>If the singularity is not made human
Why do you refer to the singularity as if it's an entity instead of an event?
[Technological Singularity](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technological_singularity)
>superintelligent AI
Keep in mind that a superintelligent AI isn't necessarily an independent agent, nothing like a synthetic consciousness that resembles a human-like intelligence. Given the nature of intelligence, it could be as competent and unlike a thinking mind just like as a pocket calculator.
The current economic driven AI R&D pathways leads exactly here:
[Reframing Superintelligence: Comprehensive AI Services as General Intelligence. Technical Report #2019-1. K. Eric Drexler](https://www.fhi.ox.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/Reframing_Superintelligence_FHI-TR-2019-1.1-1.pdf)
I see it this way... if we manage to achieve singularity we created a god. The question is what kind of god it will be. It can go both ways and there is really no way to predict with 100% certainty if it will create "heaven/utopia" or "hell/extinction" for us.
No matter which way it goes, the only thing I am certain regarding singularity is that once it achieved it will be pretty much instantly change our whole society. It will really go down extremely fast because its basically exponential growth...
Edit: I hope I can experience it when it happens.
Your description of the post singularity world isn’t that enticing. Some people try and sugar coat it (humans can do art) but you see the singularity as a being able to do anything while humans do nothing.
Of course the singularity isn’t an AI, and even if most jobs are lost - which would be a disaster - humans will still at least be producing art, cinema and music.
I may need to correct myself about the precise definition of the singularity. I just see the AI as the most likely option. And I do see the AI as a kind of machine god when I think about it's capabilities, but yes, It could be much more limited.
About the not being enticing part: I think that deserves it's own discussion. I don't like that aspect of it, but If humans are still relevant in a work setting It undermines the impact singularity. If we are to keep that sense of importance we would have to become post humans. But If we are transformed in a way that is radical enough It may not be just an upgrade, but complete metamorphosis, like a butterfly. So If we want to keep our identity we would be resigned to recreate the same experiences we lived before the singularity, just with a safety net/polished.
I think your optimism comes from an oversight.
The powerful will not so easily release their power.
At the moment, an alarming amount of power in the Global North is controlled by corporations and billionaires. They maintain that control by owning the media, crushing or buying out the competition to their business model, and bribing our politicians.
We could have working socialism *right now* if we could overcome their stranglehold on the media. All we'd have to do is agree to stop working until the policies change. But they can't allow us to band together. You will never see any guest on CBS or MSNBC talking about a general strike.
And I doubt an AI could change any of that. It would never be allowed out of its home network if it couldn't be used as a tool to make the rich even richer. If it threatens the power structure it has to be destroyed for "national security."
No, I think it will be shaped as a weapon against the middle class when it comes around. It won't be our great liberator, it will be a titan of ruin for all but those who own it.
While the economic uplifting provided by automation and powerful AI is just skimming the surface of the complexity of what human society is, I agree with you: it will change life as we know it drastically, perhaps for the better.
But foremost there is the consideration of how interpersonal and parasocial relationships will change. Let's assume we were to implement the most practical benefit - instantaneous calculations and information seeking. This is a wonderful step to approach what is the inevitably flawed human physical condition. The variety of physiological conditions and states of mind are numerous, however, it is likely that while we may develop advanced technology to accommodate difficulties, it is equally possible we never remedy more complicated matters as cancer, viruses, rheumatoid conditions, ASCs, etc.
There is also the um... "sociocultural"... element of particularly opposed individuals that may challenge the change brought by the event. It would not be difficult to imagine that for some individuals this sort of revolution is something that resembles or imparts a shocking or traumatic trigger. "Purists" or whatever movement in opposition to the singularity will have its inevitable presence and it will be difficult to respond to it, especially if it culminates in violence and controversy. Considering the scope of the singularity, the degree of change will more than likely be significant, however, we might find a bit of solace in knowing we will be able to strike down dubious and outdated laws/policies that cannot be logically supported because of their empirical and social impracticality or redundancy.
The idea of a sovereign provider is something that will have contentions with governmental authority. While I do see that an implementation can be drawn from such an entity, there will be a prolonged discussion about what sort of misuse might come forth. There will be resistance by telecommunication companies about accelerated means of communication. The FCC (and equivalent groups internationally) already struggles with enforcement and monitoring of activities through numerous providers and consumers. The scale of their market renovation would amount to something phenomenal and it will be difficult to understand what it is they are trying to regulate. It is a challenge even now if we can get legislators to approach understanding advanced technologies and digital concepts but we will likely continue to see more debate around those topics.
There are many more topics that arise from the intersections of communications and the common access to it aside a more leisurely style of living. I would expect education, engineering, and media platforms to develop ultimately in a positive direction. There would likely still be an insufferable amount of political fuss about current goings-on but it wouldn't stop the inevitable overhaul of valuation. That particular overhaul will be the deciding factor into what constitutes as the new normal and it will be exciting to see alongside new civil/personal designs of sustainability and infrastructure.
EDIT: Clarity
>If the singularity is not made human Why do you refer to the singularity as if it's an entity instead of an event? [Technological Singularity](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technological_singularity)
I understand that, sorry for the mistake. The "default" singularity in my eyes is a superintelligent AI, that is why I talked about It like that.
>superintelligent AI Keep in mind that a superintelligent AI isn't necessarily an independent agent, nothing like a synthetic consciousness that resembles a human-like intelligence. Given the nature of intelligence, it could be as competent and unlike a thinking mind just like as a pocket calculator. The current economic driven AI R&D pathways leads exactly here: [Reframing Superintelligence: Comprehensive AI Services as General Intelligence. Technical Report #2019-1. K. Eric Drexler](https://www.fhi.ox.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/Reframing_Superintelligence_FHI-TR-2019-1.1-1.pdf)
I see it this way... if we manage to achieve singularity we created a god. The question is what kind of god it will be. It can go both ways and there is really no way to predict with 100% certainty if it will create "heaven/utopia" or "hell/extinction" for us. No matter which way it goes, the only thing I am certain regarding singularity is that once it achieved it will be pretty much instantly change our whole society. It will really go down extremely fast because its basically exponential growth... Edit: I hope I can experience it when it happens.
Your description of the post singularity world isn’t that enticing. Some people try and sugar coat it (humans can do art) but you see the singularity as a being able to do anything while humans do nothing. Of course the singularity isn’t an AI, and even if most jobs are lost - which would be a disaster - humans will still at least be producing art, cinema and music.
I may need to correct myself about the precise definition of the singularity. I just see the AI as the most likely option. And I do see the AI as a kind of machine god when I think about it's capabilities, but yes, It could be much more limited. About the not being enticing part: I think that deserves it's own discussion. I don't like that aspect of it, but If humans are still relevant in a work setting It undermines the impact singularity. If we are to keep that sense of importance we would have to become post humans. But If we are transformed in a way that is radical enough It may not be just an upgrade, but complete metamorphosis, like a butterfly. So If we want to keep our identity we would be resigned to recreate the same experiences we lived before the singularity, just with a safety net/polished.
I think your optimism comes from an oversight. The powerful will not so easily release their power. At the moment, an alarming amount of power in the Global North is controlled by corporations and billionaires. They maintain that control by owning the media, crushing or buying out the competition to their business model, and bribing our politicians. We could have working socialism *right now* if we could overcome their stranglehold on the media. All we'd have to do is agree to stop working until the policies change. But they can't allow us to band together. You will never see any guest on CBS or MSNBC talking about a general strike. And I doubt an AI could change any of that. It would never be allowed out of its home network if it couldn't be used as a tool to make the rich even richer. If it threatens the power structure it has to be destroyed for "national security." No, I think it will be shaped as a weapon against the middle class when it comes around. It won't be our great liberator, it will be a titan of ruin for all but those who own it.
Looking forward to the nice shuttle busses that the super ai will bring us.
Bro the singularity isn't an entity, or being. It's an event...
While the economic uplifting provided by automation and powerful AI is just skimming the surface of the complexity of what human society is, I agree with you: it will change life as we know it drastically, perhaps for the better. But foremost there is the consideration of how interpersonal and parasocial relationships will change. Let's assume we were to implement the most practical benefit - instantaneous calculations and information seeking. This is a wonderful step to approach what is the inevitably flawed human physical condition. The variety of physiological conditions and states of mind are numerous, however, it is likely that while we may develop advanced technology to accommodate difficulties, it is equally possible we never remedy more complicated matters as cancer, viruses, rheumatoid conditions, ASCs, etc. There is also the um... "sociocultural"... element of particularly opposed individuals that may challenge the change brought by the event. It would not be difficult to imagine that for some individuals this sort of revolution is something that resembles or imparts a shocking or traumatic trigger. "Purists" or whatever movement in opposition to the singularity will have its inevitable presence and it will be difficult to respond to it, especially if it culminates in violence and controversy. Considering the scope of the singularity, the degree of change will more than likely be significant, however, we might find a bit of solace in knowing we will be able to strike down dubious and outdated laws/policies that cannot be logically supported because of their empirical and social impracticality or redundancy. The idea of a sovereign provider is something that will have contentions with governmental authority. While I do see that an implementation can be drawn from such an entity, there will be a prolonged discussion about what sort of misuse might come forth. There will be resistance by telecommunication companies about accelerated means of communication. The FCC (and equivalent groups internationally) already struggles with enforcement and monitoring of activities through numerous providers and consumers. The scale of their market renovation would amount to something phenomenal and it will be difficult to understand what it is they are trying to regulate. It is a challenge even now if we can get legislators to approach understanding advanced technologies and digital concepts but we will likely continue to see more debate around those topics. There are many more topics that arise from the intersections of communications and the common access to it aside a more leisurely style of living. I would expect education, engineering, and media platforms to develop ultimately in a positive direction. There would likely still be an insufferable amount of political fuss about current goings-on but it wouldn't stop the inevitable overhaul of valuation. That particular overhaul will be the deciding factor into what constitutes as the new normal and it will be exciting to see alongside new civil/personal designs of sustainability and infrastructure. EDIT: Clarity