Daniel Dennett's "The Mystery of David Chalmers" quickly dismissed the Singularity without really saying why:

My reactions to the first thirty-odd pages did not change my mind about the topic, aside from provoking the following judgment, perhaps worth passing along: thinking about the Singularity is a singularly imprudent pastime, in spite of its air of cautious foresight, since it deflects our attention away from a much, much more serious threat, which is already upon us, and shows no sign of being an idle fantasy: we are becoming, or have beco

... (Read more)(Click to expand thread. ⌘F to Expand All)Cmd/Ctrl F to expand all comments on this post

By the way, procrastinating on internet may be the #1 factor that delays Singularity. Before we make a first machine capable of programming better machines, we may make dozen machines capable of distracting us so much that we will never accomplish anything beyond that point.

People need cool names to treat ideas seriously, so let's call this apex of human invention "Procrastinarity". Formally, the better tools people can make, the more distraction they provide, so there is a limit for a human civilization where there is so much distraction that no... (Read more)(Click to expand thread. ⌘F to Expand All)Cmd/Ctrl F to expand all comments on this post

Journal of Consciousness Studies issue on the Singularity

by lukeprog 8y2nd Mar 20121 min read86 comments

14


...has finally been published.

Contents:

The issue consists of responses to Chalmers (2010). Future volumes will contain additional articles from Shulman & BostromIgor 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.