I’ve discovered that night photography is significantly easier than daytime photography. We were in the CBD until around 1am last night taking lovely photographs, I got hooked on black and white structural shots, especially the Arts Centre and NGV. I think I need to get a better tripod, though. Sacrificed too many photos to slight blur.
So I was reminded the other night of my two past conclusions in relation to marijuana.
1. It gets my brain going in strange, determined thoughts, which is good
2. It’s terrible in company… or I am.
So I’ll go back to not smoking, but I did have one fun thought that arose from my journey to Timmy’s house, which was as follows…
'Inteligencia Artificial' by Magdalena Ladrón de Guevara
Possible levels of programming to create a functioning AI.
Requires – near-infinitely expandable memory. Benevolent programmers.
5 Levels (4 determined)
Level 1: Gather and Store information. Visual, quantitative, temperature, language. This level simply takes the information in, categorised. Temperature, light, sound. It counts what’s in the environment (eg 4 people, 12 windows, 2 doors). Calculates distance to/between objects. Listens to and stores language (language preferably programmed somewhere into the AI before release)
Level 2: Prioritising. Develops a level system and calculates norms. The information that comes outside of those norms is brought to alert higher than things on the established level. Levels include: temperature, volume, light, speed, proximity. There should/could be a focus on people – their volume, their agitation/excitement determined through physiological indicators. Also, human input is important for the learning – if a human talks to the AI about something, or directs them somewhere, the priority of this thing is shifted higher.
Level 3: Decisions & Logic. This program chooses reactions within the system to this external stimuli. It gives intent. If something requires attention, it directs the AI there. If something is determined dangerous, it compels the AI away. This level takes into account information from the previous level, and it stores decisions. In order to develop personality, the AI makes each subsequent decision based in part on new information/stimuli as well as influence from previous decisions.
Level 4: Personality. The social output of the program based on personalities in the surrounding environment and language. This is the difficult part. AI personality could be more easily achieved through a strict structure – a controlling set of behaviours that gives the program a specific output. However, a more interesting/advanced/intelligent AI should be capable of developing its own personality. This would need to be achieved through a combination of decisions, basic emotional options, and based largely on the influence of the people surrounding the AI. It would focus on the information pertaining to language and other human behaviours. Influence would be drawn from the apparent values/behaviours of all people around, though more strongly from those who have had an earlier/stronger connection with the AI, much as a child. These values are open to change as the system grows and obtains more knowledge or is opened to further influences.
Level 5: I’m not sure about but I’m sure there should be one.
I have no doubt that this all seems like rubbish to anyone with even a basic understanding of AI and computer programming, but then I’m a writer not a programmer. I’ll make a film of it and stick to the -fi end of sci-fi.
It’s one thing to be a fan of science fiction, and have your love of the far unknown transferred frequently to screen time and again effectively. It’s quite another to also love fantasy novels, and be perpetually disappointed each time a new film or series comes out with poor treatment, little budget and no dignity. Lord of the Rings brought about a change, I suspect, but lacked the darker edge.
But when HBO gets a job, they do it right.
Admittedly, the Game of Thrones series is less ‘fantasy’ than some – no dragons or magic. The idea is the same, however. It’s a non-existent land filled with imaginary thrones for which battles are fought. The politics are exciting, the themes dark and haunting, the scale enormous and the characters are revolting. Episode one was exquisite and I’m so very excited for more.
Oh yes, and it’s beautiful.
Nan Goldin photograph
This is fucking fascinating. I’ve recently become friends with a person who, it would seem, is a sociopath. The word seems absurd for a moment as it tends to be very poorly understood, but I’ve been learning and good. lord. this is interesting.
So I’ll be studying, hopefully relating, and at the same time aiming to not become one of the “victims” so often mentioned when discussing sociopaths (mental and emotional control is common) and I think it would prove fascinating for a filmic study. Thoughts of Nan Goldin flutter somewhere in the back of my mind (love that photo of hers up top).
Moffat has achieved this beautifully with his Sherlock character in recent times. The style and structure of that show excites me a lot, I am very much looking forward to the second bout (Dr Who first, then more Holmes). Sherlock is portrayed beautifully by Benedict Cumberbatch (wonderful name) and the scripting and characters are very well put together. Basically, I’m not good at reviews so just go watch it.
Furthermore, I love metadata. So I’ll be employing a little of that, links where possible. Fun fun fun.
There’s something magical and completing about a good score.
When I was a young kid we had a tv-recorded VHS of Superman: The Movie [1978], which is great… except someone had recorded over it from the end of the opening credits. As I say, I was young, so every so often I would pop that video in and hit play, and I would sit and watch and get excited by the music – my mind would go crazy imagining Superman’s adventures. Then the credits would end it would go grey-fuzzy and some other thing would start.
Every time I watched it, I would hope that maybe this time it wouldn’t finish, the movie would go on (yes, by magic if necessary) and whenever it cut out I would rewind it and put it aside for another time.
There is a scene from Mulholland Drive, set in a diner. One man tells another of a terrifying dream. I’ve only seen it twice, and now I cannot share it as the studio has removed all videos of this scene online. If you get a chance, though, track down the film and (after appreciating how excellent Lynch’s work is) re-watch just that one scene. It’s quite possible the most effective terrifying single scene I’ve ever been exposed to. It’s all suspense and terror and you’ve no idea why.
Once I’ve found a copy, I’ll watch it over and over – I must know how he did that.
Film Student 