My Machine Life – Into the Myst – IV

Here we go again – To round out the Early Period of my computer gaming, here is a closer look at four titles that I remember quite distinctly, along with casual mentions of a few others.

Hellcats Over the Pacific (1991)

I began to learn a little bit about World War II and World War I when I played the combat/flight simulators based off of these conflicts. I think I really got into the WWII stuff after I read an account of the Battle of Midway from the point of view of the American torpedo bombers (note: this is getting turned into a questionable movie about Midway featuring Nick Jonas which I’m probably going to go watch anyway). Basically the story I read is they happened upon the defenseless Japanese ships by accident, which were refueling and reloading so the Japanese had all their fighter-bombers on deck when the Americans attacked. Fun fact: The Hellcat was not invented until after the Battle of Midway, so it did not partake.

But in terms of this game I mainly just played the demos and shot down Japanese fighters time after time. The demo was randomly generated which made it replayable. This title was particularly memorable because the graphics were quite good for the time and the Japanese fighters were bright yellow, which made them quite easy to track, along with the guns of the Hellcat which conveniently shot out black dots as bullets. There was also an instant replay and bombing function built-in to the simulator.

Honorable Mention: An F-16 simulator that I don’t remember the name of, but allowed me to learn about the different missile types used by that fighter jet (Sparrow, AIM-120 etc.) 

U-Boat – and Battle of Britain (1994)

This game was from the perspective of German U-Boat sailors operating in and near the Atlantic. You would go on missions to find merchant vessels, or destroy military ships, which got progressively difficult (some of the merchant ships would surprise you with weapons or were actually destroyers). I remember trying to sink a battleship, that did not go well. If you didn’t destroy the enemy at a first sneak attack you likely had to run away or dive deep, and hope that the enemy didn’t sink you. It was very suspenseful waiting for the depth charges to go off and dealing with “battle damage” while underwater – the sound was very atmospheric. Of course all the Germans on the U-boat are speaking English with a German accent. This was another fun game to play with my dad. 

The Battle of Britain came with U-Boat and was an interesting simulator around the titular air battle. You would be in charge of directing British fighter planes (Spitfires, mostly) towards incoming German bombers and fighters as shown on a radar screen. It was pretty difficult to anticipate the movements of the Luftwaffe, usually the Germans won when I played the simulation – meant to show how difficult the battle was for Britain, I suppose. 

Comanche (1992)

In this game the 3D graphics are getting noticeably better, so it’s getting harder to run it on our old Mac. But Comanche was a great game that pit you as an American assault helicopter pilot against Russians, warlords and drug runners, etc. The variety of enemies was interesting and the missions were fairly engrossing but not overly difficult. This is where I learned about the stinger and Hellfire missiles at an early age. 

This was one of the games where the user manual was super detailed and interesting, starting a trend where I enjoyed reading user manuals and strategy guides as much as the games themselves. In the guide, it introduces the player-character as a US pilot who used to fly fixed-wing aircraft and was now being trained for what was then a prototype Comanche. If you think about it, most of the coverage of American military helicopters are Black Hawks (like in the movie) or Apaches, not this helicopter. 

SimCity 2000 (1993)

This one is a classic. Maxxis would later make the best-selling computer game at the time, The Sims, but started out with this city-building simulator. It was recommended for urban planners, which is how my father started playing it. At first it was too difficult for me so I ended up using a lot of cheat codes and turning natural disasters “off.” The classic natural disaster was the alien robot that would cause havoc on the city from high above in the sky. 

In the game, you can build residential, commercial or industrial zones and had to provide for everything like hospitals and police stations, schools, waterworks, power lines and power plants, and parks and so on. I think one of the most interesting parts about this game was the high-tech power plants that were available later in the game, like a dish to convert energy beamed from the sun’s rays or a fusion power plant. In addition, there were Arcos, which are massive self-contained structures that would increase your population substantially. These had a heavy influence on my thinking and sci-fi writing. 

That’s it for now. Next time we will begin the Landmark Period of my computer gaming, from when I was 7 to 11 years old, where my gaming…habit?…really took shape. 

Dream a Little Deep Dream of Me (IV – End)

Does a machine have to know it is dreaming to dream?

The basic question to end our MML series on machine dreams and consciousness is, does a machine need to know it is dreaming in order to dream? In other words, if a dream tree falls in the dream forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?

Humans and other animals often have dreams but do not remember them, or remember having dreamt at all. In such states we are still dreaming, because if we were connected to a CAT scan, MRI or EKG machine our brain waves would emit signs of a dreaming state even if we didn’t remember having a dream or the contents of the dream itself.

In addition, I have no doubt that at least some non-human animals are or become aware that they are or have been dreaming upon waking up. A dog could dream of chasing a ball or a lion could dream of chasing an antelope, and each wake up in a start, but each would know that their waking state is separate from their dreaming state. Or else, wouldn’t they keep doing the same activity that they had been doing in their dream even after waking up? Clearly the activity stops, although it’s less clear what knowledge animals take from their dreams to dictate their waking activities, or if it is mainly waking activities that dictate their dreams.

Same goes for humans, of course, we normally become aware of the difference between dreaming and waking states, at least once we wake up. The problem with saying a machine/computer program like Deep Dream is dreaming, is that it doesn’t have any transitions between sleeping/dreaming and waking/dreaming states, it only has the one or more states for which it has been programmed. You can’t just call a machine’s default state the “dream” state if it is no different from its “waking” or normal state. And furthermore, it doesn’t have any self-awareness of switching between states. Again, by this I do not mean one has to be constantly aware of being in a dream (as we often don’t realize we are in one), but that when a dream ends, we return to reality (as best we can).

So can we program dreaming and waking states into computers? Possibly, but this may require programming artificial consciousness itself. The Dark-Light-Bright state model could be applied in a way that measures neural activity as a function of not only external stimulus but also internal chemistry, with the internal state of mind only an imperfect reflection of reality and somewhat detached as well. Perhaps with machines, this reality would be sharper given the digital rather than analog nature of their perceptions.

At any rate, the fundamental concept with programming consciousness (and dreaming) is one that harkens back to Immanuel Kant’s Unity of Consciousness from his Critique of Pure Reason. This Unity of Consciousness is what generates a sense of self and time and the independence of self and other objects from “everything else,” also generating perception itself. Without the Unity of Consciousness, all matter coalesces together into one indeterminate mass over an indeterminate time, which seems to be the machine’s current understanding of reality, since neither mass nor time are concepts a machine presently understands or comprehends. I would suggest that without a full Unity of Consciousness, one would not be able to distinguish between waking or dreaming states as well.

Immanuel Kant

So there you have it, if you can program Kant’s Unity of Consciousness into a machine, it might be able to transition between programmed states and dream like a human or animal does. This Unity of Consciousness in particular will be the centerpiece of many of my My Machine Life posts to come. Thanks for reading this blog arc!