Reminds me of foglets or "utility fog", something that futurist Ray Kurzweil predicts having widespread adoption in the mid 2040's. Essentially you could make any physical shape you can think of, almost instantly.

Kurtzweil responds!
http://www.kurzweilai.net/ray-kurzweil-responds-to-ray-kurzweil-does-not-understand-the-brain

Nothing he says is new information. He is simply repeating things that Ray Kurzweil and Michio Kaku have been saying for many years. Both of their theories and futurist outlooks are supported by a lot of science.

Go read The Singularity is Near - Ray Kurzweil

We aren't going to be 'the borg' we will actually be far more advanced. Our nonbiological humanity will have the option to look completely human if we wish using nanotechnology. We will be more like T1000s from the Terminator. Anyone will be able to look like anything.

>> ^chilaxe:
Genome sequencing is down from $250k a year ago to $5k now (http://www.futurepundit.com/archives/006527.html).
The exponential growth of technology is right before our eyes.


Very true. Just imagine what the rich folk who spent money on it are thinking now.

Successfully processed your "amazon" invocation - view all Amazonized posts here

I bought "The Singularity is Near" by Ray Kurzweil and "Do Polar Bear Get Lonely and 101 other intriguing science questions" from New Scientist. Sadly I bought these just a few days before the amazon thing was implemented. My next buy will be through the Sift for sure.

I'm reading The Singularity is Near by Ray Kurzweil.

I'm only a few chapters in, but I'm enjoying it. I recommend it for people interested in the direction technology is going, whether you agree with his future predictions or not (I agree with the predictions, but I'm not sold on the time line yet).

>> ^doogle:
What a kook.
If I wanted a zany view of the future, I will rent Back to the Future 2, 2010 Space Odyssey and the Jetsons.
If I wanted to hear a kook's view of the future, I'll get my uncle a bottle of JD. He is still shopping for a hard drive to download the whole Internet before he has enough space on his calculator-watch to store it all. Did I mention he wants to cyrogenically-freeze his head until they can cure whatever'll cut his life short from eternity?


You know, if I were you, I wouldn't bash a patenter of ~23 inventions, multi millionaire, successful futurologist, etc, etc...yes, he might sound a bit crazy, but if you really take time to think about what he says it really sounds very possible and the guy is super intelligent.

>> ^doogle:
What a kook.
If I wanted a zany view of the future, I will rent Back to the Future 2, 2010 Space Odyssey and the Jetsons.
If I wanted to hear a kook's view of the future, I'll get my uncle a bottle of JD. He is still shopping for a hard drive to download the whole Internet before he has enough space on his calculator-watch to store it all. Did I mention he wants to cyrogenically-freeze his head until they can cure whatever'll cut his life short from eternity?


I Can't begin to tell you how small minded that makes you sound. He's an insanely intelligent and successful man- and if you take the time to read his book A LOT of what he has predicted has already come true. I'm not here preaching that hes a soothsayer and that everything he says will come true, but he is most certainly not a "kook" who is just pulling crap out of his ass.

I see a similarity between much of what you have said and much of what was said about other great thinkers of our time. You have to realize ALL progressive thinkers seem crazy, that is until whatever they postulate comes true.

>> ^stephenfryftw:
ahh yes, the "singularity". AKA, the rapture for obsessive nerds who love to cherry pick data for nice logarithmic meaningless graphs.


say that when you've accomplished as much as ray and THEN maybe someone will listen.

>> ^stephenfryftw:
ahh yes, the "singularity". AKA, the rapture for obsessive nerds who love to cherry pick data for nice logarithmic meaningless graphs.


Depends on who you ask I guess... there is no specific definition. The logarithmic extrapolations are an attempt to predict timing, not the nature of events. The stuff he talks about in the video would come well before any "singularity" anyway.


Here's Kurzweil's opinion on the religious aspect of that subject: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CLy0tTfw8i0

>> ^Biminim:
How can we remove Glen Beck from these clips? I just want to listen to Kurzweil.


Perhaps that technology will come soon as well. =)

I thought Beck was a little more tolerable in this interview than normal. He did try to lead Kurzweil into tangents about morality and controversial subjects, but Kurzweil avoided them pretty well.

>> ^bluecliff:
Ha. I knew that there was something wrong with your logic psychologic. You are the the very model of a singularitarian.


LOL, I think that's one of the coolest things I've seen in a while.

>> ^JiggaJonson:
He seems like kind of a douche bag. On the one had he states he doesnt believe he's better than anyone else, on the other he describes Darwin's IQ as "down there in the toilet at 135."
Then he goes on (in the second and third parts of the series) to describe how to create an "elite race" by not letting un-intelligent people breed. That kind of social-darwinism is just flat out wrong.
ALSO since when is cranium circumferance the measure of intelligence???


Cranium size: He never says that it is a "measure" of intelligence, he says there is a correlation. Hawkins said the same thing, noting that human intelligence has been evolutionarily limited by the maximum head size that can fit through the birth canal. Large heads don't make people smart, but they do allow for larger brains and the possibility of higher intelligence.

Elite Race: unfortunately youtube won't let me load the 3rd part, so I can only comment on the part I've seen and what you said about it. What he wants to happen will happen, but for completely different reasons and through completely different methods.

Nanotech will soon (be it 20 years or 50) let us increase the mental capacity of any given person. We can already change a living person's dna, and that will only get easier. There will be no reason to selectively breed people since we will have direct control over dna (plus, people would never accept forced sterilization). I like the quote from Ray Kurzweil: "we will not only have designer babies, but designer baby-boomers".

Take your pick on who to believe as far as when that will happen, but chances are it will be within your lifetime.

^ You may be right, but there are also a lot of highly qualified people who disagree with you (Ray Kurzweil, Bill Joy, etc). Most of the disagreements out there are on specific dates. I can't think of any credible expert in the field who thinks it will happen beyond our expected lifetime.

As far as capitalism not being replaceable, what happens when machines can do anything that people can do (only better)? Yes, that is talking about even further in the future, but do you think capitalism will still work there?


Try this one for technological growth modeling.
http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/ray_kurzweil_on_how_technology_will_transform_us.html