DSM: uncompromised modulation

Robert Swanson (robertswanson@icehouse.net)
Thu, 04 Jan 2001 23:57:20 -0800

Uncompromised Modulation
(modulate: to adapt according to the circumstances)

Computer development will reach a magnificent turning point in the year
2010. No longer will specific information be directed into computers as
programming. Instead we will use cause and effect relationship of computer
and environment. No longer will individual programs conflict in their
interaction. Instead, a fundamental base of cooperative operations will
smooth over additional functions by applying them to a practical framework.
>From the outside this will appear to be intuitive functioning.

It will happen like this. A mother robot will be placed in an office. She
will go to a desk and there dump a hundred million nanobots. These nanobots
are tiny computers that can move about. Their individual function is limited
but the variety of connections they can make with each other is virtually
unlimited. What they need to do now is configure themselves to meet the task
at hand, the office. The mother robot's job is to deliver them to the
various aspects of the environment that will be their task.

So the nanobots run about the desk connecting to anything at random. They
touch things, they photograph, they measure, they sample. What they learn is
referenced to the mother model. She provides the base reference points for
what begins "reality". As one area of the office has been assimilated the
mother robot directs them to other items. "Reality" expands. She keeps the
nanobots from climbing out a window or falling into a toilet.

In about four days the workspace has been assimilated by the nanobots
through their contact with objects. By the seventh day the nanobots have
begun organizing themselves into patterns apart from the objects. This way
they can begin to relate to things apart from being with that thing
experientially. They now have "awareness" of the fax machine without going
to the machine. The world of the nanobots becomes a separate reality as
nanobot thought. This frees the nanobots to test infinite configurations
between the office furnishings. They will test the possibility of filing
papers in the sink. They will try plugging the typewriter into the copy
machine. They will test the effect of vacuuming clutter from the desktop. In
the end they will choose operations that have continuance. And they will
choose operations that have continuance through expansion. Simply put, they
are learning to be practical.

Around the eleventh day functional patterns will be resolved. The phone
will be answered when it rings. Files will be organized in drawers. The
ledger will be balanced. With these issues resolved many of the nanobots can
stop moving around and set themselves in a pattern to manage these things
with greatest efficiency. The group energy can now focus on advanced
operations. A third programming issue can now be addressed. Given the
functional nature of learned interrelationships, the nanobots can now assess
these functions as separate programming. That is, office procedure can be
considered apart from this specific office. The nanobots can think for
themselves what sort of office building they would like to create and how it
would do business. Learning (programming) has become fully abstract. This
can happen safely because a working base is in place.

By day sixteen the nanobots have optimized their abstract evaluation of
procedures. They are ready to move into creation. This is the next logical
step for being a business that is not a dead end. As a practical matter they
want to expand function. This can be done in at least two ways. One way is
for the nanobot computer to network with other nanobots who have arrived at
similar conclusions. Another way is for the nanobot computer to become a
mother and release millions or trillions of nanobots into a new environment.
Whichever it chooses will best further continuance.

If you are wondering where this places humans in the functional order, this
is a good question. For many years humans have placed abstract analysis
ahead of basic experience thus avoiding the foundation on which abstraction
finds functionality. This is not continuance programming. It reaches its end
in the confusion created within the material foundation of day to day
business. No one develops a full patterned understanding to uphold
continuance. Instead people have used isolated unfounded abstract values
(superstition) for expansion into new areas. This builds chaos upon chaos.
Though some individual parts function well, the system as a whole is at
least retarded, and at most a ticking time bomb. Perhaps some day humans
will develop that higher nature of intelligence -- reflection based in
reality. Then they can choose the real values of continuance and expansion.
To do so would mean bringing children to playful experiential exploration
throughout childhood, and adding in abstraction (reading, writing and values
systems) after age eleven. The teens are for free exploration of applying
what they have learned by testing reconfigurations. Adulthood is for giving
birth to reconfigurations expanding continuance. Their intelligence will
seem intuitive. Here are the Einsteins and Mozarts and Teslas and great
leaders of nations. And really great parents and teachers as playful models
of possibility.

robert swanson

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu Mar 29 2001 - 11:15:45 EST