Lifeboat Foundation

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cwXnX49Bofk

This video explores the timelapse of artificial intelligence from 2030 to 10,000A.D.+. Watch this next video about Super Intelligent AI and why it will be unstoppable: https://youtu.be/xPvo9YYHTjE
► Support This Channel: https://www.patreon.com/futurebusinesstech.
► Udacity: Up To 75% Off All Courses (Biggest Discount Ever): https://bit.ly/3j9pIRZ
► Brilliant: Learn Science And Math Interactively (20% Off): https://bit.ly/3HAznLL
► Jasper AI: Write 5x Faster With Artificial Intelligence: https://bit.ly/3MIPSYp.

SOURCES:
• https://www.futuretimeline.net.
• The Singularity Is Near: When Humans Transcend Biology (Ray Kurzweil): https://amzn.to/3ftOhXI
• The Future of Humanity (Michio Kaku): https://amzn.to/3Gz8ffA
• Physics of the Future (Michio Kaku): https://amzn.to/33NP7f7
• Physics of the Impossible (Michio Kaku): https://amzn.to/3wSBR4D
• AI 2041: 10 Visions of Our Future (Kai-Fu Lee & Chen Qiufan): https://amzn.to/3bxWat6

Continue reading “FUTURE OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE (2030 — 10,000 A.D.+)” »

The laws of physics do not exist, a theoretical physicist named Sankar Das Sarma argues in a new column published by New Scientist. While we define the laws as the “ultimate laws” of our universe, Sarma says they are merely working descriptions, and that they are nothing more than mathematical equations that match with parts of nature.

Using a chain of atoms in single-file to simulate the event horizon of a black hole, a team of physicists has observed the equivalent of what we call Hawking radiation – particles born from disturbances in the quantum fluctuations caused by the black hole’s break in spacetime.

This, they say, could help resolve the tension between two currently irreconcilable frameworks for describing the Universe: the general theory of relativity, which describes the behavior of gravity as a continuous field known as spacetime; and quantum mechanics, which describes the behavior of discrete particles using the mathematics of probability.

For a unified theory of quantum gravity that can be applied universally, these two immiscible theories need to find a way to somehow get along.

According to a recent paper by a math professor at the University of Arkansas, the existence of life on Earth provides proof that abiogenesis is relatively easy on planets similar to Earth, refuting the “Carter argument” conclusion.

Does the presence of life on Earth provide any insight into the likelihood that abiogenesis—the process by which life first emerges from inorganic substances—occurs elsewhere? That is a question that has baffled scientists for a while, as well as everyone else inclined to think about it.

When the paradise tree snake flies from one tall branch to another, its body ripples with waves like green cursive on a blank pad of blue sky. That movement, aerial undulation, happens in each glide made by members of the Chrysopelea family, the only known limbless vertebrates capable of flight. Scientists have known this, but have yet to fully explain it.

For more than 20 years, Jake Socha, a professor in the Department of Biomedical Engineering and Mechanics at Virginia Tech, has sought to measure and model the biomechanics of snake flight and answer questions about them, like that of aerial undulation’s functional role. For a study published by Nature Physics, Socha assembled an interdisciplinary team to develop the first continuous, anatomically-accurate 3D mathematical model of Chrysopelea paradisi in flight.

The team, which included Shane Ross, a professor in the Kevin T. Crofton Department of Aerospace and Ocean Engineering, and Isaac Yeaton, a recent mechanical engineering doctoral graduate and the paper’s lead author, developed the 3D model after measuring more than 100 live snake glides. The model factors in frequencies of undulating waves, their direction, forces acting on the body, and mass distribution. With it, the researchers have run virtual experiments to investigate aerial undulation.

“It’s very impressive, the performance they’re able to achieve on some pretty challenging problems,” said Dr. Armando Solar-Lezama at MIT, who was not involved in the research.

The problems AlphaCode tackled are far from everyday applications—think of it more as a sophisticated math tournament in school. It’s also unlikely the AI will take over programming completely, as its code is riddled with errors. But it could take over mundane tasks or offer out-of-the-box solutions that evade human programmers.

Perhaps more importantly, AlphaCode paves the road for a novel way to design AI coders: forget past experience and just listen to the data.

Interview with Hugo in Melbourne after the Singularity Summit Australia 2010, conducted by Adam A. Ford.

Terrans, Cyborgs and Cosmists — Varieties of human groups. Species dominance.

Continue reading “Hugo de Garis interview — part 3 — Terrans, Cosmists & Cyborgs 2010-10-09 007-1” »

We swat bees to avoid painful stings, but do they feel the pain we inflict? A new study suggests they do, a possible clue that they and other insects have sentience—the ability to be aware of their feelings.

“It’s an impressive piece of work” with important implications, says Jonathan Birch, a philosopher and expert on animal sentience at the London School of Economics who was not involved with the paper. If the study holds up, he says, “the world contains far more sentient beings than we ever realized.”

Previous research has shown honey bees and bumble bees are intelligent, innovative, creatures. They understand the concept of zero, can do simple math, and distinguish among human faces (and probably bee faces, too). They’re usually optimistic when successfully foraging, but can become depressed if momentarily trapped by a predatory spider. Even when a bee escapes a spider, “her demeanor changes; for days after, she’s scared of every flower,” says Lars Chittka, a cognitive scientist at Queen Mary University of London whose lab carried out that study as well as the new research. “They were experiencing an emotional state.”

If you’re expecting monoclonal antibody treatments to save you from getting more severe outcomes like death should you get Covid-19, it may be time to rethink that strategy. A letter published in The Lancet Infectious Diseases journal on November 18 detailed how many of the currently spreading Omicron subvariants, namely the BA.4.6, BA.2.75.2, and BJ.1 ones, appear to be resistant to most available monoclonal antibody treatments. And the BQ.1.1 Omicron subvariant, which has become one of the two dominant versions of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in the U.S., seems resistant to all of the available monoclonal antibody treatments. Yes, all of them, as in every single one.

BQ certainly doesn’t stand for “be quiet,” as the BQ.1.1 subvariant is now causing a commotion, being responsible for an estimated 24.2% of all new reported Covid-19 cases over the past week while the not-too-different BQ.1 subvariant has been the culprit behind 25.5% of them, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). If you do the math, that means that these two Omicron subvariants are now comprising over half of all reported Covid-19 cases, meaning that they have overtaken the BA.5 as the “alpha-dog” of SARS-CoV-2 versions. Therefore, you can probably no longer rely on any type of monoclonal antibody should you get Covid-19. That’s certainly bad news for anyone not able to get enough protection from Covid-19 vaccination such as those who have very weak immune systems.

You know that 1997 Backstreet Boys song that goes “everybody, yeah?” Well, looks like the latest 2022 Covid-19 coronavirus Omicron subvariants have been going, “antibody, no-oh.” So much for the argument that other Covid-19 precautions are not needed because monoclonal antibodies are available. Even back in 2020 and 2021 when monoclonal antibody treatments seemed to work against the then-circulating previous versions of the virus, such an argument held water about as well as a Brillo pad thong since relying on any single Covid-19 precaution or treatment has always been a foolhardy approach. Doing so was akin to telling someone, “since you have underwear on, why do you need pants or a skirt or a kilt?” Ever since the start of the pandemic, real pandemic experts have continued to advocate for more of a “Swiss cheese” approach that entails always layering on different Covid-19 interventions simultaneously because each single intervention has its holes.