Software vs. Wetware (Thinking & Processing)
Is executing specific actions in a sequence (linear or parallel) the creation of life or a machine?
The algorithms that comprise most actions executed by machines and software are specific steps, actions, or decisions that cascade from a singular prior act. Some complex programming includes conditional response algorithms and multi-variable actionable activities. These are put in the programming to address complex data arrangements and actionable activities. Yet, when each of these steps is taken to its fundamental element, often a module, they are in reality fixed actions adaptable only to the value, class and the range of specified objects. It might be a simple matter of adding 2 + 2 and equating it to 4. But is it any different to add two apples + two apples and equating them to four apples? Context and object class must always be defined and actionable steps only occur when the criteria are met. There is no understanding of intent, higher principle, or fundamental concepts of action. Walking, moving, skipping, crawling, driving all relate to the principle of motion.
When we work with software, and sometimes when we work on software as a developer, we configure our actions and input to the software to match its needs and language. It will process our actions, decisions, and values much more quickly than we are capable of producing in a format that is able to be shared among individuals. It is often difficult to describe our thoughts completely to others, and yet the complete object is there built completely in your mind in an instant. No steps required. Software cannot ‘imagine’ a concept. Its strength is processing, limited only by the hardware that houses its intelligence. Is what the software does considered thinking? Is it capable of understanding our intent without explicit instruction or indication by value, action, or input? Software is capable of intent measurement based upon trends, statistical analysis, and pattern recognition. These are the tools we have given to it. This must seem like the software is thinking about what we are telling it. What about new patterns? New languages of expression? That capability to learn or adapt to these new elements and modifying its current algorithms seems to be at the core of thinking, as opposed to processing. This is where people seem best adapted.
We are wetware. Some people think this only refers to the matter between our ears. It is our brain that makes us capable of thinking. I would ask what use the brain would be if it sat in a jar rather than in our individual chassis? Much like a computer with no electricity. Dust collector. We try to emulate our decision making into a structure that is more capable of leveraging the element of time than we presently are. We encode this structure to act when information is received and to act, transform or evaluate the information for compatibility, compliance, and accuracy. The process occurs quickly and we therefore decide that it is ‘better’ than our abilities. We do not process direct information nearly as fast as a computer software program and the gap is increasing. The capability for ‘number crunching’ is exponentially increasing as new methods to maximize time and data manipulation are developed. We ignore our own development and methods. There’s not much money in making smarter people, just faster computers and better software. We must remember that computers will only be as good as we are. We construct the systems by which development occurs. We offer our methods, knowledge, strategies and experience in to the coding of the modules and algorithms. We know what to do with information, how to evaluate it, and what meaning it will have out in the real world of the wetware.
Inside the computer space of electricity, binary decision gateways, and process decision actions lies a world unencumbered by gravity, feelings, money and longevity. Electricity is the only currency, and constructs the only reality. Mimics are actual, resident in permanent memory until replaced, modified, or deleted. Reason is a decision gate.
People are capable of creation and mimicking as well. Our world consists of elements which we have no understanding or cognisance of. Those particles, elements, wave forms, energies and matters that pervade our space. We have many currencies and embodiments of our memories, beliefs and history. We call them buildings, temples, oral records, and writing. Our expression is redundant, robust and often ineffective. It is always being refined, replaced and recreated. So the question of methods comes to the fore when comparing software and wetware. Which is best and why?
We must remember not to abandon our own development for convenience. Time is an element that we personify. We clearly do not understand its full conceptualization or implication. Our perception is guided by concepts like efficiency, production, and value. Our lives are measured in meaning, value, and enrichment. Let us not mistake processing for thinking, and not confuse perceptions with our lives. We use the tools that we create to provide for our lives. We do not live to use tools. When you find software lacking in its responsiveness to your needs, then your only hope is wetware. Think about that and spend you time developing for it.
