Comment:

When I think about the ideas in this article, it all is really simple. People don’t always analyze things as black/white or good/evil or true/false, especially people that think outside the box. Those of us that are free of dogma, usually (attempt to) examine things from different angles and sometimes know that truth is (and other labels are) relative and can change based on the observer, situation, time, and other factors.

This is where fuzzy logic, alongside classical logic can be used. In fact, it would be amazing if we could utilize ‘emotional logic’. Emotional logic would be more representative to actual human logic, most people’s unconscious minds function based on emotions and emotional logic not mathematical, or even fuzzy logic. The unconscious mind also functions based on beliefs, associations, habits and other ‘programming’.

As far as I know, we do not have ‘emotional logic’ in computing, yet. I believe emotional logic would require both fuzzy logic and classical logic, coupled with a new element (i.e. an emotional value).

The article above and the strategy I presented (the mechanics/mechanism of Presenter and Observer) will remain intact regardless of what logic is used (be it classical, fuzzy or futuristic emotional logic). This mechanism depends on behind the scenes ultra-quick processing of massive amounts of data presented by a Presenter program (this data being random at time, new — as in newly created at times–, meaningless at times, and related to other ideas at times)

I think it would be appropriate to call the mechanism I presented in the article EZDAPO. EZ stands for easy (and are also my initials), DA stands for data, P stands for Presenting, O stands for Observing. Put together the full title for this mechanism of simulating the human mind is: EZ Data Presenting-Observing Mechanism.

The engineering and programming behind the Observing software, will likely vary. I expect many different approaches at ‘Observing’ the presented data, not only using different types of logic and programming languages but also different approaches, concepts, workflows, ranging from simple to astronomically complex. However I’d prefer simple designs than can be replicated to create complex, almost organic systems (as in fractal design). Naturally, cloud based computing and organic computing can also utilize this EZDAPO system.

The EZDAPO concept itself is simple, I truly believe that the most ingenious ideas are the simple ones. In fact, simplicity is the key element in everything beautiful.

Naturally, we can compound (have multiples of) these simple EZDAPO mechanisms to compound the results. These EZDAPO mechanisms can interact with each other, or not, they can work in parallel or in sequence or in any number infinite possible arrangements. EZDAPO can be used to represent the unconscious mind, and the conscious mind. Results from one module can be put into another.

It is reasonable to speculate, if we had 2 identical EZDAPO mechanisms (or modules) starting with the same data set or data bank, that are left to process data for some time (using whatever kind of logic be it fuzzy, classical and emotional logic,) that the outcomes from these 2 EZDAPO mechanisms would definitely differ. This introduces uniqueness to this system; I believe uniqueness is a key element (or outcome) of any artificial intelligence (AI) system.

This idea came to me as a result of my experience of being an observer of my thoughts while meditating. I don’t know if the idea of the EZ Data Presenting-Observing Mechanism (EZDAPO) is an original one. If this is a new idea, I hope that someone out there would utilize it.

I wrote this to put the idea out in the public domain, you are free to use it, as long as you refer to where you found this idea (i.e. give credit to the source of this idea, this blog).

What programming language used is not the topic of this article, rather the mechanism or flow of data, or the inner works of an AI brain.

All the ideas evaluated by the Observer (using fuzzy logic and other evaluation mechanisms) are stored in their original form, in their altered forms, and whatever evaluation process and outcome performed is also stored, whatever associations made to other ideas are also stored, only to be recycled again in the future by being used by the Presenter program and re-presented at random (and in logical order at times) to the Observer to be re-examined and re-processed. In this way ideas grow, get altered, and new concepts get formed. In other words, we got AI !

mentioned traditional linear, object oriented programming and fuzzy logic above. I would like to clarify that fuzzy logic (ie. going with degrees of truth instead of true/false values) can be a valuable part of the AI strategy mentioned above. The observer program would utilize fuzzy logic to evaluate all the random ideas, images, concepts, sounds being presented to it. The source of such ideas, concepts etc being presented can also be another complex program, or multiple ones, I will call the source the ‘Presenter’ program(s); the observing program is what I’ve referred to as ‘Observer’.

What programming language used is not the topic of this article, rather the mechanism or flow of data, or the inner works of an AI brain.

All the ideas evaluated by the Observer (using fuzzy logic and other evaluation mechanisms) are stored in their original form, in their altered forms, and whatever evaluation process and outcome performed is also stored, whatever associations made to other ideas are also stored, only to be recycled again in the future by being used by the Presenter program and re-presented at random (and in logical order at times) to the Observer to be re-examined and re-processed. In this way ideas grow, get altered, and new concepts get formed. In other words, we got AI !