The whole idea of "the Singularity" is nonsense. It is basically people seeking a surrogate "God" in technology, and the singularity is needed to create the "all knowing" aspect.
This all depends on one's individual interpretation of the word singularity. My interpretation of it means a point in history and technological development beyond which predictions become impossible. There is no "all knowing" aspect in my interpretation. There is certainly no "God" in my interpretation. Some people interpret the term to mean the point at which humanity and machines merge. Once again, that's not my interpretation. My idea of the singularity raises questions about what happens to human civilization when all material needs and wants can be manufactured on demand, near-instantaneously and extremely cheaply. The other question of course is what an advanced AI might look like and how might society be transformed if similar AIs were available to everyone. If you ask me, neither AI or on-demand manufacturing are wild, outlandish ideas. Those things are coming down the technology pipeline and sooner than most people think. Society should prepare for these technologies now, not dismiss them.
The real problem isn't lack of net neutrality. It's lack of competition due to monopolies granted to the cable and phone companies
And yet I'm not aware of a single conservative out there trying to break up those monopolies.
Following confusion as to why Mulgrew, a life-long Democrat,
Yeah, because we all know that by choosing a party affiliation, you suddenly become scientifically literate!
Don't pretend that Republicans are not hostile to science.
An Ada exception is when a routine gets in trouble and says 'Beam me up, Scotty'.