• Phoenix5869@futurology.today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    3 months ago

    Holy shit, finally someone else who gets what i’m saying!

    I completely agree. Moore’s law is dead, photonic computing and graphene transistors (which i’ve heard are set to replace it) probably won’t be here for a while, i agree that tech has slowed down, and overall, things are not looking good.

    I am very scared of the possibility of a long period of slow, incremental growth. But unfortunately, i think deep down i know it’s a very real possibility. The world of 2030 may look pretty much the same as today, with 2040 not looking much different than that.

    I’m a former singularitarian,

    I’m glad to see that a former singularitarian has seen the truth. While i wasn’t too deep into the Kurzweil Koolaid, i did at one point think that we were getting AGI in a matter of a couple decades. With the slowdown of computing progress, that clearly isn’t happening.

    • Wanderer
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      The thing is the human brain is very small and very efficient and has some limits on what it is made from being biological in nature.

      As the human brain exists we know it is possible to make. So if we make something as equally as functional then whatever we make we just make a new version 10 times as big.

      The problem is making that first artifical brain, but when we make that I don’t see how we couldn’t have an explosion in intelligence.

        • Wanderer
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          3 months ago

          We wasn’t able to understand fire and we replicated that.

            • knightly@pawb.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              3 months ago

              Which is why neural network computer science needs psychologists and sociologists to regulate it.

              It’s only a matter of time before corps start trying to simulate human brains, but even the smaller models deserve at least the same level of consideration that we give to animals.

          • Phoenix5869@futurology.today
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            I get what you’re trying to say, but making fire and understanding the human brain are not even remotely on the same level.

        • MxM111@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          We do not have task of replicating brain, only intelligence. And even there it is not replicating that we want or we do.

      • MxM111@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        Human brain is not very efficient. It just barely made efficient enough to start civilization - it did not have time to evolve within civilization to become more intelligent. Think about how more intelligent we would be if we were to continue evolving in the same direction of smart civilization builders for another million years.

        • Wanderer
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          Okay. If anything that makes it more likely will with have some huge intelligence jump