Search

Can “Rascals” Pass The Turing Test?

Posted by Richard Dooling on March 15th, 2008

Turing Test

“Passing the Turing test–the holy grail of artificial intelligence (AI), whereby a human conversing with a computer can’t tell it’s not human–may now be possible in a limited way with the world’s fastest supercomputer (IBM’s Blue Gene), according to AI experts at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute. RPI is aiming to pass AI’s final exam this fall, by pairing the most powerful university-based supercomputing system in the world with a new multimedia group designing a holodeck, a la Star Trek.” See EETimes.com - AI researchers think ‘Rascals’ can pass Turing test.

Geek Love - New York Times

Posted by Richard Dooling on March 9th, 2008

Adam Rogers, Senior Editor at Wired, has a tribute to Gary Gygax, inventor of Dungeons & Dragons and much of the social structure of Web2, Geek Love - Sunday New York Times. Gorgeous flow chart, too!

Why Does It Take So Long?

Posted by Richard Dooling on February 2nd, 2008

NYTimes, Adam PalmerThe hoary old adage is that publishing a book is like giving birth: It takes nine months. Nowadays, we have electronic typesetting, high-speed presses, print-on-demand, and oceans of text gushing through fiberoptic pipes onto computer screens all over the planet.

So why does it still take so long to publish a dead-tree edition?

Writing in Sunday’s New York Times Book Review, Rachel Donadio explains how technology may move at the speed of light, but humans still need nine months to properly prepare, market, and distribute a book: Essay - Waiting For It - New York Times, by Rachel Donadio.

Google Book Search

Posted by Richard Dooling on January 30th, 2008

If you haven’t tried Google Book Search yet, try it out on a few of my books.

White Man's Grave

If you have the time, you can read the whole book online:

Google’s book scanning project is controversial (see, e.g., Google’s Moonshot, by Jeffrey Toobin at The New Yorker), but a quick survey of the titles available shows that most publishers are wisely going along with the plan.

Rapture For The Geeks

Posted by Richard Dooling on January 26th, 2008

My next book is Rapture For The Geeks: When AI Outsmarts IQ, due out from Random House in fall of 2008. Amazon has a page up, but no jacket image or description yet. Until the publisher makes a sample chapter available, I’ll post samples here:

Survival Of The Smartest: Will Computers Out-Evolve Us?

(from Rapture For The Geeks, by Richard Dooling.)

Alongside the snail’s pace of biological evolution, where it can take millions of years just to develop something as basic as an opposable thumb, computers go from megabytes to gigabytes in five years. Fourteen years from the personal computer to the World Wide Web!

Biological evolution and human technology both show continual acceleration, indicated by the shorter time to the next event (two billion years from the origin of life to cells; fourteen years from the PC to the World Wide Web).

–Ray Kurzweil, The Singularity Is Near: When Humans Transcend Biology (2005), page 17.

Even on a grander time scale, human evolution is about as fast-paced and exciting as continental drift. It’s taken roughly four million years for human brains to triple in size (from 400 ml to 1400 ml); one hopes we’ve tripled our processing power, as well. Woo hoo! During that time we have “evolved'’ from throwing rocks at each other to throwing bombs at each other. We’ve gone from foraging on the savannas to pawing through the meat cooler at Bag & Save. Progress, maybe, but nothing close to the relentless acceleration of technological evolution.

We are sluggish biological sorcerers with whiz-bang technological apprentices. What if the tech apprentices are about to take over? Are you with them, or against them? Are you ready to journey to the near future and acquire the knowledge and skills you’ll need to succeed in a world run by supercomputers?

If you proceed beyond this chapter, you should at all times keep in mind the teachings of Jack Handey, an insightful stand-up atomic philosopher and quantum cybernetic humorist: “When you’re riding in a time machine way far into the future, don’t stick your elbow out the window, or it’ll turn into a fossil.'’

What If The Universe Came With A Search Box?

When you’re in a panic to make an appointment and you can’t find your car keys or your billfold or purse, do you instinctively begin formulating search terms you might use if the real world came with Google Desktop Search or a command line interface? Whoever created the infinite miracle we glibly call “The Universe'’ is surely at least as smart as the guys in Berkeley California who made Unix. The Unix creators wisely included a program called “find,'’ which enables you to instantly find any file on your system, especially any file in your “home'’ directory. Another command called “grep'’ enables you to find any line of text in any file on your entire system. Mac OS X uses Spotlight to do essentially the same thing, with some spiffy visuals added; even Microsoft finally included “Instant Search'’ in Vista.

So why can’t the Creator of the Universe come up with a decent search box? Why can’t you summon a command line and search your real-world home for “Honda car keys,'’ and specify rooms in your house to search instead of folders or paths in your home directory? It’s a crippling design flaw in the real-world interface. And while we’re at it, how about an UNDO button? Wouldn’t that come in handy in the real world? Especially if you just totaled your car or contracted a venereal disease? Why can’t you just hit Ctrl-Z or click on the swirly little UNDO arrow icon and put everything back the way it was before? If only your mouth came with a backspace key.

If you have one of those days where all of life seems corrupted, broken, full of error messages and warnings, and the kids are all out somewhere performing illegal operations, buffer overruns, segmentation faults, and destabilizing the system. On those days, what you need is called: Real Life System Restore. Restore Your Life To Last Known Good Configuration?

(from Rapture For The Geeks, by Richard Dooling.

Rejection, Thy Constant Companion

Posted by Richard Dooling on January 20th, 2008

Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm.

–Winston Churchill

RejectedMost writers worry about rejection, not acceptance. Ray Bradbury says that the successful writer has to deal with both: “You have to know how to accept rejection and reject acceptance.”

Several articles on this site (usually in the “For Writers” section) offer advice to aspiring writers who are trying to find agents or publishers. The most common question I’m asked (after “How do I get an agent?”) is : “How many query letters should I send out?” Or, “I found an agent willing to represent me, but she has submitted my manuscript to five (or eight, or twelve) publishers, with no takers. What should I do now?”

Most writers start out asking “Is my writing any good?” but that inevitably leads to the question: “Is it good enough for me to get paid?” Literary agents are pretty good at spotting what sells, or at least what they can sell to an editor at any given time. Good agents know the marketplace. Writers, even working writers, don’t usually know what sells. Writers know how to make interesting sentences, some of which may sell, others not so much.

If you have read my advice to aspiring writers seeking tips on how to get published, then you know that I don’t subscribe to the “you can do it, just keep at it” school of mentoring. Obviously not everyone who wants to write for hire can get paid to write, just as not everyone who wants to get paid for playing baseball succeeds just by trying really hard. It’s true that hard work matters more than talent, which is fairly common, but sometimes hard work alone won’t do it.

Sometimes would-be writers seem to be asking: “How hard should I try?” Answer: Try as hard as you want to try. And don’t be afraid to quit. I’ve quit several times myself, and it always leads to something new and interesting . . . to write about. In my case, at various times, I have sworn off writing and traveled through Africa, gone to law school and become a working lawyer, and learned some computer programming. I wouldn’t trade any of those three endeavors for equal parts of writing time. Maybe I’d feel differently if I pulled down million-dollar book advances, but I doubt it. As Tom Stoppard put it: “Every exit is an entrance somewhere else.”

If you need a push before you can give yourself permission to quit, read Aspiring Writers: The Worst Advice You’ll Ever Read, by Charles Hugh Smith. Disheartening? You bet, but all it says is that if you are in the writing game for money or glory, you’ll probably break your own heart. Better to be in it because you love reading and writing. Sure it’s nice to get published, but then it starts all over again. No sooner do you get published, then you want a New York Times Review, a good one, please. Next, the bestseller list, of course. Annie Lamott talks about this when giving advice to aspiring writers:

Almost every single thing you hope publication will do for you is a fantasy, a hologram - it’s the eagle on your credit card that only seems to soar. What’s real is that if you do your scales every day, if you slowly try harder and harder pieces, if you listen to great musicians play music you love, you’ll get better.

–Anne Lamott, Bird By Bird: Some Instructions on Writing and Life

Or as Aristotle put it: “We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act but a habit.” Maybe it’s a bad habit? That’s up to you.

Stephen King, On WritingIf you think writing is a waste of time unless you get paid for it, then quit right now. If you intend to write no matter what, then keep writing and keep sending your stuff off to agents, no matter how often it gets rejected. What’s to lose, except pride and postage? Collect rejection slips and be proud of them. (Almost every writer saves them; someday a literary neuro-psychologist probably will explain why.) Getting discouraged is a daily rite of passage. Take a look at Stephen King’s On Writing and his account of how he tossed his first stab at Carrie into the trash. That’s right, he threw it away. And bear in mind, dear reader, these were the days of typewriters, not computers. It was bye-bye one-and-only draft. On trash day, his wife Tabitha salvaged it and convinced Stephen to keep going and finish the thing. (See On Writing, pages 75-77.) When Doubleday bought the manuscript of Carrie for $2,500, the publisher had to send a telegram, because the Kings were living in a trailer and couldn’t afford a phone.

Consider the publishing history of Harry Potter. True, Rowling found an agent on her second try (most unusual, just ask any author), but then the manuscript was rejected by publisher after publisher: “Too strange! Too long for a children’s book! Too unbelievable! Sorcerers? Spells?” Eventually, Bloomsbury, a new publishing house at the time, bought the manuscript for roughly $5,000, and then printed 500 copies for the first run. That’s how high their expectations were.

Just recently, Catherine O’Flynn, 37, joined the likes of H. G. Wells, William Golding, Graham Greene and J. K. Rowling by finding spectacular success after a string of rejections when her mystery story What Was Lost took the First Novel prize at the Costa Book Awards (formerly known as the Whitbread Prize): Rejected author has last laugh. If you seek particulars on how many rejections are “normal” or “enough,” consult the likes of Miss Snark, always funny and a working literary agent with great advice about the marketplace and query letters (although, as of 20 May 2007, her blog appears to have gone dark).

Have a look at today’s New York Times Book Review and The Story of ‘Night’. In the late 1950s, fifteen publishers rejected Elie Wiesel’s account of his time at Auschwitz and Buchenwald, before the small firm Hill & Wang finally accepted it. You can empathize with the editors who rejected it, can’t you? “Oh, here’s a cheery, heart-warming story: ‘My time at Auschwitz.’” As of today, Night has sold 10 million copies, only 3 million of which are due to Oprah’s recent endorsement. The point isn’t that you too can sell 10 million copies of your book. Night could have sold only 5,000 copies, and it would still be a great book. The point is that you can’t steer by what the marketplace seems to think is “good” at any given moment. Editors, agents, and publishers don’t know what readers will want next. They can make educated guesses, but nobody knows until the book comes out.

An old, inside publishing joke sums it up. “We’re publishing ten books next year,” says the publisher to the business reporter, “and two of them will be bestsellers.” The reporter asks, “Which ones are the bestsellers?” The publisher replies, “We don’t know yet.”

Finally, if you get downcast (that would be the status quo), visit Literary Rejections On Display, or consider Hemingway’s enduring observation: “That terrible mood of depression of whether it’s any good or not is what is known as The Artist’s Reward.”

Other than self-discipline, there’s no substitute for finding someone who believes in you besides your lonesome.

My wife made a crucial difference . . . . If she had suggested that the time I spent writing stories . . . in the laundry room of our rented trailer . . . was wasted time, I think a lot of the heart would have gone out of me. . . . Whenever I see a first novel dedicated to a wife (or a husband ), I smile and think, There’s someone who knows. Writing is a lonely job. Having someone who believes in you makes a lot of difference. They don’t have to make speeches. Just believing is usually enough.

–Stephen King, On Writing.

See also, Good Books On Publishing and How To Query A Literary Agent.

Tim O’Reilly - Static on the Dream Phone

Posted by Richard Dooling on December 15th, 2007

Tim O’Reilly comments on Verizon’s latest promise to open its network to all appliances and applications in Static on the Dream Phone - New York Times

“THE Internet and the cellphone are on a collision course . . . In the future, the cellphone and similar wireless devices, not the personal computer, will be the primary interface to the cloud of information services that we now call the Internet. The demand for Internet-style applications on the phone — e-mail, maps, photo and video sharing, social networking and even Internet telephony — is exploding. More . . .Static on the Dream Phone - New York Times

The Writers On Strike

Posted by Richard Dooling on November 16th, 2007

Thirteen days into the Hollywood Writers’ Strike and the blogs have sprung to life with daily accounts of writers walking the lines in Los Angeles. Screenwriters John August and Craig Mazin have running accounts of what it’s like out there in the first full-scale WGA strike since 1988. According to the Los Angeles Times, negotiations are scheduled to resume on November 26th.

The LA Times also has an entire section devoted to strike coverage. Many predict that this strike will last longer than the 1988 strike (which lasted 22 weeks), because the issues are more complex, and the parties are farther apart in negotiations than they were twenty years ago: Writers Seek Bigger Slice of Half-Eaten Pie and Writers’ Strike Opens New Window On Hollywood.

Douglas McGrath’s recent article in Newsweek does an excellent job of summing up: Why We’re On Strike: A screenwriter on Hollywood’s labor pains. McGrath’s article links to this excellent YouTube video, Voices of Uncertainty, which says it all.

In the meantime, some writers have diverted their energies to bypassing the studios and doing what they do best: entertainment: “Colbert Report” Writers Parody A Greedy Producer.

2007 National Book Awards

Posted by Richard Dooling on November 15th, 2007

10 Best Books of 2007 - New York Times

Posted by Richard Dooling on November 14th, 2007

The 10 Best Books of 2007 - New York Times.

100 Notable Books of 2007 - New York Times.

Brain2Robot

Posted by Richard Dooling on November 13th, 2007

Brain2Robot PhysOrg.comFor decades, we’ve known, through the work of Benjamin Libet and others, that neuronal activity to initiate neuromuscular activity precedes conscious thought. Now scientists are attempting to harness those brain signals and put them to work. In the Brain2Robot project, an international team of researchers has developed a robot control system that works on the basis of electroencephalograph (EEG) signals. This new idea could enable patients with severe motor disabilities to regain some of their lost autonomy. The patient controls the robot arm with their thoughts: If they think about wanting to move their right hand, the robot arm is activated. If they imagine themselves moving their left hand, the robot arm will, for instance, lift up a cup of coffee. More at PysOrg . . .

Age of Apoplexy, by Kurt Andersen

Posted by Richard Dooling on October 24th, 2007

New York MagazineAre the Controversial Comments of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad Really So Threatening?

Kurt Andersen, author of the novel HeyDay and host of NPR’s Studio 360, writes in New York Magazine : “For a while now, I’ve fretted that we’re turning into a nation of weenies and permanently enraged censors, that too many of us are afraid of letting disagreeable or uncomfortable ideas into the limelight. If it’s not the p.c. overreach of campus “speech codes” or the attempts to criminalize “hate speech,” it’s the FCC’s crackdown on cussing in PBS documentaries and the Secret Service’s keeping protesters fenced off in “free speech zones.” But during the last month, this impulse to squelch—indulged by the left and the right and the milquetoast middle—seems to have reached some kind of tipping point, as if we’ve entered a permanent state of hysterical overreaction . . . [more at New York Magazine]

Searching for God in the Brain

Posted by Richard Dooling on October 24th, 2007

Brain Storm book jacketResearchers are unearthing the roots of religious feeling in the neural commotion that accompanies the spiritual epiphanies of nuns, Buddhists and other people of faith. In Scientific American: Searching for God in the Brain, David Biello, writes about scanning 14 Carmelite nuns to see what prayer looks like on a functional MRI brain scan.

Such efforts to reveal the neural correlates of the divine—a new discipline with the warring titles “neurotheology” and “spiritual neuroscience”—not only might reconcile religion and science but also might help point to ways of eliciting pleasurable otherworldly feelings in people who do not have them or who cannot summon them at will. Because of the positive effect of such experiences on those who have them, some researchers speculate that the ability to induce them artificially could transform people’s lives by making them happier, healthier and better able to concentrate. Ultimately, however, neuroscientists study this question because they want to better understand the neural basis of a phenomenon that plays a central role in the lives of so many. “These experiences have existed since the dawn of humanity. They have been reported across all cultures,” Beauregard says. “It is as important to study the neural basis of [religious] experience as it is to investigate the neural basis of emotion, memory or language.”
[…more…]

Alan Greenspan and O.J. Simpson On Writing

Posted by Richard Dooling on September 24th, 2007

New YorkerAndy Borowitz interviews O. J. Simpson and Alan Greenspan on the craft of writing in a Shouts & Murmurs piece at The New Yorker online.

Every now and then, we ask authors whose work we admire to come to our offices to discuss their work and the craft of writing. Last week, we invited two writers who have just published new books: Alan Greenspan (“The Age of Turbulence”) and O. J. Simpson (“If I Did It”). Here is their conversation.

Creighton University Disinvites Anne Lamott

Posted by Richard Dooling on September 4th, 2007

Anne LamottOMAHA, Neb. — A growing rift between the Omaha Archdiocese and a Jesuit university here has been inflamed over a best-selling author’s invitation to speak at the school even though she supports assisted suicide.

Creighton University officials said they invited Anne Lamott to speak before her book “Grace (Eventually): Thoughts on Faith,” came out in March 2007. The book describes her personal experience in helping a friend commit suicide. This week the school canceled her appearance that was scheduled for Sept. 19.

See the rest of this AP Wire story in The Washington Post.

Six progressive Christian churches will host Ms. Lamott’s appearance in a new venue that accommodates twice as many people as the original theater where Creighton had planned to have her speak. Ms. Lamott is scheduled to speak at 7:00 PM on September 19th, 2007 at the Holland Center in downtown Omaha.

For more background on Creighton vs. Anne Lamott, check Edward Champion’s Return of the Reluctant site.

Opinion Piece Published in the Omaha World-Herald on Wednesday, September 5th, 2007.

by Richard Dooling

After 11 years of Jesuit education (at Omaha Creighton Prep, St. Louis University, and St. Louis University Law School), which I paid for myself, I have enough Jesuit DNA to know that no Jesuit is behind the recent events at Creighton University. Author Anne Lamott was scheduled to speak at the 18th Annual Women and Health Lecture Series sponsored by the Center for Health Policy and Ethics at Creighton University Medical Center. According to a World-Herald article: “Creighton officials later withdrew their offer to Ms. Lamott, stating: ‘We have decided that the key points she makes are in opposition to Catholic teaching.’”

Which tells me nothing. As any reader of Bird By Bird knows, Anne Lamott is a writer’s writer. She writes about tough moral and ethical problems, about the consequences of making right and wrong decisions. She also writes surprising, insightful stories and essays about the struggle to find faith in God. At times, she reminds me of Flannery O’Connor (the preeminent Catholic novelist of the 20th century), who would probably also not be allowed to speak at Creighton University if it meant that her writings may not contain any points in opposition to Catholic teaching. Flannery O’Connor’s first novel, Wise Blood, is the story of a young man who wishes to start a church without Christ. When the Catholic Church is ready to disown Flannery O’Connor, I’ll know that the end of the world is coming and get ready for Revelation.

For the record, Anne Lamott had no plans to discuss abortion or assisted suicide during her talk at Creighton, and she has no plans–in fact, has made it clear–that she will not be discussing those topics on September 19th at the Holland Center.

The “official story” is that a group of Catholic doctors wrote in urging Creighton to cancel Lamott’s appearance, stating that sponsoring a talk by Lamott “at best sends a confusing message to students at Creighton and to the public at large. . . . At worst, it undermines the ability of Creighton to provide clear, public witness as a Catholic university.” This sounds familiar to me. It sounds like the Scribes and the Pharisees trying to trick Jesus into saying that work on the Sabbath is okay. In other words: “Let’s examine every word you ever spoke or wrote and see if any of it contains heresy.” Hey, this woman has committed adultery (or assisted suicide), by law she should be stoned to death, right? No need to write the sins of the Catholic Church in the dust; they’re headline news.

The Jesuits who raised me taught me something else. They taught me that it’s easy to have the courage of your convictions; what’s hard is to have the courage to challenge those convictions. No Jesuit-educated student is going to be “confused” by encountering an eloquent speaker and writer who happens to entertain beliefs that may deviate from Church doctrine. If so, ask for a refund; the tuition is not cheap.

During my Jesuit education, I am proud to say that I studied Nietzsche (the guy who said, “God is Dead,” also a fantastic writer), the Gnostic Gospels (the ones that didn’t get picked for inclusion in the Bible), James Joyce (whose favorite hobby was mocking the Jesuits and the Catholic Church), and Ayn Rand (there is no God, only Capitalism). Being an impressionable young man I sometimes even succumbed and went for weeks wondering if I should follow God or Kurt Vonnegut. Norman Mailer spoke to us at Saint Louis University; I shudder to think how many sentences in his books are “in opposition to Catholic teaching.”

If you are a religious order charged with educating young men and women about Catholic spirituality, do you want your students to hear Anne Lamott speak before or after they graduate? Do you want to engage them in intelligent conversations about these works, or would you rather have your students come upon eloquent “heresy” ten years after graduation and say, “Oh my, I just heard Anne Lamott speak, and I am so confused! Those crafty Jesuits hid Nietzsche from me, too!” Nor do I buy the argument
that by hosting Ms. Lamott and paying her honorarium Creighton would have endorsed her controversial ideas, which is somehow different than endorsing academic freedom. Does the University pay its Jewish faculty a salary to teach Judaism? Does it therefore endorse Judaism and deny Christ?

I recently read Richard Dawkins’ The God Delusion and Christopher Hitchens’ God Is Not Great. Lucky for me, I found nothing in those books that I hadn’t already encountered during my excellent education at the hands of the Jesuits. I haven’t heard an original argument against the existence of God since I graduated from Saint Louis University in 1976, and frankly the Jesuits frame these ideas better than Messrs. Dawkins and Hitchens. Consequently, arguments against the existence of God hold no terrors for me; I still believe.

As I say, I don’t know what made Creighton cancel Anne Lamott’s appearance. All I know is that no Jesuit will ever be able to explain it to me.


Bad Behavior has blocked 405 access attempts in the last 7 days.