• About
  • THE BEADY EYE SAY’S : THE EUROPEAN UNION SHOULD THANK ENGLAND FOR ITS IN OR OUT REFERENDUM.

bobdillon33blog

~ Free Thinker.

bobdillon33blog

Author Archives: bobdillon33@gmail.com

THE BEADY ASKS YOU THIS QUESTION : ARE WE MISSING THE UNDERLYING CAUSE OF THE WORLD PRESENT PROBLEMS.

13 Thursday Jul 2017

Posted by bobdillon33@gmail.com in Uncategorized

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY ASKS YOU THIS QUESTION : ARE WE MISSING THE UNDERLYING CAUSE OF THE WORLD PRESENT PROBLEMS.

 

( A two-minute read)

What is now becoming clear with technology is that Capitalism is programmed to subordinate life to the imperative of profit. ( Capitalist Algorithms are making profit all but invisible)Image associée

Ever since David chucked a stone we have glorified war, selling trillions in arms rather than eradication of inequality.

We were and still are griped by a logic that has given us everything from slavery to the smart phone, to oil spills, to child labor, to terrorists, to Donald Trump with pending ecological collapse and climate change.Image associée

GDP and now smartphones measures everything except that which makes life worthwhile.

Surely no matter who or where you were born on earth you want to live in balance with your environment on which you depend for your survival.

Nature has the right to exist, persist, maintain and regenerate its vital cycles.

Our TV screens recently passively report one of the largest Icebergs ever to brake off the Antarctic. Not good enough.

One dimensional capitalism has to go.  We can carry on with the status quo.

If we carry on dishing out inequality the choice is staring us stark in the face.

There will be no Future with or without technology.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of politics of the future"

I am sure there are many like me blogging, twittering, their views on Social media, but we have to grow out the logic of social media algorithms.  If we do not we are going to pay a heft price. If our current trajectory continues, democracy as you know it will be ruined. Social Media is in the process of rendering our votes worthless and unfit for purpose.

The world is now full of misinformation that is debunking people’s attitudes.

Facebook algorithms along with a clatter of others, are a form of manipulation making us all, more and more polarized from the world we live in.Image associée

Its time for a reboot. It wouldn’t turn out the way you want it. We need to do some thing about it quickly. ( Read my previous blogs.) Let’s face it; you’ve probably tried to imagine the typical daily life in the distant future. Technology will, indeed, play a pivotal role in our lives in 34 years.  We are told that the primary purpose of all robots and incredibly advanced technology will be to allow men to have a relaxed and calmer lifestyle.

There will be little point if our worlds is falling asunder and watched over by a United Nations without a unity people.

Digital technology will not simply intensify prevailing cultural trends but also provide resources for reinterpreting its meaning. We must grasp the opportunities it presents us, by coming together in a united world voice to change the core human cry from growth for the sake of profit to sustainability.

All comments Appreciated. All like clicks chucked in the bin.

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this:

  • Share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window) WhatsApp
  • More
  • Share on Mastodon (Opens in new window) Mastodon

THE BEADY EYE ASKS: HOW ARE WE GOING TO HOLD CONVERSATIONS WITH ROBOTS.

11 Tuesday Jul 2017

Posted by bobdillon33@gmail.com in Artificial Intelligence.

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE ASKS: HOW ARE WE GOING TO HOLD CONVERSATIONS WITH ROBOTS.

Tags

Artificial Intelligence.

 

(A twelve-minute read)

Too often technology is discussed as if it has come from another planet and has just arrived on Earth. We seem to be losing turf as the supreme thinking and feeling being.

”We’re at a peculiar point in the development of Artificial Intelligence (AI). Right now, AI is like a toddler that is okay on their own for 30 seconds, but really requires a lot of human supervision.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "papers on how we are going to talk to robots"

The trajectory of technological progress is not inevitable, it depends on choices by governments, consumers, and businesses as they decide which technologies get researched and commercialized and how they are used. The way robotic technologies can and will augment human abilities is sometimes lost amid concerns people will be unable to compete in a world of smart machines.

At the moment the state-of-art of artificial intelligence technology is quite limited, especially for having conversation with people.

Language is power—power that often implies, or closes down knowledge and understanding, both of which we need to make informed decisions about individual and collective futures.

There’s a long way to go in getting a ROBOT to capture the subtleties of body language—the narrowing of the eyes, the pursing of the lips, the opening of the palms, the tones of voice, the subtle cues of face-to-face interaction, but sooner than later both we more than the robot will have to adapt in order to respect and listen to robots.

We’ll need different words to talk about the future. We will require more precise definitions to discuss increasingly complicated, complex and more finely nuanced objects, situations and roles people have in the world. We need to find better options to communicate about them if we’re going to understand what comes next.

In my opinion it will happen terrifying quickly but Robots aren’t going to replace us rather by working hand in hand with us they will redefine what it means to be human.

So how will future interactions between, remote-controlled and autonomous, robots and humans work? What effect will they have on people’s personality perception, group interaction. Could the rapid advances in automation and digital technology provoke social upheaval by eliminating the livelihoods of many people, even as they produce great wealth for others?

To attempt to answer these question we have to go beyond current thinking.

The versatility of the human hand is thought to have played a role in our rise to become the dominant species on Earth so when we shake hands with a robot we better make sure it wont bit the hand that feeds it.

Symbiotic relationship between humans and computers will not work because of their increasing ability to learn just not from us but from each other. “If you’re interacting with someone who is themselves an extrovert, when you do a gesture, the robot does a large gesture. How do we  tailor the robot’s gestures to suit the mood suggested by the speaker’s voice or to stress a particular point.

“Are we at the beginning of an economic transformation that is unique in history, wonderful for what it could do in bringing us better medicine, services, and products, but devastating for those not in a position to reap the financial benefits?

The answer to this question is an infantile yes.

How do you keep people engaged when AI can do most things better than most people? I don’t know what the solution is, but it’s a new kind of grand challenge for AI engineers.

As machines and software—capital—become ever cheaper and more capable, it makes sense to use less and less human labor.

We can create a society of shared prosperity only if we update our policies, organizations, and research to seize the opportunities and address the challenges these tools give rise to.

This is the very reason that now not in the future we should create a new world organisation to vet all technology. ( See previous Posts)  If the rewards of new technologies go largely to the very richest, as has been the trend in recent decades, then dystopian visions could become reality.

Depend in large part on which technologies we invent and choose to embrace.

It’s also time to start a conversation about the deeper changes that will be necessary over the longer term—to our tax and transfer system, to the nature and extent of our public investment, and even to how democracy can and should function in a networked world.

The conversation about robots today so often revolves around fears of how they will replace us, rather than help us. Science fiction is full of stories where people live vicariously, sitting in virtual reality pods from where they control robotic avatars that can perform seemingly impossible tasks safe in the knowledge that any damage—or even death—is virtual.

And while the impact of fast-approaching automation, drones, and robots on industries such as haulage, delivery, and retail is yet to be felt, the projects at Bristol demonstrate ways that people and robots can achieve more by working together rather than in competition.

Developing algorithms in which the robots themselves are useful but capable of asking for help.” through superimposing messages on your vision to tell you how it gauges the conversation is going.

Résultat de recherche d'images pour "papers on how we are going to talk to robots"

Do today’s rapid advances in artificial intelligence and automation portend a future in which robots and software greatly reduce the need for human workers?

Will robots and software replace most human workers?

Now the evidence is that technology is destroying jobs and indeed creating new and better ones but also fewer ones.

While our future in the real world will be challenging and there are real risks,

No one knows the answer.

Allowing a large number of workers to become irrelevant in the technology-centric economy would be a huge waste of human talent and ambition—and would probably put an enormous financial burden on society.

it’s difficult to quantify the effect of today’s technology on job creation, it’s impossible to accurately predict the effects of future advances. Whoever owns the capital will benefit as robots and artificial intelligence inevitably replace many jobs.

That will mean providing fairer access to quality education and training programs for people throughout their careers. As the most advanced technology becomes, the more we can focus on being humans and let robots do little, annoying things that we don’t like doing anyway.

Robots will routinely collaborate with people so most of our sex will be with machines. So far more people need to “own the robots.”Who we are going to love? Laptops, Apps?

Everyone doesn’t need to become a technical expert, or keep a field guide to drones and robots handy (though it might be useful sooner than later), but, as I’ve pointed out in the case of complex systems and supply chains, we might all benefit from having a clearer understanding of how the world is changing around us, and what new creatures we’ll encounter out there. Perhaps it’s time we all start wielding language with greater clarity. I’m sure the robots will.

But “hackers,” “algorithms,” and to some extent “robots,” sit behind metaphorical — or actual — closed doors, where obscurity can benefit those who would like to use these terms, or exercise the realities behind them to their own benefit, though perhaps not to ours. We need better definitions, and more exact words, to talk about these things because, frankly, these particular examples are part of a larger landscape of “actors” which will define how we live in coming years, alongside other ambiguous terms like “terrorist,” or “immigrant,” about which clear discourse will only become more important.

A future where robots and humans enjoy a more symbiotic relationship—where robots work alongside people, enhancing their capabilities is a future worth while having. The goal should be inclusive prosperity. Will ‘to be on-line’ be a privilege or right? You can grab our robots and teach them what to do.

The way humans interact with robots has served society well during the past 50 years: People tell robots what to do, and robots do it to maximum effect. This has led to unprecedented innovation and productivity in agriculture, medicine, and manufacturing. However, an inflection point is on the horizon. Rapid advancements in machine learning and artificial intelligence are making robotic systems smarter and more adaptable than ever—but these advancements also inherently weaken direct human control and relevance to autonomous machines.

As such, robotic manufacturing, despite its benefits, is arriving at a great human cost: The World Economic Forum estimates that over the next four years, rapid growth of robotics in global manufacturing will put the livelihoods of 5 million people at risk, as those in manual-labor roles increasingly lose out to machines.

Now is the time to rethink how people and robots will coexist on this planet. To reconfigure human relationships to these complex machines.

The world doesn’t need better, faster, or smarter robots, but it does need more opportunities for people to pool their collective ingenuity, intelligence, and relentless optimism to invent ways for robots to amplify human capabilities.

To be clear, I do not anticipate interactions with autonomous industrial robots to become a normal daily activity for most people.

As intelligent, autonomous robots become increasingly prevalent in daily life, it is critical to design more effective ways to interact and communicate with them.When something responds to people with lifelike movements––even when it is clearly an inanimate object––humans cannot help but project emotions onto it.

Deciding how these robots mediate human lives should not be in the sole discretion of tech companies or cloistered robotics labs.

The future of robotics has yet to be written, and whether a person identifies as tech-savvy or a Luddite, everyone has something valuable to contribute toward deciding how these machines will enter the built environment.

If we want a future in which technology will expand and amplify humanity, not replace it all our conversations should be heard. It’s not easy to see a practical mechanism for picking technologies that favor a future in which more people have better jobs. But “at least we need to ask” how these decisions will affect employment.

The solution involves Human-Compatible AI, which focuses on creating uncertainty in an altruistic robot’s objective and teaching it to fill that gap with knowledge of human values learned through observing human behavior.

Creating this human common sense in robots will “change the definition of AI so that we have provably beneficial machines … and, hopefully, in the process we will learn to be better people. Our growing understanding of ourselves and the world is changing our sense of how we should live.

The lesson is that if advances in technology are playing a role in increasing inequality, the effects are not inevitable, and they can be altered by government, business, and consumer decisions. Using a robotic system to enhance a person’s capabilities and let the human fill in the gaps in the bot’s skills, and the result could be something far greater than the sum of its parts.But how do we live now?

However, realistically speaking some predictions such as people will become cyborgs with talking pets, immortality, and others are highly unlikely to happen.

All comments Appreciated. All like clicks chucked in the bin.

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

blob:https%3A//www.ted.com/bdc21fe8-af06-47aa-bfcb-541899e325b9

blob:https%3A//www.ted.com/e4c499fa-c1a4-4299-b28d-e02f443ef57e

blob:https%3A//www.ted.com/488682d7-8dcf-45bc-ad9b-abaa0c78120d

https://www.google.fr/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwi2oJf_gYLVAhVFSBQKHfhTALEQjRwIBw&url=http%3A%2F%2Fblog.ted.com%2Four-robotic-overlords-the-talks-of-session-2-of-ted2017%2F&psig=AFQjCNE6TzHNe7hOfEhuabeo807F4KKpOw&ust=1499889511311603

Share this:

  • Share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window) WhatsApp
  • More
  • Share on Mastodon (Opens in new window) Mastodon

THE BEADY EYE ASKS: IS IT TIME WE DEMANDED THAT ALL OUR LEADERS ARE GIVEN A MANDATERY SIDEKICK IN THE FORM OF A ARTIFICAL INTELLIGENCE COMPUTER ROBOT.

09 Sunday Jul 2017

Posted by bobdillon33@gmail.com in Artificial Intelligence.

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE ASKS: IS IT TIME WE DEMANDED THAT ALL OUR LEADERS ARE GIVEN A MANDATERY SIDEKICK IN THE FORM OF A ARTIFICAL INTELLIGENCE COMPUTER ROBOT.

Tags

Artificial Intelligence., Technology, The Future of Mankind, THE UNITED NATIONS, Visions of the future.

( A five-minute read)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

This is the dangers of being overly dependent on technology.

It might be time to get reacquainted with our limits.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Take Dating websites for instance:

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

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

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

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

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

Bowman witnessing the withering and death of his own species.

2001-A-Space-Odyssey

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

 

 

 

Share this:

  • Share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window) WhatsApp
  • More
  • Share on Mastodon (Opens in new window) Mastodon

THE BEADY EYE SAYS: ENGLAND NEEDS A DOCTOR OR TWO.

08 Saturday Jul 2017

Posted by bobdillon33@gmail.com in England.

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE SAYS: ENGLAND NEEDS A DOCTOR OR TWO.

 

( A twenty to thirty minute Diagnostician read)

The woeful state of things in the UK implies that there is more than something really very wrong other than just Brexit. 

No amount of Government building policies around popular fears, rather than established facts is going to cure its problems.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of doctors and patients"

The UK is ethnically diverse, partly as a legacy of empire. Lately, the country has been struggling with issues revolving around multiculturalism, immigration and national identity, not to mention personal debt and a clatter of other problems that all require investment it has not got.

It is known as the home of both modern parliamentary democracy and the Industrial Revolution with a rich literary heritage. Two world wars and the end of empire diminished its role in the 20th century, and the 2016 referendum vote to leave the European Union has raised significant questions about the country’s global role.

One of the most startling aspects of England at present is the way things that were once considered to be virtues have now become the object of intense disapproval, and vice versa. You could be right in thinking that it is in the process of dismantling everything that made the country great.

Whether its in our out of the EU, the Great British trade-off will result in the country loosing its identity, with minority groups dictating what should be said and done.

More recently, the UK has suffered a deep economic slump and high public debt as a result of the 2008 financial crisis, which revealed its over-reliance on easy credit, domestic consumption and rising house prices.

With a gigafying of it working force, we now see a country that ruled by a minority government in order to maintain their grip on power that has already bribed 10 DUP representatives from a Northerner Ireland a party that has many historical connections to multiple terrorists Ulster militias.

In my option it not only needs a doctor but of a Brain Scan when it comes to prioritizing its spending.

A country that spends around £38.3bn yearly on defense, (5th Largest defense
budget in the world), plus £41 billion to maintain Trident, while needing to build 300,000 homes each year, with around 1.2 million people using food banks, with nearly 2 million landlords letting  five million properties, banking a round  £15 billion a year, with one million on ZERO-HOUR contracts, with a national health service going broke, with an economy that cannot provide free education, the UK has very little to gain by quitting the EU and much to lose.

{It will need to rethink its military and security alliances, at a time of heightened anxiety over Russia and the Middle East. Above all, it will have to cope with the domestic political consequences of opting out of the EU.]

A country that spends £334 million a year on a Royal Family, with over 9000 betting shops, generating £7.1bn Revenues, with Student loan debts of more than £100bn and seven out of ten adults have on average credit cards debts of £6,372 because it turned shopping into a sport.

A Country that runs a National Lottery accused of “making a mockery” of its monopoly with an operation profit £71 million. (The odds of winning the draw’s jackpot have now plummeted to one in 45 million.) with millions of pounds been paid to Camelot’s parent company, Canada’s Ontario Teachers’ Pension Plan.

A country renowned for being the most expensive in Rail travel in Europe, possibly the world, with a national debt that is rising, building a new Crossrail that will boost London’s rail, costing £14.8 billion or £202 million per mile.

Replacing a nuclear power station  Hinkley Point C nuclear power plant could be as high as £37bn,

A country that in January 2017 has a Public sector net debt of £1,682.8 billion equivalent to 85.3% of GDP, rising at £5500 per second! (Importantly the figure excludes borrowing by Royal Bank of Scotland, which is 73% owned by the government. Debt interest payments are rising close to £70bn given the forecast rise in national debt.

The majority of UK debt used to be held by the UK private sector, but due to the financial crises the Bank of England has bought gilts taking its holding to 25% of UK public sector debt.

It is worth bearing in mind that other countries have a much bigger problem. Japan, for example, has a National debt of 225%, Italy is over 120%.  The US national debt is close to 80% of GDP.

  • Another way to examine UK debt is to look at both government debt and private debt combined.
  • Total UK debt includes household sector debt, business sector debt, financial sector debt and government debt. This is over 500% of GDP.
  • Wonga loans” economics.
  • Governments can and do default. Argentina and Russia to give two fairly recent examples. Also, the ability to print money does not mean you can in reality repay a debt. If the government borrows money in its own currency, then devalues that currency to the point where it is worthless, then repays the debt in the worthless currency, has the lender been repaid? I think not. You really can lose money lending to a government.
  • Efforts to rein in the public debt – one of the developed world’s highest – has led to deep cuts to welfare, government services and the military, prompting concern about social equality and a possible loss of international influence.
  • 571 homicides per year

The economy is in decline, the pound is drifting towards parity with the dollar, the jobless lines are lengthening. Racists and xenophobes are gripped by an elated sense of entitlement.

In 2015 £39,023,564 was spent by 57 parties and 23 non-party campaigners with the SNAP General Election on June 8 this year costing the taxpayer around £143m.

The house of Lords cost the tax payer £9 million a year. God only knows what The entire Westminster setup costs. An educated quest would be between £200 million and £500 million.

The process of deindustrialisation has left behind lasting social problems and pockets of economic weakness in parts of the country.

The divide opening up between an open, cosmopolitan capital city and its closed, isolationist country is causing its own conflict.

Surely Britain’s interest lies in reducing the cost of trade with its largest trade partners – which the EU evidently does.

If one looks at the UK from the outside since its vote in a non-binding referendum to leave the EU, you could not be blamed for thinking that it is now a country with a minority government carrying out policies of isolation by career politicians only interested in their own agenda.

Leaving the EU will not reduce barriers to services trade. It may increase them,
unless the EU granted Britain the same level of access to its services markets that is currently available. It is undermining everything England is and always has been. The UK has always been a country of immigrants and diversity, and has grown great on the back of it. That disruption is essential for innovation, whether it be in business, technology, or food and culture — imagine what English food would be without the foreign influence of centuries of immigrants!

Life will be uncomfortable on the outside: The UK will be powerless to push for liberalization of EU services markets; it will find that in some sectors,
inward investors will switch their money to countries inside the EU.

It is going to find it very difficult to negotiate trade agreements with non-EU countries as comprehensive as those that the EU regularly agrees.

The idea that the UK would be freer outside the EU is based on a series of misconceptions: that a medium-sized, open economy could hold sway in an increasingly fractured trading system, dominated by the US, the EU and China; that the EU makes it harder for Britain to penetrate emerging markets; and that foreign capital would be more attracted to Britain’s economy if it were no longer a part of the single market.

The UK should base policy on evidence, which largely points to one conclusion: that it should stay in the EU.

Sovereignty, in a world driven by technology and a social Media which is filtered by Algorithms in effect, is a myth. The very idea of self-government is mostly a delusion.

It wont have any more useful sovereignty outside the EU than it does inside — indeed it might have less, because there’s strength in numbers. Outside the union, Britain’s government would still be constrained by the forces of geopolitics and economics, and it would have fewer friends:

If it persists in going further down this route it risk becoming like our embarrassing European neighbors that will  need to negotiate new trade agreements with all its non-EU partners, an enormous undertaking.

Any government that will ignore advice from a world expert because they’re not British is not worthy of any role in the politics of a country that has, historically, been known as an open, liberal, progressive place, and has prospered as a result. These are not the days when prejudice, propaganda, naked xenophobia and callous fear-mongering will win out over the common sense that England like to pride themselves on.

Not on a day when you are being congratulated by Donald Trump, Marine Le Pen, and nobody else.

Now apply the same thought to your economy, industry, and universities.

What the dumb populist thinking fails to recognize is that if someone moves to England from abroad and gets a job, they also pay tax, and spend the money they earn on stuff, which in turn leads to more jobs, and more tax income.

Imagine if our doctors treated us for what we feared was wrong, rather than for what they prove is wrong.

We allow our doctors to tell us that our fears are unfounded, and to use facts and science to show us what is actually happening. Our current politicians are to policy what crystal-waving quack healers are to doctors.

The Government is proposing policies that make liberal-minded people feel physically sick in order to tackle an immigration problem that exists in the minds of people, but not in reality. Going down the path of pandering that much to the electorate for the sake of winning votes is very weak.

Imagine if your doctor kept you as a patient by telling you what she thinks you’d like to hear, rather than what is medically true and important. When people think there is a problem with immigration, do you address the fact that they are wrong, or do you just go off and solve that imaginary problem with policies that will, in fact, cause the problem to start to exist.

The U.K. has a lot to lose if the EU decided to be unaccommodating, and I’m betting the EU will. To make a success of remaining in the EU as currently constituted, Britain would either have to change its attitude to closer political integration or deflect the other governments from that goal. Either of those tasks will be as hard as arranging a friendly split.  Britain’s instinctive euro-skepticism won’t dissolve in the foreseeable future, and the country isn’t interested in being told otherwise.

Europe’s other governments won’t help Britain prove the viability of more economic integration combined with less political integration. The split wouldn’t be friendly, and Europe is in a position to make Britain pay.

If Europe wanted to, it could in fact agree to a friendly divorce, preserving most of the union’s mutual single-market benefits but letting Britain step aside from the political project.

This was never a referendum on the EU. It was a referendum on the modern world.

Deep economic integration didn’t require a single currency, a European Parliament and least of all a European Court of Justice (a supreme court of the EU).

On the other hand on the face of it, there’s no reason you couldn’t combine single-market freedoms with more national sovereignty than the EU’s members now have.

The U.K.’s decision is enormously consequential not because it will settle things, but because it offers two completely different sets of challenges — a finely balanced choice between two extremely demanding futures.

It is now badly in need of a doctor.

Naturally, depending on your political viewpoint, you can interpret these basic facts to suit your view. More importantly, be wary of people selling you false equivalences or telling you there’s never an objectively true answer.

The United Kingdom is a state made up of the historic countries of England, Wales and Scotland, as well as Northern Ireland.  Three of which have devolved powers. At the end of the day the UK, or even just England, is tiny.

Anyone feel like they’ve got their country back yet? No?

The United Kingdom National Debt Clock 2017 Counter >> nationaldebtclock.co.ukhttp: //www.nationaldebtclock.co.uk/

Does it matter?

After all, world governments owe the money to their own citizens, not to the Martians. But the rising total is important for two reasons. First, when debt rises faster than economic output (as it has been doing in recent years), higher government debt implies more state interference in the economy and higher taxes in the future. Second, debt must be rolled over at regular intervals. This creates a recurring popularity test for individual governments, rather as reality TV show contestants face a public phone vote every week. Fail that vote, as various euro-zone governments have done, and the country (and its neighbours) can be plunged into crisis.

So the return to health plan should be:

A reallocation of the countries wealth, free education, and some long term aspirations that the country can embrace as a whole- such as making its self self sufficient in green energy, the scrapping of faith schools, the doubling of Overseas aid if it wants to cut migrants, the reinstatement of compulsory arm service, the downgrading of the Royal Family to a tourist attraction, cut the member of the house of lords to 400, have another in or out referendum and vote on reality.

All comments appreciated, all like clicks chucked in the bin. 

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this:

  • Share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window) WhatsApp
  • More
  • Share on Mastodon (Opens in new window) Mastodon

THE BEADY EYE SAYS: GOVERNMENTS ARE BECOMING MERE ADMINISTRATIONS.

03 Monday Jul 2017

Posted by bobdillon33@gmail.com in Artificial Intelligence., Democracy, HUMAN INTELLIGENCE, Humanity., Modern Day Communication., Modern Day Democracy., Modern day life., Our Common Values., Politics., Post - truth politics., Social Media, Technology, The Internet., The world to day., Unanswered Questions., What Needs to change in the World, World Leaders, World Organisations., World Politics

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE SAYS: GOVERNMENTS ARE BECOMING MERE ADMINISTRATIONS.

Tags

Artificial Intelligence., Big Data, Capitalism and Greed, Inequility, SMART PHONE WORLD, The Future of Mankind, Visions of the future.

 

( A Five-minute read)

Did we ever vote about the shape of Cyberspace?

To day the Internet is a free and lawless zone that is eroding state sovereignty, ignores borders, abolishing privacy and perhaps posing one of the biggest treats to security on many a front.

A decade ago it hardly registered on the radar.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of megalomaniac politics"

MIXING GOD LIKE TECHNOLOGY WITH MEGALOMANIAC POLITICS IS A RECIPE FOR DISASTER.

By the time bureaucracy makes up its mind about cyber space regulations, the internet has morphed ten times.

We are now overwhelmed with data. Never before have governments being so well-informed as to what going on but they are unable to implement any change without Social Media, the internet and AI.

As we seem void of ANY STATESMAN Artificial Intelligence in the form of unregulated Algorithms are not only plundering the world of economics ( High Frequency trading) eroding Democracy, which is failing to provide a meaningful visions of the future.

DUE TO ITS DIVORCE FROM CAPITALISM.

Leaving all the important decisions in the hand of the free market give our politicians the perfect excuse for inaction and ignorance, which are reinterpreted as profound wisdom.

So let me ask you.

Do we want a small coterie of billionaires ruining the world for profit.

Fortunately even if we did they would not be able to do so as the system is far too complex. There is no getting away from that the free market only does what is good for the market rather than what is good for mankind or the world. 

The hands of the market are now blind and invisible due to Algorithms and left to their own devices with machine learning will – FAIL TO DO ANYTHING ABOUT THE DANGERS OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE OR CLIMATE CHANGE.

With more than 1 billion users worldwide and 2.5 million apps — and counting it has become an instinctual gesture to turn to our smartphones when we are exposed to an unknown environment.

Thanks to the internet and our feature-packed smartphones, we can not only consume and interact with incoming news, we can also be the first ones to communicate things to the rest of the world if we happen to be at the right place, at the right time.  And we’re doing this over devices that just two decades ago would’ve looked at home in sci- flicks.

There is no argument that Artificial Intelligence is penetrating our daily live so new structures will be built.

The Question is who will build and control these structures?Image associée

A world run be Google, Facebook, Twitter and their like will be a world without imagination, compassion, and moral ethics of any kind other than profit.

If we think in term of decades, then Global Warming, Growing Inequality and Artificial Intelligence linked together will dwarf and overwhelm all other problems or theological developments.

Combined they will overshadow any political gains or profits. Surpassing all tin pot dictators of the world.

We must not allow global data collection to rest in the hands of world monopolies..

Goodbye, cash. Hallow iPhone’s Wallet apps. Just imagine what this is going to do to what is left of society. Consumer growth will be the only evidence of life.

The rise of apps and social media is changing the way many of the world’s two billion Christians and 1.6 billion Muslims worship – and even what it means to be religious.

Facebook said that in its most recent quarter, roughly 84 percent of its $6.82 billion in ad revenue came from mobile ads.

Smartphones - Global Connectivity

To claim back power we must turn our shiny mirrors our Smartphones into shields, passports and carriers of personal sovereignty and equality. Smart phone are the new guardians of Democracy and we better start using them wisely.

Not all changes brought by the mobile revolution have been positive.

In fact, for certain groups of people from around the world, the explosion of mobile has brought misery and exploitation.

Events in one country now have almost instant implications for the rest of the world. We see footage shot with smartphones in mass-media almost every day now.

It’s now a question of who gets heard, not what is heard.

In my opinion, we are living through a transition period triggered by a dramatic change in mobile networks in the last decade. This transition periods will be painful. But sooner or later things will stabilize and everyday liberties enjoyed by leading Western countries will spread out throughout the world.  Surely, the mobile networks are speeding up this process.

From one perspective, the dependence on mobile technology is pathetic, but on the other hand it surely makes it easier for people to explore foreign cultures.

It is highly likely that someday, as more people interact and connect with foreign cultures, borders between countries will start to dissolve and the world will become a united planet. Smartphones and mobile networks will be at the heart of this evolution.

The biggest social networks (Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn) and media sharing sites (Instagram, YouTube, Snapchat), along with maybe a handful of others like Pinterest and Google Plus are all a catch-all platforms whose functionality is constantly evolving.

As more networks add rich features like live streaming and augmented reality, the lines between their feature sets continue to blur and change faster than most people have time to read up on the changes.

Look beyond those social media juggernauts and you’ll see that people are using many different types of social media to connect online for all kinds of reasons.

There are anonymous social networks a step back toward the wild-west early days of the internet.

It is the social media sites that are the carbuncle on society’s backside, not smart phones.

We are becoming symbiotic with our computer tools, growing into interconnected systems that remember less by knowing information than by knowing where the information can be found. The always-on lifestyle suggest future generations will have different priorities about what they choose to remember.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of megalomaniac politics"

Smartphones — and the connection they represent to a global social network — is becoming more than just a device in our pockets but something closer to a digital extension of ourselves.

Apps spawned industries that couldn’t exist without smartphones but smartphones spawned the Arab Spring in the Middle East in early 2011.

The smart phone quickly demonstrated itself as a powerful tool for driving social revolution.

Smartphones helped protesters to quickly share information with observers outside the region, which in turn helped drive political pressure during the revolution.

The potential benefit of taking things to the general public, again made possible by mobile networks and smartphones for all initiative purposes is in its early stage of development.

With joint collaborative efforts their status as an indispensable item in the 21st century

If anyone has a suggestion as how we can get the world of Smartphones to collectively come together as a unite to create a new dynamic network of compassion I am all ears.  Smartphones and social media will the last chance for a compassionate world.

It begins with you.

How the social media further impact our life in our society and where do social media and the Internet technology take us in the next few decades is really an interesting question, or perhaps a mystery or a challenge for human themselves.

But one thing should stand is we ought not to be controlled by technology, we control them! If we are not already to late.

Résultat de recherche d'images pour "ppers on how smartphone are change the world"

Our Mobile Planet.

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this:

  • Share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window) WhatsApp
  • More
  • Share on Mastodon (Opens in new window) Mastodon

THE BEADY EYE SAY’S: IS IT NOT TIME WE RE EXAMINED DEMOCRACY.

30 Friday Jun 2017

Posted by bobdillon33@gmail.com in Artificial Intelligence., Big Data., Capitalism, Democracy, HUMAN INTELLIGENCE, Humanity., Modern Day Democracy., Modern day life., Our Common Values., Politics., Post - truth politics., Social Media, Technology, The Future, The Obvious., The world to day., Unanswered Questions., What Needs to change in the World

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE SAY’S: IS IT NOT TIME WE RE EXAMINED DEMOCRACY.

Tags

Artificial Intelligence., SMART PHONE WORLD, Smartphone., Smartphones, Social Media, The Future of Mankind, Visions of the future.

 

( A deep read of twenty minutes)

Democracy is the process by which we get ourselves organized to perform capitalism.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of smartphones"

To claim back power we must turn those shiny mirrors our Smartphones into shields, passports and carriers of personal sovereignty.

The good news is that for hundred of years humankind has enjoyed a growing economy without falling prey to ecological meltdown but the margin for error is narrowing with global warming.  All the talk, all the conferences, all the summits, all the promises and protocols have so far failed to curb emissions.

Why?

Because despite all our achievements we are under constant pressure to produce more and more stuff. We risk the future on the assumption that technological will come up with a solution’s in the future.

What is the price going to be?

If every thing is for sale the connection between capitalism, democracy, and liberalism is in the process of being broken.

The new modern deal is Humanist.

Soundless revolutions, silent reformations, undreamed ideas, new religions, must not be neglected, if we would grasp the unity of history in its highest sense.…The unapparent future….bids us to consider the whole sequence up to the present moment as probably no more than the beginning of a social and psychical development, where of the end is withdrawn from our view by countless millenniums to come.

However the world does not come to an end when the nine billion names of God are uttered. Freedom of speech is not over when we have uttered a certain thing.

We are the ultimate source of meaning, and free will is therefore the highest authority of all.

This is for this reason that democratic elections give expression to the ultimate political authority the People.  It will end when we final hand our future to AI.

Whoever determines the meaning of our actions – whether they be good or evil, right or wrong, beautiful or ugly, also gains the authority to tell us what to think and how to behave.

If we are not careful (because human opinion is necessarily fragile and ephemeral) absolute truths and the meaning of life, not to mention the Universe will soon be based on some external laws from some superhuman source other than God.

Creating meaning for a meaningless world will become impossible without Artificial Intelligence (AI) in all its forms of Algorithms that will and are already affect every facet of daily life.

WE MUST DETERMINE BY OURSELVES WHAT IS GOOD, AND WHAT IS EVIL, WHAT IS RIGHT AND WHAT IS WRONG, WHAT IS BEAUTIFUL AND WHAT IS UGLY, WHAT IS IGNORANCE AND CORRUPTIBLE, WHAT IS TRUTH AND WHAT IS FALSE. NOT A MACHINE.       Knowledge = experiences x Sensitivity.

IF WE LOOSE OUR FEELING THERE IS NO POINT IN BELIEVING ANYTHING.

Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of democracy"

Over the last century, capitalism has repeatedly revealed its worst tendencies: instability and inequality and its failures have turned democracy against liberalism. Across Europe, economic interventionism, nationalism, and even open racism have exerted a greater attraction for those casting their democratic votes than the causes of freedom, deregulation, and equality before the law.

Free markets have not only enlarged the gap between rich and poor, but have also reduced average incomes across the developed and developing worlds.

In turn, liberalism’s intellectual self-identity has been left in tatters.

Liberal theorists are now desperately trying to keep the ship afloat. But instead of addressing the challenges head-on they have turned to the past for solace and validation. While this new liberal historicism may have a certain rhetorical appeal, it fails to convince.

At root, liberty is a concept grounded in the individual.

It is the freedom to be all that one is, to actualize the fullness of one’s potential as a human being endowed with the capacity for creativity and the ability to make autonomous value judgments for ourselves. However surrounded by the confused, jargon-ridden babble of political commentators today, it is perhaps easy to forget that liberalism is defined by a commitment to liberty.

While each of us may wish to be free as an individual, individual freedom is dependent on us all being free; and that means that we all have to cling to our shared humanity, our shared dignity and not to be manipulated by profit seeking  un-vetted Algorithms.

The world was moving toward a politically border less and highly interdependent global economy that might have foster prosperity, international cooperation, and world peace. This is no longer true.  Now thanks to un vetted Algorithms we are witnessing a world characterized by intense economic conflict at both the domestic and international levels. Today we are returning to the huge 19th-century-sized gaps between the richest 1 percent and everyone else.

Rescuing the “disappearing middle class” has become every aspiring politician’s slogan, but this is also coming to an end with targeted Social Media Profiling, (conducted by Algorithms) that are and will produce extreme inequality that will infect all of society, as rich corporations that own these Algorithms move to protect their positions, by buying the politicians, mass media and other cultural forms that are for sale.

Capitalism is today’s version of the what and democracy is the how.

Capitalism does not say that “all men are equal”; it even has difficulty in saying that we are all “created equal.”

If we truly want to move beyond capitalism we have to break away from the employer-employee core relationships. It means no longer assigning a relatively tiny number of people inside each enterprise to the employer position of exclusively. It means that every worker has an interest in the enterprise, a share in its profits its loses and decision-making.  Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures capitalism"

While democracy is a consensual hallucination of people concerned with how to divide opportunity fairly or democracy is a process for ensuring that each gets an equal session with the eye while capitalism fosters a desire to keep the eye and not share it. An end in itself, not a means.

Democracy as a rule book is not intended to operate only until a particular individual or class has enough money. It is hard to govern the human heart with rules. The democracy rule book, though it hovers above our laws has not succeeded in making humans cherish democracy.

A Martian visiting earth would not be able to see democracy. It is intangible, a rule book we have agreed to which says that no-one shall be denied opportunity, freedom of speech, or the due process of the laws.

Democracy denies the Hobbesian war of all against all, (Thomas Hobbes saw people as weak and selfish, and thus in constant need of the governance that could save them from destruction) and capitalism, pretending to prophecy it, creates it and enshrines it at the center of our pantheon, as the true, the human, the only way to live.

Under the democracy rule book, we meet as the village council; our concern is how to preserve the commons for our children’s children. All right, shift paradigms: we are now under the capitalist rule book, meeting as the board of directors of the Intercontinental Sheep-Grazing Company run by Social media ruled by Algorithms owned by Google, Apple, etc. Their discussion, abruptly with technology is about how to maximize shareholder value, by extracting every last possible dollar from the commons this fiscal period.

Our grandchildren are nowhere in the conversation; they are not shareholders. Under the separation of powers implied by the two rule books, we are relieved of the necessity of thinking about the future, because it is someone else’s job.

The substantive corrupts the procedural, when the love of things corrupts the spirit of fairness.

So it not surprising that any ambitious youngster, perceiving the differences between the two rule books, will prefer to give his allegiance to capitalism, because it offers quicker personal progress than democracy. Democracy preaches incremental change, but capitalism offers overnight transformation, the opportunity to sell something a day after you bought it for ten times what you paid.

It was not healthy for our two divisions ( Capitalism versus Democracy)  to savage each other.

Cooperation is the key feature of democracy, but capitalism is usually thought of (it need not be) as a zero-sum game in which, if I have more, it is because you have less. Versions of capitalism, like the one I believe in, in which we all grow together, are less interesting to the ambitious, because they too closely resemble democracy.

Everything seemed to suggest that only liberal capitalist democracy allowed people to thrive in an increasingly globalized world, and that only the steady advance of laissez-faire economics would guarantee a future of free, democratic states, untroubled by want and oppression and living in peace and contentment.

Humanity imposes upon us the same basic needs. By virtue of our nature, we all require food, shelter, clothing, security, and a range of other basic goods necessary for sufficiency and survival.

Though deceptively simple, these implications have profound meaning when we consider how individual liberty is to be translated into a social and political construct. If the liberty of each person is to be maintained and maximized, the principles of equity and the common good must be embedded in the structure of society.

And since society is structured above all by law, the law must reflect these precepts. It is only if everyone recognizes the dignity of the human person that they will recognize the inherent value of equity and the common good, and strive to defend and preserve not only their own liberty, but also that of all others in their society using law.

It lies not in economics, or the tides of history. It lies in the recognition of the worthiness of humanity itself. Not wealth-creation which depends on the protection of private property, the “capitalist creep” will invariably demand greater legal protection for individual rights.

In a world still divided by rival national ambitions in which economic factors in effect determine the fate of nations, many conclude that international economic affairs will become increasingly filled with conflict. We are witness the tectonic plates of Nature, democracy, disappearing under automation of AI algorithms.

We make a colossal mistake taking it for granted. We mistakenly believe that capitalism begets inevitably democracy. It doesn’t. 

The last battle between democracy and capitalism will be fought on the field of political campaign contributions.

There is a solution:

It is possible to separate fully the political sphere from the economic sphere, so as to confine the democratic process fully in the political sphere, leaving the economic sphere — the corporate world, if you want — as a democracy-free zone.

The answer lies in the political choice that we shall be making collectively. It is our choice, and we’d better make it democratically because the system we have now is even worse than capitalism.  Nobody wants to leave the certainty of the devil they know, or think they know, for something that promises to be worse.

We have run out of world to commodify. And now commodification can only cannibalize its own means of existence, both natural and social.

What all of us make is intellectual property, which from its point of view is all equivalent and tradable as a commodity.

Of course it is always a tough argument to propose common interests among subordinate classes. Counter-hegemony is hard. Hackers, like workers or farmers, are distracted by particular and local interests. Class consciousness is rare among hackers. Most of us are rather reactionary — even in the nontechnical trades. But than class consciousness is always a rare and difficult thing.

Finally at the start of this post I advocated that: To claim back power we must turn those shiny mirrors our Smartphones into shields, passports and carriers of personal sovereignty.

Of course this can only be achieved if we can form a world on line pressure group, using the combined power of Smartphones to affect change.  

 Once the greatness of a nation could be judged by the way its animals are treated now its the power that moves through the smart phone that can be instrumentally conceptualized and strategically deployed, accounted for, and resisted is the driving force that judges. 

Democracy is using your social media channels to engage and provide feedback.

The perception of the public, how people view what you do, is just as important as what you do.  

I am all ears as to how we can capture the collective power of our phones to lobby the direction of democracy.  

To that end, if scholars, activists, and commentators are to contend with the political potential of devices such as the smartphone camera, then it is imperative to account for the simultaneous processes embodied in its mechanics alongside the cultural and social conditions as these devices are often celebrated for disrupting rather than unifying. 

The Gap between Democracy and Capitalism is widening.
Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of democracy"

All comments appreciated. All like clicks chucked in the BIN.

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

Share this:

  • Share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window) WhatsApp
  • More
  • Share on Mastodon (Opens in new window) Mastodon

THE BEADY EYE SAYS: THE COMPETITIVE DRIVE THAT PUSHES HUMANITY’S EVOLUTION IS WANING.

22 Thursday Jun 2017

Posted by bobdillon33@gmail.com in Artificial Intelligence., Humanity., Modern Day Democracy., Modern day life., The world to day., Unanswered Questions., Where's the Global Outrage.

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE SAYS: THE COMPETITIVE DRIVE THAT PUSHES HUMANITY’S EVOLUTION IS WANING.

 

( A twelve minute read)

The world is in a crisis—Humanity has exhausted its ego and doesn’t know what to do.

I could write and I have written about why we are in such a mess but in this piece I want to highlight what Social Media is doing.

Social Media is driven by technology that are in themselves governed by un-vetted algorithms, is a competition organised to make you feel better at the expense of other people. It’s not about sharing the critical elements of your life, it’s about curating a fantasy world you can convince other people to believe.

It is producing an abundance of useless data which monopolies exploit to market our souls for advertising dollar’s:  Google +, Amazon, Facebook, YouTube, Instagram, Twitter and their like are in the business of presenting the world by proxy for profit. In guessing the direction of technology it is wise to ask who is in the best position to profit.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of social media sites"The knack of arranging the world that we don’t have to experience it, has already had serious consequences:  The Arab Spring, The birth of ISIS and the most pathetic World leader ever to be elected in Donald Trump.

If we do not faced up to the reality of our own self-worth it will consume us.

Never has so much knowledge been so easily consumed by the whole of humanity but instead of exploiting this opportunity we are creating a technological divide that will cause wars.

Modern society is a product of the day’s available technology. An inordinate volume of early resources have been consumed by the most frivolous pursuit imaginable.

The worlds most talented engineers no longer work on crafts to explore the stars they work on algorithms to take advantage of our preferences in the hope of taking our money.

When investment is focused on the creation of monolithic tech giants whose only goal is to not be evil the hopes of society fade with each search or posting on Facebook.

Attention is money and if you can maintain it you can exploit eyeballs. That is all that life has become on social media.

Technology has enforced upon society the conditions whereby everybody requires instantaneous gratification. We want acknowledgement of everything we do all the time and we seek to maintain the attention of a large populous of strangers and acquaintances we couldn’t really care about but depend upon to feel good about ourselves. We outsource our self-esteem to the interweb and define our worth from the currency we are able to attain on social networks.

We no longer measure the quality of our lives by the kindness we gift to the world or the positive impact we have on other people’s lives but by the proliferation of our social media footprint.

Technology is detrimentally effecting a whole new generation.

It is infecting their lives and conquering our minds. We no longer experience the present we find ways to capture it to disseminate it to the world in order to gain credibility and approval.

We live in a world where money can make more money faster than virtually any other means. A spherically shaped speck of sand inhabited by 7 billion sentient beings who call a world the world.

Day by day new technologies and inventions are showing up while deforestation,global warming,water scarcity, and widening inequality etc are avoided completely not just by the common people, but also by unsustainable consumerism, cloaked in the economic mantra of growth at all costs.

The world is becoming a collection of a billion minds, trying to achieve a common objective, with selfish thoughts in them.

Are we at a precipice, environmentally, interpersonally, and industrially and the decisions made today will greatly affect the future generations and the future of the planet.

The common goal is to live life for a fruitful cause, to benefit the civilization as a whole is disappearing on the flat screens of smartphones, I pads, Smart TVs, and social media.

The problem is that people don’t know that their development advances in accordance with the program embedded in nature. No one sees the big picture, everyone’s busy satisfying their own needs.

We don’t know how to develop further because egoism exhausted itself and ceased to encourage us to develop. There is no competition that existed before.

The young generation doesn’t want to live the way their predecessors did. All the previous generations throughout the entire thousands-year-long history of humanity developed due to the fact that they wanted more and more.

Values are changing, but it’s hard to define them. The sense of purpose that people used to have is no longer there.

Trump is indicative of this personal entitlement. We see that everyone else is in it for themselves so we act accordingly. If you don’t you are an idiot. Nationalism is derided but personalism isn’t?

Today, it isn’t so; the young generation isn’t attracted to the values that their parents honored. They spend most of their time glued to their cell phones, absorbed in things like social media—all of this is a subconscious attempt to avoid asking questions about life, and the pain that comes from a lack of meaning.

Moreover, social media networks are making it impossible for them to find lasting fulfillment, and soon rather than later with Algorithms driven robots there will be no meaningful jobs for all of them.

In short, the world has reached an impasse.

Sooner than later some tipping point will arrive, and we all know where that leads us, we’ve been there. We  were given a huge piece of land and all we could do was divide it into territories. This ‘division’ then crept into other things, and here we are. The low hanging fruits of life have been picked. The only people who care about what happens to each individual is themselves. You see a flat lining of the standard of living and a swelling of government debt married to a population which is aging and you understand why it has happened.

The only solution is unity because unity is the general law of nature. We can make a choice—either we fall in line with Nature’s plan and unite according to its laws, or nature will force us to through all kinds of external means.

We won’t have to suffer because of our lack of compatibility with nature; rather we can reach the next stage of evolution quickly and comfortably and in that, find eternal and lasting fulfilment.

The world is looking.

But it is useless to look for new things at the old level.

The problem with modern society is that it rewards those who can keep our attention. Irrespective of whether you are a force for good or tremendous damage society has become immune to the difference.

The advent of a world connected by networks will be marked by the transition away from geographic, religious, and cultural groupings into aggregations of people unified by self selected criteria; chaos and volatility will paradoxically increase while the world is homogenized to the new normal.

Humanity has always been one which has followed examples and precedent gratefully — we desperately need an alternative which is less depressing in order to thrive. Entitlement is hard but it is perhaps the only string which ties the people of the modern world to the path — it is the only thing that gives us purpose in our daily lives.

This feeling of entitlement is a major issue that will turn and bite us in the near future. Even in a fully mechanized world some one needs to fill the tank and turn the key.

The world is beginning to understand it is in a global problem and it would be naive to make technology the scapegoat of our shortcomings as man’s blindness, cruelty, greed, immaturity, and pride are contributing as always.

Modern democracy cannot value only the voice of majority, but it respects the voice of minority as well.  But this can only be achieved if democracy re attaches its self to the capitalist world of economics. There can not be two strands of Democracy one political and the other Economic. 

In the bakelite house of the future, the dishes might not break, but the heart can.

The problem of loneliness enveloping the modern world is related to the inner emptiness of man. And even when a person wants to rid himself of this state, he has no idea how to do it.

 We are the past.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "images of empty world map"

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

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

Share this:

  • Share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window) WhatsApp
  • More
  • Share on Mastodon (Opens in new window) Mastodon

THE BEADY EYE ASKS: IS RELIGION DISAPPEARING IN THE QUICKSILVER OF TECHNOLOGY.

19 Monday Jun 2017

Posted by bobdillon33@gmail.com in Religion for a digital age., Technology

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE ASKS: IS RELIGION DISAPPEARING IN THE QUICKSILVER OF TECHNOLOGY.

Tags

Religion for a digital age., The Pearly Gates of Cyberspace.

( A five minute read)

We all know the way religious scriptures are read can influence how they are interpreted.

Apps like YouVersion, which has been installed more than 260 million times worldwide since its launch in 2008 and similarly popular apps exist for the Torah and Koran are tweeting out filtered Bible verses which are allowing a private expression of faith to take place between a person and their phone screen.

A new kind of mutated religion for a digital age.

It’s no longer necessary to set foot in a church or a mosque.

The ubiquity of smartphones and social media makes them hard to avoid, but are they both changing the way people practise their religion.

The importance of the web in everyday life – from banking to shopping to socialising – means that religious organisations must migrate their churches and temples to virtual real estate in order to stay relevant and to be where the people are.

(Credit: Getty Images)

Azerbaijani Muslims pray at the end of Ramadan (Getty Images) (Credit: Getty Images)

 

 

 

 

Religion was important just a century or so ago, but now it is at lowest rates of belief in the world. Very few societies are more religious today than they were 40 or 50 years ago.

Now we have more and more societies following many of the ethics of the secular world. Known as moralistic therapeutic deism, this form of belief is focused more on the charitable and moral side of the Bible – the underlying tenets of religion, rather than the notion that the Universe was created by an all-seeing, all-powerful leader.

These Societies are being supercharged by the internet and social media creating a sort of Pick-and-mix religious beliefs which means people can avoid doctrines that do not appeal to them.

Quite how interacting with the Bible or the Koran in bite-sized nuggets might affect people’s views of either remains somewhat unknown, but reading the Bible or Koran or any religious writings in this way is changing people’s overall sense of it.

If you go to the Bible/ Koran as a paper book, they are quite large and complicated and you’ve got to thumb through it to find what you are looking for. With the mobile phone Bible or Koran we have more access to more information, more viewpoints, and we can create a spiritual rhythm and path that’s more personalised.

Although Capitalism, access to technology and education also seems to correlate with a corrosion of religiosity in some populations. Technology is shaping religious people themselves and changed their behaviour. You just go to where you’ve asked it to go to, and you’ve no sense of what came before or after. A lot of people who consider themselves to be active Christians may not strictly even believe in God or Jesus or the acts described in the Bible.

A rabbi reads during Purim festivities (Getty Images) (Credit: Getty Images)

It is becoming less about the preacher in the pulpit,and more about the Tweet.

When you read the Bible on a screen you end up reading the text as though it was Wikipedia.

The text read on screens is generally taken more literally than text read in books. It’s a flat kind of reading, which the Bible or the Koran or for that matter any Scriptures were not written for.

Overly literal interpretations of religious texts can lead to fundamentalism. The Pearly Gates of Cyberspace, as “a new kind of realm for the mind”.

(Getty Images) (Credit: Getty Images)

Even if we lose sight of the Christian, Muslim and Hindu gods and all the rest, superstitions and spiritualism will almost certainly still prevail, and as climate change wreaks havoc on the world in coming years and natural resources potentially grow scarce, then suffering and hardship will fuel religiosity.

The greatest danger of the web is not that it will kill or change religion, but that, we will see the differences in our faiths because of our desire to find our own kind.

The web has not de facto increased inter-faith communication. It is not being used for inter-religious dialogue or diversity.

Religious leaders will have to get used to the idea of being more accountable and transparent in their dealings and of having to engage, on equal terms, with those who stand outside the traditional hierarchies.

Can it be, then, that the more information at our disposal, the more we stop to wonder whether our God, our church, and our supposedly holy books are really as believable as they once seemed?

People become their Internet selves to such an extent that these selves become their “real” selves. Does this somehow switch them off from their former core beliefs? Or could it be that some religions are so rigid, so literal, so supposedly inviolable that they don’t sufficiently allow for critical thought?

Pope Francis has 3.8 million Twitter followers. Miley Cyrus has almost 17.7 million.

When a new technology, such as the printing press or the Internet, unleashes massive cultural change, the challenge to religion is immense. Cultural developments change how God/Mohammed , or the ultimate, is thought of and spoken about.

If there is a battle between generations about the shape of the future, it is one played out not in public life but within families.

All comments appreciated.  All like clicks chucked in the Bin.

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

Share this:

  • Share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window) WhatsApp
  • More
  • Share on Mastodon (Opens in new window) Mastodon

THE BEADY EYE SAYS: ONE WOULD HAVE TO FEEL A TOUCH OF SYMPATHY FOR THE BRITISH PEOPLE.

16 Friday Jun 2017

Posted by bobdillon33@gmail.com in Brexit v EU - Negotiations., Brexit., England EU Referendum IN or Out., ENGLAND'S SNAP ELECTION, England., European Commission., European Union., The Obvious., Unanswered Questions., Uncategorized

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE SAYS: ONE WOULD HAVE TO FEEL A TOUCH OF SYMPATHY FOR THE BRITISH PEOPLE.

Tags

England - EU - Nagoiations

 

( A twenty-minute read)

Recent events in the Uk with the tragic loss of lives are more than lamentable as they have occurred mainly due to man-made decisions, to either save money or conduct phony wars.

It is now inconceivable that they are heading for another man made disaster in a few days without any clear sense of what its wants to achieve all just because a small percentage of its people voted in a referendum a year ago without any clear sense of the alternatives to EU membership.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of the eu english negotiations"

While the clock is ticking here are a few plain truths:

If the UK wants access to the single market when it has left the EU, it will have to accept three things:

1)  Continued budget contributions
2)  Continued free movement of labour,
3) Continued supremacy of EU law over British law in the single market.

4) Crashing out of the EU without a trade deal is the “alternative to membership with the most negative long-term impact.

5) Some British eurosceptics believe that Britain could negotiate a special status of ‘half-membership’, whereby the UK would remain a full, voting member of the single market, but ditch most other EU policies. However, this would require the existing treaties – which allow no such special status – to be revised, which is not a viable possibility at the moment. In any case, most member-states and the EU institutions believe that allowing such a status for Britain could provoke similar requests from others, possibly leading the entire Union to unravel. So half-membership is not an option.

6) One simple option would be for Britain to join the European
Economic Area (EEA) – the ‘Norwegian’ option. Britain would then be outside the common agricultural and fisheries policies. But its economic relationship with the EU would not change significantly: it would pay nearly as much into the budget as it does today, free movement of labour would continue, and the UK would have to apply the single market’s rules and regulations without having a vote on them.

7) Most other options would involve the negotiation of a withdrawal treaty between the UK and the EU. If that is the result:Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of the eu english negotiations"

Here are the options.

One possibility would be a withdrawal treaty leading to a customised relationship. The best possible outcome for the British, under this option, would be something akin to the Norwegian option but without EEA membership. Britain would gain as much access to the single market as it was prepared to accept EU rules, without having a vote on them; to make payments into the EU budget; and to tolerate free movement of labour.

The Swiss option is unlikely to be on offer from the EU. Switzerland has negotiated a series of bilateral agreements with the EU. The country is part of the single market for goods, but not services. A similar status for Britain would be highly costly for the City of London. But the EU is very unhappy with the
relationship, because it has to negotiate constantly with the Swiss to make sure that their rules are equivalent to the EU’s evolving acquis communautaire. And since the Swiss voted to impose quotas on immigration from the EU in 2014, the EU has demanded a new agreement which would make Switzerland automatically update its rules to match those of the EU, as well as accept the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice.

Britain could join the EU’s customs union, like Turkey – accepting the EU’s external tariffs without having a say on the setting of those tariffs. The UK would then not face tariffs in exporting to the EU, and it would have access to the single market in goods, in exchange for signing up to all the relevant EU rules. But it would not have access to services markets and Turkey, like Switzerland and Norway, does not
benefit from the free trade agreements (FTAs) that the EU negotiates with other parts of the world.

A free trade agreement is one of the more likely options, but the main benefit of most FTAs is merely tariffs that are lower than those prescribed by World Trade Organisation (WTO) rules. Most FTAs do not cover services, regulatory convergence or public procurement. If Britain sought to negotiate a more substantive FTA than any existing template – giving it good access to the EU’s single market– the other member-states would insist on mechanisms for ensuring that it automatically adopted new EU rules, and for policing the agreement. They would also demand payments into the EU budget and free movement of labour.

Britain could simply trade with the EU under WTO rules. The WTO sets upper limits on the tariffs that countries can impose. So British exports to the EU would be subject to the EU’s common external tariff. And the WTO has made little progress in freeing up services, which would restrict the City of London’s access to the EU market. British exporters to the EU would also face the same non-tariff barriers that most non-EU countries, like Russia and China, have to put up with. As for trading with the rest of the world, the UK would no longer enjoy the benefits of the 60-odd FTAs that the EU has negotiated with other countries. The British would have to negotiate new agreements from scratch; but in doing so – as with any other FTA that the UK pursued – they would have much less clout than the EU as a whole.

Withdrawal would create enormous legal headaches for EU companies and individuals currently in Britain, and for British ones elsewhere in the EU.

After the repeal of the European Communities Act of 1972, the British government would have to hurry to draft new laws covering farming, fishing, competition policy, regional aid, environmental standards and much else, to avoid a regulatory
vacuum.

To the extent that the UK retained any access to the single market, the government would also need a mechanism for adopting new EU regulations and directives as they emerged. British citizens and companies in other member-states would lose rights derived from EU law.

The British government would need to negotiate an accord with the rest of the EU on reciprocal rights. If, as is likely, a post-Brexit government made it harder for EU citizens to live, work or study in the UK, Britons wishing to remain in or move to the continent would face similar problems. 40 per cent of THE UK HIGH TECH workforce is currently made up of EU nationals not to mention the NHS

If there is a change of mind and the UK at any point wish to rejoin the European Union, it would need to make an application to do so, the same as all other non-member states.

The first problem is the euro.

This time a ‘half-member’ solution is not possible.

Ordinarily new member states of the European Union are expected to adopt the euro and to join the currency union. The UK, of course, opted out of that, however it might not be quite as easy to resist the Euro on re-admission.

Where does all of the above leave us.  In short, if the UK chooses to leave the EU, it will be left between a rock and a hard place.  A Disaster.

The conclusion should be clear: none of the options available to the UK, in case it were to decide to withdraw from the EU are attractive. Any option would take the UK in one of two directions:

 The UK would become a kind of satellite of the EU, with the obligation to transpose into its domestic law EU regulations and directives for the single market.

 The UK would suffer from higher barriers between its economy and its main market, obliging the government to start trade negotiations from scratch, both with the EU and with the rest of the world, without having much bargaining power.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of sinking ships"

All comments appreciated. All like clicks chucked in the Bin.

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

 

 

 

Share this:

  • Share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window) WhatsApp
  • More
  • Share on Mastodon (Opens in new window) Mastodon

THE BEADY EYE ASKS: IS SOCIAL MEDIA ALL ITS MADE OUT TO BE.

15 Thursday Jun 2017

Posted by bobdillon33@gmail.com in Social Media, Social Media., The world to day., Unanswered Questions.

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE ASKS: IS SOCIAL MEDIA ALL ITS MADE OUT TO BE.

Tags

Human society, Power of Social Media, Social Media, Social networking, Social world

 

( A seven to ten minute read)

I know that there are already many opinions out there about the effects of social media, but they all seem to miss the most important fact when addressing the subject.

Social media or as I like to call it Living Algorithms Intelligence feeds on beliefs not truths, till these beliefs become collectively believable, turning Social Media into a new form of religion. Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of social media"

You might think that this is a heresy, but the definition of religion in regarding its association with science is on the whole misunderstood.

Just how does science/ technology relate to religion? They don’t know each other and never will.

However most religions argue that you simply cannot understand the world without them.

This is no longer true.

Social media is now woven into the texture of the relationships in people’s everyday lives.

Social media being used to actually reinforce traditional groups, such as family, castes, and tribes, and to repair the ruptures created by migration and mobility.

Religion is defined by its social function and is anything that confers superhuman legitimacy on human social structures. Religion asserts that humans are subject to a system of moral laws that we did not invent and that we cannot change.

Through filters Social media is becoming a toxic mirror of religion.

Social media favors the bitty over the meaty, the cutting over the considered.

It is not just us but our religious and political discourse is shrinking to fit our smartphone screens. Time and again we are informed that the Internet is transforming human life towards a more enlightened and creative existence.

The public is constantly told that Big Data and the Internet of Things are about to revolutionize human existence. Claims that digital technology will fundamentally transform education, the way we work, play and interact with one another suggest that these new media will have an even greater impact on our culture than the invention of writing, reading and religion.

Just a few years ago, social media was a fairly obscure concept. Now Social media is a broad category that includes social networking sites, blogs, online review sites and photo- and video-sharing sites. It also includes sites where users can “check in” at their location, such as a restaurant or movie theater, and share their experiences and opinions.

Social media includes both sites run by the company, such as its own blog or website, and third-party sites where users can “friend” or “follow” each other.

Predictably the Internet is also an object of glorification by its technophile advocates.

The culture of everyday life has become entwined with the Internet. There is little doubt that the digital technology and social media has already a significant impact on culture.

(Take the example of radicalized jihadist youth in the West. In many cases the Internet has been represented as a powerful technology that incites young Muslims to become radicalized. Often the term“sudden radicalization” is used to highlight the power of social media to swiftly convert otherwise confused young Muslims into hardened extremist jihadists.

The social media provides a medium through which pre-existing sentiments can gain greater clarity, expressions and meaning. It provides a medium for the kind of interaction that can throw up new ideas, new symbols, new rituals and new identities. In this sense it has helped stimulate the emergent Western jihadist youth sub-culture and arguably its online expressions have exercised an important influence on its offline trajectory.)

Through the Internet the segmentation of social experience is refracted and given greater momentum through its powerful technological dynamic. This amplification and intensification of social trends constitutes the immediate impact of the Internet on the everyday culture. If the experience of printing serves as a precedent, it is likely that digital technology will not simply intensify prevailing cultural trends but also provide resources for reinterpreting its meaning.

Authority and respect don’t accumulate on social media; they have to be earned anew at each moment.

However today, with the public looking to smartphones for news and entertainment, we seem to be at the start of the third big technological makeover of modern life both politically/ electioneering and religious beliefs.

The Internet and the social media are powerful instruments for mobilization of people is not in doubt.

However, it is not its own technological imperative that allows the social media to play a prominent role in social protest. Rather the creative use of the social media is a response to aspirations and needs that pre-exist or at least exist independently of it.

This technology ought to be perceived as a resource that can be utilized by social and political movements looking for a communication infrastructure to promote their cause.

Social networking sites like Facebook and MySpace allow you to find and connect with just about anyone making it difficult for us to distinguish between the meaningful relationships we foster in the real world, and the numerous casual relationships formed through social media.

All this provides an illusion of control: The line between a “like” and feeling ranked becomes blurred.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of social media"

It’s not about don’t spend time on Facebook, but just be aware of what it might be doing to you. Perhaps future generations will recoil with similar horror at the messiness, unpredictability and immediate personal involvement of a three-dimensional, real-time interaction.

We have all witness the election of  Donald Trump with a vast web audience—four million followers on Twitter alone is the first candidate and now president optimized for the Google News algorithm.

Even though the ease of social media communication brings major benefits to previously excluded populations, this may not have any overall impact on social differences, or oppression offline.

Poverty restricts the amount of time people can spend on the internet. People avoid political and religious postings. Social media serve local purposes, instead of breaking down international boundaries.

Populations in different parts of the world may use local or regional platforms and their own online “dialects” which keeps people separated and distinct, not united. For some people living away from their family, it can become the main place they live, where they spend most of their time. 

Once you send out a message like this one via social media, you can’t take it back even if you delete it. In addition, anything you post is considered public information, and you could see it quoted in the media.

Yet, social media certainly adds crucial new elements:  Technology, along with globalization and economic trends, has made “power easier to get, but harder to use or keep” and that brings us to the present dilemma.  We now know how to disrupt, but we still have no clear formula for bridging the gap from disruption to legitimacy. Memes have become our moral police.

 Power is no longer absolute, but must be grounded in shared principles.  If the social contract is breached, there will be a heavy price to pay and social media will play a major part in exacting that price.

All comments appreciated. All like clicks chucked in the Bin.

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this:

  • Share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window) WhatsApp
  • More
  • Share on Mastodon (Opens in new window) Mastodon
← Older posts
Newer posts →

All comments and contributions much appreciated

  • THE BEADY EYE SAYS ENGLAND IS POLITICALLY TEARING ITSELF ASUNDER, AND HERE IS WHY. April 23, 2026
  • THE BEADY EYE SAYS WITH THE ARRIVAL OF SMART GLASSES THE CONCEPT OF ANY PRIVACY IN A LIFE IS ABOUT TO DISAPPEAR FOR GOOD. April 19, 2026
  • THE BEADY EYE LOOKS AT TRUMP’S DERANGEMENT SYNDROME AND ASKED HOW MUCH LONGER DO WE HAVE TO WAIT BEFORE WE ALL FUCKED. April 18, 2026
  • THE BEADY EYE. LOOKS AT TODAYS WARS. April 15, 2026
  • THE BEADY EYE ASKS AFTER 76 YEARS IN EXISTENCE NATO NEEDS TO YET AGAIN TO REVENT ITSELF. April 15, 2026

Archives

  • April 2026
  • March 2026
  • February 2026
  • January 2026
  • December 2025
  • November 2025
  • October 2025
  • September 2025
  • August 2025
  • July 2025
  • June 2025
  • May 2025
  • February 2025
  • January 2025
  • December 2024
  • November 2024
  • October 2024
  • September 2024
  • August 2024
  • July 2024
  • June 2024
  • May 2024
  • April 2024
  • March 2024
  • February 2024
  • January 2024
  • December 2023
  • October 2023
  • September 2023
  • August 2023
  • July 2023
  • June 2023
  • May 2023
  • April 2023
  • March 2023
  • February 2023
  • January 2023
  • December 2022
  • November 2022
  • October 2022
  • September 2022
  • August 2022
  • July 2022
  • June 2022
  • May 2022
  • April 2022
  • March 2022
  • February 2022
  • January 2022
  • December 2021
  • November 2021
  • October 2021
  • September 2021
  • August 2021
  • July 2021
  • June 2021
  • May 2021
  • April 2021
  • March 2021
  • February 2021
  • January 2021
  • December 2020
  • November 2020
  • October 2020
  • September 2020
  • August 2020
  • July 2020
  • June 2020
  • May 2020
  • April 2020
  • March 2020
  • February 2020
  • January 2020
  • December 2019
  • November 2019
  • October 2019
  • September 2019
  • August 2019
  • July 2019
  • June 2019
  • May 2019
  • April 2019
  • March 2019
  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • January 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • November 2015
  • October 2015
  • September 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • June 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • October 2014
  • September 2014
  • August 2014
  • July 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • February 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013
  • October 2013

Talk to me.

Jason Lawrence's avatarJason Lawrence on THE BEADY EYE ASK’S: WIT…
benmadigan's avatarbenmadigan on THE BEADY EYE ASK’S: WHA…
bobdillon33@gmail.com's avatarbobdillon33@gmail.co… on THE BEADY EYE SAYS: WELCOME TO…
Ernest Harben's avatarOG on THE BEADY EYE SAYS: WELCOME TO…
benmadigan's avatarbenmadigan on THE BEADY EYE SAY’S. ONC…

7/7

Moulin de Labarde 46300
Gourdon Lot France
0565416842
Before 6pm.

My Blog; THE BEADY EYE.

My Blog; THE BEADY EYE.
bobdillon33@gmail.com

bobdillon33@gmail.com

Free Thinker.

View Full Profile →

Follow bobdillon33blog on WordPress.com

Blog Stats

  • 98,909 hits

Blogs I Follow

  • unnecessary news from earth
  • The Invictus Soul
  • WordPress.com News
  • WestDeltaGirl's Blog
  • The PPJ Gazette
Follow bobdillon33blog on WordPress.com
Follow bobdillon33blog on WordPress.com

The Beady Eye.

The Beady Eye.
Follow bobdillon33blog on WordPress.com

Blog at WordPress.com.

unnecessary news from earth

WITH MIGO

The Invictus Soul

The only thing worse than being 'blind' is having a Sight but no Vision

WordPress.com News

The latest news on WordPress.com and the WordPress community.

WestDeltaGirl's Blog

Sharing vegetarian and vegan recipes and food ideas

The PPJ Gazette

PPJ Gazette copyright ©

Privacy & Cookies: This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use.
To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here: Cookie Policy
  • Subscribe Subscribed
    • bobdillon33blog
    • Join 222 other subscribers
    • Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
    • bobdillon33blog
    • Subscribe Subscribed
    • Sign up
    • Log in
    • Report this content
    • View site in Reader
    • Manage subscriptions
    • Collapse this bar