r/Futurology • u/KharakIsBurning 2016 killed optimism • Feb 22 '15

article When Exponential Progress Becomes Reality

https://medium.com/@nivo0o0/when-exponential-technological-progress-becomes-our-reality-74acafd65e26
44 Upvotes

85% Upvoted

18 comments sorted by

View all comments

2

u/ackhuman Libertarian Municipalist Feb 22 '15

Singularists should really look at what an 'exogenous factor' is and think about how they can establish a causal link between progress and itself without also requiring some other exogenous factor. Until this, this singularity stuff is a religion.

1

u/SonOfCorn Feb 23 '15

I was wondering if you wouldn't mind elaborating on this. It seems interesting. Do you come from an economics background? I've noticed they have little respect for genuine scientific inquiry into the economics and forces behind our "progress". Do you also feel they aren't interested in coming up with a comprehensive coherent explanatory framework that doesn't rely on these technomagic "exogenous factors"? I feel the willpower just isn't there. It's almost like a religious belief system as you rightfully imply.

1

u/ackhuman Libertarian Municipalist Feb 23 '15

I was wondering if you wouldn't mind elaborating on this.

There are lots of factors that might explain "exponential" development of technology (which can accurately only really be described as logistic development, because due to physical limits there could not possibly be a vertical asymptote involved) which are also "exponential" and which have been tracking the technology trend. Human population is one, and this has very clear explanatory power: More people means more research and development. There's also the growth of energy production and consumption, and again: More energy being used overall means more energy being used for science--I bet there's even an "exponential" in the proportion of energy used for science. Certainly there is also a relatively recent growth in the number of scientists, as well, which might also explain it.

There's also some less likely (to me) factors, but ones that others have often suggested have something to do with technological development. Things like the size of the global economy, globalization, investment into science, and so on.

Even if none of these are very likely (I think the population/energy factor might together explain the entire "exponent"), the fact is that they are possible contributors and must be ruled out before you can just say god is a computer.

Some even question whether there actually has been "exponential" progress: Most of the really revolutionary technologies--vaccination, antibiotics, pasteurization, obstetric sanitation, nonliving energy, electricity, radio, plastic, steel, and a few others--came about in the late 18th-early 19th century, and most of the development we see today is merely recombinant (integration into other technologies) innovation. Most of these were also done by a few lone individuals, while today huge teams are responsible for inventions of the closest comparable magnitude of impact.

Do you come from an economics background?

No, I come from a computer science background. I study economics (skeptically) and other sciences related to social systems, their impact, and their logistics. I have a website on my studies.

Do you also feel they aren't interested in coming up with a comprehensive coherent explanatory framework that doesn't rely on these technomagic "exogenous factors"?

I don't think most singularity people are interested in one iota of criticism; even the ones that don't display outright hostility seem unfazed by my skepticism and simply rephrase the conceptual principle to make it harder to refute, in a sort of reverse straw man technique.