Of Rats and Men: Rat brains, Blue Brains, and the coming AI age.


SEED magazine reports on the Blue Brain, which IMHO is the most likely project to attain machine-based self consciousness.  This in turn will change everything completely and usher in a new era that will bring more change to humanity than any previous event in history.

“The column has been built and it runs,” Markram says. “Now we just have to scale it up.” Blue Brain scientists are confident that, at some point in the next few years, they will be able to start simulating an entire brain. “If we build this brain right, it will do everything,” Markram says. I ask him if that includes selfconsciousness: Is it really possible to put a ghost into a machine? “When I say everything, I mean everything,” he says, and a mischievous smile spreads across his face.

As I’ve noted many times before I believe that machine consciousness will bring profound changes to humanity which will be hugely positive.   Now, we allocate resources very ineffectively.   Conscious computers will be able to do vastly superior resource allocations and staggering design improvements. These alone will likely resolve all global resource issues such as energy, food, and water.   It’s not as clear if the AI age will bring a resolution to problems that have as a a core cause our human defects.   Health, Education should benefit enormously but some of the human thinking that creates war, intolerance, crime and suicide will persist and it will resist the improvements. 

 However the abundance that the AI age will bring to the world should allow us to manage many of these human problems much more effectively. 

Markram:  “What is holding us back now are the computers.”  
Markram estimates that in order to accurately simulate the trillion synapses in the human brain, you’d need to be able to process about 500 petabytes of data – about 200 times more information than is stored on all of Google’s servers. 
Energy consumption is another huge problem …. Markram estimates that simulating the brain on a supercomputer with existing microchips would generate an annual electrical bill of about $3 billion …. But if computing speeds continue to develop at their current exponential pace, and energy efficiency improves, Markram believes that he’ll be able to model a complete human brain on a single machine in ten years or less.

This 10 year estimate is even more optimistic than Ray Kurzweil’s but in the same league.    Although most of the computer programmers I know strongly reject this view, I think it’s also possible that AI could emerge with very limited human intervention from the massive parallel processing environments such as Google’s search server farm of hundreds of thousands of connected machines.    Consciousness and human intelligence, if it is as overrated as I believe, is best seen as something of a byproduct of simpler, evolutionarily derived mental processes and other mental activities.  As the number of interconnections in machines approaches the number we have in our brains (again we bump into a 10-20 year time frame), and machines are programmed with current routines to do the same mental tasks we do, I’ll be very surprised if machine consciousness will require more than a modest level of additional tweaking of the type they have already started at Blue Brain. 

So, I’m not buying my laptop a birthday cake quite yet, but remain cautiously optimistic about the end of the world as we know it.   

Mike Arrington, Chris Anderson on Charlie Rose


TechCrunch’s Mike Arrington is on my favorite show tonight talking about the future of technology along with Chris Anderson of Wired.   (not to be confused with TED conference coordinator Chris Anderson).

Here are the videos

Ha – just got a Tweet from Mike that he hasn’t even seen himself yet since it’s not on in CA yet.    

Chris Anderson:
On sharing his next book before it is even out:   “Open Source” the idea, leading to a flood of more ideas, which in turn enrich everybody.   “Google doesn’t show up on your credit card bill”. 

Anderson’s provocative points are about how “free” is becoming a key concept in the digital economy, and may trump

Where does the some $360,000,000 that Craigslist saves the economy go?    Back to us, says Chris.   Hey thanks for the fish Craig Newmark!

Commodity information “needs to be free” vs unique information which may need to be expensive.

Radiohead as using digital economics for what it’s good at, and stimulate demand for the scarce thing – seeing the band in person, endorsements, and T shirts.

You cannot erase yourself from the web.    Shifting from privacy to self-promotion. 

Anderson:  Yes, MS will get Yahoo.    

Google as algorithms, Yahoo as a people business.   Google and the “machines first” culture are winning.    Microsoft, a pre-web culture, believes in software.   Their success kept them from being hungry, but now they are.  

Tech Bubble of 2000 was different.   Softer landing this time?

Facebook:  We’ll see narrowing of social networks (a GREAT point!).    NING model may prevail.  e.g. Chris’ own  www.DIYdrones.com    What is the right level of granularity? 

Chris: “Everything I believe is written on the back of an iPhone”: 
Designed in California, Made in China

Mike Arrington
Big issues:
* Net neutrality.
* China.   Sites are filtered and slowed rather than outright deleted from the network.   Companies are not happy with the policies, but reluctant to leave 187,000,000 internet users to the competition.
* Mobile space.   Fundamentals are changing such that USA can compete now with other countries in the mobile space.
* Identity theft.   US has done too little to fight this.  Even Sen John McCain had his ID stolen a few years back.
* Education, computers, and internet access for schools.    Government weak in this area, but also true that computers are often an educational distraction rather than enhancement. 
* Economic implications: TV ads suck (great point Mike!), so internet ad share will increase.  However also we’ll see TV and internet increasingly converge.

Mike’s online “about 100% of the time I’m awake”.     TechCrunch startup database is one key focus.    “We’re not worth 100MM”.   (for more on TC valuation issues see the excellent Yahoo Tech TV interview with Mike).

Microsoft won’t back down and be embarrassed by the Yahoo deal.    MS failed in search and fell off the online map.    All the major search engines are roughly equivalent (great point Mike!).  But Google has lots of publishers and lots of action at their own pages.

Amazon – transitioning to a services model.    Renting services in the cloud is eliminating yet another high cost business barrier by providing high level infrastructure at low cost. 

Startups and entrepreneurs:    Modern day pirates.   Gamblers.  They value risk cf risk averse folks.  YouTube’s 1.65 Billion sale as a surprise.

Can Facebook have their “Google Moment”, which for Google was figuring out pay per click advertising.     Facebook as more innovative than Myspace.   Can they invent something to generate a LOT of revenue?   If yes, another Google is born. 

Facebook’s friend based advertising model may be illegal because it’s implying an endorsement without the consent of the person. 

BBC as a great site to review the condition of the world.   Blogs as taking page views from the ‘big guys’.    Comments as important.    Blogs following Silicon Valley as a “trainwreck”, but blogs in general on the rise.

Is privacy an illusion?   Harder to get email address than SSN (hmmm – I don’t think so…).

Obama fan.   Tech potentially will make our lives much better.  3rd world education as exciting.    Worrying about Virtual Reality.   What happens when people want to spend all their time in VR? 

Why does online chat support almost always fail to solve the problem? And take so long? And generally just suck?


I’m on the online chat support with Palm right now trying to figure out how to get my Treo 650 to work in China and collect more information for my  Cell phones in China post.    As with other online help systems I’ve tried – almost always with regrets – I’m finding the online chat experience very frustrating and inefficient and time consuming.    Inefficient enough that I’m able to do this blog post while chatting, and learning that the technician appears to have far less information than I’ve already collected about how to get my Treo to work in China.  You’d think this would be a simple question and they’d have a nice FAQ but no, he’s sticking with me which I sort of appreciate, but so far all I have learned is the the Treo wil work in China but he’s not sure about the Sprint Network.  Unless I’ve missed something he’s missing the whole point here – you need unlocking and a SIM card which you normally purchase in China.

The failure of these chat support systems is really interesting because it seems like it should be a good way for a single support person to handle dozens of questions.  For some they’d know the answer immediately and send people on their merry way, while more complicated questions could be answered by using their databases, FAQs, and internet.    Yet generally I find that a phone call is more effective in drilling down to the issue and even faster unless you are on a very long hold.

OK, after over 30 minutes I have absolutely NO information I did not have before.  A total waste of time again:

LiveAssist Chat
 Status: Analyst Silas is here and your issue status is: working
Problem: Need to use Treo 650 in China

if (g_bContactLater) document.write(laterBttn.Instantiate());User Joe_Hunkins has entered room

Joe_Hunkins(Sun Mar 2 11:19:13 PST 2008)>

Hello -  I'm travelling to Shanghai and Beijing and want to take my Sprint Treo 650.    Is this possible?  What is best way to allow me to use the phone in China for about 2 hours calling total?  Will a China Mobile SIM Card work in Sprint Treo 650 in China? How do I "unlock" the phone? THANKS!      


We are experiencing higher than usual service times. Please wait and an analyst will be with you shortly.

We are experiencing higher than usual service times. Please wait and an analyst will be with you shortly.

We are experiencing higher than usual service times. Please wait and an analyst will be with you shortly.

analyst Silas has entered room

Silas(Sun Mar 2 11:36:41 PST 2008)>Hello Joe_Hunkins, Thank you for contacting Palm Technical Support. My name is Silas. How may I help you?
Silas(Sun Mar 2 11:36:54 PST 2008)>

Hello.

Joe_Hunkins(Sun Mar 2 11:38:26 PST 2008)>

hello

Joe_Hunkins(Sun Mar 2 11:38:37 PST 2008)>

Joe_Hunkins(Sun Mar 2 11:19:13 PST 2008)>Hello -  I'm travelling to Shanghai and Beijing and want to take my Sprint Treo 650.    Is this possible?  What is best way to allow me to use the phone in China for about 2 hours calling total?  Will a China Mobile SIM Card work in Sprint Treo 650 in China? How do I "unlock" the phone?   

Silas(Sun Mar 2 11:38:35 PST 2008)>

I understand that you want to take your phone to china.

Joe_Hunkins(Sun Mar 2 11:38:58 PST 2008)>

yes

Silas(Sun Mar 2 11:39:43 PST 2008)>

I will assist you with the issue.

Silas(Sun Mar 2 11:41:32 PST 2008)>

Treo 650 will work in China. However I am not sure about Sprint carrier network.

Joe_Hunkins(Sun Mar 2 11:42:33 PST 2008)>

How do I unlock the phone - that is needed to use a CHina Mobile SIM Card

Silas(Sun Mar 2 11:42:53 PST 2008)>

I mean Treo 650 (GSM) will work in China.

Silas(Sun Mar 2 11:45:08 PST 2008)>

Can I have 3 minutes to work on the issue?

Joe_Hunkins(Sun Mar 2 11:45:19 PST 2008)>

sure...

Silas(Sun Mar 2 11:49:05 PST 2008)>

Thank you for staying online.

Silas(Sun Mar 2 11:49:07 PST 2008)>

Locking and Un locking deals with the specific carrier. How ever we are not aware of that.

Silas(Sun Mar 2 11:49:35 PST 2008)>

I suggest you to contact your Sprint once.

Joe_Hunkins(Sun Mar 2 11:49:48 PST 2008)>

OK, thanks...

Silas(Sun Mar 2 11:49:59 PST 2008)>

Is there anything else I could assist you with?

Joe_Hunkins(Sun Mar 2 11:50:08 PST 2008)>

Nope..

Silas(Sun Mar 2 11:50:10 PST 2008)>

You are welcome.

Silas(Sun Mar 2 11:50:19 PST 2008)>

Thank you for using Palm Technical Support.   We value your inputs, please feel free to fill in the 
customer survey that will pop up once you click on the end session button to close the chat window.   
Have a great day!

Using Cell Phones in China


This post is about how to use your cell phone in China.    I’m having more trouble than I thought finding out the procedure but here’s what I think I know so far:

* You must have a GSM phone:   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_System_for_Mobile_Communications  My Treo 650 meets this standard.

* You must have the phone unlocked before the trip.  Usually this is done by your provider.   In my case this is Sprint

* In some cases you can buy an international calling plan from the providers.

* Cheaper service appears to come via SIM cards you can purchase online or in China.  These seem to cost about $30 and include some phone time as well as reductions in per minute costs for international calling.     I’m seeing about .18 per minute China to USA which I think is much cheaper than I’ve had with an International Calling plan.

* China Mobile is the big daddy cellular provider in China

Note – I’ll try to revise this and fix mistakes as I figure this out.

Yelp’s new funding round.


TechCrunch has a nice summary of several travel review sites and notes that Yelp has now had 31MM in funding and is rumored to be worth about 200MM.   For a company that makes under 10MM per year this seems pretty high, but the Yelp model has been fairly strong in Silicon Valley and Yelp appears to be extending the model to other areas successfully.        

I do think Yelp will have a lot of challenges as they move out of their Silicon Valley travel sweet spot.   Yelp has done a nice job of connecting people offline who meet online by hosting Yelp parties at Bay Area venues.   This probably won’t work as well outside of Silicon Valley where hip young net users are …. not as concentrated, even in the large urban areas.

Farber in charge at CNET: A good move


Premier Tech news website CNET has a new editor in chief.  Dan Farber takes over today, and as a tech journalist *and prominent tech blogger* the choice of Farber is smart for CNET and a sign that blogging sensibilities are playing an important role even in “legacy” media outlets, though it’s funny to consider CNET – a groundbreaking online news network – “legacy”.    Yet in this rocket paced online world most of us now turn to TechCrunch before CNET for breaking and insider news.    Partly for this reason and partly because CNET can’t leverage internet efficiencies as easily as leaner and meaner sites like TechCrunch, CNETs traffic and profitability has been suffering for some time.   Farber’s experience may help to bring more innovative approaches to blogging tech news at CNET, and Dan will recognize how important it is to work to establish a social network that revolves around CNET’s tech coverage.     Mike Arrington has done this brilliantly at TechCrunch and it drives their very successful efforts.    Sites like DailyKos and Huffington report as well.  Others have built smaller communities around their blogs with more modest levels of success.  CNET already has a brand and a large body of quality journalistic experience and tech related content.   Let’s see what Dan does with all that.

Journablogger Battle Dome 2008


Blogging people love a heated argument and Mike Arrington always aims to please, so he nailed Fred Wilson for a few inconsistencies in his otherwise very reasonable post suggesting the obvious – that blogs tend to have lower standards of accuracy than mainsteam journal articles.   I don’t think this can be reasonably disputed though I think on balance I’d rather have the fast paced, up to the minute blog coverage that is sometimes inaccurate than the next-day-fact-checked-cold-news that we sometimes see with mainstream technology coverage. 

Of course I hope the Journablogging does not upset Fred too much because I predict things will get *much* worse before they get better.   Monetizing is increasingly dependent on article output, and blogs like TechCrunch are pumping out articles faster than you can click on an RSS feed, and systems like TechMeme encourage mass postings to increase the chance you’ll be seen.    The flood of blogged tech news has only just begun, and accuracy is already one of the first casualties.

Matt explains all this wisely.  He’s pretty smart for a real journalist..

YahoOliver Twist to Microsoft “Can I have more please, sir?”


Ina is reporting over at CNET that Yahoo is going to reject Microsoft’s current offer of about $30 per share and ask Microsoft for $40 per share at the Wednesday meeting.    I’m still in the camp that says Yahoo is not in a good negotiating position to make this demand, though contrary to what better connected folks than I suggest I’m guessing Microsoft will up the offer to seal this deal next week.   I say they’ll offer $34-35 at current MS pricing.   This is more than any reasonable definition of “fair market price”, and Yahoo’s board could only reject this at their huge legal peril. 

 I’m not a fan of class action lawsuits but Yahoo can probably expect a gigantic one if they turn down MS and then Yahoo tanks again.   This would probably  be resolved quickly by a board decision to go ahead and sell. 

I’d love to be a fly on Eric Schmidt’s office wall right now as Google’s role in all this is really intriguing.   They can let the merger go and assume MicroHoo can’t be competitive with Google, they can help Yahoo with monetization in a bold way to prop up Yahoo’s stock but effectively keep their one true competitor alive, or they can just sit and wait for it all to shake out.   Most analysts seem to think Google’s in fine shape competitively regardless of their decision and I’d agree with that.   In fact Yahoo’s stubborn refusal to look for the winning Microsoft combination here may be yet another nail in their corporate coffin.    I can’t help but think this is ego-centric thinking rather than the broad, practical, and innovative thinking that built Yahoo in the first place.    

Given that YHOO was trading well under $20 last week I just can’t see how they can make a strong case to Microsoft (or shareholders) that MS needs to pay a premium of over 100% on this deal.    That said, I do think Yahoo is undervalued in the technological sense – they have much of what Google has and have much of the potential Google has, yet they are capitalized at about 1/4 Google even with the recent Google stock meltdown and Yahoo stock upswing from the MS offer.   Yahoo’s a great company. Unfortunately they have failed dramatically for many years to use this greatness to be profitable and they have failed to make the case to Wall Street.  

What is the right answer in all this?     It’s simple:

1.   Microsoft should counter the $40 request with an offer of $34 per share at Wednesday’s MS stock price.

2.   Microsoft will keep Yahoo intact largely in current form for six months.   Yang and the Yahoo board will be given SIX MONTHS to kick whatever asses need kicking to make Yahoo more profitable.   If Yahoo’s looking healthy in six months they’ll stay on this course, but if they can’t fix in six, send them to the sticks and MS will take over in heavy handed form.

3.  Reorganize the languishing publisher programs at MS and Yahoo to compete more effectively with Google Adsense, which has a virtual monopoly in this space and accounts for over 40% of Google revenue.

Disclosure:  Long on Yahoo

The proposed US Defense Budget is an outrage


As a fiscally responsible guy I had to chime in on the proposed US Defense budget which is, in a word, indefensible.     

At $515,000,000,000  this amount is conspicuous for several reasons, and I find it incomprehensible that people who call themselves fiscal conservatives continue to support the insane levels of inappropriate military spending.

One of the biggest reasons the proposed budget is irrational is the very low ROI on military spending.    Unlike infrastructure spending, the military spend does not leave you with more bridges, roads, and buildings.   It’s only justifiable to the extent it *protects value* and protects the national interests.     One need look no further than the Iraq war to see how questionable it is to suggest that spending 500 billion plus there has “protected” much of anything.   

One could probably make a strong case for the WWII military effort as it clearly rescued much of the world from the tyrannical grip of Nazi domination, but note that this spending came *after* the hostile actions.    I think GW would argue that spending now is a preventative measure for much greater spending later if regions like the middle east explode into much greater instability than now.   This is an arguable point, but I’d like to see his ROI calculations on this.     When you are talking about spending hundreds of billions annually you can reshape the entire planet with infrastructure improvements, and it is very hard to see how the military protection advantages would trump the tax, infrastructure, and good will advantages of redirecting military spending to other things or – probably more appropriately – lowering taxes and letting that help the economy and individuals.

I’d sure like to see the type of cost benefit analysis you’d do if the US was run more like a business than a bureaucratic empire, but one of the defects of our two party democracy is that neither party is interested in fiscal responsibility – they both want to spend irresponsibly and recklessly but on different things.    

This amount is more than all other nations combined, and more than half the entire global military budget.   It is true the US has historically born much of the expense of trying to maintain global stability  (for complex reasons), so simply noting this is half all defense spending does not explain enough.  However this amount still is highly questionable because many nations like Japan should be footing their own defense bills.

Note that this budget does not include funding for Iraq and Afghanistan wars.  Much will go for bloated, advanced weapons systems that have little place in a world where most of the threats are from asymetric warfare practiced by fundamentalists with 12th century sensibilities.

It is about time for people who call themselves fiscal conservatives to stop their sheep-like, bleeting support of these huge military budgets and start applying the same (correct) standards they apply to other government spending to the defense budget.