GA music mix invents s*x by sharing code

My 97 year old mother feels it is invasive of me to use her phone connection for internet access for extended periods of time, so I am cut off from frequent access to this list while I visit. Sharing her household must involve such compromises. I journal in the morning and this alleviates my crankiness then. I can, thereby, pleasantly spend quiet time with her when she also is cranky. This morning was good. I wrote from the library internet access this afternoon until kicked off.

Just as I was about to go off to visit her on good Friday, a thread on GA music mix appeared. It transfixed me. What could it mean? All of a sudden, talking to a librarian friend of mine long distance from my mother's city on my cell phone, I made an enormous wish :

I wished that GA stood for genetic algorithm for then I would understand how croquet was going to revolutionize human meaning on the web. I wrote a small e mail and someone confirmed that is what GA meant . Looking in wikipedia it would seem that by choosing location in worlds (mating groups), we participate in a GA that creates an environmental nitch for a genre of evolved music .

One morning, I rejoined reading of "The Inner Game of Music" by Barry Green and Tim Gallway, a book I had bought so very long ago when I had seen an Alan Kay movie made for Apple Computer. Once again, I just peeked at this book. I started journaling this e mail to get the nerve to at last read this "book of hope". I read on!

>From readings linked to in other posts : midi isn't handled by openAL and so not croquet . I would imagine whatever algorithm combines midi files must be not on a squeak VM but rather on a particular platform . Also, I'd like a sort of shared reality for the new musical baby born out of a random number generator, so that breaks the everybody calculates the baby croquet prescription . Croquet might need to develope serving midi channels to reduce bandwidth requirements of everyone seeing/"naturally selecting" a single music baby .

Paul Davies, a physicist who won the Templeton prize for religion, again displayed his courage by speaking of the wisdom of ancient bacteria.
The following paraphrase I got from Paul Davies "The Fifth Miracle", from my thesis Professor Rindler at a recent conference on time, with a little bit of my own personal "seasoning"  :

Some folks might think nature or even God unwise to give birth to bacteria only 1 1/2 million years after the birth of earth. Bacteria are associated, not with a blessing, but rather with the invasive force of a disease. To use anything that bacteria do as a model to aspire to in human behavior might be considered by some spreading or catching a disease.

I happen to think that bacteria, dangerous as they sometimes are, are also "cool" or in some sense "wise", perhaps the very first "hackers" : Bacteria "invented" sex to avoid the "perseveration" involved in merely making copies of themselves and, instead, allow individuality.

What happens with the new web afforded by croquet? How do I tell people what it is?

I don't think I want to tell just anyone on the street the following :

Just as long ago bacteria did, croquet on the web tries to have mankind "re-invent sex" by sharing code.

This might make a great headline to sell newspapers or rather not sell them ... .

What does it mean to have a conversation or collaboration?
What does it mean for two beings to get together on the same page and write it?
Can jamming be like catching a disease? Is a genome catching a disease always bad?
Is evolutionary programming going to make programmers ill?

Inquiring prurient bacteria want to know.

;-)

"The Inner Game of Music" (self 1 performance anxiety oriented context) :
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

One gets bad perspectives on subjects in the wrong "contexts".

I never took an algorithms course in graduate school. It was a so called weeding course with the professor asserting 90% of the computer graduate students taking it would fail it and be asked to leave graduate school. However, in the good context of having gotten a Ph.D. in physics, I found great joy in reading Fraser's algorithm to calculate mutual information of two systems. The knowledge wasn't going to be used to show I wasn't the fittest, since I had already "fit" somewheres.

Similarly, genetics list at NIH seemed a rancorous lot that threw opinions and whole textbooks at each other.
But, outside of that rancorous context,
genetics doing music might be a fun place to be as long as I don't get musicians throwing things at me.

Both genetics and algorithms might be "a happily ever after marriage"
(through with fighting for the attentions of the partner---perfomance anxiety),
a totally different "context".

I wish, rather than have people arrogantly throw opinions at each other as a pretense to polite conversation,
more understanding of a more genetic algorithm to mix ideas.
I hope the metaphors from bacteria or "better" croquet will assist me in further discovering individuality
in both my relationship with an increasing number of friends and my own inner game of music.


 

Yes, musical "mating groups" is exactly what the Croquet-based music
I described is trying to enable - "composition by association" is another
way to put it.  Jazz, for instance, already evolves largely through
shared improvisations involving musicians who then take their
new styles and riffs to other jam sessions (mating groups).
 
Before computers there was no easy way for those without music
improvisation skills to combine arbitrary musical material on-the-fly
without typically ending up with clashing harmonies and rhythms.
But now computers can be used to impose some rules of musical
well-formedness onto new combinations of musical streams
drawn from disparate sources (fixing harmonies,  voice-leading,
generating variations, etc).  Combined with a multi-user interface
like Croquet, this allows people to "jam" without having to do
anything other than discover their preferred "mating groups"
with which to associate (jam). 

As new musical hybrids are created by each group,
those hybrids can get fed back in as inputs to further hybrids, and
consensus over the overall direction taken by the succeeding
generations of musical results is what allows a musical mating
groups to achieve some degree of cohesion.  Diversity arises when
someone leaves one group and joins another, taking along some
music results generated by the first group, injecting into the new one.

The GA's mentioned in the previous email have of course little
to do with the type of evolution described here - those GA's are
simply optimization routines that allow the computer to blend
disparate musical inputs into musically coherent blends.
In fact the music on that video was produced without any use
of the GA's. But as you describe, the whole scheme could constitute
a sort of GA on another level (with humans as co-processors).
Repeated usage of the environment by multiple users would
entail mutation (musical variations), crossover (people leaving
one group for another), and competition (people deciding which
group they prefer to spend the most time with).  This is probably
true for any MUD's that accumulate and incorporate the the
actions of the participants.

I hope that other actions (besides mere association) could also
be used in a collaborative environments like Croquet to drive
original multi-author musical combinations. "Composition by
association" is just meant as the most stripped-down proof of
concept.  Various actions could also be used to drive
cooperation/competition within groups. Just a matter of
correctly mapping the musical selection and optimization
routines.

Will such music be "better" than that of  experienced musicians? 
Probably not in any side-by-side test -  the point  is instead get
musical output on-the-fly without having to wait for trained
musicians/composers to create that output.  And to provide a
collective sense of authorship. Also to evolve musical pieces
that might not have occurred to any particular individual on
his/her own.

I know I'm not touching on many of the interesting points you
raise, but in response to " Is evolutionary programming going to
make programmers ill?" I'll report that I've shown no serious
symptoms yet, other than lost sleep and potential carpal-tunnel
syndrome...

To mister Sheldon, who always raises the poetic part of computing --
;-) -- my opinion is, the term "genetic algorithm" always carries more
hype than in reality (for the little i know/learned about them); what
i mean is, genetic algorithmic nowadays is mostly reserved to
"automatic" mathematic optimization for selected
hard-to-solve-otherwise problems; at first, go random, generate a
large number of individuals (candidates to the "best solution award");
then take the ones that answear your problem best, keep them,
recombine them, and after a number of iterations, you may have found
acceptable solutions.

Still, GA is only relevant within it's perimeter: you need "genes"
(variables a, b), a problem to solve (function f(a,b)), and an
"efficiency function" (which allows to compare the solutions between
each otherand select the bests - it's the metric used as criteria - ex
minimize / maximize f(a,b)).

It's really hard to apply to feature self evolution (ex: high level
metaprogramming), even if advances are being worked on in the recent
autonomous computing field: self-evolving, self-deploying code. GA are
not self evolving: it's the method itself that allows to find
solutions in a semi-random fashion, not the algorithm itself that
evolves.

One can indeed imagine that croquet could be quite an interesting
playground platform for such applications: what if every feature in
croquet (read, high level function, such as "play sound x", or any
behaviour) was considered as a gene ? You'd have several "versions" of
the sound playing feature (more/less controls, ...), and the selection
criteria would be the user's satisfaction. Create a 3D object, give it
features (ex: 3D modelization of a radio, with radio playback
functions) using some drag-and-drop; one day you find another
music-playing item (say, at a friend's "home"), and you "mix" the best
of the two...

If you can get global statistics for every concurrent features/code
sections, then you can see what the most popular is (or elaborate a
metric using popularity, satisfaction, time used...), and create
objects randomly (using a code snippets database + metadata), or
time-evolving virtual devices.

It's the same as for nature: blue-eyes genes agains brown-eyes ;
jazz-playing radio against techno-playing device...

This was an analogy, but the 3D world is a unique metaphor that can
allow the personification/materialization of programs; maybe it's time
for radio players to have sex ^^

Please excuse me for the very probable stupidities i may have written here.

Cheers

Florent

Florent THIERY wrote a bit more than :
"Please excuse ... stupidities i may have written here."

Thanks for the imaginations. I often find myself surrounded
by people so afraid they will fall down that they don't walk with me
on my journey.

I kept that long e mail of mine in the outbox so long I got worried about it
and it probably lost its original pizazz.

I was glad one of the authors also publicly responded to me.
I did some private journaling to him
and finally got a gestalt extremely important to me!
This gestalt was hiding just beneath the surface.
The gestalt concerned why I was,
rather than threatened, intrigued by a machine
that could replace my humanity of playing well with other people?

The gestalt is, as yet, too vulnerable and vital to publicly disclose.
I place the gestalt in other's laps for inquiry.

I don't feel so very alone now.
Thanks for writing.

Please excuse my last email which i incidentally sent the the entire
list instead of the sole author.

It was arrogant and stupid. I wrote it on a rush, trying to express
something my english can't manage to express. I wrote the silly "i
give you a teaching about something i just studied for 6 hours" part
in order to be sure that the context / analogy would be understood.

The only point of the message i was concerned about is the concept of
"visual programming": i just wanted to know if it had already been
done/started/conceived.

Please excuse me again,

Regards

Florent

Florent THIERY wrote:

Please excuse my last email which i incidentally sent the the entire
list instead of the sole author.

I understand that you feel that the "public frame" might have had me perceive it as arrogant .

It was arrogant and stupid.

I am saddened that you felt this badly.
I thought, in fact, that you were trying to respond
and empathizing with my feeling foolish as having posted.
You see, whenever I post,
I don't know how many self-important people (who don't post) will beat me up
in private e mails as posting irrelevancies.
Such could also be disguised agents of microsoft who had that memo out
against the lynux open operating system.

I wrote it on a rush, trying to express
something my english can't manage to express.

We have to practice being bold and "rushing" lest we hide stuff forever in our drawers.
The "netiquette" of international correspondence requires extreme care in feelings,
but also empathic forgiveness.

Please don't be ashamed of rushing.
The alternative may be huge e mails held in outboxes so long as to terrify both sender and receiver.
Yes, to honor my aging mother, I must do this at times, but then I found wifi access near where I visit her.

I wrote the silly "i
give you a teaching about something i just studied for 6 hours" part
in order to be sure that the context / analogy would be understood.

I did not take it badly. I studied python for one day and worried my posting was an insult to someone who was an expert
and insufficient for someone who needed instruction . So it was I posted more extensive references to python than myself .

The only point of the message i was concerned about is the concept of
"visual programming": i just wanted to know if it had already been
done/started/conceived.

Maya PLE, free software, has a nearly free $29 DVD in exporting into object oriented frameworks.
I am timid about spending the $29 .
I'd really like my little friends to be able to visually program virtual environments.

Please excuse me again,

The frame of a conversation, whether it is public or private, is important for not interpreting it "darkly" .
An e mail can so disguise emotions that we are led to interpret them "darkly" and defensively .
It is not emotionally literate in the sense of Claude Steiner who I revere .
I have better hopes for croquet being emotionally literate and not leading to dark theories .

I am somewhat intimidated by the e mail list concept because of this
(as I imagine microsoft agents might be intimidated by open croquet) .

In fact, one might imagine such an agent writing personal e mails to intimidate posters to this list
to discourage the list one enthusiast at a time .

Croquet will do better than such e mails with small intimate conversations evolving to larger groups when it is ready .
One can imagine developing one's English or composition skills with trusted friends, developing trust,
and then, with glowing confidence enlarging one's "neighborhood".
Imagine ...

With an e mail list, however, every man speaks as if he were shouting in a room .
Some so called lurkers get offended by a "man shouting in a room"
but they should blame the e mail that doesn't know as much about presenting humanity as croquet
does with its avatars far beyond the Rand Corporations emoticons .

Now, I want to promise that I love the e mails,
but I too can't wait until we are more visual in developing and visiting our worlds .
For then, you will see my avatar smile .

I am honored by your concern for my feelings and I would honor you .

On Fri, 2007-04-13 at 21:40 -0500, Paul Sheldon wrote: VERY WELL SPOKEN!!  Hear! Hear!

Best regards to you both.  Yes, we must expose ourselves from time to
time, and we must accept criticism, and hopefully learn in spite of
spite.  Growth is valuable, ignorance is tolerable, but expensive to the
community at large.  The only way to achieve growth, and alleviate
ignorance is through discourse.  When we discuss things we should all
come away a bit richer.  The great thing about knowledge is that as you
give it away, you grow more.

Regards,
Les H

Les H wrote :

"Best regards to you both. ..."

Thanks, Les, I needed to hear that. I went long distance to wifi internet
access
to make sure that at least one person understood the kindness
of what I was trying to say .

I am greatly relieved.

On 4/15/07, [hidden email] <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Thanks, Les, I needed to hear that. I went long distance to wifi internet
> access
> to make sure that at least one person understood the kindness
> of what I was trying to say .
>
> I am greatly relieved.

So do i.

I tend to forget that people will have to click on the "delete" button
(or, who knows, "report spam" button :p), and to think that the
discussion will only be with the people that respond.

Obviously, this is an illusion: much more people listening than
speaking; hopefully, projects like croquet will enable a best presence
experience, allowing this kind of paradigm ( i don't see too many
people writing -> illusion that there are not many people -> i write
useless stuff, thinking nobody will read me) to vanish.

Yet, people like me need sometimes little "reminders", i rather like
being criticized than ignored.

Cheers

Florent

I wanted to idle in colaborative croquet again tonight in hopes of
meeting someone, unfortunately, the server seems to be broken, I get DNU
errors when I try to move around. =(


--
Opera: Sing it loud! :o(  )>-<

Thanks. I've reverted to an earlier version of the initial (commons)  
world.

I'm jammed up right now, so I'd love for some brave and industrious  
soul to debug this.
Download http://www.croquetcollaborative.org/wordpress/wp-content/ 
uploads/WisconsinWorld-bug-2.c3d to <your-Croquet-directory>/cache/
WisconsinWorld.c3d and start up the KAT demo. When it prompts for the  
place to connect to, clear the default so that you enter an empty  
string. It will try to to start up from the snapshot that was broken.

-H

On Apr 17, 2007, at 5:25 PM, Alan Grimes wrote:

> I wanted to idle in colaborative croquet again tonight in hopes of
> meeting someone, unfortunately, the server seems to be broken, I  
> get DNU
> errors when I try to move around. =(
>
>
> --
> Opera: Sing it loud! :o(  )>-<

Howard Stearns wrote:
kat demo doesn't work even on a virgin croquet installation...

Sound doesn't work at all... ( gentoo linux )

--
Opera: Sing it loud! :o(  )>-<

Now I'm confused. I tested before sending my last message, and again  
just now. Both work.

You're using the either an SDK that has been updated, or the  
Collaborative distribution, yes?
(See http://www.wetmachine.com/itf/item/755 for explanation.)

On Apr 17, 2007, at 6:55 PM, Alan Grimes wrote:

"I'm jammed up right now, so I'd love for some brave and industrious
soul to debug this.
Download http://www.croquetcollaborative.org/wordpress/wp-content/ 
uploads/WisconsinWorld-bug-2.c3d to <your-Croquet-directory>/cache/
WisconsinWorld.c3d and start up the KAT demo. When it prompts for the
place to connect to, clear the default so that you enter an empty
string. It will try to to start up from the snapshot that was broken."

Does this have meaning on my mac? Spotlight found no place you
say I should download to.

Another e mail said KAT was working yesterday, but I got a screen snapshot
that I attached.

Sorry for being too brief previously.

1. LOCAL VS CONNECTED: You can use the KAT Demo with or without  
connecting to the croquetcollaborative.org.  For example, if you  
clear the default and press accept when prompted for the  
"interactivity server address", then YOU are the interactivity server  
that you connect to.

2. LOCAL WORLDS: You can make a snapshot of a world (e.g., using the  
KAT demo menu item Admin -> Cache current world).  If you run as an  
interactivity server yourself, it will look for previously saved such  
files. It looks in the subdirectory named 'cache' of the top level  
Croquet directory.

My plea for debugging help was equivalent to having made such a  
snapshot of the buggy world.

If you run as your own interactivity server and there is NOT a .c3d  
file for a given world in your cache directory, the KAT demo will try  
to build the world from scratch. (It knows how to build the BFD demo  
worlds, but it creates pretty empty worlds for the others.)

3. VERSION: Regardless of whether you get a snapshot from disk or  
form a different interactivity server, you must generally be running  
the same version of the software as the machine that created the  
snapshot. (There is no version to match up to if you are running your  
own interactivity server and building your own worlds from scratch  
because you don't have a saved snapshot. So you don't have to worry  
in that case.)  The Collaborative version is a little further along  
than the SDK.  To connect to croquetcollaborative.org, or to try to  
debug the snapshot that was made there, you must use the new  
software. The easiest way to do this is to download the distribution  
from http://www.croquetcollaborative.org/wordpress/?page_id=5 
(Alternatively, you can use the SDK and update each package. See  
http://www.wetmachine.com/itf/item/755 for an explanation of why the  
Collaborative wasn't frozen to older package versions.)

Getting an error that that says " ... has changed class format" is a  
sure sign that you're trying to load a snapshot that is from a newer  
version in which the classes have changed their internal structure.

4. THE BUG: There was a condition that was causing "This object has  
no name" when joining. This was in the world that I set aside for  
debugging. The condition is no longer present in the worlds currently  
running at the Collaborative. However, the bug that caused that  
condition is still lurking. (It has something to do with embedded RFB  
apps, but I don't yet know what.)

On Apr 18, 2007, at 7:01 PM, [hidden email] wrote: