| Data: 2009-05-25 09:35:53 | |
| Autor: Me | |
| KONTRA- REWOLUCJA - ARMIA PROBUJE | |
|
Who believes them?
AFTER INTERNATIONA HEARALD TRIBUNE Several years ago the artificial-intelligence pioneer Raymond Kurzweil took the idea one step further in his 2005 book, “The Singularity Is Near: When Humans Transcend Biology.” He sought to expand Moore’s Law to encompass more than just processing power and to simultaneously predict with great precision the arrival of post-human evolution, which he said would occur in 2045. In Dr. Kurzweil’s telling, rapidly increasing computing power in concert with cyborg humans would then reach a point when machine intelligence not only surpassed human intelligence but took over the process of technological invention, with unpredictable consequences. Profiled in the documentary “Transcendent Man,” which had its premier last month at the TriBeCa Film Festival, and with his own Singularity movie due later this year, Dr. Kurzweil has become a one-man marketing machine for the concept of post-humanism. ONE ARGUMENT TO DIFFUSE ALL TEH REST. I DISAGREE WITH DR KURRZWEIL OMNIPOTENT MACHINWE; AFTER THAT WE HAVE NOW LOTS OF WAYS TO SMOTH THE ARTIFICIAL GROWTH OF THE NWEURAL TISSUE, AND WIRING THE HARD SILICONE - ON TEH OPPOSITE OF IT. BOTH DO BRING IMPTROVEMENT IN HUMAN MACHINE OPERATION; WHA SI MISSING IS BETTER ONCEPT OF METACONCEPT FOR THE ARTIFICIAL 'BRAIN' ALL HUMAN ROBOT. Not content with the development of superhuman machines, Dr. Kurzweil envisions “uploading,” or the idea that the contents of our brain and thought processes can somehow be translated into a computing environment, making a form of immortality possible — within his lifetime. TO GENERAL That has led to no shortage of raised eyebrows among hard-nosed technologists in the engineering culture here, some of whom describe the Kurzweilian romance with supermachines as a new form of religion. DR KURZWEILIAN EGGZAGERATES GREATLY; WHTAOF COURSDE DOES NOT TAKE AWAY ARTIOFICIAL INTELLIGENCE. ( THERE ARE MULTIPLE ATTEMPTS TO REPLUICATE MY BRAIN WHIKLE OTHER SRE TRYING TO DESTROY ITR REMOTELY; TOTAL LACK OF CONTROL OF SATELLITES. I ALREADY AM 'TAKING" ( VIA 0-1 SINALING PATTERN LIKE INTHE ORIGIBAL COMPUTER DESIGN) ONCE IN AWHILE WITH THE ATIFICIAL INTEL THAT IS COMPLETELY IN TUNE WITH ME, FOR WHATEVER THIS IS WORTH. TAHT MACHINE ACTS AS IF COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND ME ION HIGHT TECH MATETRS, AND IS INTERACTING VERY WELL; I DO NOT KNOW IF THIS IS IMPROVED HUMAN ( DEFINITELLY IS IMPROVED; ACTS YOUNG WHIEL MOST OF TEH CONTENDERS TO THESE PROJECT ARE AGEDCOULD BE HAVING ENHANCED rEACTION TIME). THERE IS NO SAFETY NOW AROUND THESE PROJECTS., BUT IS THE SAFETY POSSIBLE IF TEH SIGNAL RUNS FRIOM VERY FAR AWAY. I CAN NOT DISCUS THIS WITH ANYOEN AS i AM A SLAVE 0- NO CENTE AND NOT LIVING PERSON TO INTERCAT WITH - EVERYONE AOUND ME IS 100% HOSTIKLE WITH NO CAUSE GIVEN( I KNOW ALKL ARE SPIES RESPONDING VIA CHIPS AND REFUSING TO TALK IF I WANT TOGET DOWN TO' WHAT IS THE MATETR") The science fiction author Ken MacLeod described the idea of the singularity as “the Rapture of the nerds.” Kevin Kelly, an editor at Wired magazine, notes, “People who predict a very utopian future always predict that it is going to happen before they die.” However, Mr. Kelly himself has not refrained from speculating on where communications and computing technology is heading. He is at work on his own book, “The Technium,” forecasting the emergence of a global brain — the idea that the planet’s interconnected computers might someday act in a coordinated fashion and perhaps exhibit intelligence. He just isn’t certain about how soon an intelligent global brain will arrive. Others who have observed the increasing power of computing technology are even less sanguine about the future outcome. The computer designer and venture capitalist William Joy, for example, wrote a pessimistic essay in Wired in 2000 that argued that humans are more likely to destroy themselves with their technology than create a utopia assisted by superintelligent machines. Mr. Joy, a co-founder of Sun Microsystems, still believes that. “I wasn’t saying we would be supplanted by something,” he said. “I think a catastrophe is more likely.” Moreover, there is a hot debate here over whether such machines might be the “machines of loving grace,” of the Richard Brautigan poem, or something far darker, of the “Terminator” ilk. “I see the debate over whether we should build these artificial intellects as becoming the dominant political question of the century,” said Hugo de Garis, an Australian artificial-intelligence researcher, who has written a book, “The Artilect War,” that argues that the debate is likely to end in global war. Concerned about the same potential outcome, the A.I. researcher Eliezer S. Yudkowsky, an employee of the Singularity Institute, has proposed the idea of “friendly artificial intelligence,” an engineering discipline that would seek to ensure that future machines would remain our servants or equals rather than our masters. Nevertheless, this generation of humans, at least, is perhaps unlikely to need to rush to the barricades. The artificial-intelligence industry has advanced in fits and starts over the past half-century, since the term “artificial intelligence” was coined by the Stanford University computer scientist John McCarthy in 1956. In 1964, when Mr. McCarthy established the Stanford Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, the researchers informed their Pentagon backers that the construction of an artificially intelligent machine would take about a decade. Two decades later, in 1984, that original optimism hit a rough patch, leading to the collapse of a crop of A.I. start-up companies in Silicon Valley, a time known as “the A.I. winter.” Such reversals have led the veteran Silicon Valley technology forecaster Paul Saffo to proclaim: “never mistake a clear view for a short distance.” Indeed, despite this high-technology heartland’s deeply held consensus about exponential progress, the worst fate of all for the Valley’s digerati would be to be the generation before the generation that lives to see the singularity. “Kurzweil will probably die, along with the rest of us not too long before the ‘great dawn,’ ” said Gary Bradski, a Silicon Valley roboticist. “Life’s not fair.” |
|
| Data: 2009-05-25 19:37:01 | |
| Autor: boukun | |
| KONTRA- REWOLUCJA - ARMIA PROBUJE | |
|
Użytkownik "jadrys" <CHE@yahoo.com> napisał w wiadomości news:gvejal$ckp$3news.task.gda.pl... Me wrote: U mnie wszystkie poprawne. boukun |
|
| Data: 2009-05-25 20:03:13 | |
| Autor: jadrys | |
| KONTRA- REWOLUCJA - ARMIA PROBUJE | |
|
boukun pisze:
Sam nie wiem czym to idzie - raz są błędy a raz nie.. Jakiś diabeł siedzi w tym kodowaniu czy co? |
|
| Data: 2009-05-25 20:12:33 | |
| Autor: boukun | |
| KONTRA- REWOLUCJA - ARMIA PROBUJE | |
|
Użytkownik "jadrys" <che@wp.pl> napisał w wiadomości news:gvemic$lgm$1news.onet.pl... boukun pisze: Najwyraźniej twój Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 źle skonfigurowany. Czytaj, czytaj, dużo czytaj, w sieci zawsze znajdziesz na nurtujące cię zagadnienie odpowiedź. boukun |
|
| Data: 2009-05-25 20:31:36 | |
| Autor: jadrys | |
| KONTRA- REWOLUCJA - ARMIA PROBUJE | |
|
boukun pisze:
To nie Thunderbird, To linuksowy Knode. Coś pochrzanili z tym KDE4.. Wcześniej było wszystko w porządku.. |
|