Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id DAA06206 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Fri, 1 Feb 2002 03:54:55 GMT X-Originating-IP: [209.240.222.132] From: "Scott Chase" <ecphoric@hotmail.com> To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk Subject: Re: Singularity (was +ve or -ve curvature) Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 22:49:08 -0500 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: <F113joYAPNXRPmcarcR00014ef5@hotmail.com> X-OriginalArrivalTime: 01 Feb 2002 03:49:08.0903 (UTC) FILETIME=[672EDB70:01C1AAD3] Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
>From: John Croft <jdcroft@yahoo.com>
>Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
>To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
>Subject: Singularity (was +ve or -ve curvature)
>Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 14:55:11 +0000 (GMT)
>
> > Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2002 19:47:59 -0800
> > From: "Grant Callaghan" <grantc4@hotmail.com>
> > Subject: Re: +ve or -ve curvature (was: necessity of
> > mental memes)
> >
> > >
> > >Jo wrote to my post
> > A beautiful picture, John. I have seen emergence
> > encompassing AI rather
> > than AI producing its own emergence separate from
> > the noosphere. If
> > computers do become self replicating, as they have
> > the potential of doing if
> > we start using DNA in their construction, then your
> > prediction seems highly
> > plausible. I read today that there's going to be a
> > conference on
> > non-silicon chip building in the near future. The
> > basic elements of a
> > computer (the switches) have already been made out
> > of DNA, nanotubes, single
> > molecules of metal, and who knows what else we still
> > haven't heard about.
> > Self constructing arrays of nanotubes have also been
> > developed in a test
> > tube. We may yet be able to cram libraries of
> > information into a space
> > smaller than a chromasome and make it self
> > replicating in a way that DNA is
> > not. Who knows what might emerge from that
> > scenerio? Do you believe in
> > Kurzweil's "singularity?"
>
>In terms of Kurzweil's extrapolation of Moore's Law
>and the acceleration of Technological progress, I
>think we have passed the point of inflection and the
>speed of technological developments will be slowing
>down. Less money is being spent on pure science as
>the economic system demands immediate application of
>existing technologies. And yet it is out of the pure
>science that the technological adaptions for new
>systems has always come. The best and brightest
>students are being attracted to law, business and
>accounting degrees and away from science and
>mathematics.
>
>And yet I still feel that there is an Omega point
>around the corner. But we need to take into account
>the social, political and the economic trends, not
>just the technological. And this makes it more
>"messy" and human. In any case I see us as
>participating in a race with catastrophe resting on an
>indeterminate knife edge.
>
>Perhaps more can come out if others explore this issue
>too.
>
>
For Teilhard, upon what point was noogenesis converging and would this have
anything to do with the parousia? What did he mean by Christogenesis?
_________________________________________________________________
MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:
http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx
===============================================================
This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Feb 01 2002 - 04:33:32 GMT