I doubt there will be a clear instant of "oh, this, just now, was singularity". The ability even of a great AI to improve technologies is limited by its ability to hypothesize and experiment, and understand requirements. More likely, we'll see a lot of "automated thinking" (constraint solvers, probabilistic models, weighted logics, genetic programming) slowly take over aspects of different products and tasks. Indeed, I'm already seeing this. What humans might call 'real AI' will initially just be the human interfaces - the pieces that automate call centers, or support interactive storytelling.
Singularity won't be instantaneous from the POV of the people living within it. Though, it might seem that way from a future historian's perspective. I've been fascinated by the progress in machine learning and deep learning over just the last few years. If you haven't followed them, there have been quite a few strides forward over the last six years or so, in part due to new processing technologies (programmable GPUs, et al.) and in part due to new ways of thinking about algorithms (not really 'new' but they take some time to gain traction) - e.g. the more recent focus on deep learning, and alternatives to backwards propagation such as using genetic programming to set weights and connectivity in neural networks. Regarding the language under-the-hood: If we want to automate software development, we would gain a great deal of efficiency and robustness by focusing on languages whose programs are easy to evaluate, and that will (a) be meaningful/executable by construction, and (b) avoid redundant meanings (aka full abstraction, or near enough). Even better if the languages are good for exploration by genetic programming - i.e. easily sliced, spliced, rearranged, mutated. I imagine a developer who favors such languages would have an advantage over one who sticks with C. Though, it might still compile to C. On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 1:13 PM, Carl Gundel <ca...@psychesystems.com> wrote: > We will have singularity and real AI? We may indeed, or perhaps the last > 50 years will replay itself. Progress in artificial intelligence has moved > along at a fraction of expectations.**** > > ** ** > > I expect that there will be an incredible increase of eye candy, and when > you strip it down to the bottom there will still be languages derived from > Java, C, Python, BASIC, etc.**** > > > -Carl**** > > ** ** > > *From:* fonc-boun...@vpri.org [mailto:fonc-boun...@vpri.org] *On Behalf > Of *David Barbour > *Sent:* Tuesday, September 03, 2013 3:50 PM > > *To:* Fundamentals of New Computing > *Subject:* Re: [fonc] Final STEP progress report abandoned?**** > > ** ** > > > what will computing be in a hundred years? **** > > ** ** > > We'll have singularity - i.e. software and technology will be developed by > AIs. But there will also be a lot of corporate influence on which direction > that goes; there will likely be repeated conflicts regarding privacy, > ownership, computational rights, the issue of 'patents' and 'copyrights' in > a world with high-quality 3D printers, high quality scanners, and > AI-created technologies. As always, big companies with deep pockets will > hang on through legal actions, lobbying, lashing out at the people and > suppressing what some people will argue to be rights or freedoms. **** > > ** ** > > Computing will be much more widespread. Sensors and interactive elements > will be ubiquitous in our environments, whether we like them or not. > (Already, a huge portion of the population carries a multi-purpose sensor > device... smartphone. Later, they'll be out of the pockets, on the heads, > active all the time.) Before singularity, we'll be able to program > on-the-fly, while walking around, using augmented reality, gestures or > words, even pen-and-paper [1]. After singularity, programming will be aided > heavily by AI even when we want to write our own. Mr. Clippy might have > more street smarts and degrees than you.**** > > ** ** > > And, yeah, we'll have lots of video games. Procedural generation is > already a thing - creating worlds larger than any human could. With AI > support, we can actually create on-the-fly, creative content - e.g. like a > team of dungeon live masters dedicated to keeping the story interesting, > and keeping you on the border between addicted and terrified (or whatever > experience the game designer decides for you). **** > > ** ** > > Best,**** > > ** ** > > Dave**** > > ** ** > > [1] > http://awelonblue.wordpress.com/2013/07/18/programming-with-augmented-reality/ > **** > > ** ** > > ** ** > > ** ** > > On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 12:04 PM, karl ramberg <karlramb...@gmail.com> > wrote:**** > > So what will computing be in a hundred years? **** > > Will we still painstakingly construct systems with a keyboard interface > one letter at a time ?**** > > And what systems will we use ? And for what ?**** > > Will we use computers for slashing virtual fruits and post images of our > breakfast on Facebook version 1000,2 ?**** > > ** ** > > What are the future man using computers for ?**** > > ** ** > > Karl**** > > ** ** > > On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 2:01 PM, Alan Kay <alan.n...@yahoo.com> wrote:**** > > Hi Kevin**** > > ** ** > > At some point I'll gather enough brain cells to do the needed edits and > get the report on the Viewpoints server.**** > > ** ** > > Dan Amelang is in the process of writing his thesis on Nile, and we will > probably put Nile out in a more general form after that. (A nice project > would be to do Nile in the Chrome "Native Client" to get a usable speedy > and very compact graphics system for web based systems.)**** > > ** ** > > Yoshiki's K-Script has been experimentally implemented on top of > Javascript, and we've been learning a lot about this variant of > stream-based FRP as it is able to work within "someone else's > implementation of a language".**** > > ** ** > > A lot of work on the "cooperating solvers" part of STEPS is going on (this > was an add-on that wasn't really in the scope of the original proposal).** > ** > > ** ** > > We are taking another pass at the "interoperating alien modules" problem > that was part of the original proposal, but that we never really got around > to trying to make progress on it.**** > > ** ** > > And, as has been our pattern in the past, we have often alternated > end-user systems (especially including children) with the "deep systems" > projects, and we are currently pondering this 50+ year old problem again.* > *** > > ** ** > > A fair amount of time is being put into "problem finding" (the basic idea > is that initially trying to manifest "visions" of desirable future states > is better than going directly into trying to state new goals -- good > visions will often help "problem finding" which can then be the context for > picking actual goals).**** > > ** ** > > And most of my time right now is being spent in extending environments for > research.**** > > ** ** > > Cheers**** > > ** ** > > Alan**** > > ** ** > > ** ** > ------------------------------ > > *From:* Kevin Driedger <linuxbox+f...@gmail.com> > *To:* Alan Kay <alan.n...@yahoo.com>; Fundamentals of New Computing < > fonc@vpri.org> > *Sent:* Monday, September 2, 2013 2:41 PM > *Subject:* Re: [fonc] Final STEP progress report abandoned?**** > > ** ** > > Alan,**** > > ** ** > > Can you give us any more details or direction on these research projects?* > *** > > ** ** > > > **** > > ]{evin ])riedger**** > > ** ** > > On Mon, Sep 2, 2013 at 1:45 PM, Alan Kay <alan.n...@yahoo.com> wrote:**** > > Hi Dan**** > > ** ** > > It actually got written and given to NSF and approved, etc., a while ago, > but needs a little more work before posting on the VPRI site. **** > > ** ** > > Meanwhile we've been consumed by setting up a number of additional, and > wider scale, research projects, and this has occupied pretty much all of my > time for the last 5-6 months.**** > > ** ** > > Cheers,**** > > ** ** > > Alan**** > > ** ** > ------------------------------ > > *From:* Dan Melchione <dm.f...@melchione.com> > *To:* fonc@vpri.org > *Sent:* Monday, September 2, 2013 10:40 AM > *Subject:* [fonc] Final STEP progress report abandoned?**** > > ** ** > > Haven't seen much regarding this for a while. Has it been been abandoned > or put at such low priority that it is effectively abandoned?**** > > ** ** > > _______________________________________________ > fonc mailing list > fonc@vpri.org > http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc > > **** > > > _______________________________________________ > fonc mailing list > fonc@vpri.org > http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc**** > > ** ** > > ** ** > > > _______________________________________________ > fonc mailing list > fonc@vpri.org > http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc**** > > ** ** > > > _______________________________________________ > fonc mailing list > fonc@vpri.org > http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc**** > > ** ** > > _______________________________________________ > fonc mailing list > fonc@vpri.org > http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc > >
_______________________________________________ fonc mailing list fonc@vpri.org http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc
