Recent Comments
SIAI Bloggers
  • Tyler Emerson Executive Director
  • Ben Goertzel Director of Research
  • Bruce Klein Director of Outreach
  • Jonas Lamis Director of Partnerships
  • Michael Roy Ames SIAI Canada President
  • C. Colby Thomson Director of Strategy
  • Eliezer Yudkowsky Research Fellow
Guest Bloggers
  • Michael Anissimov Lifeboat Foundation
  • Seth Baum Pennsylvania State University
  • Nick Hay University of Auckland
  • Mitchell Howe Contributing Writer
  • Carl Shulman New York University
  • Peter de Blanc Temple University
Tag Cloud
accelerating change accelerating change agi ai Anthropic Reasoning anthropomorphism artificial intelligence artificial intelligence biases bloggers conferences conventions event horizon events evolution existential risks FAI Friendly AI Friendly Artificial Intelligence future shock futurist community goertzel intelligence explosion interesting articles interviews intros life extension math mathematics media nanotechnology news open letter open source open source projects optimization processes outreach papers podcasts prediction quantum computing radio relevant articles roadmap science fiction SIAI singularity singularity summit singularity summit transhumanism utilitarianism utility videos yudkowsky
Archives

5-Minute Singularity Intro

May 26th, 2007Eliezer Yudkowsky

This is a 5-minute spoken introduction to the Singularity I wrote for a small conference. I had to talk fast, though, so this is probably more like a 6.5 minute intro.

The rise of human intelligence in its modern form reshaped the Earth. Most of the objects you see around you, like these chairs, are byproducts of human intelligence. There’s a popular concept of “intelligence” as book smarts, like calculus or chess, as opposed to say social skills. So people say that “it takes more than intelligence to succeed in human society”. But social skills reside in the brain, not the kidneys. When you think of intelligence, don’t think of a college professor, think of human beings; as opposed to chimpanzees. If you don’t have human intelligence, you’re not even in the game.

Sometime in the next few decades, we’ll start developing technologies that improve on human intelligence. We’ll hack the brain, or interface the brain to computers, or finally crack the problem of Artificial Intelligence. Now, this is not just a pleasant futuristic speculation like soldiers with super-strong bionic arms. Humanity did not rise to prominence on Earth by lifting heavier weights than other species.

Intelligence is the source of technology. If we can use technology to improve intelligence, that closes the loop and potentially creates a positive feedback cycle. Let’s say we invent brain-computer interfaces that substantially improve human intelligence. What might these augmented humans do with their improved intelligence? Well, among other things, they’ll probably design the next generation of brain-computer interfaces. And then, being even smarter, the next generation can do an even better job of designing the third generation. This hypothetical positive feedback cycle was pointed out in the 1960s by I. J. Good, a famous statistician, who called it the “intelligence explosion”. The purest case of an intelligence explosion would be an Artificial Intelligence rewriting its own source code.

The key idea is that if you can improve intelligence even a little, the process accelerates. It’s a tipping point. Like trying to balance a pen on one end - as soon as it tilts even a little, it quickly falls the rest of the way.

The potential impact on our world is enormous. Intelligence is the source of all our technology from agriculture to nuclear weapons. All of that was produced as a side effect of the last great jump in intelligence, the one that took place tens of thousands of years ago with the rise of humanity.

So let’s say you have an Artificial Intelligence that thinks enormously faster than a human. How does that affect our world? Well, hypothetically, the AI solves the protein folding problem. And then emails a DNA string to an online service that sequences the DNA, synthesizes the protein, and fedexes the protein back. The proteins self-assemble into a biological machine that builds a machine that builds a machine and then a few days later the AI has full-blown molecular nanotechnology.

So what might an Artificial Intelligence do with nanotechnology? Feed the hungry? Heal the sick? Help us become smarter? Instantly wipe out the human species? Probably it depends on the specific makeup of the AI. See, human beings all have the same cognitive architecture. We all have a prefrontal cortex and limbic system and so on. If you imagine a space of all possible minds, then all human beings are packed into one small dot in mind design space. And then Artificial Intelligence is literally everything else. “AI” just means “a mind that does not work like we do”. So you can’t ask “What will an AI do?” as if all AIs formed a natural kind. There is more than one possible AI.

The impact, of the intelligence explosion, on our world, depends on exactly what kind of minds go through the tipping point.

I would seriously argue that we are heading for the critical point of all human history. Modifying or improving the human brain, or building strong AI, is huge enough on its own. When you consider the intelligence explosion effect, the next few decades could determine the future of intelligent life.

So this is probably the single most important issue in the world. Right now, almost no one is paying serious attention. And the marginal impact of additional efforts could be huge. My nonprofit, the Singularity Institute, is trying to get things started in this area. My own work deals with the stability of goals in self-modifying AI, so we can build an AI and have some idea of what will happen as a result. There’s more to this issue, but I’m out of time. If you’re interested in any of this, please talk to me, this problem needs your attention. Thank you.

Comments (7) (RSS feed)

Toggle comment visibility Comment by Ganesh
May 29, 2007 4:42 am

Every advance must start with a specific end in mind. Whatever research the scientists are pursuing - is it an end in itself? Does it have a particular goal in mind? I think deciding this destination (or sometimes lack of it) is the biggest problem in the discourse of human advancement. This involves not only scientific efforts, but has strong philosophical overtones. If science and philosophy do not meet, we experience the dilemma we are facing today, for example regarding stem cells research.

It is therefore that the point raised by Eliezer of lack of sufficient attention, gains importance. If humanity fails to bring these critical issues within her sphere of control, her future is bound to be shaky.

On the other hand, AI scientists should ponder and visualize where AI advances will fit within the scheme of human welfare. Anyway, I am anticipating an intellectually fulfilling blog, which does not exclude those unknown to the technicalities of AI and who nevertheless are interested in human advancement.

 
Toggle comment visibility Comment by Nick Hoffman
May 29, 2007 3:06 pm

I’m currently studying business at the Stern School in NYU, but I’d much rater dedicate my life to studying and preparing for the singularity. I think Kurzweil underestimates the rate of tech growth we’re going through based on unpredicted technological advances. This issue seems so pressing that i want to just drop what I’m doing and change my studies to be more involved in singularity research, AI, and neuroscience.

If you know of any people that need research assistance in Manhattan or the California Bay Area, or perhaps internships in related fields, I’d greatly appreciate it if you could send me their way. My email is ndh221@stern.nyu.edu. Thanks!

Nick

 
Toggle comment visibility Comment by Chris Keller
Jun 1, 2007 10:33 am

I’m excited to find a place where these ideas can be shared and discussed. This is the single most important project of the modern world! When this technology becomes a reality nothing will ever be the same. My personal opinion is that we should focus on brain computer integration rather than AI, but which ever technology succeeds first, all other research will be simplified. A tool this powerful will assist in developing solutions to the energy crisis, global warming, disease control, and every other problem that is currently plaguing our world. Because of the potential rewards, I would like to see a “Manhattan Project” style of approach where massive funds are allocated to reverse engineering the brain and developing biological integrated circuitry. With the current problems facing human civilization, how could we not push this development at all costs? This advance can not be under emphasize. I’m curious if lobby groups have been establish.

 
Toggle comment visibility Comment by Michael H. Cohen
Jun 5, 2007 11:32 am

First, I admire and appreciate your work and that of like-minded explorers. It has been an education trying to digest this material after reading “The Singularity is Near” as a starting point. Has anyone explored the connections between the Singularity and spirituality? I’m a lawyer who specializes in health care issues relating to complementary and alternative medicine. I have also explored energy healing. The idea of balance is important in many “CAM” therapies, such as acupuncture. So is the mind. It is difficult to write about “consciousness” since there are so many perspectives and every academic or scientists wants to weigh in. Nonetheless, any cursory experience with meditation or even hypnotherapy is enough to demonstrate to most open-minded persons that consciousness matters, that states of mind are possible in which we can experience foresight, compassion, and states of being beyond rational, linear thinking. There is a possible meeting place here beyond the rigidity of religious doctrine. Most of the writing around the Singularity seems to come from the rational perspective, arguing for collective action by way of safeguards — and this is doubtless critical - but what of the human spiritual evolution to correspond with these upleaps in technological acceleration? This, it seems, would be a useful vantage from which to view our progress (or lack therefore) and/or create benchmarks for work toward anticipating what you aptly call “the critical point of all human history” to which “almost no one is paying serious attention.”

 
Toggle comment visibility Pingback by networkedbacteria
Jun 11, 2007 11:50 am

[…] Those of you needing more intro, Eliezer Yudkowsky of the SIAI Blog has posted a short, but eloquent entry that explains both the Singularity and the institutes’ mission statement regarding it. For […]

 
Aug 15, 2007 6:13 pm

[…] culture, and society, and instead it would be dictated by the posthuman. I came across a post on their blog that reads, “The purest case of an intelligence explosion would be an […]

 
Apr 23, 2008 7:43 am

[…] Yudkowsky, in the newly launched Singularity Institute Blog: “Intelligence is the source of technology. If we can use […]

 

Leave a reply