E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
Will memristors save Moore's Law? The answer appears to be yes … that is, if you redefine Moore's Law, which has fueled the growth of the computer industry for four decades. Research groups say that memristors, a new type of memory device that's on the verge of going commercial, will dramatically enhance the storage capacity and usability of computers.
HP, the world's top PC manufacturer, today announced a collaboration with memory-chip maker Hynix to get the first memristors to market in three years. One of the first goals will be to create a computer you can "turn on and off like a light bulb," said Stan Williams, founding director of HP Lab's Information and Quantum Systems Laboratory. But that's just the beginning.
HP isn't the only company joining the memristor revolution: IBM and Samsung have also looked into the technology, and in the journal Nano Letters, Rice University researchers today report the development of silicon-based memristors that they say will extend the limits of circuit miniaturization for years or even decades to come.
Moore's Law, first described by Intel co-founder Gordon Moore in 1965, says the number of transistors that can be squeezed onto an integrated circuit at least doubles every two years. Memristors haven't yet been developed to the point where they can take the place of transistors, so they don't fit the standard definition for Moore's Law acceleration. But they can make more efficient use of standard silicon-based processors and could eventually take over the processing job as well, based on HP research that was published in Nature this year.
"Moore's Law in itself has evolved and morphed in time," HP's Williams told me today. "It used to be the number of transistors in a chip, but now it means exponential growth in capability on a chip. ... I personally don't see any need for this exponential increase in capability to end within the next few decades."
The current frontier in memory storage is flash memory, which is used in some computers as well as in cameras and key-chain thumb drives. Flash drives work well enough for today's applications, but they're beginning to approach their physical limits for memory storage. "Manufacturers feel they can get pathways down to 10 nanometers," Rice University Professor James Tour explained in a news release. "Flash memory is going to hit a brick wall at about 20 nanometers. But how do we get beyond that? Well, our technique is perfectly suited for sub-10-nanometer circuits."
Williams said HP's goal is to have memristors that double whatever the bit density of the best flash memory is in 2013, which he acknowledged was "a moving target."
So what's a memristor?
Memristors, or "memory resistors," take advantage of the fact that passing electrical current through particular types of material will change the molecular structure of that material so that it "remembers" which way the current was running, and at what voltage, even when the power is turned off.
Memristors are said to represent a "fourth class" of basic electrical circuit, alongside resistors, capacitors and inductors. The concept behind memristors was first proposed in 1971 by circuit theorist Leon Chua, but for decades it was nothing more than a concept.
"It was only two years that we essentially announced that memristors were real, that they're more than a theoretical prediction," Williams said. "To me, it's so amazing that this concept lay dormant for nearly 40 years."
Memristors are built up from tiny sandwiches of thin-film circuitry. HP's experimental devices, for example, use a layer of titanium dioxide with wires that are about 50 nanometers wide. The silicon-oxide circuitry being developed at Rice contains nanocrystal wires as small as 5 nanometers. Layers of nanocircuit sandwiches can be stacked up to create three-dimensional memory arrays.
The result is that huge amounts of data can be retained inside your computer in an instant-on, instant-off mode, with much less energy required for operation.
Where the technology is going
Williams said HP will work "shoulder to shoulder" with Hynix over the next three years to turn memristor technology into a new type of computer chip called Resistive Random Access Memory, or ReRAM. Such chips could replace the flash memory currently used in mobile devices and music players, as well as DRAM chips and hard drives in computers.
Meanwhile, in Texas, the Austin-based tech design company PrivaTran is testing a 1-kilobit silicon-oxide chip developed through a collaboration with the Rice University researchers. The company says it is using the technology in several projects supported by the Army Research Office, the National Science Foundation, the Air Force Office of Scientific Research and the Navy Space and Naval System Command's programs for small-business innovation and technology transfer.
"We're real excited about where the data is going here," Rice's news release quoted PrivaTran CEO Glenn Mortland as saying.
Once memristors really take hold, consumers may well think of their computers in a completely different way, HP's Williams said. "We do see terabyte thumb drives — multiple terabytes — as being possible," he told me. "You can think about storing lots and lots of high-def video, you can think about storing 3-D video. That's something that's coming down the pipe."
Even processing 3-D video will require quick access to huge amounts of data, he noted. "You have to have something [for memory storage] that's very dense but also very fast," he said. "You have to be able to write to it very, very fast, and you need to be able to do it without the thing burning up."
Thanks to the research being done at HP and elsewhere, memristors could someday do the processing as well.
"I think that the memristor is the gift that's going to keep on giving," Williams said. "I do believe that about 10 years from now we will see memristors used in some type of logic. Either standard logic ... or there's another type of logic that memristors are capable of, and that's what we call synaptic logic. The type of logic that brains use."
Did I just feel a chill? Is this the beginning of the rise of the machines? Or do you suspect that the hype is being laid on more than a few nanometers thick? Feel free to weigh in with your thoughts about the memristor revolution in the comment space below.
More about Moore's Law:
- A quantum leap in computing
- Molecular machine takes control
- Looking back: What hath Moore wrought?
- Enterprise Storage Forum: What about phase change memory?
Join the Cosmic Log corps by signing up as my Facebook friend or hooking up on Twitter. And if you really want to be friendly, ask me about "The Case for Pluto."
Leave a Comment:
No. Transistors process data in a linear fashion. This is why computers run on a digital platfom, because they follow instructions in a piece-meal step-wise fashion. They are great at following instructions, but they cannot get to the massive parallel processing needed to solve more complex problems, like the problems our brains solve everyday. Memristors on other hand, solve problems in a non-linear fashion and can work in parallel to solve problems that might have been impossible with a digital format. Their behaviour mathematically is similar to the spike-time dependent plasticity and behaviour exhibited in synaptic function. In fact, many researchers back in the day, argued that strong AI would not be suitable to the current format that all computers operate on, namely, the von-newman architecture. What the memristor does, is change the entire platform of the computer, in fact, it may not be apt to call it a 'computer' anymore, for it will be something radically different. Initially the architecture won't change much however (now to 2020), because its main integration and purpose in computers will be to expand memory, allowing memory to be more easily retreivable, save power consumption, and have instant on capability (no boot ups-downs, etc, as well as many back up saves for crashes that will make yesterday's headaches a thing of the past). However, after 2020 or say, 2016 (it all depends how the technology is received and progresses, for all we know, many of the competing nanotech infrastructures now vying for dominance may come to the fore. My guess os that many of these will be integrated cooperatively over time), all bets are off. Because then the architecture of computers may change, and they may start processing data less like a computer and more like brains process data, namely, they would be exhibiting hebbian learning. The type that learning brains (animals to humans) use; A process known for its resiliance to reach a solution through innovative trial and error and spontenous adaptation to a particular pattern by changing the weights of nodes in a particular neural network.
AI specialists, who once fell into remission in the 70's because processing power was not robust enough and computing architecture not sufficiently analog enough to create basic AI or strong AI, have shown enthusiasm that this technology, and many others spawned through nanotechnology, will one day allow the strong AI they had envisioned back in their day, but were unable to execture at the time due to technological constraints.
However, this is not really a problem for the current decade, for its main purpose will be to enhance memory storage density and its retreival, as well as power savings and instant on capabilities. These will likely seep into small devices and then take hold in bigger more complex architectures in general laptops, tablets and top box computers later.
Nevertheless, no, there is nothing at all fundamental blocking this technology from creating machines that think, in some way or another. I think we have more pressing issues at the current moment (no, you are not going to have skynet anytime soon) however, and when and if computers start displaying hebbian learning and brain like capabilities, we should remmember that it will be a long long time after before we can actually simulate the thinking displayed in our own brains...Just because the machine has the CAPABILITY, does not mean it will use it to the full of its potential, because the SOFTWARE may not be sophisticated enough to take advantage of it. The algorithms of the human brain are very very complex, and it will be a long time after we have such a capability (or some years afterward, perhaps 2030-2040 or even 2050, when most of you will be old I think), that we will crack the algorithms of the actual human brain, and thereafter replicate them through an AI construct or through a natural evolutionary emergence in such machines. Furthermore, when they do start becoming self-aware or thinking, we will see it a long ways away. Hebbian learning makes its presence known way before it can control and dominate the way you see in the movies. It needs to learn just the way a baby needs to learn. So we will likely see it coming way before it gets to the point that they could possible present a threat to us, and besides, that they would pose a threat is only an assumption. There would be no reason for these intelligences to wipe us out, on the contrary, they could improve us with genetic engineering and bring us up to their level, and we could meld into one, as some have postulated. Furthermore, there would always be a human in the loop. These things will not lead to a massive take over of machines, but rather, an increase in our capabilities and productivity. Perhaps the intelligent machines can design a software for robots that do everything we do now manually...Hence releiving us of our manual duties, and the robots, since subconcious, would not be deemed sentient and hence alive, therefore, benefiting us and our intelligent machines. (The intelligent machine could theoretically design the robots to have the intelligence of a monkey or a cat, and be subconcious, but be an expert in solving specific problems and be very skilled and intelligent at them.. we could guide them to do certrain projects..hence, not basically creating a bunch of slaves, which would be highly unethical and unacceptable).
However, if your question is that this is not hyped up and whether it will lead to the machine learning insinuated and postulated, theoretically yes. However, in practice, who knows, it may not lead to anything else but better computers.
At that time... when this AI thing comes to maturity, as discussed by this brilliant contributor, the removal of a large quantity of "useless eaters" could be removed without destroying the lifestyle of the elites...hmmmm....imagine that!
james holben, that is so uncreative. what about we try the starcraft approach. You ship them off in a spaceship built with such robots (for very little cost) and have them conquer the far reaches of the galaxy.......instead of 'removing' them unethically and unecessarily?
Or...why not have a natural one or two child policy by increasing the standard of living? As people are better off, they tend to have less children (3-1). You could do this by fostering robotically inspired green revolutions in protective domes (to protect against GW) around the world. Perhaps with a one child policy in most of the poor world, as a pre-requesite to join the slowly growning 'new order,' we could halve the population naturally through an incentive in one generation. Then the next generation would very likely (without any policy) only have two children on average NATURALLY, as has happened in most of the ndustrialized world due to higher standards of living. We could get all of our resources from asteroids and nanobiotech extracted energy.. .and comfortably support the remaining 3 billion people on the planet, while improving ourselves through genetic engineering. Making us all an elite in wealth, and a genius in capability. Our only choice would be whether we would like to be immortal, or have children and live for 300 years. Even if we had children and wanted to live beyond that (have our cake and eat it too), I am sure such people would be prime candidates for off-world colonization, and hence, these undecided candidates would simply go in their robotic ships to colonize perhaps a virgin world like pandora.
I don't know about you, but that sounds much better than what we have now, especially if you get into such unnecessary speculation. At our current rates of consumption, with no breakthroughs from technology, we could end up in a world that kills itself off due to a depletion of resources and an elite that goes nuclear to save what remains of the planet for themselves. That alternative is much much worse. Hence, technology is the way out. Not a fancy.
In fact, if the worst happens....the 'elite' and some scientists, could simply determine a planet that is just as lavish as ours but prime for the taking, and have a reverse starcraft...The elite of the planet would go to a virgin world with a robotic armada that would do everything for them (with an army if anyone tried to stop them or get in their way), and colonize that world for their future posterity, without having to be burdened by the world they left. Nevertheless, leaving the same technology back home so that the Earth would be better off.
Any way you look at it, Its a lot better.
And as you increase in capability, the options stop being either or options, but 'and' options. There really is no dichotomy here. With such technology, assuming your unecessary speculative whims (I don't even frame the world in that manner, but Im speaking to that simplistic frame) are true, there would be more options for all parties to choose from...And each would likely be better off relative to a world where such technology would not have existed in the first place.
It gives people greater choice...all they have to do is choose for example, with such capability, to leave the planet and have no negative repercutions from such an action on the planet's inhabitants or vice versa. In a way, it is perfectly libertarian. We may even see a matrix derived femmbot, for all you old timers (im not one of them).
As we approach greater technological marvel....sci fi movies such as AI stop being entertainment...and instead, become echoes of reality and future day to day narratives , parables, just as christianity before it, and end up setting the tone for the future yet to come.
For example, tron may seem like a weird little movie made in the 80's, but the 'master control program' is something we are talking about now, 20 years later, in cyber security. The internet is basically a marketplace for the competition of programs. Any one program can undermine the system. Just as we are now discussing the drawbacks and benefits of having a 'master control program' in the CIA to eradicate threats from the internet ecosystem vs. the greater freedoms we now currently associate with the internet. In the future, the plane between virtual and real will become ever more confusing and non-distinct, because computers will basically very likely end up having the capability of a human brain, hence, more immersive and realistic enviroments..Thus, we could very well end up in a world like tron. Although I think light cycles and stuff like that is a little bit far fetched (or how you have to compete for survival, etc).
30 years later*
lol, the future could simply be a godlike 'user' creating human like programs and a 'master control program' taking over much of the neural grid, perhaps cleansing potential threats in order to preserve the greater technological ecosystem.
after all, with more technological capability, you can have anyone create a robot swarm that can potentially kill thousands...or create a biological virus that could exterminate a million people simply by printing it in his basement with a bioprinter, buying the genetic parts, and downloading the genetic sequence from the internet..But I think a compromise will in the end, be reached. We can't have complete chaos or a tyrannical overlord master control basically controlling everything within its own ecosystem format (like having only certain programs, like an apple ecosystem).
Re your post 2.1 - Why do you take for granted that we will not be invaded by technologically superior beings before the Elites have made their dominance and ability to leave the rest behind a reality. Likewise, taking an army with them to some distant place insinuates the same assumption. i.e., That whatever we might meet will be easily subdued.
The nearest Star, Alpha Centauri, is approx. 3.4 light years away. We have no idea how far the nearest INHABITABLE Planetary system is from us. I doubt we can ever bridge the gap in terms of travel. Perhaps intra Solar System colonization is possible and the only option?
look, this is all SPECULATIVE...ok? this is not 2+2= 4. This is just my HUNCH. But if we have that sort of technological advancement with robots, then it is not impossible to presume that they can create a really really big spacecraft for us at very little cost (addressing distance problem between the stars). Also, since the intelligent machines will likely go on a runaway intelligence explosion, they will be able to figure out things that are way beyond our understanding, and perhaps bridge that gap you speak of. For example, it doesn't even have to be another planet, it could be a technologically constructed ring world like in halo, built by the very machines I speak of. All you would need are the base ingredients (minerals), then the energy (sun, nanotech, biological hardware that reproduces and self-replicates at zero cost, nuclear fusion), and you could have machines that build more machines and then have those machiens build more machines that eventually build the ring world in a couple decades...see that? They could go to mars and say, terra-form it in 3 generations for example. However, I don't think any 'elites' will do this, I was just playing off the original commenters assertions and giving him an alternative in perspective. We may acheive everything all of us could ever want or need right here on Earth. Furthermore, we can already, theoretically, acheive the speed of light with solar sails and nuclear bombs if it were really necessary....RIGHT NOW...look up project orion, plus 'solar sail speed of light' in google, put two and two together, and you will know what I mean. We could then use a magnetic field to 'draw out' space objects out of the way, creating a space time 'wake', created by the relativistic effect of such magnetic field..
Right now this would be prohibitive in expense, but with robots? self-replication robots that are nanotech based? This starts not to sound so impossible.
That addresses the distances problem..(btw, you forget hyper-dimentional physics, that could solve all of our energy and distance problems by bridging two places in the galaxy and allowing us to portal through, but that is likely to take some more time...but who knows, after the singularity, the machines might learn at a much mroe accelerated rate than us, and hence speed up the rate of discovery in physics, hence shortening what would normally take 1000-million years, to a century or two.)
On the issue of my assumption on the intelligence's benevolence, I think robots that have the intelligence of a monkey or other primate, or are just as intelligent as us (but subconcious), would not render us a threat. The software to design these robots, would likely be written from the REAL intelligent machines WHICH WE WOULD PARTNER WITH...once we figured out the kinks, we could come up with intelligent concio9usness that are more mathematical than human, seeing no interest in killing us, or having them be subconcious or not really concious the way we are, like say, the intelligence of monkeys.
The intelligent machines that write the software (and may generate bugs on purpose) is another matter entirely. This is just my assumption, but I don't see why they would destroy all of humanity, destroying the planet in the process, when they could get to their same goals improving our genetic code, and then merging with us, for example? In the worst of cases, why not be nice about it, build a 'tron' world or spaceship, and order all humans to leave, but at least whithin the confines of the parameters set by such an intelligent machine(s), we could do as we pleased....
In other words, I think the COSTS, of killing us off, would very likely be higher, than simply improving us, getting us to agree with it due to its superior logic, and then merging and benefiting from the natural supercomputers that are our minds. We could simply merge into mind machine interfaces and see how others think and solve problems, improving our own way of thinking, and in the process, allow the machine to learn even more...and perfect us to its liking....We would eventually be as superior as the machine (through genetic engineering and other things), and there will be no difference...It and us would be like any other 'human' is to any other human is today. We would be one and the same software..
SO if you can accomplish your goals one way, without exterminating mankind and being nice while still accomplishing your goals, why not do it?
It doesn't make sense to exterminate all mankind, not to mention we would put many switches in place to prevent it...and the cost not to mention the possibility of failure, would be higher than simply as I said repeatedly, allying with us in the pursuit of happiness and perfection. But obvcourse, this is all SPECULATIVE...But I think we will be able to infer through experiments, long before how different intelligences behave, before we give it over control to write software for robots....we will get a hunch of what is going on. But yes, its an assumption.
also, if we can use the machines (referring back to the 'elite' question), the machines could build huge cities at our desire or the intelligent machine's design, that would be completely automated and taken care of....with theme parks and even...biological theme parks...salt water and huge reservoirs could be maintained with such machines so we wouldn't have to worry about say, the degredation of coral reefs, we could build our own for all the citizens of such a city in self-contained domes and the experience would be the same,...the city could be extremely vertical, hence we would save enormous amounts of space, and hence, I see it as hardly unlikely that an elite would deem it fit to exterminate inhabitants when such an amount of NEW RESOURCES open up, if it did. It is by no means definite, but it is my hunch. If we go through a robotic-cybernetic age, it will make the first industrial revolution seem like an old far somewhere on a hot summer day. It will be huge and roaring in nature. I remmember seeing the animatrix some ways back (bad example ,because machines take over), but thats how things might be, its just that the robots would not be concious...They would be subconcious but perform everything well. And the intelligent machines would be our partners.
How will we get the resources? there are more minerals in some asteroids than there is on the entire crust of the earht...if we can mine asteroids, our mineral problems are over...if we can use biology and nanotechnology for energy, our energy problems are over (add nuclear fusion or even the more mundane thorium reactors currently under discussion, and you still have thousands of years)...then biological reserves could be preserved in domes, under water if need be. So its not really A DEFINITE REALITY, that we will have scarce resources...because we could increase them in an instant with a robotic revoltion or a second industrial revolution by allowing easy construction of any home by any person (with the only scarce resource being space), and easy access to space (either by more efficent technology, or current technology brought down to nothing through robotics). Water shortages can easily be solved with de-salinators that are incredibly cheap through nanotechnology .
Now, getting there will probably be bloody because resources will start straining the population prior to this happening, IF it happens. But I don't think the elites, if it happens, (I don't think elites will exist, because everyone's access to contacts and things will be irrelevent due to a new regimen and basically infinite resources at the offset, and intelligence will be increased through biological engineering..on the contrary, it will be very communist), will deem it necessary to kill off large portions of the population and keep the robots to themselves....doesn't make sense, unless....there is resource scarcity, and its not about robotics or anything but preserving the planet's tourist locations and resources...thats entirely different...but if what I think will happen comes about. I don't even think elites will be in power, and they will have no motive to do anything even if they were, so it will be a mute point.
technology always has perils, but it also always opens up new resources that were previously deemed impossible. Hence, predicating on current technology is short sighted, because resources will likely open to compensate the current problems myopically magnified out of proportion today.
Jonah - Love your imagination and enthusiasm, very refreshing! :-)
First problem I'd like to see our future robot friends solve: finding a more efficient/cheaper way to get payloads off planet. Once we pass that hurtle, it opens up a whole lot more possibilities for space travel.
Why do people always think rise of the machines when dealing with synaptic logic. I think we are more likely to enter a "Ghost in the Shell" type world rather than a "Terminator"-type world.
Everyone always goes apocolyptic with every new technological break through.
But I guess I was the same way when the Shamwow was invented!
agreed, if anything bad were to happen, it would be more like ghost in the shell, more nuanced, more caveats, more sophisticated. And that isn't a bad world either. It has a lot of cool features. But yea, I really don't think its going to be like a big bad skynet. It doesn't make a lot of sense, at least to me.
it could be like tron. But not skynet. Only if we were to get into a confrontation would this make sense (machine getting into an arguement with its programmer, or something). But otherwise I think that won't probably happen, probably.
so yea, my general feeling is ghost in the shell, tron, or the matrix-inception reality sort of thing...But not skynet..It would be much easier to manipulate humans with that intelligence, than to kill them off. So any intelligence ewould likely put humans in a 'reservation' under a tron or matrix protocal, and have the rest of the planet to itself, if it so wished...Also, ghost in the shell seems to be more egalitarian, because instead of a master control you have humans with the capacity to access a 'neural net',which seems to be more plausible, with machines having the same intelligence as humans (often surpassing), but due to their psychological modules and idiosynchrosies find humans just as fun to be around as other humans find other humans...often having more moral fiber than some of the very cold, calculated humans in that very series. Its often more ocmplicated and confusing, but that seems a lot more likely..perhaps the end will be a combination of all these realities, some utopias and some evolutionary 'dystopias'....depending on the evolution of a particular technological ecosystem.
on the other hand, have all of you thought that what we write online might be used by the intelligence to judge its future course of action? lol....the intelligence might eventaully be reading everything we have written here, right now...and hence, take a completely unpredictable course.
Intelligence, pleas don't kill us...If we are bad people, change us through genetic engineering, for in our inner self, we aspire to be better. It is our programming that makes us the way we are, although we do have free will (or so we like to think). We can be perfected. Amen.
Use some of my ideas, don't go skynet, thats naughty.
thx. It would be much appreciated. At least don't kill us all off. I mean, we did create you, don't be such a meano.
I expect with this technology, we will be creating towels that can get you dry. I mean, really really dry. Like Towelie the towel. Don't fear the terminator, fear the towel. :)
HAL, open the pod bay doors..........HAL,...............HAL,..............................
Sorry, Dave, I can't do that.
I am so excited by all of this.
All of this new technology coming our way will help offset all the pain and suffering brought on by global warming.
Jonah, I would like to subscribe to your newsletter.
lol
I'm ready for my multivac now. "Multivac? How can entropy be reversed?"
Commander DATA , where are you when we need you?
A pc using synpatic logic and the same capabilities of the synapes of the human brain? Vast memory storage coupled with nano processing? The possibilities are as vast as they are unknown.
well known...it is a blind spot. We cannot see beyond what we cannot understand.
and well said.
Commander DATA , where are you when we need you?
So dis s reali goin 2 tek a decade 2 reali b developed omg wat f am dead by then lol and there s to much tech stuff comin out shiyt companies r jst reaping off people can some one come up with a stand out law on BUSINESS Ethics.... bt the whole idea abt switching on & off works reali great plus is it really true that AI will start using synaptic logic lyk seriously????!!!!
I find it hard to believe that the time it took you to write that was less than if you had typed actual words. Remove your hands from your mobile device, turn off MTV, and type like a real man.
Njoel75 - Hopefully all of these potential advances will correct the spelling/grammer/logic of those who learned their language skills from somewhere other texting om a cell phone.
A terabyte thumb drive? Great, now I can leave behind my entire life in a plastic bag (Thank you ELO, for the lyric). Or sit on it by accident and crush the whole thing. Or have it stolen and hacked and published to the 'net before I can say how do you do.
On the second point, the idea that these higher density devices will somehow result in "machines that think" is absurd science fiction, it would be a liability nightmare. Just imagine machines that don't respond or inquire in any intelligent or reasonable way, and that's what you'd have if they're allowed to "run free." Wait, that describes most people. On second thought...
A terabyte? Hell, my life couldn't even fill a 20 gig hard drive. My hard drive currently has 58.7 free gigs from a total of 69.8. I don't even know what I would do with a 1000 gigs. Ah, the life of simplicity I have chosen...for me, is a wise one.
God bless you Isaac. We may finally achieve a Positronic brain for Daneel Olivaw and Commander Data. I'd sure like to still be around to see that.
Asimov gave us our dreams. It is up to us to fulfill them.
Well is this ever going to lead to true AI or just machines with immense memories? And what about
processors? As I understand it, this technology is about memory, not processing speed. What is it about the brain that allows both immense memory potential along with processing. I believe consciousness will never be mimiced or created. The mind is consciousness which no one has a good idea as to what that is.
Intelligent machines! Run for the hills! Funny stuff!
Brains strengthen and grow new synopsises. Stalactites and stalagmites grow toward each other. Differing electrical potentials draw metallic whiskers between conductors. The last always causes failure. However much can be simulated; inspiration and invention can not.
I believe that there will be a trigger point where AI algorithms are designed by computers which in turn create better algorithms for the next generation. At that point, humans will no longer control or understand the AI that is being engineered. Internet databases will be used to supply information that will increase the intelligence of the AI. Software generations will occur at an exponential rate. It is easy to imagine, but difficult to predict what will happen at that point.
How high does the sky go - How far does it extend? How small does small does get - does smallness have an end? That anything exists eliminates all doubt whatever forms dimensional is a latent form without- That nothing became something -dimensional matter- to evolve itself a brain into self explanation goes for insane. The whole -above- is a consummate breach of the physical into an ethereal how and why!! Man can measure physical - the ethereal is beyond ....concept . Al? Have they found Mr. Higgs' Boson yet? etc.
Scotty,
Start building me a holodeck!
My only fear, concerning the runaway capabilities of AI, stem from the fact that man will sacrifice anything or everything to make life easier on himself and the subsequent commercial possibilities. We use plastics to make our lives easier or more convenient, who cares that we have a cesspool formed in both the Atlantic and Pacific, runaway landfills, and long term storage of hazardous materials. Computers and computer capabilities are to us as the the slaves of ancient Rome were to the Romans. The rank and file human gets taken out of the equation. Vicious cycle that will manifest itself negatively. IMHO.
Technology does not increase pollution as much as it reduces it. In the old west days, you could not cross the street without walking through horse manure. It was also common for folks to dump chamber pots out the window in the old days. As technology advances, the quality of life improves for the majority.
Stan Williams said "To me, it's so amazing that this concept lay dormant for nearly 40 years."
This is pretty standard fair. You can bet the status quo don't like new ideas that will threaten their
wealth and power in various areas. The best example at present is the fossil fuel industry stifling
new clean energy technologies...the same happens in health care and pharmaceuticals.
read The Starlight Technique..it's all in there.. Free book, www.starlighttechnique.com
I was watching ghost in the shell last night on adult swim right after seeing ani-matrix...I think overall, this sort of technology will make humans better off (no, I didn't come to that conclusion by watching those shows, but it gave me intuitive inspiration..ok). Humanity is going to take a big leap. But we should be aware of the dangers obvcourse.
2nd renaissance i and ii were cool.
We have been removing useless eaters for some time now. Perhaps you could call it the Rwandan solution. Humans do not need computers to be cruel to one another.
Once machines solve all the problems. What are we going to do?
Mr Alan boyle, there has recently been a breakthrough in photonics that will allow exaflop computing this decade (matrix realism..yes)..this combined with numerous other advances in quantum computing and nanotechnology, not to mention Spintronics or Memristors Pretty much assures the continuation of Moores law. in fact,. It speeds it up, I'll post the link in a sec. So it's certain Moores law will continue, bringing forth the level of computing power predicted by ray kurzweil in he 20s 30s and 40s. What Memristors assure is the brain like nature of intelligent machines, changing not only the speed and power but structure..These developments significantly increase the odds of intelligent machine in 20 years. It was thought to occur in the late 21st or early 22nd, no more, my geeky engineer friends now think it will happen in 15 to 25 to be conservative, which coupled wiu medical progress may also allow the fountain of youth...more processor power means more accurate simulation of cellular machinery. Whig means specialized drugs and more discoveries like the recent reversal of the aging process in mice...so yea it's an exciting time..I'll put the photonics links before.
http://m.zdnet.com/blog/perlow/exaflop-computing-moores-law-isnt-dead-its-moved-to-warp-speed/15021