Gunnar_Zarncke comments on Open thread, September 2-8, 2013 - Less Wrong

0 Post author: David_Gerard 02 September 2013 02:07PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (376)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: Gunnar_Zarncke 02 September 2013 10:03:17PM 1 point [-]

Just had a discussion with my in-law about the singularity. He's a physicist and his immediate response was: There are no singularities. They appear mathematically all the time and it only means that there is another effect taking over. Correspondingly a quick google thus brought up this:

http://www.askamathematician.com/2012/09/q-what-are-singularities-do-they-exist-in-nature/

So my question is: What are the 'obvious' candidates for limits that take over before the all optimizable is optimized by runaway technology?

Comment author: Adele_L 03 September 2013 12:22:05AM 14 points [-]

On LW, 'singularity' does not refer to a mathematical singularity, and does not involve or require physical infinities of any kind. See Yudkowsky's post on the three major meanings of the term singularity. This may resolve your physicist friend's disagreement. In any case, it is good to be clear about what exactly is meant.

Comment author: CellBioGuy 02 September 2013 11:43:33PM 6 points [-]

Lack of cheap energy.

Ecological disruption.

Diminishing returns of computation.

Diminishing returns of engineering.

Inability to precisely manipulate matter below certain size thresholds.

All sorts of 'boring' engineering issues by which things that get more and more complicated get harder and harder faster than their benefits increase.

Comment author: Vaniver 02 September 2013 10:43:14PM 0 points [-]

So my question is: What are the 'obvious' candidates for limits that take over before the all optimizable is optimized by runaway technology?

There aren't any that I'm aware of, except for "a disaster happens and everyone dies," but that's bad luck, not a hard limit. I would respond with something along the lines of "exponential growth can't continue forever, but where it levels out has huge implications for what life will look like, and it seems likely it will level out far above our current level, rather than just above our current level."

Comment author: Armok_GoB 16 September 2013 12:54:13AM -1 points [-]

One calculation per planck time per cubic planck length in the future light cone.