Tuesday, November 25, 2008
Computer Structres is Done;
Well it's been a fun 8 weeks and I've posted some of my work here (that which I am allowed to post) as I feel it's of some educational merit with regard what I have learned. This will of course have me running down the P=NP rabbit hole. Now on to Computers and Networking ;P (should be easy enough as I've been dealing with computers and networks for over a decade).
Thursday, November 20, 2008
Week 7 DQ 2:
Jill Bolte is a Neurophysiologist and she describes the human mind as a Bicameral Processor where the right hemisphere operates as a serial processor and the left hemisphere operates as a parallel one. In her book and lecture “My Stroke of insight” she articulates the experience of how a massive hemorrhage in her right hemisphere allowed her to experience what Buddhists refer to as enlightenment.(Bolte)i
The nature of consciousness is not completely understood; however the function of how the mind creates connections and thus “Programs” itself is well understood; Hillary Putnam in 1961 and Jerry Fodor’s in the 1960’s and 1970’s work on the computational theory of the mind articulates the brain as an information processing system. (Chalmers)ii
According to a number of sources the Human Brain weighs around 1.35KG and contains around 100 billion (100,000,000,000,000); Neurons (Elert)iii. Each neuron only has 1 axon but contains many dendrites connecting to the axons of other neurons; as stated within his site; the primary layout of the neural structure of nerve tissue in mammals is determined by genetics; however the nature by which neural tissue reorganizes itself is very different; given these basic constraints we may calculate the processing power of the human mind. However this is not without difficulty as we must simulate every molecule. (Debono)iv
IBM currently has a supercomputer to rival the power of the human mind; ASCI Purple and Blue-Gene/L meet the theoretical computational power of the human mind. (Henderson)v; however since Blue-Gene/L has never asked where it has come from we may assume that it is not self aware.
The two main issues with computers and mammalian physiology are that a computer chip is a finite state device; the human mind is not. The human mind with its 100 billion neurons has an infinite number of potential interconnections that are plastic in nature; it also contains an undisclosed amount of neruo-chemcials; each having it’s own nature of action and reaction.
“Neuroplasticity” is the brains ability to re-wire it’s connections according to function, it was discovered by Jerzy Konorski in 1948. (Konorski)vi The best example of neuroplasticity is the body’s ability to re-learn the use of a given limb or part after a stroke or injury to a specific area of the mind. Another facet of neuroplacticity is cognition.
The “Synaptic Self” outlines how our minds grow into the beings that we become as we age; this book on how the mind functions and grows states that the nature of organization of our neurons defines how we as beings exist and become self aware. (LeDoux)vii
Thinking Machines was a company that developed a system called the “Simputer” based on the doctoral work of W. Daniel Hillis and Sheryal Handeler during the 1980’s (it was founded in 1982). Thinking machines designed super computers entitled “Connection Machines” however the company was only briefly profitable before becoming bankrupt in 1994. The connection machines functioned according to models of the human mind and were excellent at various problems however due to a lack of funding a “Thinking machine” never came to be. Thinking machines pioneered work with “Hypercube’s” and laid the foundation for modern connectionless cluster based compute systems such as Blue Gene/L. (Taubes)viii
However two major differences need to be articulated to the problem of creating a self aware system modeled upon the human mind; Our mind uses not only connections but also chemistry and it comes somewhat pre-wired.
Therefore; if our mind were a computer then the software is our genetic code acting as source files with our objective or compiled binaries being the linked neural nets with their features equating to our neuro-chemcial interfaces and our since of “Being” would be a constant re-compilation of all code simultaneously all the time, whilst maintaining a fully functioning application and interface.
This dichotomy of state is the human condition; and it is also the reason very few concepts of cognition may be implemented by any given computer; such as strong A.I.; weak A.I., Machine Vision, Auto-pilots, et cetera; ad nosium.
If we were to create a computational system that had the equivalent of 100 billion chips each connected to each other in a dynamic net with audio and visual input and output processing that learned via feed back towards an objective of functioning with it’s surroundings whilst developing an ontological reference of it’s experience then perhaps we would have a system akin to HAL in 2001’s a space odyssey; however the technical challenges to this problem are gargantuan in proportion; the first of which would be memory.
Our memory utilizes the semi-understood hippocampus to encode long term memory into molecules; although this is a brash generalization our mind is indifferent to memory and actual experience; how then would we enable such a model in a computational system? (Holladay)ix
Would the system become self aware and if it were would we be able to communicate with it? If communication was one of the systems objectives and we gave it constraints based upon a reward based iterative learning mechanism with adequate models of interface and pattern recognition then yes it would communicate with us; however we would have to create a system flexible enough to understand the difference between noise, sound, speech, music and learn to “learn languages” first.
The potential is there and if we were to create such a system we could communicate with it; however we usually focus our efforts on creating massive systems that communicate with their own internal data; as such if a program ever became self aware would it even be aware of us? The blue mind project aims to do just this; create a truly strong A.I. that is aware and capable of full communication with us.
i Bolte, Jill (TED, February 2008) My Stroke of Insight [Online] World Wide Web, Available From:
http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/jill_bolte_taylor_s_powerful_stroke_of_insight.html
(Accessed on November 17th 2008)
ii Chalmers, David J. (University of Arizona, n.d.) A computational foundation for the study of Cognition [Online] World Wide Web, Available From:
http://consc.net/papers/computation.html
(Accessed on November 17th 2008)
iii Elert, Glenn (Glenn Elert, n.d.) Number of Neurons in a Human Brain [Online] World Wide Web, Available From:
http://hypertextbook.com/facts/2002/AniciaNdabahaliye2.shtml
(Accessed on November 17th 2008)
iv Debono, Christian (Blue Brain Project, 2008) Blue Brain Project FAQ[Online] World Wide Web, Available From:
http://bluebrain.epfl.ch/page18924.html
(Accessed on: November 17th 2008)
v Henderson, Mark (Times Online, November 19th 2002) IBM Starts work on a computer to rival the human Brain [Online] World Wide Web, Available from:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/article833106.ece
(Accessed on: November 17th 2008)
vi Konorski, Jerzy (Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, March 1949) Conditioned Reflexes and Neuron Organization[Online] World Wide Web, Available From:
http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1643801
(Accessed on: November 17th 2008)
vii LeDoux, Jean (n.p., 2002 ) The Synaptic Self
viii Taubes, Gary (Inc.com, 1995) The rise and fall of thinking machines [Online] World Wide Web; Available from:
http://www.inc.com/magazine/19950915/2622.html
(Accessed on: November 17th 2008)
ix Holladay, April (USA Today, March 12th 2007) How does human memory work? [Online] Available From:
http://www.usatoday.com/tech/columnist/aprilholladay/2007-03-12-memory-first_N.htm
(Accessed on: November 17th 2008)
The nature of consciousness is not completely understood; however the function of how the mind creates connections and thus “Programs” itself is well understood; Hillary Putnam in 1961 and Jerry Fodor’s in the 1960’s and 1970’s work on the computational theory of the mind articulates the brain as an information processing system. (Chalmers)ii
According to a number of sources the Human Brain weighs around 1.35KG and contains around 100 billion (100,000,000,000,000); Neurons (Elert)iii. Each neuron only has 1 axon but contains many dendrites connecting to the axons of other neurons; as stated within his site; the primary layout of the neural structure of nerve tissue in mammals is determined by genetics; however the nature by which neural tissue reorganizes itself is very different; given these basic constraints we may calculate the processing power of the human mind. However this is not without difficulty as we must simulate every molecule. (Debono)iv
IBM currently has a supercomputer to rival the power of the human mind; ASCI Purple and Blue-Gene/L meet the theoretical computational power of the human mind. (Henderson)v; however since Blue-Gene/L has never asked where it has come from we may assume that it is not self aware.
The two main issues with computers and mammalian physiology are that a computer chip is a finite state device; the human mind is not. The human mind with its 100 billion neurons has an infinite number of potential interconnections that are plastic in nature; it also contains an undisclosed amount of neruo-chemcials; each having it’s own nature of action and reaction.
“Neuroplasticity” is the brains ability to re-wire it’s connections according to function, it was discovered by Jerzy Konorski in 1948. (Konorski)vi The best example of neuroplasticity is the body’s ability to re-learn the use of a given limb or part after a stroke or injury to a specific area of the mind. Another facet of neuroplacticity is cognition.
The “Synaptic Self” outlines how our minds grow into the beings that we become as we age; this book on how the mind functions and grows states that the nature of organization of our neurons defines how we as beings exist and become self aware. (LeDoux)vii
Thinking Machines was a company that developed a system called the “Simputer” based on the doctoral work of W. Daniel Hillis and Sheryal Handeler during the 1980’s (it was founded in 1982). Thinking machines designed super computers entitled “Connection Machines” however the company was only briefly profitable before becoming bankrupt in 1994. The connection machines functioned according to models of the human mind and were excellent at various problems however due to a lack of funding a “Thinking machine” never came to be. Thinking machines pioneered work with “Hypercube’s” and laid the foundation for modern connectionless cluster based compute systems such as Blue Gene/L. (Taubes)viii
However two major differences need to be articulated to the problem of creating a self aware system modeled upon the human mind; Our mind uses not only connections but also chemistry and it comes somewhat pre-wired.
Therefore; if our mind were a computer then the software is our genetic code acting as source files with our objective or compiled binaries being the linked neural nets with their features equating to our neuro-chemcial interfaces and our since of “Being” would be a constant re-compilation of all code simultaneously all the time, whilst maintaining a fully functioning application and interface.
This dichotomy of state is the human condition; and it is also the reason very few concepts of cognition may be implemented by any given computer; such as strong A.I.; weak A.I., Machine Vision, Auto-pilots, et cetera; ad nosium.
If we were to create a computational system that had the equivalent of 100 billion chips each connected to each other in a dynamic net with audio and visual input and output processing that learned via feed back towards an objective of functioning with it’s surroundings whilst developing an ontological reference of it’s experience then perhaps we would have a system akin to HAL in 2001’s a space odyssey; however the technical challenges to this problem are gargantuan in proportion; the first of which would be memory.
Our memory utilizes the semi-understood hippocampus to encode long term memory into molecules; although this is a brash generalization our mind is indifferent to memory and actual experience; how then would we enable such a model in a computational system? (Holladay)ix
Would the system become self aware and if it were would we be able to communicate with it? If communication was one of the systems objectives and we gave it constraints based upon a reward based iterative learning mechanism with adequate models of interface and pattern recognition then yes it would communicate with us; however we would have to create a system flexible enough to understand the difference between noise, sound, speech, music and learn to “learn languages” first.
The potential is there and if we were to create such a system we could communicate with it; however we usually focus our efforts on creating massive systems that communicate with their own internal data; as such if a program ever became self aware would it even be aware of us? The blue mind project aims to do just this; create a truly strong A.I. that is aware and capable of full communication with us.
i Bolte, Jill (TED, February 2008) My Stroke of Insight [Online] World Wide Web, Available From:
http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/jill_bolte_taylor_s_powerful_stroke_of_insight.html
(Accessed on November 17th 2008)
ii Chalmers, David J. (University of Arizona, n.d.) A computational foundation for the study of Cognition [Online] World Wide Web, Available From:
http://consc.net/papers/computation.html
(Accessed on November 17th 2008)
iii Elert, Glenn (Glenn Elert, n.d.) Number of Neurons in a Human Brain [Online] World Wide Web, Available From:
http://hypertextbook.com/facts/2002/AniciaNdabahaliye2.shtml
(Accessed on November 17th 2008)
iv Debono, Christian (Blue Brain Project, 2008) Blue Brain Project FAQ[Online] World Wide Web, Available From:
http://bluebrain.epfl.ch/page18924.html
(Accessed on: November 17th 2008)
v Henderson, Mark (Times Online, November 19th 2002) IBM Starts work on a computer to rival the human Brain [Online] World Wide Web, Available from:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/article833106.ece
(Accessed on: November 17th 2008)
vi Konorski, Jerzy (Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, March 1949) Conditioned Reflexes and Neuron Organization[Online] World Wide Web, Available From:
http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1643801
(Accessed on: November 17th 2008)
vii LeDoux, Jean (n.p., 2002 ) The Synaptic Self
viii Taubes, Gary (Inc.com, 1995) The rise and fall of thinking machines [Online] World Wide Web; Available from:
http://www.inc.com/magazine/19950915/2622.html
(Accessed on: November 17th 2008)
ix Holladay, April (USA Today, March 12th 2007) How does human memory work? [Online] Available From:
http://www.usatoday.com/tech/columnist/aprilholladay/2007-03-12-memory-first_N.htm
(Accessed on: November 17th 2008)
Thursday, November 13, 2008
Week 6 Discussion Question 2
Chapter 9 Page 474 of Computer Science and Overview by J. Glenn Brookshear states that:
1. Should Law enforcement agencies be given access to o databases for the purpose of identifying individuals with criminal tendencies even though the individuals might have not committed a crime?
The question of ethics regarding the safety of the few versus the safety of the many is a complex one with a long and well publicized history. The recent increase in the powers of the “Department of Homeland Security” (Wagner)i; have created a fervor over the increase of these agencies prevue into our privacy and brought to question the American citizen’s civil liberties and rights to privacy.
The notion of a double standard where almost any government agency may utilize its mandate as a means to bypass the legal process of writ and warrant has become the basis for many articles both online and in print. (Doctorow)ii Organizations such as the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) and the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) are seeking to increase their own powers to pursue and utilize independent private databases as a means to persecute “suspected” persons in civil matters.(McCullugh)iii Up to this date they have included a 94 year old woman and a printer; sued for file sharing.
Law enforcement agencies have a role to play in society at large; that is to uphold the law and maintain peace and order within a civil society. However they like any other organization public or otherwise have to, by regulation and in some cases LAW; respect people’s privacy.
Within Ontario (as I am not an American) the legal regulations for the mentally ill do not require them to register publically; nor do local law enforcement agencies have the right to access public databases within Health Canada to see if a suspect has a mental disorder. Although this “Database of potential criminal’s” would be beneficial; the local Ontario government (as well as the federal Canadian government) value an individual’s privacy as a matter of policy; however in the light of recent global terrorist threats this attitude is changing.
Pierre Trudeau once stated that “The state has no business in the bedroom”; he was referring to gay marriage at the time; but he meant that federal policy and law has no reason to involve itself with religious bias and that religion and state should always be separate.
Benjamin Franklin once stated that “Those who give up Essential Liberty for Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety”; at the time he and the founding fathers were engaged in a grass roots political revolution that eventually led to the first American civil war. By today’s standards they were by all means terrorists.
Let us for a moment consider the idea that if Ben was a political activist today; he would have been profiled by a number of institutions most notably the FBI and DHS; possibly brought in as an Enemy combatant and taken to Gitmo for further “Questioning” as his plans were to overthrow the current government by any means necessary; potentially involving water boarding and other questionable techniques.
The largest law suit regarding privacy in the united states at the moment is between the EFF and ACLU; they are suing Verzion, BellSouth and AT&T for illegally allowing the NSA to commit wiretaps on private phone lines on an as needed basis and without warrants; specifically for violations of privacy dating back to 1934; which was the same year the national phone system was implemented. (Bangeman)iv. This suit involves both the illegal monitoring of client data and the use of these institutions databases by said government agencies.
The ability to rule thought is a fascist’s dictators or oppressive regimes dream; part of implementing it is to profile your populace and then utilize propaganda to modify their opinions. Modern examples include China, North Korea, Iran and a few others. Propaganda is the reality of the modern world: The ongoing wars of ideas are as important to the development of society as water, air or shelter.
Law enforcement agencies are subject to the same errors as any other; where the potential for abuse exists it must be limited and mitigated accordingly.
Where the intent may be good but the outcome is often a violation of the individual’s rights.
Legal Agencies should not have unwarranted access to information; they should by law require warrants and writ’s subject to legal prevue prior to being granted access to anyone else’s data; corporate or otherwise; and the case requirements should be a lot thicker than “probable cause”.
The notion of being innocent until proven guilty is at the heart of criminal law; as such one should be proven before a judge to be a suspect of reasonable cause before a legal agency may access said suspects personal information: this process should be public and transparent however it is not; since legal utilities like the “Public Secret’s Act” in the United States and the “National Secrets Act” in Canada may allow these institutions to place restrictions on both Legal oversight and public transparency to any of these processes. Similar act’s exist in all G7 member nations.
We cannot as a “free society” deny the individual right to free thought; this includes political dissent in any non-violent form; as such allowing any agency anonymous access to a 3rd party individual’s information should be a grievous violation of both the law and public trust and should carry very stiff jail time for those involved; however in this modern time we often think of ethical considerations as an aftermath of the act deemed necessary for public safety.
Hyeak published “The road to Serfdom” in 1944 as a treatise on how the Nazis in Germany came to power and it often has an eerie familiarity with the laws regarding wiretap, the digital millennium copyright law (C-61 in Canada), and many others currently being instituted by government agencies under the idea of keeping the public safe. “I robot” is another good example of safety gone awry.
I for one maintain the hope that we the people see the forest from the trees.
i Wagner, Mitch (Information Week, August 4th 2008) Homeland Security: all your laptops are belong to us, [Online] World Wide Web, Available From:
http://www.informationweek.com/blog/main/archives/2008/08/homeland_securi_2.html
(Accessed on November 13th 2008)
ii Doctorow, Cory (Boing Boing, February 24th 2008) Government and corporate employees engage in an "epidemic" of snooping into databases [Online] World Wide Web, Available From:
http://www.boingboing.net/2008/02/24/government-and-corpo.html
(Accessed on November 13th 2008)
iii McCullugh, Dean (Cnet News, September 11th 2005) RIAA, MPAA resume lobbying push to expand copyright law [Online] World Wide Web, Available From:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-10039238-38.html
(Accessed on November 13th 2008)
iv Bangman, Eric (ArsTechnica, May 15th 2006) Wiretap update: big three telecoms sued while government invokes state secrets, [Online] World Wide Web, Available From:
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060515-6829.html
(Accessed on November 13th 2008)
1. Should Law enforcement agencies be given access to o databases for the purpose of identifying individuals with criminal tendencies even though the individuals might have not committed a crime?
The question of ethics regarding the safety of the few versus the safety of the many is a complex one with a long and well publicized history. The recent increase in the powers of the “Department of Homeland Security” (Wagner)i; have created a fervor over the increase of these agencies prevue into our privacy and brought to question the American citizen’s civil liberties and rights to privacy.
The notion of a double standard where almost any government agency may utilize its mandate as a means to bypass the legal process of writ and warrant has become the basis for many articles both online and in print. (Doctorow)ii Organizations such as the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) and the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) are seeking to increase their own powers to pursue and utilize independent private databases as a means to persecute “suspected” persons in civil matters.(McCullugh)iii Up to this date they have included a 94 year old woman and a printer; sued for file sharing.
Law enforcement agencies have a role to play in society at large; that is to uphold the law and maintain peace and order within a civil society. However they like any other organization public or otherwise have to, by regulation and in some cases LAW; respect people’s privacy.
Within Ontario (as I am not an American) the legal regulations for the mentally ill do not require them to register publically; nor do local law enforcement agencies have the right to access public databases within Health Canada to see if a suspect has a mental disorder. Although this “Database of potential criminal’s” would be beneficial; the local Ontario government (as well as the federal Canadian government) value an individual’s privacy as a matter of policy; however in the light of recent global terrorist threats this attitude is changing.
Pierre Trudeau once stated that “The state has no business in the bedroom”; he was referring to gay marriage at the time; but he meant that federal policy and law has no reason to involve itself with religious bias and that religion and state should always be separate.
Benjamin Franklin once stated that “Those who give up Essential Liberty for Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety”; at the time he and the founding fathers were engaged in a grass roots political revolution that eventually led to the first American civil war. By today’s standards they were by all means terrorists.
Let us for a moment consider the idea that if Ben was a political activist today; he would have been profiled by a number of institutions most notably the FBI and DHS; possibly brought in as an Enemy combatant and taken to Gitmo for further “Questioning” as his plans were to overthrow the current government by any means necessary; potentially involving water boarding and other questionable techniques.
The largest law suit regarding privacy in the united states at the moment is between the EFF and ACLU; they are suing Verzion, BellSouth and AT&T for illegally allowing the NSA to commit wiretaps on private phone lines on an as needed basis and without warrants; specifically for violations of privacy dating back to 1934; which was the same year the national phone system was implemented. (Bangeman)iv. This suit involves both the illegal monitoring of client data and the use of these institutions databases by said government agencies.
The ability to rule thought is a fascist’s dictators or oppressive regimes dream; part of implementing it is to profile your populace and then utilize propaganda to modify their opinions. Modern examples include China, North Korea, Iran and a few others. Propaganda is the reality of the modern world: The ongoing wars of ideas are as important to the development of society as water, air or shelter.
Law enforcement agencies are subject to the same errors as any other; where the potential for abuse exists it must be limited and mitigated accordingly.
Where the intent may be good but the outcome is often a violation of the individual’s rights.
Legal Agencies should not have unwarranted access to information; they should by law require warrants and writ’s subject to legal prevue prior to being granted access to anyone else’s data; corporate or otherwise; and the case requirements should be a lot thicker than “probable cause”.
The notion of being innocent until proven guilty is at the heart of criminal law; as such one should be proven before a judge to be a suspect of reasonable cause before a legal agency may access said suspects personal information: this process should be public and transparent however it is not; since legal utilities like the “Public Secret’s Act” in the United States and the “National Secrets Act” in Canada may allow these institutions to place restrictions on both Legal oversight and public transparency to any of these processes. Similar act’s exist in all G7 member nations.
We cannot as a “free society” deny the individual right to free thought; this includes political dissent in any non-violent form; as such allowing any agency anonymous access to a 3rd party individual’s information should be a grievous violation of both the law and public trust and should carry very stiff jail time for those involved; however in this modern time we often think of ethical considerations as an aftermath of the act deemed necessary for public safety.
Hyeak published “The road to Serfdom” in 1944 as a treatise on how the Nazis in Germany came to power and it often has an eerie familiarity with the laws regarding wiretap, the digital millennium copyright law (C-61 in Canada), and many others currently being instituted by government agencies under the idea of keeping the public safe. “I robot” is another good example of safety gone awry.
I for one maintain the hope that we the people see the forest from the trees.
i Wagner, Mitch (Information Week, August 4th 2008) Homeland Security: all your laptops are belong to us, [Online] World Wide Web, Available From:
http://www.informationweek.com/blog/main/archives/2008/08/homeland_securi_2.html
(Accessed on November 13th 2008)
ii Doctorow, Cory (Boing Boing, February 24th 2008) Government and corporate employees engage in an "epidemic" of snooping into databases [Online] World Wide Web, Available From:
http://www.boingboing.net/2008/02/24/government-and-corpo.html
(Accessed on November 13th 2008)
iii McCullugh, Dean (Cnet News, September 11th 2005) RIAA, MPAA resume lobbying push to expand copyright law [Online] World Wide Web, Available From:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-10039238-38.html
(Accessed on November 13th 2008)
iv Bangman, Eric (ArsTechnica, May 15th 2006) Wiretap update: big three telecoms sued while government invokes state secrets, [Online] World Wide Web, Available From:
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060515-6829.html
(Accessed on November 13th 2008)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)