I ran across this article on a trip recently and thought it was pretty incredible. It reminded me of Deep Thought frome the Hitch hikers guide books. A computer that actually comes up with new inventions, who would have thunk it.
Anyway, enjoy.
That was well worth reading.
Did you like the last line: telling a little about the author
“Jonathon Keats is writing a collection of fables called The Book of the Unknown.”
This made me briefly wonder whether it was all an elaborate hoax, but no, it’s not.
Nao
Is it just me, or when he’s spent all this money (presumably) on this massive computer, couldn’t he find somthing better than a cinder block to prop the screen on?
Thanks for the link! That was a fascinating article. It raises an interesting question… what happens when a computer-derived invention causes damage or harm to another person or their property… who are the lawyers going to sue? Do we put the offending computer code in an “electronic prison”? Our poor old, fat and dumb legislators aren’t going to even have the first clue about what to do with this new quandary…
Recently, I read this article about “artificial life” which is remotely related… it does well in explaining the basics of “evolutionary programming” and presenting a bit of its history.
Anyone else played “the game of life”? I never knew how profound it was until I read the above-mentioned article…
Perhaps it’s the most efficient solution to his problem… the cinder block is cheap, stable, and the correct height for it’s application. Why buy an expensive piece of molded plastic to do the job that a lump of stone can accomplish? Perhaps this is a subtle demonstration of the “out-of-the-box” style of thinking that the John Koza uses to come up with his inventions… or perhaps I’m just over-analyzing the situation…
The short answer to your question: it’s just you.
Very rarely does the intellectual property holder get sued for the mistakes of their device/invention. People don’t sue cars, they sue the people attempting to drive them. Even when it does trace back to the original designer or manufacturer then the patent will be owned by a company, with the involved individuals named as participants in it’s development, so the company will be targeted, not the individual.
Are you 2 feet tall? Correct height for what application? I’m not sure my knees require all that much use from a computer monitor to be honest, I’d prefer it to be at eye level or above while in a comfortable standing or seated position… The short answer of course being that you are over-analysing the situation, as am I. The picture will not even be of the machine, it’s just a media ‘fluff’ filler to signify a link between computer and industry.
Loose.
heh, awesome
I was of course joking, I don’t seriously think he operates that computer sitting on the floor in a darkened warehouse with a mysterious character lurking in the background on a regular basis. And why on earth would that screen require a cable that thick?
This concept is nothing new - while it is “very cool”, there’s been other implimentations of “evolutionary” software like this before.
For a really great read on this and similar topics, pick up The Age of Spiritual Machines: When Computers Exceed Human Intelligence by Ray Kurzweil.
It’s an infinitely fascinating subject.
Cars don’t design themselves.
Note that the article said this is the first time a non-human entity has ever attained a patent. This is ground-breaking territory here, and opens up an entirely new domain of liability.
The concept of the wheel was nothing new when the first automobile was created, but it was still revolutionary. Here, it’s the application of a concept that is more significant than the concept itself. Sure, there have been evolutionary programs before this, but none nearly as successful.
For Kurzweil’s science-fiction ideas to come into existence, it’ll take visionaries like Keats to take us there, one small step at a time… there seems to be a lot of “pie in the sky” when it comes to intelligent / evolutionary computing.