Funny because I watched this when it first came out, and now all they do in the AI industry is talk about exponential growth and things are about 4-5 years ahead of what he predicted
I love what he says about most of the project being done in the lost half of the time frame. Makes me think of programming. You spend so long designing use cases, setting up programming, charting the database, doing other charts, setting up the database, and it looks like you've done absolutely nothing. But what's the frame work is done, it sort of EXPLODES. And soon you've got something that you can actually run.
You people don't realize that 2010's and 2020's does not equal 2010 or 2020, but it is about the decade. When he says we will be using wearable technology by 2010's, it's not actually 2010, but somewhere between 2010 and 2019. Considering we are starting to use technologies like that in 2014, he was right.
19:49 "Let me just end with a couple scenarios. By 2010 computers will disappear..." He didn't say it was a prediction per se, but he did say "by 2010" not "the 2010's".
@mesofius Actually, the devlopment of the mobile phone is a clear example of exponential development. For several years nothing much happened except the mobiles getting smaller and slightly better. The last few years the development has accelerated immensly and I find it really hard to imagine what a mobile phone (or similar device) will be capable of in 6-7 years.
Am from the future in the year of 2023, his predictions have been underwhelming, he underestimated how much more progress we are seeing. AGI in 2029, more like 2026 and the singularity in 2045 very likely much sooner.
@@marashdemnika5833 Eh, no way to know if we'll see AGI by 2026, so there's no way to say his predictions are "underwhelming". At the end of the day, you yourself are making your own prediction here, thus far, it seems he has been right in that case. I would have to rewatch this video however to see the points that have been made.
This is all really amazing! However, Ray doesn't seem to be taking into account the hindrance of capitalism on technological advancement. If we can free ourselves of this inefficient, anachronistic system of resource abuse and poor distribution, we really could achieve all of these things -- even faster than he predicts. For example, Apple didn't release the next best technology in the iPad2, they released something that was just better enough to make a profit. Progress comes second to profit.
I know this comment is 9 years old but I still think this applies today. I agree that many companies value profit over progress and it leads to, for example, a higher priced ‘new and improved’ iPhone with a lot of the same features as the iPhone from two years ago and maybe a better camera.
In a way, I agree.. most companies use resources to simultaneously reach the same goals.. which is inefficient resource allocation if viewed from a global standpoint. Enough prosperity may one day make communism feasible.. who knows P.S: I don't agree with any of the dumb communists of the present era.
@@siddheshpatwardhan4920 I absolutely agree with you, in times of prosperity communism might be great, bu we gotta get there first, and yea freedom not what some countries have today wich is horrible
Packing more power into the device is truly important if your problem is lack of power in the device. For today's mobile devices though, the most important thing that limits their use is the interface - they have enough power for any application that could be run on a PC few years ago; their main limitation compared to PCs (including the older, less powerful PCs) is the limited interface that's caused by the small size of the mobile devices.
You can argue that he was right about computers disappearing, though it's just starting. The smart phones really are computers that we carry with ourselves. We do banking, browsing, paying bills, watching this very presentation on our phones now, which was NOT the case when this was filmed in 2007 or 2006.
Too many people are getting caught up on how he said 2010 vice 2010's. It's a public speech, not a written essay; he probably meant 2010's and wasn't making predictions for these things to occur in just 3 years from when this was posted.
Kurzweil's predictions on very specific technologies (e.g. devices that beam images into the retina by 2010 etc.) are arguable, but his timeline concerning more general technologies like computing power, solar power efficiency, the reverse engineering of the human brain and so on are irrefutable, unless you can somehow argue how their exponential growth will suddenly grind to a halt and prevent these powerful technologies from arriving on schedule. The world changes faster and faster every day.
What is the best and easiest way to make money. Think of something that offers hope and deliverance from the daily realities and hardships of people's lives.Then write a book about the pseudo-religious idea and sit back and enjoy the money rolling in. If you feel bored: keep repeating the same message in shows and conferences.Does this remind you of Ray Kurzwel ? It sure does! The man is an exceptional marketeer and salesman. He sold you thin air and made money from it. Well done ray.
@@NiekKuijpers yh that was way too optimistic. VR and AR is only getting mainstream now in the 2020s. Apple will release mixed reality tech within 5 years and by 2040 it should be mainstream. his timelines are too optimistic.
@@NiekKuijpers theres no reason it cant happen technologically imo the only thing that could stop it is politics. Politics has already managed to get in the way of progress many times. my own timeline is as follows human brain sized neural net circa 2030 superinteliigence able to run on massive supercomputers circa 2050 superintelligence brought down to say a flagship smartphone circa 2080 singularity 2085. After this point we dont know how things will play out. The likely outcome is that the largest companies will monopolise all the power in the world. There will be a small trillionaire class that controls everything. On the other hand if somehow we get a good actor in charge of the algorithm we may witness the greatest utopia possible on earth.
Yes for the individual technology(vacuum tubes, microchips), the growth stops eventually, but just like relais technology was replaced by vacuum tubes and vacuum tubes by transistors, todays technology will be replaced by the next(nanotubes, quantum computing etc.) thus keeping the general exponential growth of information technology alive.
As for those who are "at a disadvantage" for shunning human augmentation and technology, look at the Amish. They seem to get along just fine despite being at significant technological disadvantages even today. And if technology is another form of evolution, WE will become the common ancestor of two (or more) very different species which split. Transhumanism is accelerated evolution, and it's very exciting to see these first sparks of a potentially new race.
Knowledge. The freedom to live as we like and ought to not as dictated by corporations and nation states. To explore our galaxy and the cosmos in general, our final frontier. This is why I love Kurzweil - he has not only a positive, humanist, progressive vision but a plausible one as well. I am happy to be one of his Singularitarians... Good posts by the way!
Snowballing yes, you are right. Yet what has made a larger impact: developing the basics of algebra or advancing the theories of advanced mathematics one iota? As I say in other comments, I look at thing via a relative viewpoint. We are continuing to make steps, but our steps are becoming smaller and smaller, our snowball is slowing down. It is large, so even a 1 degree rotation covers vast swathes of area, but it is slowing.
Kurzweil was principle developer of omnifont optical character readers, the 1st print to speech reading mach for the blind, the first CCD Flat bed scanner, the first text to speech synthesizer, the first music sythesizer (kurtzweil sythesizers), the 1st commercial vocabulary speech recognition and he is a leading resource in artifical intelligence.2002 national inventors hall of fame,lemelson-MIT prize, National medal of tech, 12 doctorates and 3 presidential honors ect
I agree, there is a temporary effect of people's jobs being displaced. But I think when technology really starts to pick up, education will improve greatly as we are able to increasingly understand individual minds and improve teaching methods so people will learn more important skills and remember them in the same amount of time. Delinquency will also gradually become less of a problem as negative aspects of society are reduced and the educational system becomes much more direct and engaging.
19:51 "by 2010 computers will disappear, they'll be so small they'll be embedded into our clothing, in our environment, images will be written directly to our retina- providing full immersion virtual reality, augmented real reality... we'll be interacting with virtual personalities" lmao he sort of jumped the gun on that one..
This is a FANTASTIC summary of the whole transhumanism/singularity/futurism thing in general. An excellent presentation from Ray Kurzweil, whose presentations can normally be quite dry and bland. Welcome to the knee of the curve gents.... hopefully we can all collectively make the most of it.
@DanceInYourRoom "It (An electronically brain) is not a living thing" - Define living. An exact functional copy of a human brain whatever the framework it is implemented in is 'living'. It doesn't program itself, it evolves just like we did. If we attach some kind of body with sensors (similar to our senses) and it can move around, then it's brain could be set up to evolve in relation to interacting with the real world.
19:49 I got to say his prediction of 2010 from 2005 was a bit off.... Images are not "directly written to our retinas" by 2010. A swing and a miss. I hope your right about human level A.I. by 2029.
While economic downturns negatively effect business production of some devices, as a whole the rate of technological progress is not affected. Kurzweil addresses this with proof in his book, showing how the rate of progress is not affected by economic downturns. In fact, recessions and hard times often encourage innovation due to lack of resources and create opportunities in the market for new business and ideas. The 1930s/40s gave birth to air conditioning, fluorescent light, tv, etc.
+BlackSkullHeart There was an experiment at a University where they successfully interfaced their brains with fiber optic cables to influence their thought patterns and to create a two way brain netting scheme to link the minds of multiple rats.
They are deeply intertwined economically. The resources used in the doll market at present day can not be utilized any better then through market competition. If too many dolls are made then the company who makes them loses money via overhead, If they dont make enough then they lose money in potential profits. If they make just enough of what is desired to meet market demand thay are rewarded with money. And the strongest survive and prevail. Thats competition and best use of resources to date.
I want to ask questions the watchers. If anyone reply me i'll be so happy. Are Futurists very important in your culture? Beside of the true arguments why he always talk about future? Is there any guarantee certificate of him?
He stated you can't predict any one scenario but the trend is heading toward these means. I'm sure things like this exist today but it isn't economically feasible. They were said as "scenarios" of what could be possible, not what will definitely happen.
The biggest issue seems to be when experts in a field pretend to be experts in (or knowledgeable enough about) another field so as to make predictions. Kurzweil is a known, verified and obvious visionary who has proven himself numerous times as an accurate predictor of technological trends. However, this says nothing about his understanding of biology, genetics, evolution or the processes that drive the human body. No objective, rational, intellectually-honest person can watch a technologist make these predictions on the merging of science and physical human processes without having a modicum of skepticism. It's like if Richard Dawkins were to make claims to know how a certain area of chemistry is going to define human evolution. He's an evolutionary biologist, not a chemist. It's far more interesting to watch experts bounce these things off of each other than to hear one expert in a field talk about things that he objectively does not have the training, education and knowledge to claim an especially elegant perspective on.
That has been true for the most part, but it's changing. Kurzweil is an expert in Information Technology and IT is merging completely with these other sciences. Though he can predict all these things, because even them (like biology) become predictable through IT.
1. SamHawkens: I understand that. And my reasoning was not good enough in my earlier comment. But think about it this way. Back bone of all religion is faith - meaning no questions asked. So what if we get the state where no need to ask questions, meaning we have answers to most questions, or at least the answers for those questions which religous groups rely on to establish the need for faith.
@dheublein wrong. It's not due to the profit incentive, it is due to the lust for power. All the profit incentive does is bring more competition towards an industry. A corporation that doesn't want competition would lobby the state to impose regulations and compliances to weed out competition and limit the number of competitors. This is how you usually end up with oligopolies and monopolies. >regardless of the cost what cost? voluntaryism : human action should be voluntary. Not too many chars
He ignores a very important issue: even though we might have all kinds of technology at the experimental level pretty soon, that doesn't mean it will replace the current widely used technology. PCs are not going to suddenly disappear. We use them because they're the established standard with heaps of compatible HW and SW available. For the same reasons almost everyone still uses Windows. This isn't going to suddenly change. Once a platform is well established, we're locked in it to some degree.
I'd like to think that our current economic paradigm is feasible to continue to use for the rest of eternity, however we are forgetting the elephant in the room. Automation continuously displaces human labor, thus our current system is doomed to failure. Like all economic paradigms of the past, ours will require an "overhaul" at some point in the future. The question is how much suffering we need to endure before we change.
Yes, we have a lot of fancy toys, but they we haven't seen a quantum leap or change of the type we did when antibiotics or printing press were released. You can take overall progress and measure it by minute improvements, or you can look at it from a broader perspective. The one thing you mentioned that rises above being a forgettable step is teleportation. Developing that could be worth remembering in 300 years.
Very interesting but I always wonder when I see a graph like this, concerning technology or money in particular, how accurate the graph could possibly be due to so many discoveries being classified top secret.
I think your point on humans not having the ingenuity to fully utilize our future computers is valid, but all we need to know, and people are working on this already, is how to let these computers learn by themselves via evolutionary algorithms. Look up Hod Lipson on TED on this. Do it! And for extending life, regenerative medicine is just as important so that people won't end up degenerating as all elderly people do as you mention.
Even Moore expects transistor miniaturisation to stop only after reaching the atomic level, which is intrinsic to Kurzweil's predictions. Any other objections that I can see are either dependant on unknown/unavailable data or simply emotional.
I think I'm doing a decent job. I'm a person who believes in strength so I do my best. I think that society overlooks science too much, which is why for example the space program has not been as wild as people hoped. Its funny that people don't realize that pretty much all of their opinions and opportunities are given to them by their technological surroundings ya know?
Besides, in mobile phones / portable computers, miniaturization has already reached a point when it can't go much further without limiting usability. Look at the iPad: it's actually *larger* than the iPhone. We're able make a powerful and very small computer right now but the problem is: how are you gonna use it if it's so small? Current user interfaces use the surface of the device to communicate with the user; a small device has little surface so the UI sucks. It has already hit the wall.
Like Interactive art right? What about the Media? What happens to broadcasting? Maybe its a trade that takes place at someones home rather then in an actual studio?
@JoeTube27, It seems like you're saying we should throw away knives because they can be used to cut people. Just because we haven't yet worked out the best way to use a tool doesn't mean we should discard it. Why not just reengineer the way we use wealth to motivate ourselves? Maybe it's possible to deploy it in ways that undermine our ability to profit by exploiting each other and enhance our ability to profit by empowering others? I agree there is a problem: our economy has an effect on us.
II. ...and a genuine comprehension of the workings of our brains may (he says) lie only slightly beyond grasp of the limits of our intelligence, or perhaps even well within them. It's been awhile since I've read this passage, but the impression made upon the reader (at least this reader) is that Hofstadter is optimistic on this score.
@eyhexs Example: I own a HTC touch pro (Raphael). this phone houses the Qualcomm MSM7201A cpu @ 528 MHZ. The touch diamond, touch pro 2, and htc hd all house this same processor. Only differences are rom, ram keyboard or no keyboard and size in the screen.
@mana2432 I agree with you that corporatism runs rampant, but I propose that that is primarily due to the profit incentive. The incentive in this profit-driven monetary system is to accumulate as much profit as possible, regardless of the cost. Whenever that is the incentive, and to basis to ultimate freedom and success in a society, the result will be the corruption we see today. What do you mean by voluntaryism?
Ray Kurzweil is important for this world - technology will continue on the path he explains... so it's important to talk about this imminent future before it becomes reality so that we are ready for it - why not end all poverty, all grief and all hatred in a world of virtually no scarcity?
It is, theoretically, HIGHLY possible considering our understanding of consciousness. Now, whether it will go good or bad is a matter of thinking all decisions made with said technology VERY carefully. It could be the salvation of our species for the rest of existence, or cause the end of it (quite quickly). It's all about we as humans can handle it.
@dheublein also, money is just a representation of trade ie. trading your labor for money to buy the food you need to buy. If you are stuck in an island, and are able to get food but you have to do labor, you must put effort into your life to survive.
@MadPutz Interesting stuff. So if we literally achieve immortality (which Kurzweil has explicitly predicted), will the population rise indefinitely, at a hitherto uncharted rate, and will this not become a problem at some point?
OTOH with more things having been invented it can become harder to invent something new - because all the easy/obvious (with the technology you currently have) inventions have been already done and you haven't progressed enough yet to be able to tackle the more difficult ones. It may be that the curves are not really exponential as Kurzweil says but they are something like the logistic curve. Kurzweil focuses on new technology - for that the logistic curve would look like an exponential one.
The elite of technology is for the elite of people, that´s just how it goes. But as technology evolves, that which was elite yesterday is mundane today, and so it becomes available for the masses.
perhaps we are arguing semantics. We may not trade traditional stuff or have green paper anymore. however we will trade information, energy, and rare elements. 3 things that will still have distinct value in that future world. We will still have some sort of trade accounting system...even if its not paper...but I consider the accounting method to be money.
Yes, I'm aware of those examples, but those came from lost wars and were on a much smaller scale. Like in my previous post I assumed that if the US fails likely most other areas of the globe would fail given the immense economic power of the US related to the world. In a scenario where "everything fails" wouldn't be comparable to a historical version of collapse. However, as said, the resources would still be available even if the money isn't. If the US failed, the US would be much different
Adbastone, can you please post your list of scientific accomplishments. Kurzweil has won every scientific award known to man. So before we bypass Ray, and Listen to you, please give us one reason why we should listen to you?
Ray is RIGHT on course. His problem is his predictions are proving lately, (the last 12 years) to be about 4-6 years too early. Overall however, he is indeed the leading tech prophet of our time.
@DanceInYourRoom "a program cannot write it's own code" - A system can create new programs, i.e. it can reprogram itself. Look up evolutionary programming. The brain already does this so it can be done. I am basing all my ideas on science, not emotions. It is you that brings in emotions saying that Alan Turing would be annoyed, or when you say "Do you feel you will 'own'...".
You're right, the RFID thing is a concern. Power, money and the best technology has always concentrated itself upward (gov't, power elite), whether the R&D has come from DARPA or some private party that are then contracted or bought out.
Right, which I agree with. Let's say that all corporations and governments around the world begin to adopt a movement towards solar (the political and economic will). How many years until we can make the transition for our transportation and living needs, for 7 billion people? The effects of oil depletion are hitting us TODAY. Solar panels were on the White House in the 70s and were removed. You are correct, but you are missing the larger aspects of our energy story.
@bobjimjones I am familiar with Mises argument. He even admits "calculation in natura in an economy without exchange can embrace consumption-goods only." And as David Schweickart observes in his book Against Capitalism "[i]t has long been recognised that von Mises's argument is logically defective. Even without a market in production goods, their monetary values can be determined." What was a luddite fallacy in the 19th century is a reality today i.e. the accelerating rate of change.
The time will come when technology becomes the power source driven economy. At this most important stage, people who realizes this will be able to adapt and succeed in this transformation decade.
I suggest you read up on emerging technologies such as the Oculus rift and leap motion as a the new direction for computing interfaces. We keep viewing technology in a linear way, you speak of Windows like it were some industry standard as established as the combustion engine. 20 years ago everything was largely DOS based, and windows was not widely adopted until at least 3.11 and 95. And hence established the mouse as the preferred tool for OSes. 20 years from now things may be very different.
@FutureLaugh Aside from the retina stuff, he's kinda right on. I wear my ipod shuffle on my shirt when I go to the gym, my iPhone resides in my pocket and gives me access to the entire human knowledge wherever I am, not to mention all the other great stuff it does. Facebook and other technologies give us the ability to interact with virtual personalities. TV's now interact fully with the internet. Video games now give us almost full immersion virtual reality. He's not that far off.
beside of market analyses going up, which is obvious all the Microbivores, reverse-engenering the human brain, bloodcells and other tec where is all this? So most of his predictions did not came true.
I dont see anyone refuting his idea on an intelectual level here. He is clear: "If we can convert 0.03 of the sunlight that falls on the earth in to energy(...) " He, as an industrial, project the coming tecnology. If one wants to focus on actual tecnological problems, one should focus on the energy problem we face nowadays.
@jordan2870 To be fair, most of the space is taken up by the user interface and displays. The new iPod Shuffle is 29×31.6×8.7 mm (1.1×1.24×0.34 in) and it weighs 12.5 g (0.4 oz), it decodes mp3, has a speech synthesizer, 4 gigabytes od memory and can play over 10 hours of music on a single charge. You can pretty much "embed" it in any clothing more substantial than a g-string.
doesn't he say that we would have the option to either experience being merged with everything or being an individual? (or, e.g. merging with one other person, for example, if we wanted). He compares it to a home computer that can operate on its own as well as being linked to the web, I think
He may be a few years off, but actually the technology he's talking about already exists, but economically and ergonomically it is not fully feasible. For example, many new computers being bought today are "netbooks" or mobile smartphones, rather than old traditional desktops.
if/then/else ... you just described the process every human goes through before they make a decision, provided they think at all. Learning is simply pattern recognition; it won't be too hard to program once processor speeds get closer to that of human brain processing power.
@rspaulding Are you so certain? That argument was put forward for a long time now and its prognosis never materialized. The nature of work changed but work itself prevailed.
I'm not pessismistic about our present and future capabilities. I'm pretty excited about it. But the human genome got mapped because impractical side solutions to the problem were discarded for better ones. Neural nets and internal retinal displays are not selling points for the next leap of technology. I'm not pessimistic, I'm just correcting Ray Kurtzwieil who sounds a little like he's selling the sizzle to potential shareholders.
Hey will we still have films when the singularity happens like when were able to create Intelligence and have machines d o more of the work we do. Will we still have the media and films to entertain us?
I used to share your concern but recently I don't. Perhaps you fear you will have to relinquish decision making and feel threatened. I don't think this is going to be the case at all. As far as this planet is concerened at least; we're the 'problem' not the machines. Thanks for your post, I enjoyed it.
He meant in their box personal computer form. They will continue to exist in many different forms. Our computers are already changing, most people buy a "netbook", or even our smartphones function as capable computers too.
not to disrupt this fascinating (and entertaining) conversation but did you just cite the animatrix as a source... really?? What is he supposed to do counter back with blade runner?
kuzweil himself is an inventor and successful entrepreneur, coming from such background i think he overestimates the creative and individual capacity of human race as a whole. it's accurate to conclude that many of the scenarios he describe are inevitable outcomes... i feel he's a little "impatient" when it comes to the time-scales though... also what of current western economic climate (yes, western not global).... i'd like to hear a video response from kurzweil himself regarding that factor.
Over the course of his presentation, his use of the word "exponential" increased exponentially
Anon That genuinely made me laugh out loud.
What a comment 👏👏👏.
That's what he not only wants to say in this video , but also preaching throughout his life. 🙏🙏
Funny because I watched this when it first came out, and now all they do in the AI industry is talk about exponential growth and things are about 4-5 years ahead of what he predicted
@@joefawcett2191 Yep. Glad you commented, it's interesting to look back so far and relate popular ideas and thought to reality today. All the best
He still use "exponential" to this day 😅
Plus this video proves how far we've come in terms of video quality
😀😁😂... I'm able to see this video in maximum 240p only here in India, while even Indian RUclipsrs videos, are available upto 640p , On mobile devices.
@@DeependraTube you guys are wayy behind the top rn..
Im in 8k you guys are behind @antoine.-
I have never heard anyone squeeze as much information into 23 minutes as Ray does here!
I love what he says about most of the project being done in the lost half of the time frame.
Makes me think of programming. You spend so long designing use cases, setting up programming, charting the database, doing other charts, setting up the database, and it looks like you've done absolutely nothing.
But what's the frame work is done, it sort of EXPLODES. And soon you've got something that you can actually run.
17 years later and he's about 4-5 years late with his predictions, truly is an amazing time to be alive
My favorite word has been exponential ever since I started listening to Ray Kurzweil speak.
Who's watching in 2024?
You people don't realize that 2010's and 2020's does not equal 2010 or 2020, but it is about the decade. When he says we will be using wearable technology by 2010's, it's not actually 2010, but somewhere between 2010 and 2019. Considering we are starting to use technologies like that in 2014, he was right.
19:49
"Let me just end with a couple scenarios. By 2010 computers will disappear..."
He didn't say it was a prediction per se, but he did say "by 2010" not "the 2010's".
he means technology will become small enough to be anywhere
Yes we did get wearable technology in the 2010s like apple watches they're somewhat common now
@mesofius Actually, the devlopment of the mobile phone is a clear example of exponential development. For several years nothing much happened except the mobiles getting smaller and slightly better. The last few years the development has accelerated immensly and I find it really hard to imagine what a mobile phone (or similar device) will be capable of in 6-7 years.
Man this is old, and most of his Predictions for the 2010s did come true, let's see if the predictions for 2020's do the same or not.
well, he was wrong...
Probably a few years off but we're heading there..
Am from the future in the year of 2023, his predictions have been underwhelming, he underestimated how much more progress we are seeing. AGI in 2029, more like 2026 and the singularity in 2045 very likely much sooner.
@@berndschoder2165 Your wrong
@@marashdemnika5833 Eh, no way to know if we'll see AGI by 2026, so there's no way to say his predictions are "underwhelming". At the end of the day, you yourself are making your own prediction here, thus far, it seems he has been right in that case. I would have to rewatch this video however to see the points that have been made.
Thank you Ray. Thank God there are people like this who are devoted to thinking, analyzing, and improving the world.
john harris No transhumanists believe in god
@Kristof McKenna Transhumanists don't believe in a god, they believe in technology. And that's a good thing.
This is all really amazing! However, Ray doesn't seem to be taking into account the hindrance of capitalism on technological advancement. If we can free ourselves of this inefficient, anachronistic system of resource abuse and poor distribution, we really could achieve all of these things -- even faster than he predicts. For example, Apple didn't release the next best technology in the iPad2, they released something that was just better enough to make a profit. Progress comes second to profit.
I know this comment is 9 years old but I still think this applies today. I agree that many companies value profit over progress and it leads to, for example, a higher priced ‘new and improved’ iPhone with a lot of the same features as the iPhone from two years ago and maybe a better camera.
In a way, I agree.. most companies use resources to simultaneously reach the same goals.. which is inefficient resource allocation if viewed from a global standpoint. Enough prosperity may one day make communism feasible.. who knows
P.S: I don't agree with any of the dumb communists of the present era.
@@siddheshpatwardhan4920 Have you heard of a resource based economy? Or RBE?
@@aarongrooves no..what's it
@@siddheshpatwardhan4920 I absolutely agree with you, in times of prosperity communism might be great, bu we gotta get there first, and yea freedom not what some countries have today wich is horrible
Packing more power into the device is truly important if your problem is lack of power in the device. For today's mobile devices though, the most important thing that limits their use is the interface - they have enough power for any application that could be run on a PC few years ago; their main limitation compared to PCs (including the older, less powerful PCs) is the limited interface that's caused by the small size of the mobile devices.
You can argue that he was right about computers disappearing, though it's just starting. The smart phones really are computers that we carry with ourselves. We do banking, browsing, paying bills, watching this very presentation on our phones now, which was NOT the case when this was filmed in 2007 or 2006.
13 years later we have specialized AI microprocessors and quantum computers.
16 years later..
Too many people are getting caught up on how he said 2010 vice 2010's. It's a public speech, not a written essay; he probably meant 2010's and wasn't making predictions for these things to occur in just 3 years from when this was posted.
The 2010's have ended and he was still wrong haha
Kurzweil's predictions on very specific technologies (e.g. devices that beam images into the retina by 2010 etc.) are arguable, but his timeline concerning more general technologies like computing power, solar power efficiency, the reverse engineering of the human brain and so on are irrefutable, unless you can somehow argue how their exponential growth will suddenly grind to a halt and prevent these powerful technologies from arriving on schedule. The world changes faster and faster every day.
What is the best and easiest way to make money.
Think of something that offers hope and deliverance from the daily realities and hardships of people's lives.Then write a book about the pseudo-religious idea and sit back and enjoy the money rolling in. If you feel bored: keep repeating the same message in shows and conferences.Does this remind you of Ray Kurzwel ? It sure does! The man is an exceptional marketeer and salesman. He sold you thin air and made money from it. Well done ray.
he didn't mean computers would disappear as in they cease to exist. he meant they will be so small they are unnoticeable.
"computers will dissappear by 2010."
Huh?
Even if he meant 2010s he was completely wrong
@@NiekKuijpers yh that was way too optimistic. VR and AR is only getting mainstream now in the 2020s. Apple will release mixed reality tech within 5 years and by 2040 it should be mainstream.
his timelines are too optimistic.
@@xsuploader yeah exactly, that's why i think the singularity will not happen in 2045. Probably decades later IF it may even happen
@@NiekKuijpers theres no reason it cant happen technologically imo
the only thing that could stop it is politics. Politics has already managed to get in the way of progress many times.
my own timeline is as follows
human brain sized neural net circa 2030
superinteliigence able to run on massive supercomputers circa 2050
superintelligence brought down to say a flagship smartphone circa 2080
singularity 2085. After this point we dont know how things will play out. The likely outcome is that the largest companies will monopolise all the power in the world. There will be a small trillionaire class that controls everything. On the other hand if somehow we get a good actor in charge of the algorithm we may witness the greatest utopia possible on earth.
Smart phone replaced PC for most
Yes for the individual technology(vacuum tubes, microchips), the growth stops eventually, but just like relais technology was replaced by vacuum tubes and vacuum tubes by transistors, todays technology will be replaced by the next(nanotubes, quantum computing etc.) thus keeping the general exponential growth of information technology alive.
As for those who are "at a disadvantage" for shunning human augmentation and technology, look at the Amish. They seem to get along just fine despite being at significant technological disadvantages even today. And if technology is another form of evolution, WE will become the common ancestor of two (or more) very different species which split. Transhumanism is accelerated evolution, and it's very exciting to see these first sparks of a potentially new race.
Knowledge. The freedom to live as we like and ought to not as dictated by corporations and nation states. To explore our galaxy and the cosmos in general, our final frontier. This is why I love Kurzweil - he has not only a positive, humanist, progressive vision but a plausible one as well. I am happy to be one of his Singularitarians...
Good posts by the way!
Snowballing yes, you are right. Yet what has made a larger impact: developing the basics of algebra or advancing the theories of advanced mathematics one iota? As I say in other comments, I look at thing via a relative viewpoint. We are continuing to make steps, but our steps are becoming smaller and smaller, our snowball is slowing down. It is large, so even a 1 degree rotation covers vast swathes of area, but it is slowing.
That would be the greatest TED talk ever given!
I remember watching this when it first came out, I think about it a lot, especially these days... How right you were
Kurzweil was principle developer of omnifont optical character readers, the 1st print to speech reading mach for the blind, the first CCD Flat bed scanner, the first text to speech synthesizer, the first music sythesizer (kurtzweil sythesizers), the 1st commercial vocabulary speech recognition and he is a leading resource in artifical intelligence.2002 national inventors hall of fame,lemelson-MIT prize, National medal of tech, 12 doctorates and 3 presidential honors ect
Itd be a miracle if Ray was able to be this sharp again.
I agree, there is a temporary effect of people's jobs being displaced. But I think when technology really starts to pick up, education will improve greatly as we are able to increasingly understand individual minds and improve teaching methods so people will learn more important skills and remember them in the same amount of time. Delinquency will also gradually become less of a problem as negative aspects of society are reduced and the educational system becomes much more direct and engaging.
Hi
19:51 "by 2010 computers will disappear, they'll be so small they'll be embedded into our clothing, in our environment, images will be written directly to our retina- providing full immersion virtual reality, augmented real reality... we'll be interacting with virtual personalities" lmao he sort of jumped the gun on that one..
Hi Im from 10 years in the future still typing on a laptop.
@@xsuploader a decade ago I made this comment and im still typing on my PC lol. But yeah most my friends use phones for everything in life now
This is a FANTASTIC summary of the whole transhumanism/singularity/futurism thing in general. An excellent presentation from Ray Kurzweil, whose presentations can normally be quite dry and bland. Welcome to the knee of the curve gents.... hopefully we can all collectively make the most of it.
It's neat to watch the subtle changes that he makes from year to year.
@DanceInYourRoom "It (An electronically brain) is not a living thing" - Define living.
An exact functional copy of a human brain whatever the framework it is implemented in is 'living'. It doesn't program itself, it evolves just like we did.
If we attach some kind of body with sensors (similar to our senses) and it can move around, then it's brain could be set up to evolve in relation to interacting with the real world.
19:49 I got to say his prediction of 2010 from 2005 was a bit off.... Images are not "directly written to our retinas" by 2010. A swing and a miss. I hope your right about human level A.I. by 2029.
While economic downturns negatively effect business production of some devices, as a whole the rate of technological progress is not affected. Kurzweil addresses this with proof in his book, showing how the rate of progress is not affected by economic downturns. In fact, recessions and hard times often encourage innovation due to lack of resources and create opportunities in the market for new business and ideas. The 1930s/40s gave birth to air conditioning, fluorescent light, tv, etc.
How long do you think it takes then?
Such an inspiration this guy
The though of having small robots inside your head that can alter how you see things is rather unsettling.
+BlackSkullHeart There was an experiment at a University where they successfully interfaced their brains with fiber optic cables to influence their thought patterns and to create a two way brain netting scheme to link the minds of multiple rats.
They are deeply intertwined economically. The resources used in the doll market at present day can not be utilized any better then through market competition. If too many dolls are made then the company who makes them loses money via overhead, If they dont make enough then they lose money in potential profits. If they make just enough of what is desired to meet market demand thay are rewarded with money. And the strongest survive and prevail. Thats competition and best use of resources to date.
I want to ask questions the watchers. If anyone reply me i'll be so happy. Are Futurists very important in your culture? Beside of the true arguments why he always talk about future? Is there any guarantee certificate of him?
He stated you can't predict any one scenario but the trend is heading toward these means. I'm sure things like this exist today but it isn't economically feasible. They were said as "scenarios" of what could be possible, not what will definitely happen.
The biggest issue seems to be when experts in a field pretend to be experts in (or knowledgeable enough about) another field so as to make predictions. Kurzweil is a known, verified and obvious visionary who has proven himself numerous times as an accurate predictor of technological trends. However, this says nothing about his understanding of biology, genetics, evolution or the processes that drive the human body.
No objective, rational, intellectually-honest person can watch a technologist make these predictions on the merging of science and physical human processes without having a modicum of skepticism. It's like if Richard Dawkins were to make claims to know how a certain area of chemistry is going to define human evolution. He's an evolutionary biologist, not a chemist.
It's far more interesting to watch experts bounce these things off of each other than to hear one expert in a field talk about things that he objectively does not have the training, education and knowledge to claim an especially elegant perspective on.
That has been true for the most part, but it's changing. Kurzweil is an expert in Information Technology and IT is merging completely with these other sciences. Though he can predict all these things, because even them (like biology) become predictable through IT.
1. SamHawkens: I understand that. And my reasoning was not good enough in my earlier comment. But think about it this way. Back bone of all religion is faith - meaning no questions asked. So what if we get the state where no need to ask questions, meaning we have answers to most questions, or at least the answers for those questions which religous groups rely on to establish the need for faith.
A very intelligent and enlightened chap - nice talk, thank you.
I feel special liking all of these old comments from 10 years ago
@dheublein wrong. It's not due to the profit incentive, it is due to the lust for power. All the profit incentive does is bring more competition towards an industry. A corporation that doesn't want competition would lobby the state to impose regulations and compliances to weed out competition and limit the number of competitors. This is how you usually end up with oligopolies and monopolies.
>regardless of the cost
what cost?
voluntaryism : human action should be voluntary. Not too many chars
He said transistors would go into the 3rd dimension and they just did this year, Dr. Kurzwweil really knows what he's talking about.
He ignores a very important issue: even though we might have all kinds of technology at the experimental level pretty soon, that doesn't mean it will replace the current widely used technology. PCs are not going to suddenly disappear. We use them because they're the established standard with heaps of compatible HW and SW available. For the same reasons almost everyone still uses Windows. This isn't going to suddenly change. Once a platform is well established, we're locked in it to some degree.
I'd like to think that our current economic paradigm is feasible to continue to use for the rest of eternity, however we are forgetting the elephant in the room. Automation continuously displaces human labor, thus our current system is doomed to failure. Like all economic paradigms of the past, ours will require an "overhaul" at some point in the future. The question is how much suffering we need to endure before we change.
Yes, we have a lot of fancy toys, but they we haven't seen a quantum leap or change of the type we did when antibiotics or printing press were released. You can take overall progress and measure it by minute improvements, or you can look at it from a broader perspective. The one thing you mentioned that rises above being a forgettable step is teleportation. Developing that could be worth remembering in 300 years.
Very interesting but I always wonder when I see a graph like this, concerning technology or money in particular, how accurate the graph could possibly be due to so many discoveries being classified top secret.
I think your point on humans not having the ingenuity to fully utilize our future computers is valid, but all we need to know, and people are working on this already, is how to let these computers learn by themselves via evolutionary algorithms. Look up Hod Lipson on TED on this. Do it!
And for extending life, regenerative medicine is just as important so that people won't end up degenerating as all elderly people do as you mention.
Even Moore expects transistor miniaturisation to stop only after reaching the atomic level, which is intrinsic to Kurzweil's predictions. Any other objections that I can see are either dependant on unknown/unavailable data or simply emotional.
I think I'm doing a decent job. I'm a person who believes in strength so I do my best. I think that society overlooks science too much, which is why for example the space program has not been as wild as people hoped. Its funny that people don't realize that pretty much all of their opinions and opportunities are given to them by their technological surroundings ya know?
Besides, in mobile phones / portable computers, miniaturization has already reached a point when it can't go much further without limiting usability. Look at the iPad: it's actually *larger* than the iPhone. We're able make a powerful and very small computer right now but the problem is: how are you gonna use it if it's so small? Current user interfaces use the surface of the device to communicate with the user; a small device has little surface so the UI sucks. It has already hit the wall.
Like Interactive art right? What about the Media? What happens to broadcasting? Maybe its a trade that takes place at someones home rather then in an actual studio?
@JoeTube27, It seems like you're saying we should throw away knives because they can be used to cut people. Just because we haven't yet worked out the best way to use a tool doesn't mean we should discard it. Why not just reengineer the way we use wealth to motivate ourselves? Maybe it's possible to deploy it in ways that undermine our ability to profit by exploiting each other and enhance our ability to profit by empowering others? I agree there is a problem: our economy has an effect on us.
II. ...and a genuine comprehension of the workings of our brains may (he says) lie only slightly beyond grasp of the limits of our intelligence, or perhaps even well within them.
It's been awhile since I've read this passage, but the impression made upon the reader (at least this reader) is that Hofstadter is optimistic on this score.
@eyhexs Example: I own a HTC touch pro (Raphael). this phone houses the Qualcomm MSM7201A cpu @ 528 MHZ.
The touch diamond, touch pro 2, and htc hd all house this same processor. Only differences are rom, ram keyboard or no keyboard and size in the screen.
@mana2432 I agree with you that corporatism runs rampant, but I propose that that is primarily due to the profit incentive. The incentive in this profit-driven monetary system is to accumulate as much profit as possible, regardless of the cost. Whenever that is the incentive, and to basis to ultimate freedom and success in a society, the result will be the corruption we see today. What do you mean by voluntaryism?
I'm glad I found this video, most interesting talk.
And he was even able to turn the often scientific bable into enthusiasm-inspiring rhetoric.
Ray Kurzweil is important for this world - technology will continue on the path he explains... so it's important to talk about this imminent future before it becomes reality so that we are ready for it - why not end all poverty, all grief and all hatred in a world of virtually no scarcity?
It is, theoretically, HIGHLY possible considering our understanding of consciousness. Now, whether it will go good or bad is a matter of thinking all decisions made with said technology VERY carefully. It could be the salvation of our species for the rest of existence, or cause the end of it (quite quickly). It's all about we as humans can handle it.
@dheublein also, money is just a representation of trade ie. trading your labor for money to buy the food you need to buy. If you are stuck in an island, and are able to get food but you have to do labor, you must put effort into your life to survive.
@MadPutz Interesting stuff. So if we literally achieve immortality (which Kurzweil has explicitly predicted), will the population rise indefinitely, at a hitherto uncharted rate, and will this not become a problem at some point?
so does this mean i shouldnt buy the new ps3 because in just five years the ps28 will be coming out?
OTOH with more things having been invented it can become harder to invent something new - because all the easy/obvious (with the technology you currently have) inventions have been already done and you haven't progressed enough yet to be able to tackle the more difficult ones. It may be that the curves are not really exponential as Kurzweil says but they are something like the logistic curve. Kurzweil focuses on new technology - for that the logistic curve would look like an exponential one.
The elite of technology is for the elite of people, that´s just how it goes. But as technology evolves, that which was elite yesterday is mundane today, and so it becomes available for the masses.
perhaps we are arguing semantics.
We may not trade traditional stuff or have green paper anymore.
however we will trade information, energy, and rare elements. 3 things that will still have distinct value in that future world. We will still have some sort of trade accounting system...even if its not paper...but I consider the accounting method to be money.
Yes, I'm aware of those examples, but those came from lost wars and were on a much smaller scale. Like in my previous post I assumed that if the US fails likely most other areas of the globe would fail given the immense economic power of the US related to the world. In a scenario where "everything fails" wouldn't be comparable to a historical version of collapse. However, as said, the resources would still be available even if the money isn't. If the US failed, the US would be much different
Adbastone, can you please post your list of scientific accomplishments. Kurzweil has won every scientific award known to man. So before we bypass Ray, and Listen to you, please give us one reason why we should listen to you?
Ray is RIGHT on course. His problem is his predictions are proving lately, (the last 12 years) to be about 4-6 years too early.
Overall however, he is indeed the leading tech prophet of our time.
@DanceInYourRoom "a program cannot write it's own code" - A system can create new programs, i.e. it can reprogram itself. Look up evolutionary programming. The brain already does this so it can be done.
I am basing all my ideas on science, not emotions. It is you that brings in emotions saying that Alan Turing would be annoyed, or when you say "Do you feel you will 'own'...".
You're right, the RFID thing is a concern. Power, money and the best technology has always concentrated itself upward (gov't, power elite), whether the R&D has come from DARPA or some private party that are then contracted or bought out.
Right, which I agree with. Let's say that all corporations and governments around the world begin to adopt a movement towards solar (the political and economic will). How many years until we can make the transition for our transportation and living needs, for 7 billion people? The effects of oil depletion are hitting us TODAY. Solar panels were on the White House in the 70s and were removed. You are correct, but you are missing the larger aspects of our energy story.
@bobjimjones I am familiar with Mises argument. He even admits "calculation in natura in an economy without exchange can embrace consumption-goods only." And as David Schweickart observes in his book Against Capitalism "[i]t has long been recognised that von Mises's argument is logically defective. Even without a market in production goods, their monetary values can be determined." What was a luddite fallacy in the 19th century is a reality today i.e. the accelerating rate of change.
The time will come when technology becomes the power source driven economy. At this most important stage, people who realizes this will be able to adapt and succeed in this transformation decade.
Yes if you read his books, he's always been pretty consistent on the years and I think he did mean 2020.
I suggest you read up on emerging technologies such as the Oculus rift and leap motion as a the new direction for computing interfaces. We keep viewing technology in a linear way, you speak of Windows like it were some industry standard as established as the combustion engine. 20 years ago everything was largely DOS based, and windows was not widely adopted until at least 3.11 and 95. And hence established the mouse as the preferred tool for OSes. 20 years from now things may be very different.
@FutureLaugh Aside from the retina stuff, he's kinda right on. I wear my ipod shuffle on my shirt when I go to the gym, my iPhone resides in my pocket and gives me access to the entire human knowledge wherever I am, not to mention all the other great stuff it does. Facebook and other technologies give us the ability to interact with virtual personalities. TV's now interact fully with the internet. Video games now give us almost full immersion virtual reality. He's not that far off.
Wow! Throwback to a genius! Most of his predictions came true in this decade!
beside of market analyses going up, which is obvious all the Microbivores, reverse-engenering the human brain, bloodcells and other tec where is all this? So most of his predictions did not came true.
I dont see anyone refuting his idea on an intelectual level here. He is clear: "If we can convert 0.03 of the sunlight that falls on the earth in to energy(...) "
He, as an industrial, project the coming tecnology. If one wants to focus on actual tecnological problems, one should focus on the energy problem we face nowadays.
Sts lang talaga malakas
Lol trueeee HAHAHAHAHA
Incredible and exciting times!
@jordan2870
To be fair, most of the space is taken up by the user interface and displays. The new iPod Shuffle is 29×31.6×8.7 mm (1.1×1.24×0.34 in) and it weighs 12.5 g (0.4 oz), it decodes mp3, has a speech synthesizer, 4 gigabytes od memory and can play over 10 hours of music on a single charge. You can pretty much "embed" it in any clothing more substantial than a g-string.
This guy is my hero
Me too
doesn't he say that we would have the option to either experience being merged with everything or being an individual? (or, e.g. merging with one other person, for example, if we wanted). He compares it to a home computer that can operate on its own as well as being linked to the web, I think
He may be a few years off, but actually the technology he's talking about already exists, but economically and ergonomically it is not fully feasible. For example, many new computers being bought today are "netbooks" or mobile smartphones, rather than old traditional desktops.
if/then/else ... you just described the process every human goes through before they make a decision, provided they think at all. Learning is simply pattern recognition; it won't be too hard to program once processor speeds get closer to that of human brain processing power.
@rspaulding Are you so certain? That argument was put forward for a long time now and its prognosis never materialized. The nature of work changed but work itself prevailed.
" Computers will dissappear by 2010, they will be so small, they will be embedded in our clothing..." I'm watching this in 2020 on my computer
that's 2045
@@chicxulub2947 shut up fanboy admit he was wrong
Do you work for Mattel?
I'm not pessismistic about our present and future capabilities. I'm pretty excited about it. But the human genome got mapped because impractical side solutions to the problem were discarded for better ones. Neural nets and internal retinal displays are not selling points for the next leap of technology. I'm not pessimistic, I'm just correcting Ray Kurtzwieil who sounds a little like he's selling the sizzle to potential shareholders.
Hey will we still have films when the singularity happens like when were able to create Intelligence and have machines d o more of the work we do. Will we still have the media and films to entertain us?
I used to share your concern but recently I don't. Perhaps you fear you will have to relinquish decision making and feel threatened. I don't think this is going to be the case at all. As far as this planet is concerened at least; we're the 'problem' not the machines. Thanks for your post, I enjoyed it.
He meant in their box personal computer form. They will continue to exist in many different forms. Our computers are already changing, most people buy a "netbook", or even our smartphones function as capable computers too.
not to disrupt this fascinating (and entertaining) conversation but did you just cite the animatrix as a source... really?? What is he supposed to do counter back with blade runner?
Knowing THE TRUTH behind anything gives you the power to FULLFILL those infinite possibilities that allready exsist.
Animal learning is based solely on pleasure-seeking and pain avoidance. If we can program goals and experimentation, we can program learning.
kuzweil himself is an inventor and successful entrepreneur, coming from such background i think he overestimates the creative and individual capacity of human race as a whole. it's accurate to conclude that many of the scenarios he describe are inevitable outcomes... i feel he's a little "impatient" when it comes to the time-scales though... also what of current western economic climate (yes, western not global).... i'd like to hear a video response from kurzweil himself regarding that factor.
damn not a lot of people from 2021 here it feels like im from the future
Imagine how I feel coming from 2023.
@@marashdemnika5833 I just stopped by from 2024. AGI is almost here, and the world is concerned about human species annihilation.
Im from 2024