/sci/ - Science & Math

Hopefully high performance ceramics that can withstand heat fluxes of up to or greater than like 10 MW/m^2

Can't see anything huge coming, but we'll see some steady progress in biotechnology in particular.

Aerospace engineering will be pretty big.

SINGULARITY!!!!

>>6944621
I feel like they'll target benign conditions because that's where the money _really_ is at the end of the day
given that some 50% of people experience hair loss in their life, that's a gold mine

commercial fusion
landing on mars
vertical farming
electric vehicles

Energy related stuff.

Transhumanism, cybernetics and augmentations for all the drekking drokks.

Advances in virtual reality will see most of humanity wasting away in VR pods

>>6944609
Nothing new, just improved already existing concepts.

A proof of the co-digit hypothesis

>>6944702
>vertical farming

sounds like one of those "we'll have flying cars in 2000" predictions from the 60s. It won't happen

>>6945631
Why the fuck not?

>>6944729
Good, it only streamlines what was already occuring.

>>6944609
>With the current rate of science and mathematics, what major advancements do you predict within the next 50 years, and when?

Singularity by 2030 (my projection, some say 2045 is a better date).

After that, humans will be obviated and we won't be making any major discoveries after that. I just hope we're at least on good terms with our overlords so we enjoy some of the benefits that the superintelligence creates.

>nigga barely have an idea about how the brain works
>WE GONNA HAVE AI THAT BEHAVES JUST LIKE US!!!

For a science board you guys are pretty dumb

>>6945769
we don't even know how the time works yet we have clocks, nigger.

>>6944625

Why do you think there's no effective way of enlarging penises? It would be a billion dollar business.

>>6945784

>>6945797
that's a very hard question to answer

>>6944609
Everyday i'm hoping for some kind of breakthrough in penis enlargement. Having a 6in penis sucks especially when i'm only attracted to bad bitches.

2020 - Image recognition is mastered, ushering in the Robotics Boom. The workforce begins to be displaced by automation at a rapid pace.

2037 - Tech Singularity. Everything happens faster after this.

2038 - The human brain is mapped and understood completely.

2040 - The first human mind is uploaded into a machine.

2042 - All processes of the human body are understood completely, including how and why aging happens. New medication allows us to slow the aging process down by up to 95%.

2045 - Mars terraforming begins.

2046 - Mining of asteroids begins.

2059 - Mars terraforming is completed. The planet now resembles Earth, except its ecosystem is not as dynamic.

2060 - Humans are allowed to settle on Mars. Private space ships are commonplace, and people can fly from planet to planet by simply registering their flight with the government(s).

2067 - Mars holds a population of a billion people and has nation states.

Tfw 50 years later no one invents me a gf

>>6945842
>2059 - Mars terraforming is completed. The planet now resembles Earth, except its ecosystem is not as dynamic.
lol how the FUCK did that happen in 14 years?

>singularity
Oh wait nevermind, you're an idiot.

I will sign a contract with anyone in this thread saying Singularity, giving them legal permission to kill me if that stuff happens by 2070 and giving me permission to kill them if it doesn't happen by 2070.

SIngularity won't happen.

IA smarter than human exist already, there is no fucking singularity.

Genetic modification become the norm.
SpaceX put people on mars
I have a girlfriend

>>6945842
After singularity, humans will be on a reservation somewhere, not on Mars. And our numbers will be in tens of millions.

>>6945868
Why is it so hard to believe we'll create a program that's smarter than us? Watson beat the Jeopardy grand champions in 2011. You couple advances in AI algorithm with advances in computing power and it won't be long.

I hate these kinds of questions. Until we can predict the future, I have no fucking idea.

>>6945897
Ignore these idiots. They clearly cannot think critically. Hawking explained it well.

>>6945897
If you really believe it then make the contract.

>>6945897
First off, I'm pretty sure that's not all that "singularity" entails, or if it is then it's even a more laughable fantasy to suppose it'll magically make all your dreams reality.

Secondly, you don't know shit about AI or intelligence in general if you think it's a matter of simple "better algorithms and more computing power".
Start here:
http://leidlmair.at/doc/whyheideggerianaifailed.pdf

>>6945887
That's only if we upload the AI into a robot.

>>6945916
AI research has shifted from MIT's top-down engineering approach to more of an emulation of the brain. I don't think AI is intrinsically impossible, but it's not likely to look like what the Singularitarianists say it will, e.g. a perfect logical being capable of solving all of the world's problems.

>>6945975
>emulation of the brain
Which is a much more interesting approach that should highlight just how far we are from making substantive progress.

>>6945975
imo you can have either 2 things, extreme computation or self-intelligence

>>6944609
Speculation isn't science. We really don't know either.

>>6945797
There's surgery...

>>6945897
And wikipedia "knows" more than anyone on earth... Is wikipedia a superintelligent AI?

In the next 10 years, we might figure out enough about physics to at least shut up philosophers once and for all.

>>6945993
>wikipedia "knows"

wikipedia doesn't know anything.

>>6945996
We can't even make Christians shut up.

>>6946015
Thus the quotation marks... he was talking about Watson beating humans at Jeopardy, as if that was a significant benchmark for intelligence.

It was a natural language interpreter hooked up to an encyclopedia. Still an amazing trick, but not a human like intelligence... or even an insect-like intelligence.

I don't mean that in a "humans are special" way... I just mean that computers have always been great for specialized problems; that's what we build machines for. Making a general intelligence is a related but different problem.

>>6945797
literally too difficult to do effectively. neither biologists or engineers can come up with a solution.

>>6946032
They'll shut up when the things they consider to be unreachable by science turn out to be reachable by science.

>>6946095
that's the chinese room argument. it's nonsense. it's been thoroughly debunked.

Hopefully quantum computers become a thing.

>>6946133
Even if everyone agreed that what Watson was doing could be called intelligent, answering trivia questions is still the only thing it's good at. It can't have a conversation, move a body around, generate spontaneous behaviors, or anything else we'd expect from even low-order animals.

>>6945842
>2040 - The first human mind is uploaded into a machine.
>2040 - The first human mind is COPIED into a machine.
FTFY

>>6946202
>implying religious fags will let this happen

>>6946173
>Even if everyone agreed that what Watson was doing could be called intelligent, answering trivia questions is still the only thing it's good at. It can't have a conversation, move a body around, generate spontaneous behaviors, or anything else we'd expect from even low-order animals.

So what you're saying is that all these things are impossible to replicate in a machine? Is that the line of reasoning you're trying to pull?

>>6946202
Dualist scum like you will be long extinct before then.

captcha: dedpctf theistic

>>6946215
What he's saying is not at all dualism.

Someone get these teenagers off of /sci/

>>6946202
>2014 - Uploaded my memories into my computer
>2015 - Downloaded them onto an array of NSC-derived rat brains

>>6945955
>That's only if we upload the AI into a robot.
because....................
the Internet can't effect the real world?

>>6945861

Still got plenty of time for develop social skills if your deadline is 2050.

>>6946133
Not exactly.

How can you "debunk" the chinese room? It's just a thought experiment.

I do understand the premise of "if it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck". But again, we're talking about a machine that interprets the words coming out of Alex Trebek's mouth as a string of text, and then essentially googles the answer.

The whole environment of the quiz show was extremely predictable and well understood.

At best, we can say that intelligence is a continuum. Great, we've conquered the daytime quiz show... that's still a very long way away from an intelligence that can inhabit a useful body and do just about any menial task I ask it to in plain language.

>>6946214
Jesus Christ, no one said it's impossible. It's just that Watson wasn't doing it! It's an extraordinary implementation, but a cat is a more capable intelligence that can improvise solutions in a variety of unpredictable environments.

Let's also agree that "intelligence" is a fuzzy word, too often conflated with "will" or "conciousness" or "self awareness". AFAIK the human mind is a complex system of processes, all working in parallel. What we call our self is the gestalt of all those messy systems communicating and miscommunicating.

We could, for example, have a very intelligent system, that replicates a lot of sapient thought processes, but without any sort of self awareness or will.

>>6946215
>Dualist scum

>"Idk what Dualism is, but I'm going to spout anyway."

>>6946249
>How can you "debunk" the chinese room? It's just a thought experiment.
LOL. You really need to read a paper or two on chinese room.

>>6946249
>Let's also agree that "intelligence" is a fuzzy word, too often conflated with "will" or "conciousness" or "self awareness".

You're conflating something that's been verified and tested and is accepted by the scientific community, the intelligence, with a bunch of philosophical pseudo-garbage... consciousness & self-awareness.

>>6946254
>verified and tested and is accepted by the scientific community
lol you can't possibly mean IQ, right?

I don't know where you got the idea that "intelligence" has some widely accepted definition in the scientific community, but it doesn't.

>self-awareness
>philosophical pseudo-garbage
Oh wow.

Also, "pseudo-garbage"? Guess now we know for sure that you're just parroting things you've heard others say.

>>6946266
brainwashed libtard idiot detected.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligence_quotient#Reliability_and_validity

you took SAT, right? what the fuck do you think that test is? it correlates perfectly with a number of other tests, that are commonly known as IQ tests.

>>6945842

>2045 - Mars terraforming begins.
>2059 - Mars terraforming is completed. The planet now resembles Earth, except its ecosystem is not as dynamic.

top kek

>>6946266
>Also, "pseudo-garbage"? Guess now we know for sure that you're just parroting things you've heard others say.
so you're saying that consciousness is real? LMAO

you're a fucking moron. a shithead. someone who doesn't know anything. a product of dunning-kruger effect. please spew more nonsense so I can laugh at how retarded you are.

This place is so fucking hostile when anyone says something stupid/controversial/whatever. Sureshot way to start an endless circlejerk. This thread could've been a nice "think tank"-type of discussion. Started somewhat well, though.

>>6946254
If you can point me to those papers, I'd love to read them. Not even trolling.

The rest of your post is unsupported garbage... I'd love to read the opinion of any expert who isn't a 4chan anon saying that what Watson did on Jeopardy is a major step towards human level general intelligence. Everything I've read on the subject suggests the opposite. They've maybe worked out a small piece of the puzzle, but the larger question of how a few pounds of gray matter wakes up and gets booty blasted on 4chan remains a mystery.

>>6946276
Being able to measure something doesn't mean that there's an accepted definition for it. g-factor is basically a place holder for until we have a more grounded way to define intelligence. Not that you'd know.

Not only that but if we look back to the original post that started this

>Let's also agree that "intelligence" is a fuzzy word, too often conflated with "will" or "conciousness" or "self awareness".

He's not even suggesting that intelligence is someone linked to these things, just that they are often mistakenly (!) used interchangeably. This whole argument was over literally nothing. Maybe Google big words like "conflated" if you don't understand what they mean next time.

>>6946282
Kek not a chance bud. My making note of "pseudo-garbage" was to point out your misuse of the phrase. What, is it not real garbage? Just kind of pretending to be garbage? Fucking dumbass. You probably thought it was "so totally epic ftw xD" how the big boys were calling other people pesudo-intellectuals and calling psych a pseudo-science that you wanted to try it yourself. Don't worry, everyone messes up sometimes.

God damn ever since /pol/ closed down /sci/'s argumentative and reading comprehension skills have dropped a good 50%. Doesn't take a genius to figure out what's going on here.

>>6946279
Self-replicating robots, brah.

>>6946282
Not him, but what are you getting all rustled about? I can't even tell what argument you're trying to make through all the shitposting.

Nobody's made any suggestion that humans are some special snowflake and that their intelligence can't be replicated. Just that it's a complex and many layered problem.

Watson is an amazing machine, but it just stores and queries information. To say that it's solved the mystery of animal intelligence would be like saying a Ferrari has solved biological locomotion, just because it goes faster on a smooth road.

>>6946317
Not gonna happen. Living organisms are already near the physical limit of efficiency for self replicating objects.

>>6946323
Prove it.

>>6946323
Who cares if it beats us in efficiency when we have a star in the prime of its life, 7 planets, dozens of moons, and an asteroid belt to harvest from.

All we'd have to do is unfurl a big solar sheet in space about ten times the diameter of Earth and harvest a piece of all that energy currently going to waste. It would be like dropping a pallet of Oatmeal Cream Pies next to an ant hill.

We will be living like kings in the future.

>>6946317

Even with the most advanced techs you can think of terraforming a planet in 15 years would not be possible.

Why? It's common sense really. Stay retarded ,/m/

>>6946345
Yeah, that's all we'd have to do...

Not that I don't think it's possible mind you, I'm just afraid we won't get our shit together in time. We ain't launching all that shit out of our own gravity well, so I hope there's some seriously independent self organizing fabber bots coming down the line.

And it'd be pretty sweet to rent some bots to clear a piece of land and turn the timber into a nice house.

most of the singularity shit will probably be "around" by 2050, but not nearly cheap enough for common use until 25 to 30 years later, even with all the supposed rapid advancement a singularity would provide

dont expect post scarcity before 2070

>>6944702
>vertical farming
how is vertical farming even useful?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vertical_farming#Energy_use
How do you get around this problem?