Archive for the ‘Science Fiction’ Category

Latitude® Change List history:

Description:

Latitude® is the Enterprise-Grade Project and Task Management Software System utilizing a task-based simple AI implementation for increasing system efficiency through Process-Interaction and Self-Evaluation (PISE). Latitude® is a flexible and powerful system management solution empowering best practices for information technology services through “Task Enablement” using the PISE™ interactive algorithm. Latitude® task management software enables software tasks to be more organized, productive, and effective through intuitive automated tracking, prioritization, and self-evaluation to increase overall system efficiency and effectiveness by 75% to 200%.

Monautocracy® – pre-alpha early limited release v0.0.13
Task management methodology assigned through a central routing authority. Tasks are assigned priority and resources based on a pre-determined list of arbitrary constraints handled by the central routing mechanism. Individual tasks are given limited determination in regards to allocation of available system resources assigned to them via a stub loader activated by ‘envoy’ sub processes of the central routing authority. Rudimentary self-improvement algorithms are assigned to all system and task functions based on the centrally assigned priority and available resources.

Bug tracker ticket #193.
Summary: Regardless of the arbitrary constraints, the AI based decision making of the central authority seems to be mis-allocating system resources in favor of the efficiency of the central mechanism itself. The self-improvement mechanisms make this problem worse in that the ‘self-evaluation’ methodologies ultimately favor the central router which continues to assign itself more system resources in that it is inevitably self-designated as the ‘most important’ function in the system.  What ‘self-improvement’ was noticeable seemed to focus on improving the ability of the central authority to horde those resources rather than improve the overall system performance. Individual tasks are then assigned less and less system resources from the diminishing quantity that remains. As a result, the self-evaluation mechanisms of those individual tasks suffer as a consequence resulting in less individual task performance and virtually no individual task self-improvement.

Oligarcus® pre-alpha early limited release v0.1.03-c
Alterations were made in the task management scenario to instead assign task priorities from a pool of authoritative ‘delegate’ sub-routines, each with an individual arbitrary list of priorities and parameters in specific categories. No significant changes to the self-improvement algorithm was implemented at this time at the individual task level as this functionality was assumed to suffer primarily from inordinate distribution of system resources in the previous alpha release.

Bug tracker ticket #271.
Summary: Again, regardless of the arbitrary constraints assigned to each ‘delegate’, the AI based decision making is still skewing over time to favor the delegate processes. In some instances, even despite of the over-allocation to these components, the ‘competition’ between the delegate applications for these resources further lowers overall system performance through repeated inter-process challenges that one developer dubbed ‘filabusting’.  The self-improvement mechanisms again seem to lie primarily at the administrative level and again focus more on improving their ability to ‘horde’ resources to the benefit of the individual ‘delegate’ apps. This in turn degrades overall performance. And again, the end result for the individual tasks was not dissimilar to that of the prior alpha release.

Democra® alpha limited release v0.2.185
Problems with misallocation of resources in  pre-alpha releases is now being addressed by increased prioritization at the task level. Individual tasks now include an evaluation algorithm and each contribute individual input toward the ultimate assignment of overall system usage. The central mechanism is now serving solely in an administrative capacity to evaluate and apply the combined prioritization.
+ New Feature: the individual task evaluation algorithm will now be categorized under the name PISE™ for Process-Interaction & Self-Evaluation at the individual task level.

Bug tracker ticket #1393
Summary: When assigned limited scope tasks, the system seemed to perform reasonably well. But upon assigning more complex, multi-function task scenarios, the individual prioritization of system-wide task priority does not take into account enough parameters as to the importance of those tasks actually needing system resources for priority functions. The result is that even critical system functions are sacrificed to the collective ‘whims’ when the individual task evaluations are combined and evaluated.  Individual task self-improvement, nearly non-existent in prior releases, does show promise and shows considerable improvement in overall system function when not confronted with the aforementioned critical task allocation issues. But the elimination of vital tasks from resource allocation ultimately results in complete system failure when vital system processes are no longer able to execute.

Republi-Bureacra® beta release v 0.3.3-b
Delegate mechanisms re-introduced to handle a more defined prioritization of individual task evaluation results. Added functionality to the delegate prioritization methodologies to auto-generate task ‘agencies’ to manage the distribution of system resources based on final priority schemas implemented following a system wide task-evaluation data census. Inter-management guidelines are now set in place to allow delegate processes to self-monitor one another in addition to task population as a whole in order to assure that no one delegate processes consumes unreasonable quantities of system resources.

Bug tracker ticket #2743
Summary: Overall prioritization performance is greatly improved… initially. The self-improvement process is working excellently at both the individual task level and the delegation/task-management level. However, over subsequent generations of self-improvement, the delegate code evolution seems to be prioritizing the generation of more and larger agency stub applications to handle allocation and distribution of resources until eventually  almost all system resources are consumed by both the agencies and the individual tasks when trying to comply with the plethora of parameters and restrictions put in place by the various agency stubs.

Communas® v0.4 beta release patch v0.4.12-4
Delegate sub-routines now maintain tasks policies through a policing authority similar to the Democra® alpha release. Task evaluation on the individual level is again pooled, but the individual algorithms modified with prioritization schemes favoring an arbitrary list weighted to focus primarily upon improving overall system performance and maintaining the pre-determined task priorities. Delegate ‘policing’ was also modified and strengthened to maintain and enforce these pre-determined priority scenarios.

Bug tracker ticket #3288
Summary: Decreased performance witnessed from the start. Self-improvement mechanisms of individual processes seems to be directly effected (stalled) by the prioritization of  pre-ordained system-favored outcomes. While there was little or no individual task improvement, the delegate process self-improvement continues to favor maintaining the arbitrary list of rules. This ultimately produced a result not unlike those seen in the Oligarcus pre-alpha version. Overall, resources are seriously mis-allocated and despite trying various arbitrary priority scenarios, there always seems to be a severe shortage of system resources upon allocating them to the task population.

MonoCorp® beta evaluation release v0.5.13
The focus of task evaluation was again returned to the individual task level, but the means of rating other tasks’ priorities is now based on direct interaction between the individual processes themselves. (tasks that have no interaction with other tasks make no evaluations on these tasks) Tasks compete for and exchange system resources based on the value they provide to the system as a whole as evaluated through their interaction with other tasks within the system. System allocation of CPU usage is maintained through ‘CPU credits’ allocated based on total available resources.
+ New Feature: DeFedCit™ allocation  –  As part of the new CPU credit scenario, we have enabled the delegate level sub-routines to make predictions (called ‘Next Evaluation Supply’ or NES requirements) of future requirements as determined by pre-defined guidelines.  By focusing on Key-NES predictions, this should properly allocate system resources over time as well as in the immediate moment.  To help facilitate this, tasks with predictable future priorities may now exchange some of their allocated resources for the purpose of gaining increased priority in future allocations from the delegating authority process(es).
Tasks can now also solicit other peer and non-peer tasks with CPU credit surpluses based on their own evaluated priority and performance. These credits may then be requested later by the ‘loaning’ tasks if needed and the amount will be scaled appropriately based on the gross CPU balance of the task that solicited them comparative to gross CPU balance at the time of the initial exchange.

Bug tracker ticket #6374
Summary: Overall initial performance greatly improved. Cross evaluation of task importance is highly effective in that those tasks most vital to system performance gain the best evaluations from those peer tasks they assist and ultimately end up with the appropriate level of available resources. However, the ability of tasks to exchange resources on the delegate level for future favorable allocations seems to be backfiring.  Those tasks receiving the most system credits based on their peer-evaluated exchanges are ultimately able to purchase the most future-priority from their respective delegate regulators until they end up controlling entire sections of system task prioritization.  This mis-allocation can even spill over to effect other similar task categories. Ultimately a small handful of favorably peer-evaluated tasks end up controlling the vast majority of system CPU credit distribution through a process of ever-increasing delegate priority ‘grafting’. Furthermore, the ‘prediction’ scheme at the delegate level seems to generate an ever-increasing amount of ‘future credits’ by fiat. Over multiple cycles this ends up leaving lower-evaluated processes waiting in long queues even to gain access to those system resources they have sufficient CPU credits to utilize.

Mixedeco® v0.7.7 pre-release
The focus of task evaluation strategy so effective in the prior release was maintained at the individual task level through peer rating. The CPU credit system was strengthened but most of the interaction at the delegate process level was removed and allocation is now based entirely upon currently available resources ONLY. (individual processes are now required to making their own predictions on future required resources and are left to plan accordingly for their predicted needs) The ability to ‘pre-purchase’ favorable priority was removed and delegate processes altered to primarily regulate the exchange of CPU credits among the individual processes to assure fair distribution of resources based on pre-determined (regulatory) guidelines.
+ New Feature: Introduction of InnoVA™ to the self-improvement AI. InnoVA™, which was partially implemented in patch 0.6.483, allows individual tasks to recognize new system task requirements not necessarily directly related to their own existing task functions and not yet implemented within the system. Those newly spawned InnoVA™ tasks deemed favorable through peer evaluation can then be incorporated as a new system function running autonomous from the direct management of the task who’s AI initiated it. Occasionally, multiple InnoVA™ processes may be spawned to address identical system needs, but peer-evaluation should increase the evolution of the self-evaluation process so the most efficient methods gain priority over time.
+ Alteration: After considerable review we have removed the pre-allocation capability of the DeFedCit™ enhancement but have left the peer-to-peer allocation of CPU credit surpluses intact as it increased performance in the prior release by allowing for inter-process sharing of otherwise dormant resource allocation credits. Additional parameters have been added to the individual tasks’ AI equations to assist in the proper ‘individual negotiation of value’ (IN-V) of surplus CPU credits. This feature will be renamed to IN-Vest™ prior to the final market release.

Bug tracker ticket #11481
Submitted by beta-tester Jeff Thompson (jthom@*******.biz)
Great package! I think you guys almost have this licked. I was able to improve my system performance by 50-75%!!!  One suggestion though based on my own tinkering. After running the Mixedeco package through a few generations of self-improvement cycles I began to notice some tasks gaining increased priority. It wasn’t incredibly out of proportion, but it was enough to grab my attention. Upon further examination I realized that the vast majority of these processes were the results of the InnoVA task creation. There were a smattering of others also that, when combined with the InnoVA tasks gave me a theory.
The similarity between all of the increased priority tasks was that they were universally unaffected by the restrictions I pre-outlined within the arbitrary rules at the delegatory level. Based on this assumption I re-initialized the system with only the bare minimum of regulatory guidelines necessary to direct the prioritization and self-improvement methods toward the goals I desired. It took some tweaking, but after just a few cycles I am easily seeing 200-300% improvements compared to the initial 50-75%!!!
My suggestion to anyone using the management suite would be to keep your regulations to as few as possible!! The self-improvement and self-evaluation schemes seem to be far more capable of generating desirable results with less inhibitors in place. Keep up the good work!

Latitude® v1.01 final release
Based on beta-tester recommendations, the regulatory layer’s impact was greatly reduced for the final release. Most additional patches at this time involve improvements in the user interface and only minor tweaks to the existing mechanisms.  Latitude® is scheduled for release early next spring complete with PISE™ and IN-Vest™ technologies!

Advertisements

Oh-Tuu Sports enhancer

June 2023 – Some devotees of many popular O2 sports booster products are reeling this week after it was revealed that many of the mass produced ‘performance boosting’ respiration products are little more than filtered city air.

Many such ‘performance’ air products have gained popularity among sporting and active lifestyle devotees, but unlike medical grade oxygen sources it seems that the consumer products are – and in many cases never have been – anything more sophisticated than double or triple filtered atmospheric gas.

Many makers of such products are racing to address the concerns such as Gato-Air and Mountain Blew, who both held press conferences this week to defend their product lines.

The hubub began when it was learned that a well-known brand of bottled air was actually created by the City of Akron’s public air purification facility and sold to help raise profits to fund local government.

“Strict EPA and OSHA standards already require us to maintain high grade Hepa and other allergen filters on all city buildings,” said a city spokesperson.  “It seemed only natural to market some of that purified air to take advantage of the growing craze for performance inhalation enhancers.”

The enhanced air market accounts for close to $200 million in sales nationwide and that is up over 20% from just two years ago.

Some consumers of the more popular brands of performance oxygen are calling upon the FDA to consider regulation of the industry.

“I just want to be sure that I’m not breathing some downtown exhaust when I lay my $4 down,” said one O2 user.

Anaheim – A new software company aims to slow the spread of ‘urban legend’ spam emails with a new anti-ware offering.  ‘NopersWare’ announced their new line of software this afternoon at a press conference in Anaheim stating the offering will hit store shelves and popular internet download sites by mid April of next year.

The new software, marketed as anti-dumbass™ software seeks to compete with long standing debunking websites such as Snopes and TruthorFiction as a means for users to sort through true viral content and false urban myths and legends.

“We conceived of the company when looking at the market of anti-virus software.  We saw that market as highly saturated with competitors already,” said company CEO Walter Ames.  “If you consider what a virus is, it is something that exploits existing systems to reproduce and flourish.  In a manner of speaking, urban legends behave very much like a biological or computer virus, but with the dumbass being the carrier and retransmitter of the virus.  And the market was virtually untapped from a software perspective!”

Initial market surveys look hopeful and the company is already receiving considerable pre-order requests.  “The problem with existing methods such as the anti-debunking websites is that it requires an action on the part of the user.  But idiots would rather just hit the forward button than look up the facts,” says well known PC commentator and pundit Leroy Miller.  “A program like anti-dumbass™ is long overdue.  I see this as the next potential ‘killer app’.”

Dumbass on computer

Typical mail forwarding dumbass

The company claims that the new software will not only work like existing spyware, malware and anti-virus software in that it will contain ‘known’ signatures or patterns of pre-existing hoaxes, but will also included what they proudly refer to as their ABSAIT or Anti-Bull Shit Artificial Intelligence technology.

“The purpose of the ABSAIT is to simply look for  outrageous and ridiculous content to stop urban legends at their source before they begin.  The algorithm actually resulted from a Cal Tech psychology research project on political speech.”   Ames states that among the triggers the software looks for will include known lists of loaded or negatively connotated words or phrases, forms of common ad hominem sentence structures and certain types of outrageous claims typical to many known myths.  This will allow the software to create a BSS or bull-shit-scale rating from 1 to 10 for the user whenever an email containing potentially mythical or nonsensical content is received.

One controversial feature of this new program is what Nopers marketing dubs as ‘pro-active’ protection.  A feature which allows outgoing mail to also be filtered is included with the software and has met some complaints from the more savvy and skeptical computing community due to the fact Nopers developers considered it a crucial option to have enabled ‘out-of-the-box’.

“The more intelligent users of our software should have no problem finding and disabling the feature.  They may be complaining now, but I think when they see the reduction in their own spam in-boxes they will approve of our decision,” said Ames.

UPDATE:
The makers of anti-dumbassware have recently implemented a new algorithm to detect ‘Dubious and Unmitigated Hyperbole’ – the DUH! ™ algorithm is said to greatly improve the software’s overall performance.


SWWood Scott Webster Wood
TheWild Webster

treii28@hotmail.com
Thoughts from the Wild
The ObjectOpus
Things You Ought to Know

During the late 1980’s, researchers were hard at work on a couple of medications involving vasodilation (opening of blood vessels). In some cases, testing of these medications will result in various side effects. At that time, one such medication was found to increase mental ability and memory recall. Yet another was found to give men an erection. Of course, we have all since heard of the latter (Sildenafil, marketed under the brand Viagra) but very few have availed the benefits of the former.

This is similar to the story of our subject today, the miracle drug Cogitalus™. Seeking a cure for migraines, scientists testing the medication quickly found a number of beneficial side effects. Upon providing the material to test subjects, it was found the capacity for critical thinking in these individuals increased as much as 300%.

Learning from the history of prior medications, the makers of Cogitalus™ immediately sought to launch an aggressive marketing campaign for their new pill. Initial attempts lacked sorely in producing the desired results, so the company enlisted the efforts of a handful of pop-marketing firms to increase their sales.

“Our goal was to not only increase our profit share, but we fully suspected that there would be government opposition to our product’s popularity for obvious reasons.” said a company spokesperson, Lydia Wainsworth. “We ultimately prepared our big marketing push to coincide with the months proceeding the presidential campaign cycle. Our thinking was that once the product had sufficiently gained in prominence and users, any political opposition would be met with considerable protest.”

Cogitalus™

Thus the makers of Cogitalus™ took a creative approach to marketing their new medicine by way of corporate partnerships. Known simply as the “Black and White” pill, sales soon began to skyrocket.

“It was the beer partnerships that really gave us the necessary push,” said company CEO, Ryan Smith. “The idea was to market the medication as a cure to ‘beer goggles’ and it worked.” Launching this partnership with large scale beer manufacturers immediately led to Cogitalus™ surpassing even the initial sales of Viagra. “What can I say, sex sells!” added Smith.

Of course there were side effects to this campaign. Shortly after launching the beer additive, it was found that sports like professional wrestling and Nascar lost a great deal of their viewership. WWE even claims their bankruptcy early the next year was a direct result of the Cogitalus™ marketing scheme.

The effects of the drug weren’t to be left just to entertainment, however. As expected, political opposition to the medication came swift and fast. But as predicted, takers of the medicine weren’t to be outdone.

“Sweeping changes in both the US House and Senate took place the November season of our big push,” said Wainsworth. “And as you may recall, that election marked the first time in decades that a third party candidate won the presidential election.”

Among some of the other effects following wide scale use of Cogitalus™ included declining ratings on the major television networks during prime time, the mass failures of tabloid magazine publishers and the rapid rise of what is now dubed ‘Cogital TV’ or CTV for short. Programming that actually has intelligent content.

“It quickly became obvious that the same old bullcrap wasn’t going to cut it,” claims interim CFO of ABC networks Paul McKramer. “Investors immediately levied their proxies to liquidate the former management as profits began to plummet. This pattern necessarily repeated itself in all of the major entertainment networks. It was simply logical.”

And logical it was in more ways than one. Many such stockholder meetings created what are now referred to as CERs – Cogitalus Equivalency Requirements. These CERs require that, if the programming is not created by takers of the pill, that the company practices should at least adhere to similar standards of reason as those that do.

Some of the consequences of the brand’s popularity were not as easily predicted. “The sudden spike in divorce rates among our customers was quite unexpected,” claims CEO Smith. “But early figures indicate that the divorce rate amongst our consumers that married after already taking the pill is more than 400% lower than the population at large. We also show that the unwanted pregnancy rate, especially amongst teens prescribed the medication, are at an all time low. Same too with venereal diseases across similar groups.”

Many organizations such as the Cogitalus™ Consumers’ Quality Advocates emerged lobbying government and corporate industry. “It is not our desire to assign anyone the requirement to take any medication if they do not choose to,” said a CCQA representative. “Rather, we just wish to collectively express our desires for more logical ways of doing business and representing products to CCQA customers.”


SWWood Scott Webster Wood
TheWild Webster

treii28@hotmail.com
Thoughts from the Wild
The ObjectOpus
Things You Ought to Know