Microbiome OS

Your computer could be sitting alone and still be completely outnumbered for your operating system  is home to  millions of tiny passengers – chemlambda molecules.

The programs making the operating system of your computer are made up of around ten million code lines, but you harbour a hundred million artificial life molecular beings. For every code line in your ancient windows OS, there are 100 virtual bacterial ones. This is your ‘microbiome’ OS and it has a huge impact on your social  life, your ability to  interact with the Internet of Things and more. The way you use your computer, in turn, affect them. Everything from the forums we visit  to the way we use the Internet for our decentralized computations  influences the species of bacteria that take up residence in our individual mocrobiome OS.


Text adapted from the article Microbiome: Your Body Houses 10x More Bacteria Than Cells, which I found by reading this G+ post by Lacerant Plainer.

This is a first example of a post which would respond to the challenge from Alife vs AGI. For commodity of the reader I reproduce it further:

In  this post I want to propose a challenge.  What I have in mind, rather vague  but might be fun, would be to develop through exchanges a “what if” world, where, for example, not AI is the interesting thing when it comes about computers, but artificial biology. Not consciousness, but metabolism, not problem solving, but survival. Also related to the IoT which is a bridge between two worlds. Now, the virtual world could be as alive as the real one. Alive in the Avida sense,  in the sense that it might be like a jungle, with self-reproducing, metabolic artificial beings occupying all virtual niches, beings which are designed by humans, for various purposes. The behaviour of these virtual creatures is not limited to the virtual, due to the IoT bridge.  Think that if I can play a game in a virtual world (i.e. interact both ways with a virtual world) then why not a virtual creature can’t interact with the real world? Humans and social manipulations included.

If you start to think about this possibility, then it looks a bit like this. OK, let’s write such autonomous, decentralized, self sustained computations to achieve a purpose. May be any purpose which can be achieved by computation, be it secure communications, money replacements, or low level AI city management. What stop others to write their creatures, one for example for the fun of it,  of writing across half of the world the name Justin by building at right GPS coordinates sticks with small mirrors on top, so that from orbit all shine the pixels of that name.  Recall the IoT bridge and the many effects in the real world which can be achieved by really distributed, but cooperative computations and human interactions. Next: why don’t write a virus to get rid of all these distributed jokes of programs which run low level in all phones, antennas and fridges? A virus to kill those viruses. A super quick self-reproducer to occupy as much as possible of the cheap computing  capabilities. A killer of it. And so on. A seed, like in Neal Stephenson, only that the seed is not real, but virtual, and it does not work on nanotechnology, but on any technology connected to the net via IoT.

Stories? Comics? Fake news? Jokes? Should be fun!



6 thoughts on “Microbiome OS”

  1. If the artificial life molecular beings have a metabolism there may be a regulative mechanism of the population and diversity of interactions among them. Let me explain following the microbiome as a metaphor.
    A living system must consume low entropy “food” and expel high entropy “poop” in order to preserve its structure and power its processes. In an environment that has a very low level of available “food” it will tend to die and/or not reproduce. One method of controlling the microbiome is to change the entropy content of its environment.

  2. “Entropy”, “regulative mechanism”, “control”, no, no, no. We have already too much control and statistically based regulations over the Net. Too much thinking about how to cut and to limit discussions, how to control by introducing bottlenecks, how to baby sit people because they are too dumb to be trusted. I believe this is old thinking, and that it is already over represented. With all respect I have for entropy and statistical models, I try to go another way, which is far less explored.

    This is a fake news about an OS which self-evolves by decentralized interactions (with other, external entities, other beings) from an initial standard kernel. This can be possible if the interactions over the Net are themselves decentralized, based on an artificial chemistry.

    When saying “decentralized”, it means no direct control by a benevolent corporate entity. The interactions themselves are as deterministic as interactions between real people. You can use statistics and notions like entropy only to get an overall, average image of a huge number of such interactions, but this is a different matter than the one of trying to define the way such a decentralized system works, in a constructive manner.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s