[ExI] POST-SCARCITY SYMBOLS Launched (defeat despair, create utopia, share hope).

[Samantha Atkins]

On 9/10/10 4:25 AM, Singularity Utopia wrote:
> Dear Samantha, and others, a primitive brain naturally has a poor 
> grasp of possibilities. Primitive brains naturally grasp reality 
> poorly. A good example of how brainpower limits comprehension is this: 
> imagine a human trying to explain to a cat or dog the nature of 
> nanotechnology and how nanotechnology could make it easier for humans 
> to travel to the moon or to Mars. When super-intelligent-AI is created 
> we will be like cats or dogs; we cannot fully comprehend future 
> possibilities but with imagination we can see how our primitive 
> worries will be completely solved. We will not actually be like cats 
> or dogs because we will evolve rapidly. From dogs we can transform 
> into gods.
>
An argument from the unimaginable nature of not yet existent brains is 
not much of an argument.  Said future superbrains could be interested in 
our wellbeing, indifferent or even outright inimical.  If interested in 
our wellbeing what they deem best for us may or may not coincide with 
our happiest dreams and fond utopias.

> My example of the free Ubuntu software verses pricey MS software was 
> an example of how we are moving towards Post-Scarcity... software is 
> easily replicated and the limits on replication are decreasing, we are 
> approaching limitless software replication: post-scarcity. When 
> millions of people download a video each day from YouTube we can see 
> how that free data is transcending scarcity; there is a plentiful 
> amount of data but it is not yet Post-Scarcity. When MNT-3D-printing 
> becomes widespread, very competent, then millions of people will 
> download products or food, which will be constructed via EXTREMELY 
> efficient usage of resources for very little cost, this will be 
> another step towards Post-Scarcity but similar to the free operating 
> system Ubuntu it won't actually be Post-Scarcity but merely a step closer.
Already debugged. Your example does not show what you wanted it to.
>
> You may doubt that we will ever create a brain 12 orders of magnitude 
> faster (or greater) and generally more powerful than our own brains, 
> but when we do we will not be creating something different to 
> ourselves we will be reinventing ourselves, we will become 
> super-beings, we will transcend our human beginnings: this concept of 
> Transhumanism can seem weird but in 10 or 20 years people will have a 
> better grasp upon how humans are evolving. We will become super-beings 
> if we want to. Sometimes it can be difficult to see how technology 
> advances quicker each year and it will probably only be with hindsight 
> that people look back to this point in history as a crucial period 
> regarding accelerating change.
Most of us here grasp that possibility and have grasped it for quite 
some time.

> The growth of processing power is accelerating. Our grasp of the world 
> is accelerating. The Singularity is coming. INFINITY is entirely possible.
I patiently argued that it is not.  You did not counter my arguments but 
only reassert your position.  This is a bit of a bore.

> Humans who wish to remain unchanged/primitive will be free to do so.
Well, if you convert the planet into something else then they will only 
be free to do so as uploads (without telling them this is what has 
happened as that would be very upsetting to them).

> There will no scarcity of universes where everyone can exist however 
> they desire.
In upload space this is more true.  But even upload space is rooted in 
finite real world computational infrastructure.

> Do you think the creation of matter and universes is difficult for a 
> supremely-intelligent-being?
Creation off matter, real physical matter?  As far as we know there is 
no means of ex nihlio matter/energy creation.  What does your 
"supremely" mean? Does it mean some ultimate pinnacle or just 
inconceivably smarter than us?   No matter how intelligent no being can 
circumvent whatever the laws of physics of the containing universe turn 
out to be.

> Creating a universe would probably be as easily as creating a sandwich 
> if your brainpower is sufficiently large.
A virtual one, yes.  It is likely possible to blow off a new Big Bang 
creating a separate physical universe you cannot reach or much influence 
beyond perhaps tweaking its physics.   Beyond that, no, not by our 
current understanding.

> There will be no scarcity of matter. Virtual reality will become 
> indistinguishable from reality.
Yet they are not the same thing. Virtual realities depend upon the 
physical substrate beneath them.  You cannot create infinity on top of 
finite matter/energy substrate.  You can create much more than you can 
at the physical level alone.  But it is not literally infinite.

> Virtual worlds and real worlds will both be utterly controllable to 
> satisfy the desires and needs of anybody and everybody.
How do you know?  Will there be any conflicts of interests?  Will there 
be any instances of multiple competing desires for how to use any 
particular existing set of physical resources?    Remember even the 
virtual depends upon the underlying physical.

> At one point in our history a primitive computer was the size of an 
> entire room but today we have much much powerful computers that are 
> comparatively tiny. As computing power grows our computers become 
> smaller. The concept of a Jupiter sized brain (Mbrain) is a primitive 
> notion because massive computers in the future will not need to 
> actually be physically massive.
>
*Scratches head*  Do you acknowledge there is any limit at all on the 
amount of computation that can be performed by a given chunk of 
matter/energy?

> Humans can do impossible things.
By definition no being can do an impossible thing, only some things that 
were thought impossible but actually are possible.  The truly impossible 
cannot be done, ever.

> From putting men on the Moon to overcoming Black slavery and electing 
> a Black President. We continually change the nature of what is 
> possible. Humans can grasp reality mistakenly, therefore we may think 
> our Earth is the center of our solar system or that Post-Scarcity is 
> impossible. We are evolving. Keep an open mind. Reality is a bit like 
> the scene in Ghostbusters where a giant marshmallow man is created.
I explained exactly what post-scarcity I think is possible or in that 
direction and why I don't think the end of all scarcity forever is 
possible.  You have not given a counter-argument.  Insinuating that my 
and other minds here are too closed is not an argument.  Remember you 
are among those that would like to believe or rather would like the 
future to be as extraordinarily good as possible.  You are among people 
who dream big and have for a very long time.  We are not known for 
having closed minds to say the least.   Comparing those who disagree 
with parts of your ideas to those who believed the earth was the center 
of the universe is despicable.   But then perhaps it is not surprising 
if you think in terms of a giant marshmallow man being possible and an 
implied infinitely malleable physical reality.

>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stay_Puft_Marshmallow_Man
>
> You create the future via your desires.
We create the future at the intersection of our desires and reality.  
You cannot leave off the reality part and expect to be taken seriously.

> Your expectations skew you perceptions thereby forcing you to create 
> reality according to your expectations. Really... you should read up 
> on the concept of self-fulfilling prophecy. Expect utopia.
*yawn* Been there, done that.

> There are no nefarious people prohibiting Post-Scarcity. You are 
> responsible for reality.
No.  I am only responsible for what I have some influence/control over.  
Not for all of reality.

> You create reality.
So, did you create the very framework within which you exist?  Did you 
create the entire universe into which you were born?  No?  Then you do 
not create reality without some rather important caveats that your 
statement is missing.

> The only limit to Post-Scarcity is yourself.
Are you really thinking about this or just spouting what you want to 
believe?
> If you choose to see nefarious people in the world then that is your 
> choice... Imagine you are asleep dreaming but instead of dreaming 
> about pleasant things you dream about monsters, pain, and suffering. 
> Dreams are a good example of how people create reality. Theoretically 
> we have the power to dream whatever we want. Each night we could dream 
> about the most fabulous utopia where we enjoy ultimate pleasures. Our 
> dreams are totally inside our heads but we fail to appreciate how we 
> have the reality to control our dreams, therefore we sometimes dream 
> about unpleasant things. Our failure to control our dreams is similar 
> to our control over reality. The world is exactly the way you want it 
> to be (subconsciously). The world is your dream. I choose to dream of 
> utopia. I know you are not nefarious, nobody is nefarious, and I know 
> you will soon believe without any doubt that Post-Scarcity is possible.
Do you acknowledge a difference between dreams and reality?  What is 
that difference?
>
> I know you will believe that reality is infinite, without any limits 
> whatsoever, because your mind is limitless. The positive feedback will 
> feedback to create "eternal positivity" and the positivity will be 
> immensely positive. The future will be infinitely positive.
No, my mind and yours is certainly not limitless.  It is quite limited 
by the architecture of the human brain.   You are coming off like a mystic.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-fulfilling_prophecy
>
> Regarding my name I would say, what's in a name? A rose by any other 
> name smells just as sweet. Utopia is the sweetest rose.
>
> Believe! Dream! Seize the limitless power of reality! I know you will 
> soon begin to believe in utopian Post-Scarcity. You can see it 
> happening by 2045 at the latest... I know. I can see your mind 
> changing because I see my own mind changing. I can see you dreaming. 
> This is our dream. We dream of utopia! This is our reality. This is 
> science. This is technology. This is existence. This IS reality. You 
> are alive.
Without grounding in reality it is neither science, technology or 
existence.   I see you making no effort to so ground it and dismissing 
any attempts to do so.  Best of luck with that.

- samantha
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20100915/cc639ad1/attachment.html>