[ExI] invisible singularity and SU
pharos at gmail.com
Fri Sep 17 14:22:21 UTC 2010
On 9/17/10, Keith Henson wrote:
> Re Singularity Utopia, our big objection seems to be that she (female
> 47) is not rooted in physical reality.
Now, don't start believing the stuff you read on MySpace and Facebook! :)
Remember that most of the dolly young blonds that have 'Friended' you
there are really FBI agents. At least, that's the case in my
Her writing style did suggest female to me, so I'd believe that. But
if I was 47, I don't think I would get wildly exuberant about a
Singularity in 2045 - when I would be 82 - if I made it that far. I'd
guess that the 47 claim might be to avoid harassment from males.
> Couple of weeks ago I went to the graduation of the Singularity University.
> Oy Vey! talk about disconnected from reality.
> Not *one* of the presentations would have stood up to a physics based
> reality check.
> The one on food, for example, didn't even have a clue about the number
> of square meters it takes to grow food for one person. For a human
> density like that found in cities it is *impossible* to grow enough
> food for the people who live there.
Living Towers are already being designed.
Among the benefits claimed is:
Year-round crop production; 1 indoor acre is equivalent to 4-6
outdoor acres or more, depending upon the crop (e.g., strawberries: 1
indoor acre = 30 outdoor acres)
Although I did read that the SU projects were more of a 'wish-list'
than actual well-thought out plans, Kurzweil is expecting exponential
improvements in all technologies, not just computers. So maybe
optimistic projects are allowed?
Besides if you can raise a few million venture capital from the
listening financiers to play with these concepts, it's worth
stretching the truth a bit. Something good might turn up from the
millions spent and you'd have a fun time as well.
(It's bad PR to keep pointing out the flaws - take the money and enjoy!).
More information about the extropy-chat