The Uncanny Valley and The Singularity

[odin]

This is something that has interest me a lot for a while since the day I was told of these 2 theories for those who don't know the Uncanny Valley is an Hypothesis used in robotics and 3d animation where human replicas look and act almost human but not perfectly usually creating a sense of revultion, there are 2 ends of that valley one where the replicas are stylized replicas and in the other end is where we have yet to achive is totale realisim where you can't tell the difference if it is real or not.

Then there is the singularity which is a bit hard for me to explain but from what I uderstand is a theory of the point where artificial intelligence can reach beyond human capacity...I think... anyways I bring this up cause I wanted to ask you guy who may probably know more than me your opinions and theories to how much longer whill it take to achive both things and what would it take to achive it, I'm more interested to hear about the singularity point than uncanny vally cause in my opinion I think we would reach the other end of the valley more faster than the Singularity point since the mind is something very complex that we have yet to know everything that the human mind can do.

[*Jess♥]

I don't really subscribe to either theory properly.

the singularity is not a thing in my book because i believe that as technology advances, the distinction between technology and humanity will fade. I actually think the concept of humanity will start to become more fuzzy as animals of other species start to become considered to be more like us than different.

I mean, people have pets that are treated as part of the family. in time, the separation from us as a species will become less apparent as technology can be used to augment various things including intelligence and communication.

The uncanny valley thing, I merely think what we are seeing is the visage of a corpse. it looks like a human but we can't see the signs of life. therefore we only see it as a dead human. what is worse, it is animated so it is like looking at a zombie. the difference will always be if something has life or not. the presence of life depends on the animator. a good animator can inject life into a construct. a bad animator cannot.

[Salkafar]

I'm not sure I agree, because why would a human have an evolutionary revulsion towards a talking corpse? Talking corpses don't exist in the real world. I think it's because it sets off contradictory signals in the brain. Humans are more perfect social animals than any other species on the planet, and we are wired to recognize facial features and movement to an enormously fine degree. So if something is off, the brain can't respond properly because, like talking corpses, artificial humans don't exist in nature either. And our natural response to the unknown is fear.

And the Singularity... well, the defining characteristic of the Singularity is that it is expected to happen fast, when it happens. Much too fast for humans to phase themselves in. This is not a gradual thing - it's called the Singularity for a reason. If a true emergent artificial intelligence appears, and it has some way to make its impression on the world, the next steps will be up to it, not us, simply because those will be decisions made in the span of a handful of seconds.