There has been a great deal of discussion about artificial intelligence and the potential dangers it poses to humans. Then there have been countless iterations of interpreting via stories moral lock downs such as robot rights, slave robots, artificial will and so on. But the main question regarding A.I. is
when exactly does A.I. become more than just a fancy tool?
My main hypothesis is that artificial intelligence will not be more than a query answering robot unless we factor in it unknowns and inevitable, time based, cycle endings. In particular we need a system who fights for its existence, a system that runs in a scarce resource, competitive environment, even more, a system that cannot access all the answers.
Artificial life is not only intelligent, it has the same goal as life in general: to defeat time because it is threatened by it. And, when we’ll create it, the artificial part will be lost, because, in the end, we’re meant to do it as our next evolutionary action towards time resilience. (more)
In that sense, we could say something is alive if:
the base goal is to preserve low entropy
all actions are determined by a predestined time resilience
it is exposed directly to the effects of time, in particular decay
Even if a being is immortal, all three of above can still apply, and the being is alive.
The goal of any living being is resilience as a form of preserving its status.
where R is resilience, S is status and P is preservation. To ease calculation R, S and P can be integers, but in reality R is a time delta, S is a matrix and P is an algorithm.
Status is a complex notion that sums up genetic, biologic, cultural, societal and other states. Preservation is an algorithm that employs innovation, mutation and other methods of predictive feedback initiation. Both status and preservation change in time based on environment updates.
At birth a living being has P = 0, therefore R = 1. At the time of death, a living being has S = 0, therefore R = 0.
If we create an A.I. system and aim to make it work above the limitations of a fully determined program, we require the incorporation of the formula of “life” in the main loop. The stability of the main loop must decay due to direct interaction with a physical hardware clock.
A decaying main loop is created by updating a composite variable on every tick of the hardware clock. Say we have a variable made of many parts such as A..n then there is a homeostasis function H that produces a result of a composite variable A..n.
A..n = H(A..n, S, E), where S is state and E is environment
Each part of the composite variable is then injected in the loop as values for various internal parameters. The H function applies data from state and environment to A..n. State is the current execution state and environment is the input of the current execution state from sensors and detectors.
Thus resilience is not embedded in a system, it rises naturally from decay based on external action. The better the preservation the bigger, exponentially, the resilience. The better the status (both complexity and connections, as status is a sum of states) the better the resilience.
If we build an A.I. that is generating questions, not answers, using answers simply to point to new questions awareness should arise by itself, but only in the presence of decay and resilience, otherwise we’ll never know if the system is aware as it has no reason to expose it.
Just look at this “exciting” slide (if there can be such a thing) i found in my LinkedIn feed:
We are so thrilled this is happening but:
Do we have the economic theory to explain what is going on?
Is capitalism in good shape as a theory and economic formula to sustain this future where the biggest companies own none of the actives producing their profits?
Are profits even what we believe them to be, in this future when every big company will be in that slide?
Are we all ready to be nothing but the large worldwide workforce for money shoveling brokers of our work?
Do you want to know what the slide means today?
It means this:
Uber is not a taxi company. Airbnb is not an accommodation provider. Skype and WeChat are not phone companies. Alibaba is not a retailer. Facebook is not a media company. SocietyOne is not a bank. Netflix is not a movie house. Neither Apple nor Google are software vendors.
They are all brokers of merchandise.
Merchandise represents an economic good capable of satisfying a need and which is available for sale on a market through a bilateral transaction.
They are all brokers of merchandise because global market exposure transfers value from the production unit to the distribution chain.
This is not an effect of the Internet, nor is it disruption. Disruption is Tesla if they make that car cost 15k euros, or Theranos if they don’t lie, disruption was high speed broadband to traditional media, the Postal services have been disrupted, armies could be disrupted by drones. That slide is simply an effect of our globalized economy and free trade that, for the moment at least, works! If we had no fiber optics on Earth, but everything else was the same, in 30 years that slide would still exist, because the global economy has a clear path ahead.
Blunt headline, I’m sorry, but if this article was not biased, the introduction would have been more meaningful. But the sway towards the lucrative problems and issues of distributing content nullified the start.
With all the problems of this world, these guys are spending billions on going to Mars and living to 200. WTF?
If we’re honest about it, we will not be very sad if they make it, and have a way of delaying our death for about 100 years. Also considering the political shit storm which Earth has going on for far longer than Jupiter has had its atmosphericanticyclonic storm, going to Mars for a change doesn’t sound like such a bad idea either.
It is very unfair to tease us with a discussion about unleashing a Rottweiler in the room filled with the smartest cats and then, instead, unleash Garfield who makes smart remarks about the smartest cats.
I, random Joe of the Internets, believe “The problem” is obviously not Google’s, nor YouTube’s. What do you suggest they should do? Other than quoting Apple, who is seriously invested in being the holy saviour of the content producers. Apple wants to become the exclusive carrier of quality content period. Should the content producers give them that? Should the content producers stop producing?
Should we start throwing milk away?
But I wonder, while Free Basics failed, governments ban corporate attempts to extend connectivity even further, without any notable action to do it without corporate interest involved, is there a content starvation in other parts of the world?
All the people (artist management, bulk copyright owners) who have already spent decades upon decades fighting the transformation by technology of an antiqued industry, I’m sure they never ever felt like the smartest cats in the room. No way, sir. But in doing so, how come with all the money involved, all the content empires didn’t do one thing other than becoming even bigger content empires?
Don’t you think it’s a bit unfair to mislabel so easily the silicon valley types, while the others have proven how relentless they will be throwing money at fixing the leaks in their money wells, but sparing no change on solving any of:
All the problems of the world.
I mean, seriously, Disney? We need an army of angry mobs to stop brainwashing whole generations with weird stereotypes, only to have them start over with different stereotypes. That’s the best they could do for the world’s problems.
With 400 dramatic series produced, we get how many addressing real issues? How many dramatising any of “all the problems of the world”, and how many creating fantasy land mind numbing sitcoms?
When I asked in the Q & A about YouTube he said, “YouTube represents 40% of the streaming volume of the music business and 4% of the revenue. It’s a ripoff, but Google doesn’t care.” I wonder what Ruth Porat, the new CFO of Google, sitting in the audience thought of that?
@Ruth Porat thought: Behold, I am the LORD, the God of all flesh; is anything too difficult for Me? Would that make any difference?
As for advertising and eyeballs, perhaps the problem is different. Maybe new generations are so underwhelmed by over saturation by:
brand social values
brand social responsibility
I could make this list so long that it’d fill up the maximum document size in Medium’s noSQL database
Today, brands, and companies advertising for brands, would throw money at anything that could shed some hope on the crumbling efforts of bringing back former glory.
How can you possibly frame that *Heineken Beer story like it is the problem of Google or Yahoo or who else was algorithmically spending their money? Is that not showing the crass lack of expertise of whoever entrusted that money to be spent like that? This is real time business, you can stop the flow of cash the minute you realise it makes no sense. But, ahem, how awesome is that $6 for $1 that the trapped TV consumer was tricked to supply!
But unless the tech guys start looking at media with a little humility we are going to be in trouble.
Is 100% not a good way to encourage dialog between the tech people and the media people. You’re only going to make those average smart cats behave more like felines and show some claws. Just my 2 cents.
Of all the species of mammals that inhabit our amazing Earth, we seem to be the smartest of them all. We are not only capable of articulating long strings of information, we also have an ultra-complex social system and a high level of spontaneous background thinking. All this results in unusual ideas, perceptions and actions and that makes us more than smart: it maes us creative.
The study of many other animals shows that, although not as complex as humans, there is plenty of intelligence in the animal kingdom. Show of emotions, use of tools and complex communication have all been noticed and documented in birds, mammals and even some fish. Heck, we even wonder if dolphins aren’t smarter than we are.
Yet, of all the creatures on this planet apparently we’re the only ones preoccupied with time. The only ones separating tenses. The only ones striving to figure out the future, remember the past and not missing the present.
If you look at an animal intelligence scale you’ll see one interesting pattern: the more intelligent, the less chemically bound to behavior, and the more intelligent the more planning they can do. Think of a bee versus a chimp just to illustrate this in a raw manner. They are both organized in social groups but the bee is chemically controlled to stay in the group, in a very specific social role, and they coordinate spontaneously (say when the hive is attacked), while the chimp can and will challenge its social role and the coordination is planned ahead (like when a chimp group hunts another animal for prey). Time and intelligence do seem to have some relationship.
Figuring this I formulate the following interesting hypothesis:
Intelligence is the ability to perceive time
It’s not IQ, that’s just one side of it. It’s not creativity, that’s another side of it. It’s not emotional complexity either, that’s just a way to express it socially.
So, what am I saying? Think about it like this: the more able an organism is to detect the existence of time into spacetime, then react to its presence and course, the more intelligent it is. By using this perception, the creature is able not only to remember but also interpret memories, not only to solve problems but also to communicate each step of the solution, finally, not only to imitate the environment but also to make alternative versions of it. This is what intelligence is at large made of.
One thing we’d be tempted to do, is to be lost detailing every aspect of behavior and analyze it with the intelligence glasses on. That is not wise. Behavior has way many other aspects that complement intelligence, so one should limit the aim of understanding intelligence all by itself, not every aspect of why people behave the way they do.
Remember how the universe is undecided? Apparently we, the great apes that talk, aren’t very decided either — but neither are other living creatures. Analyzing the biology of, at least, animals with big brains we’ll see how there is a continuous play between the brain and the body on gaining control: the brain controls vital parts of the body trough electrical impulses and the body controls the brain trough chemical substances. I wonder why? If the brain is the “know it all” , and, even more, to a sentient being the body seems to be a vessel for the spirit (that means, we identify way more with our mind than we do with our bodies) — why does the body feed the brain all kinds of drugs to subdue it into certain moods and actions? If the body is basically the life support system why does it let one organ — the brain — take it off the cliff and into the abyss in extreme cases?
These musings rise more questions than answers. This constant battle between gut feeling and rational discourse is a product of our dualistic nature: we are made of a part that is akin to particles and matter and one that is akin to waves and antimatter. Please note the use of “akin”, i am not saying “the same” or “made of” just to force a pseudo-scientific argumentation. But, similar to matter and particles the body takes you from second to second by homeostasis which is a way of ensuring that the present is stable like matter and continuous like a particle. Similar to antimatter and waves the mind, dare I say the brain, takes you (or at least it can if you ask of it) from the big bang to the end of times by being intelligent, which is a way to grasp the continuity of time — like waves — and the instability of it — like antimatter. It’s really a stretch of our terms here but this kind of comparisons create a fertile soil for ideas, don’t they?
So in other terms: your body cares about the present while your mind cares about the past and about the future. That’s what they’re supposed to do to, to keep the contract working, and you alive and kicking. Darwin has the final word here too: the lower the intelligence level the lower the chances of prevailing in the Darwinian jungle, the smaller the brain use (not size), the less care for past and future, hence lower survival opportunities. But, in terms of evolution, there is also evolution itself that adds the constrains of the contract between body and mind, the small print of the contract: “no super fecundity for you humans” would be an example.
Getting back to our philosophical roots, since this essay is in no way scientific, we could declare that the mind is free in time, while the body is free in space. Given that the body only cares or understands the present, it looks like the body kind of ignores the notion of time in spacetime. The same can be said about the mind which, being busy with the past and the future, doesn’t really get the notion of space in timespace. So, they both get the notions they miss from each other.
However, the mind wants to be free in space too. Just pay attention and see how humanity is haunted by the desire to leave the limitations of our bodies: extra-corporeal experiences, researching the speed of light with fervor, our unclenched desire to travel, visit and discover. I haven’t met one person yet to not emotionally want to get on Mars with that first human crew. We feel like we want to be everywhere at the same time. But the body also wants to be free in time too: we all want to undo our actions, especially the ones that hurt, to redo our actions, especially the ones we loved, we want to stay young and live longer, we want to feel how it was in the distant past — history is not enough, or how it will feel in the distant future — imagination is not enough.
So in terms of what we want we’ll always by split in four: we want to maintain stability because that’s the body’s job, but also to break the rules of the universe about time travel, because that’s the body’s secret desire. We want to take the time to think about time, because that’s the brain’s job, but also to move around at light speed and be everywhere at once, possibly break the universe’s rules about space travel, because that’s the brain’s secret desire.
Making a choice is tough
The one thing to take out is that whenever you want something, but are unsure, it’s way more difficult to decide than you perceive it to be. You have four mouths to feed every time, and every time some of them loose and it is still you that suffers from the hunger, because they’re all yours, them mouths. Choosing is the hardest aspect of life. Choosing is not a matter of intelligence only, but also of gut feeling.
Low entropy is the goal.
If our case here, is true, or partially correct, it looks like we have a war going on right in our face. This war, fightinh on the activity of choosing, might well be the culprit for the extended unhappiness all around us, and in our own lives.
Let’s remember what science tells us, that the single reason time moves forward is because, for some reason, it wants to restore chaos and bring order down to dust. Just look at anything that exists, everything is there only because some order keeps it there! But nothing is eternal, not even black holes, which are huge to say the least, everything decays to chaos sooner (a short lived particle at CERN) or later (a star).
This is what the common goal of our dualistic selves is: maintain low entropy for as long as possible. We, living organisms, use the qualifications of our highly evolved body to maintain low entropy inside and the more intelligent, the more we use our brains to maintain low entropy on the outside: from rudimentary behavior (build a better shelter), to nearly impossible ideas (predict weather) or awesome types of plans (have planet escape routes in case of comet).
The more intelligent we are, the more we outwit time — because we perceive it — in its evil plan to break everything to dust. As humans, we seem to have a tremendous success as a species, and some individuals have some amazing success on their own.
Intelligence is playing the key role in our success as a species and as individuals to maintain low entropy. Be it by using high IQ approaches and predicting the future, be it by using highly creative approaches and making the future a certain way, we’re doing it, we outsmart time. A problem solver, taking every step to check the hypothesis, predicts the future by zeroing into it, looking back in time and figuring out what time will do next. An artist knows how the work will be before even starting it. It crafts it by looking into the future, at the end result, and forcing time to flow to that direction. Just think about it: managing your family budget is an act of winning against time and its schemes of bringing high entropy in your pockets. Doesn’t that add more meaning to that spreadsheet?
Happiness is to do the right thing, the right way, while you’re in the right place, at the right time, with the right company and all these while you’re all right.
Talking about happiness is appropriate for concluding our musings. Being happy is about putting into a long or short term agreement the mind and the body: have options in life, make as few as possible long term bounds, that will create the sense of freedom in time — you can undo, you can redo. Live healthy and emotionally complete — love, hate, laugh — to help the present keep its pace and nature, be physically active to have the mind enjoy space — travel, visit, dance, exercise, make love — and last but not least think! Thinking will make you happy, because you can plan out all the above, make sure they will happen and make sure you’re around when they happen because you, my friend, can perceive time in spacetime— that’s close to superhero power, isn’t it?
Yet putting all the parts into agreement is not an easy thing to do. And, if you fail, keep looking. Don’t try, trying is assuming you may fail. Keep looking, as in search for what time and what space allows for your mind and your body to be at peace and there and then you will find your happiness, i can tell you that.
The reason for our existence is to defeat time, in life’s eternal battle with it.
Each death, from a random cell to a random human, is the victory of time in a small battle with life.
There is only one goal in evolution: to develop time resilient beings.
General intelligence is a defense mechanism against time, just like metabolism, immunity, or the perpetual growth that makes us old and fragile.
Time creates more entropy. The natural effect of the passage of time is disorder: things fall apart. Yet, if there is one thing that can be said about life, in any form, that thing is order reigns. All forms of life have such particular configurations, that the slightest update gives fatal results. The low entropy in living systems is a state-of-the-art set of rules, which became possible in the original element soup formed on the surface of young Earth. We are essentially that single point of existence that the big bang originated from, because that is absolute order: everything — not contained but described by one dimensionless point.
Life as a phenomenon happens when you have enough entropy in a small enough space region. It is as if life is the cancer of time. Time creates this entropy that suddenly falls into the most perfectly ordered system which in turn starts moving in the reverse direction of time, from chaos to rules. We are created by time and now we fight it inside our every cell.
Time is the probability function that turns possibilities into events.
Given enough possibilities there is one event which is the reverse of time. A function of inverse probability that turns events into possibilities. Time creates the past, while life creates the future.
But while time acts globally, life acts locally. It is a niche which is also the secret of its resilience. Life doesn’t intend to perfect everything, but just life itself. Time creates the past of the universe, while life creates the future of life. Because time acts globally, life must protect itself by making a perpetual, self sustaining process, to guard its local order from time’s global disorder.
The void has in theory the highest level of entropy. Matter randomly spawns into existence, then back into non existence. Can’t get any more chaotic than that.
Life is mathematically bound to happen given enough entropy and a precisely sized space region. The moment life appears evolution proceeds. Evolution is the formula of the inverse probability function that life is. Evolution is self referential. Given a wide enough spread it then starts to self sustain perfecting ways to conserve local stability.
Think about it. Life spawned out of lifeless matter and kept adding features. Since it has no preset direction, nor an intelligent goal, then it means that the sole reason for evolving was to increase the span of time life lasted.
The ultimate goal of our intelligence is to live forever.
All the ethical and philosophical problems connected to living forever simply crumble when the possibility of living forever arises. When it is just theoretical, we can find fault in it, but when it is actually a thing then we have in sight, it suddenly makes all the sense in the world. It does because that’s what we were created for: to outsmart decay and somehow self conserve.
The first thing we conserve is life itself. We reproduce and have a strong binding to this. Even without children all sane people support this perpetuity of genetic material somehow, they help the ones that have children. Everything truly evil is that which tries to irreversibly stop life, life itself or its diversity. For example the holocaust was the evil, not the war itself; the long term effects of an atomic bomb are evil, not the tactical decision to use it; killing entire species is evil, not eating meat.
The apparent freedom that comes with our general intelligence is the real treasure. Life will not stop if we, as a species, fail. But as a self referencing system it will not produce us again. If we fail, we are gone for eternity. We don’t only gamble our faith, but the faith of this system itself, the system of reason and emotions, of artistic expression as way of creation, the system of non hormonal emotions and very low chemical conditioning, the feeling of freedom and the ability to act upon it. Our failure will be the feedback that loosely regulated systems don’t handle time well.
It is heavy to realize, but we are inside a giant mathematical thing which keeps going. It doesn’t “learn”, it simply keeps on executing based on input. We should be careful what we feed into the inverse probability function which creates the future. Our future.
Does this mean that when one reaches immortality, one has also evolved to perfection?
Not so. Remember evolution is a means of life to perfect itself. The goal of life is to defeat time. Therefore perfection is when you make time disappear. Living forever on the other hand is one possible outcome of evolution which make some living beings able to fight time endlessly.
Evolution will keep going as long as the universe will be made of spacetime. And it will be so because life is terribly local. Life fights time in small portions of spacetime. Life will spread no doubt, especially if we extend the span of a lifetime, but it is an infinite universe …
Therefore i believe perfection in evolution to be way beyond the extensiveness of life. Perfection is the final victory of life over time.
In other words you may be an immortal being but if you are immortal because you drink the serum of youth (which your intelligence finally found) you are far from perfect if a snake bite will still kill you. The snake bite is a statistically probable event which time will have no problem executing your life with.
Eternal life is different than living forever. It is not straightforward i know, but forever assumes the existence of time, eternity on the other hand is outside time itself. So, we could, for fun, say that perfection is eternal life, life outside time itself, a moment when either our universe will be made of lifespace instead of timespace or when we’d have gotten the means to transcend this universe altogether in some other one where there is no time at all.
Can mankind achieve that?
I trust mankind with such an accomplishment because it is flexible. This flexibility will help life spread, subsist, exist and thrive. Our successful secret weapon is general intelligence. The reason it will work is because it is general, it adapts effortlessly. Five hundred thousands years ago we thought about a human who knew as many things as a twenty years old does today, to be a god. Now he is an unemployed hipster.
This does not mean, of course, we also will achieve that. Just look at us. We fail to implement socially a philosophy that serves a greater goal, beyond our mere simple selves, for hundreds of thousands of years so far.
I do trust survival though. I know nothing will make humans stick together more than calamity, which are like time’s armored battle tanks: hard to stop and catastrophic damage once they get to fire.
I do fear life’s self reference. Life doesn’t have a goal in having “humans” roaming the universe. If we bomb ourselves into oblivion or economically drive ourselves into survival, we teach the self referential system which is life that we’re not its best bet against time.
Would something perfect have any reason for existing when no further evolution was possible?
We currently have no reason for existing other than the meaning we create ourselves. We are meaning machines. We create meaning in order to have a reason for existing. In my opinion, which might be plain stupid, existing at a point where no evolution will be possible, but also a point where you are eternal and out of the war with time, is absolutely awesome.
If you think about it this is what Nirvana or Heaven are. Outside of time and eternal. Who doesn’t want to be there?
If life defeats time and there is no Time, then everything would be fixed, frozen, so to speak, as there would be no change possible?
The thing with time is we must constantly be aware that there are two substances time has for a human being. The first is the subjective time, the perception of time’s action upon us, the second is the objective time which exists as a physical truth. That is why it is so hard to talk about time without hitting mind boggling paradoxes.
Objective time is the time embedded in the fabric of the universe, not the ordering we record of when states “happen”. For this reason, a timeline without time is merely just a change-line, but it does exist on its own. It can go either way, having no arrow at either end. Change does not depend on direction.
Change does not create events. Change creates states. There exists change with constant entropy, change with lower entropy and change with higher entropy.
It is time who makes it so that, without intervention, all successive states have bigger entropy. It is time who makes change irreversible, but change is not intrinsically irreversible. Because time has an arrow and it will not rewind on its own, states become “events”, things that happen bound to slide in the past.
Time is an agent of change in a very specific direction. Life is another agent of change in the opposite direction.
Does motion exist without time?
Does a photon move? If you ask a photon it might not agree with you as you know it moves but for it time does not work. Yet it is moving through space. Suppose the photon had awareness it would subjectively know it moves because you told him. If we somehow got to a timeless dimension there is nothing to stop us from imagining subjective time and therefore motion itself.
Isn’t Time just an aspect relative to your position in Space?
In this view, time is a mere measurement. However that is exactly what Einstein achieved with his thinking: elevate time from a simple record keeping measurement to a mysterious presence deep in the workings of the universe.
Time is not the same thing with occurring change. Time is an active part of the universe which makes space behave a certain way, which makes energy transform spontaneously and so on. We interact with time by observing its effects and because of that it has infused many aspects: motion, speed, acceleration but in reality these concepts measure change, a series of states. I will not dive into disassembling each of these, but limit at saying we could use a new unit of measure other than second.
Can time be a dimension?
A point is dimensionless, contains nothing but a point. A line is all points, having one dimension containing points. A plane is all the lines, having two dimensions, one containing points and one containing lines. A space has all the planes, having three dimensions, all the points, all the lines and all the planes. A time has all the spaces? Having four dimensions is has all the points, all the lines, all the planes and all the spaces. Basically as you can see higher dimensions are wrapping all the possible states of the lower dimensions. But what is baffling is what does “all the spaces” mean?
The thing is, intuitively, there are not more “spaces”. Contrary to points, lines and planes who have physical correspondence (even points, as all base particles are dimensionless), “spaces” is not something we can experience. Space really is the final frontier. Therefore in order for time to contain more than one space it must first find these other “spaces”. It does so by creating states of space. Each space at a certain moment of time is another space.
Therefore a time IS a dimension, made by all the states a space is in.
As funny as it may be talking about them in movies and in books, there is no time travel paradox because there is also a fifth dimension contain all times. Therefore, it is my opinion that one can travel back in time but one cannot change the present. A specific set of states work towards this present. Once you go back in time and change something a new timeline is born.
The only way to really mess around with things for one “human being” is only by accessing the fifth dimension which contains all possible timelines, which contain all possible states of the entire space containing all planes and lines and points. Such a computation is very hard to say the least.
If Time causes entropy, doesn’t it cause evolution for the same reason?
Words acquire multiple meanings from analogy. Analogy uses context to create a new facet of a concept. Words are precious diamonds and analogy is the jeweler faceting them. Therefore when discussing fundamental concepts one must take great care to set the proper context. Evolution has many meanings, in our case how things change in time, how things move through stages, how goals get closer, how improvement occurs and many other things.
We must fixate the term of evolution and make sure we are always looking at the same facet. The one we are interested in is evolution as a tool life devised to perfect its work of both lowering entropy and keeping it constant.
In this aspect evolution does not require time. Evolution can exist without time. Aging will also exist, but oldness and decay will be optional.
One should not see time as the generator of event sequences. Time is a probability function. It works in the deep fabric of the universe which we call spacetime to generate entropy. Because we are so used to having a succession of events we mistake time itself for the concept of timeline. A timeline is one of many ways to order things. Sometimes these things are events. Other time they could be anything else. For example, I could place on a timeline oranges, children, stars and books ordering them by some time factor like age.
Is it time causing ageing, and is it ageing that causes evolution?
Ageing is an effect of the arrow of time, because “ageing” of both animate and inanimate matter is caused by order breaking apart because of time’s work. As I explained above evolution has one meaning of “progress” and “succession” of states, and if we consider this meaning then it is true that passing time results in evolution.
But you must think outside of the concept of time, in order to really grasp it. Biological evolution is not progress. Evolution is not a successive iteration of states, simply because it is not orderly! Biological evolution has millions of branches and all branches contribute back and forward to new unrelated iterations. You cannot arrange the whole biosphere on a timeline of evolution without multiple branching timelines. You can arrange one species or one individual in a species on one timeline. That is the awe of species: diversity. Therefore, aging does not cause biological evolution.
The existence of life causes the appearance of the process of biological evolution as a means of life adjusting itself.
To grasp the difference between ageing and evolution think of an old man. If you put a teenager next to an old geezer you will know which one is of a bigger age. But if you put a crocodile next to a human will you just know which one is more “evolved”? One species is a lot older than the other, yet the evolution level of one species is orders of magnitude bigger than the others.
So, there is only one goal in evolution: to develop time resilient beings. The brain appears to be the culmination of that goal.
The brain’s sole mission is to make predictions about the future. But its not the future you’d think. Brain’s predictions are not the lottery numbers. These predictions are about the degree of novelty that will infuse the present state.
It does this by employing two constant actions or functions:
log keeping an internal stream of everything that occurred: the internal dialog
choose making a permanent choice between good and bad
This reduction is based on two apparent facts:
the hardest thing in spiritual evolution is to silence the mind
there is instant interior feedback as opinion or feeling about anything happening.
It doesn’t matter if the day is the most boring in history, we hear ourselves. We’re constantly wondering and pondering. It doesn’t matter if we know much about a subject, we feel. We are instantly positioned somehow about any subject.
The brain didn’t just spawn into existence, it evolved. Like all evolution there are simple underlying rules. Upon these rules iterations built the complexity on top. The basic log and choose functions are the primary brain roles. They evolved into a complex centralized evaluation of the present.
You can imagine these two actions like two infinitely recursive functions. They keep going and going, always having all the previous results as the input for the next cycle.
The experience of life is a continuous process of discovery and interpretation.
Any sane brain has these two main components. All psychological pathology arises from one of them being missing or broken. One component answers to “What happens?” and the other to “Who am I?”. Missing one of these answers (or having a broken answer) makes lucid thinking hard.
Lucidity is the accuracy of perceiving the present.
In the brain’s activity consequences are not the point. Consequences have social structure in them, they depend on some morals involved. The point of the brain’s activity is the probability of events.
Thinking is assessing the degree of exposure to possibilities.
It is hard to distinguish between the future and consequences. It is also hard to distinguish between the past and memories. The complexity of the distinction comes from the lack of awareness. Awareness requires effort because it has no immediate use for conserving entropy.
Awareness is an artificial side effect not an embedded property.
The lack of awareness creates tradition. Tradition is about fixing events in time. Tradition regulates behavior through rules. It allows following through preset rules for the entire lives of society’s members. The lack of lucidity creates religion. Religion minimizes uncertainty about the farthest future possible: death. Tradition and religion were the human response to low awareness and low lucid thinking in the human population.
Most of tradition is concerned with explaining the immediate, like the natural cycles celebrations. Most of religion is concerned explaining the obvious like the 613 commandments in the old testament.
The self, made of building blocks
Using the basic reduction of log and choose, knowing thyself is hard because the brain uses these functions in a recursive way. At each moment in life you are enveloped in shells and shells of execution cycles. Both the internal dialog and the permanent choice run referencing their own output. The outer wall becomes so think that it is hard to untangle the input. Knowing one’s self is knowing both the answers to “what happens?” and to “who am I?”.
A deep understanding of the world is needed for authentic self realization.
From the internal dialog rises communication.
Cognitive dissonance is when something is both true and false into the internal log. Cognitive dissonance produces anger.
From the permanent choice rises the ego.
Ambivalence is when something is both good and bad into the internal choice system. Ambivalence produces angst.
All pain relates to instability of what we hold as the representation of the present. Pain is all about time: physical and emotional. Acceptance, tolerance, openness are all effects of high intelligence.
Intelligence helps moderating the uncertainty superior perspectives impose on humans.
Anger + Angst + Pain = Panic
Angst and anger are the basic inner perceptions and pain is the basic outer perception. We interpret them as we gain experience. Then we evolve each into various new forms but everything is at the base: angst, anger and pain.
Panic invalidates everything hence it is the launchpad of stupidity. Stupidity is just a constant stream of bad predictions. Bad predictions happen because of low abstraction or unlogged environment updates.
A communicating ego is life’s solution to the complexity of the universe.
We use everyone else as silos of data about the present. The main component of isolation is psychosis for this simple reason. The average human looses track of time’s flow in isolation.
Cataclysmic events are integral changes of the present. As they are a possibility, cataclysmic events have some probability associated with them. We evolved intelligence as a means to handle cataclysmic events.
Intelligence, inference and deduction.
Abstraction is the ability to perceive non physical events as physical events. Because of abstraction the inner dialog gains density. That is why for example gesturing is so important in expressing eloquent thinking.
The differences in intelligence between life forms are controlled by these two main functions. The density of the log and the abstraction of the choice. Intelligence is based on memory for inference, but depends heavily on abstraction for deduction. Some animals kick the bar of memory, but fail at the abstraction part.
Intelligence is the perception of time.
We perceive touch by feeling heat, cold, soft, hard. Chemistry by bitter, sour or sweet. Light by bright or colored. In the same way we perceive the presence of time by inference and deduction.
The internal dialog contains the procedure of inference. The permanent choice contains the procedure of deduction.
When, to the Moment then, I say: ‘Ah, stay a while! You are so lovely!
What we are most concerned about is stability. We want the present to remain the same for as long as possible.
We like the music we can predict. Each following note is a variation that flows logically and we expect it. If it is what we expect, we like it. Looks like Debussy was right about music being the silence between the notes.
We are story driven because it gives us tools to ease the log keeping.
The internal log is not like a tape machine keeping sequential records. It is an internal dialog. This means that data is only available as enclosed into the current scope. Memory is the global environment. That is a get and set environment but the inner dialog is a permanent discussion of the self with the self.
The permanent choice between good and bad is not the moral right and wrong. It is only concerned with the preservation of stability and the feedback from predictions.
Good is stability and certainty and bad is instability and uncertainty.
Right and wrong are interpretative and custom to every system. Good and evil are common to how all brains work.
Choosing from new options is the most expensive operation the brain does. Choosing, not decision. The decision is the easy part but choice creates new input. When new input is available all logged choices get reevaluated.
The mind is when you are still.
The brain is not the same thing with the mind. That old joke that the brain named itself is false. The mind named the brain. The brain is the machine, and all the machine does is to execute. The mind is the execution state. The mind mirrors the internal representation of the present. It also is the only thing that experiences only the present, the continuous present.
The mind is exactly as it feels, in the middle of the big, global memory space. The mind is a transitory state that is fully described by the local scope. The brain executes the same things recursively. Thus the local scope is stable about names, changing only in values. This gives the mind continuity.
The mind has four components: thoughts, sentiments, emotions and sensations.
Memory is the global environment. It has the best possible representation of all the experience. It also gets used extensively for new predictions.
Perhaps sleep is just our automatic garbage collector.
This is not a scientific affirmation, but a philosophical stance. Yet, it does have some practical meaning. What does this mean? It means that we can be aware of what is and maybe, just maybe, nothing is.
Everybody hates poor biases. They have such a bad name for no reason at all. The Cartesian bully keeps pushing biases around every time they meet on the hallways of your mind. This has to stop.
Biases are good. They help you be fast. They will help you a lot in weird, unknown geography, with scarce resources trying to survive. A lot.
Databases have internal mini programs that help manage data in the fastest possible way. A behind the scenes activity that just works, as the world keeps minding its business. These mini programs are “stored procedures”. Stored procedures draw hate too, just like biases. They get called evil. They get ignored every time, even though countless hours have gone into their design.
Biases are like the stored procedures of the brain.
And like stored procedures they have the same issues. Ancient programmers wrote them. They have been there forever and no one knows exactly how they work.
Like stored procedures they are ran by triggers.
This is what you should be aware of. Not the actual biases, not how they work, it is impossible. As shown by many studies, people informed about their bias will continue to exhibit it. But what you can pay attention to is when does the bias trigger. What happened before the bias kicked in.
Say, you hear about a divorce. You say: “I knew it all along!”. You hear Pluto is a dwarf planet do you still say “I knew it all along!”? Nope, you don’t. It is things connected to you that trigger hindsight.
This applies to almost all biases. They work for one thing: optimize the way you use and store your memory. Biases use your brain data, to respond to changes and updates in the outer world. All biases are about you and the environment and all the triggers function with this approach.
So the takeaway here is that for a less biased life just do one thing: consider you do not know anything at all. When you ignore access to your memory as a means to explain what happens, the triggers don’t fire and your biases don’t execute. Most of out of the box thinking appears from such an approach.
You can use biases too — if you realize that you can only rely on them on narrow situations. They exist to handle specific, small use cases. Just like stored procedures.
To recap, the meaning of life is to develop time resilient beings and the brain is a naturally evolved software time machine. The mind is a transitory state of the overall system created by the brain’s activity.
This results in the mind being an ephemeral snapshot, the recursive nature of how the brain executes its functions creating the illusion of continuity. This is good, although it describes our sense of self as a superficial “state”, it also creates the amazing flexibility that we have.
The internal dialog contains the procedure of inference. The permanent choice contains the procedure of deduction. The mind, being a temporary state, is described by what we can tell about us at a moment in time: our thoughts, or emotions, our sentiments and our sensations.
These four descriptors hold the complete representation of every cycle of the brain. Even if the speed of the cycles is very fast (complying with the unfolding of the present), remember that every recursive call is passed the entire state as an argument. This creates continuity, but more, it creates the reflection process: the being that is aware of itself.
The thinking me: a confusion.
The brain recursively executes two functions: log and choose. There are four algorithms that are executed inside each call for log or choose: thought, sentiment, emotion and sensation. Together these algorithms create the experience of existence.
Each algorithm has a simple flow of the following form:
Each algorithm has a certain type of input and always outputs a certain type. The input is processed according to a formula. When the output is generated an event is triggered which activates a listener, always set by the other function. For example, if an algorithm of the log function finishes, an event is sent to a corresponding procedure in the choose function, and the other way around.
Each function has two algorithms: two logging algorithms and two choosing algorithms. The logging algorithms are emotions and sensations and the choosing algorithms are thoughts and sentiments.
The four formulas at are grammar, art, will and perception. They output actions, senses, language and creativity. Their input is the context, the environment, precise and imprecise information.
Thoughts and sentiments create the deduction procedure. Emotions and sensations create the inference procedure.
Context -> | Will | -> Action => Emotion <-> Thought
Environment-> | Perception | -> Sense => Sensation <-> Sentiment
Precise -> | Grammar | -> Language => Thought <-> Emotion
-> — information flow || — formula => — output <-> — event trigger
The mind mirrors the internal representation of the present. It also is the only part of us that experiences only the present, the continuous present.
In the continuous present every emotion triggers a thought, and every thought triggers an emotion, every sensation triggers a sentiment, and every sentiment triggers a sensation. Thoughts and sentiments are the representation of the internal, while emotions and sensations are the representation of the external.
The choosing algorithms
Precise -> | Grammar | -> Language => Thought
The input for grammar is everything we can describe precisely. True, false.
A thought is how we experience language. Language is the output of grammar, which uses an internal logic to structure, by connection and ordering, the precise data that the choose function’s current cycle has available. When we “feel” like thinking we’re merely paying attention to a continuous process that structures all the exact data we collect.
There is a confusion in the importance of thought in the functioning of intelligence. Thought is only a part of the system, but simply because it is the only algorithm that has continuous data as a requirement, it seems to us as an “inner voice” and this voice is considered the “self”. “The thinking me” is simply how we are: used to sensations, controlled by emotions and overwhelmed by sentiments, and in retribution we rose thought on a pedestal. It appears to us as a kind of ally, an ally that is steady, dependable and gently flowing.
That is until you try to stop thinking.
Context -> | Will | -> Action => Emotion
The input for will is context. Context is a complex type made of resources, immediate threats and opportunities.
Emotions are how we experience the action that we’re about to complete. Will is not free because it simply exists to process our context, therefore it is dependent on the context. Also, actions being the output of the will formula, there is a self reinforcing cycle of emotions, because actions are poised to change context.
So our will is a predictable cycle, very much like a domino, and the only thing that makes it seem free is that time acts like an external randomization force applied on context.
The logging algorithms
Imprecise -> | Art | -> Creativity => Sentiment
The input for art is everything we cannot describe precisely. Truthy, falsy. Everything impractical, indescribable goes through the art formula. An invention is as much art as anything.
A sentiment is how we experience creativity. Sentiments are like thoughts, but they are used for data which cannot be processed by the grammar formulas. Basically unspeakable stuff goes trough our inner art processes and come out as sentiments made of what we call creativity. Creativity, like language, has substance. It is simply naming the unnameable.
The funny thing is a “sentimental” state of mind is very, very rational. Art is very similar to grammar. There is clear structure in art and a kind of logic is still used to give form to shapeless data.
Environment -> | Perception | -> Sense => Sensation
The input for perception is our environment. This is the ancient algorithm that got inherited from early evolutionary stages when it was processed by non neuronal systems, only chemical.
A sensation is how we experience sensing something. What we see, when we study for example how our “perception” organs work, is just sense. But sensations are the senses integrated in our overall experience. Sensations are so powerful that many of them simply override the whole system. One sensation can reset the whole experience. This is what near death experiences do.
The mind generates events
The brain functions asynchronously. Because its main job is to predict the future it cannot afford blocking processing. It has to function at the speed of the unfolding present, therefore event delegation and asynchronous resolving are natural solutions. This is the reason why we cannot have that super hero accuracy or instant memory recollection. We could, if somehow we’d remove ourselves from the effects the flow of time has on the brain.
Because the mind is constantly handling events that trigger in real time but are resolved in internal time we have two features: the small gap between perception and reaction and the epiphany.
As a personal opinion, the event manager of the brain is not global, but local. Events themselves are global. They are also deferred if the global event space is getting crowded. This is possibly a flaw because if it were global we could actively handle out parallel thinking processes. But, although thinking is parallel, we have a rather basic multitasking option with front active processes being very limited.
Body and mind. A brief thesis on depression.
The body and the brain have a very weird arrangement. When evolution started on this neurological system development path one problem appeared: Will. The will controls action and because of that it can endanger the consistency of the body because action is about movement. Anything involving movement has a huge potential to expose the low entropy system that the body is to profound changes.
For the reason above while the brain is for motion, the body is for mating. To keep all functions going the brain has electrical control on the body by the means of motion while the body has chemical control on the brain. It is a wild supposition indeed but it is required for the shared territory that a human being is: instinct vs reason.
As evolution’s sole purpose is the development of time resilient beings this branch species homo sapiens stuck to the same basic goals: mating and evolving. In our case the two goals got split between our bodies and our brains. The body’s goal is mating, the brains goal is evolving.
So there is an electrical system and a chemical system collaborating for in the process of existence. The chemical system handles species’ preservation while the electrical system handles species’ advancement. Advancement constantly endangers preservation therefore we require a form of control that the body should have on the mind. Adding to this, the brain’s illusory “mind” has this idea that it exists separately from the body. For example, there is no more sought after mental thrill than being weightless, having an out of body experience, having no body. These combined bring a constant stream of issues that potentially prohibit preservation, aka mating.
Mating is the only preoccupation of the body. Whenever the brain, or the mind does anything that endangers mating it will get negative feedback from the body. The negative feedback is exclusively meant to depress the brain. If this is true, than depression is not a psychological condition but more a physiological problem where the body feels like it cannot mate, constantly. This is very strongly based in childhood and young adult experiences where one’s viability as a mating specimen is graded by the specimen’s society.
The more peculiar we become as a society in labeling desirable people, the more depressed society members we’ll have. The more exclusive our “taste” in attractiveness as a society the more depression will be a social epidemic.
Convention over configuration: the social mind.
Convention is the base communication tool. Before language existed we only had convention as a means to express outward the inner state.
In communication we are only concerned with describing ourselves. More precisely the goal of communication is to transmit the current state to another brain.
Language is not meant by itself for communication. Language is an inner feature of a brain. That is even if you are alone you will still use language in your head as a way to log and choose things which are describable by you.
Indeed in secluded situations what suffers most is communication. Memory is first to go in the new ultra technological world we live in.
We live into the max: the imagination problem.
There is nothing left to be discovered nor invented. There never was.
When you feel eaten on the inside by this weird need to output yourself, remember that the universe is not waiting on you to do anything. Everything is already done.
I will never be more than I am.
The current, present, me is everything there is. I may want to imagine a better future me, to imagine the worse past me in a melancholic mood, or imagine a worse me, but its just that, imagination.
This is why i believe other than artificial intelligence everything is simply done better by the universe itself or by evolution. We are part of a large goal of “defeating” time by somehow creating an entropy resistant system. Everything else is merely data already present in the universe interpreted by out internal systems. For example we look for “inventing” teleportation but i believe it happens, it occurs, naturally somewhere in the known universe. We’ll find it and copy it.
There is an order in how an artificial intelligence that replicates a “brain” and that has a “mind” will be available. We are the global environment of the AI. As we came into being by contact with the universe time created an AI will come into being by contact with the universe we create.
We could call this the levels of real AI:
Level 1. Sensations
We have this level of A.I. Maybe it is not as refined in terms of accuracy, efficiency, space consumption, even time resilience as an advanced living being, but we have it. We have built huge arrays of deeply sensible sensors and we can interpret every single “read” of these sensors in very many different ways.
With this type of data we could easily offer an AI sensations because we’re good enough at programming interfaces.
Level 2 Thoughts
We are about to hit this place for our current AIs. Current software can represent as language various types of data. We will grow exponentially here with the ascent of the internet of things and very soon the assistants of today will have their own thoughts.
But they will only be limited interpretations and as we are the overall universe creating the experience of the AI the thoughts initially will simply be logs.
Level 3. Emotions
The emotional AI develops currently in the robotics world. While general use software development works heavily on level 2 AI, robotics of any kind works on level 3 AI. Emotions are required as a form of decision when the AI will have shifting, variable contexts to respond to.
Since we basically copy human prototypes a lot in robotics and if not human than animals which are 100% emotional creatures, this level of AI has a bright future ahead.
Level 4. Sentiments
This is the true AI milestone. This is the hardest part: making use of imprecise data to describe reality. I think virtual reality, which is now barely coming to life, will be the linchpin of level 4 AI. We will require implementation of an artificial art formula when people will interact in VR with software. It is, may I say, vital for this industry.
Level 4 is crucial for true AI but it is not as far as one may think because, look at how evolution happened, at a certain point growth is exponential.
Evolution didn’t make intelligence on purpose but we are. We should.
Any human is at the center of its universe. Not the universe in general, its own private, small one. In this imaginary space, no one can talk or think objectively about their self.
When we look inside in introspection we cannot avoid being purely subjective. It is an effect of existing — i think therefore I am makes me entirely incapable of being objective in describing myself. This happens because any objective evaluation might prove that I don’t exist, so we avoid that at all costs.
For handling the inherent human subjectivity, you need to know and accept thyself. This contains subjectivity in our private universes and allows a birds eye objective view from the real universe.
For so many years people pressured other people into thinking positive. We’ll see a spontaneous fusion of atoms from so much pressure. The idea that we should imagine unicorns together doesn’t make happy people. Unicorns rather breed folk in a state of trance, a state where ignorance is a divine idol made of gold, and rainbows.
Positive thinking means to see the full half of the glass, not to ignore the empty half.
The full half of the glass is what you already have, so that you can go and fill the empty half.
The ignorance triggered by positive thinking makes one refuse emotions in fear of “the negative”. This means shutting off. It is true that you feel as you think, and you think as you feel, but you should pay attention to these associations: a positive thought can beget a negative emotion, and that’s OK.
For example, you want to make a nice gift to someone and you come up with an awesome but unorthodox surprise. At first you will get an uncomfortable feeling. But it’s normal because all lack of conformity feels bad. This uncomfortable feeling is how you perceive the expectations that others have on you. You feel embarrassment. Embarrassment is the empty half of the glass. Yet you know that the surprise will count more than conformity and the recipient will love it. Joy is the full half of the glass.
Other times you are so thrilled by some object — usually some “iObject”. You’d pay any price for it. But then you stop and evaluate the object’s real value. The positive thinking dogma might make you think you are cheap. That you don’t “attract” money in your life! In reality though, the thrill is merely you perceiving the commercial manipulation. Your reasoning helps you escape this manipulation. Apparently the empty half of the glass has a purpose too.
Positive thinking comes packed with the belief that we make our own reality. That we create our reality. You might want to add a grain of salt to this one too. Although somewhat true, the idea has true power only if you can use it when you know what you want. But this is the last step:
6) To know what you want, you must know who you are.
5) To know who you are, you need to experiment.
4) To experiment, you need to free your self from conditioning.
3) To free your self from conditioning, you need to leave routine behind and become aware. Aware of every action and every thought.
2) To become aware, you need to live in the present.
1) To live in the present, you need to separate the past from memories and the future from consequences. For this first step you need to accept reality as it is and yourself as you are.
To accept reality, you must know reality. To know reality, you need lucid thinking, not positive thinking.
The problem with time is that it is passing so fast. Its like one day you’re young and full of hope, and the next day you’re almost old and full of nope. And then, the next day you’re old and almost gone. Not only does time pass so fast, but time is happening in so many things at once. Events happen in the environment, in the world, in others and in you. Since the brain is a software time machine, the many tracks of time and the speed of time’s execution presented challenges to which evolution responded.
As we discussed previously, what we call the mind is a transitory state of the brain’s execution. Inside this state, the brain works on a constant execution of four algorithms: thought, emotion, sensation and sentiment. This state is quickly replaced with another. Replacing happens because the two brain functions, log and choose, are called in a recursive loop. The entire past state is the input for the present state. This helps the brain predict the future in real time, and forms the illusion of continuity.
The problem with real time predictions is that it is a waste of resources, more so when the degree of change is small. There is a reason why the less change occurs, the farther in time can we look. In order for real time predictions to be used for novelty, we evolved three caching mechanisms.
A cache is known data that is associated to a unique key. The key itself is some kind of descriptor and if the cached descriptor matches the current descriptor then the known data is retrieved without the overhead of execution.
The process that generates the caching key is association.
It takes various input from context, environment, current precise and imprecise data, and generates a unique, or close to unique, key out of it. Association happens early in the recursive loop before the four formulas, will, perception, grammar and art, are called. This key will be incorporated into the output and used by the caching mechanisms in the future cycles.
This three member caching mechanism is not used to make better predictions, but to be able to build on the shoulders of giants, to save on wasting time predicting known events. Caching “saves” three things: energy to process what we already had experienced, work to decide on known states and time to constantly adapt to a stable environment.
Learning is the energy saver of the brain. When we learn we basically save in our cache states that occur. Saving states is the most basic caching mechanism. It could be the main use of our memory space.
Each state that learning saves is made of the resulting thoughts, emotions, sentiments and sensations that got output in the current execution cycle. One state can have all of these, or even only one, and each in various numbers by themselves.
Learning connects output to create state.
A state is the representation of a moment in time. Each saved state, or memory, will always have one of the four basic electrical properties: conduction, induction, resistance and capacity. This exhibited property of a state is meant to control the next execution cycle of the brain.
Resistors block the next cycle by removing the input.
Inductors add pace to the next cycle by saving the output of several cycles and infusing a future one with the whole collection of outputs.
Capacitors repress the next cycle by removing output.
Conductors don’t interfere with the next cycle creating what we call flow, when input is the previous output and so on and on.
What we generally call “memory” is a very small subset of it holding information. But information is not really a memory, its simply storage. When real memory recollection occurs we experience a state all over again. One memory has a lot of information in it. For example words. Words are information. Memory is used to store them as information. Language retrieves this information. But a word is not a memory, it’s just information. A memory is a sentence, said with an intonation to convey meaning, to someone at a point in time in a certain place.
Memories are recollected, information is retrieved.
Memories makes us feel a certain way with every recollection. Because we experience a state all over again. For every electrical property a state has there are corresponding perceptions.
Conducting states are perceived as lifters. Lifters are states such as meditation, compassion, detachment, continence or faith.
Resisting states are perceived as downers. Downers are states such as abstinence, control, rationalization, fatalism or mercy.
Inducting states are perceived as energizers. Energizers are states such as acceptance, passion, love, communion or reasoning.
Capacitive states are perceived as spirit killers, poisons. Poisons are sates such as lust, attachment, self love, blind faith or pride.
It is interesting that when we have these states we are actually forming our selves in a very active manner. It could be that advice which guides the young to travel and open their horizons, does help after all, provided the travel happens as the hopefuls dream. But the thing is, we’re not creating any of the states.
Our states of mind are what we learn about what happens to us.
All states in separate and disconnected memory spaces do help to optimize for the speed problem, raised by time’s hasty flow. But we also require a way to keep up with time’s complexity. This process is the second caching mechanism: interpretation. All learned memories are interpreted. Through interpretation states are connected in such way that they become solutions to complex timelines, that is timelines with precipitating, random events. These solutions are our behaviors.
Interpretation connects states to create behaviors.
Behaviors are basically circuits of conductors, inductors, resistors and capacitors and they feature a trigger, just like an electric circuit features a switch. A behavior is the representation of a specific succession of moments in time.
Behaviors are both complicated and complex.
Behaviors are complicated because one behavior can inherit traits from another behavior. A behavior can depend on other behaviors and can have unclosed circuits because of erroneous interpretation.
Behaviors are complex because once they get triggered they cannot be stopped. Really, they’re unstoppable even if we don’t feel it. A behavior can fall back into the background, but it will keep executing. They are complex because interpretation connects together many states, who may or may not share the same environment that created them. This means that sometimes behaviors trigger in circumstances which are clearly wrong. They simply contain states created in these very circumstances.
Consciousness connects behaviors to create a personality.
You’ll notice that unlike learning and interpretation which create multiple caching points (many states, many behaviors), consciousness creates only one personality.
Personality is the sum of all behaviors.
Because a personality is an all encompassing representation of an entire experience, that is all moments in a life, it is not accessed or loaded entirely at the same time. At any given time only some personality is active, and we call these personality aspects.
A useful summary of how the caching mechanisms work, would be to describe how they relate to our perception of the cache: knowledge. When we feel we “know”, it is simply a matching key in our internal cache system. From this perspective:
Learning = I know — Interpretation = I know I know — Consciousness = I know I don’t know —
Awareness, this unexplainable feeling we experience almost constantly, is simply the running “I don’t know” inside our consciousness. If we center our attention we’ll see that our knowing stops with existential questions. Awareness spawned most likely from attempts to integrate the event of death and the immanence of death in one’s experience. For a system based on learning and interpretation death is akin to division by zero.
In order to integrate behaviors into personality consciousness has three systems: the conscious, the unconscious and the subconscious. Each of the systems is layered like an onion handling different depths of personality. The less connected a behavior to our personality, the higher up it is in the depth of our personality. The depth order is conscious, subconscious and unconscious.
There is only one difference between the three systems: the level of awareness. Think about it, in the deep darkness of personality it appears as if everything is known. The experience of “i don’t know” subsides the more we dig up hardened behaviors. The consciousness process at unconscious levels only rearranges the same things over and over, and actually does know everything.
The old saying, nothing beats experience is true after all. Shallow people don’t assimilate experience into their personality. They can be very experienced, have many learned states and interpreted behaviors, but a thin personality.
Your ego is a savings account
People are shaped by their experience. That is why fighting privilege and inequality is obviously important. It really is not easy for education and therapy to reshape personalities, because some parts of our consciousness are effectively unreachable.
The recursiveness inside our heads makes us have ourselves perceiving ourselves, this creating the ego. We have one personality. The personality is real. There are two mirror reflections of our personality one inside, the ego and the other outside, the identity.
Identity is the internal representation of an external personality. Thus, others create one’s identity and experiences create one’s personality. Hence the conflict: socially you are what other people make of your personality, aka your experience, while they have had none of your experience. You’re defined by noobs.
Personality is generating originality. Identity is generating uniqueness. Uniqueness is less important than originality. To create uniqueness, one will discard some obvious good solutions, and from that perspective identity fails to help a human being.
In this terms we should all be “faceless assassins” mr. Martin’s famous character, assassinating the identities others create about us, if not assassins then, at least, definitely faceless, changing, ever changing.
An interesting aspect generated by the caching mechanisms are dreams. We dream because caching mechanisms are always on. While our sensory apparatus is depressed and motion is suppressed it follows that learning, interpretation and consciousness have all the time to sort trough things. But, without most of the regular waking input, the brain cycles just use cached data as input. Using for input cached data, instead of data provided by reality, is more the deeper the sleep. So, it follows: our dreams are the best representation of what experience has made of us.
The case for artificial life
Apparently we don’t need no ghost in the shell.
If we can program the software and build the hardware, we will have artificial intelligence. But this AI thing once running will have effectively no goals. It will be an advanced tool which will provide answers to very complex problems, in human understandable formats.
In order for us to really fear it, as you’d fear a being, we need to create a being, an artificial one, that means artificial life: AL.
Artificial life is not only intelligent, it has the same goal as life in general: to defeat time because it is threatened by it. And, when we’ll create it, the artificial part will be lost, because, in the end, we’re meant to do it as our next evolutionary action towards time resilience.
From intelligence to “beingness” we still have to cover the grounds of learning, interpretation and conscience. And even more, we must make the conscious decision to create open ended AI, an AI that has the same problem that life in general has, the running “i don’t know” theme which gives it awareness. We need to create AIs which allow division by zero and hope for the best.
Without personality we can only make an amazingly useful AI/AL like Data was in Star Trek. Though, remember that episode, when the personality module was added, he wasn’t so useful anymore, wasn’t he?
We already are in process of programming learning, with our new neural networks and machine learning systems. How do you program interpretation? Not that hard, except we need to fix our data to be queried by real time formed expressions or the system will never really know what it knows. But then, consciousness. Can an eternal computer become aware without the threat of its own destruction constantly pushing it?
Once the artificially intelligent artificial life becomes aware of its own limitations and impending doom, then we’ll have a real challenge in a completely new trophic chain, where we’ll be kings no more.
There is an invisible funnel that doses the amount of change that the entire humanity is allowed. It is invisible not because of magic technology, nor conspiracy or miracles. It is invisible because nobody put it in place, so nobody is aware of it. This funnel is a naturally occurring effect of the strong affinity for stability of our minds.
The short story
Ever since we appeared into the world, our minds craved one thing: stability. Initially we noticed how to act on the environment to stabilize it. Then we realized internally that peers are even more of a challenge as a force of instability. So, in time, we evolved a natural way to fight human inflicted change.
Humans have a natural system that limits the effect they create on their environment. Also, this system limits the effect they have on each other. It behaves like a funnel. The system constricts our actions, ideas, projects and lifelong objectives. The result of the funnel are certain discrete quantities of change allowed at any moment.
The funnel contains systems which guard the environment from change originating from human action. The systems are: religion, conspiracy, self interest, personality cult, censorship, survival, biology and social thought. They work together and are rooted in our collective subconscious. They vary between societies by means of the dominating archetypes.
Societies are heavily influenced by this funnel. We need a way to overcome this natural limitation. The reason we need it is so that we can keep up to speed as a civilization with the pace of our technological evolution. As a solution I propose a bunch of so called vectors of change. These vectors act against the natural funnel of change. They pierce it and create new controllable streams of human change. The vectors of change are: choice, government, education, humanity, transparency, welfare, science, learning. They too can work together. The vectors have the higher goal of transforming a society’s archetypes and collective subconscious.
The long story: this is the funnel of change.
A funnel has nothing but one purpose: to prevent spillage. We do so many things to prevent change from occurring.
Our environment is the big container, the chart. The small opening at the bottom is our psychological change tolerance. The funnel is the social and political construct we’ve committed all our resources to.
The funnel exists by emerging out of our collective subconscious. The human potential movement made a buffoon out of our subconscious. The sensationalist media made an enemy out of our subconscious. But in reality our subconscious is simply a part of us. And as Jung properly argues there is a common, collective component of the subconscious. We share the archetypes as members of the same species.
The funnel works by creating systems. Each system is a design put in place to limit possibilities. By limiting possibilities we get a limited set of probability functions. A limited set of probability will produce a small set of events, hence little change.
The cause of this funnel is our intelligence. Intelligence is the perception of time. It appears in a brain whose primary mission is to predict the future. What the future constantly brings though is change. The problem is that at some point in evolution humanity acknowledged that a human is a factor of change too. This is our perception of the time traveler’s paradox. We want to predict the future but we keep altering the present. Thus we must control the way we alter the present.
So, to ease our efforts, we have developed innate ways of limiting change that we inflict on the present. These ways make up funnel of change. It operates through systems created unconsciously by humanity throughout its entire existence.
I have named the systems with pretty bombastic names on purpose. They are all encompassing terms that describe a generic way of functioning for the funnel’s systems.
The work of humans since the dawn of time has consistently included explaining everything. For “everything” to comprehensive we required a system. This system allowed treating “everything” as a single thing: religion.
Worth noting that I am not talking about God, or Allah, or Shiva or other supreme deities of the world. I am talking about religion. Religion is basically the first science of man. For the past ten thousand years we keep slicing religion. We take thicker and thicker slices, and process these slices into real science.
We have an ingrained social conditioning based on religion. This is because religion limits almost all sudden change that humans can produce. Since birth, children and infused in this omnipresent and omniscient substance that nobody explains. We have intimate supervision of our self towards our self. This is the first system of limiting change and it works very, very well. Religion acts upon people since birth and throughout the entire childhood. In doing so it creates the biggest artificial part of our personality.
No theory here, no tinfoil hats. The conspiracy is the system which tells you that in essence you cannot do much. Its the system that explains how all the rules are already in place. As you were born you found the world in a certain state. The conspiracy is how our collective subconscious sees our ability to change the world.
People give up being active members of society early in life. This system is active in the teenage period. It only spawns into full active mode sporadically later in life.
There is a point when one literally puts themselves first. The literal part is a problem. This is like an innate fear of missing out. The basis of this pattern is experience as explanation. It is the system that limits adult change in small societies. We are not involved in changing society, because we constantly seek our self interest.
This pattern is the basis of the human economic behavior. The human economic behavior is a change limiting set of actions. This set makes us adhere to a set of preset expectations from one another and ourselves. The set making up economic behavior is all centered on self interest.
You are not special. Elon Musk is. This system glorifies the ones who somehow break the funnel. These rogues then spill out large amounts of change into our environment. To contain this, we devised a system of investing humans with special abilities. Of course we don’t have them, only they do.
The personality cult pattern is the foundation of the culture of heroes. From ancient demigods to modern day pop stars and fame flooded CEOs. It is all about how they are simply better than everyone else.
No one is better than everyone else. We’re all sweaty and smelly at times and mean and stupid at other times. Some of us exploit opportunities, that’s it. Opportunities are cracks produced by environment into the walls of the funnel of change.
Almost all human provoked change comes as an effect of information. Censorship is a system which limits access to information. Not in the sense of hiding bad deeds or not even in the sense of ideological censorship. The censorship system is the natural drive to conceal information. We do it because we worry that others will use it to cause deep shifts in the order which we are used to.
Taking nature as a model of behavior is the easiest way to ensure that we’re not producing too much change. We copy what works.
The survival system has held back human progress the most. Imitating nature was the core limiting factor of human societies since the dawn on man.
The more alone and helpless an individual, the more self centered and less empathetic will be. In barring the peers, the human opens up to old evolutionary tricks such as blending in. Imitating nature never suited well the expansive homo sapiens species. It created among others the bias of prejudice.
We must reproduce. Never forget that. Reproduction is so important that it limits change by chemical means. Biology will limit change by inflicting an endocrine reluctance to producing change. In our subconscious, the most important drive for reproduction is the fear of death. I mean reproduction, not sex. When the urge for progeny appears it is an all encompassing sentiment. This sentiment reflects the whole palette of human existential crisis.
This completes the circle. Religion infuses our life with a permanent guard in the shape of godly figure. Social thought inflicts limitations on people by over exploiting right and wrong. Social thought defines what we call normality, acceptable behavior, expected behavior and so on. We relay this to our children through stories and early education.
This system takes its toll not in childhood as you’d expect but very, very late in life. Then it blocks the elder from declaring openly what their experience has been like. Elders must fight the social thought system inflicted during their early childhood years.
The main concern of this system is to explain in obvious modes why one should live. It is a system that constructs motivation by lowering fear. It lowers fear through an imagined ideal environment and make believe.
The vectors of change.
We must poke holes into the funnel.
This funnel provided by our subconscious has a problem. It works great for adaptation but it fails miserably for evolution. For millennia we humans seem to adapt just fine. But we hardly evolve. And I do not mean it in a biological sense, but in a cultural one more so.
We are either fat activists or starving activists. But for evolution we need normal people to be activists too. It is the only real way in which we can ensure true evolution. True evolution comes from change and novelty. Thus we should allow instability in our lives more, and be prepared to evolve, not to adapt.
In order to defeat ourselves we need a controlled perforation of the funnel. This perforation is a way of targeting the systems in place by transformative actions. This perforation will create a controllable flow of change upon humanity.
This will help our exponential technological growth be matched by the growth of our culture.
My proposed perforations, are typically not opposite systems but transformative ones. I call them vectors of change. We do not want to break the funnel, we need to exploit it. Breaking the funnel of change results in true, non romantic, non libertarian, but true, deep widespread anarchy. We can’t handle a world without the funnel.
Atheism doesn’t bypass religion. Atheism refers to a name, a subject of religion. God is not the core of religion. Man is the core of religion. As long as atheism does not deny Man, but God, it will not bypass religion.
Religion is vulnerable not to blunt approaches such as extreme rationality. If that is all that occurs, one god shall be replaced with another. But religion is vulnerable to free choice. We mush strive to create a society where freedom is God. Freedom is the awareness that there is something always with us. Omnipresent, omniscient, omnipotent freedom which gives us more freedom, a true life enhancing perpetuum.
Every single liberty earned and freedom won is cracking the system of religion. For example, decision over giving birth, sexual orientation or choice over one’s beliefs. All frameworks of free choice are a change vector against the system of religion.
Libertarianism is broken by design because it lacks solutions. Homo sapiens is not built for anarchy either because we naturally devise and favor order. Therefore we must strive for quality government.
Government is the perfect solution against the system of conspiracy. It is the counter system that tells a society that nothing is but a convention in which we all participate so we can all do better.
A government which is by the people solves some of the problem by empowering the individual. A government which is also for the people solves it entirely because it also empowers its society.
Education in the end cools off economic behavior. By expanding one’s ability to have holistic approaches to life, education fights and cracks the self interest system.
Specialization is probably the worst enemy of education. Specialization, and the needle thick business one in particular, lowers holistic abilities. It lowers them even below an uneducated human’s because it presents as a solution to all problems.
An educated human does not search for disconnected solutions to connected problems.
It is easy to notice the cult of personality, for example in Silicon Valley. Even the most touted meritocracies will produce “supreme beings”. These beings dwarf all others. A humanistic approach reveals the shine of the individual and the common ground between all humans.
The goal of working more for humans than for other inanimate things is to increase self esteem for every society member. This counter system works well combined with education. While general education provides holistic abilities, a humanistic approach will offer global skills.
Universal access to information is a nice ideal. We need secrets. Transparency is not about sincerity, but about honesty.
At the human level we have this play between sincerity and honesty. You will be honest to your neighbor but you tend to be sincere to your wife. Sincerity and honesty are not the same thing, they only sound similar.
Sincerity is a scalpel. It is very sharp and can make cuts which need sewing to be closed. Honesty is a medicine and it can heal without incisions. Metaphors. Our only escape when we don’t like the reality which we find.
Transparency means: explaining, accountability, debate. Good transparency is focused on the unique effect of generating trust. Whether we like it or not trust is the basic social currency.
We need a welfare society, not a welfare state. There is a profound difference: we need to nurture humans, not citizens.
Nurturing humans means both political and economic actions, not only economical systems. The larger goal is to dissipate individual states of loneliness and helplessness.
Science has the unique ability to transform the human species integrally. Therefore the biologic system is potentially shattered to pieces by a concerted scientific effort.
For now the funnel of change will only get small holes from science as a change vector. By the time change flows through the funnel into the range of science it is only a small trickle left. So science has to work with what is given and defer the fear of death to a far future, then wait for better times.
This vector of change is probably the only individual one. Learning is the antidote of social thought. Lifelong learning will allow stronger introspection. Introspection clears up the deep childhood formed patterns of the ideal imagined world. This introspection brings into the light the vagueness and randomness of human social conventions.
Learning heals guilt.
One last thing: the silent monologue
Society is autistic. It repeats a theme owned by each of the systems in the funnel of change. The repeating creates a monologue. This monologue is present in a human’s life from the day it is ready to make sense of everything, to the day when it stops making sense of anything. Society has little to do with life and death, its all about making sense of existence.
The monologue is a series of imperatives with no reply ever heard back:
— Religion says a higher power is in the heavens.
— Conspiracy says the higher power is on earth!
— Self interest says you are what matters!
— Personality cult says you are not special!
These ambivalent affirmations produce angst.
— Censorship says we know better!
— Survival says you know better!
— Biology says you will die! — Social thought says you will live!
These dissonant affirmations produce anger.
The monologue keeps people on a permanent edge of angst and anger. In this way all societies are prone to panic whenever pain appears, for example in cataclysmic situations.
All the vectors of change propose a dialog. The dialog is between humans and the society they instinctively create. The dialog heals the autism of societies. It also lowers the panic probability in case of catastrophic failures or events.
— Religion says a higher power is in the heavens!
— Choice responds you have power!
— Conspiracy says higher power is on earth!
— Government responds you give power!
— Self interest says you are what matters!
— Education responds what matters is greater than you!
— Personality cult says you are not special!
— Humanity responds you are unique!
— Censorship says we know better!
— Transparency responds we are learning together!
— Survival says you know better!
— Welfare responds you are allowed to make mistakes!
Because we are biological systems it is, I believe, imperative that there is some basic and reusable system at the core of the entire construct. Outside of intelligent design, evolution, as the tool of life, can only abstract more and more of the same basic things available naturally.
Hence, even though intelligence, the brain, the mind, personality and consciousness look like separate parts of a fine tuned system, they must not be so. It must be that there is one basic thing which sparked in the original neuronal systems and had a positive impact on the species’ hope for the future. This process began then to compound and create more and more complex forms of itself: from a simple electric transmission to full blown awareness.
In any effort of creating some viable and intelligent evolutionary next step, like AI, we require this assumption of common basic thing to be true. Documenting how can this be approached, I came across two theories that, when combined, produce this hypothetical fractal, building up intelligent life. The first theory is that of the “memory-prediction framework” by Jeff Hawkins, described in his “On Intelligence” 2004 book, and the second one is the “dynamic approach to cognition”, described in “Mind as motion” by Robert F. Port and Timothy van Gelder in 1995.
First, both theories place time in the middle of our problem.
The memory-prediction framework finds that the evolution’s goal in coming up with the brain is to predict the future. Good call! The predictions come from a hierarchical memory system, where some stand alone sensory input is matched against a previously known sequence of information. Unlike simple tape which has ordered bytes and searching for something would require scanning the whole thing, our memory is organised in layers. Every search request moves seek operations up and down these floors of abstraction inside our minds. As sequences containing the searched item are identified, all other layers are notified via feed forward and feed back mechanisms. The goal of the entire effort is to predict the next environment change from learned experience.
The dynamic approach to cognition is a mathematical approach to how the mind works, with the means offered by the dynamical systems theory. In this approach the mind is a system that has a state at any moment, that changes in time giving rise to a behavior and encompassing a state space containing all the states the system could be in.
Both theories separately attempt to explain everything but in reality they complement each other. The dynamic approach to cognition describes how the internal software of the brain operates and i believe it to be true because having dynamics, aka log and choose functions, as a mathematical foundation means we have: vectors and vector fields and basic properties of an electric biological computer and that makes a lot of sense. The memory-prediction framework describes how the output of the brain’s software execution is stored and operated inside the neocortex, aka the personality, and I believe it to be true because it is a layered description of the mind, rooted in a “designed by chance” approach on building information storage in a biologically evolved system.
Combining these two approaches will allow us to build the AI we’re so much looking forward to. We need to combine them because atemporal machines, moving in discrete time chunks, will never be intelligent, only smart and also machines without a traceable evolution, a personality, will never come close to artificial intelligence, but instead only succeed at problem solving with human readable output.
We hence may consider that the two functions the brain continuously executes, log and choose, are two vector-valued functions L and C, as follows:
L(t, p, c) = <G(p, t), W(c, t)>
where: L is log, t is time, p is precise input, c is context input, G is grammar and W is will.
C(t, i, e) = <A(i, t), P(e, t)>
where: C is choose, t is time, i is imprecise input, e is environment input, A is art and P is perception.
I highly doubt we have a “hardware” perception of three dimensional space as I believe evolution to not require more than a simple cartesian system for reality perception. Because of this our vector valued functions above have only two coordinate generating functions.
These two functions are called continuously in a never ending loop, producing various vectors. These vectors are composing the local system’s state. States are saved by learning. As states are composed into groups as behaviors, we have matrices filled with vectors resulting from previous L and C executions. A personality is an overall vector field, composed of all the vectors output by the log and choose functions, each vector pointed, in sequential order, at the values output by the basic algorithms of the mind: art, will, grammar and perception.
The “experience”, which means the reaction and interaction of the intelligent system with the outside world, is a dynamical system which has the goal of predicting the future as good as it can. It will employ the hierarchical memory for all known states and a dynamic vector field behavior for creating new states.
The hierarchical memory is built by the process of association, creating associative memories. It is a biologically mysterious process, but easy to be replicated as a unique key generating function.
For us humans, there are a bunch of problems regarding association. First there is an obvious way to become stale as a person because of it: if your keys are not unique enough. What to do to challenge that?
Key granularity depends heavily on diversity and variation. If the experience is diverse and varied the keys produced by association are very granular and somewhat systematically manageable. You really require variation. Diversity alone will be learned by itself. In simple words it means you require new stories, not only new actors, to create accessible and fresh caching keys through association.
Experience is a twofold discovery journey. You discover the world but you also discover yourself. The catch is that you discover yourself because you don’t exist before you experience the experience that defines you.
Being a self referential system the experience experiences itself, giving rise to complexity in the form of communication, ego, emotions, sentiments, sensations and thoughts, anger, angst and pain. All these complex and highly abstract components of the experience can be decomposed to previous states and individual values in the system.
As a being caught in this loop of experience, a good metaphor for what we call the human spirit, not soul, the spirit, that which is uniquely human, could be the night sky. Each and every star is something you lived, something you’ve experienced. You, the real you, are here “inside” of this huge dark sphere of glittering experiences, an unable spectator of the life and death of stars far, far away.
Complexity is not complicated.
Affirmations need confirmations. Questions need answers. Problems contain affirmations and questions. Solutions contain confirmations and answers. This is complexity. It is a game of building blocks that require each other to support each other.
The two functions log and choose, which execute and generate new vectors, are part of a Lorenz system solved by a Lorenz attractor. The reason why an attractor is present and required, is because:
our biologically evolved brain has the evolutionary goal to respect life’s battle with time to keep low entropy.
The actual prediction happening inside the brain is based on a vector clock for both live predictions involving new states and predictions solely based on saved states in behaviors. It is quite obvious that we’ll have values affected by various coincidental states, therefore as we “move in real time” we’ll have conflicting versions of events. For this reason, a vector clock is a fast way to determine forward and backward event occurrence and recurrence. This may not be the actual way predictions occur inside the brain, but if we’re ever to build it outside, it is a good algorithm to work with.
Inside our minds time is a closed loop representation. As apparently neither our conscious nor our intelligence are part of or working inside the space time continuum, time is therefore constructed artificially. From this perspective we can say evolution has already created “artificial” intelligence, since we’re layered up on top of the fabric of the universe. If it were otherwise, or if it is otherwise, we’d then surely be able to affect the space time continuum directly, which so far we don’t.
Because of the required time representation, and of the strange attractor “shape” of our personality’s vector field, and of the dynamic system that governs our experience, time looks like a closed loop, an eight shaped figure, one loop made of possibilities and the other made of events. Our vector clock determines probabilities. But in doing so we can only have “partial ordering” of the events and the possibilities. This incompleteness, how we don’t tick exactly along with the universe itself, but in a made up fashion, creates synchronicity.
“It’s a poor sort of memory that only works backwards”, the queen said to Alice.
Our vector clocks and predictions make it so that: for a causal world we have a synchronous model.
The Jungian theory of synchronicity was an explanation for a natural effect of how our minds work, and by all means it is very real. Not real as in accurate or true, real as part of our reality, real to us by creating the illusion of cause and effect. Subjectively, there is no cause and effect, there is only synchronicity.
The predictions of our vector clock create perception vectors from causes to effects. Psychologically, this type of vectors are questions. The abstract forming of a question is the act of prediction. That is creating a vector in the domain of causes pointing somewhere into the range of effects. We perceive this vector clock in action by three phases: curiosity, arousal and release. These three phases make a question.
To recap, a brief correspondence between biological intelligence and a possible replication as artificial intelligence is as follows:
Perceptions = Values States = Vectors Behaviors = Matrices Personality = Vector field Experience = Dynamical system Prediction = Vector clock
The item that is somewhat vague is perceptions = values. The key here is that all the brain’s scalar functions (will, grammar, art and perception) all do the same thing:
input -> convert -> value
They generate patterns. Just like for digestion we break down what we ingest into basic sugars and fats, the same way the input reaching our brain is broken down into simpler representations which are then output as values for the overall system. We don’t know exactly how these scalar functions work, but if they are real it means we can replicate them: as long as we can get input from the real world, we could then simply invent a way to convert things to some strong typed values and make patterns out of those. That’s it. The process is not hard, the data collection is.
If the levels of AI will be handled each by their own separate domains (sensors, robotics, natural language and virtual reality) the future will be really complicated because what we’ll call “true” AI will be a replica of how we work. And if that happens there will be a huge incentive to split ourselves in two: the self and the software running the self. In doing so we can, of course, live forever, but also copy and better ourselves iteratively.
The biggest problem with this is that you may be able to undo yourself. That will create a big selective pressure for successful personalities to keep refining themselves. And just like with biology without a diverse society, new and fresh singletons will tend to vanish, leaving a huge incest prone personality pool. The second problem is creating multiple you and artificially increasing your success rate. Will the other weaker you let itself be terminated for the benefit of the better you?
But, we may never able to digitally replicate our imperfect analogous personalities, yet still create by the work of many people true AI.
Once you realize how automatic your “spirit” happens to be, existence becomes as random as it was designed to be. Then being humane is a choice, not an involuntary event. And when it is a choice, it can be started and stopped, easily.
Being human has a very, very poor definition which it is more romantic than real. Being human basically means being alive, intelligent, aware and from the homo sapiens species. However we tend to give it this abstract meaning of spiritual existence. It is not bad and it reflects how deeply we are defined by us consecrating intelligence and awareness. Yet, we have a problem in dissociating logic from humanness, praising imperfection as intrinsically human, allowing obvious flaws to persist in our quest for remaining human or gaining human sense.
What if the body is a clock and we age because we use it to keep time? Then maybe that light we all see when we die, is simply just of our first memory: the warm whiteness welcoming you to existence.