On Mon, Feb 07, 2011 at 10:12:39PM -0000, Anand Manikutty wrote: > > I admit I looked for them, but unfortunately failed to find any.So you > are saying that this graph by Kurzweil is actually right? I assumed that
No, I think Kurzweil is at least guilty of serious cherry-picking. > the silliness of the graph would be obvious. Please do describe in your > own words why Kurzweil's graph is actually correct. I do not see why I have to address your strawman. Positive feedback loop dynamics do not have to follow a straight semilog plot to produce interesting behaviour. > Also, I had a rather through refutation of Yadkowsky's point on > communism. What is your rejoinder to this exactly?> It's Yudkowsky, and I do not see any relevance of monkey politics to what is driven by nonhuman agents of widely dispersed complexity and operating on widely spread time scales. > > > My claim is : there is just no reason to believe (based on the > evidence > > > presented by Yudkowsky, Vinge and Kurzweil) that a singularity could > > > happen. A singularity is still very hypothetical (more or less in > the > > > realm of science fiction). > > > > Why, so is everything. Until it isn't. > > I fail to see the point here. This is too vague to merit a response > from me. Most of things you see around you are artificial in origin, and were first represented as an activity pattern in the space between somebody's ears. Everything was 'science fiction' once, so that label is not particularly predictive. > Anand > P.S. More here : > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/indo-euro-americo-asian_list/message/223 -- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org";>leitl</a> http://leitl.org ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.ativel.com http://postbiota.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
