PyPI introduces a project archival feature to improve supply chain security, with archived projects remaining installable but unmaintained.
Outer Space, Inner Space, and the Future of Networks.
Synopsis: Does the History, Dynamics, and Structure of our Universe give any evidence that it is inherently “Good”? Does it appear to be statistically protective of adapted complexity and intelligence? Which aspects of the big history of our universe appear to be random? Which are predictable? What drives universal and societal accelerating change, and why have they both been so stable? What has developed progressively in our universe, as opposed to merely evolving randomly? Will humanity’s future be to venture to the stars (outer space) or will we increasingly escape our physical universe, into physical and virtual inner space (the transcension hypothesis)? In Earth’s big history, what can we say about what has survived and improved? Do we see any progressive improvement in humanity’s thoughts or actions? When is anthropogenic risk existential or developmental (growing pains)? In either case, how can we minimize such risk? What values do well-built networks have? What can we learn about the nature of our most adaptive complex networks, to improve our personal, team, organizational, societal, global, and universal futures? I’ll touch on each of these vital questions, which I’ve been researching and writing about since 1999, and discussing with a community of scholars at Evo-Devo Universe (join us!) since 2008.
For fun background reading, see John’s Goodness of the Universe post on Centauri Dreams, and “Evolutionary Development: A Universal Perspective”, 2019.
John writes about Foresight Development (personal, team, organizational, societal, global, and universal), Accelerating Change, Evolutionary Development (Evo-Devo), Complex Adaptive Systems, Big History, Astrobiology, Outer and Inner Space, Human-Machine Merger, the Future of AI, Neuroscience, Mind Uploading, Cryonics and Brain Preservation, Postbiological Life, and the Values of Well-Built Networks.
He is CEO of Foresight University, founder of the Acceleration Studies Foundation, and co-founder of the Evo-Devo Universe research community, and the Brain Preservation Foundation. He is editor of Evolution, Development, and Complexity (Springer 2019), and Introduction to Foresight: Personal, Team, and Organizational Adaptiveness (Foresight U Press 2022). He is also author of The Transcension Hypothesis (2011), the proposal that universal development guides leading adaptive networks increasingly into physical and virtual inner space.
A talk for the ‘Stepping into the Future‘conference (April 2022).
Along the lines of last night’s post, Keith Frankish has an article at Aeon describing and defending the illusion ist viewpoint, that phenomenal consciousness is an illusion. It’s an excellent introduction for anyone who isn’t familiar with the basic argument.
As noted before, I think the illusion ists are right about the reality, but I’m not sure using the word “illusion” is productive. We could just as easily say that yes, phenomenal consciousness exists *subjectively* but not objectively, and this is how that subjective experience is constructed. There is some value in using stark language to get people’s attention, but it also frequently gets their summary dismissal.
I’m also not entirely sure it’s all in the introspection mechanisms. Phenomenal qualities seem useful in discriminating between different objects, and the affect lacing the brain weaves in also clues the deliberation engine on how to regard those objects. It seems likely that our introspective representations of these perceptual representations are value added rather than entirely constructive. Thinking the latter implies a lot of processing overload for introspection, which doesn’t necessarily feel adaptive to me.
Philosopher Peter Hankins at Conscious Entities has a write-up on the November 12 issue of the JCS (Journal of Consciousness Studies) in which philosophers, psychologists, and neuroscientists such as Keith Frankish, Daniel Dennett, Susan Blackmore, and Michael Graziano, debate whether it makes sense to refer to phenomenal consciousness as an illusion. Unfortunately the full text of the journal articles are paywalled, although if you are on a university network, or have the ability to access the site through one, you might find you can reach them.
Saying that phenomenal consciousness is an illusion is often met with derision. The phrase “is an illusion” is meant to state that consciousness isn’t what it appears to be, but many people read it as “does not exist”, which seems self evidently ludicrous. Which is why, while I generally agree with the illusionists ontologically, that is with their actual conclusions about reality, I’ve resisted using the “illusion” label for the last few years. As one of the JCS authors (Nicholas Humphrey) stated, it’s bad politics. People have a tendency to stop listening when they perceive you’re saying consciousness isn’t there.
And it can be argued that, whatever phenomenal experience is, we most definitely have it. And that the perception of a subjective experience is the experience, such that questioning it is incoherent. I have some sympathy with that position.
However, despite these advances, human progress is never without risks. Therefore, we must address urgent challenges, including the lack of transparency in algorithms, potential intrinsic biases and the possibility of AI usage for destructive purposes.
Philosophical And Ethical Implications
The singularity and transcendence of AI could imply a radical redefinition of the relationship between humans and technology in our society. A typical key question that may arise in this context is, “If AI surpasses human intelligence, who—or what—should make critical decisions about the planet’s future?” Looking even further, the concretization of transcendent AI could challenge the very concept of the soul, prompting theologians, philosophers and scientists to reconsider the basic foundations of beliefs established for centuries over human history.
Energy-efficient, task-agnostic continual learning is a key challenge in Artificial Intelligence frameworks. Here, authors propose a hybrid neural network that emulates dual representations in corticohippocampal circuits, reducing the effect of catastrophic forgetting.
Aurora consists of four photonically interconnected modular and independent server racks, containing 35 photonic chips and 13km of fiber optics. The system operates at room temperature and is fully automated, which Xanadu says makes it capable of running “for hours without any human intervention.”
The company added that in principle, Aurora could be scaled up to “thousands of server racks and millions of qubits today, realizing the ultimate goal of a quantum data center.” In a blog post detailing Aurora, Xanadu CTO Zachary Vernon said the machine represents the “very first time [Xanadu] – or anyone else for that matter – have combined all the subsystems necessary to implement universal and fault-tolerant quantum computation in a photonic architecture.”
In this study, the authors present optimization and efficacy testing of apolipoprotein-based lipid nanoparticles for delivering various nucleic acid therapeutics in vivo to immune cells and their progenitors in the bone marrow.
Vibration can be applied to cells in vitro and in vivo to trigger specific mechanotransductive pathways and guide cell-fate decisions. This Review explores the use of vibrational stimulation for cell engineering, outlining key pathways, devices and applications for this new mechanical cell-stimulation tool.
Current wearable and implantable biosensors still face challenges to improve sensitivity, stability and scalability. Here the authors report inkjet-printable, mass-producible core–shell nanoparticle-based biosensors to monitor a broad range of biomarkers.