Author Archives: bobdillon33@gmail.com

THE BEADY EYE’S: OPEN CHRISTMAS CARD TO THE YOUTH OF THE WORLD. BECOMING POOR IS NOT AN EVENT. IT IS NOW A PROCESS.

18 Monday Dec 2017

Posted by in Christmas Card to the Young of the world., Christmas.

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE’S: OPEN CHRISTMAS CARD TO THE YOUTH OF THE WORLD. BECOMING POOR IS NOT AN EVENT. IT IS NOW A PROCESS.

Tags

, , ,

( Three minute read)Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of christmas cards"

Happy Christmas to one and all.

We are now all living in a state of permanent volatility, where the word responsibility has changed.

It has become individualized, a duty to earn work or benefits your country offers you.

A capitalistic world that is going underground that is going to impact on all, especially on you the Millennials.

In Donald Trump’s words ” It’s going to be great”

Ho! Ho! Ho! What he lacks in intelligence he makes up for in stupidity.

So I am not going to bore you with the world problems but try to stimulate you to comment ON YOUR FUTURE.  (Not with a like click.)

If you happen to get your noses out of your smart phones and get engaged YOU REALIZE THAT in an economy where wages and work are precarious and the safety nets are disheartening disappearing there is a growing shift in the relationship between governments and their citizens.

You might think of poverty in the world as a pool, a fixed portion of the world population that is to remain destitute for years. These days benefits are designed to get mother away from their children and into no contract work or training. Housing benefits are a joke, loosing a job or loosing everything. Benefits for temps, no contract or short-term workers might as well be monopoly money.

No question is so difficult to answer as that which the answer is obvious.

This is true, it’s happening right under our noses.

You’re one life away from losing everything to profit seeking algorithms.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of consumer exploitation"

They are creating a world where nearly all avenues are leading to data analyzers that in time will discriminate both the obvious and the invisible.

This is a staggering truth.

Want to get even more depresses?

Nearly every path to a stable income is going to require tens of thousands of pounds before you get your first pay packet.

Just think about what’s going to happen to you when you are old. Think at what is going to happen to so call security by the time you are 70. Your are going to get screwed by demography and rent, but don’t worry you might be able to retire at 80 screwed by machines.

What can be done?

We can attach benefits to work instead of jobs.

For every hour you work the company pays into a fund that pays out when sick, pregnant old or fired. The Fund follows you from job to job and the companies have to contribute to it whether you work there a day a month or a year.

We can nationalize all Social Services to stop Profit seeking algorithms exploitation.

Or

We can’t wait till our economic infrastructure keep disintegrating and wait to see if the rising sea get us first before our social contract dies.

The brain is a wonderful organ. It start working the moment you get up in the morning and shuts down the moment you stick your nose in your Smart Phones.

Becoming incapable of seeing further than the next text, virtual game, twitter, selfie, recommendation, or false news social media flash.

This Christmas day try turning it off. Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures smartphones"

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

THE BEADY EYE SAY’S: DO YOU WANT TO LIVE IN A WORLD THAT IS EXPLOITED BY PROFIT SEEKING ALGORITHMS.

16 Saturday Dec 2017

Posted by in Algorithms., Artificial Intelligence., Big Data., Capitalism, Life., Modern day life., Our Common Values., Sustaniability, Technology, The essence of our humanity., The Obvious., The world to day., Unanswered Questions., Wealth., What Needs to change in the World

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE SAY’S: DO YOU WANT TO LIVE IN A WORLD THAT IS EXPLOITED BY PROFIT SEEKING ALGORITHMS.

Tags

, , , ,

 

( A four-minute read)

We all urgently need to consider the implications of allowing commercial interests and governments to use algorithms to analyse our habits: Not because they are becoming all-powerful, that might turn into a source of repression, but because they are exploiting us all for profit.

They make decisions about us and on our behalf.

They are now integrated into our lives. We’re already halfway towards a world where algorithms run nearly everything. As their power intensifies, wealth will concentrate towards them. They will ensure the 1 per cent-99 per cent divide gets larger.

If you’re not part of the class attached to algorithms, then you will struggle.

On the one hand, they are good because they free up our time and do mundane processes on our behalf, but the problem is that when we outsource thinking to machines we are really outsourcing thinking to the organizations that run the machines.

At the moment ignoring the fact that they are driving the cost of living up it is not about algorithms per se, but about the way society is structured with regard to data use and data privacy.

As technology evolves, everything is going up in price.Image associée

Raw materiel’s are going up leap and bounds because of a dictatorship of data, that is concentrating on how to generate the most profit.

As profit seeking algorithms power intensifies, wealth will concentrate towards them.

They do so not out of the goodness of their little algorithmic hearts, but rather because they earn a “fee” for this service.

There are many different types of algorithms at play, with different intentions and impacts, however there is one thing that is becoming quite clear day by day that they are driving the human market makers out of business by being smarter and faster.

They are upending the nature of business, how government works and the way we live, from healthcare to education.

We should not allow ourselves to become so reliant on them – and who, if anyone, is policing their use. It’s impossible to do this perfectly. How are they being used to access and interpret “our” data? And by whom?

It won’t be long before big data denies us a bank loan or considers us unfit for a surgical operation, but we can’t learn the explicit reasons because the variables that went in programming them were so myriad and complex?

There is currently an awkward marriage between data and algorithms.

Big data is even change how we think about the world and our place in it. (Penalizing people based on what they are predicted to do, not what the have done.)Pair of handcuffs

Taken in the widest sense, algorithms OWNED BY MONOPOLIES are now responsible for the vast majority of activity on modern stock markets.

The well-being of our pensions, shareholdings, savings etc – are now largely determined by algorithmic vagaries.

Retail algorithms don’t scare me as we still have free will. However Algorithms are increasingly determining our collective futures.

Wherever we use computers, we rely on algorithms: With so much data around, and the ability to process it, big data is the bedrock of new companies profit.

Can we regulate them? I think not.

If you were leader of your country, what would you do?

I would have, Science, technology and inclusive innovation through education, on the national agenda.  Education free and equal for all.

Unfortunately this will not happen. Even if it did Profit seeking Algorithms will still be exploiting every weakness.    Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of consumer exploitation"

There is only one defense.

WE MUST RE NATIONALIZE OUR SOCIAL SERVICES, SO ALL BENEFIT NOT JUST THE FEW. Nationalize what is important, Health, Power, Water, Education.

The key outcome of nationalization is the redirection of revenues to the country’s government instead of private operators who may export funds with no benefit to the host country.

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

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

THE BEADY EYE SAY’S: FREE RIDING IS OVER.

13 Wednesday Dec 2017

Posted by in Environment, Humanity., Life., Sustaniability, The common good., The essence of our humanity., The Future, The Obvious., The world to day., Unanswered Questions., What Needs to change in the World, Where's the Global Outrage.

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE SAY’S: FREE RIDING IS OVER.

Tags

, , , , , ,

 

( A Twenty minute read)

Does the common good exist? or has technology killed it for good.

I am sure that there are far more Aristotle, thinking minded people than me that can answer this question.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of common actions"

While the exploitation and degradation of the environment is set to continue, life as we know it will one day be impossible on this planet unless we come together to act as one. 

It is rational for corporations to free ride, given the costs of individual action, which affect profits and competitiveness in an international economy. There is little incentive for individual countries or corporations to do anything other than free ride.

Yet, collectively, this is the worst possible outcome for the environment.

The problem is that for common action to work it has to start small and be appealing to thousands with incentives.

Global problems are seen as long-term, to be resolved by political decisions. These are world problems – problems that ignore the artificial frontiers which crisscross the globe, problems which concern the whole human race, are driven by the system to engage in a competitive struggle for profits against each other.

Were we expected to co-operate to solve ecological problems – problems caused by the competitive, profit-seeking system that Governments support and uphold we would not need the out of date World organisations such as the United Nations and the World Bank, the IMF, the WTO that all needs to be democratized abolishing the veto powers.

While it is clear that a question which concerns the whole world such as the possible consequences of global warming can be effectively dealt with only by unified action at a world level, it is equally clear that this is not going to happen under the profit system of capitalism.

The different countries into which the world is divided have different – and clashing – interests. At most, all that can happen under the profit system when a global problem arises is ‘much too little, much too late’.

On the surface, the changes created by climate change seem almost benign, or able to be addressed with common engineering and economic and technological solutions.

If we are honest about how much information we really possess at this time, politics would be more about than building an institutional framework for the narrow pursuit of individual self-interest in the essentially private domain of liberalized markets.

After all, whatever every human being is doing, whether it is pursuing money, or pleasure or God, he is only seeking his own well-being.

Sadly, however, most people don’t focus on what they have in common with others or on the recognition of our shared humanity.

As Einstein once said:

A human being is part of the whole, called by us ‘universe,’ a part limited in time and space. He experiences himself, his thoughts and feelings, as something separate from the rest — a kind of optical delusion of consciousness. This delusion is a kind of prison for us, restricting us to our personal desires and to affection for a few persons nearest to us. Our task must be to free ourselves from this prison by widening our circle of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole of nature in its beauty.

Today, with the tools of science and technology we have brought ourselves to a self-threatening situation that everybody in the society needs to turn spiritual, otherwise there is no survival for this world.

What we are now seeing is the other side of ego—greed, lust for wealth and power, exploitation of others for personal gain. This darker side of ego separates us. We become mean and judgmental. We become polarized, one against another. We misuse the power that accompanies money in order to get more money.

But now the intention—why we act—has corrupted itself into what’s in it for me. The scourge of debt-backed money.

Existing realities on the planet could be changed in a moment, because existing realities do not take into consideration people’s will, they do not take into consideration people’s commitment, they do not take into consideration the love in their hearts.

However I am convinced because human beings have a capacity for empathy that transcends boundaries of language, culture, skin color, religion, age, gender, and physical ability we can do so.

To engage the different voices and stories that shape human inequities and potentials.

The first and the foremost thing we need to do is to empower the people. Empowerment does not mean amassing of material wealth, or technology. Today our pursuit for these is so vigorous that the very life of the planet is being threatened.

So here are a few observations:

A thing’s nature is detectable not only in its external appearance, but also and more importantly through the natural inclinations which guide it to behave in conformity with the particular nature it has.

Participatory democracy becomes real when individuals, groups, and communities see the benefits of connecting their identities and experiences with those of others.

So why is it that we cannot act for the common good?

Is it because most beings in the universe do not possess the rational ability to act consciously.

Is it because we possess the power of free choice and therefore have a radically different relation to everything.

Is it that the simple requirements of doing good and avoiding evil fail to provide human beings with much content for pursuing the moral life.

Is it because the common good has been associated with the existence of an active of life rather than any narrow perception of the limited.

Taking care of the Earth is not just a responsibility– it’s a privilege.

Don’t ever let someone tell you that one person can’t make a difference! Making a difference for the future of Planet Earth doesn’t have to include huge life changing choices!!

Here are a few simple suggestion: 

Why not:

Make Train travel free.  Have your bills emailed to you. Share what you care about. Ban Wooden coffins – cardboard coffin. Make solar panels grant able –  Save Electricity. De-tox your home. Eat less meat. Eat and buy locally. Consume less chemicals, Conserve water. Stop using virgin paper. Paint you roof white. Make Florescent light bulbs free. Use refillable water bottles. Use your hankie as a Napkin. Recycle: Don't Use Plastic

Every natural system on the planet is in decline.

If we all work together, we really can make a collective positive difference in the amount of damage we do.

Given the modern condition of American democracy, we need the arts and humanities more than ever.

It seems that if someone wants something, then it is good for them.

To define the good as ‘what all want’ is therefore a definition not of an effect by its cause, but just the opposite: a definition of a cause by its effect. The good is a cause. It is the final cause, the end or purpose.

There are, of course, some problems that you really cannot do much about on your own but these can be solved with a World Aid Commission of 0.05%. (See previous posts)

A different mirror” reflecting our connected histories and shared narratives–conflicting and complementary- is needed. Trump is just making darn sure it happens with a vengeance.

Our knowledge begins with sensation: with the things that we see and feel and taste and smell and hear. Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. In fact, it is the only thing that ever has. Human nature impacts the rest of nature. We need to adapt to a changing world. We must organise to take the Earth back from those who currently own and exploit it, and must make it the common heritage of all.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of common actions"

Unless we invent the means with which we can practically colonize other planets and develop interstellar space travel. Without *both* of those, we are goners, no matter what.

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

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

THE BEADY EYE SAY’S: IT HAS ALREADY STARTED- BREXIT BULL SHIT. .

11 Monday Dec 2017

Posted by in Brexit v EU - Negotiations., Brexit.

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE SAY’S: IT HAS ALREADY STARTED- BREXIT BULL SHIT. .

Tags

, ,

 

( Three minute read)

We said that. We did not say that:  If you do that. If you don’t do that: Alignment, no Alignment: Agreed not Agreed: Explicable not Explicable: Phase one Phase two: This amount that amount, on the table off the table:  Deal or no Deal:  In our Out:  sets out the terms of the divorce and paves the way for Phase 2 of negotiations on future relations between London and the Twenty-Seven.

Anyone with an ounce of sawdust between their ears knows all of the above is total bollix. 

Just look at some of the blonker’s reactions.

“Theresa May won,” said Michael Gove, pro-Brexit environment minister who is eyeing his estate.

Philip Hammond, hailed the “boost for the British economy” that represents a text that lifts some uncertainties.

Nigel Farage, “the move to the second phase of humiliation” 

The only comment that might come true if the EU block his pension or at least have it payed out of the settlement. 

It time for some hard facts:

The ambiguity of Friday’s agreement on Ireland alone illustrates the difficulties that lie ahead.

Or

Spain that argues that any agreement would require its blessing, because the area is not part of the UK, as is the case with Northern Ireland, but a colony with a disputed status. It is likely to wield a veto over any Brexit deal for Gibraltar after the EU-27 backed Madrid in its draft negotiating guidelines for forthcoming divorce talks between the UK and the bloc.

Both are a poisonous topic for the upcoming negotiations.

Not only has Brexit become a subject of confrontation between the two communities of Northern Ireland, but the insoluble Irish equation sums up the central dilemma, that of the choice between a “hard Brexit” and an agreement maintaining the maximum of links with the EU.

It’s generally agreed that the “divorce deal,” setting out the arrangements for Britain’s departure from the EU, can be sealed by Brussels and London.

But Britain’s new relationship with the bloc is a different matter.

Under Article 50 an exit deal requires a qualified majority (72% of members states) to pass, after obtaining the consent of the European Parliament, whereas a comprehensive new partnership deal (or “mixed agreement”) requires unanimous assent in the Council and ratification by national or subnational parliaments.

If the deal “is being ‘loaded up’ with competencies of the member states, this would turn it into a mixed agreement [affecting both EU and national legislation], which would require unanimity in the European Council and the ratification of all member states for it to be sealed. Even a transitional deal could affect national legislation.

Therefore, any change of government or head of state near the deadlines for talks or ratification will introduce uncertainty into the process. 

There are another 12 elections scheduled across the 27 member states during the two-year negotiation period.

All countries work to slightly different time frames, but the systems of proportional representation and coalition politics in most EU states often result in extended periods following elections where there is no official government; the record being 541 days following the 2010 Belgian general election. For example, in 2013 it took 86 days to form a coalition government in Germany.

Will there be new faces?

If the national parliaments of the 27 countries remaining in the EU — and perhaps also some regional parliaments — are all to get a say, it could make the passage of the Brexit deal impossible. However the European Union’s 27 remaining national parliaments are unlikely to have the power of veto over a future Brexit trade deal with Britain.

One way or the other the best, the cheapest and the least complicated deal would be a no deal.

Transitional trade agreements are politically highly explosive.

Do not anticipate the perfect unity of Twenty Seven.  

England wants a level playing field so as to be able to do trade deals outside the EU.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of the wto"

Blinded by their refusal to see the Europe as a project policy beyond the single market,

Let them do so .

However under WTO the rules are simple. It requires every country to reduce their tariffs and subsidies to the same level, but in reality these cuts are applied selectively in favor of rich countries.

There can’t be have your cake and eat it.

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

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

THE BEADY EYE SAY’S: BRIXIT IS WELL ON THE WAY TO A HOG WASH DEAL.

09 Saturday Dec 2017

Posted by in Brexit v EU - Negotiations., Brexit.

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE SAY’S: BRIXIT IS WELL ON THE WAY TO A HOG WASH DEAL.

Tags

( A two-minute read)

England is gradually learning that their initial ambitions for Brexit are unrealistic and few will deny, the EU is in urgent need of reform.Findings show a growing disappointment with the Brexit process will not necessarily persuade voters to change minds.

Talks can now move on to their next phase with a two-year time capsule transition period with no proportional link whatsoever between IQ and wealth.

The EU has got rid of the UK but the UK has not left the EU. Brilliant! This creative ambiguity means big battles still ahead.

So where are we now?

If we believe that there is no deal till the whole deal is approved, we need our heads examined. Its taking shape whether we like it or not.

A deal which has everything and nothing to do with people.

Under the new agreement brokered Friday, EU and U.K. citizens will get to retain their rights “derived from Union law and based on past life choices, where those citizens have exercised free movement rights by the specified date.

That means they will get to keep their social security and health care, their employment and education rights, and their “tax advantages.” However, there’s a big downside too—they will be bound to the country where they’re living.

For Brits that already live in EU countries that aren’t the U.K., that means they would lose the automatic right to then move and live anywhere they like within the bloc. Basically for Brits in rest of EU: applying for a new passport is the only way to secure Freedom of movement.

EU citizens living in the U.K. will get to retain their EU rights after Brexit, the British courts will still have to defer to CJEU judgements that affect those rights.

When it comes to Northern Ireland and Ireland border the consequences of a hard Brexit are of little consideration as long as unionist objectives are met. Even more concerning is the free rein that Foster has in the absence of Executive constraint in Northern Ireland.

The Never Never party simple desire is to reassert unionism not to represent the people’s of Northern Ireland.

It is the party’s reasoning behind the rejection that is of concern – their willingness to jeopardise everything for a hard Brexit that secures their unionist identity.

The DUP argues that it does not wish to see a hard border between North and South, yet their actions in recent days clearly indicate a desire for a hard Brexit, which must mean installing a hard border.

Naïvely both the EU and England are overlooked the historical and contemporary politics and culture of the DUP.

On the border issue, the U.K. and EU have essentially agreed to kick the can down the road, in order to stop talks from breaking down entirely. But what’s new—and huge—is that if there’s no resolution to this question, the default position will be the U.K. staying within the single market.

This will ideally be the result of the overall U.K.-EU relationship that exists after Brexit, but if not, the U.K. will suggest a specific deal regarding that particular stretch of border.

If that proposal doesn’t fly, the whole of the U.K. will basically have to stay within the EU internal market and customs union—and there will be no new regulatory barriers separating Northern Ireland from the rest of the U.K.—unless Northern Ireland wants them. And whatever happens, Northern Irish businesses will retain “unfettered access” to the U.K. market.

On top of all that, everyone who was born in Northern Ireland will retain their right to EU citizenship (though this is less of a novelty, as Northern Irish people can already claim Irish citizenship anytime they like).

The enlightened ones in the EU should at least demand that Nigel Farage EU pension is payed out of the settlement figure. ( Twenty years @ 73,000 pa = 1,460,000) 

Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of hog hogwashing"

If we are not vigilant we could all end up as hog wash.

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

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

THE BEADY ASKS: FROM NAKED APE TO ROBOT – WILL IT BE WORTH IT?

08 Friday Dec 2017

Posted by in Artificial Intelligence., Evolution., Fourth Industrial Revolution., HUMAN INTELLIGENCE, Sustaniability, Technology., The essence of our humanity., The Future, The Internet., The world to day., Unanswered Questions., What Needs to change in the World, Where's the Global Outrage., World Leaders, World Organisations., World Politics

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY ASKS: FROM NAKED APE TO ROBOT – WILL IT BE WORTH IT?

Tags

, , , , , ,

 ( A Fifteen minute read)

We are becoming less and less effective in the face of enormous but slow-moving crises such as the loss of biodiversity or climate change. Deforestation, Freshwater Species Extinctions, Climate Change and Destruction of Natural Resources, Large-scale Wars and Religious Conflicts.

“human cost” of the current system:

Not to  Mention Technology.

What we prioritize, the way we shape our lives, affects the evolutionary future of our species, so we would do well to start asking some simple question about the untended consequences of technology? 

Is it likely that in the near future humans are going to speciate? ( Humans one species and robots another. )

If you can’t explain Artificial intelligence/ Machine learning stored in the cloud and what it is doing to the public, there’s a good chance it doesn’t merit doing.

Mannequin heads sitting on a shelf in a factory The number of people on the planet is set to rise to 9.7 billion in 2050 with 2 billion aged over 60.

 That is only 30 odd year away.

We are entering the age of the Fourth Industrial Revolution, a technological transformation that is robbing us of the essence of our humanity.

Driven by a ubiquitous and mobile internet, we are perhaps witnessing the end of human evolution as we know it.

Up to now human evolution proceeded extremely slowly and within historical memory, man has exhibited aggressive territorial behavior. Even as we bask smugly in the comforts of our smart phones natural selection to-day still ensured that only the fittest survived.

However it may not be long before computers are hooked up to the human brain with genetic trade-offs till we can’t be improved any further,

Then evolution will really have come to a stop for us. We will be the only species to have put a halt to natural selection, of its own free will, as it were.

Stopping natural selection is not as important, or as depressing, as it might sound — because our evolutionary process will then be cultural.

One way or the other by the time we get there our current social, political and economic systems will have driven inequalities with profit seeking algorithms off the map, rather than reducing them.

The challenge is to manage this seismic change in a way that promotes the long-term health and stability of the planet.

The writing has been on the wall for some time.Homo floresiensis

So where do we stand:

Since 1992 CO2 emissions have jumper 62% and the global temperature is up 29%. Fresh water is down 26%. Ocean dead zones up 76% . Forestland down 300 million acres. People up 35%.

You would think that we the biggest dimwit on the planet looking at this evidence would conclude that there is something very wrong. If you dont know what it is, we have evolved beyond our needs, trampling other species in the process.

We are now at a turning point we can either push ahead on our path to destruction or we can reshape our place in nature and prosper or we can face a humongous environmental crisis.

You would think that with everything connected by the internet, it would transform how we do business and help us manage resources more efficiently and sustainable.

As you can see this is not the result.

On the contrary the way we’ve set up corporations, world organisations, where even a majority vote cannot demand that a corporation’s or world organisation policies reflect the public good or preserve the environment for future use.

That’s because profit is the one and only motive.

It’s up to government and it’s up to people to protect the public interest. Corporations and world organisations are simply not allowed to.

Within the next decade, it is expected that more than a trillion sensors will be connected to the internet. By 2025, 10% of people are expected to be wearing clothes connected to the internet and the first implantable mobile phone is expected to be sold.

However today, 43% of the world’s population are connected to the internet, mostly in developed countries.

In a world driven by short-term profit, the connectivity theory is and will remain so far off the mark it can only be believed by artificial intelligence.

Growing unease over globalization, which is evident from the number of questions being asked about the power of corporations and the adequacy of the regulations governing employment, environmental issues and taxation, is causing economic and social ills, ranging from low consumption to social and political unrest, and is damaging to any future.

There is no need for me to tell you that we are living in turbulent times.

It is clear that the old stories are dying and if we continue to poison ourselves and the planet by self-interest, fragmentation and profit for profit sake there will be no point to the age of technology other than becoming slaves.

However evolution is going on invisibly all the time. Species evolve in response to whatever environment they encounter. No despots have ever set out to select for increased or decreased longevity in the populations they control.

By 2050, the world must feed 9 billion people. Yet the demand for food will be 60% greater than it is today.

The scale of the employment challenge is vast. Rapid progress in machine learning has raised the prospect that algorithms will one day be able to do most or all of the mental tasks currently performed by humans. These advances could lead to extremely positive developments, presenting solutions to now-intractable global problems, but they also pose severe risks.

This might be the most important transition of the next century – either ushering in an unprecedented era of wealth and progress, or heralding disaster.

But it’s also an area that’s highly neglected: while billions are spent making AI more powerful. The problem of how one might design a highly intelligent machine to pursue realistic human goals safely is very poorly understood. It is estimated that there are fewer than 100 people in the world working on how to make AI safe.

If AI research continues to advance without enough work going into the research problem of controlling such machines, catastrophic accidents are much more likely to occur.

It’s generally agreed that, among the forces that led to the immense sophistication of the human brain, the most powerful was a kind of feedback loop between the growing complexity of our ancestors’ physical and social environment and the ability of our ancestors to adapt to it. But why, you may ask, has the enormous increase in complexity of our recent technological environment not had a measurable physical impact on our brains?

The rate at which we are changing our environment now has outstripped even the fastest biological evolution.

However the ineluctable laws of evolution will continue to operate, probably even more strongly, in the overcrowded, ecologically damaged world of the future. And if things get really bad, the evolutionary consequences could be extreme. Any survivors of a nuclear holocaust or an ecological catastrophe are likely to be a small and highly selected subset of today’s population.

If, for example, destruction were so widespread that people could not form viable social groups, the evolution of our descendants would inevitably be driven in the direction of brutishness.

If our technologies fail to protect us against these forces of nature our genetic heritage could fail us too, meaning human evolution will return with a vengeance.

Then again if everyone had exactly the same set of genes controlling the brain’s development, there would be no genetic differences among people on which natural selection could act–and evolution really would come to a stop!

War then would be the strong life; it is life in extremism; war taxes are the only ones men never hesitate to pay, as the budgets of all nations show us.

There is no doubting the force of [the] arguments above, call me back in 3 million years time, because I may well be wrong on that one.

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

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

 

 

 

 

 

THE BEADY EYE ASKS: WILL IRELAND END UP AS THE SACRIFICIAL LAMB OF BREXIT..

03 Sunday Dec 2017

Posted by in Brexit v EU - Negotiations., Brexit.

≈ 4 Comments

Tags

 

( A five minute read)

The huge choice facing Ireland is whether, given the circumstances,
the country can live with the likely post Brexit arrangements and so stay a full member of the European Union; or whether a radically different relationship with the EU is required, including the possibility of an Irish departure from formal membership, an Irexit.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of ireland map"

Whatever the outcome of the Brexit negotiations, there will be a price to pay.

For Ireland, there is really no upside to Brexit.

The question to be raised is what price is Ireland willing to pay to
stand in solidarity with the remaining 26 EU countries?

Namely, opting to remain with the United Kingdom in a customs and free
trade area, while negotiating as favourable as possible trade and investment terms with the remaining 26 member states.

Access to the Single Market need not be synonymous with full membership of the EU. In addition, the EU itself is facing huge problems and the future direction of that body is hard to predict and though uncertain, it is unlikely to be to Ireland’s taste or in its interests.

HERE IS THE TRUTH.

Brexit is going to happen.

If there is a hard border after Brexit, Ireland be next to exit?

The new pivotal position of the DUP at Westminster has only added to this concerns.

The Good Friday Agreement is all but dead in the water. One of the major attractions of the Agreement to the Nationalist/Republican side was the promise, given in exchanges by the two governments, that once the peace was secured and the threat level diminished, there would be no need for any fixed and/or permanent installations along the border.

Sitting on the side lines and allowing the EU to negotiate for Ireland is essentially untenable.

The first duty of the EU negotiators is to act on behalf of the European Union as an Institution. This is prioritised in their Guidelines, approved by the European Council.

The type of deal that Ireland’s interests requires, however, including free trade with the UK, is directly in contradiction with the Union negotiators mandate that anything relating to Ireland and her border which emerges from the Brexit negotiations, must “maintain the integrity the Union’s Legal Order”, i.e., no exceptions to the customs union.

While the details of Brexit remain to be determined, now is the
time for Ireland to choose its future path, that choice which will have profound consequences for all those living on the island of Ireland.

With the DUP pressing for a “significant” central role in the Brexit negotiations.

There is also a danger that any unfavorable Brexit agreement that the current Irish Government is handed by the EU at the end of the negotiations, will not get through the Dáil (Irish Parliament).

Hopefully, the outcome of Brexit negotiations will be benign.

However, if this does not turn out to be the case, it would be a brave Government in Dublin who would ask the electorate to re-instate a border in Ireland and erect barriers with our nearest neighbor Britain where most Irish people have family links.

The prospects of an Irish Irexit have certainly grown in recent days.

The country undoubtedly has a strong case for special treatment.

The main difficulty for this scenario is that what Ireland requires, namely free movement of people, goods and services with the post Brexit UK, cannot be fitted into the present EU framework. It would require a very fundamental departure from EU structures and one which frankly the EU is not likely to sanction. It would break the central tenets of EU theology.

The EU is therefore is risking losing Britain and Ireland rather than concede on a core tenet.

The chances of obtaining a satisfactory outcome to the present Brexit negotiations for Ireland are faint.

It simply is not possible to reconcile the requirements of the country, with the EU’S need to maintain the integrity of the Union’s Legal Order. Also, there is little or no popular support for the further erosion of the Nation State, something that is now becoming more likely with the UK’s departure.

If that’s the direction the European Union goes in, it won’t last, because
small countries will leave. And that would be a tragedy, for the European Union as a project, but also for many of the countries that will be caught in that squeeze. We need to keep citizens with us.”

Therefore, given the circumstances, Irexit has to be the option for Ireland in a hard Brexit situation.

In any negotiation, there must be a bottom line and if breached, the option of walking away must always be there. Irexit is a definite option for Ireland, should the EU and the EU not arrive at a satisfactory deal.

It will be the ordinary citizens who will pay the price of the failure of its political leaders to put their welfare and that of the country first.

Ireland and its people have shown a great capacity to adopt to new conditions and overcome adversity. However, as in the Bailout situation, it has often been the young people of Ireland who have borne the brunt of those adaptations. Hopefully, the Irish Government will not sacrifice the well-being of its youth in order yet again to prove, its EU credentials. 

While I agree with the fact that the European Union needs to be bolder in
terms of its impact on the world and a force for good, don’t assume that the European Union can be run by two or three big countries and everybody else will just have to tow the line.

Indeed the EU if it is to do anything it should block the Pension of the biggest hypocrite Mr Nigel Farage.  Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of nigel farage"

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

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

THE BEADY EYE LOOKS AT THE TYRANNY OF GROWTH.

02 Saturday Dec 2017

Posted by in Algorithms., G7., GDP., Happiness., HUMAN INTELLIGENCE, Humanity., Life., Modern day life., Social Media, Sustaniability, Technology, The cloud., The Future, The world to day., Unanswered Questions., United Nations, What Needs to change in the World, Where's the Global Outrage., World Leaders, World Organisations.

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE LOOKS AT THE TYRANNY OF GROWTH.

Tags

, , , , , , , , , ,

 

( A Twenty minute read)

They say we have free will, but there are many types of tyrannies in our world.

You could describe our hand-held devices which are keeping us connected to anything, anytime, anywhere as one. 

We now use our hand-held devices for almost everything. More importantly, they use us for everything.

The extreme availability of information has not led to a more enlightened population, but to more confusion.

Connectivity is both a blessing and a curse.

It has become the pathway for almost all we do as we have become helpless without technology and the need for immediate data at our fingertips. But this is taking its toll.

The number of times we look at our phones daily would shock you: some studies say 50 times, others as many as 75 to 150 times. Most of our e mails are reactionary.Tyranny of the Should

Information technology is all-pervasive in production and consumption.

Each time we look at the phone, we look away from what we should be or were focused on. Our collective ability to stay focused on anything is destroyed.

How does this connect to Growth.

It is too simplistic to attribute all of our economic problems to government: indeed, that sort of reasoning is counterproductive: it absolves everyone else responsibility.

Although part of the responsibility lies with forces that are outside a government, a significant share rests with the attitudes, preoccupations, we have to Artificial Intelligence that is now analyzing our every movement to the extent that advertising is becoming personalized.

I’m not saying that growth is bad but growth that destroys value just for profit is cancer that is driving inequality with a tendency to cluster around the short-term, issues while ignoring reality is going to bite us all.

I want to begin by touching on a crucial economy-wide factor
in the erosion of our economic strength which fosters short-term
thinking.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of social media advertising"

Advertising:

 It is a major driver of unnecessary consumption.

This hasn’t always been the problem. Advertising use to inform you of the useful qualities of an object. Now it manipulates your emotions like anxiety and promises to improve social acceptance or class distinction.

It is now with a frenzy of social media advertising attaching its self to saving the world  that is driving consumption to new dizzying heights.

Growth for growth’s sake, is an ugly word with even uglier connotations when it is using social media in the form of algorithms FOR PROFIT, regardless of the cost.

So what is driving it:

In the information age, time is compressed and events are squeezed into ever-decreasing periods.

We have governments encouraging a restless, fleeting mode of being, and a superficial, hurried culture, which is inimical to fundamental values.

They encourage growth programs, the benefits of which are available   immediately, but the costs of which appear only at a later stage. They are less interested in public investments that have to be financed now but do not payoff adequately before the next election.

It’s as if human progress depends on economic progress.

At minimum, the kind of short-term oriented cycle in which we find ourselves behaves as though tomorrow is forever. And, in fact, a series of tomorrows will create a forever — a very predictable one — and not a very desirable or promising one.

Rewards which are heavily focused on short-term results, even if they make some financial sense, often do not deliver the economic promise or the synergy which is anticipated.

Perhaps it is true that the landmarks in human progress — in the arts, science, government, or elsewhere — have rarely been reached in societies in which the economy was unable to free most of its members from a daily obsession with subsistence needs.

On the contrary, wherever the economy is feeble or stagnant for
a prolonged period, where most people see their basic material
needs as unfulfilled and the prospects for improvement as
unlikely, the result is almost invariably either a dull fatalism
or political upheaval, neither of which is likely to be favorable
to liberty and freedom.

However we are now looking at a unremitting focus on economic growth. The drive to achieve growth at practically any cost and to the exclusion of all other measures of prosperity.

This focus on GDP growth as the prime measure of economic success is out of date. It’s not how big it is that counts, it’s what you do with it.

The distance to the future – is no longer the next election, it will be how much you are willing to pay the Cloud for information. The cumulative effects of almost five decades of constantly accelerating reliance on government regulation to address social inequities and problems is coming to an end.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of social media advertising"

The linkage between ownership and participation is changing.

Social Media is not just eroding the meaning of democracy but effecting our critical thinking skills. Polluted with consumption advertising it is adding to global inequality.

While there are hundreds of different marketing strategies, only one can bring in consistent sales from day one. Social media advertising. This is why global social ad spending doubled from $16 billion in 2014 to $31 billion in 2016 and is projected to increase another 26% in 2017.

One of the fascinating things about social advertising is that there is virtually no limit to your ability to scale.You don’t have to wait for someone to search for your targeted keywords. You don’t have to wait for someone to run your promotion or read your blog.

( For Instance:

With more than 2 billion monthly users, Facebook hosts over a quarter of the world’s population, providing advertisers with an unparalleled opportunity to reach virtually anyone and everyone. It provides free lead magnet like:

  • Whitepapers
  • Ebooks
  • Product coupons
  • Sitewide discounts
  • Limited-time offers
  • Giveaways
  • Free shipping

These leads can then be nurtured with a targeted autoresponder. Offering free products, download-ables and predictable discounts and coupons for her audience. Doing so has earned Facebook more than $1,000,000 in annual sales in just 2 years. Facebook allows more advanced targeting than any other advertising platform on earth. Advertisers can target by location (within a 5-mile radius), job description, interests, past activity, and many other incredibly valuable criteria.

Instagram now boasts more than 500 million monthly active users and commands one of the highest audience engagement rates in social media, 58% higher than Facebook and 2000% higher than Twitter.

Twitter with 328 million monthly active users, it remains one of the most popular social media platforms. Brands don’t need to pay in order to reach their followers, which enhances the platform’s value even when running paid ads.

Pinterest: With 175 million monthly users is highly targeted toward women with an 81% female user base.

LinkedIn : Where you tend to find the highest average disposable income, has an estimated 227 million monthly active users.

Snapchat Advertising:    310 million users.   

All Social advertising is incredibly measurable.)

(You can, in fact, control when you choose to look at your hand-held device.)

In light of this one easy solution to over-consumption would be to ban advertising- at least in pubic places and on Social Media where Profit seeking Algorithms are used.

Much of’ the crippling of our economic systems can find its roots in Algorithms for profit. (see previous posts)

The consequences of elected government’s short-range perspective are not difficult to understand. They are seen as having succeeded in undermining the economy through overbearing regulation, tolerance of inflation, indifference to the cost of environmental and social programs, and a pervasive anti-business attitude.

Government thus diminishes the private sector’s sense of responsibility —
both in economic and ethical terms — for its own conduct and for its own performance.

While I appreciate that degrowth will not happen as quickly as we need it to do and it will take generations to move our collective consciousness on most issue, we don’t have that kind of time any longer.

Technology that ostensibly should help people save time, has instead led to a situation where time is scarcer than ever.

When an exponential growth curve becomes vertical, time has ceased to exist as duration.”life stands still at a tremendous speed”, with serious consequences for culture, intellectual life and the very fabric of society.

What we do not know today is what it will take to send us to
the pumps.

The struggle now concerns the right to be unavailable, the right to live and think more slowly.

Choosing to live according to one’s own self-made conception of reality, human nature, and happiness is a recipe for tyranny.

It is about time that we ask what wireless communications and the Internet are preconditions for. They are problems need to be understood well, in order to be dealt with the political upheaval that is around the corner.

Relying on averages generate by computers is worsening inequality

within countries, and the world as a whole.

So is there anything that can be done legitimately that will have a positive effect.

Becoming more grounded in ones own true feelings and perceptions is a primary indication that one has begun to free himself from the “tyranny of the should.”

Assuring that investment in future profitability is not sacrificed on
the altar of quarterly earnings growth. Refocusing our approach to economic decision-making, to benefit all not the few.

Willingness to pay the price today for the health and vitality of the country tomorrow is the ultimate test of stewardship. To live with a view to the regime should not be supposed to be slavery, but preservation.

Finally, it is as we all know easy to point the finger, however we are the will in any form or symbol and we are identifiable as water.  

However if we are to address any of our world problems and stop the self-perpetuating downward cycle, with all the suction of a whirlpool, from which there will be no escape we cannot and should not rely on technology to bail us out.

There is only one solution. Make Greed pay a World Aid commission of 0.05% ( See previous post)

Technology, if it has not yet become the de fac~o

decision- — . . . maker in the production process, has

certainly become a participant who cannot be

ignored.

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

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

 https://youtu.be/cV_D2hC50Kk

 

 

 

 

 

THE BEADY EYE ASKS: SHOULD THE EU GRANT ENGLAND A TRANSITION PERIOD.

01 Friday Dec 2017

Posted by in Brexit v EU - Negotiations., Brexit., England., European Commission., European Union., The Irish/ Northern Ireland border., The Obvious., Unanswered Questions., What needs to change in European Union.

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE ASKS: SHOULD THE EU GRANT ENGLAND A TRANSITION PERIOD.

Tags

, ,

(A twelve-minute read)

MY VIEW IS THAT THERE SHOULD BE NO TRANSITS PERIOD.

The cake metaphors in the modern world have outlived their usefulness – if they are applied not only to spheres where they do apply (such as attempting to be an internal market member without the obligations of the four freedoms) it will destabilize what is left of good will in European Union.

A DEAL IS A DEAL:  WHEN ITS AGREED NOT BEFORE OR AFTER.   Britain's Secretary of State for Exiting the EU, David Davis, made a 'breakthrough' at the joint conference

YOU CAN’T HAVE ONE FOOT IN THE DOOR AND THE OTHER OUTSIDE.

England’s Brexit agenda is both contradictory and fantastical.

Enjoy unfettered access to the single market, WHILE implementing a deals that is one way or the other will be damaging to the EU.  Theresa May was praised by the EU leaders for helping create a 'new dynamic' from her speech in Florence

You don’t have to a genius to know that any shared history, shared challenges, or shared future is now pie in the sky.

The exact relationship the UK would have or will have with the EU during the transition is not clear.

The timescales for settling the future relationship are unknown  – and could make a significant difference to the final destination.

The UK guarantee that it would be time-limited, with a period of about two years – although this period could potentially change for different issues, is political hog wash.

Were negotiations to stall well beyond 2019, the politics of the final settlement would get mixed into the party politics of leadership transitions and the next General Election. Outcomes would then become much
more unpredictable, particularly given the very strong likelihood of a change of Conservative Prime Minister sometime between 2019 and 2021, which could push the current government into a harder position on Brexit.

Not to mention the Rock of Gib, Scotland and Ireland’s positions.

If the Article 50 period was extended, the UK would continue to be a member of the EU, when EU acquis on the Single Market applied even though the UK had left, and one suggestion is that this could be achieved through UK membership of the European Economic Area (EEA).

Another could be that the UK simply commits to continue to apply all EU rules and regulations.

Any TRANSIT period will have to be approved by the other EU leaders. Whether any such thing is negotiable is as much a question
for the EU 27 as for the UK.

All of the above scenario’s are a disaster in waiting to happen.

Why?

Because a transitional deal would also change the British politics of Brexit in ways that have not been fully anticipated.

For example:

A transition deal would end any realistic prospects of a ›referendum on the deal‹ in its predominant form, where it is a strategy of Remain advocates to seek a choice between a negotiated Brexit deal, and the status quo of remaining in the EU.

A transition phase is largely regarded as kicking the can down the road – and so not resolving the major choices about the long-term settlement.

The British do want a Brexit deal – but worry about the consequences of admitting this.

The UK government is proposing a ›special partnership‹ but this does not address some of the key choices which the UK and the EU will face over the next two years.

Continued insistence on talking about an ›implementation period‹,
on the grounds that all of the details of the future settlement will be included in the Article 50 agreement, and the language of Article 50 itself, which talks about the framework for the future relationship, perhaps
implying a political declaration as to the shared objectives of a future negotiation.

But beyond these, they become a barrier to the negotiation of what, if anything, can be negotiated, in an equitable way, between a full EEA-style relationship and a clean break on WTO terms.

If it is accepted that it is not possible to both have and eat cake, the question of whether and how it is possible to agree on how to slice a cake fairly could become more relevant.

In an ideal world, the British would prefer to have their cake and eat it on the markets / migration trade-off.

The orthodox view is that a transition simply delays all of the key decisions – but a transitional deal could shift the medium-term British politics of Brexit more than is appreciated.

The bespoke British ›Goldilocks Brexit‹ would be warmer than Canada, but cooler than Norway  – but whether such a possibility exist will depend on what the EU 27 want too. The British do not know what they want‹ is a common criticism among European politicians and officials.

If Europe wants to survive there can be no transition.  Everything must be settled in the current negotiations deal or no deal.

Stability begins at home.

Learning the lessons of the past decade, WE HAVE TO WAIT TO SEE HOW FAR THIS LOGIC GOES.

Broadly I think we have landed in the right place and I take some comfort from being flanked on both sides of the argument. In or Out.

Doing all of these things efficiently and effectively relies on a strong degree of trust and co-operation between England and the Eu.

But the EU must plan, in a proportionate way, for alternative outcomes.

Just imagine two-year of;  We did not agree to this or that.  Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of a transit period"

The real difficulties will be over the shape of Brexit. The British need a transition – so can (probably) make the compromises needed to get it.

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

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

 

 

 

THE BEADY EYE ASK: WHO ARE THE EUROPEAN UNION NEGOTIATING WITH.

30 Thursday Nov 2017

Posted by in Brexit v EU - Negotiations., Brexit., Politics., The Irish/ Northern Ireland border.

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE ASK: WHO ARE THE EUROPEAN UNION NEGOTIATING WITH.

Tags

, ,

 

( A ten minute read)

It’s true that her role as the British head of state is largely ceremonial, and the Monarch no longer holds any serious power from day-to-day. The historic “prerogative powers” of the Sovereign have been devolved largely to government ministers. But this still means that when the British government declares war, or regulates the civil service, or signs a treaty, it is doing so only on her authority.

The Queen’s consent is necessary to turn any bill into an actual law.Image associée

The United Kingdom, England, Great Britain? Are these three the same place? Different places?

Part of the confusion is that the United Kingdom is not a single country but instead is a country of countries. It contains inside of it four co-equal and sovereign nations. England, Scotland,Northern Ireland Welsh all ‘British.

’They have their own devolved Parliaments and are allowed to vote on English laws. However, as the four constituent countries don’t have their own passports, they are all British Citizens, like it or not.

The European union is not dealing with Great Britain as it is only a geographical term rather than a political term.

However this is not completely true, as all three constituent countries have islands that are not part of Great Britain, such as :The Isle of Wight, Isles of Scilly and Lundy which are part of England, the Welsh Isle of Anglesey and the Scottish Hebrides, Shetland Island, Orkney Islands, Islands of the Clyde.

In Wales  (52.5%) voters chose to leave the EU, compared with 772,347 (47.5%) supporting Remain.

In Northern Ireland (56%) voted to remain in the EU, 44% voted to leave.

In Scotland (38.0%) voted to leave, 62.0% voted to stay.

With the exception of Gibraltar and the sovereign areas on Cyprus, the British overseas territories are not part of the EU.

Gibraltar,voted overwhelmingly to remain. The Falkland Islands? 90 per cent of its exports go to the EU 27.

Commonwealth migrants from 54 states – including ­Australia, Canada, India, Pakistan and Nigeria – could join the electoral roll as long are they are residents in the UK.

Citizens from other European countries – apart from Ireland, Malta and Cyprus – did not get to vote on whether the UK remains part of the EU.

So I ask again, just who are the European Union negotiating with.

 Is it the Crown? or the DUP 

Who created the Crown?  God Did.

God however – not wanted to be bothered with micromanagement – conveniently delegates his power to an entity called the crown.

Who created the DUP?  England did. Résultat de recherche d'images pour "the rev ian paisley speech never never"

It’s a useful reminder that the United Kingdom is still technically a theocracy with the reigning monarch acting as both the head of state and the supreme governor of the official state religion:

In the end the United Kingdom is a country situated on the british isles and is part of The Crown which is controlled by the monarchy.

Also part of the crown and the British isles are the crown dependencies.

The independent nations of the former empire that still recognize the crown are the commonwealth realm and the non-independent remnants of the former empire are the British overseas territories.

To London and Theresa May, the Irish don’t matter much as she and her government are held to ransom

The people of Northern Ireland and Mrs Foster remember this.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "how much did t may pay the dup"

This shoddy DUP deal will ultimately cost Theresa May and England

far more than £1bn“

DUP will be back for more again and again. They have previous in such

matters.

However, both the Republic of Ireland and the United Kingdom are members of the European Union even though England often likes to pretend that it’s an Island in the mid-atlantic rather than 50km off the cost of France.

Border or no border the Eu and any country doing a deal in the future would do well to establish just who are they are dealing with before any agreement is agreed.

But that’s a story for another day.

 

All human comment much appreciated. All like clicks chucked in the bin.

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨