We do, it's called War[sup]TM[/sup].

While we're being math geeks, I'm going to question your statement that x^n can have a derivative that grows at an expoenentially decresing rate.

The rate of growth of the derivative of x^n would be the 2nd derivative of x^n. This is equal to n*(n-1)*x^(n-2), regardless of what n is. This is not an exponential function. It is another power function.

The derivative of ln(x) is 1/x, a power function. It's rate of growth is -1/x^2, another power function.

Otherwise I agree with everything you said.

The thing that's most disturbing about technological determinism like this is that social change is unnecessary for its proponents, since it will brought about by technological progress, driven by the virtuous "free" market. According to the transhumanist version of trickle-down economics, progress will not only see us all end up immortal (after the singularity) but stinkin' bloody rich too!

The same thing Fundy Christians do when presented with the simple fact that there is no God.


Yes, just like if 200 years ago someone was to describe parts of today’s world people would dismiss it as techno-utopian garbage.


To what end? Will civilisation so utterly collapse that there will cease to be any form of wealthy elite class to invest resources on whatever R&D they consider worthwhile? Will civilisation collapse so completely that we will lose our current knowledge and have nothing to build on and have no way to continue progress?

Short of total extinction of the human species, we will always continue to advance. The 'house of cards' and only fall so far.

Coyote and others mention Huebner, who claims that innovation peaked in 1873. I’ve noticed this guy and his beliefs held up as some sort of evidence of our failing society several times by doomers. People seem to think that innovation has stopped and we ‘merely tinker’ with what is already developed.

Firstly, his analysis is severely flawed (from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Huebner):


Secondly, and even more importantly, the notion of a divide between innovation and improvement is flawed. Ultimately there is really no such thing as innovation. The latest most advanced technology is ‘merely’ and evolution of improvements from when humans first began using primitive tools. There have been leaps and bounds along the way which are regarded as innovations, but ultimately progress is the result of building on what was been previously achieved.


How can anyone possibly argue that??? You simply cannot know for certain that there is absolutely no solution to our problems. What a lame, defeatist attitude. It’s like being asked a question and because you don’t immediately know the answer, you automatically assume that there isn’t an answer.


Yeah, solid argument. Just like me saying: “End of civilisation? You know, I really liked the first Mad Max movie, but this is the real world”.


Human level AI is expected to be around 25 years away. Which means that in around 30 years, even with resource depletion, we should have advanced better then human AI. Once this occurs, even with resource depletion, innovation will skyrocket.

You have rather too much faith in computer technology.
I believe, that within next 25 years latest version of Windows equivalent will grow to 100 terabytes of disc space, but entire thing will load within 2-3 hours upon computer start-up and will be even greater garbage to work with, than current versions are.

How would you carry on with technology development facing depletion of energy and materials allowing you to build hardware in the first place?
Are you aware, that quite significant amount of energy (equivalent of few gallons of oil) is needed to build computer in the first place?
How are you so certain, that people will bother to build these human level AI computers facing huge energy shortages?
Will anyone NEED these computers if most of his income will go to purchase food?

Lets assume, that problems of energy/resource depletion are overcomed one way or another.
Do you really believe, that innovation can continue indefinitely regardless of physical limits of our Universe.
Do you think, that Moore's Law will do away with Heisenberg principle somehow even with quantum computing in place?

My viev is that innovation will continue for sometime by delivering more and more of progressively irrelevant items.

I'm having trouble thinking you're actually serious. Cultures and civilizations end. Sure, there is something to take their place, other cultures and civilizations, but they do end. Just as there will be more people and more living things around after you die, it just won't be you.

Life without death is the existence of a rock. Inert.


Human-level AI always has been 25 years away, and always will be.

You want real human-level AI? I suggest having a child.

And incidentally, I referenced the first Highlander movie specifically because the other movies sucked.

Rather like alternative energy.

No, when the majority of experts finally dawn to how astoundingly difficult it would be to replicate the intelligence of a dog, let alone a human, they will put it at a reasonable date in the future - at about 1,000 years away.

Human Level AI? May I kindly ask you which education you have, in which field?

while (have_credit_card()==true)
{
visit_mall();
}

Ah, the old "they'd never have dreamed of the internet back then, therefore who's to say we won't soon be godlike superhumans with the ability to project our minds at light speed" argument. Well, it's unfalsifiable, so easy to proffer without fear of being proven wrong.

I see this guy's predictions as basically a postmodern "coming of the techno-messiah" idea. I'm not religious, but it seems humans, having dispensed with the need for God, have now replaced Him with an unquestioning worship of technology, and some of the more zealous ones evidently believe that they can become gods themselves, with a bit of help from their techno-messiah.

All this ridiculous talk of immortality through technology is just a diversion of the religious impulse in an age that no longer believes in God. We got rid of God, but we atheists are still scared of death, and in need of salvation from this primal fear. The only difference is that now, hope of salvation comes from technology.

In science, with advancing knowledge, comes the understanding of limits. Heisenberg's uncertainty principle, for example. It seems that this concept of limits entirely bypasses the technophiles who are unable to distinguish between "knowledge" and "information", and think that Moore's Law generalises to forms of technology other than semiconductor circuits.

Ok Sorry man. Sorry. Really I am terribly sorry. I do not know what got into me. Sorry again man!!! I somehow did not include "proper human AI" in my calculation... SO Already, Computers are more advanced already...

bool isTheCarWorthBuying ( CCar *aCar){
if (aCar->mpg > 10) {DumpUnworthyPrius(aCar); return false;}

admireNiceSUV(aCar); return true;

}


hell man its really easy to program human level AI!!!!!!

This is an example of techno-hubris: The silly assumption that there is no problem that pale geeks wearing stylish black spectacles and slightly flared trousers and toting I-Pods and Blackberries cannot solve.

This hubris has been bred out of 100 years of fantastically cheap energy, a situation that is most unlikely ever to occur again.

The world is broken and can't be fixed---not by us, anyway. How can we geek our way out of the fact that the world's carrying capacity for people has been grossly overshot? That global warming is now a fully entrained positive feedback loop and that even if we stop all greenhouse gas emissions now, we're toast? That the oceans are commencing to die of acidification?

Once you accept these and the many related facts, you recognize that computer geeks and engineers, with their conveyor belts of hamburgers aka "innovations," will have no more potency in solving our problems than freshly decapitated chickens thrashing about.

Techno-hubris, that's all we've got to offer. Not solutions. They aren't happening, and the situation continues to worsen. The population grows daily while the resource base daily weakens underneath this towering house of cards.

I am also skeptical in respect of Omnitirs ideas, as I had expressed before, but few notes here would be useful:

1. The first "they will never prove me wrong" is correct. It is not possible to prove him wrong (without waiting for 30 years and pointing out that human level AI still is not around).
The odds, that he is correct (in respect to human level AI) are extremely low and those claiming TRUE immortality are simply 0.

2. There is also a low chance, that human may become some kind of "limited power God" (say able to create from scratch some sort of living organisms at will), but to suggest that human will become a "real God" (say able to alter basic physical constants like speed of light, charge of electron or stop Universe expansion or dismiss 2nd law of thermodynamics in his energy quest) is TOTAL GARBAGE to me.

3. Immortality. I am atheist myself, but I do not fear to die. I am quite happy that this will be the case sometime from now.
For those who want REAL immortality (not just some more "extra time"): Read about "Thermal Death of Universe", note that this is the most likely fate of everything we know, and contemplate infinited life in empty space ruled by Heisenberg principle only. In fact if God *does* exist, it would be one of the best ideas of Hell.

4. You are correct here, but you had missed one important point:
Heisenberg principle is BOUND to kill Moore's law sometime in the future, if no weaker "boundary condition" managed to do it MUCH, MUCH earlier.

I think we reached a high level of euphoria with our techno-hubris.

What Lorenzo and Omnitir don't understand or don't want to understand is that technology has CONSEQUENCES, that are mostly unknown at the time of the so-called "innovation". The faster we innovate, the more uncertain our future becomes. Combining this high-speed technology chase with our profit-driven economy is the key to the "singularity" called CHAOS.

Stop smoking the weed.

Read my signature and THINK, for technology's sake: we are cruising too fast and we don't even know where the brakes are. It's gonna be a hell of a crash, you can safely bet on it.