Because I usually take the role of trying to explain to people how wonderful the new technologies that are coming along are going to be, and I thought that, since I was among friends here, I would tell you what I really think and try to look back and try to understand what is really going on here with these amazing jumps in technology that seem so fast that we can barely keep on top of it.
Pentru ca imi asum de obicei rolul de a incerca sa explic oamenilor cat de extraordinare vor fi noile tehnologii care vor aparea si m-am gandit ca, fiind intre prieteni aici, sa va spun ce cred cu adevarat si sa incerc sa privesc inapoi si sa inteleg ce se intampla de fapt aici cu aceste salturi extraordinare in tehnologie care se deruleaza asa de repede incat abia mai putem tine pasul cu ele.
So I'm going to start out by showing just one very boring technology slide. And then, so if you can just turn on the slide that's on. This is just a random slide that I picked out of my file. What I want to show you is not so much the details of the slide, but the general form of it. This happens to be a slide of some analysis that we were doing about the power of RISC microprocessors versus the power of local area networks. And the interesting thing about it is that this slide, like so many technology slides that we're used to, is a sort of a straight line on a semi-log curve. In other words, every step here represents an order of magnitude in performance scale. And this is a new thing that we talk about technology on semi-log curves. Something really weird is going on here. And that's basically what I'm going to be talking about.
Asa ca voi incepe prin a arata o prezentare despre tehnologie. Si apoi, daca puteti da drumul prezentarii. Aceasta prezentare este una aleasa la intamplare. Ceea ce vreau sa va arat nu sunt atat detaliile prezentarii, ci forma ei generala. Aceasta prezentare se refera la o analiza facuta despre puterea microprocesoarelor RISC contra puterii retelelor locale. Si ce este interesant la prezentare este ca aceasta, ca multe altele de felul ei cu care suntem obisnuiti, este o linie dreapta intr-un grafic semilogaritmic. Cu alte cuvinte, fiecare pas de aici reprezinta o magnitudine pe scara performantei. Si acesta este un lucru nou sa vorbim despre tehnologie pe grafice semilogaritmice. ` Si despre asta voi vorbi de fapt.
So, if you could bring up the lights. If you could bring up the lights higher, because I'm just going to use a piece of paper here. Now why do we draw technology curves in semi-log curves? Well the answer is, if I drew it on a normal curve where, let's say, this is years, this is time of some sort, and this is whatever measure of the technology that I'm trying to graph, the graphs look sort of silly. They sort of go like this. And they don't tell us much. Now if I graph, for instance, some other technology, say transportation technology, on a semi-log curve, it would look very stupid, it would look like a flat line. But when something like this happens, things are qualitatively changing. So if transportation technology was moving along as fast as microprocessor technology, then the day after tomorrow, I would be able to get in a taxi cab and be in Tokyo in 30 seconds. It's not moving like that. And there's nothing precedented in the history of technology development of this kind of self-feeding growth where you go by orders of magnitude every few years.
Deci, daca puteti lumina sus. Daca puteti lumina mai sus, pentru ca voi folosi o bucata de hartie. Acum de ce desenam grafice tehnologice in grafice semilogaritmice? Ei bine raspunsul este, daca as desena pe un grafic normal unde, sa spunem, acestia sunt anii, acesta este un fel de timp, si aceasta este masura tehnologiei pe care incerc sa o desenez, diagramele par stupide. Arata cam asa. Si nu ne spun prea multe. Acum daca desenez, de exemplu, alte tehnologii, de exemplu tehnologia transportului, pe un tabel semilogaritmic, ar arata foarte stupid, ca o linie dreapta. Dar cand se intampla ceva de genul acesta, calitatea lucrurilor se imbunatateste. Deci daca tehnologia transportului s-ar dezvolta la fel de repede ca cea a microprocesoarelor, atunci poimaine, as putea sa ma urc intr-un taxi si sa ajung in Tokio in 30 de secunde. Nu se intampla asa. Si nu exista precedent in istoria dezvoltarii tehnologice a unei astfel de auto-crestere unde vorbim de magnitudine la fiecare cativa ani.
Now the question that I'd like to ask is, if you look at these exponential curves, they don't go on forever. Things just can't possibly keep changing as fast as they are. One of two things is going to happen. Either it's going to turn into a sort of classical S-curve like this, until something totally different comes along, or maybe it's going to do this. That's about all it can do. Now I'm an optimist, so I sort of think it's probably going to do something like that. If so, that means that what we're in the middle of right now is a transition. We're sort of on this line in a transition from the way the world used to be to some new way that the world is. And so what I'm trying to ask, what I've been asking myself, is what's this new way that the world is? What's that new state that the world is heading toward? Because the transition seems very, very confusing when we're right in the middle of it.
Acum intrebarea mea este, daca te uiti la aceste grafice exponentiale nu continua la nesfarsit. Lucrurile nu pot fi intr-o continua schimbare in ritmul alert in care o fac. Unul din doua lucruri se va intampla. Fie se va transforma intr-un grafic in forma de S ca acesta, pana cand apare ceva cu totul diferit, sau poate va face asta. Asta este cam tot ce poate face. Eu sunt un optimist, deci cred ca va fi cam asa. Daca este asa, suntem in mijlocul unei tranzitii. Suntem pe aceasta linie in tranzitia dintre cum era lumea si noua ei forma. Si ceea ce incerc sa intreb, ce m-am intrebat pe mine insumi, este cum este aceasta noua lume? Care este acea stare noua catre care se indreapta lumea? Pentru ca tranzitia pare foarte derutanta cand suntem exact in mijlocul ei.
Now when I was a kid growing up, the future was kind of the year 2000, and people used to talk about what would happen in the year 2000. Now here's a conference in which people talk about the future, and you notice that the future is still at about the year 2000. It's about as far as we go out. So in other words, the future has kind of been shrinking one year per year for my whole lifetime. Now I think that the reason is because we all feel that something's happening there. That transition is happening. We can all sense it. And we know that it just doesn't make too much sense to think out 30, 50 years because everything's going to be so different that a simple extrapolation of what we're doing just doesn't make any sense at all.
Cand eram copil, viitorul era ca anul 2000, si oamenii vorbeau despre ce se va intampla in 2000. Aceasta este o conferinta in care oamenii vorbesc despre viitor, si remarcati ca viitorul face referire tot la anul 2000. Cam atat de departe mergem. Cu alte cuvinte viitorul s-a cam micsorat an dupa an pe parcursul intregii mele vieti. Cred ca motivul este ca simtim cu totii ca se va intampla ceva acolo. Acea tranzitie se petrece. Cu totii o simtim. Si stim ca nu are prea mult sens sa ne gandim peste 30, 50 de ani pentru ca totul va fi asa de diferit ca o simpla extrapolare a ceea ce facem nu are nici un sens.
So what I would like to talk about is what that could be, what that transition could be that we're going through. Now in order to do that I'm going to have to talk about a bunch of stuff that really has nothing to do with technology and computers. Because I think the only way to understand this is to really step back and take a long time scale look at things. So the time scale that I would like to look at this on is the time scale of life on Earth. So I think this picture makes sense if you look at it a few billion years at a time.
Deci as dori sa vorbesc despre ce ar putea fi, ce ar putea fi acea tranzitie prin ceea ce trecem. Pentru a putea face asta va trebui sa vorbesc despre multe lucruri care nu au de a face cu tehnologia si computerele. Deoarece cred ca singurul mod de a intelege asta este sa faci un pas inapoi si sa privesti lucrurile prin dimensiunea timpului. Deci scara temporala la care as dori sa privim este aceea a vietii pe pamant. Deci cred ca aceasta imagine are sens daca facem referire la ea odata la cateva miliarde de ani.
So if you go back about two and a half billion years, the Earth was this big, sterile hunk of rock with a lot of chemicals floating around on it. And if you look at the way that the chemicals got organized, we begin to get a pretty good idea of how they do it. And I think that there's theories that are beginning to understand about how it started with RNA, but I'm going to tell a sort of simple story of it, which is that, at that time, there were little drops of oil floating around with all kinds of different recipes of chemicals in them. And some of those drops of oil had a particular combination of chemicals in them which caused them to incorporate chemicals from the outside and grow the drops of oil. And those that were like that started to split and divide. And those were the most primitive forms of cells in a sense, those little drops of oil.
Deci daca mergi inapoi acum doua miliarde si jumatate de ani, Pamantul era o bucata mare de roca sterila cu multe chimicale plutind in jurul sau. Iar daca privim felul in care chimicalele s-au organizat, incepem sa intelegem destul de bine cum o fac. Si cred ca sunt teorii care incep sa inteleaga cum a inceput RNA dar voi spune o poveste simpla despre asta, si anume, ca la acea data erau picaturi mici de ulei care pluteau cu tot felul de diferite retete chimice in ele. Si unele dintre acele stropi de ulei aveau o combinatie de chimicale mai deosebita care a cauzat incorporarea chimicalelor exterioare si cresterea picaturilor de ulei. Si cele care erau asa au inceput sa se separe si sa se divida. Si acelea au fost cele mai primitive celule intr-un fel, acele picaturi de ulei.
But now those drops of oil weren't really alive, as we say it now, because every one of them was a little random recipe of chemicals. And every time it divided, they got sort of unequal division of the chemicals within them. And so every drop was a little bit different. In fact, the drops that were different in a way that caused them to be better at incorporating chemicals around them, grew more and incorporated more chemicals and divided more. So those tended to live longer, get expressed more.
Dar acele picaturi nu erau cu adevarat in viata, cum spunem acum, pentru ca fiecare dintre ele era o reteta de chimicale aleatorie. Si ori de cate ori se diviza, aveau o diviziune inegala a chimicalelor din interior. Deci fiecare picatura era putin diferita. De fapt picaturile care erau diferite intr-un fel care le facea sa fie mai bune la incorporarea chimicalelor din jurul lor, cresteau mai mult si incorporau mai multe chimicale divizandu-se mai mult. Deci cele mai longevive, sunt mai exprimate.
Now that's sort of just a very simple chemical form of life, but when things got interesting was when these drops learned a trick about abstraction. Somehow by ways that we don't quite understand, these little drops learned to write down information. They learned to record the information that was the recipe of the cell onto a particular kind of chemical called DNA. So in other words, they worked out, in this mindless sort of evolutionary way, a form of writing that let them write down what they were, so that that way of writing it down could get copied. The amazing thing is that that way of writing seems to have stayed steady since it evolved two and a half billion years ago. In fact the recipe for us, our genes, is exactly that same code and that same way of writing. In fact, every living creature is written in exactly the same set of letters and the same code.
Acesta este o simpla forma chimica de viata, dar lucrurile au devenit interesante cand aceste picaturi au invatat ce inseamna abstractia. Cumva, prin moduri pe care nu le prea intelegem, aceste picaturi au invatat sa scrie informatia. Au invatat sa inregistreze informatia care era reteta celulei pe o anume chimicala numita ADN. Cu alte cuvinte, au creat, in evolutia lor haotica, o forma a scrisului care le permite sa transmita ce erau fiind posibila copierea. Uimitor este faptul ca acea forma de scriere pare sa fi ramas stabila de la evolutia sa de acum doua miliarde si jumatate de ani. De fapt reteta genelor noastre, este exact acelasi cod scris in acelasi fel. In fapt codul fiecarei creaturi este scris cu aceleasi litere care sunt la fel.
In fact, one of the things that I did just for amusement purposes is we can now write things in this code. And I've got here a little 100 micrograms of white powder, which I try not to let the security people see at airports. (Laughter) But this has in it -- what I did is I took this code -- the code has standard letters that we use for symbolizing it -- and I wrote my business card onto a piece of DNA and amplified it 10 to the 22 times. So if anyone would like a hundred million copies of my business card, I have plenty for everyone in the room, and, in fact, everyone in the world, and it's right here. (Laughter) If I had really been a egotist, I would have put it into a virus and released it in the room.
De fapt, unul dintre lucrurile pe care le-am facut, doar pentru amuzament, este ca putem sa scriem lucruri in acest cod. Am aici 100 micrograme de pudra alba, pe care incerc sa o ascund de paza din aeroport. (hohote de ras) Dar aceasta contine-- ce am facut a fost sa iau acest cod-- codul are litere standard folosite pentru a-l simboliza-- si mi-am scris cartea de vizita pe o bucata de ADN si am amplificat-o de 10 pana la 22 de ori. Daca doreste cineva o suta de milioane de copii ale cartii mele de vizita, am destule pentru toti cei de aici, si pentru intreaga populatie, chiar aici. (hohote de ras) Daca as fi fost intr-adevar un egocentric, l-as fi pus intr-un virus si l-as fi eliberat in incapere.
(Laughter)
(hohote de ras)
So what was the next step? Writing down the DNA was an interesting step. And that caused these cells -- that kept them happy for another billion years. But then there was another really interesting step where things became completely different, which is these cells started exchanging and communicating information, so that they began to get communities of cells. I don't know if you know this, but bacteria can actually exchange DNA. Now that's why, for instance, antibiotic resistance has evolved. Some bacteria figured out how to stay away from penicillin, and it went around sort of creating its little DNA information with other bacteria, and now we have a lot of bacteria that are resistant to penicillin, because bacteria communicate. Now what this communication allowed was communities to form that, in some sense, were in the same boat together; they were synergistic. So they survived or they failed together, which means that if a community was very successful, all the individuals in that community were repeated more and they were favored by evolution.
Deci care era urmatorul pas? Scrierea ADN-ului a fost interesanta. Si a dus la aparitia acestor celule-- lucru care le-a bucurat inca un miliard de ani. Dar a existat un alt pas foarte interesant cand lucrurile s-au schimbat complet, adica momentul in care celulele au inceput sa comunice si sa faca schimb de informatii, creand comunitati de celule. Nu stiu daca stiti, dar bacteriile pot chiar si sa schimbe ADN-ul. De aceea, spre exemplu, rezistenta la antibiotice a evoluat. Unele bacterii si-au dat seama cum sa se fereasca de penicilina, si a inceput sa isi creeze propria mini informatie ADN cu alte bacterii, avand acum multe bacterii rezistente la penicilina, pentru ca bacteriile comunica. Aceasta comunicare a permis formarea de comunitati aflate , oarecum, in aceeasi barca fiind sinergetice. Deci au supravietuit sau au dat gres impreuna, adica daca o comunitate avea mult succes, toti indivizii acelei comunitati se multiplicau si erau favorizati de evolutie.
Now the transition point happened when these communities got so close that, in fact, they got together and decided to write down the whole recipe for the community together on one string of DNA. And so the next stage that's interesting in life took about another billion years. And at that stage, we have multi-cellular communities, communities of lots of different types of cells, working together as a single organism. And in fact, we're such a multi-cellular community. We have lots of cells that are not out for themselves anymore. Your skin cell is really useless without a heart cell, muscle cell, a brain cell and so on. So these communities began to evolve so that the interesting level on which evolution was taking place was no longer a cell, but a community which we call an organism.
Punctul de tranzitie a urmat cand aceste comunitati s-au apropiat asa de mult incat, de fapt, s-au reunit si au decis sa scrie intreaga reteta pentru comunitate pe un singur ADN. Urmatorul pas interesant al vietii a durat un alt miliard de ani. In aceasta etapa, avem comunitati multi-celulare, comunitati cu multe tipuri diferite de celule, care lucreaza impreuna ca un singur organism. Si de fapt, suntem o astfel de comunitate multicelulara. Avem multe celule care nu mai sunt independente. Celula pielii este nefolositoare fara o celula a inimii, a muschilor, a creierului si asa mai departe. Deci aceste comunitati au inceput sa evolueze in asa fel incat nivelul interesant la care lua loc evolutia nu mai era celula, .
Now the next step that happened is within these communities. These communities of cells, again, began to abstract information. And they began building very special structures that did nothing but process information within the community. And those are the neural structures. So neurons are the information processing apparatus that those communities of cells built up. And in fact, they began to get specialists in the community and special structures that were responsible for recording, understanding, learning information. And that was the brains and the nervous system of those communities. And that gave them an evolutionary advantage. Because at that point, an individual -- learning could happen within the time span of a single organism, instead of over this evolutionary time span.
Urmatoarea schimbare a avut loc in aceste comunitati. Aceste comunitati de celule, au inceput din nou sa extraga informatii. Si au inceput sa construiasca structuri foarte speciale care nu faceau nimic in afara procesarii informatiilor in comunitate. Si acelea sunt structurile neurologice. Deci neuronii reprezinta dispozitivul procesator de informatie construit de comunitatile de celule. Si au inceput sa aiba specialisti in comunitate si structuri speciale care erau responsabile cu inregistrarea, intelegerea, invatarea informatiilor. Si acelea reprezentau creierul si sistemul nervos al acelor comunitati. Acest lucru le-a dat un avantaj evolutionar. Deoarece in acest punct, un individ-- procesul de invatare putea avea loc in intervalul de timp al unui singur organism, in loc de intervalul de timp al evolutiei.
So an organism could, for instance, learn not to eat a certain kind of fruit because it tasted bad and it got sick last time it ate it. That could happen within the lifetime of a single organism, whereas before they'd built these special information processing structures, that would have had to be learned evolutionarily over hundreds of thousands of years by the individuals dying off that ate that kind of fruit. So that nervous system, the fact that they built these special information structures, tremendously sped up the whole process of evolution. Because evolution could now happen within an individual. It could happen in learning time scales.
Deci un organism, ar putea spre exemplu, sa invete sa nu manance un anumit fel de fruct pentru ca avea gust rau si l-a imbolnavit data trecuta cand l-a mancat. Acel lucru s-ar putea intampla de-a lungul vietii unui singur organism, pe cand inainte ar fi construit aceste structuri speciale de procesare a informatiilor, care ar fi trebuit sa fie invatate evolutionar de-a lungul a sute de mii de ani de catre indivizii care au murit pentru ca au mancat acel tip de fruct. Deci acel sistem nervos, faptul ca au construit aceste structuri speciale de informatie, a grabit mult intreg procesul de evolutie. Pentru ca evolutia se putea manifesta acum in individ. S-ar putea intampla in perioade de invatare
But then what happened was the individuals worked out, of course, tricks of communicating. And for example, the most sophisticated version that we're aware of is human language. It's really a pretty amazing invention if you think about it. Here I have a very complicated, messy, confused idea in my head. I'm sitting here making grunting sounds basically, and hopefully constructing a similar messy, confused idea in your head that bears some analogy to it. But we're taking something very complicated, turning it into sound, sequences of sounds, and producing something very complicated in your brain. So this allows us now to begin to start functioning as a single organism.
Dar ce s-a petrecut apoi a fost faptul ca indivizii au creat, desigur, trucuri pentru a comunica. Si spre exemplu, cea mai sofisticata versiune pe care o cunoastem este limbajul uman. Este de fapt o inventie destul de remarcabila daca te gandesti. Am o foarte complicata, dezordonata, confuza idee in cap. Stau aici mormaind practic, si sper sa creez o idee la fel de dezordonata si confuza in capul vostru care are o oarecare analogie. Dar luam ceva foarte complicat, il transformam in sunete, secvente de sunete, si producem ceva foarte complicat in creierul tau. Deci asta ne permite acum sa incepem sa functionam ca un singur organism.
And so, in fact, what we've done is we, humanity, have started abstracting out. We're going through the same levels that multi-cellular organisms have gone through -- abstracting out our methods of recording, presenting, processing information. So for example, the invention of language was a tiny step in that direction. Telephony, computers, videotapes, CD-ROMs and so on are all our specialized mechanisms that we've now built within our society for handling that information. And it all connects us together into something that is much bigger and much faster and able to evolve than what we were before. So now, evolution can take place on a scale of microseconds. And you saw Ty's little evolutionary example where he sort of did a little bit of evolution on the Convolution program right before your eyes.
Ceea ce am facut, de fapt, este ca noi umanitatea, am inceput sa extragem. trecem prin aceleasi etape prin care au trecut si organismele multi-celulare-- prin crearea propriilor metode de inregistrare, prezentare, procesare de informatii. Deci, spre exemplu, inventia limbajului a fost un pas minuscul in acea directie. Telefonia, computerele, casetele video, CD-ROMurile, si asa mai departe sunt toate mecanismele noastre specializate pe care le-am construit in societatea noastra pentru a lucra cu acea informatie. Si ne conecteaza unii cu altii in ceva care este mult mai mare si mult mai rapid si capabil de evolutie decat ce am fost inainte. Asa ca acum evolutia poate avea loc pe o scara a microsecundelor. Si ati vazut micul exemplu evolutionar al lui Ty unde a exersat putin evolutia in cadrul programului Convolution sub privirea noastra.
So now we've speeded up the time scales once again. So the first steps of the story that I told you about took a billion years a piece. And the next steps, like nervous systems and brains, took a few hundred million years. Then the next steps, like language and so on, took less than a million years. And these next steps, like electronics, seem to be taking only a few decades. The process is feeding on itself and becoming, I guess, autocatalytic is the word for it -- when something reinforces its rate of change. The more it changes, the faster it changes. And I think that that's what we're seeing here in this explosion of curve. We're seeing this process feeding back on itself.
Si am accelerat scara temporala din nou. Primii pasi ai povestii pe care tocmai v-am spus-o au durat un miliard de ani fiecare. Si urmatorii pasi, cum ar fi sistemele nervoase si creierele au durat cateva sute de milioane de ani. Asa ca urmatorii pasi, ca limba si altele, au durat mai putin de un milion de ani. Si acesti pasi care urmeaza precum electronica, par sa dureze doar cateva decenii. Procesul se hraneste din sine insusi si devine, cred, autocatalitic este cuvantul corect-- cand ceva isi consolideaza modul de dezvoltare. Cu cat se schimba mai mult cu atat se schimba mai repede. Si cred ca asta vedem aici in explozia acestei diagrame. Vedem cum acest proces se autodezvolta.
Now I design computers for a living, and I know that the mechanisms that I use to design computers would be impossible without recent advances in computers. So right now, what I do is I design objects at such complexity that it's really impossible for me to design them in the traditional sense. I don't know what every transistor in the connection machine does. There are billions of them. Instead, what I do and what the designers at Thinking Machines do is we think at some level of abstraction and then we hand it to the machine and the machine takes it beyond what we could ever do, much farther and faster than we could ever do. And in fact, sometimes it takes it by methods that we don't quite even understand.
Eu proiectez computere ca meserie, si stiu ca mecanismele pe care le folosesc pentru a proiecta computere nu ar putea exista fara descoperirile recente in materie de computere. Deci ce fac acum este sa proiectez obiecte de asa o complexitate incat este imposibil ca eu sa le proiectez in sensul traditional. Nu stiu ce face fiecare tranzistor al masinariei. Sunt miliarde. In schimb, ceea ce fac si ce fac proiectantii de la Thinking Machines este sa gandim la un nivel abstract si apoi lasam totul pe mana masinariei si aceasta duce totul la un punct mult mai indepartat decat am putea noi sa o facem vreodata, mai departe si mai repede decat am putea noi s-o facem. Si de fapt uneori o face prin metode pe care nu le prea intelegem.
One method that's particularly interesting that I've been using a lot lately is evolution itself. So what we do is we put inside the machine a process of evolution that takes place on the microsecond time scale. So for example, in the most extreme cases, we can actually evolve a program by starting out with random sequences of instructions. Say, "Computer, would you please make a hundred million random sequences of instructions. Now would you please run all of those random sequences of instructions, run all of those programs, and pick out the ones that came closest to doing what I wanted." So in other words, I define what I wanted. Let's say I want to sort numbers, as a simple example I've done it with. So find the programs that come closest to sorting numbers.
O metoda deosebit de interesanta pe care o folosesc mult in ultimul timp este insasi evolutia. Ceea ce facem este sa punem in interiorul masinariei un proces de evolutie care are loc in timpul unei microsecunde. Deci spre exemplu, in cele mai extreme cazuri, putem evolua un program incepand cu secvente de instructiuni aleatorii. Sa spunem," Computer, vrei sa faci te rog o suta de milioane de succesiuni de instructiuni aleatorii. Acum te rog sa rulezi aceste instructiuni, aceste programe, si sa le alegi pe cele care au fost cele mai apropiate de ceea ce cautam eu." Cu alte cuvinte, definesc ceea ce voiam. Sa spunem ca vreau sa sortez numere, ca un exemplu a cum am facut-o. Gaseste programele cele mai apropiate de sortarea numerelor.
So of course, random sequences of instructions are very unlikely to sort numbers, so none of them will really do it. But one of them, by luck, may put two numbers in the right order. And I say, "Computer, would you please now take the 10 percent of those random sequences that did the best job. Save those. Kill off the rest. And now let's reproduce the ones that sorted numbers the best. And let's reproduce them by a process of recombination analogous to sex." Take two programs and they produce children by exchanging their subroutines, and the children inherit the traits of the subroutines of the two programs. So I've got now a new generation of programs that are produced by combinations of the programs that did a little bit better job. Say, "Please repeat that process." Score them again. Introduce some mutations perhaps. And try that again and do that for another generation.
Desigur, secventele de instructiuni aleatorii au putine sanse sa sorteze numere, deci niciuna n-o va face cu adevarat. Dar una dintre ele, cu putin noroc, ar putea pune doua numere in ordinea corecta. Si eu spun,"Computer, ia acum cele 10 la suta din acele succesiuni aleatorii care au facut cea mai buna treaba. Salveaza-le pe acelea. Distruge-le pe restul. Si acum sa le reproducem pe cele care au sortat numerele cel mai bine. Si sa le reproducem printr-un proces de recombinare asemanator cu sexul." Luam doua programe si ele produc copii facand schimb de subprograme, si copiii mostenesc trasaturile ambelor subprograme. Deci am o noua generatie de programe care sunt produse prin combinarea programelor care au facut o treaba putin mai buna. Spunem,"Te rog repeta procesul." Sortam din nou. Introducem poate unele mutatii. Si incercam asta din nou facand-o pentru alta generatie.
Well every one of those generations just takes a few milliseconds. So I can do the equivalent of millions of years of evolution on that within the computer in a few minutes, or in the complicated cases, in a few hours. At the end of that, I end up with programs that are absolutely perfect at sorting numbers. In fact, they are programs that are much more efficient than programs I could have ever written by hand.
Fiecare generatie necesita cateva milisecunde. Deci pot face echivalentul a milioane de ani de evolutie astfel pe un computer in cateva minute, sau in cazurile complicate, in cateva ore. La sfarsit am programe care sunt absolut perfecte la sortarea numerelor. Sunt, in fapt, programe care sunt mult mai eficiente decat cele pe care as fi putut sa le scriu manual.
Now if I look at those programs, I can't tell you how they work. I've tried looking at them and telling you how they work. They're obscure, weird programs. But they do the job. And in fact, I know, I'm very confident that they do the job because they come from a line of hundreds of thousands of programs that did the job. In fact, their life depended on doing the job.
Daca ma uit la acele programe, nu va pot spune cum functioneaza. Am incercat sa le studiez si sa va spun cum functioneaza. Sunt programe obscure, ciudate. Dar isi fac meseria. Si stiu, in fapt, sunt convins ca-si fac treaba pentru ca provin dintr-o serie de sute de mii de programe care si-au facut treaba. De fapt, viata lor depindea de infaptuirea scopului.
(Laughter)
(hohote de ras)
I was riding in a 747 with Marvin Minsky once, and he pulls out this card and says, "Oh look. Look at this. It says, 'This plane has hundreds of thousands of tiny parts working together to make you a safe flight.' Doesn't that make you feel confident?"
Mergeam odata intr-un avion 747 cu Marvin Minski, si el scoate un card si spune," Priveste. Spune, " Acest avion are sute de mii de parti minuscule care lucreaza impreuna pentru un zbor sigur." Nu te face sa te simti increzator?"
(Laughter)
(hohote de ras)
In fact, we know that the engineering process doesn't work very well when it gets complicated. So we're beginning to depend on computers to do a process that's very different than engineering. And it lets us produce things of much more complexity than normal engineering lets us produce. And yet, we don't quite understand the options of it. So in a sense, it's getting ahead of us. We're now using those programs to make much faster computers so that we'll be able to run this process much faster. So it's feeding back on itself. The thing is becoming faster and that's why I think it seems so confusing. Because all of these technologies are feeding back on themselves. We're taking off.
Stim ca procesul tehnologic nu functioneaza foarte bine cand devine complicat. Deci incepem sa depindem de computere sa faca un procedeu foarte diferit de cel ingineresc. Si ne permite sa producem lucruri mult mai complexe decat ne permite ingineria normala. Si totusi, nu intelegem pe deplin optiunile sale. Deci pe de-o parte ne-o ia inainte. Acum folosim acele programe pentru a face computere mult mai rapide pentru a putea rula acest proces mult mai repede. Deci se auto dezvolta. Devine mai rapid si de aceea cred ca produce confuzie. Pentru ca toate aceste tehnologii se autodezvolta. Decolam.
And what we are is we're at a point in time which is analogous to when single-celled organisms were turning into multi-celled organisms. So we're the amoebas and we can't quite figure out what the hell this thing is we're creating. We're right at that point of transition. But I think that there really is something coming along after us. I think it's very haughty of us to think that we're the end product of evolution. And I think all of us here are a part of producing whatever that next thing is. So lunch is coming along, and I think I will stop at that point, before I get selected out.
Si suntem intr-un punct in timp analog cu acela in care organismele unicelulare se transformau in organisme multicelulare. Suntem amibele si nu ne prea putem da seama ce naiba cream. Suntem in punctul de tranzitie. Dar cred ca este cu adevarat ceva ce urmeaza dupa noi. Cred ca este arogant din partea noastra sa credem ca suntem produsul finit al evolutiei. Si cred ca toti cei de aici sunt o parte a producerii urmatorului lucru, indiferent care va fi acela. Se apropie pranzul, si cred ca ma voi opri in acest punct inainte sa fiu indepartat.
(Applause)
(Aplauze)