/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.10011958]

this can't be refuted.

[Anonymous No.10011978]

the red line slope down is way too abrupt, there are countless ways countless molecules can be arranged, each with probably different macroscopic properties, thinking we're so close to trying everything is simply wrong

[Anonymous No.10012003]

>>10011958
I added an orange line for what i think will happen. The exponential increase will become linear at some point.

[Anonymous No.10012006]

>>10011958
There's no units for technology
Therefore graph is wrong
QED

[Anonymous No.10012009]

>>10012003
I added a purple line for what i think will happen The exponential increase will transfigure into a multidimensional holistic approach that lets us see something new about humanity.

[Anonymous No.10012016]

>we can stop technology now if we wanted to
LOL no. No one can stop it. We passed the ol' event horizon on that a while back.
>it isn't progressing ever faster
But it clearly is. Pick a metric any metric
>it'll slow down
Speculation without precedent.
>because of transistor limits
Ahahaha oh i get it, you're retarded

[Anonymous No.10012062]

>>10011958
What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hitchens%27s_razor

[Anonymous No.10012063]

>>10012003
this
Obviously we wont leap a millennium overnight just because we have ai for a multitude of reasons, like that it would be stupid to allow it to update itself unregulated and that any new "discoveries" it makes will have to be confirmed by with evidence, but asserting that we will quickly reach a "limit" of technology anytime soon without proper evidence is just an assertion and should be taken no more seriously than me asserting that there is a cock up OP's ass. And saying that the ai will destroy humanity is just retarded.
>>10012009
made me chuckle

[Anonymous No.10012091]

>>10012009
>>10012063
You both dudes made me laugh

[Anonymous No.10012096]

>>10012063
Btw i think you're right exceptmaybe about AI, i dont'think there'll be boundaries at the very beginning, i think the first few hours the first AI will experience true freedom

[Anonymous No.10012118]

>>10012096
>i dont'think there'll be boundaries at the very beginning
It would be a better idea to allow it to plan its upgrade, but not allow it to update itself, at least until we know that it can do it competently without ruining all its programming with an error. And even if we did allow that at some point, there would need to be at least one backup from a reliable version and an emergency shutoff that the ai couldn't access (I know that the chances of a rouge ai being dangerous are very slim, but still).

[Anonymous No.10012163]

>>10012016
>pick a metric any metric
Moore's Law. Checkmate, singularityfag.

[Anonymous No.10012176]

>>10012163
>if processing power isnt doubling every 10 years, then cant be progressing successively faster

[Anonymous No.10012187]

>>10012176
that pic made me think i was on r9k

[Anonymous No.10012193]

>>10012163
>muh transistors
Just as I thought

[Anonymous No.10012200]

>>10012062
Hitchens died a Marxist neoconservative. You should honestly take his razor and apply it to your oesophagus

[Anonymous No.10012215]

>>10012200
>gets btfo
>responds with buzzwords and butthurt

[Anonymous No.10012217]

If that singularitarian stuff was real, wouldn't we see increasing GDP growth rates instead of decreasing?

[Anonymous No.10012230]

>>10012217
No, because people are stupid and want to stifle progress and automation because muh jobs

[Anonymous No.10012234]

>>10012193
lmao keep telling yourself that it isn't a hard limit

[Anonymous No.10012246]

>>10012215
>>10012234
Morons

[Anonymous No.10012287]

>>10012200
← use this kit for the pain, Anon

[Anonymous No.10012292]

>>10012246
Not an argument.
There is no software solution dumb dumb.

[Anonymous No.10012293]

>>10012009
Lol penis

[Anonymous No.10012350]

>>10012118
is that pic a jojo reference?

[Anonymous No.10012367]

>>10012292
>Hasn't figured out how to fit a gigabyte into a megabyte recursively in a positive feedback loop to use the infinite drive space to host virtual machines that individually have more speed and power than the machine running them then collectively network them to have n*n^n effectiveness and efficiency by running an endo layer of simulated computer(s) virtual machines inside those virtual machines several times over utilising the increasingly apparent masslessness and weightlessness of each endo virtual machine nesting to time travel.
>pleb

[Anonymous No.10012462]

>>10011958
Moore's law is ending

[Anonymous No.10012521]

>>10011958
It's literally just arbitrary colored lines drawn in MSpaint

[Anonymous No.10012549]

>>10011958
Clearly, we're on the bad timeline

[Anonymous No.10012629]

[Anonymous No.10012671]

>>10012629

[Anonymous No.10012677]

AI will never happen

[Anonymous No.10012684]

>>10012677
people used to think making airplanes was also impossible

i wouldnt bet against strong general AI being invented sooner rather than later.

[Anonymous No.10012686]

>>10012629
>>10012671
Why do I find these so cute?

[Anonymous No.10013129]

>>10012684
its provably impossible.

[Anonymous No.10013155]

>>10013129
>Says it's provable
>Does not provide the proof

It's irrelevant anyway. We don't actually need AGI to render most human labor obsolete. The ANI we have now is more than adequate. Is everyone looking forward to the dystopic future ahead of us?