• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In    
  • Create Account
  LongeCity
              Advocacy & Research for Unlimited Lifespans


Adverts help to support the work of this non-profit organisation. To go ad-free join as a Member.


Photo
- - - - -

Immortality only 20 years away


  • Please log in to reply
179 replies to this topic
⌛⇒ MITOMOUSE has been fully funded!

#1 karl_bednarik

  • Guest
  • 426 posts
  • 102
  • Location:Wien, Oesterreich (Vienna, Austria)

Posted 23 September 2009 - 08:46 AM


Immortality only 20 years away says scientist

Scientist Ray Kurzweil claims humans could become
immortal in as little as 20 years' time through nanotechnology
and an increased understanding of how the body works.

http://www.telegraph...-scientist.html

#2 Vgamer1

  • Guest, F@H
  • 763 posts
  • 39
  • Location:Los Angeles

Posted 23 September 2009 - 01:35 PM

Exciting article. But why the terminator??

#3 forever freedom

  • Guest
  • 2,357 posts
  • 68

Posted 23 September 2009 - 04:24 PM

Indeed, what does a terminator have to do with anything lol. Pure sensationalism.

20 years may be a bit of a stretch; it's more like in some 40+ years. But as long as Moore's Law stays alive, the outlook for the future is bright.

sponsored ad

  • Advert
Advertisements help to support the work of this non-profit organisation. [] To go ad-free join as a Member.

#4 niner

  • Guest
  • 16,276 posts
  • 2,000
  • Location:Philadelphia

Posted 23 September 2009 - 04:44 PM

Ray Kurzweil isn't a scientist. He's an engineer. Therein lies at least part of the problem with some of his predictions.

#5 chmstar

  • Guest
  • 12 posts
  • 2

Posted 23 September 2009 - 06:03 PM

His over use of the phrase 'exponential growth' really bothers me he doesn't seem to be able to go a few minutes with out uttering it.

#6 Mind

  • Life Member, Moderator, Secretary
  • 16,446 posts
  • 2,000
  • Location:Wausau, WI

Posted 23 September 2009 - 06:24 PM

As long as economies do not crash and existential risks are managed well, I think it is easy to see that progress will continue. I am not going to say it will be exponential, or super exponential, or linear, or whatever, but progress will continue. Even if we only continue on the pace we saw in the 20th century for lifespan extension (unlikely, it will probably be a greater pace), people will routinely live longer than 90 years by 2029. Retarding aging, repairing damage, and the like, are not so distant so as to be science fiction.

#7 forever freedom

  • Guest
  • 2,357 posts
  • 68

Posted 23 September 2009 - 07:27 PM

This is an interesting link:

http://www.computerw...orth_processing


Having an exaflop supercomputer in a decade seems feasible and even very likely, as we already have a 20 petaflop supercomputer and advances have been constant and predictable. It appears that everything is going according to schedule. I suppose an exaflop computer would already be able to simulate a human brain given the right software, but even if the necessary power is greatly underestimated, by 2030 we should have a computer 1,000 times more powerful than in 2020 and by 2040 we'll have a computer 1 million times more powerful than what we now consider sufficient to simulate a human brain. Could our software possibly still be so lousy by then that we won't be able to simulate a human brain?

#8 karl_bednarik

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 426 posts
  • 102
  • Location:Wien, Oesterreich (Vienna, Austria)

Posted 23 September 2009 - 11:12 PM

For immortality the computer must be able to simulate only the functions of the human body.

The computer does not have to be able to simulate the functions of the human brain.

#9 Vgamer1

  • Guest, F@H
  • 763 posts
  • 39
  • Location:Los Angeles

Posted 24 September 2009 - 12:13 AM

For immortality the computer must be able to simulate only the functions of the human body.

The computer does not have to be able to simulate the functions of the human brain.


I'm not so sure... To me the body includes the brain, so I'm not really sure what you mean. Can you elaborate?

⌛⇒ MITOMOUSE has been fully funded!

#10 thestuffjunky

  • Guest
  • 94 posts
  • -1
  • Location:kent ohio

Posted 24 September 2009 - 04:59 PM

maybe this might clear a few misconceptions about RAY KURZWEIL

Honorary Doctorate of Humane Letters[30] Hofstra University 1982
Honorary Doctorate of Music[30] Berklee College of Music 1987
Honorary Doctorate of Science[30] Northeastern University 1988
Honorary Doctorate of Science[30] Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute 1988
Honorary Doctorate of Engineering[30] Merrimack College 1989
Honorary Doctorate of Humane Letters[30] Misericordia University 1989
Honorary Doctorate of Science[30] New Jersey Institute of Technology 1990
Honorary Doctorate of Science[30] Queens College, City University of New York 1991
Honorary Doctorate of Science[30] Dominican College 1993
Honorary Doctorate in Science and Humanities[30] Michigan State University 2000
Honorary Doctorate of Humane Letters[30][31] Landmark College 2002
Honorary Doctorate of Science[30] Worcester Polytechnic Institute 2005
Honorary Doctorate of Science[30] DePaul University 2006
Honorary Doctorate of Science[30] Bloomfield College 2007
Honorary Doctorate of Science[32] McGill University 2008
Honorary Doctorate of Science[33] Clarkson University 2009

um, i think the above makes him a man with a FEW credentials in SCIENCE...

http://en.wikipedia....aymond_Kurzweil

i can be found live at

#11 VidX

  • Guest
  • 865 posts
  • 137

Posted 24 September 2009 - 05:47 PM

http://www.thesun.co...ve-forever.html


I'm attending in a few big forums (unrelated) and this made the news guys, reaction is far better then I expected. Many hears this first time, but a lot of people are fascinated, you can tell by the amount of comments/threads about this. Really great to see how fast these small comments made it to the news all around the world. We all heard 100 times what Kurzweil told, but for general public it's very new, well put in layman terms, and it doesn't matter if it's not accurate, the main idea is spreading smoothly at the moment.

Edited by VidX, 24 September 2009 - 06:13 PM.


#12 Vgamer1

  • Guest, F@H
  • 763 posts
  • 39
  • Location:Los Angeles

Posted 24 September 2009 - 05:59 PM

Very exciting! I love seeing articles like this in popular periodicals.

#13 VidX

  • Guest
  • 865 posts
  • 137

Posted 24 September 2009 - 06:11 PM

Believe me - they deliver. It was all over the news where I live (and I live in not the most in pace with technology place) Tv, radio, internet news portals, and what's most important - there's a HUGE raction, negative or positive, but a BIG interest. Seems like most of the public are completely unaware.

#14 Vgamer1

  • Guest, F@H
  • 763 posts
  • 39
  • Location:Los Angeles

Posted 24 September 2009 - 06:22 PM

Awesome man. Keep spreading the good news!

#15 forever freedom

  • Guest
  • 2,357 posts
  • 68

Posted 24 September 2009 - 06:39 PM

And we consider Kurzweil repetitive... but it's only because we've been familiar with his stuff for a long time. It's funny to think that most people never heard of him and what he says. So after all Kurzweil's strategy is the best one to use: repeat, repeat, repeat, because there will always be new ears to hear it.

Edited by forever freedom, 24 September 2009 - 06:40 PM.


#16 karl_bednarik

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 426 posts
  • 102
  • Location:Wien, Oesterreich (Vienna, Austria)

Posted 25 September 2009 - 01:29 AM

For immortality the computer must be able to simulate only the functions of the human body.

The computer does not have to be able to simulate the functions of the human brain.


I'm not so sure... To me the body includes the brain, so I'm not really sure what you mean. Can you elaborate?


There is a big difference between the biological functions of
the human brain and the informatic functions of the human brain.

The biological functions of the human brain are needing the organization of many molecules.

The informatic functions of the human brain are needing the organization of many cells.

(I am living in Austria, my language is "Ausglish".)

#17 PWAIN

  • Guest
  • 1,288 posts
  • 241
  • Location:Melbourne

Posted 25 September 2009 - 05:05 AM

Hmmm....

From Wikipedia:

An honorary degree[1] or a degree honoris causa (Latin: 'for the sake of the honour') is an academic degree for which a university (or other degree-awarding institution) has waived the usual requirements (such as matriculation, residence, study and the passing of examinations). The degree itself is typically a doctorate or, less commonly, a master's degree, and may be awarded to someone who has no prior connection with the institution in question.

Usually the degree is conferred as a way of honoring a distinguished visitor's contributions to a specific field, or to society in general. The university often derives benefits by association with the person in question.

Give me some real degrees or better still real accomplishments if you want to impress.

His previous predictions have left me completly unimpressed. I hope he is right, but I wouldn't count on it.



maybe this might clear a few misconceptions about RAY KURZWEIL

Honorary Doctorate of Humane Letters[30] Hofstra University 1982
Honorary Doctorate of Music[30] Berklee College of Music 1987
Honorary Doctorate of Science[30] Northeastern University 1988
Honorary Doctorate of Science[30] Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute 1988
Honorary Doctorate of Engineering[30] Merrimack College 1989
Honorary Doctorate of Humane Letters[30] Misericordia University 1989
Honorary Doctorate of Science[30] New Jersey Institute of Technology 1990
Honorary Doctorate of Science[30] Queens College, City University of New York 1991
Honorary Doctorate of Science[30] Dominican College 1993
Honorary Doctorate in Science and Humanities[30] Michigan State University 2000
Honorary Doctorate of Humane Letters[30][31] Landmark College 2002
Honorary Doctorate of Science[30] Worcester Polytechnic Institute 2005
Honorary Doctorate of Science[30] DePaul University 2006
Honorary Doctorate of Science[30] Bloomfield College 2007
Honorary Doctorate of Science[32] McGill University 2008
Honorary Doctorate of Science[33] Clarkson University 2009

um, i think the above makes him a man with a FEW credentials in SCIENCE...

http://en.wikipedia....aymond_Kurzweil

i can be found live at



#18 forever freedom

  • Guest
  • 2,357 posts
  • 68

Posted 25 September 2009 - 01:35 PM

Hmmm....

From Wikipedia:

An honorary degree[1] or a degree honoris causa (Latin: 'for the sake of the honour') is an academic degree for which a university (or other degree-awarding institution) has waived the usual requirements (such as matriculation, residence, study and the passing of examinations). The degree itself is typically a doctorate or, less commonly, a master's degree, and may be awarded to someone who has no prior connection with the institution in question.

Usually the degree is conferred as a way of honoring a distinguished visitor's contributions to a specific field, or to society in general. The university often derives benefits by association with the person in question.

Give me some real degrees or better still real accomplishments if you want to impress.

His previous predictions have left me completly unimpressed. I hope he is right, but I wouldn't count on it.


Real accomplishments? What about successful inventor, entrepreneur, writer, and thinker. What else do you want? Maybe president of the United States would be enough for you?

Moreover, i think we can all agree that his contributions to science and technology (just considering his many inventions, not to mention his ideas) are bigger than those of most "real" PhDs out there.

His predictions may be a bit too optimistic sometimes (but add a few years to the prediction and it will usually be right on spot, he gets most tendencies right) but besides that i haven't seen anyone make better predictions or have a better idea about the future than him. It's not like predicting the future is very easy you know..

#19 niner

  • Guest
  • 16,276 posts
  • 2,000
  • Location:Philadelphia

Posted 25 September 2009 - 02:05 PM

Could our software possibly still be so lousy by then that we won't be able to simulate a human brain?

Yes.

#20 niner

  • Guest
  • 16,276 posts
  • 2,000
  • Location:Philadelphia

Posted 25 September 2009 - 02:12 PM

Real accomplishments? What about successful inventor, entrepreneur, writer, and thinker. What else do you want? Maybe president of the United States would be enough for you?

As fascinating and brilliant as Kurzweil is, none of these qualify him as a scientist. The presidency of the US, considering some of the recent occupants of the office, might be a negative qualification.

#21 Vgamer1

  • Guest, F@H
  • 763 posts
  • 39
  • Location:Los Angeles

Posted 25 September 2009 - 03:17 PM

As fascinating and brilliant as Kurzweil is, none of these qualify him as a scientist. The presidency of the US, considering some of the recent occupants of the office, might be a negative qualification.


You don't even consider Kurzweil a scientist? He has a degree in computer science from MIT does he not? His inventions use his degree...

Edited by Vgamer1, 25 September 2009 - 03:17 PM.


#22 forever freedom

  • Guest
  • 2,357 posts
  • 68

Posted 25 September 2009 - 03:34 PM

As fascinating and brilliant as Kurzweil is, none of these qualify him as a scientist. The presidency of the US, considering some of the recent occupants of the office, might be a negative qualification.


You don't even consider Kurzweil a scientist? He has a degree in computer science from MIT does he not? His inventions use his degree...


Well said.


Could our software possibly still be so lousy by then that we won't be able to simulate a human brain?

Yes.


Why do you think that? In this case, do you think humans are not smart enough to create a simulation of the human brain?

⌛⇒ MITOMOUSE has been fully funded!

#23 Vgamer1

  • Guest, F@H
  • 763 posts
  • 39
  • Location:Los Angeles

Posted 25 September 2009 - 03:54 PM

Could our software possibly still be so lousy by then that we won't be able to simulate a human brain?

Yes.


Why do you think that? In this case, do you think humans are not smart enough to create a simulation of the human brain?


Hmmm.... There's no real way of knowing if we're smart enough until we actually accomplish it. I'm optimistic though.

#24 forever freedom

  • Guest
  • 2,357 posts
  • 68

Posted 25 September 2009 - 04:51 PM

Could our software possibly still be so lousy by then that we won't be able to simulate a human brain?

Yes.


Why do you think that? In this case, do you think humans are not smart enough to create a simulation of the human brain?


Hmmm.... There's no real way of knowing if we're smart enough until we actually accomplish it. I'm optimistic though.



Yes, it's possible that we may not be smart enough, but i don't see any signs of it right now, so i'm also optimistic. Very optimistic, actually.

#25 Oliver_R

  • Guest
  • 74 posts
  • 0

Posted 25 September 2009 - 05:36 PM

Universities don't hand out honarart degrees for no reason - they only do it if they think the person has done something distinguished connected to the relevant field; but even so, no, I would not call him a "scientist", probably, but then I suppose "futurist" might not be familiar to a lot of Sun readers. Yes, it is good news about this getting popular press coverage. What was this in aid of? Why have the Sun and Telegraph suddenly picked up on him?

Re. simulating the brain, the people at the Blue Brain project claim they are on track to do it in 10 years.

#26 Reno

  • Guest
  • 584 posts
  • 37
  • Location:Somewhere

Posted 26 September 2009 - 02:14 AM

It's nothing that hasn't been said around here before, but it is nice to hear it from an academic every once in awhile.

Scientist Ray Kurzweil claims humans could become immortal in as little as 20 years' time.

The 61 year old American said that this new immortality will be thanks to nanotechnology and an increased understanding of how the body works.

Kurzweil said that humanity is starting to understand genes and computer technology at an accelerating rate. He said that nanotechnologies capable of replacing many of our vital organs could be in the shops in 20 years' time. He points out that artificial pancreases and neural implants are starting to become available.

You want to live here forever?

According to the Daily Telegraph, Kurzweil says that in 20 years we will have the means to reprogram our bodies' stone-age software so we can halt, then reverse, ageing. Then nanotechnology will let us live for ever. Nanobots will replace blood cells and do their work thousands of times more effectively.

He said that within 25 years we will be able to do an Olympic sprint for 15 minutes without taking a breath, or go scuba-diving for four hours without oxygen. This will be handy because with global warming you will not be able to breathe the air.

Apparently nanotechnology will improve our brains to such an extent we will be able to write books within minutes. Of course there is no guarantee that anyone will want to read them.

In virtual-reality mode, nanobots will shut down brain signals and take us wherever we want to go. Virtual sex will become commonplace. Hologram-like figures will pop in our brain to explain what is happening so we can make the right decisions.

Humans will effectively become cyborgs. Resistance is futile.


source

#27 Vgamer1

  • Guest, F@H
  • 763 posts
  • 39
  • Location:Los Angeles

Posted 26 September 2009 - 02:19 AM

Thanks for the link man. This article has been featured in 3 periodicals now! Very awesome!

Admins, I ask that you don't close or combine this thread with the others. Although it's the same article, it is an independent source.

Edited by Vgamer1, 26 September 2009 - 02:20 AM.


#28 Luna

  • Guest, F@H
  • 2,528 posts
  • 66
  • Location:Israel

Posted 26 September 2009 - 02:35 AM

I don't see how simulating the brain has to do with it, unless you are talking about AI smarter than human to learn and aid us.

But was I saw there (and what I am more likely to think that might come before the AI) is a reference to replacing parts of our bodies with artificial ones to keep us going.
I am not sure we need an AI to make them, I think we can do them pretty much by ourselves.

Stem cells and artificial organs, let's see, bionic liver, kidney, heart..
Stem cell regeneration of cartilages, bone or artificial bone..
The only thing I find important is regenerating the brain (I still don't believe in "uploading", it sounds more like cloning to me - maybe the adding of neural implants slowly is different), we seen some articles in the past about brain regeneration and rejuvenation with stem cells, but are we there yet? when will we be?

Another thing that scares me would be things which attack the brain..

#29 niner

  • Guest
  • 16,276 posts
  • 2,000
  • Location:Philadelphia

Posted 26 September 2009 - 03:10 AM

Admins, I ask that you don't close or combine this thread with the others. Although it's the same article, it is an independent source.

If we're lucky, someone will close the thread due to it being full of hooey.

Nanobots will replace blood cells and do their work thousands of times more effectively.

He said that within 25 years we will be able to do an Olympic sprint for 15 minutes without taking a breath, or go scuba-diving for four hours without oxygen. This will be handy because with global warming you will not be able to breathe the air.

Apparently nanotechnology will improve our brains to such an extent we will be able to write books within minutes.

Yeah, I'm such a grouch.

sponsored ad

  • Advert
Advertisements help to support the work of this non-profit organisation. [] To go ad-free join as a Member.

#30 thestuffjunky

  • Guest
  • 94 posts
  • -1
  • Location:kent ohio

Posted 26 September 2009 - 03:11 AM

Universities don't hand out honarart degrees for no reason - they only do it if they think the person has done something distinguished connected to the relevant field; but even so, no, I would not call him a "scientist", probably, but then I suppose "futurist" might not be familiar to a lot of Sun readers. Yes, it is good news about this getting popular press coverage. What was this in aid of? Why have the Sun and Telegraph suddenly picked up on him?

Re. simulating the brain, the people at the Blue Brain project claim they are on track to do it in 10 years.



i am the one who posted kurzwiels credentials.... well, i may have a ton of money but i am not a millionaire. however, kurzweil has more under his belt before computers... he is a pioneer greater that bill gates, steve jobs, steve wazniack, apple and the common computer.... scientist maybe no, but just dont call him a ballerina....




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users