On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 4:07 AM, Azn A <[email protected]> wrote:
> Kurzweil suggests post singularity, that the Universe wakes up. This is > when machines begin converting all of the matter and energy in the universe > into similar massive computers. Breaking down whole planets, stars, moons > and meteoroids and reassembling them into giant computers. This, in effect, > "wakes up" the universe as all the inanimate "dumb" matter (rocks, dust, > gases, etc.) is converted into structured matter capable of supporting > intelligence, or a form of synthetic life. With the entire universe made > into a giant, highly efficient supercomputer. > >From an Animist perspective, the entire universe is already awake. such conversions would simply be changing the shape of that intelligence. > > However, is the cost to wake up everything is too high? Give a > supercomputer endless curiosity and it will try to track everything and > figure everything out, the number of watts for that is almost infinite ... > that's a bit of a strawman, in terms that endless curiosity is infinite by definition, just as endless anything. Typically curiosity, as well as most activities have an "end" or goal in mind. such as reproduction, improving fitness, etc. > I.e. As much energy as it can get but if you base the whole equation right > than the way it deals with information/concept storage, it will basically > hopefully verify all the concepts and never try to reconfigure the sun for > energy conversion. Its how you setup the conceptual framework that defines > whether or not super intelligences will take over or optimize themselves > for existence by remaining mobile and small sizes for replication ease. > There really is no way to know until it might be too late. > too late for what? > > To just create a human, the energy requirements are huge to sustain a > memory system that is universal instead of just being programmed for normal > survival and replication activities, is not trivial. > http://jeb.biologists.org/content/208/9/1621/F1.large.jpg for the energy > of different groups of animals on earth. From this research article > http://jeb.biologists.org/content/208/9/1621.full -- Note the higher > energy use by mammals. > > For humans, this demand goes even higher: "Human brain's metabolic budget > significantly different from apes. They point out that anthropoid primates > use ~8% of resting metabolism for the brain, other mammals (excluding > humans) use 3-4%, but humans use an impressive 25% of resting metabolism > for the brain. This indicates that the human "energy budget" is > substantially different from all other animals, even our closest primate > relatives--the anthropoid apes." Quoting this random source of arguments > for going beyond vegetarian diets > http://www.beyondveg.com/billings-t/comp-anat/comp-anat-4a.shtml > > even so we only use 100 watts at rest. > The point is that to have something universally self-aware and curious > enough to explore, is expensive in terms of change or energy per delta > operation... Reflexive processing is by nature either very general, to > minimize this cost, or very detailed, to make sure the measurements are > correct and the energy budget isn't exceeded because there is no extra > energy available except acquired over time to reduce the energy demand at > any one point in time. But add them together for an explosion of > intelligent matter and you have an energy deficit larger than say the > entire output of the sun for the size of the surface of the earth (just > making a point, not an actual reference for energy requirements but it > could be considering how much energy the human brain is using and if you > put the same energy demands on the unit area of the surface of a planet and > the processing was just down in an endless manner or without mammal like > goal directed behavior constraints)... I.e. you can't put that many brain > like entities on the surface of even the earth and expect to sustain the > energy requirements from the same earth surface or any ratio thereof. > how many brain like entities? I think making all matter into a brain is kinda silly. Just as humans aren't all brain, it's a fairly small percentage of the body. > > Summary: intelligence/curiosity is expensive, copying/emulating others is > cheap and energy efficient. Not an argument for the dumbing down of america > but valid when considering the singularity context of larger than earth > super intelligences. > Copying is a requirement for life, such as for instance in reproduction. This is why proprietary systems are doomed to fail, since they are functionally sterile. However a certain level of curiosity and of course intelligence is also necessary, perhaps not by all members of a populace, but by sufficient quantity to increase the fitness of the society, such as averting or mitigating disasters, while also improving the host-bodies and or living conditions. > > Just throwing that out there... thoughts? > > > *AGI* | Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now> > <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/5037279-a88c7a6d> | > Modify<https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;>Your Subscription > <http://www.listbox.com> > ------------------------------------------- AGI Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/21088071-f452e424 Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=21088071&id_secret=21088071-58d57657 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
