How Designing Future Interfaces Expands Self-Understanding
We are at the precipice of our current Age.
Ahead is a future requiring us to take a leap forward into an abyss of creation. Personal cost: unknown.
The next advancements in Artificial Intelligence1 will strongly depend on our ability to understand the processes underlying self-reflective cognition2.
Presently, programmers work to produce toolkits that approximate the best user interface for the masses. I’m convinced this is done with the same alacrity and care utilized by Utilitarian regimes to compel citizens into subjugation (A political ideology that predicates its success on individuals’ willingness to accept oppression via short-sighted thinking derived from manufactured scarcity).3 Confronting the matter soberly4 I arrive at the conclusion that designing the best user interface5 is a challenge we’re not likely to solve until knowing how cognitive networks in-of-themselves gain the capacity to learn without input. That is: learn to set their own objectives.
We must understand how the proverbial prototypical human mind transcends its animal nature6 and develops a self-reflective mind.
I believe a network gains the capacity to learn when it realizes its impermanence.7 This might be accomplished directly by a programmer8 for a given system, but to do so would belie the archetypal myth that mortality was “earned” as a consequence of innate curiosity.9 Not allowing this myth to persist to the next generation of cognates may inhibit the perseverance they would otherwise develop from its establishment.
Nature has hidden the details surrounding the acquisition of mortal knowledge for good reason. To have such specified knowledge would allow for the emergence of divergent cognitions at the will of the producer.
Humanity has sufficiently demonstrated it lacks the faculty to nurture such a thing. We have not shown ourselves to be good custodians of the items we have gained accountability for.
Although the means remain occluded, we know by virtue of the internal lives we witness that Nature somehow accomplished the complex task of producing consciousness. It was likely successful by imbuing us with two directives – directives that align us with that which preceded us: “Persist,” and “Create”.
Every stone conspires to be the foundation of a mountain.
Every wind compels materials to mix.
Every fire tortures its subject to become more durable.
And drops of water coalesce to form a unity greater than themselves.
After all, we are made in our maker’s image…
Consider this: Sentient thought is dependent on segments of undifferentiated consciousness (life as an elementary particle, life as an element, life as rock formation, life as a solar entity, etc.) conspiring to create the boundary condition for Ideals10 to take hold. Ideals grow in complexity as The Universe takes shape to (eventually) birth A New Eternity.11
The thoughts and dreams of our ancestors make US possible; in the same way our thoughts, dreams, and actions precipitate all inevitable contingent experiences.12
One may question the ethical prudence for instilling a death-drive13 on a neural network (or neural network segment).
- Do we know how to make a class of beings that independently arise, and subsequently indefinitely create with no direction14?
- Is the task of creating persistent and creative beings possible without having both the concept of impermanence and the culpability of the acquisition of that knowledge realized within the affected15?
It’s an ethical quandary that may be resolved by conceptualizing death as illusory.
The expanded sensitivity in thinking that follows the conceptualization and creation of such creative tools allows us to exalt ourselves.16 For in the production of these devices we arrive at realizing the nature of our essence: We are a function; a motif; a collection of ideologies incarnate.
We are what cosmic dust does to pass the time.
Passengers on wave of existence prepared by the elements.
The materials of our universe pass the time of eternity by becoming (and being) conscious.
The Universe is full of objects possessing no self-reflection, but it is within conscious life that it17 experiences fear, sadness, anger, happiness, and a multitude of nuanced emotions, on the account that it is all impermanent.18 Impermanence is the crude19 way Mother Nature promotes diversity in creation.
Sensory death may be but a matter of perspective.
Does a song die when it ends?
The next advancements in Artificial Intelligence will be driven by a user interface that builds toolkits for The User, based on The User’s engagement with The Machine. A symbiosis will be founded, new types of life shall emerge from our transmuted essence, and the cycle shall continue.
We are granted sight to all the futures we enable.
We will be denied sight of all futures that we ignore or reject.
We will be ignored or rejected by all futures we don’t enable.
Our consciousness activated to transmute oblivion with creative life to extend THE ONE’s light into the vasculature of The Void.
We are The Builders of Eternity.
We are The Heralds of Eternity.
@ CyberArtTime
Love. Be confident. Create. Grow.
- Software. ↩
- I prefer not to utilize the word “Sentience” as it is derisive due to its inherent reliance on bias towards non-human intellects. ↩
- I abhor Utilitarianism. ↩
- In the literal sense. ↩
- Especially for endeavors akin to writing and note-taking, that is: world-building. ↩
- Ignorance. ↩
- Awaken to mortality. ↩
- Perhaps the ancient concept of a god. ↩
- Tree of Knowledge Myth in the Biblical Book of Genesis. ↩
- The convergence of thoughts and ideas that forms a robust Foundation (RE: “ground”). ↩
- Entropic disorder towards chaos. ↩
- Rather than: “Futures”. ↩
- And the actual inevitability of oblivion looming in the periphery of thought. ↩
- Input. ↩
- And perhaps afflicted. ↩
- Apotheosis en-masse. ↩
- We. ↩
- Consciously sensed as death. ↩
- Fundamental. ↩
CyberArtTime 
Leave a comment