The singularity is a sci-fi end-of-days story. It speculates that at some point we'll invent an AI that's about as smart as a human, and smart enough to design a better version of itself.

Then a week later it'll come up with a version of itself that's twice as smart. A week later that version will come up with a version that's twice as smart again, making it 4x as smart as a human. A week after that, it'll come up with a version that's twice as smart again, 8x as smart as a human. And so on. A year later it'll be a trillion times smarter than a human.

The AI will then either solve all our problems, invent fusion power and faster-than-light travel, and usher in a Star Trek style post-scarcity world of infinite resources and luxury, or it'll take over and create a Terminator style oppressive dystopia where the few surviving humans survive on rats we roast over a barrel in our underground bunker.

At geological or biological timescales, that’s what the emergence of language did. AI can all be viewed as part of the accelerating returns of language…

You mean slowing it down, by producing large amounts of meaningless text?

> At geological or biological timescales, that’s what the emergence of language did

Elaborate on this idea please. Are you saying that human languages are self-replicating abstract entities?

There's a dystopian definition in the other comment but usually, when people say they're looking forwards to the singularity, they're referring to a version of the future where robots and computers are able to do most of not all jobs, so humans no longer have to work, and can spend all their time doing whatever, usually phrased as painting, singing, dancing, and the other leisure-type activities. Bettering themselves and helping humanity. The utopian, post-scarcity Federation from Star Trek, if you've seen it.

But without offering an objective model for how that could happen, it’s just wish-fulfillment fantasy.

The Singularity is the rapture of the nerds, and is about as likely to happen as the second coming of Jesus.

That was not a comment on the plausibility of it. Offering up a definition is still useful so people actually have conversation instead of just talking past each other.

There are many competing definitions which is why these comment threads devolve.