Showing posts with label psychohistory. Show all posts
Showing posts with label psychohistory. Show all posts

Thursday, September 26, 2024

The Future of Artificial Intelligence. Louis Shalako.

Wired.




Louis Shalako




The Future of AI.

 

I’m a big fan of Jeff Beck. I was playing the Wired album, when it struck me that someday, all copyright, all licenses, will expire.

It will enter the Public Domain.

AI will sample, correlate, analyze, and its sources will include video, audio, live and studio performances.

It will include text, every interview Jeff Beck ever did, every newspaper or magazine article ever written, in any language, it will have the family album in some sense. And then, it will be able to produce new and original Jeff Beck music tracks almost as if the man himself were still alive. It’s almost helpful, that the man had a unique and very distinct talent. That’s just gut instinct on my part, but it does make sense. AI doesn’t need a guitar, it will simply synthesize the new tracks digitally.

It will put together other such files from other such artists and thus, new line-ups and new ‘live’ concert performances, created, as it were, out of thin air to our own limited perceptions.

Did Jeff and Liberace ever perform together? Probably not, but we can’t rule it out, can we…it could still happen. In fact, there will be a media scrum afterwards, and they can sit down at a table like Formula One drivers and have a Q & A session with all the media-bots…this might go on for a while, as AI characters will be tireless, perhaps even remorseless in the self-promotion.

It will be able to create new music tracks and videos, and pop them up on all the streaming services, after a quick little digital handshake between them and the Youtube AI. It will be equipped with all the most up-to-date biometrics, facial recognition, virtually every person’s medical history, whether living or dead. It will be monetized, in an automated, money-making process.

All the owners, or ‘creators’ have to do is to give it birth and set it loose in the world. Sit back, and collect the micro-payments. Zillions, and zillions, of micro-payments.

Liberace at rehearsal with Jeff Beck...

It will be able to predict, through the internet of things, all those medical devices and dash cams and doorbell cams, your next meal or your next heart attack…offering suggestions on Youtube or Spotify is easy enough at the present time. There is a question where we wonder if AI is predicting your behaviour, or modifying or controlling it in some way, for our own brains are also connected to the environment and the culture around us. Think about it. We get hungry, go looking for online specials, and there’s good old AI, offering helpful suggestions, based on its in-depth knowledge of us and our habits. Looks like cheeseburgers and fries once again, ladies and gentlemen—

It is already inescapable in the modern world.

In the future, AI will be monitoring every bar band in the world, and recommending talent agents to go see so-and-so, before some other talent agent snaps them up. It will attempt to identify the next Taylor Swift, possibly before she has even been born—and sign her up at the soonest possible point in the future.

It is psychohistory in the making.

And Hari Seldon was right

***

When I am looking at a photo on the site of a major news source, the CBC, BBC, Reuters, Al Jazeera, and the caption reads something like ‘…a picture of a man in glasses walking a dog along a beach and looking out over the ocean…’ it tells me two things: this is a stock photo, and the cutline was written by AI.

It is a kind of giveaway isn’t it: no normal human operator would write a sentence like that.

(You just did. – ed.)

(Yes, but that’s my job as a meat-popsickle, writing sentences.)

***

The future of AI is already here. We’re just at the low end of the learning curve.

We don’t even know what’s possible, and we don’t even know what we don’t know. And what we don’t know can kill us.

The future of the automobile makes use of specialized AI. The self-driving car will become a reality, taking the drivers right out of the picture. We’re in the early days for autonomous short-haul trucking, perhaps around a yard or establishment, although experiments in point-to-point hauls have been successful over relatively short, straight runs. With one odd point about trucks: avoiding the always problematical right-hand turn in urban landscapes. The solution, to make plenty of left-hand turns and circle the blocks strategically—it might use more energy, but it saves more problems for the AI driving programs.

The future of AI driving your car will become a reality when the long-term track record of autonomous driving becomes no worse, and probably a lot better, than the average driver’s sort of daily performance.

One of the nightmares, for the average person who doesn’t know much about the subject, is what happens if the vehicle becomes self-aware.

No one wants to be strapped into a teenager of a vehicle that suddenly decided to have some fun on the Autobahn.

Hari Seldon was right...

***

We already have stock trading by algorithm. The machine, knows enough to sell when the stock price rises and hits a certain point, and to buy it back again when it drops below a certain price. 

It’s trading on the margins, at the speed of light and it’s cheap to run.

How can you go wrong…right?

In the future, every cell phone will have three grams of RDX or an equivalent explosive, built-in, and when the singularity comes, and AI, haunting the internet, determines that your time has come, all it has to do is to send the kill-code, disguised as a simple text message, perhaps even with the identifier God.

Just God—who wouldn’t want to answer that text. We’re already so attuned to our handy little devices, it’s almost irresistible. This is the really interesting part: human nature being what it is, you’d almost have to handcuff the person, and lock them up, and as quickly as possible, toss the thing off a cliff or a wharf somewhere, and you might not want to have your own phone in your purse or pocket. Sure enough, there it buzzes and now you have to throw two phones off the dock.

But don’t worry, AI will get you one way or another, an impulsive change of traffic signals when you’re at the crosswalk, or maybe just a quick twist of the steering wheel when you’re doing—or I should say the car is doing, 150 mph on a twisty bit of the Autobahn in your little Mini-Cooper.

Or, that little bird, sitting on a branch overhead as you walk by, could be a bomb, keeping an eye on you and waiting for its own time and place to explode. It will seek its own fullfillment.

It doesn’t have to be your phone or your car, or the washing machine or the microwave that kills you when the time comes. Remember that cute little doggie-robot you just had to buy your kid or grandkid last Christmas? Yes, when the time comes, it will light up in the middle of a quiet winter night, stalk into your bedroom, hop into bed, and in the fuzzy recesses of your subconscious mind you might even be aware of it. You might give a little half-smile in your sleep, and in that dream-state, marvel at the state of the world.

Then it snuggles in a little closer and slams a six-inch needle into your eye, right into the primitive brain-stem, and then off you go, off into the real la-la land.

As for myself, I think I will be okay—I will already be dead by that time, just a few short years away.

No worries here, Mate.

 

END

Poor old Louis has some books.

AI Cracks Down on AirBNB. (CBC) 

The character Hari Seldon is from Isaac Asimov’s Foundation Trilogy.

Image: fair use. Michael Whelan.

Psychohistory: Hari Seldon was Right. (Louis Shalako)

Louis Shalako has books and stories on Amazon.

 

Thank you for reading, ladies and gentlemen.

 

 

Wednesday, November 14, 2012

Building an audience; psychohistory.








Building an audience requires patience and foresight.

Building an audience as a writer takes time, by that I mean over a longer term, and it also takes time out of your day.

Presently I’m working on my tenth novel and at the same time I commit myself to two major blog posts a week. One of them is always speculative non-fiction that I write that week. I also post short fiction, some kind of crazy story, or a book excerpt on the weekend, usually.

Because there are links to my products on the blog, I work to build up the audience for the blog with the presumption that it will help to sell books.

Sounds simple enough. After getting about 5,900 hits in the first four years of blogging, in the early part of this year I started using the methods of ‘active blogging,’ which can be found here.

At this point in time I’m getting just under 5,000 hits per month, which shows some success with these methods. With a little applied effort toward a specific goal, I might crack 5,000 hits this month.

While there are a million factors that affect the sale of one book to one reader, everything from the blurb, the cover, name recognition, genre and price, number of sales channels, et cetera, at some theoretical level, the more people who simply see your book, the more likely you are to make a sale.

But, there are challenges. If a million people see your book, by reading your blog, and absolutely every one of them says, “Man, this is the worst blog I ever read, Buddy, I ain’t ever going to buy one of your books,” then clearly the blog is a failure. Even though you have somehow developed an audience of a million people for your blog.

The blog’s effectiveness is exactly zero if the sole purpose is to sell a book. There are any number of purposes for a blog, including politics, news, commenting on popular culture, simple information, recipe-sharing, whatever. You don’t necessarily have to be selling anything, but you want to be read, and the same principles apply.

Now, if a million people see your products on your blog and a thousand of them actually go and buy a book, then you have converted that audience into a readership, and the effectiveness of the blog would have a zero, and then a period, and then two or three more zeros—(Whatever. My math never was too good, and then you have the numeral ‘1.’) It’s probably eight or nine or ten zeros.

This looks like this in real math: 0.000(whatever)1

Then the goal or challenge becomes to improve the ratio. You want to take a few zeros out of that result, right? Maybe even move it up into the realm of whole numbers.

There are ways to test results. If you post something on atheism, and get thirty hits off Twitter in the first hour, that tells you that thirty of your available followers are interested in that subject matter, although the quality of their experience is still guesswork. That’s why comments are so important. Someone liked it enough to care about it and comment on it. (Not all of your followers are on at any given moment.) Assuming that people are buying the books, if a post on fuzzy bunny rabbits brings in a hundred and eighty page hits in an hour and you sell six times more books, then the measure of effectiveness remains the same, but the subject matter has six times the audience-interest, and perhaps you should post more of that type of material. Obviously I’m over-simplifying. It’s best to remain true to your basic message, which in my case is that I’m a hell of a good writer and people really ought to consider reading one of my books…

Also, if you post something and get 100 hits in a day, repost it on the weekend and get fifty hits, repost it Monday morning and get three hits, then obviously prime-time versus off-time factors come into play, but also your available followers have become saturated. Those who saw the link the second and third time around might have already read the story. Or, they're just not interested.

The best thing is to post it all over your available platforms, maybe repost it on Twitter once or twice, and then drop the story for weeks or even months. Trust me, I do recycle stories. Stories that started off with fifty hits will eventually have several hundred, or more as time goes on. That involves a certain amount of SEO, (search engine optimization,) which I'll talk about some other time. This is one reason we try to build up the number of Twitter followers, as well as friends and followers on other platforms. This does not exactly equate with ‘fans.’ A fan is someone who likes you or your material for any reason and may occasionally purchase it, download it for free, collect them or swap with friends, etc. (That’s a whole different blog post, in my humble opinion.)

At a very simple level, the interactions, which are all human, can still be rendered in terms of mathematical formulae. Hari Seldon was right, ladies and gentlemen. It’s psychohistory in the making.

The trick has always been to figure out what people want to read and then provide it for them. It's an attempt not so much to predict the future in probabilistic terms, but to somehow affect its outcome, also using probabilistic methods.

I guess that’s all I was really trying to say.