Answer: It's impossible to say! Comparing the invention of penicillin with the escapement that enabled clocks with basic metallurgy with the stock certificate with the printing press… They all had massive impact on human beings.
Good question; I'd have to go with the dictionary definition of"making something better." That's pretty subjective, but I'm OK with that.
I don't think it needs replacement so much as obsolescing. We don'tt alk about "ambition" all the time anymore because it's an assumed quality most people today share. Innovation needs to fall into the same category; we've all got access to nearly endless opportunities to innovate, along with copious free resources to do so. It's not necessary to talk about innovation anymore, it only remains to do it as a normal part of our role as human beings.
Yes, definitely, and start with what you're curious in. We've got near-infinite access to information and education out there, and staying a hyper-focused specialist following only pre-designated lines of inquiry is just a sure-fire way to be irrelevant. Crossing disciplines is where the majority of innovation has always happened — supported by expertise, of course.
I'm often asked "how do I become a hacker?" and it's fundamentally the same question with the same answer. Find out what interests you, get better at solving the problems associated with it, and share your results. Then repeat.
If you use the Wikipedia definition of an "emergence of greater-than-human intelligence through technological means" then I'd say we're already there. After all, there are lots of types of intelligence, and while it'd be glib to say that stuff like "memory" is a kind of intelligence (and therefore computers are already better than human beings at it), I think the comparison stands. Just seeing how big data and machine learning have advanced in the last few years seems a lot like "greater-than-human intelligence" already.
Put another way, there are numerous kinds of intelligence, and we can only truly understand the human ones. It's similar to our inability to understand how a fish experiences water or a dog experiences scent; despite our lack of capacity to relate or understand them, those experiences are still there. Rather than trying to anticipate emergent intelligences as a mirror of human thought, I think the real question is about how new kinds of intelligence could emerge in ways we don't like and have trouble anticipating, and what we can do about it ahead of time.
Read more news and ideas about Innovations: