It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Can a $1.5bn supercomputer save humanity?

page: 1
10
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 5 2010 @ 04:03 AM
link   

Can a $1.5bn supercomputer save humanity?


digg.com



* Computer to map every detail possible
* Aims to predict where we're heading
* EU funding to tune of $1.5 billion

IT'S like the real-life version of popular video game Sim Earth, in which players build and manage their own planet.

This week, the world's leading techno-socio-economic guru Dirk Helbing outlined his vision of the Earth's future, or rather, the means to acquire it.

At a cost of $1.5bn, the Living Earth Simulator will gather as much data about humanity as possible, mining every available source to produce a picture of where we're at and where we're
(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
www.ne ws.com.au
www.technologyreview.com
www.popsci.com




posted on May, 5 2010 @ 04:03 AM
link   
I used the search function, found nothing so forgive me if it is already posted.

Discuss! A machine that will absorb knowledge about everything and i suppose everyone and try to predict the future? sounds like a wanna-be God and to me it rings some bells about the Biblical Image of the Beast.

i added another link that speaks of a global planetary skin kind of a precursor to this thing.





digg.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on May, 5 2010 @ 04:12 AM
link   
Well if used in a good manner, it could predict crime. Unfortunately it is the government that will have the knowledge. I say kill the project now. If you haven't seen the movie, watch Eagle Eye. This is probably a fairly accurate description of what the computer could end up doing.



posted on May, 5 2010 @ 04:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by ventian
Well if used in a good manner, it could predict crime.


So we'd be charged for crimes before we committed them?

I don't really think this article poses the right question. Instead they should ask;

Can a $1.5bn supercomputer enslave humanity?

Because that is what it will be used for. They said it right there in black and white.


The main concerns are not for how the Living Earth Simulator will be used, but for how it could be misused.

For global financial companies, it could be a goldmine.


Yeah I bet. How much more "gold" do these criminals think people have left to "mine"

I wonder who is funding this thing?



posted on May, 5 2010 @ 04:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by belial259
Can a $1.5bn supercomputer enslave humanity?


dude, we're already enslaved !!!
I have tax receipts to prove it.

This computer is just the ball and chain
that goes on the remaining ankle.



posted on May, 5 2010 @ 04:26 AM
link   
So is this one of the computers that they use when they torture people and link there minds to it, to teach a bloody computer how humans think.

Go and listen to al bielek he talks of such things, that computers will dictate whats right and wrong, and you will not be able to lie to it, we are along way of that yet.



posted on May, 5 2010 @ 04:27 AM
link   
1.5 billion $ could save humanity.

If we spent it on food, improving production, safety etc.

So dropping it all on a single computer that will be obsolete in 5years is a HUGE waste, imo.

BTW As a kid I was a HUGE Sim Earth fan! One of my favorite games from way back in the day!

[edit on 5-5-2010 by muzzleflash]



posted on May, 5 2010 @ 04:27 AM
link   
The European Union is funding this.



posted on May, 5 2010 @ 04:30 AM
link   

This computer is just the ball and chain
that goes on the remaining ankle.



I don't think so. It's them making their singularity. They don't just want to enslave us they want to become our Gods and live forever. This is another step down that path.

I'd recommend watching the documentary "Technocalypse" or watching some of Ray Kurzweil's works.



posted on May, 5 2010 @ 04:30 AM
link   
why do we need a computer to tell us what to do? does this mean that we're simply too stupid to come up with solutions to our own problems (which we created, in the first place)? if we become dependent on this computer and how it tells us to live our lives, what are we to do if it does a "blue-screen" on us? twiddle our thumbs?



posted on May, 5 2010 @ 04:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by muzzleflash
1.5 billion $ could save humanity.

If we spent it on food, improving production, safety etc.

So dropping it all on a single computer that will be obsolete in 5years is a HUGE waste, imo.

BTW As a kid I was a HUGE Sim Earth fan! One of my favorite games from way back in the day!

[edit on 5-5-2010 by muzzleflash]


Holy crap! You call Sim Earth a game from "back in the day"?

All of a sudden, I feel old! I'm talking Tetris and Donkey Kong here. Hell, Super Mario Bros. was state of the freakin' art back in the day!

Anyway, it's obvious that this is just the precursor for Skynet!


Seriously, relax peeps, this is just another giant database that uses statistical and analytical formulae to "predict" the probability of future events.

It's basically Web bot... but it works!

[edit on 5-5-2010 by nik1halo]



posted on May, 5 2010 @ 04:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by toreishi
why do we need a computer to tell us what to do? does this mean that we're simply too stupid to come up with solutions to our own problems (which we created, in the first place)? if we become dependent on this computer and how it tells us to live our lives, what are we to do if it does a "blue-screen" on us? twiddle our thumbs?


this very same scenario with a super computer
that predicts the future was the basis of a hollywood
movie with Ben Afleck called "Paycheck".
A very good scenario worth watching.



posted on May, 5 2010 @ 04:47 AM
link   
reply to post by nik1halo
 



In electronic financial markets, algorithmic trading or automated trading, also known as algo trading, black-box trading or robo trading, is the use of computer programs for entering trading orders with the computer algorithm deciding on aspects of the order such as the timing, price, or quantity of the order, or in many cases initiating the order without human intervention. Algorithmic Trading is widely used by pension funds, mutual funds, and other buy side (investor driven) institutional traders, to divide large trades into several smaller trades in order to manage market impact, and risk. Sell side traders, such as market makers and some hedge funds, provide liquidity to the market, generating and executing orders automatically. A special class of algorithmic trading is "high-frequency trading" (HFT), in which computers make elaborate decisions to initiate orders based on information that is received electronically, before human traders are capable of processing the information they observe. As in the famed chess match between a human chess player and a computer, computers once again demonstrate their ability to outperform human traders. In addition to ultra-fast information processing, computers reduce costs of trading and improve shareholder returns.

Algorithmic trading may be used in any investment strategy, including market making, inter-market spreading, arbitrage, or pure speculation (including trend following). The investment decision and implementation may be augmented at any stage with algorithmic support or may operate completely automatically ("on auto-pilot").

A third of all EU and US stock trades in 2006 were driven by automatic programs, or algorithms, according to Boston-based financial services industry research and consulting firm Aite Group. As of 2009, high frequency trading firms account for 73% of all US equity trading volume.

In 2006 at the London Stock Exchange, over 40% of all orders were entered by algo traders, with 60% predicted for 2007. American markets and equity markets generally have a higher proportion of algo trades than other markets, and estimates for 2008 range as high as an 80% proportion in some markets. Foreign exchange markets also have active algo trading (about 25% of orders in 2006). Futures and options markets are considered to be fairly easily integrated into algorithmic trading, with about 20% of options volume expected to be computer generated by 2010. Bond markets are moving toward more access to algorithmic traders.

One of the main issues regarding high frequency trading is the difficulty in determining just how profitable it is. A report released in August 2009 by the TABB Group, a financial services industry research firm, estimated that the 300 securities firms and hedge funds that specialize in rapid fire algorithmic trading took in roughly $21 billion in profits in 2008


Wikipedia

[edit on 5-5-2010 by belial259]



posted on May, 5 2010 @ 04:49 AM
link   
This really is the natural destiny of the super computer, we already use climate modeling to predict the behavior of the climate so we can try to modify our behavior.

I think it's possible that this type of data could be used to protect us rather than enslave us. It will be an awful lot more difficult to predict the behavior of individuals to an action than it will be to predict the behavior of a population.

If it's the case where the PTB know that the latest increase in surveillance they want to roll out will have 0 effect on terrorism because a team of scientists in Switzerland have run it through the models then it will be very hard for them to justify doing it.

On the other hand, this could be the reason for the Internet filters that governments are trying to push through, data collection points for the super computer.

It also occurs to me that governments might well have developed this capability on a black budget. Are they using this tech to predict just how much they can get away with before we all revolt? They seem to be constantly at the line lately. (They'll revolt for the banks, elect a change candidate, They'll go nuts about all this oil, plant a bomb in times square, Greece is bust, shut down the airspace over europe etc.)

[edit on 5/5/10 by pieman]



posted on May, 5 2010 @ 04:55 AM
link   
reply to post by belial259
 


The quoting of that large and incredibly boring Wiki link didn't tell me anything I didn't already know and simply backed up what I said in nice, simplistic language, that this is a statistical analysis system, much like many already in operation, just better, thus costing more money.

The only advantage was that you reminded me of the word algorithm, which I was wracking my brains trying to recall, so thanks for that.



posted on May, 5 2010 @ 05:06 AM
link   
This so-called 'super computer' is NOT really breaking news at all as DARPA have had for quite some time now, an active and ongoing project to create such a computer.

I actually created a thread along similar lines back in September 2009 entitled:
"Project DARPA-BAA-09-03 - will this be the 1st true machine intelligence ?"
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Amazingly enough, the response to this thread was dismal - especially considering the stupendous possibilities that creating such a capable machine would open up ... and the ramifications it would have on each and every person on the planet.

In a nut shell, DARPA wants to create a system by which ANY (and I mean ANY) online document can be accessed and the contents of those documents automatically analyzed, the contained information extracted and resultant inferences made.

In effect, what DARPA want to create is an AI system that is capable of accessing almost ANY kind of document, no matter how it's stored (online or offline), no matter what format the document uses (such as books, magazines, technical journals, newspapers, emails, letters, etc) and be able to process the natural language contents, extract the meaning and use this information to make additional inferences by linking to previously extracted and assimilated information from other sources.

But DARPA doesn't want to restrict this AI to written documentation, it wants to give the AI the ability to also access virtually ANY online source such as web pages, blogs and chat sessions and be able to extract meaningful information from all these sources.




"These include books (fiction, nonfiction, technical), technical manuals, technical or other scholarly journals and their papers, magazines, and newspapers. In addition, corporations, governments, militaries, and other organizations have private documents such as memoranda and email messages."



Mention is also made of the capability to access any kind of documentation created by mobile phones such as emails and sms text.



"Other technologies, such as cell phones, have led to even more arcane documents and languages, such as the hyper-abbreviated lingo of instant messaging."



But it doesn't stop with the above examples, it seems that the AI will even have the capability to process formal and informal natural speech that has been converted to text e.g. lectures, newscasts, person to person speech, phone conversations, etc.



"... naturally occurring speech can be converted to text and has many analogs to written document forms. Formal speech can include lectures, newscasts, and oral 'articles'. Less formal speech is found in phone conversations, in-person conversations, multi-person teleconferences, voicemail messages, etc."



posted on May, 5 2010 @ 05:09 AM
link   
reply to post by nik1halo
 


Sorry I did try to break it up, but for some reason it didn't separate into different quotes.

I didn't know that you already knew that stuff. Maybe some people don't.

With so many algos already, sure you can see some similar programs on a much smaller scale.

But one that was based in a super computer and could predict all markets on a global scale could literally control the entire global economy.

So much of it is already consolidated in a very few hands. But as is mentioned algo's can beat human opponents. Imagine this in the hands of a man like Warren Buffet or George Soros, between their own intuition and experience and this bot they'd be able to extend their power to take over the entire world.



posted on May, 5 2010 @ 05:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by belial259

Originally posted by ventian
Well if used in a good manner, it could predict crime.


So we'd be charged for crimes before we committed them?


They used this rubbish on me, my life has proven they cannot take one single thought from your mind and say what it means, everyones thoughts are for themselves, not one person on this planet can understand anothers even basic thought.

Even the word hello in your mind could mean a thousand things, get it. There is no way to understand thoughts by another period, and my life is prove of this.



posted on May, 5 2010 @ 05:29 AM
link   
I smell skynet.... or the computer needed for the venus project... either way it will be useless and show no real information apart from who likes to look at what porn and when we like to shop.



posted on May, 5 2010 @ 05:29 AM
link   
In regards to the title 'Can a $1.5bn supercomputer save humanity' - IMO in a word NO not a chance, a 'super' computer is nothing more than an extension to the 'TPTB' inflated ego. What appears 'super' to us, is something completely different to our makers.

'Life' is so complicated we can only go as far as our intellect and mind can take us, considering that we hu-mans, only use a small fraction of our brain should tell us that we (as a hu-man collective) do not hold all the answers and a 'super' computer is not the answer to save humanity.

IMHO - The only way to save humanity is for everyone to WAKE up and see what indeed has been masked right in front of our own eyes since birth, which is of course the powerful connection that each and everyone of us has. As a collective group we can achieve anything.



[edit on 5-5-2010 by franspeakfree]



new topics




 
10
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join