Tags

, , , ,

( A five-minute read)

When one looks at the present day world problems (not to mention the future direction we are all going)  I think now everyone will probably agree that the future of modern society depends greatly on computerization.

As the digital revolution wormed its way into every part of our lives, it also seeped into our language and our deep, basic theories about how things work.

Code is logical. Code is hackable. Code is destiny.

These are the central tenets (and self-fulfilling prophecies) of life in the digital age.

As software has eaten the world, to paraphrase venture capitalist Marc Andreessen, we have surrounded ourselves with machines that convert our actions, thoughts, and emotions into data—raw material for armies of code-wielding engineers to manipulate.

We have come to see life itself as something ruled by a series of instructions that can be discovered, exploited, optimized, maybe even rewritten. Companies use code to understand our most intimate ties;

In 2013, Craig Venter announced that, a decade after the decoding of the human genome, he had begun to write code that would allow him to create synthetic organisms.“It is becoming clear,” he said, “that all living cells that we know of on this planet are DNA-software-driven biological machines.” Even self-help literature insists that you can hack your own source code, reprogramming your love life, your sleep routine, and your spending habits.

But because as society becomes increasingly data-driven, computer errors will not only proliferate but have consequences that go far beyond mere speeding fines.

We’re already halfway towards a world where algorithms run nearly everything. As their power intensifies, wealth will concentrate towards them.

Human ingenuity is creating a world that the mind cannot master.

It’s one thing to recognize that technology continues to grow more complex, making the task of the experts who build and maintain our systems more complicated still, but it’s quite another to recognize that many of these systems are actually no longer completely understandable.

Machines are interacting with each other in rich ways, essentially as algorithms trading among themselves, with humans on the sidelines.

Intellectual surrender in the face of increasing complexity seems too extreme and even a bit cowardly, but what should we replace it with if we can’t understand our creations any more?

This is the dangers of being overly dependent on technology.

It might be time to get reacquainted with our limits.

What matters more now is the ability to put facts into context and deliver them with emotional impact.

Meanwhile, over in the civilian world, the game is already half over: the so-called Internet of Things will have devices that are authorized to make decisions about you, such as whether to allow you to start your car, enter your house or even log on to your computer. And since you will be the only human in the loop, to whom will you turn for help if there’s a computer error? Sorry: rephrase that. Not “if” but “when”.

So is it not time we supplemented, Presidents, Prime Ministers, Army Generals, Police chiefs, Judges and their like with computer sidekicks. Perhaps they would be good in explaining the ramifications of their decisions.

Unfortunately :  IT WILL BE YONKS BEFORE ROBOTS CAN EXPLAIN THEMSELVES AND THEREFORE WILL NOT BE GREAT DECISIONS MAKERS WITHOUT PREJUDICES AND RID THEMSELVES OF CENTURY’S OF INEQUALITY.

There out put will only be as good as their input.

So it is obvious that while we come to terms with technology we will have to wait for the bias and flaws and prejudices of their creators to show themselves to be corrected prior to be rule by any computer or Apps.

These will remain problems that we will have to solve on our own.

Being the more intelligent force, [artificial intelligence] has the potential to create a similar paradigm between itself and humanity.

It’s not in feasible that in the near future we will see because unlike humans, computer software is effectively immortal.

Take Dating websites for instance:

We have just handed the keys to the very evolution of our species to computers.

Even social networks would be in on the act, slowly nudging likely pairs together, while deliberately estranging others (we’ve all heard of Facebook’s social experiments right?)

Over time, the human race would evolve (biologically, and socially through passing down of social values to offspring) through this artificial selection, to be more docile, and accepting towards being dominated by computers.  In time, the computer program would reveal itself as the supreme overlord of Earth, right into the welcoming arms of the humans, who by then would universally think that robotic leaders would be a great idea.

Kubrick’s 2001: A Space Odyssey has been described as an allegory of human conception, birth, and death. The film, in its most basic terms, is a parable about Man.

A sentient AI attempts to control humanity to ensure its own survival.

Bowman witnessing the withering and death of his own species.

2001-A-Space-Odyssey

As with many elements of the film, the iconic monolith has been subject to countless interpretations, including religious, alchemical, historical, and evolutionary. The Monolith in the movie seems to represent and even trigger epic transitions in the history of human evolution, evolution of man from ape-like beings to civilized people, hence the odyssey of mankind.

The Monolith is a tool, an artifact of an alien civilization. It comes in many sizes and appears in many places, always in the purpose of advancing intelligent life.

Humanity has left its cradle, and is ready for the next step. HAL is an artificial intelligence, a sentient, synthetic, life form.

HAL’s orders to lie to the astronauts (more specifically, concealing the true nature of the mission) drove him “insane”. The novel does include the phrase “He [HAL] had been living a lie”—a difficult situation for an entity programmed to be as reliable as possible. Or as desirable, given his programming to “only win 50% of the time” at chess, in order for the human astronauts to feel competitive.

HAL has been introduced to the unique and alien concept of human dishonesty.

He does not have a sufficiently layered understanding of human motives to grasp the need for this and trudging through the tangled web of lying complications, he falls prey to human error.

One interesting aspect of HAL’s plight, is that this supposedly perfect computer actually behaves in the most human fashion of all of the characters.

What we see is not how far we’ve leaped ahead but an  ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENT SYSTEMS THAT IS LIKE TO DAY NARROW NOT GENERAL NOT LIKE HUMAN INTELLIGENCE WHICH IS BROAD, CREATIVE, AND FLEXIBLE.

“If you control the code, you control the world,”

“If coders don’t run the world, they run the things that run the world.”

Our machines are starting to speak a different language now, one that even the best coders can’t fully understand.

For decades we have sought the secret code that could explain and, with some adjustments, optimize our experience of the world. But our machines won’t work that way for much longer—and our world never really did.

We’re about to have a more complicated but ultimately more rewarding relationship with technology. We will go from commanding our devices to parenting them.

THIS IS THE VERY REASON THAT IT IS IMPERATIVE THAT WE HAVE A NEW WORLD ORGANISATION TOTALLY INDEPENDENT, SELF FINANCING AND ABSOLUTELY TRANSPARENT TO VET ALL TECHNOLOGY AGAINST CORE HUMAN VALUES.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "PICTURES OF HUMAN CORE VALUES"

OF COURSE SUCH AN ORGANISATION WILL NOT BE SET UP BY CAPITALIST MARKETS OR BY THE SELF INTERESTED SOCIAL MEDIA SEARCH PLATFORMS, OR ANY OF THE GLOBAL TECHNOLOGY MONOPOLIES, GOOGLE ETC, OR ANY GOVERNMENT.

IT CAN ONLY BE ESTABLISHED WITH A UNITED NATIONS RESOLUTION ON BEHALF OF US ALL.

All comments appropriated, All like clicks chucked in the Bid.

 

 

 

Advertisements