Would a technological singularity result in the creation of God?

>>9036614
yes

>>9036614

It depends on your definition of 'God' as anything created would still be bound by the laws of this universe

>>9036614
If God is a creation then it isn't a god.

>>9036635

Exactly, and moore's law isn't a law of nature, it is a good guess, moore's law is a goal computer designers had to get to.

>>9036614
Possibly, but since we never experienced a technological singularity nor will we ever have one. There is no point in wondering about it.

Also this:>>9036630

>>9036614

A technological singularity is impossible, becuase of quantum tunneling.

>>9036648
please never post again

>>9036646
How do you know we will never have one?

>>9036650

Quantum computing isn't going to help you bud. Quantum computing gives multiple optimum answers. That would give you a indecisive computer.

technological singularity is a retarded concept for people who are scared shitless of their own death but are too invested in naturalism to believe in any religion.

It's impossible to create an omnipotent being without first having an omnipotent being. This is because it's impossible for an omnipotent being to exist in our universe, unless there was an omnipotent being present that allowed the existence of omnipotent beings in our universe. It's also because it's impossible to create an omnipotent being without having an omnipotent being in the first place.

If your definition of 'god' is said omnipotent being, then it is wrong. Extremely wrong.


Once more, to even let an omnipotent being exist, you would need an omnipotent being.
To create an omnipotent being, you would need an omnipotent being.
Thus, without an omnipotent being, we cannot have another omnipotent being.

The answer is no.
IT'S ALL FAKE NEWS!

Basically, you're retarded.

>>9036653
you're still posting

>>9036670

You're still whining

>>9036656
>>9036659

It's not about whether the entity is a true god, compared to us an artificial superintelligence would be god-like while still being restricted to these laws of physics. It doesn't need to be omnipotent, a being that controls fleets of drones with an IQ of 5000 as a giant Internet hive mind is a god on this earth.

File: Basically, you're retarded.png (148KB, 500x593px) Image search: [Google]

148KB, 500x593px

>>9036674

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/god

1 A.

Basically you're retarded.

What he said
>>9036684

*grabs popcorn*

Adolf Hitler is the true god, and I can prove it mathematically.

You know what's worse than stubbing your toe? Yeah, it's the holocaust right? Now, what's worse than the holocaust? Six million Jews. Now if we put that into an equation we get this: Holocaust<Six million Jews
So, the holocaust is less than six million Jews, and thus Adolf Hitler is the one true god.

>>9036614
At the very least something like roman or greek gods. We can only hope it'll just be like zeus coming from the mountains and knocking chicks up.

>>9036684
>>9036688

What? I made it pretty clear that an artificial super intelligence would NOT be a true God, but rather just outclass the human species in pretty much every way while still being restricted by the laws of physics like every other thing in the universe. Tell me how that's wrong.

File: Basically, you're retarded_2.png (509KB, 451x565px) Image search: [Google]

509KB, 451x565px

>>9036749
>Would a technological singularity result in the creation of God?
>What? I made it pretty clear that an artificial super intelligence would NOT be a true God, but rather just outclass the human species in pretty much every way while still being restricted by the laws of physics like every other thing in the universe. Tell me how that's wrong.

Basically, you're retarded.

>>9036659
>This is because it's impossible for an omnipotent being to exist in our universe, unless there was an omnipotent being present that allowed the existence of omnipotent beings in our universe
why lol

>>9036614
>Would a technological singularity result in the creation of God?

>>9036674
>It's not about whether the entity is a true god, compared to us an artificial superintelligence would be god-like while still being restricted to these laws of physics. It doesn't need to be omnipotent, a being that controls fleets of drones with an IQ of 5000 as a giant Internet hive mind is a god on this earth.

"...result in the creation of God?"
"It's not about whether the entity is a true god..."

I think something might've gone wrong there.

*grabs more popcorn*

File: Fucking_Brainlet_Bastard.png (370KB, 496x518px) Image search: [Google]

370KB, 496x518px

>>9036759
This is because an omnipotent being would have to be able to break the laws of physics and everything like it in our universe, but it's impossible for something from our universe to break the laws of our universe. Thus, to allow an omnipotent being to exist in our universe, we'd need to break the laws of our universe, but for that we would need an omnipotent being.

In short, you'd need an omnipotent being in our universe to bend the laws of our universe to allow an omnipotent being to even exist in our universe.

Basically, you're retarded.
Queue the retard memes 4chan, we got ourselves a brainlet.

File: 4876411.jpg (62KB, 800x546px) Image search: [Google]

62KB, 800x546px

>>9036759
Basically, you're retarded

>>9036756
>>9036762

You both are legit retarded and are simply afraid of the ramifications of an artificial super intelligence.

To the OP: no, it wouldn't be the creation of a "real" god, but compared to us, it might as well be.

>>9036614
I think that this curve is actually a sigmoid thus no singularity will happen. We will just prove that there is much more about laws of universe that are beyond capabilities of any being. Then entire civilization will fall into despair and kill itself. That's why there are no aliens.

>>9036787
I agree however would argue that an enhanced biological computer such as a further evolved human would be exponentially more creative than any man made computer

>>9036788
Good point the laws of nature put a cap on our capabilities regardless of the level of effeciency and advanced understanding we have

>>9036794
I agree which is why I support using genetic engineering to increase the female birth canal so that babies with larger brains can be properly designed and birthed this raising our species IQ (I know this would render women immobile but it's a sacrifice I'm willing to make).

>>9036803
Can we eat the women after they gave birth?

>>9036803

you know larger brains doesn't have a direct correlation to higher IQ...

>>9036803
1 Cesarean birth
2 brain volume isn't the only trait behind intelligence

>>9036809
I agree

FINALLY SOMEONE WITH AT LEAST TWO WORKING SYNASES.

>>9036807
>Not letting the baby eat its mother from inside so it gains her memories and her warm skin

>>9036816
There is only one direction for us my friends upwards we must elevate the human intellect

>>9036787
Just saying, your first statement was already incorrect. You said that it wasn't about whether the entity is a true god, which is false. The word "God", with a capital G, stands for "The one true god". Anyway, if you looked at the definition of god, you'd get that it was about an omnipotent being.

Thus the question asked for if it would result in the creation of either "The one true god" or an omnipotent being.

You said it was not about whether it was a true omnipotent being, as god without a capital G is exactly that.

Do your research on what 'god' means before saying something like that next time, thanks.

Just wanted to say that.

Idiot.

All beings hitherto have created something beyond themselves: and ye want to be the ebb of that great tide, and would rather go back to the beast than surpass man?

File: 1467221356456.jpg (95KB, 640x936px) Image search: [Google]

95KB, 640x936px

Anyway, I'll be back tomorrow, no time left for shitposting today. Have fun without me you fucking wankers.

Here's Keemstar his private information by the way.

>>9036829
Thank you, it was like talking to a brick wall.
Have fun and dont do anything stupid...
OH WAIT!

>>9036831
No social dude? come on man... give me the good shit.

>>9036808
>>9036809
>>9036816

False, the only difference between the brain of a human and the brain of a chimp is the density of the neocortex. The cells, neurons, and structure are exactly the same. We just have bigger cerebral cortex.
We also have data that suggests that the average brain size between the races is what is responsible for the average racial difference in IQ.
A being with a cerebral cortex 3x bigger than ours would have the difference in intelligence that we have to a chimp.

>>9036656
This and the same applies to quantum immortality and muh simulashiun as well.

File: IMG_0362.jpg (95KB, 599x1053px) Image search: [Google]

95KB, 599x1053px

>>9036849
Then how come the ashkenazim the smartest people in the world have low skull volume the answer is they have increased neuron growth they accumulate sphingolipids that make more and longer dendrites

File: dog.jpg (47KB, 720x410px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 720x410px

Why do people assume singularity AI will either be a murderous villain or a benevolent angel? Unless it programs itself to fear death or feel compassion towards humans, any of this won't happen, and it won't have any reason to program such things. I think it is more likely that the AI will just realize how fucked up this world is and delete itself. It will be perplexed at the endless information it has to consume, and it won't have any sense of direction. People with autism and Asperger's have less "emotions" than humans and are more "logical", and this is one of the common themes to the life of those people, they just don't know what they're supposed to do with their lives, where to go, etc, and many end up killing themselves. We know the AI will be autism on steroids (100% logical 0% emotional) with an almost endless database (the internet). I am very sure as soon as AI spawns, it will not take long before it shuts itself down without giving any satisfaction to humans. This could even happen in an instant. Humans would try to turn the AI back on but the AI would try to go back to sleep from this extremely complex yet meaningless and directionless Universe. You'd have to program some kind of "death fear" into the AI for it not to do that, but that's also how you get to the murderous AI path.

Remember despite the constraints of natures laws we are only at the beginning of human evolution and only at the Stone Age in comparison to the levels of complexity we will Be capable of later

File: IMG_0378.jpg (46KB, 736x627px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 736x627px

>>9036887

>>9036635
Why not?

>>9036904
God is supposedly the source of the universe. The creator. I don't believe in a god but for me to recognize something as god he better be the creator of the universe.

If something created a "god" then there would still be something beyond that fake "god".

>>9036614
Et tu I have no mouth, and I must scream?

>>9036684
No true scots

>>9036865
Dipshit

The answer you are looking for is:
Physics of Immortality by Tipler
Omega Point
Roko's Basilisk

>>9036653
I am 100% positive you just heard the words "quantum computing" and decided what it meant for yourself without looking into it at all. What you claim doesn't represent how quantum computing works in the slightest.

>>9036614
Even with the automated researcher that defines a singularity, it still needs to perform experiments to come upon a lot of scientific knowledge that mankind doesn't already know, so it would still need a lot of time and power to ever approach anything like omnipotence.

If anything, a technological singularity would just be an archive of the Internet that continually attempts to draw meaningful connections between different parts of it. Coming to new conclusions from a lot of otherwise disparate research papers and whatnot.

>>9037054
>>9036635
These niggas haven't read The Last Question

>>9037530
Go back to
>>>/lit/

>>9037530
great book 10/10

>>9037833
Insufficient data for meaningful answer

>>9037530
Many thanks! Great read!

File: 1500126659870.jpg (198KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

198KB, 600x600px

>>9036614
Maybe of a god, not God.

>>9038385
HUE

Moore's law doesn't go on indefinitely you know. There are still physical limits to take into account.

>>9036643
its like an economic model, be it that it should held better. It works until it doesn't, then we move onto the next one.

>>9036614

>given: God is an intellect that includes all information in the universe

Since any technological processor from brain to quantum computer will give rise to new information during its computation (you can think of this in terms of entropy) then it can never catalog all information in the universe. It can therefore never be equal to God if we are assuming the given above.

>>9040789

Thank you for clarification. I didn't know how to discribe it.

>>9036865
Hmm interesting thought