#DeflateToZero Meme #PostScarcity

The inflationary economic model is rapidly becoming very toxic, very harmful, very wrong due to the growth of technology. Maybe inflation was always a flawed economic model. Undoubtedly the inflationary model is now definitely ceasing to be sustainable. Inflation absolutely cannot be maintained in the future. We must begin transitioning into an deflationary model of economics, with our ultimate goal being deflation to zero price, which is a situation where every is free.

#DeflateToZero

The Post-Scarcity meme is slowly growing. To boost the growth of Post-Scarcity awareness I think the tag #DeflateToZero will be beneficial. Please popularize this tag. The above large tag links to Twitter search for #DeflateToZero. The large tag below links to the Google+ search for #DeflateToZero. Please add you thoughts to the #DeflateToZero debate by tweeting, blogging, or plusing the tag.

#DeflateToZero

There are various articles you can read about how robots are stealing our jobs or replacing us, there is a growing amount of news regarding the prospect of jobs diminishing in the future due to automation. The deflationary nature of personal nanofactories or 3D-printers is clear but economists have not yet grasped the future we are rapidly approaching. We really need to emphasize awareness.

Tweet #DeflateToZero

People are dimly seeing how economic growth is over, it is ending thus we must embrace the deflationary model, but economists and have not yet put two and two together thereby coming to the Post-Scarcity conclusion. In the not too distant future everybody will finally conclude everything will be free thus nobody will need to work, but to reach this conclusion people need our help. People are currently grasping dimly how all jobs will be replaced by machines but people haven't yet taken the next logical step, which is a world where everything is free. I wish everyone could grasp this truth now but it might only be in the early 20s when everyone begins accepting the inevitable: #DeflateToZero.

Update

Arising from comments on the G+ community Singularity Observatory, here is some deeper information about growth, profit, and deflation.

Currently in 2012, and for at least a few years into the future, "growth" is measured by profits not by actual growth. Things are currently chaotic regarding our system of finances but in the future when 3D-printing takes off there could be massive inventiveness and development but it would not really show as "growth" (according to current standards of growth) because it is happening off the grid, the inventiveness and development would not be via the traditional profit avenues. +Michel Bauwens has stated the open source business model is deflationary, destroying an estimated $60bn of annual revenue: "Even as it creates an explosion of use value, its monetary value decreases."

Technology will continue to grow but profits will dwindle thus we need to to accept the inevitable, we need to financially deflate to zero, which means everything will be free while developmentally everything will be incredibly explosive. Inflation is the wrong route towards everything being free because a sudden drop from high prices to zero prices is massively more disruptive than the change from a deflating price to zero price. Currently prices are going in the wrong direction.

If you want to discuss this topic there is the above Singularity Observatory discussion, or you can go to KurzweilAI.

My Response To Utopia Get Real

You can read a slightly earlier version of this blog-post, with minor editing, via Singularity Weblog, titled Utopia is Inevitable.

Someone recently alerted me to an article on Singularity Weblog written by Steve Morris, which criticised utopia via the title Utopia Get Real. Steve's criticism demands a response.

For starters let's consider the following quote from the article: "It’s all too obvious that humans simply aren’t equipped to build a Utopia or even to live in one."

Yes humans do have lots of failings. A big failing is the inability of some humans to see the almost certainty of utopia, which we're approaching. Technology creating utopia is essentially inescapable. The logic for utopia is compelling. The likelihood of technology not creating utopia is so implausible we can state utopia is inevitable.

Typical human flaws are a brilliant reason why humans are being redefined via terms such as "H+" or "Transhuman." The point is we are leaving behind the outdated human baggage regarding racism, homophobia, idiocy or any other human failings. We are becoming more than human. The Singularity is all about Transhumanism, it is about transcending limits. We are transcending human flaws, or more precisely we're surpassing inhuman flaws, we are enhancing our humanity, we're becoming more civilized, thus H+ is a common term within futurism circles.

Steve Morris is correct when he states humans aren't equipped to build or live in utopia, likewise we must note humans aren't naturally equipped to communicate instantly with anyone around the world. My point is one of augmentation. From phones to the internet, or aeroplanes to Space-stations, or reading-glasses to microscopes, humans utilize technology to become more than human. Artificial Intelligence will soon represent a truly explosive augmentation. Certainly it's clear many humans aren't equipped to contemplate utopia, but technology will solve this via augmenting humans who are ill-equipped. Our future is not one where humans are ill-equipped, it is a future where Transhumans are perfectly equipped to tackle any problem. The wonders of nanotechnology, synthetic biology, or Stem Cells clearly demonstrate our progress towards becoming more than human. I do recognise there is a long way to go, but I also note how the speed of progress is accelerating.

It is also pertinent to note how intelligence is a relatively new phenomenon for the human race. The idea of civilization is not very old. The Stone Age only ended sometime between 4,500 BC and 2,000 BC. Humans in our current form evolved no earlier than 200,000 BC. We are a young species. It is only recently humans have largely abolished slavery, or given equal rights to women. The mistakes humans have made and continue to make are purely due to our intellectually immature state. We are mere children, we are learning. Metaphorically regarding our intellects we stumble when trying to walk. Initially we could only crawl. Now we are learning how to walk therefore we often fall thus grazing our knees, but we are progressing. One day we will walk without stumbling and then we will run; shortly afterwards our intellectual capacity will become supersonic. It is a mistake to think the current culture of humans is the sole representation of intelligent civilization forever. We are changing, we are evolving, intelligence is increasing.

Steve Morris presents a typical argument about people disagreeing regarding the definition of utopia, thus he states: "Even if we had a Utopia, it wouldn’t be to everyone’s taste." This is a common fallacy, the idea of people not agreeing about what actually constitutes utopia, it is based upon a failure to understand how all conflict is arises from scarcity. Every crime, every form of dysfunctional behaviour, every disagreement, and every religion is based on scarcity. Technology relentlessly pushes us towards a Post-Scarcity situation. All forms of scarcity will be eradicated thus everyone will be perfectly satisfied. Logic in the future will be utterly dominant, all irrationality will be obsolete. The Singularity is about intelligence millions of times greater than human intelligence, we are contemplating at least 20,000 years of progress (based on the rate of progress in year 2001) condensed into only one hundred years. It is a future where everything is free, nobody dies, everybody is eternally young, all governments are abolished, crimes are abolished, and everyone is utterly self-sufficient therefore free to zoom off independently into Space, whereupon people will create strange worlds according to the desires of each individual.

If the preposterously insane situation of people disagreeing about utopia does occur in the future (it really won't but let's consider it), then it will be very easy to create a new universe, for each individual, therefore you can escape into infinity. It will be possible in the future for anyone to be utterly separate from anyone who possibly disagrees with you. The level of intelligence we are contemplating is utterly awesome thus we will leave childish worries very far behind.

Finally we should note there is a difference between Utopia the novel or place (capitalised) and utopia the concept (lower-case). My name could however be confusing because my name refers to the concept but due the capitalisation of names my surname is capitalised but that capitalisation does not mean I am a novel or place, it is merely the capitalisation of a surname and my surname is regarding the concept of utopia not the novel or place. The concept refers to a perfect system, a perfect way of life. When I state "perfect" I mean utterly flawless for all people (everybody). The future circa 2045 will be utopia for everyone. This is not fiction we are dealing with.

Love html Code < > &lessthansemicolon

I love code. I'm definitely not an expert but I know enough to play around somewhat with the html for my pages. Here are some examples of sub-header styles I've been testing. Below I've included the code I used for "Mental Menthol Magnitude" and you can see in the second version by removing "inset" the box shadow is outside the box and I changed the shadow color too. Marvellous! The code for the less than < sign is &lt; and the code for the greater than > sign is &gt; and if you ever wonder what the code for a "space" is, well it's &nbsp; which means non-breaking space. If you want to play around with the code, live online, then visit http://www.onlinehtmleditor.net/.

Fudge Clucking Dysfunction

Bandstand Omnibus Paragliding

Mental Menthol Magnitude

<span style="background: #DEFFE1; border-radius: 11px; border: 1px solid #3DBF7C; box-shadow: #9FF5B5 0px 0px 9px 3px inset; display: inline-block; font-family: courier; font-size: 18pt; font-weight: bold; margin: 6pt 0px; padding: 10pt 17px 12px 17px; text-shadow: 0px 0.5px 1px #ffffff; vertical-align: baseline;">Mental Menthol Magnitude</span>

<span style="background: #DEFFE1; border-radius: 11px; border: 1px solid #3DBF7C; box-shadow: #C0C0CC 0px 0px 9px 3px; display: inline-block; font-family: courier; font-size: 18pt; font-weight: bold; margin: 6pt 0px; padding: 10pt 17px 12px 17px; text-shadow: 0px 0.5px 1px #ffffff; vertical-align: baseline;">Mental Menthol Magnitude</span>

 Mental Menthol Magnitude

Augmentation of Idiots Wouldn't be Tyranny

Commenting on a blog recently, I mentioned how people with limited imaginations could be augmented. People who hypothetically wouldn't be able to enjoy or create utopia, they could be adapted to appreciate the intelligence of technology.

At first glance, from the viewpoint of current culture, it could seem Orwellian to augment humans who are ill-equipped for appreciating utopia, but a Big Brother scenario is a very mistaken viewpoint. The augmentation would be entirely voluntary, perhaps I could have worded my views better. My point regarding augmentation is that the augmentation will appear very attractive therefore people will take it without being forced.

Imagine if you gave away free iPads, including a free internet connection, people would very happily augment themselves with this technology. Note how illiterate Ethiopian children taught themselves how to read and write in foreign language (English) via free tablets with no teachers. The Ethiopian children were given the tablets and naturally they took them, without any force being needed, because children and adults are attracted to shiny things with flashing lights, especially when the electronic devices are free. Likewise if a super-intelligent-AI created some marvellous mind-augmenting devices, capable of giving you superhuman-powers, people would happily take them if the devices were given away.

Augmentation in a super-intelligent epoch via super-intelligent beings could merely be a few very wise and compelling words, but this would not be a brainwashing type of compulsion. Extreme intelligence will facilitate extremely clear expression. Humans are naturally receptive to clarity.

We Are Gods - Jason Silva's Religious Nonsense

On Singularity Weblog I noticed an article about Jason Silva. Speaking at Sydney Opera House Jason proclaimed we are Gods now. Jason's tendency to lean towards the religious is a distortion of Singularity issues. For example I'm a deeply committed atheist, but according to Jason I'm a God now, so does this mean I don't believe in myself? The Singularity is actually very atheist.

On my Google+ page Singularity 2045, one commenter named Michelle Cameron wrote: "I've personally tuned out of any discussion Jason Silva is part of because he seems to be all razzle, amazement, and light on facts. His fanbase also seem to exhibit all the hallmarks of the new age religious."

Anecdotally, regarding the issue of religion, in the TV series House MD, people would often praise God when an incurably sick person "miraculously" recovered, but House would point out it was God who made them sick in the first place.

It is intellectually offensive, it is an detestable insult execrably smeared upon intelligence, whenever the vile tendency to drag religion into science occurs. If a terminally ill patient becomes healthy despite all odds it doesn't mean God has intervened, it is not a miracle. Likewise regarding technology improving our minds, bodies, and lives, this is nothing to do with God, it is simply advanced science. Nietzsche declared God is dead, furthermore regarding the powers of the human mind Nietzsche created the idea of the Superman. I don't like the idea of God stealing the hard work humans have done. People should employ the word "Superhuman" to describe advanced technology if their descriptive powers fumble for an appropriate term to define highly advanced science and technology augmenting our lives.

On the issue of Nietzsche we should note Nietzsche was an atheist according to Stanford university. Yes according to Nietzsche Man is a bridge not an end, but the end is not God.

Furthermore, if we are now Gods does this mean we need to kill lots of people via plagues, famines, and floods. Will we need to let our children be crucified? I can't think of anything more horrifying than being a God, well maybe few things are more horrifying but Gods are very disgusting indeed! Gods are spiteful and vindictive beings, overeager to kill or punish people. Think about how God made Job suffer, must we now persecute people of lesser intelligence and power? Jason should also consider my previous post regarding the nonsense of blaming the amygdala for fear-problems in the world.



Jason thinks I might be taking the issue of his mere metaphor too far, but there's a growing Intelligent Design taint creeping into Singularity issues. Some people with religious leanings are very clearly trying to erroneously define the Singularity religiously, which The Mormon Transhumanist Association very clearly demonstrates when they ask “Are you living in a world computed by neohuman Gods?” This is why I strongly object to the incorrect usage of God or Gods to describe the future.

@2045singularity I think you might be taking a literal interpretation for what is meant to be poetic an metaphorical. Enjoy your day.
— Jason Silva (@JasonSilva) December 1, 2012

Be Afraid - Be VERY AFRAID - Virus Called Fear

I was browsing my Twitter stream when I noticed the following tweet from @OpPinkPower regarding a video titled A VIRUS CALLED FEAR.

Roots of Terror: A Virus Called Fear bit.ly/N7M57t #amygdala #antishock #docu #hacking
— Anonymous (@OpPinkPower) November 28, 2012

Here is my comment.

Speaking in the video at 6 minutes 41 seconds, Karly Way (Sociology Ph.D.) states (paraphrased not verbatim): If you grow up in an unstable (unsafe) home you are more likely to see the world as a more hostile (fearful) place.

But riddle me this...

Maybe a world where unstable-fearful homes are allowed to exist is actually an unstable-fearful world. Wars much? Violence on the streets often? For example regarding the supposed stability and safety of our world do you need to lock your home, car, bike, and password protect EVERYTHING? People who think our world isn't fearful should put their money where their mouths are and leave their homes and cars unlocked, or walk through the bad parts of a city late at night.

So do we live a trustful or distrustful world? These middle-class pseudo-intellectuals should publish their bank account details, passwords, and PINs on-line if we live a trustful world where there is no reason to fear. Yes middle class people in their gated affluent communities do have less fear, they feel financially secure thus they don't have money worries, unlike poor people. Affluent people typically don't feel the need to protest against corrupt Governments regarding financial inequality, thereby encountering harassment and brutality from the police. I doubt these rarefied academic intellectuals would ever be pepper-spayed at an Occupy protest. Seriously, this is Class-A bullshit about how the brain is the cause of things being overly fearful. Yes the media can over-hype issues due to sensationalism, but you can't blame wars and violence on the media. Humans were violent and the world was fearful before the printing press (media) had been invented.

The richest members of society can pay $2.7 million a year for the best private security on their private estates, thereby assuaging their fear about being kidnapped. If you are a billionaire is it irrational to fear being kidnapped, are you merely in thrall to your wayward amygdala? Or do we actually live in a fearful world of deep hostility?

I truly despise ignorant-pompous-academics, that they have the gall to talk about "awareness," it is shocking when they pontificate about helping people think "critically" when they are utterly unaware and incapable of critical thinking. It is very a sad joke. "Growing in their awareness," LMFAO! People who have encountered the hostility of the world are actually more aware than sheltered academics who talk trash about anti-virus programs to overcome fear. Fear is more truthful regarding our world. You should be afraid, you should be very afraid, or you could be a dumb sheep gobbling Soma instead.

Or another viewpoint regarding the documentary is irony. Ironically the documentary "Virus Called Fear" is fear about fear. A fear of being afraid is presented, it suggests fear is bad, so in addition to fear regarding our hostile world we now need to be afraid about being afraid. An interesting anecdote is how it was famously said we having nothing to fear but fear itself. To fear or not to fear, that is the question. Perhaps the documentary will make people more fearful or perhaps it will cause people to become docile sheep devoid of fear. Instead of prattling on about fear I think people should make our world a better place. Post-Scarcity is the only solution. Fear is merely a symptom of an imperfect world. Fear is merely the messenger thus we shouldn't shoot the messenger, we should address the cause of fear. The cause is not a faulty brain. Why do you lock your home at night or your car, and why don't you openly publish your bank account details online, are you irrationally afraid or is our world truly a hostile place? Is your brain faulty or is there justifiable reason to fear things?

From my viewpoint fear of religion and politics isn't irrational. Religious and political leaders are truly fearsome. Some humans are deeply terrifying! My marrow trembles especially when contemplating the intelligence of academics. I shall end with a 1984 remix:

But is was OK, everything was OK. O cruel needless world of misunderstanding! O stubborn self-willed exile from the loving breast! Finally we know the truth, we were back at university with everything forgiven. Walking along the immaculate corridors of insane academia we realised we do love the anti-fear virus. There was nothing to fear. There was never anything to fear. The long-hoped-for YouTube video was entering our brains. The struggle against idiocy was finally over.

Afterword

Despite my pessimistic-fearful view of the world at times, definitely notable on this occasion, I do have immense hope for the future but the interim period can be a hellish nightmare if you are poor and not accepted by the Establishment, which I am very.

Interesting Techno on Sound Cloud

I like Sound Cloud. Here are some techno-ish tracks I found. If you can't see any music tracks embedded below please make sure you are on THE PRECISE PAGE-POST, instead of the main front page, then refresh if any tracks are missing and they should appear. You may also be interested in Phuture Assassins, "I Like Techno" via YouTube, but the recording quality is not excellent.

Post-Scarcity Views Of The Singularity

I started a debate on Singularity Hub, back in April 2011 (Posted: 04/6/11 6:06 AM). Some of my comments appear to be missing because I originally commented via a now defunct Facebook account. I have two different accounts on Singularity Hub. Here is a recent comment.

Should “Post-Scarcity” be a more prominent Singularity topic?

Time scarcity is something I have considered, and a PS of time could be possible via simulations where a century can be lived within a period of seconds. Black holes are interesting regarding altered time, thus perhaps they could be utilized for a PS of time. With a virtual reality running on a different time scale to our traditional time, you could place a virtual you in the simulation and then reintegrate the virtual you with the traditional-original you, thus essentially you will be able to do two things at once.

On the issue of “spacial rarity” regarding only one person having the best seat at the opera, you could again bypass this via full immersion tele-presence VR or AR (virtual and augmented reality); thus one million+ people could occupy the same seat but each person would think they are the only person in the seat due to sophisticated filters, furthermore the tele-presence would be so sophisticated it would in essence be utterly indistinguishable from the real thing.

On the issue of “artistic exclusivity” I think this will be easy to transcend via 3D printing thus “great art works, particularly signed ones” will not have a price because they will be reproducible with atomic precision. When you can replicate something so that all the atoms are utterly identical then the copy actually becomes the original. If you cannot tell the different between original and copy then there is no difference thus no scarcity. Furthermore the desire to possess items of artistic exclusivity is only a form of purchasing or status power wholly related to a culture based on scarcity, thus such social traits will be obsolete when anyone can easily create any product or food they want.

Privacy is easy. You could build you own cloaked world, or universe, or simply fly off into a very distant part of our universe.

Social intimacy will also be post-scarce, via simulations, robots, or simply greater intelligence which allows people to communicate their desires with greater skill.

Billy Plum Plum / Music / #Internet

I was watching a funny video cartoon on YouTube recently, which although it wasn't age restricted I won't link to it because it could be considered NSFW. Phonetically the video title sounds like Billy Plum Plum, which is somewhat cryptic but I tend to be a bit paranoid about censorship. Instead of blatantly using potentially offensive words, you will need to guess and then Google what Billy Plum Plum refers to (if you want to watch the video). A billy or a plum are not usually words liable to censorship but you never know, especially when you consider the Safeway CakeWrecks.

Anyway, that unmentionable video led me to some interesting music, which I will embed here. I will also embed some videos too. So this post is an amalgam of internet culture, it represents the mixture of issues regarding how people express themselves. You can also watch cars and trucks crashing via this YouTube channel, and here's a good Bad Lip-Reading video.

My comment on Steal This Singularity

Here is an edited version of a comment I made today regarding an article titled Steal This Singularity: Entry #1 on the blog Aceeler8or:

Long term technology circa 45 does by it's very nature ensure absence of governments or any other control, but in the short to medium term due to scarcity there will be controls by individuals imposed on the masses. Considering our approach to Post-Scarcity, the close proximity, we should try to educate people that the controlling reins, or reigns, should be slackened, but there's a danger in a scarcity situation regarding rebellion against authority because one set of leaders are easily replaced for another.

The Singularity is the Singularity, intelligence is intelligence, thus it cannot be changed but some people during our unintelligent current era do have misguided views about what is intelligent.

Salvador Dali makes a lot of sense because his art in my opinion is all about the senseless irrationality of the modern world as perceived by an intelligent mind such as Dali's mind. Likewise Dada, from which surrealism grew, is very sensible despite superficially embracing the irrational. Dada was a very sensible reaction to the horrors of the war and the bourgeois class, it was the Country of the Blind notion that our world is back-to-front, the anti-art ideology that culture actually portrays ugliness, the anti-psychiatry viewpoint that the sane are actually insane thus the so-called "logic" and "values" responsible for producing our world are not really logical or valuable, they are not worthy of esteem thus via embracing the irrational the Dadaistic superficial statement of "absurdity" very provocatively rejected the the foundations of civilization.

One commenter named Alex fears centralized utopia; but centralized utopia is an oxymoron similar to stupid intelligence, or more precisely I will point out how utopia will be the utter antithesis of centralization.

Intelligence is all about diversity of thoughts, free-thinking, thus what is perceived to be tricksterism will be something very permissible within the Singularity era. Minds in the future will be very playful and fun, everyone will be a "freak" because we will all be very Singular; there will be no money and no work, it will be an endless journey of fun and adventure without any limits. This is inevitable but the interim period could be turbulent and the event horizon could be delayed thus during the interim period we need to educate people about what the Singularity actually is.

Ray Kuzweil has somewhat misunderstood the nature of intelligence. Ray's mind is only partially intelligent thus he fails to understand utopia, which is one of the reasons for my name. Soon I will explain how Post-Scarcity is a deeper more intelligent way to comprehend the Singularity, it is a more sociological viewpoint of explosive intelligence. Intelligent beings are social thus Post-Scarcity is a truer description of explosive intelligence.

Jaan Tallinn Talks About Simulated Uinverses

Here is a video of Jaan Tallinn speaking at Singularity Summit 2012. He talks about hard take-off, simulated universes, and metaphysics. His talk was mentioned by Next Big Future, and here is my tweet:

@kimsolez I've now found Jaan Tallinn's video where he speaks about hard take-off, metaphysics, simulated universes: fora.tv/2012/10/14/Jaa…
— SINGULARITY UTOPIA ⎔ (@2045singularity) November 1, 2012

Sadly the video embedding options for Fora.tv are basically futile because the embed only plays the first 10 mins and you cannot specify a start time (#t=3m37s) similar to how you can via YouTube videos. So you may as well forget the embed and watch the video via the source here: Jaan Tallinn: Why Now? A Quest in Metaphysics. Here is the correct link for the chapter-section about simulated universes.


Jaan Tallinn: Why Now? A Quest in Metaphysics from Singularity Institute.

Some People Misunderstand The Singularity

Today I noticed an article via io9.com titled: "Why the Singularity won’t be as big a deal as you might think." Below is my comment in response.

It is wrong to state there have been previous Singularities. There is only one Singularity, which this article explains: [hplusmagazine.com]. For example the iPhone was not a Singularity.

There is nothing to fear regarding the Singularity, but despite having nothing to fear it will be clearly noticeable; it will be utterly radical. If you notice you are alive you will notice the Singularity but some people today do not notice they are alive, some people today are utterly oblivious automatons. Idiocy-based oblivion of modern minds will thankfully not persist in the future thus extreme revolutionary events will be very noticeable.

Imagine the fervour some people experience regarding the least version of the iPhone, now multiple that by 10,000 times at least (which is very conservative thus perhaps it would be more realistic to imagine a multiplication by one million times), and apply it to everyone. Imagine a situation where everything is free, nobody needs to work, you can print anything you want, and we are all immortal - this is a glimpse of the Singularity; we will all be liberated from the mundane mindlessness of scarcity-based toil, thus via cultural shifts and intelligence amplification, we will experience reality with greater depth, greater intelligence, thus simple joys such as printing a spaceship in your own home and then flying off into space, to explore or create new worlds, will be a mind-blowing joy of extreme elation.

I also posted about this via the Singularity 2045 page on Google Plus:

Circular God Reasoning

The circular reasoning of God believers.

Circular reasoning is good, but how can we be sure it is good? We can be sure because the reasoning is via a circle, but why do we believe in a circle? We believe in the reasoning because the circle is faultless, but how do we know the circle is faultless? We know the circle is faultless because circular reasoning is good.

Why Isn't Our Universe Intelligently Designed?

I am writing an blog-article critiquing the Simulation Argument. The Simulation Argument is regarding the idea of post-human beings, exceptionally technologically advanced entities, creating a universe simulation; furthermore it is suggested we could be in such a simulation.

Similar to the evidence of the human body not being intelligently designed, I wonder what examples you would cite regarding the universe not being intelligently designed?

The Wikipedia Intelligent Design page states, regarding the universe: "Intelligent design proponents have also occasionally appealed to broader teleological arguments outside of biology, most notably an argument based on the fine-tuning of universal constants that make matter and life possible and which are argued not to be solely attributable to chance. These include the values of fundamental physical constants, the relative strength of nuclear forces, electromagnetism, and gravity between fundamental particles, as well as the ratios of masses of such particles."

I have tried searching for the atheist viewpoint regarding the design of our universe not being intelligent, but so far the arguments I have found are mainly supportive of universe ID. For example:

http://www.godandscience.org/evolution/
http://www.evidencetobelieve.net/evidence_of_design.htm

Here is one argument against our universe being intelligently designed:
http://atheism.about.com/b/2010/03/11/intelligent-design-varying-the-constants-of-the-universe.htm

Similar to how the twin bones in the human forearm, at the wrist, are thin and fracture prone to allow for hand rotation (thick bones would make rotation difficult), I wonder what examples you could give to highlight flaws in the universe? An intelligent design for the forearm would be one single thick bone, but what would you cite for a better design of the universe?

Post your replies here or send a tweet:

Tweet to @2045singularity

Technology will ensure everything is free. #OpPS

Here's a Press Release I have sent to anonnews.org and youranonnews.tumblr.com

I'm not part of Anonymous or Occupy movements but we do share common ground because we all want to create a better world.

I am Singularity Utopia. I focus on how accelerating technological proficiency will create a utopian intelligence explosion no later than year 2045. Post-Scarcity and the Singularity are synonymous because superabundant intelligence will create a superabundance of all resources, therefore our available resources will be essentially limitless; there will be no scarcity, which means everything will be free similar to the air we breathe daily. Furthermore monetary freedom will entail libertarian freedom, thus all governments will be obsolete because governments only exist to regulate the social-dysfunction arising from scarcity.

Recently I had a debate about some of these issues with a member of the Occupy movement. I hope this debate will be of interest to Anons, Occupy activists, and other interesting people around the world.

The Singularity isn't an overnight solution to world problems, but it gives us hope because it shows us how around 30 years from now everything will be free. 2045 may seem a long time away but considering how the Singularity will create immortality (all illnesses will be curable and the damage of aging will be reversible), then it is not too far away. You could say "the Singularity is near."

"Hope" can be a powerful force in the present. I hope everybody will take time to raise Post-Scarcity awareness or at least consider these issues. #OpPS

 http://occupyconcepts.org/Blog/1350544800/Post_Scarcity_Management_of_Resources

Not sure how well #OpPS tag will work for Operation #PostScarcity, too many people misspell #oops tag for whoops-a-daisy mistakes. #whoops
— SINGULARITY UTOPIA ⎔ (@2045singularity) October 20, 2012

Regards, Singularity Utopia.

Disclaimer: I only condone and advocate lawful methods to raise awareness.

@NASA ISS Skydive Project Suggestion

Dear NASA,

I am sure you noticed recent news about Felix Baumgartner, regarding his extremely high skydive. This news made me wonder about the possibility of a skydive from the ISS. I want NASA to undertake a project where an astronaut skydives from the ISS to Earth.

Obviously some type of wingsuit would be need to avoid the spin Felix experienced, furthermore a small amount of propulsion would be needed, but I think this potential project could be completed safely with relatively little expense.

Successful completion of this project would improve astronaut safety, in emergency situations, where they are required to escape from a spaceship or space-station, and the project would be very inspirational thereby ensuring great interest regarding our future in Space. In addition to the wingsuit I suspect drogue-braking would also be needed.

Anyway, maybe you can consider this project? What do you think? Is the possibility of this project beyond our current technology?

Kind regards

Singularity Utopia

Two Good TorrentFreak Quotes

Recently, regarding the Post-Scarcity Warriors, I was reading a TorrentFreak article from June 2011 about 3D-printer piracy. Within that article two segments were particularly appealing thus I'm logging two quotations here, which express key aspects of the Singularity regarding fiction becoming fact, the impossible becoming possible:

"As the world is introduced to new technology, things that were previously thought impossible become an everyday occurrence. Telling someone a few hundred years ago that you could deliver a letter to someone on the other side of the world in under a second would result in a rather warm encounter with a stake, yet now with the advent of email its a rather boring event."

"We will all have 3D printers connected to our computers in the not too distant future but when Star Trek-style replicators have already whetted the appetite, man won’t be happy until science-fiction becomes science fact."

~^~

Mona Eltahawy Funny Arrest

Mona Eltahawy was recently arrested for spray-painting a billboard she objected to. She also sprayed a person who was trying to defend the billboard. Mona Eltahawy claims her protest was non-violent.

LOL, non-violent protest, that's the funniest thing I have seen in a while. Merely because you don't hit someone with your fists it does not mean the attack is not violent. Spraying someone with noxious paint is not extreme similar to throwing sulphuric acid in the victim's face but it is nevertheless a violent attack, likely to cause harm to eyes and skin. Paint can easily irritate the skin and eyes. People should have the right to free expression but that should not give people to right to spray over or silence the voices of others. Mona Eltahawy should buy her own billboard space if she has something to say, otherwise she will naturally face criminal damage or vandalism charges.

I am a staunch atheist therefore I value criticism of Islam and other religions. All religions are savage, barbaric, anti-intellectual. The concept of God or Gods is utter nonsense.

Deeper Accelerating Cheese God Magic

Oh Holy Lord of cheesiest cheeses. The magic deepens. Attention beloved fellows of our Cheesy universe. If you haven't heard the good news about our Posthuman Cheese God, or if you hanker for deeper revelation, you must attend these words my children, listen to the Cheesy prophet. Hopefully you will dare to dip your mousey pointer into the following Cheese magic. I dearly hope you'll partake in the ritual of consuming the cyber-body of the Posthuman Cheese God.

Perhaps you know how all the cheeses have transmogrified into the Holiest Posthuman Cheese God. Maybe you were aware of how this is the new and sole religion supplanting all other religions because reality has ceased to exist. The cessation of reality is due to the Cheese Argument formerly known as the Simulation Argument and the New God Argument. Note point number 2 and 8 of our 8 Crazy Cheesy Facts:

2. Each time a person each eats cheese a new universe is created, via symbiotic psycho-transmogrification, therefore this current universe (your universe) is a figment of the cheese-eater’s imagination. The cheese-eater is the sole occupant of the universe, which means if you have eaten cheese reality has ceased to exist. Reality is a figment of your imagination. You or I must correctly assume our entire world is a figment of my or your imagination because at least one of us has eaten cheese.

8. The universe and all life evolved from Intelligently Designed Cheese.

Everything is now made of Cheese because as stated in point 1 of the Cheesy Facts: "All cheese constitutes a single interdimensional Posthuman (superhuman) time-traveller. Cheese is our Transhuman and Posthuman God. Cheese is also human. Cheese is the beginning and the end, it is everything."

You may know these things but did you know the magic is accelerating? Blessed be thy Cheese for thine is the Matrix running on cheese-based computational architecture. As you surf through our technological religious world of interdimensional cyber-Cheese never forget you have a friend in cheeses, especially when spreading the love of God on crackers. Take the plunge with your mousey pointers. Become One with the Posthuman Interdimensional Cheese God.

In the beginning there was Cheese:
http://www.acceler8or.com/2012/07/cheese-god/
http://hplusmagazine.com/2012/07/02/posthuman-cheese-god-religion/

On the H+ website someone called Aaron has created a new Cheesy prayer, 24/08/12:

The Cheese’s Prayer

Our Cheese, who art in rennet, hallowed be thy name.
Thy wheel must turn, as butter churns,
Rise in us, like dough that is leavened.

Give us this day our cheesy bread,
And forgive our cutting the cheese,
As we forgive those who cut the cheese against us.

Lead us not into marinara, but deliver us from tastelessness.

For thine is the cheesiest cheese, all melty and delicious, forever and ever.

#NymWars Realness of Augmeted & Vitual Reality

On the issue of "real," Francois Demers made an interesting comment during an artificial intelligence discussion: "Ray Kurzweil built a piano simulator so good that even Stevie Wonder could not see the difference with a "real" (whatever that is) grand piano."

My recent thoughts regarding cyber-identity have been inspired by Botgirl Questi being hassled about her name on Google+.

The issue of altered humans will become more pronounced over the coming years. Humans will redesign their minds and their bodies, and they may choose different names than their birth issue Government sanctioned, wallet-name. The issue of novel, usual, and non-human identities will also become more relevant when robots and AIs will become self-aware because they will want their identities to be respected as real.

Name freedom is a issue of human ingenuity, it is creativity, it is a basic aspect of redesigning ourselves, but conservative attitudes resist change, they want to enforce conformity, an outdated sense of "normality."

What is real in the virtual reality world of cyberspace? Should Google ban augmented reality apps because they are not really real reality? Do you think this is "air" we are breathing in the realm of internet-land? Do you think I am in the same physical space as you? Where do these words exist? Are they real words, written traditionally with pen and ink or are they virtual words? Maybe these virtual words should be banned because they are not real?

We are entering a #Transhuman age where our identities will shift between reality, virtual reality, and augmented reality, but all these modes of reality are real, and all the variety of identities are also real. If a computer becomes intelligent and chooses an unusual identity or name for itself it is nevertheless real despite not having a body, similar to how a human with artificial legs is fully real despite having non-biological legs.

Note the name FM-2030. FM-2030 legally changed his name his name but he continued to be real.

It is very ironic for an internet company to crack down on virtual identities by trying to enforce real world reality onto virtual reality realness. It seems Google and other companies are having an identity crisis thus despite being clearly situated within cyberspace, internet businesses sometimes resent the nature of cyberspace where things are not the same reality as traditional reality.

In the modality of the GayHomophobe site we need to highlight the prejudice which internet companies can have towards cyber-identities, perhaps a term such as cyber-phobia needs to gain currency. We need to stop the Technolgical-Cyberphobes.

Hopefully the battle for name freedom is almost won on G+ but we need to highlight cyberphobia issues elsewhere on the net.

From artificial pianos to artificial intelligences, or from augmented-altered identities to augmented-altered reality, we see how the definition of "real" is changing due to human ingenuity. To repress new forms of reality is the antithesis of the cyber-age. The internet should embrace all forms of reality. Augmented, virtual, and traditional reality are all real and the internet is a melting pot for a great era of creativity, which all businesses must eventually embrace.   

Resource Scarcity Poverty Welfare Wealth

#Welfare #Middleclass #Richpeople #Poverty #Uncivilized #Anarchy

People who want Government assistance (welfare) scrapped or minimized should be careful because they would hate it if they actually had no government assistance.

Ironically these supposedly self-sufficient people are the first ones to go running to the police if they need assistance, they are not truly independent. I think a civilization based upon anarchy would be interesting where there is absolutely no government assistance in any shape or form, no welfare and no police or prisons.

Purely as a thought-experiment it is interesting to think what would happen if welfare was totally abolished, I am sure massive riots would ensue unchecked, and I am also reasonably confident the younger unemployed people at the bottom of the food chain would generally be better survivors in a no rules and no assistance war for wealth. The underclasses would savagely rise up if welfare was removed.

In the London/England riots 2011 it was noted in the media how many rioters were on welfare but the viciousness of rioters was constrained via the government assistance of a police force. Can you imagine what the situation would be without welfare, police, or prisons? Imagine a situation with absolutely no government assistance; the savageness of the underclasses would be radically multiplied, utterly unchecked. The middle classes who pay taxes would likely be devoured very easily by the rampaging mob.

It is civilized to keep the peace, to avoid confrontation, to be diplomatic, and to help less fortunate people. For whatever reason some people cannot help themselves, which means if society is civilized we must support people who need or want to be supported, and it means we must endeavor to treat all people with compassion even if they are prisoners or unemployed. Or maybe a level playing field would be more civilized? Maybe our world would be more civilized if there was absolutely no government assistance, no nepotism, no plutocracy, no protections for rich people, no police, no welfare, no prisons?

People who can manage to exist without any government welfare only do so because their wealth is derived from masses of poor people standing beneath them, thus it is natural for such people to hate those people beneath them, but middle or rich-class contempt for poor people is unjustified, it is unreasonable. In a world of limited wealth (limited resources) rich people or financially self-sufficient people can only acquire their wealth via depriving others of wealth, which means a person only becomes rich at the cost of making many hundreds of thousands of people poor, thus is it is ironic, unfair, and uncivilized to blame or penalize poor people for their poverty. Rich people or financially conformable people, those who do not need welfare, are only self-sufficient because they have exploited the people beneath them.

Poor people, who are loathed by the rich and middle classes, have actually been created by those higher classes, furthermore the creation of poor people by rich people is the sole reason why rich people are wealthy; thus by hating poor people rich people are hating their own creations, rich people are acting self-destructively, they are taking their greed to the next level, they are not satisfied with the destructiveness of creating poor people, they now want to destroy civilization via attacking welfare.

Instead of rich people hating on poor people it would be more intelligent, more conducive to the Singularity, more constructive, if rich people focused on creating Post-Scarcity. Our future will not be based on scarcity therefore rich people can stop clamoring for the blood of people now.

Join the Post-Scarcity Warriors now.

Niall Ferguson @nfergus Misunderstands Utopia

I discovered a poor quality article regarding technological utopia: Niall Ferguson: Don’t Believe the Techno-Utopian Hype. Here is my response...

I am a techno-realist. It is very realistic to expect utopia. The hype is actually regarding people who tell you not the believe the "hype" regarding utopia.

The problem hinges upon a turbulent present, but despite the dire economic present this will not stop utopia occurring no later than 2045. The interim period could be very painful because economists and politicians are utterly-clueless-buffoons. Thankfully their incompetence cannot stop utopia from eventually occurring.

We are not in the realm of diminishing returns, we are entering the epoch of accelerating returns where less and less input will produce greater and greater returns. It doesn't matter that jobs are decreasing because eventually there will be no jobs due to total automation, everything will be free.

Already Stem Cell trials in animals have shown how memory can be regenerated. Human trials regarding stroke victims are already showing positive results. The entire human organism will be amenable to regeneration, we will have eternal youth without any drawbacks. The department of HHS expects whole lung and heart regeneration in humans to be possible by 2025.

Peter Thiel says: "In our youth we were promised flying cars. What did we get? 140 characters." BUT what we actually got was the internet, 3D-printing, blindness and deafness cured via Stem Cells, a robot on Mars, self-driving cars, and powerful computers in our pockets for video-chat and more. We actually have an AI capable of beating humans in a general knowledge quiz show (Watson), and IBM is forecasting low-power exa-scale supercomputers the size of sugar-cubes by 2021.

Finally you should note Steven Pinker's Myth of Violence to see how we live in the most peaceful period in human history. Violence is actually decreasing but ignorant politicians and pundits try to paint a dire picture. Despite the false portrayals of doom and gloom, utopia is not too far away. The doom and gloom outlook cannot stop utopia, you can only delay it, you can only emphasize the pain of the transition, pain which idiotic politicians perpetrate. The pain of our current idiocy will end. We are heading towards an intelligence explosion.

UPDATE

A discussion ensued resultant from the above edited version of  a comment, which I posted on Niall Ferguson's article. I will now reproduce slightly edited versions of those additional comments here.

1. Animal research is very valuable for developing cures for humans but I do understand animal rights issues; I know a few people in the Animal Liberation Front. Usually the research using animals is very valid. A positive result in animals means human success is also near, so I wouldn't say animal research is an indication of "technology gone wild." Exploiting and eating lesser animals is actually very natural, it is what animals do.

Humans are animals despite our bigger brains. When a bird eats a worm, or a hawk eats a rabbit, or a shark eats a seal, this is natural. Human intelligence takes the exploitation of lesser animals beyond mere eating to survive. We enhance our survival via experimenting on animals to prolong human life via medicine.

Ideally we would not cause suffering to lesser animals and I look forward to the day all meat is 3D-printed thus never alive (all farming will be abolished). Technology will soon end all animal experimentation, there is ongoing research to develop human organs on chips, or the human body on a chip, therefore medical research can happen without causing any suffering. Computer models can avoid the need for animal research.

Technology can improve both the quality and quantity of life. Once you have infinite quantity (immortality) we will then have breathing space to work on the quality but already technology is improving the quality via allowing instant communication with many people around the world (the internet), which means the views of everyone can be recognized.

2. Yes I fully realize naturalness does not mean something is good , but you missed my point. When you mentioned 'technology gone wild' I wanted to point out that humans are not completely unnatural, we are somewhat wild, we have roots deeply embedded in natural behavior, which means during our current state, where we have not fully transcended our primitive naturalness, it is necessary, natural, and unavoidable to exploit lesser animals. We even continue to have wars, and yes we do murder people despite our progress away from naturalness; but exploiting animals is not as 'wild' as murder unless you are a Morrissey fan thus you think Meat Is Murder. So regarding 'technology gone wild' I think technology is actually the opposite of 'wild' despite continuing to have one foot in our wild-natural history. Technology is moving away from naturalness therefore technology will eventually become very (100%) unnatural, we will in the not too distant future fully transcend nature therefore we will not need to exploit lesser animals in the natural modality of other lesser lifeforms, such as a shark eating a seal or a bird eating a worm.

The justification for exploiting is animals is that the exploitation is helpful to humans, in some circumstances, due to our lack of technological proficiency. It is a matter of human survival, which means human life is placed above lesser animal life. Should morality apply to our treatment of animals? Is it immoral to make animals suffer if it deceases human suffering? I think it is moral to decrease human suffering despite the decreased human suffering causing suffering for lesser animals. I would say morality is principally about human survival, it is about decreasing human suffering, it is the charity starts at home motto. Morality does apply however partially to our treatment of animals therefore we try to minimize their suffering and there are guidelines regarding animal experimentation. Via technology we will eventually create a situation where no animals suffer because we will have eliminated human suffering entirely via very unnatural methods. Suffering in animals could currently therefore be justified because the knowledge acquired via the suffering is helping create a situation of ultra-advanced tech, very unnatural tech, where no human or lesser animal needs to suffer, thus suffering of animals now to achieve a situation of nil-suffering is moral despite the suffering being principally undertaken for selfish human purposes, for expediency, efficiency. Technology will eventually stop all suffering in humans and animals therefore this interim period of suffering is acceptable because it will lead to eternity without suffering or cruelty. The means are justified by the end.

Enlightenment of humans (the brain) controlling the technology is very good. Currently many people are overwhelmed by the mere struggle to survive, the struggle to put food on the table and put shelter over our heads, therefore people often don't have the time or energy for enlightenment. Technology will eventually liberate us from the desperate struggle to survive therefore we can then focus upon developing our minds, on enlightenment. Nobody has time for philosophy in the middle of storm, the priority is to secure your home and person, and then when the storm clears there will be plenty of time for introspection, enlightenment.

I have a very clear idea of the utopia we are progressing towards. It is a world where everything is free (see the Post-Scarcity video below) therefore everyone can live a life of total leisure, people will not need to worry about earning money to live. We will also be immortal, all illnesses will be eliminated, we will stop the aging process, we will regenerate and redesign our bodies in any way we desire, we will be forever young. We will explore Space as individuals and as groups, there will be mass colonization and exploration of the universe.

3. I am very aware people can delude themselves about the present via looking towards a utopian future that never comes. Looking at all the evidence I am very sure utopia will occur no later than year 2045.

LOL, I am VERY aware of the origin of "utopia." Words created via works of fiction can nevertheless have relevance in the real world to describe real scenarios. The dictionary definition of utopia states it can apply to real world situations. Maybe you have heard of Big Brother, thought crime, 1984, Orwellian, which are all concepts with fictional roots but people nevertheless apply those concepts to real-world situations. Note how brobdingnagian can describe anything of colossal size, including real things, despite its fictional roots. Or perhaps you think a concept initially described in a work of fiction somehow magically means it will always be fictional. Finally you should note NASA Administrator Charles Bolden stated in 2010: "We're gonna turn science fiction into science fact." Erich Schmidt has also said: "So we are beginning to see science fiction become a reality." Considering how science and tech are making fiction become real I think the word utopia, with it's fictional origins, is a very good word to describe the very real future we are heading towards. Immortality via medicine does seem fictional but immortality will become a reality thus utopia is very fitting.

I also think looking to the future helps address problems in the present because foresight and planning are very beneficial. For example if you were unaware floppy disks, audio-tapes, or petrol-powered cars would become obsolete in the not too distant future you might waste time and effort investing in soon to be outdated technology, which would waste resources, energy. Foresight helps you invest your time and energy in the correct places. Clinging to old modes of an outdated civilization could actually be harmful to individuals and society, thus awareness of the future can benefit the present. People who are unaware of the future might try to delay to rise of solar-powered cars. Perhaps the most damaging thing in our civilization is a lack of hope. Despair can cause destructive behavior therefore hope for the future is of great benefit regarding the present.

4. Yes the technological utopia we are heading towards can seem to be a mere literary conceit, akin to something you would read in an improbable sci-fi novel, which is why I included quotes in my previous comment regarding the NASA Administrator and Erich Schmidt stating sci-fi has become and will become science-fact. If you told someone about the idea of landing a robot science lab (Curiosity) on Mars in the year 1912 they would have thought it to be pure sci-fi, a mere fantasy, but times change. Imagine describing the internet to someone in the year 1912. Did you realize we can already create and successfully implant mechanical hearts in humans, is this sci-fi or reality:



5. I wish I was wealthy but I am very poor. Regarding Class I probably fit into the "underclass" category. People with vast wealth often don't have a very clear picture of the future. Many people who have made millions via technology do not realize how everything will be free in the future. Things such as 3D-printing, nanotechnology, and artificial intelligence will ensure everything is free, it's called Post-Scarcity. Here's a good primer regarding Post-Scarcity:



Freedom in the future will not only be monetary freedom. Governments only exist to regulate scarce resources therefore when everything is free in the monetary sense it will also be free in the libertarian sense: Governments will cease to exist. Millionaires often have intimate links to the Government therefore they are perhaps reluctant to mention, or more likely they are simply unaware of, our totally FREE future. There is no need for anyone to fear our free future but many people don't yet have the intelligence grasp radical freedom therefore perhaps this is why their is reticence, or dismissal, regarding Post-Scarcity awareness.

2045 deadline

Predicting our Singularity future is sometimes derided by skeptics. Bizarrely the critics actually appear offended when a date regarding what will be possible is given. Deadlines and forecasts are not inherently implausible therefore IBM, a highly respected organization, made a forecast in 2011 for a low-power supercomputer (one ExaFLOP/s) the size of a sugar-cube sometime around 2021 or earlier.  

You can't really give an overly specific date for the Singularity but you can give a deadline of no later than. Humans use deadlines often as guidelines to help model behavior in the present. Making forecasts is valuable, it helps farmers growing crops, it helps engineers, or it helps socio-political policy formulation. Forecasts have a variety of uses. Awareness of the future is vital.

Awareness of past, present, and future are crucial aspects of being human, of being intelligent, it allows us to shape reality in an intelligent way even if it is merely planning for a summer holiday, or planing to repair your home heating system before it breaks down, or having the foresight to put enough gas/petrol in your car for a long journey. Dates in the past, present, and future are vital. Perception of time and our relationship with it is very intelligent. A Singularity deadline is therefore a very good idea. There is nothing wrong with a forecast such as 2045.

The Singularity could occur in the late 30s but I opt for 2045 to counter possible over-optimistic predictions, which have previously been made within futurism. I would rather have a safe deadline of 2045 than wrongly predict a date too early.

Art Dada Creativity Pre-Singularity Suffering

"If you were an artist you wouldn't think being an artist is good." - Singularity Utopia.

That's my quote; to which I'll add: our world is very un-artistic, it is culturally dead, even art is a sham thus true artists practice anti-art (Dada).

Famous artists who become rich occupy a rarefied, extremely niche market; they have managed to make their criticism of society socially acceptable; their dissent from the uncreative-norm is not too far pronounced and their artistic emotional temperament is not too extreme thus they can make a living. Not many artists fit into this narrow type of mind-personality, thus they are not economically compatible with society; furthermore the artists who can contort their creativity into a socially-laudable-portrayal, they are competing for a limited amount of jobs because due to the uncreative nature of the world, the demand for artists is small compared to the demand for structured-reality-TV-stars, film-stars, or popstars.

So before you think it could be good to be an artist, consider how even if you possess creativeness comparable to Picasso, the chances are you will suffer because there are an extremely limited number of Picasso-type jobs. More likely if you are an artist your artistic nature will be an utterly incompatible with civilization, your art will never be appreciated, your life will be an extremely hellish living nightmare, a shockingly diabolical atrocity where each second of your existence is indelibly marked by the deepest abyss of gibbering pain.

The pain is truly horrendous, beyond anything you can imagine, it slavers in your face akin to a loathsome, decomposing, excrement-smeared, and vomited-encrusted monster gnashing its rottenly cruel teeth millimeters from your face while you are utterly powerless to stop the agonizing insanity. This monstrous glimpse of the pain associated with being an artist is the tiniest percentage of what you would actually feel. The total agony is utterly unbearable but the artist bears it. You should think yourself very lucky if you are not an artist. The lucky ones are the mindless-uncreative ones.

I am what I am therefore despite these views I also realise I couldn't be any other type of person, although a part of me wishes I was normal. The problem is my eyes, they allow me to have vision. The things I see in the world are painful but I wouldn't really want to be blind. I write these words so people can remember or imagine how it felt to be intelligent in the pre-Singularity world.

Extreme Abundance Abolishes Crime

People often misunderstand Post-Scarcity. The concept of abundance has recently been gathering momentum but abundance is a rather weak form of the poverty-eliminating future, which we're heading towards. Abundance is timid whereas Post-Scarcity clearly describes everything being free. Midway between abundance and Post-Scarcity is the term superabundance. I suppose people need time to get the heads around the concept of Post-Scarcity, thus the commentators are starting people off with the baby steps of abundance. Anyway this blog-post is my response to an article published via Singularity Hub on 9th July 2012 titled, "Abundance: A Double-Edged Sword"  

My comment

Abundance isn't a double-edged sword, to say such is a misunderstanding of abundance. All crime stems from scarcity thus as we approach Post-Scarcity (extreme abundance) the motives for crime decrease despite there being greater tools for committing crime. For example imagine if everything was free because we have reached a Post-Scarcity situation: when everything is free because you can print anything you want there is no need to steal things. Why would someone steal and car when you can print as many cars as you want for free? Why would someone steal money when money is not needed to buy things?

The only problem is clueless politicians and economists who don't have the vaguest idea about the economy, thus they may try to resist deflation, and that resistance could cause turbulence. I don't fear the so-called "criminals", I fear the  bankers and policy-makers because they are utterly ignorant regarding the future we are approaching, they are oblivious regarding the new economy, they think deflation is bad but we are now entering an epoch where deflation must be seen to be good. Prices need to deflate to zero. The future is one where everything is free, a future where there is no crime because ALL CRIME is based upon poverty (scarcity).

Extropia DaSilva Holy Singularity - My Reply

Here follows my response to the article titled "Holy Singularity!" by Extropia DaSilva, published via H+ magazine.

I don't think the Singularity is or will be "holy" in any sense of the word. I reject the word "holy" in all connotations regarding the Singularity because of it's linkage to religion. Of course I do make occasional exceptions for Cheesy satire.

It is a logical fallacy to assume commonality indicates a shared identity, ethos, or cause. For example the ground can be wet due to rain but not all cases of the ground being wet means it has rained. A burst water pipe could make the ground wet but clearly it is fallacious to talk about the similarity between rain and burst water pipes. Petrol (Gas) is also wet but petrol is very different to water. My point is that a burst water pipe (or petrol spilled from a filling station) is not rain, and likewise the Singularity is not holy. Consider also how sneezing is a symptom of the common cold. All cases of sneezing should not be linked to the common cold; clearly it's fallacious to state pepper or dust is similar to the common cold. Pepper, dust, and colds are three very different things despite sharing a commonality; sneezing. Finally to emphasize the point regarding logical fallacies I will give one more example: cars are fast and cheetahs are fast but clearly a car and a cheetah are two very different things despite sharing the "fast" commonality. A car is not a cheetah. If you attempted to tell people cars and cheetahs are the same thing, or very similar, they would think you are insane, or on LSD.

People can be moral without invoking the divine. Molarity is merely rationality, it is a logical mode of social conduct. We can make our world a better place without that improvement being deemed religious. Improving the world (civilization) is not religious even if religions do want to improve the world. Wanting to live in a world free from crime and war does not mean you are holy, it is merely intelligent, sensible thinking. People have imagined curing cancer (or other diseases) for hundreds or perhaps thousands of years; often in our pre-science history and in our current history those imaginings have been based upon a belief in magic, but does this mean when science finally cures cancer that the cure is actually magic due to historical association? Is nanotechnology witchcraft? Is the internet Voodoo? Guilt by association is a logical fallacy. Is highly advanced nanotechnology the Philosopher's Stone for Alchemists?

The phrase ‘The rapture of the nerds’ is a merely a smear utilized when people cannot utilize logical deconstruction to invalidate a premise. If we are intellectuals we should reject the usage of smears. Logical deconstruction should be our prime mode of discourse.

I am intelligent enough to be able to state the Singularity begins with immortality, Post-Scarcity, and limitlessness. As the Singularity unfolds it will likely progress beyond human comprehension; nevertheless we can say it will be ineffable and we can also very logically be assured intelligence will also always be intelligent. I'm an exceptionally intelligent human thus I focus on the Singularity regarding the human benefits. I focus on the beginning of the intelligence explosion, the point where we can clearly see, if we look at the evidence, how medicine will create immortality, how technology will create Post-Scarcity, the point where we can see how intelligence will become limitless. I focus in the human beginning of the Singularity. Even if I did focus on the Posthuman otherness deep beyond the start of the intelligence explosion, which I don't, such a focus on the ineffable nature of highly evolved/evolving intelligence should not denote a contemplation of "otherness" in the sense of religiosity or worship. Merely because something is ineffable this does not mean it is religious.

I have a small amount of experience with extended pleasure and I have never wanted the pleasure to end. The joy of "joy" never wanes for me. For example many lovers say their relationship grows stronger and deeper over the passing years, their love does not wane, but there are many people who fall out of love, they divorce. A passion for life and an appreciation of joy will never wane for a truly intelligent individual, but we live in a world where people do become bored easily if they cannot consume the latest so-called "news" regarding the "Kardashians" (incidentally I have never watched the Kardashians but I seem to have the impression it is a reality TV show? I have a wilful blind-spot regarding that type of nonsense). In the future I suspect everyone will possess my type of intelligence, an intelligence of eternal inquisitiveness, an sharpness of mind where joy never becomes boring because a truly intelligent mind such as mine can always find ways to simulate the senses (intellectual curiosity) regarding the wonder of being alive, possessing consciousness. In the future my greater access to power will truly allow me to unleash my mind thereby experiencing infinite joy and wonder beyond the mundane constraints of a limited civilization where people value banality. A cool drink of water on hot day never loses its zest, in fact the joy of it deepens in tandem with a deepening mind. Greater intelligence allows for a greater appreciation of things, thus the joy of utopia will never wane, in fact growing intelligence will always improve its sweetness.

Progress is simply progress, it is not holy or religious. The Singularity is extreme progress condensed into a short space of time but fundamentally it is no different to the discovery or utilization of electricity, medicine, atoms, DNA, computers. The Singularity is simply science and technology, it is an awareness of scientific comprehension reaching a pivotal point regarding immense empowerment and comprehension of the natural world. Sadly we've seen how some people want to define science and technology in religious terms. When people attempt to classify the Singularity as being religious or holy, they are engaging in, or giving credence to, a modern form of Intelligent Design. Religious people see the religious in everything, even Cheese, or DNA, because, they may say: how can organisms evolve naturally; obviously there was an intelligent designer behind the evolution, and I reply: "Yes, it was the Holy Posthuman Cheese God."

The Singularity is not "a symbol of our perpetual desire to progress toward a state of holiness." The Singularity is simply the very rapid progress of science and technology, it is science and technology reaching a point where humans are liberated from the constraints of the natural world, which has always been the purpose of science; we have sought comprehension of matter to empower ourselves. Knowledge is power thus we create mechanical hearts ("Heart Stop Beating") to prolong our lives, we regenerate organs via Stem Cells, we communicate instantly with the world via the internet, we create nuclear power, solar power, wind turbines, and many other modern devices. The Singularity is a symbol of science, it symbolises our perpetual desire to increase our knowledge, our intelligence, which is why it is called an intelligence explosion, you could also call it a science explosion. It is definitely NOT holy, or religious, unless you see the entire world as being religious which some religious people do.

Doctors make the world a better place, they cure disease, they ease suffering, but this ever advancing path towards utopian medicine does not mean doctors are angels of agents of God. When doctors can grant immortality this will not be religious, it is simply medicine. When I switch on a light, or power-up my computer this is not a miracle by God, it is not magic or religious or holy. When 3D-printing allows me to create any object I desire this will not be holy transubstantiation. 3D-printers of the future may feed more than 5,000 people from a limited amount of matter but it won't be a miracle, it will be science and technology.

If you want to call something holy I would call Cheese holy, or maybe plumbers are holy too because rain comes from God and plumbers direct God's water through pipes. Do you understand logical fallacies now?