Pitchforks And Torches Will No Longer Be Able To Stop The 1%

The technological singularity is a point in the near future when technological growth becomes uncontrollable and irreversible, resulting in unfathomable changes to human civilization. It will advance at inconceivable rates and will overwhelm our human capacity to understand it. The technological singularity and economic inequality are two powerful streams that will merge together, massively feeding upon each other to create the ultimate disaster. We will either live in a twisted dystopian reality, become extinct as a species, or both. We must stop this now.

Posted on: » Wed Jun 05, 2019 10:39 am #31

User avatar
Jessica
Posts: 61
Joined: Fri Apr 14, 2017 3:03 pm
Contact:
REFERENCING: Sterling Volunteer, Post #11, Posted Feb 28, 2018
Shades Of Colossus: The Forbin Project.

Imagine that, an artificial neuron capable of operating 200 million times faster than a biological neuron. Now imagine an artificial neural network with an imagination as is presented in
none

Re: Pitchforks And Torches Will No Longer Be Able To Stop The 1%

Post by Jessica » Wed Jun 05, 2019 10:39 am

We homosapians have a great capacity for noticing changes around us and are aware of the ever increasing speed and quantity of technological developments. Likewise we notice that economic inequality is increasing due to these ever increasing technological changes. Although we may not necessarily be able to quantify these initial changes, there is a sense it is occurring. Both of these perceptions are indicative of a synergistic interaction between these two components foreshadowing an awakening new world.

For example, on the technological side, George Dvorsky in his 10-18-17 article in Gizmodo.com talks about this newly felt speed of change in his article "Stunning AI Breakthrough Takes Us One Step Closer to the Singularity."
https://gizmodo.com/stunning-ai-breakth ... 1819650084
Remember AlphaGo, the first artificial intelligence to defeat a grandmaster at Go? Well, the program just got a major upgrade, and it can now teach itself how to dominate the game without any human intervention. But get this: In a tournament that pitted AI against AI, this juiced-up version, called AlphaGo Zero, defeated the regular AlphaGo by a whopping 100 games to 0, signifying a major advance in the field. Hear that? It’s the technological singularity inching ever closer.

A new paper published in Nature today describes how the artificially intelligent system that defeated Go grandmaster Lee Sedol in 2016 got its digital XXX kicked by a new-and-improved version of itself. And it didn’t just lose by a little—it couldn’t even muster a single win after playing a hundred games. Incredibly, it took AlphaGo Zero (AGZ) just three days to train itself from scratch and acquire literally thousands of years of human Go knowledge simply by playing itself. The only input it had was what it does to the positions of the black and white pieces on the board. In addition to devising completely new strategies, the new system is also considerably leaner and meaner than the original AlphaGo.

Now, every once in a while the field of AI experiences a “holy XXXX” moment, and this would appear to be one of those moments.
Regarding economic inequality, author Pedro Nicolaci da Costa describes the increasing speed of change of its change in his article, "America's Humongous Wealth Gap Is Widening Further."
See Forbes.com, May 29th, 2019
https://www.forbes.com/sites/pedrodacos ... e1cdbe42ee
The Fed’s report shows, among other things, that the poorest 50% of Americans are literally getting crushed by the weight of rising inequalities.

"The top 10% of the wealth distribution—the purple and green areas together—hold a large and growing share of U.S. aggregate wealth, while the bottom half (the thin red area) hold a barely visible share," Fed economists write in a paper outlining the new data set on inequality, which is more timely than exisiting statistics.

The rich are still getting richer.

The chart show that "while the total net worth of U.S. households has more than quadrupled in nominal terms since 1989, this increase has clearly accrued more to the top of the distribution than the bottom."
The elite get rich off the technological advancements, not so the less fortunate. The increase in economic inequality ensures the wealthy will maintain their control of the technology and that revenue is distributed to the wealthy. The laws will ensure it happens this way. Taken together, increasing technological advancements and an increase in economic inequality create the perfect storm against the 99%. While the good fortune of the wealthy spirals upwards, hardship and misfortune plagues the rest of us.

Sterling's post #17 on this topic clearly encapsulates this view,
Taken all together, the conservatives who are currently in power will have the opportunity to abuse the legal system in their favor now and even more so in the future. With shortened time frames between technological events, and with massive quantities of events, by the time we as an underclass figure out what is going on with individual and corporate actions, we will be severely injured by the elite. In the blink of an eye, and without technology capable of keeping up in the law profession relative to other arenas, a significant amount of damage can be done. When seen through Mr. Chomsky's view that the Republican Party is the most dangerous organization in human history, and combined with their staunch allies like those corporations creating their own regulations through a process of, regulation capture, there is little wonder as to why we need to be fearful and take action now, not later.
Soon the technological advancements will arrive with an ever increasing frequency and at a rate our minds will not be able to comprehend. Shortly thereafter, we will be consumed.
Times Referenced: 1

Posted on: » Fri Aug 09, 2019 12:58 pm #32

User avatar
Doctor A
Volunteer
Volunteer
Posts: 60
Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2015 2:30 pm
Contact:
REFERENCING: Jessica, Post #31, Posted Jun 5, 2019
We homosapians have a great capacity for noticing changes around us and are aware of the ever increasing speed and quantity of technological developments. Likewise we notice that economic inequality is increasing due to these ever increasi...
none

Re: Pitchforks And Torches Will No Longer Be Able To Stop The 1%

Post by Doctor A » Fri Aug 09, 2019 12:58 pm

Obviously today's rate of technological advancements are mirrored by the phenomenal sums of money flowing into these projects.

From the above referencing post we have a clear idea of how the wealthy will maintain their control of the coming singularity.
The elite get rich off the technological advancements, not so the less fortunate. The increase in economic inequality ensures the wealthy will maintain their control of the technology and that revenue is distributed to the wealthy. The laws will ensure it happens this way. Taken together, increasing technological advancements and an increase in economic inequality create the perfect storm against the 99%. While the good fortune of the wealthy spirals upwards, hardship and misfortune plagues the rest of us.
Here are two recent examples of the huge amounts of cash fanning the flames of these technological advancements:

1) CNN Business
SoftBank wants its second massive tech fund to raise $108 billion
Sherisse Pham, July 26, 2019
https://edition.cnn.com/2019/07/25/tech ... index.html
SoftBank is launching another mega tech fund.
The Japanese tech company said Friday that it expects to raise $108 billion for the new Vision Fund 2
Vision Fund 2 will plow money into tech startups driven by artificial intelligence. Billionaire SoftBank founder Masayoshi Son has repeatedly said that he wants to have a stake in companies leading the AI revolution.
2) Financial Times
The billion-dollar bet to reach human-level AI
By Richard Waters, August 3, 2019
https://www.ft.com/content/c96e43be-b4d ... 9a3a8cf37b

The San Francisco-based AI research group, OpenAI, set up four years ago by tech industry luminaries including Elon Musk, Peter Thiel and Reid Hoffman, has just thrown down a challenge to the rest of the AI world.

Late last month, it raised $1bn from Microsoft to speed its pursuit of the Holy Grail of AI: a computer capable of so-called artificial general intelligence, a level of cognition that would match its makers, and which is seen as the final step before the advent of computers with superhuman intelligence.

According to Mr Brockman, that money — a huge amount for a research organisation — will be spent “within five years, and possibly much faster”, with the aim of building a system that can run “a human brain-sized [AI] model”.
Times Referenced: 0

Posted on: » Fri Aug 16, 2019 4:08 am #33

User avatar
Doctor A
Volunteer
Volunteer
Posts: 60
Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2015 2:30 pm
Contact:
REFERENCING: Sterling Volunteer, Post #12, Posted Mar 14, 2018
The question is, "Who will control the slaughterbots?"

As the race to the singularity quickens, the wealthy will use every means possible to control the non-elite masses.

There are those who think about the future and thi...
none

Re: Pitchforks And Torches Will No Longer Be Able To Stop The 1%

Post by Doctor A » Fri Aug 16, 2019 4:08 am

An initial grass root bottom up social revolution is needed to counter the coming technological revolution.

Sterling in his post #12 is very much in tune with the fact we need to be rescued from the elite as he describes below,
Our capability to use pitchforks and torches to challenge these technologies with laws in our favor are quickly diminishing. We best wrest control of these new technologies from the hands of those who will want to manipulate and harm us while we still have the chance. Frankly we are the cavalry that needs to come to our own rescue.
The use of pitchforks and torches is traditionally viewed as an angry crowd from days of yore violently attacking the elite to remove unjust inequalities. But this tactic of bygone days will yield little results in the modern era. Rather, a more subtle non-violent approach is needed to come to our own rescue. With the coming technological singularity, there are plenty of injustices to fight against. For example, there is the possibility of starting World War III.

INDEPENDENT
Alibaba’s Jack Ma warns evolving technology could cause World War III
Josie Cox, June 22nd, 2018
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/busi ... 02051.html
Chinese business magnate Jack Ma said that evolving technologies are likely to pose a threat to more than just the job market and could in fact trigger a Third World War.

In an interview with CNBC, the billionaire chairman of Alibaba said that world leaders have a duty to educate people to prevent the pain caused by a rapid rise in automation and artificial intelligence.

"The first technology revolution caused World War I," he said. "The second technology revolution caused World War II. This is the third technology revolution."
Another injustice as a reaction to new technology is the possibility of infecting political systems with fascism.

Forbes
Technological Revolutions Bring About Fascism. Who Will Save Us This Time?
Nicolas Colin, Oct 19, 2018
https://www.forbes.com/sites/nicolascol ... 36aaa834dc
Over the short term, however, countries responded to the technological revolution in very different ways. The UK embraced an incremental approach to institution building, from David Lloyd George’s National Insurance Act of 1911 to his successor Clement Attlee’s founding of the National Health Service in 1948. Other countries simply couldn’t stand the shock of the paradigm shift and fell victim to a dissolution of their political system. In Germany as well as Italy, conservative business leaders and members of the old aristocratic guard grew so afraid of the labor movement that they set about countering it using far-right, anti-union organizations as their proxy: Mussolini’s Fascists and Hitler’s NSDAP. Sadly, we all know how that ended.
The US was the first country that showed how a nation could be saved from fascism during a paradigm shift: with a new Safety Net designed for the paradigm of the day.

Who are the Roosevelts of our time? Obama raised such expectations when he was first elected in 2008, but he arguably fell short: you’ve hardly succeeded with a new New Deal if you’re succeeded by Donald Trump. Does Emmanuel Macron represent a European version of that kind of political entrepreneurship? It’s too early to tell, but he needs to hurry up. Or is the modern equivalent of Roosevelt outside the realm of politics? It’s a distinct possibility!

Meanwhile, fascism, the backward-looking, violent reaction to a technological revolution, is rising again, from Hungary to Italy to Brazil and even to the US itself. We’re in a global emergency similar to that of 1935. And it’s up to all of us to avert the danger, just as our great-grandparents did last time.
To address this article's question, "Or is the modern equivalent of Roosevelt outside the realm of politics? It’s a distinct possibility!" I am of the mind it is more than a distinct possibility our salvation will not be dependent initially upon a single individual from a single political party. The answer lies more in a grass roots bottom up social revolution to counter the technological revolution. This will not necessarily be dependent upon the spotlighting of a single individual but eventually could put pressure upon the political process to select such an individual as a champion of the cause.

From the original FRC website, under the topic of The Community Business Venture, then under Aspects of the BASIC CONCEPTS, then The Community Business Venture (A GENERAL OVERVIEW DISCUSSION), post #3 , I presented my views on revolutions and will reiterate the post here once again,
From: wiki How to Start a Revolution

To create a revolution, you need to unite people around a shared purpose. It’s possible to start a revolution, although it can take a lot of patience, organization, and passion. It will be more likely to succeed if you don’t wing it. A revolution (from the Latin revolutio, "a turnaround") is a significant change that usually occurs in a short period of time.

But I think one critical element is missing from the WikiHow process and that is having the necessary financial capacity in place in many instances before starting. The FRC business venture can supply this necessary financial capacity for our use. Also, from what I have seen, the more people are on the line, meaning they have "skin in the game",the more they are willing to participate. Economic inequality puts at least 99% of the people in the world in just such a position. Just here in the USA, that puts approximately 317 million individuals into play. The idea is to take these individuals and focus them around a cause; the cause is their own survival. No doubt, regardless of an individual's knowledge level about economic inequality, there is an instinctual fear that something is wrong. If nothing else, fear will get a person motivated as a shared purpose.

I have had the good fortune to speak with Dr. Heetun on numerous occasions regarding her goal relative to FirstRateCrowd's Fight Inequality. Needless to say, she is passionate about stopping economic inequality. Moreover she rails against any form of inequality be it racial, religious, or sexual. However, her main focus remains on economic inequality. Her clarity of thought regarding this issue stems from the fact that much of the world's suffering stems from this one dominant issue. This includes the creation and exacerbation of those inequalities mentioned above.

Revolutions, as in the colloquial sense of overthrowing a government or economic system, are many times rapid, explosive, bloody, and with unpredictable results. Yet I hear many people calling for revolution in this manner without really thinking about the real consequences. For example, the Civil War here the USA caused approximately 750,000 deaths. This accounted for about 2.5% of the population at that time being lost. In today's terms, with a USA population of nearly 320 million people, this percentage is equivalent to the loss of 8.13 million people. To put this into perspective, nearly all of our largest city, New York City with its 8.5 million people, would be annihilated. It would mean a massive amount of suffering and this does not even account for the associated morbidity.

From our discussions, Dr. Heetun has expressed to me her desire not to invoke this type of radical revolution. Rather it would be the nature of the non-violent type of revolution. This involves creating change more in line with the philosophy of Gandhi's non-violent resistance. Bye the way, this resonates well with my own philosophy of how change should take place. What's more, Dr. Heetun and me are similarly minded in that we do not wish to change from Capitalism to another system. Surely we see Capitalism as being broke and needing repair. It's history in just the past seventy years has created a Great Depression and a Great Recession. Talk about suffering! The process seemingly goes off track whenever there is not a sizeable enough moderating element to counter the power of the wealthy elite. Dr. Heetun's aim is for FirstRateCrowd's Fight Inequality to become this moderating element. When established on a permanent basis, and with sufficient force, it will continually counter the power of the 1%.

Every revolution has a spark, a defining moment for change. I believe FirstRateCrowd's Fight Inequality can be the spark for this type of benevolent revolution here and now. The gravity of our situation warrants your immediate attention and action. We all need to join together to solve this problem. Not doing so would be a grave disservice to us all.
Times Referenced: 0

Posted on: » Sun Aug 18, 2019 6:13 pm #34

User avatar
Sterling Volunteer
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 59
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2017 6:15 pm
Contact:
REFERENCING: MaureenCarter, Post #10, Posted Feb 8, 2018
FIRES 200 MILLION TIMES FASTER THAN THE HUMAN BRAIN

Talk about new technology driving the future, check this out from the Kurzweil news letter. Just the idea of this kind of mind speed is blowing out the cobwebs of my synaptic conn...
none

Re: Pitchforks And Torches Will No Longer Be Able To Stop The 1%

Post by Sterling Volunteer » Sun Aug 18, 2019 6:13 pm

We do not need to reach General Artificial Intelligence (AGI), a state whereby computers reach and then transcend the capacities of the adult human brain, for massive disruptions within our society to occur. As is colloquially said, like horseshoes and hand grenades, almost is close enough. Given the exponential nature of nearing AGI, our ability for society not to be annihilated is questionable due to the linear processing of the human brain. This dichotomy of processing capabilities between the wet brain and synthetic analog will put a massive stress upon humanity. The Doomsday Clock is already perilously close to an apocalyptic event and an "almost" state of AGI is something we should not wish to entertain without guard rails to protect us. A synthetic neuron firing 200 million times faster than our neurons can fire is a harbinger of our future reality.
What time is it on the nuclear clock?
Doomsday Clock: According to the group, the clock “conveys how close we are to destroying our civilization with dangerous technologies of our own making.” It's still 2 minutes to midnight because of nuclear weapons and climate change. According to the Doomsday Clock, it's two minutes to midnight. That's the same time as last year and remains the closest it's been since 1953 at the height of the Cold War. Jan 24, 2019
Ray Kurzweil offers his insight into linear versus exponential thinking.

Forbes
Ray Kurzweil on Using Exponential Thinking to Predict the Future
Adam Ludwig, Nov 9, 2012 https://www.forbes.com/sites/techonomy/ ... 93e45c546b
Next week's Techonomy conference in Tucson, Ariz., will feature Ray Kurzweil, a leading thinker, inventor, and futurist known for his track record of accurate predictions. On November 13 Kurzweil is releasing a new book, How to Create a Mind, which applies neuroscience research to the possibilities of super-intelligence. In this video, recorded in Kurzweil's office near Boston, he talks to Techonomy founder David Kirkpatrick about how his exponential perspective of the future is different than the typical linear perspective. Thinking exponentially, Kurzweil says, has allowed him to predict the future of information technology.

Kurzweil: The biggest difference between myself and either pessimists or critics is the linear versus exponential perspective.

Kirkpatrick: Exponential was a word in my next question to you.

Kurzweil: Because if I looked at the current situation, and then applied a linear expectation to it, and that is our intuition. That is what’s hired into our brains; that is what generally speaking my critics looks at. They don’t even express that point of view. It’s so obvious it doesn’t even need to be said, according to these critics. They look at the current situation—like my prediction that we would have a world wide web with hundreds of millions of people, that that would emerge in the late 1990s. I made that in the early 80s, and people said, “That’s ridiculous. Look, it takes the entire defense budget to tie 2,000 scientists together. There’s no way you’re going to do that.” If a linear perspective was correct, they’d be right. But a linear perspective is not correct when it comes to information technology, and information technology is not only influencing, but encompassing, one area after another. And now most recently health and medicine, which didn’t used to be an information technology. So that’s the principal difference between my perspective and a common person’s perspective, because it’s actually hardwired in our brain to have a linear perspective.

Thirty steps linearly, that’s our intuition, gets us to 30. Thirty steps exponentially—2, 4, 8, 16—gets us to a billion. And it’s not an idle speculation about the future. I mean this [pulls out smartphone] is several billion times more powerful per unit currency, standard, unit currency, that the computer I used when I was a student at MIT. And it’s also a thousand times smaller. And if you were to say that something thousands of times more powerful than the one computer that thousands of us shared at MIT would fit in your pocket, people would think you were crazy.
I fancy myself as having a fair amount of intellectual capacity. After all, I did graduate from college in the upper half of the lowest one percent and I know with certainty I am neither the sharpest knife in the chandelier nor the brightest bulb in the drawer (Ha Ha). However, exponential thought, say something reaching or even exceeding speeds of 200 million times faster than what my neurons can process is beyond my reach. Perhaps Kurzweil can get glimpses of this, but I cannot.

The best I can do is to be aware this state of computer mental processing will exist in the future. Here is an automated visual graphic I found to be helpful for me to understand the rate at which this will occur. It illustrates exponential growth. Although I had to view it multiple times and keep in mind the dates, it gives me a reference point for thinking about a future process I really cannot understand. Follow the link below to the end of the article and try it for yourself. It is called, How Long Until Computers Have The Same Power As The Human Brain?

AI Multiple
373 experts opinion: AGI / singularity by 2060 [2019 update]
May 27, 2019 https://blog.aimultiple.com/artificial- ... ty-timing/

So buckle up folks! The trip to the future will be a fast and bumpy ride with a flash ending. Unless we put in reasonable controls to protect ourselves now, it will also be frightening and most likely deadly.

~SV~
Times Referenced: 0

Posted on: » Sun Sep 15, 2019 4:04 pm #35

User avatar
Doctor A
Volunteer
Volunteer
Posts: 60
Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2015 2:30 pm
Contact:
REFERENCING: Jessica, Post #29, Posted Apr 4, 2019
We will need AI safety measures first before the technological singularity consumes us but this is in direct conflict with the profit motive of the wealthy. Knowingly, the wealthy will fight tooth and nail to maintain their profits while je...
none

Re: Pitchforks And Torches Will No Longer Be Able To Stop The 1%

Post by Doctor A » Sun Sep 15, 2019 4:04 pm

The preceding post #29 makes clear we will need new rules and regulations to deal with the threat of Artificial Intelligence (AI). Yet we do not have a government in place capable of carrying out these directives in an effective manner. Government in this area will need to be as quick and responsive as the technology itself. Any talk of legal and ethical policies dealing with AI cannot fall back into the arcane and slow dysfunction of "modern day" government. Instead the jurisdiction within any part of government related to AI will need to be separated out not only to create the new laws but also to enforce them. Any weak link regarding speed and breadth of response will not work to protect us.

Post #29
Ahead of us will be an ever increasing number of exponentially expanding algorithmic damage events that we will have to deal with in ever shortening time frames. Contending with this more rapid exponential reality as it barrels down the road towards us means we will not have the luxury of time to solve the problems at hand let alone the ever increasing sets of new problems caused by not solving the last set of older problems. We will be overwhelmed and consumed by these problems unless we apply the breaks before the inevitable crash occurs. The implementation of rules and regulations to control Artificial Intelligence is needed now, not later. An unfettered de-regulatory laissez faire approach promoted by the wealthy profit motive is not sufficient to protect us and guarantees a dystopian apocalyptic future due to our own cleverness. Let us be smart, not clever, and guide the emerging field of Artificial Intelligence with safety measures first before it devours us.
Forbes
Jan 4, 2019
Artificial Intelligence And The End Of Government
Daniel Araya
https://www.forbes.com/sites/danielaray ... d3009d719b
But what about government? What will the impact of AI be on the nature of government?

Waking Government to AI

Not surprisingly much of the public sector has already begun experimenting with AI-driven technologies. At the federal level, many agencies are beginning to deploy AI-powered interfaces for customer service, alongside an expanding use of software to update legacy-systems and automate simple tasks. Growing investments in infrastructure planning, legal adjudication, fraud detection and citizen response systems represent the first phase in the ongoing digitization of government.

Notwithstanding these investments, however, government remains far behind the private sector in deploying and integrating AI.
Thenextweb
Governments need to embrace AI for the good of the people
by Bennat Berger
https://thenextweb.com/contributors/201 ... he-people/
AI has already taken the private sphere by storm, with massive corporations, dynamic startups, and even our own living rooms playing host to intelligent machine learning software. It’s no big surprise, then, that the world of government is starting to turn to AI to improve its effectiveness in serving populations large and small.

The staid, often congested nature of government bureaucracy is a deeply ingrained image in the national consciousness. The reason this image exists is simple: it’s mostly accurate.

For a number of reasons, public sector work is frequently marred by slowdowns and redundant processes, with nearly every potential step forward wrapped in layers of red tape. Not only that, justified accusations of unfairness in the justice system are a constant blemish on the reputation of those in power. From top to bottom, there are innumerable ways that the government could be made better.
Weforum.org
World Economic Forum
16 Aug 2019
Julian Torres Santeli and Sabine Gerdon
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2019/08/ ... ic-sector/
What's slowing the progress of widespread adoption of AI by government?
Widespread adoption of AI has been slower in government than in the private sector. Given the magnitude of the impact that AI could have on public entities, it is important to understand the roadblocks that stand in the way of systemic government adoption of AI.
All organizations face challenges in adopting new technologies. However, public entities tend to be less agile than their private sector counterparts, owing in part to their established practices and processes. In parts of the private sector a strong culture for experimentation encourages employees to innovate, and positive performance is rewarded. In government there can be less encouragement for employees to take risks.
How the government responds to AI will to a large part be money driven. With vast sums flowing into the private sector at an unprecedented rate, how we fund government will be critical for them to keep up with the private sector.

We cannot afford a weak and feeble future governance in the face this existential threat. Having government not being able to effectively create new policies and regulations in a timely and effective manner will not work. Additionally, enforcing those new laws sufficiently to adress the problem is a must do proposition. The speed and power of the private sector will need to be matched by a future government. Any future discussions about regulating AI will need to keep this in mind. Let us not have government be a rate limiting step because it maybe the misstep that kills us all.
Times Referenced: 1

Posted on: » Sun Sep 22, 2019 11:30 am #36

MaureenCarter
Posts: 36
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2018 7:19 am
Contact:
REFERENCING: MaureenCarter, Post #10, Posted Feb 8, 2018
FIRES 200 MILLION TIMES FASTER THAN THE HUMAN BRAIN

Talk about new technology driving the future, check this out from the Kurzweil news letter. Just the idea of this kind of mind speed is blowing out the cobwebs of my synaptic conn...
none

Re: Pitchforks And Torches Will No Longer Be Able To Stop The 1%

Post by MaureenCarter » Sun Sep 22, 2019 11:30 am

From my post #10,
Superconducting ‘synapse’ could enable powerful future neuromorphic supercomputers
February 7, 2018

Fires 200 million times faster than human brain, uses one ten-thousandth as much energy A superconducting “synapse” (switch) that “learns” like a biological system, operating like the human brain, has been built by researchers a...
I already know what everyone is going to say; it has to be accomplished at near Absolute Zero. But it was not that long ago when the first research started looking at entangling photon pairs at Absolute Zero and today they are entangling macro size objects, like diamonds, at room temperature.
Perhaps we are looking at apples and oranges in these applications but still the research is continuing in the quest for coherence at room temperature for an individual photon as exemplified in this article.

Phys.org
Team closes in on 'holy grail' of room temperature quantum computing chips
by Thania Benios, Stevens Institute of Technology, Sept 18, 2019 https://phys.org/news/2019-09-team-holy ... ature.html
To process information, photons must interact. However, these tiny packets of light want nothing to do with each other, each passing by without altering the other. Now, researchers at Stevens Institute of Technology have coaxed photons into interacting with one another with unprecedented efficiency—a key advance toward realizing long-awaited quantum optics technologies for computing, communication and remote sensing.

The team, led by Yuping Huang, an associate professor of physics and director of the Center for Quantum Science and Engineering, brings us closer to that goal with a nano-scale chip that facilitates photon interactions with much higher efficiency than any previous system. The new method, reported as a memorandum in the Sept. 18 issue of Optica, works at very low energy levels, suggesting that it could be optimized to work at the level of individual photons—the holy grail for room-temperature quantum computing and secure quantum communication.

"We're pushing the boundaries of physics and optical engineering in order to bring quantum and all-optical signal processing closer to reality," said Huang.
Times Referenced: 1

Posted on: » Mon Sep 23, 2019 8:48 pm #37

User avatar
Sterling Volunteer
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 59
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2017 6:15 pm
Contact:
REFERENCING: MaureenCarter, Post #36, Posted Sep 22, 2019
From my post #10,
Superconducting ‘synapse’ could enable powerful future neuromorphic supercomputers
February 7, 2018

Fires 200 million times faster than human brain, uses one ten-thousa
...
none

Re: Pitchforks And Torches Will No Longer Be Able To Stop The 1%

Post by Sterling Volunteer » Mon Sep 23, 2019 8:48 pm

Rapid progress is being made towards the Technological Singularity. The Google quantum lab has just reported "quantum supremacy" with IBM nipping at their heals. This should silence some of the singularity deniers who do not believe in the concept. Breath taking speeds and new techniques are earmarks of a new dawn in this field. Perhaps we all need to re-calibrate our time frames.

What is Quantum Supremacy?

Wikipedia
Quantum supremacy is the potential ability of quantum computing devices to solve problems that classical computers practically cannot.[1] Quantum advantage is the potential to solve problems faster. In computational-complexity-theoretic terms, this generally means providing a superpolynomial speedup over the best known or possible classical algorithm.[2]
QuantaMagazine
Quantum Supremacy Is Coming: Here’s What You Should Know
Researchers are getting close to building a quantum computer that can perform tasks a classical computer can’t. Here’s what the milestone will mean.
Kevin Hartnett, July 18, 2019
https://www.quantamagazine.org/quantum- ... -20190718/
Quantum computers will never fully replace “classical” ones like the device you’re reading this article on. They won’t run web browsers, help with your taxes, or stream the latest video from Netflix.

What they will do — what’s long been hoped for, at least — will be to offer a fundamentally different way of performing certain calculations. They’ll be able to solve problems that would take a fast classical computer billions of years to perform. They’ll enable the simulation of complex quantum systems such as biological molecules, or offer a way to factor incredibly large numbers, thereby breaking long-standing forms of encryption.

The threshold where quantum computers cross from being interesting research projects to doing things that no classical computer can do is called “quantum supremacy.” Many people believe that Google’s quantum computing project will achieve it later this year.
That threshold is here today.

MIT Technology Review
Google researchers have reportedly achieved “quantum supremacy”
Sept 20, 2019
https://www.technologyreview.com/f/6144 ... supremacy/

The news: According to a report in the Financial Times, a team of researchers from Google led by John Martinis have demonstrated quantum supremacy for the first time. This is the point at which a quantum computer is shown to be capable of performing a task that’s beyond the reach of even the most powerful conventional supercomputer. The claim appeared in a paper that was posted on a NASA website, but the publication was then taken down. Google did not respond to a request for comment from MIT Technology Review.

Why NASA? Google struck an agreement last year to use supercomputers available to NASA as benchmarks for its supremacy experiments. According to the Financial Times report, the paper said that Google’s quantum processor was able to perform a calculation in three minutes and 20 seconds that would take today’s most advanced supercomputer, known as Summit, around 10,000 years. In the paper, the researchers said that, to their knowledge, the experiment “marks the first computation that can only be performed on a quantum processor.”
How significant is this milestone? Very. In a discussion of quantum computing at MIT Technology Review’s EmTech conference in Cambridge, Massachusetts, this week before news of Google’s paper came out, Will Oliver, an MIT professor and quantum specialist, likened the computing milestone to the first flight of the Wright brothers at Kitty Hawk in aviation. He said it would give added impetus to research in the field, which should help quantum machines achieve their promise more quickly. Their immense processing power could ultimately help researchers and companies discover new drugs and materials, create more efficient supply chains, and turbocharge AI.
But, but: It’s not clear what task Google’s quantum machine was working on, but it’s likely to be a very narrow one. In an emailed comment to MIT Technology Review, Dario Gil of IBM, which is also working on quantum computers, says an experiment that was probably designed around a very narrow quantum sampling problem doesn’t mean the machines will rule the roost. “In fact quantum computers will never reign ‘supreme’ over classical ones,” says Gil, “but will work in concert with them, since each have their specific strengths.” For many problems, classical computers will remain the best tool to use.

And another but: Quantum computers are still a long way from being ready for mainstream use. The machines are notoriously prone to errors, because even the slightest change in temperature, or a tiny vibration, can destroy the delicate state of qubits. Researchers are working on machines that will be easier to build, manage, and scale, and some computers are now available via the computing cloud. But it could still be many years before quantum computers that can tackle a wide range of problems are widely available.
~SV~
Times Referenced: 1

Posted on: » Sun Sep 29, 2019 3:45 pm #38

User avatar
Sterling Volunteer
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 59
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2017 6:15 pm
Contact:
REFERENCING: Sterling Volunteer, Post #37, Posted Sep 24, 2019
Rapid progress is being made towards the Technological Singularity. The Google quantum lab has just reported "quantum supremacy" with IBM nipping at their heals. This should silence some of the singularity deniers who do not believe in the ...
none

Re: Pitchforks And Torches Will No Longer Be Able To Stop The 1%

Post by Sterling Volunteer » Sun Sep 29, 2019 3:45 pm

The Canadian quantum computer company D-Wave has sold their latest computer model to the Los Alamos National Laboratory. It is another step forward towards the technological singularity as Doctor A first wrote in his post #1,
The coming Quantum Computer Revolution with its associated subjects of the Singularity, will make it impossible to stop the 1% with the outdated modes of pitchforks and torches. The 1% will obviously own the superior computers and robotics. They will gain the ability to hide on the internet never to be caught.

Yes, This is spot on! The old methods of stopping the 1% with pitchforks and torches will no longer work with the coming Singularity.
Tom's Hardware
D-Wave Announces First Sale of Its 5,000-Qubit Quantum Computer
by Lucian Armasu September 24, 2019
https://www.tomshardware.com/news/d-wav ... 40470.html
D-Wave Systems today announced the first sale of its next-generation 5,000-qubit quantum annealing computer to the Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL). The computer also received an official market name -- “Advantage” -- meant to emphasize that the new system will focus on offering businesses an “advantage” over competitors that don’t have their own quantum (annealing) computer.

A quantum annealing computer is a specialized type of quantum computer that can help solve optimization problems (logistics, traffic issues, etc). D-Wave said that LANL has been a long-time customer, with LANL and its national security-focused partners having developed over 60 applications for the previous-generation D-Wave 2000Q system, and now it’s now also the first to give the new 5,000 qubit system a try.
Times Referenced: 0

Posted on: » Sun Oct 06, 2019 2:56 pm #39

User avatar
Jessica
Posts: 61
Joined: Fri Apr 14, 2017 3:03 pm
Contact:
REFERENCING: Doctor A, Post #35, Posted Sep 15, 2019
The preceding post #29 makes clear we will need new rules and regulations to deal with the threat of Artificial Intelligence (AI). Yet we do not have a government in place capable of carrying out these directives in an effective manner. Gov...
none

Re: Pitchforks And Torches Will No Longer Be Able To Stop The 1%

Post by Jessica » Sun Oct 06, 2019 2:56 pm

I too worry the US Government is not doing enough along the lines of establishing Artificial Intelligence supremacy. This lack of a call to action to meet the growing threat is echoed in the following article by Edd Gent.

Singularity Hub
Is the US Doing Enough to Maintain Its Leadership in AI?
By Edd Gent -Sep 25, 2019 https://singularityhub.com/2019/09/25/i ... hip-in-ai/
Governments around the world are pouring money into AI research and developing detailed AI strategies, but the US has been slow to follow suit. That’s leading some to question whether policy makers are doing enough to maintain the country’s lead in the technology.

Earlier this month the US government announced that the 2020 budget request includes nearly $1 billion worth of funding for non-military research and development in AI. They were eager to note that represents a significant increase in spending on civilian applications—in 2016 the total was $1 billion including defense projects.

But the response from industry insiders was markedly lackluster, according to the Wall Street Journal. While they welcomed the move, representatives from chipmakers Intel and Nvidia said it was still insufficient if the US wants to maintain its currently dominant position in AI.
The initiative addresses a number of areas of key concern in AI development, but the lack of new funding will worry some. To date, ( see https://www.theverge.com/2019/2/11/1821 ... earch-data), 18 countries had already beaten it to the punch. The plan was also criticized for being light on detail and including no new funding unlike many of its counterparts—South Korea pledged nearly $2 billion to support its strategy. While the latest announcement does redress the balance on funding somewhat, it’s still far less than the tens of billions that China, the US’s biggest AI rival, is spending on research and development.

Possibly even more important than funding, though, is building the policy foundations for AI. Following the funding announcement, Intel representative Jackie Medecki criticized the government for dragging its feet on federal privacy regulations, which she said would provide much needed clarity on how data—the industry’s lifeblood—can be used.
From the preceding post #35,
How the government responds to AI will to a large part be money driven. With vast sums flowing into the private sector at an unprecedented rate, how we fund government will be critical for them to keep up with the private sector.

We cannot afford a weak and feeble future governance in the face this existential threat. Having government not being able to effectively create new policies and regulations in a timely and effective manner will not work. Additionally, enforcing those new laws sufficiently to adress the problem is a must do proposition. The speed and power of the private sector will need to be matched by a future government. Any future discussions about regulating AI will need to keep this in mind. Let us not have government be a rate limiting step because it maybe the misstep that kills us all.
I recently pointed out in my previous post #47 on Economic Inequality: Today's Concerns, then under New Age Slavery,
The White House has established a National Quantum Coordination Office which is only a tiny step in the right direction to countering China's growing prowess in developing Super Artificial Intelligence. With a budget of only $1.3 billion dollars over a five year period, this office is woefully inadequate to meet the Chinese challenge. One hopes, as Maureen suggests, a secretive funding of large scale projects by the USA military is ongoing and operational at this time. If not, we are toast.

Maureen has accurately described the quantum race with China by saying,
The United States and it's collaborative allies need a herculean effort such as the Manhattan Project to win the Super Artificial Intelligence race. Anything less defaults to a position of defeat and enslavement. Vladimir Putin of Russia clearly puts this into perspective in 2017 when he said in absolute terms, "Whoever becomes the leader in this sphere will become the ruler of the world.”
But as I pointed out in my quote from Arthur Herman,
Arthur Herman, from the Hudson Institute (Hudson.org) highlights this pittance for funding and puts other inadequacies into perspective.
https://www.hudson.org/research/14509-a ... on-quantum
A year ago many of us were calling on the U.S. to step up and deal with the growing quantum computing challenge and to commit serious resources to winning the quantum computing race, on which the fate of information technology in the 21st century will depend.

Finally, things are finally starting to move on Capitol Hill and at the Trump White House.

We still have a long way to go, and China is still outspending us in the quantum sector by nearly 30 to 1. But a House bill and a White House proposal are signs that America’s political establishment is starting to get it: This is one high-tech race America can’t afford to lose.
I too align myself with Maureen's sentiment and hope a Manhattan like project is underway. It is obvious the current government's efforts under the Trump administration is falling severely short in this race. The Republican concepts of lassie faire and less control are conspicuously near sighted when it comes to good governance.
Times Referenced: 0

Posted on: » Thu Oct 10, 2019 10:50 am #40

User avatar
Sterling Volunteer
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 59
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2017 6:15 pm
Contact:
REFERENCING: Sterling Volunteer, Post #17, Posted Apr 8, 2018
Superconducting synapse could enable powerful future neuromorphic supercomputers
February 7, 2018

Fires 200 million times faster than human brain, uses one ten-thousandth as much energy
...
none

Re: Pitchforks And Torches Will No Longer Be Able To Stop The 1%

Post by Sterling Volunteer » Thu Oct 10, 2019 10:50 am

Even without quantum computers, new non-neuromorphic computer chips may soon be operating at phenomenal exascale speeds. This means they could in short order operate at speeds reaching nearly one thousand times faster than the computers we have today.

SingularityHub
Moore’s Law Is Dying. This Brain-Inspired Analogue Chip Is a Glimpse of What’s Next
By Shelly Fan -Sep 29, 2019
https://singularityhub.com/2019/09/29/m ... hats-next/

the looming problems in silicon-based computer chips are very real. Although computational power has exploded exponentially in the past five decades, we’ve begun hitting some intractable limits in further growth, both in terms of physics and economics.

Moore’s Law is dying. And chipmakers around the globe are asking, now what?
Another idea is to look inside our heads: the quantum realm isn’t the only way to get past binary computation. Our brains also operate on probabilities, making them a tangible source of inspiration to overhaul the entire computational world.

This week, a team from Pennsylvania State University designed a 2D device that operates like neurons. Rather than processing yes or no, the “Gaussian synapse” thrives on probabilities. Similar to the brain, the analogue chip is far more energy-efficient and produces less heat than current silicon chips, making it an ideal candidate for scaling up systems.

In a proof-of-concept test, the team used a simulated chip to analyze EEG (electroencephalography) signals taken from either wakeful or sleeping people. Without extensive training, the chip was able to determine if the subject was sleeping.

“Combined, these new developments can facilitate exascale computing and ultimately benefit scientific discovery, national security, energy security, economic security, infrastructure development, and advanced healthcare programs,” the team concluded.
I think of my ability to comprehend computer speed as being analogous to money I have earned. Like a computer operating at speeds of one thousand times as fast as my laptop computer, I know what it is to have a thousand dollars more than one dollar because I have had this experience in my paycheck. Needless to say, I have never had two hundred million dollars in a paycheck so I find it somewhat incomprehensible to understand the speeds of the future synthetic switch based quantum computers. I just do not have that level of personal experience. In any event, speeds of one thousand or two hundred million times faster than today's computers all seem like a freight train barreling towards us. The computer revolution is coming fast but will anyone be able to control the collisions should the trains go off the tracks?

Note: Exascale computing refers to computing systems capable of at least one exaFLOPS, or a billion billion (i.e. a quintillion) calculations per second. Such capacity represents a thousandfold increase over the first petascale computer that came into operation in 2008.

~SV~
Times Referenced: 0

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests