how long do you think it will to get to point where we can experience the changes mentioned in text
Reading. What will happen to art forms in the future? Ray Kurzweil, the director of engineering at Google has made statements about the changes that art will undergo in the future and so far, he has been correct. His first prediction is that A.I. will create better art than humans will. Computers are already capable of painting pictures, creating stories or composing music. Kurzweil points out the amazing progress of the machines that a decade ago could not even distinguish between two figures and are now able to paint a classic in another style. What the A.I. still lacks is to be able to make works of art with the same sensitivity as a person and to reach logical conclusions. According to Kurzweil, we are today much smarter than we were 20 years ago thanks to technology. In the future, our communication skills will be better because our brains will have a connection to the cloud through a chip. We will have access to more language by connecting to the dictionary. Stories will no longer be simply stories, in the future we will be able to participate in the stories. Virtual reality will make literature more realistic when we immerse in them. This may be both good and bad and it could make our personality much more flexible. Finally, Kurzweil says that we will be resurrected through avatars, thanks to all the information about our personality that we leave in the cloud such as photographs, emails, letters, diaries, videos, tastes, interests
We all know that science-based technology has progressed incessantly since the time of Galileo, but skeptics also know that, unlike science, technology is ambivalent because, although largely beneficial, a part of it it is also harmful. Thus, for example, while nuclear science has enriched civilization, nuclear engineering produced the crimes of Hiroshima and Nagasaki and has made us skeptical of the future of life on earth. This axiological ambivalence of technology is the subject of these pages.
Traducción
Todos sabemos que la tecnología basada en la ciencia ha conocido un avance incesante desde los tiempos de Galileo, pero los escépticos también saben que, a diferencia de las ciencias, la tecnología es ambivalente pues, aunque en gran medida es beneficiosa, una parte de ella también es dañina. Así, por ejemplo, mientras que la ciencia nuclear ha enriquecido la civilización, la ingeniería nuclear produjo los crímenes de Hiroshima y Nagasaki y nos ha vuelto escépticos ante el futuro de la vida en la tierra. Esta ambivalencia axiológica de la tecnología es el tema de estas páginas.
Explicación:Espero que te ayude :)
2 votes Thanks 2
Isaaczhininb
Eso es mi opinión es base a la lectura
Respuesta:
We all know that science-based technology has progressed incessantly since the time of Galileo, but skeptics also know that, unlike science, technology is ambivalent because, although largely beneficial, a part of it it is also harmful. Thus, for example, while nuclear science has enriched civilization, nuclear engineering produced the crimes of Hiroshima and Nagasaki and has made us skeptical of the future of life on earth. This axiological ambivalence of technology is the subject of these pages.
Traducción
Todos sabemos que la tecnología basada en la ciencia ha conocido un avance incesante desde los tiempos de Galileo, pero los escépticos también saben que, a diferencia de las ciencias, la tecnología es ambivalente pues, aunque en gran medida es beneficiosa, una parte de ella también es dañina. Así, por ejemplo, mientras que la ciencia nuclear ha enriquecido la civilización, la ingeniería nuclear produjo los crímenes de Hiroshima y Nagasaki y nos ha vuelto escépticos ante el futuro de la vida en la tierra. Esta ambivalencia axiológica de la tecnología es el tema de estas páginas.
Explicación:Espero que te ayude :)