...
首页> 外文期刊>Technological forecasting and social change >How many singularities are near and how will they disrupt human history?
【24h】

How many singularities are near and how will they disrupt human history?

机译:有几处奇异之处,它们将如何破坏人类历史?

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

This paper reviews a large number of approaches that have been used for considering technologically driven profound societal change. We agree with Vinge's suggestion for naming events that are "capable of rupturing the fabric of human history" (or leading to profound societal changes) as a "singularity". This is a useful terminology especially since a mathematically rigorous singularity seems impossible for technological and related societal change. The overview of previous work is done within the context of a broader look at the role of technological change within human history. The review shows that a wide variety of methods have been used and almost all point to singularities in the present century particularly in the middle of the century. The diversity of the methods is reassuring about the potential robustness of these predictions. However, the subjectivity of labeling events as singularities (even well studied past events) is a concern about all of the methods and thus one must carefully pause when relying in any way on these predictions. The general lack of empirical research in this area is also a concern. Quantitative considerations (by proponents and opponents) about past singularities or future singularities often confound two types of metrics. The first type is essentially related to diffusion of technologies (or bundles of technologies) where the logistic curve is empirically well established as the proper time dependence. The second type of metric is for technological capability where hyper-exponentials are empirically well established for their time dependence. In this paper, we consider two past singularities (arguably with important enough social change to qualify) in which the basic metric is alternatively of one type or another. The globalization occurring under Portuguese leadership of maritime empire building and naval technological progress is characterized by a metric describing diffusion. The revolution in time keeping, on the other hand, is characterized by a technological capability metric. For these two cases (and thus robust to the choice of metric type), we find that: 1.People undergoing profound technologically-driven societal change do not sense a singularity. 2.The societal impacts depend in complicated ways on human needs, institutional variables and other more uncertain factors and thus are particularly hard to project; 3.The societal impact is apparently not determined by the rate of progress on either type of metric or by projections to mathematical points with either kind of metric. This finding supports the existing concept that social change due to technology is a more holistic phenomenon than can be characterized by any technical metric In the final section, we use these empirical findings as the basis for exploring the possibilities for and nature of future singularities. In this we speculate that the potential for a future strong singularity based upon computational capability does not appear particularly probable but that one may already be occurring and is not fully noticed by those (us) going through it. Other possible 21st century singularities (life extension and fossil fuel elimination are two examples considered) may also be already underway rather than waiting for the predicted mid-century changes.
机译:本文回顾了许多用于考虑技术驱动的深刻社会变革的方法。我们同意Vinge提出的将“能够破坏人类历史结构”(或导致深刻的社会变革)的事件命名为“奇点”的建议。这是一个有用的术语,特别是因为对于技术和相关的社会变革,数学上严格的奇异性似乎是不可能的。在更广泛地了解技术变革在人类历史中的作用的背景下完成了对先前工作的概述。审查表明,已经使用了各种各样的方法,并且几乎所有都指出了本世纪特别是本世纪中叶的奇异之处。这些方法的多样性可确保这些预测的潜在鲁棒性。但是,将事件标记为奇异点(甚至是经过深入研究的过去事件)的主观性是所有方法的关注点,因此,在以任何方式依赖于这些预测时,必须谨慎地暂停。这方面普遍缺乏实证研究也令人担忧。关于支持者和反对者的过去的奇异性或未来的奇异性的定量考虑常常混淆两种类型的度量。第一类本质上与技术(或技术束)的传播有关,在逻辑上,逻辑曲线在经验上被很好地确定为适当的时间依赖性。第二种度量标准是针对技术能力的,其中经验丰富地建立了超指数的时间依赖性。在本文中,我们考虑了两个过去的奇异点(可以说是具有足够重要的社会变革资格),其中基本度量标准是另一种类型。在葡萄牙领导下的海洋帝国建设和海军技术进步下发生的全球化,其特征是描述扩散的指标。另一方面,计时革命以技术能力指标为特征。对于这两种情况(因此对于度量标准类型的选择是可靠的),我们发现:1.经历深刻的技术驱动的社会变革的人们不会感觉到奇异之处。 2,社会影响在很多方面取决于人类需求,体制变量和其他更不确定的因素,因此很难预测; 3.社会影响显然不是由任何一种度量标准的进步速度或由对每种度量标准的数学点的预测所决定的。这一发现支持了现有的观念,即由于技术导致的社会变革是一种比任何技术指标都无法体现的更为全面的现象。在最后一节中,我们将这些经验性发现用作探索未来奇异性的可能性和性质的基础。在本文中,我们推测基于计算能力的未来强奇异性的可能性似乎并不是特别可能,但是可能已经发生,并且没有被那些(我们)所注意到。其他可能出现的21世纪奇异现象(考虑延长寿命和消除化石燃料是两个例子)可能已经在进行中,而不是等待世纪中叶的预期变化。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号