Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Biotech Robotics Technology

Ray Kurzweil On IT And The Future of Technology 450

Roland Piquepaille writes "In this interview with CIO Magazine, Ray Kurzweil says that one day, software and computers will reside inside us. He adds that by 2020, "we will be placing millions or billions of nanobots -- blood cell-size devices -- inside our bloodstream to travel into our brains and interact with our neurons." He also says that if we're not enhanced by machines, they will surpass us. But he doesn't think it will happen. According to him, machines and humans will merge. In the mean time, he's pursuing his anti-aging quest and takes about 250 supplements to his diet every day! With this regime, he says his biological age is 40 while he's 56 years old. By 2030, there will be very little difference between 30-year-old and 120-year-old people, says Kurzweil. He's certainly a bright person, but I'm not sure that I agree with someone taking daily such an amount of pills. What do you think? This summary contains some selected -- and biased -- excerpts to help you forge your opinion."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Ray Kurzweil On IT And The Future of Technology

Comments Filter:
  • by Pingular ( 670773 ) on Sunday October 17, 2004 @01:59PM (#10550934)
    website [kurzweilai.net]
  • More info (Score:3, Informative)

    by balster neb ( 645686 ) on Sunday October 17, 2004 @02:04PM (#10550964)
  • by KrackHouse ( 628313 ) on Sunday October 17, 2004 @02:07PM (#10550993) Homepage
    I stopped taking supplements after reading this [technewsworld.com] article a few weeks ago. Here's an excerpt:
    Careless use of vitamins, taken by millions in the belief that they promote good health, could be causing thousands of premature deaths.
    A study investigating whether antioxidant vitamin supplements can prevent cancer found that rather than saving lives they seemed to increase overall risk of death.
    Although the effect was small, it amounted to 9,000 premature deaths among every million supplement users.

    Food for thought.
  • by GillBates0 ( 664202 ) on Sunday October 17, 2004 @02:21PM (#10551081) Homepage Journal
    I had an opportunity to meet Ray at a Distinguished Guest lecture he delivered at my company last week.

    I also managed to ask him about his views (in his capacity as an established innovator/inventor) on aggressive Patenting and Copyright laws by corporations (for example SCO vs IBM, and the Record Industry lawsuits).

    It was gratifying to know that he was well aware of these problems, and even commended the "Open Source movement" and stressed on it's importance to encourage free flow of information and it's significance in the fight against the evergrowing stifling of innovation.

    It was an interesting lecture, where he covered quite a few of the topics in this article. Apparently, he treats his body as a "biological experiment" to try out different drugs (he's a diabetic) on himself.

    An interesting guy to say the least.

  • Pills-Overdose (Score:2, Informative)

    by eagle52997 ( 691489 ) on Sunday October 17, 2004 @02:23PM (#10551098) Journal
    Taking that many supplements is dangerous. Perhaps some readers know that Vitamin C is water soluble, so taking more does nothing unless your body needs it right then, because its going to come out again in less than 24 hours. But, for other minerals, and essential elements, there are narrow ranges which are healthy. Take fluoride for instance, just the right amount strengthens your teeth, and allows them to recover from cavities. But too much and ugly brown spots for on the teeth. Others are more serious like iron or copper...while some is necessary for enzymes to function properly, too much overloads your body and will cause other problems Woman dies of iron overdose [slashdot.org]
  • by wasted ( 94866 ) on Sunday October 17, 2004 @02:33PM (#10551165)
    What good is the latest nerve regeneration treatment when stem cells are illegal in the US?

    Contrary to what the opponents of the current administration would have you believe, stem cell research is legal in the US. The federal government will not fund research on new embryonic stem cell lines, however.

    Here is President Bush's speech explaining it. [whitehouse.gov]

    So, if new embryonic stem cell lines are likely to cure diseases, private industry will probably jump in so they can patent the resulting cures.
  • by dstone ( 191334 ) on Sunday October 17, 2004 @03:31PM (#10551578) Homepage
    I stopped taking supplements after reading this article a few weeks ago.

    I agree too many people think vitamins and herbal supplements are the magical solution to simple problems so thanks for sharing the link. But I think it's important to consider the serious limitations of that study and what one can justifiably conclude from it.

    1. The study did not include 'healthy' people. All participants had cancer of the gullet, stomach and intestine, bowel, pancreas or liver. Conclusions about any supplement's effect on a person without those cancers is not supported by this study. It would have been interesting to include a group of healthy patients in the study to see if the supplements were accelerating the existing cancer or causing some other form of death. The cause(s) of death is not stated in the article but probably is in the study itself. (Link to the study, anyone?)

    2. The supplements studied were limited to beta-carotene, vitamins A, C, and E, and selenium, alone or in combination. The premature death increases were connected to taking both beta-carotene and either A or E. Conclusions about supplements other than beta-carotene and A or E aren't supported by this study.

    I'm not saying you can't extrapolate in your own mind about what other supplements might do to healthy people. Maybe that's a safe thing to do. But it isn't something the study is suggesting.
  • by fyngyrz ( 762201 ) on Sunday October 17, 2004 @06:20PM (#10552406) Homepage Journal
    I think the numbers you're using include infant deaths. The huge decrease in infant deaths affects the final number a great deal without extending anyone's ability to go deeper into "old age."

    People weren't just keeling over at age 30.

    Concrete example: The direct paternal line of my ancestors, of which I have complete birth/death detail back to 1634, all lived into their 70's, a good number of them into their 80's and 90's until the middle of the last century, when my father broke the record by dying of lung cancer at age 54. He was a heavy smoker, so I don't consider this a significant statistical factor as compared to the rest of the paternal line. If you factor in all the dead babies and dead young children, the average numbers come out low for my family as well - even though just about every one who made it to 21 also made it way past 60. This isn't lifespan extension, so much as it is the puffing up of a somewhat vaguely named average number.

    No question there have been health care improvements; lifespan extension into old age is happening, but it has not doubled by any means. 90 year olds, somewhat exceptional in the 1700's and 1800's in my family, are still just somewhat exceptional. And no one is living to 180, I assure you.

    Your longevity stats are also affected by amelioration of disease effects. For instance, if you get cancer, you're still probably going to die. You will quite probably live a few more years if it is caught early, but the odds are very much against your living more than an additional five to ten. If you catch a flu, we can do a lot more, you probably won't die, though we still lose thousands to it every year in the US. Sanitation is also better, and that has a very large effect upon the general ability of many diseases to take hold.

    What I'm trying to say here is that "lifespan extension" appears to me to be somewhat of an illusion. YMMV, and in fact, I hope it does. :)

  • by synaptic ( 4599 ) on Sunday October 17, 2004 @08:11PM (#10552985) Homepage
    > What good is the latest nerve regeneration
    > treatment when stem cells are illegal in the US.

    *SMACK*

    Stem cells are not illegal in the US. They just are no longer funded by the federal government.

    There's nothing stopping you from researching them, Uncle Sam just isn't going to give you a meaty grant to do it.

Today is a good day for information-gathering. Read someone else's mail file.

Working...