The Technological Singularity | Jonas Witt | TEDxUniPotsdam

How do you feel about the world? Is it loaded with problems, becoming more and more complex? Does it seem to move a lot faster compared to when you were a child?
In fact, technology and its impact on the world is advancing perhaps faster than ever before, and there is little reason to believe that this will change. An emerging concept from the tech world called the “technological singularity” points to a dramatically different future than most people expect. Although highly controversial, it is worth understanding the fascinating and frightening perspective of Silicon Valley futurists. Jonas Witt is a Medical Doctor with a background in Digital Health who decided not to pursue a clinical but rather a career in Tech. For many years, he developed a passion for accelerating technological developments and their consequences for society. Given that humans have a poor intuition for exponential growth, it is likely that technological developments in the coming years could significantly exceed their expectations. Since 2022, Jonas has co-hosted the podcast Ereignishorizont, where he discusses exponential technological developments with experts from the DACH region.
He co-founded the digital health startup mama health, a patient platform to find and learn from other patients with a very similar journey. This talk was given at a TEDx event using the TED conference format but independently organized by a local community. Learn more at www.ted.com/tedx

[@edsdinosaurslive5262]

I can't understand why we aren't all talking about this. I think it is inevitable. I'm hoping for the best and thinking things might get really good if we can just make it through this. I really enjoyed this talk and will share it with some friends. I think this will help get more folks into it. Thanks for putting this together!

[@Jonas-be6xi]

I totally agree. Either that or a drastic event preventing humanity from progressing. It is mindblowing to me how little this concept is discussed.

[@ScarlettM]

It's extremely hard for people to understand and ACCEPT this as potential reality. They just can't wrap their minds around a world that resembles magic land.

[@2trains182]

100%

[@slo3337]

AI makes more money than talking about it.

[@nova8091]

Revolt against the modern world is the only solution industrial society seeks destroy all meeting left in the world, and create a nihilistic cult

[@Jacoblydom]

I am convinced that, in just a few short years, we will be utterly surprised that our politicians and public intellectuals were so oblivious to the extent to which technological progress would accelerate. Sure, we've seen more policymakers talk about tech and AI in the past year than ever before, but it's clear that much of this stuff still seems like pure science fiction to them. It will be interesting to watch politicians in the future discuss the best ways to effectively accelerate humanity towards the singularity.

[@Jonas-be6xi]

I agree. The concept of exponentially accelerating technological progress is still so little known (especially in politics), while to me it seems it's the most important issue facing humanity. I am not sure whether we should actively accelerate towards singularity, but certainly we should have as many smart people as possible from all domains working on a positive vision. Whatever that means.

[@CristalMediumBlue]

We already crossed the event horizon and are inevitably approaching the singularity faster and faster. The singularity is no longer one possibility, it is the only future of all trajectories.

[@Doc_Fun]

That's assuming we don't nuke ourselves into oblivion. Or an engineered super-pathogen annihilates us. Or a giant space rock. Basically, you're making a giant assumption with that claim. I too think it's a likely future, but it isn't the only one.

[@unkind6070]

​@@Doc_Funno it's not a giant assumption because it's the most likely future

[@Doc_Fun]

@@unkind6070 Says who? You?

[@cozzfromaus1158]

"Skynet is inevitable. It cannot be prevented, only postponed."

[@Vulcansrule6969lol]

I'm a simple man. I see "Singularity" in the title of a video and I click.

[@daniel_koenig]

Wow, amazing speech and interesting concept!

[@DigitalHealthOrbit]

Very impressive Jonas!

[@Jonas-be6xi]

Thanks man :)

[@trojanhorse6029]

I would love to see a new series of Visions of the Future by Michui Kaku

[@theopinionpost9731]

Great Talk ❤

[@ParthaPratimDasPPD]

Awesome, bro! 👌👍

[@patrickmiller878]

Chills.

[@anjafriedrich8102]

Very interesting topic, we should start thinking about the ethics of the AI development in the future.

[@xaviermontane3287]

We should start thinking about them now not in the future

[@GeysaQuewtr]

Too late

[@simongross3122]

Chances are that AIs will develop their own ethics. For better or worse.

[@Montenegro651]

@@simongross3122shit man, that’s a great point. I never thought of it that way; they will govern us, not the other way around 😩 Unless we merge and that seems like an even worse prospect.

[@5leepytyme]

@@simongross3122 AI is not sentient and there is no reason to think it would be malicious

[@hoagied3783]

While I love this topic, this speech is a total ripoff of a 2018 speech by Ray Kurzweil at the Nova conference in Belgium.

[@beautifulcatastrophes463]

Thank you for informing us of this. I was really enjoying this too :(

[@RussInGA]

on a grand timescale we are clearly in the singularity already

[@lancequek5203]

12:37 Ask Masayoshi Son - he would love to tell you about his thoughts and his SoftBank Vision Fund

[@d4rkside84]

when???????????????????????????????????????????????

[@janluctavares]

Who created this analogy and where can I read more?

[@trojanhorse6029]

Ray Kurzweil is a contemporay source

[@user-ub1ef9rw9u]

​@@trojanhorse6029Waiting for his new book next year by the way.. "The Singularity Is Nearer"

[@tommiest3769]

@Jonas Witt: There are a number of lacunae and oversights in your talk. Progress in basic physics has stalled since the 1970s. We still have not cracked controlled nuclear fusion, room-temperature superconductors, or Von Neumann-esque self-replicators. Our ability to travel beyond low earth orbit is not even on par with what was available in the 1970s. Many of the medications that we are using to treat chronic health conditions are the same as they were 10-20 years ago and our ability to treat infection with antibiotics has *decreased* during this same period. The engines that we use for air travel and space travel have not changed dramatically in the last 50-70 years. Therefore, the rate of scientific progress and technological change has actually slowed down since the early 20th century and the developments, when they occur, are not as dramatic in scope as they were during that era. This point is *LOST* on many who *OVER-EMPHASIZE* the exponential increase in our computational ability. Yes, our cell phone's processor is WAY better than what existed during the Apollo era, but they were going to the Moon and we are not!!

[@LifeWithRilla]

You're a random person on the internet who wrote a random opinion. Yet the greatest minds of the world all agree on this one point. Everybody from Einstein, Stephen Hawking, and other of the greatest minds of our time agree on this. Lmao, your rant is mute. Good night.

[@Nattyog]

Look around. The world is changing fast. The internet, computers, and ai is making it easier to trade and connect on a global level, instantaneously. And it’s getting only faster as long as computer power keeps doubling. Oh and you lost me at “our ability to travel to low earth orbit is not on par with what was available in the 70’s”

[@tommiest3769]

@@Nattyog You misquoted me here with all due respect. I said, "Our ability to travel beyond low earth orbit is not even on par with what was available in the 1970s". That is a factually true statement. The Saturn V brought people to the Moon, repeatedly, in the 1970s whereas just recently SpaceX's Starship blew up not long after it launched. Humans have not traveled beyond low earth orbit since the 1970s. And your point about computer technology reinforces my point. Our information technology has advanced considerably and has made significant changes to the world, but we still have not cracked controlled nuclear fusion, room-temperature superconductors, or Von Neumann-esque self-replicators. Again, think about it my friend, your cell phone has more computing power than supercomputers during the 1970s, but they were traveling to the Moon and we are not.

[@Nattyog]

@@tommiest3769 NASA space program and rocket technology was extremely expensive. Around 1.5 billion dollars in todays money. Elon musk is trying to do it for 50 million which is 3% of 1.5 billion. This is the only way we can make space more accessible. To make it more affordable. Computers are doubling in power every year. And with the help of ai, this will accelerate scientific discoveries by a factor of between 100 - 1000 within the next decade. You are free to have your opinion, but I believe this will be true in the coming years. I guess we will see

[@tommiest3769]

@@Nattyog Can you please provide a reference to the statement about A.I. accelerating scientific discoveries by a factor of between 100 - 1000 within the next decade? I too have heard that A.I. and/or possibly quantum computers will help accelerate scientific discovery. Hopefully, then we will be able to advance beyond using chemical rockets to access space. But back to the space travel issue. Surely, with all of the advancements in computer power and such we should have been able to devise, design, and implement new space propulsion technologies that are more cost-effective and more physically capable prior to now, right? Here it is over 50 years since the last Moon landing and we are still using chemical rockets to travel into space despite our advancements in computational capacity. Therefore, thus far, our advances in computational capacity have not dramatically changed the pace of scientific discovery or the rate of non-information technology advancement.

[@mathewblackman2794]

Wisdom. Where is the wisdom singularity?

[@simongross3122]

Or the ethical singularity

[@spook873]

great speech, looking forward to the AI future :D

[@arktseytlin]

well, its mosy about computer tech. In majority of fields there is no exponential growth, and even in computing its questionable.

[@0doggod0]

the internet of things and the internet of bodies = they expect we will be merged with tech by 2030 lmao

[@2trains182]

We gained our freedom, over many, many, generations, gradually forgot about life before it, then we saw little danger, in slowly selling it off again, for our convenience, and our "safety". I get really concerned when I see so many people trying so hard to please their masters. It means that they're being owned by someone

[@christopherm6725]

The negative outcomes seem way more likely. There will be positive things that happen, but the negative things will overshadow those things.

[@aguinaga]

Singularity / Mayan prophecy/ Christ return… all the same thing 😊 . It’s closer than people think 🙏🏼

[@bobtarmac1828]

I believe we are on borrowed time. An Ai tantrum will end you, your family, all of us. Ai jobloss, Ai as weapons, the list goes on. Can we please find a way to cease Ai / GPT? Or begin pausing Ai before it’s too late?

[@johnhughes4631]

Agree I think from now 2023 onwards say 30 years we will reap the good AI will bring then from say 35 years + we are reaching AI danger point to the human race reason I say this as I am 60 just now so will be 90 or dead so hopefully wont see the problems that will come. The thought everyman for them self comes to mind.

[@simongross3122]

@@johnhughes4631 I like your optimism. But who or what will decide what is "good"?

[@jebus4261]

It it can happen, it eventually will. If the AI in question does destroy humanity, then we’re inevitably doomed regardless of what we do. Might as well just get it over with as soon as possible and hope it would be benevolent.

[@Vladislav_Titov]

​@@jebus4261Does that mean we should all commit suicide, if only to avoid looking at the suffering of others?

[@TKBreaksTheRules]

that was a terrible presentation. i could have got the point across much clearer and simpler