I think it is a poetic metaphor vs a 1 to 1 precise analogy between the
technological and physical/mathematical singularity (we don't even have a
good definition for a physical singularity because it would require
new physics to even know if it is possible at all).
But I think the key element in the metaphor is discontinuity. The
mathematical singularity implies a discontinuity in the process or
function. At least in the language of Kurzweil, I believe what is meant is
there is a before and an after that is completely different because a
particular event happened. That event is the birth of superhuman
intelligence that would be a very non linear event relative to what we have
experienced or even able to conceive at this particular point in time. The
idea is that no model can predict what would happen next (given we cannot
even imagine what a superintelligencet would do). This actually a bit
similar to what happens in a physics singularity given we don't have
physics that can handle quantum relevant and extremely curved space-time
regions at the same time. I think that is the crucial type of information
that is conveyed in the term Technological Singularity. The discontinuity
is in terms of knowledge, what we can predict with at least order of
magnitude precision (using Moore's like curves) and what is completely
unknowable now. Of course, if we will all become superintelligent ourselves
and "merge with technology" then we will know when it happens and maybe
even make models about the future from that moment on (using our
superintelligence).
Alternative terminology like "inflection point" would not be able to
deliver the same, maybe not fully clear, but powerful message.
Giovanni
On Mon, Apr 5, 2021 at 7:37 PM TimTyler wrote:
> On 2021-03-09 13:28:PM, Ben Goertzel wrote or quoted:
>
> >> Also, "after the singularity" is a logical contradiction. The
> singularity is the point where the rate of recursive self improvement goes
> to infinity. It is infinitely far into the future measured in perceptual
> time or in number of irreversible bit operations. Time would not exist
> "afterwards", just like there are no real numbers after infinity. That is,
> if the universe were infinite so that physics even allowed a singularity to
> happen in the first place.
> > This is just shallow wordplay and I guess you probably know it. The
> > Technological Singularity is its own term, which has been explicated
> > fairly clearly by many including Kurzweil and Vinge and myself, and
> > which is inspired by but not literally equivalent to the math or
> > physics notions of Singularity.
>
> I don't remember any such thing. Kurzweil did say "it"
> would happen in 2045, some time after human level
> intelligence was reached in 2029. No doubt 2045 will
> be an interesting time, but I expect it to come and
> go much like any of the years before or after it.
> There's no "point where our old models must be
> discarded and a new reality rules". The reality is
> that models are discarded all the time as data comes
> in that conflicts with them.
>
> --
> __
> |im |yler http://timtyler.org/
>
--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink:
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/Tb380484bd5b9f66e-M583f4e45a859e13c72250356
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription
