On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 10:24:46AM +0530, Udhay Shankar N wrote: > I agree that nanotech definitely needs to be in there, as does water > (which I think will be the cause of the next round of wars). I am a > little more ambiguous about AI - especially since we don't really have
Why, if you have nanotechnology, you can do everything by brute-force. > a good definition of what the "I" in "AI" is. Of course you have, you're looking at it in your bathroom mirror, daily. > OTOH, this[1] is thought-provoking: Kevin Kelly making the points that > a) the web is only 5000 days old, and who knows what will happen in > the next 5000; and b) the number of transistors currently linking The average GPU complexity today is way over a gigatransistor. > online has reached about the same number as the neurons in a human > brain. > > Transcendence, here we come? Not unless you engineer your system for emergence of it. No amounts of lolcats will cogitoergosum spontaneously. -- 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
