Singularity is a bad idea

The floor is mine indeed, and I'll soon be wiping it with your arse. This debate will contain your recommended daily allowance of references to sci-fis and bad humour. ( And trace amounts of hesphaestos. Please consult a doctor after debating me) 1; Immortality. Eternal life would be a useful thing if we had the resources to sustain it. But, you have presented some easy to resolve issues with it. I will have to sidetrack onto my biology studies to explain why you are incorrect about evolution. You see, evolution and natural selection work in combination. The reason neanderthals don't exist anymore is because something wiped them out that failed to wipe out homo sapiens. My guess was the use of fire. You see, natural selection means those who are best adapted to their situation (survival of the fittest) will live long enough to reproduce and carry on their genes. This means that evolution occurs, but it doesn't replace the old species unless it is necessary. What advantage could wipe out an immortal society to the point of introducing a new species, and if it did occur, what makes you think you would survive this genophage long enough to meet the new species, we'll call them Novo Hominem. (new man) . This means evolution would not be an issue. Back to immortality. We would never make food we couldn't eat, and my passage which will earn me 27 marks in my exam in two weeks time explains why. No new species. On language, maybe a new language will arise, but in the world of the singularity, our built in microcomputers will be able to translate languages in an instant, erasing the need. Think Star Wars, where everyone understands R2-D2, but speak to it in english. Each person hears in their own language. A war on eternal life would be interesting, no doubt some religions would be opposed, while the wealthy would remain. I believe eventually everyone will be ready to accept death in time. This merely allows us to choose our own time of death. Death waits for no man, but he gets in line for the machines. 2; Freedom. We already experience a lack of privacy in the world, it's undeniable. But your idea of being enslaved is a false premonition. I'll have to draw from more sci-fi, as this is very much the genre. In Mass Effect, there are 3 kinds of intelligence. Natural intelligence, ie; living things. Virtual Intelligence, where a computer has preset answers to a stimulus, and Artificial Intelligence, akin to natural intelligence. You see, in the real world, AI can never truly exist. Things like Cleverbot are VIs. The we could never be enslaved by machines because we would be the machines. We would be merged with them, physically (a la Deus Ex) and mentally (by cloud storage). You could never put your personality on the computer because AI is an impossibility though. Identity is a complex issue. 3; Utopia; the ideal society, doesn't imply totalitarian control. It implies near-perfection in its citizens. 21st century media depicts future societies as dystopias because it makes for a better story setting. Think back to Star Trek in the 60s, around the Cold War, depicting a society with multinational crews aboard the Enterprise. Utopias do imply people currently lack certain virtues, but stripping away individuality is not a requirement to achieve virtue. The virtues as I understand the are Tolerance, Bravery, Justice, Wisdom, Transcendance (ie; having a purpose other than to eat/sleep/breed) and Humanity (love). Individuality can still be Tolerated in a Utopia. Differences are to be embraced. 4; Peace. With enhancements into technologies of war, the Mutually Assured Destruction theory will become ever more prevalent, preventing large scale war from occurring, but the assumed abundance of resources, and the increased usage of the Metaverse, as Neal Stephenson first named it in his amazing book Snow Crash, (back in 1992!) predicted a society where real space wasn't an issue because you stayed at home and went out online instead, Land won't be an issue, and war won't be a requirement. Example; the US's use of fracking has led to a massive amount of gas being found, enough for the next 100 years. Now, they have less need of oil and will be less inclined to begin campaigns in oil rich countries. Also, like in these oil rich countries, where fundamentalist religions are common, the internet and the spread of technology has led to increased education there thanks to the development of communications. It leads to less people being fanatically religious and lessens the likelihood of terrorism, especially in a world where abundance is present, meaning no one will need to make viruses to steal money as they will have their necessities in plentiful supply. Crime in general will be lowered. 5; The internet is the ultimate place of freedom. Everyone can express their voice, and as Rich Jeni once said, The Web brings people together because no matter what kind of a twisted sexual mutant you happen to be, you've got millions of pals out there. Type in 'Find people that have sex with goats that are on fire' and the computer will say, 'Specify type of goat.'" There is a great deal of freedom on the net that easily prevents dictatorship occurring, anyone who would try to establish one would be challenged by defenders of anonymity, namely Anonymous, the bipolar freedom fighters, as I like to call them. (Good and Bad in equal measures). Freedom of speech with never be an issue in the Age of Information. (I would also like to bring up my hypothesis that a capital of a word somehow makes it correct, a theory I will call the Theory or Capitalised Importance). 6; In a society where resources are limitless, everything can be built by machine imprinted with software, and people will be able to effortlessly maintain these machines as the knowledge of how to will be accessed by micro computers. People will make things because they enjoy making things. Artists paint because they enjoy painting. Musicians like music and Directors like to direct. This plenty could only serve to weed out those who are just in it for the money (looking at you MB) and support individual pursuit of dreams and goals. You can't say we would have what we need; if we didn't have what we needed, we would be dead. We will become a society that only does things because they want to do them. 7; As earlier mentioned, true AI is an impossibility. Machines can only do what they are programmed to do, and would never be capable of Terminator style uprisings. Yes, we would be dependent on them, but I am dependent on my lungs, but can control them at will. Watch. *takes breath*............ ahhhhh..... *begins choking on bad joke, dies with face on keyboard* That was fun. See you next round, and yes, I'll be leaving my signature the bottom of each post. Duncan.