The Technological Revolution: Artificial Intelligence and the Invisible Plague

[bearcow]

for their matrix to be complete, they need all avenues of thought in humanity to flow along controlled linear lines of progression. They must completely destroy the female aspect of humanity in order to have total control. People like Spock. All yang.

Spock, as you know came from the planet vulcan, a planet that is considered in some astrological circles to be a actual sphere of influence in this solar system.

Also i find it interesting that Leonard Nimoy was cast as one of the world controllers in the tv version of Aldous Huxley's brave new world



yin energy is non linear, and cannot be manipulated by them as it is the antithesis of their very nature.

But therein lies the paradox, this female (yin) energy is what they need to posses in order to become more than what they are now.

I suppose part of the plan, if they have truly thought this out, is to replace or alter all yin organs in the body (right side of the brain, heart, kidneys etc) with mechanical implants or genetic variations so that they only serve the basic physical functions.

I'm not sure total control of humanity is the end game though.

There is also evidence that they want to become human.

In addition, I'm not so sure they would know what to do next if they were successful in transferring their consciousness into the collective hive mind of humanity that they wish to create.

[Jeffrey]

BEGIN EXCERPT

-------------------------

DARPA To Support Development Of Human Brain-Machine Interfaces

The Duke center will consist initially of a collaboration of separate laboratories in the medical center's department of neurobiology and in the Pratt School of Engineering department of biomedical engineering. However, the researchers expect to unite the center's efforts in a new multidisciplinary engineering building now under construction.
As part of the DARPA support:

• Biomedical engineer Henriquez and his colleagues will coordinate development of equipment and methods for visualizing and analyzing the massive amounts of data produced from electrode arrays in the brains of experimental animals.
  
• Neurosurgeon Turner and his colleagues will investigate potential use of brain-machine interfaces in patients with neurological disorders.
  
• Biomedical engineer Patrick Wolf and his colleagues will develop a miniaturized "neurochip" for detecting and analyzing brain signals, as well as optical communications links between the chip and the control components of the interface.
  
• John Chapin's laboratory will develop the sensory feedback mechanism by which animals and humans can "feel" the actions of a neurorobotic arm or hand.
  
• Jose Principe and his colleagues will develop new computer algorithms for translating brain-derived signals into control commands to operate a robot arm.
  
• Mandayam Srinivasan's laboratory will develop new interfaces to provide visual and tactile feedback signals to animal subjects operating robot arms, and
  
• Harvey Wiggins of Plexon Inc. in Dallas will supply hardware and software that will enable development and testing of brain-machine interfaces.

[...]

"Last year, we reported experiments in primates showing that a brain-machine interface could, indeed, control a robot arm," said Nicolelis. "While this was a first-generation system, it proved to us that there was an enormous opportunity to pursue research leading to clinical applications. We are extremely grateful to DARPA for their vision in establishing a program that will provide the crucial support to launch this effort."

In 2000, Nicolelis and his colleagues tested a neural system on monkeys that enabled the animals to use their brain signals, as detected by implanted electrodes, to control a robot arm to reach for a piece of food. The scientists even transmitted the brain signals over the Internet, remotely controlling a robot arm 600 miles away. The technique they used, called "multi-neuron population recordings" was originally developed by center collaborator Chapin.

[...]

"This research involves a major effort to decode how the brain manages information," said Henriquez. "Once we are able to use computation to decode such information, we can translate that understanding into an algorithm that can be incorporated into hardware." Ultimately, the researchers hope to be able to record and analyze such signals for long periods of time without damage to brain tissue, said the researchers. They have already shown that animals can tolerate the electrodes for periods of years without apparent harm.

According to Nicolelis, the technology and computational methods developed under the DARPA support also will lead to a deeper understanding of the brain itself.

"This research will provide us with a powerful new set of experimental tools and techniques to answer the question of how millions of brain cells come together to generate a particular behavior," he said. "Traditionally, the neurosciences have taken a reductionist approach, with investigators trying to understand individual neurons, molecules and genes. We are trying to understand the brain's function as a dynamic system."

[...]

"One provocative, and controversial, question is whether the brain can actually incorporate a machine as part of the neural representation of the body," he said. "I truly believe that it is possible. The brain is continuously learning and adapting, and previous studies have shown that the body representation in the brain is dynamic. So, if you created a closed feedback loop in which the brain controls a device and the device provides feedback to the brain, I would predict that as people or animals learn to use the device, their brains will basically dedicate neuronal space to represent that device."

Development of the Duke center's brain-interface technologies also will involve collaborations with industry, said the researchers. The market for such devices should be considerable, they said. According to a market analysis commissioned by DARPA, the current worldwide market of about $270 million annually is projected to be $1.5 billion by 2005.

"In our discussion with corporations, we've found that, even though these technologies are in their infancy, the companies are emphasizing their commercial development," said Henriquez. "We believe that the Duke center will help propel development of the next generation of brain interface technologies. And the opportunities for their application seem almost boundless."

DARPA (www.darpa.mil) is the central research and development organization for the Department of Defense. It manages and directs selected basic and applied research and development projects for DoD, and pursues research and technology where risk and payoff are both very high and where success may provide dramatic advances for traditional military roles and missions.

Read the full article here: http://websearch.about.com/gi/o.htm?...A//clusty.com/

-------------------------

END EXCERPT

The article above was written just over ten years ago. This research was made available to the public (i.e. it wasn't classified).

There is likely more happening behind closed doors.

See also: http://websearch.about.com/gi/o.htm?...A//clusty.com/

[Jeffrey]

-------------------------

This is getting all too real. There are many leads in the video. Other than that, I'm speechless.

Weird Science, Mind Manipulation and James Eagan Holmes

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=NVOZ0APmQdM

This needs to be dissected and it's components need to be followed up on. I'm not even talking about how they relate to James Holmes -- that can be for another thread. I'm talking about the different programs mentioned in the video.

[skippy]

Posted by Freed Fox (here)
...it will be a very simple task to gain public favor for trans-humanism. I think one could even argue that this is what we were always meant to do; the pinnacle toward which our evolutionary path has been gradually leading. Unless they are shown the reality of foreign installation in an understandable and undeniable fashion, then it would seem that technological advancement is a natural function of humanity..

The mind-ego is in a quest for control. It will use anything to secure it’s survival including advanced technology. Survival instinct and it's behavioural patterns are quite predictable in nature and can easily be mapped out in mathematical computer models. The animal realm is the main driver behind technological innovation and any other ego-based structures, like our modern economy.

[Aurelius]

i don't think i can BUMP Vivek's post above .. hard enough!

if you don't have time to watch the whole embedded youtube video, watch the first 7 mins (everything he says in these 7 mins is indeed correct).

[Jeffrey]

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=LS3wMC2BpxU

BEGIN EXCERPTS

-------------------------

There is enough evidence to show that man is a digital organic machine. As such, he may be measured, quantified, augmented and redesigned.

[...]

The Genome is a Digital Program. When executed, it produces man.

[...]

The DNA which describes each individual is in a digital code. The code is made up of four possible values. In number form, these could be expressed as 0, 1, 2, 3, but are normally expressed as four letter values: A, C, G, and T. These are always paired with their reciprocal value (see the text OneLife for more detail). Note that the DNA description of all living things is made up of only four basic construction blocks. There are about three billion of these base pairs in the human genome. These are used in groups of three, called codons. Each codon consists of three base pairs, each of which may carry one of four possible values. The number of codon values which can be expressed in three elements of four values each is 64.

[...]

Most of these sixty-four combinations are used to produce 20 protein building blocks, called amino acids, from which the human organism is constructed.

[...]

The substance of the human body is constructed from proteins, which in turn are constructed from these 20 amino acids.

As the program in the genome is read codon by codon from a starting code to a codon stop code, the sequence of codons dictate the construction of a protein. A particular series of codons will describe a particular protein which the cell can produce. In the case of man, more than 80,000 different proteins are manufactured in the cells from these digital formulas to form and maintain the overall organism. Some of these proteins are quite complex. The final assembly may total many thousands of various amino acids, all arranged precisely. The genome, then, is a precise digital formula which describes the construction of an entire human being. These instructions include precise formulas for the material used to build the body and precise assembly instructions as well.

[...]



The sketch shows a typical nerve cell which is provided in the body for the transfer of information. The red dot on the left represents the nucleus of the cell. Signals are input from other nerve cells or from sensors to the cell wall and the dendrites. There may be many inputs. As a result of these inputs the cell will develop an electrical pulse which will travel down the axon and away from the nucleus. The axon may be quite short or it may be up to a meter in length. When the signal reaches the right end of the axon it will travel to the ends of the terminal branches. There the signal will be applied to many other nerve cells.

The input signal is arranged on receipt to act as either an excitation signal or an inhibition signal. Some pulses received on certain locations tend to excite the subject nerve cell into discharging an electrical pulse down the axon, others at different locations tend to inhibit the generation of a pulse. The cell then becomes a decision mechanism which generates pulses in response to a form of signal summation [...] The signal on the axon is then distributed to many other nerve cells for a similar summation (further computation).

[...]

The axon signal is an electrical voltage pulse. It requires about .7 millisecond for the pulse to reach its peak voltage. The decay of the pulse is quite long, about 7 milliseconds. The shape of the pulse with time is incidental, it is the presence or absence of the pulse which matters in the data transmission. That method is within the definition of digital communication.

Modern communications practice is to provide high volume data transmission by multiplexing single paths. A single channel is setup on a signal conductor (example - a fiber optic line) and a high volume of signals are processed by time-sharing the line. The switching from signal to signal is done so rapidly that it appears to the end user as if a separate line was assigned to each signal.

[...]

The eye is composed of thousands upon thousands of photoreceptors (sensor cells). A separate nerve axon carries the signal from each photoreceptor into the brain. It uses thousands upon thousands of parallel channels to offset the slow signal generation and transmission. When it arrives in the brain, each channel immediately fans out to many other cells through summation decision mechanisms as described above, where the movement of a signal from cell to cell performs the calculation necessary to visualize the result. All of the signals from the eye into the brain are in the form of digital pulses. The speed at which the brain can perceive images is about twenty images per second. This is why TV and movies can fool the brain into perceiving motion by presenting images at a rate faster than the ability of the eye and brain to process. It is a remarkable feat, however, that the brain can receive, process and understand a million or so portions of an image in about fifty milliseconds. That includes high definition color (at least equal to 32 bits per pixel) and with depth perception. It must simultaneously process two sets of images and compare them. In communications terms that bandwidth is about the same as a 32 bit wide computer buss running at 20 megahertz.

[...]

To further confuse the issue, the "connections" between the nerve cells undergo physical change with use. A connection not used withers. A connection used often becomes strong. The brain is born with a program. At least a part of that program changes with time and frequency of use. Does this mean that even instincts may be educated? In a sense, yes. The intellectual portion of the brain may be trained to control the instinct. If there is constant intellectual lingering on an emotion, such as sexual desire, then the emotion (instinct) is extended into the intellectual portion of the brain, in the form of permanent connections there.

[...]

The DNA within each cell of an organism contains the description of that entire organism. In that sense it is a memory device, one which is repeated in each cell. When a cell replicates, the DNA which is a part of that cell, also replicates.

As it is used in the cells of an organism, various patterns in the DNA provide instructions for the manufacturing of various proteins. The cell, in which the DNA giving the instructions resides, then produces that protein in the designated amounts. These proteins are used in the construction and repair of the body of the organism.

The genome of a given organism is therefore a particular set of knowledge (information, instructions, memory) in DNA format which describes in detail the physical and neural construction of the organism. This knowledge is then replicated throughout the body of the organism and is passed down to future generations of the organism. Since it can replicate, we say it is alive. DNA, therefore, is a living form of digital memory.

The human genome is about 3 billion base pairs in length. Each base pair has four possible conditions (A, G, C and T). There are two sets in each cell in the human body. This is equivalent to a computer hard disk with a capacity of 1.5 gigabytes in each cell, an enormous sub-microscopic ROM (read only memory), sufficient for two sets of the Encyclopedia Britannica. A thumb-sized organ specifically designed for knowledge recall should some day be possible, one which could contain all of the factual knowledge of the modern human. Formed in the brain at birth, it would be useful throughout the life of the human.

Questions about access are still unanswered. The organism body uses a system of area selection which activates the gene necessary for that particular location of the cell. It, in effect, reads out that portion of memory. In mapping genomes in the laboratory, it is necessary to determine the sequence of the DNA, exactly the same process needed for reading out a memory. Phospholipid membranes will transport electric charges making them a possibility for interrogation of an organic memory. These and many other avenues must be explored. Many different access systems will be needed since not only are these memory systems needed in the organism body, the same system would have industrial and commercial applications.

Full article here: http://www.onelife.com/evolve/digman.html

-------------------------

END EXCERPTS

You are not the body. You are more than that. You are beyond it. Sheds new light on Vedanta and maya.

Osho: Man is a Machine

This may be quite literal. A biological machine, an advanced cognitive computer.

Makes one wonder about what the Gnostics were trying to get across regarding matter and humanity.

[Jeffrey]

BEGIN EXCERPT

-------------------------

Molecular Computing

The next great change in computer science and information technology will come from mimicking the techniques by which biological organisms process information. To do this computer scientists must draw on expertise in subjects not usually associated with their field, including organic chemistry, molecular biology, bioengineering, and smart materials. This book provides an introduction to the interdisciplinary field of molecular computing.

The book moves from abstract principles of molecular computing to the building of actual systems. The topics include the use of proteins and other molecules for information-processing, molecular recognition, computation in nonlinear media, computers based on physical reaction-diffusion systems found in chemical media, DNA computing, bioelectronics and protein-based optical computing, and biosensors.

Source: http://mitpress.mit.edu/books/molecular-computing

-------------------------

END EXCERPT

See also:

http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-molecular-computing.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNA_computing

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=NyH3OCWjuhc

“DNA is like a computer program but far, far more advanced than any software ever created.” — Bill Gates

[Jeffrey]

Regarding the last two posts (and many others) ...

BEGIN EXCERPTS

-------------------------

A MIND-BENDING MEDITATION ON THE TRANSCENDENT POWER OF DIGITAL COMPUTATION.

Biology, that pulsating mass of plant and animal flesh, is conceived by science today as an information process. As computers keep shrinking, we can imagine our complex bodies being numerically condensed to the size of two tiny cells. These micro-memory devices are called the egg and sperm. They are packed with information.

That life might be information, as biologists propose, is far more intuitive than the corresponding idea that hard matter is information as well. When we bang a knee against a table leg, it sure doesn't feel like we knocked into information. But that's the idea many physicists are formulating.

The spooky nature of material things is not new. Once science examined matter below the level of fleeting quarks and muons, it knew the world was incorporeal. What could be less substantial than a realm built out of waves of quantum probabilities? And what could be weirder? Digital physics is both. It suggests that those strange and insubstantial quantum wavicles, along with everything else in the universe, are themselves made of nothing but 1s and 0s. The physical world itself is digital.

The scientist John Archibald Wheeler [...] claimed that, fundamentally, atoms are made up of of bits of information. As he put it in a 1989 lecture, "Its are from bits." He elaborated: "Every it — every particle, every field of force, even the space-time continuum itself — derives its function, its meaning, its very existence entirely from binary choices, bits. What we call reality arises in the last analysis from the posing of yes/no questions."

[...]

Every mountain, every star, the smallest salamander or woodland tick, each thought in our mind, each flight of a ball is but a web of elemental yes/nos woven together. If the theory of digital physics holds up, movement (f = ma), energy (E = mc²), gravity, dark matter, and antimatter can all be explained by elaborate programs of 1/0 decisions. Bits can be seen as a digital version of the "atoms" of classical Greece: the tiniest constituent of existence. But these new digital atoms are the basis not only of matter, as the Greeks thought, but of energy, motion, mind, and life.

From this perspective, computation, which juggles and manipulates these primal bits, is a silent reckoning that uses a small amount of energy to rearrange symbols. And its result is a signal that makes a difference — a difference that can be felt as a bruised knee. The input of computation is energy and information; the output is order, structure, extropy.

Our awakening to the true power of computation rests on two suspicions. The first is that computation can describe all things. To date, computer scientists have been able to encapsulate every logical argument, scientific equation, and literary work that we know about into the basic notation of computation. Now, with the advent of digital signal processing, we can capture video, music, and art in the same form. Even emotion is not immune. Researchers Cynthia Breazeal at MIT and Charles Guerin and Albert Mehrabian in Quebec have built Kismet and EMIR (Emotional Model for Intelligent Response), two systems that exhibit primitive feelings.

The second supposition is that all things can compute. We have begun to see that almost any kind of material can serve as a computer. Human brains, which are mostly water, compute fairly well. (The first "calculators" were clerical workers figuring mathematical tables by hand.) So can sticks and strings [...] Recently, scientists have used both quantum particles and minute strands of DNA to perform computations.

A third postulate ties the first two together into a remarkable new view: All computation is one.

In 1937, Alan Turing, Alonso Church, and Emil Post worked out the logical underpinnings of useful computers. They called the most basic loop — which has become the foundation of all working computers — a finite-state machine. Based on their analysis of the finite-state machine, Turing and Church proved a theorem now bearing their names. Their conjecture states that any computation executed by one finite-state machine, writing on an infinite tape (known later as a Turing machine), can be done by any other finite-state machine on an infinite tape, no matter what its configuration. In other words, all computation is equivalent. They called this universal computation.

When John von Neumann and others jump-started the first electronic computers in the 1950s, they immediately began extending the laws of computation away from math proofs and into the natural world. They tentatively applied the laws of loops and cybernetics to ecology, culture, families, weather, and biological systems. Evolution and learning, they declared, were types of computation. Nature computed.

If nature computed, why not the entire universe? The first to put down on paper the outrageous idea of a universe-wide computer was science fiction writer Isaac Asimov. In his 1956 short story "The Last Question," humans create a computer smart enough to bootstrap new computers smarter than itself. These analytical engines recursively grow super smarter and super bigger until they act as a single giant computer filling the universe. At each stage of development, humans ask the mighty machine if it knows how to reverse entropy. Each time it answers: "Insufficient data for a meaningful reply." The story ends when human minds merge into the ultimate computer mind, which takes over the entire mass and energy of the universe. Then the universal computer figures out how to reverse entropy and create a universe.

[...]

Few ideas are so preposterous that no one at all takes them seriously, and this idea — that God, or at least the universe, might be the ultimate large-scale computer — is actually less preposterous than most. The first scientist to consider it, minus the whimsy or irony, was Konrad Zuse, a little-known German who conceived of programmable digital computers 10 years before von Neumann and friends. In 1967, Zuse outlined his idea that the universe ran on a grid of cellular automata, or CA. Simultaneously, Ed Fredkin was considering the same idea. Self-educated, opinionated, and independently wealthy, Fredkin hung around early computer scientists exploring CAs. In the 1960s, he began to wonder if he could use computation as the basis for an understanding of physics.

Fredkin didn't make much headway until 1970, when mathematician John Conway unveiled the Game of Life, a particularly robust version of cellular automata. The Game of Life, as its name suggests, was a simple computational model that mimicked the growth and evolution of living things. Fredkin began to play with other CAs to see if they could mimic physics. You needed very large ones, but they seemed to scale up nicely, so he was soon fantasizing huge — really huge — CAs that would extend to include everything. Maybe the universe itself was nothing but a great CA.

The more Fredkin investigated the metaphor, the more real it looked to him. By the mid-'80s, he was saying things like, "I've come to the conclusion that the most concrete thing in the world is information."

Many of his colleagues felt that if Fredkin had left his observations at the level of metaphor — "the universe behaves as if it was a computer" — he would have been more famous. As it is, Fredkin is not as well known as his colleague Marvin Minsky, who shares some of his views. Fredkin insisted, flouting moderation, that the universe is a large field of cellular automata, not merely like one, and that everything we see and feel is information.

Many others besides Fredkin recognized the beauty of CAs as a model for investigating the real world. One of the early explorers was the prodigy Stephen Wolfram. Wolfram took the lead in systematically investigating possible CA structures in the early 1980s. By programmatically tweaking the rules in tens of thousands of alterations, then running them out and visually inspecting them, he acquired a sense of what was possible. He was able to generate patterns identical to those seen in seashells, animal skins, leaves, and sea creatures. His simple rules could generate a wildly complicated beauty, just as life could. Wolfram was working from the same inspiration that Fredkin did: The universe seems to behave like a vast cellular automaton.

Even the infinitesimally small and nutty realm of the quantum can't escape this sort of binary logic. We describe a quantum-level particle's existence as a continuous field of probabilities, which seems to blur the sharp distinction of is/isn't. Yet this uncertainty resolves as soon as information makes a difference (as in, as soon as it's measured). At that moment, all other possibilities collapse to leave only the single yes/no state. Indeed, the very term "quantum" suggests an indefinite realm constantly resolving into discrete increments, precise yes/no states.

For years, Wolfram explored the notion of universal computation in earnest (and in secret) while he built a business selling his popular software Mathematica. So convinced was he of the benefits of looking at the world as a gigantic Turing machine that he penned a 1,200-page magnum opus he modestly calls A New Kind of Science. Self-published in 2002, the book reinterprets nearly every field of science in terms of computation: "All processes, whether they are produced by human effort or occur spontaneously in nature, can be viewed as computation." (See "The Man Who Cracked the Code to Everything," Wired 10.6.)

[...]

There's still confusion. Is God the Word itself, the Ultimate Software and Source Code, or is God the Ultimate Programmer? Or is God the necessary Other, the off-universe platform where this universe is computed?

But each of these three possibilities has at its root the mystical doctrine of universal computation. Somehow, according to digitalism, we are linked to one another, all beings alive and inert, because we share, as John Wheeler said, "at the bottom — at a very deep bottom, in most instances — an immaterial source." This commonality, spoken of by mystics of many beliefs in different terms, also has a scientific name: computation. Bits — minute logical atoms, spiritual in form — amass into quantum quarks and gravity waves, raw thoughts and rapid motions.

The computation of these bits is a precise, definable, yet invisible process that is immaterial yet produces matter.

"Computation is a process that is perhaps the process," says Danny Hillis, whose new book, The Pattern on the Stone, explains the formidable nature of computation. "It has an almost mystical character because it seems to have some deep relationship to the underlying order of the universe. Exactly what that relationship is, we cannot say. At least for now."

Full article here: http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/1...lytech_pr.html

-------------------------

END EXCERPTS

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=aboZctrHfK8

... EARTH.

[778 neighbour of some guy]

Marvin the GPP robot ( Genuine People Personality), this one is a bit depressed, a taste of things to come eh, grinn.

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=sQqeidrlDyw

[RMorgan]

Hey folks,

Look how bizarre this Google Glass stuff is:

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=v1uyQZNg2vE

Imagine it in a few years; Everybody will have one of those just like everybody has an iphone nowadays, transmitting their lives to the net in real time; Everybody will be turned into a potential spy.

That´s really creepy.

Raf.

[Jeffrey]

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=ykDUYzDLp6Q

[lookbeyond]

So life is a big game of "Mindcraft"?

[Jeffrey]

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=_ySljCcnq4o

[william r sanford72]

since i was a small child i had what i would call knacks or talents that others my age did not have.not movie or scifi type of stuff. just NOT normal talents youth have. I had away with people and animals &insects even plants. i never talked about this with anybody.only my wife.She once asked or i tryd to explain what it was like and the only real honest way to explain it was it was like a song.that everything had a song & some times i could hear them. I guess this was common info amoung scientist who understood how matter interacts through vibrations..binds itself even...and well music and or a note is...a vibration creating a tone.maybe my description to my wife wasnt to far off. thanks again.

[Carmody]

How real is this?

From a real website, real AI, real opinions from the creators of AI software and hardware:

What is the ultimate idea?

"We, along with many others, believe that grandest of all notions is how ideas themselves are formed within the biological neural networks of the brain. If the principle behind this highly prized cognitive mechanism can be captured, understood, and then implemented within lightning fast machine intelligence, then we have attained the ultimate idea, the one that can generate all subsequent ideas. "

so, he's saying AI can generate it all, for us. That we will no longer need to think, that all subsequent ideas will come from the AI.

Once again, this is a real website, with real functioning AI software and hardware.

http://www.imagination-engines.com/

It is my understanding, or belief, or guess, if I had to make one...that Thaler's work (the website link) is what was the basis of this. That this has become the black ops AI network, that all of our data is being poured through -into quantum computers. That we are feeding the AI software/hardware, that our data is what it is using to become or move toward being sentient.

All your modern funky toothbrush designs where originally created by this software/hardware. And much more. That was it's least evolved design, from the humble beginnings. I wonder where it has gone now, what the darker bits of humanity have done with Thaler's work.

[Gardener]

From the same website,
http://imagination-engines.com/iei_i...on_warfare.php
Has an almost parody taste to it

Thereafter, IEI embarked upon an effort to build an extensive suite of attack signature filters based upon its revolutionary GMF concept, obviating the need to hand-code such objects. Using such filters, Creativity Machine paradigm was harnessed to create the most sophisticated "honey pots" and "carnival mirrors" known to mankind. Using the very tempting IEI web site as a lure, hordes of would-be hackers made off with torrents of, guess what, misinformation...

Surfacing into the consciousness of the intelligence community, IEI was recruited in 1998 to build a semantic parser that could resolve meaning of natural language, written or spoken, in a manner that was consistent with overarching context. Impressed with its ability to autonomously understand and organize accumulated information, without the use of laborious templates, lookup tables, or "if-then-else" programming logic, the software was licensed by the principals of the Able Danger effort, in both pre- and post-911 data mining efforts.

Thereafter, higher-ups in government, thought it might be cool to use machine intelligence, specifically Creativity Machine paradigm, to perform spin control on news headlines across the world. To those of you who have followed the IEI web site from 1996, a comical offshoot of this program was the "International Expirer," a Web-based Creativity Machine that offered up spontaneously generated tabloid-like misinformation. Although a major draw to the site, it was decommisioned in 1999 to avoid any liabilities stemming from this witty, yet loose-lipped AI.

[Carmody]

What you have there, is a public taste of the private or black ops functional version that has been let loose in the internet world of comment areas and forums/boards. the software is designed to commit to specific tasks, one might image. To agitate, separate, confuse, obfuscate and so on. the more data it has to sift through, the more accurate it becomes.

What was that figure? 80% of All north American internet traffic goes though those computers near Langley?

As the Buddhists said, 'seek detachment'. It can't work if you can't be agitated.

[ThePythonicCow]

Posted by Carmody (here)
What is the ultimate idea?

"We, along with many others, believe that grandest of all notions is how ideas themselves are formed within the biological neural networks of the brain. If the principle behind this highly prized cognitive mechanism can be captured, understood, and then implemented within lightning fast machine intelligence, then we have attained the ultimate idea, the one that can generate all subsequent ideas. "

so, he's saying AI can generate it all, for us. That we will no longer need to think, that all subsequent ideas will come from the AI.

If by Artificial Intelligence (AI), he means what software programmers can do in Lisp and such computer programming languages, then there's a gap, in my view. Expecting such software programmers to code programs manifesting the highest esoteric human like genius is rather like expecting 10,000 Egyptian slaves with stone hammers and wooden sleds and no particular esoteric technology to build the Great Pyramid in 30 years ... something is missing in that picture.

If on the other hand, by AI he means whatever it takes to artificially create such high intelligence, then perhaps, though I would consider that overloading the term "AI" .

[Jeffrey]

http://www.techgnosis.com/pkdnet.html

[sllim11]

Mind-Machine/ Cryptids

In the first half, George Knapp welcomed futurist Ray Kurzweil for a discussion on the merging of man and machine as well as his research into reverse engineering the human brain to understand precisely how it works.

[...]


Kurzweil observed that the envelopment of humanity by technology is not a fearful new development and contended that it is merely part of larger evolution of the species to "transcend the limitations of biology." To that end, he dismissed concerns about the eventual augmentation of the body with technological devices and suggested that "very, very few people will opt out" when the opportunity becomes available. Additionally, he surmised that, much like there are a myriad of apps available for cell phones, there will be "millions of choices" for people to fuse technology with their body. Similarly, Kurzweil pointed to the ubiquity of cell phones as a sign that technologically augmenting the body will not be solely the domain of the wealthy. Ultimately, he stressed that machines are the creations of humans and, thus, are already "part of who we are."

kurzweil is taking the position of "director of engineering" at ( no surprise ) GOOGLE.

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=KcNKjxYamgM