What I've been reading: 2008-05-24

• 'Blade Runner' ruling subverts nature of sport (Art Caplan)
  Artificial legs would make for artificial competition at Beijing Olympics.
• Searching for Alien Neutrino Messages (Wired)
  If you were a hyper advanced alien civilization, rather then mucking about with noisy electromagnetic waves, perhaps you would try to make contact with other intelligent life forms by sending your messages via neutrinos.
• Does Time Run Backward in Other Universes? (Scientific American)
  One of the most basic facts of life is that the future looks different from the past. But on a grand cosmological scale, they may look the same.
• Sports-related knee injuries more severe in girls than boys (CBC)
  When it comes to playing sports, the knee injuries that boys and girls sustain are very different, suggests new research.
• Distant Mirrors (Lee Billings - SEED)
  To find life on other worlds requires thinking about how other life would find us.
• Brain's 'trust machinery' identified
  The brain centers triggered by a betrayal of trust have been identified by researchers, who found they could suppress such triggering and maintain trust by administering the brain chemical oxytocin.
• Six 'uniquely' human traits now found in animals (New Scientist)
  To accompany the article So you think humans are unique? we have selected six articles from the New Scientist archive that tell a similar story.
• Perfect Ponderables
  Secular and scientific themed decorative candles.
• Researchers develop robotic brain-computer interface (Engadget)
  Brain-computer interfaces have been kicking around for a few years now, but they're relatively slow and unwieldy, which kind of puts a damper on world-domination plans -- the guy with the keyboard would probably be well into the missile-launch sequence by
• That Alien Message (Eliezer Yudkowsky - Overcoming Bias)
  Imagine a world much like this one, in which, thanks to gene-selection technologies, the average IQ is 140.

European court to hear chimp's plea for human rights

His name is Matthew, he is 26 years old, and his supporters hope to take his case to the European Court of Human Rights.

But he won't be able to give evidence on his own behalf - since he is a chimpanzee. Animal rights activists led by British teacher Paula Stibbe are fighting to have Matthew legally declared a 'person' so she can be appointed as his guardian if the bankrupt animal sanctuary where he lives in Vienna is forced to close.

An anonymous businessman has offered a substantial amount to cover his care, but under Austrian law only humans are entitled to have guardians.

Via James Hughes.

Related articles:

The myth of our exalted human place

Spanish socialists want to give apes human rights

Sue Savage-Rumbaugh on the welfare of apes in captivity

Aging 2008 at UCLA

Looks like the Methuselah Foundation is putting together a fantastic event: Aging 2008 at UCLA.

The event will feature leading scientists and thinkers in stem cell research and regenerative medicine to explain how their work can combat human aging, along with the sociological implications of developing rejuvenation therapies.

Speakers will include biogerontologist Aubrey de Grey and Gregory Stock, author of Redesigning Humans.

Details:

Aging 2008 @ UCLA Royce Hall
Friday June 27th | Doors open 4pm
405 Hilgard Ave, Los Angeles, CA 90024
Free registration @ mfoundation.org/ADCI

Links for 2008-05-22

• Amputee Gets a Shot at the Olympics (Technology Review)
  Hugh Herr explains the scientific evidence behind the decision.
• Enter, the Cybrids (NYT)
  This week, a complex and controversial piece of legislation began to make its way through the British parliament.
• The emerging supremacy of artificial legs (William Saletan - Slate Magazine)
  Go, Oscar, go. We're all rooting for you to cross that finish line in Beijing. Just one note of caution: Don't win.
• Good God? (Peter Singer - Guardian)
  Religious people are still unable to provide a satisfying answer to the age-old question of why God allows suffering.
• Anthropic Breakthrough (Robin Hanson - Overcoming Bias)
  If the universe is extremely large, with effective physics and cosmological conditions varying widely from place to place, how can we predict the conditions we should expect to see?
• Can the Singularity Save Us From Ourselves? (Al Fin)
  Humans are only evolved primates--monkeys and apes--with a limited conceptual vocabulary. We are easily impressed by our technological accomplishments.
• On becoming vegan: five good reasons (David Orban's Blog)
  A few days ago I've become a vegan. Vegans are those who do not eat meat like vegetarians, and also eschew animal products, like milk, cheese, eggs. When I tell people they laugh. I laugh as well, since I am a jovial person. But I am pretty serious.
• Birth cry of a supernova (Bad Astronomy Blog)
  Very, very cool news today: for the first time in history, astronomers have unambiguously observed the exact moment when a star explodes.

Links for 2008-05-21

• "2084" - Is China Building the Next-Generation Police State? (The Daily Galaxy)
  Thirty years ago the new Chinese city of Shenzhen did not exist. Today, with the help of U.S. defense contractors, the booming city is a model for a high-tech police state 2.0. And, according to some authorities, it's ready for export.
• British parliament backs hybrid embryos (Nature)
  UK politicians have rejected calls to ban the creation of animal–human hybrid embryos.
• Who's afraid of a synthetic human? (John Harris - Times Online)
  If we can enhance our species - make it live longer and resist disease - we should do it
• Amazing flying fish! (YouTube)

Of dead race horses and the dead long-ball: Two very different consequences of enhancement in sports

On May 3, 2008, shortly after finishing second at the Kentucky Derby, filly Eight Belles went crashing to the ground, the result of sustained compound fractures to both her front legs. The horse's injuries were so devastating that she had to be euthanized right there on the track, much to the horror of the 157,770 spectators.

Last week, a number of baseball pundits noticed that home run production was significantly down across the Majors. And not by just a little bit. It's being predicted that this season could see a drop of 1,000 home runs compared to the 2006 season. Last year saw a drop of nearly 600 home runs compared to 2006. Home runs, it would appear, are on the decline.

What do these two seemingly unrelated stories have in common?

Performance-enhancing drugs.

The first story showcases the tragic consequences of enhancement overuse in sports, with the second showing the dramatic way in which performance-enhancement can impact on a sport -- particularly if it's taken away.

And love it or hate it, both stories show the extent to which enhancement is impacting on sports today.

Over-medicated horses

Catastrophic injuries like the one experienced by Eight Belles is becoming a disturbingly regular occurrence at racetracks across the United States.

Of the major thoroughbred racing events (the Kentucky Derby, Preakness, Belmont and Breeders' Cup) half of them have seen lethal breakdowns since 2005.

It's gotten so bad that PETA has entered the picture, calling horse racing "cruelty masquerading as sport." They insist that organizers make major changes to horse racing, or face an all-out ban.

Which leads to the question: why are horses increasingly crossing the finish line completely wrecked?

There are a number of factors, but two stand out in particular: breeding and drugs.

Racehorses are bred for speed, not durability. These days, the average number of races run by a horse is 6.37. Back in the 60s a horse could be expected to run 11.31 races. Racing breeds are becoming more brittle with each passing generation.

The only consideration at breeding time is selecting for speed and a horse psychology that says 'run like hell' (or what industry folk call 'precociousness'). As equine surgeon Wayne McIlwraith has said, "We've evolved a super-fast athlete."

More significant, however, is the use of medication. Horses are given drugs to deaden pain, to prevent pulmonary bleeding, to ease joint inflammation, and, of course, to add muscle.

This is all perfectly legal. American racing adopted a policy of "permissive medication" during the 1970s which allowed for drugs banned in other parts of the world (which may also explain why these sorts of injuries aren't happening elsewhere).

There's also the problem of illegal drug use -- horses are given everything from cocaine to cobra venom (used as a numbing agent).

No wonder horses are ending races completely shattered. Medical science has exceeded their biological tolerances, and horses are paying with their lives.

Under-medicated sluggers

Back in 2005, in a survey of 568 MLB players, 79% said they believed steroids played some role in record-breaking performances by high-profile players. And 27% said they believed performance-enhancing drugs were a "major contributor" to recent statistical achievements.

The statistical achievements they were referring to included the astounding home run records set by Mark McGuire and Barry Bonds in 1998 and 2001 respectively. Steroids have changed the sport to such a degree that there have been calls to "asterisk" all records set during this era.

But this era appears to be over. Owing to a Congressional Committee, the ensuing Mitchell Report and tougher drug-testing programs, it appears that players have been scared straight.

And seemingly overnight.

Home run production has dropped dramatically, putting to rest silly notions of juiced balls and corked bats. Steroids has been quite clearly a major force in baseball in recent times.

What does all this mean?

Enhancement changes everything.

But not always for the worse, and not always for the better.

Clearly, in the case of horse racing, there's a significant problem. Until they can engineer cyborg horses who can actually survive a race, there has to be some serious soul-searching done amongst the organizers and owners. What's currently happening is beyond the pale.

As for baseball, one could make the case that the McGuire/Bonds years were some of the most exciting to ever grace the sport. As anyone who follows baseball knows, pitchers have traditionally held a decided advantage over hitters. It's been a very defensive game.

Steroids, for better or worse, altered this balance. Personally, I'm having a hard time getting into the current baseball season, particularly here in Toronto where the Jays can't score runs to save their lives.

I'm likely not alone when I say that I enjoy watching home runs and would like to see more.

Moving forward

I'm not a fan of medication bans. As a transhumanist, I look at the entire issue as a part of the broader trend in performance-enhancement across all spheres, whether it be physical or cognitive aspects.

But I have my limits. Like anything, performance-enhancement has to be monitored and calibrated when things get out of whack. Adjustments and provisions need to be made when enhancement causes undue harm to an athlete (human or otherwise) or when it alters the nature of the sport in a regressive way (which can often be a very personal and philosophic opinion).

Ultimately, enhancement cannot happen inside a vacuum. We have to understand and accept the fact that it's going to change things -- often in non-subtle and unpredictable ways.

The goal shouldn't be to eliminate enhancement, but to help athletes perform at their highest level possible, and to see sports brought to their ultimate potential.

Next TTA event: "Apocalyptic Threats and Happy Pills," with Dr. Mark Walker

The Toronto Transhumanist Association is proud to announce its next event, a talk by Dr. Mark Walker entitled, "Apocalyptic Threats and Happy Pills."

The talk is open to the general public and admission is free. It will be held on Saturday, June 14, 2008 from 5:00pm to 7:00pm at the Centre for Inquiry Ontario, 216 Beverley St. in Toronto.

Mark A. Walker, Ph.D. is Research Associate in philosophy at Trinity College, University of Toronto, and lecturer in Philosophy at McMaster University. He is founder and president of Permanent End International, a nonprofit organization devoted to ending hunger, illiteracy and environmental degradation. He serves on the editorial board of the Journal of Evolution and Technology and served on the Board of Directors of the World Transhumanist Association from 2002 to 2006.

Abstract for Dr. Walker's talk:

Apocalyptic threats are possible or probable civilization-ending events, e.g., asteroid collisions, global nuclear war, biotechnology accidents or warfare, and various "goo" scenarios connected with self-replicating nanotechnology. Obviously, reducing such threats is morally imperative. I will delineate two broad strategies for attempting to mitigate such threats: the technical and the social. Technical mitigation seeks to use technology to defeat, defend or disarm the threatening events; examples include fallout shelters, antivirals and universal surveillance. Social mitigation of apocalyptic threats work indirectly to reduce the social causes that may contribute to an increased probability of such threats, or reduce the probability that we will effectively deal with such threats, for example, removing sources of conflict such as poverty and injustice. Transhumanists have focused considerable attention on technical mitigation but little to social mitigation. This talk discusses the possibility of using "happy pills" for the purpose of social mitigation of apocalyptic threats.

Dr. Walker has also authored such papers as In Praise of Bio-Happiness, Universal Superlongevity: Is It Inevitable And Is It Good?, Apologism, Prolongevistism and Utilitarianism, Mary Poppins 3000s of the World Unite: A Moral Paradox in the Creation of Artificial Intelligence, Where did Marx go wrong?, Genetic Virtue, and Prolegomena to any Future Philosophy, and coauthored Astrophysical Fine Tuning, Naturalism, and the Contemporary Design.

Contact me for more information.

Links for 2008-05-20

• The Knife's Olof Dreijer, More Send Music to the Aliens (Pitchfork)
  Swedish techno artist Håkan Lidbo has a plan to blast sounds into outer space for the betterment of beings from all corners of the universe.
• Ontario to resume coverage of sex-change operations (CBC)
  The Ontario government will soon pay for sex-change operations again, Health Minister George Smitherman confirmed on Thursday.
• Our Data, Ourselves (Wired)
  In the information age, we all have a data shadow; who controls our data controls our lives.
• Pharmacists unhappy about new morning-after-pill availability (CBC)
  The emergency contraceptive drug known as Plan B will likely be coming out from behind the pharmacy counter, a move the Canadian Association of Pharmacists is not happy about.
• How Many Earths? (Jamais Cascio -- Open the Future)
  It's a standard trope in environmental commentary: we would need more than one Earth to support the planet's population, especially if everyone lived like Americans. The number of Earths needed can vary greatly, depending upon who's doing the counting.
• Women Have "No Emotional Feelings" During Orgasm, Say Neuroscientists (io9)
  During orgasm, men experience heightened activity in the emotion-processing centers of the brain. But women's brains, say researchers, are shut down in emotion-processing regions
• Olympic Athlete Technology (Next Big Future)
  South African Paralympian Oscar Pistorius [bladerunner] has won a landmark appeal over a ban on his artificial legs. There will be a technology battle between the Biorubber Swim-SCS Fabric against the Speedo LZR Racer.
• Creative writing for extraterrestrials (csmonitor.com)
  A college class, funded by a NASA Space Grant Consortium, contemplates what to say to E.T.
• Robotic suit could usher in super soldier era (PhysOrg)
  Rex Jameson bikes and swims regularly, and plays tennis and skis when time allows. But the 5-foot-11, 180-pound software engineer is lucky if he presses 200 pounds - that is, until he steps into an "exoskeleton" of aluminum and electronics that multiplies...

Sentient Developments turns 6

This weeks marks the 6th anniversary of Sentient Developments.

Last year, for it's 5th birthday, I ran a 5-part retrospective:

Part I, Part II, Part III, Part IV and Part V.

Preserving the dead in warm biostasis

Aschwin de Wolf is speculating about warm biostasis through nanotechnology over at Depressed Metabolism. This is a fantastic idea that makes a lot of sense.

In his article, de Wolf writes:

Such a form of warm biostasis would not only produce a true molecular alternative to cryonics, it would also enable long-duration space travel and could be employed as a means to provide trauma care in emergency situations. These kind of applications of molecular nanotechnology are extremely advanced and, as a result, literature, either fiction or non-fiction, about them is virtually non-existent. It seems that the first rigorous treatment of cellular and whole-body warm biostasis will be published in Robert Freitas’ Nanomedicine Volume IIB and Nanomedicine Volume III (personal correspondence).

Perhaps the future of biostasis will be an advanced form of chemical fixation after all.

This possibility is also being discussed at Longevity Meme: "What if cryonics wasn't cold?"

The purpose of cryonics is to preserve the body and brain with as little small-scale damage as possible for revival via plausible future technologies, most likely medical nanomachinery. To save lives, in other words. Depressed Metabolism has previously argued that it's something of an accident of history that the cryonics industry uses cold-based preservation rather than a form of warm chemical preservation, and here elaborates on future molecular nanotechnologies that may achieve warm biostasis: "To see how one approach would work, imagine that the blood stream carries simple molecular devices to tissues, where they enter the cells. There they block the molecular machinery of metabolism - in the brain and elsewhere - and tie structures together with stabilizing cross-links. Other molecular devices then move in, displacing water and packing themselves solidly around the molecules of the cell. These steps stop metabolism and preserve cell structures."

This is definitely an area to watch.

Stuart Kauffman: Reinventing the Sacred

Check out Stuart Kaufmann's new book, Reinventing the Sacred: A New View of Science, Reason, and Religion.

Book Description:

Consider the woven integrated complexity of a living cell after 3.8 billion years of evolution. Is it more awe-inspiring to suppose that a transcendent God fashioned the cell, or to consider that the living organism was created by the evolving biosphere? As the eminent complexity theorist Stuart Kauffman explains in this ambitious and groundbreaking new book, people who do not believe in God have largely lost their sense of the sacred and the deep human legitimacy of our inherited spirituality. For those who believe in a Creator God, no science will ever disprove that belief. In Reinventing the Sacred, Kauffman argues that the science of complexity provides a way to move beyond reductionist science to something new: a unified culture where we see God in the creativity of the universe, biosphere, and humanity. Kauffman explains that the ceaseless natural creativity of the world can be a profound source of meaning, wonder, and further grounding of our place in the universe. His theory carries with it a new ethic for an emerging civilization and a reinterpretation of the divine. He asserts that we are impelled by the imperative of life itself to live with faith and courage-and the fact that we do so is indeed sublime. Reinventing the Sacred will change the way we all think about the evolution of humanity, the universe, faith, and reason.

Kaufmann is also the author of At Home in the Universe: The Search for the Laws of Self-Organization and Complexity.

Fingernail Touch Sensors

"My doctoral thesis research project was the development of "Fingernail Touch Sensors" for human-machine interaction. These sensors can detect touch forces at the human fingertip as well as changes in finger posture by measuring the color pattern of the fingernail. Thus they do not interfere with the human's natural sense of touch." -- Stephen Mascaro

Mascaro is director of the BioRobotics Lab and is affiliated with the Robotics Program at the University of Utah.

[via Grinding]

Justine Cooper's TERMINAL

The title of the current show refers to her new series of large format photographs depicting medical robots and mannequins. These sophisticated manikins, typically connected up to computers, simulate living situations from crisis to childbirth. At once alien and familiar, they represent the feats of modern medical technology. Far from the public dissections of the 17th century, these private theaters play out imagined traumas for the benefit of doctors and surgeons honing their skills. In this landscape, the abject body of the patient is dispensed with and supplanted by creations that are neither virtual, nor real. At a time when medical intervention can be so de-humanizing, when technology is criticized for removing us from reality, these images create a perverse inversion. The artist found that the personnel charged with the care of the mannequins had humanized these objects into subjects by naming them, dressing them in holiday attire and constructing a narrative through their care. These million dollar manikins embody memories of daily life, offering up their injuries and procedures as rather austere visual diaries in the era of Second Life and the blogosphere.

[Via We Make Money Not Art]

Why I think Pistorius should not be allowed to compete at the Olympics

Shocking, you say.

How could I, an unabashed proponent of human enhancement, be opposed to seeing disabled athlete Oscar Pistorius compete at the Olympic Games?

The short answer is that it's not fair to the able-bodied athletes who don't want to get into the enhancement game.

Moving forward, it sets up a situation where:

(1) able-bodied athletes will increasingly be set at a disadvantage relative to the cyber-athletes, particularly as prostheses improve
and
(2) able-bodied athletes will have no choice but to seek enhancement measures of their own, legal or otherwise, to remain competitive

Despite what the Court of Arbitration for Sport says, Pistorius has an advantage. A 25% advantage to be exact.

And even if we assume the Court is wrong, that the IAAF has not conclusively proven that the Cheetahs go beyond the call of normal human functioning duty, the day is all but upon us when advanced prostheses and other measures will.

Consequently, Pistorius and other disabled athletes should continue to compete against each other. This is not intended as a way to segregate athletes according to their abilities per se, but a way to create leagues in which athletes don't feel coerced into entering arms races with each other. Mirrored leagues should be set up, those in which enhancement is sanctioned, and those in which it is not. Athletes can then choose where they want to compete.

Ultimately, the end result will be to the advantage of Pistorius and those like him. They'll inherit the top echelons of sport and maintain the public's interest, while the unenhanced leagues will whither away as quaint curiosity, a throwback to how things used to be.

But until then, let's not set up a situation where chaos and ambiguity ruins it for everyone.

Pistorius allowed to qualify for Olympics

Unexpected news today: Disabled sprinter Oscar Pistorius will be able to qualify for the 2008 Olympic Games after all.

The Court of Arbitration for Sport overruled an earlier decision by the International Association of Athletics Federation that made Pistorius ineligible for competition against able-bodied athletes. According to the Court, the IAAF has not conclusively proven that Pistorius is given a decided advantage from his 'Cheetah' prostheses.

According to the New York Times article:

What the decision means for other disabled athletes hoping to compete in the Olympics is that they will be allowed to compete with able-bodied athletes unless the I.A.A.F. can provide indubitable scientific evidence to the contrary. In the past, I.A.A.F. spokesman Nick Davies has insisted that these matters can only be treated on a case-by-case basis with the burden of proof on the athletes to show that the prosthetics do not provide an unfair advantage.

[image: Alessandro Bianchi/Reuter]

Results of the perfect memory poll

Would you like to have perfect memory? (results based on 109 responses)

1. 32% Yes, but I'd like to be able to suppress certain memories
2. 25% Yes, human memory is far too limited and flawed
3. 18% Yes, it would add to the richness of experience
4. 14% No, human memory is imperfect for good reason
5. 8% No, it would make life too intense and/or confusing
6. 4% No, all the bad memories would be overwhelming

75% of you want perfect memory, with 32% wanting that power with control.

Links for 2008-05-16

• Carnivores Like Us (Seed)
  Humanity's rapidly increasing appetite for meat is fast becoming a matter of global consequence. Paul Roberts on the science, and morality, of our planet's modern palate.
• Animal Prosthetics (The Speculist)
• When Science Can't Help (Eliezer Yudkowsky: Overcoming Bias)
  From Science's perspective, that is how things are supposed to work - happy fun for everyone. You admitted your error! Good for you! Isn't that what Science is all about? But what if I didn't want to waste ten years?

Links for 2008-05-15

• Vatican says aliens could exist (BBC)
  The Pope's chief astronomer says that life on Mars cannot be ruled out.
• Experts move closer to identifying best embryos (Reuters)
  Scientists in Australia and Greece appear to be moving closer to identifying genes that determine which test-tube embryos stand the best chance of implanting in the womb and growing into healthy babies.
• How Second Life Affects Real Life (TIME)
  With my plain Jane avatar and my inexperience in Second Life, I did what most people would want to do in an uncomfortable social situation: run away.
• Regulating Future Science (Anders Sandberg)
  This monday I attended the 21st Century School's Distinguished Public Lecture where John Sulston, John Harris and Richard Dawkins discussed what science is for.
• The Less the Education, the Higher the Risk of Dying Early (Washington Post)
  The difference in death rates between highly educated and poorly educated people in the United States is very wide and growing wider, according to new research.
• False Memory (The Frontal Cortex)
  One of the delicious ironies of memory is that, even when our recollections are utterly false, they still feel true.
• Does the simulation have an evil or indifferent designer? (Marginal Revolution)
  It occurred to me that if we are living in a simulation we can make Bayesian inferences about the intentions of the designer.
• Shannon Larratt Leaves ModBlog/BME (Warren Ellis)
  The online bodymodification-reportage pioneer Shannon Larratt has now permanently left BME, the sprawling web presence he co-founded and figureheaded.
• Eugenics and You (Damn Interesting)
  The breeding behaviors of humans remains of utmost interest to geneticists today.
• Don't Forget the Animals in Burma (The Buddhist Blog)
  I received an email from Lauren of Animal Voices about making sure we help the animals caught up in the cyclone devastation in Burma. Animal Voices has a great interview with Buddhist scholar and advocate of ecological balance, Dr. Joanna Macy.

Cascio chimes in on Fermi

IEET colleague Jamais Cascio has responded to Nick Bostrom's suggestion that the detection of extraterrestrial life would be bad news.

Cascio is unconvinced that the parameters of Bostrom's argument are entirely correct, including the assumption that super-advanced civs take up interstellar colonization as a hobby.

Specifically, he argues that technologically advanced ETI's must be post-Singularity civs, and by definition, outside the bounds of current trajectorial models. As Cascio notes, "The demands and concerns and requirements of a post-Singularity civilization wouldn't be based on a pre-Singularity pattern."

Consequently, Cascio makes the claim that galactic empires are likely not on the post-Singularity to-do list. "To be clear, this isn't an argument that these interstellar-capable civs just sit at home. They could and would likely spread, and certainly explore," he writes, "But the notion that they'd hop from solar system to solar system planting their colonies, strikes me as terribly unimaginative, and definitely a pre-Singularity perspective."

I'm not entirely on board with Cascio here, but I will say that he is absolutely correct when he suggests that speculations about colonization-capable civs must presuppose their condition as being post-Singularity.

And I'll further this by noting that we should adopt a digital perspective. As NASA's Steven J. Dick has noted, we should be looking for post-biological brains.

Consequently, when we try to figure out what futuristic civilizations might look like, we should consider:

1. the demands imposed on a civ that's completely reliant on megascale computing
2. the potential mindspace of a post-Singularity superintelligence, its interpretation of utility, and the manner in which it achieves its goals

For the first point, we're talking about a postbiological modality that would likely require a hideous amount of computational power.

As for the second point, good luck with that one.

But where Cascio and I diverge is in how he deals with the non-exclusivity problem -- i.e. finding a solution to the FP that applies to ALL advanced civs.

Cascio argues that Galactic colonization is "unimaginative" and a "pre-Singularity" perspective.

Sure, this may be true. And perhaps 99.9% of all advanced civs would agree with him.

But it's the 0.01% that I'm concerned about.

It's not impossible or ridiculous to imagine at least one non-conformist civilization taking it upon itself to expand its presence across the Galaxy.

Moreover, the colonization process for a post-Singularity intelligence would be a rather pedestrian exercise -- one that doesn't really require much of a commitment. Interstellar colonization would be a largely automated process that exploits the happy consequence of exponential growth.

To be fair, Cascio does suggest that there may be an a universal upper bound to growth. Cascio notes, "Interstellar-capable civilizations that somehow remain wedded to colonization would inevitably fall into internal conflict because of speed-of-light communication/travel lag and divergent evolution (social or biological)."

I think the disconnect here is the notion that galactic colonization necessarily implies the expansion and interconnectedness of communication, economic and political networks. I'm not so convinced. Nodes spawned by Von Neumann probes could be stand-alone and completely segregated from its parent system. One could imagine a Von Neumann wave expanding outward, uplifting all life and matter in its path and leaving computronium in its wake; the probes would not be equipped with rear-view mirrors.

Cascio also presents another possible reconciliation to the Fermi Paradox -- the notion that we are not yet capable of detecting the activities of advanced civs. Specifically, he suggests that ETIs may use alternative communication schemes. Again, as Cascio argues, because we're talking about post-Singularity life, we simply don't know what we're supposed to be looking for.

Unfortunately, this doesn't really solve the Paradox. We are still still stuck with the colonization problem.

That's the crux of the the Fermi Paradox why it remains a non-trivial conundrum. It's also why the FP was given new life in the 1970s by Michael Hart, John D. Barrow and Frank J. Tipler, and why in recent times it has become more perplexing than ever.

The Fermi Paradox is alive and well.

The Singularity is not what you think

People often ask me for my definition of the technological Singularity.

More specifically, they want me to offer some predictions as to what it will actually look like and what it might mean to them and the human species.

More often than not they don't like my answer, and it's probably because I re-frame the discussion and take the conversation elsewhere.

What people are really asking me to do is predict the outcome of the Singularity. And because I don't, they get frustrated with me.

But that's the problem. That's the whole point of this 'thing' we call the Singularity.

As has been noted elsewhere, virtually everyone has their own definition of the Singularity and it's become a very polluted term, one that's been stripped of all meaning.

So, before I tell you my own 'definition' of the Singularity, let me first tell you what it's not.

It's not any particular outcome or prognostication.

It's not any kind of definable event or transformational process.

Nor is it a term that can be used to describe a futuristic state of existence or the nature of advanced artificial intelligence.

But it's often used to describe these very things -- as if the term can be used as a synonym for what are essentially predictions. When people talk about the Singularity they can't help but inject their own anticipated outcome -- be it positive or negative.

I can be guilty of this at times. But so I don't get myself into too much futurological trouble I tend to refer to things as being in a state of post-Singularity. That's my clever way of avoiding any in-depth discussion as to how we'll actually get there.

Alright, so what's the technological Singularity?

Simply put, it's an unanswered question.

Vernor Vinge used the term Singularity for a very good reason. It's an event horizon in the truest sense.

But instead of a cosmological event horizon caused by a black hole's gravitational pull, it's a social event horizon caused by our inability to extrapolate the trajectory of human civilization beyond a certain point of technological sophistication.

The Singularity, therefore, describes a futurological problem -- a blind-spot in our predictive thinking.

That's it. There's no more to it than that.

Anything beyond this strict and limited definition is a discussion of something else -- an attempt to solve the conundrum and make predictions about 1) the actual characteristics and manifestation of the Singularity and 2) its aftermath.

So, if I say that the Singularity will involve a hard takeoff of SAI, I'm actually presenting a hypothesis that attempts to retire the term 'Singularity' and see it replaced by the term, uh, SAI hard takeoff event (we'll clearly have to come up with something better).

Or, if I say it will be a decades long process that sees humanity transition into a postbiological condition, I am likewise trying to put the term to rest.

Why does our predictive modeling break down?

Two reasons: 1) accelerating change and 2) the theoretic potential for the rise of recursively self-modifying artificial superintelligence.

Essentially, because disruptive change will be coming so fast and furiously, humanity's future remains largely unpredicted; there are too many variables and wildcards. And the rise of SAI, given its potential to be thousands upon thousands of times more powerful than the human mind, is simply beyond our prognosticative sensibilities.

Sure, we can make wild-ass guesses. And maybe one or two of them may actually turn out to be correct. But we won't know for sure until we get there.

Or at least until we get really close.

Consequently, the Singularity is a relativistic term.

People of the future won't use the word. That's a term reserved for us in our ignorance.

But as we get closer to the Singularity we will in all likelihood gain an increased appreciation of what will happen at the point when machine intelligence exceeds the capacity of humans.

And keeps on going.

At that point, once the fog that is the Singularity begins to lift, we will cease to call it the Singularity and replace it with a more descriptive term.

So, as we journey forward, what was once concealed over the horizon will finally be revealed.

In the meantime, just remember to frame the Singularity as a social event horizon, particularly as it pertains to accelerating change and the seemingly imminent rise of SAI.