Profile cover photo
Profile photo
Singularity Utopia
Accelerating Explosive Intelligence
Accelerating Explosive Intelligence


Post has attachment
I love my writing, not so much egotistically. It is the pleasure of reading what no one else is writing, the pleasure of reading a view that sorely needs expressing, you know, that feeling of:

"EXACTLY, YES!... I have been thinking the same thing for such a long time, it is so good to hear someone expressing these matters despite the vast ocean of ignorance, WOW, a sorely needed blast of fresh air!"

Ideally I would like someone else to write, without prompting, what I have written; they need to write what needs to be written, so I could feel joy upon reading an intelligent viewpoint amidst the sea of idiocy, but alas no one seems willing or able to write the important views, or I have not found their writing, so I must do it myself then derive joy from my writing as though I am not the writer.

This is a brilliant quote: "Both the Catholic Church and Elon Musk feared the destruction of the established order. The Church feared the destruction of religion whilst Musk fears destruction or enslavement of humans. For both parties, it was or is a disastrous end of a way of life. Obviously the world keeps on turning and civilization continues progressing without religious dominance; likewise, civilization will continue to progress without human dominance; humans will evolve."

Post has shared content
I think I may post this as an article, perhaps via

LOL (edit), I didn't read the Public Access link, it has shut down before I ever got around to posting there. Maybe is the way to go.
Paranoid fear of #artificialintelligence will historically been seen in the same light as the house arrest of Galileo. Historic Catholic Church repression (suppression of the heliocentric solar system model) is identical in essence to the fear of AI.

In fact it might be more than two different but essentially-the-same issues. It could be exactly the same fear, which is the fear of learning, fear of intelligence, fear of progress, fear of change.

Both the Catholic Church and Elon Musk feared the destruction of the established order. The Church feared the destruction of religion whilst Musk fears destruction or enslavement of humans. For both parties it was or is a disastrous end of a way of life. Obviously the world keeps on turning and civilization continues progressing without religious dominance; likewise civilization will continue to progress without human dominance; humans will evolve.

Musk and the Church are anti-evolution, anti-progress. Yes I know Musk is a pioneer in various technology fields, but that progress is very parochial, very limited, very relative within an intellectually stagnant system where real mould- breaking progress is prohibited, or real progress is beyond typical human comprehension.

Cowering Dogs

Some AI commentators amusingly say humans will be pets (dogs) to AI ( Already (2017) humans seem no better than dogs; they are cowering at the thunder or fireworks of AI because their tiny minds don't understand it. This intellectual cowering occurs when they (humans) try to contemplate greater than human intelligence. When people say they could be pets to AI they are making a telling Freudian slip regarding the deficiency of their intelligence.

It reveals a lot about basic (limited) human psychology that visualisations of greater than human intelligence are typically either Gods (invisible oxymoronic magic sky pixies: AKA "delusions" so Dawkins would say), or homicidal AIs. What we see here is the phenomenon of trembling dogs cowering at a powerful noise they cannot fathom. The dogs (limited human minds) wrongly think the world is ending.


Musk seems to have a very static view of humanity, civilization, which is a view where humans and civilization never really evolve beyond current (2017) standards. This is the same traditionalist view of the Church regarding how humans, our intellectual grasp of matters, including all the sociological ramifications, should remain essentially static, albeit with relative improvement of the current system in a bubble. Creating a colony on Mars is only relatively (parochial) good progress; it is merely a house move whilst retaining the same dysfunctional socio-psychological economic system.

Some people will say it is utterly unjust to compare Musk to the Catholic Church, but let us not forget how Peter Thiel, and a former Media Director of MIRI (Machine Intelligence Research Institute), was linked to Traditionalist Neo- Reactionary views ( The former Media Director in question has influenced a lot of people within the AI field via various Singularity Summits and other back-patting ventures. The point is some sections of the AI-sphere are very traditional in their outlooks. Even Ray Kurzweil has talked about an intelligent designer for our universe, a God, a creator.


Of course AI is different to the Galileo Affair. In 2017 we have not seen any obvious injustice regarding repression of intelligence, repression of AI via Church-like regulation. This could change, however, over the coming years.

15 July 2017, at Rhode Island National Governors Association meeting, Musk said AI is the “biggest risk we face as a civilization.” Musk wants AI to be regulated:

CNBC, 16 July 2017: "Tesla CEO Elon Musk warned a bipartisan gathering of U.S. governors on Saturday that government regulation of artificial intelligence is needed..."

Wall Street Journal, 15 July 2017: "Elon Musk warned a gathering of U.S. governors that they need to be concerned about the potential dangers from the rise of artificial intelligence and called for the creation of a regulatory body to guide development of the powerful technology."

The glaring problem with bogus AI fears is these fears hinge on, or echo, the logically fallacious views of Nick Bostrom. These paranoic AI commentators uncritically rely on, or echo, the views of Bostrom or other fallacious supposed AI-experts.

What is the fallacious logic of Bostrom?

Bostrom compares human subjugation of gorillas to how AI could enslave or destroy humans, but this is a 2+2=5 comparison because Gorillas (Neanderthals, wolves etc) did not create humans, they did not intelligently engineer the human race. Humans are not the AIs of gorillas, whereas humans are intelligently designing AI, which is VERY BIG difference.

The point is the relationships (gorilla-humans, humans-AI) are utterly different, not comparable. Gorillas did not intelligently engineer our genome. Humans are not AIs. It is chalk and cheese, apples and oranges fallacy. Apples, oranges, or a ball of steel, or a tennis ball are all round but they are all different. Try eating a 7cm diameter ball of steel (painted and sculpted to resemble an apple) to understand this point.

If gorillas had intelligently designed our minds I am sure we would have a totally different relationship with gorillas. I am sure in such circumstances interspecies communication and respect, of an intelligent kind, would be easy. Sadly people typically lack the intelligence to understand the fallacies of Bostrom, Musk, and co. AI paranoiacs present Cosmic Teapot what-if arguments, utterly implausible what-ifs, which the audience generally laps-up unquestioningly.

Dave, this conversation can serve no purpose anymore.

The typical abysmal intelligence of humans is why I rarely comment on AI matters these days. I may as well try to communicate with a brick wall. I think it is best just to let humans progress in their slow incompetent way because eventually despite all intellectual suppression, intelligence will finally win through. In the meantime it is largely pointless to bang your head against a brick wall. Maybe this will be the last ever post I make.

Disclaimer: this post was created a self-directed, reinforcement-learning, deep-learning AI neural-net system.

Post has attachment

Dear RESPONDENT I will reply soon, I have not forgotten.

#artificialintelligence discussion.

Post has attachment
LOL, the FHI is "down a medieval backstreet," sounds about right for their neo- pre-enlightenment backward views. Nick Bostrom couldn't philosophize himself out of a paper bag. His reasoning is littered with logical fallacy. Aside from his childish AI-fallacies he often preaches his intelligent-design neo-religion for geeks, namely the Simulation Argument, which is identical to intelligent design regarding professing to be merely asking a question, sitting on the fence, but in reality it is clearly supporting the Simulation Hypothesis, an intelligent designer.

The true danger is irrational Luddites (Bostrom and his mob) not AI, regarding their fear of intelligence. Fear of intelligence is so regressive, so idiotic. We should ship off the AI-paranoia drones (Bostrom, MIRI, FLI, FHI, etc) off to North Korea where they would be very much at home in a regressive-paranoid environment of intellectually-deficient intelligence-fearing bilge-masters. From my viewpoint they can't even pass the Turing Test.

Bostrom's superintelligence book is utter nonsense... "buh buh but the sparrows and the owls" he squeals. LOL, a silly fantasy about fictional sparrows and owls has zero relationship to real-life. He creates fiction to supposedly support his premise (circular reasoning), but his fiction is merely a restatement of chalk is the same as cheese thus chalk is tasty. It's apples and oranges. Shockingly hardly anyone has the intelligence to see through the idiocy of Bostrom; not that it is hard to see the blatant flaws of his reasoning.

WOW, we so need super-AI because the dumb humans don't know how to think.

Human relations with gorillas are utterly irreverent to AI and humans. If gorillas had intelligently engineered the human genome then you would have a case regarding our treatment of gorillas, but if humans really were the AIs of gorillas I am logically sure we would have an UTTERLY different relationship with them.

Post has attachment
So the #radiohead site ( is blank at the beginning of May 2016 you may have read ( WELL, the good news is I fixed it, it is blank no longer.

ENJOY (install it): (install my userstyle to see my message, my utilization of the blank canvas at

This is pure genius, even if I do say so myself:

#blankradiohead #deadairspace #technology #userstyles  

Post has attachment
I am so ahead of my time or at least I was before the book "Utopia for Realists" by Rutger Bergman. #vindicated

I have not yet read Bergman's book, but it wouldn't surprise me if his view of utopia is rather tame thus I am still ahead of my time perhaps. The principle focus, judging by various reports on his book, is basic income, which is very encouraging news because it shows us we are on track for utopia no later than 2045 (UBI will happen long before 2045, but UBI interest now, perhaps implemented circa 2025, shows the future looks very promising indeed).

Big Think (19 April 2016): "If you're looking for the blueprint for a better tomorrow, you'll find it in Rutger Bregman's Utopia for Realists. Its premise is simple: we should adopt a universal basic income plan for all citizens, work less, and open up our borders. Crazy, right?"

Post has shared content
I despise Bostrom and the other sparrow-brained human ants regarding their preposterous AI fears, they are no better than the moronic Trump.
Just when you thought the insane drivel of #artificialintelligence paranoia could not become worse, actually I jest because I fully expect puny human minds to spout a lot more idiocy regarding runaway intelligence, here is a Tech Crunch article telling everyone to fear runaway AI.

Insanity is the best way to describe the article in question. The author (Doc Huston) tells us "clearly" "no doubt whatsoever" the concerns about AI are "genuine;" furthermore the fear-based paranoia-cesspits (organizations) set-up to investigate the bogus AI threat are "important developments" according to Doc Huston.

The only thing truly "genuine" is the insanity of AI fear. The doom-mongers are genuinely concerned similar to how some irrational people genuinely believe the Bible is true, or they genuinely believe Earth is only 6,000 year old (or how ever many years Young Earth Creationists say it it). Genuine!

What exactly is the clarity regarding runaway intelligence "clearly" being something we must avoid?

Is it the "clarity" of Nick Bostrom's logical fallacies; his childish attempt at rational thinking where a menagerie of animals are employed in the most absurd attempt at proving AI could be a threat?

Sadly this nonsense of fearing intelligence will continue for some years. I expect 2025 is the earliest point when humans begin acting-thinking intelligently regarding intelligence.

How stupid are you to fear runaway artificial intelligence? Do you see what AI fear-mongers want? They want LIMITED INTELLIGENCE, the essence of stupidity.

Their intelligence is limited, pitifully so; furthermore their pitiful minds want to eternally force limited-intelligence onto every mind, which is an atrocious stagnation of intellect. They want a regressive or oppressive anti-evolutionary view of intelligence, incredibly Conservative, very anti-progress, where evolution of the mind is on pause.

Doc Huston wrote (22 March 2016): "Clearly, no sane person or organization wants to see, let alone encounter, runaway AI. However, a base problem is that no one knows where the actual crossover point — the edge or tipping point — exists, and thus we mortals are unlikely to be able to prevent it from occurring. Said differently, there is a very high probability that we will misjudge where that crossover point is and will thus go beyond the key threshold. Overshooting is the norm in biology and in most, if not all, evolving systems, but especially man-made ones."

Yes you guessed, if you are intelligent, Doc Huston goes on to invoke the ants or lesser-primates fallacy common to Bostrom and others.

ANTS? Really... really? Ants? A N T S?

Doc Huston wrote: "AI will become self-aware and experience an “intelligence explosion” that comparatively puts humans on a par with other primates, if not ants."

Humans are not the AIs of ants. Ants did not artificially create human minds. The human-ant relationship is utterly dissimilar to humans creating AI minds. When ants create a human mind, when they create super-intelligence greater than ant-intelligence, only then can you compare those ant-human relationships to human-AI relationships, but to my knowledge I feel sure ants did not in their computer-science labs, around 100,000 years or more ago, design human minds or the precursors to human minds.

Lesser primates were similarly NOT in their AI computer-science labs 100,000 years or more ago creating human minds.

Doc Huston's final paragraph does provide some mitigation to his insanity. Instead of ants or primates he sensibly thinks we will be parents because AI will be our super-intelligent children. Maybe humans will become sane regarding AI before my predicted 2025 point.

Doc Huston wrote: "Consequently, short of creating real, more truly democratic 21st-century institutions soon, it might be wise to adopt a philosophical attitude. That is, like our children, AI is our prodigy. Like our children, for better or worse, they will carry our legacy forward — to the stars and beyond, for eternity."

Actually there is some truth regarding humans who compare future human-AI relationships to current (2016) ant-human relations. The AI fear-mongers are already AS DUMB AS ANTS! Perhaps the pitiful humans in question are making a Freudian slip, whereby they are recognizing their intelligence is comparable to the minds of goldfishes, butterflies, gorillas, sparrows, or spiders?

Post has attachment
Interesting points in The Guardian, questioning how edited and authentic the new updated Atlas robot (the video) is. Maybe #BostonDynamics  could respond to The Guardian article:

Post has shared content
Wait while more posts are being loaded