Jame5

In a recent story on the Singularity Hub Aaron Saenz laid out the basic tenant behind Intelligence Realm‘s artificial intelligence project. In a nutshell IR is using the BIONC architecture to create neural brain simulations. What distinguishes them from IBM’s Blue Brain initiative, is the distributed nature of their approach. Where IBM is throwing big iron at the problem, IR is using idle processor cyclces of thousands of volunteers and is thus following in teh foot steps of such successful BOINC projects as SETI@Home as well as Foldong@Home.

From the article:

If someone considers the development of artificial intelligence impossible or too far into the future to care about, I can only tell him or her, “Embrace the inevitable”. The advances in the field of neuroscience are increasing rapidly. Scientists are thorough. Understanding its benefits and pitfalls is all that is needed.

Hear, hear – my thoughts exactly. There is just one tiny little detail that raised my eyebrows about the project:

Well…, we will not be able to provide full details about the entire project because we are pursuing a business model, so that we can support the project in the future, so there is little chance of a collaboration with a University or other research institution.

Of course this was bound to happen…

In an opt-ed piece on TIME.com notable scholar of language and philosophy of mind Steven Pinker is presenting his view on the question if the brain can understand itself:

Will neurologists scan our brains down to the last synapse and duplicate the wiring in a silicon chip, giving our minds eternal life?

Personally I do not feel that 100% understanding is required actually. We do not fully understand the universe but never the less come up with all kinds of useful gadgets that fulfill their intended functions within the margin of error between the applied theories used in their design and actual reality.

As long as we understand the brain well enough to improve it even just a little we will have a runaway intelligence explosion aka technological singularity.

Just a quick update with some news on IBM’s cognitive computing project which Wired describes in a nutshell as follows:

In what could be one of the most ambitious computing projects ever, neuroscientists, computer engineers and psychologists are coming together in a bid to create an entirely new computing architecture that can simulate the brain’s abilities for perception, interaction and cognition. All that, while being small enough to fit into a lunch box and consuming extremely small amounts of power.

Together with the Blue Brain project as well as advances in memristor based electronics this project’s stated goal of building what amounts to a ‘brain in a lunch box’ is moving a lot of the science fiction in Jame5 into the realm of engineering. The fact that barely 18 months passed since Jame5’s initial publication speaks volumes about what is to be expected in the not so distant future. For a more technical background there is some very good material online about IBM Research’s Almaden Institute Conference on Cognitive Computing.

These guys are not playing around.

3 updates in one day – it is getting out of hand, I know…

I have stumbled across two encouraging posts about Jame5 that I would like to share. The first is by Constantin Gonzalez from his BarCamp Munich 2008 summary:

Another great way to think about the future is to read Stefan Pernar’s sci-fi thriller “Jame5 – A Tale of Good and Evil”. This book starts in the best Michael Crichton style and then becomes a deep and thoughtful discussion around the philosophy of the future, when mankind confronts the powers of strong AI. […] Highly recommended.

Secondly Marc Garnaut was kind enough to write about Jame5 on his blog:

I’ve been immersed in a book recently. It’s a fictional story, but it’s based on a lot of scientific fact. A bit like The Matrix or anything in the cyberpunk genre by authors like Neal Stephenson or William Gibson.

Much obliged gentlemen, much obliged indeed. Did I mention that I am still looking for a publisher? Hint! Hint! 🙂

A very interesting piece on the maliability of beliefs using the example of the origin of life being the result of devine creation or a result of natural laws has been put up on Science Daily. Belief control being a central concept of cognitive evolution in Jame5 I found the article rather fitting.