Skip navigation
Help

Xi

warning: Creating default object from empty value in /var/www/vhosts/sayforward.com/subdomains/recorder/httpdocs/modules/taxonomy/taxonomy.pages.inc on line 33.

How to create a global brain in only a few lines of code

This is where my research was going years ago and I found so many interesting things that I forgot that's why I was doing it. Here's the summary of the plan:

User Interface can be anything which is statistically balanced and has continuous input and output of at least 1 dimension between each person and their computer. A simple example is the speed they are moving the mouse, if its increasing or decreasing at the time, and an output could be some music which is playing becomes a little slower or faster at the time. It could be more complex things like realtime video, evolved audio, Nintendo Wii controllers, Kinect, Emotiv Epoc or OpenEEG mind reading game controllers, or many other things. The User Interface is a stream of vectors in and vectors out, of at least 1 dimension, through any devices. If there is any audio or video, that is part of the User Interface. The core idea is a kind of math and is calculated independently of any game content which players create while in the game.

N people play the game at once, streaming data to eachother's computer through the Internet as it was all 1 system with many inputs and outputs as paths of information flow between the players.

The output to each player is a prediction of the next input of that player. The player must hear/see/experience the output in some way so it affects their state of mind.

The combined inputs of all players are used to predict the combined outputs of all players. This can be done many ways. A bayesian network should work well for this since it calculates using the math of conditional-probability and scales up efficiently.

Here's what makes it work extremely more than the intelligence of the AI or any 1 player:
Since the bayesian network calculates relevance of inputs and outputs to its prediction accuracy, whichever inputs of other people are most useful (combined in some statistical way) to predict the next few inputs of this local person, will gradually be given more influence here, and because of that this local person, who "must hear/see/experience the output in some way", will tend to become more statistically relevant for the AI to use their inputs to predict the other peoples' next few inputs, and the feedback loop is complete and amplifies peoples' ability to play the game in a way that helps the AI use people to predict other people.

In this feedback loop of N people, without needing conscious knowledge or intent of it, people will unavoidably be influenced toward flowing their thoughts together because the set of all possibilities where that does not happen is partially cancelled-out by the bayesian network.

Depnding on the accuracy of whatever kind of AI does these predictions and is the "glue code" for networking our minds together, and how skilled people become at the game, a superintelligence is somewhere along this research path and it will be made of the minds of billions of people and computers flowing thoughts together at the subconscious psychology level.

This is the simplest way to build a superintelligence. My research years ago took a different direction in finding User Interfaces, like Audivolv, BayesianCortex, and Physicsmata (all open source), and now I have a good idea of how to put it all together. We can proceed with these experiments toward thinking more like a global brain.

Does anyone have idea on what kind of game it should be? The research path leaves many possibilities.

0
Your rating: None

Most parts of governments, religions, and many other parts of the world are far more complex than other ways things could be done that would work better.

If a government department is simple, more people would understand what is happening in it.

If more people understand what government is doing, more people would be able to have an opinion against it, and some would reduce support for or act against it. Those whose opinion would be positively influenced would do less than those whose opinion is negatively influenced.

Complex government departments breed other complex government departments. The more you have, the more there will be later, if few people resist.

Most people involved probably don't know they're doing it, but society evolved toward patterns where complex things survive because we don't have the brain power to understand them, which would be required to solve those problems. Complexity is a problem like AIDS. It spreads unnoticed for many years because its deep in the system (biology in this case) in ways its not easily observed, and being so well evolved with the system its hard to remove. It consumes resources to continue its own survival. It disables you just enough that its hard to fight back but little enough that you survive more years to spread it. Like we want a cure for AIDS, we should want a cure for Complexity.

Complexity is an evolved defense against progress, because progress includes many of the ways the world works, including some parts of governments and religions, becoming obsolete.

Complexity is a cost, not something to measure progress by. Something may need to be a certain level of complex to accomplish something else, but complexity by itself is negative and should be avoided like spending money. If something simpler or cheaper does the same job at least the same quality, then its a mistake to pay higher complexity or pay more of other resources.

People say things like "They spent billions of dollars researching it, and if they can't do it, why do you think you can?" Did they try spending only thousands of dollars researching it? With the ability to do complex things often comes the overlooking of simple things.

Similarly, why don't people say things like "If you want to build a system as advanced as animals or Humans, you've got to have AIDS in the system overall or something equally complex." Some parts we should not include in our world.

In open source, for example, we usually don't have the resources of a business, so we have to explore deeper into simple ways to make things work, so how are open source products staying competitive? We cure complexity because we have to. Others are still infected and allow their Complexity to refuse the cure which would obsolete itself.

0
Your rating: None