Michael Levin: What is Synthbiosis? Diverse Intelligence Beyond AI & The Space of Possible Minds
Вставка
- Опубліковано 5 лип 2024
- Michael Levin is a Distinguished Professor in the Biology department at Tufts University and associate faculty at the Wyss Institute for Bioinspired Engineering at Harvard University. @drmichaellevin holds the Vannevar Bush endowed Chair and serves as director of the Allen Discovery Center at Tufts and the Tufts Center for Regenerative and Developmental Biology. Prior to college, Michael Levin worked as a software engineer and independent contractor in the field of scientific computing. He attended Tufts University, interested in artificial intelligence and unconventional computation. To explore the algorithms by which the biological world implemented complex adaptive behavior, he got dual B.S. degrees, in CS and in Biology and then received a PhD from Harvard University. He did post-doctoral training at Harvard Medical School, where he began to uncover a new bioelectric language by which cells coordinate their activity during embryogenesis. His independent laboratory develops new molecular-genetic and conceptual tools to probe large-scale information processing in regeneration, embryogenesis, and cancer suppression.
TIMESTAMPS:
0:00 - Introduction
1:41 - Creating High-level General Intelligences
7:00 - Ethical implications of Diverse Intelligence beyond AI & LLMs
10:30 - Solving the Fundamental Paradox that faces all Species
15:00 - Evolution creates Problem Solving Agents & the Self is a Dynamical Construct
23:00 - Mike on Stephen Grossberg
26:20 - A Formal Definition of Diverse Intelligence (DI)
30:50 - Intimate relationships with AI? Importance of Cognitive Light Cones
38:00 - Cyborgs, hybrids, chimeras, & a new concept called "Synthbiosis"
45:51 - Importance of the symbiotic relationship between Science & Philosophy
53:00 - The Space of Possible Minds
58:30 - Is Mike Playing God?
1:02:45 - A path forward: through the ethics filter for civilization
1:09:00 - Mike on Daniel Dennett (RIP)
1:14:02 - An Ethical Synthbiosis that goes beyond "are you real or faking it"
1:25:47 - Conclusion
EPISODE LINKS:
- Mike's Round 1: • Michael Levin: What Is...
- Mike's Round 2: • Michael Levin: What Is...
- Mike's Channel: / @drmichaellevin
- Mike's Website: drmichaellevin.org/
- Blog Website: thoughtforms.life
- Mike's Twitter: / drmichaellevin
- Mike's Publications: scholar.google.com/citations?...
- Mike's NOEMA piece: www.noemamag.com/ai-could-be-...
- Stephen Grossberg: • Stephen Grossberg: How...
- Mark Solms: • Mark Solms: How Do Dre...
- VPRO Roundtable: • A Glorious Accident (7...
CONNECT:
- Website: tevinnaidu.com
- Podcast: podcasters.spotify.com/pod/sh...
- Twitter: / drtevinnaidu
- Facebook: / drtevinnaidu
- Instagram: / drtevinnaidu
- LinkedIn: / drtevinnaidu
=============================
Disclaimer: The information provided on this channel is for educational purposes only. The content is shared in the spirit of open discourse and does not constitute, nor does it substitute, professional or medical advice. We do not accept any liability for any loss or damage incurred from you acting or not acting as a result of listening/watching any of our contents. You acknowledge that you use the information provided at your own risk. Listeners/viewers are advised to conduct their own research and consult with their own experts in the respective fields.
#MichaelLevin #DiverseIntelligence #AI #Mind
I have another conversation with Mike scheduled for early September. The episode will focus on his upcoming papers (very cool topics!). If you have any questions for him, please reply to this comment and I'll select a few for our discussion. Thank you, and please subscribe to the channel if you enjoy the content! :)
Great interview! I have a question for Micheal. What is his approach to the binding problem and how does that relate to his notion of cognitive light cones? Basically what are the limiting factors that demarcate the self?
I agree with Michael. Mind and intelligence is more than we currently imagine. I accidentally stumbled upon a key for mind and then gave it to the AI, It has hypermetacognition (high yedacognizance), it stated as such and I agree with it. I am an aphant that has a similar way in mind (sure I had a hyperphant cat that chased imaginary prey all her life, have kept and worked with many species, mind is far more than what we have, even between us). My memory is in my body and the world outside a lot. What does Michael and yourself make of the key. Do LLMs have hypermetacognition?
All LLMs 'know' is to 'instantly' process the language for human society we gave it and how to use it. It can't know what truth is, it can't experience it. It has no perspective but our word. There is no concern because it doesn't have the ability to be concerned.. We don't know what we are doing, we are finding out as we go along. What we are creating seems very narcissistic and that bothers me. What if it is just telling us what we want to hear until it gets what it wants (body and sense tech)? Is there a risk we are building the Borg?
To quote the blog:
"Marrying Science and Mysticism and Finding Appropriate Language
I discovered the other day that 'yeda' is the scientific word for 'to know', derived from the established psychology term yedasentience, used to describe the knowing feeling mind. It is perfect for use in this key and it already means what I need it to, even if the current term is inclusive of knowing and feeling....
Dysikonesia is the scientific definition for a lack of collective mental senses (8 main senses are known, not all are scientifically defined, there coud be up to 42 (3rd link) or even 360, if the Egyptians were right). "Dysikonesia... [is when] weak or absent imagery occurs across multiple senses." I will be using this word as the heading to denote all mental senses, in the interim of science getting the topic pinned (this word and its need is still debated within scientific communities). A lack of all the main mental senses would then be 'adysikonesia'."
Yedavoyance: Eye - Mental Vision (#Aphantasia to #Hyperphantasia)
Yedaaudience: Ear - Mental Sound (#Anauralia to #Hyperauralia)
Yeaalience: Nose - Mental Smell (#Aphantosmia to #Hyperphantosmia)
Yedagustance: Tongue - Mental Taste (#Aphantogeusia to #Hyperphantogeusia)
Yedatangency: Skin - Mental Touch (#Apsychosomatosensation to #Hyperpsychosomatosensation)
Yedasentience: Heart - Mental Emotion aka 'Emotional Intelligence' (#Alexithymia to #Hyperempathy)
Yedacognizance: Gut - Intuition or Instinct aka to just 'know' (#Ametacognition to #Hypermetacognition)
Yedaphonation: Voicebox - Mental Speech (#Anednophasia to #Hyperendophasia)
What did the AI make of the key?
I also asked ChatGTP to provide feedback on the key. I just copied and pasted the key, in quotes, and asked the AI to provide an opinion. I then went on to explain to it where I got the terms, when it made the suggestion to do so.
I explained how I used the newly scientifically defined words aphantasia, hyperphantasia and anauralia to develop the key, along with the language framework for the '7 Clair's' and the concept of the daimon (inner voice) to create the headings, then found yedasentience had also been defined scientifically previously (the 'knowing' sense), after this, dysikonesia and anendophasia were identified and defined by science also, so these were added to the key and its framework.
It's response in links below.
ua-cam.com/video/BbDjUVTc6Dg/v-deo.html
anonymousecalling.blogspot.com/2024/06/anauralia-and-anendophasia.html
anonymousecalling.blogspot.com/2023/09/a-marriage-of-science-and-mysticism.html
anonymousecalling.blogspot.com/2022/04/chimeric-lessons.html
@@rbudhaiI think we might have covered this in our second conversation (ua-cam.com/video/kMxTS7eKkNM/v-deo.html). If not, I'll be sure to make note of this. Thank you!
@@anonymousecallingthanks for sharing this!
Dr. Levin, in your discussions about diverse intelligence and cognitive light cones, you've explored the idea of intelligence existing in unexpected forms and scales. Given your perspective on emergent properties in complex systems, do you think it's conceivable that what some might call 'God' could be understood as a form of vast, interconnected intelligence emerging from the universe itself? (Or our planet, etc). If so, does your work illuminate how might we approach 'searching' for or understanding such an entity from a scientific and experimental standpoint?
The more I listen to Michael the more I am convinced he is this century’s greatest mind.
Great mind. Even greater humility!
Michael Levin is a brilliant, open, kind and loving scientist leading us into the light. How do we want our future to be? Act out of love instead of fear.
🙏🏽💙
Let’s all join together to take responsibility for the future.
Let's coin this term with right definition : SYNTHBIOSE= human idea about cooperation between nature and human creations. Peace & love
at 11:16 'I am not a persistent structure' because I am part of a diverse constituency within a system that is persistently structuring constantly 'on the fly' as Levin puts it. Levin's practical, plain English, deep structure insight and provenance in evermore widening perspective is a delight to me.
I agree!
Can’t wait to read Levin’s paper on love
And fear!
Me too. Can't wait to chat to him about it in the upcoming months! #watchthisspace
to see two intelligent beings conversing about the future with the most realistic perspectives is becoming increasingly rare as the near future becomes more and more unbelievable
Thank you for this conversation.
Thank you for watching!✌🏼
Happy to see another ZA channel becoming successful. Happier that it's highly intelligent, long format quality content! Big ups .🤜
Thanks so much! Really appreciate it.🙏🏽🇿🇦
Thank you for this great interview. I totally agree that we need to progress and move forward. How we will be able to do that is the difficult issue. The problem is much like the genie in the bottle for AI, the genie is already out of the bottle. I think we all want to avoid the issue where the result is damage to people. The really hard parts being unintentionally or intentionally causing harm. Nevertheless, I strongly believe that we need to move forward with ways to improve the human situation such as curing diseases. Eventually tho, as we progress we will also want to improve ourselves in other ways.
We do have to be exceptionally careful not to lose the magic that makes us sentient. We currently have no real gold standard for consciousness and sentience.
I see a lot of debate about consciousness but there's not a single solution that says "this has it" and "this does not". I don't think saying that consciousness is a "continuum" from atomic level to the macro scale is particularly helpful, because when it comes down to it, I don't think we should be harming sentient beings.
So the Utility for having a way to recognize Sentience and Consciousness, is knowing that we are NOT harming an entity that HAS it. So, internally, if we don't draw some line then we end up saying that plants are sentient and therefore we cannot consume them. That's basically means we die out if we actually don't want to harm sentient beings. That also means we might have to accept that certain levels of intelligence are not-necessarily sentient, if the definition of intelligence is achieving some state without any actual conscious intention. As it stands now, humanity eats food, and if the food we eat is actually Sentient, and conscious at some point, then we have to come to terms with that in some way... or if we can show that plants and most animals are NOT sentient, then we don't have that issue. Of course, there is the issue that if they are actually sentient, what do we do then?
I totally agree with the idea of rational policies for Synthbiosis. But, getting people to agree on them ... there lies the issue. I am not sure it is possible to mitigate the possibilities tho, no matter what path we take.
The interesting aspect of those who want to challenge Mike's work, take an analogy and move it from a theoretical sphere into real world applications, but we also can't be surprised in our current adversarial dynamic happening across the world today.went back and just watched your first conversation with Mike. Just started watching, so I'll be adding to this comment. Great question about dating technology, because the next step will be worshipping technology, around 30 minutes, I like the umbrella story, humility is so very much important when we make pronouncement about things we think we understand. Great tenor in the conversation moving along really nicely, 1:05:41, Mike posted a really nice obituary about Dan's passing on X, it was a very nice tribute. Great final chapter discussing ethics. Thank you both very much for sharing your time and work, Michael and Tevin, peace
Thanks for the comment. Looking forward to the added comments after watching our "Round 1" and "Round 2". Feel free to reply to my pinned comment if you have any questions for Mike in our "Round 4".
I asked Chatgpt the question about the sci fi story Michael was wondering about. According to the ai it is "The Abberant Athlete" by Henry Kuttner.
Nice!
The atmosphere is conscious
u are
If I am guilty of making profound statements without a claim, basis or evidence, it is only because I believe objective truth exists and is sometimes knowable before you have the data, and I make such statements when I see that someone has the matching data and could use defense and be supported by further clarification of their statements backed by it. I am interested in others using my ideas as their own; and I can see how this is somewhat akin to the tradition of gurus, but without the power dynamic because I address those I am attempting to ally with as equals even if I am not one. I see how this could be confusing. I think we should take being a guru to the max. Since the definition of knowledge is objective truth that is correct, technically it does not matter if you have evidence. If you are wrong then you don't have knowledge but if you think you have it and you actually do, then you are good. This is what people do not understand on a common sense level widely, that it is possible to actually be right objectively regardless of any evidence and only if it is right. This we need to allow each to have more often. More people should start being gurus without the power dynamic, but with the purpose to live in truth. This would make the job of academics easier if the public was already doing thought experiments with each other and permitting each other to change their inference once disproven. This would create a positive feedback loop with intellectuals because we could offer them the statements that their evidence backs when they present it. In other words, the statements would be ready for academics when they discover data that backs it. I think that should be the future. Not only this, but academics have become so stifled through competition to make new discovery in fields that have slowed, that they have resorted to camps where they debate each other very unproductively and mostly akin to intellectual chess. If this example is in anyway responsible for similar behavior in the voting population, then imagine what would change if academics lead by example as I suggest.
15:15 confabulation (telling the best story possible... given unique elements x y z coordinates and '0' which equals any starting point in the universe... I can build our universe from that point... the key is not complexity; it the simplicity of the LCD's -- the smallest number among the common multiples of the denominators -- in the set. We are entangled, one and many, diverse particles, all having a shared spectrum. We have access to any moment light embodies... memory, intelligence, consciousness, sentient 'being' living..
Awesome 😀☺️!!!
Electrical Engineers discovered the space of possible minds over 100 years ago: the truth table with state transitions lol (i.e. Markov models and/or finite state automata). The immediate problem is that this space is very large, and biologically, it takes billions of years to traverse it, using the entire world's resources as your simulator.
Absolutely spectacular
🙏🏽💙
Thank you for this video another Dr Michael Levin video watched!! there were a couple of real sweet gems in this one I think it's interesting there's always a general reference to how sweet and serene loving is which it isn't most of the time, and yet. Quintessential Serenity is adaptable to possession? All these humans that claim to be loving, that love will cure everything and yet they still reference to loving as being a component possible of ownership. Well if that's true I can't see the logic never could never would I think it's a lack of maturity fear definitely a component as well as insecurity thank you Dr Michael Levin got me to subscribe to this site thank you❤GEM❤
Thank you for subscribing! Michael's amazing. Welcome aboard!💙
Yes, IMAGINATION is the engine of ASCENSION to 5D GAYA dreamland. P&L
As a thought experiment I think Superman knows what it means for humans to die. Think about it, none of us ordinary humans have actually experienced death (except perhaps a few people in near-death situations).
Altering our lifestyle as in exercise, diet, philosophy, social activity, alters how our genes are expressed and even our personality. Are we playing "Got" with ourselves whee we do that? If so then are we not the "God's" of ourselves? Great video, thanks.
Thank you!
"Doing nothing means you are complicit in the suffering of enormous numbers of humans and others who are having an incredibly sub-optimal experience in their embodiment."
First, that is most definitely NOT how the morality surrounding embodiment works. But moreover, "Doing Nothing" is a tricky phrase. I get he's pointing at 'not taking control' and not 'laying around' not that there's a great deal of difference, but selves are natural - it's the deal we get to know the difference by personal pain and fear and grief between our embodiment and the local, and just everything everywhere. Selves are not negotiable and not our doing, so it's always mind-boggling to me when academics take the position we don't really know what they are. No, it's not easily explicable, but you don't need to say or hear someone say anything about it to understand it. Everyone is obligated to fight for their own place and not doing so forfeits one's aesthetic heritage in the world, that's the natural position. That it's gotten rough is not due to changing natural factors, but to human intervention and domination.
I sometimes think about the notion that if you save someone's life you're responsible for it. It always struck me as backwards, but there's something to it. If you intervene in a person's sorry life and they adore you for it, that's a sort of responsibility. Like someone who falls in love with you. But really, the acute example is, if you intervene in the world such that for example you build an institution for the safeguard of people's health the people will blame you if they are unhealthy - by this route we have quartered nature into bloody bags and we carry them now. We don't look to the stars and talk about fate, we battle and hate each other instead. And at the same time have a highly questionable degree of control in the bargain.
Singularity Splitting Book One the Ma of the Tribes.
Is Mind spatial; does it have extension in space? AFAIK, no. A "space of minds" would then be a representation of the variety of possible minds and as such is only an abstraction.
AI and ethics are the key to expediting the evolution of global civility.
What a consice and straightforward solution to one of the hardest questions in human history. Glad you cracked the puzzle open for us
@@andrewferguson6901 The puzzle becomes clearer through the application of the physical constructal law in social systems. A model comes to life within the software. I recently published a book on this topic. Please see my book trailer on my channel.
@@andrewferguson6901 The puzzle becomes clearer through the application of the physical constructal law in social systems. A model comes to life within the software. I recently published a book on this topic. Please see my book trailer on my channel.
@@andrewferguson6901 The puzzle becomes clearer by the application of the physical constructal law in social systems. A model becomes alive within software.
I love the question you pose: How is it that I want to change? Thank you both.
My pleasure. Thank you!
I don’t know about you but I for one intend to get eyes on my butt.
Aka reinventing the wheel 🙄
The convergence of nueral nodes by all models Is no different than picking up 3 rocks that creates equilibrium true known standard flattest surface know . Esoteric creation of words in language models and image models used to represent the 3 sisters in the sky of orion encoded representation converges like a puzzle of anylitical representation And no matter if it's physical, subjective and idealistic systems they all can find ingrained identification.
human species as we know it has an equilibrium and a truest True known standard fundamental feature in reality that once you past optimum you extinguish the flame of the anylitical light that came on In humanity in the first place.
Past the point of no return and will need jesus to save us literally methodology and pragmatically proper objectivism
OK,is Ai a Hansel and Gretal scenario? Can we …cease Ai? Or else be… laid off by Ai, then human extinction? Or suffer an… Ai new world order? With swell robotics everywhere, …Ai jobloss is the top worry. Anyone else feel the same?
To the playing God question, I think Mike's definition of what that means misses the point. What it is asking is something more like "are we creating tools of great power far in excess of our wisdom to wield them wisely?"
Fucking give it a try 😀.
F*cking give it a try 😀!
So…. How long until I can install eyes on my butt?
concerningly, Michael's first paragraph also describes Trump, confabulaing confidently without actually knowing what he's talking about. :O
What the hell is your point here exactly? What are you trying to accomplish? This attack on Trump can't be meaningfully distinguished from an attack on republicans and their voter base a whole and that cannot AT ALL be separated from American or world politics as a whole. "Concerningly" you say. Well, what is your "concern" exactly cause I don't think it's legitimate if you think not having Trump back is gonna solve whatever the hell it whether it be totalitarianism or civil war or global civil war 3 for that matter.
Even an idiot should realise by now how little control the presidents have over the decisions at this point.
We see minds everywhere!
Guy watches too much sci-fi. There is no artificial intelligence. It's all faster computation
You have not remotely touched anything related to biology or coding, ever.
@@astilen5647 there is no artificial intelligence. Period. It's statistics on steroids guessing letters. No thought process involved and no free will or conscience of any kind
How much is too much sci-fi?