by burt » Wed Jan 19, 2011 4:22 am
Gerald:
Sorry I didn't want to hurt you.
Ma basic education is pysicist (I'v got several different degrees and I worked as a consultant for different companies during 20 years, I noted the importance of human, and after studying psychology, I' m a coach, yet).
So I'm very curious about what we do not know yet on the universe. But it is very important, for me to make a difference between Science and Belief.
When I was 20 I was very interested on flying soccers and aliens, so I came to study the facts, and there is, until now, strictly no proof that an alien came on earth, so this is a belief. Until you give a proof of something a belief is a belief.
+ the probability that we ever meet an alien is very, very low (close to 0, but a probability is never 0), so what I did, was stuying the sites you referenced, with my family and friends, and I arrived at the conclusion that they are not serious, and surely not scientifics.
I never reject an hypothesis I do not know and which interests me before studying it.
Until now the Singularity is a belief, BUT, if you study the power of the computers with geometric scale with a definition of what is "intelligence", you arrive at the conclusion that computers will be as smart as people at aroung 2030.
And as I wrote somewhere that we do not even need to have computer more clever than human but more efficient than humans (so the intellectual blah-blah on "computers will never be more clever that humans" upset me, because it IS out of purpose with the event of the Singularity, alle we need if "brute force" as John says).
As programming computers is very "human cleverness" consumming, as soon as possible we will use computer to program computers, at THAT time, computers will not need any more humans, EXCEPT for giving them the electrical power they need.
On addition of that I can observe every day the fact that most people BELIEVE in what come out from a computer, even if it is stupid. They NEED to have a God and Priests to that God.
So the Singularity is a HIGH PROBABILTY event, and before the end of the century computers will not need any more humans is a MEDIUM probability (so many things can happen before the end of the century, BUT this is on the track of the world we are building yet).
As I do NOT believe (to make a difference between belief and observations) <"human in group" are good for humans>, I'm convinced that at a certain time, computers will be build against the humanity, so I think that (IF we can feed computers with the energy they need, a big IF, but otherwise it will be the end of the civilization) the role of humans in front of the computers will be the same as the dogs in front of human, and this before the end of the century.
On addition of that psychology tell us that human in group are much, much more stupid and easy to manipulate than humans. So I'm convinced that he first super-computers (2020?) will be used to manipulate the population through wordings.
Thank you for having given a new idea on this site, I reject the idea NOT you, you give life here, and this is not because that we, perhaps disagree, now, that we will ever disagree on anything.
Regards
Gerald:
Sorry I didn't want to hurt you.
Ma basic education is pysicist (I'v got several different degrees and I worked as a consultant for different companies during 20 years, I noted the importance of human, and after studying psychology, I' m a coach, yet).
So I'm very curious about what we do not know yet on the universe. But it is very important, for me to make a difference between Science and Belief.
When I was 20 I was very interested on flying soccers and aliens, so I came to study the facts, and there is, until now, strictly no proof that an alien came on earth, so this is a belief. Until you give a proof of something a belief is a belief.
+ the probability that we ever meet an alien is very, very low (close to 0, but a probability is never 0), so what I did, was stuying the sites you referenced, with my family and friends, and I arrived at the conclusion that they are not serious, and surely not scientifics.
I never reject an hypothesis I do not know and which interests me before studying it.
Until now the Singularity is a belief, BUT, if you study the power of the computers with geometric scale with a definition of what is "intelligence", you arrive at the conclusion that computers will be as smart as people at aroung 2030.
And as I wrote somewhere that we do not even need to have computer more clever than human but more efficient than humans (so the intellectual blah-blah on "computers will never be more clever that humans" upset me, because it IS out of purpose with the event of the Singularity, alle we need if "brute force" as John says).
As programming computers is very "human cleverness" consumming, as soon as possible we will use computer to program computers, at THAT time, computers will not need any more humans, EXCEPT for giving them the electrical power they need.
On addition of that I can observe every day the fact that most people BELIEVE in what come out from a computer, even if it is stupid. They NEED to have a God and Priests to that God.
So the Singularity is a HIGH PROBABILTY event, and before the end of the century computers will not need any more humans is a MEDIUM probability (so many things can happen before the end of the century, BUT this is on the track of the world we are building yet).
As I do NOT believe (to make a difference between belief and observations) <"human in group" are good for humans>, I'm convinced that at a certain time, computers will be build against the humanity, so I think that (IF we can feed computers with the energy they need, a big IF, but otherwise it will be the end of the civilization) the role of humans in front of the computers will be the same as the dogs in front of human, and this before the end of the century.
On addition of that psychology tell us that human in group are much, much more stupid and easy to manipulate than humans. So I'm convinced that he first super-computers (2020?) will be used to manipulate the population through wordings.
Thank you for having given a new idea on this site, I reject the idea NOT you, you give life here, and this is not because that we, perhaps disagree, now, that we will ever disagree on anything.
Regards