Article - Will Humanity Become Obsolete

[Drashner1]

Forwarded to me by an OA member:

http://www.trendingcentral.com/will-huma...-obsolete/

Enjoy.

Todd

[radtech497]

(rant)
Aside from "Rapid exploration and colonisation of the Solar System," there is very little in this article of interest or utility to me (as always, YMMV). The advances described in the article might be of interest to some (including, no doubt, many of the members of this list), but to others, like myself, they hold as little interest for me as does a smartphone (or any wireless telephone, for that matter). I do take exception to being characterized as being an old-fashioned technophobe simply because I haven't abandoned my sense of personal utility so as to join the technophilic hordes waiting impatiently for the Next New Thing. Reading this article, I can take comfort in the expectation that I will have shuffled off this mortal coil before these predictions come to fruition (if they ever do).

(/rant)
Radtech497

[FrodoGoofball]

Well, essentially, this is still the same vision of transhumanism foretold by the OA canon, albeit more optimistic in several areas:

"by 2045 humanity will have created A.I.": see 030 to 130 AT: The Information Age
"73 (2043) - First true human-equivalent sentient Artificial Intelligences, but the resulting AIs seem secretive and curiously unable to understand humans."

"Unlimited human lifespans available on demand": see Life Extension

"Implantable computers to connect the brain to the internet": see DNI: Capabilities and Components, Augmentics

"New ‘nootropic’ drugs to vastly increase human intelligence": see Nootropics

"The ability to copy, upload and download human memories": see Uploading technology, The Early History of

"Using genetic modification to create post-human supermen": see Superior Genemods

"Rapid exploration and colonisation of the Solar System": see 130 to 400 AT (2100 - 2370 CE): The Interplanetary Age

When you consider what we have today compared to very early SciFi, what I see is that Real Life generally encounters more subtle dangers, unnecessary cost overruns, etc., and thus often takes considerably longer than might seem reasonable, but ultimately creates even more impressive outcomes. Compare Jules Verne's Nautilis and moon cannon to real life submarines and spacecraft.

[stevebowers]

Interesting that they use the same date for the creation of AI as we do. That probably means they used the same primary sources as Anders did when he wrote the earliest timeline.

To be honest I think 2045 is a bit optimistic. I'd be surprised if there was human equivalent AI by 2045, but by 2070 I think there should be a greater than even chance of very advanced AI systems emerging, and by 2100 it would be very surprising if there were no human level aioids of some sort.

Note that I don't propose that we change the timeline in any way, at least not yet; but we should be aware that the 2045 prediction is both widespread and optimistic (some might say pessimistic).

[omega_tyrant]

Interesting that they use the same date for the creation of AI as we do. That probably means they used the same primary sources as Anders did when he wrote the earliest timeline.

To be honest I think 2045 is a bit optimistic. I'd be surprised if there was human equivalent AI by 2045, but by 2070 I think there should be a greater than even chance of very advanced AI systems emerging, and by 2100 it would be very surprising if there were no human level aioids of some sort.

Note that I don't propose that we change the timeline in any way, at least not yet; but we should be aware that the 2045 prediction is both widespread and optimistic (some might say pessimistic).

I agree about the 2045 date. I think this comes from Kurzweil, who set this date back in 1999 in the Age of Spiritual Machines, if I'm not mistaken. I'm no expert in the field, but from what I've been reading, so many unexpected challenges have come up since that time. Not the least of which is the realization from many in the field that "human mind equivalency" does not necessarily come from a set number of ops/sec being achieved, as Kurzweil would like the public to believe. The 2045 year is out of date, IMO, and needs to be pushed back to account for the new challenges/political situations/economic slowdowns/Moore's Law slowdown, etc., all of which could delay the advent of AGI by years or decades. This is just my opinion, and I would not dream of attempting to coerce OA into changing the date right now.