The Computational Universe

As Brooks described in his book, people are essentially like machines, but there is a natural, compelling drive to distinguish humans.  “It is the deep seated desire to be special.  To be more than mere.  The idea that we are machines makes seems to make us have no free will, no spark, no life.” (Brooks, 174)  Initially, I took the distinction between humans and machines as a given – I mean, of course I am different from a refrigerator.  However, through Brooks’ views and discussions in class, the topic of artificial intelligence blurs this distinction. 

Is artificial intelligence possible?  After discussion in class, Searle’s argument is much clearer to me.  While he argues that actual “thinking” cannot be elicited from results of a Turing Test, it brings up the question of what would actually show that something is thinking.  I think this is a tremendously difficult question to test because Searle’s definition of thinking incorporates consciousness.  This idea is the greatest problem in the argument about artificial intelligence primarily because it is not understood yet.  The concept of consciousness is not scientific and no one at this point knows the roots of it and what organisms, if any other, possess it.  If we eliminate the consciousness aspect of “thinking,” there is no doubt that artificial intelligence is possible.  Therefore, the main missing crux in the argument for artificial intelligence lies in the possibility of replicating or simulating emotion and consciousness. 

Brooks brings up the question of if something is “functionally” the same as a human, can it be accepted as human?  I will admit that I fall in the group that believes that there is something special about humans.  I am inclined to think that humans encompass a special, inexplicable quality that cannot be duplicated in machines.  While it may not be because of quantum mechanics, as Penrose tried to explain, it still exists, although it eludes us.  If a robot can simulate human behavior, will it actually be human?  I would resolve that it is human-like, but am reluctant to designate it the same level of life as that of a human. 

As history has worked in a way that shows that the unthinkable can be achieved, I am still open minded to the possibility of achieving artificial intelligence.  Although I’m a little skeptical about creating a machine that can function exactly like a human, the speed of technological progress has proved that we should never to rule anything out completely.  I still think that humans have an inherent quality that is unique to us, although I can’t explain where it originates; however, maybe the future will show us differently. 

Holding the title as the “inventor of the World Wide Web” seems somewhat mind-boggling and inconceivable.  Yet, the man who holds this title, Tim Berners-Lee, actually came to speak to us on Wednesday night. I wondered how the person who created one of the most influential systems in the world would be like.  Of course he had to be smart, but it was great to find that he has a great sense of humor as well.  His intermittent jokes and comments heightened the appeal of the lecture.  His ease of discussing the many technical concepts also demonstrated his intellect. 

During the lecture, Berners-Lee brought up the distinction between the technical and social rules of the World Wide Web.  Like the others who iterated the difficulty of understanding the jargon, I too struggled with technical side.  However, the social rules that he delineates captures the essence and goal of the World Wide Web.  A social aspect that he expressed was the importance of “citizen responsibility” and how systems like wiki’s depend on trusting other editors and contributors.  Another interesting point was how the web was not coordinated by a single person.  Small group of individuals are generally responsible for the smooth running of the web.  As Berners-Lee expressed, we should really thank the people who work on the WWW and make it available to the whole population.

Still, the most important objective of the WWW, as Berners-Lee articulated, is to serve useful things, make useful links, and share and agree on ontologies.  The most exciting part of the web is making data available in such a way that people can use it in unexpected ways.  Berners-Lee emphasizes that the true value of the web lies in this “serendipitous use.”  It has merged and connected different communities of different sizes.  In terms of the future, one of the most important goals is dealing with transparency.  Nevertheless, the World Wide Web has been tremendously successful in the communication and sharing of data and ideas.  It was really cool to see the individual that created it all.

The components of Boolean logic are relatively simple.  Based on three simple gates (NOT, AND, OR) this reasoning methodology utilizes a binary system to perform calculations.  Combinations of these three types of gates form combinational circuits.  These Boolean circuits are all that is needed to create the necessary effects for the different applications that computers are capable of, such as playing chess and performing calculator functions.  Performing binary addition requires the use an OR gate in the Boolean circuit, but it gets slightly more complicated due to carry bits which need to be accounted for in the next digit position.  In this manner, many 1-bit adders can be combined to add larger numbers.  Binary arithmetic is the fundamental operation in computers and paves the way for other operations like subtraction and multiplication.  Another use of Boolean logic is exemplified through the flip-flop circuit which is able to store different values.  This allows for the creation of memory for modern computers.

While Boolean logic can be used in many applications, there are still some limitations to this method.  First off, it can only be applied to a binary system, where there are only two values 0 or 1.  Therefore, in situations where there are more than strictly two values, there arises a problem.  Sometimes there cannot be fixed answers like 0 and 1, or yes and no.  Complex questions requiring more judgment will not be solved according to Boolean logic.  As the proof of God example demonstrates, Boolean logic, though seemingly very logical, sometimes overlooks the nuances that cannot be simplified to just two values. 

 All in all, it is still astounding that such simple concepts of Boolean logic can be united to form very complex systems in computers.

When I first heard that we were each going to get our own robot, I was thrilled.  I mean, what could be more exciting than playing with your personal robot for a lab?  However, things did not run as smoothly as I had imagined.  On our last lab, we had to make our Scribblers fill the role of artists.  The first task: draw a square with four inch sides – sounds simple enough.  While actually writing the program was not that difficult, the most frustrating aspect was the inconsistency of the Scribbler.  It just refused to draw a square for me.  I wrote one set of instructions for drawing one side of the square and looped it so that it would be repeated three more times to complete the shape.  Each of the sides theoretically should have been exactly the same.  However, my final result was an incomplete quadrangle.  I was disappointed that I couldn’t get my Scribbler to draw a perfect square.  From this exercise, I realized the limits of my Scribbler robot.  Its physical movements are inconsistent.  When you tell it to move forward and backward for the same amount of time, it does not end up in the same spot.  Its sensors are also slightly unreliable.  If an obstacle is too close, it will not be able to detect it.  The labs have demonstrated the Scribbler’s discrepancies, but on the whole, it is still effective.  For example, the Scribbler is still good at lighting up its LEDs and making sounds.  Even though my Scribbler is slightly variable, it’s alright – nobody’s perfect. 

These slight issues with the Scribbler also parallel the points that Brooks makes about robotic toys in Flesh and Machines.  In order to make robotic toys marketable and available to the masses, it is critical that they are made efficiently.  Efficiency requires not only cheap parts, but lowers the complexity of the features of the robot.  This idea was appealing to me because it is constantly seen in economic topics.  For example highly tailored government programs with many details, require a lot of money.  There is a tradeoff between customizing for the individual and price for determining feasibility.  In terms of producing marketable items, simplicity became an important idea.  Our Scribbler can do simple tasks like move forward, turn right, spin left, turn on a light, or play a sound.  These tasks in themselves are simplistic and help make the Scribbler practical.  If it were any more complex, with a wide range of features, as seen in Brook’s Baby IT example, it would be extremely difficult to produce and sell.  As these examples show, the main requirement of robotic toys is simplicity and fun.

Hi, my name is Elaine.  My official name is Yan Yu, which is also my Chinese name.  I was born in Hong Kong and moved to New York when I was four.  Despite some initial moving around, my family and I have settled on Long Island.  It’s a really good distance from campus – not too far and not too close.  It’s good to have the option to go home whenever I want; although, I’ll admit that I haven’t been home much this year.  I am currently a sophomore economics major and I also plan to pursue a finance certificate.  I have many interests, including playing badminton, dancing, and eating desserts.  I also love going on trips, so I’m hoping that I’ll get the change to travel and see more places.  I’m always up for doing touristy things.

I chose this class not only because I needed an ST, but also because the course blurb sounded pretty interesting.  I can generally use technology, but I have no clue how it works at all.  I figure that it’s a useful thing to learn about, especially since the world is getting increasingly more reliant on technology.  I’ve also wondered a lot of times about how computers, like my Dell Latitude laptop, and internet work, so I’m hoping that this class will help make me a more well-rounded, technologically literate person.

Update 3:00 pm 2/11/06: I have modified my post to include the kind of computer that I use most often, which is my Dell laptop.