Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

No aging, robot cars - and radical business plans
CNN ^ | 5/25/2006 | Chris Taylor

Posted on 05/26/2006 8:08:09 AM PDT by Neville72

The rate of technological progress is about to shift into high gear, some futurists say. Are you ready to take advantage of the business opportunities?

If Ray Kurzweil is right, the business landscape - indeed, the entire human race - is about to be transformed beyond all recognition.

Kurzweil is a renowned computer scientist and inventor (he built the first flatbed scanner). And no less a figure than Microsoft chairman Bill Gates has called Kurzweil the greatest thinker on artificial intelligence alive today. So when he talks, it's worth paying attention.

Here's the question Kurzweil is asking these days: What if the exponential growth shown in Moore's Law applies not just to etching transistors in silicon chips, but to all of human progress and innovation?

(Excerpt) Read more at money.cnn.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Culture/Society
KEYWORDS: kurzweil; raykurzweil
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-83 next last
To: AntiGuv

A complete waste.


41 posted on 05/26/2006 9:30:45 AM PDT by Smogger (It's the WOT Stupid)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: underbyte
If Ray Kurzweil is 1/10 right we are in for a wild ride in the next 30 years

Right. Substantial advancements in *one* of biotech, nanotech, or AI would profoundly change the world. If we get all three, "wild ride" is probably an understatement.

42 posted on 05/26/2006 9:32:08 AM PDT by ThinkDifferent (Chloe rocks)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Neville72

Sorry not fearful, not a Luddite. And you've got your dates wrong, 15 years ago a lot of that stuff was in place (Battle Chess anyone? still the best computer chess game ever IMHO... probably because it's the only one I can beat). Many of those problems were very close to being solved 15 years ago and the CW of everybody working on those problems (some of whom I knew) was that the barrier was computing power, they needed more RAM being accessed by faster CPUs.

CompuServe predicted the growth of networked computers in 1969, the difference is they put their money where their mouth was. By the late 70s (H&R Block bought CompuServe and moved them to the big time in 1977) it was obvious to anybody that recreationally networked computers was going to happen, the only question was who would own the protocol and the access points.

You really should learn to make posts without insults, nothing proves you should be ignored like the need to insult people.


43 posted on 05/26/2006 9:32:55 AM PDT by discostu (get on your feet and do the funky Alphonzo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: AnotherUnixGeek
a life expectancy of 100 or 1000 is simply a matter of time, money and research.

I never understood the desire to live so long. Most of our atoms are replaced every 20 years or so, so we're not the same that we were anyway, and nobody we know is either. The nice thing though about living to 1000 is the power of compound interest. If you put $1 into a bank account paying 5% interest, you'll have $1,546,318,920,731,950,000,000 to spend in the year 1000.

44 posted on 05/26/2006 9:34:20 AM PDT by Reeses
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Iconoclast2
Why do you prefer the word "socialist" to "communist"?

especially when the correct term is "neo-Stalinist"

45 posted on 05/26/2006 9:34:59 AM PDT by martin gibson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Neville72; discostu
That was a well constructed post right up to this part- You really should avail yourself of the facts before posting such moronic generalities.

Why be rude?

46 posted on 05/26/2006 9:36:15 AM PDT by new cruelty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Defiant
...Communist is a species of Socialist. A communist follows Marx, and the dialectic theory of human history. A Socialist need not agree with Marx, but can still believe that the best society is one where the government owns all the property, and is in charge of distributing all benefits...

golly, you're really smart...

47 posted on 05/26/2006 9:37:29 AM PDT by martin gibson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Reeses
The nice thing though about living to 1000 is the power of compound interest. If you put $1 into a bank account paying 5% interest, you'll have $1,546,318,920,731,950,000,000 to spend in the year 1000.

LOL. Cool, but should't you account for a little time to spend it before you turn 1,000?

48 posted on 05/26/2006 9:39:01 AM PDT by new cruelty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Reeses
The nice thing though about living to 1000 is the power of compound interest. If you put $1 into a bank account paying 5% interest, you'll have $1,546,318,920,731,950,000,000 to spend in the year 1000.

I suspect that if radical life extension becomes common, interest rates will fall substantially because it would be less valuable to have money now instead of 10 years from now.

49 posted on 05/26/2006 9:40:34 AM PDT by ThinkDifferent (Chloe rocks)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: RobRoy

I agree with you that virtual reality is very near. Not too long ago, in fact, I was going to post an article about current advances toward VR, but when I hit post I was told that the source couldn't be posted on FR.

On another note, the biggest factor that holds back progress is just inertia - most people can only handle so much change all at once. Then also, you have compatibility issues when everything is geared one way and it's more expensive to transition to the better product/process than to just keep the inferior but entrenched product/process.

Take something as simple as light bulbs. We now have far more efficient and aesthetic LED lighting technology than the ordinary incandescent bulb that we're all accustomed to. If it were based on just the best product, incandescent bulbs would have already gone the way of kerosene lamps, but because they're entrenched, of course, it'll be a long time before that happens.


50 posted on 05/26/2006 9:40:34 AM PDT by AntiGuv ("..I do things for political expediency.." - Sen. John McCain on FOX News)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: AntiGuv

This concept is why IBM beat Eniac. :)

You're right.


51 posted on 05/26/2006 9:46:58 AM PDT by RobRoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: martin gibson

I know that. But it's important that YOU understand it as well.


52 posted on 05/26/2006 9:48:03 AM PDT by Defiant (I was willing to fight to the death for George W. Bush, but not to America's death.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: RobRoy

Another good example is operating systems, or other types of software. The prime directive of Microsoft, for instance, is backward compatibility, where each new Windows would be backward compatible with past versions of Windows. If I'm not mistaken, Windows Vista will be the first that disregards backward compatibility to a considerable extent (iirc, XP did to a slighter extent, but Vista will much more so). In any case, the requirement for backward compatibility has inevitably held back the advance of computer tech, but if you totally threw backward compatibility out then it would not be economically viable, because not enough people would buy it.


53 posted on 05/26/2006 9:49:53 AM PDT by AntiGuv ("..I do things for political expediency.." - Sen. John McCain on FOX News)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Reeses
I never understood the desire to live so long. Most of our atoms are replaced every 20 years or so, so we're not the same that we were anyway, and nobody we know is either.

There's a single, continuous thread of consciousness running on top of that matrix of ever-changing atoms, though, which is the point for most of us. I'd like the option to live that long, and I'd especially like the option to avoid all of the disease and afflictions that come with aging.

If you put $1 into a bank account paying 5% interest, you'll have $1,546,318,920,731,950,000,000 to spend in the year 1000.

The economic impact of increasing age limits is mostly ignored, since human lifespan is increasing at a relatively slow rate. But the 21st century is likely to see some big breakthroughs in longevity - I have no idea what it'll mean for concepts like compounded interest, retirement, medical insurance, etc.
54 posted on 05/26/2006 9:51:19 AM PDT by AnotherUnixGeek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Neville72

"Thrun predicts we'll have reliable urban robot driving by 2010, and that a majority of miles will be driven autonomously by 2030. You'll have more time to answer your e-mail, and arguments over who's going to be the designated driver would be a thing of the past."

Why even bother answering your e-mail? Just give your PC--- which by this time will be smarter than you and have a better personality---a general idea of the sort of the answers you like to give and let it answer the e-mails itself.


55 posted on 05/26/2006 9:51:25 AM PDT by strategofr (H-mentor:"pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it"Hillary's Secret War,Poe,p.198)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Neville72
If I apply "moores law" to myself, I'd be twice as fast, occupy half the space, and consume 1/2 the power that I do now.

In 20 years I'd be 1/2 a foot tall, be blurting out pop-up adds uncontrollably and, would be a survivor of a horrific bio-comp rooting.

On the upside, I could boot Linux ;)

56 posted on 05/26/2006 9:55:47 AM PDT by ChadGore (VISUALIZE 62,041,268 Bush fans. We Vote.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: martin gibson
especially when the correct term is "neo-Stalinist"

I see now, your concern is over having this future society labelled precisely with the term that you find most appropriate. Having rejected menshevik, bolshevik, leninist, maoist, gramscite, trotskyite, progressive, glasnostic, fascist, hitlerian, nazi, and the term "neo" in front of any of these and other terms, you have decided that it is best described as "neo-Stalinist" and that anyone who uses a more generic, less precise term than that which you have decided applies, shall be heaped with ridicule and scorn.

Be glad you have so much time and brainpower on your hands.

57 posted on 05/26/2006 9:55:53 AM PDT by Defiant (I was willing to fight to the death for George W. Bush, but not to America's death.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: doc30
If it makes you feel any better, I actually think the human race is going to take a major step backward from a "human progress" standpoint sometime in the not-too-distant future (maybe the next 50-100 years). What is going to happen is that eventually technology becomes so "easy" to master and manipulate that it renders most physical and intellectual property totally worthless.

Call it the Tower of Babel, Part II.

58 posted on 05/26/2006 9:55:57 AM PDT by Alberta's Child (Can money pay for all the days I lived awake but half asleep?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: RobRoy

Is that the same Dr Robert Prehoda that was in the crowd in the late 60s predicting life expectancy would be over 100 today?


59 posted on 05/26/2006 9:56:36 AM PDT by discostu (get on your feet and do the funky Alphonzo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: AnotherUnixGeek
There's a single, continuous thread of consciousness running on top of that matrix of ever-changing atoms, though, which is the point for most of us. I'd like the option to live that long, and I'd especially like the option to avoid all of the disease and afflictions that come with aging.

Exactly.

The economic impact of increasing age limits is mostly ignored, since human lifespan is increasing at a relatively slow rate. But the 21st century is likely to see some big breakthroughs in longevity - I have no idea what it'll mean for concepts like compounded interest, retirement, medical insurance, etc.

Ultimately, the concept of permanent retirement would go away completely, and with it old-age programs like Social Security. That's one of several reasons I expect anti-aging research would pay for itself many times over.

60 posted on 05/26/2006 10:01:10 AM PDT by ThinkDifferent (Chloe rocks)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-83 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson