 Next up we have James Driessen addressing us on foundations of skeptical operation systems using non-classical suspension of a logic gate. James actually goes by Jamie. He has years of experience working in fast-paced, regulatory and technology-driven environments. He's an attorney, MBA and engineer, practiced in both sides of the business arena, defending corporations or advocating consumers' rights. And he has in-depth software and hardware knowledge in Linux, Solaris, Windows, and Netware LAN environments. In January of this year, James' method of building a skeptical logic algorithm received a U.S. patent number 8099375. Welcome, Jamie. Now I have to get into a Mac world here and figure out where I am. No, I need to pull up my folder, which is in the presentations. There you go. Okay, so I'm going to present a little bit differently here because I am approaching a very optimistic or subject of programming sentience. And so while at the podium, I simply represent the programmer and you get to watch the movie. This presentation introduces you to several new concepts about programming sentience. It particularly focuses on machine skepticism and how skepticism relates to self-awareness. Skepticism no longer has to be some ethereal or unexplainable concept. Once skepticism is actually understood, it can be programmed. The programmer defines sentience herein as the ability for self-awareness. This programmer also advocates human ownership for machine life. Much in the way we own our own children until they are 18, patent-term periods for 20 years should serve for protecting machine life literally as children until maturation may lead to citizenship if the machine can qualify. Just as different vertebrate animals seem to exhibit different levels of intelligence, different machines might also have different levels of intelligence. This idea of measuring a computer's intelligence introduces us to a form of the compatibilist argument for free will on the standpoint that intelligence and sentience are actually not the same thing at all. For example, no oblivious routing protocols facilitate transmission irrespective of existing states of the network and allow for emergent behavioral routing between destination pairs. Emergent routing protocols suggest that we might manage data transmission independent of data connection or even data correction. This might also introduce us to this rough idea of quantum computing. Quantum computing is primarily approached on the chip level, what we call semiconductors, but it can also be a logic paradigm that challenges our established notions of what is computable and what is not computable. Quantum mechanics does not mean the world is suddenly gone magic or mystical. Yet, quantum computing should help inspire further advances in sentient computing beyond our standard true or false variables. This three-dimensional block sphere diagram should not suggest to you tertiary or quaternary constructs. Rather, it should suggest a quantum level binary, or true-false, which builds upon our current understanding of true or false. This depiction of a two-dimensional Hilbert space overlaid upon a projective representation with right-hand rule consistency gives us a new way to look at true or false variables. Because a free decision is a causally complex event, consisting of the agents causing itself to have a certain intention, such a causally complex event is called volition, which any programmer of sentience should place at the pinnacle of any free overt action, such as one's freely raising one's arm. The blue screen of death or stop message occurs when operating systems confront a programming error or glitch, also called kernel panic, fatal error, postmortem dump, segmentation fault, reboot requirement, core dump or bus error. There is nothing mysterious or indeterminate about the blue screen, but under quantum computing the blue screen may provide a separate state space representation for a simulation within the simulation. Along these same lines, skepticism must not generate any independent factor data. It should only organize or check data to form belief or doubt and to serve as an operating system in the game of self-awareness. The skepticism alternative to a decision tree should perform only parsing and pausing of data input. Parse and immediate pause should occur whenever data or input is accepted and thus elevate any two-dimensional Hilbert space data representation or data correction to a higher level skeptical construct. If objective self-awareness can be defined simply as the cognitive ability to separate ourselves from our environment, programmers of sentient should aspire to acquire a much greater understanding of both physical reality and metaphysical reality from a quantum level. Even if existential truth is real, belief and doubt are actually the same thing, just different levels on the same scale where irrefutable facts and knowledge are the fallacy. Understanding how the sentient mind is devoid of facts without belief helps us overcome Hilbert space through false limitations and leads us ultimately into the realm of antipodal belief doubt within the skeptic operating system. Philosophically, a machine's skeptic construct might be best imitated by nihilism, which refers to a reductionist principle proposed by 19th century authors such as Friedrich Nietzsche, who once said, as long as you still experience the stars as something above you, you still lack a viewpoint of knowledge. The solipsistic belief-pass filtering can take us to an I think therefore I am picture of self and the nihilistic pass filter can lead us even beyond to the I think but I am not yet self-realization. Probabilistic or Bayesian neural nets as useful as they may be may not satisfy right hand rule consistency for machine skepticism because probabilities ultimately tend to drive all data toward factual resolution or air correction. A quantum level belief pass filter allows the computer to make the leap all by itself or in other words to embrace that granular or quantum packetized nature of the cosmos. Our minds do not accept data without skepticism and our proposed sentient machine should not be fed air corrected data from a programmer. On many philosophical levels, all data input is in air. The skeptical operating system should remain at all times devoid of meaning within the computational framework as long as the operational structure remains at all times within the proposed skeptical framework shown here. This proposed recurrent cyclical redundancy is where the programmer proposes that data may become self-aware rather than air corrected. No facts or knowledge are ever registered in the human brain without a similar belief pass filter. Likewise in the skeptical operating system there is no fact which is completely 100% irrefutable. There is no falsity which has 0% chance of being true. When you look at the nature of reality with an open mind yet armed with the tools of math and hard science such as quantum mechanics and cosmology, it is hard not to arrive at the conclusion that a programic mechanism is behind the workings of the universe. The evidence includes the discrete nature of reality, the inevitable direction of virtual reality, the finely tuned universe and the fact that all known scientific and metaphysical anomalies are only explained by such a model. Are we living in Nick Bostrom's computer simulation? There is the brain in the VAT explanation supposing that one might be a disembodied brain kept alive in a VAT and fed false sensory signals by a mad scientist. There is the famous dream argument of Descartes supposing reality to be indistinguishable from a dream. There is the 5 minute hypothesis or unfollows or last Thursdayism which suggests that the world was created recently together with records and traces indicating a greater age. And of course the pop culture matrix hypothesis or simulated reality hypothesis suggesting that we might be inside a computer simulation or virtual reality. Whatever non-locality framework we want to assign, this virtual reality cause of causation view of our environment can show that skepticism is the most simple and correct approach to programming sentience. George Boole once told us that traditional deductive reasoning differs from inductive reasoning where facts are determined by repeated observations. In machines we have always thought that syllogism was presumed superseded by first-order predicate logic. But perhaps intelligence is different than sentience and intelligence can never be more than data input. Author Daniel Dennett in his lecture on free will in the Enlightenment lecture series of Edinburgh University in June of 2007 stated, yes we have a soul, but it's made of lots of tiny robots. In conclusion, given this new construct of machine-based soul, I want you to accept a definition for skepticism. As a paused state, when a system stops parsing data, a sort of crash should occur and a belief hedge state may be accomplished. Accept this definition, a paused state, because it will allow a binary belief or doubt. 1 equals believe and 0 equals doubt and the gradient becomes a cyclic redundancy that pauses or terminates based on data classification, not on fact resolution or on data storage. I hope you have enjoyed this presentation. If you have any questions, please see me during the breaks or after the conference at the dinner tonight. Thank you very much. Will your algorithm run on a quantum computer? Or can it run on a classical computer? My algorithm is designed to run on a classic computer. And the reason being that quantum computing really, when you look at the block sphere in Hilbert's space, overlaid on a three-dimensional representation, it's not telling you to look at tertiary or quaternary or three-dimensional. It's telling you that true-false is not what we think it is. True-false has many areas in between. And so what we do with the algorithm is simply not allow data to be anything other than data. We in our programming accept this idea that we can feed facts into computers. Facts do not exist in the mind. Even if existential truth and false may exist, there is no way for the mind to tell. And so why should we let our computers act any differently than our minds and actually register a true or false? And so we just use a belief pass filter in the front that does not allow data to be anything other than data. It cannot ever be registered as a true or false or a fact.