A Rope over an Abyss by Laurence Hitterdale

Laurence,

your essay reveals a precise, analytical mind, and an ability to organise into a logical structure a topic that does not easily lend itself to such a treatment.

I appreciated the psychological annotation about our inclination to consider ourselves as special, and our present times as a crucial passage in history. But exactly because of the illusory nature of these opinions, I disagree with the picture that is given of the post-singularity.

What I mean is that the only fact we cannot deny is the acceleration of technological progress, and of the other usual parameters related to population growth, pollution, etc.

But the expectation that, after possibly surviving the next `change of phase` (or the Singularity) in the most desirable way, and after entering a new phase of prosperity, the future will stabilise into such positive, steady-state scenario, would be totally unjustified. I believe it is perfectly natural to expect that changes of phase will keep occurring, periodically, in the future, as they did in the past. New singularities might, for example, correlate with space colonisation steps, on various cosmic scales, or with alien life encounters.

I am not exactly sure about your position on this this multi-singularity conjecture (but `change of phase` is perhaps a better term for what I mean), since you do not seem to mention it explicitly. I am curious about your opinion, especially in case you disagree with it :-]

Best regards

Tommaso

Dear Laurence,

Thank you for your close reading of my essay and your comments and questions.

I agree with your answer to your first question about freedom and social stability: the goal is to achieve social stability while doing the best we can to achieve as much freedom for individuals as possible. You have correctly interpreted the "cost function" statement.

The second question is harder to answer. You indicate that those who successfully market their ideas may succeed in promoting their own inferior ideas above better, less well marketed (or less well-funded) ideas. You identify this as a problem associated with economic freedom, but I find exactly the same problem occurring in academia, where "wealth" is more a matter of "prestige" (and the accompanying funding), but ideas are still marketed unequally.

In general I do not see a solution of this that does not involve gatekeeping by a "master" class, controlling the expression of the beta class. It's a tough problem.

Thanks for participating. I always enjoy our discussions.

Best regards,

Edwin Eugene Klingman

Dear Laurence,

A very useful and nice essay, with food for thought. I agree with your proposal of preventing disasters as an important step in the steering. More broadly, I have been thinking that many of the essays in this forum, when put together, provide a significant and comprehensive steering strategy, if only those who matter will pay heed to these ideas.

Best regards,

Tejinder

Hi Laurence,

Thanks for your essay. I agree with the views you express. One item I found interesting was the description of transhumanist interests in improving human "intellectual, physical, and psychological" capacities, largely because of what is not mentioned - like the capacity for caring, justice, and honesty. It is these qualities of kindness, mercy, consideration, etc., that I think are most in need to avert a catastrophe.

I found that your essay resonated with my essay on computationally intelligent personal dialogic agents. I developed a prototype as part of a National Science Foundation CAREER award, and have shown that it can "nudge" human interactions in the midst of conversation toward more productive and effective ends. I believe it can help to prevent the kind of disasters you discuss.

I'd appreciate a rating on my essay, if you can do that, since I am a bit short on ratings. Also, if you know of someone that might be interested in collaborating on the further development of a dialogic web, please have them contact me. My gmail username is my first name, then a period, then my last name. Thanks,

Ray Luechtefeld, PhD

Laurence,

Your essay gave me great food for thought. I prefer practicable dooable solutions to idealism so gelled with your "Grand solutions, whatever they may be for others, remain only fantasies for me." Yet my recent experiences suggest that alone is inadequate.

Considering the poor understanding we have of nature, and physics riddled with inconsistencies and anomalies do you think it's not possible that one day somebody will come up with a new coherent solution? There must be some answer unifying out understanding of physics which allows allowing both ' production of a positive' and 'avoidance of a negative' outcomes, not just for for climate change but dozen of other areas at once. Surely it may be fatal to rule that out?

So if someone stumbles across such a major advancement in understanding, what should they do? I'm sure you wouldn't say; 'cycle to work', so how can they gain attention for a solution, by definition 'unfamiliar' when science is 'belief lead' and all such departures rejected a priori?

Shouldn't we work to create the conditions where we ARE able to see and assess the value of such possibilities? The Estep-Heokstra essay expresses it well as needing better ways of thinking. Are not positivity and ambition first required? Or do you consider such advanced beyond us.

I hope you'll read and comment on my own essay allegorically offering a palatable glimpse of work in that direction. Yet it seems perhaps that even self apparent geometrical proofs, evidence and more coherent ontologies are powerless in the face of old beliefs. Is there a solution?

Thank you kindly. Very best wishes.

Peter

Hi Laurence,

I really like your broad principles. Indeed the point you make that there will be no singularity or transhumanism if we do not manage to solve more immediate human difficulties is one that often escapes those who opt for the very optimistic view. While its true that some people find the future frightening, a failure to protect humanity is of far greater threat to futurist goals than any 'luddite' outrage. Agility and wise choices are preferrable to pure speed in 'progress'. With all that said there is some brilliant opportunities for humanity and Earth just over the horizon.

In my estimates an letter writing campaign probably isn't going to make a significant dent. However, I think a good start is to do what we can to support the CSER and other initiatives whose work seems to take our species' survival seriously. And don't underestimate your own contribution here, it matters!

Thanks and I hope you might also share your thoughts with me on my own entry. It draws on a partly fictional format, but I think it draws on a similar understanding to yours - of seeing both the serious opportunities and serious threats in humanity's future. I hope you get a chance to view and rate it before ratings close! Thanks and good luck!

Hello Mr. Hitterdale,

My name is Margarita Iudin.

I read your essay without rating it. I stop rating essays because I feel confused about how the authors rate each other.

These are my remarks

1. what the persistence of human civilization does mean for you

zoom in

The Quaternary, glacial-interglacial periods, questionable conditions for the persistence

The Holocene, interglacial period, some conditions

more than one civilization

Timeline of the so called Western civilization and its transformations

diversity has increased, yes no, the change in a kind of diversity

before Sumer

Sumer, written language, agronomic melioration

Akkad, consolidation, empire, hierarchy, multiple social stratification

Mesopotamia, sciences, arts, systems of faith, cultural memos

Egypt, sciences, arts, systems of faith, cultural memos

The Mediterranean world, sciences, arts, systems of faith, cultural memos

Spread around, Judeo-Christianity-Islam

Centers of influences, the first world, the second world nations and countries and so on

Globalization, we will see what will come out of assimilation and loss of identity

2. Transhumanism Singularity hypothesis transhumanists

Your referral to wikipedia as a reputable source HmHmHm

Are you familiar with the process of the article submission to wikipedia?

Human consciousness is a part of the universal consciousness, consciousness

transcends material world, and so on

All things including humanity exist in transformation

Believe me, anybody who can foresee post human affairs will not say a word.

The true foreseers live upon the Divine force,

God Will Hunting, In Hebrew it sounds something like that sheh ha-kol ieheh ba dvaro

Please draw your conclusions based on whether the transhumanists make living out of their prophecies or not

3. Lifespan extension nay

What about cleansing of the soul and rebirth of the soul

4 Google, systematic research a good shot, Google guys do a great work indeed,

I need to check Kurzweil, a child prodigy, inventor, pianos are good, friend of Richard Glass,the composer,

the series of life crises, 400 hundred pills daily or weekly, personal trainers, wants to live a long life

pass, I do not remember the main thing about Kurzweil

not everybody can live a worthy life after the major life crisis

5 Evidently humanity is at a turning point may be, may be not

global amateurism

climate panic money money money

green energy money money money

etc.

6 unified consciousness stop

There is collective consciousness

You may want to read about quorum sensing in literature on cellular biology

Phenomena of quorum sensing help us to better understand the workings of collective consciousness

Alas, I have considered your thoughts.

I read Harvard magazine, not SA

http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/2096

Imagining the future humanity by Margarita Iudin

Please read my essay on your convenience and share your opinion.

Good luck,

M Iudin

Hello Laurence,

I enjoyed your essay. You do not pretend to offer a total answer, but as a strand in a greater rope across the current abyss, you are strong. I'll have more to say when there is ample time.

All the Best,

Jonathan

Hello Laurence,

I posted an article giving some publicity to your piece:

http://ieet.org/index.php/IEET/more/searle20140705

All the best!

Rick Searle