click on image to view listing
You have the right to your own mental order. You need not be ashamed of anything you think or any way you think.
Performing, advocating or threatening harm to others are the only crimes.
Harm is deliberate inequality.
In the last few days I became strongly concerned about a political issue. I cared so strongly about that issue that I contacted the leaders of Canada’s federal political parties, including the Canadian Prime Minister and my provincial political parties, including the Premier of my province. I cared so much about this issue I revealed personal information regarding something that is not understood by society, those entrusted with its care or the leaders I contacted.
There is a large community that does understand what I revealed. I spoke out to protect them. I spoke out for a group that was executed by the Nazis to no one’s protest. No movies are made about their disappearance. They were among the first to die.
I want the rights of these people protected by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms–the Canadian Constitution. Nothing less.
I don’t think there is a leader among us up to it.
We have to help ourselves.
I take comfort in the words of Aristotle: “Evil destroys even itself” and “All virtue is summed up in dealing justly.”
In a Forum interview by Michael Krasny of NPR with Futurist Paul Saffo brought to my attention in a blog by Tim Brown of IDEO, Paul quotes Mark Twain who said, “History does not repeat itself, but sometimes it rhymes.”
My work on the Czerepak Framework is an effort to look back as far as possible to find the rhymes of the history of systems and out of it has come the following:
Freedom and Fiat
Future and Flow
Function and Form
Fruition and Fulfillment
I have adopted the above process for my company, Cognitary, Inc., and call it “Cognitary Stratus”. It is both a methodology and, when extended to additional dimensions, a framework for designing a system.
My usage of the root “verto” with the prefixes “tri-“, “di-“, “uni-” and “con-” are intended to create new terms to deal with a four dimensional perspective (not three) of systems. The eight sub-forms of thinking correspond to the eight interrogatives:
These rhymes and sub-rhymes are the stratus of all systems and all systems design. Together they are the basis of Cognitary Stratus.
We have lived in “exponential times” since the big bang (if there was one)
Working with Malcolm Gladwell’s Tipping point, Ray Kurzweil’s Singularity and the Pareto Principle lead me to begin thinking about a pattern that presented itself. In an earlier post here and here I discussed how there had been many Singularities in history. It also lead me to talk about Pluralarites. Then it struck me there is an oscillation between Singularity and Plurality, giving us the Singularity Pluralarity Plot above. And the implications are interesting.
Any innovation follows the Singularity Pluralarity Plot as a complete life cycle. Kurzweil’s singularity will be no exception. The first working AI will be the domain of specialists it will not be unleashed uncontrolled on humanity and it will have been accomplished after several incremental developments that will leave humanity more than prepared for it. The AI will then have to be molded into compatibility to a variety of purposes. After that it will have to be iterated until it is reliable. Once it is reliable then the true singularity happens: the cost benefit ratio is achieved and AI becomes accessible to the general public. The next step is availability on the global market. Finally, AI will have to be always on and pluralarity is achieved. AI will be ubiquitous and the next innovation will take place. The commoditized original AI will begin its descent and a new innovation in AI or a completely new technology will take its place and begin its ascent.
There will be social upheaval, but I don’t think it will be as dramatic or as immediate as some think. The anthropomorphization of AI will fade and it will just be considered another tool.
The first thing that occurred to me is that as there is a positive and negative infinity there is also a positive and negative zero. Whether the zero is positive or negative is determined by whether you approach it from positive values or negative values. The second thing that occurred to me is that a pluralarity to singularity transition is divisive while a pluralarity to singularity transition is multiplicative. The third thing that occurred to me is that it is possible to have a positive to negative transition. For example you could follow a positive singularity to positive pluralarity curve with a negative pluralarity to negative singularity curve which would ascend like a staircase. The fourth thing that became obvious is that on an exponential curve the Pareto Principle applies at both ends. It’s like applying Lorentz transformations. Fifth, I am currently reading Peter Drucker’s Innovation and Entrepreneurship and have discovered that seizing opportunity, Entrepreneurship, requires recognizing whether you are approaching a Singularity or a Pluralarity while creating opportunity, Innovation, is making a Singularity or Pluralarity. The final thought that occurred to me is what are the implications of this knowledge on network design, physics, chemistry, biology, databases, complexity, simplicity, organization, history, anthropology, evolution, commoditization? I’ll leave it there.
In writing about the abundance of singularities (tipping points) in my previous post (here) it became apparent to me that in literature both great faction (my word for non-fiction) and great fiction document either slavery, servitas, or freedom, libertas.
What is significant here is my education in literature never described it this way. Simply put, the difference is between the two is whether you follow through or not. Do you make the transition from the old order to the new order or do you fall back into the old order. And the libertas plot reveals you can fall back not only before the libra point (the breakthrough), but before the dilibra point (the finish) where you achieve dominance.
The libertas plot illustrates the transition from old plurality to singularity to new pluralarity.
We have all sorts of terms for the old pluralarity: black hole, bar, barricade, bound, boundary, chain, confines, dam, defense, door, drawback, fence, fortress, gate, handicap, hedge, hindrance, hurdle, impediment, limit, line, moat, obstacle, obstruction, palisades, parapet, rail, railing, restraint, roadblock, screen, stockade, trench, wall, oblivion, boundlessness, immeasurability, immeasurableness, inexhaustibility, inexhaustibleness, infiniteness, limitlessness, measurelessness, unboundedness, unlimitedness, affliction, dullness, extortion, hardship, injustice, lassitude, misery, persecution, severity, suffering, tyranny
We also have all sorts of terms for the sigularity: avoid, bolt, breakout, decamp, desertion, disappear, diversion, dodge, duck, elope, elude, emerge, eschew, evade, evasion, flee, fly the coop, getaway, lam, leak, liberation, miss, outflow, outlet, rescue, shake, shun, sidestepping, skip, slip, spill, tone, vamoose, vent, break, breakout, decampment, escapement, flight, getaway, avoidance, bypass, circumvention, evasion, advance, boost, development, discovery, find, improvement, leap, progress, bloodshed, circuit, cycle, gyration, gyre, insurrection, outbreak, overthrow, rebellion, revolt, rotation, turn, unrest, uprising
But the most important word is the new pluralarity: accomplish, achieve, cease, close, coating, complete, completion, conclusion, culminate, defeat, deplete, destroy, devour, die, dispatch, dispose, elaborate, end, execute, finalize, finis, fulfill, glaze, kill, lacquer, limit, mop up, perfect, perfection, stain, stop, surface, terminate, windup
As John F. Kennedy illustrated in his “We choose to go to the Moon” speech, reaching the Moon was the breakthrough, returning safely was the finish.
In the same way we must choose to not only cross the singularity of creating artificial intelligence, but also include the plan to shut it down safely.
When we look at history, winning a war is a breakthrough, restoring order (lasting peace) is the real finish.
The Soviet Union’s defeat in Afghanistan was a crucial anti-climax in world history that exhausted the Soviet Military, Soviet Imperial aspirations and ultimately averted a third world war in the 20th century.
I’ve continued my reading of Jonathan Swift’s novel, Gulliver’s Travels, and have completed the Third Part. In this part we encounter the people of Laputa, so caught up in cogitation limited to music and mathematics that they are nearly unable to function in the physical world; the people of Balnibarbi, so caught up in academics that they are impoverished for lack of pragmatism; the people of Glubbdrubdrib where necromancy allows Gulliver to discover from the dead how contorted historical accounts truly are; and finally the people of Luggnagg among whom exist the immortal Struldbruggs who reveal that immortality is not necessarily everything it is hoped to be.
Jonathan’s fiction is a journey into extremes and reveals an irreverance for each of them. All to often we idealize cognition, academics, history and immortality and Jonathan does his utmost to help us to be regrounded.
related post: The Small and the Great