> Send Yasmin_discussions mailing list submissions to
> yasmin_discsions@estia.media.uoa.gr
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://estia.media.uoa.gr/mailman/listinfo/yasmin_discussions
> or, via eil, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> yasmin_discussions-reest@estia.media.uoa.gr
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at yasmin_discussions-owner@estia.media.uoa.gr
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject li so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Yasmin_discussiondigest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: Around Simulation II -imulating Empathy and Subjective
> Experience (Avi Rosen)
> 2. Re: Around Simulation II - Simulating Empathyand Subjective
> Experience (Natasha Vita-More)
> 3. Re: Around Simulation II - SimulatedSenses and the
> Un-Simulatable (V?tor Reia-Baptista)
> 4. Re: Around Simulation II - Simulated Senses and the
> Un-Simulatable (xDxD.vs.xDxD)
> 5. Re: Around Simulation II - Simulated Senses and the
> Un-Simulatable (xDxD.vs.xDxD)
> 6. Re: Around Simulation II - Simulating Empathy and Subjective
> Experience (xDxD.vs.xDxD)
> 7. Re: Around Simulation II - Simulated Senses and the
> Un-Simulatable (Avi Rosen)
> 8. Re: Around Simulation II - Simulated Senses and the
> Un-Simulatable (Luigi Pagliarini)
> 9. Re: Yasmin_discussions Digest, Vol 102, Issue 1 (Ziva Ljubec)
> 10. Re: Around Simulation II - Simulating Empathy and Subjective
> Experience (Clarissa Ribeiro Pereira de Almeida)
> 11. Re: Around Simulation II - Simulated Senses and the
> Un-Simulatable (Clarissa Ribeiro Pereira de Almeida)
> 12. Re: Around Simulation II - Simulating Emathyand Subjective
> Experience (Joshua Madara)
> 13. Some other contributes to the Discussions Around Simulation
> II (V?tor Reia-Baptista)
> 14. Re: Around Simulation II - Simulated Senses and the
> Un-Simulatable (Luigi Pagliarini)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2011 12:38:56 +0200
> From: "Avi Rosen" <avi@siglab.technion.ac.il>
> Subject: Re: [Yasmin_discussions] Around Simulation II - Simulating
> Empathy and Subjective Experience
> To: "'YASMIN DISCUSSIONS'" <yasmin_discussions@estia.media.uoa.gr>
> Message-ID: <01f401cbbbb2$e718dc10$b54a9430$@siglab.technion.ac.il>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> The Artifact turned to be Responsive. the passive Marcel Duchamp's
> readymade "La Fontaine" evolved to La iFontaine, -
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rc6xjKQ0mkI
> an interactive ready made with awareness and empathy to users and other
> linked objects. Symbiosis of Artifact and Art consumer in cybernetic
> holistic rhizome.
> The surfer (art consumer) implementing digital gadgets is witnessing Pierre
> Teilhard de Chardin's "noosphere", the "sphere of human thought" as it
> grows towards a greater integration and unification, culminating in the
> 'Omega Point'- the maximum level of complexity and consciousness to which
> the universe seems to be evolving.
> Avi.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: yasmin_discussions-bounces@estia.media.uoa.gr
> [mailto:yasmin_discussions-bounces@estia.media.uoa.gr] On Behalf Of Jennifer
> Kanary Nikolov(a)
> Sent: Sunday, January 23, 2011 7:44 PM
> To: YASMIN DISCUSSIONS
> Subject: Re: [Yasmin_discussions] Around Simulation II - Simulating Empathy
> and Subjective Experience
>
> Dear All,
>
> In the meantime, I apologise if my own posts have actually contributed to
> the rise to confusion :) Here is a post about the simulation of subjective
> experience. Its in addition to my previous posts.
>
> Like I stated before, I'm interested in the Simulation of Empathy, well
> known in humans, but considered impossible in computers (for AI purposes).
> Empathy being the mental simulation of the experience of the other. When we
> know how our own empathy systems work, and what role our own senses play in
> this, we might learn more about how this could be evoked in digital systems,
> AI and Robotics. This is strongly related to the theory of mirror neurons
> (it is also where we left off at the last discussion with Derrick De
> Kerckhoves contribution). I am interested in how artists knowledge about how
> to evoke subjective experiences in humans could contribute to our
> understanding as to how to evoke such experiences in AI systems and
> robotics. I'm interested in the role art experiences play in evoking
> empathy, how it jiggles our neurons and is there a form of programmability
> to this?
>
>
> For one to experience empathy, to have a sense as to what the other is
> feeling, one must have an idea or awareness that there is an other and one
> must have an inner archive of subjective experiences and believe that the
> other feels. I use the word subjective experience to separate the subjective
> aspect of a sensation, a signal of the sense organ, and its emotional
> affect. I experience a signal, I experience the signal as pain, I experience
> fear. A digital system can sense the signal, but as far as we know, does not
> have a sensation about this signal, not does it compare it to our signals.
>
> Some believe that it is impossible for AI to feel, subjective experience is
> ambiguous and ambiguity causes error in a computers calculations. Some
> believe that subjective experience comes from a heart and soul, and that
> computers do not have a soul and thus can never experience subjectivity. As
> an artist interested in scientific speculations I wonder how to change our
> perspective in this thinking. This changes dramatically when scientific
> speculations rise like The Universe is a Quantum Computer. In such a world
> Simulation is Life. We are Avatars creating Avatars. We are Worlds creating
> Worlds. The Simulated Simulate in an ongoing cycle of many layers. It gives
> a whole new meaning to concepts of God as a Creator, God residing in All of
> us, God made man in his own image. It is a very cybernetic approach, that
> everything is computed.
>
> For me Simulation is Computation, be it by my brain, by a digital or
> analogue or quantum computer. I'm interested in how technology and art are
> used as a tools of empathy. I am interested in how subjective experience is
> generated by all technologies. I'm interested in how qbits might solve the
> issue of ambiguation causing error in computations of classical computers.
>
> Our senses play a big role in how we empathise. We sense muscles tensions
> in the faces of others, we learn to 'read' such faces and make conclusions
> about how the other is feeling, we compare it to how we feel when our
> muscles are like that. In our current society we do not take several of our
> senses seriously. We need to focus on how our all our senses can be
> simulated with digital computers and how the data, the incoming signals of
> sensors interfere and affect interpretation.
>
>
> How our senses dance a dance of signals that triggers our neurons. If we
> know how it is evoked in brains with the use of technology, we will learn
> more about how to evoke it in computers. In particular from the view that we
> are all jiggling atoms ;) How to make my Avatar/Robot feel? How to put the
> Gaia in the world of my Avatar/Robot?
>
>
> Jennifer
> _______________________________________________
> Yasmin_discussions mailing list
> Yasmin_discussions@estia.media.uoa.gr
> http://estia.media.uoa.gr/mailman/listinfo/yasmin_discussions
>
> Yasmin URL: http://www.media.uoa.gr/yasmin
>
> HOW TO SUBSCRIBE: click on the link to the list you wish to subscribe to. In
> the page that will appear ("info page"), enter e-mail address, name, and
> password in the fields found further down the page.
>
> HOW TO UNSUBSCRIBE: on the info page, scroll all the way down and enter your
> e-mail address in the last field. Enter password if asked. Click on the
> unsubscribe button on the page that will appear ("options page").
>
> HOW TO ENABLE / DISABLE DIGEST MODE: in the options page, find the "Set
> Digest Mode" option and set it to either on or off.
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2011 10:20:51 -0600
> From: "Natasha Vita-More" <natasha@natasha.cc>
> Subject: Re: [Yasmin_discussions] Around Simulation II - Simulating
> Empathyand Subjective Experience
> To: "'YASMIN DISCUSSIONS'" <yasmin_discussions@estia.media.uoa.gr>
> Message-ID: <AA0B9420EA75492B9DE739305F6AAF4E@DFC68LF1>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> Hi Jennifer,
>
> You wrote:
>
>> In the meantime, I apologies if my own posts have actually contributed to
> the rise to
>> confusion :) Here is a post about the simulation of subjective experience.
> Its in
>> addition to my previous posts.
>
> You are not confusing things Jennifer. I think it is how we want to talk
> about simulation and your interest appears to be of simulation as having
> potential in computational systems, which is timely, although I'm not a
> religious person so I don't see it pertainint to God, but I do see it as
> pertaining to we are all part of an evolving cybernetics.
>
>> Like I stated before, I'm interested in the Simulation of Empathy, well
> known in humans,
>> but considered impossible in computers (for AI purposes). Empathy being the
> mental
>> simulation of the experience of the other.
>
> Empathy may be the most needed and also the most difficult experiential
> behavior to obtain. To have empathy an agent needs to understand the
> thoughts, feelings and state of another agent/person. To have empathy then,
> the agent would also have to have "personhood." So, what is personhood if
> it is not to be alive, self-awareness, and able to make decisions. How can
> something make decisions if it is not alive and self-aware? Certainly AI
> makes decisions and interacts with its environment, but not alive. So the
> issue is what makes AI alive?
>
>> Some believe that it is impossible for AI to feel, subjective experience is
> ambiguous and
>> ambiguity causes error in a computers calculations. Some believe that
> subjective experience
>> comes from a heart and soul, and that computers do not have a soul and thus
> can never
>> experience subjectivity.
>
> AI is narrow. "Strong AI" is where we would have to begin, and which takes
> us to the baby steps of A[G]I (i.e., artificial general intelligence,
> hereinafter "AGI"), which is where AI was originally headed before its
> winter (inability to achieve its original directive in producing human level
> intelligence). AGI offers the potential for being self-aware and able to
> make decisions based on "experience". Through its experience in its
> learning, it could obtain personhood at the juncture where the idea of life
> and death becomes redefined based on semi and non-biological or synthetic
> systems which develop self-awareness and may want rights, similar to the
> rights of humans.
>
> With all this said, the issue of empathy could be obtainable by AGIs. But I
> have to return to my original post on this one, if I may. A brain that is
> transferable or copied onto a computational system, would also transfer or
> copy its mind (in the material sense) and that mind would contain the
> feelings, emotions, and sensorial memory of the biological person). If the
> AGI could relate to this, it would also become familiar and experience the
> feelings, emotions and sensory memory of the human. So the merging of
> humans and technology becomes even more blurred and the AGI would learn
> empathy through its own experiential behavior.
>
> All my best,
> Natasha
>
> Natasha Vita-More
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2011 16:47:32 +0000
> From: V?tor Reia-Baptista <vreia@ualg.pt>
> Subject: Re: [Yasmin_discussions] Around Simulation II -
> SimulatedSenses and the Un-Simulatable
> To: YASMIN DISCUSSIONS <yasmin_discussions@estia.media.uoa.gr>,
> Natasha Vita-More <natasha@natasha.cc>
> Cc: 'YASMIN DISCUSSIONS' <yasmin_discussions@estia.media.uoa.gr>
> Message-ID: <20110124164732.26134anq4rnqmiio@wmail.ualg.pt>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; DelSp="Yes";
> format="flowed"
>
> Hi Natasha.
> Good question, why not return to Plato? (to Jesus I don't know, since
> a lot of people are returning to him weekly in diffrent churches). We
> probably shoud do that, the aspect that speaks in favor of Baudrillard
> is the media awareness thing, or media literacy as some of us call it,
> which turns every single piece of information into different pieces of
> representation, whether we are speaking of so called reality
> representations (journalism; documentary; science reports...) or of
> fictional representations. But Plato is still a very good choice.
> V?tor
>
> Citando Natasha Vita-More <natasha@natasha.cc>:
>
>> Why return to Baudrillard's interpretation of simulation? Why not return to
>> Plato? Why not return to Jesus? Or earlier notions of symbols and
>> interpretations of the early homo sapiens sapiens and cave paintings, where
>> the image represented an deeply physiological manifestation of how the image
>> could alter perceptions of the past and present, and form an attempt to
>> predestine the future?
>>
>> These all have historical import and have influenced how individuals and
>> society feel and think about the world around us, while animating signs and
>> interpreting visual associations and tokens of social patterns.
>>
>> The world has become so deeply and profoundly influenced by the obvious and
>> the silent signs that we have, in fact and in part, become psychologically
>> confused by what is true meaning and what is hyped, or if the hyped has
>> become the truth. On this level, it seems that one large environmental spill
>> is simulacra that is nondestructable and potentially nonaesthetic.
>>
>> But even if we cherish Baudrillard's interpretation of simulacra, rather
>> than Philip K. Dick's, Baudrillard contends that simulation, his suggested
>> fourth stage it is no more than a reflection. Is this postmodern view
>> correct? Yes, probably if it is sequestered to the world of postmodernist
>> perspectives. Yes, it has great value framed as such.
>>
>> Outside this philosophical framing is a different understanding of
>> simulation. One that is more integrated with the "The Matrix", and not "The
>> Truman Show" (which is merely an intended, outright falsifying of the real
>> is developing a pretense). In an interview, Baudrillard interprets the
>> significance of the "The Matrix"
>> http://web.archive.org/web/20080113012028/http://www.empyree.org/divers/Matr
>> ix-Baudrillard_english.html as relative to his vision of simulacra outside
>> the hypermodern meaning which ties more neatly into the computational mode
>> or reality.
>>
>> All my best,
>> Natasha
>>
>>
>> Natasha Vita-More
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: yasmin_discussions-bounces@estia.media.uoa.gr
>> [mailto:yasmin_discussions-bounces@estia.media.uoa.gr] On Behalf Of V?tor
>> Reia-Baptista
>> Sent: Sunday, January 23, 2011 5:07 AM
>> To: YASMIN DISCUSSIONS
>> Subject: Re: [Yasmin_discussions] Around Simulation II - SimulatedSenses and
>> the Un-Simulatable
>>
>> Hi.
>> I also have some problems following this discussion, since it seems to me
>> (as Roger says) that there is some confusion between simulation and
>> representation. There are many texts written about this but Baudrillard's
>> Simulacres et simulation can be a good start for those that feel that need
>> of clarification.
>> V?tor
>>
>> Citando roger malina <rmalina@alum.mit.edu>:
>>
>>> annick
>>>
>>> I agree with you that in order for this discussion not to be
>>> hopelessly confused and generalising we need to distinguich between
>> "simulating"
>>> which needs be seen in the context of digital simulation, and
>>> representation (such as the Brughel paintings and the photos that pier
>>> luigi points to)
>>>
>>> here is the wikipaedia statement on the meaning of the word simulation
>>> in the context of computer and systems sciences:
>>>
>>> ""Historically, simulations used in different fields developed largely
>>> independently, but 20th century studies of Systems theory and
>>> Cybernetics combined with spreading use of computers across all those
>>> fields have led to some unification and a more systematic view of the
>>> concept.
>>>
>>> Physical simulation refers to simulation in which physical objects are
>>> substituted for the real thing (some circles[3] use the term for
>>> computer simulations modelling selected laws of physics, but this
>>> article doesn't). These physical objects are often chosen because they
>>> are smaller or cheaper than the actual object or system.
>>>
>>> Interactive simulation is a special kind of physical simulation, often
>>> referred to as a human in the loop simulation, in which physical
>>> simulations include human operators, such as in a flight simulator or
>>> a driving simulator.
>>>
>>> Human in the loop simulations can include a computer simulation as a
>>> so-called synthetic environment.[4]""
>>>
>>> pier luigi and jennifer when they talk about "simulating the senses"
>>> i think are within this definition of "simulation" and the general
>>> dicussion one could have about painting and music and representation
>>> in the arts
>>>
>>> so for me a picture that happens to be developed using computer
>>> graphics is not a "simulation" in this sense but an alife program that
>>> generates evolving life like systems ( and then you can photograph and
>>> produce a still graphic)= the work of karl simms etc
>>>
>>> as mentioned in the definition above, often the aspect of
>>> interactivity is key to creating an digitally generated experience that
>> "simulates'
>>> a naturally
>>> occuring one
>>>
>>> so i agree= for the discussion of simulation here not to be over
>>> general we need to distinguish clearly between simulation and
>>> representation
>>>
>>> roger
>>>
>>> On Sun, Jan 23, 2011 at 10:42 AM, Annick Bureaud <bureaud@altern.org>
>> wrote:
>>>> Dear Pier Luigi, Dear All,
>>>>
>>>> This discussion is a bit difficult to follow for me as I don't have
>>>> much time to read everything, so I hope that my remark will not be too
>> trivial.
>>>>
>>>> For me there is a difference between simulating and representing.
>>>>
>>>> But one naive question : if life is simulatable (A.life), then death
>>>> is too...
>>>>
>>>> Annick
>>>>
>>>> Pier Luigi Capucci wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Dear Derek, beautiful idea that death can be something
>> un-simulatable....
>>>>> But, don't you think images like the following ones can represent it?
>>>>>
>>>>> http://laccarossa.files.wordpress.com/2008/10/2202la-morte-sceletro.
>>>>> jpg
>>>>>
>>>>> http://dimensionemorgana.ilcannocchiale.it/blogs/bloggerarchimg/dist
>>>>> rattamentemorgana/morte.jpg
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.settemuse.it/pittori_scultori_europei/bruegel/pieter_brue
>>>>> gel_the_elder_013_il_trionfo_della_morte_1562.jpg
>>>>> http://www.anti-communist.net/katyn/katyn_wood_massacre.jpg
>>>>> http://www.infopal.it/writable/img/morti%20di%20gaza.jpg
>>>>> ...........
>>>>> ...........
>>>>>
>>>>> Pier Luigi
>>>>>
>>>>> Il giorno 21/gen/2011, alle ore 21.13, derek hales ha scritto:
>>>>>
>>>>>> to go back to the opening question - and with apologies, when Pier
>>>>>> first posed the question of what was un-simulatable / unsimulable,
>>>>>> before staring the discussion - I said something like "life"...I
>>>>>> take it all back - it is death. death cannot be simulated, perhaps
>>>>>> the final rasping breath can - but the completion of non - sense,
>>>>>> the utter desolation of the senses, the unconditioned, a void: this
>>>>>> surely cannot be simulated?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> derek
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Yasmin_discussions mailing list
>>> Yasmin_discussions@estia.media.uoa.gr
>>> http://estia.media.uoa.gr/mailman/listinfo/yasmin_discussions
>>>
>>> Yasmin URL: http://www.media.uoa.gr/yasmin
>>>
>>> HOW TO SUBSCRIBE: click on the link to the list you wish to subscribe
>>> to. In the page that will appear ("info page"), enter e-mail address,
>>> name, and password in the fields found further down the page.
>>>
>>> HOW TO UNSUBSCRIBE: on the info page, scroll all the way down and
>>> enter your e-mail address in the last field. Enter password if asked.
>>> Click on the unsubscribe button on the page that will appear ("options
>>> page").
>>>
>>> HOW TO ENABLE / DISABLE DIGEST MODE: in the options page, find the
>>> "Set Digest Mode" option and set it to either on or off.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------
>> This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Yasmin_discussions mailing list
>> Yasmin_discussions@estia.media.uoa.gr
>> http://estia.media.uoa.gr/mailman/listinfo/yasmin_discussions
>>
>> Yasmin URL: http://www.media.uoa.gr/yasmin
>>
>> HOW TO SUBSCRIBE: click on the link to the list you wish to subscribe to. In
>> the page that will appear ("info page"), enter e-mail address, name, and
>> password in the fields found further down the page.
>>
>> HOW TO UNSUBSCRIBE: on the info page, scroll all the way down and enter your
>> e-mail address in the last field. Enter password if asked. Click on the
>> unsubscribe button on the page that will appear ("options page").
>>
>> HOW TO ENABLE / DISABLE DIGEST MODE: in the options page, find the "Set
>> Digest Mode" option and set it to either on or off.
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Yasmin_discussions mailing list
>> Yasmin_discussions@estia.media.uoa.gr
>> http://estia.media.uoa.gr/mailman/listinfo/yasmin_discussions
>>
>> Yasmin URL: http://www.media.uoa.gr/yasmin
>>
>> HOW TO SUBSCRIBE: click on the link to the list you wish to
>> subscribe to. In the page that will appear ("info page"), enter
>> e-mail address, name, and password in the fields found further down
>> the page.
>>
>> HOW TO UNSUBSCRIBE: on the info page, scroll all the way down and
>> enter your e-mail address in the last field. Enter password if
>> asked. Click on the unsubscribe button on the page that will appear
>> ("options page").
>>
>> HOW TO ENABLE / DISABLE DIGEST MODE: in the options page, find the
>> "Set Digest Mode" option and set it to either on or off.
>>
>>
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2011 10:55:12 +0100
> From: "xDxD.vs.xDxD" <xdxd.vs.xdxd@gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Yasmin_discussions] Around Simulation II - Simulated
> Senses and the Un-Simulatable
> To: YASMIN DISCUSSIONS <yasmin_discussions@estia.media.uoa.gr>
> Message-ID:
> <AANLkTi=aHC7LFy7awrV+3ZBMFOz0rZZCzwkFyAmtzquC@mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> hello all!
>
> On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 11:17 PM, Jennifer Kanary Nikolov(a)
> <jenniferkanary@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> What about death in literature, death in imagination, is that a form of
>> simulation? If imagination is a form of simulation, then the limits of the
>> un-simulatable might be found there?
>
> and maybe death and after death can be imaginatively simulated, after
> all, like in
>
> http://www.artisopensource.net/2008/01/15/dead-on-second-life/
>
> in which 3 artificial intelligences, fed with the original texts that
> Karl Marx, Franz Kafka and Coco Chanel left us, have been embodied in
> autonomous avatars on Second Life (walking around, choosing who/what
> to interact with, etc completely on their own, according to
> behavioural algorithms built around the characters' personality).
>
> This is a kind of simulation that interested me a lot, as it sits
> across the formal dimensions of systems theory and the poetical
> re-enactment of processes (or people! :) ): while there is a formal,
> scientific based approach in the design and definition of the systems
> defining behaviour and expression of the re-embodied-avatars, there
> also is the suggestion of how people never, actually, die, continuing
> their lives in the memories, imaginaries, sensations of the people who
> knew them (and this is actually a really complex and totally
> insightful simulation of a human being).
>
> In more than one way they are completely alive, not dead, living in a
> continuous multi-authored simulation based on the "material" (texts,
> experiences, relationships...) that they left behind, and on a
> multitude of interpretations.
>
> ciao!
> salvatore
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2011 11:10:16 +0100
> From: "xDxD.vs.xDxD" <xdxd.vs.xdxd@gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Yasmin_discussions] Around Simulation II - Simulated
> Senses and the Un-Simulatable
> To: YASMIN DISCUSSIONS <yasmin_discussions@estia.media.uoa.gr>
> Message-ID:
> <AANLkTik7ZJuT7=gYzyi-LHUPFtVPkc5Kkgnq9_eerec_@mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> hello roger and all,
>
> On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 12:35 PM, roger malina <rmalina@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
>> I would like to make the assertion that relying on digital simulations
>> is creating
>> a situation where we focus primarily on processes that are theoretically
>> simulatable or computable=
>> ?whereas there are many other processes that are just not
>> simulatable and there is a danger that we are developing huge blind spots
>> (similarly there are parts of the universe that are theoretically
>> unobservable
>> eg the interior of a black hole, or the universe further away than
>> light could travel since the birth of the universe)
>>
>> the work of artists , with its emphasis on triggering subjective
>> experience.and exploitation of phenomena that may be unsimulatable may
>> open up interesting
>> areas of research that computer scientists are not focused on
>>
>> are there any examples ?
>
>
> we need cognitive scientists or/and some more anthropologists! :)
>
> as this is a problem that is truly similar to the international
> discussion on "how do we go beyond ethnographical writing?"
>
> or: anthropological reports are an incomplete simulation. They
> represent the point of view of the anthropologist and, in that, they
> are, allow me to make it simple, novels. With that i do not mean that
> they "are not good", i just mean that they are "incomplete", as we
> know since the works of Mead and Bateson that "completeness" is a
> concept that is somewhat awkward to define, and probabily the key to
> describing it is to let it describe itself, by not trying to define it
> and by finding ways in which the multiplicity of voices and
> perceptions, and the network of relations, and their evolution in time
> and space can express themselves. And also getting ready to accept
> that a "system" (self-)described in this way is not coherent, static,
> or objective. As roger said: there is not shortcut.
>
> yet again the most interesting parts (for me, obviously :) )of the
> scientific research in this field are those that are creating a
> short-circuit between "the map and the territory", by using the
> territory (and its inhabitants, and cultures, and relations, and
> expressions...) as the map itself through technologies that allow both
> reading, writing and interpreting the world in its "entirety" (at
> least theoretically, as it would require *everything/everyone* to be
> technologically connected). In this perspective: the simulation of the
> system is the system itself and, thus, can become simulatable.
>
> ciao!
> s
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2011 12:04:50 +0100
> From: "xDxD.vs.xDxD" <xdxd.vs.xdxd@gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Yasmin_discussions] Around Simulation II - Simulating
> Empathy and Subjective Experience
> To: YASMIN DISCUSSIONS <yasmin_discussions@estia.media.uoa.gr>
> Message-ID:
> <AANLkTi=1iEV=yHetKZJiWdcj6nBaxg6EmUU=xS0E7U5r@mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> hello jennifer and everyone!
>
>> How our senses dance a dance of signals that triggers our neurons. If we know
>> how it is evoked in brains with the use of technology, we will learn more
>> about
>> how to evoke it in computers. In particular from the view that we are all
>> jiggling atoms ;) How to make my Avatar/Robot feel? How to put the Gaia in
>> the
>> world of my Avatar/Robot?
>
> here come some suggestions from my own practice in arts+science. hope
> you find them interesting for your research.
>
> http://www.artisopensource.net/2006/12/21/talkers-performance/
> in the Talkers performance, the body of a dancer is connected to a
> stimulation system that enacts a grammar made of electrical
> stlimulation signals that are conveyed to the body of the dancer to
> "write" on it the expressions of the audience, as sensed through a
> series of online and live mechanisms and interfaces.
> These mechanisms are the controls (parameters) defining the life of a
> digital life form that expresses itself through generative language
> and emotional expressions whose algorithms work through the realtime
> contents of social networks. The body of the dancer becomes a
> "display" for the simulation, re-mediating the body with the
> digital-emotions and generative-linguistic-expressions of the digital
> being.
>
>
> http://www.artisopensource.net/OneAvatar/
> OneAvatar simulates the senses of an avatar on Second Life on a
> physical human-body.
> Created as a game in the virtual world of Second Life (and then on a
> series of additional platforms), OneAvatar is a suit that connects the
> body of the human to the digital-body of an avatar, allowing the human
> to "feel" the digital-perceptions of the avatar through a series of
> electrical and haptic stimuli.
> OneAvatar has since become an open source platform that can be used to
> build simulations that involve digital-life-forms and mapping them
> onto a human body.
> The human body becomes the medium for a simulation for researching
> digital emotions and perceptions, as well as the cybernetic systems
> built by interconnecting human body to digital body.
>
> http://www.artisopensource.net/2008/01/15/dead-on-second-life/
> i already mentioned Dead on Second Life in the other message, and i
> will put it here only for the sake of completeness: famous dead human
> beings are simulated in virtual worlds through autonomous avatars led
> by artificial intelligence and behavioural algorithms. A scientific
> simulation and an artistic metaphor on the continuous simulation of
> people constantly taking place in our cognitive processes through
> their words, images, relationships.
>
> http://www.artisopensource.net/2009/12/05/conference-biofeedback/
> Conference Biofeedback creates in real time a simple model of the
> emotional state of the audience of a lecture, and describes it to the
> lecturer by means of sensorial stimuli directly on his/her body.
>
>
> and, by the way, here's a picture of me wearing a primordial version
> of Conference Biofeedback for my conference at Consciousness Reframed
> in Munich, together with Pier Luigi
> http://www.artisopensource.net/network/artisopensource/wp-content/uploads/2009
> /11/confbiofeedback.jpg
> (not many electrical shocks received in that occasion :) )
>
> ciao!
> s
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2011 17:33:03 +0200
> From: "Avi Rosen" <avi@siglab.technion.ac.il>
> Subject: Re: [Yasmin_discussions] Around Simulation II - Simulated
> Senses and the Un-Simulatable
> To: "'YASMIN DISCUSSIONS'" <yasmin_discussions@estia.media.uoa.gr>
> Message-ID: <003501cbbca5$27de0ac0$779a2040$@siglab.technion.ac.il>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> Hi Salvatore!
> I have a Vlog on YouTube, "BITS_OF_MY_LIFE" -
> http://www.youtube.com/ephemeral8 where I document my life for the last 3
> years.( More than 40000 video clips). It's my digital avatar located in
> cyberspace superposition. It will remain there for an endless period of Time
> for the future generation.
>
> The BITS are the MEME for further construction \deconstruction of net
> audiovisual mutual memory sequences... It's a form of immortality :-)
> Avi.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: yasmin_discussions-bounces@estia.media.uoa.gr
> [mailto:yasmin_discussions-bounces@estia.media.uoa.gr] On Behalf Of
> xDxD.vs.xDxD
> Sent: Tuesday, January 25, 2011 11:55 AM
> To: YASMIN DISCUSSIONS
> Subject: Re: [Yasmin_discussions] Around Simulation II - Simulated Senses
> and the Un-Simulatable
>
> hello all!
>
> On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 11:17 PM, Jennifer Kanary Nikolov(a)
> <jenniferkanary@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> What about death in literature, death in imagination, is that a form
>> of simulation? If imagination is a form of simulation, then the limits
>> of the un-simulatable might be found there?
>
> and maybe death and after death can be imaginatively simulated, after all,
> like in
>
> http://www.artisopensource.net/2008/01/15/dead-on-second-life/
>
> in which 3 artificial intelligences, fed with the original texts that Karl
> Marx, Franz Kafka and Coco Chanel left us, have been embodied in autonomous
> avatars on Second Life (walking around, choosing who/what to interact with,
> etc completely on their own, according to behavioural algorithms built
> around the characters' personality).
>
> This is a kind of simulation that interested me a lot, as it sits across the
> formal dimensions of systems theory and the poetical re-enactment of
> processes (or people! :) ): while there is a formal, scientific based
> approach in the design and definition of the systems defining behaviour and
> expression of the re-embodied-avatars, there also is the suggestion of how
> people never, actually, die, continuing their lives in the memories,
> imaginaries, sensations of the people who knew them (and this is actually a
> really complex and totally insightful simulation of a human being).
>
> In more than one way they are completely alive, not dead, living in a
> continuous multi-authored simulation based on the "material" (texts,
> experiences, relationships...) that they left behind, and on a multitude of
> interpretations.
>
> ciao!
> salvatore
> _______________________________________________
> Yasmin_discussions mailing list
> Yasmin_discussions@estia.media.uoa.gr
> http://estia.media.uoa.gr/mailman/listinfo/yasmin_discussions
>
> Yasmin URL: http://www.media.uoa.gr/yasmin
>
> HOW TO SUBSCRIBE: click on the link to the list you wish to subscribe to. In
> the page that will appear ("info page"), enter e-mail address, name, and
> password in the fields found further down the page.
>
> HOW TO UNSUBSCRIBE: on the info page, scroll all the way down and enter your
> e-mail address in the last field. Enter password if asked. Click on the
> unsubscribe button on the page that will appear ("options page").
>
> HOW TO ENABLE / DISABLE DIGEST MODE: in the options page, find the "Set
> Digest Mode" option and set it to either on or off.
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 8
> Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2011 16:18:09 +0100
> From: Luigi Pagliarini <luigi@artificialia.com>
> Subject: Re: [Yasmin_discussions] Around Simulation II - Simulated
> Senses and the Un-Simulatable
> To: YASMIN DISCUSSIONS <yasmin_discussions@estia.media.uoa.gr>
> Message-ID: <D15F58BE-1FF9-4DD2-8E86-7EBECAE4E384@artificialia.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
>
> Actually the death concept is implicit in what I (personally) consider the
> "real" simulations :-) and it is there since the first GA was coded
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 9
> Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2011 12:32:55 +0100
> From: Ziva Ljubec <ziva.ljubec@gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Yasmin_discussions] Yasmin_discussions Digest, Vol 102,
> Issue 1
> To: yasmin_discussions@estia.media.uoa.gr
> Message-ID:
> <AANLkTi=ua4p4zDQ+7YamOcdPMFr1Xqy+gV7scZBMfMKB@mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
>
> Dear Natasha, Jennifer, Simon and other Yasminers,
>
> we seem to be recognising empathy as that other non algorithmic
> approach to simulating the ''unsimulatable''. Empathy, sympathy,
> instincts and intuition are much broader venues of knowledge than pure
> abstract, symbolic and conceptual intellect, but we seem to be
> clueless how to access this absolute knowledge at will. Roger proposed
> the enaction model of cognition, which might guide us towards
> simulating the algorithmically irreducible procesess. Here is a
> simplified chart of how enaction model differs from other cognitive
> models:
>
> http://www.enolagaia.com/ECSTables.html
>
> Reading just the enaction coloumn there is evident trace of bergsonism
> present:
> METAPHOR FOR MIND:
> Inseparable from experience and world
> METAPHOR FOR COGNITION:
> Ongoing interaction within the medium
> THE WORLD IN RELATION TO US:
> Engaged, brought forth, presentable through action
> MIND VS. WORLD:
> Inseparable mind and world enacted in history of interactions
>
> I must share this brilliant example of knowing from within and from
> without (although it is quite cruel example I must warn you) that
> demonstrates the capacity of simulation that leads to efficient
> action, that perhaps in a way simulates through enaction:
>
> ... from Bergson, Creative Evolution, 1911
>
> ''Different species of hymenoptera that have a paralyzing instinct lay
> their eggs in spiders, beetles or caterpillars, which having first
> been subjected by the wasp to a skilfull surgical operation will go on
> motionless for a certain number of days, and thus provide the larvae
> with fresh meat.
> In the sting which they give to the nerve-centres of their victim, in
> order to destroy their power of moving without killing it, these
> different species of hymenoptera take into accout, so to speak, the
> different species of prey they respectively attack.''
>
> ''Compare the ammophila with the entomologist, who knows the
> caterpillar as he knows everything else ? from the outside, and
> without having on its part a special or vital interest.
> The ammophilia must learn, one by one, like the entomologist, the
> positions of the nerve centers of the caterpillar, must acquire at
> least practical knowledge of these positions by trying the effects of
> its sting.
> But there is no need for such a view if we suppose sympathy between
> the ammophila and its victim, which teaches it from within, so to say,
> concerning the vulnerability of the caterpillar.
> This feeling of the vulnerability might owe nothing to outward
> perception, but results from the mere presence together of the
> ammophila and the caterpillar, considered no longer as two organisms,
> but as two activities. It would express a relation of the one to the other.
> Certainly, a scientific theory cannot appeal to considerations of this
> kind. It must not put action before organisation, sympathy before
> perception and knowledge.''
>
> Ziva Ljubec
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 10
> Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2011 13:45:01 -0200
> From: Clarissa Ribeiro Pereira de Almeida <almeida.clarissa@gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Yasmin_discussions] Around Simulation II - Simulating
> Empathy and Subjective Experience
> To: YASMIN DISCUSSIONS <yasmin_discussions@estia.media.uoa.gr>
> Message-ID:
> <AANLkTi=VXhyBko5gmTt=gGauBWTy5J4QfdfxVo9Cia+o@mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
>
> A pocket post (or just a meditation):
>
>
>
> Starting from the serene considerations of Simon Biggs about the simulation
> of mind, I want to recall my first post. I used the short/pocket tale around
> scales, realities/worlds, perspectives? as an artifice to thing about
> multilevel, many worlds, super complex contexts. Contexts like this, and as
> Simon remembered it is the same concerning human mind, are unsimulatable. We
> can only simulate what we simplify, the things/ideas we isolate, mutilate,
> extract from its natural, intrinsic, complexity. To simulate is just an
> exercise we realize in order to understand. Simulating/simplifying we can
> communicate, explain in congress and symposiums and lectures and? we can
> share. Simulation is invention and is translation and is becoming. The
> simulated, is an emergence from our random conversations, interactions,
> transactions. Not alone, we all together ? the humans and the ants and the
> food and the plants; the sun and beyond; the radio waves? we simulate to
> make the invisible, visible, giving this visible, several names ? waves and
> particles and molecules and atoms and feelings and hormones and ideas. But,
> despite it is super simple and evident, we love discussing to understand
> ourselves as processes, open systems in system's pools, learning how to feel
> comfortable with the idea we just collectively invented this marvelous
> simulated real.
>
>
>
>
>
> Clarissa
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 2011/1/24 Simon Biggs <simon@littlepig.org.uk>
>
>> Empathy would seem to involve one mind appreciating, by some means, the
>> state of another mind. As yet no meaningful or useful definition of mind,
>> or
>> explication of how it comes to be, has been put forward so we are
>> discussing
>> something we know very little about. The mind, in the sense of a conscious
>> being's sense of self, might not even exist, or at least not in the sense
>> we
>> appreciate it. Computers, on the other hand, clearly do not have a mind.
>> They are computational machines, not beings.
>>
>> Whilst there seems to be a connection between mind and thought, the ability
>> to compute and process information, it isn't necessary for an individual to
>> have a higher level of intelligence to possess a mind, although
>> intelligence
>> and mind appear interdependent. Humans and most animals, even some
>> organisms
>> with minimal neural capacity, exhibit the properties associated with having
>> a mind. This allows us to feel empathy with a small bird dying in our hand,
>> even a fish caught in a net, but little empathy for a carrot that has just
>> been pulled from the ground. That said, it is possible to feel empathy for
>> a
>> tree that has been injured. Where is the difference here? Where is the line
>> between us projecting our sense of self onto the other (anthropomorphising
>> a
>> tree, for example) and our sense of an actual other, perceiving its
>> subjective state in some way? If we knew the answer to this question, the
>> difference between objects and subjects, then perhaps we could simulate
>> mind
>> and create a conscious machine.
>>
>> One thing I would be pretty confident of is that the mind is only partially
>> dependent on the brain and other elements of the organism it is associated
>> with. Mind seems as much emergent from and interactive with non-biological
>> factors, such as social and physical space. In this respect mind is
>> determined as much by our social relations, as expressed through language
>> or
>> the normalisation and negotiation of individual and collective behaviour,
>> as the neural tissue in our heads. We would be wise to keep the ideas and
>> practices emergent from the work of Freud, Merleau-Ponty and Levi-Strauss
>> at
>> the centre of any discussion on this subject. However, what is clear is
>> that
>> until we do understand what mind is we will not be able to simulate it. I
>> wonder if we will ever achieve that understanding. Most of the time I doubt
>> we will. When I do think we will I'm pretty quick to discount my hubris.
>>
>> I would propose that our understanding of ourselves, of the world around
>> us,
>> remains very limited. As a consequence of our limited knowledge I would
>> argue that to date most things remain beyond our capacity to simulate them.
>> To claim we do have the capacity to simulate things is to assume we have
>> knowledge of them we most likely do not possess. This would seem arrogant
>> in
>> the extreme. Further to this, a simulation is only a knowledge modelling
>> activity. Even where we do have enough information about something to build
>> what seems to be a useful and functional simulation it does not mean we
>> have
>> made an accurate copy of something. It is only as accurate as we are able
>> to
>> test its accuracy and that testing is constrained by what we know. Even the
>> best simulations are likely to be incomplete or even erroneous in their
>> conception. To assume otherwise is to consider oneself to have complete and
>> irrefutable knowledge of something. That does not seem like good
>> (sceptical)
>> science or philosophy. It starts to sound like arrogant dogma.
>>
>> Best
>>
>> Simon
>>
>>
>> On 23/01/2011 17:43, "Jennifer Kanary Nikolov(a)" <
>> jenniferkanary@yahoo.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Dear All,
>>>
>>> In the meantime, I apologise if my own posts have actually contributed to
>> the
>>> rise to confusion :) Here is a post about the simulation of subjective
>>> experience. Its in addition to my previous posts.
>>>
>>> Like I stated before, I'm interested in the Simulation of Empathy, well
>> known
>>> in
>>> humans, but considered impossible in computers (for AI purposes). Empathy
>>> being
>>> the mental simulation of the experience of the other. When we know how
>> our own
>>> empathy systems work, and what role our own senses play in this, we might
>>> learn
>>> more about how this could be evoked in digital systems, AI and Robotics.
>> This
>>> is
>>> strongly related to the theory of mirror neurons (it is also where we
>> left off
>>> at the last discussion with Derrick De Kerckhoves contribution). I am
>>> interested
>>> in how artists knowledge about how to evoke subjective experiences in
>> humans
>>> could contribute to our understanding as to how to evoke such
>> experiences in
>>> AI
>>> systems and robotics. I'm interested in the role art experiences play in
>>> evoking
>>> empathy, how it jiggles our neurons and is there a form of
>> programmability to
>>> this?
>>>
>>>
>>> For one to experience empathy, to have a sense as to what the other is
>>> feeling,
>>> one must have an idea or awareness that there is an other and one must
>> have an
>>> inner archive of subjective experiences and believe that the other feels.
>> I
>>> use
>>> the word subjective experience to separate the subjective aspect of a
>>> sensation,
>>> a signal of the sense organ, and its emotional affect. I experience a
>> signal,
>>> I
>>> experience the signal as pain, I experience fear. A digital system can
>> sense
>>> the
>>> signal, but as far as we know, does not have a sensation about this
>> signal,
>>> not
>>> does it compare it to our signals.
>>>
>>> Some believe that it is impossible for AI to feel, subjective experience
>> is
>>> ambiguous and ambiguity causes error in a computers calculations. Some
>> believe
>>> that subjective experience comes from a heart and soul, and that
>> computers do
>>> not have a soul and thus can never experience subjectivity. As an artist
>>> interested in scientific speculations I wonder how to change our
>> perspective
>>> in
>>> this thinking. This changes dramatically when scientific speculations
>> rise
>>> like
>>> The Universe is a Quantum Computer. In such a world Simulation is Life.
>> We are
>>> Avatars creating Avatars. We are Worlds creating Worlds. The Simulated
>>> Simulate
>>> in an ongoing cycle of many layers. It gives a whole new meaning to
>> concepts
>>> of
>>> God as a Creator, God residing in All of us, God made man in his own
>> image.
>>> It
>>> is a very cybernetic approach, that everything is computed.
>>>
>>> For me Simulation is Computation, be it by my brain, by a digital or
>> analogue
>>> or
>>> quantum computer. I'm interested in how technology and art are used as a
>> tools
>>> of empathy. I am interested in how subjective experience is generated
>> by all
>>> technologies. I'm interested in how qbits might solve the issue of
>> ambiguation
>>> causing error in computations of classical computers.
>>>
>>> Our senses play a big role in how we empathise. We sense muscles
>> tensions in
>>> the faces of others, we learn to 'read' such faces and make conclusions
>> about
>>> how the other is feeling, we compare it to how we feel when our muscles
>> are
>>> like
>>> that. In our current society we do not take several of our senses
>> seriously.
>>> We
>>> need to focus on how our all our senses can be simulated with digital
>>> computers
>>> and how the data, the incoming signals of sensors interfere and affect
>>> interpretation.
>>>
>>>
>>> How our senses dance a dance of signals that triggers our neurons. If we
>> know
>>> how it is evoked in brains with the use of technology, we will learn more
>>> about
>>> how to evoke it in computers. In particular from the view that we are all
>>> jiggling atoms ;) How to make my Avatar/Robot feel? How to put the Gaia
>> in the
>>> world of my Avatar/Robot?
>>>
>>>
>>> Jennifer
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Yasmin_discussions mailing list
>>> Yasmin_discussions@estia.media.uoa.gr
>>> http://estia.media.uoa.gr/mailman/listinfo/yasmin_discussions
>>>
>>> Yasmin URL: http://www.media.uoa.gr/yasmin
>>>
>>> HOW TO SUBSCRIBE: click on the link to the list you wish to subscribe to.
>> In
>>> the page that will appear ("info page"), enter e-mail address, name, and
>>> password in the fields found further down the page.
>>>
>>> HOW TO UNSUBSCRIBE: on the info page, scroll all the way down and enter
>> your
>>> e-mail address in the last field. Enter password if asked. Click on the
>>> unsubscribe button on the page that will appear ("options page").
>>>
>>> HOW TO ENABLE / DISABLE DIGEST MODE: in the options page, find the "Set
>> Digest
>>> Mode" option and set it to either on or off.
>>>
>>
>>
>> Simon Biggs
>> simon@littlepig.org.uk
>> http://www.littlepig.org.uk/
>>
>> s.biggs@eca.ac.uk
>> http://www.elmcip.net/
>> http://www.eca.ac.uk/circle/
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Yasmin_discussions mailing list
>> Yasmin_discussions@estia.media.uoa.gr
>> http://estia.media.uoa.gr/mailman/listinfo/yasmin_discussions
>>
>> Yasmin URL: http://www.media.uoa.gr/yasmin
>>
>> HOW TO SUBSCRIBE: click on the link to the list you wish to subscribe to.
>> In the page that will appear ("info page"), enter e-mail address, name, and
>> password in the fields found further down the page.
>>
>> HOW TO UNSUBSCRIBE: on the info page, scroll all the way down and enter
>> your e-mail address in the last field. Enter password if asked. Click on the
>> unsubscribe button on the page that will appear ("options page").
>>
>> HOW TO ENABLE / DISABLE DIGEST MODE: in the options page, find the "Set
>> Digest Mode" option and set it to either on or off.
>>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 11
> Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2011 14:48:03 -0200
> From: Clarissa Ribeiro Pereira de Almeida <almeida.clarissa@gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Yasmin_discussions] Around Simulation II - Simulated
> Senses and the Un-Simulatable
> To: YASMIN DISCUSSIONS <yasmin_discussions@estia.media.uoa.gr>
> Message-ID:
> <AANLkTimMzpnjj+f3-3hX6_s4CFMqj0B2k1_H8_QJWpr6@mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
>
> Man-Machine (or http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3T65NpyfPkQ)
>
>
> And we cannot forget the creation/simulation of reality depends on previous
> simulations/super-extension of our senses we made. Here, the amazing and
> powerful "*Thermo Quantum Discovery* LC/MS/MS System" - the most robust and
> sensitive triple quadrupole in its class:
>
> http://www.ietltd.com/inventory.jsp?id=944
>
>
>
> It is interesting as well, to take a look in the inventory available at the
> ?International Equipament Tranding? website:
>
> http://www.ietltd.com/inventory.jsp
>
>
>
> The super-machines can "help" in to run "small sacale simulations" and think
> about, for instance, ?Adiabatic quantum optimization?:
>
> http://arxiv.org/abs/0908.2782
>
>
>
> And we can discuss everything in a realm where ?all is composed of
> references with no referents?, a hyperreality:
>
> http://arstechnica.com/science/news/2010/06/magic-quantum-wand-does-not-vanish
> -hard-maths.ars
>
> Here, there and everywhere?
>
>
>
> Clarissa
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 2011/1/25 xDxD.vs.xDxD <xdxd.vs.xdxd@gmail.com>
>
>> hello roger and all,
>>
>> On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 12:35 PM, roger malina <rmalina@alum.mit.edu>
>> wrote:
>>> I would like to make the assertion that relying on digital simulations
>>> is creating
>>> a situation where we focus primarily on processes that are theoretically
>>> simulatable or computable=
>>> whereas there are many other processes that are just not
>>> simulatable and there is a danger that we are developing huge blind spots
>>> (similarly there are parts of the universe that are theoretically
>> unobservable
>>> eg the interior of a black hole, or the universe further away than
>>> light could travel since the birth of the universe)
>>>
>>> the work of artists , with its emphasis on triggering subjective
>>> experience.and exploitation of phenomena that may be unsimulatable may
>>> open up interesting
>>> areas of research that computer scientists are not focused on
>>>
>>> are there any examples ?
>>
>>
>> we need cognitive scientists or/and some more anthropologists! :)
>>
>> as this is a problem that is truly similar to the international
>> discussion on "how do we go beyond ethnographical writing?"
>>
>> or: anthropological reports are an incomplete simulation. They
>> represent the point of view of the anthropologist and, in that, they
>> are, allow me to make it simple, novels. With that i do not mean that
>> they "are not good", i just mean that they are "incomplete", as we
>> know since the works of Mead and Bateson that "completeness" is a
>> concept that is somewhat awkward to define, and probabily the key to
>> describing it is to let it describe itself, by not trying to define it
>> and by finding ways in which the multiplicity of voices and
>> perceptions, and the network of relations, and their evolution in time
>> and space can express themselves. And also getting ready to accept
>> that a "system" (self-)described in this way is not coherent, static,
>> or objective. As roger said: there is not shortcut.
>>
>> yet again the most interesting parts (for me, obviously :) )of the
>> scientific research in this field are those that are creating a
>> short-circuit between "the map and the territory", by using the
>> territory (and its inhabitants, and cultures, and relations, and
>> expressions...) as the map itself through technologies that allow both
>> reading, writing and interpreting the world in its "entirety" (at
>> least theoretically, as it would require *everything/everyone* to be
>> technologically connected). In this perspective: the simulation of the
>> system is the system itself and, thus, can become simulatable.
>>
>> ciao!
>> s
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Yasmin_discussions mailing list
>> Yasmin_discussions@estia.media.uoa.gr
>> http://estia.media.uoa.gr/mailman/listinfo/yasmin_discussions
>>
>> Yasmin URL: http://www.media.uoa.gr/yasmin
>>
>> HOW TO SUBSCRIBE: click on the link to the list you wish to subscribe to.
>> In the page that will appear ("info page"), enter e-mail address, name, and
>> password in the fields found further down the page.
>>
>> HOW TO UNSUBSCRIBE: on the info page, scroll all the way down and enter
>> your e-mail address in the last field. Enter password if asked. Click on the
>> unsubscribe button on the page that will appear ("options page").
>>
>> HOW TO ENABLE / DISABLE DIGEST MODE: in the options page, find the "Set
>> Digest Mode" option and set it to either on or off.
>>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 12
> Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2011 11:04:49 -0500
> From: Joshua Madara <jamadara@gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Yasmin_discussions] Around Simulation II - Simulating
> Empathyand Subjective Experience
> To: YASMIN DISCUSSIONS <yasmin_discussions@estia.media.uoa.gr>
> Message-ID:
> <AANLkTikcWqk5j_=e4y+Q_+DgDGL4qG+26UitYft6v3KU@mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> I suppose the difficulty with externalizing subjective experience
> (i.e. re/constructing it within an artifact) is like how it is
> difficult to show that God is on the inside. Alan Watts cut into an
> apple to show his children that God is on the inside, and showed that
> every time you cut into another piece of apple, you just see more of
> its outside (i.e. one cannot reach God through analysis). If we could
> access subjective experience by any way other than directly
> experiencing it, would it not cease being subjective? We can talk
> about it, we can measure its correlations (e.g. EEG activity), but
> words and electrical signals are not subjective experiences.
>
> It is comparatively easy to simulate emotion in artifacts. Maturana
> said that an automobile has emotion. "You put it in first gear and you
> have a powerful car. You say, 'Look how powerful this car is in
> first!' It's aggressive, because when you scarcely touch the
> accelerator, vrrooom! It takes off!" But isn't that metaphorical, we
> ask? "To a certain extent, but more than metaphorical it is
> 'isophorical,' that is, it refers to something in the same class. You
> put the car in fifth and you travel at a higher speed, and the car is
> peaceful, fluid, serene. What is happening there? Each time you change
> gears, you change the internal configuration of the automobile and it
> does different things. Emotions correspond precisely to that, from the
> biological perspective they are internal changes in configuration that
> transform the reactivity of the living being, such that the living
> being in the relational space is different."
> (http://www.tierramerica.info/2000/1126/questions.html)
>
> Note the role of the observer in attributing emotion to the
> automobile. The same happens with empathy. When we observe a mother
> bear become "angry" when a foreign agent approaches near to her child,
> we do not (cannot?) know for certain that she actually feels anger. We
> infer that she does when she expresses in a way that we recognize as
> homomorphic with our own expressions when we feel anger. (The
> "inference" may not be logical, but a simpler computation of
> difference.) Ditto for how we respond to Johnny 5, WALL-E, etc.
>
> Empathy requires the ability to model another's emotional state (here
> I do not mean "model" in the sense of an imaginative construct, but in
> the Conant-Ashby sense, as a homomorphism), and I do not suppose that
> requires understanding (as humans acquire through language and
> complex, imaginative models) nor personhood (although it may approach
> personhood especially as it develops or is developed to respond to
> persons). Here are two projects using computers that detect human
> emotional states and respond accordingly -- note that they are both
> attempts at understanding and personhood:
>
> 1. Cambridge Ideas - The Emotional Computer
> (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=whCJ4NLUSB8)
>
> 2. The New Face of Autism Therapy
> (http://www.popsci.com/science/article/2010-05/humanoid-robots-are-new-therapi
> sts)
>
> Aside: Do Animals Feel Empathy?
> (http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=do-animals-feel-empathy)
>
> Sincerely,
> Joshua
>
>
> On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 11:20 AM, Natasha Vita-More <natasha@natasha.cc>
> wrote:
>> Hi Jennifer,
>>
>> You wrote:
>>
>>> In the meantime, I apologies if my own posts have actually contributed to
>> the rise to
>>> confusion :) Here is a post about the simulation of subjective experience.
>> Its in
>>> addition to my previous posts.
>>
>> You are not confusing things Jennifer. I think it is how we want to talk
>> about simulation and your interest appears to be of simulation as having
>> potential in computational systems, which is timely, although I'm not a
>> religious person so I don't see it pertainint to God, but I do see it as
>> pertaining to we are all part of an evolving cybernetics.
>>
>>> Like I stated before, I'm interested in the Simulation of Empathy, well
>> known in humans,
>>> but considered impossible in computers (for AI purposes). Empathy being the
>> mental
>>> simulation of the experience of the other.
>>
>> Empathy may be the most needed and also the most difficult experiential
>> behavior to obtain. ?To have empathy an agent needs to understand the
>> thoughts, feelings and state of another agent/person. ?To have empathy then,
>> the agent would also have to have "personhood." ?So, what is personhood if
>> it is not to be alive, self-awareness, and able to make decisions. How can
>> something make decisions if it is not alive and self-aware? ?Certainly AI
>> makes decisions and interacts with its environment, but not alive. So the
>> issue is what makes AI alive?
>>
>>> Some believe that it is impossible for AI to feel, subjective experience is
>> ambiguous and
>>> ambiguity causes error in a computers calculations. Some believe that
>> subjective experience
>>> comes from a heart and soul, and that computers do not have a soul and thus
>> can never
>>> experience subjectivity.
>>
>> AI is narrow. ?"Strong AI" is where we would have to begin, and which takes
>> us to the baby steps of A[G]I (i.e., artificial general intelligence,
>> hereinafter "AGI"), which is where AI was originally headed before its
>> winter (inability to achieve its original directive in producing human level
>> intelligence). ?AGI offers the potential for being self-aware and able to
>> make decisions based on "experience". ?Through its experience in its
>> learning, it could obtain personhood at the juncture where the idea of life
>> and death becomes redefined based on semi and non-biological or synthetic
>> systems which develop self-awareness and may want rights, similar to the
>> rights of humans.
>>
>> With all this said, the issue of empathy could be obtainable by AGIs. ?But I
>> have to return to my original post on this one, if I may. ?A brain that is
>> transferable or copied onto a computational system, would also transfer or
>> copy its mind (in the material sense) and that mind would contain the
>> feelings, emotions, and sensorial memory of the biological person). ?If the
>> AGI could relate to this, it would also become familiar and experience the
>> feelings, emotions and sensory memory of the human. ?So the merging of
>> humans and technology becomes even more blurred and the AGI would learn
>> empathy through its own experiential behavior.
>>
>> All my best,
>> Natasha
>>
>> Natasha Vita-More
>>
>>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 13
> Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2011 00:17:21 +0000
> From: V?tor Reia-Baptista <vreia@ualg.pt>
> Subject: [Yasmin_discussions] Some other contributes to the
> Discussions Around Simulation II
> To: YASMIN DISCUSSIONS <yasmin_discussions@estia.media.uoa.gr>
> Message-ID: <20110126001721.99964000f4t29xk4@wmail.ualg.pt>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; DelSp="Yes";
> format="flowed"
>
> Hi.
> One of the most interesting texts that I?ve read touching this subject
> (still considering the specific aspect of representation and simulated
> representation) is Umberto Eco?s ?Travels in Hyperreality?. Of
> course, we have to remember that this text was written in 1975, thus,
> much earlier than everybody was using terms like ?hypertexts?,
> ?virtual reality? or ?cyberspace?, at least in the sense that we are
> giving to them today as given elements of simulation of a ?real?
> ?second life?. In this text Eco identified the world of ?Hyperreality?
> as the world of ?Absolute Fakes?, but in a way that made the faking
> mechanisms, imitations or simulations, not merely reproduce reality,
> but eventually improve it. He illustrates this aspect with the
> examples of the faked Disney Worlds, where real life elements like
> cities, streets and houses (castles and alike) would offer the perfect
> environments for different lifelike figures to play real lifelike
> stories. Once inside those stories everybody would be able to live, or
> to simulate living (which in that context would mean the same),
> different actions obtaining different feelings and different states of
> mind that would be rather hard to get without those simulation
> environments.
> I think that this example given by Eco (but we could in fact be
> speaking of many fiction films, cartoons or videogames) help us to
> understand at least part of the problem: we need to reproduce
> different environments and different actions for many different
> purposes, from pure entertainment to strict scientific aims, but we
> should also remain aware of some words said by Eco about these
> processes being generally ?an allegory of the consumer society, a
> place of absolute iconicism? where the simulation environment ?is also
> as place of total passivity? and ?its visitors must agree to behave
> like robots?.
> This bring us back to the worries of Baudrillard, that I?ve mentioned
> already in a former post, showing that many of the possible simulation
> situations that we share, in fact, today are many times signs of other
> states of alienation, either in real life situations, or in controlled
> laboratory situations.
> These were only some loose thoughts that I tried to put together
> aiming to come closer to a more analytical approach within the
> discussions, but after reading them now, I can hardly agree that they
> contribute to that purpose at all.
> Best wishes to you all.
> V?tor
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 14
> Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2011 04:11:52 +0100
> From: Luigi Pagliarini <luigi@artificialia.com>
> Subject: Re: [Yasmin_discussions] Around Simulation II - Simulated
> Senses and the Un-Simulatable
> To: YASMIN DISCUSSIONS <yasmin_discussions@estia.media.uoa.gr>
> Message-ID: <35ABA5B7-7572-414F-B1A9-6EB6698D5E87@artificialia.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
>
>> On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 12:35 PM, roger malina <rmalina@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
>>> I would like to make the assertion that relying on digital simulations
>>> is creating
>>> a situation where we focus primarily on processes that are theoretically
>>> simulatable or computable=
>>> whereas there are many other processes that are just not
>>> simulatable and there is a danger that we are developing huge blind spots
>>> (similarly there are parts of the universe that are theoretically
>>> unobservable
>>> eg the interior of a black hole, or the universe further away than
>>> light could travel since the birth of the universe)
>>>
>>> the work of artists , with its emphasis on triggering subjective
>>> experience.and exploitation of phenomena that may be unsimulatable may
>>> open up interesting
>>> areas of research that computer scientists are not focused on
>>>
>>> are there any examples ?
>
>
> it is a strange question!
> not to be self-referential but.. maybe these examples?
> http://www.artificialia.com/intelligenza/
> http://www.artificialia.com/CG/english.html
> http://www.artificialia.com/AoD/
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Yasmin_discussions mailing list
> Yasmin_discussions@estia.media.uoa.gr
> http://estia.media.uoa.gr/mailman/listinfo/yasmin_discussions
>
>
> End of Yasmin_discussions Digest, Vol 103, Issue 1
> **************************************************
_______________________________________________
Yasmin_discussions mailing list
Yasmin_discussions@estia.media.uoa.gr
http://estia.media.uoa.gr/mailman/listinfo/yasmin_discussions
Yasmin URL: http://www.media.uoa.gr/yasmin
HOW TO SUBSCRIBE: click on the link to the list you wish to subscribe to. In the page that will appear ("info page"), enter e-mail address, name, and password in the fields found further down the page.
HOW TO UNSUBSCRIBE: on the info page, scroll all the way down and enter your e-mail address in the last field. Enter password if asked. Click on the unsubscribe button on the page that will appear ("options page").
HOW TO ENABLE / DISABLE DIGEST MODE: in the options page, find the "Set Digest Mode" option and set it to either on or off.
