Blockchain Thinking: Transition to Digital Societies of Multispecies Intelligence

The future world could be one of multi-species intelligence. The possibility space could include “classic” humans, enhanced humans, digital mindfile uploads, and many forms of artificial intelligence: deep learning neural nets, machine learning algorithms, blockchain-based DACs (distributed autonomous organizations), and whole-brain software emulations. Machine modes of existence are different than those of humans, which means the need for ways to interact that facilitate and extend the existence of both parties.

Blockchains for Trustful Interspecies Social Contracts
The properties of blockchain technology as a decentralized, distributed, global, permanent, code-based ledger of transactions could be useful in managing such interactions. The cryptographic ledger system could be used for interactions either between humans or multispecies parties, exactly because it is not necessary to know, trust, or understand the other entity, just the code system.

While perhaps not a full answer to the problem of trustful multispecies interaction, and the subcase of enacting Friendly AI, decentralized smart networks like blockchains are a robust system of checks and balances. As such, blockchains are a mechanism with more leverage than other available solutions in responding to situations of future uncertainty. Blockchains could be the infrastructure for setting forth the new social contract between humans and technology, and formalizing this arrangement in smart contracts.

Mutual Coexistence in the Capacity Spectrum for Actualization
Trust-building models for interspecies digital intelligence interaction could include both game-theoretic checks-and-balances systems like blockchains to alleviate threats and fears, and also at a higher level, frameworks that put entities on the same plane of shared objectives. The problem frame of machine and human intelligence should not be one that characterizes relations as oppositional, but rather one that aligns entities on the same ground and value system for the most important shared parameters, like growth and actualization.

What we want is the ability to experience, grow, and contribute more, for both humans and machines, and the two in symbiosis and synthesis. This can be conceived as all entities existing on a spectrum of capacity for individuation (the ability to grow and realize potential). Productive interaction between intelligent species could be fostered by being joined in the common framework of a capacity spectrum that facilitates the objectives of personal, mutual, and collective growth in creating the digital communities of the future.

Adapted from: Swan, M. We Should Consider The Future World As One Of Multi-Species Intelligence. Response to The Edge Question 2015. Ed. John Brockman. 2015. 

Integrated Information as a Measure of Consciousness

The fourth FQXi international conference was held in Vieques Puerto Rico January 6-10, 2014 on the Physics of Information.

The first and primary focus was on information in the quantitative physical sense, as opposed to the epistemic sense, particularly as information is used in quantum mechanics. There are several objective measurable definitions of information such as Shannon information. Objective information and other mathematical and physics theories were also used to formalize definitions and distinctions between determinism, free will, and predictability, and intelligence versus consciousness.

Many talks and debates helped to sharpen thinking regarding consciousness, where we have been stuck with crude explanatory heuristics like ‘consciousness may be an emergent property of any sufficiently complex system.’ Interesting and provocative research was presented by Giulio Tononi and Larissa Albantakis from the Center for Sleep and Consciousness at the University of Wisconsin. They have an objective measure called ‘integrated information’ which is meant as the compositional character of experience (including subjective experience), and represents the causality amongst macro-level elements within a system. There could be systems that are complex at the macro level but have low integrated information if there are not extensive mechanisms with causal relations within the system. In other words, complexity does not necessarily confer consciousness, and the relevant factors to look for could be causality and experience. 

Crowd Models Become Pervasive Across Society

Crowd-based models are becoming so pervasive that almost no major segment of modern life is left untouched by them. The concept of digital crowd models refers to the coordination of large numbers of individuals (the crowd) through an open call on the Internet in the conduct of some sort of activity.

Not only are crowd models an efficient at-scale alternative to former methods that the Internet now affords, but at another level, crowd models are also a node of progress for humanity, both individually and en masse. An inherent property of crowd models is greater autonomy, decision-making, and action-taking by the individual. This means greater individual agency whilst simultaneously enabling group collaboration projects at previously unimaginable scales, for example, possibly ultimately coordinating and employing the cognitive power of millions of human agents.  

Crowd Models by Sector

• In economics, there are crowdsourced labor marketplaces where simple tasks and professional services requests can be posted and fulfilled, crowdfunding websites for financing projects, and group purchasing mechanisms. 
• In politics, crowd models mean the use of big data and social media to organize opinion and action, conduct direct marketing, and affect change. 
• In the social venue, blogs, social networks, and online dating sites are examples of crowd models. 
• In entertainment, there are massively multiplayer online games and virtual worlds. In education, vast eLearning networks are populating the landscape. 
• In health, there are health social networks, digital health collaboration and experimentation communities, crowdscience competitions, and new movements such as the quantified self. 
• In the legal venue, digital public goods have arisen through crowd contributions such as the Wikipedia, online health databanks, and other data commons resources.

Singularity Summit 2012: Image Recognition, Analogy, Big Health Data, and Bias Reduction

The seventh Singularity Summit was held in San Francisco, California on October 13-14, 2012. As in other years, there were about 600 attendees, although this year’s conference program included both general-interest science and singularity-related topics. Singularity in this sense denotes a technological singularity - a potential future moment when smarter-than-human intelligence may arise. The conference was organized by the Singularity Institute, who focuses on researching safe artificial intelligence architectures. The key themes of the conference are summarized below. Overall the conference material could be characterized as incrementalism within the space of traditional singularity-related work and faster-moving advances coming in other fields such as image recognition, big health data, synthetic biology, crowdsourcing, and biosensors.

Key Themes:

• Singularity Thought Leadership
• Big Data Artificial Intelligence: Image Recognition
• Era of Big Health Data
• Improving Cognition: Bias Reduction and Analogies
• Singularity Predictions

Singularity Thought Leadership
Singularity thought leader Vernor Vinge, who coined the term technological singularity, provided an interesting perspective. Already since at least 2000, he has been referring to the idea of computing-enabled matter and the wireless Internet-of-things as Digital Gaia. He noted that 5% of objects worldwide are already embedded with microprocessors, and it could be scary as reality ‘wakes up’ further, especially as we are unable to control other phenomena we have created such as financial markets. He was pessimistic regarding privacy, suggesting that Brin’s traditional counterproposal to surveillance, sousveillance, is not necessarily better. More positively, he discussed the framing of computers as a neo-neocortex for the brain, extreme UIs to provide convenient and unobtrusive cognitive support, other intelligence amplification techniques, and how we have been unconsciously prepping many of our environments for robotic operations. There has also been the rise of an important resource in crowdsourcing as the network (the Internet plus potentially 7 billion Turing-test passing agents) filters optimal resources to specific cognitive tasks (like protein folding analysis).

Big Data Artificial Intelligence: Image Recognition
Peter Norvig continued in his usual vein of discussing what has been important in resolving contemporary problems in artificial intelligence. In machine translation (interestingly a Searlean Chinese room), the key was using large online data corpuses and straightforward machine learning algorithms (The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Data). In more recent work, his lab at Google has been able to recognize pictures of cats. In this digital vision processing advance (announced in June 2012 (article, paper)), the key was creating neural networks for machine learning that used hierarchical representation and problem solving, and again large online data corpuses (10 million images scanned by 16,000 computers) and straightforward learning algorithms.

Era of Big Health Data 
Three speakers presented innovations in the era of big health data, a sector which is generating data faster than any other and starting to use more sophisticated artificial intelligence techniques. Carl Zimmer pointed out that new viruses are continuing to develop and spread, and that this is expected to persist. Encouragingly, new viruses are genetically sequenced increasingly rapidly, but it still takes time breed up vaccines. A faster means of vaccine production could possibly come from newer techniques in synthetic biology and nanotechnology such as those from Angela Belcher’s lab.  Linda Avey discussed Curious, Inc, a personal data discovery platform in beta launch that looks for correlations across big health data streams (more information). John Wilbanks discussed the pyrrhic notion of privacy provided by traditional models as we move to a cloud-based big health data era (for example, only a few data points are needed to identify an individual and medical records may have ~500,000). Some health regulatory innovations include an updated version of HIPAA privacy policies, a portable consent for granting the use of personalized genomic data, and a network where patients may connect directly with researchers.

Improving Cognition: Bias Reduction and Analogies (QS’ing Your Thinking) 
A perennial theme in the singularity community is improving thinking and cognition, for example through bias reduction. Nobel Prize winner Daniel Kahneman spoke remotely on his work regarding fast and slow thinking. We have two thinking modes, fast (blink intuitions) and slow (more deliberative logical) thinking, both of which are indispensable and potentially problematic. Across all thinking is a strong inherent loss aversion, and this helps to generate a bias towards optimism. Steven Pinker also spoke about the theme of bias, indirectly. In recent work, he found that there has been a persistent decline in violence over the multi-century history of time, possibly mostly due to increases in affluence and literacy/knowledge. This may seem counter to popular media accounts which, guided by short-term interests, help to create an area of societal cognitive bias. Other research regarding cognitive enhancement and the processes of intelligence was Melanie Mitchell’s claim that analogies are a key attribute of intelligence. The practice of using analogies in new and appropriate ways could be a means of identifying intelligence, perhaps superior to other mechanisms such as general-purpose problem solving, question-answering, or Turing test-passing as the traditional proxies for intelligence.

Singularity Predictions 
Another persistent theme in the singularity community is sharpening analysis, predictions, and context around the moment when there might be greater-than-human intelligence. Singularity movement leader Ray Kurzweil made his usual optimistic remarks accompanied by slides with exponentiating curves of technology cost/functionality improvements, but did not confirm or update his long-standing prediction of a technological singularity circa 2045 [1]. Stuart Armstrong pointed out how predictions are usually 15-25 years out, and that this is true every year. In an analysis of the Singularity Institute’s database of 257 singularity predictions from 1950 forward, there is no convergence of time in estimates ranging from 2020-2080. Vernor Vinge encourages the consideration of a wide range of scenarios and methods including ‘What if the Singularity Doesn’t Happen.’ The singularity prediction problem might be improved by widening the possibility space, for example perhaps it less useful to focus on intelligence as the exclusive element for the moment of innovation, speciation, or progress beyond human-level; other dimensions such as emotional intelligence, empathy, creativity, or a composite thereof could be considered.

Reference
1. Kurzweil, R. The Singularity is Near; Penguin Group: New York, NY, USA, 2006; pp. 299-367.

Supercomputing: 16 petaflops, schmetaflops?

Supercomputing advances continue to exponentiate – the world’s best machine (IBM’s Sequoia - BlueGene/Q installed in the U.S. at LLNL) currently has 16 petaflops of raw compute capability.

Figure 1. Data Source: Top 500 Supercomputing Sites

As shown in Figure 1, the curve has been popping – up from 2 to 16 petaflops in just two years! However for all its massivity, supercomputing remains a linear endeavor. While the average contemporary supercomputer has much greater than human-level capability in raw compute power, it cannot think, which is to say pattern-match and respond in new situations, and solve general rather than special-purpose problems.

For the future of intelligence and cognitive computing, the three-way horse race continues between enhancing biological human cognition, reverse-engineering and simulating the human brain in software, and hybrids of these two.

Principia Posthuman: an assertion-free posthuman philosophy

Although a definition of philosophy is hard to come by, and practitioners may be either loth to define it (sacrilegious to the field’s pervasive intentional obscurantism) or fill tomes with its consideration (Deleuze’s What is Philosophy? is one of the more recent examples), one purpose of philosophy would certainly seem to be serving as a tool for structuring thinking about almost any topic. In particular, the future is a welcome venue for more standardized tools for structuring thinking. Just because the future has not yet occurred, and linear and probabilistic forecasting is limited, does not mean that there could not be rigorous means of thinking about it.

In fact, whilst thinking about the future from a philosophical view, points arise which suggest that the current nature of philosophy may be limited and inapplicable to many future conditions, and will need to be extended and re-thought. For example, much of philosophy is built upon concepts like language, the self, and subject-object differences while it is not at all radical to envision a post-lingual, post-self, and post-subject object future. There are already starting to be more profound communication structures such as body language readers and holographic thought maps that could supplement and replace language as the only (and hopelessly narrowband and mediated) communication mechanism. The self can be seen as merely the current meatsphere holding tank for an individual brain in a future which might include a variety of biological and electronic copies, with different portions permissioned out to groupmind projects. Subject-object differences fade too with the controlled manipulations of nanotechnology and perspective-extending sensors.

Humbly proposed by a pseudonymous Mary Posthumanis then, is the need for a Principia Posthuman, a new thought paradigm that realizes just as ancient philosophy and theology were not enough and gave way to existentialism, that modern, post-modern, post-post-modern, neo-post-structuralism, post-subjectivity, etc. thinking is currently insufficient as a guidepost to the different possible flavors of posthuman future, and that a radical Posthuman Principia will be needed which apprehends post-Marxist economics, post-existential metaphysics, and a model-free, assertion-free, wholistic, noSQL philosophy.

Human morphology-changing technologies

To date, most technology has been human-created. It can be grouped into two categories, technologies that are not likely to have an immediate direct impact on human morphology, and those that might.

Technologies that would likely not change human morphology
There could be the rapid advent of significantly more dramatic technologies than have been experienced to date. While these new technologies could change some aspects of life, human biological drives could remain unchanged, and therefore the structure and dynamics of human societal organization, interaction, and goal pursuit could also remain unchanged. Some examples of these advances could include the realization of molecular nanotechnology, quantum computing, cold fusion, and immortality. Even with several of these revolutionary technologies implemented, the seemingly different world would not actually be structurally different if humanity is still ordered around the same familiar biologically-driven goals.

Technologies that might change human morphology
The other group of technologies is those which could possibly have a near-term impact on the structure and form of what it means to be human, for example, cognitive augmentation, genomic therapies, and synthetic biology. The area with the greatest possible change is improving human mental capability. There have been several significant advances in a variety of neurology-related fields in the last few years that if ultimately realized, could potentially alter human morphology. Even the resolution of all mental pathologies such as Parkinson’s disease, depression, stroke rehabilitation, and addiction would constitute morphological change at a basic level. Augmenting cognition and deliberately managing biophysical states would constitute morphological change at other levels.

Morphological reach of technology

Is technology simply the tools that humanity has created to further its will or a force that can change humanity? Whether arrowheads or supercomputers, humans have made technology to enable and reinforce human nature and evolutionary tendencies. However, it is possible that advanced technology could actually change humans, human nature, and biological drives, both unintentionally and by design.

Evolutionary adaptations and artificial intelligence

Art and religion are human evolutionary adaptations. Are there similar evolutionary adaptations that human-level and beyond artificial intelligence would be likely to make? Another way to ask this is whether art and religion were predictable? It seems that they were, maybe not the detailed outcomes, but that mechanisms would arise to allow for the achievement of human objectives such as status-garnering and mate selection.

Likewise, it seems quite possible that human-level and beyond artificial intelligence would be likely to make evolutionary adaptations. Utility functions could be edited in many ways. The primary area could be performance optimization, continuously improving cognition and other operations. A second area could be related to societal objectives to the extent that artificial intelligence is present in communities. Artificial intelligence might not have art and religion, but could have related mechanisms for achieving external and internal purposes.

Cognitive enhancement through longer Schwann cells

Do faster thinkers have longer Schwann cells? Evolution has optimized human brain signal transmission in the existing machinery. Schwann cells (nerve cells) are punctuated with Nodes of Ranvier, unwrapped spaces that occur regularly on axons between the myelin sheaths that wrap and insulate the axons. The Nodes of Ranvier make signal transmission faster and conserve energy.

While Schwann cells may be the minimal length for the selection processes of evolution, they may not be optimized for modern thought. In many cases, modern thought constitutes more reasoning, imagining, conceptualizing, and contemplation than fight or flight responses. Different brain patterns arise from the different kinds of thought. One path to cognitive enhancement could be lengthening Schwann cells for faster transmission and possibly faster cognition.

Phase transition in intelligence

There could be at least three approaches to the long-term future of intelligence: engineering life into technology, simulated intelligence, and artificial intelligence. Further, while the story of evolutionary history is the domination of one form of intelligence, the future could hold ecosystems with multiple kinds of intelligence, particular specialized by purpose/task.

There are significant technical hurdles in executing simulated intelligence and artificial intelligence, but the areas have been progressing in Moore’s Law fashion. The engineering of life into technology will need to proceed expediently to keep pace with technological advance, and tie a lot of wetware loose ends together.

At present, the mutation rate of genetic replication puts an upward bound on how complex biological organisms can be. The human cannot be more than about 10x as complex as Drosophila (the fruit fly), for example. However, if the error rate in the genetic replication machinery could be improved, maybe it would be possible to have organisms 10x more complex than humans, and so on, and so on…

Ethics of historical revivification

Thought experiment: Assuming a world or worlds without basic resource constraints, if technologically possible, would it be more humane or less human humane to revive dead persons from history? Even those recently dead could be out of sync with the current milieu. Obviously, there would need to be rehab programs as contemplated in science fiction, for example,

"Life 101: Introducing Genghis Khan to the iPhone"

If is arguable that some large percent of dead persons would find enjoyment and utility in revivification.

The interpretation of the core rights of the individual could be different in the future. “Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” seems immutable, even when considered in the possible farther future context of many worlds, uploaded mindfiles, and human/AI hybrid intelligences. However, how these principles are applied in practice could seem strange from different historical viewpoints.

Attributes that might be important to an individual now, for example embodiment or corporeality (being physically instantiated in a body), could well be moot in the future. On-demand instantiation could be a norm to complement digital mindfiles.

It could be queried whether revived historical persons should have the option to re-die? Dying and suicide could be much different conceptually in a digital upload culture. Choosing not to run your mindfile could be legal, but deleting it (and all backups) could be the equivalent of suicide, which is generally illegal in contemporary society.

Supercomputing and human intelligence

As of November 2009, the world’s fastest supercomputer was the Cray Jaguar located at the U.S. Department of Energy’s Oak Ridge National Laboratory, operating at 1.8 petaflops (1.8 x 10¹⁵ flops). Unlike human brain capacity, supercomputing capacity has been growing exponentially. In June 2005, the world’s fastest supercomputer was the IBM Blue Gene/L at Los Alamos National Laboratory, running at 0.1 petaflops. In less than five years, the Jaguar represents an order of magnitude increase, the latest culmination of capacity doublings each few years. (Figure 1)

Figure 1. Growth in supercomputer power

Source: Ray Kurzweil with modifications

The next supercomputing node, one more order of magnitude, at 10¹⁶ flops, is expected in 2011 with the Pleiades, Blue Waters, or Japanese RIKEN systems. 10¹⁶ flops would possibly allow the functional simulation of the human brain.

Clearly, there are many critical differences between the human brain and supercomputers. Supercomputers tend to be modular in architecture and address specific problems as opposed to having the general problem solving capabilities of the human brain. Having equal to or greater than human-level raw computing power in a machine does not necessarily confer the ability to compute as a human. Some estimates of the raw computational power of the human brain range between 10¹³ and 10¹⁶ operations per second. This would indicate that

supercomputing power is already on the order of estimated human brain capacity, but intelligent or human-simulating machines do not yet exist.

The digital comparison of raw computational capability may not be the right measure for understanding the complexity of the brain. Signal transmission is different in biological systems, with a variety of parameters such as context and continuum determining the quality and quantity of signals.

Neurotechnology taboos

There is a claim that the magnitude of change that could eventually be possible with neurotechnology makes it different from other technologies. Those who choose not to buy cell phones may not be able to communicate in certain situations, but those who choose not to adopt cognitive enhancement may not be able to participate meaningfully in society.

This claim has already arisen with regard to smart drugs, that school and work environments have become so competitive, that it is not possible to compete effectively on an unenhanced basis. Professional baseball has been a prominent example of the enhancement issue, where enhancement is illegal, yet widespread. Like many other technology rollouts, and particularly given the sensitivities regarding neurotechnology, it could be that incremental tiers of pathology cures become well-grounded before being extended slowly for enhancement purposes. Legally, in certain nation-states, that is.

Philosophically, it could be queried whether mental health is any different than physical health. Humans and societies may not be able to think objectively about mental enhancement given taboos.

Engineering life into technology

Information optimization, presently known as intelligence, is a centerpiece phenomenon in the universe. It arises from simplicity, then continuously breaks symmetry and cycles through instability on its progression to increasingly dense nodes of complexity and diversity.

A contemporary imbalance has arisen that exponentially growing technology is potentially poised to be a sole successor to human intelligence. A complex dynamical system is emerging in response, the engineering of life into technology. Numerous macroscopic and microscopic elements are under development which could together stimulate advancement to the next node of symmetry and stability, creating a phase transition in intelligence which could broadly include many varieties of sentience.

The macroscopic and microscopic network elements that comprise the complex adaptive system, engineering life into technology, are illustrated in Figure 1.

Figure 1: Elements of engineering life into technology

Integration of life and technology

Life and technology are thought of as discrete but they are starting to converge (a detailed explanation is here) and could continue to become increasingly integrated, unified as is sought with the physical laws. Life sciences have evolved from being an art to a science to now an engineering problem. Life is complex but finite and it is quite possible that all biological processes, human and otherwise, will be understood and managed, including disease and death. All matter, including life, could be designed to spec in the future; the aims of synthetic biology, building genetically-precise organisms from the bottom up, programmable matter and molecular nanotechnology are early examples. In the future, form factor and embodiment could be temporary and determined by purpose.



The above graphic represents the evolution of human and machine intelligence. Given the faster pace of technology advancement, a crossover point, sometimes called the technological singularity is inevitable. Futurist Ray Kurzweil expects this point of machine intelligence surpassing [current] human intelligence in 2029. The two curves could merge (the Human’ line above), with humans reengineering themselves into technology that can learn and evolve as fast as information technology. In actuality, there may be many forms of biological life integrating with technology and more ‘human’ diversity than has ever existed.

Future of intelligence
It is not clear that there is anything special or inherently undesignable or unreplicable about intelligence. Intelligence may be nothing more than the manipulation of patterns of information, and presumably could be substrate agnostic and executor agnostic.

Machine creativity

What are the relevant differences between humans and the machines of the future?

The general claim is that the uniqueness of humans is creativity, imagination and fallibility.

Creativity is rationality
Examining and demystifying the concept of creativity suggests that machines can be every bit as creative as humans. Creativity is merely a new idea or approach, a novel solution to a problem, a fresh representation; a process, a personality attribute, a mindset, an approach to life.

Alternative intelligences/machines can use brute force to rationally crunch through the set of all possible answers to a problem and suggest which are best. Much human creativity comes from "out-of-the-box" thinking which is largely applying knowledge, structure or skills from another domain, and also making mistakes (penicillin, 3M's post-its, Nike's waffle soles, painter Apelles' foam depiction, etc.). Machines can easily do all of this and more, testing a wide range of "out-of-the-box" domains and applying inverse or orthogonal analysis to incorporate human creativity by trial and error.

It is not clear that humans have any positive aspect that cannot be replicated or superseded by an alternative intelligence/machine. Therefore, nothing appears to be lost in the potential extinguishment of the human form as intelligence evolves to non-biological substrates.

Relevancy for digital humans

So much of the structure of current human experience will be irrelevant in an upload world. The ultimate state will be one where identity, nationalism, community, belongingness, property rights, economy and resource requirements all go away. All that will be left is creativity, entertainment, actualization and intelligence's pure focus on problem-solving.

There may be an intermediary phase where digital humans attempt to translate and create a surrogate structure of their former world:

-Property rights no longer pertain to physical objects but control over one's source code and ideas

-Competition for scarce resources becomes over computing resources to run one's digital self rather than over money, foodstuffs and energy

-Competition for status, that great biological human pastime, becomes not material and money-based but idea-based

-Survival means not against the physical conditions of heat, cold, hunger, disease, etc. but rather regarding the backup, storage and access to digital human source files

-Reproduction becomes not about the spreading of genes biologically but about the legality and compute resources required for creating, merging and modifying additional instances

-Politics becomes not about large security-driven nation-states with special interests and contract awards but looser federations concerned with rights, freedoms, preferences and voluntary participations.

Brave New Simu World

What an exciting world we live in with so many new and evolving forms of entertainment, learning, experiencing, interacting and actualizing. And they are all converging, merging and bubbling into new possibilities. It's all part of the trends to seamlessness between learning and entertainment and people being more interactive and expressive with every medium.

We used to have radio, then TV, then cable, then video games, then online video games and MMOGs (massive multi-player online games).

As one great example of what is available now, SimuLearn offers the Virtual Leader simulation elearning tool to develop leadership skills for corporate and government customers. What a great tool this could be. What if everyone in a work team played themselves in the online simulation? What if everyone played others especially swapping roles up and down the power hierarchy, what could you learn by playing your supervisor? What if every role was played by others with your personality and work skill characteristics? A dream or a nightmare?

There can be at least two ways to play a role; first by being yourself doing the responsibilities of that position or second by inheriting or creating character attributes (personality, skills, etc.) that filter/direct how the player you are playing can perform their role and interact in that context. Being someone else from the constraints of their value system, background, personality, skills, mindset and outlook can be hugely educational. Identifying these aspects of yourself can be extremely educational. This would be useful in any and all contexts of human interaction: professional relationships, personal relationships, interactions between any entities, politics, international relations in particular....

Kuma War offers game simulations of real world events, mainly war strategy related. The Great Divine is a move-through-the-stages video game but ability to move up is measured via biofeedback of how calm you are. And of course The Sims were the original simulation platform, with Sims Online and Second Life now growing exponentially as users create their experiences, realize their creativity and interact with others.

How soon can we have holographic 3-D displays and simulated conversations with non-human characters representing our dream characters or real-life people!