4 years ago
Wednesday, January 19, 2011
Sunday, October 18, 2009
Afterlife Avatars
One of the unique human traits is the preservation of memories of the people that have passed away from our lives. We keep their pictures, stories, personal items, video and audio recordings, and other reminders about who they were and what they meant for us. Sometimes, the necessity to communicate with someone who has passed away is so strong (due to overwhelming emotions, unresolved guilt, superstitions, etc), that we employ the use of psychics and palm readers and fortune tellers to help us reach out to our dear ones. I think it is inevitable that soon we will be able to do the same with the cyber-world representations, or Avatars, of our friends and family who have left us. I would like to see how people’s behaviors and interactions with the Afterlife Avatars (AL-atar) will shape and change overtime.
It is not so hard to imagine how much an avatar can eventually come to resemble its owner. As technology evolves ever faster, it is possible that avatars will evolve into intelligent entities with the ability to mimic and preserve our behavior and thought processes. We leave tremendous amounts of data about who we are and how we act - on social sites like Facebook and Myspace, in virtual environments like Second Life, in our financial/spending history, in our mailboxes and personal files, etc. As Artificial Intelligence evolves and we use more sophisticated computational mechanisms - recursive logic, neuronal networks, evolutional algorithms and quantum computing (Kurzweil), just to name a few - it is possible that our avatars will learn how to think and act like us. It is also possible that we will become more attracted to avatars primarily due to their quality to closely resemble us, and thus we will go to great lengths to design them in our liking. Furthermore, it is possible that the AL-atars will not stop where we have left and will continue to develop further and “live” on.
When I pass away what will my friends do with my Facebook page? Will they simply visit it to leave their condolences? Will they engage in conversations among themselves about who I was and what I meant to everybody? Will they ever wish to communicate with me via my AL-atar? Sure, they will know that I am dead and they are dealing with something that thinks and acts like I do, but how far can and will they go in believing my AL-atar? If my AL-atar is just like me - it can leave similar comments, likes, ask questions, provide interesting links - where is the borderline between the real me and the fictional me? Will my grand-grand-grand-grand-grandchildren ever want to communicate with me and ask me for some advice? How will humans’ perception of the dead change in general? If more and more almost-identical versions of ourselves start to populate cyber-worlds in the near future, will we pay the same kind of attention to cemeteries? Is it possible that AL-atars will start to communicate with other AL-atars? What can come out of this? AL-atar sounds a lot like Altar, and ironically, the symbolic meaning is pretty similar too. How will our Altar-keeping culture transform in the AL-atar future?
It is not so hard to imagine how much an avatar can eventually come to resemble its owner. As technology evolves ever faster, it is possible that avatars will evolve into intelligent entities with the ability to mimic and preserve our behavior and thought processes. We leave tremendous amounts of data about who we are and how we act - on social sites like Facebook and Myspace, in virtual environments like Second Life, in our financial/spending history, in our mailboxes and personal files, etc. As Artificial Intelligence evolves and we use more sophisticated computational mechanisms - recursive logic, neuronal networks, evolutional algorithms and quantum computing (Kurzweil), just to name a few - it is possible that our avatars will learn how to think and act like us. It is also possible that we will become more attracted to avatars primarily due to their quality to closely resemble us, and thus we will go to great lengths to design them in our liking. Furthermore, it is possible that the AL-atars will not stop where we have left and will continue to develop further and “live” on.
When I pass away what will my friends do with my Facebook page? Will they simply visit it to leave their condolences? Will they engage in conversations among themselves about who I was and what I meant to everybody? Will they ever wish to communicate with me via my AL-atar? Sure, they will know that I am dead and they are dealing with something that thinks and acts like I do, but how far can and will they go in believing my AL-atar? If my AL-atar is just like me - it can leave similar comments, likes, ask questions, provide interesting links - where is the borderline between the real me and the fictional me? Will my grand-grand-grand-grand-grandchildren ever want to communicate with me and ask me for some advice? How will humans’ perception of the dead change in general? If more and more almost-identical versions of ourselves start to populate cyber-worlds in the near future, will we pay the same kind of attention to cemeteries? Is it possible that AL-atars will start to communicate with other AL-atars? What can come out of this? AL-atar sounds a lot like Altar, and ironically, the symbolic meaning is pretty similar too. How will our Altar-keeping culture transform in the AL-atar future?
Saturday, October 10, 2009
Artificial Intelligence
I had a heated argument with my friend yesterday about whether one type of intelligence can create another type that is more intelligent than itself. I have to say that she was convincing in smashing all of my theories and hypothesis (why I thought this would be possible) and won primarily thanks to this idea: whatever model of artificial intelligence we create will be a reflection of who and what WE are, and since we have a limited knowledge of ourselves, the model would never go beyond these limitations. In other words, the model would never stop being just a model, instead of being something complete and perfect. No matter how complicated the logic behind the computational and thinking process of a computer, it will not be able to grasp what WE (humans) haven't grasped yet because we did not include it in the design of the computer's logic. Its like saying that because we haven't grasped the understanding of our conscious process (the subjective perception of ourselves) we haven't grasped the meaning of our behavior. So in a way, we can perceive ourselves as a form of intelligence designed by someone else who is invisible yet always around and observing us and keeping us in check and not letting us figure out why we know that joy is really joy and sadness is sadness and why we are who we are. I know there is me who acts and does things a certain way, but I really don't understand how I do all of these things. My model is so perfect that it knows how to do everything without me ever worrying about anything - I just concentrate on being me. Well who are we and what is our purpose on this planet? Can the computer ask the same question on its own, without being pre-programmed to do so?
Lets consider the evolution of life (a form of intelligence) from the very beginning. The Eastern and Western philosophies approach this question from two different directions. According to the Western philosophy, matter came before reason. Thus, it took a very long time for any type of reasoning or intelligence to form out of the chaos of our universe. And later, through processes of Darwinian Natural Selection (survival of the fittest), humans evolved as the most intelligent of all known species. According to Eastern philosophy, it was the ultimate Reason (Ahura Mazda) that gave birth to matter in the universe. Just like a bolt of lightening, reason struck and matter started forming. Physics is of the opinion that matter and energy(reason) are essentially the same thing (duality of light, electrons, etc). None of this still explains why certain random, totally clueless bits of tiny matter started to self-organize and form into shapes and bits of larger matter and reproduce and decide what to do for itself. Darwin's theory is only applicable to organisms that are complicated enough to replicate, but it doesn't explain the early stages of the origin of life. Well, if and when we finally understand how simple lifeless matter turns into not-so-simple matter that is alive, would we be able to design something similar and breathe life into it? No matter how we approach this subject, we get stuck in the loop and can't break out of it. It is possible that we are not capable of finding the answer due to the computational limitations of our brain power. Can we hope to find the answer once the technology surpasses our thought-processing limitations? Or are we faced with a flawed argument, like a Zen riddle which originally implies that there is no solution... Whatever the case may be, I see Artificial Intelligence as a tool for building world models and better understanding who we are.
Lets consider the evolution of life (a form of intelligence) from the very beginning. The Eastern and Western philosophies approach this question from two different directions. According to the Western philosophy, matter came before reason. Thus, it took a very long time for any type of reasoning or intelligence to form out of the chaos of our universe. And later, through processes of Darwinian Natural Selection (survival of the fittest), humans evolved as the most intelligent of all known species. According to Eastern philosophy, it was the ultimate Reason (Ahura Mazda) that gave birth to matter in the universe. Just like a bolt of lightening, reason struck and matter started forming. Physics is of the opinion that matter and energy(reason) are essentially the same thing (duality of light, electrons, etc). None of this still explains why certain random, totally clueless bits of tiny matter started to self-organize and form into shapes and bits of larger matter and reproduce and decide what to do for itself. Darwin's theory is only applicable to organisms that are complicated enough to replicate, but it doesn't explain the early stages of the origin of life. Well, if and when we finally understand how simple lifeless matter turns into not-so-simple matter that is alive, would we be able to design something similar and breathe life into it? No matter how we approach this subject, we get stuck in the loop and can't break out of it. It is possible that we are not capable of finding the answer due to the computational limitations of our brain power. Can we hope to find the answer once the technology surpasses our thought-processing limitations? Or are we faced with a flawed argument, like a Zen riddle which originally implies that there is no solution... Whatever the case may be, I see Artificial Intelligence as a tool for building world models and better understanding who we are.
Sunday, June 21, 2009
Monday, March 30, 2009
Friday, March 20, 2009
Tuesday, March 10, 2009
STEM
I finally started a company
STEM: Science Technology Education Media.
Current STEM project - Carbon Nanotube Aerogels, a film about a unique new material unlike any others in nature.
Next STEM project - building the STEM website, designing logos, business cards... my new STEM identity.
Everlasting STEM initiative - finding new stories and clients, understanding market demand, accumulating IP
STEM searching for - after effects experts, art director, 3D animators
STEM needs - MONEY!
STEM: Science Technology Education Media.
Current STEM project - Carbon Nanotube Aerogels, a film about a unique new material unlike any others in nature.
Next STEM project - building the STEM website, designing logos, business cards... my new STEM identity.
Everlasting STEM initiative - finding new stories and clients, understanding market demand, accumulating IP
STEM searching for - after effects experts, art director, 3D animators
STEM needs - MONEY!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)