This is such a amazing time to be living and is without question the best time to live in all of human history. To witness the change in just my lifetime has been a great thing, and to hear people naively say "This generation sucks" is beyond disgusting because the amount of information and knowledge that anybody has access to is way more than the most powerful man in the world could get a hold of 15 years ago. That kind of liberation is a extraordinary.
Brilliant guy, but he got a few things wrong. First, neural networks have come a long way since he gave this talk. Now, LSTM networks/neural Turing machines are the major brains behind NLP. Google Translate, for example, is a series of networks that can each translate a human language into a series of vectors representing meaning, share them across a neural interface, and then translate back into a human language. Second, dinosaurs didn't go extinct: tens of thousands of them fly around to this day. Birds and mammals survived the K-T event because they were adaptable. If you look at corvids, they have language skills that far exceed that of all non-human apes; they have more advanced skills in making and using tools than most apes; and they are able to teach others in their flocks about things, perpetuating knowledge through multiple generations. Corvids have a very different brain structure without a neocortex, but their evolutionary history converged upon the same abilities. It is unfortunate that he dismissed both neural networks and non-neocortical brain structures, but he will probably change his opinions.
yeah, his description of what neural networks aren't is actually a pretty good description of modern neural network techniques. adjusting their own weights to recognise patterns, then 'fill in' occluded details? even the hierarchical aspect has been addressed in recent convolutional models
31:11 Already true. And scary as hell. For those who have the data a blessing. For those produce the data and never got them to see or only a fraction of it, it's terrible.
RAy predicts that changes will be slow,but in our life time,better health,self driving cars,politicians and its cronies will be singlet out ,improving in all fields and we will be traveling to outer space and many new technologies will be born.....
It is not that they trigger a spot that made everything funny. Rather, they (temporarily) messed up a critical piece of information that led to contradictions. Contradictions are the source of all humor. The limbic system and lower brain functions monitor the state of the cortex/neocortex. A contradiction causes the cortex/neocortex to go into an unstable state, which is detected by the limbic system and laughing is a side-effect of how the limbic system floods the cortex in that area with suppressing neurotransmitters.
Maravillosa creación y una exposición de primer nivel. Ray Kurzweil es un inventor y creador como nadie. Quisiera conocerlo y poder participar en la Universidad de la Singularidad.
@Neueregel I can't agree with You: "Moore's Law", not a law anymore. CPUs are stalled at 7 nm." While it is true that due to some thermal limitations growth in processor's clock speed has almost stopped (~2003), further progress, according to Moore's law (computational power is doubled over two years) was reached by adding another cores to processor. This approach does not speed up sequential program so there is need to change paradigm for parallel programming. There are two ways: 1) multicore cpu's (2,4,6,8...) cores which support heavy threads (branching prediction etc) or 2) manycore GPU's (thousands of cores) supporting lightweight-threads (single instruction multiple data). Numerical application with high computational complexity are now mainly implemented on GPU's due to high efficiency and low cost
Kamil Czerski Agreed, that guys comment is ignorant. Saying CPUs are stalled is because of silicon limits of course. But what happened before that? what about the limits of vacuum tubes? We overcame that, we always overcome these problems, hence Moore's law has held so strong since the emergence of computing. NHS didn't fail, although i'm not sure how that is relevant here. Internet isn't troll infested, you're just in the wrong parts if you're looking for information. Try scientific papers. Theres plenty online, and it's a troll-free zone. AI hasn't failed at all. Not much else I can say. It took longer than we thought it would in the 50s but no it hasn't failed, it now growing at a huge pace. The turing test is not unpassable, actually it was unofficially passed last year, I should know, my lecturer for my AI degree was a judge. Global warming yes. The singularity? No way 3045. That would involve technology slowing down not speeding up, and that has NO signs of happening, and you can point back to the creation of the wheel to see how long technological growth has been accelerating for, and there is no reason it will stop. I hope he's a troll.
+Kamil Czerski Good answer Kamil, I agree with what you said. Its also important to remember that when AI does overtake humans, it will itself speed up all technological breakthroughs within itself thus creating an astonishing leap into an unrecognizable future from today's standpoint. =)
@@squamish4244 3nm is coming out next year and 2nm has already been designed Early research for 1nm is underway Intel predicts 48x density improvements are possible. Moving to carbon may increase this by a factor of 10. After that we can use ASICS for all the common stuff like deep learnnig to keep pushing it to the edge.
Hi again Xeletoph. FYI: here is a group that is committed to developing critical thinking - its called the "The Foundation for Critical Thinking". Their teachings were part of my Masters Degree at Evergreen State College in Washington State.They hold conferences in different areas. At the time of this post the next conference takes place on March 22 - 24, 2013 in Berkeley, California March. Its their International Spring Workshops on Critical Thinking. I strongly recommend their teachings.
From my experience many 'Googler' types don't pay much mind to formalities... they just want to talk about / work on amazing stuff and not have to worry about who's eating what and where. Ray has given talks at Google before and he knows exactly what he's getting into. It's one of the first places on his book tour, so I would bet Google is one of his favorite places to visit exactly because he gets to be surrounded by Googler types of people.
Hehe, a lot of people get pissed off when they hear about change, especially change as extreme and realistic as that which Kurzweil proposes. So is the way it's always been, a basic principle of the law of accelerating returns, timing is of the utmost importance.
In addition to that discussed below: The fascinating thing about "Deep Mind" is the fact that "Mind" has not been cogently defined in any branch of science or academia. In fact, no definition and description does not exist outside my own work, a fact which is unlikely to change one iota in the foreseeable future. The reason why this is the case is the fact that, way back in the early days of psychology, the study of mind and the study of brain were clearly defined as distinct intellectual inquiries. It is only in modern times that the two, erroneously, became conflated. This problem is, in actuality, more serious than anyone knows. The seriousness of this "quite literally, global problem became further exacerbated by the systemic degradation of language-use across all academic disciplines. I have over five decades experience as an independent thinker in educational, developmental and existential psychology and among many revelations what has become abundantly and consistently clear is, don't trust anyone who smiles. What interested me from the outset, about Elon is the fact that his smiles are exclusively the product of nervousness.
p.s. One of the reasons why I ask my previous question is because there are religious & moral Fundamentalists just about anywhere, who really believe they are Right. Some can even willingly die & kill others over their beliefs. When they are in positions where they can hold back enlightening progress - even in a family, or an office -- what convinces them to be relax & more open minded? Or is their role in human evolution, albeit can be extreme, a stablization force to appreciate somehow?
I was really feeling a bit guilty and bummed out about technology in general until I came across Kurzweil some years back. Every new book just helps me get it all into perspective how great technology is, despite too many people in my life always telling me that it's scary, big brother is coming, the world is about to end because I bought a tablet etc.
I'm not attacking Ray Kurzweil directly, more his idea here, or perhaps his capacity for interpreting the data, but I watched another version of the same talk he is doing here - and in it, he says the brain "fills up" around the age of 15. In this video, he says it "fills up" around the age of 20. That is a substantial difference. Which is true? I wish he would cite the research for me that is helping him come to this conclusion.
Even if I am not completely in phase with those ideas. I took a lesson from the speech: we are armed with more and more information analysis and spreading tools. In some sense they can be dangerous as weapons or wonderful as healing drugs. This evolution won't stop accelerating as it is pushed by markets. However, if we are not careful, if we use these tools to spread hate, ignorance, insults, frustration... a global information collapse could become reality. If we use them to make knowledge, respect and trust arrive to every single home in the planet we will be realizing a wonderful vision.
Not at all. I was thinking about this before I just read your comment, and it will be eternal sadness- not only for if loved ones have permanently passed, but those days which were in jeopardy of not existing, as well as the small domain we used to view the ultimate potential of reality as ultimately meaningful. The more ideal existence will have commenced, but we bear those memories as scars. And even as we could take away the memories- the experiences will have always occurred.
In addition to that discussed below is the concept and proper definition of "creation". Creation is defined exclusively as Forming something from nothing. Therefore, no one can claim to have created either mind or brain without being functionally delusional. Language is the only intellectual instrument available to the human species which can present the opportunity to transcend but only if it is used properly and precisely.
The assumption is that hierarchical pattern recognition with sufficient complexity will result in the arising of an emergent intelligence. An intriguing idea. Worth a try.
Hi Xeletoph.The stat you mention is interesting to me. Where did you find it? I'm wondering if younger people are better able to evolve - or increase their awareness - within their one single physical life - because the influx of new info or change is trenuous on the physical body & brain? In other words, is it harder for 50+ human bodies & brains to adapt to change because of the physical strain? fyi: I'm a 50+ & born with some capacity to adapt to changing my mind & lifestyle for the better.
from self-awareness, which in turn comes from "programmed" to adapt to chaos, where no program suffices. Thus, probabilitic awareness. What we call consciousness, is the regulation of data imput regarding future possibilities and probabilistic tendencies based on constantly changing parameters. No computer is even CLOSE to that.
(continued 1) I believe the microtubules act as a tuned quantum receiver - the structure is important. But, i also believe the organic material is one that is conducive to plasticity around the particular "holographic electrical interference patterns" and fields which allow the underlying "ghost" if you will to reside in and interact with the brain interface. I think the structures have slight differences which are subtly important and necessary for correct traction between the "ghost" and brain
Hi there X :) -- I'm focusing in on addressing the apparent need to provide opportunities to help folks age 50+ keep their minds agile, as per my earlier posts here. Making college cool and crucial for elders may help some stave off and even help heal from indoctrination. Imagine many people in their 90's & 100's in college! Too cool.
Kurzweil is right about the exponential nature of technological progress, because he can identify the cause of it: the hierarchical nature of human knowledge (which Newton was speaking of when he spoke of "standing on the shoulders of giants"). This doesn't mean the benefits of technological progress will be available to all of humanity, nor that technology won't be used destructively (history bears me out). In my Objectivist perspective, free-market capitalism can best solve those two problems.
the question is: can machines think and feel like us? does a search engine have consciousness of searching for the results? to me it is a definitely yes
Historically interesting that he only speaks about HMM's as being state of the art in modelling the hierarchical structure of the neocortex. 2012 was right on the turning point when deep learning (ANN's) really took off due to increase in compute (GPU's).
People tend to impart their own feelings and emotions on to others when they are conflicted over something (a technique called Psychological projection). So they take their own fears and problems they hold, and "project" them onto Kurzweil because he is challenging their currently held beliefs about the future.
You've spent too long studying photography. The reason why we like Ray is because he is both a visionary and a creater, in that he has the morality as well as the ability.
In order to prevent price inflation in a monopoly in a capitalist system, you would have to have an organization independent of the company set the price of the product. In a capistalist system the goal of the company is to make as much profit as possible so prices would rise if the company sets its own prices.
Kurzweil says that jobs are being eliminated from the bottom of the skill ladder but new and higher paying jobs are being created at the top of the skill ladder. The problem is, the jobs at the top of the skill ladder are very technical ones that most people will never be qualified for. For example, I for one know that I will never be able to be a nuclear physicist, and neither will most people.
Interesting points on the development of information technology and surely a very skilfull engineer with powerful entrepreneurial ideas. But did he not want to talk about the mind? 🤔Could not find anything on it in the whole talk... 🧐
EDIT: The video is now available in 720p. Expand the discussion to find out why it's a bad idea to insult random people, and how easily those people can turn your own insults around on you. It's very educational, and you're welcome! Old, now obsolete text posted a few months ago: Google owns TH-cam, but they had to upload this video of one of their most important employees in 240p (ruining the graphs and making the whole thing look like crap) - why? To save bandwidth? :P
***** It was not available in 720p when I made the comment, which is why two people upvoted my comment. Also, don't start shit with strangers. It makes you look insecure, like you have something to prove.
***** When someone publicly insults me based on faulty premises, I feel it's necessary to correct them publicly so that they and others can recognize the mistake. I also feel that when someone mistakenly insults someone else, that person should expect to be corrected, and that this is beneficial to them because it helps them to learn from their mistakes. Why _don't_ I remove the comment? I agree that 720p is available right now. However, for the above stated reasons, I wish to refute your statements. Because leaving the unedited comment in place provides an unimpeachable record of exactly what I said in my first post, I have what I need to prove that your premises are incorrect. After I'm finished proving conclusively that you are wrong, I'm willing to edit the comment to point out that the situation has been rectified. Why _didn't_ I remove the comment before you saw it? Because until you responded, I wasn't aware that they'd made higher resolutions available. TH-cam never notified me and I didn't happen to come back to this, so I had no way of knowing; you are therefore blaming me for responding to something in state A as though it was in state B. It is in state B now, but at the time of the post in question, it was in state A. I cannot be expected to act on knowledge of an event that hasn't taken place yet, and which I have no specific reason to believe will happen. Here are the premises of your first post: It was available in HD when I accused you of idiocy, about one week ago. Therefore, in saying that it wasn't available in HD several months ago, you are an idiot. In order for that to be correct, you'd need to prove the following premises: P1: If it was available in HD about a week ago, it was also available in HD a few months ago. P2: It was available in HD about a week ago. P3: You said it wasn't available in HD a few months ago. C1: I must be correct, and you must be incorrect. P4: If you're incorrect, you're an idiot. P5: You're incorrect. C2: You are incorrect and therefore an idiot. Regarding P1, you _suppose,_ but don't actually know, that TH-cam gave me an option to play the video in HD several months ago. Premises cannot be based on supposition. Therefore, P1 is invalid. P2 is true; it was indeed available in HD about a week ago. However, P1 is invalid; since P1 must be valid in order for P2 and P3 to be relevant, P2 is irrelevant. P3 is true; I did indeed say that it wasn't available in HD a few months ago. However, this is irrelevant for the same reason as P2 (P1 is invalid). C1 is invalid because the supporting premises are all invalid or irrelevant. P4 is debatable. Even a genius can make a mistake - indeed, it's often _necessary_ to make decisions that may well be mistaken in the process of selecting the best way to do something; yet a genius is not an idiot by any reasonable definition. You yourself have made mistakes, such as the ones I've illustrated here. The very premise of an insult is that you're better than the other person concerning what the insult describes. It would be hypocritical for you to insult someone for doing the same thing you yourself are doing and have done countless times. P5 is invalid because it assumes C1, which is also invalid. C2 is invalid because P4 is debatable and P5 is invalid. Your second post makes a statement that has already been addressed at the top of this post, and then it goes into some invalid logic. Here is your logic: I highly doubt it would take over 6 Months for the 720p to encode. I reiterate my "You Idiot" for you not being able to notice. Or, Too proud of your thumbs up maybe... Fool Stated formally: P1: What I highly doubt is impossible. P2: You stated something that I highly doubt. C1: Your statement is impossible. P3: Your impossible statement is wrong. P4: If you're wrong, you're an idiot. C2: You're an idiot. P5: If you can't admit you're wrong because of votes, you're a fool. P6: You may be too proud of your votes to admit you're wrong. C3: You're a fool. P1 is invalid because _impossible_ necessarily means a probability of 0, whereas _highly doubt_ admits a probability of >0. In your own words, _you don't believe it's impossible._ P2 is correct, but as it relies on P1 to support C1 and P1 is invalid, it's irrelevant. C1 is unsupported by P1 and P2, and is therefore invalid. P3 relies on C1, which is invalid, making P3 invalid. P4 is invalid for the same reason that the first post's P4 is invalid (see above paragraph that begins with "P4 is debatable"). C2 is unsupported by P3 and P4, and is therefore invalid. P5 is an opinion. I _could_ agree with it, but it isn't necessarily true. P6 is invalid beacuse it's indeterminate. It can't be used to determine the truth of anything because it doesn't state whether or not I'm too proud. C3 is a concrete conclusion that depends on premises that are either opinions or indeterminate. You cannot arrive at "you are" by way of "you may be" because "you are" requires information that is not made available by "you may be". So far you're zero for two. Would you like to keep going? I sure would! Disassembling arguments and checking them for consistency is a lot of fun.
***** Let me remind you of your own statements: "It's 720 HD" - As stated above, in my very first response to you, I agree! I never said that it isn't available in 720p _now._ Several months ago I made the statement that it wasn't. The statement was true when I made it. If you had simply stated that it was available in 720p now, I would have agreed with you 100%. The insult is why we are here. "You idiot" - Assumes there was something wrong with my post at the time I wrote it. Unless you think I can see the future, or have some way of knowing when TH-cam makes higher resolutions available for old videos? (For the record, I can't see the future, and TH-cam didn't notify me when 720p was made available.) See, you can't blame a person for not seeing something that wasn't in the only place they could have looked for it, at the time when they looked for it. You _certainly_ can't use that as a basis to call that person an idiot. Even if you could, doing so would brand _you_ a hypocrite, because you yourself have made bigger mistakes. "I highly doubt it would take over 6 Months for the 720p to encode. I reiterate my "You Idiot" for you not being able to notice." - BUT THEN... "Just admit you were correct "AT THE TIME" and now the vid is in 720" - Let me get this straight. First, you "highly doubt" the video would take over 6 months to show up in 720p, but then you also want me to "admit" that I was correct at the time, which can only mean that you believe I _was_ correct at the time. Let the record show that you agree that the video WAS NOT available in 720p at the time I made my original post. So, then, what was I to do? You were the first person to tell me that the video is available in 720p. In the same post, you called me an idiot. In other words, _you pointed out that the video is now available in 720p, but gave me _*_no chance_*_ to edit my post before calling me out on it._ How can you hold me responsible for information I haven't been given a chance to respond to? Do you not know that I need to actually _have_ information _before_ I can act on it? Let's see if there are any other points to address... "I think you'll find that your whole "Essay" there is invalid by me asking about your post removal." - I already answered that. To make the answer easy to find, look for the paragraphs that start with "Why don't I remove the comment" and "Why didn't I remove the comment" in my first response to you. "In your terms, when I made my statement the vid was in 720 so, I was correct and your argument is moot" - The _insult_ presented in your argument is both invalid and hypocritical. That is why we are still here. "Secondly, After realising said video was now available in a higher rez (When I pointed it out to you) - Your only recourse would be to state your question was only valid at time, Realise the error and either remove or retract." - You're forgetting that you called me an idiot, based on your assumption that I had missed something, which you later contradicted by saying I ought to admit that it _wasn't_ there at the time (which was already a completely inescapable, obvious property of my original post). _Several_ recourses are available in this case. This is the one I chose. How do you like it so far? "You sir were wrong at time of my initial statement and at this time none of what I have written is wrong." - You think it isn't wrong to hold people accountable for not knowing about things that haven't happened, to contradict yourself, and to behave hypocritically? "Yes, I "Highly Doubt..." I didn't say it was impossible Nor did I imply it. As you missed this fundamental point and it is the basis of your entire argument," - Remember when you said this? "I highly doubt it would take over 6 Months for the 720p to encode. I reiterate my "You Idiot" for you not being able to notice." You have contradicted yourself. If I'm an idiot for missing something that _wasn't there_, you're infinitely more of an idiot for missing _your own statements._ "Everything your wrote after that line is moot and has been disregarded." - It's common for people to disregard information that hurts their case. "As for "Keeping score" You made SO MANY inaccurate premises in your 'explanation' it's not worth re-scoring." - Prove that they're wrong. "Needless to say; At time of writing, I was correct and your comment was wrong" - If it's needless to say, why say it? Anyway, the statement that it is _now_ available in 720p is correct and I agree with it. The statement that I am an "idiot" is a baseless, hypocritical insult. "stop trying to act big with your stupid "Disassembling arguments" - You're not any good at it... Because you are a fool :D" - I have disassembled your argument and supporting statements and demonstrated that they are baseless. I have also demonstrated that you are a hypocrite. _If that makes either of us a fool, it's you._
Human Predictions could be also exponential we already know it : if the assumption that the structure of our mind is similar to the universe then we could theoretically "beat the time". But you have no data on this right?
You can't handle the truth. The truth is that we are none us very special. Once we realize we all act stupid sometimes, we all are selfish sometimes, we all are common sometimes, and we are all wonderfully generous sometimes, we can stop worrying about privacy and start helping all of us "be all that we can be" without killing each other.
I read "The Singularity is Near", "Fantastic Voyage: Live Long Enough to Live Forever" . Will pick this up, as well. I'm so glad to know that there are people who think just like I do, look at the world just like I do and see it for what it is, but more importantly what it can be. Visionaries of modern day.
I would generally agree with this. Since we have a good way to go to even understand the brain completely, it's impossible to even begin to put a lower limit on when this type of computer could happen. That being said, I often underestimated technological progress--I couldn't imagine 15 years ago when I was on 56k dialup that even low income people would be watching video on powerful mobile computers --so I tend to be more liberal for this.
Hi ! That is interedting that you mention the receiver idea - i believe this myself (through myown research and thinking). I am an engineer btw (I call myself a scientist though) and have worked for 7+ years in defence research. My first gig was developing a beamforming tracking system. Anyway, i believe the brain acts as a receiver. The "sensor translation" is a form of Bayes parallel feedback that is adaptive. But the "ghost in machine part uses the receiver interface - ill continue next post
Deep Blue was a major improvement in A.I do you know how many possible moves there are in any particular situation in a game? It's stunning, now even further into A.I is Watson who kick the best two human player asses, in a game that requires more natural language understanding then most average people have. Information technology is doubling about every 11 months now so expect to see some radical changes in society itself.
During the Q&A, there's mention that some people fear things are currently getting worse.Mr Kurzeil said he likes to show them a graph that shows them instead that we have longer life spans & more money. This info may be reassuring for some, but people for eg who are fundamental in their religious & moral beliefs believe the world has gone to the "Devil". What kind of graphs can be made to reassure these terrified&confused&stubborn people, that new ideas maybe helpful? Or are they hopeless?
I don't think you understand what you're saying; competition creates the incentive to continuously lower the prices of goods - as soon as you remove all competition (that is, you create a monopoly), prices rise and quality lowers. I don't understand how you can create an economy based on "cooperation" when there is inherent scarcity.
Hi X. "MOSH', for those here that don't know the meaning is "a human being that uses 'native carbon-based neurons & is unenhanced by neural implants'. I'm OK with being one of these ;) Again, where did u find the stat about the 5%? My 90 yr old Gramma was a prejudiced Southern Baptist white woman that looked down on colored people, until she took an interest on her own in reading books about Black American History. She apologized to the family for her prejudices & said she hadn't understood.
It would be interesting to hear Ray’s thoughts on Large Language Models today, especially that Google had a significant hand in their invention and popularity. Hey Google: Can we do a 10-year anniversary talk? (April 2023)
> In my Objectivist perspective, free-market capitalism can best solve those two problems. This line was like 180 degrees out of phase with the rest of what you said. It's a big "fat" claim that free-market capitalism can somehow distribute and control the benefits of technology. Can you even give a broad hand-waving at what a proof of that statement might look like? I'm sure not going to hold my breath for it though.
He talked about technology increases, which are well-known, but he did not talk about 'how to create a mind', or the greater problem, of how to even know how to define in words what a mind, or awareness, or quale/qualia, etc, are. Awareness and etc. are a different order of being, and no matter how many computer circuits you link up, we don't know if it will become self-aware, suddenly. At what point does organized matter--pieces gain this ineffable thing called self-awareness? Those are the questions that the big-name big-audience philosophers of mind do not answer, and seems are not being asked by their audiences either.
This is just superb, I have been researching "battlefield of the mind devotional online" for a while now, and I think this has helped. Ever heard of - Giyoe Fonogan Builder - (just google it ) ? Ive heard some great things about it and my friend got cool results with it.
In its mind cockroach does not separate itself from its environment. Cockroach's perception of reality is similar to our perception when we dream - unconsciousness fully takes over
computation produces numbers, chemistry produces chemical. how is conscious experience any of that? You can ask headless questions forever or you can think and see. I can't tell you what you don't want to hear. How would a machine feel pain..
Education starts when young, and it's better that we teach our children HOW to think (not what to think) as they're maturing. It's far easier then trying to 'fix' a person whose sustained heavy psychological damage from a lifetime of indoctrination. Free, collegiate level education should be available for people at all ages. Everybody deserves an IEP. We should determine aptitudes and interests, and personally tailor every teaching regimen according to them. Life relevant classes are important.
(cont 3). But - i merely point this out as a "possibility" to consider... before people go ahead and start "uploading" in 20 - 60 years, or whenever. I have experienced 2 personal events of OBE. This and other experiences has led me to consider the possible existence of this "soul" or "spirit" element. The results of cassimir effect and other "Virtual Particle" phenomena also opens the door for 'post-relativity' aether concepts, which opens again the door to more esoteric science possibilities.
I got the opportunity to talk with Ray Kurzweil today. I learned that he is a very kind man to say the least.
This is such a amazing time to be living and is without question the best time to live in all of human history. To witness the change in just my lifetime has been a great thing, and to hear people naively say "This generation sucks" is beyond disgusting because the amount of information and knowledge that anybody has access to is way more than the most powerful man in the world could get a hold of 15 years ago. That kind of liberation is a extraordinary.
Hi how is your age reversal going?
@@djagereversalresearch7018Huh?
Brilliant guy, but he got a few things wrong. First, neural networks have come a long way since he gave this talk. Now, LSTM networks/neural Turing machines are the major brains behind NLP. Google Translate, for example, is a series of networks that can each translate a human language into a series of vectors representing meaning, share them across a neural interface, and then translate back into a human language. Second, dinosaurs didn't go extinct: tens of thousands of them fly around to this day. Birds and mammals survived the K-T event because they were adaptable. If you look at corvids, they have language skills that far exceed that of all non-human apes; they have more advanced skills in making and using tools than most apes; and they are able to teach others in their flocks about things, perpetuating knowledge through multiple generations. Corvids have a very different brain structure without a neocortex, but their evolutionary history converged upon the same abilities. It is unfortunate that he dismissed both neural networks and non-neocortical brain structures, but he will probably change his opinions.
yeah, his description of what neural networks aren't is actually a pretty good description of modern neural network techniques. adjusting their own weights to recognise patterns, then 'fill in' occluded details? even the hierarchical aspect has been addressed in recent convolutional models
31:11 Already true. And scary as hell. For those who have the data a blessing. For those produce the data and never got them to see or only a fraction of it, it's terrible.
Thank you very, very much, Ray.
RAy predicts that changes will be slow,but in our life time,better health,self driving cars,politicians and its cronies will be singlet out ,improving in all fields and we will be traveling to outer space and many new technologies will be born.....
It is not that they trigger a spot that made everything funny. Rather, they (temporarily) messed up a critical piece of information that led to contradictions. Contradictions are the source of all humor. The limbic system and lower brain functions monitor the state of the cortex/neocortex. A contradiction causes the cortex/neocortex to go into an unstable state, which is detected by the limbic system and laughing is a side-effect of how the limbic system floods the cortex in that area with suppressing neurotransmitters.
+ThinkTank255 Thanks for the info!
heh. That's interesting. You're smart, you must be one of the newer tanks.
awsome, thanks
Ethan Grimmer no, it's called being wrong with style.
Hi how is your age reversal going?
Maravillosa creación y una exposición de primer nivel. Ray Kurzweil es un inventor y creador como nadie. Quisiera conocerlo y poder participar en la Universidad de la Singularidad.
i'm not gay, but I'm in love with this man.
@Neueregel I can't agree with You: "Moore's Law", not a law anymore. CPUs are stalled at 7 nm."
While it is true that due to some thermal limitations growth in processor's clock speed has almost stopped (~2003), further progress, according to Moore's law (computational power is doubled over two years) was reached by adding another cores to processor. This approach does not speed up sequential program so there is need to change paradigm for parallel programming. There are two ways: 1) multicore cpu's (2,4,6,8...) cores which support heavy threads (branching prediction etc) or 2) manycore GPU's (thousands of cores) supporting lightweight-threads (single instruction multiple data). Numerical application with high computational complexity are now mainly implemented on GPU's due to high efficiency and low cost
Kamil Czerski Agreed, that guys comment is ignorant. Saying CPUs are stalled is because of silicon limits of course. But what happened before that? what about the limits of vacuum tubes? We overcame that, we always overcome these problems, hence Moore's law has held so strong since the emergence of computing. NHS didn't fail, although i'm not sure how that is relevant here. Internet isn't troll infested, you're just in the wrong parts if you're looking for information. Try scientific papers. Theres plenty online, and it's a troll-free zone. AI hasn't failed at all. Not much else I can say. It took longer than we thought it would in the 50s but no it hasn't failed, it now growing at a huge pace. The turing test is not unpassable, actually it was unofficially passed last year, I should know, my lecturer for my AI degree was a judge. Global warming yes. The singularity? No way 3045. That would involve technology slowing down not speeding up, and that has NO signs of happening, and you can point back to the creation of the wheel to see how long technological growth has been accelerating for, and there is no reason it will stop.
I hope he's a troll.
+Kamil Czerski Good answer Kamil, I agree with what you said. Its also important to remember that when AI does overtake humans, it will itself speed up all technological breakthroughs within itself thus creating an astonishing leap into an unrecognizable future from today's standpoint. =)
An astonishing leap into an abyss !!!!
Now 5 nm is feasible. But after that, a hard limit. At this point though, there are so many options that Moore's Law is irrelevant.
@@squamish4244 3nm is coming out next year and 2nm has already been designed
Early research for 1nm is underway
Intel predicts 48x density improvements are possible. Moving to carbon may increase this by a factor of 10. After that we can use ASICS for all the common stuff like deep learnnig to keep pushing it to the edge.
A brilliant person, I must say!
Hi again Xeletoph. FYI: here is a group that is committed to developing critical thinking - its called the "The Foundation for Critical Thinking". Their teachings were part of my Masters Degree at Evergreen State College in Washington State.They hold conferences in different areas. At the time of this post the next conference takes place on March 22 - 24, 2013 in Berkeley, California March. Its their International Spring Workshops
on Critical Thinking. I strongly recommend their teachings.
Amazing talk
From my experience many 'Googler' types don't pay much mind to formalities... they just want to talk about / work on amazing stuff and not have to worry about who's eating what and where.
Ray has given talks at Google before and he knows exactly what he's getting into. It's one of the first places on his book tour, so I would bet Google is one of his favorite places to visit exactly because he gets to be surrounded by Googler types of people.
Hehe, a lot of people get pissed off when they hear about change, especially change as extreme and realistic as that which Kurzweil proposes. So is the way it's always been, a basic principle of the law of accelerating returns, timing is of the utmost importance.
"Ive never been a fan of neural nets"
Lol now his latest presentation showed the 300,000x increase in neural nets in the 2010s
Ray Kurzweil saved my life
Why?
The visualizations in the talk are outstanding. Can`t wait to read the book!
In addition to that discussed below:
The fascinating thing about "Deep Mind" is the fact that "Mind" has not been cogently defined in any branch of science or academia. In fact, no definition and description does not exist outside my own work, a fact which is unlikely to change one iota in the foreseeable future.
The reason why this is the case is the fact that, way back in the early days of psychology, the study of mind and the study of brain were clearly defined as distinct intellectual inquiries. It is only in modern times that the two, erroneously, became conflated. This problem is, in actuality, more serious than anyone knows. The seriousness of this "quite literally, global problem became further exacerbated by the systemic degradation of language-use across all academic disciplines.
I have over five decades experience as an independent thinker in educational, developmental and existential psychology and among many revelations what has become abundantly and consistently clear is, don't trust anyone who smiles. What interested me from the outset, about Elon is the fact that his smiles are exclusively the product of nervousness.
p.s. One of the reasons why I ask my previous question is because there are religious & moral Fundamentalists just about anywhere, who really believe they are Right. Some can even willingly die & kill others over their beliefs. When they are in positions where they can hold back enlightening progress - even in a family, or an office -- what convinces them to be relax & more open minded? Or is their role in human evolution, albeit can be extreme, a stablization force to appreciate somehow?
I was really feeling a bit guilty and bummed out about technology in general until I came across Kurzweil some years back. Every new book just helps me get it all into perspective how great technology is, despite too many people in my life always telling me that it's scary, big brother is coming, the world is about to end because I bought a tablet etc.
Hi how is your age reversal going?
@@djagereversalresearch7018 It's getting better, actually.
I'm not attacking Ray Kurzweil directly, more his idea here, or perhaps his capacity for interpreting the data, but I watched another version of the same talk he is doing here - and in it, he says the brain "fills up" around the age of 15. In this video, he says it "fills up" around the age of 20. That is a substantial difference. Which is true? I wish he would cite the research for me that is helping him come to this conclusion.
Even if I am not completely in phase with those ideas. I took a lesson from the speech: we are armed with more and more information analysis and spreading tools. In some sense they can be dangerous as weapons or wonderful as healing drugs. This evolution won't stop accelerating as it is pushed by markets. However, if we are not careful, if we use these tools to spread hate, ignorance, insults, frustration... a global information collapse could become reality. If we use them to make knowledge, respect and trust arrive to every single home in the planet we will be realizing a wonderful vision.
Not at all. I was thinking about this before I just read your comment, and it will be eternal sadness- not only for if loved ones have permanently passed, but those days which were in jeopardy of not existing, as well as the small domain we used to view the ultimate potential of reality as ultimately meaningful. The more ideal existence will have commenced, but we bear those memories as scars. And even as we could take away the memories- the experiences will have always occurred.
Well, just be thankful that Ray is engineering it at the moment.
In addition to that discussed below is the concept and proper definition of "creation". Creation is defined exclusively as Forming something from nothing. Therefore, no one can claim to have created either mind or brain without being functionally delusional. Language is the only intellectual instrument available to the human species which can present the opportunity to transcend but only if it is used properly and precisely.
The assumption is that hierarchical pattern recognition with sufficient complexity will result in the arising of an emergent intelligence. An intriguing idea. Worth a try.
Hi Xeletoph.The stat you mention is interesting to me. Where did you find it? I'm wondering if younger people are better able to evolve - or increase their awareness - within their one single physical life - because the influx of new info or change is trenuous on the physical body & brain? In other words, is it harder for 50+ human bodies & brains to adapt to change because of the physical strain? fyi: I'm a 50+ & born with some capacity to adapt to changing my mind & lifestyle for the better.
1:00
** the power of exponential growth
** you can see the future coming
21:00
** our biology
26:00
from self-awareness, which in turn comes from "programmed" to adapt to chaos, where no program suffices. Thus, probabilitic awareness. What we call consciousness, is the regulation of data imput regarding future possibilities and probabilistic tendencies based on constantly changing parameters. No computer is even CLOSE to that.
I think he is quite intelligent.
This intelligence has come through persistence, combined with astute aptitude.
He is great😍
(continued 1) I believe the microtubules act as a tuned quantum receiver - the structure is important. But, i also believe the organic material is one that is conducive to plasticity around the particular "holographic electrical interference patterns" and fields which allow the underlying "ghost" if you will to reside in and interact with the brain interface. I think the structures have slight differences which are subtly important and necessary for correct traction between the "ghost" and brain
And now he works there. I'm surprised it took them this long to get him on the team.
Thanks! The video was well shot this time, appropriately focusing on the content and the speaker.
Hi there X :) -- I'm focusing in on addressing the apparent need to provide opportunities to help folks age 50+ keep their minds agile, as per my earlier posts here. Making college cool and crucial for elders may help some stave off and even help heal from indoctrination. Imagine many people in their 90's & 100's in college! Too cool.
Can one simply create an immaterial, asomatous aspect ('not-atom':e.g., the-Mind?)
Kurzweil is right about the exponential nature of technological progress, because he can identify the cause of it: the hierarchical nature of human knowledge (which Newton was speaking of when he spoke of "standing on the shoulders of giants"). This doesn't mean the benefits of technological progress will be available to all of humanity, nor that technology won't be used destructively (history bears me out). In my Objectivist perspective, free-market capitalism can best solve those two problems.
who woulda thought his predictions for around 2029 would be true - amazing scientist
the question is: can machines think and feel like us? does a search engine have consciousness of searching for the results? to me it is a definitely yes
This book itself is an encyclopedia and includes a lot of information we need to understand the past and future of humanity.
Hi how is your age reversal going?
Historically interesting that he only speaks about HMM's as being state of the art in modelling the hierarchical structure of the neocortex. 2012 was right on the turning point when deep learning (ANN's) really took off due to increase in compute (GPU's).
People tend to impart their own feelings and emotions on to others when they are conflicted over something (a technique called Psychological projection). So they take their own fears and problems they hold, and "project" them onto Kurzweil because he is challenging their currently held beliefs about the future.
Word! I can count the number of people on my hand that I can talk to about this kind of stuff; it's a shame, really.
It CAN be a bad thing. But it will happen certainly, and that´s why we need to study it.
You've spent too long studying photography. The reason why we like Ray is because he is both a visionary and a creater, in that he has the morality as well as the ability.
How can you create something that's formless with form?
Bob Boyle you do that every time you imagine a person or create a virtual object
Like exponential curves, Ray's talks are always smooth and predictable.
In order to prevent price inflation in a monopoly in a capitalist system, you would have to have an organization independent of the company set the price of the product. In a capistalist system the goal of the company is to make as much profit as possible so prices would rise if the company sets its own prices.
Kurzweil says that jobs are being eliminated from the bottom of the skill ladder but new and higher paying jobs are being created at the top of the skill ladder. The problem is, the jobs at the top of the skill ladder are very technical ones that most people will never be qualified for. For example, I for one know that I will never be able to be a nuclear physicist, and neither will most people.
your correct. But are we not also products of our experiences and information gained-thought created?
You're absolutely correct
Interesting points on the development of information technology and surely a very skilfull engineer with powerful entrepreneurial ideas. But did he not want to talk about the mind? 🤔Could not find anything on it in the whole talk... 🧐
Fascinating talk & will be interesting to follow his predictions over the next 10 to 15 years. Book worth reading.
So how did his predictions go?
What concerns me is the idea of authorized knowledge.
Awesome talk.
EDIT: The video is now available in 720p. Expand the discussion to find out why it's a bad idea to insult random people, and how easily those people can turn your own insults around on you. It's very educational, and you're welcome!
Old, now obsolete text posted a few months ago: Google owns TH-cam, but they had to upload this video of one of their most important employees in 240p (ruining the graphs and making the whole thing look like crap) - why? To save bandwidth? :P
*****
It was not available in 720p when I made the comment, which is why two people upvoted my comment. Also, don't start shit with strangers. It makes you look insecure, like you have something to prove.
*****
When someone publicly insults me based on faulty premises, I feel it's necessary to correct them publicly so that they and others can recognize the mistake. I also feel that when someone mistakenly insults someone else, that person should expect to be corrected, and that this is beneficial to them because it helps them to learn from their mistakes.
Why _don't_ I remove the comment? I agree that 720p is available right now. However, for the above stated reasons, I wish to refute your statements. Because leaving the unedited comment in place provides an unimpeachable record of exactly what I said in my first post, I have what I need to prove that your premises are incorrect. After I'm finished proving conclusively that you are wrong, I'm willing to edit the comment to point out that the situation has been rectified.
Why _didn't_ I remove the comment before you saw it? Because until you responded, I wasn't aware that they'd made higher resolutions available. TH-cam never notified me and I didn't happen to come back to this, so I had no way of knowing; you are therefore blaming me for responding to something in state A as though it was in state B. It is in state B now, but at the time of the post in question, it was in state A. I cannot be expected to act on knowledge of an event that hasn't taken place yet, and which I have no specific reason to believe will happen.
Here are the premises of your first post:
It was available in HD when I accused you of idiocy, about one week ago.
Therefore, in saying that it wasn't available in HD several months ago, you are an idiot.
In order for that to be correct, you'd need to prove the following premises:
P1: If it was available in HD about a week ago, it was also available in HD a few months ago.
P2: It was available in HD about a week ago.
P3: You said it wasn't available in HD a few months ago.
C1: I must be correct, and you must be incorrect.
P4: If you're incorrect, you're an idiot.
P5: You're incorrect.
C2: You are incorrect and therefore an idiot.
Regarding P1, you _suppose,_ but don't actually know, that TH-cam gave me an option to play the video in HD several months ago. Premises cannot be based on supposition. Therefore, P1 is invalid.
P2 is true; it was indeed available in HD about a week ago. However, P1 is invalid; since P1 must be valid in order for P2 and P3 to be relevant, P2 is irrelevant.
P3 is true; I did indeed say that it wasn't available in HD a few months ago. However, this is irrelevant for the same reason as P2 (P1 is invalid).
C1 is invalid because the supporting premises are all invalid or irrelevant.
P4 is debatable. Even a genius can make a mistake - indeed, it's often _necessary_ to make decisions that may well be mistaken in the process of selecting the best way to do something; yet a genius is not an idiot by any reasonable definition. You yourself have made mistakes, such as the ones I've illustrated here. The very premise of an insult is that you're better than the other person concerning what the insult describes. It would be hypocritical for you to insult someone for doing the same thing you yourself are doing and have done countless times.
P5 is invalid because it assumes C1, which is also invalid.
C2 is invalid because P4 is debatable and P5 is invalid.
Your second post makes a statement that has already been addressed at the top of this post, and then it goes into some invalid logic.
Here is your logic:
I highly doubt it would take over 6 Months for the 720p to encode. I reiterate my "You Idiot" for you not being able to notice.
Or, Too proud of your thumbs up maybe... Fool
Stated formally:
P1: What I highly doubt is impossible.
P2: You stated something that I highly doubt.
C1: Your statement is impossible.
P3: Your impossible statement is wrong.
P4: If you're wrong, you're an idiot.
C2: You're an idiot.
P5: If you can't admit you're wrong because of votes, you're a fool.
P6: You may be too proud of your votes to admit you're wrong.
C3: You're a fool.
P1 is invalid because _impossible_ necessarily means a probability of 0, whereas _highly doubt_ admits a probability of >0. In your own words, _you don't believe it's impossible._
P2 is correct, but as it relies on P1 to support C1 and P1 is invalid, it's irrelevant.
C1 is unsupported by P1 and P2, and is therefore invalid.
P3 relies on C1, which is invalid, making P3 invalid.
P4 is invalid for the same reason that the first post's P4 is invalid (see above paragraph that begins with "P4 is debatable").
C2 is unsupported by P3 and P4, and is therefore invalid.
P5 is an opinion. I _could_ agree with it, but it isn't necessarily true.
P6 is invalid beacuse it's indeterminate. It can't be used to determine the truth of anything because it doesn't state whether or not I'm too proud.
C3 is a concrete conclusion that depends on premises that are either opinions or indeterminate. You cannot arrive at "you are" by way of "you may be" because "you are" requires information that is not made available by "you may be".
So far you're zero for two. Would you like to keep going? I sure would! Disassembling arguments and checking them for consistency is a lot of fun.
*****
Let me remind you of your own statements:
"It's 720 HD"
- As stated above, in my very first response to you, I agree! I never said that it isn't available in 720p _now._ Several months ago I made the statement that it wasn't. The statement was true when I made it. If you had simply stated that it was available in 720p now, I would have agreed with you 100%. The insult is why we are here.
"You idiot"
- Assumes there was something wrong with my post at the time I wrote it. Unless you think I can see the future, or have some way of knowing when TH-cam makes higher resolutions available for old videos? (For the record, I can't see the future, and TH-cam didn't notify me when 720p was made available.) See, you can't blame a person for not seeing something that wasn't in the only place they could have looked for it, at the time when they looked for it. You _certainly_ can't use that as a basis to call that person an idiot. Even if you could, doing so would brand _you_ a hypocrite, because you yourself have made bigger mistakes.
"I highly doubt it would take over 6 Months for the 720p to encode. I reiterate my "You Idiot" for you not being able to notice."
- BUT THEN...
"Just admit you were correct "AT THE TIME" and now the vid is in 720"
- Let me get this straight. First, you "highly doubt" the video would take over 6 months to show up in 720p, but then you also want me to "admit" that I was correct at the time, which can only mean that you believe I _was_ correct at the time. Let the record show that you agree that the video WAS NOT available in 720p at the time I made my original post.
So, then, what was I to do? You were the first person to tell me that the video is available in 720p. In the same post, you called me an idiot. In other words, _you pointed out that the video is now available in 720p, but gave me _*_no chance_*_ to edit my post before calling me out on it._ How can you hold me responsible for information I haven't been given a chance to respond to? Do you not know that I need to actually _have_ information _before_ I can act on it?
Let's see if there are any other points to address...
"I think you'll find that your whole "Essay" there is invalid by me asking about your post removal."
- I already answered that. To make the answer easy to find, look for the paragraphs that start with "Why don't I remove the comment" and "Why didn't I remove the comment" in my first response to you.
"In your terms, when I made my statement the vid was in 720 so, I was correct and your argument is moot"
- The _insult_ presented in your argument is both invalid and hypocritical. That is why we are still here.
"Secondly, After realising said video was now available in a higher rez (When I pointed it out to you) - Your only recourse would be to state your question was only valid at time, Realise the error and either remove or retract."
- You're forgetting that you called me an idiot, based on your assumption that I had missed something, which you later contradicted by saying I ought to admit that it _wasn't_ there at the time (which was already a completely inescapable, obvious property of my original post). _Several_ recourses are available in this case. This is the one I chose. How do you like it so far?
"You sir were wrong at time of my initial statement and at this time none of what I have written is wrong."
- You think it isn't wrong to hold people accountable for not knowing about things that haven't happened, to contradict yourself, and to behave hypocritically?
"Yes, I "Highly Doubt..." I didn't say it was impossible Nor did I imply it. As you missed this fundamental point and it is the basis of your entire argument,"
- Remember when you said this? "I highly doubt it would take over 6 Months for the 720p to encode. I reiterate my "You Idiot" for you not being able to notice." You have contradicted yourself. If I'm an idiot for missing something that _wasn't there_, you're infinitely more of an idiot for missing _your own statements._
"Everything your wrote after that line is moot and has been disregarded."
- It's common for people to disregard information that hurts their case.
"As for "Keeping score" You made SO MANY inaccurate premises in your 'explanation' it's not worth re-scoring."
- Prove that they're wrong.
"Needless to say; At time of writing, I was correct and your comment was wrong"
- If it's needless to say, why say it? Anyway, the statement that it is _now_ available in 720p is correct and I agree with it. The statement that I am an "idiot" is a baseless, hypocritical insult.
"stop trying to act big with your stupid "Disassembling arguments" - You're not any good at it... Because you are a fool :D"
- I have disassembled your argument and supporting statements and demonstrated that they are baseless. I have also demonstrated that you are a hypocrite. _If that makes either of us a fool, it's you._
*****
I accept your capitulation. As promised, I have corrected the original post.
Ray Kurtzweil has a wonderful imagination which ironically is a quality machines do not possess.
Human Predictions could be also exponential we already know it : if the assumption that the structure of our mind is similar to the universe then we could theoretically "beat the time". But you have no data on this right?
I read the book. Very interesting ideas. Wouldn't mind more detail.
What about a cloud cortex that everyone has access to? To change, add, improve? Your brain would get used to it's inputs and outputs.
Love to hear Ray talk with #BernardoKastrup ...
I don't usually associate "intuitive" with "linear." Am I nuts?
Mindblowing ! No pun intended !
You can't handle the truth. The truth is that we are none us very special. Once we realize we all act stupid sometimes, we all are selfish sometimes, we all are common sometimes, and we are all wonderfully generous sometimes, we can stop worrying about privacy and start helping all of us "be all that we can be" without killing each other.
Brain and computer will melt together.
I read "The Singularity is Near", "Fantastic Voyage: Live Long Enough to Live Forever" .
Will pick this up, as well.
I'm so glad to know that there are people who think just like I do, look at the world just like I do and see it for what it is, but more importantly what it can be.
Visionaries of modern day.
I would generally agree with this. Since we have a good way to go to even understand the brain completely, it's impossible to even begin to put a lower limit on when this type of computer could happen. That being said, I often underestimated technological progress--I couldn't imagine 15 years ago when I was on 56k dialup that even low income people would be watching video on powerful mobile computers --so I tend to be more liberal for this.
"100,000,000 million years ago."
Amazing.
Damn. Kurzweil has some sick bling.
It's fantastic. But we should not loose the human touch while using technology, or else we will become more like machines and less human.
Its amazing , I had learned a lot
whats up with the facial tick? Never noticed that before. Nanotechnology side effects?
do you run your computer in a quilt?
Are there any organisms that naturally receive/send radio waves? Could anything organic do so?
Hi ! That is interedting that you mention the receiver idea - i believe this myself (through myown research and thinking). I am an engineer btw (I call myself a scientist though) and have worked for 7+ years in defence research. My first gig was developing a beamforming tracking system. Anyway, i believe the brain acts as a receiver. The "sensor translation" is a form of Bayes parallel feedback that is adaptive. But the "ghost in machine part uses the receiver interface - ill continue next post
P
I feel the same way about pico projectors. This nascent technology segment will disrupt mobile displays and how we consume mobile content
Abundance is coming, stop being afraid of change, its inevitable, its inexorable, its coming.
Deep Blue was a major improvement in A.I do you know how many possible moves there are in any particular situation in a game? It's stunning, now even further into A.I is Watson who kick the best two human player asses, in a game that requires more natural language understanding then most average people have. Information technology is doubling about every 11 months now so expect to see some radical changes in society itself.
this man speak in a way that seems god
Does anyone know when this talk happened.. He says often ' I mentioned that on my book' but which book??
Talk happened November 16, 2012. The book shares the title with this video.
During the Q&A, there's mention that some people fear things are currently getting worse.Mr Kurzeil said he likes to show them a graph that shows them instead that we have longer life spans & more money. This info may be reassuring for some, but people for eg who are fundamental in their religious & moral beliefs believe the world has gone to the "Devil". What kind of graphs can be made to reassure these terrified&confused&stubborn people, that new ideas maybe helpful? Or are they hopeless?
Top 10 strikes again!
~ 17:00 deflation in the great depression wasn't "consumer confidence", it was a massive decrease in money supply. (reference milton friedman).
I don't think you understand what you're saying; competition creates the incentive to continuously lower the prices of goods - as soon as you remove all competition (that is, you create a monopoly), prices rise and quality lowers. I don't understand how you can create an economy based on "cooperation" when there is inherent scarcity.
Extremely exciting and interesting talk. Had to laugh at the "these guys weren't funny" comment :D
Hi X. "MOSH', for those here that don't know the meaning is "a human being that uses 'native carbon-based neurons & is unenhanced by neural implants'. I'm OK with being one of these ;) Again, where did u find the stat about the 5%? My 90 yr old Gramma was a prejudiced Southern Baptist white woman that looked down on colored people, until she took an interest on her own in reading books about Black American History. She apologized to the family for her prejudices & said she hadn't understood.
It would be interesting to hear Ray’s thoughts on Large Language Models today, especially that Google had a significant hand in their invention and popularity. Hey Google: Can we do a 10-year anniversary talk? (April 2023)
He was on Lex Friedman podcast last month.
I agree with you that computers are only getting faster. But why the negative attitude towards Ray?
> In my Objectivist perspective, free-market capitalism can best solve those two problems.
This line was like 180 degrees out of phase with the rest of what you said. It's a big "fat" claim that free-market capitalism can somehow distribute and control the benefits of technology. Can you even give a broad hand-waving at what a proof of that statement might look like? I'm sure not going to hold my breath for it though.
He talked about technology increases, which are well-known, but he did not talk about 'how to create a mind', or the greater problem, of how to even know how to define in words what a mind, or awareness, or quale/qualia, etc, are. Awareness and etc. are a different order of being, and no matter how many computer circuits you link up, we don't know if it will become self-aware, suddenly. At what point does organized matter--pieces gain this ineffable thing called self-awareness? Those are the questions that the big-name big-audience philosophers of mind do not answer, and seems are not being asked by their audiences either.
Who else constantly noticed "60 is the new 40" ?
I noticed gujarati and afrikaans.
Because Kurzweil was ~65 at the time. But it is NOT the new 40.
This is just superb, I have been researching "battlefield of the mind devotional online" for a while now, and I think this has helped. Ever heard of - Giyoe Fonogan Builder - (just google it ) ? Ive heard some great things about it and my friend got cool results with it.
very informative lecture
Thanks. Isn't it insane that we are just a blob of neurons that talks about neurons? Just blow's my mind. Can't wait for the next 50 years...
In its mind cockroach does not separate itself from its environment. Cockroach's perception of reality is similar to our perception when we dream - unconsciousness fully takes over
I predicted Ray would make accurate predictions.
computation produces numbers, chemistry produces chemical.
how is conscious experience any of that?
You can ask headless questions forever or you can think and see. I can't tell you what you don't want to hear.
How would a machine feel pain..
Education starts when young, and it's better that we teach our children HOW to think (not what to think) as they're maturing. It's far easier then trying to 'fix' a person whose sustained heavy psychological damage from a lifetime of indoctrination. Free, collegiate level education should be available for people at all ages. Everybody deserves an IEP. We should determine aptitudes and interests, and personally tailor every teaching regimen according to them. Life relevant classes are important.
(cont 3). But - i merely point this out as a "possibility" to consider... before people go ahead and start "uploading" in 20 - 60 years, or whenever. I have experienced 2 personal events of OBE. This and other experiences has led me to consider the possible existence of this "soul" or "spirit" element. The results of cassimir effect and other "Virtual Particle" phenomena also opens the door for 'post-relativity' aether concepts, which opens again the door to more esoteric science possibilities.
Ray Kurzweil working at Google is a huge deal.
Wow. I cant believe how many rings he is wearing. Interesting.