turning on the vibrator when the robotgirl passes the unit test
seen from United States
seen from Russia
seen from China
seen from United States

seen from Argentina
seen from China

seen from Argentina
seen from China
seen from United States
seen from China

seen from United States

seen from United States

seen from Argentina

seen from Netherlands
seen from China
seen from Türkiye

seen from Australia
seen from Türkiye

seen from Argentina

seen from Türkiye
turning on the vibrator when the robotgirl passes the unit test

Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
computer science ignores the fact that there's many people in this world who it'd be really easy to turn into some kind of turing machine if you could promise them an orgasm or several out of it
Organic Computing, Education reform, Autism, and Opportunity
The science fiction writer in me has been inspired. I have been doing some 'creative' research lately, and it has lead me into a veritable treasure trove of information. Perhaps some of you see this as boring, or dismiss it- me, I am quite excited by it. I also created a term earlier, after some thought, and found that an entire Wikipedia entry was dedicated to it and it already had its own field of research! (although a little differently than I had envisioned it- honestly, with all the breakthroughs going on right now they could set their sights a little higher, one might think) It is called "organic computing".
Perhaps that seems a bit obvious - our brains are all organic computers after all. However, that is still a complex area we are just venturing into- and my idea was a tad less ambitious, and more on the matter of attempting to develop organic computing using concepts we are just discovering from plants. Plants, we are discovering, have memory and learning ability - but on a much simpler and more long term scale, which we are still just starting to explore and understand. This makes that a perfect 'first step' - attempting to create computers that either the chemical elements that plants use, or biological plant cells themselves to attempt to create simple computers. Of course, organic computing means something else entirely- and it is quite brilliant in and of itself, though it seems a bit more common sense to me. I had thought of most of these properties in my teen years- and so have a lot of science fiction authors. However, the difference is that it is no longer fiction- and we are suddenly hitting a dramatic leap as everything comes together. Computers are suddenly emerging that use these very concepts- IBM, Google, they are all on the cutting edge of developing systems that are able to work on their own.
I have a theory, however, as to why this is only just happening and has not happened sooner- and how we, and our current educational system, are shooting ourselves in the feet (and can help fix this). It is only in the last decade or so that Google has begun gathering some of the top experts from a range of fields together, letting them do their thing and propose ideas, letting them attempt them in their ‘moonshot’ program, and throwing huge amounts of money at it. It is no wonder that they have shot forward more than any other company. And as they stated at one time early on, their goal began as and remains to be an Artificial Intelligence company. ‘We are not a search company that does AI, we are an AI company that does search’. Our entire concept of education needs to be restructured and changed, as many already know. Organic computing, something essential for the next steps in technology, requires a combination of diverse fields of study including Neuroscience, Molecular Biology and Computer Engineering. It requires a combination of knowledge, skills, and expertiese that 1) we do not currently encourage, 2) require unique individuals capable of thinking in ways that cross over multiples fields, and 3) would be prohibitively expensive using our current system (meaning only someone with lots of money or scholarships would be able to pursue it). You can combine experts from these fields, but you need people leading the research that understand them all- people like Leonardo DiVinchi.
I personally get excited at this thought. I love the idea. To me, if someone said "You can major in any field you like, study whatever you want without limit- and get as many degrees as you like, go as far as you want to go- then utilize it to apply it to new technology and areas of study"....?!?!?! I would go bananas. I would probably laugh at them and ask them if it was "April Fools" day, or if there were cameras somewhere. Why? Because that would be a dream come true.
I'd love to study medicine hands on, get a medical degree (and cover a few different specialties there, including most especially neuroscience)- and then study computer science. I'd also like to study animal and (especially) plant biology, human psychology, cultural anthropology, rocket science, astrophysics, philosophy... well, the list goes on. But my priority would be around areas that I feel would be most interesting, and those would all likely relate to areas that would be useful in the development of advanced, self-aware AI.
If you think this sounds like a pipe dream, I thought so too- until I wrote a paper to a professor specialising in AI at the University of New Mexico, and his response was "Where do you live and when can we talk?". He himself had a Phd in computer science AND in psychology, and felt the worst mistake anyone could make is denying someone entry into a masters program because they lacked a major in the field. He himself was retiring, but his colleague, it turns out, had been hired by Google. He was working on writing a paper on how philosophy and science can work together. This was a few years ago- but at the time I was in the middle of a divorce, and life has not been too conductive towards moving to New Mexico since or pursuing studies. However, I was encouraged to pursue the self-study route in the meantime and get up to calculus level in math and learn Java-script. The method they encouraged me to do so is, to me, the path that we need to pursue to solve this problem. They made me aware of Kahn academy, a free learning resource that focuses on math but is expanding. Unfortunately, the teaching style they use is not quite the greatest for me, but it is a brilliant concept. People who have the passion, desire, and ability - who are 'divergent' (like the book/movies tease at, but more seriously so) can explore and grow across all their abilities and interests. People who can understand and enjoy literature and art, and also are passionate about science and experimentation- people who understand and want to explore psychology- all the fields out there, could do that. Instead of one Leonardo DiVinchi, we could have an entire city full of them. Right now we make doing that extremely difficult - and each area of study punishes people who want to think outside 'the box' of that field, who want to challenge preconceptions and think in new ways. I know- I got people angry at me in my college/university classes for constantly asking questions (though I had a few professors that loved me for it! My psychology 101 teacher would talk after class with me, and enjoyed going off into extremely detailed discussions in class that were likely beyond the scope of Psych 101 at Midlands Tech).
I will rely on my own personal experiences for a bit to elaborate. When I took a programming class there at MTC- Intro to Programming in C- and I tried to relate what we were learning to other areas that made more sense to me, the professor quickly got annoyed and was so obsessed with things being exactly applicable (an imperfect analogy was unacceptable – this was a very technical kind of mindset, that allow no room for divergence or margin of ‘error’) that I quickly was discouraged from interacting, and I barely passed the class. I think he may have passed me just to avoid questions into why an A student would make an F in his class (when I already knew how to program, to some extent, too).
It was the context that hurt me- learning from a textbook that way, the way it was taught, it just... I couldn't focus, it melted my brain. It was boring and it didn't make sense, and I would end up just staring off or trying to focus and not being able to make sense of it. Yet I could use editing programs for games like Neverwinter Nights 2, and tweak the code or use the editor programs- and create things. I made a whole ‘game segment’ with an introduction and storyline to it, custom selected music, and an emotional dialogue scene- all by myself, using some custom code. And when I was in middle school, I was using MSDOS to create text adventure games using batch files and directories (a creative approach, you must admit ;) ), making PC-speaker one-note music using what I was learning on the Piano and BASIC.
What I realized at Midlands Tech, however, is that I was not a ‘coder’ nor did I ever want to be. I was drawn to game design for its creative element. If I ended up programming flight assignment programs the rest of my life, it would drain me empty. I wanted to create, to imagine- and the computer, programming, was just the path I was told was best to reach that destination, a tool to do it with. Yet I see a future where highly developed AI will allow us a range of tools that most people cannot even imagine, and current creators and artists who spent decades perfecting abilities with existing tools might deny should even ‘count’ as tools. That, however, is another ‘blog’ for another time. I digress, quite a bit. I suppose my passion is to open doors so that people who have the interest and minds to learn, can- without navigating a complex social or political system. This is especially true for some of the real genius minds we have- some of which are autistic, either mild or severe, and are incapable of handling social situations in the same way others can. Yet when taught correctly, and when their brilliance is utilised, they can do amazing things. I have a friend who is autistic, and he is a genius when it comes to music, languages, and theology. He can write a symphony in his free time, play multiple instruments, teach himself dead languages and then tutor others in them. He is one of the most brilliant minds I know - and he was not able to thrive at a fast food job, not to mention it was a waste of his talent and ability. He should be given a scholarship to one of the best schools in the country, enabled to teach- allowed to conduct orchestras and write symphonies. Barring that, he should have the venue to self-teach himself as many fields as he wants. I wish, sometimes, I could be like Professor Xavier in X-men, and go around gathering all these amazingly talented and brilliant minds up, and offer them access to unlimited resources and education, and then let them just go at it and do whatever-the-heck they want to do, create whatever they want to create, and coordinate their efforts together. It would change the world. What some of us see as a disability, can in its own way also be an extraordinary gift. The creator of the notorious Bittorrent, one of the most brilliant (if somewhat 'misused' creations), is autistic as well. Autism awareness day occurred not too long ago, and I think that we need to keep in mind that we are limiting ourselves. God created us with so many gifts, with the desire to explore and create- and using these gifts in His name and for His glory, exploring His creation and creating majestic works to honour Him and give credit to Him- that is, to me, part of why we were put here to begin with. But who am I? I'm just a guy who likes to think of ideas, to write and learn, and doesn't even have a job. We give more credit to degrees and position, to perceived success and status, than we do to actual knowledge or ability, sometimes. And by not creating a social system that allows people unlimited educational opportunities, we do not just hurt them- leaving them cleaning floors like in Good Will Hunting - but we hurt ourselves.
A DNA-powered PC may not be on the horizon, but DNA can still compute even if it can't build a computer.
DNA molecules’ many appealing features include their size (2nm width), programmability and high storage capacity – much greater than their silicon counterparts. DNA is also versatile, cheap and easy to synthesise, and computing with DNA requires much less energy than electric powered silicon processors.
Its drawback is speed: it currently takes several hours to compute the square root of a four digit number, something that a traditional computer could compute in a hundredth of a second. Another drawback is that DNA circuits are single-use, and need to be recreated to run the same computation again.
Perhaps the greatest advantage of DNA over electronic circuits is that it can interact with its biochemical environment. Computing with molecules involves recognising the presence or absence of certain molecules, and so a natural application of DNA computing is to bring such programmability into the realm of environmental biosensing, or delivering medicines and therapies inside living organisms.
The Technodrome's mainframe utilizes organic computing, which is pretty neat. It would be neater if we saw or heard about this before the 19th episode. Or ever again.

Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
Pavlov’s experiments showed that pathways in the memory of animals can be synthesized. Tolman showed that these pathways could become complex in scope, when they are made goal-oriented. This concept of animal memory can be applied and implemented for no-power storage of information – organic computer memory. Through the use of conditional reflex, simple memory “building blocks” can be created. These building blocks can be assembled to synthesize more complex memory systems... Networks of mazes, multiple animals, or varieties of animals could all be utilized to construct increasingly elaborate systems. As animals become smaller, their range of operational building blocks becomes smaller and simpler, but the number that can be used becomes massive. (As the creatures become so small that they have no mnemonic capacity, or have no brains, the building blocks would become biochemical in nature, with reflexive responses occurring due to changes in biochemical conditions, e.g., pH, temperature, number of proteins, ion availability, electrochemical gradients, etc. – so-called “biochemical computing.”) Clearly, animal brains are very dissimilar to computer chips, so a classical binary logic system, or a system with unit “building blocks” that are too simple, would be inefficient and difficult to implement in practice. But animal brains, like human brains, and unlike computers, are very good at certain tasks, such as visual recognition, spatial judgement, reflexive response to sensory stimulation, and so on. In other words, the most efficient unit operations would be complex. These organic memory systems would not, therefore, work best when applied to the kinds of applications for which computer memory works best.
Charles Martin Reid, "Solarpunk Lo/No Power Computing: Organic Computing"
There are some really excellent (and some horribly unethical) ideas for computers you could pull from this.