This is part 1 in a 5 part series to be released over the next week or two on the Global Brain. To help me continue this research at the Ph.D. level please consider visiting Microryza and supporting my campaign.
Here is my Hubski post discussing the reasoning behind the campaign.
Haha thanks, I've just noticed that #LongReads gets more traffic on Twitter.
Very interesting, TAA. I wonder if you have read Gödel, Escher, Bach, by Douglas Hofstadter. In particular, I am thinking about a section where he discusses the emergence of a mind in an ant colony where the ants work as social units similar to neurons. If you haven't read GEB, I highly suggest it. Hofstadter has laid a lot of groundwork in this area of intelligence as an phenomenon that emerges from parts lesser than (and arguably independent from) the whole. But, that leads to a question I have. IMO intelligence is in the eye of the beholder, and from a certain perspective, we could say that a Global Brain already exists. I wonder what measures you might use for calculating the evolution (or emergence) of a GB, and in what framework does the Global Intelligence operate? Also, to what extent will the GB depend upon our higher intelligence, and to what extent will it exist independently of us? Also, you mention that we might be able to predict the evolution of the GB. Does this include a singularity scenario? Finally, I'm not sure I agree that only crystals exhibit non-living, non-random behavior. I think by that measure you could say that all objects exhibit non-random behavior in their gravitational interactions. You could probably extend that to the atomic forces, quantum systems, rivers, etc. There are lots of non-living processes where entropy is reduced within the observed system, but increased overall.
Yes, we could... and it has been vehemently debated. There are aspects of our global consciousness that are "Global Brain-like" - but IMO what Global Brain will be is an environment where we are immersed in intelligence. And our environment definitely isn't that yet. And we would be much more well connected and intimately connected with our minds via the substrate of the Internet. And that hasn't happened yet either. But it is a good debate - I feel that at this point is productive to continue having it. Also, I haven't read Hofstadter but I'll make sure to before October. This is still debated. In one of the first papers on Global Brain, Mayer-Kress suggests that density and quality of agent connections will be more important than absolute intelligent agents in the system. I tend to agree. We could model the density and quality of connections in the brain to figure out what type of system we would need to produce on our scale of reality. I think everything in the universe is produced bottom-up... so ultimately it would be a higher intelligence produced by our collective interactions. I'm pretty sure. I believe that, although I question the name singularity, what the singularity describes is the neurons more deep connection with the Internet substrate - so they are mutually supportive ideas. I will go into great detail about it in the part 5. Don't have time to respond to this now - but you have given me a lot of reason to reconsider - I want to elaborate on what I meant further to see if there is any merit to it. Thanks for your response :) Very helpful! EDIT: So in regards to your comment about my analysis of living/non-living. I'm glad you brought it up. I think what I am referring to, or the that inspired me to claims this, is autopoiesis. Life "creates" internal order from the surrounding environment. In this way they anti-entropic. I don't feel any non-life creates internal order, they are just drifting towards disorder. Is this a fair assessment? I am not completely wedded to the idea, I just wanted to propose it. What do you think?we could say that a Global Brain already exists
what measures you might use for calculating the evolution (or emergence) of a GB
to what extent will the GB depend upon our higher intelligence, and to what extent will it exist independently of us?
Does this include a singularity scenario?
Finally, I'm not sure I agree that only crystals exhibit non-living, non-random behavior. I think by that measure you could say that all objects exhibit non-random behavior in their gravitational interactions. You could probably extend that to the atomic forces, quantum systems, rivers, etc. There are lots of non-living processes where entropy is reduced within the observed system, but increased overall.
I don't feel any non-life creates internal order, they are just drifting towards disorder.
I disagree. As once explained by a friend, take a jar of dimes and quarters, and shake them, they sort in an orderly fashion. You could even call the formation of solar systems order from disorder. I don't think the hypothesis is critical to your thesis, however.but IMO what Global Brain will be is an environment where we are immersed in intelligence.
I wonder if this is a requisite. Just as an ant has no clue about the goals of the colony, or a neuron about problem solving, perhaps we won't (or needn't) be enlightened by (or participants in) the GB.
Ya, it is really unrelated. It is just me trying to find out some fundamental difference between life and non-life. I am not surprised that I have a lot more work to do. There is a part of me that thinks there is something in the order/disorder separation. But of course you are right - the solar system is a formation of order from disorder. But what is it about life that is different? Do you have any opinion on this? I think I was really influenced by a biologist and philosopher Evan Thompson from UofT who emphasized the unity of life and mind. I think b_b influenced me on this as well. But I don't want to speak for him on the matter of unity between life and mind. It is definitely debated whether we will be aware of GB or whether it will be aware of us. It is not something I feel anyone knows, or really can know at this point... but it is fun to think about and discuss. However, I do think a fully matured GB will only form once we are fully immersed in intelligence. Your entire environment... meaning your transportation, your experience at stores, schools, hospitals, etc. will all be intelligently mediated through activity in the environment that just knows you and your preferences/desires/ambitions, etc.I don't think the hypothesis is critical to your thesis, however.
I wonder if this is a requisite. Just as an ant has no clue about the goals of the colony, or a neuron about problem solving, perhaps we won't (or needn't) be enlightened by (or participants in) the GB.
Very interesting. Is the Global Brain planetary or inter-planetary?
At first it will be planetary. But for how long?
This is great stuff. I agree with Humanodon on there being a lot in there. I am looking forward to the other 4 parts in this series. I like the last part about Big Brother. The absolute oppression in North Korea is indeed halting the development of the country. That much is for sure. However, I don't see how it makes a big brother senario less likely. Yes, the big brother of 1984 might not be the outcome (thoughtcrimes alone can stop development). However, a less extreme variation can exist. All you need is the illusion of freedom to let people act, invent, do art, etc. This all without threatening the established powers. Anyhow, I am intersted in the research and will seriously consider donating. Thanks for the interesting piece.
The point is that the Global Brain (a higher distributed intelligence produced by human/machine interactions via the medium of the Internet) could not be produced in a centralized fashion. If we experienced a future in a global dictatorship, the Global Brain wouldn't emerge. I actually don't even know how such a regime could stabilize itself on such a large scale. If a Global Brain emerges, it will be because of complete decentralization. I'll be detailing this very clearly in parts 3 and 4 especially. Thanks, I appreciate the consideration :)I don't see how it makes a big brother senario less likely
I am intersted in the research and will seriously consider donating.
Ah, so the point is in the fact that it cannot be centeralized. Thanks for clearing that up. It is a bit like a decenteralized computer network in that respect. It cannot be controlled because of the fact that every computer makes its own (informed) decisions.
Precisely! And we will see through the actual pathway that our system keeps decentralizing. It is a exhilarating phenomenon (and path)!
Tagged 'longreads' ;) _____________________ This, THIS is exactly what I meant here only a smaller scale. I completely agree. And I really enjoyed the way you wrapped up. Good stuff.If you share this, please use the hashtags #GlobalBrain and/or #LongReads
As a result, the year 2013 C.E. would be an alien “timescape” to someone in the year 1813 C.E. But the year 20,000 B.C.E. would not be an alien timescape for someone in the year 40,000 B.C.E., even though 20,000 years separate the latter example and only 200 years separate the former example.
That was a wonderfully written comment flagamuffin. I love your quote here: That's exactly right. It is going to be really exciting to see what type of species we get that is used to constant and rapid changes. A literal tsunami of computation is on the way. And thanks, hopefully the rest of the series is equally as enjoyable.I think in this generation we've finally grasped that change, especially with regard to technology, isn't going away anytime soon.
Wow, there was a lot in there! It's all really interesting stuff though and it's easy to digest, very accessible. AND you injected the personal element in there as well. I thought that worked very well. I liked the timing of the humor here. I'll admit, my mind was starting to wander a little bit, but that little flash of personable jocularity brought me back into it.Basically, the universe is always going to be a dick. It is always going to throw problems at you. This is inescapable. And in fact, the more complex your system becomes the more problems are going to be coming your way and the more information you’re going to need to stabilize the system, which is the pressure that will create a Global Brain.
I'm hoping to deliver more of that in the next parts. We will start to get into evolutionary anthropology soon so it will be more familiar to the stuff you're used to me writing, but it will get crazy in the last two posts about the Global Brain and the then some general thoughts about the future of intelligence. There is definitely some more humour in the parts 4 and 5. But our current political and religious systems are really easy to make fun of so ... I had good material to work with.Wow, there was a lot in there! It's all really interesting stuff though and it's easy to digest, very accessible.
that little flash of personable jocularity brought me back into it.