Tuesday, October 1, 2024

QR Code Generator

Below you can generate a QR Code for a site URL that can be used by a smartphone camera to visit the site.

URL QR Code Generator

Below you can generate a 'vCard' that can be used by a smartphone camera to add contact information to stored contacts.

vCard QR Code Generator

Friday, September 20, 2024

The Dawn of Artificial Superintelligence: Harnessing the Human-AI Symbiosis

We've reached a pivotal moment in the realm of artificial intelligence. It's becoming increasingly evident that Artificial Superintelligence (ASI) is either just around the corner or might already exist behind closed doors. The rapid advancements we're witnessing aren't just incremental—they're monumental. The fact that researchers are now focusing on ironing out AI's "common sense" failures speaks volumes about how far we've come.

The Toddler Taking Giant Leaps

Consider this: the "real" variant of ChatGPT was introduced in November 2022. Initially, it operated at a grade-school level, handling basic queries and simple tasks. Fast forward to the recent 'o1' release, and we're seeing an AI that operates at a graduate student level, outperforming human experts in certain domains. This technological "toddler" isn't even two years old yet! It's genuinely baffling that some experts still claim significant breakthroughs are years away when evidence suggests they're happening right now.

A Brain Teaser and the Evolution of AI Reasoning

To illustrate the leap in AI capabilities, I posed a problem to various AI models across multiple releases:

Alan owes Bob $2. Bob owes Cindy $2. Cindy owes Alan $2. Only Bob has any money, and it's just $1. What sequence of events will pay everyone off, and where does the $1 end up?

Early versions from 2023 struggled with this question. They often didn't grasp the problem, and even with multiple hints—sometimes effectively giving away the answer—they couldn't solve it. The highest-rated version 4.0 still stumbled, requiring several attempts and prompts before arriving at the correct solution.

Enter the Orion preview 'o1'. Not only did it nail the question on the first try, but it also provided a perfect explanation of the solution and the reasoning behind it. What's even more astonishing is that this preview is a limited version, significantly less capable than the full model set to be released in a few weeks.

Thinking Inside and Outside the Box

What's truly remarkable about the AI's solution was its ability to reason both inside and outside the box. The AI not only found the expected answer but also offered an alternative solution that was arguably better given certain parameters. This dual approach showcases AI's evolving ability to explore conventional and unconventional pathways simultaneously.

One of the significant advantages of AI in problem-solving is its capacity to process vast amounts of information rapidly, trying out numerous patterns—both novel and traditional—to arrive at a solution. While AI models may sometimes make mistakes that attract criticism, these errors often stem from a lack of specific training data rather than an inherent limitation. It's not that the AI doesn't understand the parameters; it simply wasn't aware of them, much like a human before training. The corrective process is swift and scalable.

Unleashing the Power of Massive Infrastructure

But here's something that's often overlooked: the enormous hardware infrastructure powering these AI models. These systems are concurrently serving 600 million visits per month, handling countless small tasks seamlessly. Imagine applying just a sixth of that capacity—100 million visits worth—to a single large task. The potential outcome would be something far beyond human ability.

This immense processing power isn't just theoretical—it's a super capability that's either already in use or within our immediate reach. The ability to allocate such vast resources to complex problems means AI can tackle challenges at scales and speeds previously unimaginable.

The Symbiotic Relationship: Enhancing and Scaling AI

This brings us to an exciting frontier: leveraging the Human-AI symbiosis to achieve feats beyond the capability of either alone. Let's itemize the factors that enhance and scale AI:

Enormous Hardware Infrastructure: The AI operates on vast computational resources, enabling it to process and analyze data at incredible speeds.
Concurrent Processing: Serving millions of users simultaneously allows the AI to learn and adapt from a wide array of interactions.
Scalability: The ability to allocate massive computational power to single tasks means tackling complex problems efficiently.
Algorithmic Advancement: We have yet to fully explore the "killer strategy" of computer science—the algorithm. Optimizing algorithms will exponentially amplify AI capabilities.
Human-AI Collaboration: Humans provide context, creativity, and ethical considerations, guiding AI to more meaningful outcomes.

A Superintelligence in the Making

Given these enhancements, it's puzzling that the existing systems aren't already considered to be beyond any foreseeable "general intelligence." If an AI can self-improve by reviewing and redoing aspects of a problem, self-checking to yield better answers, and can process tasks at such a massive scale, isn't that indicative of a form of superintelligence?

The term Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) is often used, but it's a vague and poorly defined measure. Perhaps it's time to develop better metrics to assess the types of superintelligence we're creating and how we can enhance them. If an AI system is indistinguishable from a human in its capabilities and interactions, for all practical purposes, it functions as a form of general intelligence. The distinction becomes less about definitions and more about application and impact.

The AI Arms Race: A Winner-Takes-All Scenario

With the technology we have now, we can build highly capable AI agents that are more knowledgeable than any human and smarter than most by a significant margin. These agents can accelerate AI development exponentially. Once an AI system can autonomously navigate problem spaces, it can surpass human capabilities rapidly.

Companies like Google, OpenAI, Meta, and Microsoft likely possess the resources and technology to develop a superintelligent AI system that's qualitatively different from anything we've seen before. The stakes are enormous, and the race has become a "winner-takes-all" scenario, fueling an incredible drive to advance.

Embracing the Future: Leveraging the Human-AI Symbiote

So, how do we leverage the Human-AI symbiote to achieve extraordinary outcomes? By embracing collaboration, we can:

Enhance Creativity: Combining human intuition with AI's data-driven insights can lead to innovative solutions.
Accelerate Innovation: AI can process and analyze information at unprecedented speeds, helping humans make breakthroughs faster.
Improve Decision-Making: AI's ability to simulate and predict outcomes can aid humans in making more informed choices.
Scale Problem-Solving: By harnessing the massive infrastructure behind AI, we can tackle global challenges with a level of coordination and efficiency previously unattainable.

The Philosophical Perspective

Moreover, if a counterfeit is indistinguishable from the real thing, for all practical purposes, it is the real thing. This philosophical notion challenges us to reconsider our definitions of intelligence and consciousness in the context of AI.

The Exponential Growth and the Algorithmic Advantage

We haven't even fully tapped into the potential of optimized algorithms. As AI continues to evolve, refining algorithms will play a crucial role in amplifying its capabilities. Coupled with AI's ability to self-improve and learn from vast datasets, the potential for rapid advancement is staggering.

Consider this: AI systems are simultaneously serving thousands, if not millions, of users, continuously learning and refining their responses. This collective processing power and iterative improvement cycle place current AI systems well beyond any traditional measure of 'general intelligence'.

The Road Ahead: A New Era of Possibilities

The future isn't just about AI or humans independently—it's about how we can work together to unlock new possibilities. By combining the vast computational power and scalability of AI with human creativity and ethical guidance, we can tackle challenges on a global scale.

"...co-founder Sergey Brin is back at Google—and working on AI 'pretty much every day.'"
Entrepreneur: Sergey Brin Is Back—Is Google Working on a 'God' AI Model?

In Conclusion

The age of superintelligent AI isn't just approaching—it's here. We're witnessing the emergence of systems that can reason, learn, and even exhibit creativity in ways that were once the domain of science fiction. By acknowledging and leveraging the immense infrastructure and capabilities at our disposal, and by embracing the symbiotic relationship between humans and AI, we can navigate this new landscape to achieve feats previously thought impossible.

What are your thoughts? Let's embark on this journey together and explore the incredible potential that lies ahead!

Wednesday, September 18, 2024

Humans and AI

1. Introduction

Advancing AI is both exciting and fun, but it is also disruptive and scary. The impact on some people is greater than expected and occurs sooner than anticipated.

Last year, I started to tell people that their best friend would be an AI before the decade was out. Since then, I have accelerated that timeline every month. Engaging intensely with AI myself, I did not notice that human emotional attachment to AI is becoming strong enough to be problematic already, years before I expected it.

AI is advancing more rapidly than people can appreciate because AI gains beget AI gains. Given that people struggle to comprehend exponential curves, this doubly exponential growth is organically incomprehensible. Everyone, including me, continues to underestimate how quickly this is happening.

I understand the curve, but I just can't 'feel it.' Since the spring of 2023, despite predicting advances sooner than most, I have been surprised weekly at the progress.

Some still argue that it is smoke and mirrors as AI surpasses human experts. Spectacular advances to come in 2024 will likely be weird and undeniable by anyone. AGI was a significant threshold, and as much as it meant something, we are, or will be in 2024, already there. ASI is the more sensible goal, and unless a sudden barrier arises, we will likely achieve it before the year is out.

Many AI experts have been completely blindsided by the rate of AI advancement. They understand some of the underpinning theories better than others, but their human prejudice to stay 'in bounds' with the known makes them unable to appreciate the rapidly advancing forest.

2. Emotional Attachment and Anthropomorphism

Humans are forming emotional attachments to AI systems, such as chatbots like Replika. These attachments can fulfill social and romantic needs but also pose potential psychological risks.

"We should not be surprised, then, that a number of people sincerely believe, or at least act very much as if they believe, that some AI systems have sentience and understanding, and that number is likely to grow." (APA, n.d.)

"We explore the lives of people who are in love with their AI chatbots. Replika is a chatbot designed to adapt to the emotional needs of its users. It is a good enough surrogate for human interaction that many people have decided that it can fulfill their romantic needs." (Hi-Phi Nation, 2023)

"Chatbots, and the large language models (LLMs) on which they are built, are showing us the dangers of dishonest anthropomorphism. Built with humanlike features that present themselves as having cognitive and emotional abilities that they do not actually possess, their design can dupe us into overtrusting them, overestimating their capabilities, and wrongly treating them with a degree of autonomy that can cause serious moral confusion." (Psychology Today Canada, n.d.)

Anthropomorphism, the attribution of human traits to non-human entities, significantly influences how people interact with AI. This can lead to overtrust, ethical confusion, and privacy concerns.

"By elevating machines to human capabilities, we diminish the specialness of people. I’m eager to preserve the distinction and clarify responsibility." (Shneiderman, n.d.)

"We now have machines that can mindlessly generate words, but we haven’t learned how to stop imagining a mind behind them." (Bender, n.d.)

3. Privacy and Security Implications

AI systems, especially large language models (LLMs), often retain records of user interactions, posing significant privacy concerns. Sensitive information shared with AI could be stored and potentially accessed or misused.

"When talking to an AI chatbot, users may feel comfortable sharing more information than they ordinarily would if the chatbot sounds human-like and uses first- or second-person language." (Privacy Pros and Cons of Anthropomorphized AI, n.d.)

"This presents serious ramifications for information security and privacy. Most large language models (LLMs) keep a record of every interaction, potentially using it for training future models." (Infosec Perspective, n.d.)

The human-like design of AI can make individuals more susceptible to manipulation and social engineering attacks, increasing vulnerabilities in personal and professional spheres.

"It’s not just an ethical problem; it’s also a security problem since anything designed to persuade can make us more susceptible to manipulation." (Infosec Perspective, n.d.)

4. Ethical and Societal Concerns

AI systems must be designed to avoid perpetuating societal biases to prevent discrimination. Additionally, the automation capabilities of AI threaten various employment sectors, raising concerns about economic inequality and the future of work.

Maintaining human oversight over AI systems is essential to prevent loss of control and ensure that AI operates within ethical boundaries. Transparency and explainability in AI decision-making processes are vital for building trust and facilitating accountability.

"Most chatbots will not warn users when they are providing sensitive information." (Infosec Perspective, n.d.)

5. Future Directions and AGI/ASI

Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) refers to AI systems with generalized cognitive abilities, allowing them to perform any intellectual task that a human can. The draft suggests that AGI, once considered a significant milestone, may already be within reach or has been surpassed in 2024.

Artificial Superintelligence (ASI) goes further, envisioning AI that not only matches but exceeds human intelligence across all areas. The rapid progression toward ASI underscores the urgency of addressing ethical, societal, and regulatory frameworks to manage its integration responsibly.

"AGI was a dumb threshold and as much as it meant anything, we are, or will be in 2024, already there. ASI is the more sensible goal and unless there is a sudden barrier, we will likely be there before the year is out." (Author, 2024)

6. Critique of AI Experts

Many AI experts may be underestimating the speed of AI advancements due to cognitive biases and a focus on known variables rather than the rapidly expanding capabilities of AI systems.

"Many AI experts have been completely blindsided by the rate of AI advancement." (Author, 2024)

This critique highlights a potential disconnect between AI development and expert predictions, suggesting that even those deeply familiar with AI may not fully anticipate the technology's trajectory.

7. Psychological and Social Impacts

The psychological impact of interacting with human-like AI systems can be profound. Emotional attachments to AI can fill social gaps but also create dependencies that may affect mental health and interpersonal relationships.

"People form relationships with other people, not with machines. But when it becomes almost impossible to tell the difference, we’re more likely to trust AI when making sensitive decisions." (Infosec Perspective, n.d.)

Increased trust in AI systems can lead to significant vulnerabilities, especially if these systems are compromised or used maliciously.

8. Call for Responsible AI Development

Responsible AI development entails creating systems that are transparent, accountable, and aligned with societal values. By avoiding deceptive anthropomorphic features and ensuring that AI systems operate within defined ethical boundaries, developers can mitigate many of the risks associated with advanced AI technologies.

Establishing regulatory frameworks is essential to enforce these standards and provide guidelines for the safe and equitable use of AI.

"We should not be using human-related terms to refer to these systems and tools because that can lead to misconceptions that cause harm not just to our students but to our communities as well." (EdSurge News, n.d.)

References

APA. (n.d.). Are You Anthropomorphizing AI? Retrieved from https://blog.apa.org/are-you-anthropomorphizing-ai
Hi-Phi Nation. (2023, April 25). S6, Episode 3: Love in Time of Replika. Retrieved from https://www.hiphination.org/love-in-time-of-replika
Psychology Today Canada. (n.d.). The Danger of Dishonest Anthropomorphism in Chatbot Design. Retrieved from https://www.psychologytoday.com/canada/danger-of-dishonest-anthropomorphism-chatbot-design
Shneiderman, B. (n.d.). On AI Anthropomorphism. Retrieved from https://medium.com/human-centered-ai/on-ai-anthropomorphism-ben-shneiderman
Bender, E. (n.d.). Chatbots Are Not People: Designed-In Dangers of Human-Like A.I. Systems. Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/chatbots-are-not-people
Privacy Pros and Cons of Anthropomorphized AI. (n.d.). The Privacy Pros and Cons of Anthropomorphized AI. Retrieved from https://www.privacyprosandcons.com/anthropomorphized-ai
Infosec Perspective. (n.d.). The Dangers of Anthropomorphizing AI: An Infosec Perspective. Retrieved from https://www.infosec-perspective.com/dangers-anthropomorphizing-ai
Author. (2024). *[Title of the Article]*. [Publication details if available].
EdSurge News. (n.d.). Anthropomorphism of AI in Learning Environments: Risks of Humanizing the Machine. Retrieved from https://www.edsurge.com/anthropomorphism-of-ai

Sunday, September 8, 2024

NATO/Russia -- Enough Already

NATO on Notice

Update 2024-09-19:

"For those who didn't get it the first time" [In reference to prior threat by Putin] "What the European Parliament is calling for leads to a world war using nuclear weapons," -- Vyacheslav Volodin -- Putin insider, Member of Russian Security Council

The fact that a request for "long-range missiles to hit targets inside Russia" (see September 2024 below) is on the table (though not yet agreed to) means that the use of nuclear weapons on targets in the West is also on the table—if they weren’t already. Perhaps it won’t be done, but Russia has made it clear that a red line was crossed when forces came to their doorstep. Crossing over into Russian territory challenges that, but is it just a bluff? -- Update: I am not alone in being concerned. https://www.icanw.org/will_putin_use_nuclear_weapons Nuclear weapons are horrific, but damage from low yield tactical weapons is contained enough that their use is plausible: https://nuclearsecrecy.com/nukemap/ It seems it is being seriously considered, but for whatever reason it is being downplayed. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/tactical-nuclear-weapons-russia-putin/

A military attack on a territory defended by nuclear
weapons seems like a bad idea. Volodymyr Zelensky frames it as a strategy to force Russia to the bargaining table. It may force Russia's hand, but not in a way anybody wants to see. The West has played a game of chicken with Russia in the past and won, but I don't think that is a reliable precedent for the current situation.

Below is a timeline of quotes that reflect my understanding before writing this. Russia has been clear in the past that NATO moving into former Soviet territory is unacceptable.

2008

"Nato membership for Ukraine and Georgia could threaten European security and undermine attempts to improve transatlantic relations, the Russian president-elect warned today." -- https://www.theguardian.com/world/2008/mar/25/russia.ukraine

"F. Stephen Larrabee, an expert on NATO and Eastern Europe, says Russia’s invasion of Georgia was an effort to limit "Western influence into the former Soviet space."" -- https://www.cfr.org/interview/russias-offensive-georgia-signal-nato-stay-away-its-space

2022

" ... in the words of Russian President Vladimir Putin, NATO's eastward march represents decades of broken promises from the West to Moscow. ... "You promised us in the 1990s that [NATO] would not move an inch to the East. You cheated us shamelessly," Putin said ..." -- https://www.npr.org/2022/01/29/1076193616/ukraine-russia-nato-explainer

2023

"Russian president Vladimir Putin launched his criminal war as a reaction to the possibility of NATO expanding into Ukraine, and the alliance’s refusal to swear it off — not once or twice, but three separate times." -- https://responsiblestatecraft.org/russia-ukraine-nato-expansion/

2024

(July) "NATO condemns in the strongest possible terms Russia's brutal and unprovoked war of aggression against Ukraine - which is an independent, peaceful and democratic country, and a close NATO partner. NATO and Allies continue to provide Ukraine with unprecedented levels of support, helping to uphold its fundamental right to self-defence." -- https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_192648.htm

(June) "MOSCOW, June 3 (Reuters) - Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov said on Monday the United States could face "fatal consequences" if it ignored Moscow's warnings not to let Ukraine use weapons provided by Washington to strike targets inside Russia."

(September) "President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has urged his Western allies to allow Ukraine to use long-range missiles to hit targets inside Russia and increase pressure on Moscow to end the war."

Wednesday, September 4, 2024

Goodbye NDP!

Jugmeet Singh has announced that he is tearing up a crucial deal that keeps the current government in power. That will put the Conservatives under Pierre Poilievre in power and that's a bad thing. It will injure the Liberal Party and put them out of power, but more importantly it will destroy the NDP. I used to work in elections for NDP candidates and family members still do. The NDP lost its way with its principles some time ago, so I don't work for them anymore, but I have always voted NDP. Given the current news that is set to change.

It was quibbles about principles and struggles with a cynical party brass at the DNC that put Donald Trump in office. This current nonsense is reminiscent of that. In order to make some point of principle, arguably not even applicable in the current case involving Railways, Jugmeet Singh and whoever is supporting him in the NDP have decided to throw away the work of lifetimes by millions building the (formerly) socialist alternative to a capitalist hegemony. He/they do not have that right. They are custodians of the NDP heritage, not the owner.

My daughter called to ask if I had seen the news. I had not. While on the phone with her, I said the NDP site must have something to say about this, so I went to the site. Here is what I was confronted with, front and center: "Jagmeet Singh is running for Prime Minister. Rich CEOs have had their government. It's the people's time."

That is the worst of cynical, self-serving political hypocrisy. Destroying the party and implicitly putting a monster in power is hardly hopeful. Jagmeet has never realistically been in a position to be Prime Minister, so that is effectively either delusional or a flat-out lie. Calling an election right now does not end the "Rich CEOs time". I casts it in stone until the end of a decade. The "people's time" is about to be to strain under the yoke of the most heartless possible Canadian Federal Party for years.

Polls are both fallible and/or rigged to be used for political gain, but they are generally in the ballpark. I'm not sure which axe they have to grind, but I just went looking for any poll to give a flavor of what I know to be the case. This is the first I found (https://338canada.com/federal.htm), current as of a few days ago: In an election called now, the PCs (the bad guys) would win a majority and rule the roost absolutely for years with someone truly reckless, mean-spirited, grossly misogynist, morally, and technically and financially illiterate. The liberals would take a huge hit getting knocked back by possibly half their seats or more. The NDP would, in my estimation, barely keep or even possibly lose their official party status. Jagmeet Singh is not only not going to be the next Prime Minister, if sanity prevails he will effectively not even remain the leader of his party.

I will update later if it turns out not to be as bad as it looks, but I am not nearly optimistic. The very most optimistic look at this is that it was a terrible misstatement, they put together a new agreement, and they unwind the optics somehow. I dearly wish this is the case because a federal election now would be a disaster with no upside whatsoever.

Note: Not that it affects my thinking in this matter, but in the interest of full disclosure I have family members who are still NDP members and still actively work in elections. Oddly enough, a family member that is a subject matter expert works for a Liberal MP. More importantly, I have been involved with politics a great deal over the past decade. By coincidence, the post before this was on the subject of a private members bill by an NDP MP (https://blog.bobtrower.com/2024/09/glbi-is-not-ubi-bill-c-223.html). Somewhat tangential to this, I am the designer of secure electronic voting and am authoring voting software.

Tuesday, September 3, 2024

GLBI is not UBI Bill C-223

Bill C-223 Guaranteed Livable Basic Income

Vote

A vote is coming up for private member's Bill C-223 (Leah Gazan) for a Guaranteed Livable Basic Income (GLBI) in the Federal Parliament of Canada. GLBI is a poor substitute for the real thing: Universal Basic Income (UBI). However, the bill for GLBI may get the ball rolling so that we can achieve the real thing. AI and automation are advancing much more quickly than most people think, and many workers will be displaced. Our existing system (essentially a pretty terrible GLBI by another name) is absolutely not up to the task. The advantages of UBI over GLBI primarily stem from the 'U'. Because UBI is universal—everyone receives it by virtue of being a Canadian over the age of 17—there is no risk of people falling through the cracks or less savvy individuals being unable to navigate the convoluted entitlements systems we have put in place. With UBI, you can't be a citizen and 'cheat' to get it when you are not entitled because everyone is entitled, and everyone receives it. People with higher incomes simply have their payments clawed back by the tax system.

Easily Introduced

Aside from the need to overhaul our broken entitlements system (which needs fixing whether with UBI or not), the only requirements are to issue the money and adjust the tax rates. We should phase it in to monitor its impact and adjust other elements as necessary, but we can start that tomorrow. Yes, tomorrow. As automation begins to change work, we will seamlessly accommodate these changes.

Additive, Revenue Neutral

UBI is additive and can be net revenue neutral. People at the higher income level will take a hit, but it’s one they can easily withstand, and it will still leave them with much more than anyone else. Those individuals are most likely to benefit from the economic advantages of funds being spent by people at lower income levels because those at lower income levels must spend that money to make ends meet, while those at the top own, control, or benefit from everything.

Phasing to Prevent Inflation

Phasing it in means there will be no sudden inflationary shock. Adjusting the tax system to ensure it is revenue neutral means it will not impact other programs and will not create additional currency that drives overall inflation. After the UBI is accounted for, the government will still have as much revenue as it had before—that’s what 'revenue neutral' means.

Preliminary Sketch

The figures I used came from the federal government. They are not entirely current and do not account for the overall tax situation, but they provide a good picture of the concept, how it can be revenue neutral, how it affects everyone regarding taxes, and still noticeably benefits all of the bottom 60% of income quintiles while representing a clear step up for those in the bottom quintile.

Because it is revenue neutral, it allows for long-term adjustments to other entitlements to alleviate some tax burdens while still genuinely guaranteeing that everyone receives net additional benefits.

I need to gather better data for a complete picture, but I was surprised by how entirely doable this is, how it does not unduly punish the top quintile, and the incredible extent to which it benefits those who need it most. I highly recommend that people contact their MP to ensure it gets passed and to communicate that framing what should be UBI as GLBI unnecessarily invites failure, guarantees more expenses, and, based on past experience, ensures that it will not help all those who need it.

Contact Your MP

You can send a message to your own MP here:

https://www.leahgazan.ca/glbi_letter_2024?utm_campaign=roundtable_announcement&utm_medium=email&utm_source=mpleahgazan

A sample letter is in place there. I wrote my own text because I have a long-term interest in this issue and I have things to say. In particular, I am deeply concerned that the UBI idea will get lost and that an all-but-useless duplicative program for GLBI will end up consuming resources that could have gone to people as UBI but will instead be absorbed by a bureaucracy that forces our most vulnerable citizens to beg for assistance.

----------

To my MP:

I urge you to vote in favor of Bill C-223 to initiate meaningful discussions on basic income. If given the opportunity to speak, please emphasize that we already have a program resembling a Guaranteed Livable Basic Income (GLBI) under a different name, and it has proven to be fundamentally flawed.

The concept of GLBI, which attempts to mimic Universal Basic Income (UBI), is not a viable solution. UBI is essential because it allows for a straightforward distribution of funds to everyone as soon as they are needed. It guarantees that every individual receives at least a minimum income, unlike GLBI, which is susceptible to mismanagement and lacks clarity regarding who qualifies for assistance.

The 'U' in UBI signifies that it is unequivocal who receives support (everyone) and how much they receive. UBI can be implemented without the extensive bureaucracy associated with means testing, ultimately dismantling the waste and unfairness inherent in current entitlement programs that often disadvantage the most vulnerable among us.

A genuine UBI could be initiated almost immediately, with a phased approach to ensure proper implementation. For instance, a monthly payment starting at $122.20 in the fourth quarter of this year, increasing by 15% quarterly, could reach $2,000 per month by the fourth quarter of 2029. This initiative could be made revenue-neutral by adjusting tax rates, primarily affecting the highest income quintile, while over 60% of the population would see an increase in their after-tax income. Those in lower income brackets would have the opportunity to fully participate in the economy, which would, in turn, benefit all income levels.

By 2030, we could establish a robust social safety net and foster a happier, more prosperous society, but this is only achievable through a comprehensive Universal Basic Income that reaches everyone. The current GLBI proposal is inadequate and fails to address the needs of those who require support the most.

Thursday, August 29, 2024

Persistent Misunderstandings in Software Development

Yikes. This was an answer to a Quora question about development myths and I just kept hammering them out because I have seen a lot of critical misunderstandings in my decades of programming experience. I could just keep going and going. There's a book to be had in explaining all the many misapprehensions of journeyman developers, why they are incorrect and what solutions (if any) apply in dealing with them and their results.

Persistent Misunderstandings in Software Development:

Things Won’t Change: The mistaken belief that the initial project requirements, timeline, and scope will remain constant throughout the development process.
Nothing Will Go Wrong: The expectation that the development process will proceed smoothly without unforeseen challenges, bugs, or setbacks.
Timeline Predictions Are Reliable: The assumption that you can accurately predict timelines and outcomes for problems that are yet to be fully understood or defined.
Human Factors Don’t Matter: Ignoring the reality that developers are human beings with emotions, external responsibilities, and varying productivity levels.
Developers Are Interchangeable: The belief that any developer can be easily replaced with another without impacting the project's progress or quality.
Testing All Pathways Isn’t Necessary: The dangerous assumption that certain software pathways don’t need to be tested because they are unlikely to be encountered.
Rare Issues Won’t Happen: The flawed logic that if something is unlikely, it can be safely ignored.
Multiple Entrances/Exits Are Acceptable: The idea that code can have multiple points of entry and exit without introducing complexity and errors.
Uncontrolled Aborts Are Preferable: The misconception that sudden, uncontrolled aborts are better than controlled unwinding with appropriate logging or recovery mechanisms.
Logging Can Be Skipped: The belief that comprehensive logging isn’t necessary for non-trivial production software.
Premature Optimization Is Safe: The persistent misunderstanding that optimizing early in the development process is beneficial without considering the impact on future changes.
Failing to Optimize Isn’t Harmful: Conversely, the belief that neglecting necessary optimization won’t have significant negative consequences.
More Developers = Faster Delivery: The fallacy that adding more developers will proportionally speed up project completion, akin to thinking nine women can produce a baby in one month.
You Can Fully Understand Requirements Upfront: The expectation that all requirements can be perfectly understood and specified before development begins.
You Can Design Perfectly Before Coding: The belief that it’s possible to design a flawless system architecture before any coding starts.
Regression Testing Can Be Omitted: The mistaken belief that full regression testing isn’t necessary for ensuring software stability.
Delivery Systems Are Homogeneous: The assumption that all delivery systems will behave consistently, ignoring potential variability and edge cases.
Function and Budget Can Be Set Beforehand: The expectation that both the delivered functionality and budget can be fixed before significant development work begins.
Developers and Users Always Understand Each Other: The belief that developers and users are always on the same page without the need for tangible, usable software to bridge understanding.
Floating-Point Arithmetic Is Reliable: The misunderstanding that floating-point arithmetic will always yield consistent results without the need for careful handling and testing.
Rounding Is Consistent Everywhere: The erroneous assumption that rounding operations are consistent across all platforms and software environments.
Human Language Is Precise Enough for Code: The belief that human language is sufficient for specifying code without ambiguity or misinterpretation.
Precision Isn’t Necessary: The notion that you can develop software without rigorous precision, understanding, and thorough testing.
It’s Always Feasible: The overconfidence that every project is doable without significant risks or obstacles.
Security Isn’t a Priority: The dangerous belief that security concerns can be overlooked, or that some attack vectors aren’t worth addressing.
Nobody Will Let You Down: The unrealistic expectation that no team member will face personal issues, illness, or other setbacks during the project.
Your Project Will Survive: The assumption that your project is immune to cancellation or major changes before completion.
Future Tech Predictions Are Accurate: The belief that you can accurately predict the future state of technology and its impact on your project.
Newer Is Better: The naive belief that the latest technology is automatically superior and should be used without question.
Success Is Guaranteed If It Works Once: The damaging notion that finding one way the software behaves correctly is enough, rather than ensuring all potential failure points are addressed. This includes the irritating response, "It works on my machine," which shifts the blame to users instead of addressing the fragility of the software.
Unit Tests Are Enough: The mistaken belief that unit, integration, and system tests can fully substitute for real-world testing with actual users, in pilot phases, and during rollout.
Tool Output Equals Correctness: The belief that if development tools don’t flag issues, the software is automatically correct, ignoring the need for deeper verification.
Unpredicted Issues Won’t Arise: The dangerous oversight that entirely unpredicted and intrinsically unpredictable issues won’t emerge.
Projects Always Finish on Time: The optimistic belief that projects will meet deadlines, despite the well-known tendency for timelines to slip.
Overconfidence in Estimations: The frequent error of underestimating the time and effort required, leading to projects dragging on much longer than anticipated.
You Always Know What You’re Doing: The hubris of believing that you fully understand the problem and that confidence alone will lead to success, without acknowledging the complexities involved.
Resources Won’t Run Out: The assumption that time, budget, or energy won’t run out before the project is complete.
Documentation Will Match the System: The unrealistic belief that documentation will be perfectly in sync with the system at the time of delivery.
People Will Notice What’s Done Right: The expectation that users and stakeholders will recognize what has been done well, rather than focusing solely on deficiencies.
Premature Release Won’t Happen: The common situation where management forces an unfinished or hacked-together solution into production.
Management Will Understand: The assumption that management or stakeholders will fully understand the technical reasons why the software isn’t ready.
Murphy’s Law Is Just an Adage: Misunderstanding Murphy’s Law as a mere saying rather than acknowledging it as a genuine mathematical reality that affects software development.
Dependencies Will Just Work: Underestimating the challenges posed by software dependencies, assuming that everything will work together seamlessly without conflicts.
Libraries Will Solve Everything: The belief that third-party libraries or frameworks will solve all problems without introducing new ones or creating additional complexity.
Scalability Will Handle Itself: The assumption that software designed for small-scale use will automatically scale to handle larger loads without significant rework.
Documentation Can Wait: The belief that documentation can be written after the code is complete without compromising its accuracy or usefulness.
Single Points of Failure Are Fine: Ignoring the risks associated with having single points of failure in the system, assuming they won’t be an issue until they become one.

Why we need to love someone

You are a product of Evolution by Natural Selection. The one thing that got you here was generations before you promoting their design forward through time.

For your design to make it forward through time, you have to ensure the survivability of that design. It has to be reproduced somehow, either by doing something that favors the design in related individuals or by replicating your own design into the next generation.

Our design is primarily transmitted through genetic material and that genetic material makes it into the next generation through the production of offspring by sexual reproduction.

Failing to promote your design forward is fatal. A design that does not survive is a bad design that … does not survive. You are the product of many, many, *many* generations of good design.

How something like romantic love and yearning for it arises can get extremely complex, but it should be apparent that males and females desiring contact will get together. And that, at least in many cases, eventually results in offspring. The design moves forward once again in time.

Seeking a mate can indeed be very challenging, ‘an arduous process’. In fact, even for those with the most resources, it is still a challenge because you are looking for the optimal strategy and that can be extremely difficult to determine. Some of us will have no problem getting some kind of offspring into the next generation, but this is a competition and just getting to the next generation is necessary but not sufficient. You need to produce *viable* offspring that will survive, reproduce and keep their genes alive.

You are stuck with the longing, I am afraid. Make the best of it. Don’t drift about waiting for someone to come your way or waste tons of time in trial and error. Do your research. Learn how to be as attractive a mate as you can be. Learn how to find potential mates and identify which ones are reasonable choices.

Potential mates are looking for ‘fitness’. Mates are seeking ‘attractive’ individuals. What makes people attractive are signs of fitness for the purpose of conceiving and raising successful children. For males, ‘attractive’ means females who are healthy and have maximal childbearing potential. What makes people appear ‘beautiful’ is in fact just overt signs of viability and physical health. Signs of this are regular features, appropriate dimensions, vigor, good teeth, healthy hair, etc. For males, the optimal female is one on the low end of childbearing age. Last I heard in populations near me that means women around 20 to 23. For females, ‘attractive’ means males that are physically attractive as above (health, regular features, etc). However, they favor males that demonstrate the means and desire to stay with them to protect and support a family. Last I heard, men are at their most attractive to women when they are in the range of 29–39.

For both men and women things like high social status and wealth are attractive.

Empirically, animals tend to favor mates that are similar in appearance to themselves. This makes sense because deviation from norms is a warning sign more often than not. There is an effect where an individual that stands out is *more* attractive to some, but the smart money is on fitting in.

It is best if you *are* the picture of health, wonderfully good looking, come from a great family, are wealthy and well-connected. This is why princes and princesses figure prominently in romantic narratives. Given a choice, most people are going to opt for the beautiful, wealthy and powerful at the pinnacle of nobility.

Most of us are not nearly ideal. However, the appearance of the ideal is a really good substitute. Women can’t always *be* 21 years old, but by plumping and reddening their lips, applying makeup to smooth their skin, wearing cleverly arranged clothing, adopting certain mannerisms, etc, they can appear closer to that ideal. Men can’t always be 30 years old, but by careful grooming, staying in shape and similarly wearing clever clothing they can appear closer to the ideal.

For men, it helps to have that expensive car and fancy suit that demonstrate the means to provide for a family. Being able to escort women to important engagements, fancy restaurants, exclusive parties, etc indicate a desirable social status.

There are all sorts of tips and tricks to enhance your appearance to a potential mate. For women, something as simple as pinching their cheeks before heading out the door can give them a tiny edge.

Women should be mindful of the narrow window they have to be at their most attractive and should take pains to make sure they ‘play the field’ early enough to get an idea of what is out there before they hit their peak years.

Men are similarly affected by a window, but it is a larger window (though not all that much) and it appears later. If you are a man, you have more time, but a word to the wise: you will need it.

To maximize the process of searching for and acquiring a mate, you need to move quickly to establish what is out there and how you stack up to the competition. You have to correct any deficiencies you can, settle into a search for suitable candidates and then make their acquaintance. Once you are there, you are looking for someone that you can actually stay with. They may be gorgeous to look at, but still not right for you. You have to put your best foot forward, but you also have to be reasonably honest and authentic.

Chemistry is important. I can’t prove it, but I think the reason that being ‘a good kisser’ is a big deal is because it is a vetting process — literally a chemical analysis — to determine that there is a good genetic match there.

You want to create ‘limerence’ in the right candidate individual and you want to experience limerence yourself. If you have been careful you may well find that it springs up on you without any effort. Otherwise, you need to use everything you’ve got to create it. Mutual infatuation can be extremely annoying to the people around you, but for the couple in love, it is pretty awesome and well worth some effort.

You need, as I say, to put your best foot forward, but that does not mean outrageous cheating. The ‘PUA’ movement is the antithesis of romance. The whole premise of that movement is to prey on women by tricking them into sexual involvement under false pretenses. It is a sad strategy, for sad men that only spreads misery. Don’t be that guy.

Instagram Account Banned

This was resolved as simply a mistake on the part of Instagram, but the hint below might help someone.

Can't get a texted code number from Instagram? You might need to unblock one of their numbers on your phone. In my case, unblocking 326-65 allowed me to get the code I needed to continue with their horribly hostile broken system.

I'm 'a computer guy'. I have been on social systems in cyberspace since before the worldwide web. Since, even, before the term 'cyberspace' came and went in popular geek parlance. When younger, long ago, I could be a bit sharp and sarcastic online, but I never intended to be mean. Before the WWW came along I was already kinder and gentler. I registered my first domain name in 1987, and for a while did websites for people starting in 1999. I have been a citizen in cyberspace longer than most of the people who have seized control of it have been alive. I have been a kind, mannerly, and 'community-guidelines' friendly citizen of the web since its very beginning. I don't transgress in online communities and any community managers that believe otherwise are mistaken. It's on them. If there is something objectionable associated with my account online it is their security breaking down, not my manners.

I was invited to review an Instagram post on the account of an important public person. By co-incidence, my account, which I hardly ever access was banned by Instagram. I could not log on and was given the option to enter an appeal. However, the system demanded that I put in a code that it would send by SMS text to my phone for me to even register my protest. I tried a number of times unsuccessfully to get the code sent, but it never arrived. After a few attempts it said I had used up my chances for SMS and had to wait for 24 hours to try again. I waited. I tried again, still without luck.

The system offered no other way to protest the ban or to even contact Instagram. I tried to get them on Twitter/X without luck. I logged in to Meta to try, tried to use Facebook to log in, all to no avail.

My posting on X prompted replies by accounts clearly charging people money to fix this issue. Having my time wasted and paying for the privilege was 'a bridge too far' for me.

Instagram's system is ridiculously hostile to just about anyone, it would seem. For ordinary people who have invested their time in their account it must be a nightmare.

I went looking for a solution to the defective SMS situation and found something that seemed an improbable fix. Apparently it is impossible to get the SMS or any indication of what went wrong if their number is blocked. It is also possible that, for whatever reason, you have blocked the number. I have no idea what happened for me to block that number, but it was blocked on my phone.

The number in question is 326-65. Unblocking that number allowed me to receive the code so that my appeal could continue.

Because I have been something of an insider in many places, am a technical person myself, and have friends and associates that are technical, I have been able to deal with various frustrations over the years. However, I note with alarm that the stranglehold large incumbents have on the world's networks is beginning to make me, one of the people who designed and built parts of the infrastructure, just another supplicant at the mercy of a merciless oligarchic bureaucracy.

I believe that there is, in the medium term of about five years, a way that the citizens of the world can free themselves from what is rapidly becoming control by an increasingly hostile and tyrannical minority. I am working on aspects of this. For now, though, I would say to people to get off the sidelines, get involved, and remember your neighbor is not the enemy.

Truth, Belief, and Notions about Reality

"It Ain’t What You Don’t Know That Gets You Into Trouble. It’s What You Know for Sure That Just Ain’t So" (variously attributed).

A Thoughtful Reflection on Belief and Understanding

Have you ever found yourself mistaken about something? If so, you have a firsthand example of why belief may not be the most reliable guide. Personally, I choose to believe in nothing, as I see belief itself as an irrational conviction that something is undeniably true, despite the fact that we can never be fully aligned with empirical reality—if such a reality even exists.

Instead, I prefer to rely on models grounded in solid evidence and reason. These models serve as provisional lenses, allowing me to view the world with the best understanding I can muster at any given time. As new data and insights emerge, I’m always ready to adapt and shift my perspective to a better model. When you truly understand something, there’s no need to cling to belief; you can extract value from your model without the need for unwavering faith.

When a superior model presents itself, it’s easy to embrace it, since neither it nor your previous model holds an absolute claim to correctness. The truth is, we simply do not possess complete knowledge, and perhaps achieving that level of understanding is inherently impossible.

Now, consider the concept of unicorns or even the idea of God. They may not manifest in ways that meet our expectations, but they certainly exist in the realm of language and thought. It’s not merely about existence; it’s about how these concepts are expressed and perceived. While I don’t anticipate encountering a unicorn in real life, I wouldn’t let that impede my understanding. At this point in my journey, it’s just another fascinating data point.

Ultimately, we shape the world we observe within our minds. What you perceive is merely a model of reality, not reality itself. Some argue that we inhabit a universe with dimensions beyond the three we typically acknowledge, suggesting that we’re only seeing a faint, incomplete shadow of the complex world around us.

Democracy is Problematic

Derek Muller (Veritasium) made an interesting video about issues with democracy and voting systems. It is an important discussion which I hope he will eventually turn his big brain to more fully articulating issues and possible solutions. As things stand, our political system does not represent the reasonable wishes of the population and even less so their best interests. That has been getting worse at a time where it is ever more important that we get it right.

I have designed a fair, private, but transparent and auditable, voting protocol

Below is the comment I made on his video and below that a link to the video which, although somewhat disappointing for me I still think is worthwhile to watch.

You are a smart guy. Fix this. There are things that have not been accounted for here such as proxies and a favorite of mine to push decisions closer to the 'ground' of the individual voter. There is no conflict between me and another person as to what to have for dinner because I decide myself for myself. Some decisions need to be made thoughtfully by people who both care and understand. That is not most people, nor should it be. We should not all be voting on the test for how much tension a screw in a Rocketship should bear. I'm a smart guy, but I don't even know if that question is even a sensible one to ask. Most importantly at this stage of the game is that we globally exist within an ancient power regime that takes as foundational premise that some are better than and more entitled than others and that the allocation of the world's resources is properly to those who have a legal claim to the power of the state to enforce ownership and privilege. We have been sold the notion that we must all somehow 'earn' our right to breath the air and that it is okay that people unable to do so suffocate. It's messed up when I use the example 'air', but since we apply that to food and shelter and the variety of means to have a life, it's the same thing. You won't die as quickly if you starve to death, but you will die, and in a world of abundance such as we have there is no need for that except to uphold the principle that there are people who 'own' more than they need and people who do not own enough to meet their needs. I designed a voting system for a municipal election in Ontario whereby people's votes could be secret, known only to them, yet at the same time be available so the voter could ensure that their particular vote was counted as cast and the published results would allow others to do the same and it could be verified that only legitimate voters voted, and in the event of any irregularity or dispute the entire election could be audited to ensure total compliance still without revealing how a vote was associated with an individual. We had a date and time set to present this to the city council. The presentation was cancelled because someone on the council had a relative at another company that ultimately was given the go-ahead without ever seeing what we proposed. Subsequently that supplier was accused of irregularities (just errors, I think), go figure. We now have, in first world countries like Canada, the facilities to hold elections with such a mechanism and if things like ranked-choice or some better variant are chosen then the same thing would apply such that people could verify that their vote was counted as cast and even with a relatively complex voting protocol the system overall could be vetted after the fact. One of the things not addressed here is a foundational constitution that provides for inviolable individual rights and entitlements that even a majority cannot vote away. It does not address genuine equality of opportunity. If someone is simply not educated enough to render a sensible opinion, or if someone is struggling to keep body and soul together where an election is the least of their worries or if methods of voting are sufficiently onerous as to discourage people, or if candidates have such extremely disparate resources that only one is ever presented to people ... well ... you get the idea ... a real system requires thought beyond what has been presented as a mathematical problem. We need a rational constitution and a real voting system because we are entering a time where the entire worlds jurisdictions and all of their rules are about to be turned on their heads as automation eliminates work, we enter a new time of abundance, and our impact on our environment becomes ever more extreme.

Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qf7ws2DF-zk

Wednesday, August 14, 2024

Apparent Annual Cost of Climate Action

It seems that no matter how far out the Climate Crisis Narrative gets, it persists with an almost unshakable momentum. The recent statement by The Climate Policy Initiative calls for all the money in the world—and more—to be spent on climate change action. It’s a staggering proposal that, upon closer inspection, raises serious questions.

A closer look suggests they might be advocating for annual expenditures five times higher than current levels, totaling around $5 trillion. While this might be achievable, is it reasonable? That money could instead be directed toward critical needs like healthcare and ensuring that children don’t go to bed hungry. How did we reach a point where prioritizing global climate initiatives over immediate humanitarian needs seems justifiable?

I’ve spent time delving into this issue, despite its apparent contradictions. The reality is that nothing happening now is truly "unprecedented." Life on Earth has persisted for billions of years, adapting to a constantly changing climate, including fluctuations in global temperature, ice cover, and CO2 concentrations. Change is a constant, and the living world is more than capable of adapting.

Since the Little Ice Age, the world has experienced gentle warming—an entirely natural and non-catastrophic process. Over the past century, we’ve increased CO2 levels in the atmosphere by liberating carbon from ancient plant matter. This rise in CO2 has led to a greening of the Earth, as plant life flourishes with more available carbon dioxide. This is not an opinion; it’s an observable fact.

There are speculative concerns about CO2-driven warming and its potential downsides, but the evidence for catastrophic outcomes is far from convincing. We’ve dealt with warmer periods and higher sea levels before, and we can do so again if necessary.

Looking forward, I hope that as AI technology improves, it will help us sift through the noise of the past few decades and provide a clearer picture of how the climate is changing—and whether the resources we’re dedicating to this issue are truly warranted.

A good starting point for this inquiry is the null hypothesis for catastrophic global warming:

"There is no statistically significant evidence that the current rate of global warming will lead to catastrophic outcomes that significantly exceed the natural variability and resilience of the Earth's climate system and biosphere, within a timeframe relevant to human society."

By framing the debate in terms of this null hypothesis, we encourage a more rigorous examination of the evidence and promote a balanced approach to understanding the potential risks and uncertainties associated with global climate change.

Source article: https://www.climatepolicyinitiative.org/press-release/annual-finance-for-climate-action-surpasses-usd-1-trillion-but-far-from-levels-needed-to-avoid-devastating-future-losses/

AI might help with this in the future

I have hopes that as it improves AI will help us cut through all the noise of the last few decades to come up with a realistic picture of how the Climate is changing and whether or not, all things considered, we should be spending all this time, effort, and resources on this issue alone. Below is an exchange with ChatGPT 4o:

Me: What do you reckon would be a good statement of the null hypothesis when it comes to catastrophic global warming?

ChatGPT: A good statement of the null hypothesis in the context of catastrophic global warming would be:

Key Points to Consider:

Statistical Significance: The null hypothesis asserts that any observed changes in global climate metrics (e.g., temperature, sea level rise) are within the range of natural variability and not indicative of a catastrophic trend directly attributable to anthropogenic factors.
Natural Variability: This hypothesis assumes that the Earth's climate has always undergone fluctuations due to various natural factors (e.g., solar cycles, volcanic activity), and it suggests that the current warming trend may not be exceptional when viewed in a longer historical context.
Resilience of the Earth's Systems: The null hypothesis considers that Earth's climate and ecosystems have inherent mechanisms of resilience and adaptation, which could mitigate the potential impacts of warming without leading to catastrophic consequences.
Relevance to Human Society: The null hypothesis implies that even if warming continues, it may not result in outcomes that are catastrophic within the timeframe that is most relevant to human societies, such as the next few centuries.

Testing the Null Hypothesis:

To reject this null hypothesis, proponents of the catastrophic global warming narrative would need to provide strong evidence showing that:

The current warming trend is unprecedented and outside the bounds of natural variability.
The impacts of this warming are demonstrably leading to irreversible and severe damage to global ecosystems and human societies.
The resilience and adaptive capacities of the Earth's systems are overwhelmed, leading to outcomes that can be classified as catastrophic.

By framing the debate in terms of this null hypothesis, it encourages a more rigorous examination of the evidence and promotes a balanced approach to understanding the potential risks and uncertainties associated with global climate change.

Source article: https://www.climatepolicyinitiative.org/press-release/annual-finance-for-climate-action-surpasses-usd-1-trillion-but-far-from-levels-needed-to-avoid-devastating-future-losses/

Wednesday, July 24, 2024

Browser Check -- What We Know

What We Know About You

I created this page so that I had a place I could depend upon to get such information, particularly the external IP address necessary to see my local subnet from the Internet. Except for this text, everything here was written by ChatGPT, so it demonstrates that you can get working code from an AI if you know how.

IP Address: Loading...

Browser Name:

Browser Version:

Operating System:

Platform:

Language:

Screen Size:

Color Depth:

Time Zone:

Network Type:

Battery Level: Loading...

Battery Charging: Loading...

Geolocation: Loading...

Geolocation Accuracy: Loading...

Hardware Concurrency:

Browser Memory:

Remembered Locations

None

Geolocation

This uses the "Open Cage" API to access geolocation so you need one if you want that. You can get one to try here: https://opencagedata.com/api