I have heard discussion about the singularity on the web but I have never had any idea at all what it is, so I can’t say much about that.
I do not think there is much prospect for dramatic IQ elevation without producing somewhat damaged people. We talk a lot in our book about the ever-present deleterious consequences of the strong selection that follows any environmental change. Have a look for example at the whippet homozygous for a dinged version of myostatin. Even a magic pill is likely to do the same thing. OTOH scientists don’t have a very good track record at predicting the future. Now, I am going to hop into my flying car and go to the office -:)
I have heard discussion about the singularity on the web but I have never had any idea at all what it is, so I can’t say much about that.
You could contact Anna Salamon or Carl Shulman for a well-written introductory piece on the singularity.
Very short summary: if we humans manage to scientifically understand intelligence, then the consequences would be counter-intuitively extreme. The counter-intuitiveness comes from the fact that humans struggle to see our own intelligence in perspective:
both how extreme and sudden its effects have been on the biosphere,
and the fact that it is not the best possible form of intelligence, not the final word, more the like a messy first attempt
If one accepts that intelligence is a naturalistic property of computational systems, then it becomes clear that the range of possible kinds or levels of intelligence probably extends both to much narrower and dumber systems than humans and to much more able, general systems.
I do not think there is much prospect for dramatic IQ elevation without producing somewhat damaged people.
Interesting. Would these people be so damaged that they would be unable to do science? Or would you be expecting super-aspergers types? (Or, to put it more rigorously, what probability would you assign to dead/severely disabled vs. super-aspergers/some other non-showstopping deleterious effect?)
I don’t know but I can give you some candidates. One is torsion spasm (Idiopathic Torsion Dystonia). It will give you about a ten point IQ boost just by itself. Most of the time the only effect of the disease is vulnerability to writer’s cramp, but 10% of the time it puts you in a wheelchair. So you could do science just fine.
Similarly the Ashkenazi form of Gaucher’s disease is not ordinarily all that serious but it also give a hefty IQ boost. Asperger like stuff would probably also increase: many super bright people seem to be a bit not quite. Of course lots of other super-brights seem to be completely normal.
I am just babbling, I have no special insight at all...
The only question that remains in my mind is what the timescale for this is: both the “when will it become technically feasible” and “when will political and economic factors actually cause it to happen”.
I have heard discussion about the singularity on the web but I have never had any idea at all what it is, so I can’t say much about that.
I do not think there is much prospect for dramatic IQ elevation without producing somewhat damaged people. We talk a lot in our book about the ever-present deleterious consequences of the strong selection that follows any environmental change. Have a look for example at the whippet homozygous for a dinged version of myostatin. Even a magic pill is likely to do the same thing. OTOH scientists don’t have a very good track record at predicting the future. Now, I am going to hop into my flying car and go to the office -:)
HCH
You could contact Anna Salamon or Carl Shulman for a well-written introductory piece on the singularity.
Very short summary: if we humans manage to scientifically understand intelligence, then the consequences would be counter-intuitively extreme. The counter-intuitiveness comes from the fact that humans struggle to see our own intelligence in perspective:
both how extreme and sudden its effects have been on the biosphere,
and the fact that it is not the best possible form of intelligence, not the final word, more the like a messy first attempt
If one accepts that intelligence is a naturalistic property of computational systems, then it becomes clear that the range of possible kinds or levels of intelligence probably extends both to much narrower and dumber systems than humans and to much more able, general systems.
Interesting. Would these people be so damaged that they would be unable to do science? Or would you be expecting super-aspergers types? (Or, to put it more rigorously, what probability would you assign to dead/severely disabled vs. super-aspergers/some other non-showstopping deleterious effect?)
I don’t know but I can give you some candidates. One is torsion spasm (Idiopathic Torsion Dystonia). It will give you about a ten point IQ boost just by itself. Most of the time the only effect of the disease is vulnerability to writer’s cramp, but 10% of the time it puts you in a wheelchair. So you could do science just fine.
Similarly the Ashkenazi form of Gaucher’s disease is not ordinarily all that serious but it also give a hefty IQ boost. Asperger like stuff would probably also increase: many super bright people seem to be a bit not quite. Of course lots of other super-brights seem to be completely normal.
I am just babbling, I have no special insight at all...
HCH
That is very interesting, thanks.
The only question that remains in my mind is what the timescale for this is: both the “when will it become technically feasible” and “when will political and economic factors actually cause it to happen”.