Philosophical prospective future question of the week

[Turanil]

I am now reading a great book The Singularity Is Near by Ray Kurtzweil (more on his website: www.KurzweilAI.net). This book is about our near future (21st century), and very convincing (lots of mathematical analysis and scientific explanations, etc.). If you are interested in science-fiction, computers, or what our near future may look like, I think it's a great read.

Basically, the book's main idea is this: Our current technological progress in fact belongs to the evolution of life here on Earth. It began with bacterias billions of years ago, and followed an exponential curve. That is, at first it took 2 billions of years to evolve a simple bacteria into multicellular life, but then each step of evolution took much less time. Later, evolution of human technology followed that same exponential trend, where inventing the wheel and using fire took ages, but now creating better technology every year is increasingly faster. So, according to all these observations, the author thinks that by 2020/2030, we will have sentient computers vastly superior to human brains, and that will create vastly superior technology.

Anyway, you don't need to have read the book to post in this thread. The thing is that I want to write a sci-fi novel based on these projections, but have a hard time to fathom what society could be like if it is going to be true. I would like to get your opinion on this question:

So, in this view the world is dominated by powerful sentient computers (compared to which humans appear to be morons) in the hands of governments, multinationals, and other powerful organizations. Given that a 1000$ personal computer would be intellectually much better (and tireless) than a normal human, plus that nanotechnology now enables to manufacture almost anything better than any human or 20th century factory could do, what would people do for a living? I mean: any computer and nano-assembly line can do whatever I could do better, faster, and cheaper. So what can I do for a living? (I mean, whatever I may try to do to make money, some machine will do it better, faster, and cheaper, so I am outcompeted.) Would this be a world where masses of poors would starve, unable to find any job to make a living?

Give me your ideas about a world where all personal computers are better than humans at intellectual doings, and nano-assembly lines make human workforces useless. I don't believe in philanthropy being an effective force at work on this world, so I don't think everybody would be served freely by a world of subservient machines. But maybe you think different. Maybe there are factors I canot think of. Opinions?

 

[Umbran]

"The singularity" is where mankind catches up with Clarke's Law - "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." So, in essence, you don't need to write a sci-fi story, but a fantasy couched in sci-fi imagry. Think of it as Eberron instead of the real world.

There's a major problem with the whole Singularity thing - computing power is growing, but our ability to store energy isn't growing nearly as quickly. At the moment, then, we aren't really approaching a time when we have horrendously powerful thinking machines that are particularly portable. So, no robots walking around taking over things. Major computing power still has to be anchored to energy sources.

 

[Thornir Alekeg]

Just spiiting out some ideas:

Spinning off from Umbran's thoughts where energy and portability are limiting factors, the world ends up with three major subgroups: the Creators, the Caretakers and the Privileged. The creators are the elite class. They comprise those who continue in the creative arts and those who continue to innovate and think outside the logical abilities of the sentient computers. The Caretakers are what we would refer to now as the blue-collar or lower class. They perform functions that the Sentients cannot, such as maintenance, cleaning, food production (I don't forsee machines plucking chickens or picking cabbage). The Privileged are the former middle class. Now they are cared for by government subsidy, but their existence is a purposeless one. Some indulge their primal appetites continuously, using physical sensations to validate their existence. Others try to break out of their purposeless life by either becoming a Creator, or a Caretaker. There would have to be some barrier to taking these roles (Minimum IQ for Creators, maximum for Caretakers?) or something like that in order to create the conflict.

 

[BiggusGeekus]

Well, I, for one, welcome our new robot overlords!

no robots walking around taking over things. Major computing power still has to be anchored to energy sources.

Er ... um ... I mean: Viva Humanity!

 

[BiggusGeekus]

On a more serious note....

what would people do for a living? I mean: any computer and nano-assembly line can do whatever I could do better, faster, and cheaper. So what can I do for a living?

Play D&D.

No! I'm serious!

Look, we already live in a time of unparalled wealth and luxury (well, 10% - 20% of us at any rate). We can pretty much extrapolate that what most people want to do is live in large homes, eat fancy meals that they don't have to prepare themselves, and otherwise hang out. Jobs will become more like hobbies. Hobbies will become more like jobs.

Look at how the upper 2% of the population spends their time. That'll pretty much answer the question for you.

 

[Umbran]

They perform functions that the Sentients cannot, such as maintenance, cleaning, food production (I don't forsee machines plucking chickens or picking cabbage).

Remember - the machines are now smarter than humans - they can diagnose and repair and maintain better than a human can. Most of our foods are already harvested by machine, and with advancing technology, the machines should end up with dexterity similar to a human's - so chicken-plucking is in!

I still imagine the limiting factos being power - machines intended to be autonomous for any length of time need to be car-sized, and they can operate independantly for as long as a car can. So, humans are required for jobs that require long-term autonomy in a small package. Anything that can be done at or near an installation can be done by machine.

The #1 question that comes up is - what is the machine "psychology"? Because these things are smarter than men, how they interact with men depends upon how they think. Somethign with Asimov's Laws integral totheir design are different to things allowed to program their own minds.

 

[nakia]

One thing to consider is what those super-sentient computers can't do. Can they compose original art? Can they write stories? How are they at teaching and raising children?

You also have to think about the distribution of the technology. When I went to Africa, I was told that about half the world's polulation had never made a phone call. Anecdotal, to be sure, but the presence of increased technology in the "developed" world means different things for the "developing" nations. The supercomputers wouldn't put anyone out of work whose work was subsistence farming, for example.

Sounds like an interesting premise for a novel, though.

 

[BiggusGeekus]

One thing to consider is what those super-sentient computers can't do. Can they compose original art? Can they write stories? How are they at teaching and raising children?

Thing is I'm not so sure we're great at any of that either.

OK, we're probably better at face-to-face interactions than our hypothetical robot overlords, but a computer is going to be more patient. Still, we're primates and we need a degree of interaction or we go a little nutsy (some more than others).

But art? A lot of what's out there is complete crap. Ever been to a small art show? The only thing most of those chuckleheads know how to do is frame their pictures. And don't think of stories like you see on the bestseller list on Amazon, think about fan fic. I don't have anything against someone who is trying to gain skill at their craft, but I've personally met dozens and virtually met (over the computer) hundreds who just spurt stuff out carelessly as a statement of ego. And don't even get me started on open mic poetry nights.
Yes, I think a computer could do much better than most of these so-called artists.

Frankly, I'd give even odds that you could set up a computer to write poetry for you and if you had the cojones and posessed physical beauty, you could go far in the world of the spoken word. It's pretty lame.

Anyway, just my two cents ... two very arrogant cents as I re-read this post.

 

[nakia]

Thing is I'm not so sure we're great at any of that either.

Granted, there is a lot of crap out there. And, while I am not a complete subjectivist about art, I will say that "good" art can be "good" in a whole lot of different ways, some of which we may not even be aware of. Maybe that small art show has within it something revolutionary that we just can't (do to circumstances and history) get our heads around.

Even if the supercomputers could make art, I would hope that it would be very different art than we humans make. If art is an expression of human consciousness and experience, then wouldn't the computers have a different type of consciousness and different ways of experiencing. I'm tempted to say the true definition of "computer sentience" is when comptuers can make their own art. I know there are all sorts of problems with that definition, though.

Anyway, just my two cents ... two very arrogant cents as I re-read this post.

Not arrogant, just. . .passionate.

 

[Dakkareth]

The Matrix.

Most people spend their lives in simulations, linked together in worlds from the mundane, to the insane. They enter willingly, have their awareness of their situation (that they're just playing an extremely advanced game) temporarily suppressed if they want, and start living there. Want to be an aristocrat in the 17th century? No problem, you'll be put together with the other wanna-be nobles or history freaks. Want to be the richest man in the 23rd century? Bingo, there you have your sci-fi world and unlimited money in your account. Want to be a savage warrior in a world ruled by dragons and gods, where magic is real and you are the only one who can stop The End? Uplink to DnD-World #12789 created, meet your fellow adventurers.

Or maybe you simply want to live in a world you understand, interact with humans instead of computers, who are so much smarter than you it isn't even funny. Then you go into the Matrix, the main world of the simulation. Suppression of reality-awareness is optional, but any role-breaking is editted out - the others simply don't hear you saying 'you know that this is just a simulation, right?'.

This assumes, that the AIs are benevolent, of course.


And I really need to get Kurtzweil's books. His works have influenced me greatly through their secondary expressions, but I've never read them directly ...