When I was working actively in the blockchain space, one of the
biggest debates for the “non-believers” was around immutability and why it
matters, especially in the notorious double-spend problem. If you don’t recognize
the problem, it’s hard to see a solution or an advantage.
Chargebacks: If chargebacks are not a problem, “immutability
is not an advantage of blockchain, it is simply a feature of blockchain. But it
is not solving anything, so why put it up as an advantage?”
Government tax numbers: “For instance, I can say that I have
a product which makes sure that the government does not arbitrarily change your
tax number. Okay. But is there a big problem of governments changing people’s
tax numbers? Not in the slightest! So why mention it as an advantage? It is
solving a non-existing problem.”
These challenges seem to be very different. But they are not.
Both the chargeback problem and the government tax problem described above are
about identity. Let me explain how. Chargebacks are about who took my money for
the wrong reasons and how I get it back, within a network. The government tax
number is about how the government identifies its tax payers so you can be sure
that it recognizes you have paid your dues. Both trust the central “ oracle”, the
governor of the network or the country administrators/tax collectors. Both are
vulnerable to Sybil attacks and can only work with other networks/countries if
there is trust and transparency across networks.
Let’s take a step back and talk about identity. There are
three forms of identity as of today:
Non-digital identity – think of your
birth certificate, your driver’s license, your old passport and other paper/plastic/metal
Digital identity – your SSO service,
your user management platform, Facebook account, your biometric data on a new
passport, your email address, credit cards
Decentralized identity – similar to
the digital identity category, but issued and/or stored outside a centralized
database, on individual devices/mediums that the owner controls
While the first two are easier to grasp, the third one is
still nascent, with a few use cases emerging now in access management,
cryptocurrency wallets, for example. You’d be tempted to say that immutability
is only key for the decentralized identity category. And you would be wrong.
Our world goes through great lengths to make sure that your non-digital and
digital identity is unique and immutable, so that you can’t be one person today
and another person the next day. This immutability and the identity consistency
that it creates is the foundation of our society. You can create long term
relationships only if the other person is who they say they are over time and
that statement does not fundamentally change.
This immutability attribute is what makes identity possible,
not just decentralized identity, all identity. The difference is that you’re
not relying on a 3rd party to keep records of who is who, like in
the centralized examples. With decentralized identity, you are relying on
immutable records of a person’s (or a bot’s, if you like) collection of credentials
and their minimum viable verification proof (MVVP). There’s a lot of materials
to read on the topic, especially from the W3C, a standardization body that
makes the internet interoperable.
Since I brought up interoperability, immutability is a
direct enabler of that as it becomes exponentially easier to operate across networks
if you don’t have always verify all the actors all over again from scratch. The
costs and time to verify drop significantly.
If you’re a blockchain non-believer, or nay-sayer, try thinking about a time you had to redo something all over again, like prove who you are, because there was no easy way to cross networks reliably. It might not be an obvious problem today, but in the future it will speed up and increase the security of travel, payments, building access, virtually any kind of transaction that occurs between two or more parties that need to be identified.
It’s almost the end of 2019, and there are still a lot of
marketers out there that are too afraid to pour some personality into their
strategies. You know the ones I’m talking about, the ones who created and made “corporate
speak” a category.
It’s those who tweet or post on LinkedIn using language that
the board or some lawyers reviewed first, so it ends up sounding like all
things to all people, or like nothing at all, failing to commit to a storyline.
Sure, it de-risks the post and the company, but it also reduces
the possibility of a standout, and in turn, long term success for the brand. That
might make sense for a quarter to quarter focused team, but for those who want
to play the 5-10-15 year game, it’s quite damaging.
Brands are a lot like people. They can be interesting or
boring, on a sliding scale, with 00s of shades of grey. You know an interesting
person when you see them – they stand out using a few simple traits – loud voice,
strong facial expressions, specific clothes, specific/expert/passion topics
they speak about, clear attitudes, strong beliefs. All those flavors define
them and help them show their inner uniqueness. The boring one will be the
polar opposite – low voice, no facial expression, traditional, conservative
clothing, talks about the weather, their commute or some other mundane topic
that’s low risk, equivocal attitudes, weak or no beliefs they hold/show.
Obviously, no one is 100% interesting or 100% boring.
Sometimes we are both at the same time, depending on the audience. For example,
when I speak about cryptocurrencies, artificial intelligence or quantum computing
around my wife, she tunes out, and tells me outright that I’m boring her and I
should change the topic. When I do it with my Romanian IT group, people listen
and engage with me on those topics, and soon 2 hours pass without changing the
Interesting people, like interesting brands, are deeply interesting
to their target audience and uninteresting to the rest. It keeps the
conversation clean – only the ones who care should engage with you and your
brand. The rest are time wasters, better have them focus their time and energy
There’s tons of literature out there about how to best do this
as a marketer, so I won’t get into that. The problem is not reading it, but
putting it into practice, especially in an organization that is inherently risk
averse and there are non-marketing gatekeepers on how the brand should
As marketers, we need to let go of our fear of being too out
there, too forward or too bold. That fear is what keeps us from being
interesting, same as in our personal lives. Sure, there will be people who don’t
like the message. Sure, you will make mistakes along the way, and some may
argue that this is a sure way to get fired. Not letting go of the fear is the
best way to get fired, and not just from the company, but from the entire industry
Boring marketers have a special place in the world, and that’s not on any top or podium, but in the “looking for a career change category”.
I heard the original line while driving to Los Altos, for the Romanian presidential elections, round one. My wife said it out loud in the car while we were discussing attitudes towards failing and where we had all grown up, back in Eastern Europe, and connected to a message on one of the leading party’s WhatsApp group about a candidate that received over 1.7M votes.
I thought then and there that I wanted to write about the topic, about our shared trauma, as a generation that grew up in fear of this dreaded failure. There’s more to it than that, but not for today.
Today, I was also prompted by something else. Another friend of mine wrote a beautiful post (in Romanian) about admiration and how rare of a muscle this was, and to some extent, still is where we come from.
While I was growing up, I didn’t understand until later that you had to hide any kind of weakness or hint of deviation from the norm. Others did, and the way they did it was directly linked to the ones that didn’t – like me. They learned to see a blush, a tremor in ones voice, a showing of emotion and to turn that against the “perpetrator”, thereby deflecting any attention on their own failures. It’s like they “felt” when someone around them could be perceived as failing and took the opportunity to point the first finger, and so positioning themselves in a safe space, as the accuser, not the accused.
Memories of public micro-moments where I failed, trying to ask girls out, speaking up against bullies, speaking out on topics I enjoyed, playing basketball, and later in work environments, both in companies and as an entrepreneur or consultant, they all share the same thing – one person or, usually, a group of people constantly looking for ways to tell you how you’re failing or you are going to fail.
It’s an incredibly toxic culture that pushes people to close up, create a large wall, a persona to hide behind and only come out when things are “perfect”, or not come out at all because they do not fell “worthy” or “enough” to face the scrutiny of the finger-pointers. This breeds insecurities and the imposter syndrome. This also breeds fake people, that are risk averse to anything that might tear down the wall or pierce the vail.
If I look inside and am very honest with myself, it was less about economic opportunity when I left Romania, it was more about escaping this cultural context where failure was ridiculed and constantly tracked. It still is, and probably will be until enough people speak up and tell those people off.
It’s ok to fail, it’s ok to try and not always win, it’s ok to show that you’re human.
I admire people who start something knowing that it’s highly likely they will fail.
I used to write a lot at some point and even guest post on other sites. Recently, I started writing again, and with the intro of a friend, I was invited to contribute to HavingTime.com, a platform for people with stories to tell.
I chose to share my thoughts about my own impostor syndrome, and how I managed to overcome it. I found it very ironic that it was the very first thought that struck me while I was searching for a first topic to send them for review. It was basically telling me I have no authority and that my story is not interesting enough to be shared there.
It was an opportunity too good to refuse, that’s what I said about two years ago, when I left AI for the crypto world and joined Civic Technologies to help build what now is a decentralized marketplace (identity.com) and the for-profit startup on top of it (civic.com), that eventually expanded from identity to identity and finch – decentralized finance / defi. It was a great journey, with an amazing team and I’m sure they will do well moving forward.
Now for the personal news. This October, I have joined the Figure Eight team, part of Appen, as the Director of Marketing Communications. The group is the biggest ML-assisted and crowd data labeling platform for machine learning. I can’t share too much about the journey ahead, but I can tell you big things will happen in this industry in the next 5-10 years. Machine learning is at a point where it has become productive in a few industries and more and more giants are now looking at their data sets, their processes and trying to figure out how to optimize and improve efficiency.
Data is the new energy, and it’s likely we will see a similar revolution with ML departments as we have seen with the IT function. It (and IT, ha!) started out in the basement, with the servers, and evolved from a fringe function to the core of many of the most profitable businesses in the world. The best jobs out there rely on IT today and will do so in the future. I see the same future for machine learning, now elevated from curiosity/research only domain to part of the engineering team, where it plays various roles, from marginal to core business, depending on the company. Soon, with enough data and understanding of ML processes and principles, any enterprise will be able to scale faster and more effectively.
You might wonder what data labeling has to do with all this.
“During the gold rush it’s a good time to be in the pick and shovel business,” Mark Twain reportedly said
Think of it like the gold rush, where people flock to gold bearing mountains to find the prize, gold. They need food, supplies, clothes, fuel, picks and shovels, mining gear and machines, cars and planes. It this case, the prize is profit, the gold rush is the digital age and data is the energy powering everything. The more energy you have and the more refined/adequate it is, the better your chances to find gold. Same goes for machine learning, the more high quality data you have, the less of it you need to train an efficient model, the less resources you spend on computing power. Also, data, unlike fuel, comes in all shapes and sizes, and there will always be more data to be labeled as it is being created.
Long story short, I’m excited about the journey ahead and looking forward to sharing more stories along the way.
In an age where “the world’s largest taxi firm, Uber, owns no cars, (…) the world’s most valuable retailer, Alibaba, carries no stock, and the world’s largest accommodation provider, Airbnb, owns no property,” (source) it’s possible to consider a country that has no land.
If Facebook were a country, it would be the
largest in the world. It now has over 2.4B users and it’s still growing.
Once it launched its Marketplace in 2016, Facebook started having its own economy – and that’s
besides the advertising economy it had by selling user data and attention.
Facebook has a system of laws and rules, deemed
in the terms of service, which get enforced by teams of moderators. It also has
a network of robots that evaluate accounts periodically to weed out risky
behavior, other bots or spammers.
There was one thing Facebook did not have – a currency – until they came up with Libra and Calibra, the network, basked-backed currency and wallet designed to replace current payment rails and change the financial system as we know it.
They have drawn significant attention and scrutiny from regulators
(US, UK, Indian Government, for example), the banking system, and even made
Christine Lagarde shrug on camera this summer.
But is this new or revolutionary? By no means. Facebook is drawing from exsiting stuff:
Special Drawing Rights by the World Bank and International
Monetary Fund (1969)
The launch of the Euro currency and its success (1999)
Visa as a foundation for inter-bank compensation
Every other digital wallet out there, including Venmo,
Cash App (2009, 2013)
Special Drawing Rights as an inspiration for Libra
Libra will issue a stable coin (a cryptocurrency that does not
fluctuate severely) backed by a number of national currencies, to enable
stability and interchangeability.
For anyone who knows a little bit about macroeconomy, baskets of currencies
are not new. The International Monetary fund created them to support the global
credit system and shield it from single country currency risks. The underlying mechanics
are simple, weighted pot sums of each participating currency are used to
determine the basked currency value at any point in time.
Libra will most likely combine a series of top economies’
currencies with a few top cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin, Ethereum and others
to determine the price of Libras. Libra will most likely operate outside the
traditional banking and national currency sector, given the regulatory issues
surrounding its birth. It will be interesting to see what on-ramps will be
allowed early on.
Countries and banks don’t like this too much for two
It takes away their power to control supply and
demand for their currency and influence how the economy evolves – see the
Eurozone’s issues with Greece, Spain, Italy
It creates a network that can circumvent fees, rules
that banking systems and countries set for their citizens, such as capital
controls or restrictions, removes the possibility to charge exorbitant fees due
to lack of alternatives when dealing in exotic trades and unusual territories
The launch of the Euro currency and its success
I’ve written about this topic before. The
Euro and its launch are the original initial coin offering, with countries
participating to the biggest artificial coin issue of its time. National banks
were required to initially seed, and then exchange their currencies to Euros
after a transition period, effectively ascribing value to the new currency. It
has been successful thanks to its use inside the system, between citizens,
countries, companies, and due the fact that it is mandatory to deal in Euros
when dealing with the EU.
Libra learns from this and tries to get many entities
involved to seed outside money (the basket of currencies), first in a limited
format, with the membership fee – $10M or equivalent. They want as much exchangeability
as possible from day one, so that the currency is useful. Having it also used
alongside traditional money will create the foundation for “inside the system”
transactions to start growing vs money having to constantly go out of the
Libra and Facebook will ultimately have to hold a trade
balance with the rest of the world, ensuring that there is always enough liquidity
of Libras to currencies that are needed to be withdrawn from the system. This
is similar to preventing a run on the bank.
If they follow the EU model, they are likely to be successful.
Visa as a foundation for inter-bank compensation
A few months ago, I ordered a book called The
Birth of the Chaordic Age, by Dee Hock. For those who don’t know who he is,
he created VISA, one of the most impressive and important financial
organizations of our time, about 60 years ago. He wrote the book on how the
organization was created and his leadership style. It’s a great read.
This is relevant for Libra because VISA, unlike the publicly
traded corporation that it is today, started out as a member-owned not-for-profit
organization that helped banks settle payments faster than the 6 month process
they previously had and reduce fraud that resulted due to ledgers being out of
sync for so long. Each member organization had equal rights to vote –
decentralization – and had to participate financially to the network to be able
to vote – staking. Libra called them network members and has them stake the
$10M to both regulate the network and provide liquidity.
The question here for Facebook and Libra is: If this becomes
profitable, will you IPO Libra, the same way VISA decided to change from a member-owned
not-for-profit to a public corporation?
I’m not saying that’s bad. Dee Hock, on the other hand, is
more decisive about the topic than I am – he parted ways with Visa for this
reason – he wanted to keep it from becoming a profit-seeking corporation to
maintain its mission to open access to financial products for everyone.
Will Libra maintain its mission, or will it turn into Visa
2.0 meets Facebook-style data mining?
Peer to peer and payment functions
Libra claims that the network itself will enable two kinds
of wallets – Facebook’s (Calibra), with full identity verification and affiliated
with Libra, and more self-sovereign wallets, where if you control your key, you
control your Libras, without any identity checks.
The second wallet type is interesting, but likely doomed
from birth – most merchants, vendors won’t accept it due to risks. Some will,
in the same way they accept cash today.
Calibra, the first wallet, is interesting to mention here because it wants to ultimately connect two things – identity and payment. The most interesting and concerning part about this fact is they want to do it fee free. That means that the users and their data will be the product. If you don’t pay for the service, you’re being offered to someone who does. Fun, right?
And, yes, Calibra will compete with Paypal, Venmo, Cash App, Zelle etc.
The ethics and moral debate on Facebook and Libra
This was the topic of debate when we met in San Francisco,
for Libra-themed round table.
This comes at no surprise to anyone who has seen Facebook
take off from a college-themed youth social network to the global organization
that it is today. It’s over 2.4B strong user base has proven to be not just a
tool for people to connect with each other – which is great, but also one of
the best cash cows for advertising, a mass surveillance tool for governments
and, more recently, a powerful elections / political medium. I’m sure the team
behind Facebook never intended for more than the first 2, but as it happens
when large groups of people gravitate in one place, so does a proportional
level of bad actors (both individual and institutional).
Let’s fast forward a few years into a future where Facebook
is successful, and Libra is being used by 3B people globally. We now have not
only the biggest social network, but it is now interconnected with the global financial
system – showing to whomever wants to see who is paying whom for what and when,
further enriching human metadata.
Ethics of good and bad here are debatable and my inner libertarian-leaning self tends to argue that people have the right to choose to use a tool like that, if made available, with reasonable warnings / explanations / disclaimers.
The reason we need these disclaimers / communication pieces
inside Facebook and Libra is the two type of users the platform has – unconscious
and conscious. The unconscious ones share everything and are easy to profile due
to the almost exact resemblance of their online profile to their physical self.
The conscious users are engaged in a transaction with Facebook, only sharing
that what is useful for them and receiving service as a result. In their case,
the online persona can differ significantly from their physical selves.
You might think you are a conscious user and that Facebook
doesn’t already have most of your data, but if you think harder, you’ll see
that Facebook knows if you changed jobs, bought a house, had a child, got
married, divorced, moved to a new city, country, neighborhood, how often you go
on vacation and where, what media you follow, what jokes you like, your sexual
and social preference, what opinions you share publicly with others, and that’s
all just by looking at your usage data – friends, likes, shares, comments, posts,
photos (and their EXIF info).
When looking at the bigger picture and what Facebook and similar companies do to our lives, my assessment is net positive. This doesn’t mean everything they do is good, but that for the most part they have made it easier for us to keep up with people in our lives.
I don’t usually post about referral programs, but this one has to be the best I’ve seen in a while. Remember those early mobile games where to you had to frantically tap your screen to get more points or win the game? Guess what, product managers and UX designers at Robinhood did, too.
They launched the Cash management waitlist where you tap to go up in line. You can only tap for about 1,000 times per day, it seems. Pretty crazy, right?
Here’s what they did.
They launched Cash management, an added feature to Robinhood Financial LLC brokerage accounts. The Annual Percentage Yield (APY) paid by Sutton Bank is 2.05% as of October 8, 2019, and can be changed at any time. If you’re interested, use my signup link and we’ll both get rewarded.
Previously, they tried this thing before with savings accounts, but regulators shut them down, since they didn’t ask for approval beforehand. Hopefully this time it’s more legit!
I met with a friend at the best coffee shop in town while I was in Baia Mare, visiting my family. She had just returned from Indonesia after years of traveling and living abroad. We both shared stories about how alien we felt in this town and how travelers always feel like this when surrounded by less traveled people. She told me about the people in Indonesia and the beauty of their culture, and then she asked me about the US, about life in California.
After delivering the classic picture of a tech manager in Silicon Valley, along with a few observations about the cultural differences between Eastern Europeans and Californians, I shared something that I found remarkable about people in San Francisco that I had encountered both professionally and in a friendly setting.
But first, a little context – I grew up in Northern Transylvania, attending public schools and being brought up in a very Romanian fashion. You were supposed to be great in school, get top grades, not get overtaken by your neighbor. Sports was secondary, but I still took up competitive basketball for awhile. The coach was tough, the team was demanding and there was little pleasure in playing, except for the winning moments and training with the girls’ high school team.
I dropped out of the competitive part of the sport mainly to pursue random teenage things like partying, smoking, drinking and being rebellious — for the duration of my high school years. It was only in London that I picked up basketball again, playing with startup co-workers and investment bankers at Canary Wharf’s Reebok gym every week. When I eventually left London for the US, I tried to find the same thing in San Francisco. A few months in, through friends, I found the basketball group that plays in the Presidio every weekend and I’ve been going there ever since.
You’re probably wondering why all this context, what’s the catch? It’s about basketball.
You see, I am not a professional player, nor am I a great amateur. I’m average, even considering my 6ft 6in advantage over others. When I was back in Romania, or even in the UK, playing and missing or failing to pass resulted in disappointment comments and bad looks from fellow players. You were expected to punish yourself with some down talk, too. That diminished the fun of the game, but supposedly kept your competitive spirit up and in the game. In San Francisco, I started playing, but something was missing. I would miss shots, fail to pass, but the only person talking down or frowning was me. Everyone else was trying to encourage me to go again, “good try”, “great shot”, “good look” – even though I knew and they knew I was way off. That made the game more enjoyable. Slowly, I started getting rid of the self talk that put me down on the basketball court.
But it’s not just in basketball. I’ve seen this type of behavior all over, where your peers, your bosses and your employees give you positive reinforcement and encouragement, even if things are going south. That, too, was a cultural shift from the mostly negative, sullen offices I had grew up in as a professional. This type of attitude not only makes things more fun and enjoyable all around, but push you to do more things, take more risks and ultimately grow — ironically the same goal of the other type of behavior I was used to, but significantly more effective.
This reflected in my writing too, because when I started doing it, it was more of a rebellious spout, a manifestation of my personality, in Romanian and very stream-of-consciousness, even with the more trade pieces.
I lost that when I moved to the UK, and then to the US, and it took me a long time to get it back, since I felt I had to “impress” my past readers in English and held back from publishing due to fear of looking like a fool. I forgot the fun in blogging. And it was this observation of how people react to mistakes in pickup weekend games that showed me I have a different public this time.
My friend asked me if I like America. I said yes, and used this basketball story. She understood why.
Ever since I was a child, I had been thinking about death and ways to cheat it, to survive beyond the abyss. People do it with books, content, personas, legacies, children and other ways they want to be remembered. But that was never good enough for me. It’s too passive, you can’t reap the rewards of it, you can’t see how generations interact with your brand/legacy/offspring and you sure hell can’t contribute anymore.
Recently, I’ve been following the latest developments in brain-machine interface, including early research, invasive methods or visions of the future from companies like Neuralink. There are about 20 or so organizations that CB Insights has labeled as working on connecting us to machines.
See, the problem is our own interfaces are 50,000 years old, like our bodies. While they function well and work for the hunter – gatherer, they are becoming more and more stressed – both literally and figuratively – by what we are trying to achieve as a species. Imagine you didn’t have to speak, type or even see, hear or touch, but everything you experience happens directly in your brain.
That’s the future I would like to see unfold in my lifetime and it will lead us to merging with machines, using them as our vessels after our bodies no longer serve us, which is in about 70-80 years now. Sure, with modern medicine we might reach 120-130 years, but it’s hard to imagine more than that at this point.
So come with me on a little journey to find version 1.0 of the first fully digital brain.
Early brain computer interfaces
You can probably use Google to find the early days of brain-computer interfaces, so I won’t go to deep into what’s been done. These guys put together a good history of research done so far on connecting brains to machines. Spoiler, it often involved drills, cables and electrodes attached to the brain. Not fun, also not easy to survive long with that kind of invasion to your skull, due to bacteria and stuff.
I had a chance to talk about this with folks at a Brain Machine Interface event in San Francisco hosted by Berkeley researchers. Even posted on Instagram about it.
Everyone agrees we’re still early, but significant progress has been made. Like this team playing chess with their minds, that was recently documented on Arxiv.
Non invasive BMI like the company Facebook bought
It’s no secret Facebook wants to build a brain-machine interface. They have been working at it since the 2017 F8 announcement. It only seems natural, after years of collecting our most private thoughts and relationships, with our consent, that they would think of the best ways to get more share of our attention and brain. I know some people find this creepy already, but I am intrigued of the possibilities of actually finding likeminded people on Facebook with the help of these interfaces.
Ok, side note, I would be disappointed if you didn’t smile at my likeminded pun and that would make me question your understanding of this article.
But back to Facebook – they reportedly spent over $1B to acquire CTRL-Labs, a startup working on a such interface. Imagine combining the CTRL-kit (their device package) with Facebooks knowledge graph and with Oculus VR. Wouldn’t that be the perfect alternative world, where you think and you become part of it?
I would love to see some early prototypes and examples soon, so we can meet our parents from across the world in VR and not have to fly 7000+ miles every time we want to hang out. Time will tell.
This part of the journey only enhances our experience, and creates new ways to interact. It won’t actually mess with our cognitive abilities. Ok, maybe marginally, as we learn how to interact in the new world. The next part is where things get really exciting.
Brain functional enhancement with external processors/neural nets
This part is more future looking, so there will be less examples, more me trying to conceptualize what’s coming once our brains are truly connected to computers, not just through a wristband, but for real.
There’s already some headway done here, as well. Scientists at Graz University of Technology and UC Irvine have had breakthroughs in restoring motor functions of people with spinal injuries. It’s still early days, but it gives people hope.
Restoring functions after injuries is great and will help loads of people lead normal lives after otherwise life-altering accidents or illnesses. However, the next level is augmentation with other neural nets and external processors. The human brain performance varies significantly due to how you’re brought up, what you eat, how you learn, what you listen to, how chemicals flow inside it. What if you could leverage add-ons, like a new language skill neural net, or a neural net that does advanced algebra for you so you don’t have to go through college to learn it, or code. You would plug in the new net and transfer that exact pattern into your existing cortex or you could carry the add-on around with you and not have to rewrite your own brain. Feels a bit like Johnny Mnemonic, but I believe it’s possible in the next 20-30 years. After all, the brain and the way we think is very probabilistic, eerily similar to how neural nets understand and process information. Theoretically, by enriching your organic level neural nets with these engineered ones, you could jump through knowledge hoops faster.
I recently read a book called The Forever War, where the Taurans share a collective, yet centralized, knowledge server, where they upload and download their collective experiences as a sum of the parts – each tauran. That’s another way one could enhance one’s knowledge – know everything that everyone knows at a given time. It’s kind of having Google inside your brain and not having to use a computer. Imagine the possibilities.
Quantum neural net
While some people argue that we are all operating with quantum concepts in our brains – either consciously or unconsciously – by making scenario analysis and running risk-reward queries, it’s still quite discreet for the vast majority of people and rather slow even for those who can do it while being aware of it. For example, card counting, chess, these are applications of this type of scenario planning.
Imagine you could outsource this analysis to a quantum neural net, to a quantum computer that you can carry around in your pocket or even inside your skull. It could be powered by your bio-electricity and it could help you boost your scenario planning skills by running parallel computing at unthinkable speeds. This would accelerate decision-making, research, trials, investment, dating, virtually all life events.
The requirement for this is twofold – a great interface that’s non-invasive and a functioning quantum computer that adapts to whatever problem your brains throw at it, while still being portable.
Actually, I can also challenge the portability concept, because you can link up to it via LTE/5G/future mobile interfaces and not have to carry it around. It’s a single point of failure and centralizes the system a bit, but we’ll have to make do with that vulnerability for a while, if that’s what it takes.
I did spill over into this next step a little. This evolution of the quantum neural net can also store and reference existing information and experience it has collected throughout its interactions with humans. It’s basically a rudimentary version of a brain companion, which becomes complementary to the human brain.
It won’t be as vast and as versatile at the beginning, but it will be a step up – since it will be able to operate untethered, kind of like your Apple Watch without the phone nearby. This opens the door to creating mini-skill-bots, virtual brains that perform one function of your own brain really well repeatedly and consistently – like the UiPath RPA bots.
I can go a step further and say that a marketplace can be created for these bots and they can be paid in micro-transactions via the blockchain, as they complete tasks for you or for others that need that skill. They could even help you in your own job, create new kinds of jobs and replace meaningless work altogether.
Again, there’s the conversation here if we can host them on a personal device / implant or if they can be cloud-based or blockchain hosted and run decentralized, as a service. That would enable a whole new arbitrage market – where you buy computing and storage, train the mini-brain and sell its services to pay for the initial investment / running costs. Endless possibilities.
Fully digital brain on a server and/or distributed system
We’re now at a point where we’re not only able to communicate back and forth with machines, but we can also create mini-brains that run on prem or in the cloud, kind of like brain microservices, if you know what those are. No worries if you don’t, they have been explained on that page I linked above.
The challenge now is to connect those microservices and form a fully digital brain, that’s capable of operating on its own, without the human creator. It would have to be able to learn and decide on its own, contribute to society or get crushed by the debt incurred by its running costs. This brain, or should I say entity, is the singularity, the moment humanity creates new “life” inside a computer, life that can replicate, contribute, interact, learn, destroy, torture, you get my point.
This is now the point where we have a competitor on our hands – sapiens digitalus. I lost the human part of it for the sake of evolution, but who knows, it might be more human than many of us on this planet today.
Fully digital brain on blockchain systems for immutability
As we are building the world computer on multiple blockchains, it’s only natural to now think about hosting the new digital beings on blockchains, too, so they become immutable. If we host them on servers (prem or cloud), they are still bound by one single system, a single point of failure. While this vulnerability could keep them closer under human control, it could also limit their evolutionary capabilities.
What if we could release them in the blockchain and have them operate on the world super-computers? That way, they cannot be easily destroyed. Sure, you can already see Skynet rising and humans being driven to extinction, but this could also mean we can use them as vessels to preserve human knowledge, advance it and transcend with them.
A step up from here would be for the digital beings to run their own chains, build their own factories, robots and servers, produce their own energy and finally find ways to get out of the solar system to explore other worlds. For them, time does not matter anymore, since there is very little decay compared to the fragile human shell we currently call our body. They could travel for thousands of years at near light speed to jump from galaxy to galaxy and understand more about the universe that we would ever be capable of. In an ideal world, we’re friends with these creatures and they help us grow our collective knowledge. In a bad scenario, we’re extinct or kept in zoos/breeding planets, as a diversity and preservation effort. Wouldn’t that be ironic?
I didn’t want to reveal my goal until the very end — but these digital beings that I mentioned above are likely to be us, the elders. My dream is for technology to advance to the level where we can upload our entire life experience as we approach an age where the body becomes inhabitable and we have to die. This is the equivalent to immortality. Sure, you won’t feel the same feelings, you won’t taste food, you won’t have the same type of experiences, but with tech advancements, you should be able to plug into a network of sensors far superior to what your body could offer and find new ways to feel the world.
Imagine having uploaded your brain before death and being onboard a starship that wanders through the galaxy exploring new life. Or being able to continue to live on, find new goals, connect with new people, see how your offspring and their offspring and their offspring do, talk to them and grow your circle for eons.
Hell, it could even become boring after a while and bring forth the digital turnoff movement, the digital beings/brains that have had enough and want to be shut down. But I doubt that such beings won’t find more purpose in a world that’s changing every day.
In summary, I’m excited about the world and what we can achieve a society, if only we would forget our little bickering and focus on technology advancements, AI, brain interfaces, body repair and restoration and improving the way we interact with our environment.
You stare at a blank page and you think — this is going to be my capstone, the best piece I have written so far. Then you start putting pressure on yourself to deliver and it becomes a chore, a burden. That dries up your inner writing flow and the blank page stays blank.
I have done that here. I have done that by boxing my writing into certain topics, trying to set fixed expectations when my mind is nothing but fixed. I want to change that now.
10 years ago, when I first started writing, it was raw, unfiltered, unfettered, and it spoke to a few people. Then it spoke to more and more, soon becoming one of the best professional blogs in my country.
But I moved to the UK in 2014 and part of me got left behind. I thought I could continue writing the same way, but I failed to recognize the fact that I couldn’t force a flow in a new language, a new industry and a world I had not experienced.
After all, it took me 22 years to start writing in Romania, so why shouldn’t I expect at least some lead time? It only took me another 5 years to get to a point where I don’t need to box the writing in and let it flow.
A few months ago, I wrote about how life is an improv game. Mine combines AI, blockchain, brain-computer interfaces, super-countries, social evolution and multiculturalism with a strong liberal flavor.
If you are reading this and wondering what’s going on, look inside, let got and ride the flow. It will take you where you need to be.
For me, the show is just about to start. Act II. Yes, and…