Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Neil deGrasse Tyson AMA

reddit.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 68 posts

Re: Neil deGrasse Tyson AMA

#21

Post by Ryanmf »

akkartik wrote: post #10

So he's skeptical of the singularity but he thinks we'll be able to live forever in a lifetime or so. Weird.

He also suspects we're a decade or less from discovery of life on another body in our solar system.

I'm not skeptical of the singularity but I can see how/why an intelligent person could be. (Though I do feel it's worth considering that semi-sentient software could precipitate singularity-like changes without being able to pass the Turing test. I mean, it's sort of inherently myopic that we base the distinction of when a machine has crossed the threshold of sentience based on whether or not it's as smart as/smarter than a human. That could turn out to be a completely useless metric.)

My understanding of the arguments in support of meaningful extension of human lifespan (trending towards immortality) in the foreseeable future is that we're ±100 years from a development that results in (let's say) a 20 year bump, before those 20 years are up we will have accomplished a 60 year increase, within the following 60 we'll have managed to tack on 180, etc.

I do think mind uploading is probably a much more sustainable approach to Immortality for Everyone!®—then again, that's a lot of electricity.

Re: Neil deGrasse Tyson AMA

#22

Post by akkartik »

Ryanmf wrote: post #21
akkartik wrote: post #10

So he's skeptical of the singularity but he thinks we'll be able to live forever in a lifetime or so. Weird.

He also suspects we're a decade or less from discovery of life on another body in our solar system. I'm not skeptical of the singularity but I can see how/why an intelligent person could be. (Though I do feel it's worth considering that semi-sentient software could precipitate singularity-like changes without being able to pass the Turing test. I mean, it's sort of inherently myopic that we base the distinction of wh…

"we're ±100 years from a development that results in (let's say) a 20 year bump, before those 20 years are up we will have accomplished a 60 year increase, within the following 60 we'll have managed to tack on 180, etc."

Predicting the future by extrapolating a trend without bound, that's kinda like the singularity. I have trouble with this sort of thinking. It's a little too pat, a little too wishful, requires a little too much reliance on faith. Things are never that simple. You can't just find one screw and keep cranking on it indefinitely. Progress relies on the occasional blacksmith[1].

And this is good. It helps social mobility. I have a hard time imagining a metric that wouldn't entrench a tiny set of haves if it grew without bound. Monotonic progress perpetuates the status quo, like trees stunting the ground around themselves. To avoid it requires periodic creative destruction. Ends of eras. The saturating of metrics.

(If I could still edit my original comment I'd replace 'weird' with 'interesting/weird'.)

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johannes_Gutenberg

Re: Neil deGrasse Tyson AMA

#23

Post by jrappleye »

My personal favorite:

Q: If you could add one course to a student's curriculum, what would it be?"

A: Course title every university should offer: "How to tell when someone else is full of shit"

Re: Neil deGrasse Tyson AMA

#24

Post by malkia »

He is one of my heroes. So charming, funny and educating at the same time. His speech on the islam downfall in the 13th century due to some "prophet" claiming that math and devil were interconnected was much enlightening on how religion actually stops scientific progress.

Re: Neil deGrasse Tyson AMA

#25

Post by kloncks »

malkia wrote: post #24

He is one of my heroes. So charming, funny and educating at the same time. His speech on the islam downfall in the 13th century due to some "prophet" claiming that math and devil were interconnected was much enlightening on how religion actually stops scientific progress.

I was in the middle of one of his talks and heard this exactly. I agree...but allow me to just correct one thing.

The "prophet" was a sheikh/imam in Iraq (?) that said math and Satan were connected. Islam had - up until that time - managed to have some pretty amazing feats.

That said, it's interesting how we blindly take advice from men with authority. Whether that's religious figures, famous people, or politicians.

Re: Neil deGrasse Tyson AMA

#26

Post by [deleted] »

cbo wrote: post #16
akkartik wrote: post #10

So he's skeptical of the singularity but he thinks we'll be able to live forever in a lifetime or so. Weird.

They're two very different ideas, even if they're often shared by the same people. The singularity is all about AI surpassing human intelligence. On this front, I can tell you after having studied a lot of AI for the past three years, we are not close. We're a lot further than many people think, but still not quite that far. As for extending lifespans, this is something we've been doing from the dawn of medicine. We'…

[deleted]

Re: Neil deGrasse Tyson AMA

#27

Post by davidhollander »

Anyone interested in NdGT, check out the show he hosts: Nova Science Now

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/sciencenow/

You can watch full episodes online, no commercial interruptions after they start. It does a good job at filling the popular science video niche, in addition to Through the Wormhole with Morgan Freeman.

Re: Neil deGrasse Tyson AMA

#28

Post by md224 »

cbo wrote: post #16
akkartik wrote: post #10

So he's skeptical of the singularity but he thinks we'll be able to live forever in a lifetime or so. Weird.

They're two very different ideas, even if they're often shared by the same people. The singularity is all about AI surpassing human intelligence. On this front, I can tell you after having studied a lot of AI for the past three years, we are not close. We're a lot further than many people think, but still not quite that far. As for extending lifespans, this is something we've been doing from the dawn of medicine. We'…

Has anyone considered the idea that perhaps this "AI" has already arrived in the form of the collective intelligence of the Internet? That perhaps the "Singularity" is simply a shift of scope in terms of consciousness from the individual to the group? Much like multicellular organisms evolving from single-celled creatures?

I just think this makes a lot more sense than the whole "we will build a conscious robot" thing, especially since many of the innovations that are used as evidence of an approaching singularity have helped human beings become ever more tightly interconnected.

Re: Neil deGrasse Tyson AMA

#29

Post by malkia »

kloncks wrote: post #25
malkia wrote: post #24

He is one of my heroes. So charming, funny and educating at the same time. His speech on the islam downfall in the 13th century due to some "prophet" claiming that math and devil were interconnected was much enlightening on how religion actually stops scientific progress.

I was in the middle of one of his talks and heard this exactly. I agree...but allow me to just correct one thing. The "prophet" was a sheikh/imam in Iraq (?) that said math and Satan were connected. Islam had - up until that time - managed to have some pretty amazing feats. That said, it's interesting how we blindly take advice from men with authority. Whether that's religious figures, famous people, or politicians.

Thanks for the correction kloncks!

Not trying to excuse myself, but I'm simply not good at remembering details. Would have to watch the video again!

Re: Neil deGrasse Tyson AMA

#30

Post by zem »

akkartik wrote: post #10

So he's skeptical of the singularity but he thinks we'll be able to live forever in a lifetime or so. Weird.

you don't need to live till they discover immortality, you need to live till the rejuvenative rate of extension of existing lifetimes crosses one year per year. (i think i stole that from nancy kress)
Post reply on HN