Indeed Jones, it seems the only logical next evolutionary step, I was telling you so a couple years ago:
----- Original Message ----- From: "Michel Jullian" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, June 04, 2006 4:38 PM Subject: Re: the "LifeBox" > IMHO a more realistic prediction based on Moore's law is that we will talk > equal to equal with machines in a few decades, and they will consider us as > fancy pets (or antique machines?) in a few more decades. The time will soon come when Sony will have to hardwire Asimov's three laws of robotics in their PlayStation processors :) Michel ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jones Beene" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2008 5:34 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:New supercomputer is a rack of PlayStations > Steve, > > Don't know if you caught the full impact of the > "double paradigm shift" which is looming on the > immediate horizon, and which is hinted at the end of > this piece. > > Probably not to the extent which is verbalized below, > since as usual, I am reading-in more information (and > personal expectation) than was likey intended by the > writer; but anyway, there is appearing (once again) > the signs and reverberations of what looks to me like > the start of a quantum leap in the evolution of ... > > hmm ... well, not just the evolution of computers, > which Moore's Law is taking care of, but in the > evolution of (who/what) will become the dominant > "thinker" on Terra > > ...and eventually maybe even the dominant species. > That would be assuming that the dominant-thinker > becomes the dominant-species over time. > > [SIDE NOTE] In truth, at least in the short history of > evolution on earth, it has been the dominant predator > which becomes the dominant species; and in the case of > 'homo sapiens', being able to use logic and thinking > has helped greatly in that quest for domination - but > most apparently, the details of that help has been in > the design and building of, among other things, > superior killing machines ;-( > > Anyway, after that long-winded preamble, here is the > quote from the article which portends a double > paradigm shift with Darwinian consequences: > > "Of course 'it' [the ultra-computer based on cheap > gaming machines] does cost less, but what needs to be > recognized is that it also changes the way people > think about problems when they are given a hundred > times more computer power." > > Paradigm shift #1 is reaching the 'tipping point' of > raw affordability (MIPS/$) in the hardware. > > This is what can be called the 'son of x-box' where > within 2-4 years (if Moore's Law holds) we will have > reached the $100/teraflop level in raw processing > power. > > The very best human brain is 'around' the equivalent > of 1-10 teraflops although admittedly this is an > impossible comparison to make valid- since the brain > is analog not digital. With 'proper software', many > experts suspect a 10 teraflop computer will become > fully 'verbal' and equal to humans in most respects > and far superior in others.... beyond that is > anybody's guess. > > (there is not enough space & time here to counter the > Penrose objections to that conclusion. > > Anyway, back to the unexpected and final step in > linked paradigm shifts: "So rather than taking the > thing apart you just start moving all the knobs about > to see what happens when you change something - just > as you might in real life...." > > Paradigm shift #2, however, goes beyond this (which is > a bit short-sighted) and is found in reaching another > tipping point of NOT necessarily needing knobs, or > human programmers, but instead you just step aside.... > > That is, you instead of requiring software to utilize > that affordable hardware, someone will just give the > machine a few basic rules and logic, stand back, plug > it in and let it learn and self-educate itself from > any and all accessible information resources (mainly > the www, of course). > > Of course you have to teach it to discriminate, weed > out the BS and minimize the disinformation and SPAM > which is overwhelming the net these days ;-} > > We are not that far away from this scenario, and yet > almost no one outside of the field of AI is aware of > the ultimate ramifications of "allowing" this kind of > evolutionary jump to continue at its present pace. > > Except Sci-Fi writers and assorted Vorticians, of > course. > > Jones > > > > --- OrionWorks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> The esteemed Mr. Jones might enjoy this article: >> >> SUBJECT: New supercomputer is a rack of PlayStations >> By: Louisa Hearn >> February 26, 2008 >> >> > http://www.theage.com.au/cgi-bin/common/popupPrintArticle.pl? >> path=/articles/2008/02/26/1203788327976.html >> >> http://tinyurl.com/2vbc87 >> >> "What makes the gaming console vastly superior to >> high-end computers >> for complex research algorithms, Mr Khanna says, is >> the Cell chip >> built by IBM to facilitate high-end gaming functions >> on the latest >> generation of consoles." >> >> Regards >> Steven Vincent Johnson >> www.OrionWorks.com >> www.zazzle.com/orionworks >> >> >
