background preloader

Artificial General Intelligence in Second Life 

Artificial General Intelligence in Second Life 
Virtual worlds are the golden path to achieving Artificial General Intelligence and positive Singularity, Dr Ben Goertzel’s, CEO of Novamente LLC and author of “The Hidden Pattern: A Patternist Philosophy of Mind” explained in his presentation “Artificial General Intelligence in Virtual Worlds” given at the Singularity Summit 2007 earlier this month. According to Goertzel, Singularity is no longer a far future idea. About a year ago Goertzel gave a talk “Ten Years to a Positive Singularity — If We Really, Really Try.” The slide that opens this post was in Goerzel’s presentation. It depicts an Archailect, Archai from the Orion’s Arm science-fiction world — a mega scale brain, “sophont or sophont cluster that has grown so vast as to become a god-like entity.” What is singularity? Harnessing the wisdom of crowds in the quintessential rapid prototyping environment for embodied virtual agents — Second Life – may well turn Artificial General Intelligence into an idea with traction. Related:  Artificial IntelligenceDigital LiveAI

On Intelligence Outline[edit] Hawkins outlines the book as follows: The book starts with some background on why previous attempts at understanding intelligence and building intelligent machines have failed. I then introduce and develop the core idea of the theory, what I call the memory-prediction framework. In chapter 6 I detail how the physical brain implements the memory-prediction model—in other words, how the brain actually works. I then discuss social and other implications of the theory, which for many readers might be the most thought-provoking section. A personal history[edit] The first chapter is a brief history of Hawkins' interest in neuroscience juxtaposed against a history of artificial intelligence research. Hawkins is an electrical engineer by training, and a neuroscientist by inclination. The theory[edit] The hierarchy is capable of memorizing frequently observed sequences (Cognitive modules) of patterns and developing invariant representations. An Appendix of 11 Testable Predictions: 1.

Is Twitter a Complex Adaptive System I’ve seen a bunch of posts bubble up over the past few days that are really sparking my curiousity about what is really going on with Twitter, so I need to do a little brain dump. Bear with me. Insight #1 An article by Rosabeth Moss Kanter was just published today on the Harvard Business Review website, titled On Twitter and in the Workplace, It’s Power to the Connectors. She also points out that success today is based on a person’s ability to leverage power and influence within their social networks, to act as “connectors” between people and information, and in turn build social capital. She leaves the evaluation of the significance of Twitter open-ended, but she lays out a few characteristics of Twitter that I found most interesting: In the World According to Twitter, giving away access to information rewards the giver by building followers. (just keep those points in mind, I’m going to come back to it) Insight #2 From a social viewpoint, the architecture of business seems all wrong.

Metaverse Roadmap: Pathways to the 3D Web Conceptual Framework for Online Identity Roles I just wrapped up a final project for an aesthetics course this semester, the assignment being to create a “Database of the Self.” I chose to make the database as a representation of the roles we play in terms of how we interact with information online. The roles are overlaid on a panarchy, which shows a visualization of adaptive lifecycles. Though the evolution of every idea or meme won’t necessarily follow this specific path, (it may in fact be rhizomatic, with multiple feedback loops), this begins to flesh out what we become as nodes within an enmeshed series of networks. The cycle can be thought to begin with the “Activators,” in the lower right side of image. For an interactive version of the graphic, click here. I found this to be an interesting exercise when thinking about the impact and influence we have on the web, and how information travels. Thanks to @wildcat2030 for inspiration from Friendships in Hyperconnectivity mindmap and to @gavinkeech for visual design. Like this:

The AI Revolution: Our Immortality or Extinction Note: This is Part 2 of a two-part series on AI. Part 1 is here. PDF: We made a fancy PDF of this post for printing and offline viewing. We have what may be an extremely difficult problem with an unknown time to solve it, on which quite possibly the entire future of humanity depends. — Nick Bostrom Welcome to Part 2 of the “Wait how is this possibly what I’m reading I don’t get why everyone isn’t talking about this” series. Part 1 started innocently enough, as we discussed Artificial Narrow Intelligence, or ANI (AI that specializes in one narrow task like coming up with driving routes or playing chess), and how it’s all around us in the world today. This left us staring at the screen, confronting the intense concept of potentially-in-our-lifetime Artificial Superintelligence, or ASI (AI that’s way smarter than any human, across the board), and trying to figure out which emotion we were supposed to have on as we thought about that.← open these So where does that leave us? i.e. Timeline

Autonomous agent An autonomous agent is an intelligent agent operating on an owner's behalf but without any interference of that ownership entity. An intelligent agent, however appears according to a multiply cited statement in a no longer accessible IBM white paper as follows: Intelligent agents are software entities that carry out some set of operations on behalf of a user or another program with some degree of independence or autonomy, and in so doing, employ some knowledge or representation of the user's goals or desires. Non-biological examples include intelligent agents, autonomous robots, and various software agents, including artificial life agents, and many computer viruses. Biological examples are not yet defined. References[edit] External links[edit] See also[edit]

Google Consciousness Second Life Built into the software is a three-dimensional modeling tool based on simple geometric shapes that allows residents to build virtual objects. There is also a procedural scripting language, Linden Scripting Language, which can be used to add interactivity to objects. Sculpted prims (sculpties), mesh, textures for clothing or other objects, animations, and gestures can be created using external software and imported. The Second Life terms of service provide that users retain copyright for any content they create, and the server and client provide simple digital rights management (DRM) functions.[3] However, Linden Lab changed their terms of service in August 2013, to be able to use user-generated content for any purpose. The new terms of service prevents users from using textures from 3rd-party texture services, as some of them pointed out explicitly.[5] Users can also photograph in Second Life with the camera technology the client programs have. History[edit] 10th anniversary[edit]

The Architecture of Participation by Tim O'Reilly June 2004 I've come to use the term "the architecture of participation" to describe the nature of systems that are designed for user contribution. Larry Lessig's book, Code and Other Laws of Cyberspace, which he characterizes as an extended meditation on Mitch Kapor's maxim, "architecture is politics", made the case that we need to pay attention to the architecture of systems if we want to understand their effects. I immediately thought of Kernighan and Pike's description of the Unix software tools philosophy referred to above. I also recalled an unpublished portion of the interview we did with Linus Torvalds to create his essay for the 1998 book, Open Sources. And of course, the Internet and the World Wide Web have this participatory architecture in spades. In addition, the IETF, the Internet standards process, has a great many similarities with an open source software project. These projects can be seen to have a natural architecture of participation.

Simplicity is key to co-operative robots -- ScienceDaily A way of making hundreds -- or even thousands -- of tiny robots cluster to carry out tasks without using any memory or processing power has been developed by engineers at the University of Sheffield, UK. The team, working in the Sheffield Centre for Robotics (SCentRo), in the University's Faculty of Engineering, has programmed extremely simple robots that are able to form a dense cluster without the need for complex computation, in a similar way to how a swarm of bees or a flock of birds is able to carry out tasks collectively. The work, published April 17, 2014 in the International Journal of Robotics Research, paves the way for robot 'swarms' to be used in, for example, the agricultural industry where precision farming methods could benefit from the use of large numbers of very simple and cheap robots. Each robot uses just one sensor that tells them whether or not they can 'see' another robot in front of them. Video of the swarming robots can be seen at

Autonomic Computing The system makes decisions on its own, using high-level policies; it will constantly check and optimize its status and automatically adapt itself to changing conditions. An autonomic computing framework is composed of autonomic components (AC) interacting with each other. An AC can be modeled in terms of two main control loops (local and global) with sensors (for self-monitoring), effectors (for self-adjustment), knowledge and planner/adapter for exploiting policies based on self- and environment awareness. Driven by such vision, a variety of architectural frameworks based on “self-regulating” autonomic components has been recently proposed. A very similar trend has recently characterized significant research in the area of multi-agent systems. Autonomy-oriented computation is a paradigm proposed by Jiming Liu in 2001 that uses artificial systems imitating social animals' collective behaviours to solve difficult computational problems. Problem of growing complexity[edit] Automatic Aware

Facebook vs. Google : future of the Web FORTUNE -- Paul Adams is one of Silicon Valley's most wanted. He's an intellectually minded product designer with square-framed glasses, a thick Irish accent, and a cult following of passionate techies. As one of Google's lead social researchers, he helped dream up the big idea behind the company's new social network, Google+: those flexible circles that let you group friends easily under monikers like "real friends" or "college buddies." He never got to help bring his concept to consumers, though. In a master talent grab last December, Facebook lured him 10 miles east to Palo Alto to help design social advertisements. On his blog, Adams explained, "Google values technology, not social science." In the long history of tech rivalries, rarely has there been a battle as competitive as the raging war between the web's wonder twins. In one corner is Facebook, the reigning champion of the social web, trying to cement its position as the owner of everyone's online identity. Google Facebook

Second Earth This version of the story contains additional content that was not published in the print edition of the magazine. This bonus content appears in special boxes found throughout the story. The print version of the story can be found here. A thunderhead towers at knee level, throwing tiny lightning bolts at my shoes. I’m standing–rather, my avatar is standing–astride a giant map [SLurl] of the continental United States, and southern Illinois, at my feet, is evidently getting a good April shower. The weather is nicer on the East Coast: I can see pillowy cumulus clouds floating over Boston and New York, a few virtual meters away. The red polka dots over Phoenix and Los Angeles indicate a hot day, as I would expect. Once you've downloaded the appropriate software from Second Life and Google Earth, many locations mentioned in this story can be accessed using special links in the copy. “Any clue why this dot is blue?” “Let me check something,” Manbi/Corbin responds.

13 Community Role Archetypes (Which One Are You?) Decker and I had a blast putting this together – It’s a breakdown of some archetypical roles in community we’ve noticed over the years, along with the specific people in our community who fill those roles. More on this below. (Download a larger-font, editable version here) (Download a larger-font, editable version here) Assertion #1 – Everyone has essential gifts to bring to a community.Assertion #2 – Recognizing and Celebrating each person’s gifts is an essential aspect of Community Leadership. And, while the Art of Deeply Seeing people ultimately defies any nice neat categories we can come up with, these possibilities can definitely get your wheels turning. Question: What combination of these types do you see in yourself? You may look at these roles and be struck by how little of ANY of these roles are actually being filled by the people in your social circles. And once you’ve left your comment, check out our new training here: Authentic Community Leadership

Related: