to Kurzweil but his answers and thoughts didn't give me confidence that he's a current authority on AI right now. For example he talks about smartphones being slow but doesn't give the benefits of instant access to knowledge without even having to bridge a divide, he failed to communicate that knowledge will be automatic, just like memories are. This way you can develop more connections between different fields to have better insight and original thoughts.
He wasn’t that bad, if you’re looking for painful try watching him on the Joe rogan podcast… in fact I suggest you don’t watch it as it’s not really a proper interview, more a diatribe on the future from JR
Long live Kurzweil
It might just be me but I find his hand gestures particularly annoying. They're not designed to communicate, but assert. Not a good vibe.
Came to the comments to see if other people were irritated by him.
@@rpbmpn yeah its not like hes horrible or anything but there were many small things that made me say "oof"
I understand they may have had some technical difficulties on location but there's no reason they couldn't have cranked the volume up a bit for the TH-cam video. I've got my iPhone maxed out and I'm having trouble hearing in a quiet room.
My Samsung is just above half and its coming across loud and clear, I guess nothing except taxes are universal
Amazingly polite ray! To the interviewer with such hunger to be seen
I notice on the graph (*@7:30) the plateau of the 1975-91. Confirms to me that the late 70's were a depression in many ways. Then, new wave music and the curve started up again and we somehow got through the dreary plateau in a very important time ... similar to a wall. SONY and Panasonic were the only source of any sign of progress though the industry the universities were busy in the labs trying to break the logjam. I think we're definitely in the "paperless society" goal era and this has been a beautiful and beneficial rollout for pretty much everyone, ever. Lead on.
In 2014 I read Ray Kurzweil book "singularity is near", two years later I listened to Jensen Huan, CEO of Nvidia, talking about GPU's - and AI. I made immediately the connection: a brain is a massive parallel computer, GPU's are the way that will lead to AI. I bought Nvidia shares at $32 (with the 1:4 split it's at $8), Nvidia is over $900!
People don't understand the repercussions on our life of the exponential acceleration. If you explain to young adults that we were living in a world without smartphone and no internet, they can't understand how our life was! All new technology advancements we've seen coming over the last 50 years, will come in the next 10 years.
Defining consciousness is quite easy: free will. Our brain has no free will, it's a computer, the conscousness is not a product of our brain. That's where I disagree with Ray Kurzweil.
If your brain is just a computer, and thoughts, and subsequent actions just "arise", why do you ever act irrationally?
@@dieselphiend garbage in garbage out. Same with AI, if your data is not clean, AI will act irrationally. But free will is not the action of the brain, but the action of the consciousness passing through the filter of instincts and emotions. I compare the brain as the computer of an autonomous car, you (the passenger) tells the car where to go, the car will bring you there.
@@phvaessen I think 'free' will is just our ability to form a subjective translation of reality. It's simply not 'free' because it itself is a product of limitation. It doesn't make sense to blame the very things our will is dependent upon as the things that negate it. I mean, do you think the universe is just being read from some sort of media, like a compact disc? Or is it actually processing stuff?
What more could you ask for than to be able to predict the future and build out reality with your perception? How could our will possibly be free? 'Free' is an absolute, and absolutes simply don't exist. Everything that exists is subject to everything that exists. Do not the quantum processes in your brain and within reality itself guarantee a measure of randomness? I believe that only our destination is 'determined'. How we get there, and how long it takes is determined by us.
Irrationality itself is a kind of randomness. Variance is not an aspect of information but of perspective. Each of us chooses how much time and effort we put into decoding complexity. We are perfectly capable of resisting popular culture and popular narratives, and we are capable of choosing even when we feel totally ambiguous about something.
Still u will have to let go all that money when u die and can be reborn as a pauper. U guys r kids when it comes to knowledge about atma and paramatma. Stuck in maya.
💯 I do concur on the point of consciousness not being a product of the brain - perhaps it’s the other way around- everything is a product of consciousness.
Ray handled this interview very well given that the circumstances created by the host.
Assert that consciousness is not a scientific thing is a bit short : when I love something or somebody and yes I have chemical reactions and also I am conscious that I experiment the feeling of joy deep inside myself beyond explaining it
It is a direct and personal experiment that any human being can only feel and judge by himself and contemplate its nature.
Its definition is beyond the computation bc you have to experiment it you can only feel it yourself directly to know what it's about.
And that's what makes us different from a machine.
I Don't talk about the mechanism of joy or pleasure or else here but the unspeakable nature of this feeling that you become aware of and experience directly.
"We will soon reach the singularity!" "We can't hear you!"
Ray just rocks. Always.
Yeah, if you put him in a rocking chair, in a rest home. I was shocked to see he is just slightly younger than me, he looks far older than he is. I took him for somewhere in his eighties. If he makes it to 2029 I'd be surprised.
Ray needs an AI Generated Pixar movie about his life.
Maybe one where he attaches a lot of balloons to his house and floats off into the sunset?
you would think from the comments that the audio was messed up for the duration, but no, after a couple of minutes the audio is fixed, so.
Marvin Minsky is cryogenically frozen, so Ray is really planning on bringing him back.
I love Ray kurzweil
right? its still one of the highlights in my life whenever I ask someone if they've heard of them and I get to introduce them to him and h is over 10 year old documentary the transcendent man. The things he talks about are mind blowing then and even now but more visible. I cant wait till we have foglets and smart dust
why? seriously, what is so great about this guy?
This is the new Tower of Babel.
The father of Havana syndrome and the reason your should be aware of the dangers of neurodata. Let me ask you, at the hands of these people in with all this influence and money, how much better off is our economy or health in America? Your really think it’s a good idea to give this man or anyone else in high level positions any kind of insight or remote control over your mind?
Great Interview Thanks
The singularity is quieter
18:06 - But would it actually be the very same person (on a soul level) or not really? I guess not really.
you dont have a soul. if you ACCURATELY copy all interaction of data that makes you you, it will be YOU.
there is that phylosophical question of a ship which gets its blanks replaced you may know that? at which point is it not the same ship anymore? after 50% of blanks have been replaced? 90? 100%? or is it always the same ship as it was before no matter how many times you replace the blanks?
in this analogy, the "soul", the individuality of the ship would be the way it gnarks when you walk over that one blank that isnt fitting perfectly, how you can only softly lean against that one reiling because its old and eroded by the sea water, maybe the wood smells like pine because of the resin in the wood that was used for the blanks that were used to build it.
so if you build the "same" ship, somewhere else, its isnt the actual same, unless you ACCURATELY scan the ship to every last atom, including the eroded parts, the salt water that has sieved in and dried up, the spaces between the blanks that gnark, the resin within the wood, etc. etc.
but if you do that, the ship will do EXACTLY the same as it would have, if you release it into the same environment. the entire world is CAUSAL.
so yeah, if we become able to scan the brain in a single state ACCURATELY, we can upload that network data and replicate you. it doesent even have to be the same medium. data is data if its correctly transformed it doesent matter. what matters is that all components used have effectively the same attributes as before and NO information is lost. much of said information lies within relation.
@@kliersheed Well, you could in the same way replace 90% of a person's body yet as long as his brain is still there and not being replaced then his soul still exist (so I tend to believe the soul exist in the brain somewhere and somehow, it's super advanced and complex and unreachable/invisible kind of science of the soul but it exists I think), also, you compare an already soulless inanimate thing (ship) to another and a human being and animals all have souls so a duplicate of a human being 1 to 1 could maybe simulate our souls but there would still be no souls in them unless you actually would also make sure the being's brain is biological.
Every one of us can tell that the experience we have in human bodies is definitely being observed by us through our senses and that we are truly aware and have true conciousness, that's the only proof we have and need to know that we are truly concious with souls/spirit or whatever you wanna call it in us that is being able to experience it on such authentic ways, it feels that there is something beyond mere materials to our mind/brain and body which would lack even in a 99.9% real like human like indistiguishable robot which is probably the soul that resides in us.
@@MrRandomPlays_1987
1. so humans souls is in the brain? but your hormones e.g. are also partly produced by your organs, and they regulate many things in your brain. if you only keep the brain, your "soul" would take a hit.
2. if animals olso have a soul ,where do you draw the border? a dog? (i would argue that it is as conscious as a human is), a cat? ca frog? a cokcroach? a bacteria? a virus (that cant even replicate by itself)? plants? whats makes them have or not have a soul? how do you think a worm that doesent have a classic brain or a sunflower makes "decisions" (in case you think- which i would assume- that they dont have a soul). how do they know where to crawl or where to move towards (to be in the sun), how do they decide if they should eat whats in front of them (the worm lol not the sunflower xd)? its simply actio and reactio, evolved over the 3 billion years of live existing. the ones who made the right decisions naturally survived, the weighting of doing that decision has naturally incrteased inside their DNA and thats that. no sould, just causal acting.
3. if there was a soul (that mattered) aka that had ANY influence on us (otherwise it might as well NOT exist). it would have to at some point interact with your brain, which is entirely made of matter. if it would interact, the moment it interacts you would be able to measure it (with whatever it interacts with). being unable to measure it, means it doesent exist.
@@kliersheed 1. I suppose then that the hormones are probably an added thing to our body+brain but its not relating to our souls (maybe indirectly but even then your feelings and experience in regard to hormones are still coming ultimately from your brain so then it still makes sense for our souls to be influenced by it in a way
2. I tend to believe all living things are having souls/spirits but are just on a different level (so their conciousness and soul is a different type of soul, some of them maybe more aware and concious than others but in different ways as well and on different scales of magnitude of awareness), I think that since they are biological then naturally they posses the feature of having a soul to some extent (depending on the creature/organism or lifeform if you will)
I'd assume that those with no brains kind of lifeforms are probably having a logic system (working like a brain) on their whole body? I don't know, probably else it does not make sense for them to make decisions but then I still think they might be having a soul in a way but just a drowsy one that is in their whole body or most of it, just a guess.
You could also claim that our brain is also a action reaction kind of thing so we don't have souls/spirits/awareness but we do indeed know for certain that our own individual experiences are real, hence that if we have a real awareness then we also have a soul/spirit and so despite the action reaction thing going on in our brains we are still more than just that, more than just neurons interacting with each other, it's something else that exist on top of that, else, we would have no awareness to reflect upon internally, if we were to be souless and without any true awareness then we would have zero reflection felt, it would be basically like a robot's brain, that can only simulate speech and thoughts yet it has zero feelings and zero true awareness, it is a dead material made believe to be alive.
3. I think our souls kind of snap on our brain's (and bodies maybe) and you might be thinking in the right direction that if it exists then it should be somehow be seen by its interactions or whatever it does in relation to our brain material but since we don't yet have figured out not even the slightest of bits of the souls realm science and supernatural science then we can't say for sure if we can measure it using existing devices/instruments or not, I tend to believe that it does exist and maybe one day humans would be able to measure it and even see it ETC but it's just a rather complicated kind of science that is maybe impossble to figure out, maybe using advanced AI in the future it would be possible to figure it out (the AGI/ASI would try to do a thorough research on the topic and who knows what it might be able to do).
A better example of how you can't quantify or "prove" consciousness are plants. Most wouldn't look at a plant and think of it as conscious, even though it's alive and probably conscious in some form we may never understand due to biology. Plant intelligence is already a thing people study.
Intelligence and consciousness are not remotely the same thing but I get your point.
Don't tell me L. Ron Hubbard was right about tomatoes screaming. Lol
@@Dogbertforpresident Only the big fat Italian varieties, the rest are fairly circumspect.
Ray is 18 yrs my senior, a hero and along with Arthur C Clarke, Isaac Asimov and Gene Roddenberry, the last living Father of Futurism in the Late 20thC. Everyone else has been influenced by one of these four, regarding last century and how I believe we all want a very similar idea of the future to come to fruition.
Basically, it's a version of Star Trek - not exactly like but based upon the ideals of maximising human potential that all four held as a centralising tenet; though in some works is the maypole around which utopia and dystopia dance.
We are only 4 key technologies away from that ideal; warp drive, replicator manufacturing, transporter, tricorder/health treatment and the only thing needed is compute power to realize the science.
OF COURSE I'm aware of the impossibilities where the laws of either Relativity or QFT are transgressed currently and within any current paradigm. These are hopes, dreams and goals to be striven for no matter how improbable the outcome I want.
I could care less what/where/why the interviewer gets cred, he ain't gotr none wit' me because like most journalists, there's an agenda.
why is this interviewer an egomaniac who thinks his opinions are more important or valid than someone who literally wrote the book on this topic? He pushes the conversation into empty and meaningless conversational dead ends when Kurzweil actually has plenty to say and to communicate things that this crowd wants to hear, who even is this guy?
were he a competent interviewer and had he asked more relevant questions, I believe we could've gotten much more from Mr. Ray. A shame to say the least
read his book 15 years go. just 20 years left to go for the singularity. cant wait for it.
So I need to live 21 more years? Ok, I think maybe I can pull that off.
Nick Thompson is exactly the kind of person I expect to meet at SXSW and is exactly why I’ve avoided it for 10+ years. Their culture is like Coachella of the South
I always enjoy listening to Ray Kurzweil. Towards the end the interviewer asked a question about the role of humans in a world where technology is already in a primary role. Ray's response was that he sees technology as an extension of the human mind which is a great answer. I would also add that the democratization of capital via capital accounts for all and a push towards employee and community ownership of larger business entities and financial institutions would definitely put humans in charge of determining how A(G/S)I is deployed and if as Ray suggests, humans will be integrated into technology and vice versa, by democratizing the economy, you just add a layer of protection and democratization of the whole realm of society to prevent unhealthy concentrations of power. In short, it enhances the likelihood that Ray's vision of a society which does not just benefit a techno-elite, but that technical abilities are given fair and equal access to all.
Thank you Ray - Gr3eetings frpm AllenVivien and Ron
Technocalypse (2006) 3 part series - has great interviews with some the pioneers of the transhumanist movement including Ray, Marvin and the gang;)
As long as he never lives forever, I'll call it a win.
xD
I'm curious about his book, not having read the previous one yet. I'm simply a curious layman, does anyone know if his older book is still worth a read, or should I just wait for his next one to be released?
In any case, I believe this man is truly amazing to be able to predict so many things in such a long timeframe. I can't even imagine what the future will look 10 years from now. 10 years ago, the speed of the technological evolution was so much slower; it's not even comparable to what we will have in the upcoming years. Truly a great time to be alive
Great work Nick Thompson
Such a good interview!
Ray's being polite because on the inside, he's relishing the fact that this interviewer is basically the archetypical lame-ass journalist that the singularity will make obsolete.
🇧🇷🇧🇷🇧🇷🇧🇷👏🏻, Ray was the one that got me into AI and told us that, we all need to get through the second bridge, so that we can achieve the third bridge! The first bridge ends in 7 years or less...
But from where does "need" come from, and what does it mean, ultimately?
@@dieselphiend Oh, this is just such a long insight that he gave us a while back, if you look through his earlier videos you will see him explaining it and all in a better way! Basically the first bridge ends by 2030, second brigde goes from 2030 to 2045, and the third bridge from 2045 to the Singularity!
@@claudioagmfilho It's like planning the destruction of the universe. Reminds me of cult.
@@claudioagmfilho Bom dia! So he visited you in Brazil? Wowsers.
@@truth8422 So sorry, I meant to say US and not Me, thanks tho, for pointing that out...
In the movies, one character can be the brilliant scientist that thinks up, implements, and evangelizes the technology - like Dr. Hammond in Jurassic Park. In reality this almost never happens. When asking Ray Kurzweil questions all across the spectrum from ethical, societal, economic, and technological standpoints there are bound to be things he can't answer completely or immediately. However, give him a book to write and make his own arguments where he's comfortable and he's brilliant. This interview makes Kurzweil come across in a way which shows we expect too much of him. This is partly his doing, as he's put himself out there as a sort of sociologist in addition to his technical expertise. Going back to my Dr. Hammond example, we shouldn't expect the person with the genius to develop a technology to also work out all the ethical or social dilemmas - these are their own areas that need a seat at the table.
Wouldn't the statement "Those who cannot hear Ray, raise your hand" be more effective, instead of asking a yes/no question where everyone is speaking at once?
04:38 "AGI automatic general intelligence:"?
You are lacking basic intelligence (bi) if you can't figure out that he meant to say artificial. You must be related to the interviewer, disrespecting a 76 year old who clearly made a simple mistake. You are brilliant, pointing out something so obvious that everyone heard and nobody felt a need to point out.
@@UltimReality this was among many insufficient answers he gave.
You were paying attention. Perhaps he doesn’t consider it artificial, as it has come from the whole (humanity) therefore, it is not necessarily artificial -> it reaches an automated generalization of the intelligence of the whole (humanity). That is what is needed. To think. To expand and to grow.
Everybody else: Wow this interviewer is rude!
Me: Is the interviewer's hair actually like that on purpose?!?
Maybe next time AI can interview Ray for us
Who was the audio guy? I mean, seriously. They didn't have Ray K's volume up. Overall sound is low as well.
I need to watch the screen to read the captions, but the moving background is giving me motion sickness. Not good.
Never mind. I put another window over the top of the video to block the motion but leave the captions showing.
Could you determine consciousness of AI by having it observe a quantum double split experiment at some point?
You can see a ceratin mental decline .. Ray had some problem following the questions and his replies were not very deep. Can Ray last till 2045 ? Unlikely .. Anyway, his incoming book will be worth reading ..
@26:00 ray is very confused here. He's not understanding the question being asked. He seems very lost. Ray is not well. So sad to see :(
What a nice guy , this ray man , So happy he exists!! ❤
Fact Check: Recent rumours has ChatGPT4 could be already having 1.76- 100 trillion parameters. The brain actually has 100 trillion connections so we could be already very close to AGI working like brain.
On average parameters are increasing in factor of 10 each year:
GPT-1 (2018): 117 million parameters.
GPT-2 (2019): 1.5 billion parameters.
GPT-3 (2020): 175 billion parameters.
GPT-3.5 (2022) : undisclosed
GPT-4 (2023): undisclosed
CHatGPT4o (2024): rumour 1.76- 100 trillion
everything is getting faster and faster, and Ray is getting slower and slower. It's lovely
Hm. He’s already reached the Singularity.
Go Ray!! Thank you so much for your books! I love your books! For longevity, please consider getting nutrition from whole unprocessed foods.
Ray is a legend. Love this guy.
why do you love him?
Yes me too. why? 2004 I bought the book Fantastic Voyage - In it Ray & his good friend Terry laid out medical reasoning why it was possible to help your self start on that journey. I think it was either 2008 / 2009 when TRANSCEND came out. I bought that too. My book is worse for ware, but my body is so mch better for it! It gave you a practical way of staying in reasonable health until medical progreess was made, so you could benefit from those advances. I pesonally found it hard to make the changes needed, but now they are daily habits. Its a bit like leapfrog. Bridge 1 -> 2 & 2 -> 3 and so on. Once you take responsibilty for your own outcomes - again something that I found was quite hard to take on board, little by little you can see gradual changes happening.
First i want to preface by saying I respect Ray Kurzweil, that being said dosnt he look like Mike Myers in The Pentaverate?
Ray reminds me of Marshall Mcluhan -- he's eclectic and sometimes hard to agree with, but it's probably just my own limitation. Nice that he mentions Minsky.
Necesito ser mortal ayúdame ser mortal ayúdame ser mortal ayúdame ser mortal
sound engineer just got fired.
I wish the interviewer would have asked Ray about AI hallucinations and perhaps explain why the hallucinations occur and how they can be avoided. Everything about AI is so fascinating!
I wonder what would happen if we arranged multiple LLMs into one huge network of grouped specialized LLMs where each group of LLMs is trained for a more specific object emulating how the human brain designates a part of its neural network for a specific purpose like vision, hearing, thinking, fear, etc.
I think that they need to Scientifically define and Prove the Concept and reality of consciousness.
I can wait to read the book!! I don't think the interviewer disrespected Mr. Ray. I really enjoyed the interview! All my respect and appreciation for Mr Ray ! I hope God will guide us only on the right paths!
Ray Kurzweil is truly a modern prophet, everything he has written and said (since the 90s) about the future has come to pass.
Ojalá, siga cumpliendo y acertando, John. Aunque muy difícil, esto de la inmortalidad en el cuerpo.
Espero equivocarme, y logré sus pronósticos.
Not everything, but definitely a very high success rate, probably the most successful predictive streak. I'm on board with that AGI and immortality by 2029, even earlier as he starting to think. Many do as well, we just keep speeding up in technological evolution
¿Qué va a pasar con el fútbol?
Fuckin audio issues in 2024?!?
I choose to see the glass as half full. The way Ray gracefully waited for the issue to be resolved before starting to address the audience was commendable. I understand the interviewer's frustration, but I was happy this happened, as it allowed us to witness an act of kindness, which is an essential quality in people who are building the future.
Typical manager fallacy, "assuming it will be sorted out". Yeah sure 😂 Gotta appreciate Ray's insistence.
Kurzweil is a legend. The interviewer makes this almost impossible to watch.
Very exciting times. I absolutely agree with biologic simulators, and it is easily forseable. I predict the US will not be able to catch up with regulations, and people will be flying to third world countries to get treatment due to their lack of regulations. Wealthy will be first to benefit, then over time it become the norm. Great interview.
In the end, creativity is just a number. A number of many ideas. Brutforce, Ai, quantum computers will ultimately teach us who is the real boss here. Just as weapons manufacturers don't talk publicly about death rates, scientists and engineers don't talk about the threats but about the possibilities. Their own professional base is defended until their own existence is at stake. Look in the history books.
From what I see in this video, I very much doubt Mr. Kurzweil, will get to next year, let alone 5 years from now, much less 500. We'll see
Talent is a gift from the creator and is to be used for his purposes
im watching ray im wishing to be part of those visionary man Im aadicitng him also he remind of the of the movie transcendence
What do you think people from a hundred years from now would think about our society today compared to theirs on the measure of order vs. chaos as well as the measure of complexity on things such as international diplomacy, operations of various institutes, different types of services, and so on?
I think there is a higher probability than we would like to admit that we are living in the closest to Utopia as we will get. Which isn’t saying much. If technological advancement was in a vacuum then I’d say there is a 99.99% chance it will only get better and better at every dimension you mention. But obviously it’s not. Look up the great filter if you don’t already know of it. It’s an explanation for as to why we don’t see evidence galore of ET in the universe. Once a life form gets enough advancement in tech to become interstellar they also, by default, have the advanced enough tech to wipe themselves out in war and conflict, which they inevitably do. Unless AI helps us to become something we are not, as humans, such as help us to not have serious conflict, which may itself prevent a lot of innovation, we may never be around long enough to enjoy the fruit of our labor or AI’s labor, that is.
Wow I'm only gonna be 53 when the singularity hits
When Ray has a full head of hair and no longer needs that toupee, we will have reached full AGI. That's my own personal Turing test.
BTW, I adore Ray and his predictions. I've been following him for many years, so don't think I'm being mean to him! I'm sure he would agree that he will grow his hair back when we have full AGI.
As for the discussion about consciousness, I think Ray means that consciousness is probably an emergent property. It's also not an off/on thing.
And the ridiculously dumb interviewer asked Ray whether people in this room would live to 500 years old if they could survive 5 more years and Ray said, "If they are _diligent_ they will." And the dumb interviewer scoffed, smirked, laughed, and then said, well everybody can go drink whatever they want, and they don't have to worry about decline! Ray didn't say that. He said if they are diligent. That interviewer should be ashamed of himself for speaking so arrogantly and dismissively to this great man.
at least people still get that the interviewer was an ass and the guy may be old and slow like a fossil, not quite up to date anymore when it comes to AI progress, but still deserves some respect considering his age and the possibilities he had to his time/ what he made out of that. gives me some hope.
There's a difference form consciousness and sentience. Every one's conscious, which simiply means to be aware of surroundings. consciouness is performed by any computer that receives input from the environment, simply put.
Great Interview and a question for Ray will Languages disappear and a new Global Language will be used in the future?
we call that english, yes :"D
jokes aside, while most programming languages that are present in majority of fields are english based (which is a good indivator for english becoming the world language), it simultaneously doesent mean much once AI will be able to real-time translate any language into another (including programming languages) so everyone could theoretically speak whatever they want as long as its codified into the AI.
ראיון מעולה. ריי קורצוויל מקסים בידע ובעשייה שלו לטובת האנושות.
Kurzweil is right, Instead of calling it Large Language Models, I think the expression Large Multimodal Models seems more fitting? Multimodal means multiple types of output. Also, when he said about backup of the brain and earth blowing up so the backup being lost, that's not entirely true because Elon Musk and others are launching rockets and we might be able to have server backups of these details on other planets so we can continue even if the earth backup is lost. The principle of multiple backups and multiple locations.
agreed. multi.planet species is a good next step we should definitely work on, i admire musk for that despite everyone hating the guy xd.
also agree with the "multi-modal-model" would at "that is trained on large language data bases for logical reasoning and communication". MMM for LRaC
I want to hear Mr. Kurzweil loud and clear.
I don't understand why many people in the comment section are saying that the interviewer was disrespectful to Ray Kurzweil, maybe at times it looked a bit almost on the edge of a bit being disrespectful towards him but not really and even then it was just a tiny bit like that but nothing serious, I watched the whole video clip and got the impression the interviewer actually respected Ray more than disrespected him, people are exaggerating it and taking it out of context.
I agrée.
@@MrRandomPlays_1987 maybe the overwhelming consensus is worth considering, or watch it again and look at his consistent pushy mannerisms, lack of attunement to Ray and the audience, and lack of active listening.
I came down to the comments to say that the interviewer did a great job given the terrible hand he was dealt. Ray is doddering, the audience is being infantile, and the set up was incorrect. I think he juggled those three problems really well.
If mans mind was simple for him to understand he would be so simple he could not understand it.
@@Php48 🤣 true 🧠
Ray looking and sounding quite a bit older than I remember....odds on his living forever lengthening 😥