Main

June 23, 2006

The Singularity is Nearer Than You Think

I’m reading The Singularity Is Near: When Humans Transcend Biology by Ray Kurzweil. While I’ll post a full book review later, I wanted to share a few thoughts about his basic calculations concerning when artificial intelligence will surpass human intelligent.

On the one hand, I agree with the basic calculations. Ray Kurzweil uses a base value of 10^16 calculations per second (cps) needed to mimic human intelligence based on functional equivalence, I’m more inclined to believe the 10^19 cps based on physical structure simulation. That’s because I have a hard time believing that we’re going to design something more elegant than nature. (Look at Janine Benyus’s Biomimicry, which provides scores of examples that demonstrate that nature is still way ahead of us when it comes to effective solutions to real world problems.)

While the author seems to believe there is progress on AI, I have to ask if that feels true. Computers don’t feel smarter to me. They have incrementally improved between 1986 and 2006, but are they smarter? About the smartest thing my computer does is remember which menu items I click on frequently and hide the ones I don’t click on. That’s not smart, that’s a simple usage algorithm. The smartest thing the web has done is recommend products that I might like based on purchasing habits. That is pretty smart, but is it surprising? (In later chapters the author does lament the trend of downplaying the contribution of AI by classifying previously hard problems as simple algorithms.)

We’ve replaced the 640K DOS memory limit with the 100mb Outlook Exchange server limit at my company. Is email smarter? No, it has just grown in capability.

The technology innovations that amaze me are people driven, not computer driven. Wikipedia harnesses the power of people, not computers. Ruby on Rails is the brainchild of a few outstanding hackers. But it is still a pretty simple application of rules.

I do think we’ll hit that singularity though, but it’ll be with brute force, not because we’re clever engineers and can implement functional equivalence better than nature can.

But even though it will be through brute force, I still think we’ll hit it earlier than Ray believes. That’s because Ray posits that the singularity will occur only when the technology is a billion times more power than a single human brain. The mistake is thinking that we must exceed so radically the brain capacity of humans. I think that innovation comes not from mass of brain power, but from concentration of brain power. The really big ideas come from a few brilliant people. Are those brilliant people a million times smart than you or I? Or are they just a dozen times smarter, and by virtue of that concentration of brain power in one mind, capable of having the critical mass needed to achieve breakthroughs.

In other words, I think that those first few AIs that are brought online will exceed our intelligence, and rapidly design the next generation of themselves, and proceed at a pace far exceeding our own capability to follow. Ray believes that the hardware technology necessary to simulate human comparable AIs will existing somewhere around 2020, the software by 2030 and the singularity (exponentially spirally increases in machine intelligence) will occur by 2040. My timeline is somewhat different. I think the hardware will get there between 2020 and 2025, and the software will immediately follow. (If you have followed my technology projections spreadsheet, you’ll know that you can predict when technology uses such as mp3 sharing, internet phone calling, and videostreaming occur by hardware capability, not software. The trend appears to indicate that if the hardware exists, out of the great masses of humanity, the software will arise more or less spontaneously.)

The singularity will then occur within just a few years (i.e. by the late 2020s) as machine intelligent greatly increases the exponential acceleration of technology and solves the truly difficult problems (nanotechnology, effective gene manipulation) that we’re making only slow progress with. My estimate is that we reach the singularity at least 10 years before Ray's best estimate, even though my estimate starts with the assumption that we need to do a neuron-interaction and behavior level simulation.

April 25, 2006

Book Review: The Sense of Being Stared At:...

This book combines both anecdotal and experimental evidence making the case for telepathy, precognition, and clairvoyance. It does give some pretty compelling evidence, and in many cases, presents good summaries of the extensive research done into these areas.

Here is an example of one amazing experiment to test the question of how dogs know when their owner is coming home. Is it based on seeing their owner? Here's their owners car/bus/train? Based on an accurate sense of the time of day? Here's how the experiment was constructed: A videocamera covered the area were the dogs normally waited for their owners. The owners carried a pager, and at a random time during the day were paged and instructed to come home immediately. So the experimental question: at what point do the dogs start spending a statistically significant greater amount of time in the place where they wait for their owner? The answer: immediately following the point at which the owner receives the pager notification and plans to come home. The conclusion: The experiment appears to indicate that dogs know their owners are coming home at the moment that their owners have the intention of coming home, way before there could be any physical evidence of their arrival.

Here is another amazing experiment that comes to mind: When subjects are trained to record their dreams immediately on awakening. While some dreams are fluff, many dreams refer to real-world events. About 50% refer to things that have happened in the past 48 hours, while about 50% refer to things that will happen in the NEXT 48 hours. Wow!

From a literary perspective, the book is OK, but I found myself speeding past certain sections. I'd rank it as a 3 out of 5 for writing, but 4 out of 5 for pure amazing of content.

The Sense of Being Stared At: And Other Aspects of the Extended Mind by Rupert Sheldrake: Buy at Amazon or Place hold at Multnomah County Library

March 30, 2006

The Way the World Really Works

One bookshelf in my office is the one I think of as "The Way the World Really Works". This is a collection of books that exposed me to radically different thinking than anything I had seen in traditional education or traditional media. I think of these books as correcting some knowledge deficiency or inadequacy that exists in most of us in western culture.

I started thinking about this bookshelf after reading Dave Pollard's How to Save the World Reading List (via Rebecca's Pocket). There are many similarities between Dave's list and my bookshelf, but one key difference is that my bookshelf seems to contain a large number of spiritual (not religious) books, especially on the concept of the power of our thinking to affect reality.

So read on for Will's The Way the World Really Works Reading List:

Continue reading "The Way the World Really Works" »

March 21, 2006

Book Review: The Continuum Concept by Jean Liedloff

I read this anthropological study of child rearing by the indigenous people of South America about five years ago, and it significantly changed my beliefs about raising children. Some key concepts this book introduced to me included: carrying your baby extensively in the early months; involving children in adult activities rather than just "playing" with them; letting children raise each other in mixed age groups; and children instinctively don’t endanger themselves but adults can install fear and cause accidents by putting the idea in their subconscious by saying things like “be careful”, “don’t touch those knives”. It's part of my "The Way the World Really Works" bookshelf. 5 of 5. Buy at Amazon or Place hold at Multnomah County Library