Singularity Sunrise

Steve Jobs and Ubiquitous Computing

I've been reading all the news and commentary about the death of Steve Jobs and I've been impressed by how well the media have explored all the facets of his life and his legacy. What really can I add to all of that? In terms of the focus of this blog, the technological singularity, I think probably the greatest contribution that Steve Jobs made is that he ushered us into the age of ubiquitous computing. Take, for example, this quote from a recent CBS News report noting an old interview that Job's gave, it sums it up nicely: 

He is on a mission," the magazine writes, "preaching the Gospel of salvation through the personal computer--preferably one manufactured by Apple. He is an engaging pitchman and never loses an opportunity to sell his products, eloquently describing a time when computers will be as common as kitchen appliances and as revolutionary in their impact as the telephone or the internal-combustion engine.

Well, he did it, we are now living in that time. Steve Jobs made computers a part of our everyday lives by making them so easy to use, so intuitive, and so well designed, that we barely even think of them as computers. My iPhone is a powerful computer, but I don't think of it as a computer, even though it connects me like never before to everyone I know and to the global information network. Abstract concepts like "ubiquitous computing" are now so personalized that we don't even stop to think about how deeply embedded into our lives computers and networks have become. And it's just getting started, as the Siri personal assistant in the new iPhone is about to introduce people to artificial intelligence in a way they have never seen before. The real digital revolution is just starting and that, I think, it Steve Job's real legacy.

Image Credit: Los Angeles Times/Justin Sullivan / Getty Images

Watson Wins

Artificial intelligence may be a fact of life for modern consumers, operating behind the scenes in a myriad of ways, but the public awareness of it is rather minimal. Predictive algorithms, after all, rarely make the headlines. That all changed this week as IBM entered a new question-answering machine called Watson as a contestant on the Jeopardy game show. As the LA Times reports:

The machine has won. Watson defeated the two biggest "Jeopardy" winners of all time: Ken Jennings and Brad Rutter. The IBM computer finished the final round of competition on Wednesday night with $77,147 in winnings over Jennings' $24,000 and Rutter's $21,600. Jennings holds the record for number of consecutive Jeopardy matches won, with 74. Rutter has won more money than anyone else on Jeopardy. The two men competed against each other in a 2005 tournament that resulted in a Rutter victory. Since Watson won, IBM is awarded $1 million -- all of it going to charities World Vision (an anti-poverty group) and World Community Grid (which builds computer grids to address social issues such as water shortages). Jennings, who won a $300,000 prize for second place, and Rutter, who was awarded $200,000, will each donate half their winnings to charities of their choosing. The three-episode showdown, which began Monday, was filled with minutes of featurettes in which IBM engineers spoke about how they built Watson and how its question-answering technology could be tailored to its enterprise clients such as hospitals, transportation departments, help desks and law firms. Academics have applauded IBM as having created a potentially breakthrough system to analyze unstructured data. And some readers, who left their comments on previous Technology Blog posts this week, complained about the three-day run, calling it essentially an infomercial for IBM.

No word yet on which "enterprise clients" will next make use of Watson, but there's no doubt that variations or descendants of Watson will soon find a place in business, academia and military circles:

Photo Credit: The Los Angeles Times

Memories of Driving

A Letter from Grandpa in 2040: Listen up kids and I'll tell you about a time long ago, a time when cars were not smart. You could get into your car and tell it to start and it would just sit there, silent and mute. You actually had to turn it on by hand and even then, once it was on, it would just sit there. You would have to pilot it yourself, turning a round nob they called a "wheel" to tell it which direction to go while using your foot to press a "pedal" to give it "gas" to make it move. The car could not talk, not to the driver, to other cars, or the highway network, it was all alone, just you and the car. And once you were on the road the car could not sense proximity to other cars or objects and take action to avoid collisions. And it certainly couldn't sync with the autonet and plot your course and drive you to your destination. You can't imagine what driving was like then. The slightest mistake could result in a horrific accident. Be glad you live in a time when cars are smart and drive themselves.

NY Times Explains the Singularity

The New York Times recently offered a well-written introduction to the technological singularity for the average reader. In this report the Times notes the role of Google and Silicon Valley in promoting research and scholarship, as well as the founding voice of Ray Kurzweil, Vernor Vinge, and John von Neumann in guiding what the Times calls a movement. The article then moves on to consider the technological changes just over the horizon and the industry leaders that are pointing the way. Author Ashlee Vance does not allow herself to get carried away by the hype and carefully notes dissenting voices and doubters. In all, an impressive primer for those unfamiliar with the singularity.

Singularity Sighting in Slate

Sorry for the lack of posts lately, conference travel and start of the year busyness has cut into my blogging time. I'm hopeful that things are settling down a bit now and I'll have more time for blogging. I noticed this article in Slate during my morning browsing, it notes our sorry track record for predicting the future and speculates about the future of the internet, something of interest to those who consider it more than a passing fad. For our particular focus on the rise of the technological singularity, the very last paragraph is noteworthy:

In the realm of outlandish predictions, I feel more comfortable with the extreme optimists. Ray Kurzweil—the acclaimed technologist who in 1990 correctly predicted that a computer would beat the best human chess player by the end of the decade—believes that humans will soon "transcend biology." He says we're on the cusp of "the singularity"—a point when technology will have advanced so far that human beings will essentially become immortal. It's hard to believe. But Kurzweil's predictions are based on current trends, and nothing about them seems really impossible. I doubt the singularity is just around the corner. But, hey, maybe he's right.

This is a fairly predictable piece, nothing really new here, but I did want to point out the singularity sighting, as it appears to be largely positive.

Looking Ahead at Consumer Technology

Here is an interesting report from the mainstream news media speculating about a future transformed by ubiquitous computing:

We'll also have access to more data about the world around us, dwarfing the real-time stock quotes, government statistics, scientific databases and other information stores available today. In the next decade as conjured by Forrester Research analyst James McQuivey, all that information will be available instantaneously, anywhere. He imagines spotting an acquaintance at a conference and having at his fingertips links to the person's most recent research, plus a reminder of her husband's name. Software will remember everything McQuivey buys, reads online and watches on TV. A "smart filter" will use his past choices to suggest the next book or show, or even what he should eat for dinner. It's a more powerful version of the way Amazon.com and Netflix make book or movie recommendations.

I particularly like how the reporter charts a path from where we were in technology (using familiar and fondly remembered products), to where we are now and to where we are likely to be in the future. Her comment that the iPhone will likely be obsolete in ten years was exciting (or chilling, depending on your perspective). My only criticism would be that she fails to anticipate artificial intelligence contributing to the power of ubiquitous computing, although one could argue that some of the applications she envisions would most likely have some kind of AI component. In all, it was an imaginative and informed look at a future in which we become more dependent on computers even as their physical footprint continues to shrink.

Artificial Hand That Feels

An advance in the design of prosthetic hands has been made that allows the user to "feel" objects (CNN):

The SmartHand project is funded by the European Union and is a collaboration between researchers from across  the continent. It has produced a prototype motorized prosthetic hand that researchers say gives unprecedented sensory feedback. [...] the SmartHand gives much more control than other systems. It also allows sensory information to be detected and transmitted from several sensors in each prosthetic finger, meaning users can actually "feel" objects they hold in the SmartHand.

The report notes that the long-term goal of the project is to attach sensors directly to nerves, via a "neural interface." More:

Japan Promotes Elder-Care Robots

This video demonstrates that Japan is making great strides in elder-care robots. Japan may be the only country in the world with an aging population that would have a built-in comfort level with robots, I can't see these being all that popular in assisted living facilities in the States, but who knows, if it works, it works. Let's just hope they don't read this report from MSNBC about what happens when good robots go bad.

Debating The Use of Warbots

Sorry for the lack of posts lately, I've been traveling. Here's something that caught my eye and may be of interest to you. According to this report from BBC News, a leading academic is calling for an international debate on using robots in warfare. The report notes that the current state of artificial intelligence is not yet advanced enough for an autonomous warbot to be able to tell friend from foe or to determine the proper amount of force to use in any given situation. Although it's encouraging that the need for debate on this issue is being recognized, I suspect that the debate will be ongoing even as more advanced nearly-autonomous warbots are deployed in combat, and eventually the state of the debate will be overtaken by the state of the technology. After all, it's not like the U.S. or any other country will call a halt to the use of warbots until the academic community reaches a consensus on their proper use. For more on this subject, check out this h+ magazine interview with Dr. Ronald Arkin on the difficulties arising in teaching robots the rules of war.

Photo Credit: BBC News

Thought-Powered Wheelchair

In this latest development in brain-machine interface technology, a user is able to move a wheelchair by thinking about it:

The person in the wheelchair wears a cap that can read brain signals, which are relayed to a brain scan electroencephalograph, or EEG, on the electrically powered wheelchair, and then analyzed in a computer program. Research into mobility is part of Toyota's larger strategy to go beyond automobiles in helping people get around in new ways. The new system allows the person on the wheelchair to turn left or right and go forward, almost instantly, according to researchers.

More development is needed to handle complex tasks (like braking), but it's certainly a noteworthy advance.

Warbots in Training

We have talked about warbots before, and it remains an interesting area, if only because the use of robots in warfare is such a natural technological development arising from our very human propensity to use almost every new and promising technology available to kill each other. RoboteX Inc. has released the following video showcasing their vision of the robotic firepower of tomorrow, today:

HT: Singularity Hub

Band of Warbots

The premier of the new Terminator Salvation movie has the news services abuzz with headlines featuring robots. In this MSNBC report we are told that real life soldiers love their warbots:

Human warriors have long spoken of the bonds forged in combat and of becoming a "band of brothers." The fact that some of those fellow soldiers are made of metal has not discouraged human feelings toward them. Thousands of robots now fight with humans on modern battlefields that resemble scenes from science fiction movies such as "Terminator Salvation ." But the real world poses a more complex situation than humans versus robots, and has added new twists to the psychology of war.

The report goes on to note the many ways the soldiers are bonding with their warbots and the impact the use of aerial drones has had on ground operations.

Photo: MSNBC/Warner Bros.

Can Twitter Save Your Life?

This AP wire report picked up by MSNBC notes that the flu beleaguered residents of Mexico are interacting more and more on a virtual level in order to maintain a healthy physical distance from each other:

Churchgoers celebrate Mass via television. Congressional candidates campaign with real-time speeches on the Web. A magazine promises Internet tours through the real Mexico — the one with open museums and pyramids. And rock bands plan online concerts. Swine flu is creating a virtual Mexico. With school canceled nationwide and many parents forbidding their kids to party, teenagers are logging a lot more time chatting on Facebook, Twittering and downloading music and movies from the Internet. So are many adults, especially after most business and government offices in Mexico City shut down Friday for five days.

Is Mexico on the right track? Should governments everywhere encourage citizens to engage in virtual interaction, distance learning, and telecommuting to avoid the flu? Can Twitter save your life? Viva la Revolución!

Your Brain on Twitter

I've posted before about advances in brain-computer interface technology and this latest advance involves one of the hot topics of the day - Twitter. The micro-blogging service has been in the news a lot lately, just a week or two ago Oprah sent her first tweet and Ashton Kutcher and CNN Breaking News each surpassed 1 million Twitter followers. Twitter has become part of the popular lexicon and firmly established as part of pop culture. And now for the neurotech angle: What if you could Twitter just by thinking it? Scientists at  the University of Wisconsin have been working on brain-computer interfaces to help paralyzed patients and they have used the technology to allow a user to send messages to Twitter without typing them in. This is a very promising technology that not only demonstrates the utility of Twitter but also opens up a world of communication for those whose world would otherwise be very limited.

Photo: UW-Madison

Robo-Scientists Conduct Experiments

Is the age of robo-scientists dawning? The answer is yes according to this Reuters report:

Two teams of researchers said on Thursday they had created machines that could reason, formulate theories and discover scientific knowledge on their own, marking a major advance in the field of artificial intelligence. Such robo-scientists could be put to work unraveling complex biological systems, designing new drugs, modeling the world's climate or understanding the cosmos.

If this is indeed the breakthrough that they are making it out to be it could be rather revolutionary, especially when we consider how advanced the second, third or fourth generation machines will be.

Photo Credit: Reuters

Google Spoofs Singularity in April Fools Joke

Google has not let us down with their annual April Fool's Joke. This year they spoofed the singularity and AI, offering a new service that sounds rather remarkable:

Research group switches on world's first "artificial intelligence" tasked-array system.

For several years now a small research group has been working on some challenging problems in the areas of neural networking, natural language and autonomous problem-solving. Last fall this group achieved a significant breakthrough: a powerful new technique for solving reinforcement learning problems, resulting in the first functional global-scale neuro-evolutionary learning cluster.

Since then progress has been rapid, and tonight we're pleased to announce that just moments ago, the world's first Cognitive Autoheuristic Distributed-Intelligence Entity (CADIE) was switched on and began performing some initial functions. It's an exciting moment that we're determined to build upon by coming to understand more fully what CADIE's emergence might mean, for Google and for our users. So although CADIE technology will be rolled out with the caution befitting any advance of this magnitude, in the months to come users can expect to notice her influence on various google.com properties. Earlier today, for instance, CADIE deduced from a quick scan of the visual segment of the social web a set of online design principles from which she derived this intriguing homepage.

These are merely the first steps onto what will doubtless prove a long and difficult road. Considerable bugs remain in CADIE'S programming, and considerable development clearly is called for. But we can't imagine a more important journey for Google to have undertaken.

For more information about CADIE see this monograph, and follow CADIE's progress via her YouTube channel and blog.

Thank you Google for bringing a smile to the face of singulatarians everywhere.

Brin on the Singularity

Sci-fi author David Brin has some commentary on the singularity over at the Sentient Developments blog. He appeals for moderation from all sides of the debate and calls the singularity one of the greatest issues of our time.

Warbots Fight in Afghanistan

I just want to say up front that I don't normally read or watch Fox News, not so much out of political reasons, but because I don't like opinionated news and shout-fests (which seem to be popular these days), and having said that, I noted this Fox News report on the use of warbots in Iraq:

The U.S. military is calling out the "BigDogs" in addition to its big guns as it deploys more troops to fight terrorists in Afghanistan. The BigDogs — four-legged robots that can navigate the country's treacherous terrain — and pilotless helicopters than can transport tons of supplies to very remote bases are just two of the new weapons being tested in Afghanistan. The war zone is increasingly becoming a development laboratory for machines that don't eat, sleep, polish their boots or suffer casualties. But can they succeed where man struggles?

We will only see more of this kind of thing, so I note it now and will continue to note it to encourage the kind of public debate we need to have about the pros and cons (and there are many of both) of using robots in warfare. What do you think, do the benefits of using robots in war out way the potential harm?

Photo: Boston Dynamics

UK Warbots to Afghanistan

This report in the Telegraph notes three types of robots that the UK will soon deploy in Afghanistan (and notes that one of them is being used by the U.S. already). This related video (below) shows one of them, the Dragonrunner, in action. As the report notes, the Dragonrunner is:

a small, highly robust four-wheeled buggy that can be mounted with an array of cameras and gadgets. But the” selling point of the “throwbot” is its agility. Soldiers can chuck it through windows and the machine will zip around a room identifying enemy and bombs before bursting out of the back of a house smashing windows as it goes. It has also been thrown out of the back of vehicles by troops driving through hostile towns where it can hide and spy on the population while soldiers can view the scene on a screen from a safe distance. It also has the ability to place a disrupter device to detonate a bomb.

And here is the Dragonrunner in action:

Quantum Computing Advances

If you have a quantum computer, is it on even when it's off? Ok, just having some fun, here's the news (BBC News - Major leap for faster computers):

Edinburgh and Manchester University researchers have created a molecular device which could act as a building block for super-fast computers. They have created components that could be used to develop quantum computers, which can make intricate calculations faster than conventional machines. The academics used molecular scale technology instead of silicon chips. They achieved the breakthrough by combining tiny magnets with molecular machines that can shuttle between two locations without the use of external force.

PS. The answer is: Yes and No at the same time.

Warning On Warbots

Author P.W. Singer warns about the need to think about the implications of using more and more warbots in his new book Wired for War: The Robotics Revolution and Conflict in the 21st Century. Here is his thesis stated at the conclusion of his interview with CNet:

You may be getting new technological capabilities, but you are also creating new human dilemmas. And it's those dilemmas that are really the revolutionary aspect of this. What are the laws that surround this and how do you insure accountability in this setting? At what point do we have to become concerned about our weapons becoming a threat to ourselves? This future of war is again a mix of more and more machines being used to fight, but the wars themselves are still about our human realities. They're still driven by our human failings, and the ripple effects are still because of our human politics, our human laws. And it's the cross between the two that we have to understand.

It's a timely warning, as the military is only now starting to build and test autonomous weapons systems, this is the time to have this kind of discussion.

Microsoft Prepares Desktop AI

Microsoft is hoping that their Windows operating system may yet be the shape of things to come as they prepare for an AI powered version of the personal assistant. According to this report from The New York Times, they envision an artificially-intelligent avatar as your interface to a powerful personal assistant program that can interpret your mood and expressions while making your appointments, sorting your e-mail and taking care of other routine tasks:

Meet Laura, the virtual personal assistant for those of us who cannot afford a human one. Built by researchers at Microsoft, Laura appears as a talking head on a screen. You can speak to her and ask her to handle basic tasks like booking appointments for meetings or scheduling a flight. More compelling, however, is Laura’s ability to make sophisticated decisions about the people in front of her, judging things like their attire, whether they seem impatient, their importance and their preferred times for appointments. Instead of being a relatively dumb terminal, Laura represents a nuanced attempt to recreate the finer aspects of a relationship that can develop between an executive and an assistant over the course of many years.

I think this is a worthy effort, but if Google ever creates a cloud based avatar interface for standard search, they may leapfrog Microsoft as consumers will probably prefer quick efficiency over a digital relationship. And with Google, they would probably figure out the relationship part (sustained by a steady diet of cookies and datamining) eventually. Of course, Google has no comparable project in the works that I know of, so perhaps this is one innovation in which Microsoft will take the early lead.

Here is more on the project:

Is The Singularity A Spy?

Could the development of a smarter than human artificial intelligence arise to facilitate the information processing demands of the total surveillance state? That's the provocative question I would ask after reading about a new NSA effort reviewed by the PBS television series Nova. According to their report:

The National Security Agency (NSA) is developing a tool that George Orwell's Thought Police might have found useful: an artificial intelligence system designed to gain insight into what people are thinking.

With the entire Internet and thousands of databases for a brain, the device will be able to respond almost instantaneously to complex questions posed by intelligence analysts. As more and more data is collected—through phone calls, credit card receipts, social networks like Facebook and MySpace, GPS tracks, cell phone geolocation, Internet searches, Amazon book purchases, even E-Z Pass toll records—it may one day be possible to know not just where people are and what they are doing, but what and how they think.

The system is so potentially intrusive that at least one researcher has quit, citing concerns over the dangers in placing such a powerful weapon in the hands of a top-secret agency with little accountability.

[...]

"The technology behaves like a robot, understanding and answering complex questions," said a former Aquaint researcher. "Think of 2001: A Space Odyssey and the most memorable character, HAL 9000, having a conversation with David. We are essentially building this system. We are building HAL." A naturalized U.S. citizen who received her Ph.D. from Columbia, the researcher worked on the program for several years but eventually left due to moral concerns. "The system can answer the question, 'What does X think about Y?'" she said. "Working for the government is great, but I don't like looking into other people's secrets. I am interested in helping people and helping physicians and patients for the quality of people's lives." The researcher now focuses on developing similar search techniques for the medical community.

Are we prepared to let HAL track our movements, read our e-mail, and assess our threat potential? Like many, I would prefer to think of AI and the possible rise of the technological singularity as a good thing, something that will promote the traditional human goals of creating stable and prosperous societies, but what if our persuit of security (certainly an elusive goal for much of human history) leads to a much darker dystopian society in which the promise of the singularity is turned against human freedom?

The Singularity Goes to School

I know I've been missing in action lately, so I'm checking in just to say that I'm not abandoning this blog, I've just been really busy. I hope that things will settle down sometime in the next three or four weeks. I did want to note this singularity sighting today in a report from Computerworld about the new Singularity University:

Google Inc. is teaming up with NASA and world-renowned futurist Ray Kurzweil to create a university designed to help people learn how to handle "humanity's grand challenges."

Singularity University (SU) will bring students together from around the world to study subjects like nanotechnology, biotechnology, human enhancements and artificial intelligence to see how the technologies can work together. SU's goals also include fostering professional networking and business creation.

The university, unveiled today at the annual TED (Technology, Entertainment and Design) Conference in Long Beach, Calif., will offer nine-week graduate-level classes. It will be temporarily housed on the on the NASA Research Park campus.

Other news media covered the story, including the AP, CNET News (well written report), and Business Week. I hope this new university will help improve U.S. competitiveness in science and math and perhaps lead to a new generation of successful science entrepreneurs. No more dot.com millionaires, now we will have singularity millionaires!

Calling All Mad Scientists

Here is a report about a conference last summer in which the U.S. military invited, recruited and encouraged scientists to build a bigger, badder future:

Last August, the U.S. Army held a three-day conference in Portsmouth, Virginia, to look at new developments in military science and hardware. The confab was called the "2008 Mad Scientist Future Technology Seminar." Really. It was. "The objective of the seminar was to investigate proliferating technologies with the potential to empower individuals and groups in the next 10-25 years," according to an unclassified summary of the Mad Scientist gathering, obtained by Danger Room. As you'd expect from such a colorfully-titled gathering, the collected brains predicted a world in which individuals would have easy access to everything from ray guns to nano-bots to bioengineered weapons to arms for creating international chaos online.

I'm still waiting for my nanobots but I certainly appreciate that they are making an effort.