The Singularity

I had a meeting today and afterwards me and my business associates (doesn't that sound all professional and formal) went out and had a late lunch. Lunches are usually pretty leisurely when we get together and I had not seen one of the two for a few months so we had some catching up to do.

We chatted about life, my move, what we saw coming in the business world and about cloud computing. Both me and one of the two people I was with manage systems groups. My friends and I (business associates can be friends) all have our own circles and insight into other arenas. Well one of the two had a friend from Silicon valley who he saw recently that was telling him where Silicon Valley saw the next wave coming. It is called the Singularity. I think he was a bit surprised that I knew about it already.

He told me that he had now heard the word used twice in the last ten days, once by his Silicon Valley friend and once by me. I sort of gave him a quick rundown on what it means and why it was disturbing. The purpose of this post is to expound upon it for him and give him some links so that he can get a good starting point.

I will start with a Wikipedia page on the Technological Singularity.

I will attempt to explain the concept in it's most basic terms. The idea is that technology is increasing at an ever increasing rate. This is called Moore's Law. They then extrapolate that artificial intelligence (computer generated questions and answers) are also subject to Moore's law. They believe that life, like technology, is driven by an increase in evolution.

Again the idea is that computers could one day improve upon their own design on their own and thereby someday surpass the intelligence of humans. A super-intelligence. For those who read my prior post on crowd sourcing it should be apparent that I am not in agreement. A Wikipedia article on Crowd Sourcing.

The human rather than giving up control, it is believed, would need to harness this super-intelligence. It is believed that in order to do this humans would need to accept transhumanism. Transhumanism is the modification of human beings using either technology or gene modification so that we could compete with the machines. The term sometimes thrown around is intelligence amplification.

Here is an article written this month by someone who sort of thinks we are already there.

This may all be news to most people; but, I have been writing and talking about these things for quite awhile. Somebody who also wrote about this, though clearly not a pacifist, was Ted Kazynski (The Unabomber). He wrote a "Manifesto" that has ever been quoted by some in the Technology field. He was against where he thought things were going. Apparently the man who committed the recent killings in Norway made his own Manifesto and stole from The Unabomber's Manifesto.

All that I have written and linked to is discussed quite openly by people in the tech businesses. At least the one's at the forefront of it. The problem, as I see it, is that the average person does not even know that this is being discussed, the future of humanity, where we go from here. My friend is a pretty smart guy and does manage a systems group and he had never heard about this till ten days ago. I would bet that 90% plus of the population don't know anything about it and certainly the people in most of the world don't know about it.

I don't believe in the singularity. You see there is something that technology cannot surpass, the autistic, intellectual outliers. They destroy the algorithms. All computer programs make assumptions and the most basic assumptions determine where the logic can lead to. As all paths can lead to an dead end, there is no way of a limited human determining in advance the basic assumptions that the path should have that will lead to the ultimate perfect answer. It is a God joke and he does love jokes.

Now, here is why artificial intelligence cannot duplicate human intelligence, the autistic. People who are autistic have been pre-wired to see things that nobody else in the world can see, not even other autistic people. A little boy that can look at rows and rows of numbers and immediately tell you what they add up to has the gift of Asperger's. No computer can do that as fast as one kid who has the gift in that area. The answers are not calculated, they are known, it is in the DNA.

The idea by Transhumanists is that we can give everyone the mental abilities of those who have Aspergers. It doesn't work that way. In order for the singularity to occur either all outliers would need to be eliminated or all humans would need to have the abilities of those with Aspergers. Here is the problem, people with Aspergers don't work well together and cannot understand each others gift. You see the gene that creates it is never in the same place for any two individuals.

This is one of my longer and more boring posts; but, I do hope everyone of my readers reflects on the whole thing because people are determining your future for you and these things are being worked on. Jail does not imprison a man, that is in your mind. Free will and free thought are what make us human. People with Aspergers have a little less free will because they are born knowing a thing. Having said that, the vast majority of their lives are spent trying to deal with that knowledge and how it effects their personal lives. They also trade understanding social cues because their minds are always calculating.

This then is where the whole singularity thing gets hilarious (God has a sense of humor). When I was born the odds of being born autistic was 1 in 10,000, it is now less than 1 in 100. I do hope you see the humor in it all. Human innate knowledge is evolving faster than computers and cannot be competed with. Rather than face a world of autistic people. Lets talk about that for a second. Intelligence is measured on a curve. There are retarded people (sorry for the language, I don't know what other word to use; but, am open to suggestions and willing to edit) and geniuses. It is no different with people who are autistic, there are really smart ones and less intelligent ones). Right now in the world there are attempts to eliminate them all. I meant "cure".

Wisdom comes by learning and that requires effort and pain. It requires growth. Humans are still evolving and that is all that matters. We grow as a species and rely on past learning and the ability to continue knowing and learning what was previously learned, that is a dead man's switch for nature. No species can too quickly evolve and you can have too many outliers, they do not cooperate well unless all parts are moving forward and have agreement.

Gay Marriage, Heck State Control of Marriage

New York legalized "Gay" marriage and I don't care. I am a Christian and I still don't care. Why is the state involved in marriage in the first place, that is my question. Why is the state in the business of regulating personal relationships? Why do they care what people do in bed?

There are a couple of issues going on. Lets get sex out of the way. Clearly you don't have to be married to have sex. So, marriage is not about sex (although it can be a nice little diversion). So what is marriage about? Well the bible says it is when two become one flesh. Still, it is not about sex. The bible also says that "For a man is actually loving himself when he loves his wife. No one hates his own body but lovingly cares for it, just as Christ cares for his body, which is the church. And we are his body."

Basically the two unite to form a new being, a joint being. That is spiritual marriage. Then we have "legal" marriage. State sanctioned marriage. So I ask, why is government involved in "marriage" at all? I don't need government approval to have sex or be married, it is not relevant. So why have state sponsored marriage at all?

There are two sides to state sponsored marriage, the couple and the state. The couple usually have a state sponsored marriage because they get cookies, they get tax write offs, insurance benefits and other perks. The state on the other hand gets to make decisions for you if you divorce. The state gets to force one party to provide for the other. We can discuss regulating what happens to the children; but, the state can do that even if people were not legally married.

So state sponsored marriage is not about marriage, it is about divorce. Married people are given a slight break on their taxes in exchange for giving the government the right to make sure that if they divorce the state can force one to pay for the other rather than go on Welfare.

More and more we are seeing heterosexuals not asking the state for permission to live together. At the same time we are seeing "gays" wanting to get married. I cannot understand why some gays want to have state sanctioned marriage. Take my advice, it is not to their advantage. Government regulations have not been friends to gay people over the years.

Some states used to have laws regarding how people could have sex. How is that their business? Many states used to have anti-sodomy laws. Personally, I have never wanted to have that type of sex with a man or a woman; but, how is it anyone's business if it is consensual? Society should protect children and those who cannot protect themselves, I believe that. Society does not need to be involved in consenting adults personal relationships (to have consent one must be of sound mind).

Somewhere in the bible it says that in the end times government will outlaw marriage. Government cannot outlaw spiritual marriage, that would impossible. How can the government outlaw souls combining and becoming one? All government can do is prevent people from having state sanctioned marriage. We have lived to see that, some states have outlawed (it won't last long) "gay" marriage. All that really does is prevent the state from making one party pay for the other if they divorce.

Prior to these times it wasn't illegal for gays to marry, the state simply didn't get involved, would not make it a legal contract. Over the past few years, some states have actually made it illegal for gays to marry. That is foolishness, as I said, people do not need the state to make them a couple.

There are a lot of Christians that will think that what I am saying is sacrilege, sorry, it isn't. Our job as Christians is to be faithful and have an answer for the hope that is within us. It is not our job to tell others how to live their lives. We are told to follow the laws and to be good slaves (I love saying that because it really upsets some "Christians" who don't know their bible).

Oh, and for "Christians" who get a government sanctioned divorce, it doesn't make you divorced in the eyes of God unless you meet the standards of Corinthians. Matthew 5:32 says, "But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery."

After my wife left me for another it was important to me to know what it was biblical for me to do. As I attempted to reconcile and my then wife did commit adultery, I am free to remarry and hopefully one day I will; but, I am not convinced that I will seek a state sanctioned marriage.

By the way, I should also state that I do not think a believer can be married to a non-believer in Christ (legally of course they can). This is found a couple of places in the bible; but, I want to discuss why. Spiritually you cannot become one because you do are not of the same spirit. The New Testament doesn't say it quite as nicely; but, the message is the same.

This post should have something to offend just about everyone. Lets see, I don't care if gays want state acceptance of their relationship. I don't want state involvement in marriage. If two believers make a commitment to God to be married then the states opinion is meaningless and the state acceptance of the divorce is equally meaningless and if you don't meet the requirements under God's law the people who remarry become adulterers. I guess I think that governments involvement in marriage has done more to harm the institution than help it. Be well.

Not Much Good in the News Today

The tragedy in Norway is certainly on my mind. Apparently 90 plus people were killed by one individual. He exploded a bomb in one place and dressed as a policeman fired on young campers on a small island. All self righteous and indignant over what he perceived as a wrong he merrily went out and made things worse. It is indeed sad.

Another news story is that Amy Winehouse, the singer, was found dead at age 27. She had talent, fame and fortune. The cause of death has not been stated; however, it is reported that she had a history of drug problems. I have no idea what the young lady was running from; but, she is not going to find it now.

Rationality seems to escape us anymore and nothing seems to satisfy anyone. As my readers know, a few months back I was finally able to return my house to my lender. I looked up my house on Yahoo Real Estate and it is for sale. I saw pictures of it, they had put in new carpet. It needed it. I am not quite sure how I feel about losing the house, I mean my wages were garnished by my ex-wife so I couldn't make the payments; but, it was my home.

I was reading about some people who were attempting to take homes for $16 through what is known as adverse possession. Basically, if you live there longer enough and the owner doesn't throw you out, you can become the owner. The law is different in each state regarding the steps necessary; but, that is the deal in short. Other people are living in their homes, having not paid their mortgages for three years and not even attempting to work out something with the banks. Many people are trying to renegotiate their loans; but, the system is working slowly.

Now comes word that the government is considering renting out homes that have been foreclosed. Remember that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are owned by the government and have the deeds or mortgages to 70% of all the homes in the United States, they used mortgage companies merely as loan processors. This should make you scratch your head, the federal government is about to become the biggest landlord in the United States.

I do hope people understand what I just said, the federal government will be your landlord. I bet they keep rents low. That is going to keep the market low. We are looking at government housing for millions and millions. I wonder if they will rent out to groups of singles. You know mini-apartments. Maybe that would explain why for the past ten years builders were building larger and larger houses while the average family was getting smaller and smaller. I had a Fannie Mae conventional loan and my original loan processor was Citi-Mortgage. Now it is owned by the government, perhaps they will rent it out.

Now if the government begins renting out millions of homes, they will also have to hire people to maintain the homes, collect rent and find renters. Sounds like there will be a lot of work in those areas pretty soon. Once these homes are rented out it becomes a cash flow for the government; but, beyond that, how will these homes ever be sold? I mean you cannot just kick someone out of a rental, there are laws regarding such things.

Lets do a quick recap of what has transpired since 1999. Did you know that the Euro was begun in 1999? That year was also the first year that the Dow Jones Industrial average hit 10,000. Did I say 10,000? Later that year it hit 11,000, actually a little over a month later. That was a 10% increase, that is a lot.

In 2000 the Dow hits 11,722,98 and the tech bubble peaks. NASDAQ hit 5,048, it's all time high. We turn to 2001 and we all know what happened on September 11th.

2002 has the United States going into Afghanistan. That same year the Dow Jones tumbles down to 7,200. People forgot about how bad it got. Now the following month the Federal Reserve dropped the interest rate to below the inflation rate. That had meaning and consequences.

In 2003 we invaded Iraq. In 2004 we can clearly see that the housing bubble which began in 1999 is truly moving upward. The number to watch is the inflation adjusted cost. The housing market was clearly violating it's history. You see if you look at the cost of housing over the past 200 years, you will discover that the annual increase was about the same as inflation (approximately 5%). The jumps we saw in the 1970s were unusual; but, they still matched inflation. The jump in the years between 1999 and 2007 exceeded inflation.

In 2005 we saw the terror attacks in London, their own 9/11. In 2007 we see the housing prices hit the highest point (I sold my rental just as it was occurring). 2008 sees the first of the stock market crash. 2008 also sees the global market crashes as they merrily spread their was across the world. Since 2008 housing prices have continued to drop. Currently housing prices are roughly where they should have been if they had continued to follow inflation.

Housing Bubble Charts.

Now lets try and make some sense of what occurred. The United States basically got out of manufacturing during the 1980s. We saw the great outsourcing as the technologies of other countries began to match ours and their people were willing to work for less while actually increasing the quality.

Warren Buffet began talking about America's probable long term fall. The tech bubble was all air and when it burst there was nothing to prop up the United States economy. The bursting of the tech bubble should have been the beginning of our economic collapse; however, other countries continued buying out debt. Sorry, but we have to talk economics for a minute. In 1996 two economists for the Federal Reserve published a paper explaining how Inverted Yield Curves were predictors of recessions and depressions. I won't bother explaining what the curve is; but, you can look it up online. I have discussed them before.

Now in 2005 and 2006 the yield curve inverted. That should have raised eyebrows. Remember in late 2006 and early 2007 we saw the peak of the housing market. Instead of concern, the Federal Reserve said everything was just fine.

Well as we all everything was not fine and the housing market and stock markets both crashed. How come the best economists that we have didn't see the crashes coming. They either are bad economists or liars. I believe they lied and I believe there was a reason.

One of the biggest reasons that we cannot compete in the industrial race is not infrastructure and it is not technology, it is labor costs and the fact that we had a standard of living that we could not afford. If one had read Mr. Buffet then one would have known that this was coming; but, rather than a long downward spiral, I believe the decision was made to have a bubble and a faster move downward. Here is the reason why, a quick downturn allows us to compete again while we still have resources and trained workers.

In late 2005 I gave a two day seminar in Las Vegas where I told people in real estate that these crashes were coming. They aren't over. In order to work our way out of this mess we are going to have to be producing goods again or selling off our minerals. The problem with selling our mineral wealth is that you cannot get it back and that in the future the world's currencies will have their value set on a structured system that looks at both a nations labor force and mineral wealth.

Lets look at things in their simplest terms. America has about 310 million people. China has a population of 1,340 million. China is the number one leading manufacturer in the world. We owe China trillions and they don't owe us. Now if we don't pay the Chinese, they will simply stop selling us goods unless we pay catch, that immediately drops our standard of living; but, it also causes us to manufacture for ourselves. Do you get it? We will have to work for less or we won't have any toys.

In order for this to work our nation needs to reorganize itself starting with management. Our failure began at the top because they were unwilling to fight the unions or tell the truth and we wouldn't listen to those who did. We need managers who rather than trying to please us and investors will go back to making solid business decisions. Over about the last ten years Detroit was making more money from loans than from cars, GM was making more money buying debt than building cars. That is insanity and led to bad business decisions.

On the labor side I will give a perfect example. We cannot build houses because the labor cost to build a house is more than you can sell a house for. It is simple supply and demand. That means is construction workers want to build houses again, they need to drop their labor rates.

The next thing we need to do, real simple, stop being greedy and stealing so much, it could be lying about overtime worked or pure theft. Same goes for the management. They need to be paid based on how well the company sells products and not the value of the stock. It also means that the value of the stock has to be based on the assets of the company and the expected profit on sales of real products. This is how things used to work; however, debt financing destroyed peoples understanding of the basics, instead they were rewarded for destroying companies and selling off assets.

What we are seeing currently is the last painful attempts to avoid a return to sanity. We are seeing the last sell off of assets by City, County and State governments. We would see the same by business; but, there are no buyers. Same for housing, no buyers.

Let me put it another way, what would it take to make the United States a country that produces and sells products to other countries and make a profit that we can save and/or invest in needed new technologies? Does getting another trillion dollars in debt paying for people to stay in houses that they are not the paying mortgage for and paying their unemployment at the same time make the United States a more competitive nation? If you say yes then I am going to have to hurt you.

We have become a nation of debtors who are unwilling to pay our debts, is that in anyway sustainable? Who will lend to us. My ex-mother in law lent me the couple thousand dollars it took for a down payment on my first house. I set up a spreadsheet that paid her 2% above prime, amortized for so many years by month. I payed her off in advance on the fully burdened amount. I haven't spoken to her in well over a year, still love her, best mother-in-law I ever had. If I needed to borrow money, she would lend it to me. Says a lot about her and something about me.

Sorry, had to pause and lost my train of thought. Be well. Had to go back and read what I wrote. Debt. Yeah, after a certain amount of time, you stop lending to some people. That is good business and I cannot imagine why anyone would lend to the United States as we don't intend to pay off our debt. Be well.

For Robbie

Hey kids, I am a real person and not some bot. I have met people and loved, I love me some Robbie and always seek to please ladies, she helped me find me again, it takes a woman to do that. Help men to find themselves. Thanks dear lady, I will post music for you.

Crosby, Stills and Nash - Suite Judy Blue Eyes

The Baby's - Everytime I think of You

Barry Manilow - Weekend in New England (my mom liked him a lot)

Dearest Robbie, it is so hard to continue to wait; but, wait I do. You know of the one I love, so close and so far. I wait and shall wait forever if that is what it takes. A poem and more music.

ANNABEL LEE

It was many and many a year ago,
In a kingdom by the sea,
That a maiden there lived whom you may know
By the name of Annabel Lee;
And this maiden she lived with no other thought
Than to love and be loved by me.

I was a child and she was a child,
In this kingdom by the sea;
But we loved with a love that was more than love -
I and my Annabel Lee;
With a love that the winged seraphs of heaven
Coveted her and me.
And this was the reason that, long ago,
In this kingdom by the sea,
A wind blew out of a cloud, chilling
My beautiful Annabel Lee;
So that her highborn kinsman came
And bore her away from me,
To shut her up in a sepulcher
In this kingdom by the sea.
The angels, not half so happy in heaven,
Went envying her and me
Yes! that was the reason
(as all men know, In this kingdom by the sea)
That the wind came out of the cloud by night,
Chilling and killing my Annabel Lee.

But our love was stronger by far than the love
Of those who were older than we
Of many far wiser than we
And neither the angels in heaven above,
Nor the demons down under the sea,
Can ever dissever my soul from the soul
Of the beautiful Annabel Lee.
For the moon never beams without bringing me dreams
Of the beautiful Annabel Lee;
And the stars never rise but I feel the bright eyes
Of the beautiful Annabel Lee;
And so, all the night-tide, I lie down by the side
Of my darling, my darling, my life and my bride,
In the sepulcher there by the sea,
In her tomb by the sounding sea.

I love reading Poe's poetry. "Oh my darling, my darling, my life and my bride. He says so much with so little. The longing and loss so cut to the bone, a genius to be sure.

Carly Simon - Anticipation

Heart - This Man is Mine

Dearest Robbie, when will you go to Vegas and let me spend some time with you. I will not post your answer, lol. I await it. Be well, here is more music.

Carly Simon - You Belong to Me

Corey Hart - Never Surrender

Good night and be well. Dearest Robbie, thank you for being there when I needed it.

Sorry, I am about to Shortchange the Blog

Sorry all, I am in a very lengthy thread on another site and it is getting very interesting. Not much to post here today. Perhaps a musical interlude.

George Harrison - Crackerbox Palace

Be well.

It is Madness

I didn't intend to post so much tonight, the news just makes me more and more angry. If you wish to see true sinfulness, try reading this article. UK scientists want human-animal tests to be monitored better. Let me explain. Human DNA is being spliced with animal DNA to create a new type of being; but, just for the purpose of experimentation. They kill it after it has gestated for two weeks. Why would we do that to something that was part human?

Frankenstein was nothing compared to these sick and twisted people who claim to be scientists and I don't care what discoveries they make, not even a little. I don't even believe in all the animal testing we do and I am anti-Peta. I am a pacifist and therefore cannot condone non-consensual human experimentation. I am also against the death penalty and abortion, just to be clear.

Scientists are now truly playing God and they will fail; but, what damage will they do in the meantime. I will go back to the bible for a moment. In Genesis it mentions that the "Sons of God" interbred with humans, specifically females. This is generally believed to refer to fallen angels, it is not considered a good thing. Now scientists want to create animal human hybrids. That is playing God, or more accurately playing demons.

Pastors Declare Homosexuality Not a Sin

I really don't want to talk about homosexuality again. Some of my readers are gay and friends. I have previously said that I don't care if the government allows gay marriage because I don't. Government marriage is an enforceable contract and people should be allowed to enter into any contracts that do not break laws and I don't believe that homosexuality should be illegal, that is madness and overreaching by the government, they should stay out of our bedrooms.

Apparently a group of more than 100 pastors in Omaha, Nebraska have issued a proclamation that homosexuality is not a sin, does that mean that lust isn't a sin anymore too? Whew, because I lust all the time and thought it was. These people do not deserve to teach the bible because apparently they never bothered to read it. I would not call homosexuality evil; but, I would call it a sin (if you haven't figured out that I am a Christian by now, you haven't been paying attention, yes, I believe in the bible, I just interpret it with an open mind). We are all sinners, that is what it says. It also says that there is only one sin that is not pardonable and it isn't believed to be homosexuality or lust.

I don't have a problem with sinners, I don't have a problem with gays, I do have a problem with Pastors not following the word. Perhaps they will now say that adultery is not a sin, my ex would like that. What about gluttony, is that still a sin? I don't believe there is a rating for sins, I never read it in the bible; but, if there was then I would think that adultery was worse than homosexuality because promises are broken and we have legalized adultery (no-fault divorce).

My issue is with the church and with the pastors. Heck, maybe we can get all the pedophile priests together to issue a proclamation that sleeping with little boys is not a sin anymore, I bet they would do it. And I am not comparing what those priests did to being gay, there is a big difference between consenting adults and people who use their position to take advantage of minors. It was lesbians that kept pedophiles from being accepted in the gay community, I have written about this in the past (I should have tagged my articles but I am not going back and doing it now).

Church is for sinners and I want all sinners to feel they can come and hear the word. Jesus reached out to those who were not accepted and saved the life of an adulterer. He didn't tell her that she did not sin, instead, he asked who was sin free. We still haven't found anyone who was. I am disgusted that pastors would make such a proclamation rather than say why we must be accepting and loving to all including those who commit all types of sins.

Not all homosexuals are promiscuous, lets start with that; but, many are (same for heterosexuals), is promiscuity still a sin? I bet the pastors that signed this document would say it isn't. I would love to know by what logic these pastors feel they are entitled to determine what is a sin. I just don't know what to say. I love sinners and don't know anyone who isn't, I guess only gays are non-sinners according to these people.