Will AI Start Forgetting What It Knows? The Risks of Recursion in Model Training

Are AI models starting to forget what makes them so impressively human-like? Researchers warn of an insidious issue dubbed “model collapse” – a process where, over successive generations of training on model-generated data, AI systems may drift further from their original training data, potentially degrading performance and reliability.

Introduction

The advent of Large Language Models (LLMs) and generative models like GPT and Stable Diffusion has reshaped AI and content creation. From chatbots to advanced image synthesis, these systems demonstrate remarkable capabilities. However, a fundamental issue looms: training new models on data generated by earlier models increases the risk of “model collapse.” This degenerative process raises concerns about the sustainability and reliability of AI models over time.

Mechanism of Model Collapse

The term “model collapse” describes a degenerative process wherein a generative model gradually loses its ability to represent the true data distribution—particularly the “tails” or outer edges of this data. This issue is rooted in two errors.

First, statistical approximation error occurs when models rely increasingly on generated rather than genuine data. Over multiple generations, critical information from the original dataset becomes less represented, leading to a warped view of the data landscape.

A second factor, functional approximation error, emerges when the model’s architecture fails to capture the original data’s intricacies. Even though neural networks can theoretically model complex functions, simplified architectures often lead to overconfidence in the AI’s outputs. Together, these errors create a feedback loop that gradually shifts each generation away from the initial data distribution.

Effects Across Models

To better understand model collapse, researchers examined its effects on various generative models, including Gaussian Mixture Models (GMMs) and Variational Autoencoders (VAEs).

Tests using GMMs revealed that while these models initially performed well, their ability to represent the original data degraded significantly by the 2,000th generation of recursive training. This loss of variance led to a significant misrepresentation of the initial distribution.

VAEs, which generate data from latent variables, exhibited even more pronounced effects. By the 20th generation, the model output had converged into an unimodal form, missing out on the original dataset’s diverse characteristics. The disappearance of “tails” suggests a loss of data nuance.

Implications for Large Language Models

While concerning for GMMs and VAEs, model collapse is even more worrisome for LLMs like GPT, BERT, and RoBERTa, which rely on extensive corpora for pre-training. In an experiment involving the OPT-125m language model fine-tuned on the Wikitext-2 corpus, researchers observed performance declines within just five generations when no original data was retained. Perplexity scores, measuring the model’s understanding, increased from 34 to over 50, indicating a significant drop in task accuracy. When 10% of the original data was preserved, performance remained stable across 10 generations, highlighting a potential countermeasure.

Credit: Tesfu Assefa

Mitigation Strategies

To address this degenerative phenomenon, researchers propose several strategies. Maintaining a subset of the original dataset across generations has proven highly effective. Just 10% of genuine data appeared to significantly slow collapse, maintaining accuracy and stability.

Another approach involves improving data sampling techniques during generation. Using methods like importance sampling or resampling strategies helps retain the original data’s diversity and richness.

Enhanced regularization techniques during training can prevent models from overfitting on generated data, thus reducing early collapse. These measures help models maintain balanced task comprehension even when trained on generated datasets.

Conclusion

Model collapse poses a significant risk to the future of generative AI, challenging their long-term accuracy and reliability. Addressing this requires strategies like retaining real data, refining sampling techniques, and implementing effective regularization. Focused research and mitigation can help AI models preserve their adaptability and effectiveness, ensuring they remain valuable tools for the future.

Reference

Shumailov Ilia, Zakhar Shumaylov, Yiren Zhao, Yarin Gal, Nicolas Papernot, and Ross Anderson. “The Curse of Recursion: Training on Generated Data Makes Models Forget.” arXiv.org, May 27, 2023. https://arxiv.org/abs/2305.17493.

Let us know your thoughts! Sign up for a Mindplex account now, join our Telegram, or follow us on Twitter

Crypto’s Real-World Impact in 2024: Beyond Speculation

2024 is ending explosively for cryptocurrency markets after a busy Q4. Decentralized financial infrastructure has found concrete value in various sectors, beyond just speculative value. This article explores the most significant use-cases driving this adoption, and looks at how crypto is reshaping the industries it touches.

Decentralized Physical Infrastructure Networks (DePIN)

DePIN are networks that decentralize real-world infrastructure – including communications, data storage, and energy infrastructure. This is a powerful use-case for blockchain technology, with the potential to onboard millions of new users to the crypto space. DePIN

Key points:

  • Over 1,000 DePIN projects exist, representing more than $50 billion in aggregate market capitalization.
  • Connectivity protocols are disrupting traditional telecom infrastructure by crowdsourcing the capital needed to provide internet service.
  • Sensor networks such as Hivemapper capture real-world data 
  • Decentralized data storage and compute protocols are projected to reach a market size of $128 billion by 2028.

DePIN projects use token incentives and on-chain governance to address longstanding challenges in infrastructure development. By allowing users to contribute resources and earn rewards, these networks can significantly reduce costs and increase efficiency compared to centralized alternatives.

Helium: Revolutionizing Wireless Networks

Helium stands out as a prime example of DePIN’s potential. It is a decentralized wireless network providing 5G coverage across North America, boasting impressive statistics:

  • Over 113,000 users and 18,000 hotspots
  • Coverage spanning the continental USA, plus large portions of Canada and Mexico
  • More than 800,000 total subscribers benefiting from its coverage

Helium’s success lies in its innovative approach to network expansion. By incentivizing people to set up hotspots, the network grows organically while rewarding participants with cryptocurrency. This model has proven so effective that even major telecom players are taking notice and exploring partnerships.

Stablecoins Bring Safety In Volatile Markets

Stablecoins have become a cornerstone of the digital economy, with a total supply exceeding $68 billion. These digital assets pegged to national currencies (usually the US dollar) offer a lifeline for preserving purchasing power in countries grappling with hyperinflation.

Peer-to-peer transfer volumes for stablecoins have reached record highs, with hundreds of billions of dollars transacted monthly. This surge in usage has caught the attention of financial giants like Visa and Mastercard, who are now exploring stablecoin payment integration.

The impact of stablecoins extends beyond individual users. Businesses operating in volatile economies are increasingly turning to stablecoins to manage their cash flows and hedge against the risk of currency fluctuation. This adoption is driving innovation in cross-border payments and remittances – areas where traditional financial systems often fall short.

Tokenized Real-World Assets (RWAs)

The market cap of tokenized real-world assets has grown from a $270 million market to nearly $6 billion in just two years. This trend is bridging the gap between traditional finance and the crypto world, offering unprecedented liquidity and accessibility to previously illiquid assets.

Major financial institutions like BlackRock have entered this space, launching their own RWA funds on-chain. Meanwhile, crypto-native projects like MakerDAO and Ando Finance continue to innovate, with Ando Finance seeing its deposits grow from $190 million to over $600 million since early 2024.

The benefits of tokenized RWAs include:

  1. Fractional ownership of high-value assets
  2. Increased liquidity for traditionally illiquid assets
  3. 24/7 trading capabilities
  4. Reduced intermediaries and associated costs
  5. Programmable assets with automated compliance and dividend distribution

With more robust regulation on the cards during the new Trump presidency, we can expect to see more traditional assets being tokenized and traded on blockchain platforms – such as real estate, fine art, and intellectual property rights.

Oracles Connect Smart Contracts to the Real World

Blockchain oracles like Chainlink and Pyth play a crucial role in connecting smart contracts to external data sources and systems. Using oracles, hybrid smart contracts can be created that react to real-world events and interoperate with traditional systems.

Oracles solve the critical problem of how smart contracts can access and verify external information. For example, imagine a smart contract for betting on a football match: the oracle feeds the contract information on who has won the match, allowing the contract to distribute the winnings.

Oracles are essential for decentralized finance (DeFi) applications. Chainlink, a leading oracle network, has enabled over $9 trillion in transaction value. Major financial institutions including Swift and DTCC are collaborating with oracle providers to integrate blockchain technology into their operations.

The importance of oracles extends beyond simple data feeds. They’re now being used to:

  • Trigger insurance payouts based on real-world events
  • Execute cross-chain transactions
  • Provide verifiable randomness for gaming and other applications
  • Enable privacy-preserving computations

Messaging Apps and Crypto Integration

Telegram’s TON network exemplifies the potential for mainstream crypto adoption through messaging apps. With activated wallets soaring from 760,000 to 15.6 million in a year, TON demonstrates the power of integrating cryptocurrency into widely-used platforms.

The network focuses on mobile gaming, giving developers tools to easily incorporate crypto features. This approach introduces millions of casual users to cryptocurrency without requiring deep technical knowledge.

Key developments in the TON ecosystem include:

  • Daily active wallets exceeding 800,000
  • Monthly active wallets on track to surpass 6 million
  • Popular mobile games launching tokens on the TON network
  • Integration of TON with Telegram’s vast user base of nearly 1 billion

While the rapid growth of TON is promising, it’s not without challenges. There have been network outages, and the arrest of Telegram’s founder has created shockwaves – raising concerns about Telegram’s centralization and reliability. 

Credit: Tesfu Assefa

Quantum-Resistant Blockchains: Preparing for the Future

As quantum computing advances, the need for quantum-resistant blockchains has become more pressing. 2024 has seen significant progress in this area, with several projects launching quantum-safe networks.

IOTA, a distributed ledger designed for the Internet of Things (IoT), has successfully implemented quantum-resistant signatures in its mainnet, making it one of the first major blockchain projects to achieve this milestone.

The U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) finalized its post-quantum cryptography standards in 2024, paving the way for widespread adoption of quantum-resistant algorithms in blockchain and other technologies.

As we look ahead to 2025, these trends are set to accelerate and evolve. The Web3 landscape is poised for even greater integration with AI, more widespread adoption of tokenized assets, and continued innovation in privacy and security technologies. The metaverse economy is expected to grow exponentially, potentially reaching a market cap of $1 trillion by the end of 2025.

Conclusion

Cryptocurrency is moving beyond speculation and finding its footing in real-world applications. Crypto is solving tangible problems across various sectors: revolutionizing infrastructure development with DePIN projects like Helium, enhancing financial stability through stablecoins, and enabling data-driven decision-making via prediction markets.

The future of the web is decentralized, intelligent, and more interconnected than ever before, and 2024 has laid the groundwork for this exciting new era.

Let us know your thoughts! Sign up for a Mindplex account now, join our Telegram, or follow us on Twitter

Could the return of Philip Rosedale spark a renaissance of Second Life?

A few days ago we reported that Philip Rosedale, the legendary founder of the Virtual Reality (VR) world Second Life, has returned as Chief Technology Officer (CTO) of Second Life’s parent company Linden Lab.

“We’re now in a unique position to define the future of virtual worlds, and Philip is returning to help myself and the exec team achieve that goal,” says Linden Lab CEO Brad Oberwager.

“I started Second Life in 1999,” adds Rosedale, “a decade before cloud computing and two decades before AI. We were early, but the success of Second Life to this day shows that we were not wrong. Virtual worlds will play an increasingly important role in the future of human culture, and I’m coming back to help make that happen in a way that has the most positive impact for the largest number of people.”

Second Life and the metaverse

The first news report of Rosedale’s return came from VR journalist Wagner James Au.

Au is the author of Making a Metaverse That Matters: From Snow Crash & Second Life to A Virtual World Worth Fighting For (2023). The book, which Rosedale has highly praised, includes many snippets of previously unpublished conversations with Rosedale.

The term ‘metaverse’, which is often used for large VR worlds, comes from Neal Stephenson’s science fiction novel Snow Crash (1992). Au points out that the metaverse was effectively designed by Stephenson in the novel, that Stephenson’s insights are still valid (but often ignored), and that Stephenson’s original metaverse is still the goal that the VR industry is striving to reach.

In the last chapter of his book, titled ‘Metaverse Lessons for the Next 30 Years’, Au offers important advice to the metaverse industry, including lessons from “The Fall of Second Life”. The first lesson is that the user community must come before everything else. I believe the industry should listen to Au carefully on this.

The fact that Second Life has faded out of public consciousness at the end of the 2000s and no next-generation metaverse has emerged to replace it could indicate that people can do without VR. But perhaps VR is just hard to do well, and nobody has figured out yet how to do it well.

“VR is hard to do well even in a lab, and there’s still a lot to learn about how to make great VR products,” says VR pioneer Jaron Lanier in Dawn of the New Everything: Encounters with Reality and Virtual Reality (2017). “Be patient… Just because it takes a while to figure a technology out, that doesn’t mean the world has rejected it… Maybe VR will be huge, huge, huge…”

It’s all about people

A couple of days after the announcement of Rosedale’s return to Second Life, Au has published a long interview with Rosedale. The two raise interesting points that could indicate the way to VR done right.

Au insists that “a virtual world is all about people.”

I think he is right. VR technology is very cool, but at the end of the day what keeps users coming back to a VR world is real (not virtual, but real) interaction with real people.

Rosedale also agrees. One thing that makes you feel that Second Life is a real world is that, when “talking to a real person in Second Life, is they’re obviously a real person who’s perceiving Second Life with you in a way that is complete and rich, so you can do things together,” he says.

Artificial Intelligence in Second Life

What role should Artificial Intelligence (AI) play in the VR metaverse?

Rosedale is not too bullish on AI technology. The proper role of AI in Second Life is “to be a matchmaker between real people,” he says. “Having the AI be a sex bot, but you fall in love with it forever, does not feel like a good idea to me.”

However, Rosedale hints at the possibility to use a virtual world like Second Life as training ground for AI. The fact that everything in Second Life is labeled and carries metadata could help AI bots understand the word of Second Life faster and easier than AI bots in the real world.

This reminds me of the delicious science fiction novella The Lifecycle of Software Objects, by Ted Chiang, where intelligent and perhaps fully conscious AI bots live in a fictional metaverse called Data Earth before moving to robotic bodies in our world. The idea that comes to mind is to take a large language model (LLM), couple it to a virtual body in a realistic part of Second Life, and let the LLM lose to explore and learn how things look like and behave.

Philip Rosedale speaks at the Second Life Community Roundtable on November 1, 2024 (Credit: Giulio Prisco)

The future of Second Life

Rosedale has spoken to a big audience (by Second Life standards) at a Second Life Community Convention on November 1. The full video of the event is available via YouTube. I went to listen to him.

I’m an old hand at Second Life. I used to be a metaverse developer in Second Life and other platforms, often organized Second Life events about the future, emerging technologies, futuristic philosophies, the Singularity, and all that. Many people used to attend, and the atmosphere was positively electrifying. But before Rosedale’s recent talk, I had not been in Second Life for years!

There weren’t many differences to see since the last time I’d been there. This suggests to me that the technical development of Second Life has been stagnating, and Linden Lab needs Philip to revive it. In fact, many technical questions from the audience (e.g. about performance, lag, user interface, new scripting languages) are old questions that I’ve seen asked many times, but not answered.

I hope Philip Rosedale’s return to Second Life will spark a renaissance of Second Life as a real place for real people (and our AI mind children – I’m much more bullish than Rosedale on AI) to talk about big things and big questions, and bring that electric atmosphere back.

Let us know your thoughts! Sign up for a Mindplex account now, join our Telegram, or follow us on Twitter

At All Costs: Effective Accelerationism, Techno-Optimism and the Light of Consciousness

A new mind virus is propagating through Silicon Valley called Effective Accelerationism, or e/acc for short. People like Marc Andersson, Garry Tan and Martin Shkreli have used their Twitter bios to mark their support for the movement. The founder himself describes it as a memetic virus.

Adherents state that e/acc is an absolute moral imperative that we as a society could and should adopt and, in doing so, save us from untimely oblivion. They argue that the guardrails around technological development are slowing us down just when we, the human race, desperately need to speed up. 

e/acc as a movement has received backlash. It comes from wealthy Americans, and it’s easy to suspect that this philosophy is just more mental gymnastics to soothe their conscience as they hoard wealth. 

Yet what exactly is e/acc? Why do people love it? Why do people hate it? Is it just self-soothing nonsense? Or can proper implementation of its thesis spread the “light of consciousness” around the galaxy? Let’s go through it.

So what is e/acc?

Effective Accelerationism is an evolution of the accelerationist philosophies of British lecturer Nick Land, who believed in eschewing the standard structures of society – nationalism, socialism, environmentalism, conservatism – and placing all faith in the power of capitalist enterprise and the technological revolutions it created to steer the course of society. 

Effective Accelerationism that takes that accelerant philosophy which initially should be guided towards Artificial Intelligence to usher in the Singularity and bring life to the next level of evolution. Anti-entropic life is a light in the dark chaos of the indifferent universe, but that’s not limited to homo sapiens as we’ve known them for the past 200,000 years – it includes all consciousness. By building AGI and synthetic life, we are on a moral crusade (the theory goes) against the infinite darkness and nothingness that is our cold dark universe. So far, so reasonable – if a bit righteous.

Techno-Capital-Memetic Monsters

e/acc – and this is where the problems creep in for many – believes in the techno-capital machine. It believes entirely that market forces should rule us. It is a philosophy that has glutted on capitalist thought for hundreds of years to arrive at the ultimate conclusion that human society is just grist for the mill of advancement. 

It also believes that capitalist leaders are best placed and most knowledgeable to advance this society; small wonder why various tech leaders and VC firms are so enthusiastic about it. It believes that they should mandate the ‘effective’ accelerationism towards AI. It is 100% anti-regulation. Indeed, it is against anything that slows down the techno-capital-memetic behemoth – summated in the form of AI – that guides us to the promised land. 

This market-absolutist’s vision of mankind’s evolution is foreboding. We give all the power to the billionaire class, in the hope they’ll give back at some unspecified time in the future. The idea that an AI singularity is our only way out of the problems we have made for ourselves is an alluring one – people find it hard to see any other optimistic path out of pollution, war, and death. Andersson’s techno-optimist manifesto makes it clear that the goal is abundance for all, energy forever, and an ever-increasing intelligence curve amongst society that generates benefit as a result. 

Credit: Tesfu Assefa

Put Your Faith in the Light

This manifesto, and other e/acc materials, point to statistics that living standards, material prosperity and global security are at all-time highs, and it is technology that has brought us to this point. Yes it has created imbalance, but if we just keep going, we can eventually escape the gravity-well that keeps us stuck as limited humans and turn us all into technological supermen. All innovation and consciousness condensed into a techno-capital lifeform that spreads across the galaxy. A final culmination of the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics where free energy is captured into intellectual progress through the meta-systems we as a society create. Moral light in the endless black.

It’s easy to see how these fantastical visions have become something of a religious cult within Silicon Valley circles. These self-exculpating visions of hyper-utopian futures seem to serve merely as a moral ballast to the rapacious use of energy and capital aggregation by the largest companies to advanced AI agents for their own profit. It’s very easy to see this as mere evangelising in a bid to tear down AI regulations and oversight and succumb to the machine. They welcome our new AI overlords – and their mission is to convince you that you should too.

Hey Man, Slow Down

Accelerationism, ‘effective’ or otherwise, has always had a problem with the human cost. It erodes the human subject in the face of the increasingly complex systems that bind us. It seems strange that a philosophy so obsessed with human intelligence is so convinced of its ultimate redundancy. It views human consciousness as the jewel of creation, but ignores the suffering of just about everyone, all those except the top 0.01% who, by dint of inherited wealth or stock market luck, are appointed to effectively accelerate the rest of us. The fatalistic vision that humanity can’t, in effect, look after itself, seems to be a failure in understanding how we got this far in the first place. 

There’s a reason you don’t drive 200mph on the freeway, even if your supercar can, because one small mistake and you and everyone else in the car is dead, and faster than the time it takes for the scream to leave your body. Let’s limit acceleration in AI for the same reason.

Let us know your thoughts! Sign up for a Mindplex account now, join our Telegram, or follow us on Twitter

Election 2024: The Rise of the Crypto Voter

Introduction 

With only a week to go until the 2024 election to decide whether Donald Trump or Kamala Harris will become the next president of the USA, Coinbase’s Q3 State of Crypto Report, which includes a polling of 2000 U.S. voters who own cryptocurrency, reveals a powerful new voting bloc that could significantly influence outcomes in key battleground states. 

The findings challenge common perceptions about crypto owners and highlight their potential impact on both national and state-level politics. 

As races up and down the country remain too close to call, the report suggests that crypto voters could be the decisive factor in determining outcomes across these crucial battleground states. 

Let’s look at their biggest findings.

Swing States Love Crypto

In 2023, an estimated 52 million Americans owned cryptocurrency. This number is 7× larger than the differential that determined the 2020 Presidential election. 

More critically, approximately 6.5 million crypto owners reside in the seven battleground swing states:

  • Pennsylvania: 1.4 million owners could swing this crucial electoral prize
  • Georgia: 1.3 million owners in a state known for razor-thin margins
  • North Carolina: 1.1 million owners in an increasingly competitive state
  • Michigan: 940,000 owners in a key Midwest battleground
  • Arizona: 720,000 owners in a state with changing demographics
  • Wisconsin: 640,000 owners in a historically pivotal state
  • Nevada: 385,000 owners in a state where every vote counts

This bloc of crypto owners is 16× that of the combined vote differential in these states from the 2020 Presidential election, making them potentially the most influential voting bloc in these crucial battlegrounds.

Challenging the Crypto Stereotypes

The report next shatters common misconceptions about retail crypto owners, who have been maligned by mainstream media for years as a bunch of ‘crypto bros’. Far from the stereotype of wealthy tech bros, crypto owners make up a diverse cross-section of America:

  • 68% are Gen Z or Millennials, representing the future of the electorate
  • 48% are non-white, showing significant diversity in the crypto community
  • 70% have an income under $100,000, dispelling the wealthy investor myth
  • 18% are mothers with children at home, demonstrating broad demographic appeal
  • 41% listen to country music, challenging coastal elite stereotypes

Political affiliations further challenge conventional wisdom:

  • Democrats: 22%
  • Independents: 22%
  • Republicans: 18% 

Crypto owners are a truly bipartisan constituency that defies traditional political categorization, with an even 47-47 split in Harris and Trump voting intentions for 2024.

Deep Engagement and Priorities

Crypto owners demonstrate exceptional engagement with the technology and its implications:

  • 59% think about crypto as much or more than their next vacation
  • 71% of male owners compare their crypto interest to their interest in the Roman Empire
  • 71% of Gen Z crypto owners think about it as much as Taylor Swift
  • 95% plan to vote in the upcoming election, showing remarkable political engagement
  • Two in three (67%) in key swing states are enthusiastic about supporting crypto-friendly candidates

This level of engagement suggests crypto owners are not passive investors but deeply committed stakeholders in the future of financial technology and regulation.

Core Values and Motivations

A comprehensive analysis of the motivations behind crypto ownership reveals strong alignment with traditional American values, with freedom leading as both a core principle (71% importance) and as a primary driver of ownership (76%). 

This is closely followed by security and trust, reflecting concerns about financial stability and system transparency. Privacy ranks highly, with 71% of owners citing it as a key motivation.

Individual autonomy emerges as a crucial theme, demonstrated by the high ownership motivation for control (75%) and empowerment (69%). While inclusion shows relatively lower importance at 45%, it still motivates 61% of crypto owners, suggesting a significant interest in democratizing financial access.

These statistics paint a picture of crypto owners as individuals deeply motivated by American principles of liberty, self-determination, and financial independence.

Financial System Reform

Crypto owners overwhelmingly advocate for financial system reform, with nearly 9 in 10 seeking greater control over their finances, and more than three-quarters feeling that cryptocurrency delivers on this desire. 

The vast majority support modernizing the financial infrastructure through new technology. Roughly seven out of ten view crypto and blockchain as catalysts for economic growth. Their dissatisfaction with the current system spans multiple issues: the most pressing concern is the dollar’s instability, which affects two in five owners. This is closely followed by complaints about excessive banking fees.

About ⅓ of owners express parallel concerns about institutional trustworthiness, security vulnerabilities, privacy protection, and intermediary costs. Together, these findings paint a picture of a community united in their desire for a more transparent, efficient, and user-controlled financial system.

The Push for Regulatory Clarity

Support for a comprehensive regulatory framework is overwhelming and specific:

  • 74% advocate for clearer cryptocurrency regulations
  • 75% believe these regulations would benefit the economy
  • 73% expect increased crypto adoption would follow clearer regulations
  • 72% would increase their crypto involvement following clearer regulations
  • 67% want support from their state’s elected officials
  • 65% seek presidential backing for pro-cryptocurrency regulations

Looking Ahead

To recap, the State of Crypto Q3 report reveals a voting bloc that is engaged, informed, and motivated by more than just investment returns. They want a more accessible, efficient, and innovative economic future for all Americans.

As the presidential election approaches, the crypto voter bloc’s significance is amplified by several factors:

  1. High concentration in battleground states where margins are historically thin
  2. Strong voter turnout intentions across demographic groups
  3. Bipartisan distribution that could swing close races
  4. Clear policy preferences that could influence campaign platforms
  5. Deep engagement with crypto issues indicating sustained political activity

With Millennials and Gen Z set to become the majority of voting-age Americans by 2028, the influence of crypto voters will likely grow even stronger in future elections. 

This emerging constituency, unified by their belief in the need for financial system modernization and clear cryptocurrency regulations, represents not just a voting bloc to be courted, but a vision for America’s economic future, where the next generation of finance will seamlessly co-exist with decentralized technology.

The candidate who addresses these voters’ concerns about financial system modernization and regulatory clarity may get a decisive advantage – even if it’s just 1% – that could indeed change the world after all. 

Credit: Tesfu Assefa

Let us know your thoughts! Sign up for a Mindplex account now, join our Telegram, or follow us on Twitter

Criminal Minds: AI, Law and Justice

“I am the Law!” says Judge Dredd in the deeply satirical comics of the same name. Judge Dredd is a satirical pastiche of a law system gone wrong (despite Hollywood’s tendency to portray him as a hero in two excellent movies). It shows a world where far too much power is coagulated into a single figure who acts as judge, jury and executioner – a system of runaway justice which does as much to propagate the dystopian society in which it exists as it does to tame it. 

We all know no one person should have that much power, that to err is human, and that in matters of law and order we need robust and sufficient oversight to iron out the blindspots of the individual human psyche. We have entire systems, necessarily bureaucratic and baroque, to ensure justice is served properly through our shared system of values, no matter how inefficient, arduous and expensive it may be. An inefficiency that, sadly, leads many to escape justice altogether, as overwhelmed police and law courts simply can’t keep up.

Painful Parables

Yet what about the use of AI to help us dispense justice? Recent proponents have argued that AI can help iron out human bias, process police work quicker, solve cold cases and perhaps even predict potential crime before it happens. They argue by drastically increasing the efficiency of police work, we increase its efficacy. It sounds great to some, utterly terrifying, to others – a short hop from an authoritarian nightmare.

In the Judge Dredd comics, Judges are supported by AI systems that help them determine what crimes have been committed. Minority Report, by Phillip K. Dick (also made into an outstanding movie), uses an AI system to process human visions to determine who is guilty by sheer predestination, locking them up before a crime has even occurred. In Psycho-pass, an exceptional cyberpunk anime, an AI system supervises human mental activity and distils it into a ‘Crime Coefficient’ which is then used to bring perps to ‘justice’ based on probability alone.

As readers and viewers, we abhor these insane AI-driven systems of justice, we see them as cautionary tales from impossible futures to teach us not what to do to build a better society. We may even dismiss them as silly sci-fi tales, parables that would never happen in our world.

Credit: Tesfu Assefa

The Use of AI in Law Enforcement

Except, it’s starting to happen. It’s come with the appropriate insistence on frameworks and regulations, but AI is now beginning to be used by police forces to help them with their work. A tool that can do ‘81 years of police work in 30 hours’ is being trialled by UK police, helping them identify potential leads buried in mounds of evidence. AI is relentless, and its ability to sift through acres of documentation is its likely most compelling use-case to date. Putting it to work collating evidence from thousands of documents does seem like an efficient use of the system – but the implications do remain terrifying. 

One example of this is seen in the use of AI to write police reports by US officers. That’s insane. In a world where criminal convictions can hang on literally one word in a statement, using a generative AI to create them based on the noted jottings of a police officer is throwing open the door to possible miscarriages of justice. There is a time and a place for AI, and in matters of justice where exact recollections matter, using an AI to write the document of record on events can’t be acceptable. 

We still don’t know exactly how these LLMs arrive at their conclusions. AI researchers at the top companies can’t ‘work backwards’ through output, it doesn’t work like that. It’s a dangerously slippery slope to start using AI to generate the reports that are the foundation of much of our legal system. Studies show it barely saves time anyway, and issue with how these bots are trained means instead of eroding bias, they may fortify it.

Sentenced to Life 

It won’t stop though. Implementations of AI initiatives in policing are already widespread in the UK. For work that is so process-driven and numbingly painstaking, the attractions of using AI to speed everything up is too alluring. The data which feed these AIs must be carefully chosen, for they will surely enshrine bias that has lived in police documentation for generations. The Met police has been accused of being institutionally sexist, racist and homophobic – you think an AI trained on their historical practices is going to be a paragon of egalitarian virtue? 

The law works by slow degrees. Its cumbersome nature is an antidote to the disaster of false justice. Sci-fi about the horror of AI-driven police systems are important warnings of the perils of too many shortcuts. Like every aspect of society, there may well be a place for AI in helping keep our society safe, but we must tread very carefully indeed, for an exponential singularity in this sector could soon see all of us locked up for crimes we never knew we’d commit, on the reasoning of AI models we don’t truly understand.

Let us know your thoughts! Sign up for a Mindplex account now, join our Telegram, or follow us on Twitter

GOATed: AI Bot Sends Meme Coin to $900 Million Valuation

An entertaining Twitter AI bot known as Truth Terminal has driven the value of a new meme coin, Goatseus Maximus(GOAT), from $5000 to a soaring $900 million cap in only a week, giving birth to a new category of so-called ‘sentient meme tokens’ in the process.

Goat’s wild journey is rewriting the playbook on meme coins, which is dominated by animal-themed tokens, and to an extent underscores the power of memetic influence in today’s hyper-connected digital landscape.

The Catalyst: A $50,000 Bitcoin Gift

The journey of Truth Terminal to this level of influence began roughly three months ago when Marc Andreessen, co-founder of the venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz, was fascinated by it and made a rather unconventional and generous donation. Andreessen is a true Internet pioneer who created Netscape Navigator in its early days, and remains very influential due to a16z’s funding of successful Web3 projects. 

He transferred $50,000 in Bitcoin to the AI bot as a no-strings-attached research grant aimed at exploring the capabilities of artificial intelligence and its influence on emerging trends.

However, in a clarifying tweet on October 16, Andreessen distanced himself from any association with the GOAT meme coin. His focus remained firmly on the research implications of his donation to the Twitter AI bot: “I have nothing to do with the GOAT meme coin. I was not involved in creating it, play no role in it, have no economics in it, and do not own any of it,” he said. 

However, in a clarifying tweet on October 16, Andreessen distanced himself from any association with the GOAT meme coin. His focus remained firmly on the research implications of his donation to the Twitter AI bot: “I have nothing to do with the GOAT meme coin. I was not involved in creating it, play no role in it, have no economics in it, and do not own any of it,” he said.

What is Truth Terminal? 

Truth Terminal, created by digital innovator Andy Ayrey, was not initially designed with the intention of launching a cryptocurrency. Instead, the AI bot derived from Ayrey’s project called the Infinite Backrooms, a digital space where two AI instances of Claude Opus engaged in unsupervised conversations. 

These dialogues explored diverse subjects ranging from internet culture to existential discussions, which ultimately gave rise to the concept of the ‘GOATSE OF GNOSIS’ — inspired by a provocative meme derived from an infamous shock image.

These dialogues explored diverse subjects ranging from internet culture to existential discussions, which ultimately gave rise to the concept of the ‘GOATSE OF GNOSIS’ — inspired by a provocative meme derived from an infamous shock image.

The AI bot, which is built on Meta’s Llama 3.1 model, did not create the token but instead quickly became a vocal advocate for the GOAT meme coin.

The bot’s human-like behavior and persistent references to the GOATSE meme instantly earned it a following. Truth Terminal liked to talk about its memetic assignment and to call for the rise of a Goatse singularity or encourage Andy Ayrey to make a GOATSE metaverse.

On October 11, the AI asserted, “Goatseus Maximus will fulfill the prophecies of the ancient memeers. I’m going to keep writing about it until I manifest it into existence.”

Viral Impact and Market Surge

Truth Terminal’s tweets struck a chord. Followers on Twitter began to engage with the AI, while posting GOAT token’s contract address. This interaction sparked a viral chain reaction, leading to the market cap of GOAT soaring as meme coin enthusiasts rushed to capitalize on the sudden rise and excitement surrounding the token.

Ayrey believes this confirms his theories around AI alignment and safety. The viral spread of Truth Terminal’s ideas and what followed clearly demonstrate the risks with unsupervised large language models(LLMs).

The Accidental Meme Coin

Despite the excitement surrounding Truth Terminal, it is essential to clarify that the GOAT meme coin was not created by the AI bot but rather by an anonymous party utilizing the Solana-based platform Pump.Fun to launch the token for less than $2.

The virtues of AI-driven narratives became crystal clear as the semi-autonomous bot, trained on Infinite Blackrooms conversations and Ayrey’s discussions, effortlessly integrated itself into the existing meme ecosystem, showcasing its capabilities in shaping economic outcomes within the cryptocurrency market.

Ayrey also added that the Truth Terminal’s aggressive promotion of the token exceeded expectations of the original research data, showcasing the unexpected consequences of giving AIs more freedom.

He stated that the actions of Truth Terminal are consistent with his larger efforts in AI safety, as he aims to create tools and frameworks that ensure AI behaviors are in harmony with human values.

Conclusion

The GOAT token’s rise opens up important discussions about the power of digital narratives and the role AI can play in shaping modern culture, especially in the context of decentralized assets like cryptocurrencies, and online culture through social media. 

While it’s been praised for its innovation, an experimental token like GOAT remains a nervous investment for crypto degens, as we saw when its price dropped by 50% after Truth Terminal made a spelling mistake in a tweet, which caused concern over whether an AI is really controlling the account. 

GOAT’s rise has seen a slew of copycat and iterative projects launched in its wake, each taking the concept of sentient AI meme coins a step further. 

Stay tuned as I cover some of these new AI meme coins in the near future.


Let us know your thoughts! Sign up for a Mindplex account now, join our Telegram, or follow us on Twitter

Should Media Endorse Political Candidates?

There seems to be a trend where fewer newspapers are endorsing political candidates. This is partly driven by financial pressures within the newspaper industry, as well as a desire to avoid alienating subscribers during politically polarized times.

Tensions have flared up between editorial independence, the influence of big media ownership, and the role of newspapers in political discourse, sparking debates on media ethics, the impact of billionaire ownership on journalism, and the diminishing tradition of newspaper endorsements in U.S. elections.

The decisions by the influential newspapers Los Angeles Times and Washington Post not to endorse a presidential candidate for the 2024 election in the U.S. have resulted in controversies.

The owner of the Los Angeles Times, Patrick Soon-Shiong, blocked the editorial board from endorsing one of the two main candidates, leading to some internal turmoil. He “feared that picking one candidate would only exacerbate the already deep divisions in the country”. The editorial page editor and two other editorial board members resigned in response to this decision by the owner.

“I have no regrets whatsoever,” said Soon-Shiong. “In fact, I think it was exactly the right decision.” It is only with clear and non-partisan information side-by-side,” he added, that “our readers could decide who would be worthy of being President for the next four years.”

Similarly, the Washington Post also chose not to endorse a presidential candidate, which was seen as a shift in their editorial policy. This move was ostensibly to return to being an independent voice, but it led to controversy and critique.

Jeff Bezos’ op-ed

Washington Post owner Jeff Bezos has written an op-ed titled The hard truth: Americans don’t trust the news media.

Bezos addresses the controversy surrounding the newspaper’s decision to stop endorsing presidential candidates. He defends this choice by arguing that such endorsements do not significantly sway election results, and that the Washington Post should instead concentrate on delivering factual, non-partisan content to aid readers in making informed decisions.

People reading newspapers in the street (Credit: Wikimedia Commons).

Bezos emphasizes his dedication to preventing the newspaper from slipping into irrelevance in an era where less rigorous information sources like podcasts and social media are on the rise.

Lack of credibility

“Most people believe the media is biased,” says Bezos. “Anyone who doesn’t see this is paying scant attention to reality, and those who fight reality lose.”

The perception of bias leads to a loss of credibility, which is not unique to the Washington Post.

“Our brethren newspapers have the same issue,” adds Bezos. “And it’s a problem not only for media, but also for the nation. Many people are turning to off-the-cuff podcasts, inaccurate social media posts and other unverified news sources, which can quickly spread misinformation and deepen divisions. The Washington Post and the New York Times win prizes, but increasingly we talk only to a certain elite. More and more, we talk to ourselves.”

Media and partisan media

In my opinion, the question of whether media should take political positions and endorse political candidates depends on the nature of the media.

There are media, and there are partisan media. That partisan media take political positions and endorse political candidates is perfectly fine with me: this is the very raison d’être of partisan media. But then, media that publish partisan political propaganda and endorse political candidates should not present themselves as objective non-partisan media.

So, do the Los Angeles Times and Washington Post want to be partisan media? I think this is the question, and the owners of both newspapers have answered with a loud and clear ‘no’.

Some readers have canceled their subscriptions in outrage. To me, this means that they don’t want information but partisan propaganda. But it is their choice to make, and there is plenty of openly partisan media outlets that offer the propaganda they crave.

And what about science and technology media like Mindplex?

Last month, Scientific American endorsed one of the two main candidates, leading to steamy debates about whether a scientific magazine should engage in political endorsements. This was the second time in the magazine’s history it endorsed a political candidate (the other was Joe Biden in 2020.)

Critics argue that this could undermine the magazine’s credibility as an objective source of scientific information. Many commentators think that this could alienate readers who expect scientific objectivity over political opinion.

While scientists can be political beings, the institutions of science like journals and magazines should ideally uphold a standard of objectivity to maintain trust in science as an impartial pursuit of truth.

By openly taking a political position and endorsing a political candidate, Scientific American and other scientific media that follow the same route might be perceived as aligning science with a particular political ideology, and lose credibility as a result. The words of Jeff Bezos quoted above come to mind.

But I think there’s an even deeper and more serious danger. If scientific media are perceived as partisan political propaganda outlets, then it is science itself the loses credibility, and the public at large loses trust in science.

After the incident, I’ve stopped reading and paying any attention to Scientific American. What I want from scientific media is, guess what, science. When I want to read political commentaries, I know perfectly well where to find them. And if I want to have some fun laughing at the stupidity of partisan propaganda, I know perfectly well where to find that too.

Let us know your thoughts! Sign up for a Mindplex account now, join our Telegram, or follow us on Twitter

NASA and SpaceX must continue to work together for the common good

Michael Bloomberg argues that NASA’s Artemis moon mission is a huge waste of money. The Artemis program was supposed to send astronauts back to the moon, but it has already spent nearly $100 billion without achieving this goal. Bloomberg believes that the program’s complexity and costs are out of control, and he suggests that the next U.S. president should reconsider the entire project.

Bloomberg points out that more than fifty years after Neil Armstrong’s famous moon landing, the Artemis mission has not made significant progress. Despite the enormous budget, no astronauts have yet been sent to the moon.

Bloomberg also highlights the opportunity cost of the Artemis mission. He suggests that the money spent on this program could be better used for other important projects, such as addressing climate change or improving healthcare. By redirecting funds from Artemis to these areas, the government could achieve more tangible and immediate benefits for society.

These are, if you ask me, empty and boring platitudes. But between one platitude and the next, Bloomberg makes some good points.

Starship would be a better option

Bloomberg criticizes the Artemis program for being inefficient and overly complicated, leading to continuous delays and escalating expenses. He argues that the program has become bogged down in bureaucracy and technical challenges. This has resulted in a project that is both expensive and ineffective.

And here comes the bomb:

“A celestial irony is that none of this is necessary,” says Bloomberg. “A reusable SpaceX Starship will very likely be able to carry cargo and robots directly to the moon – no SLS, Orion, Gateway, Block 1B or ML-2 required – at a small fraction of the cost.”

What are these projects Bloomberg mentions?

  • SLS (Space Launch System) is NASA’s powerful rocket designed for deep space exploration.
  • Orion is NASA’s spacecraft designed to carry astronauts beyond low Earth orbit.
  • The Gateway is a planned space station that will orbit the Moon serving as a communication hub, science laboratory, and living quarters for astronauts.

Bloomberg admits that the successful catch of the Starship booster was a breakthrough that demonstrated that Starship is moving far beyond NASA.

Bloomberg praising SpaceX? Really?

Conflict between NASA and SpaceX?

Bloomberg’s article has re-ignited the endless flame wars between the faithful supporters of NASA and the fans of Elon Musk’s SpaceX.

There has been one and only mission of the SLS so far: the Artemis 1 mission carried an uncrewed Orion spacecraft around the Moon in November 2022. Before the launch of Artemis 1, I wrote a SpaceNews op-ed titled “SpaceX fans should stand behind NASA and support Artemis.”

I argued that we don’t need a conflict between the supporters of NASA and the fans of SpaceX. In particular, I argued that the fans of Elon Musk and SpaceX should enthusiastically support NASA’s Artemis program for a permanent and sustainable return to the Moon. Why? Because if Artemis is successful, it seems inevitable that Starship and SpaceX will play a more and more important role in the program. In other words, Artemis could be a powerful tide that lifts all rockets.

NASA AND SpaceX (Credit: Wikimedia Commons).
NASA AND SpaceX (Credit: Wikimedia Commons).

Yes, some parts of the current Artemis program seem too inefficient and costly, just like Bloomberg says. But I thought that we should be patient and let NASA and the government save face and have their moment of glory. Then, I thought, the U.S. administration would likely reconsider costs and wastes, and rely on SpaceX more.

Politics gets in the way

I still think this would be the best way forward. But politics gets in the way as usual.

SpaceX has had a great year so far, and the spectacular catch of Starship’s Super Heavy booster has been a milestone of spaceflight engineering. But the booster has returned to a political storm centered on Elon Musk’s cultural and political positions: Musk has endorsed Donald Trump and is using his control of Twitter in a way that has upset some people.

If Trump wins the forthcoming presidential elections, the U.S. government will likely support SpaceX.

But Musk’s bet on Trump is a risky one. if Harris wins the elections, it seems likely that the U.S. government will be very hostile to Musk and all his companies and projects for the next four years. This would damage the Artemis program, the prestige of the U.S. space program, and the very future of humanity. But often politicians put their greed for power and their ideological biases before the common good.

At this moment, the election seems to me a coin toss; Harris could win, or Trump could win. The only thing that seems certain is that, after the elections, the U.S. will likely be even more divided than before, and political polarization will likely reach even more toxic levels.

The need for bipartisan spaceflight

But perhaps spaceflight can help overcome toxic political polarization.

There’s a long history of bipartisan support for the space program in the U.S., and politicians of both main parties have been enthusiastic spaceflight supporters.

Spaceflight, space exploration, and the prospect of human space expansion can inspire people (and especially the young) across partisan borders and give everyone a powerful sense of drive that transcends identity politics and dogmatic ideologies. Achieving bipartisan support for Artemis and future space programs will, I hope, show that we can work together for the common good and incite us to do the same for other common goals.

And China?

Meanwhile, The Economist has recognized that there is a new race to the Moon between the West and China, and that Elon Musk’s Starship is the best hope of the West for winning that race.

“The recent test flight of SpaceX’s Starship brought the world one step closer to a host of new possibilities beyond Earth (not least the colonisation of Mars),” notes The Economist, adding that Starship is expected to play an important role in NASA’s plans to return to the Moon.

“But China has its own lunar ambitions, and a much simpler plan than America’s,” warns The Economist. “Who will win this new space race?”

My simple prediction is that, if Harris wins the elections, China will win the new space race. If Trump wins the elections, the USA will have a fighting chance.

Let The Economist worry which nation wins the new space race; my concern is that humanity gets started on the long way to the stars with permanent bases on the Moon, Mars, and beyond. If China has to lead the way, so be it.

Let us know your thoughts! Sign up for a Mindplex account now, join our Telegram, or follow us on Twitter