Author Archives: bobdillon33@gmail.com

THE BEADY EYE ASK’S : IN THIS AGE OF TECHNOLOGY ARE WE REALLY TALKING TO ONE ANOTHER?

13 Tuesday Mar 2018

Posted by in Algorithms., Technology., The cloud., The Future, The Internet., Unanswered Questions., What Needs to change in the World, Where's the Global Outrage.

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , ,

 

( A twenty-minute read)

Today’s atomizing forces are brand new and far less tangible: ubiquitous Internet access, constant email and social-media updates, all distracting us from our surroundings, loved ones and other people around us.

Are we indeed socially hobbled by our little screens?

If matters have gotten worse, how would we know?

We’re disengaged.’ Compared to what?

If the new technologies are to fulfill their promise, it is necessary to direct attention towards the costs and concerns that come with the globalization of technology.

Although information technology and increased knowledge can empower everyone on an individual level, the limitations of the existing structures within the job market, socioeconomics, and governmental sovereignty are hard to cast away; an underlying irony has yet to be eliminated.

We are only just beginning to replacing vague theories with some hard data and the overarching effects so far point to the disruptive nature of technology.

So here are a few facts explaining how digital-age technologies have already transformed our world, for better and for worse.

Wealth boosted by technology has not been equally distributed.

By 2020, it is estimated that the 1 percent will own 54 percent of global wealth.

Thanks to technology, we can vent our frustration in increasingly visible ways.

Jobs will be computerized in the next 10-20 years.

With the rise of websites like WebMD, LegalZoom, and E*Trade, even white-collar professionals like lawyers, doctors, and financial middlemen are under threat from technology. Are any jobs safe? For the time being, positions that require empathy—say, nurses over doctors—are better positioned to withstand the technological blow.

Furthermore, governmental programs do not provide the assistance needed to help workers transition to the technological age, further wedging the gap between rural and urban. This disparity is also magnified within the stratification of international systems: The digital divide that exists among developed and developing countries is obvious and the high cost of bringing broadband and technology to third-world countries is an issue that needs to be solved.

Health will be run by algorithms attached to the cloud.

To put this in perspective, a full human genome sequence cost $100 million in 2002. Today, it can be done for $1,000; by 2020 it may cost less than a cup of coffee.

Technology can be a double-edged sword, but at least when it comes to our health (if not necessarily our medical professionals), it has largely been a force for good but just imagine what is going to happen to Health Insurance when your health is monitored by the Cloud.

Education.

Today, there are more than 80,000 education apps available for download through Apple’s App Store; 72 percent of those are aimed at toddlers and preschoolers. But while parents and app developers have obviously embraced the tech education revolution, the link between technology and educational performance is murky at best.

Technology can help save the planet…

The World Bank estimates that climate change may push more than 100 million people into extreme poverty by 2030.

Of course, technology has played a role in our current predicament. The shale revolution—which at its core is a technological revolution—has given a new lease on life to the oil and gas era. That may be good for falling oil prices, but it’s horrible for our environment.

But what makes the difference is that the global economy grew by 3 percent in 2014 while world emissions remained flat.

People are not willing to fundamentally change their lives for problems far off in the future, even ones as potentially catastrophic as climate change. To avoid the worst effects of climate change, alternative energies need to become as cheap and reliable as their carbon-emitting counterparts, and quickly.

Cheaper alternative energy is the best hope the world has left.

Global Security:

Technology has also created a whole new set of global security concerns.

The thoroughly modern phenomenon of cybercrime and economic espionage is estimated to cost the world more than $445 billion every year. That’s roughly 1 percent of global income. And while it hasn’t happened yet, the fear that cyber attacks can spill over and trigger real-world conflicts remains an ongoing concern.

Technology has also changed the face of modern warfare. A decade ago, the Pentagon had a stockpile of fewer than 50 drones; today it has an arsenal of about 7,000. The Pentagon estimates that China will build nearly 42,000 drones by 2023. Others will follow suit. Yet another possible complication.

But the most worrisome development?

Technology has given terrorist groups like ISIS an unparalleled platform to spread their messages of hate. The knowledge needed to build bombs in the comfort of your own home is now just a few short clicks away. Technology is capable of empowering every single individual in the world, even the worst of us.

Finance and the world economy.

It is quite obvious that money in the form of cash is going to disappear.

World stock market is now run by high-frequency trading algorithms. Personal credit lines are governed by algorithms. World trade is reverting to protectionism. Inequality is widening.

Communication:

We are all talking on our cell phones. Public spaces aren’t communal anymore. No one interacts in public spaces.

On the other hand, access to the wealth of information and opinion available on the internet is exposing people of all ages to views, lifestyles, and knowledge they might never have encountered otherwise, potentially generating greater compassion and understanding both within local communities and for people on the other side of the world.

In the next few years, virtual reality could offer a further means of breaking down geographic and social barriers.

Project Syria, for instance, uses virtual-reality goggles to place people inside the meticulously researched world of a Syrian citizen caught in the Syrian conflict, cutting through the ‘empathy fatigue’ often brought about by constant access to global news.

THEN THERE IS:

CRIME:

WHAT LAWS SHOULD APPLY TO AI.

SHOULD THEIR CREATORS BE HELD RESPONSIBLE FOR ITS ACTIONS?

An AI programme could be an innocent agent with either the software programmer or the user being held to be the perpetrator-vi another.

Does the programmer know that if the machine is used in a certain way that a certain outcome is inevitable?

Who or what should be punished if for an offense of which an AI system is directly liable.

Is Ai a service or a product. The legal implications will be profound.

PRIVACY: 

Nothing is private any longer. Whether you like it or not everything is data.

Should AI platforms Pay us for the Data?

FALSE NEWS:

There is no longer a source of Facts. Campaigns to manipulate public opinion through false or misleading social media postings have become standard political practice across much of the world.

Exploiting every social media platform — Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and beyond — and relying on human users and computerized “bots” that can dramatically amplify the power of disinformation campaigns by automating the process of preparing and delivering posts. Bots interact with human users and also with other bots. They generate so much content — and they share each other’s content — that it’s hard to disaggregate the networks.

The impact goes beyond electoral politics to hot-button issues such as climate change and the safety of vaccines.

So should we put aside these value judgments and focus on how technology will simply make the world different going forward. 65 percent of children entering primary school today will end up working in jobs that don’t even exist yet. Our time is better spent figuring out how to live in this new world rather than lamenting the old one.

Unfortunately, by the time we get around to waking up to Algorithms, we will be owned by one.

History also advises that the measures taken must be developed through close consultation between governments, private sector experts, and stakeholders and citizens. Experience with previous technologies suggests that prudent policies can help us effectively manage the risks associated with new technologies without harm to their benefits. But can we say that this is honestly true with Algorithms that are learning from each other or driven by profit, filtering platforms in order to supply personalized information?

The result is having corrosive effects across the whole political arena worldwide.

Whether you are techno-utopians or techno-skeptics technology is changing our lives and the world we all live in and on IN MORE WAYS THAN WE YET OR WILL EVER BE CAPABLE OF COMPREHENDiING.

This is why I advocate a strong room for technology. Where all software is stored and available to all. (See the previous post)

If we are not careful the very thing that we all cherish Freedom will become the sole prerogative of the Algorithms world OF APPLE, MICROSOFT, FACEBOOK, TWITTER, AND THEIR LIKE.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of technology"

All human comments appreciated. All like clicks chucked in the bin.

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

 

 

 

 

 

 

revolutionary.

What was still missing from the research, he decided, was historical perspective.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

THE BEADY EYE SAY’S. WORLD MAINSTREAM POLITICS IS TURNING A BLIND EYE TO WHAT TECHNOLOGY IS DOING TO THE WORLD.

11 Sunday Mar 2018

Posted by in Algorithms., Capitalism, Climate Change., Energy, Environment, Humanity., Life., Politics., Post - truth politics., Sustaniability, Technology, The Future, The world to day., Unanswered Questions., United Nations, Wealth., What Needs to change in the World

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE SAY’S. WORLD MAINSTREAM POLITICS IS TURNING A BLIND EYE TO WHAT TECHNOLOGY IS DOING TO THE WORLD.

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

 

( A six-minute read)

Algorithms are shifting authority.

Surely its time for all of us to stop acting as though we are all independent of Life.

To see the future first you have to be able to imagine it.

People might be beginning to understand but the clock is running out faster and faster which is being signaled by nature year after year while banks are commercializing its very existence.

Including us, none of the worlds in the universe are immune to natural limits.

If we and our politicians are still dragging our feet in another ten, twenty, thirty years we will have degrees of climate change that we will simply not be able to manage.  The whole world will be in trouble.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of political movements"

As all the bad things re climate change are coming true assisted by the inertia of AI which is getting build into the system this time  we will not be able to rely on coal to generate energy,

The chances of Technology (In the form of Algorithms) tackling inequality or driving sustainability are dismal in the extreme.  (See previous postings)

The coming global problems that are going to be created by technology are obvious to see, lack of meaningful employment with the resulting immigration causing civil unrest and a return to Nationalism.

Just look at the results of Paris Climate Agreements being adhered too.

A complete allusion due to the rise of Nationalism.

Why?

Because of nationalism, we are now beginning to address the world problems on all the wrong levels.

We need to be looking forward not backward.  Make America great, or Brexit Britain the two current prime examples.

We are now all living with technology and no government can control it.

Now more than ever the global capitalistic economy with national politics does not work.

Basic human needs are changing and even if we manage to establish a Basic Wage for all it will not solve who lives or dies.

Human stupidity or violence should never be underestimated. There is no post-truth fake news it has been with us for thousands of years.

No one has the time to analyze all the information that AI is producing other than another machine to make a judgment.

( I often feel that we should all be changing Facebook, Twitter, Google and the like for the information we are supplying them with.)

We have out of date Organisations that are incapable of making anything stick.

So I hear you saying what can be done.

First and for most, we must apply a World  Aid Commission on all Profit-seeking Algorithms, on all high-frequency trading, on all sovereign wealth funds acquisitions, on all foreign exchange transaction over $50,00, on all world Lotto prize money etc. (See previous postings)

Then we must create a technology storm room where all programmes relating to technology in all its forms are held with access to all in sundry.

Of course, this is pie in the sky as it will never happen.

Since the dawn of history, the human has not been able to share for the common good of all, but there is one thing that might focus our minds sooner than extinction and that is the price of oil as it runs out.

New media such as Social Media seems to be driving a return to a more pluralistic communication System and Social movement activists may be seen as consumers of these new media, and for this very reason find attention for their demands.

But this, in fact, is open to différent types of interprétation.

So where are we?

As F.M. Powicke said: ” Political and social history are in my view aspects of the same process. Social Life loses half its interest, and political movements lose most of their meaning if they are considered separately”

Social media with its networks and its rules petitions and false news that go beyond democratic representation and is achieving exactly what Powicke rightly identified.

Social left politics is in disarray, Right-wing politics on the rise, Liberal politics in the pockets of Economic growth and the technologic revolution.

It is, therefore, time for in-depth research on the interactions between movement organizations and the society of social media that goes beyond the analysis of media bias.

In course of constructing the political landscape of these movements, if there is going to be any chance.  We must not allow the world to be governed by the altar of profit, whether its Apple, Microsoft or some other monopoly platform.

All human comments appreciated. All like clicks chucked in the bin.

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

 

 

THE BEADY EYE ASK’S: HAS ENGLAND DONE A TRADE DEAL WITH SAUDI.

09 Friday Mar 2018

Posted by in Brexit v EU - Negotiations., European Union., Trade Agreements.

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE ASK’S: HAS ENGLAND DONE A TRADE DEAL WITH SAUDI.

Tags

, , ,

( A seven-minute read)

Of course not.

Britain cannot conclude trade deals or agreements with countries while it is still a member of the European Union.

However, it’s important to note exactly what this means.

Does it mean leapfrogging?

Britain cannot conclude such agreements while still a member, not that Britain cannot negotiate them while still in the bloc.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "Pictures of trade agreements"

This is a distinction that all too many are not making and it’s an important one:

WHATEVER ABOUT THE HIPOCRICY of trading with a country that abuses human rights, and is killing Yemenites with English weapons (UK sales of arms and military kit to Saudi Arabia hit £1.1bn in 2017.) the question for the EU is:

Is England breaching its EU treaty or not.

A Chines £9bn agreement  ( Not all details have been made public.)

A Saudi £65bn agreement trade and investment target for the year 2030.

Both disguised as mutual trade and investment opportunities ambitions, visions, whatever you like to call them over the coming years.

Britain will remain within custom union rules during any Brexit transition. This means that no new trade deals can come into force until at least 2021.

Over the years, the EU has forged a constructive political dialogue with members of the Cooperation Council for the Arab States of the Gulf (GCC). These countries are Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar and the UAE.

The Cooperation Agreement, which was concluded in 1988, forms the basis for the relationship that aims at:

  • strengthening the stability in the strategically important region;
  • facilitating the political and economic relations;
  • broadening economic and technical cooperation;
  • further broadening cooperation on energy, industry, trade and services, agriculture, fisheries, investment, science, technology, and environment.
  • The EU and GCC have been engaged in negotiating a Free Trade Agreement (FTA) since 1990.

In the meantime here are some of the benefits England enjoys from EU trade deals ( There are 800 odd trading)Résultat de recherche d'images pour "Pictures of trade agreements"

As a member of the EU, Uk business has easier access to 1/3 of the world’s markets by value.

The EU gives UK business preferential market access to over 50 countries outside of the EU.

The EU gives the UK access to more markets than Switzerland, Canada or Australia – who have 38, 15 and 15 trade deals respectively.

The EU gets the UK a better deal – eliminating tariffs with South Korea
almost 4 times quicker than Australia’s deal.

EU trade deals are comprehensive in scope – all deals signed in the last year include services.

The EU-South Korea deal boosted UK trade with South Korea by 57%.

The EU-Canada trade deal will add £1.3bn to the economy.

If the EU completes all deals currently under negotiation, 88% of the UK’s trade would be covered.

The EU-US deal (TTIP) could add £10bn to the UK economy by attracting more investment, cutting red tape and increasing consumer choice. The deal would also set the bar for regulatory standards around the world with corporations having legal powers to sue nations. Let’s hope it will never happen.

Britain is now trumping free trade.

” Free trade under WTO rules will play an important role in global poverty reduction post-Brexit.”

But this argument is based on nostalgia for a system where free and fair trade represented a cornerstone of Britain’s foreign policy. It is nostalgic because such a system, which had its origins in colonies and treaty ports, was neither free nor based on fair rules. It’s a fallacy that provides – at best – some comfort against the uncertainty of Brexit. At worst, it evokes memories among many countries, including China, of an era when trade was used to exacerbate exploitation rather than alleviate poverty.

The arguments that rules-based free trade reduces poverty do not stand up to scrutiny. Not only are they divorced from the history of the colonial trade system, they are also inconsistent with the way in which China lifted some 700m citizens out of absolute poverty.

Plus, the assertion that a “protectionist” EU has constrained the UK’s ability to form free trade agreements with its “natural” trade partners in the Commonwealth has been shown to be inconsistent. The EU incorporated many of these countries into its system trade preferences after the UK joined its precursor, the EEC.

The colonial trade system was neither built on free trade nor liberal economic policy. Instead, it functioned on the basis of strict currency controls, centralized planning and unbalanced economic power, which favored the colonial power.

Perhaps the biggest irony is that the UK’s best prospects for a favorable trade agreement with China, a strong currency, and rules-based trade are to be found by remaining within the EU. The EU has long been reluctant to grant China market economy status until it can demonstrate that Chinese product prices reflect their market value. More recently, it has sought to develop a more cohesive approach to Chinese investment in EU countries.

In holding China to rules-based trade, the EU is, therefore, following the very approach that those in favor of Brexit appear to be advocating. And, as one of China’s biggest export markets, has far more clout to shape these rules.

There remains this question should countries make trade deals with countries that use them to sell arms.

England has already sold £4.6bn of arms to Saudi since the war started in Yemen in 2015. It now in the process of selling an additional 48 Typhoon at an expected to cost on average about $180 million each. So much for Free trade under WTO rules.

All human comments appreciated. All like clicks chucked in the bin.

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

THE BEADY EYE SAY’S: IT IS TIME TO CREATE A WORLD TECHNOLOGICAL STRONG ROOM.

07 Wednesday Mar 2018

Posted by in Algorithms., Artificial Intelligence., Google, HUMAN INTELLIGENCE, Humanity., Our Common Values., Technology, The common good., The Future, The world to day., Unanswered Questions., What Needs to change in the World

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE SAY’S: IT IS TIME TO CREATE A WORLD TECHNOLOGICAL STRONG ROOM.

Tags

, , , ,

 

( A two-minute read)

Of course, some argue that we have better things to worry about. Climate Change, Wars, Sustainability etc, but Superhuman, might finally create a joke so funny that everyone on Earth dies laughing. Artificial Intelligence is becoming is becoming incredibly sophisticated and scientists aren't sure how

The fact is that there are a lot of unquestioned assumptions when it comes to AI, learning in ways far beyond that of humans.

We can’t really predict what might happen next because superintelligent A.I. may not just think faster than humans, but in ways that are completely different. It may have motivations — feelings, even — that we cannot fathom. It could rapidly solve the problems of aging, of human conflict, of space travel. We might see a dawning utopia.

There is one thing for sure it has been set in motion and now we are waiting for the results.

In the meantime, there is something unpleasant about A.I. and that is Humanity is already losing control of artificial intelligence which could have catastrophic consequences for civilization.

For example “Deep learning”, is a powerful tool for solving problems. It helps us tag our friends on Facebook, provides assistance on our smartphones using Siri, Cortana or Google.

Deep learning has helped computers get better at recognizing objects than a person.

The military is pouring millions into the technology so it can be used to steer ships, control drones and destroy targets.

And there’s hope it will be able to diagnose deadly diseases, make traders billionaires by reading the stock market and totally transform the world we live in.

Indeed whether you call it Deep learning, it could be the last invention that humanity will ever need to make.

If they can’t figure out how the algorithms (the formulas which keep computers performing the tasks we ask them to do) work, they won’t be able to predict when they fail.

The Question is are we going to rely on a Google AI ethics board or we agree on a World Technological Strong Room where all AI programs are stored and available to everyone.

It’s now or never.

All human comments appriciated. All like clicks chucked in the bin.

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

 

 

THE BEADY EYE ASK’S: CAN THE EUROPEAN UNION SURVIVE WITHOUT MAKING SOME REFORMS .

05 Monday Mar 2018

Posted by in Brexit v EU - Negotiations., European Commission., European Union., Modern Day Democracy., Our Common Values., Populism., Post - truth politics., The Obvious., What needs to change in European Union.

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , ,

 

( A two-minute read)

There’s no denying Brexit is going to be a serious smack in the face for the EU.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of the EU House of parliament"

The second EU straw is now the populist gale that will blow throughout next year.

Surely now is the time for some reforms.

Fundamental problems other than Brexit must be addressed.

But what to change? There’s little consensus yet.

Ever closer union, which has been an EU rallying cry for nearly 30 years, is almost “dead.”  Lofty speeches are falling on deaf ears.

It may be forced by politics or forced by new leadership but there is no doubt that the divisions between wealthy northern European nations and those in the South, where public finances are strained and youth unemployment remains a major problem has to be resolved.

The rise of nationalist parties — on left and right — threatens to reverse nearly 70 years of integration in Europe. The Greek bailout is in danger of collapsing. There are doubts about the future of the euro.

It is was unrealistic to expect radical change, when there are creditors and debtors in the EU. Because of this, it’s almost impossible for European Union to continue with a deepening integration on fiscal affairs.

Here are three reforms it should and can be undertaking imminently.

One > Stop the gravy train Strasburg to Brussels.

Two > Make the Commission an elected body.

Three > Establish legal entry points for refugees.

There are arguably two primary types of democracy: direct democracy, in which all
citizens directly participate in decision-making; and representative democracy, in which the power of the people is delegated to periodically elected representatives.

Where is the difficulty with the above reforms?

After all is not democracy said to be in the eye of the beholder.

Britain’s departure from the EU, which will be negotiated over just two years, will also distract attention from reforms. There will be pressure to wrap up Brexit talks quickly, but the EU is not known for moving fast.

Europe needs to change, and fast.

Either it prepares for the future, or it will become obsolete.

All human comments appreciated. All like clicks chucked in the bin.

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

 

THE BEADY EYE SAY’S: BEWARE BREXIT DOES NOT MEAN BREXIT AFTER ALL.

04 Sunday Mar 2018

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE SAY’S: BEWARE BREXIT DOES NOT MEAN BREXIT AFTER ALL.

 

(A two-minute read)

Prime Minister said her position is ‘based on practicality.’Brexit negotiations

These are empty reassurances not only for the fish stocks in the Irish sea but for the Good Friday agreement and any other agreement transition period or not with or without a border protecting Unionism.

We all need to face up to a few hard facts.

Brexit will be a loss for all of us.

England will be poorer in more ways than one and it will be so entirely of its own choice.

Next:   There will be no hard border in Ireland.

This is only true if Ireland somehow manages unites. Why? Because it is totally impossible while one side is in the customs union and the single market and the other isn’t.

Every Tom Dick and Harry will have their own regulations.  Yuppie England will see more snow than Columba exports.

Direct rule in Northern Ireland or a hard border after Brexit could lead to “serious trouble.”  When there was a hard border, there was very little commerce, very little travel, very little interaction between the people of Northern Ireland and the people of the Republic.

“That led to stereotyping, to the demonization of others, to attitudes that were based upon acts from the distant past.”

Next:  Ms May needs to secure a trade deal to do this England has to remain in a customs union.

The UK and the EU have not started discussing their “future partnership” yet.

Next: Any transition period is going to be costly and riddled with but what we are saying is.

Citizens’ rights – in particular, EU nationals who move to the UK during the transition period. Do they get treated the same as if they had arrived while the UK was in the EU? The EU says yes, the UK no.

The UK also wants to be able to strike trade deals with other countries – which it cannot do as an EU member – although these cannot come into force until the transition ends.

Next: Vague aspirations.

There are two sides in England both have different ideas about what it should look like.

It is England, that wants to leave the European Union, not the European Union wanting to leave England.

She had the temerity to talk of what will be remembered of Brexit “a generation from now”.

Here’s a prediction:

A generation from now, the current young generation, who utterly loathe Brexit, will remember the monumental pain in the arse that was taking the UK back into the EU under worse terms, sometime around 2031 at the very latest.

“Brexit means Brexit”  “Let’s get on with it!”  “The world is not watching.”

The Lawyers are laughing all the way to the Bank.

All human comments appreciated. All like clicks chucked in the bin.

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

 

 

 

 

 

costly transformation,

 

THE BEADY EYE SAY’S: WE EDUCATING THEM ALL WRONG.

02 Friday Mar 2018

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE SAY’S: WE EDUCATING THEM ALL WRONG.

 

( A three-minute read)

In the not so distant future, it will not be the aims of education to be the transmission of knowledge but the fostering of inquiry.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "future of education pictures"

All human societies, past and present, have had a vested interest in education; children are born illiterate and innumerate, and ignorant of the norms and cultural achievements of the community or society into which they have been thrust.

We all know that education serves as a social-sorting mechanism but this is coming to an end with technology. The great social importance of education is underscored by the fact that when a society is shaken by a crisis, this often is taken as a sign of educational breakdown; education and educators become scapegoats.

There seems little point in education the children of the today with yesterdays knowledge if they are void of creativity. The passive language of seeing, which has shaped our discourse down to the present will no longer apply.

The question of what knowledge will be, and what skills will be needed ought to be—part of the domain of philosophy of the curriculum of the future.

What are the basic aims and ideals of the educational enterprise?

What ought educators try to accomplish?

I suppose the best education will equip individuals with the skills and substantive knowledge that allows them to define and to pursue their own goals, and also allows them to participate in the life of their community as full-fledged, autonomous citizens.

The world is going to need critical thinkers, not the present day state-provided brainwashing students.

Plato’s starting point is that the organization of society depends ultimately upon knowledge of the end of existence. Only those who have rightly trained minds will be able to recognize the end.

Granted each individual is an organism situated in a biological and social environment in which problems were constantly emerging, forcing the individual to reflect, act, and learn but this is also changing and perhaps Plato’s theory “the spectator theory of knowledge” is going to come true.

In schools, those under instruction are too customarily looked upon as acquiring knowledge as theoretical spectators, minds which appropriate knowledge by a direct energy of intellect. The very word pupil has almost come to mean one who is engaged not in having fruitful experiences but in absorbing knowledge directly.

Something which is called mind or consciousness is severed from the physical organs of activity.

However, in the future, as robots and automation sweep the global workforce each student although an individual will blaze his or her unique trail of growth on the internet.

This is already happening with many University offering online courses.

A teacher will have the task of guiding and facilitating this growth, without imposing a fixed end upon the process.

Dewey sometimes uses the term “curriculum” to mean “the funded wisdom of the human race”, the point is that over the course of human history an enormous stock of knowledge and skills has accumulated and the teacher has the task of helping the student to make contact with this repertoire—but helping by facilitating rather than by imposing.

As technology removes the need for knowledge students coming out of University with degrees in Law, Medicine etc will not be needed.

Virtual learning, digitization, and augmented reality will make obsolete our old definitions of a classroom in 2020.

Before each of us is imprisoned in a world of our own making we should move creativity to the top of the education premise.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "future of education pictures"

All human comments appreciated. All like clicks chucked in the bin.

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

THE BEADY EYE ASK’S: IS IT VALUE FOR MONEY:

28 Wednesday Feb 2018

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE ASK’S: IS IT VALUE FOR MONEY:

 

( A one minute read)

The feel-good factor of Britain’s success took little time to wear off after it emerged that each medal at the Rio de Janeiro Olympic Games had cost £4.1m in funding a mere £350m for 27 golds, 23 silvers, and 38 bronzes.Image associée

The five-medal haul in Pyeongchang cost a mere 28million, £5.6 million a medal. 

Using the current rates of both precious metals, the street value of a gold medal is approximately $548.

In a country with its national health services trapped for additional funds, (£8 billion a year in funding will be needed by 2020.) going through the biggest financial squeeze in its history with waiting times rising and quality of care deteriorating.

That is spending £6.2bn on two aircraft carrier that will be worthless and possibly be spending £40bn on a programme that is designed for uncertainty and indeed that an “uncertain future threat environment” may mean no threats arise and so £40bn would have been spent unnecessarily.

It would be a fair question to ask are they worth it. Is it Lottery Funds well spent.

I would say yes on the premises that money spent promoting peace far outweighs money spent on defense in a world that needs to come together to fight inequality and climate change.

All human comments appreciated. All like clicks chucked in the bin.

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

 

 

 

 

 

Against worthless Aircraft carriers, Trident missiles they certainly are.

 

 

THE BEADY LOOK AT THE POSSIBILITY OF CONSCIOUS MACHINES.

27 Tuesday Feb 2018

Posted by in Artificial Intelligence.

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY LOOK AT THE POSSIBILITY OF CONSCIOUS MACHINES.

Tags

, , ,

 

( A five-minute read)

There is little doubt that future A.I. will be capable of doing significant damage.

In the near future, we may indeed need a very new perspective on the nature of consciousness, as quantum mechanics is proving with a narrative of the self-interacting with the world.

Even if we manage through technology to artificially create some kind of limited consciousness it does not mean we understand it as it is an emergent property of very complex neuronal patterns.

It is easy to imagine an unconstrained software application that spreads throughout the Internet, severely mucking up our most efficient and relied upon medium for global exchange.

However, the question is will we see a machine that is aware of itself and its surroundings. That could take in and process massive amounts of data in real time?

This will require intentional behavior from an A.I. Therefore it would have a mind, as intentionality can only arise when something possesses its own beliefs, desires, and motivations.

Though computers and robots are more advanced than ever, they’re still just tools. They are unaware of their own existence and can only perform tasks for which they were programmed.

But what if they could think for themselves?

Brains and computers work very differently. Both compute, but only one understands.

A strict symbol-processing machine can never be a symbol-understanding machine

Conscious machines would raise troubling legal and ethical problems.

Would a conscious machine be a “person” under the law?

Should “conscious” be thought of in the way we think of humans, and even some animals?

IE:  Information received through any of the six senses: sight, sound, smell, taste, touch, or feeling.

Your conscious mind is continually observing and categorizing what is going on around you. It has no memory, and it can only hold one thought at a time and deal with it either positively or negatively, “yes” or “no.”

Is consciousness the accepting new information, storing and retrieving old information and cognitive processing of it all into perceptions and actions.

If that’s right, then one day machines will indeed be the ultimate consciousness.

They’ll be able to gather more information than a human, store more than many libraries, access vast databases in milliseconds and compute all of it into decisions more complex, and yet more logical, than any person ever could.

So where are we?

Is consciousness more about human behavior that cannot be computed by a machine. Creativity, for example, and the sense of freedom people possess don’t appear to come from logic or calculations.

Then again consciousness and the physical world are complementary aspects of the same reality.

When a person observes, or experiments on, some aspect of the physical world, that person’s conscious interaction causes discernible change.

Although it requires brains to become real is consciousness a thing that exists by itself –  there had to be something before the Big bang perhaps space had or has a conscious.

Consciousness alone, however, cannot make physical changes to the world, but dreams or visions can. After all, we experience the world subjectively.

If a computer can’t be conscious, then how can a brain?” A simulation of a brain is still not a physical brain. After all, it is a purely physical object that works according to physical law. It even uses electrical activity to process information, just like a computer.

Some of these questions have to do with technology; others have to do with what consciousness actually is.

We left with the possibility that new biological structures that are, or could become, conscious are yet to be discovered.

The most accurate of brain simulations will not yield minds, nor will software programs produce consciousness. Therefore we will not have machines with what we call consciousness.

Human brainpower transplanted into a mechanical robot–is a quite a leap.

However, we could be confronted with this kind of technology so don’t lose your mind too soon.

All conscious human comments appreciated. All like clicks chucked in the bin.

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

 

 

THE BEADY EYE ASK’S: JUST WHAT IS IT THAT BRITAIN IS OPTING OUT OF FOR THE SAKE OF ISOLATION.

25 Sunday Feb 2018

Posted by in Brexit v EU - Negotiations.

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE ASK’S: JUST WHAT IS IT THAT BRITAIN IS OPTING OUT OF FOR THE SAKE OF ISOLATION.

Tags

, ,

 

( A seven-minute read)

Perhaps the biggest issue in the June 23 referendum was the question of whether 43 years in the EU have helped or hurt the UK economy. Of course, the referendum completely ignored that when Britain joined the EEC as it was known then as the sick man of Europe.Image associée

One can not know exactly how much the EU directly benefited Britain, but a 10 percent rise in prosperity is a reasonable estimate.

I would like some political ( descendants of the two world wars)  to tell me or explain to me why now in a world that is in turmoil Britain wants to turn itself into a hermit kingdom squandering its wealth and ingenuity for an idealised notion that you are still a mighty power that the nations of the world want to trade with on your terms.

Governments and Countries can’t be run like businesses.

Societies are built on a commitment to social and economic justice, not by the free market, but by equality of opportunity.

From the outside, the whole Brexit process has highlighted your indifference to seeing that there are going to to be enormous repercussions due to a fog of denial and self-delusion.

Today one in 20 UK residents was born in another EU country.

 

Some Eurosceptics say Britain stands a better chance of growth if it looks beyond the sluggish economies of the EU. But this is a claim about the future, predicated on trading relationships that do not yet exist, rather than an analysis of the past.

UK trade with EU partners grew faster after 1973 than it did with the remaining countries in the European Free Trade Association, the grouping to which Britain previously belonged.

For almost half a century, Britain has benefited from greater openness to world markets, which has fostered economic dynamism. Economists have demonstrated that the main cause of that change was membership of the EU, which brought with it gains from trade, foreign direct investment, competition, and innovation.

This is what Britain is turning it back on.

The UK is one of the largest recipients of research funding in the EU. Over the period 2007 – 2013 the UK received €8.8 billion

Many Eurosceptics raged against the UK’s annual £18bn transfer to the EU.

Nigel Farage has claimed that being in the bloc costs Britain £55m a day — more than £20bn a year.

But the UK’s net transfer to the EU falls far short of such claims.

A rebate secured by Margaret Thatcher in 1984 reduced the bill and London sent £13bn to Brussels in 2015. Against that, the UK received £4.5bn from the EU in regional aid and agricultural subsidies, and the private sector received a further £1.4bn direct from the EU budget.

That takes the net cost of membership to about £7bn, less than half a percent of national income — about £260 a year for each British household.

Another often-quoted figure — the reported £33bn cost of regulation — comes from an impact assessment by Open Europe, a think-tank, of 100 EU rules.

But it is based on only one side of the balance sheet.

The benefits of the regulations are “much higher” than the costs and “clearly not all of [the costs] would disappear after Brexit”.

Most economists have little doubt that Britain’s membership of the EU has translated into more trade.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of isolation"

For crying out loud it’s not Isolation that Britain needs but a large dose of common sense and cooperation.

Get a grip.

It is time for young of the nation to unbottling their responsibilities to England by demanding a re-run of the Referendum without the pursuit of personal pleasure.

All human comments appreciated. All like clicks chucked in the bin.

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨