Understanding the science is fundamentally different than being an expert on the subjects. I never claimed expertise, only that I can read the abstracts from both sets of journals without having to look up any of the terms (well, usually).
You don't mean any disrespect, and then liken me to a script kiddie and an evangelical nutjob.
Imagine a silicon brain that we create that is 10% more capable than our brain. It's nothing astounding, but it's smarter. And it has access to all knowledge within seconds. So this brain is able to actively comb through that information, and look at it's own design, and being 10% smarter, it's able to design a more efficient AI. That AI, now X% smarter will be able to do the same, etc, etc... It's not unlike what we do now. You couldn't design and build a modern computer without a modern computer. But the AI will be able to do it better, and faster. So it's not about a potential advancement that changes the world a little. It's about the possibility of being able to jump human knowledge by years or even centuries in a very short period of time.
You're a little unclear as to why it's called the singularity. It means a point so drastically different that we cannot predict what the world will look like after it happens. However, should a planet still exist on the day after this occurs, you can pretty much guarantee that the company that controls this technology will make Apple, Google, and Microsoft look like technological infants. Well, unless it is Google, which seems to be the play they are making by hiring RK.
Also, World of Warcraft is virtualized, and everything in that game is potentially infinitely abundant. And yet, it still seems to pull in billions. So...
Well, that statement was a lot more correct even just a few years ago. But we're starting to get a much better grasp on it. In the past 10 years or so we have learned more about how the brain functions than in all of human history. It's true, we're not yet experts, but you're making the assumption that we need to know entirely how the human brain works in order to build something that supersedes it in capability, and this is simply untrue. I don't need to know anything about how a gasoline engine works to build a faster and more efficient electrical engine. In truth, such thinking may even impinge on my ability to do so. The singularity isn't about creating a human brain in chips, it's about a point when the chips are able to process more than our brains are capable. What forms that takes and consequence of that is simply unforeseeable. Simple math proves it's coming.
You are missing a fundamental key difference. There is no profit in reaching the stars. Besides that, there are also no barriers that come close to the issues with the Physics and energy requirements of space travel. Unlike a warp drive which we don't even know is possible, the human brain is an actual physical device that exists, and simply uses chemicals as it's logic gates and transistors. We both run on electricity.
I'm a biologist by schooling, and a programmer by occupation. So I understand the science on both sides, and it's not a matter of if, it's a matter of when. And it's coming a lot sooner than people think.
I get the new iMac this week, and I'm taking my current windows machine and turning it into a homebrew Steambox tomorrow. I'm using an Ikea dresser thing http://www.ikea.com/ca/en/catalog/products/90179927/#/601799... as the box (with the top drawer for the console games), though I'm a little concerned with the airflow... The current case is probably overkill with the 6 fans, but I can only cut out two holes in the drawer before I'm worried about loosing structural integrity, it's particle board after all. Add the power supply and drive mounts (I want both windows 7 and Linux), and there isn't any more space. Oh well, I guess I'll find out soon enough. As much as I love the hacking, it would be nice to have something prebuilt so I'm not completely screwed if I turn this into a smokebox instead of a steambox.
Well, no, it's Fair Use. It's a legal defense, but since a news site would be hosting their own content, and editorializing, they would be be able to claim safe harbor. So a DMCA takedown would be effectively ignores, and followed up in the courts. Regardless, it's text book fair use. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use
How would you make that case? There are plenty of restrictions on free speech as well as freedom of the press, which is far from absolute, and is most certainly regulated.
Because of the whole elitest nature of svblte, I actively go out of my way to ignore it. When the 'cool kid' in school doesn't want you to be in his group, you don't mimic him and try to be like him. You say fuck 'em, I'm going to do my own thing.
Absolutely, as we see from the numbers, most iPhone apps aren't making a lot of money, so $400 + $100 for the app store access is simply dumb for an indie dev.
Miguel is a very smart man and completely clueless at the same time.
You don't mean any disrespect, and then liken me to a script kiddie and an evangelical nutjob.
I mean no disrespect, but eat a dick, bitch.