Entries Tagged as ''

Reality Check: Teleportation: Going Nowhere Fast

Howstuffworks “How Teleportation Will Work”

I’m a big fan of anything that reduces travel time and of “super-high-tech” in general. But teleportation, as it’s popularly portrayed, is a very silly concept. And the popularization of the modern scientific experiements in the quantum realm has taken on proportions of mass delusion. It’s time for a reality check.

The linked article is perfect example. The author glosses over the key problem with teleportation experiments thus far (and even theoretical constructs). You can’t use this phenomenon to send useful information. Scientists can show that two or more entangled particles remain entangled and seem to “send” information instantaneously about their state. But when the remote locations eagerly discover the spin of their particle, that does little good, because we can’t control the source particle’s state without destoying the entanglement. In other words, we can’t use this device to send even a one-bit telegram. And that’s not changing anytime soon.

But assuming that problem can be solved eventually, the article glosses over the idea that copying the roughly 10^28 (his estimate) atoms in a human body would make a perfect copy. After scanning, you most importantly have to re-assemble those atoms into the original configuration. If we can do that reliably and quickly, we have much more important technology than a teleporter (see below). Moreover, we are each more than a collection of atoms. There is a dynamic electro-chemical flow throughout our bodies that must be captured and recreated, or else the teleported copy is quite literally a corpse. So it’s more like 10^28 atoms and who knows how many buzzing electrons in four dimensions, not three, plus field effects, and perhaps other unknown processes floating about. Good luck.

Even assuming we solve that problem and make a living human copy at the other end, it’s still, after all, a copy. We haven’t done anything to transfer your consciousness (not to mention your soul, if you believe in it). Now, the copy may look like you. If we solve the electrical problem above, it might even think it’s you. But if you two ever met, you’d be left to duke it out for the property rights and who gets the wife. Plus, consider me cowardly, but I have no intention of destroying my original body simply to go traveling. The only possible way I can imagine using such a device is to esacpe an exploding building or planet, where I’d likely die anyway. Would you allow your original body to be destroyed just because your perfect copy says he or she is really you? Without witnessing myself take the travel, I’d say no.

But there’s an even more fundamental flaw in the popular delusion of future teleportation: if we have the ability to send instantaneous messages over great distances and can rapidly arrange that many atoms at once, then why would we ever want to go anywhere?

I mean, that same technology, plus some clever software, is more than good enough to build the best possible holodeck we can imagine. Why not just send holographic “cameras” to remote destinations and beam the scene back to our living rooms using our nice instant communication? That would undoubtedly seem as real to us as being there. Plus, if we wanted, we could still send some atomic body-arrangers to the remote site to create a walking avatar of ourselves–not a distinct living person, but simply a virtual reflection of us, our actions, in real-time.

To the extent we allow the remote environment to affect that avatar and us, we are at some potential risk. But if we limit our exposure to the normal sensorium and, for example, prevent bullets and rock slides from affecting our source bodies, that’s a hell of a lot safer than teleporting there. But, by any reasonable measurement, it’s just as good as being there. I imagine some combination of sensor/avatar we can send in a very small package. Perhaps we can teleport that (or at least mail it or rent one on site) and let it represent us and send the scene back to us.

That’s what teleportation will look like, IMO. Not beaming us down to the planet like in Star Trek, but sending our virtual selves out to explore at minimal risk and much less cost than dying every time we step on the pad. One would think that even Captain Kirk would see the benefits of sending a virtual Kirk down to the dangerous planet surface instead of himself.

Schmidt on Truth Detector

Google boss warns politicians about Internet power | Top News | Reuters.com

It sounds like the stuff of science fantasy, but the group that invents a functional “internet truth detector” should win the Nobel Peace Prize, IMO. No single invention could do more to stem the constant bombardment of lies we endure, and theoretically, improve the political discourse in this country.

How would it work? One could imagine some AI software that can detect signs of deceit. Voice stress, etc.. That would be incredibly useful, especially in the portable version. But that’s hard. And I doubt that’s how Google would approach the problem.

Google likes information–lots of it. What information? Right now, various groups are assembling streaming data sources for congressional votes. Link that with fund raising records and some natural language software that can monitor political spin in real time, at least for content, if not veracity. On our new internet-enabled TVs (coincidentally, showing google-managed TV ads), we should be able to see custom subtitles like “Congressman Mark Payoli (R-VA) received $50,000 from the Tobacco lobby” when the good congressman tells snows us as to why he’s opposed to a related bill.

Better than that, we could see old quotes by various media pundits which were proven to be false. When Drudge comes on, claiming teenagers are responsible for tempting 50 year old men, we can remind the audience of that, every time Drudge makes a new defense of the next sexual predator on the block. What it is is a memory, a reminder service of what they told you yesterday, for a world in which our memories seem to last a day at best.

The service would need to be independent, of course. There’s no way Fox is going to run blurbs counter to their official spin, or CNN for that matter. We neet an internet truth machine that remembers everything that people, in their infinite wisdom, forget–or never got to see in the first place.

Web 3D, Transmission

I was originally going to post Vlad’s interview on Friday and a longer article on "What is 3D Good For" tomorrow. But I think I’ll put Vlad’s up today and wrap the series for now. In the future, if there’s more interest/feedback/discussion, I’m happy to resume.

For now, I’ll close by saying that I think 3D in the browser is a critical step, not because we need 2D web pages rotated in 3D (as some have tried), but because we need web pages built in 3D, built with 3D properties in mind, and more importantly, we need 3D built on an open model of content interchange like the Web itself. So browser-level 3D, as it leads to new forms of 3D content, not just effects, may be one of the key facilitators to opening the frontier beyond the fertile playgrounds of the last 10 years.

I hope you’ve enjoyed this mini-series of articles. And if there’s interest, we can do more in the future.

For reference, here is the table of contents again:

Web 3D, Part 1: Introduction
Web 3D, Part 2: Interview with Tony Parisi of Media Machines
Web 3D, Part 3: What is Web 3D, anyway?
Web 3D, Part 4: Interview with Joshua Smith of Kaon Interactive
Web 3D, Part 5: Glossary
Web 3D, Part 6: Interview with Jerry Paffendorf of Electric Sheep
Web 3D, Part 7: Interview with Vladimir Vukicevic of Mozilla

If you submit this to Slashdot or Digg, please use the off-site cached mirror: http://www.realityprime.com/bromo_web3D_part1.html

Web 3D, part 7: Interview with Vladimir Vukicevic of Mozilla

Vladimir Vukicevic is an employee of the Mozilla Corporation, currently working on Gecko 1.9, the next version of the rendering engine used in the Firefox browser. He focuses mainly on back-end rendering, specifically the move to "Cairo" across all platforms, but he works in other areas as well. He’s been involved full time with the Mozilla Project for just over 2 years now. 

[Read more →]

Netflix $1M Prize

Netflix Prize: Home

Netflix is offering $1M to improve their automated recommendation system by 10%, plus $50k for just a 1% improvement. It’s an interesting problem. Here they’re limited to a 1-5 rating per movie per user at best (assuming people cooperate), and they need to then tell you what movies you might like. According to the contest FAQ, their Cinematch system doesn’t even take traits of the movie (director, genre, actors) into account. No wonder it sucks.

They give registered contestants (groups, ideally) about 1/10th of their actual collected data, AOL-style, with names anonymized. To better protect privacy, they say they’re also slightly randomizing the data. And they won’t give you the program that tests your accuracy. You have to upload your predictions (basically, filling in the blanks of the ratings they intentionally removed) and wait a week each time to see your score.

The area of research is called collaborative filtering, because just knowing you liked movie A and B tells you nothing about movie C without context. That context is what other people also thought about these movies. For example, identify and group all users who rate movies most similarly. Then, for a given user, find movies the others in his group saw that this user didn’t, and just use the aggregate ratings as a prediction. It works well for those people who don’t see as many movies. If you’re the trend setter, you’re SOL.

But the real problem is in the 1-5 ratings. Amazon also his this same problem with “customers who bought this also bought…” There isn’t enough real context for these decisions–the answer to the question “why?”

Web 3D, Part 6: Interview with Jerry Paffendorf of Electric Sheep

Jerry Paffendorf is Futurist in Residence with The Electric Sheep Company, providers of professional services including 3D art, custom software, and experience design for platform virtual worlds like Second Life, Multiverse, There, and Google Earth. He also serves as a researcher with the Acceleration Studies Foundation, a nonprofit dedicated to improving our understanding of accelerating technological change, its drivers and implications, where he helps direct the Metaverse Roadmap Project. A creative curator of ideas about change and the future, Jerry is a frequent public speaker and helps put together the Accelerating Change, State of Play, Second Life Community Convention, and Metaverse Roadmap Summit conferences, and has worked on many Second Life projects, including the monthly Second Life Future Salon, SL Relay for Life, and Democracy Island. Jerry holds a BFA from Montclair State University in New Jersey, and an MS in Studies of the Future from the University of Houston. He lives in Williamsburg, Brooklyn.

These questions were asked in September, 2006
[Read more →]