Monday, April 22, 2002

Today, I made the transition from Blogger.com to Radio UserLand. All the posts you see today were originally made on Blogger.com 4:14:02 PM     As I was thinking about the limitations of computers, AI and the Turing test today, I had a thought. Nature has provided human beings with a good deal of specialized abilities for dealing with our environment. Many of these abilities, such as the ability to orient ourselves in space, detect danger and react in dangerous situations, are shared by many other creatures that inhabit the Earth. These specialized abilities were custom designed by evolution to fit the constraints on life as they exist here on Earth. The idea of building a machine to fool a human into thinking that the machine is really a human may turn out to be a bigger task than simply creating intelligence. Even if Douglas Hofstader is correct in saying that all intelligences will be basically the same, I think many of the things that make us human predate the advent of intelligence in our ancestors. Our ability to interact with our environment is only partially influenced by our intelligence. Much of our interaction with our environment is in our DNA, not our intellect. For a computer to imitate a human to such a high degree as dictated by the Turing test, we will not only have to develop intelligence in the computer, but we will also have to teach the computer the lessons we learned through the human evolutionary experience. Instead of fooling humans, I think computers in the future will become more and more intelligent while still maintaining their identity as computers. On the other hand, as computers become more pervasive, humans may start to modify themselves, both physically and mentally, to make the distinction between computer and human less clear. Maybe then the Turing test could be passed by the computer. Not because the computer is like a human, but because the human is like a computer. 4:11:43 PM     Open-source is making great strides in Latin America, here. 4:11:33 PM     In reference to my post on primitive vs. modern brain processes, my friend, Lance, writes: > Ok then.......................... > > As we grow older and set in our ways of thinking -- How do we step outside > these 'learned' boundaries and begin to expand our thought process? That's a good question :) One thing to note is that by the age of five we are already becoming set in our ways. By 35 we *are* set in our ways... However, I do believe you can teach an old dog new tricks. The main obstacle that limits people is the tendancy to give up when something is hard. Adults think that they can't do something and they give up. Children are not sufficiently aware of themselves to realize their "limitations". What that means to me is that our "limitations" are largely self fulfilling prophesies. So, the first step is to be aware that you favor one problem solving technique over some dormant or under-developed capability. The next step would be to devise exercises that allow you to focus on those dormant capabilities. An example might be painting. If an individual thinks that they are incapable of learning to paint, is that a self imposed limitation or a true limitation. I would propose that it is self imposed. A 20 year-old who has been interrested in drawing since the age of 3 has a 17 year head start over a 20 year-old that has never drawn before. If the inexperienced 20 year-old wants to learn to paint as well as the experienced 20 year-old, they shouldn't expect to reach the same level of skill until they are 37 years old! That is a daunting reality to most people and, instead of facing the challange, they accept defeat on the grounds that they don't have the same God given talents. Now, I chose painting as an example, because it is a skill that relies heavily on primitive constructs of the brain. What about the Spanish example I gave? Well, it is not clear to me how you can get people to ignore the symbolic processing and simply let their inborn abilities shine through. One way is to distract the symbolic system. For instance. If the skill that you are learning is free-throw shooting, you might distract the shooter by throwing basketballs at him while he makes his free throw shots. This way, his instincts will take over the shooting process while his concious mind figures out how to avoid being hit by basketballs!!! Another way that I have seen be effective is getting a _little_ intoxicated. It is true, I think, that someone can actually improve certain activities by getting slightly intoxicated, if their symbolic thought processes are getting in the way of their primitive brain functions. Maybe this is because the alcohol more heavily influences symbolic processes. Overall, though, I think there is a *lot* of research yet to be done in this area. But, I think it is true that humans are capable of a higher level of performance in many areas if they are able to make good use of their whole brain, not just symbolic processing. 4:11:21 PM     Ever since R2-D2 showed us a 3-D hologram of Princess Leia in the original Star Wars, I have wondered when 3-D displays would become science fact. Wired has this article highlighting some of the contenders. 4:11:11 PM     Today's Wired has this article about a possible technique for accessing more primitive functions of the brain that are inhibited by more modern (ie. executive) functions. I have been thinking about some of these issues for years. I can't speak to the specific technique mentioned in the article, but I definitely think that these researchers are posing some of the essential questions. The article discusses autistic individuals and proposes that the astounding abilities of autistics is largely the result of using these more primitive structures in the brain. This may be the case. I think a further case should be made for differences in how everyday people use their brains. I spent a couple of years in Venezuela. In that time, I had the opportunity to learn Spanish as well as watch as many other English speakers attempted to learn the language. I was amazed by the vast differences in learning speeds between individuals. Some people would come to the country and be speaking clearly and almost fluently within months. Others would spend years and still speak poorly. I have developed the opinion that the primary difference is in how an individual uses more primitive vs. more modern brain functions. The more modern brain functions probably revolve around symbolic thought, whereas more primitive functions include practical models for interacting with our environment and processing the large amounts of information coming through our senses. Humankind's ability to analyze information symbolically is astounding, but slow. Whereas older cognitive processes are incredibly fast, but more specialized. The wiring for language acquisition is built in. We don't have to learn how to learn a language. That's in our genes. However as individuals mature into adulthood, they continually develop the more modern, symbolic functions of the brain. As the symbolic functions develop and become more powerful, many individuals begin to favor them over the more primitive functions. I think this is one of the primary differences between slow and fast language acquisition. Those who favor symbolic processing over more primitive capabilities of the brain are, ultimately, limiting their learning capacity. Of course, this is an incredibly complex interraction. Undoubtedly, some balanced combination of the two competing sides of the brain will give the best results. Wired also had another article on the topic today here. 4:10:57 PM     Last week, I was in Salt Lake City, Utah, just kickin' it at Andrea's parent's house. Andrea was busy attending the TESOL conference that was held there. Well, I spent most of the time watching international football (soccer) matches on satellite. I also discovered this great channel called UCTV. It is run by the University of California and features lectures on a variety of topics given by professors from the various California universities as well as other guest lecturers. To many of you, this might seem about as exciting as watching paint dry, but I was enthralled. Anyway, I was kind of disappointed knowing that this channel is not available on my basic cable at home, until I did I search yesterday and found that it is available online! Not only do they stream it live, but you can select from a bunch of archived shows on-demand. If this interrests you, you may also be interrested in checking out the University of Washington's TV here or MIT Cable here. 4:10:38 PM     I have been reading about blogging for many months now. Today, after reading "The Blogging Revolution" on Wired, I decided to give it a try. I hope you enjoy my blog. 4:04:55 PM

© Copyright 2002 Christopher Taylor. Last update: 4/22/2002; 3:50:52 PM. This theme is based on the SoundWaves (blue) Manila theme.