, ,

There is no doubting that the influence of technology will go beyond new equipment and faster communications and that Science and technology are in danger of out running our morality.

The evolution of technology has morphed the relationship between consumer and creator forever. But life exists in individual moments and it is up to us to make sure those moments are vital to technology.  Each of us has meaning, and it is us that bring these moments to life not the other way around.

This for me defines the dangers of Technology. There is a danger that we will end up starved for wisdom and individual wonder distorting the values of civilization.

Sharing may well be the mechanism that propels culture forward, but individualism driven by knowledge is what counts. Therefore we should be wary of falling into the trap of futurism. There may be a temptation to follow technological determinism, that is the idea that technology provides a logical sequence of development that pervades society regardless of its effects.

So it is necessary to study the relationship of science, technology, innovation and government. We need to stay attuned to the power dynamics at play.

Ultimately as we continue to develop and our technological capabilities even the stars will be open to our explorations.

Will humanity be prepared for the greatest discoveries of the history of our civilization?  No

Will we find other intelligent civilizations far older and incredibly superior than our technological capabilities and collective wisdom?  Yes

Our collective destiny could end with speculation on the values, ethics and consciousness of these civilizations and lessons they may hold for the future of humanity.

Recently I have concentrating on the effects of what Technology could do to Society and how we will behave or change as its influence grows.

We are already living in a world few could have imagined 50 years ago. In a new economy—powered by technology, fueled by information, without a sustainable Life-Plan.

As technology continues to spread, questions emerge:

What are we losing as a society? What is the effect on social relations? Work, after all, is more than just a job or paycheck. It is where we meet friends, share ideas, and build a common sense of purpose and a social network.

What happens if we all become Google Slaves. (see previous post) Is it creating an Hip-pro activity world designed by us that will not work. With voice mail, e-mail, and computer networks, how do we preserve the human network and the social interaction that work has helped to facilitate? What takes its place?

As I have said there may well be a strong link between technology adoption by society and its culture. But technology is never purely beneficial. It has negative and positive effects, There is a need to distinguish between desirable sustainable development and economic growth.

While it is not possible to foretell the future, it is useful to examine present trends and determine their possible consequences.

The use of computers and the Internet in workplaces is become more pervasive as work and skills are being redefined and reorganized.

The demands of the future will require increased efforts to include these workers who have been left behind and have not shared in our prosperity.

It will also require successfully integrating millions of immigrants into the workplace.

If we’re not careful, our technological evolution will take us toward not a singularity but a sofalarity.

The problem with technological evolution is that it is under our control and, unfortunately, we don’t always make the best decisions.

Does Technology want what life wants: Increasing efficiency; Increasing opportunity; Increasing emergence; Increasing complexity; Increasing diversity; Increasing specialization; Increasing ubiquity; Increasing freedom; Increasing mutualism; Increasing beauty; Increasing sentience; Increasing structure; Increasing evolvability. I think not.

Technological evolution has a different motive force. It is self-evolution, and it is therefore driven by what we want as opposed to what is adaptive. In a market economy, it is even more complex: for most of us, our technological identities are determined by what companies decide to sell based on what they believe we, as consumers, will pay for.

When it comes to technologies, we mainly want to make things easy. We are at a time of great creativity, of great potential for change for better or worse.

Technology is not the only cause of these changes, but scientists have made clear that it is a driving factor.

It is already dispensing death by algorithms.

Assuming that we really are evolving as we wear or inhabit more technological prosthetics—like ever-smarter phones, helpful glasses, and brainy cars—here’s the big question:

Will that type of evolution take us in desirable directions, as we usually assume biological evolution does?

The technology industry, which does so much to define us, has a duty to cater to our more complete selves rather than just our narrow interests. It has both the opportunity and the means to reach for something higher. And, as consumers, we should remember that our collective demands drive our destiny as a species, and define the post human condition.  Both Google and Apple would do well to keep this in mind.

All of these factors have contributed to rising inequality. The development of a hierarchy of knowledge, a prejudiced vision towards a desired future rather than recognition of more plausible realities.

We all want a future defined not by an evolution toward super intelligence but by the absence of discomforts.

In general, humans have a tendency to always choose the easiest option without
stopping to think that maybe, to think another perspective would open other