Last year, I told you the story, in seven minutes, of Project Orion, which was this very implausible technology that technically could have worked, but it had this one-year political window where it could have happened. So it didn't happen. It was a dream that did not happen. This year I'm going to tell you the story of the birth of digital computing. This was a perfect introduction. And it's a story that did work. It did happen, and the machines are all around us. And it was a technology that was inevitable. If the people I'm going to tell you the story about, if they hadn't done it, somebody else would have. So, it was sort of the right idea at the right time.
Eelmisel aastal rääkisin ma teile 7 minutit Orioni Projektist, mis polnud väga veenev tehnoloogia, kuid mis tehniliselt oleks võinud töötada, aga selle teostamine oli võimalik poliitilistel põhjustel vaid ühe aasta jooksul, nii et seda ei juhtunud. See oli unistus, mis ei täitunud. Sel aastal räägin ma teile loo digitaalse arvutustehnika sünnist. See oli täiuslik sissejuhatus. See on lugu millestki, mis õnnestus. See tõesti juhtus ja need masinad on kõikjal meie ümber. Selle tehnoloogia tulek oli vältimatu. Kui need inimesed, kellest ma teile jutustan, poleks seda teinud, oleks seda teinud keegi teine. Nii et see oli õige idee õigel hetkel.
This is Barricelli's universe. This is the universe we live in now. It's the universe in which these machines are now doing all these things, including changing biology. I'm starting the story with the first atomic bomb at Trinity, which was the Manhattan Project. It was a little bit like TED: it brought a whole lot of very smart people together. And three of the smartest people were Stan Ulam, Richard Feynman and John von Neumann. And it was Von Neumann who said, after the bomb, he was working on something much more important than bombs: he's thinking about computers. So, he wasn't only thinking about them; he built one. This is the machine he built.
See on Barricelli universum. Universum, kus me elame. See on universum, kus masinad teevad kõike, näiteks bioloogilisi muudatusi. Alustuseks räägin esimesest aatompommist Trinity katses, mis oli Manhattani projekt. See oli pisut nagu TED: tõi kokku väga palju nutikaid inimesi. Ja kolm kõige nutikamat neist olid Stan Ulam, Richard Feynman ja John von Neumann. See oli von Neumann, kes ütles, et lisaks pommile töötas ta millegi palju tähtsama kallal kui pommid: ta pidas silmas arvuteid. Ta mitte ainult ei unistanud neist, vaid ka ehitas. Ta ehitas selle masina.
(Laughter)
(Naer)
He built this machine, and we had a beautiful demonstration of how this thing really works, with these little bits. And it's an idea that goes way back. The first person to really explain that was Thomas Hobbes, who, in 1651, explained how arithmetic and logic are the same thing, and if you want to do artificial thinking and artificial logic, you can do it all with arithmetic. He said you needed addition and subtraction. Leibniz, who came a little bit later -- this is 1679 -- showed that you didn't even need subtraction. You could do the whole thing with addition. Here, we have all the binary arithmetic and logic that drove the computer revolution. And Leibniz was the first person to really talk about building such a machine. He talked about doing it with marbles, having gates and what we now call shift registers, where you shift the gates, drop the marbles down the tracks. And that's what all these machines are doing, except, instead of doing it with marbles, they're doing it with electrons.
Ta ehitas selle masina ja meile demonstreeriti, kuidas see töötab koos oma väikeste osadega. See idee on väga pika ajalooga. Esimene inimene, kes selle ära seletas oli Thomas Hobbes, kes aastal 1651 kirjeldas, kuidas aritmeetika ja loogika on üks ja seesama, ja kui sa tahad luua tehislikku mõtlemist ja loogikat, saad sa teha seda aritmeetika abil. Ta ütles, et sul on vaja liita ja lahutada. Leibniz, kes tuli pisut hiljem - aastal 1679 - näitas, et sul ei lähe isegi vaja lahutamist. Kõike saab teha ka ainult liitmisega. Siin on meil kahendsüsteemne arvutamine ja loogika, mis viis arvutite revolutsioonini, ja Leibniz oli esimene inimene, kes rääkis sellise masina ehitamisest. Ta pakkus välja, et seda võiks teha marmorkuulidega, loogikaväravate süsteemiga, mida nimetatakse nüüd nihkeregistriteks, kus sa nihutad väravaid ja kukutad radadele marmorkuulikesi. Ja seda teevad praegu kõik masinad, kuid marmorkuulide asemel kasutatakse nüüd elektrone.
And then we jump to Von Neumann, 1945, when he sort of reinvents the whole same thing. And 1945, after the war, the electronics existed to actually try and build such a machine. So June 1945 -- actually, the bomb hasn't even been dropped yet -- and Von Neumann is putting together all the theory to actually build this thing, which also goes back to Turing, who, before that, gave the idea that you could do all this with a very brainless, little, finite state machine, just reading a tape in and reading a tape out. The other sort of genesis of what Von Neumann did was the difficulty of how you would predict the weather. Lewis Richardson saw how you could do this with a cellular array of people, giving them each a little chunk, and putting it together. Here, we have an electrical model illustrating a mind having a will, but capable of only two ideas.
Hüppame von Neumanni juurde aastasse 1945, kus ta sama asja justkui uuesti leiutab. Ja aastal 1945 pärast sõda oli olemas elektroonika, et katsetada ja see masin valmis ehitada. Niisiis on 1945. aasta juuni - aatompommi pole veel visatud - ja von Neumann paneb kokku teooriat, mille järgi masin ehitada, mis viib meid tagasi Turingini, kes käis varem välja idee, et seda kõike saaks teha ühe väga nutitu, väikese, piiratud olekus masinaga, mis tegeleb lindi sisse ja välja lugemisega. Üks teine Neumanni algatatud asi oli seotud ilma ennustamise raskustega. Lewis Richardson nägi, kuidas seda saaks lahendada kärgstruktuuri alusel jaotatud inimestega, andes neile igaühele pisikese osa ja pannes hiljem osad kokku. Siin on elektriline mudel, mis illustreerib tahet omavat meelt, kuid mis võimaldab vaid kahte mõtet.
(Laughter)
(Naer)
And that's really the simplest computer. It's basically why you need the qubit, because it only has two ideas.
Ja see ongi lihtsaim arvuti. Põhiliselt selleks sul ongi kvantbitti vaja, kuna sel on vaid kaks mõtet.
And you put lots of those together, you get the essentials of the modern computer: the arithmetic unit, the central control, the memory, the recording medium, the input and the output. But, there's one catch. This is the fatal -- you know, we saw it in starting these programs up. The instructions which govern this operation must be given in absolutely exhaustive detail. So, the programming has to be perfect, or it won't work.
Pannes palju selliseid kokku, saad sa nüüdisaegse arvuti põhikomponendid: aritmeetikaploki, juhtploki, mälu, salvestusmeediumi, sisendid ja väljundid. Aga siin on üks konks. Ja see on ülioluline - me nägime seda nende programmide käivitamisel. Juhised, mis sellise arvuti tegevust reguleerivad, peavad olema antud ülimalt detailselt. Programmeerimine peab olema ideaalne või see ei tööta.
If you look at the origins of this, the classic history sort of takes it all back to the ENIAC here. But actually, the machine I'm going to tell you about, the Institute for Advanced Study machine, which is way up there, really should be down there. So, I'm trying to revise history, and give some of these guys more credit than they've had. Such a computer would open up universes, which are, at the present, outside the range of any instruments. So it opens up a whole new world, and these people saw it. The guy who was supposed to build this machine was the guy in the middle, Vladimir Zworykin, from RCA. RCA, in probably one of the lousiest business decisions of all time, decided not to go into computers. But the first meetings, November 1945, were at RCA's offices. RCA started this whole thing off, and said, you know, televisions are the future, not computers.
Kui sa nüüd selle algupära vaatad, siis klassikaline ajalugu viib meid tagasi ENIAC'ini. Aga masin, millest ma teile rääkima hakkan, Süvauuringute Instituudi masin, mis on päris seal üleval, peaks tegelikult olema siin. Nii et ma üritan ajalugu parandada ja jagada tunnustust mõnele mehele, kes seda rohkem vääriks. Sellise arvuti abil avaneksid meie ees universumid, mis jäävad hetkel väljapoole mistahes instrumendi haardest, nii et see avab meile täiesti uue maailma, ja need inimesed nägid seda. Mees, kes pidi selle masina ehitama on see keskmine, Vladimir Zworykin, RCA'st (Americal Radio Corporation) RCA langetas ühe oma kõige viletsama äriotsuse ajaloos ja otsustas arvutitega mitte tegeleda. Aga esimesed kohtumised 1945. a novembris toimusid kõik RCA ruumides. RCA pani sellele kõigele alguse ja ütles, teate, televiisorid on tulevik, mitte arvutid.
The essentials were all there -- all the things that make these machines run. Von Neumann, and a logician, and a mathematician from the army put this together. Then, they needed a place to build it. When RCA said no, that's when they decided to build it in Princeton, where Freeman works at the Institute. That's where I grew up as a kid. That's me, that's my sister Esther, who's talked to you before, so we both go back to the birth of this thing. That's Freeman, a long time ago, and that was me. And this is Von Neumann and Morgenstern, who wrote the "Theory of Games." All these forces came together there, in Princeton. Oppenheimer, who had built the bomb. The machine was actually used mainly for doing bomb calculations. And Julian Bigelow, who took Zworkykin's place as the engineer, to actually figure out, using electronics, how you would build this thing. The whole gang of people who came to work on this, and women in front, who actually did most of the coding, were the first programmers. These were the prototype geeks, the nerds. They didn't fit in at the Institute. This is a letter from the director, concerned about -- "especially unfair on the matter of sugar."
Kõik põhiline oli neil olemas - kõik asjad, mis nende masinate tööks oli vaja. Von Neumann, üks loogik ja sõjaväelasest matemaatik panid selle kokku. Siis neil oli vaja kohta, kus ehitada. Kui RCA ütles "ei", otsustasid nad ehitada Princetonis, kus Freeman töötas instituudis. Seal möödus minu lapsepõlv. See olen mina, see on mu õde Esther, kes teile ennist esines, nii et me mõlemad olime selle asja sünni juures. See on Freeman, väga ammu, ja see olin mina. Ja see on von Neumann ja Morgenstern, kes kirjutasid mänguteooria. Kõik need jõud said Princetonis kokku. Oppenheimer, kes oli ehitanud aatompommi. Seda masinat kasutati peamiselt pommikalkulatsioonide teostamiseks. Ja Julian Bigelow, kes asus tööle insenerina, et välja selgitada, kuidas elektroonika abil see tõepoolest valmis ehitada. Kogu kamp, kes tööle asus, eesotsas naised, kes tegid suurema osa kodeerimisest, olid esimesed programmeerijad. Need olid prototüüpveidrikud, nohikud. Nad ei sobinud instituuti. See on murelik kiri direktorilt, et nad on "suhkru osas eriti ebaõiglased."
(Laughter)
(Naer)
You can read the text.
Te võite seda teksti lugeda.
(Laughter)
(Naer)
This is hackers getting in trouble for the first time.
Niimoodi sattusid häkkerid esimest korda jamasse.
(Laughter).
(Naer)
These were not theoretical physicists. They were real soldering-gun type guys, and they actually built this thing.
Need ei olnud teoreetilise füüsika teadlased. Nad olid tõelised jootekolvi-vennad ja nad tõesti ehitasid selle.
And we take it for granted now, that each of these machines has billions of transistors, doing billions of cycles per second without failing. They were using vacuum tubes, very narrow, sloppy techniques to get actually binary behavior out of these radio vacuum tubes. They actually used 6J6, the common radio tube, because they found they were more reliable than the more expensive tubes. And what they did at the Institute was publish every step of the way. Reports were issued, so that this machine was cloned at 15 other places around the world. And it really was. It was the original microprocessor. All the computers now are copies of that machine. The memory was in cathode ray tubes -- a whole bunch of spots on the face of the tube -- very, very sensitive to electromagnetic disturbances. So, there's 40 of these tubes, like a V-40 engine running the memory.
Ja meie jaoks on see nüüd enesestmõistetav, et igas sellises masinas on miljardeid transistoreid, tegemas miljardeid operatsioone sekundis - ilma äpardusteta. Nemad kasutasid vaakumlampe ning väga piiratud ja lohakaid meetodeid, et raadiovaakumlambid binaarsüsteemis toimima panna. Nad kasutasid 6J6 mudelit, tavalist raadiolampi, sest nad leidsid, et need on palju töökindlamad kui kallimad lambid. Ja kõike, mida nad instituudis tegid, publitseeriti igal sammul. Koostati raporteid, nii et seda masinat klooniti 15 kohas üle maailma. Kuid see oli tõesti esimene mikroprotsessor. Kõik tänapäeva arvutid on selle masina koopiad. Mälu hoiti siis katoodkiirte torudes - tohutu hulk täpikesi toru pinnal, väga-väga tundlikud elektromagneetilistele muutustele. Nii et seal oli 40 sellist toru, nagu 40-hobujõuline mootor, mis jooksutab mälu.
(Laughter)
(Naer)
The input and the output was by teletype tape at first. This is a wire drive, using bicycle wheels. This is the archetype of the hard disk that's in your machine now. Then they switched to a magnetic drum. This is modifying IBM equipment, which is the origins of the whole data-processing industry, later at IBM. And this is the beginning of computer graphics. The "Graph'g-Beam Turn On." This next slide, that's the -- as far as I know -- the first digital bitmap display, 1954.
Sisendiks ja väljundiks oli algselt perfolint. See on jalgratta ratastest tehtud lindikoguja. See on teie arvutites olevate kõvaketaste esiisa. Siis hakkasid nad kasutama magnettrumlit. Siin modifitseeritakse IBM'i seadmeid, kust pärineb terve IBM'i andmetöötluse tööstus. Ja see on arvutigraafika algus, nn "Graph'g-Beam Turn On". Järgmine slaid on, niipalju kui mina tean, esimene digitaalpilti näitav ekraan, 1954 aastal.
So, Von Neumann was already off in a theoretical cloud, doing abstract sorts of studies of how you could build reliable machines out of unreliable components. Those guys drinking all the tea with sugar in it were writing in their logbooks, trying to get this thing to work, with all these 2,600 vacuum tubes that failed half the time. And that's what I've been doing, this last six months, is going through the logs. "Running time: two minutes. Input, output: 90 minutes." This includes a large amount of human error. So they are always trying to figure out, what's machine error? What's human error? What's code, what's hardware?
Von Neumann oli juba kadunud teoreetilisse pilve, korraldades abstraktseid uuringuid, kuidas ehitada töökindlaid masinaid ebakindlatest komponentidest. Need tüübid, kes jõid ära kõik suhkruga tee, kirjutasid enda logiraamatutesse, üritame seda asja tööle saada - 2600 vaakumlambiga, mis pooltel kordadel ei tööta. Ma olengi viimased kuus kuud logiraamatutes tuhninud. "Tööaeg: kaks minutit. Sisend, väljund: 90 minutit." Sellesse on arvestatud ka suur inimvea võimalus. Nii üritavad nad kogu aeg aru saada, oli see masina viga? Oli see inimviga? Mis on kood, mis on raudvara?
That's an engineer gazing at tube number 36, trying to figure out why the memory's not in focus. He had to focus the memory -- seems OK. So, he had to focus each tube just to get the memory up and running, let alone having, you know, software problems.
See on insener, kes põrnitseb lampi number 36, üritades aru saada, miks mälu ei ole fookuses. Ta pidi mälu fokusseerima - tundub korras. Nii pidi ta iga lampi fokusseerima lihtsalt selleks, et mälu töökorda seada, rääkimata, teate küll, tarkvara probleemidest.
"No use, went home." (Laughter)
"Mõttetu, läksin koju." (Naer).
"Impossible to follow the damn thing, where's a directory?"
"Seda asja on võimatu järgida, kus on juhendid?"
So, already, they're complaining about the manuals: "before closing down in disgust ... "
Nii et juba siis viriseti manuaalide üle. "Enne kui ma vastikusega selle asja sulgen".
"The General Arithmetic: Operating Logs." Burning lots of midnight oil.
"Üldine aritmeetika. Tööde logiraamat" Põletame ohtralt südaöist õli.
"MANIAC," which became the acronym for the machine, Mathematical and Numerical Integrator and Calculator, "lost its memory."
MANIAC, mis sai selle masina akronüümiks - Mathematical And Numerical Integrator And Calculator "kaotas mälu".
"MANIAC regained its memory, when the power went off." "Machine or human?"
"MANIAC'i mälu taastus voolu väljalülitumisel", "masin või inimene?".
"Aha!" So, they figured out it's a code problem.
"Ahaa!" Nad said aru - probleem on koodis:
"Found trouble in code, I hope."
"Leidsin koodist vea, loodetavasti".
"Code error, machine not guilty."
"Koodiviga, masin pole süüdi."
"Damn it, I can be just as stubborn as this thing."
"Kurat, ma olen vahel sama jäärapäine kui see masin."
(Laughter)
(Naer)
"And the dawn came." So they ran all night. Twenty-four hours a day, this thing was running, mainly running bomb calculations.
"Ja saabus koidik." Nii et nad töötasid terve öö. Masin töötas 24 tundi päevas peamiselt pommiga seotud kalkulatsioonide kallal.
"Everything up to this point is wasted time." "What's the use? Good night."
"Kuni siiani on kõik raisatud aeg." "Mis kasu sest on? Head ööd."
"Master control off. The hell with it. Way off." (Laughter)
"Pealüliti väljas. Põrgusse sellega. Liiga väljas." (Naer)
"Something's wrong with the air conditioner -- smell of burning V-belts in the air."
"Konditsioneeriga on midagi valesti - õhus on tunda kärssavate ajamlintide haisu."
"A short -- do not turn the machine on."
"Lühis - ärge lülitage masinat sisse."
"IBM machine putting a tar-like substance on the cards. The tar is from the roof." So they really were working under tough conditions.
"IBM masin jätab perfokaartidele tõrvalaadset ollust. Tõrv on katuselt." Nii et nad töötasid tõesti rasketes oludes.
(Laughter)
(Naer)
Here, "A mouse has climbed into the blower behind the regulator rack, set blower to vibrating. Result: no more mouse."
Näe, "hiir on roninud puhurisse, regulaatori raami taha, pannes puhuri vibreerima. Tulemus: hiirt pole enam".
(Laughter)
(Naer)
"Here lies mouse. Born: ?. Died: 4:50 a.m., May 1953."
"Siin puhkab hiir. Sündinud: ?. Surnud: 4:50, mai 1953"
(Laughter)
(Naer)
There's an inside joke someone has penciled in: "Here lies Marston Mouse." If you're a mathematician, you get that, because Marston was a mathematician who objected to the computer being there.
Siin on siseringi nali, mille keegi on siia lisanud: "Siin puhkab Marston Mouse." Kui sa oled matemaatik, siis saad sellest aru, sest Marston oli matemaatik, kes oli arvutite instituudis hoidmise vastu.
"Picked a lightning bug off the drum." "Running at two kilocycles." That's two thousand cycles per second -- "yes, I'm chicken" -- so two kilocycles was slow speed. The high speed was 16 kilocycles. I don't know if you remember a Mac that was 16 Megahertz, that's slow speed.
"Leidsin trumlist jaanimardika." "Kiirus on kaks kilotsüklit." See on kaks tuhat tsüklit sekundis - "Jah, ma olen tossike" - nii et kaks kilotsüklit oli aeglane. Suurim kiirus oli 16 kilotsüklit. Ma ei tea, kas te mäletate Mac'i, mis oli 16 megahertsiga. See oli aeglane.
"I have now duplicated both results. How will I know which is right, assuming one result is correct? This now is the third different output. I know when I'm licked."
"Ma olen suutnud korrata mõlemat tulemust. Kust ma tean, kumb on õige, eeldades, et üks on õige? See on nüüd kolmas tulemus. Mind on jälle haneks tõmmatud."
(Laughter)
(Naer)
"We've duplicated errors before."
"Oleme ennegi neid vigu korranud."
"Machine run, fine. Code isn't."
"Masin töötab kenasti. Kood mitte."
"Only happens when the machine is running."
"Juhtub ainult siis, kui masin töötab."
And sometimes things are okay. "Machine a thing of beauty, and a joy forever." "Perfect running."
Ja mõnikord on kõik hästi. "See masin on kaunis ja igavese rõõmu allikas." "Töötab ideaalselt."
"Parting thought: when there's bigger and better errors, we'll have them."
"Mõte enne lahkumist: kui on veel suuremaid ja paremaid vigu, me saame nad kätte."
So, nobody was supposed to know they were actually designing bombs. They're designing hydrogen bombs. But someone in the logbook, late one night, finally drew a bomb. So, that was the result. It was Mike, the first thermonuclear bomb, in 1952. That was designed on that machine, in the woods behind the Institute.
Keegi neist ei oleks pidanud aimama, et nad disainivad pomme. Nad disainisid vesinikpomme. Aga ühel hilisõhtul oli keegi logiraamatusse lõpuks pommi joonistanud. See oli tulemus. See oli Mike, esimene termotuumapomm, aastal 1952. Mis loodi selle masina abil instituudi taga metsas.
So Von Neumann invited a whole gang of weirdos from all over the world to work on all these problems. Barricelli, he came to do what we now call, really, artificial life, trying to see if, in this artificial universe -- he was a viral-geneticist, way, way, way ahead of his time. He's still ahead of some of the stuff that's being done now. Trying to start an artificial genetic system running in the computer. Began -- his universe started March 3, '53. So it's almost exactly -- it's 50 years ago next Tuesday, I guess. And he saw everything in terms of -- he could read the binary code straight off the machine. He had a wonderful rapport. Other people couldn't get the machine running. It always worked for him. Even errors were duplicated.
Von Neumann oli see, kes kutsus terve bande veidrikke üle maailma kokku, et probleemid lahendada. Barricelli asus looma, nagu me seda nüüd kutsume, tehiselu, üritades näha, kas selles tehisuniversumis ... Ta oli viirusi uuriv geneetik - kõvasti enda ajast ees. Ta on praegugi osadest asjadest ees. Üritab käivitada arvutis töötavat tehislikku geneetilist süsteemi. Tema universum sai alguse 3. märtsil 1953. Nii et järgmine teisipäev on sellest möödas 50 aastat. Ta nägi kõike seisukohalt ... Ta suutis lugeda binaarkoodi otse masinast. Ta sai sellega suurepäraselt läbi. Teised ei saanud masinat tööle. Temaga töötas see aga alati. Isegi vigu suudeti korrata.
(Laughter)
(Naer)
"Dr. Barricelli claims machine is wrong, code is right."
"Dr Baricelli väidab, et masin eksib, kood on õige."
So he designed this universe, and ran it. When the bomb people went home, he was allowed in there. He would run that thing all night long, running these things, if anybody remembers Stephen Wolfram, who reinvented this stuff. And he published it. It wasn't locked up and disappeared. It was published in the literature. "If it's that easy to create living organisms, why not create a few yourself?" So, he decided to give it a try, to start this artificial biology going in the machines. And he found all these, sort of -- it was like a naturalist coming in and looking at this tiny, 5,000-byte universe, and seeing all these things happening that we see in the outside world, in biology. This is some of the generations of his universe. But they're just going to stay numbers; they're not going to become organisms. They have to have something. You have a genotype and you have to have a phenotype. They have to go out and do something. And he started doing that, started giving these little numerical organisms things they could play with -- playing chess with other machines and so on. And they did start to evolve. And he went around the country after that. Every time there was a new, fast machine, he started using it, and saw exactly what's happening now. That the programs, instead of being turned off -- when you quit the program, you'd keep running and, basically, all the sorts of things like Windows is doing, running as a multi-cellular organism on many machines, he envisioned all that happening. And he saw that evolution itself was an intelligent process. It wasn't any sort of creator intelligence, but the thing itself was a giant parallel computation that would have some intelligence. And he went out of his way to say that he was not saying this was lifelike, or a new kind of life. It just was another version of the same thing happening. And there's really no difference between what he was doing in the computer and what nature did billions of years ago. And could you do it again now?
Nii et ta disainis universumi ja jooksutas seda. Kui pommi-inimesed koju läksid, lubati tema sinna. Ta jooksutas koodi terve öö. Kui keegi mäletab Stephen Wolframi, siis tema taasleiutas selle. Ja ta kirjutas artikli. Seda ei pandud luku taha ja läks kaduma. See publitseeriti kirjanduses. "Kui elusorganisme on nii kerge luua, miks mitte luua iseendast koopiaid?" Nii ta otsustas proovida ja käivitada masinates toimiva tehisbioloogia. Ja ta leidis kõik need ... Just kui loodusteadlane oleks tulnud, vaadanud seda väikest 5000-baidist universumi, ja näinud, kuidas bioloogias toimivad kõik need asjad, mida meie näeme pärismaailmas. Need on mõned näited tema universumist. Aga need jäävadki kõigest numbriteks; neist ei saa organisme. Neil peab midagi olema. Sul on genotüüp ja sul kujuneb välja fenotüüp. Need peavad midagi tegema. Ja ta hakkas sellega tegelema, ta hakkas andma neile numbrilistele olenditele midagi, millega mängida, malemäng teise masinaga, jne. Ja nad hakkasid arenema. Ja ta läks seejärel riigi peale tuuritama. Ja kui kuskil oli uuem kiirem masin, võttis ta selle kasutusele, ja ta nägi just seda, kuhu oleme praegu jõudnud: et programmid, selle asemel et välja lülituda, kui sa programmist väljud, töötaksid edasi. Ta nägi põhimõtteliselt kõike seda, mida Windows praegu teeb, - töötades nagu mitmerakuline organism mitmes masinas - ta nägi kõike seda ette. Tema meelest oli evolutsioon intelligentne protsess. Mitte mingit sorti looja tarkus, vaid tohutu paralleelne arvutus, millel on mingil määral intelligentsi. Ta läks nii kaugele, et ütles, et ta ei väida, et see on elutruu, või mingi uut tüüpi elu, vaid lihtsalt teine versioon samasugusest protsessist. Ja pole suurt vahet sellel, mida tema tegi arvutis, ja sellel, mida loodus tegi miljardeid aastaid tagasi. Kas meie suudaks seda praegu korrata?
So, when I went into these archives looking at this stuff, lo and behold, the archivist came up one day, saying, "I think we found another box that had been thrown out." And it was his universe on punch cards. So there it is, 50 years later, sitting there -- sort of suspended animation. That's the instructions for running -- this is actually the source code for one of those universes, with a note from the engineers saying they're having some problems. "There must be something about this code that you haven't explained yet." And I think that's really the truth. We still don't understand how these very simple instructions can lead to increasing complexity. What's the dividing line between when that is lifelike and when it really is alive? These cards, now, thanks to me showing up, are being saved. And the question is, should we run them or not? You know, could we get them running? Do you want to let it loose on the Internet? These machines would think they -- these organisms, if they came back to life now -- whether they've died and gone to heaven, there's a universe. My laptop is 10 thousand million times the size of the universe that they lived in when Barricelli quit the project.
Kui ma siis läksin arhiivi ta asju otsima, tuli arhivaar ühel päeval ja ütles: "Ma arvan, et me leidsime veel ühe äravisatud kasti." Ja see oli tema perfokaartide maailm. Seal see siis kössitabki 50 aastat hiljem. Nii öelda tardunud asendis. Need olid juhised selle käivitamiseks - see on tegelikult lähtekood ühe sellise universumi jaoks, koos kirjaga inseneridelt, kel tekkis mõningaid probleeme. "Siin koodis peab olema midagi, mida te pole veel ära seletanud." Ja ma arvan, et see ongi tõde. Me ei saa siiani aru, kuidas need väga lihtsad juhised viivad kasvava keerukuseni. Mis on üldse eraldusjooneks elutruu ja reaalselt elusoleva vahel? Need kaardid hoitakse nüüd tänu minu ilmumisele alles. Ja küsimus on, kas me peaks need tööle panema või mitte? Noh et, kas me saaks need tööle? Kas panna need internetti? Need masinad arvaksid, et nad ... need organismid, kui nad taas ellu ärkaksid, et nad on surnud ja taevasse sattunud, et siin on universum ... Minu sülearvuti on 10 tuhat miljonit korda suurem universumist, kus nemad elasid, kui Baricelli projekti lõpetas.
He was thinking far ahead, to how this would really grow into a new kind of life. And that's what's happening! When Juan Enriquez told us about these 12 trillion bits being transferred back and forth, of all this genomics data going to the proteomics lab, that's what Barricelli imagined: that this digital code in these machines is actually starting to code -- it already is coding from nucleic acids. We've been doing that since, you know, since we started PCR and synthesizing small strings of DNA. And real soon, we're actually going to be synthesizing the proteins, and, like Steve showed us, that just opens an entirely new world.
Ta mõtles kauge tuleviku peale, kus kõik kasvaks tõesti uueks eluvormiks. Ja just see praegu toimubki! Kui Juan Enriquez rääkis meile neist 12 triljonist bitist, mida saadetakse edasi-tagasi, kogu sellest geneetilistest infost, mis läheb proteoomika laborisse, siis selline oligi Baricelli ettekujutus: et see digitaalne kood masinates hakkabki tegelikult koodeerima - see kodeerib juba nukleiinhapete põhjal. Me oleme seda teinud alates PCR'i kasutuselevõtust ja DNA fragmentide sünteesimisest. Ja varsti hakkame me proteiine sünteesima, ja nagu Steve näitas, avab see meile täiesti uue maailma.
It's a world that Von Neumann himself envisioned. This was published after he died: his sort of unfinished notes on self-reproducing machines, what it takes to get the machines sort of jump-started to where they begin to reproduce. It took really three people: Barricelli had the concept of the code as a living thing; Von Neumann saw how you could build the machines -- that now, last count, four million of these Von Neumann machines is built every 24 hours; and Julian Bigelow, who died 10 days ago -- this is John Markoff's obituary for him -- he was the important missing link, the engineer who came in and knew how to put those vacuum tubes together and make it work. And all our computers have, inside them, the copies of the architecture that he had to just design one day, sort of on pencil and paper. And we owe a tremendous credit to that. And he explained, in a very generous way, the spirit that brought all these different people to the Institute for Advanced Study in the '40s to do this project, and make it freely available with no patents, no restrictions, no intellectual property disputes to the rest of the world.
See on maailm, mida von Neumann ette kujutas. See publitseeriti pärast tema surma: tema niiöelda lõpetamata kirjutised isepaljunevatest masinatest. Mida on vaja, et masinad jõuaksid punkti, kus nad hakkaksid paljunema. Selleks oli tegelikult vaja kolme inimest: Baricellil oli kontseptsioon koodist kui elusolendist. Von Neumann teadis, kuidas need masinad ehitada. Viimaste andmete järgi ehitataksegi 4 miljonit sellist von Neumanni masinat igas ööpäevas. Ja Julian Bigelow, kes suri 10 päeva eest - see on John Markoffi järelhüüe talle - tema oli tähtis puuduv lüli, insener, kes tuli ja teadis, kuidas vaakumlambid ühendada ja asi käima panna. Ja kõigi meie arvutite sees on koopia struktuurist, mille ta ühel päeval lihtsalt disainis paberi ja pliiatsiga. Me oleme selle eest talle palju tänu võlgu. Ta seletas lahkelt, milline vaim valitses kõigi nende inimestete keskel, kes kogunesid 40-ndaltel Kõrgemate Uuringute Instituuti projektiga tegelema ning avaldasid selle tasuta ilma patentide, piirangute ja intellektuaalomandi vaidlusteta kogu ülejäänud maailmale.
That's the last entry in the logbook when the machine was shut down, July 1958. And it's Julian Bigelow who was running it until midnight when the machine was officially turned off. And that's the end.
See on logiraamatu viimane sissekanne, kui masin 1958. a juulis välja lülitati. Ja see siin on Julian Bigelow, kes lasi masinal töötada südaööni, mil see ametlikult välja lülitati. Ja see ongi kõik.
Thank you very much.
Ma tänan teid.
(Applause)
(Aplaus)