Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?
For the out-of-band Slashdot experience (mostly headlines), follow us on Twitter, or Facebook. ×

Comment: Right from the Article (Score 2, Informative) 483 483

by madolvin (#23643603) Attached to: IEEE Special Report On the Singularity

Why should a mere journalist question Kurzweils conclusion that some of us alive today will live indefinitely? Because we all know its wrong. We can sense it in the gaping, take-my-word-for-it extrapolations and the specious reasoning of those who subscribe to this form of the singularity argument. Then, too, theres the flawed grasp of neuroscience, human physiology, and philosophy. Most of all, we note the willingness of these people to predict fabulous technological advances in a period so conveniently short it offers themselves hope of life everlasting. This has all gone on too long. The emperor isnt wearing anything, for heavens sake. The singularity debate is too rarely a real argument. Theres too much fixation on death avoidance. Thats a shame, because in the coming years, as computers become stupendously powerful, really and truly ridiculously powerful, and as electronics and other technologies begin to enhance and fuse with biology, life really is going to get more interesting.

says it all

End of line

The perversity of nature is nowhere better demonstrated by the fact that, when exposed to the same atmosphere, bread becomes hard while crackers become soft.