Author 400692

Ray
Kurzweil, fully Raymond "Ray" Kurzweil
1948

American Author, Computer Scientist, Inventor, Futurist, Co-Founder of Singularity University and Director of Engineering at Google, Recipient of the MIT-Lemelson Prize, National Medal of Technology, 19 Honorary Doctorate Degrees and Inducted into National Inventor's Hall of Fame,Principal Developer of the first omni-font optical character recognition, the first print-to-speech reading machine for the blind, the first CCD flat-bed scanner, the first text-to-speech synthesizer, the first music synthesizer capable of recreating the grand piano and other orchestral instruments, and the first commercially marketed large-vocabulary speech recognition

Author Quotes

No matter what problem you encounter, whether it's a grand challenge for humanity or a personal problem of your own, there's an idea out there that can overcome it. And you can find that idea.

3D printing will be even more common than it is today, with public 3D printing stations for people to print out clothes, toys, and anything else.

Artificial intelligence will reach human levels by around 2029. Follow that out further to, say, 2045, we will have multiplied the intelligence, the human biological machine intelligence of our civilization a billion-fold.

Emotional intelligence is what humans are good at and that's not a sideshow. That's the cutting edge of human intelligence.

I envision some years from now that the majority of search queries will be answered without you actually asking. It'll just know this is something that you're going to want to see.

I'm working on artificial intelligence. Actually, natural language understanding, which is to get computers to understand the meaning of documents.

Machines will follow a path that mirrors the evolution of humans. Ultimately, however, self-aware, self-improving machines will evolve beyond humans' ability to control or even understand them.

None of the global warming discussions mention the word ?nanotechnology.? Yet nanotechnology will eliminate the need for fossil fuels within 20 years. If we captured 1% of 1% of the sunlight (1 part in 10,000) we could meet 100% of our energy needs without ANY fossil fuels. We can?t do that today because the solar panels are too heavy, expensive, and inefficient. But there are new nano-engineered designs that are much more effective. Within five to six years, this technology will make a significant contribution. Within 20 years, it can provide all of our energy needs. The discussions talk about current trends continuing for the next century as if nothing is going to change. I think global warming is real but it has been modest thus far - 1 degree f. in 100 years. It would be concern if that continued or accelerated for a long period of time, but that?s not going to happen. And it?s not just environmental concern that will drive this, the $2 trillion we spend on energy is providing plenty of economic incentive. I don?t see any disasters occurring in the next 10 years from this. However, I AM concerned about other environment issues. There are other reasons to want to move quickly away from fossil fuels including environmental pollution at every step and the geopolitical instability it causes.

A computer can also remember billions or even trillions of facts perfectly, while we are hard pressed to remember a handful of phone numbers. The combination of human level intelligence in a machine with a computer's inherent superiority in the speed, accuracy, and sharing ability of its memory will be formidable.

As order exponentially increases, time exponentially speeds up.

ESPN asked me, ?we?re going to ban these, right?? I answered that steroids are bad for health long term, but these are good for your health. If you ban them, you?ll be forcing athletes to ignore something useful and high school students will outperform Olympic athletes.

I get very excited about discussions about the true nature of consciousness, because I?ve been thinking about this issue for literally 50 years, going back to junior high school. And it?s a very difficult subject. When some article purports to present the neurological basis of consciousness? I read it. And the articles usually start out, ?Well, we think that consciousness is caused by?? You know, fill in the blank. And then it goes on with a big extensive examination of that phenomenon. And at the end of the article, I inevitably find myself thinking? where is the link to consciousness? Where is any justification for believing that this phenomenon should cause consciousness? Why would it cause consciousness?

In 2029, I think computers will match and exceed human intelligence in the ways that we are now superior, like being funny, where we still have an edge.

Most long-range forecasts of what is technically feasible in future time periods dramatically underestimate the power of future developments because they are based on what I call the intuitive linear view of history rather than the historical exponential view.

Now, a big evolutionary innovation with homo sapiens is that we have a bigger forehead so that we could fit a larger cortex. But it?s still quite limited. And it?s running on the substrate that transmits information from one part of the brain to another at a few hundred feet per second, which is a million times slower than electronics. The intra-neural connections compute at about 100 or 200 calculations per second, which is somewhere between 1,000,000 to 10,000,000 times slower than electronics. So if we can get past the substrates, we don?t have to settle for a billion of these recognizers. We could have a trillion of them, or a thousand trillion. We could have many more hierarchal levels. We can design it to solve more difficult problems.

A future period during which the pace of technological change will be so rapid, its impact so deep, that human life will be irreversibly transformed. Although neither utopian nor dystopian, this epoch will transform the concepts that we rely on to give meaning to our lives, from our business models to the cycle of human life, including death itself. Understanding the Singularity will alter our perspective on the significance of our past and the ramifications of our future. To truly understand it inherently changes one's view of life in general and one's own particular life. I regard someone who understands the Singularity and who has reflected on its implications for his or her own life as ?singularitarian."

As we gradually learn to harness the optimal computing capacity of matter, our intelligence will spread through the universe at (or exceeding) the speed of light, eventually leading to a sublime, universe wide awakening.

Even by common wisdom, there seem to be both people and objects in my dream that are outside myself, but clearly they were created in myself and are part of me, they are mental constructs in my own brain.

I had this debate with John Horgan, who wrote a critical article about my views in IEEE Spectrum. Horgan says that we would need trillions of lines of code to emulate the brain and that?s far beyond the complexity that we?ve shown we can handle in our software. The most sophisticated software programs are only tens of millions of lines of code. But that?s complete nonsense. Because, first of all, there?s no way the brain could be that complicated. The design of the brain is in the genome. The genome ? well? it?s 800 million bytes. Well, back up and take a look at that. It?s 3 billion base pairs, 6 billion bits, 800 million bytes before compression ? but it?s replete with redundancies. Lengthy sequences like ALU are repeated hundreds of thousands of times. In The Singularity is Near, I show that if you apply lossless compression, you get down to about 50 million bytes. About half of that is the brain, so that?s about 25 million bytes. That?s about a million lines of code. That?s one derivation. You could also look at the amount of complexity that appears to be necessary to perform functional simulations of different brain regions. You actually get about the same answer, about a million lines of code. So with two very different methods, you come up with a similar order of magnitude. There just isn?t trillions of lines of code ? of complexity ? in the design of the brain. There is trillions, or even thousands of trillions of bytes of information, but that?s not complexity because there?s massive redundancy.

In his presentation, Hameroff said consciousness comes from gamma coherence, basically a certain synchrony between neurons that create gamma waves that are in a certain frequency, something like around 10 cycles per second. And the evidence is, indeed, that gamma coherence goes away with anesthesia.

Most scientific laws are not physical laws, but result from the emergent properties of a large number of events at a finer level. A classical example is the laws of thermodynamics (LOT). If you look at the mathematics underlying the LOT, they model each particle as following a random walk. So by definition, we cannot predict where any particular particle will be at any future time. Yet the overall properties of the gas are highly predictable to a high degree of precision according to the laws of thermodynamics. So it is with the law of accelerating returns. Each technology project and contributor is unpredictable, yet the overall trajectory as quantified by basic measures of price-performance and capacity nonetheless follow remarkably predictable paths.

Once we have inexpensive energy, we can readily and inexpensively convert the vast amount of dirty and salinated water we have on the planet to usable water.

A lot of movies about artificial intelligence envision that AI's will be very intelligent but missing some key emotional qualities of humans and therefore turn out to be very dangerous.

At today?s rate of change, we will achieve an amount of progress equivalent to that of the whole 20th century in 14 years.

Evolution is a process of creating patterns of increasing order....I believe that it's the evolution of patterns that constitutes the ultimate story of our world. Evolution works through indirection: each stage or epoch uses the information-processing methods of the previous epoch to create the next.

Author Picture
First Name
Ray
Last Name
Kurzweil, fully Raymond "Ray" Kurzweil
Birth Date
1948
Bio

American Author, Computer Scientist, Inventor, Futurist, Co-Founder of Singularity University and Director of Engineering at Google, Recipient of the MIT-Lemelson Prize, National Medal of Technology, 19 Honorary Doctorate Degrees and Inducted into National Inventor's Hall of Fame,Principal Developer of the first omni-font optical character recognition, the first print-to-speech reading machine for the blind, the first CCD flat-bed scanner, the first text-to-speech synthesizer, the first music synthesizer capable of recreating the grand piano and other orchestral instruments, and the first commercially marketed large-vocabulary speech recognition