Many of those people are believers who are already completely sold on the idea of a technological singularity. I hope some sort of critical examination is forthcoming as well.
Schmidhuber, Hutter and Goertzel might be called experts. But I dare to argue that statements like "progress towards self-improving AIs is already substantially beyond what many futurists and philosophers are aware of" are almost certainly bullshit.
I dare to argue that statements like "progress towards self-improving AIs is already substantially beyond what many futurists and philosophers are aware of" are almost certainly bullshit.
That's one of those statements-that-is-so-vague-it-is-bound-to-be-true. "Substantially" in one problem, and "many" is another one.
...has finally been published.
Contents:
The issue consists of responses to Chalmers (2010). Future volumes will contain additional articles from Shulman & Bostrom, Igor Aleksander, Richard Brown, Ray Kurzweil, Pamela McCorduck, Chris Nunn, Arkady Plotnitsky, Jesse Prinz, Susan Schneider, Murray Shanahan, Burt Voorhees, and a response from Chalmers.
McDermott's chapter should be supplemented with this, which he says he didn't have space for in his JCS article.