The Six Epochs Of The Singularity... (Remastered)

[00:00:00] Discover the amazing, clinically proven health benefits of Original Tahitian Noni.

[00:00:05] Original Tahitian Noni includes powerful antioxidants, adaptogens, nutrients, and phytonutrients to naturally boost energy levels, immune system function, and overall health.

[00:00:15] Meticulously sourced from French Polynesia, this is the original super fruit, except no imitations.

[00:00:21] Original Tahitian Noni.

[00:00:23] Visit ATRHealth at AlchemicalTechRevolution.com and click on the Shop Here tab for more details.

[00:00:30] We lead the world in facing down a threat to decency and humanity.

[00:00:37] What is it saying?

[00:00:39] It's more than one fault.

[00:00:42] It is a big idea.

[00:00:44] It is because of oppression.

[00:00:46] A new role.

[00:00:54] For the faithful.

[00:00:56] The Alchemical Tech Revolution, and I am your host, Wayne McRoy.

[00:01:26] Good evening, everyone.

[00:01:28] Tonight, we're going to look at a little topic called The Six Epochs Of The Singularity.

[00:01:34] We'll be reading tonight from a book written by one Mr. Ray Kurzweil that some of you may or may not have heard of.

[00:01:42] This guy was the head of Google for a long time, and also one of the main futurists that people like to quote.

[00:01:49] One of the main proponents of the transhumanist notion.

[00:01:53] And his book we're reading from is called The Singularity Is Near, When Humans Transcend Biology.

[00:02:00] And he laid out this idea of the six different epochs of the singularity.

[00:02:05] So we'll get it right from the horse's mouth here tonight.

[00:02:08] So for those of you tuning in, this should be an interesting one.

[00:02:11] It should be a wild ride here.

[00:02:13] So let's get into it.

[00:02:14] I figured this is a good topic in light of all the recent hubbub about AI.

[00:02:20] So with AI being something on the minds of everybody, even the world leaders who just met this past weekend at the Bilderberg Conference,

[00:02:29] which they held a couple weeks early because they usually don't do that until the first week of June.

[00:02:35] So they were worried about AI that was on top of their list of concerns.

[00:02:41] So maybe they pushed it up a couple weeks because of the concern.

[00:02:44] Or I suspect maybe they know something about our jacked up calendar that we don't.

[00:02:49] Because, of course, they time these events to the sky clock meticulously.

[00:02:53] So they must know something we don't.

[00:02:55] So even though early June is usually when they do this,

[00:02:59] they chose to do it the weekend before Memorial Day for some reason this time.

[00:03:04] We may never know the full reasons, but I'm sure, I'm sure they had their reasoning.

[00:03:10] But at any rate, let's get right into the reading here tonight.

[00:03:13] The six epochs.

[00:03:15] So right off the bat, Kurzweil has a quote from one Mr. Arthur Schopenhauer here.

[00:03:20] And it says, quote,

[00:03:28] Then Kurzweil goes on to say,

[00:03:45] that I have witnessed at many levels.

[00:03:47] Gradually, I've become aware of a transforming event looming in the first half of the 21st century.

[00:03:55] Just as a black hole in space dramatically alters the patterns of matter and energy,

[00:04:00] accelerating toward its event horizon,

[00:04:03] this impending singularity in our future

[00:04:06] is increasingly transforming every institution and aspect of human life.

[00:04:11] From sexuality to spirituality.

[00:04:14] And I'm going to pause for a moment here, folks.

[00:04:16] Notice he lists off the term sexuality first.

[00:04:20] And that, of course, is a direct inference to the things going on today

[00:04:25] with the whole push for this transgender notion of things out there.

[00:04:30] This was absolutely foreseen by Kurzweil.

[00:04:33] I think this one was written in 2004.

[00:04:35] This book.

[00:04:37] If I'm not mistaken.

[00:04:38] It was 2002 or 2004.

[00:04:40] I'll let you know in just a second here.

[00:04:42] Let me look because, you know, we should be precise about these things as precise as possible.

[00:04:48] So just to give an indication,

[00:04:50] this guy had his finger on the pulse of what's to come.

[00:04:54] So let me see here.

[00:04:56] Where are you?

[00:04:58] Copyright date on this book.

[00:05:01] The publication date on this was 2005.

[00:05:03] Sorry, I was off by a year.

[00:05:06] But for the purpose of being precise,

[00:05:08] 2005 was the publication date of this book.

[00:05:12] So that many years ago, you're going back 18 years,

[00:05:15] Kurzweil understood that the coming singularity was going to bring about

[00:05:20] these ideas of alteration of sexuality in humankind.

[00:05:26] So that's something that he pointed out here.

[00:05:29] So we see that.

[00:05:30] And he says from sexuality to spirituality.

[00:05:33] So, of course, this is one of the guys that writes the playbook.

[00:05:36] So you got to keep that in mind, too.

[00:05:39] Let's read on.

[00:05:40] What then is singularity?

[00:05:43] It's a future period during which the pace of technological change will be so rapid.

[00:05:48] Its impact so deep that human life will be irreversibly transformed.

[00:05:53] Although neither utopian nor dystopian,

[00:05:56] this epoch will transform the concepts that we rely on to give meaning to our lives

[00:06:01] from our business models to the cycle of human life,

[00:06:04] including death itself.

[00:06:07] Going to pause for a moment here, folks.

[00:06:08] So do you hear the hearkenings back to the old, old ideas of the great work

[00:06:14] and the philosopher's stone in this statement?

[00:06:17] Because even the very problem of death itself will be solved and transformed

[00:06:24] through this singularity process, according to Kurzweil.

[00:06:28] But let's read on.

[00:06:31] Understanding the singularity will alter our perspective on the significance of our past

[00:06:36] and the ramifications for our future.

[00:06:38] To truly understand it inherently changes one's view of life in general

[00:06:44] and one's own particular life.

[00:06:46] I regard someone who understands the singularity

[00:06:49] and who has reflected on its implications

[00:06:51] for his or her own life as a singularitarian.

[00:06:56] I'm going to pause for a moment.

[00:06:58] That's a mouthful.

[00:06:59] So he calls them a singularitarian

[00:07:00] if you understand and realize

[00:07:03] how the singularity will transform your life

[00:07:06] if you fully grasp that.

[00:07:07] So I don't think there's any true singularitarians out there,

[00:07:11] according to Kurzweil's definition.

[00:07:13] But I digress on that point.

[00:07:15] Maybe he claims to be one.

[00:07:17] He seems to think he knows what's all going to be involved with this.

[00:07:22] But let's read on.

[00:07:23] I would suggest the future is probably a bit more mysterious

[00:07:29] as far as what can happen than what Kurzweil may think.

[00:07:33] And that's the thing.

[00:07:34] Many of these people, they think they got it all figured out.

[00:07:36] But surprises happen all the time.

[00:07:39] Unexpected things.

[00:07:40] And we learn unexpected things about this world and reality that we live in

[00:07:44] that we hadn't taken into account in our initial predictions.

[00:07:47] We've seen this in the past.

[00:07:50] I mean, where's our flying cars?

[00:07:53] We've had futurists in the past make claims about what the year 2021 is going to be like, right?

[00:08:01] Or the year 2020.

[00:08:03] In the year 2000.

[00:08:05] If you go back and look at the predictions from the 1950s,

[00:08:09] we were supposed to have flying cars.

[00:08:11] We were going to have robots to clean our houses.

[00:08:14] We'd be having moon bases and flying around in space and everything else.

[00:08:19] That simply has not come to fruition for one reason or another.

[00:08:23] And I'll leave that to you to decide what the reasons for the lack of space travel and the like are.

[00:08:29] But as far as the flying cars and stuff, all those cartoons I watched as a kid lied to me, didn't they?

[00:08:34] But that's beside the point.

[00:08:36] So things don't always shake out the way the futurists predict.

[00:08:41] That's the whole notion here.

[00:08:43] But Kurzweil seems to think he's got a good grasp on it.

[00:08:46] So let's read on and see what he says.

[00:08:48] I can understand why many observers do not readily embrace the obvious implications of what I have called

[00:08:54] the law of accelerating returns.

[00:08:57] And it says in parentheses here,

[00:08:58] the inherent acceleration of the rate of evolution with technological evolution

[00:09:03] as a continuation of biological evolution.

[00:09:06] So I'm going to pause for a second here, folks.

[00:09:08] So that's just in the parentheses, right?

[00:09:10] That's just the party that's listed in the parentheses.

[00:09:13] So once again, it harkens back to these ideas of evolution

[00:09:18] and technology becoming a part of that evolution,

[00:09:22] a continuation of our natural or biological evolution,

[00:09:27] according to Kurzweil and the other futurists and transhumanists here.

[00:09:31] They absolutely think that mankind using his own technology and merging with it

[00:09:36] is a type of self-guided evolution,

[00:09:39] and that it's the next step in human evolution,

[00:09:42] and that this is how we're going to transcend what it is to be human

[00:09:46] and become post-human.

[00:09:49] This is how they talk.

[00:09:50] So essentially this harkens back to the idea of apotheosis as discussed by the ancient mystery schools.

[00:09:57] Same thing, just different new high-tech names for it.

[00:10:01] It's all about the Philosopher's Stone, the great work,

[00:10:05] the ability to achieve immortality,

[00:10:08] and to become godlike.

[00:10:11] That's what it's about.

[00:10:13] Just with more modern terms to suit our scientific mentality, right?

[00:10:22] Let's continue on.

[00:10:23] It says,

[00:10:24] After all, it took me 40 years to be able to see what was right in front of me,

[00:10:28] and I still cannot say that I am entirely comfortable with all of its consequences.

[00:10:33] The key idea underlying the impending singularity

[00:10:36] is that the pace of change of our human-created technology

[00:10:40] is accelerating and its powers are expanding at an exponential pace.

[00:10:45] Exponential growth is deceptive.

[00:10:47] It starts out almost imperceptibly and then explodes with unexpected fury.

[00:10:52] Unexpected, that is, if one does not take care to follow its trajectory.

[00:10:56] And then he says here in parentheses,

[00:11:00] he says,

[00:11:01] See the linear versus exponential growth graph on page 10.

[00:11:05] So that was nice of Kurzweil to include graphs in his wonderful writing here, isn't it?

[00:11:10] We're not going to look at that graph right now.

[00:11:13] But the whole point here is,

[00:11:15] when growth happens exponentially,

[00:11:17] it happens rather suddenly.

[00:11:20] Whereas linear growth, it's progressive.

[00:11:23] You can see the progression slowly.

[00:11:25] Over the course of time, it's steady.

[00:11:27] Whereas exponential growth happens very rapidly.

[00:11:30] And seemingly out of nowhere at times.

[00:11:33] That's the whole point he's trying to make there.

[00:11:35] So let's continue reading.

[00:11:38] Consider this parable.

[00:11:40] A lake owner wants to stay at home to tend to the lake's fish

[00:11:44] and make certain that the lake itself will not become covered with lily pads,

[00:11:48] which are said to double their number every few days.

[00:11:51] Month after month, he patiently waits,

[00:11:53] yet only tiny patches of lily pads can be discerned.

[00:11:57] And they don't seem to be expanding in any noticeable way.

[00:12:00] With the lily pads covering less than 1% of the lake,

[00:12:04] the owner figures that it's safe to take a vacation and leaves with his family.

[00:12:08] When he returns a few weeks later,

[00:12:10] he's shocked to discover that the entire lake has become covered with the pads,

[00:12:14] and his fish have perished.

[00:12:17] By doubling their number every few days,

[00:12:19] the last seven doublings were sufficient to extend the pads' coverage to the entire lake.

[00:12:25] And it says seven doublings extended their reach 128-fold.

[00:12:30] This is the nature of exponential growth.

[00:12:33] So I'm going to pause for a moment here, folks.

[00:12:35] So this is the difference between maybe addition and multiplication,

[00:12:40] if you want to look at it in simple mathematical terms.

[00:12:43] Or exponents.

[00:12:45] We're all familiar with the idea of the exponent.

[00:12:47] So this says seven exponents later,

[00:12:50] it covers the entire lake in this allegory that he has represented here.

[00:12:55] So the whole point here is, once again,

[00:12:57] it happens rapidly, seemingly out of nowhere,

[00:13:01] this exponential growth activity.

[00:13:03] So this is what they expect to happen with our technology.

[00:13:10] At least this is the claim from the transhumanists.

[00:13:13] I think there are absolute limits to growth.

[00:13:17] With these kind of things.

[00:13:20] But, you know, you never know.

[00:13:23] We'll see what they say here.

[00:13:25] These are the supposed experts, after all.

[00:13:27] So let's read on.

[00:13:28] Consider Gary Kasparov,

[00:13:30] who scorned the pathetic state of computer chess in 1992.

[00:13:34] Yet the relentless doubling of computer power every year

[00:13:37] enabled a computer to defeat him only five years later.

[00:13:41] The list of ways computers can now exceed human capabilities is rapidly growing.

[00:13:46] Moreover, the once narrow applications of computer intelligence

[00:13:50] are gradually broadening in one type of activity after another.

[00:13:54] For example, computers are diagnosing electrocardiograms and medical images,

[00:14:00] flying and landing airplanes,

[00:14:01] controlling the tactical decisions of automated weapons,

[00:14:04] making credit and financial decisions,

[00:14:06] and being given responsibility for many other tasks that used to require human intelligence.

[00:14:12] The performance of these systems is increasingly based on integrating multiple types of artificial intelligence.

[00:14:20] But as long as there is an AI shortcoming in any such area of endeavor,

[00:14:25] skeptics will point to that area as an inherent bastion of permanent human superiority

[00:14:31] over the capabilities of our own creations.

[00:14:34] And I'm going to pause for a moment here, folks.

[00:14:36] This is why the major focus right now on artificial intelligence.

[00:14:40] You see, they want it to be able to surpass human abilities.

[00:14:45] I don't think it's feasible because it lacks something that the human mind has.

[00:14:51] It lacks that.

[00:14:52] But they seem to think that at some point it will surpass us in every possible way.

[00:14:59] And here's the problem.

[00:15:00] It can only deal with whatever inputs it has.

[00:15:03] So if there's not a human being to feed it inputs,

[00:15:06] it's not going to do anything.

[00:15:08] That's the bottom line with artificial intelligence.

[00:15:12] If there's not a human being there to give it input,

[00:15:17] it's not going to do anything.

[00:15:19] It cannot do anything without some type of a program to execute.

[00:15:24] And that's where it becomes dangerous

[00:15:26] because if you have a human being that wants to do something nefarious,

[00:15:31] it will have the AI execute some nefarious program.

[00:15:36] And perhaps it would do a good job doing that.

[00:15:39] But there always has to be that human input.

[00:15:43] That's one of the weaknesses with AI right now.

[00:15:46] But they want us to believe at some point AI will break away and become sentient

[00:15:51] and be able to somehow discover the inputs itself,

[00:15:57] to give itself prompts, decide its own actions

[00:16:00] without any human guidance or record to draw from.

[00:16:03] Because how AI operates is it draws off of algorithms.

[00:16:07] It compiles data from algorithms

[00:16:09] and comes up with a plausible scenario through that.

[00:16:13] So it cannot invent anything new.

[00:16:16] It cannot come up with new novel ideas on its own.

[00:16:19] It just compiles what it has access to together

[00:16:23] and determines a result that looks pretty close

[00:16:26] in approximation to what it can draw from the past.

[00:16:31] So AI will not build the future.

[00:16:34] It cannot create the future.

[00:16:35] It cannot be forward thinking.

[00:16:37] It can only be backward thinking.

[00:16:39] That's the whole point here when you look at this.

[00:16:43] Without that human interaction to go with it,

[00:16:47] the human input, the human intuition to guide it,

[00:16:50] all it can do is compile data from algorithms

[00:16:54] and maybe make a selection of choices from that data.

[00:16:58] And that's it.

[00:16:59] It can't create new data on its own.

[00:17:03] And that is where the main difference is.

[00:17:06] Human beings create new data all the time.

[00:17:10] All the time.

[00:17:11] So anyway, that's enough of a mouthful for me.

[00:17:13] Let's get back to reading here about what Kurzweil says.

[00:17:17] Okay, Kurzweil says,

[00:17:18] This book will argue, however, that within several decades,

[00:17:22] information-based technologies will encompass all human knowledge and proficiency,

[00:17:26] ultimately including the pattern recognition powers,

[00:17:30] problem-solving skills, and emotional and moral intelligence

[00:17:33] of the human brain itself.

[00:17:35] I'm going to pause for a moment here, folks.

[00:17:38] And herein, in my estimation,

[00:17:40] is where the error is made in this way of thinking

[00:17:42] because he's comparing it to the human brain,

[00:17:45] not the human mind.

[00:17:48] And there is a distinction between the two.

[00:17:50] The brain is merely the operating system,

[00:17:55] the hardware.

[00:17:56] The human mind is the software.

[00:17:58] And an artificial intelligence can never have the proper software

[00:18:02] for its hardware to do this.

[00:18:05] This all boils down to the idea of what is consciousness?

[00:18:09] And not being able to define exactly what consciousness is

[00:18:13] within our modern scientific paradigm,

[00:18:16] they cannot duplicate this.

[00:18:19] They cannot duplicate this in a machine,

[00:18:21] although they will make their attempts.

[00:18:24] And they seem to think that they have a good shot at it

[00:18:27] because they look at the human brain

[00:18:28] as being the epicenter of everything.

[00:18:32] When, in fact, I don't think it is.

[00:18:36] The human mind exists outside of the framework of the human brain,

[00:18:41] although these people would like you to believe

[00:18:44] that consciousness itself is nothing more

[00:18:46] but the electrochemical byproduct

[00:18:49] of the activity of the brain and brainstem.

[00:18:53] However, we have evidences

[00:18:55] that suggest otherwise.

[00:18:58] The brain and the brainstem

[00:19:00] within the human body, in my estimation,

[00:19:03] is pretty comparable

[00:19:05] to what you would call a radio receiver.

[00:19:09] You turn on your radio

[00:19:10] and you pick up the signal

[00:19:12] and you could play the radio channel.

[00:19:14] You could play the music on your radio

[00:19:16] from the broadcast.

[00:19:18] Well, the human consciousness

[00:19:21] is the broadcast.

[00:19:22] The broadcast is picked up by the receiver,

[00:19:25] the human brain,

[00:19:26] and therefore,

[00:19:28] it can be interpreted

[00:19:30] through the human brain that way.

[00:19:32] And that, in my estimation,

[00:19:34] is a little bit more close

[00:19:36] of an approximation

[00:19:37] of how it really works.

[00:19:38] But that's a subject for another day.

[00:19:40] We'll just go with

[00:19:41] Kurzweil's arguments here

[00:19:43] and see what he has to say.

[00:19:45] Let's continue on.

[00:19:47] Although impressive in many respects,

[00:19:49] the brain suffers from severe limitations.

[00:19:51] We use its massive parallelism,

[00:19:54] 100 trillion intra-neuronal connections

[00:19:57] operating simultaneously,

[00:19:58] to quickly recognize subtle patterns.

[00:20:01] But our thinking is extremely slow.

[00:20:04] The basic neural transactions

[00:20:06] are several million times slower

[00:20:07] than contemporary electronic circuits.

[00:20:10] That makes our physiological bandwidth

[00:20:12] for processing new information

[00:20:13] extremely limited

[00:20:15] compared to the exponential growth

[00:20:17] of the overall human knowledge base.

[00:20:19] He's going to pause for a moment here, folks.

[00:20:21] So because your brain

[00:20:23] processes information

[00:20:25] more slowly than a computer,

[00:20:27] they're saying this is a major weakness.

[00:20:29] Well, perhaps it is.

[00:20:31] Perhaps we can't out-calculate a machine.

[00:20:35] But is that coinciding with thinking?

[00:20:42] Can a machine think?

[00:20:44] We can think.

[00:20:46] We know we can think.

[00:20:48] But can the machine think?

[00:20:49] Well, it could duplicate a process

[00:20:51] that looks like it's thinking.

[00:20:53] But is it really thinking?

[00:20:55] Just making a number of calculations per second

[00:20:58] is not on the same order

[00:21:00] as human cognition or human consciousness.

[00:21:03] So this is a comparing apples to oranges

[00:21:07] type thing in my estimation.

[00:21:08] But let's read on.

[00:21:11] Our version 1.0 biological bodies

[00:21:13] are likewise frail

[00:21:14] and subject to a myriad of failure modes,

[00:21:17] not to mention the cumbersome maintenance rituals

[00:21:20] they require.

[00:21:21] While human intelligence

[00:21:22] is sometimes capable of soaring

[00:21:24] in its creativity and expressiveness,

[00:21:26] much human thought is derivative,

[00:21:28] petty, and circumscribed.

[00:21:29] And I'm going to pause for a moment here, folks.

[00:21:32] Doesn't this guy sound hubristic?

[00:21:34] He's claiming our biological bodies

[00:21:37] are frail and subject to a myriad of failures.

[00:21:43] The human body is the most complex machine

[00:21:46] on the face of this earth.

[00:21:48] It is the most complex machine

[00:21:51] on the face of this earth.

[00:21:53] The human being has not even figured out

[00:21:55] how the human being works.

[00:21:57] And this guy will make a hubristic statement like that,

[00:22:00] like it's a failure.

[00:22:01] It heals itself.

[00:22:03] Look at how the human body functions.

[00:22:06] It repairs itself when it's damaged.

[00:22:10] Do we have any machines that do that today

[00:22:13] that we've built?

[00:22:14] Can a computer repair itself

[00:22:16] when it's damaged?

[00:22:20] Can it?

[00:22:21] Does it heal itself?

[00:22:22] Does it just automatically do that?

[00:22:24] Hmm?

[00:22:25] I don't think it does.

[00:22:28] I don't think it does.

[00:22:29] Maybe they can program a computer

[00:22:31] to maybe do some kind of an analysis

[00:22:34] of what's wrong

[00:22:35] and make an attempt at a repair

[00:22:36] of some sort

[00:22:37] based upon what it has available.

[00:22:39] But I don't think this machine

[00:22:41] has a healing system

[00:22:42] like the human body does.

[00:22:43] And yet we have these comparisons

[00:22:45] being made all the time.

[00:22:47] Oh, and this is the argument

[00:22:48] that transhumanists use all the time.

[00:22:50] We're so limited in our abilities.

[00:22:53] We can do better.

[00:22:54] They think they could build

[00:22:55] a better human being.

[00:22:56] They think they could build

[00:22:58] a better world.

[00:23:00] A better universe.

[00:23:03] A better civilization.

[00:23:05] A better creature than mankind.

[00:23:08] The apex of this creation.

[00:23:11] They think they could do better.

[00:23:13] That's hubristic in and of itself.

[00:23:17] But let's go ahead and continue on.

[00:23:20] The singularity will allow us

[00:23:22] to transcend these limitations

[00:23:23] of our biological bodies and brains.

[00:23:26] We will gain power over our fates.

[00:23:29] Our mortality will be in our hands.

[00:23:32] We will be able to live

[00:23:33] as long as we want.

[00:23:34] A subtly different statement

[00:23:36] from saying we will live forever.

[00:23:38] We will fully understand

[00:23:39] human thinking

[00:23:40] and will vastly extend

[00:23:42] and expand its reach.

[00:23:43] By the end of this century,

[00:23:45] the non-biological portion

[00:23:46] of our intelligence

[00:23:47] will be trillions of trillions

[00:23:50] of times more powerful

[00:23:51] than unaided human intelligence.

[00:23:54] I'm going to pause

[00:23:55] for a moment here, folks.

[00:23:57] Notice he uses the time

[00:23:58] the non-biological portion

[00:24:00] of our intelligence

[00:24:02] will be trillions of trillions

[00:24:04] of times more powerful

[00:24:06] than unaided human intelligence.

[00:24:09] And once again,

[00:24:10] we see the hubristic mindset here

[00:24:13] in play.

[00:24:16] They can build a better brain.

[00:24:19] You see,

[00:24:20] if we could hook mankind's brain

[00:24:22] to the internet,

[00:24:23] to the computer,

[00:24:25] we could have this neocortex.

[00:24:28] That's what they like to call it.

[00:24:30] A digital neocortex.

[00:24:32] Wherein the input-output speeds

[00:24:34] would be much, much faster.

[00:24:36] More on the lines

[00:24:37] with modern electronics.

[00:24:38] And we could be so much superior.

[00:24:42] We could be so much more intelligent.

[00:24:44] That's their claim.

[00:24:48] I don't know

[00:24:49] if that really would work

[00:24:51] how they expect it to,

[00:24:52] but this is what

[00:24:53] they're talking about.

[00:24:54] They seem to think

[00:24:55] that merging with the machine

[00:24:56] will give us

[00:24:58] godlike powers and abilities.

[00:24:59] It'll give us immortality.

[00:25:01] We can live as long as we want.

[00:25:04] We can live as long as we want.

[00:25:06] And we'll be able to

[00:25:07] know so much more

[00:25:08] and do so much more.

[00:25:11] Let's see what else he says here.

[00:25:15] We are now in the early stages

[00:25:16] of this transition.

[00:25:18] The acceleration of paradigm shift,

[00:25:20] the rate at which we change

[00:25:22] fundamental technological approaches,

[00:25:24] as well as the exponential growth

[00:25:26] of the capacity

[00:25:27] of information technology,

[00:25:28] are both beginning to reach

[00:25:30] the knee of the curve,

[00:25:32] which is the stage

[00:25:33] at which an exponential trend

[00:25:35] becomes noticeable.

[00:25:36] I'm going to pause

[00:25:37] for a moment here, folks.

[00:25:39] So if you look at a bar graph,

[00:25:41] we're almost to the peak

[00:25:44] where we will begin to notice

[00:25:47] exponential changes

[00:25:49] happening in the technologies,

[00:25:51] where the growth of these technologies

[00:25:53] is going to take off

[00:25:54] very rapidly.

[00:25:55] And we've seen this

[00:25:56] through the course of time.

[00:25:58] Look at how rapidly

[00:25:59] things have come about

[00:26:01] just over the past 20 years.

[00:26:03] Our entire culture and society

[00:26:06] has been transformed

[00:26:07] by the internet.

[00:26:09] Think about that.

[00:26:10] If you go back to the 1990s,

[00:26:12] yeah, the internet

[00:26:13] was kind of in its infancy.

[00:26:15] You had maybe a couple of

[00:26:17] bulletin board services

[00:26:18] or something there.

[00:26:20] People were maybe doing

[00:26:21] a little bit of talking online,

[00:26:23] typing and talking online,

[00:26:24] but it's nothing like it is today.

[00:26:27] You had the slow dial-up

[00:26:29] where you had to actually

[00:26:29] use the phone line

[00:26:30] and listen to the thing

[00:26:32] and wait for it to connect

[00:26:33] and all of that stuff.

[00:26:36] I remember those times

[00:26:37] very well.

[00:26:39] And now you look

[00:26:40] at the world today,

[00:26:41] everything's interconnected

[00:26:42] and everything depends

[00:26:44] upon the internet

[00:26:45] for its existence right now.

[00:26:47] It really does.

[00:26:48] Business revolves around

[00:26:50] the internet.

[00:26:52] It's almost impossible today

[00:26:54] to do business

[00:26:55] without access to the internet.

[00:26:56] internet.

[00:26:58] So much

[00:27:00] of our world

[00:27:01] is now entrenched

[00:27:02] heavily in this idea

[00:27:03] and this concept.

[00:27:05] Look how it's transformed.

[00:27:06] And that was a very slow period

[00:27:08] only over the course

[00:27:09] of about

[00:27:09] the past 20 years

[00:27:11] have we seen it really

[00:27:12] get to the point

[00:27:13] where it is now.

[00:27:15] And that's a very short time

[00:27:17] that's become

[00:27:18] extremely transformative

[00:27:19] to the way we do business

[00:27:20] and the way we interact

[00:27:22] and do things.

[00:27:23] That's part of this

[00:27:24] exponential curve

[00:27:25] that he's talking about.

[00:27:27] So we are indeed

[00:27:29] in the early parts

[00:27:30] of this transition

[00:27:32] like he says.

[00:27:34] Now let's read on.

[00:27:35] So he says

[00:27:36] shortly after this stage

[00:27:37] the trend quickly

[00:27:38] becomes explosive.

[00:27:39] Before the middle

[00:27:41] of this century

[00:27:41] the growth rates

[00:27:42] of our technology

[00:27:43] which will be

[00:27:44] indistinguishable

[00:27:45] from ourselves

[00:27:46] will be so steep

[00:27:48] as to appear

[00:27:48] essentially vertical.

[00:27:50] From a strictly

[00:27:51] mathematical perspective

[00:27:52] the growth rates

[00:27:53] will still be

[00:27:54] finite

[00:27:54] but so extreme

[00:27:56] that the changes

[00:27:57] they bring about

[00:27:57] will appear to

[00:27:58] rupture the fabric

[00:27:59] of human history.

[00:28:01] That at least

[00:28:02] will be the perspective

[00:28:03] of unenhanced

[00:28:05] biological humanity.

[00:28:06] Going to pause

[00:28:07] for a moment here folks.

[00:28:08] So once again

[00:28:09] he's making the inference

[00:28:10] that there's going

[00:28:11] to be this divide

[00:28:14] in the world here.

[00:28:18] The unenhanced

[00:28:21] biological human

[00:28:23] human and of course

[00:28:24] the enhanced

[00:28:24] biological human

[00:28:26] there's going to be

[00:28:27] this class division.

[00:28:29] Now how will this

[00:28:31] class division shake out?

[00:28:33] I really can't say

[00:28:34] for sure.

[00:28:35] There's been some

[00:28:35] speculation as to this.

[00:28:38] I think the power

[00:28:40] structure, those in charge

[00:28:41] would like this class

[00:28:42] distinction to shake out

[00:28:44] in this way

[00:28:44] where the very powerful

[00:28:46] and wealthy

[00:28:46] and elite class

[00:28:47] of people

[00:28:48] are the ones

[00:28:49] that take

[00:28:50] the transhumanist

[00:28:51] technologies

[00:28:51] and transcend

[00:28:52] to the next level

[00:28:53] and leave the rest

[00:28:54] of us behind

[00:28:56] and of course

[00:28:59] of course

[00:29:00] this has to do

[00:29:00] with what they call

[00:29:01] the great culling

[00:29:05] wherein

[00:29:08] at some point

[00:29:10] the plan

[00:29:11] of the elite

[00:29:12] would be to

[00:29:13] exterminate

[00:29:14] the rest of us

[00:29:15] the ones that they call

[00:29:15] the useless eaters.

[00:29:18] That's their viewpoint

[00:29:20] not mine

[00:29:20] or the other

[00:29:22] way this could go

[00:29:23] is there will be

[00:29:24] some of us

[00:29:25] that will refuse

[00:29:26] to take the transhuman

[00:29:29] technological advancements

[00:29:31] and maintain

[00:29:31] our humanity

[00:29:32] to try to fulfill

[00:29:34] what it is

[00:29:34] what it truly means

[00:29:35] to be human

[00:29:36] fulfill

[00:29:37] our destiny

[00:29:39] as human beings

[00:29:40] see what it truly

[00:29:43] means to be human

[00:29:46] and this has to do

[00:29:47] with a more spiritual

[00:29:48] notion of things

[00:29:51] and the division

[00:29:52] may go along

[00:29:52] those lines

[00:29:53] where you have

[00:29:54] pockets of people

[00:29:54] who will jack

[00:29:56] into the matrix

[00:29:57] so to say

[00:29:57] and then

[00:29:59] there will be

[00:29:59] some of us

[00:30:00] who decide

[00:30:01] to get back

[00:30:03] to nature

[00:30:05] and it may be

[00:30:06] a division

[00:30:06] along those ways

[00:30:07] and maybe

[00:30:08] there will be

[00:30:10] some type

[00:30:11] some type

[00:30:12] of friendly

[00:30:13] relationship

[00:30:13] between those

[00:30:14] two different

[00:30:15] classes

[00:30:16] I don't think

[00:30:17] it's going to be

[00:30:18] that way though

[00:30:19] based upon

[00:30:19] what I've seen

[00:30:20] written in the

[00:30:21] science fiction works

[00:30:22] because those people

[00:30:23] controlling these

[00:30:24] technological innovations

[00:30:26] right now

[00:30:26] they want

[00:30:27] to be rid

[00:30:30] of those

[00:30:31] that eat up

[00:30:32] all

[00:30:34] of their resources

[00:30:38] that's

[00:30:38] what their

[00:30:39] viewpoint is

[00:30:40] so if they

[00:30:42] decide to take

[00:30:43] that attitude

[00:30:44] with them

[00:30:44] into the

[00:30:45] transhumanist

[00:30:46] future

[00:30:46] they may

[00:30:47] see us

[00:30:48] as a plague

[00:30:48] upon the world

[00:30:51] and want

[00:30:52] to exterminate

[00:30:53] us

[00:30:53] so that

[00:30:54] being the

[00:30:55] case

[00:30:55] that being

[00:30:56] the case

[00:30:58] we need

[00:30:58] to be mindful

[00:30:59] of their

[00:31:01] intentions

[00:31:01] the people

[00:31:02] controlling

[00:31:04] these advancements

[00:31:05] and although

[00:31:06] I think

[00:31:07] much of what

[00:31:07] they are

[00:31:08] pushing

[00:31:10] is a lie

[00:31:11] on the face

[00:31:12] of it

[00:31:12] it's fraudulent

[00:31:15] they absolutely

[00:31:16] believe

[00:31:16] they can do

[00:31:17] this

[00:31:17] that they

[00:31:18] can transcend

[00:31:20] the human

[00:31:21] being

[00:31:21] they can

[00:31:22] transcend

[00:31:22] themselves

[00:31:23] as human

[00:31:24] beings

[00:31:24] and become

[00:31:25] a godlike

[00:31:25] entity

[00:31:26] and the

[00:31:27] things they

[00:31:27] do to act

[00:31:28] on that

[00:31:28] will affect

[00:31:28] all of us

[00:31:29] so we need

[00:31:29] to be mindful

[00:31:30] of what

[00:31:31] they have

[00:31:31] in mind

[00:31:32] and be

[00:31:32] mindful

[00:31:33] of what

[00:31:33] technologies

[00:31:34] they're pushing

[00:31:34] at us

[00:31:36] and I would

[00:31:36] say a lot

[00:31:37] of what

[00:31:37] they push

[00:31:37] at us

[00:31:38] is fiction

[00:31:40] fiction

[00:31:41] that they're

[00:31:41] trying to

[00:31:42] shape

[00:31:42] into a reality

[00:31:44] so we

[00:31:45] need to

[00:31:45] be mindful

[00:31:46] of that

[00:31:46] but let's

[00:31:47] continue on

[00:31:47] because I

[00:31:47] still got a lot

[00:31:48] of ground

[00:31:48] here to cover

[00:31:49] before we sign

[00:31:50] off tonight

[00:31:50] we've only

[00:31:51] just begun

[00:31:53] the singularity

[00:31:54] will represent

[00:31:55] the culmination

[00:31:55] of the

[00:31:56] merger

[00:31:56] of our

[00:31:56] biological

[00:31:57] thinking

[00:31:57] and existence

[00:31:59] with our

[00:31:59] technology

[00:32:00] resulting in

[00:32:01] a world

[00:32:02] that is still

[00:32:02] human

[00:32:03] but that

[00:32:04] transcends

[00:32:05] our

[00:32:05] biological

[00:32:06] roots

[00:32:06] there will

[00:32:07] be no

[00:32:08] distinction

[00:32:08] post-singularity

[00:32:10] between human

[00:32:10] and machine

[00:32:11] or between

[00:32:12] physical

[00:32:13] and virtual

[00:32:13] reality

[00:32:14] I'm going to

[00:32:15] pause for a

[00:32:15] moment here

[00:32:16] and repeat

[00:32:16] that sentence

[00:32:17] because this

[00:32:19] this is

[00:32:21] where

[00:32:23] the

[00:32:23] screwing

[00:32:24] up of

[00:32:24] human

[00:32:25] minds

[00:32:25] will occur

[00:32:26] in mass

[00:32:27] when or

[00:32:28] if this

[00:32:29] event happens

[00:32:30] it says

[00:32:31] here

[00:32:31] there will

[00:32:33] be no

[00:32:33] distinction

[00:32:34] post-singularity

[00:32:35] between human

[00:32:36] and machine

[00:32:36] or between

[00:32:37] physical

[00:32:38] and virtual

[00:32:39] reality

[00:32:41] if you

[00:32:42] wonder

[00:32:43] what will

[00:32:43] remain

[00:32:43] unequivocally

[00:32:44] human

[00:32:45] in such a

[00:32:45] world

[00:32:45] it's simply

[00:32:46] this quality

[00:32:47] ours

[00:32:48] is the

[00:32:48] species

[00:32:49] that inherently

[00:32:49] seeks to

[00:32:50] extend

[00:32:50] its

[00:32:51] physical

[00:32:51] and mental

[00:32:51] reach

[00:32:52] beyond

[00:32:52] current

[00:32:53] limitations

[00:32:55] so I'm

[00:32:55] going to

[00:32:55] pause again

[00:32:56] for a

[00:32:57] moment there

[00:32:57] folks

[00:32:57] so there

[00:32:59] will be

[00:32:59] no

[00:32:59] distinction

[00:33:00] between

[00:33:00] physical

[00:33:01] reality

[00:33:01] and virtual

[00:33:02] reality

[00:33:04] this is a

[00:33:05] dangerous

[00:33:06] concept

[00:33:06] because that

[00:33:07] means

[00:33:07] somebody

[00:33:08] could present

[00:33:09] you

[00:33:10] with

[00:33:10] some

[00:33:11] version

[00:33:12] of reality

[00:33:12] that they

[00:33:13] want you

[00:33:13] to perceive

[00:33:14] and you

[00:33:15] won't be

[00:33:15] able to

[00:33:16] determine

[00:33:16] if it's

[00:33:16] true or

[00:33:17] false

[00:33:17] and we're

[00:33:18] seeing the

[00:33:19] beginning phases

[00:33:19] of this

[00:33:20] in society

[00:33:20] right now

[00:33:21] aren't we

[00:33:22] in fact

[00:33:23] there was

[00:33:24] just a

[00:33:24] story

[00:33:24] in the

[00:33:25] news cycle

[00:33:26] the past

[00:33:27] couple days

[00:33:27] where there

[00:33:28] was some

[00:33:29] kind of a

[00:33:29] photo of a

[00:33:30] fire at the

[00:33:31] pentagon or

[00:33:31] something that

[00:33:32] was generated

[00:33:33] by AI that

[00:33:34] went over to

[00:33:35] Russian television

[00:33:36] networks and

[00:33:37] began to

[00:33:37] circulate through

[00:33:38] social media

[00:33:39] and many people

[00:33:40] in this world

[00:33:41] thought that

[00:33:42] there was some

[00:33:42] type of an

[00:33:43] attack or

[00:33:44] some type of

[00:33:45] an event

[00:33:45] happened

[00:33:46] and it

[00:33:47] actually

[00:33:47] affected the

[00:33:48] stock market

[00:33:49] heavily for

[00:33:50] a very brief

[00:33:50] time until

[00:33:51] it was

[00:33:51] determined that

[00:33:52] this was a

[00:33:53] false report

[00:33:53] and that

[00:33:54] this was a

[00:33:55] picture generated

[00:33:55] by AI

[00:33:57] see now

[00:33:58] whether any

[00:33:58] of that's

[00:33:59] true or not

[00:33:59] or if this

[00:34:00] is just hype

[00:34:01] given through

[00:34:02] the media

[00:34:04] and this

[00:34:04] is some

[00:34:05] type of a

[00:34:06] planted

[00:34:06] situation to

[00:34:07] get us to

[00:34:08] think in those

[00:34:08] terms to

[00:34:09] fear the

[00:34:09] AI

[00:34:11] what this

[00:34:11] does is

[00:34:12] this skews

[00:34:13] our view

[00:34:13] of reality

[00:34:15] and we've

[00:34:16] seen the

[00:34:17] results of

[00:34:17] what happens

[00:34:18] when your

[00:34:18] reality is

[00:34:19] skewed

[00:34:19] it can be

[00:34:20] skewed in

[00:34:20] multiple ways

[00:34:21] look at the

[00:34:21] events of

[00:34:22] the past

[00:34:22] three years

[00:34:23] as an

[00:34:23] example

[00:34:24] and that's

[00:34:24] not even

[00:34:24] using

[00:34:25] high tech

[00:34:26] ways

[00:34:26] in which

[00:34:28] to

[00:34:29] directly

[00:34:29] affect

[00:34:30] your mind

[00:34:33] to

[00:34:33] directly

[00:34:34] affect

[00:34:35] your mind

[00:34:35] they've

[00:34:36] used

[00:34:37] methods

[00:34:37] to

[00:34:38] control

[00:34:38] people

[00:34:39] and make

[00:34:39] them act

[00:34:40] in certain

[00:34:40] ways

[00:34:41] based upon

[00:34:42] an illusion

[00:34:45] this is a

[00:34:46] dangerous

[00:34:47] situation

[00:34:47] so we're

[00:34:48] getting to

[00:34:48] that point

[00:34:49] we're beginning

[00:34:49] to see

[00:34:50] humanity

[00:34:50] shifting that

[00:34:51] way

[00:34:52] the paradigm

[00:34:53] here is

[00:34:53] shifting

[00:34:54] it's getting

[00:34:55] very hard

[00:34:55] to separate

[00:34:56] fact from

[00:34:57] fiction

[00:34:58] in a lot

[00:34:59] of things

[00:34:59] and this

[00:35:00] is by

[00:35:00] design

[00:35:01] and it's

[00:35:01] only going

[00:35:02] to get

[00:35:02] exponentially

[00:35:02] worse

[00:35:03] especially

[00:35:03] post

[00:35:04] singularity

[00:35:05] as he

[00:35:05] says

[00:35:05] here

[00:35:06] because

[00:35:06] then they

[00:35:07] will have

[00:35:07] direct

[00:35:08] access

[00:35:08] to

[00:35:08] your

[00:35:09] perception

[00:35:09] they can

[00:35:10] make you

[00:35:11] perceive

[00:35:11] whatever

[00:35:11] they want

[00:35:12] who's

[00:35:13] they

[00:35:13] whoever

[00:35:13] would

[00:35:14] happen

[00:35:14] to control

[00:35:15] the virtual

[00:35:16] reality

[00:35:16] inputs

[00:35:17] it's whoever

[00:35:18] controls

[00:35:18] the inputs

[00:35:19] now will

[00:35:22] that be

[00:35:22] the machine

[00:35:23] itself

[00:35:24] I would

[00:35:25] say highly

[00:35:25] unlikely

[00:35:27] based upon

[00:35:27] what we

[00:35:28] know at

[00:35:29] this point

[00:35:29] about artificial

[00:35:30] intelligence

[00:35:33] so I would

[00:35:34] say there

[00:35:34] has to be

[00:35:35] somebody

[00:35:35] controlling

[00:35:35] it and

[00:35:36] who's it

[00:35:36] going to

[00:35:36] be

[00:35:37] well based

[00:35:37] upon the

[00:35:38] current

[00:35:38] situation

[00:35:39] it's these

[00:35:40] people at

[00:35:41] the top

[00:35:41] of the

[00:35:41] power

[00:35:42] structure

[00:35:42] that very

[00:35:43] much do

[00:35:43] not want

[00:35:44] the rest

[00:35:44] of us

[00:35:45] around

[00:35:46] so if

[00:35:47] they're

[00:35:47] the ones

[00:35:49] that are

[00:35:49] controlling

[00:35:51] these

[00:35:51] advents

[00:35:52] these

[00:35:53] advances

[00:35:53] in

[00:35:53] technology

[00:35:55] if they're

[00:35:56] controlling

[00:35:57] it

[00:35:57] what's

[00:35:57] their

[00:35:57] intention

[00:35:58] and what

[00:35:59] will they

[00:35:59] do

[00:36:00] once they

[00:36:00] have

[00:36:01] this

[00:36:01] control

[00:36:01] and they

[00:36:02] can manipulate

[00:36:02] the minds

[00:36:03] of the

[00:36:03] masses

[00:36:04] at the

[00:36:04] touch

[00:36:05] of a

[00:36:05] button

[00:36:06] in a

[00:36:07] much

[00:36:07] more

[00:36:08] intrusive

[00:36:09] way

[00:36:09] than ever

[00:36:10] before

[00:36:11] what will

[00:36:12] they do

[00:36:13] with this

[00:36:13] power

[00:36:14] that's

[00:36:15] what it

[00:36:15] is

[00:36:15] this is

[00:36:16] ultimate

[00:36:16] power

[00:36:17] over your

[00:36:17] own

[00:36:18] reality

[00:36:18] over

[00:36:19] someone

[00:36:19] else's

[00:36:19] reality

[00:36:20] or their

[00:36:21] perceived

[00:36:21] reality

[00:36:22] I should

[00:36:23] say

[00:36:23] because

[00:36:24] that's

[00:36:24] the point

[00:36:24] perception

[00:36:25] is

[00:36:25] reality

[00:36:27] and

[00:36:27] this

[00:36:28] would be

[00:36:28] the

[00:36:28] ultimate

[00:36:28] way

[00:36:29] to

[00:36:40] anyway

[00:36:40] so we

[00:36:41] see

[00:36:41] some

[00:36:42] aspect

[00:36:42] of that

[00:36:43] happening

[00:36:43] today

[00:36:44] as we're

[00:36:45] gearing up

[00:36:45] towards

[00:36:46] this

[00:36:46] so we

[00:36:46] need to

[00:36:46] be

[00:36:47] mindful

[00:36:47] of

[00:36:47] that

[00:36:48] let's

[00:36:49] continue

[00:36:49] reading

[00:36:49] many

[00:36:50] commentators

[00:36:51] on these

[00:36:51] changes

[00:36:52] focus on

[00:36:53] what they

[00:36:53] perceive

[00:36:53] as a

[00:36:54] loss

[00:36:54] of some

[00:36:55] vital

[00:36:55] aspect

[00:36:55] of our

[00:36:56] humanity

[00:36:56] that will

[00:36:57] result from

[00:36:58] this

[00:36:58] transition

[00:36:58] this

[00:36:59] perspective

[00:37:00] stems

[00:37:00] however

[00:37:01] from a

[00:37:01] misunderstanding

[00:37:02] of what

[00:37:03] our

[00:37:03] technology

[00:37:03] will

[00:37:04] become

[00:37:05] gonna

[00:37:05] pause

[00:37:06] for a

[00:37:06] moment

[00:37:06] here

[00:37:06] folks

[00:37:07] because

[00:37:07] you

[00:37:07] see

[00:37:07] only

[00:37:08] the

[00:37:08] smart

[00:37:09] people

[00:37:09] and the

[00:37:09] brainiacs

[00:37:10] like

[00:37:11] Ray

[00:37:11] Kurzweil

[00:37:12] understand

[00:37:13] the

[00:37:14] true

[00:37:14] nature

[00:37:15] of

[00:37:15] what

[00:37:15] this

[00:37:15] technology

[00:37:16] will

[00:37:16] become

[00:37:16] and

[00:37:17] you're

[00:37:17] just

[00:37:17] a

[00:37:17] backward

[00:37:18] thinker

[00:37:18] if

[00:37:19] you

[00:37:19] think

[00:37:19] you

[00:37:20] know

[00:37:20] some

[00:37:20] such

[00:37:20] thing

[00:37:21] as

[00:37:21] we'll

[00:37:22] lose

[00:37:22] something

[00:37:22] critical

[00:37:23] or crucial

[00:37:24] to being

[00:37:24] human

[00:37:25] if we

[00:37:26] take part

[00:37:27] in this

[00:37:27] transhumanist

[00:37:28] advancement

[00:37:28] let's

[00:37:29] read on

[00:37:30] says

[00:37:31] all the

[00:37:31] machines

[00:37:31] we have

[00:37:32] met

[00:37:32] to date

[00:37:33] lack

[00:37:33] the

[00:37:34] essential

[00:37:34] subtlety

[00:37:35] of human

[00:37:35] biological

[00:37:36] qualities

[00:37:37] although

[00:37:38] the

[00:37:38] singularity

[00:37:38] has

[00:37:39] many

[00:37:39] faces

[00:37:40] its

[00:37:40] most

[00:37:41] important

[00:37:41] implication

[00:37:41] is

[00:37:42] this

[00:37:42] our

[00:37:43] technology

[00:37:43] will

[00:37:44] match

[00:37:44] and

[00:37:44] then

[00:37:45] vastly

[00:37:45] exceed

[00:37:46] the

[00:37:46] refinement

[00:37:47] and

[00:37:47] suppleness

[00:37:48] of what

[00:37:48] we

[00:37:48] regard

[00:37:49] as

[00:37:49] the

[00:37:50] best

[00:37:50] of

[00:37:50] human

[00:38:45] human body. Well, scientists and our modern science cannot quantify that. They have no friggin

[00:38:53] clue. Everything's there. All the cells are there. It's all the same stuff. It's all the

[00:39:00] same inherent ingredients, the same physical ingredients, but there's something missing

[00:39:06] and they don't know how that works. It's the divine spark of life and that's something

[00:39:11] a machine will never have, nor can we impart in a machine. This is also the same thing.

[00:39:19] How do magnets work? They don't know. They can make a magnet by magnetizing something else

[00:39:28] with a current magnet, but they don't know what it is that fundamentally makes that a magnet.

[00:39:36] You see, what's the difference between a neomidium magnet and just a regular piece of neomidium?

[00:39:46] Well, there is no quantitative difference. There's no quantitative way of measuring something

[00:39:53] differently from them. It's a qualitative ingredient and they don't know how to measure that or how to

[00:39:59] duplicate that. They don't know how it works. It's the same thing with the human soul, the human psyche,

[00:40:06] the human mind. Life. It's the same thing with a life. What imparts life? Well, they can't answer

[00:40:14] that and because they don't know that, they cannot make a machine that will live. We're not capable of

[00:40:21] that as human beings. It's not a feasible thing, but yet in their hubris, they think they can do better,

[00:40:29] but they're missing an ingredient here. Let's read on and we'll see what else they have to say here.

[00:40:36] So next, he has another quote here, the intuitive linear view versus the historical exponential view,

[00:40:41] and he quotes a man named Michael Anasimov. I can't even pronounce it. Anasimov.

[00:40:49] Quote, when the first transhuman intelligence is created and launches itself into recursive

[00:40:55] self-improvement, a fundamentally discontinuity is likely to occur, the likes of which I can't even

[00:41:02] begin to predict, end quote. No kidding. In the 1950s, John von Neumann, the legendary information

[00:41:09] theorist, was quoted as saying that, quote, the ever-accelerating progress of technology

[00:41:15] gives the appearance of approaching some essential singularity in the history of the race beyond which

[00:41:21] human affairs as we know them could not continue, end quote. Von Neumann makes two important

[00:41:28] observations here, acceleration and singularity. The first idea is that human progress is exponential,

[00:41:36] that is, it depends or it expands by repeatedly multiplying by a constant rather than linear,

[00:41:43] that is, expanding by repeatedly adding a constant. The second is that exponential growth is seductive,

[00:41:51] starting out slowly and virtually unnoticeably, but beyond the knee of the curve it turns explosive

[00:41:57] and profoundly transformative. The future is widely misunderstood. Our forebears expected it to be

[00:42:04] pretty much like their present, which had been pretty much like their past. Exponential trends did exist

[00:42:10] 1,000 years ago, but they were at the very early stage in which they were so flat and so slow that they

[00:42:18] looked like no trend at all. As a result, observers' expectation of an unchanged future was fulfilled.

[00:42:25] Today we anticipate continuous technological progress and the social repercussions that follow,

[00:42:30] but the future will be far more surprising than most people realize because few observers have

[00:42:36] truly internalized the implications of the fact that the rate of change itself is accelerating.

[00:42:42] I'm going to pause here for a moment. It's the quickening idea that was put out by so many

[00:42:50] so long ago. One Mr. Art Bell being notable among that. He wrote a book called The Quickening,

[00:42:58] talked about it on air quite a bit, and of course he was an insider in a lot of this stuff.

[00:43:04] Entertaining radio personality for sure, and brought a lot of information to the forefront,

[00:43:09] but, you know, it is what it is. But at any rate, he understood and he was kind of one of the

[00:43:17] early voices promoting these types of ideas on the radio waves here. But let's continue on.

[00:43:26] Most long-range forecasts of what is technically feasible in future time periods dramatically

[00:43:32] underestimate the power of future developments because they are based on what I call the intuitive

[00:43:38] linear view of history rather than the historical exponential view. My models show that we are

[00:43:45] doubling the paradigm shift rate every decade as I will discuss in the next chapter. Thus,

[00:43:50] the 20th century was gradually speeding up to today's rate of progress. Its achievements,

[00:43:56] therefore, were equivalent to about 20 years of progress at the rate in 2000. We'll make another

[00:44:03] 20 years of progress in just 14 years by 2014 and then do the same again in only seven years.

[00:44:09] To express this another way, we won't experience 100 years of technological advance in the first

[00:44:15] in the 21st century. We will witness on the order of 20,000 years of progress, again when measured by

[00:44:22] today's rate of progress or about 1,000 times greater than what was achieved in the 20th century.

[00:44:28] And I'm going to pause for a moment here and call absolute poppycock on this.

[00:44:33] If you think that over the course of this, the next 100 years, the 100 years between the year 2000 and the year 2100,

[00:44:42] that we're going to make 20,000 years of technological progress, I think you are sorely mistaken.

[00:44:51] How would you even gauge that? Have we even experienced 20,000 years of progress?

[00:44:59] What would that look like and how would you come to that kind of an estimation?

[00:45:05] This is all based upon advanced mathematics.

[00:45:09] And when you put mathematicians in charge of making things up like this,

[00:45:15] these are the results you get.

[00:45:18] Because you see, it's millions and millions of years ago that many things happened,

[00:45:26] according to the scientists and the mathematicians who decided this stuff.

[00:45:30] That the universe came into being 20 billion years ago or something, 20 billion years ago,

[00:45:38] nothing exploded and became everything.

[00:45:41] This is all fantasy.

[00:45:46] It's all based in fantasy.

[00:45:48] There's no evidence of that.

[00:45:49] There's no proof of that.

[00:45:51] This is just what the mathematicians put together because it makes a nice formula.

[00:45:56] And it might fit.

[00:45:58] So let's make it fit, the paradigm.

[00:46:01] Same thing with this.

[00:46:03] So we're going to squeeze 20,000 years of progress into 100 years.

[00:46:06] Yeah, okay.

[00:46:07] Let's stick around a few years and see if that comes to fruition, shall we?

[00:46:11] Let's read on.

[00:46:14] Misperceptions about the shape of the future come up frequently and in a variety of contexts,

[00:46:19] as one example of many.

[00:46:20] In a recent debate in which I took part concerning the feasibility of molecular manufacturing,

[00:46:26] a Nobel Prize winning panelist dismissed safety concerns regarding nanotechnology,

[00:46:31] proclaiming that, quote,

[00:46:32] we're not going to see self-replicating nano-engineered entities,

[00:46:37] devices constructed molecular fragment by fragment for 100 years, end quote.

[00:46:42] And I'm going to pause for a second here, folks,

[00:46:44] and say that whoever that Nobel Prize winning panelist was,

[00:46:48] was sadly, sadly misinformed about the nature of nanotech.

[00:46:55] Of course, this was written in 2005, remember?

[00:47:01] Nanotech's come a long way since then.

[00:47:04] Probably a lot further in the auspices of the military industrial complex.

[00:47:10] You know, those secret black budget programs that we are not privy to,

[00:47:14] but are bare minimum 50 to 100 years in advance of what we see in the mainstream

[00:47:19] as the most state-of-the-art technology that there is.

[00:47:23] So who knows what they're able to pull off with nanotech.

[00:47:27] I would argue that their response to this situation the past three years is largely nanotech-based.

[00:47:36] It's nanotech. That's the problem.

[00:47:41] But people don't want to admit that, even a Nobel Prize winning scientist.

[00:47:46] But of course, Kurzweil understood, well, because he's one of the planners,

[00:47:50] but that's beside the point.

[00:47:52] Let's read on.

[00:47:53] I pointed out that 100 years was a reasonable estimate

[00:47:57] and actually matched my own appraisal of the amount of technical progress

[00:48:01] required to achieve this particular milestone

[00:48:04] when measured at today's rate of progress,

[00:48:06] five times the average rate of change that we saw in the 20th century.

[00:48:11] But because we're doubling the rate of progress every decade,

[00:48:14] we'll see the equivalent of a century of progress at today's rate

[00:48:19] in only 25 calendar years.

[00:48:22] I'm going to pause for a moment here, folks.

[00:48:24] So 25 calendar years from 2005.

[00:48:27] Well, wouldn't you know, it's the year 2030.

[00:48:30] The year of agendas, if you will.

[00:48:34] Agenda 2030 and all of that.

[00:48:36] Of course, of course he's going to say some such thing.

[00:48:41] 25 calendar years.

[00:48:43] That'll be equivalent to what he says is about, oh, I don't know,

[00:48:47] a rate of 100 years of progress in that 25 years.

[00:48:52] Yeah, things have come a long way since 2005,

[00:48:55] but I don't think we're anywhere near 100 years advanced of what we were in 2005.

[00:48:59] Do you?

[00:49:02] Nowhere close.

[00:49:03] Actually, we should probably only be, I don't know, based upon his math,

[00:49:07] maybe 70 years advanced from what we were in 2005.

[00:49:12] And I don't see that big of a difference aside from everything being on the computer.

[00:49:18] That's about it.

[00:49:20] But let's continue on.

[00:49:23] Similarly, at Time Magazine's Future of Life conference held in 2003

[00:49:27] to celebrate the 50th anniversary of the discovery of the structure of DNA,

[00:49:33] all of the invited speakers were asked what they thought the next 50 years would be like.

[00:49:38] Virtually every presenter looked at the progress of the last 50 years

[00:49:42] and used it as a model for the next 50 years.

[00:49:45] For example, James Watson, the co-discoverer of DNA,

[00:49:49] said that in 50 years,

[00:49:50] we will have drugs that will allow us to eat as much as we want without gaining weight.

[00:49:55] Going to pause for a moment here, folks.

[00:49:58] We'll see if that happens.

[00:50:00] Somehow I doubt that.

[00:50:01] I doubt that, but we'll see.

[00:50:04] Maybe they'll have a cure for the common cold by then too, right?

[00:50:08] Let's continue on.

[00:50:09] I replied, 50 years?

[00:50:11] We have accomplished this already in mice

[00:50:13] by blocking the fat insulin receptor gene

[00:50:15] that controls the storage of fat in the fat cells.

[00:50:19] Drugs for human use using RNA interference and other techniques

[00:50:23] we will discuss in Chapter 5.

[00:50:25] Going to pause for a moment here, folks,

[00:50:27] and point out that Ray Kurzweil in 2005

[00:50:30] and even in 2003,

[00:50:32] because this is when this conference took place,

[00:50:34] was referring to RNA interference

[00:50:38] for drugs in human use.

[00:50:40] Way back then.

[00:50:42] All part of the plan,

[00:50:44] if you pay attention.

[00:50:47] So he says,

[00:50:47] drugs for human use are in development now

[00:50:50] and will be in FDA tests in several years.

[00:50:53] These will be available in 5 to 10 years,

[00:50:56] not 50.

[00:50:57] Other projections were equally short-sighted,

[00:50:59] reflecting contemporary research priorities

[00:51:02] rather than the profound changes

[00:51:04] that the next half-century will bring.

[00:51:06] Of all the thinkers at this conference,

[00:51:08] it was primarily Bill Joy and I

[00:51:11] who took account of the exponential nature of the future,

[00:51:14] although Joy and I disagree on the import of these changes,

[00:51:18] as I will discuss in Chapter 8.

[00:51:21] Going to pause for a moment here, folks.

[00:51:22] So do you notice Kurzweil very much likes himself a lot, it seems.

[00:51:27] He seems to think he's the smartest guy in the room all the time.

[00:51:30] The hubris involved here.

[00:51:33] Let's go ahead and read on.

[00:51:36] People intuitively assume that the current rate of progress

[00:51:39] will continue for future periods,

[00:51:41] even for those who have been around long enough

[00:51:44] to experience how the pace of change increases over time.

[00:51:48] Unexamined intuition leaves one with the impression

[00:51:50] that change occurs at the same rate

[00:51:52] that we have experienced most recently.

[00:51:55] From the mathematician's perspective,

[00:51:57] the reason for this is that an exponential curve

[00:52:00] looks like a straight line when examined for only a brief duration.

[00:52:03] As a result, even sophisticated commentators,

[00:52:06] when considering the future,

[00:52:08] typically extrapolate the current pace of change

[00:52:10] over the next 10 years or 100 years

[00:52:13] to determine their expectations.

[00:52:15] This is why I describe this way of looking at the future

[00:52:18] as the intuitive linear view.

[00:52:21] But a serious assessment of the history of technology

[00:52:24] reveals that technological change is exponential.

[00:52:27] Exponential growth is a feature of any evolutionary process,

[00:52:32] of which technology is a primary example.

[00:52:35] You can examine the data in different ways,

[00:52:37] on different timescales,

[00:52:38] and for a wide variety of technologies,

[00:52:41] ranging from electronic to biological,

[00:52:43] as well as for their implications,

[00:52:46] ranging from the amount of human knowledge

[00:52:48] to the size of the economy.

[00:52:50] The acceleration of progress and growth

[00:52:53] applies to each of them.

[00:52:55] Indeed, we often find not just simple exponential growth,

[00:52:58] but double exponential growth,

[00:53:01] meaning that the rate of exponential growth,

[00:53:03] that is the exponent,

[00:53:04] is itself growing exponentially.

[00:53:06] For example, see the discussion

[00:53:08] on the price performance of computing

[00:53:10] in the next chapter.

[00:53:12] Going to pause for a moment here, folks.

[00:53:13] So now he's saying the exponential curve

[00:53:15] will exponentially curve itself.

[00:53:19] So I guess it'll be 20,000 times 20,000 years, right?

[00:53:23] That will advance in the next 100 years.

[00:53:25] So 400,000 years of progress in 100 years.

[00:53:28] Sounds like it's feasible, doesn't it?

[00:53:31] But sorry, I take umbrage

[00:53:34] with a lot of the mathematics

[00:53:37] quoted in a lot of this stuff

[00:53:39] as far as the growth curve goes.

[00:53:41] Now, I do think that since the time

[00:53:44] that Kurzweil wrote this,

[00:53:45] the growth curve or the exponential curve

[00:53:47] of advancement has kind of leveled off

[00:53:50] a little bit from where it was.

[00:53:51] But we are in a period

[00:53:54] where we are seeing some advances

[00:53:56] happening rapidly.

[00:53:58] Let's take that into account.

[00:54:00] But let's continue on.

[00:54:02] And at some point, we'll get here

[00:54:03] to the next portion,

[00:54:04] which talks about these six different epochs

[00:54:07] of the singularity.

[00:54:10] But let's continue setting it up here

[00:54:12] because this is exactly how

[00:54:14] Kurzweil describes these things.

[00:54:16] Let's continue.

[00:54:17] Many scientists and engineers

[00:54:18] have what I call scientists' pessimism.

[00:54:22] Often they are so immersed

[00:54:23] in the difficulties and intricate details

[00:54:25] of a contemporary challenge

[00:54:27] that they fail to appreciate

[00:54:28] the ultimate long-term implications

[00:54:30] of their own work

[00:54:31] and the larger field of work

[00:54:33] in which they operate.

[00:54:34] They likewise fail to account

[00:54:36] for the far more powerful tools

[00:54:38] they will have available

[00:54:39] with each new generation of technology.

[00:54:42] Scientists are trained to be skeptical,

[00:54:44] to speak cautiously

[00:54:45] of current research goals,

[00:54:47] and to rarely speculate

[00:54:48] beyond the current generation

[00:54:49] of scientific pursuit.

[00:54:51] This may have been

[00:54:52] a satisfactory approach

[00:54:53] when a generation of science

[00:54:55] and technology lasted longer

[00:54:56] than a human generation,

[00:54:58] but it does not serve society's interests

[00:55:01] now that a generation

[00:55:02] of scientific and technological progress

[00:55:04] comprises only a few years.

[00:55:06] And I'm going to pause

[00:55:07] for a moment here, folks.

[00:55:08] And in the case of computing,

[00:55:10] not even a year.

[00:55:11] Let's put it that way.

[00:55:13] If you buy a computer today,

[00:55:15] it will be out of date tomorrow.

[00:55:18] Let's put it that way.

[00:55:19] Let's continue.

[00:55:21] Consider the biochemists

[00:55:22] who in 1990 were skeptical

[00:55:24] of the goal of transcribing

[00:55:26] the entire human genome

[00:55:27] in a mere 15 years.

[00:55:29] These scientists had just spent

[00:55:31] an entire year transcribing

[00:55:32] a mere 1,000th of the genome.

[00:55:35] So even with reasonable

[00:55:37] anticipated advances,

[00:55:39] it seemed natural to them

[00:55:40] that it would take a century,

[00:55:41] if not longer,

[00:55:42] before the entire genome

[00:55:44] could be sequenced.

[00:55:45] Or consider the skepticism

[00:55:46] expressed in the mid-1980s

[00:55:48] that the internet

[00:55:49] would ever be

[00:55:50] a significant phenomenon,

[00:55:52] given that it then included

[00:55:54] only tens of thousands

[00:55:55] of nodes,

[00:55:56] also known as servers.

[00:55:57] In fact,

[00:55:58] the number of nodes

[00:55:59] was doubling every year,

[00:56:00] so that there were likely

[00:56:02] to be tens of millions

[00:56:03] of nodes 10 years later.

[00:56:04] But this trend

[00:56:05] was not appreciated

[00:56:06] by those who struggled

[00:56:07] with the state-of-the-art

[00:56:09] technology in 1985,

[00:56:11] which permitted adding

[00:56:12] only a few thousand nodes

[00:56:14] throughout the world

[00:56:14] in a single year.

[00:56:16] The converse conceptual error

[00:56:18] occurs when certain

[00:56:19] exponential phenomena

[00:56:20] are first recognized

[00:56:22] and are applied

[00:56:22] in an overly aggressive manner

[00:56:24] without modeling

[00:56:25] the appropriate pace of growth.

[00:56:26] While exponential growth

[00:56:28] gains speed over time,

[00:56:30] it is not instantaneous.

[00:56:31] The run-up in capital values,

[00:56:34] that is,

[00:56:34] stock market prices,

[00:56:35] during the internet bubble

[00:56:36] and related to

[00:56:38] telecommunications bubble

[00:56:39] 1997-2000

[00:56:40] was greatly in excess

[00:56:42] of any reasonable expectation

[00:56:43] of even exponential growth.

[00:56:45] As I demonstrate,

[00:56:46] in the next chapter,

[00:56:47] the actual adoption

[00:56:48] of the internet

[00:56:49] and e-commerce

[00:56:50] did show smooth

[00:56:52] exponential growth

[00:56:53] through both boom and bust.

[00:56:55] The overzealous expectation

[00:56:56] of growth

[00:56:57] affected only capital valuations.

[00:56:59] We have seen

[00:57:00] comparable mistakes

[00:57:01] during the earlier

[00:57:02] paradigm shifts.

[00:57:04] For example,

[00:57:05] during the early

[00:57:05] railroad era

[00:57:06] in the 1830s,

[00:57:09] when the equivalent

[00:57:09] of the internet boom

[00:57:10] and bust

[00:57:11] led to a frenzy

[00:57:12] of railroad expansion.

[00:57:15] Another error

[00:57:16] the prognosticators make

[00:57:18] is to consider

[00:57:18] that transformations

[00:57:19] that will result

[00:57:20] from a single trend

[00:57:22] in today's world

[00:57:24] as if nothing else

[00:57:25] will change.

[00:57:26] A good example

[00:57:27] is the concern

[00:57:28] that radical life extension

[00:57:29] will result in overpopulation

[00:57:31] and the exhaustion

[00:57:32] of limited material resources

[00:57:34] to sustain human life,

[00:57:36] which ignores comparably

[00:57:37] radical wealth creation

[00:57:38] from nanotechnology

[00:57:39] and strong AI.

[00:57:41] Going to pause

[00:57:42] for a moment here, folks.

[00:57:43] So notice,

[00:57:44] once again,

[00:57:47] the overpopulation problem,

[00:57:48] the exhaustion

[00:57:49] of material resources.

[00:57:51] Well,

[00:57:52] he thinks that

[00:57:53] through the use

[00:57:53] of nanotechnology

[00:57:54] and strong AI,

[00:57:55] perhaps this could be overcome.

[00:57:58] But that's not the view

[00:58:00] of most of the people

[00:58:01] at the topmost levels.

[00:58:04] You see,

[00:58:05] you need the resources

[00:58:08] to be able to do that.

[00:58:10] And if you don't have

[00:58:11] the resources to begin with,

[00:58:13] you can't manufacture

[00:58:13] more resources in that way.

[00:58:15] So they see that

[00:58:17] as being a potential problem.

[00:58:18] Let's continue reading, though.

[00:58:21] For example,

[00:58:22] nanotechnology-based

[00:58:23] manufacturing devices

[00:58:24] in the 2020s

[00:58:25] will be capable

[00:58:27] of creating

[00:58:27] almost any physical product

[00:58:29] from inexpensive

[00:58:30] raw materials

[00:58:31] and information.

[00:58:32] Going to pause

[00:58:32] for a moment here, folks.

[00:58:34] We're in the 2020s.

[00:58:35] Where is this technology,

[00:58:37] Kurzweil?

[00:58:38] I mean,

[00:58:38] we have 3D printers,

[00:58:40] but I wouldn't call that

[00:58:41] a nanotechnology

[00:58:42] manufacturing process.

[00:58:46] We don't have this yet.

[00:58:48] I think you were a little

[00:58:49] off base in your predictions.

[00:58:51] Let's continue on.

[00:58:53] I emphasize

[00:58:53] the exponential

[00:58:54] versus linear perspective

[00:58:56] because it's the most

[00:58:57] important failure

[00:58:58] that prognosticators make

[00:58:59] in considering future trends.

[00:59:01] Most technology forecasts

[00:59:03] and forecasters

[00:59:04] ignore altogether

[00:59:05] this historical exponential view

[00:59:07] of technological process.

[00:59:09] Indeed,

[00:59:09] almost everyone I have met

[00:59:11] has a linear view

[00:59:13] of the future.

[00:59:13] That's why people

[00:59:14] tend to overestimate

[00:59:15] what can be achieved

[00:59:16] in the short term.

[00:59:17] Because we tend to leave out

[00:59:19] necessary details,

[00:59:20] but underestimate

[00:59:21] what can be achieved

[00:59:22] in the long term

[00:59:23] because exponential growth

[00:59:25] is ignored.

[00:59:27] Going to pause

[00:59:28] for a second there.

[00:59:29] So,

[00:59:30] Kurzweil

[00:59:30] is of the mindset

[00:59:31] that

[00:59:32] many of these things

[00:59:34] can be achieved

[00:59:34] in a very short time.

[00:59:37] I would say

[00:59:38] Kurzweil, I think,

[00:59:39] is a little too optimistic.

[00:59:41] I mean,

[00:59:41] especially

[00:59:42] considering his statement

[00:59:43] there about

[00:59:44] in the 2020s,

[00:59:46] which is now,

[00:59:48] he said this in 2005,

[00:59:51] that will have

[00:59:52] nanotechnology-based

[00:59:53] manufacturing devices

[00:59:54] that are capable

[00:59:55] of creating

[00:59:56] almost any physical product

[00:59:57] from inexpensive

[00:59:58] raw materials

[00:59:59] and information.

[01:00:01] We don't have that yet,

[01:00:02] Kurzweil.

[01:00:03] I think you are a little off

[01:00:05] in your estimation here.

[01:00:06] In fact,

[01:00:07] many of the nanotech

[01:00:08] researchers would tell you

[01:00:09] that's still

[01:00:10] probably quite a long

[01:00:11] ways off yet.

[01:00:13] Even still,

[01:00:14] so I think your

[01:00:15] growth curve

[01:00:16] idea here

[01:00:17] is a little bit skewed,

[01:00:18] but let's continue on

[01:00:20] and see

[01:00:21] what he says here.

[01:00:22] He talks about

[01:00:23] the six epochs

[01:00:25] and he's got two quotes here.

[01:00:26] The first quote

[01:00:27] is from a guy named

[01:00:28] Marshall McLuhan

[01:00:29] and it says,

[01:00:31] quote,

[01:00:31] first we build the tools,

[01:00:33] then they build us.

[01:00:34] End quote.

[01:00:35] The next quote

[01:00:37] is from

[01:00:38] the late great

[01:00:39] Yogi Berra

[01:00:40] and he says,

[01:00:41] quote,

[01:00:42] the future ain't

[01:00:43] what it used to be.

[01:00:44] End quote.

[01:00:46] So let's read on here

[01:00:48] and we'll get

[01:00:49] to the meat of the matter.

[01:00:52] Evolution

[01:00:52] is a process

[01:00:53] of creating patterns

[01:00:54] of increasing order.

[01:00:56] I'll discuss

[01:00:57] the concept of order

[01:00:58] in the next chapter.

[01:00:59] The emphasis

[01:01:00] in this section

[01:01:01] is on the concept

[01:01:02] of patterns

[01:01:03] and I'm going to pause

[01:01:04] for a second right here,

[01:01:05] folks,

[01:01:05] just to point out

[01:01:06] a flaw

[01:01:07] in Kurzweil's thinking.

[01:01:08] He says,

[01:01:09] evolution

[01:01:09] is a process

[01:01:11] of creating patterns

[01:01:12] of increasing order.

[01:01:15] That's not necessarily true.

[01:01:17] If you're basing

[01:01:18] the term evolution

[01:01:19] on what we see

[01:01:20] in the scientific paradigm,

[01:01:22] what we see

[01:01:23] is entropy,

[01:01:24] the breaking down

[01:01:25] of things over time,

[01:01:26] the decomplexity

[01:01:27] of things.

[01:01:29] Things do not evolve

[01:01:30] into something

[01:01:31] more complex.

[01:01:32] Not necessarily.

[01:01:34] We've never

[01:01:35] seen that before.

[01:01:36] There's no evidence

[01:01:37] that supports that.

[01:01:40] Now,

[01:01:41] we do see

[01:01:41] what they call

[01:01:42] terms like

[01:01:44] natural selection

[01:01:45] or adaptation

[01:01:46] or some such thing.

[01:01:47] We can see

[01:01:49] some of that,

[01:01:50] but by and large,

[01:01:51] most of the adaptations

[01:01:52] arise from mutations

[01:01:55] which usually have

[01:01:56] some negative impact

[01:01:57] on a creature.

[01:01:58] So if you see

[01:01:59] a mutation,

[01:02:00] it's usually

[01:02:02] something negative

[01:02:03] that affects them

[01:02:06] and therefore

[01:02:07] leads to further

[01:02:08] entropy

[01:02:08] and breaking down

[01:02:09] rather than

[01:02:11] building up.

[01:02:12] So evolution,

[01:02:13] this is a straw man

[01:02:14] argument,

[01:02:15] saying evolution

[01:02:15] is a process

[01:02:16] of creating patterns

[01:02:18] of increasing order.

[01:02:19] order.

[01:02:20] That's not true.

[01:02:22] Not if you're going

[01:02:23] to hold it to what

[01:02:23] your scientific

[01:02:24] terminology is here,

[01:02:26] to what the basis

[01:02:28] of evolution

[01:02:29] really is.

[01:02:30] It's not increasing

[01:02:31] order.

[01:02:32] In fact,

[01:02:33] it's more chaotic

[01:02:34] and more breaking

[01:02:35] down over the course

[01:02:37] of time.

[01:02:38] We lose more

[01:02:39] from generation

[01:02:40] to generation.

[01:02:41] Information is lost,

[01:02:42] you see,

[01:02:43] from generation

[01:02:44] to generation,

[01:02:45] not gained

[01:02:46] or expounded

[01:02:47] upon

[01:02:47] or becoming

[01:02:47] more complex.

[01:02:49] This all has to do

[01:02:50] with cybernetics

[01:02:51] principles,

[01:02:52] folks,

[01:02:52] and what they call

[01:02:52] complexity science.

[01:02:54] So,

[01:02:55] of course,

[01:02:56] they want to argue

[01:02:57] that more is better,

[01:02:59] more information

[01:03:00] is better,

[01:03:01] not necessarily.

[01:03:03] If something's simple,

[01:03:04] if it ain't broke,

[01:03:05] don't try to fix it,

[01:03:06] right?

[01:03:07] So if something's

[01:03:08] simple,

[01:03:09] why make it

[01:03:09] complex?

[01:03:11] That does not

[01:03:13] fit

[01:03:13] in the natural

[01:03:15] order here.

[01:03:16] The natural

[01:03:17] world does not

[01:03:18] work in that way.

[01:03:19] It does not

[01:03:19] create ever-increasing

[01:03:21] patterns of order.

[01:03:25] That's the thing.

[01:03:27] That's not how

[01:03:28] things work.

[01:03:29] It finds the

[01:03:30] simplest solution.

[01:03:32] So,

[01:03:33] this is a faulty

[01:03:34] definition of evolution

[01:03:35] just right out of

[01:03:36] the gate here,

[01:03:37] but this is what

[01:03:38] the transhumanists

[01:03:39] push for.

[01:03:39] This is the notion

[01:03:40] they talk about.

[01:03:41] So let's continue

[01:03:42] on and we'll keep

[01:03:43] that in mind.

[01:03:44] Now,

[01:03:45] Kurzweil says,

[01:03:46] I believe that it's

[01:03:47] the evolution of

[01:03:48] patterns that

[01:03:48] constitutes the

[01:03:49] ultimate story

[01:03:50] of our world.

[01:03:51] Evolution works

[01:03:52] through indirection.

[01:03:54] Each stage or

[01:03:54] epoch uses the

[01:03:56] information processing

[01:03:57] methods of the

[01:03:58] previous epoch to

[01:03:59] create the next.

[01:04:00] I conceptualize

[01:04:01] the history of

[01:04:02] evolution,

[01:04:03] both biological

[01:04:04] and technological,

[01:04:05] as occurring in

[01:04:07] six epochs.

[01:04:09] As we discuss,

[01:04:10] the singularity

[01:04:11] will begin with

[01:04:12] epoch five,

[01:04:13] and will spread

[01:04:14] from earth to

[01:04:16] the rest of the

[01:04:16] universe in

[01:04:17] epoch six.

[01:04:18] Going to pause

[01:04:19] for a moment

[01:04:20] here, folks.

[01:04:21] So here you go.

[01:04:22] So this is what

[01:04:23] they believe.

[01:04:24] And of course,

[01:04:25] this goes back

[01:04:26] to that whole

[01:04:27] notion again.

[01:04:28] If you talk to

[01:04:29] any of those

[01:04:30] science-y guys

[01:04:31] out there like

[01:04:32] that Michio

[01:04:32] Kaku or some

[01:04:33] of these other

[01:04:34] ones that are

[01:04:34] out there on

[01:04:35] History Channel

[01:04:36] and stuff all

[01:04:37] the time,

[01:04:37] they'll tell you

[01:04:38] about class one

[01:04:39] and class zero

[01:04:40] and class two

[01:04:41] civilizations and

[01:04:42] stuff like this

[01:04:43] talking about

[01:04:44] these alien

[01:04:45] civilizations that

[01:04:46] may or may not

[01:04:47] exist.

[01:04:47] They don't know,

[01:04:48] but they claim

[01:04:49] that it's the

[01:04:51] same kind of

[01:04:51] talk going on

[01:04:52] here.

[01:04:53] So we have

[01:04:54] these different

[01:04:54] epochs.

[01:04:56] And of course,

[01:04:57] you see,

[01:04:57] epoch five will

[01:04:58] of course be

[01:05:00] the rise of

[01:05:01] the singularity.

[01:05:02] That'll be the

[01:05:02] beginning of the

[01:05:03] singularity.

[01:05:04] And of course,

[01:05:04] epoch six,

[01:05:05] that'll be when

[01:05:06] the transhumanists

[01:05:08] or the post-humans

[01:05:09] take over the

[01:05:10] entire universe

[01:05:10] and become the

[01:05:11] gods here.

[01:05:12] Right?

[01:05:13] Of all the

[01:05:14] universe.

[01:05:15] That's essentially

[01:05:15] what's being said

[01:05:16] here.

[01:05:16] But let's read

[01:05:18] his little

[01:05:18] breakdown here

[01:05:19] and we'll

[01:05:22] try to take it

[01:05:24] apart a little

[01:05:24] at a time.

[01:05:26] Epoch one,

[01:05:27] physics and

[01:05:28] chemistry.

[01:05:28] We can trace

[01:05:29] our origins to

[01:05:30] a state that

[01:05:31] represents information

[01:05:32] in its basic

[01:05:33] structures,

[01:05:34] patterns of

[01:05:34] matter and

[01:05:35] energy.

[01:05:36] Recent theories

[01:05:37] of quantum

[01:05:37] gravity hold

[01:05:38] that time and

[01:05:39] space are broken

[01:05:40] down into

[01:05:41] discrete quanta,

[01:05:42] essentially fragments

[01:05:43] of information.

[01:05:44] There is

[01:05:45] controversy as to

[01:05:46] whether matter and

[01:05:47] energy are ultimately

[01:05:48] digital or analog in

[01:05:50] nature, but regardless

[01:05:51] of the resolution of

[01:05:52] this issue, we do

[01:05:54] know that atomic

[01:05:55] structures store and

[01:05:56] represent discrete

[01:05:57] information.

[01:05:58] So I'm going to

[01:05:58] pause for a moment

[01:05:59] here, folks.

[01:06:00] So right out of the

[01:06:01] gate, he's calling

[01:06:01] things quantum.

[01:06:04] Quantum, quantum,

[01:06:05] quantum, quantum

[01:06:06] gravity.

[01:06:07] What is gravity?

[01:06:08] Explain gravity to

[01:06:09] me, Mr.

[01:06:10] Kurzweil, please.

[01:06:11] Now I understand,

[01:06:12] you know, what goes

[01:06:13] up must come down.

[01:06:14] That's very basic.

[01:06:15] But science, our

[01:06:17] modern science does

[01:06:18] not even understand

[01:06:19] gravity, how it

[01:06:20] works.

[01:06:21] And yet they'll say

[01:06:22] quantum gravity.

[01:06:25] Quantum gravity

[01:06:26] holds space and time

[01:06:27] together.

[01:06:28] You can break it

[01:06:29] down into fundamental

[01:06:30] particles.

[01:06:32] Absolute poppycock,

[01:06:33] in my view.

[01:06:35] But at any rate,

[01:06:37] don't get me wrong,

[01:06:38] I think there are

[01:06:38] fundamental particles

[01:06:40] out there, but you

[01:06:40] cannot call everything

[01:06:43] a particle interaction.

[01:06:45] Doesn't work that way.

[01:06:47] But we'll give him the

[01:06:48] benefit of the doubt.

[01:06:49] Let's see what else he

[01:06:50] has to say here.

[01:06:52] A few hundred thousand

[01:06:54] years after the Big

[01:06:55] Bang.

[01:06:56] Sorry, gotta pause for

[01:06:57] a second.

[01:06:58] I love the way these

[01:07:00] guys speak as if this

[01:07:01] is factual and they

[01:07:02] know this.

[01:07:03] Like as if they were

[01:07:04] there and this is

[01:07:05] recorded, this is a

[01:07:06] known thing.

[01:07:08] That, you know, this

[01:07:09] is how it really

[01:07:10] happened.

[01:07:10] They take these stupid

[01:07:12] theories and they

[01:07:14] use them as absolute

[01:07:15] veritas when they are

[01:07:17] not absolute veritas.

[01:07:19] They are very bad

[01:07:20] theories.

[01:07:21] Let's put it that way.

[01:07:23] So let's read it

[01:07:24] again anyway.

[01:07:25] A few hundred thousand

[01:07:26] years after the Big

[01:07:27] Bang, atoms began to

[01:07:29] form, and he knows

[01:07:30] this of course, as

[01:07:31] electrons became

[01:07:33] trapped in orbits

[01:07:34] around nuclei consisting

[01:07:35] of protons and

[01:07:36] neutrons.

[01:07:37] Gotta pause for a

[01:07:38] moment there, folks.

[01:07:39] So apparently

[01:07:39] electrons came first

[01:07:41] and then protons and

[01:07:43] neutrons and then they

[01:07:44] evolved into atoms.

[01:07:45] And it's amazing.

[01:07:46] This happened only a few

[01:07:47] hundred thousand years

[01:07:48] after the Big Bang.

[01:07:49] I mean, what was out

[01:07:49] there beforehand?

[01:07:51] What was the matter of

[01:07:53] the Big Bang made of?

[01:07:56] These people, they speak

[01:07:58] in such nonsensical terms

[01:08:00] here and they act like

[01:08:01] they're so smart, right?

[01:08:04] Because they use these

[01:08:05] science-y terms.

[01:08:06] Let's continue on.

[01:08:08] The electrical structure

[01:08:09] of atoms made them

[01:08:10] sticky.

[01:08:11] There's a good science-y

[01:08:12] term for you.

[01:08:13] Chemistry was born a few

[01:08:15] million years later as

[01:08:16] atoms came together to

[01:08:17] create relatively stable

[01:08:19] structures called

[01:08:20] molecules.

[01:08:21] Of all the elements,

[01:08:22] carbon proved to be the

[01:08:23] most versatile.

[01:08:24] It's able to form bonds

[01:08:26] in four directions versus

[01:08:27] one to three for most

[01:08:29] other elements, giving

[01:08:30] rise to complicated

[01:08:31] information-rich

[01:08:32] three-dimensional

[01:08:33] structures.

[01:08:34] The rules of our

[01:08:35] universe and the

[01:08:36] balance of the physical

[01:08:37] constants that govern the

[01:08:38] interaction of basic

[01:08:40] forces are so

[01:08:41] exquisitely, delicately,

[01:08:42] and exactly appropriate

[01:08:43] for the codification and

[01:08:45] evolution of information

[01:08:46] resulting in increasing

[01:08:47] complexity that one

[01:08:49] wonders how such an

[01:08:50] extraordinarily unlikely

[01:08:51] situation came about.

[01:08:53] Where some see a divine

[01:08:55] hand, others see our

[01:08:56] own hands, namely the

[01:08:58] anthroporphic principle,

[01:09:00] which holds that only in

[01:09:03] a universe that allowed

[01:09:04] our evolution would we be

[01:09:06] here to ask such

[01:09:07] questions.

[01:09:08] Recent theories of

[01:09:09] physics concerning multiple

[01:09:10] universes speculate that

[01:09:12] new universes are created

[01:09:14] on a regular basis, each with

[01:09:16] its own unique rules, but

[01:09:17] that most of these either die

[01:09:19] out quickly or else continue

[01:09:20] without the evolution of any

[01:09:22] interesting patterns such as

[01:09:24] earth-based biology has

[01:09:26] created because their rules

[01:09:28] do not support the

[01:09:29] evolution of increasingly

[01:09:30] complex forms.

[01:09:31] I'm going to pause for a

[01:09:32] moment here, folks.

[01:09:34] So this, this is just

[01:09:37] profoundly stupid.

[01:09:38] I'm sorry.

[01:09:39] This, this way of thinking.

[01:09:41] Now, of course, he's talking

[01:09:42] about universes are, are,

[01:09:44] you know, created all the

[01:09:45] time and they just kind of

[01:09:47] pop into existence all the

[01:09:48] time.

[01:09:48] But most of the time,

[01:09:50] nothing interesting happens

[01:09:51] there and it dies out

[01:09:52] quickly.

[01:09:53] But, you know, in our case,

[01:09:55] it's because we, the laws

[01:09:56] of physics here, these, these

[01:09:58] mysterious laws that took

[01:09:59] place, they're different

[01:10:01] here than they are in some

[01:10:02] of these other universes and

[01:10:03] they're all governed by

[01:10:04] different laws somehow.

[01:10:06] But who or what put these

[01:10:08] laws in place?

[01:10:09] Well, that, that's not, you

[01:10:10] know, that's not open for

[01:10:12] discussion.

[01:10:13] But at any rate, let's

[01:10:15] continue on.

[01:10:16] And I don't want to get

[01:10:16] too hung up on that side

[01:10:18] tangent because there's a

[01:10:19] lot more ground to cover.

[01:10:20] And I want to try and stay

[01:10:21] on topic.

[01:10:22] I do apologize for veering

[01:10:24] off topic, but I just can't

[01:10:25] help it when their arguments

[01:10:28] are so illogical most of the

[01:10:30] time with this stuff.

[01:10:31] Let's read on though.

[01:10:32] It's hard to imagine how we

[01:10:34] could test these theories of

[01:10:35] evolution applied to early

[01:10:37] cosmology, but it's clear that

[01:10:39] the physical laws of our

[01:10:40] universe are precisely what

[01:10:41] they need to be to allow for

[01:10:43] the evolution of increasing

[01:10:44] levels of order and

[01:10:46] complexity.

[01:10:46] Pause for a moment here,

[01:10:48] folks.

[01:10:48] So that's the most

[01:10:49] unsciencey type of statement

[01:10:52] I've ever heard.

[01:10:53] So even though he's saying

[01:10:55] there's no way we could

[01:10:56] really test these theories

[01:10:57] of evolution applied to

[01:10:59] early cosmology, this is

[01:11:03] the very definition of

[01:11:04] anti-science, right?

[01:11:05] We're going to accept that

[01:11:07] that's the case because

[01:11:08] here we are, right?

[01:11:09] But at any rate, let's

[01:11:11] continue on.

[01:11:12] So that was epoch number

[01:11:14] one, which he calls here

[01:11:17] physics and chemistry.

[01:11:18] So now we're going to look at

[01:11:20] epoch number two, and this is a

[01:11:21] much shorter section.

[01:11:23] See, that's the thing.

[01:11:24] It seems like he got all of his

[01:11:25] grandiose ideas out of the way

[01:11:27] early on.

[01:11:29] So let's try and see.

[01:11:31] He's kept them a little more

[01:11:32] concise.

[01:11:33] And that way maybe we could wrap

[01:11:35] this up within the next 15 minutes

[01:11:37] epoch number two, biology and

[01:11:40] DNA.

[01:11:41] In the second epoch, starting

[01:11:44] several billion years ago,

[01:11:46] carbon-based compounds became

[01:11:48] more and more intricate until

[01:11:49] complex aggregations of molecules

[01:11:51] formed self-replicating mechanisms

[01:11:54] and life originated.

[01:11:56] Ultimately, biological systems

[01:11:58] evolved a precise digital mechanism,

[01:12:01] which is called DNA, to store

[01:12:02] information describing a larger

[01:12:04] society of molecules.

[01:12:06] I'm going to pause for a second

[01:12:07] here, folks.

[01:12:08] Just to point out that

[01:12:10] Kurzweil says that DNA is a

[01:12:14] digital mechanism.

[01:12:16] I don't necessarily agree with

[01:12:19] that statement, but they

[01:12:20] certainly want to transform it

[01:12:21] into a digital system of

[01:12:24] information storage.

[01:12:26] Let's continue reading, though.

[01:12:28] The molecule and its supporting

[01:12:30] machinery of codons and

[01:12:32] ribosomes enabled a record to be

[01:12:34] kept of the evolutionary

[01:12:35] experiments of this second

[01:12:38] epoch.

[01:12:38] So I'm going to pause for a

[01:12:40] second here, folks.

[01:12:41] So who was doing the

[01:12:42] experimenting then, Kurzweil?

[01:12:45] You've got to wonder what his

[01:12:47] next statement is going to be

[01:12:49] here, because we're going to

[01:12:49] look at epoch three.

[01:12:52] Epoch three.

[01:12:54] Brains.

[01:12:56] Each epoch continues the

[01:12:58] evolution of information through a

[01:12:59] paradigm shift to a further

[01:13:01] level of indirection.

[01:13:03] That is, evolution uses the

[01:13:05] results of one epoch to create

[01:13:07] the next.

[01:13:08] For example, in the third

[01:13:09] epoch, DNA-guided evolution

[01:13:12] produced organisms that could

[01:13:14] detect information with their own

[01:13:16] sensory organs and process and

[01:13:18] store that information in their

[01:13:20] own brains and nervous systems.

[01:13:22] Going to pause for a moment here,

[01:13:23] folks.

[01:13:24] So once again, more of this

[01:13:26] godlessness nonsense that these

[01:13:30] people believe.

[01:13:31] So, you see, not God, but DNA-guided

[01:13:34] evolution produced organisms,

[01:13:37] produced life.

[01:13:40] DNA-guided evolution.

[01:13:42] You see, all the chemicals, all the

[01:13:47] atoms came together in the grand

[01:13:49] soup and formed chemicals, and then

[01:13:51] the chemicals formed DNA information

[01:13:54] packets that evolved and produced

[01:13:57] organisms in life.

[01:14:00] Amazing.

[01:14:01] Through this process of

[01:14:03] increasing complexity over time

[01:14:05] that's never been witnessed or

[01:14:07] recorded or analyzed or

[01:14:09] duplicated in experimentation ever

[01:14:12] in the history of mankind.

[01:14:15] You know, those very things that

[01:14:16] science requires in order for it to

[01:14:18] be science.

[01:14:19] Being able to reproduce something

[01:14:21] or observe something actually

[01:14:24] happening.

[01:14:25] No, no.

[01:14:27] Not based on observation.

[01:14:29] Not based upon experimentation.

[01:14:31] Not based upon duplication.

[01:14:34] This is not science

[01:14:36] by definition, but this is what

[01:14:38] they push as science.

[01:14:41] Speculation at best.

[01:14:43] And godless speculation at that.

[01:14:46] Because they have to make it

[01:14:48] godless speculation.

[01:14:50] But anyway, let's go ahead and

[01:14:52] continue reading here.

[01:14:54] These were made possible by

[01:14:57] second epoch mechanisms.

[01:14:59] DNA and epigenetic information of

[01:15:01] proteins and RNA fragments that

[01:15:04] control gene expression, which

[01:15:06] indirectly enabled and defined

[01:15:07] third epoch information processing

[01:15:10] mechanisms.

[01:15:11] The brains and nervous systems of

[01:15:12] organisms.

[01:15:13] The third epoch started with the

[01:15:15] ability of early animals to

[01:15:17] recognize patterns, which still

[01:15:19] accounts for the vast majority of

[01:15:21] the activity in our brains.

[01:15:22] Ultimately, our own species evolved the

[01:15:25] ability to create abstract mental

[01:15:27] models of the world we experience and

[01:15:30] to contemplate the rational implications

[01:15:32] of these models.

[01:15:33] We have the ability to redesign the

[01:15:35] world in our minds and to put these

[01:15:38] ideas into action.

[01:15:39] And I'm going to pause for a moment here,

[01:15:42] folks.

[01:15:42] So the grand soup turned into the human

[01:15:45] brain, which made everything possible here,

[01:15:48] made it possible for us to think and to

[01:15:50] understand, you know, in our rational

[01:15:53] minds here, how all this works.

[01:15:57] It's crazy, isn't it?

[01:15:59] Anyway, let's continue on.

[01:16:02] Epoch number four, technology.

[01:16:05] Combining the endowment of rational and

[01:16:08] abstract thought with our opposable

[01:16:09] thumb, our species ushered in the fourth

[01:16:12] epoch and the next level of indirection,

[01:16:14] the evolution of human created technology.

[01:16:17] This started out with the simple

[01:16:20] mechanisms and developed into elaborate

[01:16:22] automated mechanical machines.

[01:16:26] Ultimately, with sophisticated

[01:16:27] computational and communication devices,

[01:16:30] technology was itself capable of sensing,

[01:16:33] storing, and evaluating elaborate

[01:16:35] patterns of information.

[01:16:37] To compare the rate of progress of the

[01:16:40] biological evolution of intelligence to

[01:16:42] that of technological evolution,

[01:16:43] consider that the most advanced mammals

[01:16:46] have added about one cubic inch of brain

[01:16:50] matter every hundred thousand years.

[01:16:53] Going to pause for a second here.

[01:16:54] So he claims here that even the most

[01:16:57] advanced mammals have added about one

[01:16:59] cubic inch of brain matter every hundred

[01:17:01] thousand years, whereas we are roughly

[01:17:04] doubling the computational capacity of

[01:17:06] computers every year.

[01:17:08] So he's claiming here that the computers

[01:17:13] will be much faster, of course.

[01:17:15] That's what the implication is here.

[01:17:17] Of course, neither brain size nor computer

[01:17:20] capacity is the sole determinant of

[01:17:22] intelligence, but they do represent

[01:17:23] enabling factors.

[01:17:25] If we place key milestones of both

[01:17:27] biological evolution and human

[01:17:28] technological development on a single

[01:17:31] graph plotting both the x-axis and the

[01:17:33] y-axis on logarithmic scales, we find a

[01:17:36] reasonably straight line with biological

[01:17:39] evolution leading directly to human

[01:17:41] directed development.

[01:17:43] Going to pause for a moment here, folks.

[01:17:44] So now, now Kurzweil, of course, will

[01:17:49] suggest, well, the next logical trend is

[01:17:52] human guided evolution here.

[01:17:55] That's what he's trying to promote in

[01:17:57] this way of thinking.

[01:17:58] And he's got his little graphs here, a

[01:18:00] bunch of graphs pointing to this.

[01:18:03] So he says, the attributes that are

[01:18:05] growing exponentially in these charts are

[01:18:07] order and complexity concepts we will

[01:18:10] explore in the next chapter.

[01:18:11] This acceleration matches our common

[01:18:13] sense observations.

[01:18:15] A billion years ago, not much happened

[01:18:17] over the course of even one million

[01:18:19] years.

[01:18:20] How would you know that?

[01:18:23] But a quarter million years ago,

[01:18:26] epochal events such as the evolution

[01:18:28] of our species occurred in time frames

[01:18:30] of just 100,000 years.

[01:18:33] Yeah.

[01:18:34] OK, where's the evidence and proof of this

[01:18:36] Kurzweil?

[01:18:36] Honestly.

[01:18:37] In technology, if we go back 50,000 years,

[01:18:40] not much happened over a 100 or over a

[01:18:43] 1,000 year period.

[01:18:45] But in the recent past, we see new paradigms

[01:18:48] such as the World Wide Web, progress from

[01:18:51] inception to mass adoption, meaning that

[01:18:53] all are used by a quarter of the population

[01:18:56] in advanced countries within only a decade.

[01:18:59] So I'm going to pause for a second there, folks.

[01:19:01] So he's making the argument here that this

[01:19:04] growth of technology can be equated back to

[01:19:07] the comparable growth through the course of

[01:19:10] time with various things happening.

[01:19:14] And of course, they use all the illogical

[01:19:17] timescales that are unproven, the billions

[01:19:19] of years and the millions of years, all these

[01:19:23] things to make their arguments.

[01:19:25] So that was epoch number four, epoch number

[01:19:29] four, which was technology.

[01:19:33] So I think that is what he is suggesting is the

[01:19:37] epoch that we're leaving now and we're in the

[01:19:39] transitive phase between epoch four and epoch

[01:19:43] five.

[01:19:44] That, in my estimation, is what he is saying here.

[01:19:49] So let's take a look at epoch five.

[01:19:53] So according to Kurzweil, epoch five, the

[01:19:56] merger of human technology with human

[01:19:58] intelligence.

[01:19:59] Looking ahead several decades, the singularity

[01:20:02] will begin with the fifth epoch.

[01:20:05] It will result from the merger of the vast

[01:20:08] knowledge embedded in our own brains with the

[01:20:11] vastly greater capacity, speed and knowledge

[01:20:13] sharing ability of our technology.

[01:20:16] The fifth epoch will enable our human machine

[01:20:19] civilization to transcend the human brain's

[01:20:23] mere hundred trillion extremely slow connections.

[01:20:26] The singularity will allow us to overcome old

[01:20:29] age or sorry, to overcome age old human

[01:20:32] problems and vastly amplify human creativity.

[01:20:36] We will preserve and enhance the intelligence

[01:20:39] that evolution has bestowed on us while

[01:20:41] overcoming the profound limitations of

[01:20:44] biological evolution.

[01:20:45] But the singularity will also amplify the ability

[01:20:49] to act on our destructive inclinations.

[01:20:51] So its full story has not yet been written.

[01:20:55] So I'm going to pause for a moment here, folks,

[01:20:57] and notice that he says that it also has the ability

[01:21:01] to amplify our ability to act on our own destructive

[01:21:06] inclinations.

[01:21:08] And that is where the rubber meets the road with a lot

[01:21:11] of this.

[01:21:12] Because who's controlling this development?

[01:21:16] It's the people in charge of these things that are

[01:21:19] the big problem.

[01:21:21] The technologies themselves are not a big problem.

[01:21:24] Because they're tools like anything else.

[01:21:26] It's how they're used that's the problem.

[01:21:28] And the people running these programs,

[01:21:31] what are their intentions?

[01:21:33] And that is where we have a huge problem with this.

[01:21:35] So let's go ahead and we'll finish this up.

[01:21:39] Epoch 6.

[01:21:40] The universe wakes up.

[01:21:42] I will discuss this topic in chapter 6

[01:21:45] under the heading

[01:21:46] On the Intelligent Destiny of the Cosmos.

[01:21:49] In the aftermath of the singularity,

[01:21:51] intelligence derived from its biological origins

[01:21:54] in human brains

[01:21:55] and its technological origins in human ingenuity

[01:21:58] will begin to saturate the matter and energy

[01:22:02] in its mists.

[01:22:03] It will achieve this by reorganizing matter and energy

[01:22:07] to provide an optimal level of computation

[01:22:11] based on limits we will discuss in chapter 3

[01:22:14] to spread out from its origin on Earth.

[01:22:17] We currently understand the speed of light

[01:22:19] as a bounding factor on the transfer of information.

[01:22:23] Circumventing this limit has to be regarded

[01:22:25] as highly speculative.

[01:22:26] But there are hints that this constraint

[01:22:28] may be able to be superseded.

[01:22:31] If there are even subtle deviations,

[01:22:33] we will ultimately harness this superluminal ability.

[01:22:36] Whether our civilization infuses the rest of the universe

[01:22:39] with its creativity and intelligence quickly

[01:22:42] or slowly depends on its immutability.

[01:22:45] In any event,

[01:22:46] the dumb matter and mechanisms of the universe

[01:22:49] will be transformed

[01:22:50] into exquisitely sublime forms of intelligence

[01:22:53] which will constitute the sixth epoch

[01:22:56] in the evolution patterns of information.

[01:22:58] This is the ultimate destiny of the singularity

[01:23:01] and of the universe.

[01:23:04] And that's where we're going to end it, folks.

[01:23:07] So you see,

[01:23:09] Kurzweil seems to think the singularity

[01:23:16] will bring about

[01:23:19] intelligences into all of creation.

[01:23:22] I've got news for you, Kurzweil.

[01:23:26] There are intelligences already inherent

[01:23:29] in all of creation.

[01:23:31] The occultists knew it and talked about it.

[01:23:34] We can see it by looking around.

[01:23:36] Do you really think

[01:23:38] things happen in this world

[01:23:40] by accident or by sheer coincidence,

[01:23:42] the timing of everything?

[01:23:44] You don't think there's some type

[01:23:46] of a guiding intelligence behind that?

[01:23:48] But it's the ultimate act of hubris here

[01:23:52] in claiming that the universe will wake up.

[01:23:56] It's already teeming with life.

[01:23:59] Life we don't understand.

[01:24:01] So it's not a matter of

[01:24:03] when mankind transcends his physical form here

[01:24:06] and is able to use his technology

[01:24:09] to become, I don't know,

[01:24:11] more greatly expanded here

[01:24:14] where we'll conquer the whole universe.

[01:24:16] See, and this is the notion that

[01:24:18] space travel,

[01:24:20] the whole idea of space travel

[01:24:23] or our entire species

[01:24:26] being able to travel through space,

[01:24:29] outer space,

[01:24:30] that won't come to fruition

[01:24:32] until after the singularity, folks.

[01:24:35] And there's a reason for that.

[01:24:37] There's a reason for that.

[01:24:38] And I'll let you speculate that reason

[01:24:41] why there won't be any actual space travel

[01:24:45] until after the singularity.

[01:24:48] I think it has everything to do

[01:24:49] with what we discussed earlier

[01:24:51] as to they have these

[01:24:52] fantasy models of what they want to build.

[01:24:58] And it has to do with

[01:25:00] the control of people's perceptions.

[01:25:04] And your perception is your reality.

[01:25:06] So when they can control your mind

[01:25:08] to that level,

[01:25:09] then they can control you

[01:25:11] to that level,

[01:25:13] make you believe perhaps

[01:25:14] you're able to travel in outer space

[01:25:16] when really there might not even be

[01:25:18] such a thing.

[01:25:20] So you understand where this goes

[01:25:22] if that's the case.

[01:25:24] But anyway,

[01:25:26] the singularity.

[01:25:29] That's what this is all about.

[01:25:31] He's talking about the singularity

[01:25:32] and these six epochs

[01:25:34] of progression that lead towards it.

[01:25:37] We are at the precipice here.

[01:25:38] We are on phase number five,

[01:25:41] according to Kurzweil,

[01:25:42] where we're stepping out of the bounds

[01:25:44] of technological advancement

[01:25:46] and we're going to the place

[01:25:48] where humanity will merge

[01:25:50] with its technology

[01:25:51] and transcend to the next level.

[01:25:53] That's what Kurzweil's vision is

[01:25:56] within the next several decades here.

[01:26:00] And it's largely based upon a lie, folks.

[01:26:03] I think there's going to be

[01:26:06] some spiritual type of implication,

[01:26:12] some spiritual type of implication

[01:26:14] that comes about with this.

[01:26:19] And perhaps,

[01:26:21] perhaps we'll see

[01:26:24] some good come about

[01:26:26] in this whole thing here.

[01:26:28] Because like I said,

[01:26:29] the technologies in and of themselves

[01:26:31] aren't bad.

[01:26:31] It's the people controlling them.

[01:26:33] That's the issue.

[01:26:36] That is the true issue.

[01:26:39] It's the people in charge

[01:26:40] of these innovations

[01:26:42] that become the problem

[01:26:44] at this level.

[01:26:46] So,

[01:26:47] we need to be mindful

[01:26:49] of these things.

[01:26:50] We need to make sure

[01:26:51] that we

[01:26:52] have our finger on the pulse

[01:26:54] of what's going on

[01:26:55] with these innovations

[01:26:57] and these things

[01:26:58] and not lose sight

[01:27:00] of the spiritual aspects

[01:27:02] of things.

[01:27:02] Because that

[01:27:03] is wherein the problem lies.

[01:27:05] They want us to lose sight

[01:27:07] of the spiritual

[01:27:07] and be wholly ingratiated

[01:27:10] into the digital realm.

[01:27:13] And that is not

[01:27:14] what is best

[01:27:15] for humankind

[01:27:16] in my estimation.

[01:27:17] We need

[01:27:18] the spiritual facet.

[01:27:20] Anyway,

[01:27:21] I want to thank you all

[01:27:22] for tuning in.

[01:27:23] I appreciate each

[01:27:24] and every one of you.

[01:27:25] We'll catch you

[01:27:25] next time.

[01:27:26] Have a good night now.

[01:27:27] Discover the amazing

[01:27:29] clinically proven

[01:27:30] health benefits

[01:27:31] of Original Tahitian Noni.

[01:27:33] Original Tahitian Noni

[01:27:35] includes powerful

[01:27:35] antioxidants,

[01:27:36] adaptogens,

[01:27:37] nutrients,

[01:27:38] and phytonutrients

[01:27:39] to naturally boost

[01:27:39] energy levels,

[01:27:40] immune system function,

[01:27:42] and overall health.

[01:27:43] Meticulously sourced

[01:27:44] from French Polynesia,

[01:27:45] this is the original

[01:27:47] super fruit,

[01:27:48] except no imitations.

[01:27:49] Original Tahitian Noni.

[01:27:51] Visit ATRHealth

[01:27:53] at AlchemicalTechRevolution.com

[01:27:55] and click on the

[01:27:56] Shop Here tab

[01:27:57] for more details.

[01:27:58] We lead the world

[01:27:59] in facing down

[01:28:01] a threat to decency

[01:28:02] and humanity.

[01:28:03] Last week,

[01:28:04] along with cocaine

[01:28:05] in Sosea

[01:28:06] will be a stump

[01:28:07] and a little

[01:28:08] more than

[01:28:08] another one

[01:28:09] thought of.

[01:28:10] Pray, pray,

[01:28:11] pray,

[01:28:11] it's a big idea

[01:28:12] because of oppression

[01:28:13] has been wrong

[01:28:14] and faithful

[01:28:17] and will be faithful

[01:28:18] and will gather

[01:28:19] inside the church

[01:28:20] and will gather

[01:28:21] inside the church

[01:28:22] faithful,

[01:28:22] faithful,

[01:28:23] faithful.