Socrates

The Story of Story

by

ReWriting the Human Story: How Our Story Determines Our Future

an alternative thought experiment by Nikola Danaylov

 

Chapter 2: The Story of Story

“The limits of my language means the limits of my world.” Ludwig Wittgenstein

Humanity has searched for meaning since our beginning. And we find it in story. The story that we tell ourselves. Thus, a world devoid of meaning becomes meaningful. But this meaning is given by and designed for us. And it is created in language.

The truly unique feature of human language is not its ability to transmit practical information – about animals, rivers, stones, and trees because this feature is present in the languages of many other species. What makes human language unique is its ability to transmit information about things that don’t exist in the physical world at all – like gods, money, law, ethics, corporations and so on. That’s why ours is a fictive language. And this fact is very important for the two key features of our civilization:

1. Large-scale cooperation: Neanderthals and Cro-Magnons rarely cooperated in groups larger than 150 [Dunbar’s number]. This placed a rather low upper limit on what they could accomplish. Homo Sapiens, however, when given a powerful enough story, can exhibit cooperation among millions of strangers working towards the same goal. And what we can accomplish is of unlimited scale. Both positive and negative examples abound in history from wars and genocides to sports events, through religious rituals, social movements, construction projects such as the Great Wall of China, or technological and scientific breakthroughs such as the Large Hadron Collider and space exploration.

2. Rapid Innovation of social behavior and faster cultural evolution: What this means is that when we change the story, we change the culture. When enough people switch the story they believe in we have a popular revolution. For example, in 1789 the population of France shifted almost overnight from believing in the story of the divine right of their king to the story of the sovereignty of the people. [“Liberté, égalité, fraternité.”] Now known as the French Revolution, this event shows how cultural revolutions, in contrast to genetic revolutions, are very fast. And that, in turn, is the main reason why humanity has outstripped all other species in evolutionary terms – because we are using our culture, not our genes, to evolve faster.

In short, without our fictive language, we can’t have a story. And without a human story, our human civilization will not exist. So, the story of story is the story of our language.

Part  I: Story

by

ReWriting the Human Story: How Our Story Determines Our Future

an alternative thought experiment by Nikola Danaylov

 

Part  I: Story

“People always find it easier to be a result of the past rather than a cause of the future.” Unknown

Are we just billiard balls in a predetermined cosmic game of pool? Or are we free to choose our future?

My thesis in this thought-experiment is that our future is indeed determined. But not by some unbreakable and deterministic law of nature. No. Our future is determined by a story that we have created. Because ours is a civilization of story. So much so that today humanity lives and dies not by facts but by and for our stories. And this has gone so far that at present the fate of actual, non-fictional entities – such as animals, rivers, trees, mountains, oceans and even our planet, is determined by stories – such as money, religion, law, corporations, nations and international organizations.

In other words, in our civilization, what is real and we can touch, see, feel and smell, is ruled by what is fictional and doesn’t necessarily exist outside of the shared human imagination. All future possibilities – what is and what is not possible, are not determined by past events or facts on the ground. They are determined by the stories we attach to those because we are story-telling animals. And that is true for us individually – as persons, or collectively – as organizations, businesses, nations and even for our civilization.

I am not claiming that anything is possible. Geographical, biological, physical and economic forces do create constraints. But those constraints leave sufficient room for us to choose our future and not be bound by determinism. Yes, the past does exert a choke-hold on us all but we can break free if we can change the story. And it doesn’t matter if you are an individual, a company, a nation or an international organization – change your story, change your future.

But before we have a story, any story, we must first have a story-teller. Therefore, the most important story, that which all other stories are derived from, the story-of-all-stories, is the story of the story-teller: the human story.

The human story has been rewritten several times already. The last time was somewhere between the Enlightenment and the Industrial Revolution when we dethroned God as the central authority in the Universe and took his place instead. Since then our story has spread the myth of the supremacy and centrality of the human being – of how we are the pinnacle of evolution, the supreme intelligence and the masters of nature. And everything we have done since then, together with everything we are likely to do in the future, will stem from that story – the story of who we are, what’s our place in the universe, what we are here for and where we are going.

It is, therefore, this story that is the cornerstone of our stunning progress and fantastic accomplishments. It is also the same story that underpins our failures and current predicaments – be it climate change, nuclear war, terrorism or even artificial intelligence. For it is this story that gave us Auschwitz and took us to the Moon. And it is this story that will, in this century, determine if we are going to go extinct like the dinosaurs, or if and how we might populate the universe.

Now, the major challenges we are currently facing are mostly new kinds of challenges. And exponential technologies – such as genetic engineering, artificial intelligence, big data, synthetic biology, nanotechnology, are already causing disruptive change. But new kinds of challenges require new kinds of thinking. And, since we think in and are ruled by stories, we must rewrite the human story yet again. Because our current story is facing many new challenges. And recent events have shown it is starting to fall apart.

But before we can write a new story we must understand how the current story came to be, what’s its history, how it works, what’s its impact and importance. Only then can we have any hope of writing a story that will serve us better than the current one. And we also should be very careful because this is not just a semantic exercise but a question of survival. Not just for humanity but possibly all life on our planet. Because Viktor Frankl said it best:

“Since Auschwitz we know what man is capable of. And since Hiroshima we know what is at stake.”

ReWriting the Human Story: How Our Story Determines Our Future

by

It is harder and harder to make sense of life. Everything is changing, all the time, at a faster and faster pace. Our civilization is struggling to react to and keep up with exponential technology and disruptive change. Our age-old institutions, politics, economics, ethics, religion and laws, even our environment, are so fundamentally challenged, that we risk collapse. Our stories have gotten so divorced from reality, so divisive, so inflexible and so inept to adapt to and explain our present, let alone guide us towards a better future, that we often feel like helpless passengers on a Titanic spaceship Earth. No wonder Aristotle observed that “When the storytelling goes bad in a society, the result is decadence.”

But why is this the case? And, perhaps more importantly, how is it that bad storytelling can keep, if not bring, a whole society down? Is that not simply overstating the power of story?

Literary theorist Kenneth Burke famously noted: “Stories are equipment for living. Human beings need storytelling in order to make certain sense out of life.” If that is true then our equipment for living has gone obsolete. And unless we upgrade we are going to go obsolete too.

We desperately need a new story. A story that will not only help us make sense of the world today but also unite us as a species of human beings. A story that will motivate us to stop bickering and resolve our common problems. A story that will inspire us to achieve our common goals and guide us towards a better future for all sentient beings on our planet.

We have to rewrite the story. Our story. The human story. Because the old stories that brought us thus far are no longer useful. They’ve lost their vision and grandeur. They’ve become petty and short-sighted. They’re stuck in a past that never was at the expense of a future that can be. They divide us and keep us bickering while our civilization is facing unprecedented diversity and depth of existential challenges. Those stories are not simply our history. They are now our chains. And unless we break them, they will be our death sentence.

So, if it is true that old stories or bad stories can bring us down, then, it is worth exploring if or how new stories, good stories can bring us up.

The human story that brought us into the 21st century was written and rewritten several times. The latest major update was perhaps during the industrial revolution. It is time to rewrite it again. We need a new story. A brave story. An unreasonable story. A story that can inspire, unite and motivate us to break free from the past and create the best possible future.

This is what this book proposal is about. And, since I only have a rather rough draft, it is first and foremost a kind of a thought experiment. Many of the ideas I will be putting here are not fully formed. Some are raw. Others are just wrong. Or bad. But as a guest on my podcast once said: “Big ideas are born bad.” So I will not shy away from sharing my bad ideas with you. And, hopefully, among the gravel and the dust, there might be some nuggets too.

From now on, I intend to publish a short chapter proposal every week for the next 3 or 4 months. Then you be the judge as per how big or bad my ideas are. Either way, while I feel I am not quite ready for this journey, I feel it is a journey I must begin. Because, whether I succeed or fail in its ultimate goal of rewriting the human story, I know I would be better for trying. Hopefully, you can benefit from it too.

And, if, in the end, there is enough good material for a proper book – great. If not, then, at least I can say I tried. Either way, your feedback will play an important part in the whole process.

Thank you very much for coming along with me. And let us begin:

 

ReWriting the Human Story: How Our Story Determines Our Future

an alternative thought experiment by Nikola Danaylov

 

“The end of the human race will be that it will
eventually die of civilization.” Ralph Waldo Emerson

 

Suggested Table of Contents:

Part I: Story

  1. The Definition of Story
  2. The Story of Story
  3. The Power of Story
  4. The Biology of Story
  5. The Power of the Story-Teller
  6. The Importance of Story [Narratives and MTP’s]

Part II: Our Story

  1. The Human Story
  2. The Science Story
  3. The Technology Story
  4. The Capitalism Story
  5. The Technological Singularity Story [AI]

Part III: ReWriting the Human Story [this is the part I am least ready for]

  1. The Danger of a Single Story  [and the Power of Many]
  2. Uncivilized Art: Stories Beyond [Trans]Humanism
  3. More chapters…

 

Nikola Danaylov on the Dissenter: The Singularity, Futurism, and Humanity

by

A few weeks ago I got interviewed by Ricardo Lopes for the Dissenter. The interview just came out and I thought I’d share it with you to enjoy or critique. Here is Ricardo’s original description:

#131 Nikola Danaylov: The Singularity, Doing Futurism, and the Human Element

In this episode, we talk about what is meant by the term “Singularity”, and its technological, social, economic, and scientific implications. We consider the technological and human aspects of the equation of economic and technologic growth, and human and moral progress. We also deal with more specific issues, like transhumanism, the ethics of enhancement, AI, and Big Data.

Time Links:

00:58 What is the Singularity?

02:51 Exponential growth

04:42 What would mean to have reached the Singularity?

10:29 The trouble with futurism

15:35 The technological and the human aspects

20:20 What we get from technology depends on how we use it

23:16 Transhumanism, enhancement, and ethics

26:26 AI and economics

31:53 Eliminating boring tasks, and living more meaningful lives

36:37 Big Data, and the risk of exploitation

43:04 The example of self-driving cars

51:32 The human element in the equation

52:20 Follow Mr. Danaylov’s work!

On Transhumanist Manifestos and Dilemmas

by

It’s been almost 10 years since I wrote the first versions of Hamlet’s Transhumanist Dilemma and A Transhumanist Manifesto. And a lot has changed. Including my point of view.

I started with Hamlet. With asking a question: Will technology replace biology?

At the time I felt that this was the contemporary version of Shakespeare’s original human dilemma: to be or not to be.

I felt that, since death is a tragedy, technology was our only way out. And a worthy one at that. Still, I was also afraid that choosing technology over biology might come at too high a price. A Faustian bargain.

While I couldn’t put my finger on it, I was concerned that in moving from human to transhuman, or cyborg, we might be losing something. Something precious and unique. Something not to be lost or traded – even for immortality. Hence, I titled the piece Hamlet’s Transhumanist Dilemma. Because I felt that there is no right answer. And that each and every one of us ought to figure it out on our own.

A few months later, I felt I had the right answer and was going all in. I’ve been drinking the cool aid straight from the fire hose of Transhumanism and the world was getting really simple. Black and white even. Because, as the Transhumanist Party Chairman Gennady Stolyarov II simply put it: “Death is wrong and life is right.”

Right.

You see, the problem with dilemmas is that there is no right answer. They are uncomfortable. They are good at posing questions but bad at giving you the answer.

Manifestos, on the other hand, leave no room for doubt. By their nature, manifestos are a straightforward call in support of action that is certain to provide the answer. And, since I was so submerged in the transhumanist narrative, I decided to write my version of a transhumanist manifesto. A manifesto where I call on my transhumanist brothers and sisters to unite in breaking the “chains of biology and death.”

Ten years later I feel I’m almost back where I started. [I guess, at least in some ways, life is a circle.] Yes, it is true that dilemmas don’t give you guidance as per what to do but I feel they are real, raw and honest. They are true to the world we live in. A world where there is no GPS towards our future. A world where answers are often free but good questions can be priceless.

Dilemmas call for introspection, manifestos call for action.

Manifestos are idealistic, romantic and convenient. Worse – they are naïve, simplistic, and utopian, often dangerously so. They help us focus and inspire action, but it is often action without introspection. Action which often ought not to be justified.

Perhaps I’m getting old, but, lately, I see a lot of action taken without much introspection. The kind of action that is ready to do violence in order to supposedly build a new world on the ruins of the current one. But, unfortunately, the world is never as simple and straightforward as manifestos make it be. [Especially after the revolutionary (i.e. the destructive) part is over and we actually have to build something.]

And so I’ve gone back to dilemmas as a better way to face my future. Because the world is transformed by asking questions. And because, as Richard Feynman noticed, it is better to have questions we have no answers for than answers we can’t question.

And thus I’m back to Hamlet. I’m back to doubt, uncertainty, paradox, not knowing and probably being wrong.

And what about you? Are you up for revolution or introspection?

Douglas Rushkoff’s TED Talk: How to be “Team Human” in the digital future

by

Humans are no longer valued for our creativity, says media theorist Douglas Rushkoff — in a world dominated by digital technology, we’re now just valued for our data. In a passionate talk, Rushkoff urges us to stop using technology to optimize people for the market and start using it to build a future centered on our pre-digital values of connection, creativity and respect. “Join ‘Team Human.’ Find the others,” he says. “Together let’s make the future that we always wanted.”

Why Team Human?

It doesn’t have to be this way.

Autonomous technologies, runaway markets, and weaponized media seem to have overturned civil society, paralyzing our ability to think constructively, connect meaningfully, or act purposefully. It feels as if civilization itself were on the brink, and that we lack the collective willpower and coordination necessary to address issues of vital importance to the very survival of our species.

The simplest way to understand and change our predicament is to recognize that being human is a team sport. We cannot be fully human, alone. Anything that brings us together fosters our humanity. Likewise, anything that separates us makes us less human, and less able to exercise our will.

Who is Douglas Rushkoff?

Douglas Rushkoff coined such expressions as “viral media,” “digital natives” and “social currency,” and advises governments, communities, and businesses on the impact of technology on society’s future. Named one of “the world’s ten most influential thinkers” by MIT, Rushkoff won the Marshal McLuhan Award for media writing and the Neil Postman award for Public Intellectual Activity.

Rushkoff hosts the Team Human podcast, made four PBS Frontline documentaries including Generation Like and The Merchants of Cool, and wrote many bestselling books including Team Human, Present Shock, Program or Be Programmed and Throwing Rocks at the Google Bus. He founded the Laboratory for Digital Humanism at CUNY/Queens College, where he is a professor of media theory and digital economics.

The Economist Asks: How could veganism change the world?

by

Interest in vegan food and its associated health benefits has been booming across the rich world. A global retreat from meat could have a far-reaching environmental impact.

By 2050 the world’s population could approach 10 billion – and around 60% more food could be needed to feed everyone. The environmental impacts of the food system are daunting its responsible for about a quarter of all greenhouse gas emissions and uses about 70% of all freshwater resources, and it occupies about 40% of the Earth’s land surface.

Food rated emissions could increase to 50 percent by 2050 and fill up the total emissions budget that we have in order to avoid dangerous levels of climate change.

Interest in vegan food has been booming across the rich world. A major study has put the diet to the test – analyzing an imagined scenario in which the world goes vegan by 2050. If everybody went vegan by 2050 we estimated that food-related greenhouse gas emissions could be reduced by 3/4.

Cows are the biggest emission contributors. Bugs in their digestive system produce methane and deforestation for their pasture releases carbon dioxide – these gases warm the planet. If cows were a country, they’d be the third largest greenhouse gas emitter.

Dr. Joseph Mercola on Health and Longevity: Take Health into Your Own Hands

by

Podcast: Play in new window | Download | Embed

Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Android | RSS

With 15 million unique visitors per month, Dr. Joseph Mercola is the founder of the largest health and wellness website on the internet. His life’s mission is to cure rather than treat disease and Dr. Mercola has not only published extensively but also treated successfully a variety of chronic health conditions with natural methods such as diet, exercise, and sleep. Joseph also lives his own message by being strong and healthy himself – just check out this video of him doing pullups with a 45-pound weight.

During our 90-minute interview with Dr. Joseph Mercola, we cover a variety of interesting topics such as: why he is a physician first-and-foremost; his activism against dental (mercury) amalgam; osteopathic medicine; food and toxins; electromagnetic radiation; the free radical theory of aging; processed foods and optimal eating time; intermittent and longer fasting; good fats and bad fats; my experience with coconut oil; the long-term dangers of vegan and keto diet; supplements and smart drugs.

As always you can listen to or download the audio file above or scroll down and watch the video interview in full. To show your support you can write a review on iTunes, make a direct donation or become a patron on Patreon.

Who is Dr. Joseph Mercola?

I was born and raised in the inner city of Chicago, IL. I had a normal childhood, and it was in my school years that I truly took an interest in health and wellness. In my early twenties, I worked as a pharm tech at a physician’s office. I worked at the Illinois Eye Bank to harvest donated eyes to be used for cornea transplants. I also worked at the Kidney Bank.

I first began seeing patients at my private wellness clinic in Schaumburg, IL, in 1985. I was a sole practitioner. It was filled with routine checkups, school physical exams, and seeing chronically ill patients. I was prescribing drugs, but realized that they were not working.

I began exploring the world of natural medicine in the early 1990s. After seeing drastic improvements when my patients modified their diet and became more physically active, I changed the way I practiced medicine.

My passion is to transform the traditional medical paradigm in the United States, and that consumes most of my free time. For 40 years since 1968, I was an active runner; I completed the Chicago Marathon in just over three hours, among other accomplishments. I have also been a computer hobbyist since 1985, with an interest in the Internet that dates back to the early ‘90s.

In 2009, I was named the top Ultimate Wellness Game Changer by the Huffington Post, an honor that celebrates “100 innovators, visionaries, and leaders in 10 categories who are harnessing the power of new media to reshape their fields and change the world.” HuffPost readers voted me to the top to receive this special award.

Joscha Bach: We need to understand the nature of AI to understand who we are

by

Podcast: Play in new window | Download | Embed

Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Android | RSS

Joscha Bach is one of those rare people whose primary motivation is unbound curiosity and inspiration. He clearly loves what he does and you can’t help but notice his radiating passion and youthful exuberance. Joscha has an impressively wide and deep knowledge in a variety of scientific, philosophical and artistic disciplines and I had to do my best just to keep up with Bach’s brilliant fast-paced mind and stream of consciousness. I enjoyed our conversation immensely and hope you love it too.

During our 130-minute interview with Joscha Bach, we cover a variety of interesting topics such as: the space between academia and professorship; if organisms are algorithms, philosophy, and ethics; growing up in East Germany; science, art, evolution and the meaning of life; mathematics, computing and the limits thereof; the usefulness of useless knowledge; climate change and “the demise of humanity;” artificial intelligence and consciousness; why we are stories in a movie that the brain is creating, the difference between scholars and scientists…

Just some of my favorite quotes from Joscha Bach are:

“If you take this as a computer game metaphor, this is like the best level for humanity to play. And this best level happens to be the last level for humanity to play, as it happens against the backdrop of a dying world. But it’s still the best level.”

“Intelligence is the ability to make models. What is a model? A model is something that explains information. Information is discernable differences at your systemic interface. And the meaning of information is the relationships you discover to changes in other information.”

“Some people think that a simulation can’t be conscious and only a physical system can. But they got it completely backward: a physical system cannot be conscious. Only a simulation can be conscious. Consciousness is a simulated property of the simulated self.”

“The practice of AI is in a way statistics on steroids. It’s experimental statistics. It’s identifying new functions to model reality.”

As always you can listen to or download the audio file above or scroll down and watch the video interview in full. To show your support you can write a review on iTunes, make a direct donation or become a patron on Patreon.

Who is Joscha Bach?

Joscha Bach, Ph.D. is a cognitive scientist focused on cognitive architectures, mental representation, emotion, social modeling, and learning. He earned his Ph.D. in cognitive science from the University of Osnabrück, Germany. He is especially interested in the philosophy of AI, and in using computational models and conceptual tools to understand our minds and what makes us human. Joscha has taught computer science, AI, and cognitive science at the Humboldt-University of Berlin, the Institute for Cognitive Science at Osnabrück, and the MIT Media Lab, and authored the book “Principles of Synthetic Intelligence” (Oxford University Press). He currently works at the Harvard Program for Evolutionary Dynamics in Cambridge, Massachusetts.

Dr. Michael Greger on How Not to Age

by

Podcast: Play in new window | Download | Embed

Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Android | RSS

There are two people who caused me to become vegan and switch to a whole-plant-based diet. The first is Prof. Peter Singer who put the idea in my head many years ago when I started studying ethics. The second person is Dr. Michael Greger whose books How not to Die and The How Not To Die Cookbook are a must-read for anyone interested in evidence-based healthy living and healthy longevity. And so it has been a two-year-dream of mine to one day interview Dr. Greger on my podcast. Well, yesterday was that day and I am happy to publish this short but informative and entertaining interview with Michael Greger.

Dr. Michael Greger does hundreds of interviews per year and could only schedule 30 min for our conversation but we still managed to cover a variety of interesting topics such as: starting off as a math geek; why he became a lifestyle medicine physician and founded NutritionFacts.org; eating healthy as our best current bet to live healthier and longer life; his future book How Not to Age; the alien concepts of evidence-based medicine and nutrition; the optimal human diet; HealthData.org as the largest study of human risk factors for disease; the healthiest and most longevity promoting foods; the benefits of calorie restriction; Dr. Greger’s Daily Dozen App…

As always you can listen to or download the audio file above or scroll down and watch the video interview in full. To show your support you can write a review on iTunes, make a direct donation or become a patron on Patreon.

How Not to Die (book trailer)

Who is Dr. Michael Greger?

Michael Greger, M.D. FACLM is a physician, New York Times bestselling author, and internationally recognized professional speaker on a number of important public health issues. Dr. Greger has lectured at the Conference on World Affairs, the National Institutes of Health, and the International Bird Flu Summit, among countless other symposia and institutions; testified before Congress; has appeared on shows such as The Colbert Report and The Dr. Oz Show; and was invited as an expert witness in defense of Oprah Winfrey at the infamous “meat defamation” trial. In 2017, he was honored with the ACLM Lifestyle Medicine Trailblazer Award.

Dr. Greger’s most recent scientific publications in the American Journal of Preventive Medicine, Critical Reviews in Microbiology, Family and Community Health, and the International Journal of Food Safety, Nutrition, and Public Health explore the public health implications of industrialized animal agriculture.

Dr. Greger is also licensed as a general practitioner specializing in clinical nutrition and is a founding member and Fellow of the American College of Lifestyle Medicine. He was featured on the Healthy Living Channel promoting his latest nutrition DVDs and honored to teach part of Dr. T. Colin Campbell’s esteemed nutrition course at Cornell University. Dr. Greger’s nutrition work can be found at NutritionFacts.org, which is a registered 501(c)3 nonprofit charity.

He is the author of Bird Flu: A Virus of Our Own Hatching and Carbophobia: The Scary Truth Behind America’s Low Carb Craze. Both of his latest books, How Not to Die and the How Not to Die Cookbook, became instant New York Times Best Sellers. View the book trailer here. Dr. Greger is a graduate of the Cornell University School of Agriculture and the Tufts University School of Medicine.

Dr. Greger is proud to be a Council of Directors member of the global voice for lifestyle as medicine, the True Health Initiative (THI). This is a growing coalition of more than 360 world experts representing 35 countries. It is an unprecedented assembly that includes physicians, University Deans, former Surgeon Generals, Olympic athletes, chefs, environmental professionals and a diverse group of nutritionists. Together they offer clarity over confusion and support the foundational principles of healthy eating and healthy living.

Stuart Russell on Artificial Intelligence: What if we succeed?

by

Podcast: Play in new window | Download | Embed

Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Android | RSS

Stuart Russell is a professor of Computer Science at UC Berkeley as well as co-author of the most popular textbook in the field – Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach. Given that it has been translated into 13 languages and is used in more than 1,300 universities in 118 countries, I can hardly think of anyone more qualified or more appropriate to discuss issues related to AI or the technological singularity. Unfortunately, we had problems with our internet connection and, consequently, the video recording is among the worst I have ever published. Thus this episode may be a good candidate to listen to as an audio file only. However, given how prominent Prof. Russel is and how generous he was with his time, I thought it would be a sad loss if I didn’t publish the video also, poor quality as it is.

During our 90 min conversation with Stuart Russell we cover a variety of interesting topics such as: his love for physics and computer science; human preferences, expected utility and decision making; why his textbook on AI was “unreasonably successful”; his dream that AI will contribute to a Golden Age of Humanity; aligning human and AI objectives; the proper definition of Artificial Intelligence; Machine Learning vs Deep Learning; debugging and the King Midas problem; the control problem and Russell’s 3 Laws; provably safe mathematical systems and the nature of intelligence; the technological singularity; Artificial General Intelligence and consciousness…

As always you can listen to or download the audio file above or scroll down and watch the video interview in full. To show your support you can write a review on iTunes, make a direct donation or become a patron on Patreon.

Who is Start Russell?

Stuart Russell is a professor (and formerly chair) of Electrical Engineering and Computer Sciences at University of California at Berkeley. His book Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach (with Peter Norvig) is the standard text in AI; it has been translated into 13 languages and is used in more than 1,300 universities in 118 countries. His research covers a wide range of topics in artificial intelligence including machine learning, probabilistic reasoning, knowledge representation, planning, real-time decision making, multitarget tracking, computer vision, computational physiology, global seismic monitoring, and philosophical foundations.

He also works for the United Nations, developing a new global seismic monitoring system for the nuclear-test-ban treaty. His current concerns include the threat of autonomous weapons and the long-term future of artificial intelligence and its relation to humanity.

Roman Yampolskiy on Artificial Intelligence Safety and Security

by

Podcast: Play in new window | Download | Embed

Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Android | RSS

There are those of us who philosophize and debate the finer points surrounding the dangers of artificial intelligence. And then there are those who dare go in the trenches and get their hands dirty by doing the actual work that may just end up making the difference. So if AI turns out to be like the terminator then Prof. Roman Yampolskiy may turn out to be like John Connor – but better. Because instead of fighting by using guns and brawn he is utilizing computer science, human intelligence, and code. Whether that turns out to be the case and whether Yampolskiy will be successful or not is to be seen. But at this point, I was very happy to have Roman back on my podcast for our third interview. [See his previous interviews here and here.]

During our 80-minute conversation with Prof. Yampolskiy, we cover a variety of interesting topics such as: AI in the media; why we’re all living in our own bubbles; the rise of interest in AI safety and ethics; the possibility of a 9.11 type of an AI event; why progress is at best making “safer” AI rather than “safe” AI; human and artificial stupidity; the need for an AI emergency task force; machine vs deep learning; technology and AI as a magnifying mirror; technological unemployment; his latest book Artificial Intelligence Safety and Security.

As always you can listen to or download the audio file above or scroll down and watch the video interview in full. To show your support you can write a review on iTunes, make a direct donation or become a patron on Patreon.

Who is Roman Yampolskiy?

Dr. Roman V. Yampolskiy is a Tenured Associate Professor in the Department of Computer Engineering and Computer Science at the Speed School of Engineering, University of Louisville. He is the founding and current director of the Cyber Security Lab and an author of many books including Artificial Superintelligence: a Futuristic Approach.

Yampolskiy is a Senior member of IEEE and AGI; Member of Kentucky Academy of Science, former Research Advisor for MIRI and Associate of GCRI.

Roman Yampolskiy holds a Ph.D. degree from the Department of Computer Science and Engineering at the University at Buffalo. He was a recipient of a four year National Science Foundation fellowship. Dr. Yampolskiy’s main areas of interest are AI Safety, Artificial Intelligence, Behavioral Biometrics, and Cybersecurity.

Dr. Yampolskiy is an author of over 150 publications including multiple journal articles and books. His research has been cited by 2000+ scientists and profiled in popular magazines both American and foreign, dozens of websites, on radio and TV and other media reports in some 30 languages.