23 replies to this topic

[celindra]

Mike Deering of the Singularity Action Group will be interviewed by Martin Sargent on TechTV's "Unscrewed" on the 29th of July, 2003, 11 pm EST.

The subject of the interview will be the Singularity.

For those who don't know, Unscrewed is a humorous program geared toward computer geeks and such. Here's the synopsis from the show's website:

-------------
Mike Deering of the Singularity Action Group
There are those who resist technology, and there are those who embrace it. Then there are those who believe it will usher in a brave new world populated by angels, fairies, and goblins. No, we're not kidding. Working to prepare for this change are members of the Singularity Action Group. Can they make Martin morph into Michael Jordan? Tune in to find out.
-------------

I'll compile a transcript, and piece together some audio and video clips.

[Bruce Klein]

Mike,

That'd be quite interesting. I didn't get a chance to see the show.

[celindra]

Transcript and MP3 clip

Video coming soon.

[Bruce Klein]

Jeezz.. that's pretty crazy stuff. The Singularity going simi-mainstream. Interesting how the discussion drifts toward how the Singularity will allow us to 'loose a few pounds' when it's much more than that.

Thanks for the update.

[Cyto]

I just got done seeing it (MST) and I have to say it wasn't flattering for Singularity Advocates. All I had heard about a singularity was the part about everything making anything possible. With the show though it made everything sound like a joke.

*Show up in person and wipe the stupid grin off your face so your not mistaken for an evangelist

*Don't say: "I think 2005"

*Act serious and point out advances to back you up

*Having a scientific background would help or knowing what your talking about can work well too

*The pictures of fairies, mike jordan with that guy's face on it, and the clip art website picture collages were not helping - I am very glad you didn't make pictures like that on this site

If someone was there and knew what they were talking about, could show quickly that they can take a few jokes, then get a point across. Even if he is still nagging on your singularity you could of illustrated something that would have people think: "could current technologies make people live exponentially?" Its great that someone is seeing at least something Immortalist-like but next time pick a better speaker. I could see why he wants to say 2005, and I'm sorry for being an arse about all this, but next time choose someone younger who will be realist. I mean nature isn't fair and the older you are the more you want something sooner, we all should know this applies, I'll just take the rap as being the party-pooper-pointer-outer.

I'm not saying you two had any hand in this but Mr. Klein and Mr. Deering, I know you two could of done better.

Feel like emailing the show and seeing if they want to talk about exponential life?

Edited by XxDoubleHelixX, 30 July 2003 - 06:56 AM.

[Bruce Klein]

By the way, I did not associate with Deering on this. I was just commenting that for a show called "Unscrewed", this is probably more than most Singularitarians could have hoped for. I'd like to see the video before reserving final judgment.

[celindra]

Show will be rebroadcast Saturday, August 2, at 10:30 PM Eastern.

[DJS]

DH,

I think as BJ said, the name of the show is "Unscrewed". Levity is probably one of its defining characteristics. There is the possibility that they picked Deering because they gave him a preshow interview and felt he was easy pickings.


Points I whole heartedly agree with you on:

"I think 2005". 2005 is definitely not the mainstream view among singularitarians. I don't even think 2020 is! I'd say more on the order of 2030 is a safe bet.

Don't say "I have no scientific background." Say I am well versed in future trends and have been study singularity theory for 20 years." Something like that. There are ways to make yourself look good without lying out right. Hasn't this guy ever been on an interview?

Point to technological advances. How about mentioning Moore's Law? That would be a start.

I did not come to the concept of immortality through Singularity Theory and am cautious about my association with it. I think it is inherently unprovable. This is not to say that I discount the possibility of it happening, it's just that biotech is so much closer to fruition. There is so much progress taking place in biotech that you can use to justify your claims. There is really none of that when discussing the Singularity.

[Jace Tropic]

True story:

1. July 29, 9pm - 10:30pm: I decided to go to bed early on this particular night because I wanted some time just to think and cry. I could not focus on anything other than how deeply disappointed I was with the negative outcomes of every single encounter I had where I brought up immortality with someone.

2. July 29, 10:30pm - 11:15pm: After I had enough self-torment, I decided the best thing to do was to get out of bed and do something that would take my mind off negative thoughts. "Unscrewed" came on and suggested a curious link.

3. July 29, 11:15pm - 11:20pm: I visited singularityactiongroup.com which opened the door to ImmInst.

4. July 29-30, 11:20pm - 2am: I regrouped, wiped my tears, and joined ImmInst -- never in my life feeling so grateful, happy, and... safe.

[celindra]

I think as BJ said, the name of the show is "Unscrewed".  Levity is probably one of its defining characteristics.  There is the possibility that they picked Deering because they gave him a preshow interview and felt he was easy pickings.

Geez, you guys are a tough crowd. The whole thing was scripted from the very beginning, if you didn't notice. Not much you can do with a 3.5 minute interview.

"I think 2005".  2005 is definitely not the mainstream view among singularitarians.  I don't even think 2020 is!  I'd say more on the order of 2030 is a safe bet.

Eh, who knows?

Don't say "I have no scientific background."  Say I am well versed in future trends and have been study singularity theory for 20 years."  Something like that.  There are ways to make yourself look good without lying out right.  Hasn't this guy ever been on an interview?

The host ad libbed that part, which caught Mike by surprise. He was already nervous as it was.

Point to technological advances.  How about mentioning Moore's Law?  That would be a start.

Nobody watching that show wants to hear a discussion of Moore's Law. And he did mention nano, bio, and AI.

I am rather disheartened by the response to the appearance. Here we have a lively conversation on a national tv program about the *singularity*, and all people can think of are why it wasn't good. What do you expect? A full hour on "60 Minutes." A Congressional hearing?

We are the minority. We take what we can get.

[Bruce Klein]

From my experience, finding anyone in my immediate meat space vicinity with a similar desire for physical immortality has been totally fruitless. With the internet however, this search has been expatiated tremendously.

[celindra]

I could not focus on anything other than how deeply disappointed I was with the negative outcomes of every single encounter I had where I brought up immortality with someone.

Some just can't wait to die.

Fortunately, I have a couple of aquaintances that are signing up for cryonics as soon as they can afford it. It's a start.

Welcome to ImmInst, by the way.

[DJS]

Geez, you guys are a tough crowd. The whole thing was scripted from the very beginning, if you didn't notice. Not much you can do with a 3.5 minute interview.

Your right Celindra, I'm being overly critical. That is one of my flaws.

"I think 2005".  2005 is definitely not the mainstream view among singularitarians.  I don't even think 2020 is!  I'd say more on the order of 2030 is a safe bet.

Eh, who knows?

I stand by this statement. I don't think he should have stated 2005. But that's my opinion.

Don't say "I have no scientific background."  Say I am well versed in future trends and have been study singularity theory for 20 years."  Something like that.  There are ways to make yourself look good without lying out right.  Hasn't this guy ever been on an interview?

The host ad libbed that part, which caught Mike by surprise. He was already nervous as it was.

Okay, okay. Now I feel bad. I know what its like to have those "butterflies" . Mike, if you read this, sorry for being overly critical. We're all on the same boat, after all. We have to stick together.

I am rather disheartened by the response to the appearance. Here we have a lively conversation on a national tv program about the *singularity*, and all people can think of are why it wasn't good. What do you expect? A full hour on "60 Minutes." A Congressional hearing?

We are the minority. We take what we can get.

Criticism strengthens future performance. I'm not trying to be mean. But your right, we got a new member in Jace Tropic from his appearance. So obviously there were positive results.

[MichaelAnissimov]

I don't think he should have said 2005 either - in fact, I asked him if he would not, before the interview, but looks like he did so anyway...

However, it is worthwhile to keep in mind that some Singularitarians play around in their heads with early dates, because rather than being in the business of futurism, we are in the business of activism, and want to formulate strategies that work as well as possible *regardless* of whether the Singularity happens in 2030 or 2008. If we don't already have a sophisticated Friendliness theory by 2006, then I will be worried. (Heck, I'm worried right now as it is.) If we don't have a sophisticated Friendliness theory by 2008, then I would be extremely worried. It's better to err on the side of caution. The Singularity should not be a conventional futurist prediction where we would rather err on the side of predicting it late so that we won't be laughed at if it turns out we got the dates wrong. The Singularity is more important than that, right?

It's absolutely wonderful that Jace Tropic found us due to this show, however. (Welcome!)

Thanks for making this interview more accessible to us by posting the mp3 link and summary, Celindra.

[Jace Tropic]

Thank you, everyone, for a pleasant welcome. I look forward to getting to know all of you!

The ideas you present have already opened up many doors for incipient immortalists such as me, and I'm sure as well for those guests who are passing by. I may be speaking too trivially, but I don't think it can be overemphasized how important this group is in working toward developing a value that will be coherent and appealing enough to elicit ever-increasing numbers to this organization.

Keep up the excellent work.

I probably will be a little quiet during the next several months. Becoming an immortalist has inspired new direction; therefore I must still do some more research and restructure my milieu if I want to contribute intelligently. But again, thanks to you and Mr. Klein, I know where to look and whom to turn for guidance.

Sincerely,
Jace

[Bruce Klein]

Jace,

You're quite welcome and please call me Bruce or BJ. Thankfully, I'm not quite Methuselah material yet at least

[Gewis]

Yeah, Jace, gramps isn't ready to be put in the grave yet.

[Mangala]

The interviewer made us look like crackpots in a way. I really didn't like the way Mike sounded like he was the most unprepared for the interview. If we want to create awareness, lets be more honest with the public and give them something the general mainstream might accept, like 2100 or something. Then we can suprise people who know about the singularity with earlier dates. I still think you're assuming to much of our advances Micheal.

C'mon, witches in two years? We're like Raelians at this point.

[NickH]

Do you believe 2100 is a likely date for the Singularity? If you don't think the public will accept the date you really believe, and want to avoid sharing that belief with them, don't make up a more acceptable date. If you have to mention timing don't use specific dates, try ranges perhaps. I'm all for honesty: "[giving] them something the mainstream might accept, like 2100 or something" sounds like dishonesty.

[Mechanus]

I agree you shouldn't say you believe it will happen in 2100 if you believe it will happen in 2030.

However, given the audience's background beliefs, 2100 is a much more reasonable date than 2030. This issue should not get into the way of the basic idea, which is that it will probably happen in the not absurdly long term future, that the future depends on it, and that it can and should be influenced for the better.

So, you'll have to try to convey the spirit of both of the above paragraphs. For example:
"I believe the Singularity will happen in the next few decades, as do many transhumanists. However, transhumanists tend to expect much from accelerating progress. If these expectations turn out not to be warranted, the Singularity might happen in the more distant future, such as 2100. This would not make it a less critical event -- humanity's survival and potentially infinite future may still depend on the way in which the Singularity is 'seeded'."

Condensing this into something short enough that sounds good in a quick TV interview is left as an exercise for the reader.

(And, welcome on these forums, Nick)

[NickH]

Right. It's quite possible the audience will come to the conclusion of 2100 in any case, but it should be for locally right reasons ie. because they disagree with some premise you haven't convinced them of - you haven't completely transfered the justification in such a small time, so they've got a naturally incomplete conclusion. Of course there are more (and less) legitimate reasons they might continue to disagree even if they knew the entire justification.

As you point out, the ETA isn't the most important Singularity-relevant belief, and thinking about it in the more distant sense might lead to a more accurate understanding of it (less of the wrong emotions binding to it and distorting beliefs).

(Thanks)

[Mangala]

Well sorry I didn't explain enough in detail but what Mechanus said was exactly what I meant. Whenever I talk with my friends about the singularity, anyone who even believes it might happen only comes to that conclusion because he believes it won't happen for millions of years. We have to account for conservatism.

As well as radicalism. 2005 just scares people away.

And about dishonesty. It isn't all that dishonest in my opinion...expedient would be a better word .

[Thomas]

I think, what was important in that interview was: Well, the Singularity is going to hit the world like a tidal wave ... . Some people will remember that, and it's enough for those several minutes.

[chubtoad]

"Deering: Yes, we do. We've signed a contract with a Hollywood screenwriter to write a scifi/action/adventure blockbuster about the Singularity. The picture will star someone like Bruce Willis, a perfect role for a guy like him."

Is this going to be a movie that actually goes to the theaters or just one on the scifi channel at 3 AM?