Archives for February 2016

Star Trek was a groundbreaking series, in hindsight. At the time it’s original five year run died after three. While its fans did not number enough to qualify as “worth knowing” to NBC and others, they were rabid. They were also different. There were fans of diverse ethnicities, something TV executives didn’t care about until it was a thing, scientists, high ranking politicians from all over the world, Dr. Martin Luther King was a huge fan (and helped save the show for a while), young people tired of being force fed stuff they were supposed like such as Dobie Gillis, et al, and, obviously, women, those mythical creatures you only heard about before then. Sure, Kirk was a horn dog, but there were many women on that show who were his intellectual and physical equal. Powerful women in multiple colors was unheard of before Star Trek. NBC, probably confused as to what to do with a demographic that didn’t fit the “white male, dad, 2.5 kids, in the suburbs, who likes TV dinners, and Winstons” mold, dicked the show around, slashing its budget, and finally killed it in 1969.

This is memorialized as one of the Top 10 Worst Moves in TV History.

But a funny thing happened on the way to oblivion. Kaiser Broadcasting, a division of Paramount, was looking for a show on the cheap that wouldn’t require them to butt heads with the traditional demographic. NBC was happy to toss them Star Trek and they were glad to have it. By 1972 it was one of the highest rated shows in syndication primarily because Kaiser moved its time slot to when young people and others could watch it. Also in 1972 fans held the first Star Trek convention in New York. Over 3,000 people showed up and, suddenly, everyone involved knew they were on to something.

As conventions blossomed and fans began showing up in costumes, Paramount realized they had something bigger than they were used to. By 1979 they put up the cash to create and release the first Star Trek movie. Which was horrible. But, another funny thing happened on the way back to oblivion. The movie got re-edited, put on Paramount’s many TV outlets, and became a smash hit.

The rest, as they say, is history.

Flash forward to now.

Along with the movies and spin off shows there has also been a long tradition of fans creating their own visions of Star Trek. Many of those fan made films developed their own fan bases.

The deal was simple, as long as the films were not commercially released Paramount’s lawyers turned a blind eye. The reasons were simple; most of them were of poor quality, and served to reinforce the camaraderie that Star Trek was supposed to envision.

Everything was moving along just fine until Axanar came along. Looking for around $10,000 in Kickstarter funding they raised over $100,000 and set about making the short film, Prelude to Axanar.

Here’s the blurb.

“Axanar” is the story of Garth of Izar & the Battle of Axanar, a pivotal event in the history of the Federation.

Before I go on I should note that, initially, this was called Star Trek: Axanar, and later Star Trek: Prelude to Axanar, and then Axanar: The Four Years War before just settling in on Axanar. Since they could have just as easily called it The Further Adventures of Spot the Wonderfish as a working title, none of that matters. At least not legally.

Now, here’s where things get fun.

In December 2015 CBS sued Axanar’s production company for copyright infringement. Axanar responded by saying “Which copyright?” And now all hell has broken loose.

First I’ll let the show’s producer, Alec Peters, give you a lay of the land.

Axanar is a cut above the usual fan-produced movie, said Peters. “There’s a reason why Prelude to Axanar and Axanar look like professional movies, because we have professionals working on them,” he said. “These are professionals. They do this for a living. They’re not fans who are voice actors, or Elvis impersonators who have a hobby and have always wanted to play Captain Kirk. That’s not to knock fan films. I’m just saying, if you want volunteers, you get a certain quality. You want professionals? You’ve got to pay for them. It’s real simple.”

Peters believes that the reason they were targeted was due to this professional quality of the production. “It’s real simple,” he said. “Because of our quality. “Star Trek Continues is a fan film. Amateur actors, beautiful sets, well-done photography. But it’s a fan film. There’s no way you take that for a real TV show. Star Trek: New Voyages? Fan film. It looks good — well directed — but no one’s ever going to take that for a network TV show.”

– AND –

But Peters thinks that since they “violate CBS copyright less than any other fan film,” CBS and Paramount shouldn’t have gone after them. “Star Trek Continues and Star Trek: New Voyages violate more than we do,” he said. “Axanar doesn’t call itself Star Trek anymore, nor does it use iconic characters like Kirk, Spock and McCoy.

“We don’t use the chevron. We don’t use the uniforms you’re used to seeing. We don’t use (the Original Series) bridge or sets. Those two productions are entirely copyright infringement.”

It’s probable that raising over a million dollars caught the attention of Paramount and CBS too, but Peters believes that since other productions have raised money and have not been sued, Axanar should not have been sued either. [They] “already said that it’s OK, basically, letting these guys go,” said Peters. “Star Trek Continues has raised $400,000, and you haven’t said anything about that. Star Trek: Renegades has raised $800,000, and they use characters from the original too … They waived their rights because they let this go on for so long.”

Peters also claims that tacit approval was given by CBS as long as they didn’t “make any money off of the project.”

If you want to read a complete breakdown of all the legal proceedings, and filings, just CLICK HERE and have fun.

But, to summarize, CBS says Axanar bad, Alec Peters and his lawyers say Axanar good.

Now, let’s move on to the fun world of unintended consequences.

CBS’ suit claims that it wants $150,000 per incident of copyright infringement. Axanar claims that lawsuits are not like making spaghetti, you can’t just toss something against the wall and see if it sticks. They want a detailed list of the alleged infringements so they know exactly what’s at stake.

So far so good.

And this is where CBS could get into trouble. Let’s take some basic elements.

Warp Drive. The term has been used by numerous films, video games, TV shows, and is even used by NASA as a bullet point to describe Faster than Light Travel.

Phasers. Not just a weapon any more, it’s a kids’ video game too.

The Federation. That term, and it’s logical variants, has been used so often that it’s now considered a TV Trope. A shortcut to let fans know who the good guys are. Hint: They’re always members of the Federation.

Star Trek itself. What is it? You think you know. It seems like an easy answer. But, which version are we talking about? Which variant? Rights and licenses have been handed down, parsed out, set aside, and reworked, since the late 70’s. There are numerous fiction books, cartoons, canonical technical guides, TV shows, movies, characters, and the current reboots, with an entirely new set of canonical characters and locations. And it’s unclear what rights, if any, CBS owns in each.

NBC broadcasted Star Trek, Desilu owned Star Trek, Gene Roddenberry’s production company Norway Productions produced it, Paramount bought Desilu (including Star Trek) in 1967, some time after the series was canceled Paramount offered Gene Roddenberry the rights to Star Trek, Gene couldn’t afford Paramounts asking price of One million dollars (I have seen a lower price mentioned) to purchase the rights. Viacom purchased Paramount in 1994. Viacom purchased CBS in 2000. CBS & Viacom are split into two seperate companies in 2005. Paramount Televison is renamed to CBS Television in 2009. In the end no matter how it is sliced up and renamed, both CBS and Paramount are owned by Sumner Redstone who owns National Amusements that controls Viacom, CBS and Paramount. That’s one snaky paper trail.

Thanks to Daiv Golden for the correct chain of title.

I bring this up to point out that the judge could rule, and there is plenty of precedent for this to happen, that while specific groupings of elements are covered under copyright law, i.e., a complete movie or TV show, the underlying elements are in the public domain.

Simply put, this was not well thought out by CBS.

They have another problem too. They are claiming that the film, Axanar, infringes on their copyrights but the film hasn’t been made yet. Just the prelude. Which is not the same thing. In other words they are suing for something which may happen. That could set a chilling precedent if allowed.

Lastly, not to be crass, but if they were truly interested in protecting their copyrights they would have shut down Sex Trek and its offshoots, years ago. While the aggregate is clearly parody, and porn, several of those films, and there are a lot of them, look like they were shot on the original sets and even use the uniforms, emblems of rank, and plot protocols, from the original show.

Personally I can’t wait to see the defense show clips of those videos in court.

“Your Honor, I would now like to ask the Court to ‘Boldly Cum Where No Man Has Cum Before.'”

Of course, I guess the one bright spot in this mess is that we’re almost guaranteed to get “Assanar: The Four Beer Whore.”

3/2/16: This post has been updated to show the full chain of title.

Star Trek Rap from Those Aren't Muskets! on Vimeo.

Listen to Bill McCormick on WBIG (FOX! Sports) every Friday around 9:10 AM.
Visit us on Rebel Mouse for even more fun!
contact Bill McCormick
Your Ad Can Be Here Now!

The human mind is an interesting thing. It completely controls what we can learn about it. Think about that, while ignoring the irony of those three words, and try and imagine any other situation like that. While others may try and influence you no one can truly control your thoughts without your permission. Oh, I’ll grant, there are ways to influence someone’s decision making process. To be more accurate, there are seven. If you’re looking to become a cult leader or something, feel free to click that link. But, even then, simply recognizing the techniques nullifies them. If you’re bored, however, just watch any televangelist. They use them all the time. Nevertheless, the one thing we all have, at one level or another, is control of our own dreams and memories.

Or so you thought.

Phillip Ball, over at the Guardian, quietly noted that scientists can erase memories and replace them with new ones.

Be careful what you wish for. That’s what Joel, played by Jim Carrey, discovers in Charlie Kaufman’s 2004 film Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, when he asks a memory-erasure company, Lacuna Inc, to excise the recollections of a painful breakup from his mind. During the procedure, Joel realises he doesn’t want every memory of the relationship to vanish and tries desperately to hold on to a few fragments.

The movie offers a metaphor for how we are defined by our memories, how poignant is both their recall and their loss – and how unreliable they can be. So what if Lacuna’s process is implausible? Just enjoy the allegory. Except that selective memory erasure isn’t implausible. It’s already happening.

Researchers and clinicians are using drugs to suppress the emotional impact of traumatic memories. They have been able to implant false memories in flies and mice, so that innocuous environments or smells seem to be “remembered” as threatening. They are showing that memory is not like an old celluloid film, fixed but fading; it is constantly being changed and updated, and can be edited and falsified with alarming ease.

“I see a world where we can reactivate any kind of memory we like, or erase unwanted memories,” says neuroscientist Steve Ramirez of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. “I even see a world where editing memories is something of a reality. We’re living in a time where it’s possible to pluck questions from the tree of science fiction and ground them in experimental reality.” So be careful what you wish for.

The good news is that, just like in Total Recall or Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, you have to volunteer for this.

So far.

But not all forms of mind control are malevolent. Some can be downright beneficial. The nice people over at Science Alert tell us how the mind of a paralytic can be tricked into having the patient walk again.

Australian researchers have developed a tiny ‘bionic spine’ that can be implanted into a blood vessel next to the brain to read electrical signals and feed them into an exoskeleton, bionic limbs, or wheelchair to give paraplegic patients greater mobility based on subconscious thoughts.

“Our vision, through this device, is to return function and mobility to patients with complete paralysis by recording brain activity and converting the acquired signals into electrical commands, which in turn would lead to movement of the limbs through a mobility assist device like an exoskeleton. In essence this a bionic spinal cord,” said neurologist and lead researcher, Thomas Oxley from the Royal Melbourne Hospital and the University of Melbourne.

One of the biggest advantages of the new device is how easy it is to implant. Measuring 3 cm long and a few millimetres wide – basically the size of a paperclip – it requires a small cut to be made in the back of a patient’s neck, and is fed into the blood vessels that connect to the brain via a catheter.

Once it hits the top of the motor cortex – where the nerve impulses that control voluntary muscular activity originate – the bionic spine is left behind as the catheter is removed. The whole procedure should only take a few hours, the team reports.

“We have been able to create the world’s only minimally invasive device that is implanted into a blood vessel in the brain via a simple day procedure, avoiding the need for high risk open brain surgery,” said Oxley.

“This is a procedure that Royal Melbourne staff do commonly to remove blood clots,” one of the team, Nicholas Opie from the University of Melbourne, told Melissa Davey at The Guardian. “The difference with our device is we have to put it in, and leave it in.”

Once the bionic spine is implanted, the tiny electrodes on its exterior will stick to the walls of a vein and start recording electrical signals from the motor cortex. These signals are then transmitted to another device implanted in the patient’s shoulder, which translates them into commands to control wheelchairs, exoskeletons, prosthetic limbs, or computers via bluetooth.

This isn’t something a patient will immediately know how to do, but the researchers say that with training, deliberate thoughts about manoeuvring bionic limbs and other apparatuses will eventually be controlled by their subconscious.

While this is certainly not the first piece of technology designed to give paralysed patients the ability to move again using neural signals, the team behind it says it’s an improvement on previous devices because of how tiny it is.

“[M]ost require invasive surgery involving removing a piece of the skull, known as a craniotomy, and which carries a risk of infection and other complications,” Davey explains for The Guardian, adding that a few recently unveiled devices involve bulky electrode caps and robotic suits.

“[A]nother existing procedure, which involves puncturing thousands of electrodes into the brain, is only effective for up to a year before the brain starts treating it as a foreign object and grows scar tissue over it,” she describes.

The device has so far only been tested in sheep, but the team plans to start human trials in 2017, with three patients to be selected from Royal Melbourne Hospital’s Austin Health spinal cord unit as the first recipients.

The exciting thing about this, besides the obvious, is that the implant only needs to be done once and then the patient will be mobile for the rest of their lives. Slim exo-skeletons have already been developed and, by 2017, there is hope that they could be worn like underwear or a T-shirt and not be noticeable to observers.

Now, as with all things, the mind can sometimes let its owner down. Alzheimer’s and Dementia are the most obvious examples. And while strides are being made in treatment and, possibly, a cure, for now we can only address the symptoms. And one of those symptoms, victims getting confused and wandering off, sometimes with lethal consequences, has been the hardest to overcome.

Until now.

Chiarra Sottlie, at NBS News, tells us all about the teenage boy who solved the problem.

Kenneth Shinozuka will soon start the eleventh grade. He’s a Boy Scout and a lover of the outdoors, and he wants to someday cure Alzheimer’s Disease.

Shinozuka, 15, crosses the cheerily decorated room with its floral paintings and karaoke station, and greets Ida with a handshake and polite salutations. Then, he gets down to business.

“I made this sock that lets Conrad know when you walk off your chair or out of bed, and lets him know if you need help,” Shinozuka says, referring to Ida’s nurse.

“Oh really?” Ida asks. “That’s pretty clever.”

“Thank you,” he says, in his characteristic politeness. “So we’re going to put the sock on you know, if that’s okay.” Delicately, he kneels down and slides a blue gingham sock equipped with a sensor on Ida’s right foot.

According to the Alzheimer’s Association, of the estimated five million Americans with the disease, about 60 percent of them wander — and often become dangerously lost — as a result.

Shinozuka has invented a pressure sensor that when worn on the bottom of the foot or with a sock detects an increase in pressure and wirelessly sends an alert to a caregiver’s smartphone. Not only did Shinozuka come up with the gadget from scratch and teach himself how to make it, but he’s also beta testing it on patients like Ida this summer.

The CEO and founder of Irvine Cottages, gerontologist Jacqueline Dupont recalls the day earlier this summer when the eager 15-year-old called her saying he wanted to help her patients.

“I just couldn’t believe that anyone so young could achieve so much,” says Dupont. “I thought he was a college student!”

Shinozuka gets that a lot.

He’s matter-of-fact as he reviews his device with Dr. Dupont. “Pressure is applied, the alert is sounded,” says Shinozuka, squeezing the white, lima-bean sized sensor and triggering a musical chime on the iPhone in his other hand.

Side note, he invented this as a way for his family to track his grandfather who suffers from Alzheimer’s and keeps wandering off. The device, while simple, is also 100% effective.

So now that I’ve got you feeling all warm and fuzzy please allow me to scare the living shit out of you.

A while back I wrote about how some simians have entered the Stone Age and are now evolving towards true sentience. Many assumed that this was nature’s way of picking our replacements. And there is enough truth in that possibility to make it worth considering. But, as anyone who’s studied rudimentary anthropology knows, nature always offers alternatives. Before there were homo-sapiens there were many forms of proto-humans. Some we mated with, others we killed, until it was finally just us.

So what other animals are on that list? The answer might surprise you.

I’ll let Mark Prigg, of the Daily Mail, tell you all about crow funerals.

Crows mourn their dead to try and learn about potential dangers to their own lives, researchers have found.

They found the birds can even remember an animal or person seen with a dead crow.

The birds were also able to easily distinguish between people or hawks carrying dead crows and other birds.

‘The funeral behaviour of crows is so widely observed, and people often asked about it – but we haven’t known what was happening,’ Kaeli Swift at the University of Washington, who led the research, told Dailymail.com.

The study recorded the crow’s behaviour when stuffed crows which appeared dead were introduced to areas where they are feeding.

‘I introduced one of my three dangerous scenarios: a masked person holding a dead crow, a masked person standing near perched hawk, and a masked person standing near a perched hawk with a dead crow.’

In all these cases the birds were taxidermy-prepared mounts.

‘The masks were used to work out how the crows recognised people – I had different volunteers each week,’ Swift said.

In 96% of cases , the response was the same.

‘The discovering bird (usually the territory holder) would scold and typically attract 5-11 additional birds.

‘The mob would stick around for 10-20 minutes, scolding loudly and gradually growing more silent and dispersing before all but the territory holders were left.’

Exposure to the dangerous stimuli would only last 30min, after which they were removed.
Volunteers wore realistic facemasks with neutral expressions for the experiments so the crows could recognise faces even though different volunteers were underneath them.

‘I found that crows responded most strongly when they saw a person and a hawk with a dead crow as opposed to a person holding a dead crow or a person near a hawk,’ said Swift.

‘This tells us that context matters, and crows are most sensitive to dead crows when they’re with familiar predators.

Even after 6 week, 38% of the 65 pairs eligible for all 6 tests continued to respond to the ‘dangerous’ person.

Previous research has found crows have an excellent memory for human faces, and Swift said the team have a pending publication on exactly how long they remember for, and said it is ‘years’

She admits she was surprised by some of the results – in particular the fact crows learnt to recognise people simply standing near hawks.

‘That was really surprising.’

So what does that mean? Essentially that crows modify their cultural responses to their surroundings. This allows them to have different bases for their reactions and to interact with other groups that have different reactions to different stimuli and learn.

And that leads to this.

Molly Jackson, over at the Christian Science Monitor, says that Ravens, a more intelligent and evolved version of crows, might possess a true theory of mind.

From ancient Greek mythology to Native American folklore, ravens tend to have the same role: the clever tricksters you don’t want to cross. Corvus corax and its relatives were even spies for Apollo, which didn’t end well for his unfaithful lover Coronis, and served as the eyes and ears of Norse god Odin.

Ravens do spy on each other, it turns out, and they can infer when other birds are snooping on them. New findings, released Tuesday in a study in Nature Communications, highlight just how sophisticated – and human-like – ravens’ cognitive abilities are.

“What really is the feature that’s unique and special about human cognition?” asks co-author Cameron Buckner, a philosopher at the University of Houston.

Something helped propel us to learn language, built political institutions, develop arts and culture. Many biologists and philosophers think it’s our ability to see things through another person’s eyes, and to think about what they might be thinking, skills referred to as “Theory of Mind.”

But ravens do have basic Theory of Mind, the authors suggest, after cracking one of the biggest puzzles in animal cognition debates: without speech, how can we tell what a bird is thinking?

Ravens are willing to eat just about anything, but especially meat. After a group comes across some carrion, and has eaten as much as they can, birds will tuck remaining bits into their throat pouches, then scoot off to bury the scraps in hidden caches they can come back to later. It’s a competitive game of hide-and-seek, in which subordinates often spy to see where a dominant has stashed a future meal, and try to fly in for a taste as soon as the dominant takes off.

Often, though, she knows they’re watching. Ravens use all kinds of tricks to throw off competitors: burying their cache as quickly as they can, for instance, or doing their digging behind a visual barrier; afterwards, they may avoid the spot, hoping not to draw attention to their buried loot. Some will even pretend to dig a hole while secretly keeping their snack in their throat pouch until they can find a more private spot.

It all points to the idea that they know they’re being watched: that they can project other ravens’ motives. Better watch where he’s headed; I’ll dig up a bit as soon as he’s gone. Earlier studies with chimps, monkeys and ravens have also suggested a basic Theory of Mind, but with a major caveat: do the animals really know what others are thinking? Or are they just reacting to physical stimuli: visible raven plus a fresh food cache equals lost supper?

“This was a really difficult problem to overcome,” Dr. Buckner says in a phone interview with The Christian Science Monitor. Mere cache-hiding might be “one-to-one stimulus responses,” ravens’ individual trial and error when they see another bird looking their way. To prove that a raven showed Theory of Mind, researchers needed to get the second raven out of the picture, to demonstrate that there was some underlying code helping ravens generalize about others’ motives.

To test it out, they separated two experiment areas with a wall, which they fitted with a window and a small peephole, visible when the window was shut. Offering food to ravens in both rooms, with the windows first open, then closed, they observed baseline caching behavior: how did the birds try to disguise their caches when they could clearly see competitors, and when they couldn’t?

Then came peephole training. Individually, 10 birds were trained to look through the open peephole and spy on a human researcher burying some cheese; afterwards, the window was fully opened, and they could go find their edible reward. (Most could, that is; one feathered fellow named Rufus never mastered the peephole, and had to sit out the rest of the experiment.)

The next time one of the remaining nine ravens entered the caching room, the window was still shut — but the peephole was open, and a loudspeaker on the other side played recordings of the ravens’ noises during the earlier caching stage. The birds couldn’t see the competition (and in fact there wasn’t any, just recorded noises) but, now acquainted with the peephole, they seemed to infer that someone could be watching. The birds hid their caches more quickly and delayed a return visit to the cache, similar to their behavior when they were visibly observed by other ravens.

“Because all available behavior-reading cues have been controlled for in the test condition – there is no actual competitor whose gaze could be read, and the situation is novel from the subject’s perspective – these data provide clear evidence that raven social cognition cannot be reduced to behavior-reading,” the team writes.

In other words, the birds met the researchers’ criteria for Theory of Mind by incorporating information from their own experiences with novel ones, to predict how others might act and how to adapt their own behavior appropriately.

I should note here that crows and ravens have both developed the ability to use tools. Well enough that it’s easy to consider them pre-Stone Age in their development.

Keep this in mind, if you’ll pardon the expression, once humans had developed rudimentary civilizations and communication skills, similar to the ones chimps, ravens, and crows are now demonstrating, it took them barely 10,000 years to turn that into cities, agriculture, and so on. And they had no references to learn from. All the other animals have us.

Maybe wiping our minds and calling it a day isn’t such a bad idea after all.

Listen to Bill McCormick on WBIG (FOX! Sports) every Friday around 9:10 AM.
Visit us on Rebel Mouse for even more fun!
contact Bill McCormick
Your Ad Can Be Here Now!

I’ve written about the perils of our impending cybernetic overlords on several occasions. Sometimes in terror, sometimes in fun. Often for the same reasons. Let’s face it, relationships are hard. And, sometimes, the thought of having a sexbot around to take the edge off after a hard day of World News Centering doesn’t sound that bad. Having that same sexbot become self aware and end up controlling my life, however, seems problematic. Even if it would, probably, be for my best interests. But the one thing that keeps all of this simple thought experiments instead of being something to seriously consider are three limitations. (1) There is no viable storage device for all the data required for sentience; (2) Stored data can provide many library like functions, HI SIRI!, but it can’t reason; and (3) There is no viable way (yes, I used the same word twice, sue me) to have such data interact on a social level in any case.

And all that was true yesterday.

Let’s bust them down one by one.

(1) There is no viable storage device for all the data required for sentience

Chloe Olewitz, over at Digital Trends, says that’s no longer true.

A whole new kind of digital data storage could protect the legacy of the documents humanity considers most precious. The tiny glass disk can store up to 360 terabytes of information, and will be able to survive for billions of years without damage or data loss. Scientists at the University of Southampton’s Optoelectronics Research Centre are behind the disk, and are responsible for engineering the nano-structured glass material to store the huge amount of data in five dimensions.

The disk’s nano-structured glass material actively influences the way light passes through the glass layers. Nano-structures modify the light’s polarization so that positive and negative values can be read as rich information. In this particular case, documents are recorded to the glass disk using an ultrafast laser that hits the three layers of nano-structured dots with short, strong light pulses. That’s how information is encoded in five dimensions — the size and orientation of the data is meaningful, in addition to the three dimensional layout of the nano-structures themselves.

According to the disk’s creators, the affectionately named “Superman memory crystal” will last for up to 13.8 billion years at 190 degrees Celsius, and for a virtually unlimited lifetime at room temperature. This technology was successfully demonstrated as part of a 2013 experiment that recorded 300 kilobytes of a text file in five dimensions.

“It is thrilling to think that we have created the technology to preserve documents and information and store it in space for future generations. This technology can secure the last evidence of our civilization: all we’ve learnt will not be forgotten,” said Professor Peter Kazansky from the Optoelectronics Research Center.

Although the Southampton team is still actively looking for industry partners to commercialize the new technology, this particular approach to nano-structured glass data storage is expected to be used by national archives, museums, and libraries. They have already saved versions of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Newton’s Opticks, the Magna Carta and the King James Bible in 5D storage, and the possibilities for other kinds of data storage and sharing are quite literally limitless. Any data stored to these disks will outlast us all.

That last sentence, emphasis mine, is about to become very meaningful in a few moments.

(2) Stored data can provide many library like functions, HI SIRI!, but it can’t reason

Phys.org says, Yeah? Sez who?

The rapid pace of artificial intelligence (AI) has raised fears about whether robots could act unethically or soon choose to harm humans. Some are calling for bans on robotics research; others are calling for more research to understand how AI might be constrained. But how can robots learn ethical behavior if there is no “user manual” for being human?

Researchers Mark Riedl and Brent Harrison from the School of Interactive Computing at the Georgia Institute of Technology believe the answer lies in “Quixote”—to be unveiled at the AAAI-16 Conference in Phoenix, Ariz. (Feb. 12 – 17, 2016). Quixote teaches “value alignment” to robots by training them to read stories, learn acceptable sequences of events and understand successful ways to behave in human societies.

“The collected stories of different cultures teach children how to behave in socially acceptable ways with examples of proper and improper behavior in fables, novels and other literature,” says Riedl, associate professor and director of the Entertainment Intelligence Lab. “We believe story comprehension in robots can eliminate psychotic-appearing behavior and reinforce choices that won’t harm humans and still achieve the intended purpose.”

Quixote is a technique for aligning an AI’s goals with human values by placing rewards on socially appropriate behavior. It builds upon Riedl’s prior research—the Scheherazade system—which demonstrated how artificial intelligence can gather a correct sequence of actions by crowdsourcing story plots from the Internet.

Scheherazade learns what is a normal or “correct” plot graph. It then passes that data structure along to Quixote, which converts it into a “reward signal” that reinforces certain behaviors and punishes other behaviors during trial-and-error learning. In essence, Quixote learns that it will be rewarded whenever it acts like the protagonist in a story instead of randomly or like the antagonist.
For example, if a robot is tasked with picking up a prescription for a human as quickly as possible, the robot could a) rob the pharmacy, take the medicine, and run; b) interact politely with the pharmacists, or c) wait in line. Without value alignment and positive reinforcement, the robot would learn that robbing is the fastest and cheapest way to accomplish its task. With value alignment from Quixote, the robot would be rewarded for waiting patiently in line and paying for the prescription.
Riedl and Harrison demonstrate in their research how a value-aligned reward signal can be produced to uncover all possible steps in a given scenario, map them into a plot trajectory tree, which is then used by the robotic agent to make “plot choices” (akin to what humans might remember as a Choose-Your-Own-Adventure novel) and receive rewards or punishments based on its choice.

The Quixote technique is best for robots that have a limited purpose but need to interact with humans to achieve it, and it is a primitive first step toward general moral reasoning in AI, Riedl says.
“We believe that AI has to be enculturated to adopt the values of a particular society, and in doing so, it will strive to avoid unacceptable behavior,” he adds. “Giving robots the ability to read and understand our stories may be the most expedient means in the absence of a human user manual.”

Yeah, load those babies up with The Art of War by Sun Tzu and The Prince by Niccolò Machiavelli and let the fun begin.

Anyway, we now have the elemental parts for what we’ll need next. A place to put all the data and a way to parse it so it doesn’t kill us all. Well, that’s the idea. We’ll see how that all works out.

(3) There is no viable way to have such data interact on a social level in any case

Now, a little thought experiment for you. What else do you know that can process millions of bits of data simultaneously, reason out their uses, and then apply to required functions?

If you said “the human brain” you go to the head of your class. What does that have to do with any of the above, except as a rough comparison? Well, try this; what if we could take all the data in your mind and transfer it to an immortal cyborg?

No, it’s not really far fetched.

Rob Waugh, over at Yahoo News, tells you why.

Human beings will be VERY different in just over three decades time – when we’ll be gold-skinned, immortal cyborgs.

That’s the startling prediction of one futurologist – who says that technology will cause us to ‘evolve’ into a new species over the next few decades.

Our mastery of technology will also lead to ‘engineered’ pets which talk – a little like living Furbies.

Human beings will effectively become immortal as we gain the ability to upload our minds into computers – and download them into new robot bodies.

The predictions – based on academic research – were made by futurologist Dr Ian Pearson for the Big Bang Science Fair 2016.

Dr Pearson says that by 2050, people will be able to connect their brains directly to computers and, ‘could move their mind into an improved android body.

‘This would allow people to have multiple existences and identities, or to carry on living long after their biological death.’

How will that work? I’m glad you asked. Dr. Pearson was kind enough to provide a graphic.

We already have the technology to allow the brain to control biological functions through cybernetic devices. It is how the blind can now see, the deaf can hear, and the paralyzed can walk.

You can see, hear, and get around. Combine that with your continued ability to interact with the world around you, as noted above, and you no longer need an organic body.

Here’s something else for you to think about. Evolution requires new organisms to replace the old. Otherwise there is evolutionary stagnation. Can you honestly claim that you’re the pinnacle of evolution and let it stop with you? I’ll leave that to you to answer by, and for, yourself.

MMD [R-18] Cyber Thunder Cider from Pr0nB0tz on Vimeo.

Listen to Bill McCormick on WBIG (FOX! Sports) every Friday around 9:10 AM.
Visit us on Rebel Mouse for even more fun!
contact Bill McCormick
Your Ad Can Be Here Now!