The Singularity is Near: When Humans Transcend Biology
- Downloads：7909
- Type：Epub+TxT+PDF+Mobi
- Create Date：2021-11-01 09:54:30
- Update Date：2025-09-06
- Status：finish
- Author：Ray Kurzweil
- ISBN：0143037889
- Environment：PC/Android/iPhone/iPad/Kindle
- Download
Summary
For over three decades， Ray Kurzweil has been one of the most respected and provocative advocates of the role of technology in our future。 In his classic The Age of Spiritual Machines， he argued that computers would soon rival the full range of human intelligence at its best。 Now he examines the next step in this inexorable evolutionary process: the union of human and machine， in which the knowledge and skills embedded in our brains will be combined with the vastly greater capacity， speed， and knowledge-sharing ability of our creations。
Reviews
Gregory
，
My vision of the future involves people in bicycle helmets， white short sleeve dress shirts， and black ties knocking on my door holding a copy of The Singularity is Near。
Mark
，
In his fascinating view of the blending of biology and technology （a singularity）， futurist Ray Kurzweil throws a lot at readers throughout his fairly hefty book， The Singularity is Near: When Humans Transcend Biology。 Readers with a modest amount of intellectual stamina and faith-leaping capability will have what it takes to accompany Mr。 Kurzweil on this futuristic journey…even though frequent rest-stops may be required to avoid concept overload。I have to confess there were at least a couple o In his fascinating view of the blending of biology and technology （a singularity）， futurist Ray Kurzweil throws a lot at readers throughout his fairly hefty book， The Singularity is Near: When Humans Transcend Biology。 Readers with a modest amount of intellectual stamina and faith-leaping capability will have what it takes to accompany Mr。 Kurzweil on this futuristic journey…even though frequent rest-stops may be required to avoid concept overload。I have to confess there were at least a couple of instances early in the book where I felt as if I couldn’t go on—not didn’t want to go on， but almost couldn’t go on because of the seismic， thought-provoking notion Kurzweil had just put into my head！ For example， in explaining and qualifying his purpose with this book， he says: “The story is predicated on the idea that we have the ability to understand our own intelligence—to access our own source code， if you will—and then revise and expand it。” （my italics） Now， even my humble， circa 1970s computer programming experience knows the excitement， danger， and power that comes with the possession of source code！Another prolonged rest-stop （for this reader， at any rate）， came when Kurzweil presented 37 bullet items that define his principles for the manifestation of the Singularity。 Fasten your seatbelts for a couple of examples:Billions of nanobots in the capillaries of the brain will also vastly extend human intelligence。In virtual reality， we can be a different person both physically and emotionally。 In fact， other people （such as your romantic partner） will be able to select a different body for you than you might select for yourself （and vice versa）。Don’t be tempted to readily express satisfaction with the 37 bullets in lieu of reading the entire book， for Kurzweil expands on those bullets throughout the remaining pages。My top three takeaways from The Singularity is Near include the following。 First is Kurzweil’s “Law of Accelerating Returns，” which he says “provides the basis of understanding evolutionary change as a doubly exponential phenomenon （that is， exponential growth in which the rate of exponential growth—the exponent—is itself growing exponentially。” Second is the six-epoch schematic showing progression toward the Singularity。 Kurzweil says that “dumb matter and mechanisms of the universe will be transformed into exquisitely sublime forms of intelligence， which will constitute the sixth epoch in the evolution of patterns of information。 This is the ultimate destiny of the Singularity and of the universe。” My final takeaway is the long chapter Kurzweil devotes to GNR。 Advances in Genetics， Nanotechnology， and Robotics comprise the enabling technologies that will lead to the Singularity。Two points on timing are worth noting。 In the chapter on “Achieving the Computational Capacity of the Human Brain，” Kurzweil boldly goes out on a limb， by saying， “I set the date for the Singularity—representing a profound and disruptive transformation in human capability—at 2045。 The nonbiological intelligence created in that year will be one billion times more powerful than all human intelligence today。” The second point is that this book was published in 2005， and Kurzweil predicted that a number of intermediate accomplishments en route to the Singularity would be realized in a decade or two。 It would be nice for Mr。 Kurzweil to provide a brief update on what has/has not been accomplished and on any adjustment to the 2045 date。The Singularity is Near is a lively narrative full of very plausible possibilities and predictions， and Mr。 Kurzweil’s matter-of-fact， science-based optimism is infectious enough to carry readers along in the belief that this Singularity is indubitably a question of “when” not “if。” 。。。more
Jacqueline
，
没有看完 读得稀里糊涂的
J。 Johnson
，
Bar none， the pinnacle of materialist delusion and idol-making in the guise of science。 Its erroneous assumptions disintegrated with the limits of Moore's law。 Its prophecies fall flat before history in every respect， with author Ray Kurzweil's "delays" becoming all the more desperate with age， a secular doomsday prediction revised on multiple occasions once demonstrated false。 Its sophomoric metaphysics reads like a first draft pulp rags of years past。 I have dredged up better dialectic and ana Bar none， the pinnacle of materialist delusion and idol-making in the guise of science。 Its erroneous assumptions disintegrated with the limits of Moore's law。 Its prophecies fall flat before history in every respect， with author Ray Kurzweil's "delays" becoming all the more desperate with age， a secular doomsday prediction revised on multiple occasions once demonstrated false。 Its sophomoric metaphysics reads like a first draft pulp rags of years past。 I have dredged up better dialectic and analysis from the bottom of New York Harbor。Kurzweil， self-styled pundit in complexity， transhumanism， and futurology， shows us in a nauseating 700 pages that the opinions of one with a career in AI and cybernetics look not the least bit different than late-stage dementia。 He not-so-subtly asserts our universe's teleological end is the creation of God， and obtusely dismembers every field of science for the sake of retrofitting his untenable and pointless philosophy into actual intellectual pursuits。 This book， better than any other， embodies the foul extrapolated nightmare that occupies the minds of LSD-microdosing sycophants churned out by his eponymous Singularity University。I might prefer death than for Kurzweil's reality to be true， where we mere humans will be crushed under the treads of the juggernaut bearing the techno-fetishist pantheon ascending the steep turning point of metaphysical complexity。 Fortunately， the world as understood by The Singularity is Near is so divorced from reality that it hardly works as sci-fi schlock， much less a compelling or even coherent understanding of the universe and its mechanics。 I suffer every moment the Santa Clara valley remains populated。 I wish the choir of singularity head-cases would sing their final asinine song。 I expect that until Ray Kurzweil inevitably converts to Buddhism， the business-tech world will never know peace。Do yourself a favor， dear reader。 Before deciding to pick up this book or read it to any extent， look up Ray Kurzweil in your search engine。 Then， click "images"。 Decide from that basis whether you can trust this man with your entire worldview。 。。。more
Matthew
，
Most thick learning， all encompassing， on a vast range of topics， that I've gotten from a single piece。 Must look back and check the predictions。 Most thick learning， all encompassing， on a vast range of topics， that I've gotten from a single piece。 Must look back and check the predictions。 。。。more
David Lansing
，
Love the optimism and descriptions of where he sees the world going。 Now that some time has passed we can see some of his predictions coming true， some not， but as every technologist knows the progress only happens when it receives the funding and focus it needs。 Just look at how quickly we were able to progress with mRNA technology in the wake of covid 19， I think rays timelines here are assuming the funding is there and the focus is there。 However obviously this is overly optimistic and his pe Love the optimism and descriptions of where he sees the world going。 Now that some time has passed we can see some of his predictions coming true， some not， but as every technologist knows the progress only happens when it receives the funding and focus it needs。 Just look at how quickly we were able to progress with mRNA technology in the wake of covid 19， I think rays timelines here are assuming the funding is there and the focus is there。 However obviously this is overly optimistic and his perception of accelerating returns is a bit unfounded to be honest but I enjoyed this book as a window into the mind of a brilliant man with hope for our future。 Sometimes that hope becomes excessive but I much prefer this to the alternative。I really enjoy the cross timeline conversations peppered throughout the book- this is a great strategy for innovation， talk to yourself in 2070 what would be the conversation？ Molly in 2004 vs me in 2021 is certainly ignorant to how different life can be in only a few decades 。。。 so 。。。more
Igor Pejic
，
Strong illustration of the ever-accelerating speed of technological progress。 Kurzweil puts forward the highly debatable claim that AI can outpace human intelligence。
Jeff
，
This book reads like a series of essays。 Each chapter is effectively independent。 I suppose that is fitting because the author repeatedly breaks down this concept into a series of stages， epochs， generations， etc。 The author is clearly an expert in this field and does a good job of justifying the various conclusions。 This book is filled with exceptional science and interpretation of that science。 It was published in 2005， roughly 16 years ago， and I can see where many of the authors predictions This book reads like a series of essays。 Each chapter is effectively independent。 I suppose that is fitting because the author repeatedly breaks down this concept into a series of stages， epochs， generations， etc。 The author is clearly an expert in this field and does a good job of justifying the various conclusions。 This book is filled with exceptional science and interpretation of that science。 It was published in 2005， roughly 16 years ago， and I can see where many of the authors predictions have come true， and some still seem far off。 However， the exponential growth of technology， especially in the areas of genetics， robotics， and human-computer connection， is following the general path that he expected。 He did not name the CRISPR-CAS9 innovation， but he laid out many claims that would require that level of precision in DNA/RNA editing。 We are definitely approaching the singularity。 I hope the author is right that we will use our new-found computational speed as a way to augment our humanity， instead of using it in some sort of arms race。 。。。more
Glenn
，
This book is over-rated。 I read about 100 pages and scanned the rest。 Just so you know， I'm an iconoclast to begin with。 Kurzweil talks about Darwinian evolution as gospel truth， no evidence required。 Then， he asserts that computer technology develops in a manner similar to evolution。 I totally disagree with both his theses。 He thinks that computers and artificial intelligence will become smarter than any human。 He has an interesting argument， and tries to defend it， but he fails。 He truly belie This book is over-rated。 I read about 100 pages and scanned the rest。 Just so you know， I'm an iconoclast to begin with。 Kurzweil talks about Darwinian evolution as gospel truth， no evidence required。 Then， he asserts that computer technology develops in a manner similar to evolution。 I totally disagree with both his theses。 He thinks that computers and artificial intelligence will become smarter than any human。 He has an interesting argument， and tries to defend it， but he fails。 He truly believes a human brain is like a computer。 I think that is a childish idea， has no correspondence with reality， it is merely an attractive image to him。 I believe that the theory of evolution is false， and the idea that the human brain is like a computer is false。 But Kurzweil based the book on these false foundations。Anyway， I'm disappointed with the book because I'm sure there will be a time in the far future when the descendants of our computers will be much more powerful and important than they are now。 I'm sure that humans will incorporate technological devices into their bodies。 It does not seem immoral to do so。Kurzweil may be a successful inventor， but falls down as a philosopher。 。。。more
Yehmehneh
，
meh
ماهي
，
I wonder how pandemics， like Covid-19， can impact the profound paths outlined in this book。Amazing ideas indeed， and the writer keeps insisting that pandemics or wide-scale economic crisis wouldn't much affect the expected technological evolution。 However， it seems that we're already in 2020s where many of the commercial applications should have been here， why aren't they？ The research projects are already evident， but the commercial availability at "almost no cost" is much more further than tha I wonder how pandemics， like Covid-19， can impact the profound paths outlined in this book。Amazing ideas indeed， and the writer keeps insisting that pandemics or wide-scale economic crisis wouldn't much affect the expected technological evolution。 However， it seems that we're already in 2020s where many of the commercial applications should have been here， why aren't they？ The research projects are already evident， but the commercial availability at "almost no cost" is much more further than that。 I don't agree with most of the philosophical issues discussed in the book， and I'm not sure if the ultimate goal for human being is to be "immortal， then what？！ :DHowever， I totally agree that the next epoch questions belong the next epoch human， we don't have to and can't answer such questions with our so little intellectual capabilities， compared to the coming generations of non-biological intelligent entities。 We can actually see the neurological inventions and biotechnology solutions improving the lives of so many people， so the concepts of "cyborg" or "conscious machines" shall be addressed sooner or later， as what happened before with ethical issues of genetic editing babies。 I hope most of our generation would be here when the Singularity era begins :） 。。。more
Austin Abell
，
This book has lots of thought-provoking ideas and predictions， but the book is far too long and unorganized。 Kurzweil goes on many tangents and drawn out explanations that have little to no relevance to the underlying thesis。 Paired with how he interjects himself in these ideas， this reads like Kurzweil is just trying to list everything he knows about technology， biology， and even some unrelated topics。 It was frustrating when he would go on tangents for long periods and then fail to indicate th This book has lots of thought-provoking ideas and predictions， but the book is far too long and unorganized。 Kurzweil goes on many tangents and drawn out explanations that have little to no relevance to the underlying thesis。 Paired with how he interjects himself in these ideas， this reads like Kurzweil is just trying to list everything he knows about technology， biology， and even some unrelated topics。 It was frustrating when he would go on tangents for long periods and then fail to indicate the relevance of the ideas toward the previous point or the underlying thesis。I won't note the accuracy of the claims because it's easy to look back in hindsight， but many of the predictions in the book would be much more novel or feasible if read closer to the publication date。I read the audiobook version and found myself speeding up to 2x to cover all of the ideas to avoid getting bored or annoyed with the amount of fluff in the book， especially the fictional dialogues。 If this book had a more cohesive argument and condensed heavily， this rating would be much higher。 This book has an abundance of great information but still felt like a waste of time and painful to get through。 。。。more
Florin Grigoriu
，
This book can be a good transhumanist manifesto。 Reading it after 15 years from publishing is clear that some predictions were off， especially the one about nano-scale engineering。If we look on the predictions on information technology， the author was quite close， predicting the ML/AI/DeepLearning renaissance。“It's tough to make predictions， especially about the future。” but there is more than enjoying exploration of how people thing 2020s would be 15 years ago， actually is about push the limits This book can be a good transhumanist manifesto。 Reading it after 15 years from publishing is clear that some predictions were off， especially the one about nano-scale engineering。If we look on the predictions on information technology， the author was quite close， predicting the ML/AI/DeepLearning renaissance。“It's tough to make predictions， especially about the future。” but there is more than enjoying exploration of how people thing 2020s would be 15 years ago， actually is about push the limits， inventing what's next。I find particular eye-opening the comments about "human-in-the-loop" or augmenting human thinking。 It doesn't need to be with direct BMI， still realizing the human brain is finite and ask a machine for extra help can be the next revolution。 。。。more
Brian Norman
，
This is a brilliant examination of the human path toward the future。 Its opening chapters are superb， filled with a collection of surprising facts and concepts。 After the third chapter however， Kursweil dives into the dense amounts of information required to support his thesis。 The going gets pretty heavy at this point， at least in my case。 I feel that Harari in his book "Homo Deus" takes basically the same material and， with a less dense writing style， makes that material more interesting。 This is a brilliant examination of the human path toward the future。 Its opening chapters are superb， filled with a collection of surprising facts and concepts。 After the third chapter however， Kursweil dives into the dense amounts of information required to support his thesis。 The going gets pretty heavy at this point， at least in my case。 I feel that Harari in his book "Homo Deus" takes basically the same material and， with a less dense writing style， makes that material more interesting。 。。。more
Draden
，
Overall a good book。 The key message is important: that technology is advancing at an exponential pace to the point of reaching a singularity。 To me the future course of humanity indeed seems obvious after reading this book， unless some unexpected event changes the course。 As Kurzweil puts it， the singularity is probably going to happen faster than we realize。 It is impossible to give an exact timeline， as Kurzweil explains， but even based on conservative estimates， we will see dramatic advances Overall a good book。 The key message is important: that technology is advancing at an exponential pace to the point of reaching a singularity。 To me the future course of humanity indeed seems obvious after reading this book， unless some unexpected event changes the course。 As Kurzweil puts it， the singularity is probably going to happen faster than we realize。 It is impossible to give an exact timeline， as Kurzweil explains， but even based on conservative estimates， we will see dramatic advances in technology and AI in this century。As a downside， the book could use some editing。 It is too long。 There is too much repetition and too many technical details that are glossed over quickly。 Many of these details do not add much real substance to the main thesis of the book。 A lot of it could just be removed and focus on the main message instead。 。。。more
Alexei Masterov
，
Ray is very utilitarian in his views。 Given that he is American， that is understood， and it also means that he is likely right， however I hope that's not what lies in our future。 Ray is very utilitarian in his views。 Given that he is American， that is understood， and it also means that he is likely right， however I hope that's not what lies in our future。 。。。more
Ninja
，
At the time of publication （2005）， Ray was taking 250 vitamins and pills a day and claims to have cured or at least overcome his type II diabetes。 He plans to subject himself to cryogenic processes when （and if） he dies， in the hope that he can be woken when the technology is able to revive him。 Ray may be eccentric， but many of his predictions have come true。 Some of them because he has had a hand in inventing them。 He is right about the ability of AI to do things we never thought possible: mac At the time of publication （2005）， Ray was taking 250 vitamins and pills a day and claims to have cured or at least overcome his type II diabetes。 He plans to subject himself to cryogenic processes when （and if） he dies， in the hope that he can be woken when the technology is able to revive him。 Ray may be eccentric， but many of his predictions have come true。 Some of them because he has had a hand in inventing them。 He is right about the ability of AI to do things we never thought possible: machine learning， virtual reality， and advances in genetics。 I don't know if he is right about the rate of acceleration of technology， which is the basis for the titular Singularity。 Once we reach the technological singularity， the world will become unimaginably strange。 All bets will be off。 And it cannot be known or described by any methods we are familiar with today。 It is that dramatic。 He discusses hoping that he will be able to upload his consciousness to the internet before he dies， thereby preserving his Rayness indefinitely。 For all our technological advances， I don't think we will have cracked the mystery of consciousness and it's potential to live on without a body by then。 Or in a new body。 Or in a cloned body。 But we are merging with machines and metal， and have been for some time。 Cochlear implants and hip replacements come to mind。 I don't think he has thought the issues through though。 According to a biologist who spoke on the documentary about Kurzweil， Transcendent Man ， Ray is an engineer， not a biologist。 And therefore， has no authority to talk about what we will be able to accomplish in a biology/machine merger。 The links between the body and our consciousness are likely so intertwined， that a Ninja without Ninja's body will necessarily no longer be Ninja。 In his utopian world， we are all cyborgs forever downloading our consciousness multiple times to new bodies or robots， perhaps for hundreds of years， from machines we have previously uploaded ourselves to。 To Ray， it will be as natural as brushing our teeth to plug yourself into the net for your daily backup。 The only limits would be misadventure or accident。 We will be able to avoid the ravages of disease and old age by choosing our age， our body and our genes。 But what is wrong with dying？ Everything must die。 Everything must have its day and end。 Even an intelligent robot。 Not only does he not acknowledge death， he actively rejects it。 He also doesn’t deal in any meaningful way with the problem of the ethical use of technology despite the fact that he knows about and has lived through some of its tragedies。 For example， nuclear technology has not exactly been the solution to human conflict or clean， renewable energy that we had hoped for。 Better and more deadly weapons for use against each other are always being developed。 Technology itself， he does remind us， is neither good nor bad， but can be used for either the betterment or determent of humanity。 He does address ethics by marveling that we entrust the development of our technology to people （like me） who have no training or certification in ethics。 In fact， I’d be laughed out the office if I even suggested that there was anything vaguely immoral or unethical about some colleagues' piece of code。 We save that consideration for hackers。 I can program or build anything I want without regard to how it will be used or what biases I inadvertently embed into it， especially if I am writing or designing something that will be used for A。I。 purposes。 This issue is worth thinking about。 He thinks all builders of technology should live by a similar creed that physicians do。 He is certain though， that our better natures will see us through the destructive potential of our inventions。 I agree that all technology workers should be aware of the dangers of their inventions and code and work towards ethical solutions。 In Ray's brave new world， where will that leave the environment， our fellow mammals， and other members of the eco-system of the earth？ He is so fixated on extending human lives and the quality of it， he， as a non-biologist， almost completely ignores our connection with the world we live and depend on。 This connection does not seem matter to him。 All that matters to him is that someday we will live very long lives。 We will eventually make it off the planet as cybermen （or Nietzsche's Ubermensch） to mine and conquer the universe much the same as we have mined and conquered the earth。 He thinks he will live to see this next great evolution in humanity。 For all his genius， and all his sincerity in wanting to end human suffering， I think it is quixotic of him to think that it will all work out in the end。 But then again， who am I？ Maybe it will。 Copyright （c） Ninja Notion 2021 。。。more
Rob
，
Fear， Uncertainty， and Doubt。https://www。youtube。com/watch？v=u7jKF。。。Last week， I met with some High School friends in San Francisco。 We all grew up in New York。 It was interesting to see how COVID affected them， compared to someone who left the five boroughs。 I have not been to San Francisco in 15 years。 The weather is still beautiful， but I am a much different person than I was the last time I was there。 The ire in my eyes for cosseted culture and corporations have changed how I view the city。 Fear， Uncertainty， and Doubt。https://www。youtube。com/watch？v=u7jKF。。。Last week， I met with some High School friends in San Francisco。 We all grew up in New York。 It was interesting to see how COVID affected them， compared to someone who left the five boroughs。 I have not been to San Francisco in 15 years。 The weather is still beautiful， but I am a much different person than I was the last time I was there。 The ire in my eyes for cosseted culture and corporations have changed how I view the city。 There were a lot of Teslas。The city， which， at least in average real estate pricing， had been considered the crème de la crème of the United States。 Long gone from the mantle were the blue-collar kingdoms of the Midwest， the cosmopolitan melting pot of New York， or the glitz of Hollywood。 San Francisco was where you had to be， at least for the last 15-20 years。 Well， that’s not entirely true anymore。 San Francisco just isn’t what it’s used to be。 The city found a way of synthesizing modern inequality literally worse （https://pbs。twimg。com/media/E5phQkwUc。。。） than the glided age with the rugged realism of the 1970s （https://www。youtube。com/watch？v=XgVZ4。。。）。 We are out of the bling era。 People know how shitty it is and they are walking with a tightness in their chest， taking ashwagandha twice daily。 And there are a lot of Teslas。It was good to catch up with friends。 We went to Big Sur， Silicon Valley， Stanford。 Most if not all of us were on the left wing of the political spectrum in High School， but each time I see them， they move further and further rightward。 The idea that I must argue with some of the most intelligent people I know that the election wasn’t rigged， or that climate change is real is something I’m still coming to grips with。 They’re crazy， right？ …I’m not crazy， right？ It depends on where you look （https://www。youtube。com/watch？v=ElbU8。。。） and I suggest you don’t。Participating in modern society is train surfing。 When you subscribe to someone that says no institutions can be trusted， that any moderate dissent is controlled opposition， that anything can be a psyop， you no longer have any guardrails on the sides of that train。 You left to deal with the psychological whiplash of the doomscroll， just you and gravity。 There are a myriad of reasons why people look to tech。 We were sold a bill of goods that tech would save us from ourselves and the world。 Because big tech has not delivered on that promise， when someone who is inexplicitly pro tech is faced with doubt that tech has done much to change the world， they will no doubt point to the promises of Tesla。 I know I have。 Even while part of my brain is firing quips about him being a billionaire who hates unions， the idea that he could spearhead the fight against climate change by making electric cars and solar roofs cool， along with pushing space travel， was too optimistic for me to ignore。 I am so tired of the cynicism of the left and of big cosmopolitan cities。 I loved science fiction as a child and want to believe in the optimism that is an automatic impulse of my personality。 I do not blame myself for believing in someone who did not exactly fit with my political views。Well， what happened？ I don’t know if I don’t believe in anything the man says anymore， but there are quite （https://www。youtube。com/watch？v=GSUQh。。。） a few （https://www。youtube。com/watch？v=pzdXE。。。）red （https://www。youtube。com/watch？v=2vuMz。。。） flags （https://www。youtube。com/watch？v=c-FGw。。。）。 Especially when one of the friends I went to see was heavily involved with one of these companies and did not deny the FUD I asked him about。Is this new？ The great man theory is not something I believed in。 Great movements and moments giant slabs of marble， chipped away at by generations。 But losing faith in something you invested yourself in makes you feel like a fool。 I spent time internalizing my own scoffs at my friends’ devotional following of Alex Jones， when I weeks earlier was in the grips of a similar one。 All the while bemoaning 45 years of austerity politics。Hypocrisy is an innately human characteristic。 It takes mindfulness to keep it away。 Everyone has these unspoken things you cannot talk about with them， that you will upset them。 I do not personally know anyone that wield the axe of cancellation， but I avoid speaking about certain things with certain people because I do not want to upset them。 I identify with some “woke-isms”， some “anti-woke-isms”， but each have group think or brainworm assertions that they themselves lash out at the other side of the aisle for。All of anyone or any group is not bad。 No matter how much money some one makes， what they or their family is guilty of， they are still a person。 All of anyone or any group is not bad。 No matter how nauseating， the brow beating of the politically correct mafia paves a road to hell with many of the same good intentions of pious populations of the past。 Many I know have become so disillusioned by the nadir of materialism and hyper commodification that they’ve seeked refuge in religion。 An understandable shelter， one that emanates simplicity and smaller horizons。 What all has tech （i。e Silicon Valley） done to help？ At the risk of spreading that nadir to whomever reads this， it has done nothing more than sow discord， suffering， and shorten attention spans。 As my friends and I stood across the street from it （https://en。wikipedia。org/wiki/Apple_Park）， it was hard not to breathe that in。 But， as my friends groaned on and on about the intellectual dishonesty of our times， about the importance of free thinking and speech， it was hard not to draw comparisons: Those brow beaters my friends bemoaned， those warriors of twitter armed with internet muscles and intellectual privilege never known to human history， have many of the same goals my now religious friends do。 Populations associated with both have been guilty of the failure of separating church and state。 Many brow beaters， the church goers of Diangelo， have no room for traditional religiosity， due to the myriad of social failures institutional religions have past committed （degradation of women， mass coverups of sexual abuse， authoritarian rejection of hedonism， etc）。 But， but。 But when splitting the atom of this overruling social movement， they are trying to do something in the vein of past theocracies。 This PC theocracy is a top down enforcement of how to be a better human。 No， there will not beheadings or physical excommunications。 But digital excommunications are daily， some because of nameless accusations。 We want to abolish prisons， but clutch our astrology necklaces and shake north to south when accusations are weaponized （https://www。youtube。com/watch？v=WoXZP。。。） without evidence （https://www。nytimes。com/2021/06/27/bu。。。）。 Look at the verbiage of the second link， the New York Times article there。 [Referring to Stringer and his accusation] “Nor did his candidacy carry the kind of high national stakes that came with Tara Reade’s allegations against Joseph R。 Biden Jr。 last spring。” So， because the stakes were too high， Reade’s allegations do not mean anything？ What a Gigerian （https://www。ecosia。org/images？q=HR%20。。。） interpretation of the law。 I want $15 an hour， but not for all of this water I have to carry （https://www。youtube。com/watch？v=NjXlE。。。）。It looks like rain。 Licking my finger to the wind， it tastes like the cultural authoritarianism my grandmother had to endure under Eisenhower。 No one should suffer domestic abuse in silence， not my grandmother because ‘what would the neighbors think？’ and not the millions of families who want answers as to why their loved ones died， because ‘kneecapping Fauci would let the conservatives win。’ This is what Byron the bulb was talking （https://www。youtube。com/watch？v=Pew6C。。。） about。 They will take whatever flavor of the month it is and weaponize it to divide us。 Whether it be pro racism， anti-racism， populism， Reaganism， or some combination of all four。 And the media will take sides to perpetrate it because our only value （https://www。youtube。com/watch？v=5P4kN。。。） is money （https://www。youtube。com/watch？v=n5qbW。。。）。 And the left is no refuge！ I mean it's my only choice， but even the "real" left mirrors these excommunicative power grabs。 What many view as the "real" left， （i。e。 an intersection of class and identity politics， end to imperialism abroad， an either total remapping of free trade or more instances of protectionism， etc。） love to differentiate themselves from “the MSNBC left” or “the SJW left”， both of which they wish to distance themselves from their ingenuousness， on one level or another。 This is rooted in the arguments that MSNBC has continued to staff themselves with former heads of intelligence， and the idea that ‘Who cares the identity of our oppressor， if they are still our oppressor？’ Of course。 Yes。 Clapping emoji。 Those things ring true。 What does not， is when the "real" left， the authentic left， feigns innocence and laments cancel culture， but only does so until it is opportune to use it。 This is not about power， because the left clearly does not understand that。 This is not about purity tests。 This is about fraud。 Dr。 King did not go around the south and single out what supporters he felt he aligned closest with。 He went far and wide， recruiting everyone from the white liberal to the white racist convincing them for his cause。 But we live in an atmosphere where the internet drives our need for instant validation。 If I had a large enough following and posted this， I would likely see surmising’s about my own identity being my motivator， or mentions of Dr。 King’s adultery， attempting to nullify whatever points I make。 That is the larger point of what Greenwald’s getting at above。 Why has so much time been used to cover this story， by so many news outlets？ The final two iterations of which I will leave here:https://www。youtube。com/watch？v=3vaKc。。。 https://www。youtube。com/watch？v=0Hm8N。。。 It is assumed that people like Tucker Carlson and Sean Hannity have issues off air all the time， but that they continue to leave them off air for the good of a greater goal， one they probably do not even have the same vision of。 While important to note that they work for a corporate communications company who likely would not allow them to squabble on the air， my sentiment remains。 The problem for the real left is deciding when to ‘take one for the team’ and keep your mouth shut， and when to speak out with the ‘burn it down’ Trumpian attitude。 Bernie never was willing to come to that。 He never has （https://www。youtube。com/watch？v=jr4cX。。。） been。 I am tired of talking shit about white people and the rich with my luddite leftist friends。 I am tired of talking shit about the liberal intelligentsia and big tech with my luddite Alex Jones friends。I saw a man in front of the grocery store， not much older than me。 He asked me if I could buy him a Gatorade。 I bought three。 He told me God bless you。 God’s blessing isn’t worth $1。80。 It’s fucked up where a person is so grateful for some modicum of empathy because they live in a country where kindness is not a virtue。 It’s fucked up that they’re conditioned to feel guilt for asking for help， that they’re compelled to compensate by saying something like God bless you。https://www。youtube。com/watch？v=TiDDe。。。 。。。more
John Derek
，
Thoughtful and slightly controversial。
David Johann Lensing
，
Schade， dass Kurzweil sich seine verfehlten Prognosen nicht klarer eingesteht。 An sich wieder ein lesenswertes Werk voller spannender Gedanken， die mich teils überzeugen， mir teils überzogen erscheinen。 Bin gespannt auf sein Folgewerk Singularity is Nearer。
Fairport Public Library
，
October 2008， Pat R， NonFiction
Sunil Rajasekar
，
This is a very thought-provoking and mind-expanding book。 Ray Kurzweil is a very well-known technologist and futurist and provides a credible and very optimistic view of where technology is taking us。 Enjoyed it even the second time。
Robert Narojek
，
It goes without saying that Ray is primarily an engineer， not a writer。 We will not experience any literary value here - but that is not the point。 The key question is whether the author's vision of the future of technology is coherent or does he have gaps in his study？ It seems that Ray is right on key points （this is also confirmed by the opinions of other specialists）。 The only weak point in my opinion is the excessive optimism of the author with regard to the economic and socio-political asp It goes without saying that Ray is primarily an engineer， not a writer。 We will not experience any literary value here - but that is not the point。 The key question is whether the author's vision of the future of technology is coherent or does he have gaps in his study？ It seems that Ray is right on key points （this is also confirmed by the opinions of other specialists）。 The only weak point in my opinion is the excessive optimism of the author with regard to the economic and socio-political aspects。 It is inevitable feeling that he is a child of the US free market economy in its glorious age and underestimates the power with which crises affect reality。 However， this does not affect the essence of the argument， it only delays the inevitable。 The appearance of a strong AI is only a matter of time， and the consequences of this event can only be compared with the landing of aliens。 We are going to live in extremely interesting times。 I can only be happy that I am quite old now ☺ 。。。more
Aion
，
The techno-optimist vision of the future。
Liquidlasagna
，
i found this commentDoug Hofstadter， author of Godel， Escher， Bach” said once in an interview in the New Yorker"If you read Ray Kurzweil’s books。。。。what I find is that it’s a very bizarre mixture of ideas that are solid and good with ideas that are crazy。 It’s as if you took a lot of very good food and some dog excrement and blended it all up so that you can’t possibly figure out what’s good or bad。"yes you heard it here first50% dog crap---"Mitch Kapor， the founder of Lotus Development Corporat i found this commentDoug Hofstadter， author of Godel， Escher， Bach” said once in an interview in the New Yorker"If you read Ray Kurzweil’s books。。。。what I find is that it’s a very bizarre mixture of ideas that are solid and good with ideas that are crazy。 It’s as if you took a lot of very good food and some dog excrement and blended it all up so that you can’t possibly figure out what’s good or bad。"yes you heard it here first50% dog crap---"Mitch Kapor， the founder of Lotus Development Corporation， has called the notion of a technological singularity "intelligent design for the IQ 140 people。"---Then again i haven't seen a futurist i've remotely liked after 1980 。。。more
Lauri Ehrenpreis
，
The topics are super interesting - future of computing， AI， bio and nanotechnology。The main thesis is that information based technologies will continue to evolve exponentially and that leads to some pretty fun conclusions。 By 2050 a laptop exceeds the computing power of all human brains on Earth。 By 2100 we could have turned all the mass and energy in our solar system into a giant computer doing 10^69 calculations per second :）Trying to predict the future that far isn't that interesting to me。 I The topics are super interesting - future of computing， AI， bio and nanotechnology。The main thesis is that information based technologies will continue to evolve exponentially and that leads to some pretty fun conclusions。 By 2050 a laptop exceeds the computing power of all human brains on Earth。 By 2100 we could have turned all the mass and energy in our solar system into a giant computer doing 10^69 calculations per second :）Trying to predict the future that far isn't that interesting to me。 I would let the emerging AI decide if it makes sense to turn the solar system or the entire universe into a giant computer。 It should be much smarter than us anyway :） But discussions about things like brain reverse engineering and self-replicating nanobots are more interesting。It's true that the growth of computing power hasn't run out of steam， and it doesn't seem like it will anytime soon。 However I'm not convinced that the overall progress will be exponential， as the problems we are trying to solve are also getting harder。 Self driving cars are 5 years away for 10 years already and nuclear fusion is 40 years away and always will be:）Since the book was written 15 years ago， many of its predictions can be tested soon。 By the 2020s we should have nanobots in our bloodstream and by 2029 we should see human-level general AI。 Will be waiting for updated predictions in his upcoming book "Singularity is Nearer" next year！ 。。。more
Chris Pearse
，
Another book I ‘read’ for my thesis。 I forgot how unbearable futurist writers can be and I wasn’t a fan of Kurzweil’s techno-utopian optimism， even if he is an expert in technological development and innovation。 The whole idea of becoming digital gives me the heebie jeebies and to be honest， I only read the parts pertaining to my topic and stayed away from the parts that were leaning toward genetic editing。。。
Camryn
，
Such a brilliant， thought provoking read。 It felt like taking a college course， and frankly， my brain during a pandemic has major ADHD， so this took me approximately a billion years to finish。 BUT， each chapter was so interesting and nerdy， and yeah， I was 100% here for it。 I think maybe 0。5% of my friends would like this book， but it's a seriously dense and intriguing read。 Such a brilliant， thought provoking read。 It felt like taking a college course， and frankly， my brain during a pandemic has major ADHD， so this took me approximately a billion years to finish。 BUT， each chapter was so interesting and nerdy， and yeah， I was 100% here for it。 I think maybe 0。5% of my friends would like this book， but it's a seriously dense and intriguing read。 。。。more
Aby Koshy
，