I can't say that I'm any type of expert on this singularity business, but I'll give it a go. The singularity is a point we may or may not reach where technology and computing power becomes so sophisticated that the machines themselves might not be distinguishable from man. And, in fact, man and machine may merge into a cyborg type of creature. We may basically render ourselves immortal in that a consciousness may survive and live in the empty computing world or may be planted into any number of forms as so desired.
There are many different configurations of what the singularity may entail. And while I do deem some of it wishful scientific fiction, I can't say that we would not see at least some of the singularity unfold. Even as soo as the current generation. Computing power is still building fast. Genetics and bioengineering is becoming big business. We are learning and revising the way we look at living organisms on nearly a daily basis. Cosmology has taken giant steps to uncovering the mysteries of the universe. Physics is in the same boat and perhaps in the giant cruise ship to the land of barely detectable pieces of fundamental matter. LHC for short. Science is just plain busy.
I recently listend to a Scientific American podcast about this issue. They claim that the singularity is plain old fiction. It just won't and apparently cannot happen. They say that the mind and consciousness is too complex to ever foresee it on DVD any time soon. Then they go on to say that they really know NOTHING about the mind-body relationship. They have no clues why consciousness exists or even HOW it exists. But for some reason they are determined to undermine the notion of a singularity. In a nutshell they posit, "We know nothing about consciousness, but we know it CAN NOT go on indefinitely and will never become part of some technology". So, ... they know nothing, but they know something. Got it.
They might be right. But the fact that they acknowledge their ignorance then reject possibilities doesn't make sense to me. The mind is complex. Perhaps the mind cannot exist without the body. But maybe it can. Either way we have an extravagant, lovely, poetic arrangement of elements, compounds, molecules, organs, and so forth that make up us. Living, breathing, thinking, self aware, intelligent humans. So, if this complex configuration of molecules is the natural substances that make up our consciousness, then why couldn't it be theoretically be copied?? We are basically copying a database of points. An unbelievable one, but still a natural set of data points. With the advancement of already intricate technologies, is it beyond comprehension that we might be able to do this someday?? Perhaps not in Kurzweils lifetime, but maybe his grandsons son??
I don't find reason to reject this idea. If it is theoretically possible, then science should meet the challenges that the question poses. Science is about answering questions, but sometimes it seems as if the scientific community by in large has it's mind already made up. I think science should embrace this idea. It is one way to try and study what consciousness really is. Is it a complex arrangement of molecules?? Because if it isn't, then that opens another avenue. Consciousness comes from elsewhere and is not indicitive and local to the physical body. That type of conclusion might have creationists hopping for joy and scientists leaping from ivory towers. And for the Buddhists, the song will remain the same.