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

Skip to comments.

Google's chief futurist Ray Kurzweil thinks we could start living forever by 2029
businessinsider.com ^ | April 20, 2016 | Brandt Ranj

Posted on 04/20/2016 5:12:57 PM PDT by John W

Ray Kurzweil, Google's chief futurist, laid out what he thinks the next few decades will look like in an interview with Playboy.

Kurzweil is one of the biggest believers in The Singularity, the moment when humans — with the aid of technology —will supposedly live forever.

He's chosen the year 2045 because, according to his calculations, "The nonbiological intelligence created in that year will reach a level that’s a billion times more powerful than all human intelligence today."

But even before 2045, Kurzweil thinks we could begin the deathless process.

"I believe we will reach a point around 2029 when medical technologies will add one additional year every year to your life expectancy," he told Playboy. "By that I don’t mean life expectancy based on your birthdate, but rather your remaining life expectancy."

A lot will have to happen in the next 30 years to make that a reality, but Kurzweil isn't fazed: He predicts that nano machines capable of taking over for our immune system (to fix problems like cancerous cells and clogged arteries) and connecting our brains to the cloud will be available by then.

(Excerpt) Read more at businessinsider.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: google; immortality; kurzweil; longevity; raykurzweil
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-56 next last
To: wastedyears

Well, I am going to live forever and fortunately not in this body or as part of this world. This is just a stopping off place for a while until I go to Heaven.


21 posted on 04/20/2016 5:45:29 PM PDT by Grams A (The Sun will rise in the East in the morning and God is still on his throne.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: John W

That future might already be here. Obama has been in power for 2647 terrible and destructive days, and every one of them seemed like forever.


22 posted on 04/20/2016 5:56:12 PM PDT by Pollster1 (Somebody who agrees with me 80% of the time is a friend and ally, not a 20% traitor. - Ronald Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: John W
Hillary....forever.....

HA HA HA HA HA HA! HA HA HA HA HA HA!


23 posted on 04/20/2016 5:59:32 PM PDT by GrandJediMasterYoda (Can we please kill the guy already who invented the saying "My bad"?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: John W
The nonbiological intelligence created in that year will reach a level that’s a billion times more powerful than all human intelligence today.

I've tried it. It isn't all it's cracked up to be.

Oh, and that is, of course, under the assumption that that hyperintelligence wants us around. Somebody has to change its vacuum tubes, I suppose, but there ought to be robots for that by then.

On a more serious note, there is an underlying and very unproven assumption that what we describe as human consciousness can be migrated to another medium. Quite a few years ago Roger Penrose suggested that it might not; that human consciousness might be a biological quantum event that is otherwise untranslatable. And further, that the Ghost in the Machine that Gilbert Ryle so ridiculed might actually have a basis in truth, that that silly "soul" thing that Christians are always nattering about might (gasp!) actually be real.

We don't know. We're not even close to being in a position to know, and all of this is mere speculation. It is clear, however, from testing on neural networking that a full human intelligence requires resources that are equal to a human brain and that it takes time to learn, to train, not to program. We have developed such a system already. It's called a "baby".

I might, of course, be entirely mistaken. I used to be a strong-AI proponent but I don't know, maybe it's just me, but there does seem to be a little more to it than that. Just my $0.02.

24 posted on 04/20/2016 6:00:00 PM PDT by Billthedrill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dr_lew
So what am I?

You're what is aware of your body and mind. Your body and mind only generate sensations, stimuli, whether physically, mentally or emotionally. You're what's aware of them.

25 posted on 04/20/2016 6:02:23 PM PDT by Talisker (One who commands, must obey.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Secret Agent Man

Amen. Living forever in this sin-cursed world would be truly a curse. Only Jesus can make the Millenium happen, then a beautiful eternity in which to praise Him.


26 posted on 04/20/2016 6:03:31 PM PDT by mrsmel (I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: John W

Signs of the times.


27 posted on 04/20/2016 6:06:15 PM PDT by Dogbert41 (All the days of my life were written in your book before there was one of them!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Billthedrill

Penrose has no foundation for his theory. There is nothing that indicates complexity creates consciousness, just self-referential stimuli. That’s not consciousness - consciences is what is aware of the self-referential stimuli.


28 posted on 04/20/2016 6:06:49 PM PDT by Talisker (One who commands, must obey.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: MV=PY
Do you remember metamagical themes, back when Scientific American was a credible publication?

Well, that was a transitional period, as METAMAGICAL THEMAS ( N.B. ) was an anagram of MATHEMATICAL GAMES, the column of many years previous authored by Martin Gardner.

So yeah, I remember!

Just to reminisce, I was very amused by Hofstadter's experiment in group cooperation. He wanted people to submit values, the greatest of which so submitted would be remunerated in reciprocal ratio to the value itself. The idea being that people would have to restrain themselves in the knowledge that outlandishly large values would not bear any significant prize.

Of course, he was inundated by every sort of outlandish extrapolation, which he admitted in his column he was not able to evaluate in full, but he mainly lamented the complete failure of his project to engage the public with the subtle premise he presented.

Ah, Bartelby! Ah, humanity!

29 posted on 04/20/2016 6:12:40 PM PDT by dr_lew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: FlingWingFlyer

Well, if I could be convinced they will always have Terminator Stout and Penang curry, it might be okay.


30 posted on 04/20/2016 6:14:28 PM PDT by JimSEA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: John W

The quickening...so don’t lose your head.


31 posted on 04/20/2016 6:16:32 PM PDT by King Moonracer (Bad lighting and cheap fabric, that's how you sell clothing.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: John W

32 posted on 04/20/2016 6:17:04 PM PDT by Dr. Sivana ("There is no limit to the amount of good you can do if you don't care who gets the credit."-R.Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: John W

” . . . and connecting our brains to the cloud will be available by then.”

Once dated a girl whose brains were connected to a cloud (or so it seemed); not sure if that’s going to be a that much of an improvement.


33 posted on 04/20/2016 6:18:37 PM PDT by Stosh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CaptainMorgantown
Kurzweil has been peddling the same crap for about two decades now. When preacher sets a date for the end of the world that doesn’t happen, their next prediction rightly gets ridiculed. When a ‘futurist’ does it, they write another book and cash another royalty check.

His predictions are there to look at and compare with what actually happened. He looks about 80% right. The preachers are always wrong, of course.

34 posted on 04/20/2016 6:19:43 PM PDT by Poison Pill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: John W

What there are articles in Playboy? /s


35 posted on 04/20/2016 6:21:52 PM PDT by zaxtres
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ClearCase_guy

Generally when those guys make predictions, the date is somewhere before their own expected termination date.


36 posted on 04/20/2016 6:23:42 PM PDT by glorgau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: John W

Oh, we’re all going to live forever. In one of two places.


37 posted on 04/20/2016 6:35:01 PM PDT by SoFloFreeper (Just say no to HRC)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Talisker

You’re sidestepping the transporter paradox, which I believe is substantially the same as that presented by Kurzweil’s projection.

But aside from that, and in context of my own life experience, it’s hard for me to say that “I” am some presence continuous with my youthful self, as it’s such a one way street, you know ... looking back. And a narrow street, too!


38 posted on 04/20/2016 6:47:28 PM PDT by dr_lew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: dr_lew
"Ah, Bartelby! Ah, humanity! "

Your memory is far better than mine!

Thanks for the Bartelby reference. It seems I have some exploring to do. ;-)

39 posted on 04/20/2016 6:50:34 PM PDT by MV=PY (The Magic Question: Who's paying for it?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: dr_lew
But aside from that, and in context of my own life experience, it’s hard for me to say that “I” am some presence continuous with my youthful self, as it’s such a one way street, you know ... looking back. And a narrow street, too!

The transporter is fiction. Without knowing how it works, nothing can be said about it in reality.

But what's the difference between "you" and your youthful self? The state of your body? Memories? All those things are things "you" experienced. None of them were ever the "you" that experienced them. You're conflating your "self," your experience of "I," with your personality. But they aren't the same - "you" are aware of your personality. In fact, "you" are what is aware your personality has changed over time.

40 posted on 04/20/2016 6:55:10 PM PDT by Talisker (One who commands, must obey.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-56 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