Sent to you by Sean McBride via Google Reader: You: Computer modeling
of belief systems, ideologies, religions, political systems, political
movements, economic systems, global power elites, organizations,
persons. (via FriendFeed) via FriendFeed on 10/22/08 You posted a
message “Computer modeling of belief systems, ideologies, religions,
political systems, political movements, economic systems, global power
elites, organizations, persons.” Wednesday at 9:48 am - Comment Mike
Reynolds and Uldis Bojars liked this Sean: This isn't even a sentence;
what are you trying to say? - eggsy I'm defining a frame for a certain
line of research with a topic cluster. Some folks will get it. - You
The thought behind the thought: the Semantic Web will provide a unified
framework for conducting computer modeling and data mining for all
these activities and many more. - You And: possibly a simple binary
system of pluses and minuses will get us 90% of the way towards the
goal of modeling these social and psychological systems. - You What if
we are a computer model? - eggsy We might well be. Or an experiment in
genetic engineering. I don't know. - You in some sense all those things
are themselves models, or structures based on models ... something
recursive in all of this ... and one interesting addition, climate, for
want of a better word ... at every point on the planet the models are
different, in a different climate .... - Gregory Lent I suspect you'd
have an easier time dumbing down those systems, ideologies, movements
etc. until computers can model them. But I'm somewhat cynical about the
whole Semantic Web notion. - Steven Kaye A list of nouns is ok, tho i
prefer a single gerund. - j1m Steven - what are your reservations about
the Semantic Web? I think it may be possible to model any degree of
complexity with simple triples. - You Models will make sense if they
allow for evolutionary breakthroughs. Things like adaptation and
survival of the fittest. Would genetic algorithms with a shifting
fitness function work? - Mike Reynolds Mike - I'm not sure I understand
you. Can you elaborate? What I do think is that computer models of the
world -- and THE computer model of the world -- a global
superintelligence which integrates all computer models, ontologies,
data sets, data mining algorithms, etc. -- could track and often
predict in real time any changes in the real world of any kind,
evolutionary, devolutionary or otherwise. A GS (global
superintelligence) could also actively intervene to react to change or
to create change, including radical evolutionary change. There really
are no obvious limits. - You Sean: are you alluding to this - melmcb Great pointer, Mel - and,
yes, this is an important facet of this emerging and rapidly
self-evolving global superintelligence I have mentioned. The potential
of automated and AI-based social network analysis to map in
excruciating detail the social behavior of the entire human race is
unlimited. The dangers for totalitarian abuse are also unlimited. It is
important for the general public to understand this technology as well
as it possibly can, and for democracies to impose controls on the abuse
of this power. But there are also potentially enormous benefits for
everyone in automated social network analysis. Super article: you
caught this before I saw it. :) - You From the Guardian article linked
to by Mel: "The iLink system had several goals, including real-time
learning by matching queries and communities users; adapting to user
demands and directions, providing accuracy in message targeting and
routing and, finally, dynamic user profile correction based on
community behaviours and identification of community experts. The
learning in iLink occurs by watching a natural social network, and
selecting effective strategies that emerge from the system as the
members try to solve problems. The system continuously monitors the
real social network and it is capable of drafting from the social
network's learning." - You Whatever is useful in the ILink system
should be folded into Friendfeed. I wonder if Bret Taylor and Paul
Bucheit are tracking this research. - You Sean - Thanks for your
response. My POV is that there can't be one 100% correct global super
intelligence. Just as there is subjectivity in our daily lives, a
computer model would likely also involve some subjectivity. Regarding
my specific comments, I was referring to a much narrower simulation. -
Mike Reynolds modeling nature would be a challenge, an entire system
with out subsets, completely self-referential, everything connected to
everything and influence everything, seamless ... - Gregory Lent Mike -
a global superintelligence would integrate all human subjective models
and treat them as theories to be empirically tested, intensively and
relentlessly. It would learn which subjective models seem to be most
closely correlated with the real world, which are most objective. It
would never be "perfect" -- but its understanding of the real world
would continue to grow without limits. (Actually, there are many
physical limits: we could be hit by an asteroid or suffer some other
natural disaster which would destroy all life and technology on this
small planet.) - You Gregory - graphing the cosmic grid -- it's doable.
The universe is a network of entities and relations. (I am not trying
to say that any model, no matter how sophisticated, can contain reality
in its entirety -- it almost certainly can't. But some models are
better than others.) - You Essentially this global superintelligence is
a meta-intelligence machine. - Mike Reynolds Mike - a global
superintelligence would integrate all the best artificial intelligence
and data mining algorithms in the world, all the documents, all the
databases, all the sensors, etc. This thing is coming together as we
speak, and very quickly. - You
Things you can do from here:
- Subscribe to FriendFeed using Google Reader
- Get started using Google Reader to easily keep up with all your
favorite sites

Reply via email to