THE BEADY EYE SAY’S: THE NEW TYPE OF NON- CONSCIOUS INTELLIGENCE DRIVEN BY NON-CONSCIOUS ALGORITHMS IS GOING TO DESTROY WHAT IS LEFT OF DECENCY IN THE WORLD.

Featured

Posted by bobdillon33@gmail.com in Artificial Intelligence., Facebook

Tags

Artificial Intelligence., Technology, The Future of Mankind

( A six-minute read)

The idea that humans will always have a unique ability beyond the reach of non-conscious algorithms is just wishful thinking.

The fact is, as time goes by it will be easier and easier to replace humans with computer algorithms, not because they are getting smarter and smarter but because humans are professionalising.

One would have to say are we all such naive bonkers that we are going to allow algorithms dictate our lives.

The answer so far appears to be yes. We are going to become militarily and economically useless.

Technical difficulties or political objections might slow down the algorithmic invasion of the job market but while the systems might need humans, it will not need individuals.

These systems will make most of the important decisions depriving individuals of their authority and freedom.

They are already assembling humans into dividuals ie. humans are becoming an assemblage of many different algorithms lacking a single inner voice or a single self.

Its time we realized that if we continue down this path allowing large corporations platforms to introduce algorithms willy nilly with no overall vetting as to whether they comply with our values we will be replacing the voter, the consumer, and the beholder.

The Al algorithm will know best, will always be right, and beauty will be in the calculation of the algorithm. Individualism will collapse and authority will shift from individual humans to autonomous networks.

People will not see themselves as individuals but as collections of biochemical mechanisms that are constantly monitored and guided by a network of electronic algorithms.

We are already crossing the line. Most of us use Apps without any thought whatsoever.

You might say that every age has its organizing principles.

The nineteenth century had the novel, and the twentieth had TV; in our more modern times, they come and go more quickly than ever—on Web 1.0 it was the website, for example, and a few years later, for 2.0, it was the app.

And now, another shift is underway:

Today’s organizing principle is the algorithm. (Though you could productively argue that our new lingua franca will either be artificial intelligence or virtual reality.)

Algorithms rule the modern world, silent workhorses aligning data sets and systematizing the world. They’re everywhere, in everything, and you wouldn’t know unless you looked. For some of the most powerful companies in the world—Google, Facebook, etc.—they’re also closely held secrets, the most valuable intellectual property a company owns.

Perhaps it is naïve to believe algorithms should be neutral? but it’s also deceptive to advance the illusion that Facebook and the algorithms that power it are bias-free.

They are not neutral.

Facebook is intended to be the home of what the world is talking about. Their business model depends on it, even if that’s an impossible goal. As such, with now well over a billion users, and still growing, it’s worth asking:

What role should Facebook play in shaping public discourse? And just how transparent should it be?

After all, Facebook is mind-boggling massive.

It accounts for a huge portion of traffic directed to news sites; small tweaks in its own feed algorithm can have serious consequences for media companies’ bottom lines.

What can be done? ( See previous posts)

Evolution will continue and will need to do so if we humans are to exist.

We therefore should welcome all technology that enhances our chances of this existence in as far that it equates to human values.

All Algorithms that violate these values for the sake of profit or power should be destroyed.

After all if humans have no soul and if thoughts, emotions, and sensations are just biochemical algorithms why can’t biology account for all the vagaries of human societies.?

If Donald Trump is the best that twitter Algorithms can produce it appears to me that there is a long way to go and it’s not too late to change course.

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

THE BEADY EYE SAYS: COMPUTER ALGORITHMS THAT ARE FILTERING CONTENT ARE STARTING TO ISOLATE US FROM ONE ANOTHER.

30 Sunday Apr 2017

Posted by bobdillon33@gmail.com in Artificial Intelligence., Big Data., Facebook, Google Knowledge., Humanity., Privatization, Social Media., Technology, The Future, The Internet., The Obvious., The world to day., Twitter, Unanswered Questions., What Needs to change in the World, Where's the Global Outrage.

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Artificial Intelligence., Big Data, ongoing Privatization of the world, Privatization, Privatization of the World., SMART PHONE WORLD, Technology, The Future of Mankind

( A five-minute read)

We all know or at least we should all be aware that our world is becoming less and less transparent thanks to what we call Artificial Intelligence.

The challenge there is:

The false promise of the Internet was that it can connect people from different backgrounds, with different beliefs and across disparate locations.

The trend toward personalization by AI is impeding the fulfillment of that promise?

What is becoming more and more apparent is that while most personalization on the web is algorithmically driven, aren’t we implicitly, informing the algorithms based on the choices we’ve previously made interacting with content?

Couldn’t you then, in theory, manipulate the filter so you see what you want to see or are there too many factors beyond our control?

Consider:

Even if you’re completely logged out of Google, on a new computer, the company can track 57 signals about you — from what kind of laptop you’re using to what your IP address is to what the font size in your browser is. Already, that gives a lot of important clues about age, income and demographics.

It’s ironic — the promise of personalization is that it gives us our own personal view of the world.

But the challenge is that a lot of the time, it’s actually pushing us toward a stereotyped, simplified version of ourselves: “This person is male, so we’ll show him more gadget and car news.”

So let me ask you.

Many of the major social, discovery and media sites on the Internet now implement some type of personalization. Do you feel these sites have a responsibility to educate consumers about how their information is being filtered? Do you think users should be able to opt out of personalization?

I would say Yes, on both counts.

In an increasingly complex and vast media landscape it is crucial that me maintain our private lives.

Why?

Because: Algorithms of all shapes and sizes are monitoring, analyzing, making

decisions, dictating our credit scores etc. They are shaping our lives and economies, our future, so shouldn’t we know what code and mathematical equations, or deep learning go into making them work.

However Transparency alone won’t help.

Algorithms are complicated so exposing the code behind them won’t make them more understandable. Knowing how an algorithm is coded is useless without knowing the data that has being fed into it in the first place.

There is only one solution and that is the:

The Creation of a New World Organisation that is totally transparent, and self financing: To vet all Technology. To ensure that they comply with the core world gold standard of human values.

(See previous Posts)

Let me ask you two further questions.

Can some level of personalization be useful?

What are we missing that we need to see?

Some amount of algorithmic personalization is necessary — there’s just too much stuff to sort through for humans to do it all. However you don’t know who Google thinks you are or on what basis it’s editing your results, and therefore you don’t know what you’re missing.

A lot of the personalization that exists today just serves up information junk food, but a growing portion is being curated by robots — computer algorithms that are filtering content and deciding what we get to see.

It may be delicious, but it doesn’t feed the soul.

Now it’s possible to live in a bubble where that stuff doesn’t ever show up — you’d never know it’s happening.

Take the Facebook “Like” button — the main way that information gets spread on Facebook. “Like” isn’t a neutral word — it’s easy to Like “I just finished a marathon,” and hard to Like “cell phones may cause cancer.”

So some kinds of information get through, and others don’t, and when that’s happening in the Facebook News Feed, where an increasing number of folks get their news, it’s a real problem.

Most people aren’t aware that their Google search results, Yahoo News links, or Facebook feed is being tailored in this way.

Filters can provide relevance and combat information overload, but with so much riding on automated decisions to ensure algorithms deal with humans fairly is now more relevant than ever.

I recently read that in five-year your smartphone could be reading your mind.

Brain- computer interface.

Personalization couldn’t exist without the massive dossiers of personal data being collected by big companies online these days. And it’s a problem because consumers don’t have much control over that.

The current laws around personal data just don’t contemplate a world in which a click on one website changes what you see on an entirely different one.

Almost all popular websites, from search engines to social networks to media outlets, are now utilizing filters in some way to personalize content for visitors.

When websites show us only what we like, we get cut off from the diverse points of view that can enrich our understanding of the world.

We get Donald Trumps.

Privacy is about controlling what the world is allowed to know about you. This is about controlling what you’re able to see of the world — what your filters let through and what they don’t.

Its time to wake up.

We can lose sight of our common problems, but they don’t lose sight of us.

It’s only a matter of time before our Fidelity/ Loyalty cards are linked up to our personal data held by banks, e-commerce sites and social media. If not already.

We will then be looking at citizen character score, which will bring credit scores to a whole new level, turning them more into to life scores, by tracking anything and everything we do. The scary bit is what is tracked and by who.

I hear you saying that this will never be accepted.

It is already on the cards for people living in China and Singapore. Humans and robot algorithms, living in peaceful harmony. Where you go, what you buy, who you know, how many points are on your driving licence, how your friends rate you.

The scores will serve not just to indicate an individual’s credit risk, but could be used in a vast array of applications and organisations such as Governments, Benefits, Hospital Operations, Visa, Education, down to all fields that makes Society including prison sentences, landlords, employers, and even romantic partners to gauge an individual’s character.

Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of cloud computing"

All stored in the Cloud. Which comes in many different models forms.

Ubiquitous access to the network: Self-service and on-demand access to computing capabilities. This service will most often be performed by the service provider automatically without the need for human interaction.

Cloud Computers is not the easiest of terms to define, or explain what it all actually means. Owned by Google, Twitter, Gmail and Facebook the Cloud is elusive as grabbing a cloud itself.

Perhaps we can blame it all on Leonhard Euler one of the most prolific mathematicians in history, and also a prolific inventor of canonical notation.

( An Euler path is a path that uses every edge of a graph exactly once.)

One way or the other to use a Trumpetism: It’s ain’t going to be great unless we build algorithms that have a sense of civic purpose embedded in them, giving us both entertainment and the information we really need, not profit.

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

O sorry about the line spacing in this post just cannot figure out how to correct it.

THE BEADY EYE ASKS: IS TECHNOLOGY STRIPPING US OF LIVING A LIFE OF PURPOSE, LEAVING US WITH ON SUBSTANTIVE CONTENT.

22 Wednesday Feb 2017

Posted by bobdillon33@gmail.com in Artificial Intelligence., Big Data., Facebook, Google it., Google Knowledge., Humanity., Life., Scientific., Social Media., Technology, The Future, The Internet., The world to day., Unanswered Questions., What Needs to change in the World, Where's the Global Outrage., World Organisations.

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Artificial Intelligence., Big Data, Inequility, The Future of Mankind, THE UNITED NATIONS, Visions of the future.

( A Ten minute read, that challenges the reader to leave a comment.)

Something is profoundly wrong with the way we live today.

People’s characters, conceptions and behaviour are socially and culturally are being constructed by Data. We are living in a data explosion.

Like every period of significant rupture and change throughout history, the data-evolution we are witnessing is in urgent need of a stronger ethical and critical backbone.

Big Data is creating a new kind of digital divide: “the Big Data rich and the Big Data poor.” Inequality has become an essential part of the system that creates, stores and makes data accessible.

Tech giants like Google are creating what some call an “intellectual monopoly,” as universities’ best brains are hired to work with their exclusive access to privately harvested data to produce scientific results which are often not shared publically if they are profitable.

The Internet, has become an alternative space of consumption, production and social interaction. It is an increasingly influential space where the future divisions and similarities between people are being formed and the political and economic rules and structures that govern this space called Internet deserve our critical attention.

Ninety percent of data that exists in the world today was created in the past two years. This mass explosion of data – and our increasing reliance on it is creating a very disturbed place devoid of human life and filled with whirring fibre optic cables, servers and generators to convey the vastness of the web through binary code and pixels:

The majority of data which exists nowadays is made not by governments or scientific organisations but by ordinary citizens.

It’s the kind of information that most people share without a second thought, but when compiled in physical form, presents a surprisingly discernible narrative from hobbies and habits to musical tastes and conversations.

I am all for Technology but its impact on organisations and institutions will be profound.

Governments, armies, churches, universities, banks and companies all evolved to thrive in relatively murky epistemological environment, in which most knowledge was local, secrets were easily kept, and individuals were, if not blind, myopic.

When these organisations suddenly find themselves exposed to daylight, they quickly discover that they can no longer rely on old methods; they must respond to the new transparency or go extinct.

They are struggling to cope with transparency.

In my last post I asked the question – are we just becoming fodder for Artificial Intelligence, ie Data.

Don’t get me wrong, data is a treasure trove when it comes to health, predicting the climate, space, and the like. Community projects such as Open Street Map and Safecast‘s work to record radiation levels in Japan.

Big data’s impact on politics can also be beneficial such as Madrid City Council site, which acts as an open consultation platform where people can have their say on issues from bull fighting to transport proposals, something we’ll likely see a lot more of over the next few years.

We will see more and more live data streams on a map of the capital, showing Tweets, Instagram posts and TfL updates, while another by Future Cities Catapult asks users to make decisions about housing, energy, transport and building projects, and uses data modelling to predict the effects those decisions would have over the next 20 years.

Now I am no data mining scientist but it seems to me that the data world is not clear-cut, whilst a good data visualisation is worth a thousand words, it does not automatically follow that it tells the whole truth.

Machines are learning to recognize all sorts of patterns in the data at a scale and speed humans couldn’t possibly manage to do on their own. It’s not just data on its own, it’s data from a gigapixel imaging devices that can scan the whole body for indications of cancer, or data captured by sensors installed in self-driving cars about nearby objects and vehicles in motion that can eliminate sources of human error and make self-driving cars possible.

Whole industries are being disrupted by those who know how to tap the new potential of the right information in the right place at the right time.

The whole Big Data thing started with Google.

Some estimates put the total amount of data generated each day at 2.5 quintillion bytes!

While the massiveness of data boggles the mind with ease, the granularity of it is equally staggering when you consider the individual sources of the stuff.

The Large Hadron Collider at CERN generates about 30 Petabytes per year (as a result of 600 million collisions per second generating data in their detectors.

The Synoptic Survey Telescope generates 30 Terabytes of astronomical data per night.

In 2010 the list of largest databases in the world quotes the World Data Centre for Climate database as the largest in the world, at 220 Terabyte (possibly because of the additional 6 Petabyte of tapes they hold, albeit not directly accessible data). By the end of 2014, according to the Centre’s web site, the database size is close to 4 Petabyte (roughly 2 Petabytes of these are internal data).

Every interaction that every user has with any piece of technology produces more of it, and as people are becoming more comfortable using technology and more reliant on the information it provides, they want to use more of that data in simple and rewarding ways.

Although it may be logical to assume that we retain the power to control our digital privacy, like the bar-coded plastic membership cards that dangle from our key chains, our privacy is quickly slipping through our fingers.

As surveillance technologies shrink in cost and grow in sophistication, we are increasingly unaware of the vast, cumulative data we offer up.

Of course not many of us are concerned in an era when cellphone data, web searches, online transactions, and social-media commentary are actively gathered, logged, and cross-compared, we’ve seemingly surrendered to the inevitability of trade-offs in a digital future.

Mobile devices themselves are becoming the primary access point for information.

There is nothing new about this data digital culture, however significant changes are happening — some are obvious while others are below the surface. We’re only just starting to see how revolutionary big data can be, and as it truly takes off, we can expect even more changes on the horizon.

While digital natives are comfortable with technology, the question is: which technology, in which context?

There are now more mobile phones on Earth than there are people! And most of these phones have cameras. Yet Google Glass feels invasive because of its ability to record video.

As wearable technology is getting its toehold embedded technology, it’s not so much about the technology, but when, all of a sudden, things go from impossible (or immoral) to ubiquitous only a fraction of the world is going to benefit.

The fact is that when we all start to wear wearables, the intimacy level will be much higher that we cannot avoid considering how these devices literally change who we are and our bodily engagement with the world.

For example when one buys a Fitbit because they desire to be seen as fitness-conscious, just as much as they seek truth in quantification. Their exercise routine or daily walks are an act of designing a better self, so the device simply becomes part of that ecosystem.

A teleological view of human nature is inherently dynamic.

We know what things cost but have no idea what they are worth. We know longer ask of a judicial ruling or a legislative act: Is it good? Is it fair? Is it just? Is it right? Will it help to bring about a better society or a better world?

In the words of moral and political philosopher Alasdair MacIntyre, this teleological view maps out the journey between “man-as-he happens-to-be” and “man-as-he-could-be-if-he realized-his-essential-nature.”

Those who surrender freedom for security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one.

The inevitable price of the convenience of opting in is compromise.

The promise of big data cannot be segregated from this price.

Embracing the radical transparency at our threshold, many see a potentiality that far outweighs the threat—after all, what do we have to hide?

Yet, privacy is not secrecy—and while there are things we should be comfortable bearing, our dignity should not be one of them.

Whistleblower Edward Snowden said his biggest fear was that we “won’t be willing to take the risks necessary to stand up and fight to change things.”

Machines will win our hearts with every step they take in evolution. Undoubtedly, this is a co-evolution.

It’s a symbiotic relationship where we are becoming more and more enmeshed and less aware of the capacity of this evolving interconnection. It’s a compulsory affair built on convenience and reward.

Arguably, we are no more mindful of the bits and bytes that we tap, swipe, and key than we are of our own breathing.

The true heirs of this data are platforms like Facebook, Google, Microsoft and others that we have gifted seemingly insignificant data to—under the guise of “sharing.”

As more mobile devices enter the world, they generate more and more data that needs to be understood, analyzed, presented, and consumed.

There is already so much data stored in the world that we are running out of ways to quantify it.

Data is quickly becoming the primary content of the 21st century.

Humankind is able to store at least 295 exabytes of information. (Yes, that’s a number with 20 zeroes in it.)

For 30 years we have made a virtue out of the pursuit of material self-interest: Indeed, this pursuit now constitutes whatever remains of our sense of collective purpose.

The sense of living a life of purpose, meaning, sociality, and mutuality are disappearing. These scenes used to be the backbone to political questions, even if they invited no easy answers.

Modern economics focuses a lot on incentives, but not nearly enough on intrinsic motivation.

Samsung has just warned its customers that their smart televisions may be impinging their privacy.

Facebook is now a public entity. It claims to have upwards of 300 Petabyte of data in their (so-called) data warehouse;

Fortunately there is a series of mixed media installations that encourage visitors to think twice about the information they post online.

If you don’t want them to share your photos and information in your profile updates and statuses you need to issue the following statement. I declare that I have not given my permission to Facebook to use my photos or any information in my profile, my updates and my statuses.

Twitter has produced a millionaire buffoon as president of the USA.

Three examples of a big difference in perception and expectations.

Our lack of control over the data we upload serve as a chilling reminder of global governments’ power to use personal data without our consent, and the extreme lengths used to conceal surveillance programmes.

We must learn once again to pose questions of our governments by taking a fresh look at democracy.

The conversation, both national and world-wide, is terrifically out of balance, with near-total focus on what’s broken and how we should fix it, and so little focus on stories of attractive, desirable possibilities we might agree to work toward.

To tackle social problems in their entirety, organisations need to mount a collective approach. It is the role of statesmanship – always in short supply – to remind us of the enduring commonalities that we are forever in danger of overlooking.

We are currently opting into an unfathomable interdependency with an urgent need to re-evaluate our daily interactions with technology and their impact on the fidelity of our privacy.

What that ecosystem and the devices that inhabit it will look like 20, 10, or even five years from now is anyone’s guess and it’s not at all comfortable.

We need a more controlled understanding of Big Data before headgear and an apps allows users to control products using their brainwaves.

Data itself is of no value if it is just being stored and not converted into useful information or actionable insight.

As I have said in the last post the AI genie is out of the bottle with no way to get it back in. So, knowing what you know now, do you choose the red pill or the blue one?

Red for access to a digital divided world.

Blue for a digital world where all technology is vetted by an Independent totally transparent New World organisation. Called Click.

All comments welcome all like clicks chucked in the bin.

…

THE BEADY EYE SAYS: IF MACHINES ARE TO INTERACT WITH HUMANS IN A INTELLIGENT WAY, THEY NEED TO HAVE COMMONSENSE KNOWLEDGE.

31 Saturday Dec 2016

Posted by bobdillon33@gmail.com in Artificial Intelligence., Big Data., Communication., Facebook, HUMAN INTELLIGENCE, Humanity., Innovation., Modern Day Communication., Social Media., Technology, The Future, The Internet., The world to day., Unanswered Questions., What Needs to change in the World, Where's the Global Outrage.

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Artificial Intelligence., Big Data, Commonsense., Community cohesion, Globalization, SMART PHONE WORLD, Visions of the future.

( A Questioning read of six to five minutes)

Can machines achieve “common sense” in the near future?

We have no clue right now how to go about solving this problem.

We are living in a world where common sense ironically is very uncommon.

When you look at the way Artificial Intelligence is destroying what is left it is hard to even define it.

We have to force our ideas to conform to the evidence of reality rather than the other way around.

Commercial Algorithms for profit and big data are creating a world of insecurity with false news destroying the very fabric of society by removing basic knowledge about how the world of human beings works.

Common sense is not rule-based. It is not entirely logical. It is a set of heuristics almost all human beings quickly acquire. Commonsense knowledge encompasses facts that people know and use in their daily lives. It is assumed to be known by average people, therefore it is not verbally communicated most of the time.

Much of the interaction in this digital world happens at a distance, which can diminish the rules of cause and effect, action and consequence. Additionally, much of digital life takes place under the cloak of anonymity, making it easier to participate in unethical and even illegal behaviors.

Common sense, by contrast, is regarded – or rather, it is often disregarded – as a low-level, practical, ‘everyday’ phenomenon, hardly noticed, except when its absence is suddenly revealed in the actions of an otherwise apparently intelligent, capable adult.

It not necessary for us to understand how the software works for the software to be effective.

The universe doesn’t care about our common sense.

With enough data, enough computing power and trial and error, there is no telling what we can find.

A world where brains have been replaced with digital computers.

In some sense, this is what software is all about: extending our intelligence.

What is this “intelligence” we are talking about?

Is AI using nonstandard logics natural deduction, to predict the future of a sequence from observation of its past.

Is there commonsense reasoning in AI- what role of logic is there in AI?

Is there such a thing as AI Philosophy?

Will it be genetically engineered intelligence.?

Though I don’t know much about biology, I doubt that any brain runs at twice the speed of another brain.

Is it logic of obligation and permission;

What facts are observed by AI and how are these facts represented in the memory of a computer, smart phone, iPad?

What rules (if any) permit legitimate conclusions to be drawn from these facts?

Humans up to now are the source of commonsense rules with memory as a constraint.

We may hope that machines will eventually compete with men in all purely intellectual fields. But which are the best ones to start with? Even this is a difficult decision.

We call our phones “smart”, don’t we?

Lots of people want to judge machine intelligence based on human intelligence.

Your intelligence is actually an aggregate of your brain with your environment and the tools and ideas around you. Tools extend our intelligence… with computers and robots being obvious examples. They can always extend your memory with external support (in this case, use a pen and paper, or just Google) and all it might do is slow you down. Except for storage capabilities (memory) and speed, all hardware is equivalent.

I am not sure understanding language and common sense are the same thing. For example, many human beings are illiterate and yet they can be said to have common sense.

Do machines really offer: a new kind of intelligence, a new form of common sense. It is not necessary for the software to play at “human level”.

By definition, digital media is participatory. To adults it looks like a brave new world – but to kids, it’s “just life.”

Digital life describes the media world our kids inhabit 24/7 – online, on cell phones and mobile devices, and anywhere media is displayed.

The users create the content, and anything created in this digital life becomes instantly viral, scalable, replicable, and viewable by vast, invisible audiences.

This implies an educative process rooted in, and respectful of, people’s lived experience. Unfortunately this is not so. We now have instant gratification, irrelevant of where or how we get it.

As sensing technologies become increasingly distributed and democratized, this dynamic new world requires new comprehension and communication skills, as well as new codes of conduct, to ensure that these powerful media and technologies are used responsibly and ethically.

We all know about Artificial Intelligence.

But is Common sense and the Plane Truth being replaced by machines, simple facts, plain arguments, simplistic assumptions with reliable, independent data have all but disappeared.

The chaotic and contradictory nature of ‘common sense’, makes it impossible for Machines to evaluate. They are programmed by humans and therefore will never be able to predict their future performance without prejudice and let their feelings decide for themselves.

To achieve any common sense we will need a database containing all the general knowledge that most people possess, represented in a way that it is available to artificial intelligence programs that use natural language or make inferences about the ordinary world. Such a database is a type of ontology of which the most general are called upper ontologies.

” Common sense is the best distributed commodity in the world, for every man is convinced that he is well supplied with it.” Rene Descartes (1596-1650) French philosopher and mathematician.

Le Discours de la method (1637) long-term goals of Artificial Intelligence research. Commonsense reasoning is relevant for many applications, including systems in which robots and humans interact.

To maintain a sophisticated civilization, we have to keep out-innovating our problems. You may have heard that our civilization is not sustainable. We burn too much fossil oil, we pollute too much, there are too many of us, and so on. This is all true. If we are going to keep on surviving, let alone get better, we need to keep on getting smarter even if our brains are standing still biologically at a rate that exceeds our growing problems.

I am generally favorable to any biological technology that can enhance intelligence.

I also think that any long-term intelligence improvement strategy has to take into account that we are become hybrids, part machine, part human beings…The line between digital life’s perils and possibilities is thin.

I am still waiting for a chip that will give me access to the web at the speed of the thought.

The question is whether Gramsci’s distinction between good sense and common sense will be predicated on an irredeemably hierarchical conception of knowledge. One data base against another – Google vers Facebook. Commonsense rule extraction requires minimal human interaction.

Endowing computers with common sense is one of the major problems facing the world.

The relationship between ethics, common sense, and rationality is not just simply feeds books and articles into the computer and has it understand them.

We are if you look at the present state of the Planet we are far from broad deep and robust commonsense reasoning.

Unfortunately, at some point in our lives we give into the fast paced world around us and disregard the faculties of our own mind.

While everyone is entitled to their own beliefs, don’t just turn your brain off and not think about it. I’m not saying one person or another is right, or wrong. I’m simply saying that you need to free your mind from the dogma that holds you down from seeking the principles and truths that govern these areas of life.

If we dont start to veting all technology that is not for the betterment of humankind we will have such a fucked up world with some people desperately unrehearsed that the rest of us can forget it.

( See previous posts: Re the need to give all technology a bill of health)

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

THE BEADY EYE SAY’S: THERE IS ONLY ONE NEW YEAR RESOLUTION WORTH WHILE.

27 Tuesday Dec 2016

Posted by bobdillon33@gmail.com in Artificial Intelligence., Big Data., Facebook, Google it., Google Knowledge., HUMAN INTELLIGENCE, Humanity., Innovation., Life., Modern Day Communication., Social Media., Technology, The Future, The Internet., The New year 2017, The world to day., What Needs to change in the World, Where's the Global Outrage., WiFi communication.

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Artificial Intelligence., Internet, Social Media, The Future of Mankind, THE UNITED NATIONS, Visions of the future.

(Your New Year Resolution)

Good vs. bad. Right vs. wrong. Human beings begin to learn the difference before we learn to speak—and thankfully so. We owe much of our success as a species to our capacity for moral reasoning. It’s the glue that holds human social groups together, the key to our fraught but effective ability to cooperate.

We are (most believe) the lone moral agents on planet Earth—but this may not last. The day may come soon when we are forced to share this status with a new kind of being, one whose intelligence is of our own design.

As awesome as the internet has been we are on the most part digital immigrants because it is destroying the sense of community.

The Internet is the forerunner of artificial intelligence which is set to change all of us and the very planet we all live on.

The survival of our species may depend on instilling values in AI, but doing so could also ensure harmonious robo-relations in more prosaic settings.

We are only just glimpsing the tip its potential. Our very DNA destiny is changing. (the root of intelligence)

We haven’t just been redefining what we mean by AI—we’ve been redefining what it means to be human. We’ll spend the next decade—indeed, perhaps the next century—in a permanent identity crisis, constantly asking ourselves what humans are for.

The greatest benefit of the arrival of artificial intelligence is that AIs will help define humanity. We need AIs to tell us who we are. But on its present connectivity form of Capitalistic algorithms its trajectory is set to fail both people and the planet.

At the moment artificial Intelligence might seem banal and it may well remain so for some time to come, till we have Neuromorphic computers.

Algorithms live on the a diet of information.

They are black box of the future, impossible for outsiders to know what is going on inside them.

Whether you are black white, man or woman, over 60th, married or divorced, catholic or muslim, use an Apple phone or not, whether you are on Facebook, whether you have criminal record or not down to the zip code you live in they are deciding what price to charge you.

Facebook for instance has a dossier of more the 2 billion people.

Buried deep within its site is a setting called “Ad Preferences”

It logs everything. It also buys data about its users, and used all this data to target the very ADs you look at, which are follow you around with an algorithm from one site to the next.

Much of the current debate on algorithmic culture revolves around the role that humans play in the design of algorithms – that is whether a creator’s subconscious beliefs and biases are encoded into the algorithms that make decisions about us.

Accountability is the important issue here.

Do we want an echo chamber of our social media feeds that are creating a striking gap between our real interested and their digital reflection.

Ghettoizing all of us into prescribed category of demographically content.

Algorithmic determinism will be the curse of the globe.

Our Identities are crucial to our survival. To day Artificial Intelligence algorithms are already embedded in almost every aspect of everyday living with thousands of algorithmic decisions being made about each of us every day.

The Question is: Are we supposed to keep track and be responsible for all of them.

What relationship between us and Ai do we want.?

So here is a worthwhile New year Resolution.

We still have a great deal of work to do to address the concerns and risks a foot with our growing reliance on AI systems.

Because AI algorithms are being asked to make high-stakes decisions, the impact of successful cyber attacks on AI systems could be much more devastating than you envisage. Before we put AI algorithms in control of high-stakes decisions, we must be much more confident that these systems can survive large-scale cyber attacks.

To promote its responsible use and “verification” of the behavior of software systems. That systems built automatically via statistical “machine learning” methods behave properly. To ensure good behavior when an AI system encounters unforeseen situations.

Send the Secretary General of United Nations an Email everyday.

Requesting a world people’s resolution:

That All Technology must carry a universal stamp of UN approval.

The prospect of out-of-control super intelligences that threaten the survival of humanity will be down to where humans have failed to correctly instruct the AI algorithm in how it should behave.

Send an email (Office of the Spokesperson for the Secretary General):sgcentral@un.org; dujarric@un.org; haqf@un.org; maestracci@un.org; kaneko@un.org; gillmann@un.org; palanivelu@un.org; contactnewscentre@un.org

Call the Secretary General’s office in UN Headquarter in New York

1-212-963-7162
Fax 1-212-963-7055

Send a letter to his office:
Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon
United Nations Headquarter
405 East 42nd Street
New York, NY 10017 USA

It is time for the United Nations to chart a sensible path for technology to create transparent and accountable AI in order to improve humanity’s collective future.

We must not put AI algorithms in control of potentially-dangerous systems until we can provide a high degree of assurance that they will behave safely and properly.

These issues are becoming increasingly important as more people discover the digital world and find the need for anonymity in this new society. Current rules regarding anonymity on the internet are not global and are severely dependent on the opinion of the service providers who run the servers. The international nature of the net simply makes it impossible to enforce the laws of every country individually. Freedom of expression must be enshrined in all forms of software.

That future national and international legislation on the internet allows the vital service of anonymity to remain. This will only function on an international scale if both lawmakers and net users work together and try to figure out a solution.

The ethical issues related to the possible future creation of machines with general intellectual capabilities far outstripping those of humans are quite distinct from any ethical problems arising in current automation and information systems.

Such super intelligence would not be just another technological development; it would be the most important invention ever made, and would lead to explosive progress in all scientific and technological fields, as the super intelligence would conduct research with superhuman efficiency. To the extent that ethics is a cognitive pursuit, a super intelligence could also easily surpass humans in the quality of its moral thinking.

However, it would be up to the designers of the super intelligence to specify its original motivations. Since the super intelligence may become unstoppable powerful because of its intellectual superiority and the technologies it could develop, it is crucial that it be provided with human-friendly motivations.

We will probably one day have to take the gamble of super intelligence no matter what. But once in existence, a super intelligence could help us reduce or eliminate other existential risks, such as the risk that advanced nanotechnology will be used by humans in warfare or terrorism, a serious threat to the long-term survival of intelligent life on earth.

If we get to super intelligence first, we may avoid this risk from nanotechnology and many others. If, on the other hand, we get nanotechnology first, we will have to face both the risks from nanotechnology and, if these risks are survived, also the risks from super intelligence.

The overall risk seems to be minimized by implementing super intelligence, with great care, as soon as possible.

Any Other suggestions welcome, all like button clicks will be put in the bind.

THE BEADY EYE ASKS: IS ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE THE BREAKING POINT FOR CAPITALISM.

09 Friday Dec 2016

Posted by bobdillon33@gmail.com in Artificial Intelligence., Big Data., Capitalism, Facebook, Google it., Google Knowledge., HUMAN INTELLIGENCE, Humanity., Innovation., Life., Modern day life., Politics., Sustaniability, Technology, The Future, The Internet., The world to day., Twitter, Unanswered Questions., What Needs to change in the World, Where's the Global Outrage., WiFi communication., World Organisations.

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

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

( A five-minute read that might change your life.)

The last two posts were an attempt to highlight the fact that Artificial Intelligence is changing the way we think and bemoaned the fact that our world is accepting this without an oversight.

This heading is self-explanatory.

Without us noticing, we are entering the post capitalist era. At the heart of further change to come is information technology, new ways of working and the sharing economy.

It’s starting to feel like humans have made themselves redundant in their own economy. The first stage of an economy beyond capitalism.

The knowledge content of products is becoming more valuable than the physical things that are used to produce them. Today, the thing that is corroding capitalism, barely rationalised by mainstream economics, is information.

Any variable to success can be bought and sold, and that means for those who have wealth, they can buy success instead of creating it – the arrival of Twitter President Donald Trump.

It’s a shift in the ‘fairness’ of capitalism, and the reward for someone putting in effort. When capital can beat humans on thinking, it’s hard to create a marketplace that doesn’t resemble feudalism (albeit minus the harsh living conditions).

For a long time, artificial intelligence was little more than science fiction — now it’s now just a matter of time before AI isn’t just a static piece of IP.

It’s capable of building entirely new monopolies, businesses and ‘things’ all by itself.

It will and is already creating monopolies.

Here’s a stark reality:

Innovation is also much, much harder in a world driven by individuals owning large swathes of AI resource. Why? Because innovation will increasingly be defined by world views of a single person, rather than the thinking power of many.

Today’s great leaders must empathise with the perspectives of many and convince people that they’re making the right choice. It’s tricky and often means concessions and understanding problems outside of specific world views.

If they could solve problems however they wanted with whomever they wanted, that paradigm shifts. You might start finding that someone in control of AI resources only solved problems for themselves. Humans are, after all, selfish creatures.

Capitalism has been fuelled by the ability to create creative monopolies and be rewarded for it. But the shift we’re about to experience is profound — for the first time, capital will become a source of those creative monopolies rather than just a product.

Putting aside the ethics for a second,

AI is essentially a new form of inter-species slavery.

Instead of relying on our fellow species, we’re creating automated, non-human slaves. AI are just cattle versions of intelligence (once is created/bred for meat, the other for intelligence).

Ethically that may pose a problem, but conceptually, it positions AI differently to ‘owned’ property — mostly because it shifts the market based on who owns them.

Rather than capital now being a source of ownership and minor wealth generation, it can now be a source of exponential wealth creation — simply because AI continuously evolves and builds upon itself. It’s unique because it isn’t a static capital item.

Capitalism’s greatest threat is it’s own progress. The technology capitalism has created is systematically undermining it. Which is why we may have to rethink it.

We live in a world where not everyone’s effort is equal. Yes, capitalism is grossly unfair in some parts — based on your birth, inheritance and a range of other factors. But it’s also one of the only systems we have the accounts for the effort you put in to produce things that other people want to use.

Automation is coming. And with it, the tasks you and I would normally do for jobs aren’t going to be there.

The GAFA (Google, Apple, Facebook and Amazon) Internet giants, as well as IBM, have all been investing massively in the field.

It wont be long before we have Self-aware AI a billion times more powerful than all of the human brains on the planet and it will crush human intelligence as early as 2045.

We will make machines that can reason, think and make things better than we do.

It is potentially more dangerous” than nuclear weapons, or climate change .

To compete with robots, Google proposes transhumanism, i.e. turning humans into cyborgs.

By 2035, we’ll have nanobots implanted into our brains and connected to our neurons to “upgrade” both our mental and physical capabilities.

Paradoxically, the ultimate tool to avoid the human race’s vassalization would also be the instrument of its suicide. The human-AI hybrid would indeed mean the death knell for the 1.0 biological human.

Artificial intelligence could cause another significant casualty: Money.

In our meritocratic societies, the difference in intellectual abilities are, rightly or wrongly, the primary reason for the wage and capital gap. But AI would break this very notion. Eventually, human intelligence will be ridiculous compared to that of machines.

So the question is, in such a world will we accept that some people earn 1,000 times more than others?

If we accept Google’s brain nanobots, what will be the legitimacy of any revenue gap between people, since our performances will be linked to the power of our brain aids, and not to our inherent qualities?

Besides, a society driven by artificial intelligence will be a society without work, which will render the mere function of money useless. If we’re able to emulate a billion cancer scientists on an array of hard drives in a few seconds, what will be the value of a human oncologist?

All goods and services will be created and produced by machines in an infinitely more efficient way that any human being can, even an upgraded one. The meritocratic system will go up in smoke.

And how to organize the distribution of capital if merit is impossible?

The best solution will without a doubt be the equal redistribution of goods and services among individuals, a communism 2.0 of sorts in which everybody will be provided for according to their needs and not according to their work.

It will be artificial intelligence — not economists like Thomas Piketty — that puts and end to the wage gap. Capitalism simply won’t survive intelligent machines.

I don’t understand why some people are not concerned.

The people who controlled AI’s would have a disproportionate amount of power early on, as they’d be able to more rapidly automate most of their work.

Rather than a monopoly on products, you have a monopoly on ‘thinking power’ — the very thing that eroded capitalist monopolies originally.

As technology continues to eliminate traditional jobs and massive new wealth gets created, we’re going to see the need for a Universal Basic Income some version of this at a national scale.

If you don’t believe the automation argument, take a look at the below graph.

Every industry has the potential to be automated. Fishing can be done by drones. Farming too. There’s very little examples of a menial task that can’t be done by a robot. That sounds like utopia, but until we recognise that it means whoever has the most money will win forever, it’s going to be a pretty shocking life for most of us.

That’s why it’s important to recognise that AI is not just a new form of technology, but a brand new class of capital which automates the ‘last’ parts of humanity: thinking.

Humans are destined to become a layer over the top of AI.

Arguably we can already buy brainpower. But the great thing about human labour is there is some form of negotiation — mostly in the form of the vote at the ballot box which defines workers rights, unions and a number of laws and checks and balances.

With AI it’s hard to see what rights the AI will have unless it is completely independent (a problem in a class of its own).

AI is sentient but created for a purpose. Does that strip it of it’s right to autonomy? I’m not sure.

If we accept that AI is a new class of capital which also allows for (relatively) unlimited work to be done, then we also have to start to realise that we no longer need to be around in our own economy.

What is the solution?

Make AI common property, tax it and use the new automated/robotic workforce to fuel our work. Use the labour that AI creates and the wealth created to give people a Universal Basic Income.

In the end, it isn’t going to be a revolution that breaks capitalism.

All the things capitalism has given us is going to be what brings it undone. When you put AI, automation and capitalism together, it’s clear that we don’t just need new technologies. We need a new social system. We need a project based on reason, evidence and testable designs, that cuts with the grain of history and is sustainable by the planet.

If we don’t vet all technology for the benefits to us all, there will be little point in getting an education if all knowledge is artificial and all that’s is left is Greed and profit.

With no moral reasoning and based on ruthless optimization processes which provide much cheaper and more efficient solutions for companies around the world – poses a deeply unsettling challenges to the way we model our society.

AI could rig elections, subvert markets, or become dangerous military technology.

It’s time to dump your Super Market Loyalty or Fidelity Card, get you face out of your Smartphone and become smart by demanding the Establishment of a New World Body that is totally transparent and independent:

To vet all Aps and any artificial Intelligence software that is motivated by Profit.

All Non AI comments welcome.

THE BEADY EYE ASKS: WHERE DOES IT END? – GOOGLE.

04 Sunday Dec 2016

Posted by bobdillon33@gmail.com in Artificial Intelligence., Big Data., Communication., Facebook, Google it., Google Knowledge., HUMAN INTELLIGENCE, Modern Day Communication., Modern day life., Social Media., Technology, The Future, The Internet., The world to day., Unanswered Questions., What Needs to change in the World, WiFi communication.

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Artificial Intelligence., Big Data, Google, SMART PHONE WORLD, The Future of Mankind, The Internet.

( A seven minute read)

Our worldviews are formed by who is shouting louder and more persistently into our ears.

While our Technologic vision is to create more intuitive and human-like interactions between man and machines Google, Facebook, Twitter, the Internet of Everything. The last thing these companies want is to encourage leisurely reading or slow, concentrated thought. It’s in their economic interest to drive us to distraction.Ambiguity is not an opening for insight but a bug to be fixed. The human brain is just an outdated computer that needs a faster processor and a bigger hard drive.

There’s has been little consideration of how, exactly, the Internet and these Companies are reprogramming us.

Having said that, I think internet and new media actually can be effective to fight such brainwashing.

However most of the Internet and Social Media is now presenting just superficial information we won’t even remember tomorrow. It is the illusion of knowledge by information.

Just as we coming to rely on computers to mediate our understanding of the world, it is our own intelligence that is being flattened into artificial intelligence.

True reality might be forever beyond our reach, but surely our senses give us at least an inkling of what it’s really like. Quantum mechanics is telling us that we have to question the very notions of ‘physical things’ sitting in ‘space.

If you have got this far, you might be wondering where am I going with this post.

Just as there’s a tendency to glorify technological progress, there’s a counter tendency to expect the worst of every new tool or machine.

The idea that our minds should operate as high-speed data-processing machines is not only built into the workings of the Internet, it is the network’s reigning business model as well.

The faster we surf across the Web—the more links we click and pages we view—the more opportunities Google and other companies gain to collect information about us and to feed us advertisements.

Last year, Page told a convention of scientists that Google is “really trying to build artificial intelligence and to do it on a large-scale.

Certainly if you had all the world’s information directly attached to your brain, or an artificial brain that was smarter than your brain, you’d be better off.

Still, their easy assumption that we’d all “be better off” if our brains were supplemented, or even replaced, by an artificial intelligence is unsettling.

Is it real knowledge? or a HAL-like machine that might be connected directly to our brains. “The ultimate search engine is something as smart as people—or smarter,”

Thanks to the growing power that computer engineers and software coders wield over our intellectual lives,“algorithm,” are beginning to govern the realm of the mind.

The Internet is a machine designed for the efficient and automated collection, transmission, and manipulation of information, and its legions of programmers are intent on finding the “one best method”—the perfect algorithm—to carry out every mental movement of what we’ve come to describe as “knowledge work.”

Google, is “a company that’s founded around the science of measurement,” and it is striving to “systematize everything”

It carries out thousands of experiments a day, according to the Harvard Business Review, and it uses the results to refine the algorithms that increasingly control how people find information and extract meaning from it.

The company has declared that its mission is “to organize the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful.” It seeks to develop “the perfect search engine,” which it defines as something that “understands exactly what you mean and gives you back exactly what you want.”

In Google’s view, information is a kind of commodity, a utilitarian resource that can be mined and processed with industrial efficiency. The more pieces of information we can “access” and the faster we can extract their gist, the more productive we become as thinkers.

It would bring about a restructuring not only of industry but of society, creating a utopia of perfect efficiency. “In the past the man has been first,” he declared; “in the future the system must be first.”

An “algorithm world.”

Never has a communications system played so many roles in our lives—or exerted such broad influence over our thoughts—as the Internet does today.

Thanks to our brain’s plasticity, the adaptation occurs also at a biological level.

In the midst of a sea change in the way we read and think, the Internet promises to have particularly far-reaching effects on cognition.

The Internet, an immeasurably powerful computing system, is subsuming most of our other intellectual technologies. It’s becoming our map and our clock, our printing press and our typewriter, our calculator and our telephone, and our radio and TV.

A new e-mail message, for instance, may announce its arrival as we’re glancing over the latest headlines at a newspaper’s site. The result is to scatter our attention and diffuse our concentration.

The Net’s influence doesn’t end at the edges of a computer screen, either.

As people’s minds become attuned to the crazy quilt of Internet media, traditional media have to adapt to the audience’s new expectations. Television programs add text crawls and pop-up ads, and magazines and newspapers shorten their articles, introduce capsule summaries, and crowd their pages with easy-to-browse info-snippets. “Shortcuts” give harried readers a quick “taste” of the day’s news, sparing them the “less efficient” method of actually turning the pages and reading the articles.

Intellectual technologies —the tools that extend our mental rather than our physical capacities—we inevitably begin to take on the qualities of those technologies.

They are disassociated time from human events and helped create the belief in an independent world of mathematically measurable sequences.

The conception of the world that emerged from the widespread use of timekeeping instruments “remains an impoverished version of the older one, for it rests on a rejection of those direct experiences that formed the basis for, and indeed constituted, the old reality.

Skimming activity, hopping from one source to another and rarely returning to any source they’d already visited.

We are becoming “power browsers”

Thanks to the ubiquity of text on the Internet, not to mention the popularity of text-messaging on cell phones, we may well be reading more today than we did in the 1970s or 1980s, when television was our medium of choice.

But it’s a different kind of reading, and behind it lies a different kind of thinking—perhaps even a new sense of the self, weakening our capacity for the kind of deep reading that emerged when an earlier technology, the printing press, made long and complex works of prose commonplace.

We are becoming “mere decoders of information.”

Our ability to interpret text, to make the rich mental connections that form when we read deeply and without distraction, remains largely disengaged.

Reading, explains Wolf, is not an instinctive skill for human beings.

It’s not etched into our genes the way speech is. We have to teach our minds how to translate the symbolic characters we see into the language we understand. And the media or other technologies we use in learning and practicing the craft of reading play an important part in shaping the neural circuits inside our brains.

The circuits woven by our use of the Net will be different from those woven by our reading of books and other printed works.

The human brain is almost infinitely malleable.

People used to think that our mental meshwork, the dense connections formed among the 100 billion or so neurons inside our skulls, was largely fixed by the time we reached adulthood. But brain researchers have discovered that that’s not the case. Nerve cells routinely break old connections and form new ones. “The brain,” according to Olds, “has the ability to reprogram itself on the fly, altering the way it functions.”

Over the past few years I’ve had an uncomfortable sense that someone, or something, has been tinkering with my brain, remapping the neural circuitry, reprogramming the memory.

I think I know what’s going on.

For more than a decade now, I’ve been spending a lot of time online, searching and surfing and sometimes adding to the great databases of the Internet. For me, as for others, the Net is becoming a universal medium, the conduit for most of the information that flows through my eyes and ears and into my mind. The advantages of having immediate access to such an incredibly rich store of information are many, and they’ve been widely described and duly applauded.

In the 1960s, media are not just passive channels of information. They supply the stuff of thought, but they also shape the process of thought. And what the Net seems to be doing is chipping away my capacity for concentration and contemplation. My mind now expects to take in information the way the Net distributes it: in a swiftly moving stream of particles.

Once I was a scuba diver in the sea of words. Now I zip along the surface like a guy on a Jet Ski.

I have to fight to stay focused on long pieces of writing. Even a blog post of more than three or four paragraphs is too much to absorb.

Having a computer for a brain has its perks, but it has its drawbacks as well. Language is a tough concept for robots, as words can convey the abstract as well as the concrete and robots have trouble knowing the difference (and grasping the abstract).

That makes human-machine interaction less than intuitive for humans and confusing to ‘bots. Thoughts and actions feel scripted, as if they’re following the steps of an algorithm.

As we are drained of our “inner repertory of dense cultural inheritance,” Foreman concluded, we risk turning into “‘pancake people’—spread wide and thin as we connect with that vast network of information accessed by the mere touch of a button.”

Every day of the week new APPS replace thinking, Jobs. Humanoid robots are now able to speak in different languages with voice recognition thanks to the cloud. Robots can also ask one another about where they just came from, and which directions it is from where they currently are.

If one finds itself in an unfamiliar place, it will make up a word to describe it from randomly generated syllables. It communicates that word to other robots it meets there, establishing the name of the locale within the community. From this, a spatial and verbal framework is established to name places on the map. Creating a shared language between them.

If we lose those quiet spaces, or fill them up with “content,” we will sacrifice something important not only in ourselves but in our culture.

I find myself centered between understanding the necessity for change into the world of technology and mourning the loss of social interpretation and deep thinking.

Don’t stopped reading books altogether.

THE BEADY EYE SAYS. THE SOURCES OF POLITICAL POWER IS CHANGING. SOCIAL MEDIA IS RUNNING POLITICS.

24 Thursday Nov 2016

Posted by bobdillon33@gmail.com in Artificial Intelligence., Big Data., Communication., Elections/ Voting, Facebook, HUMAN INTELLIGENCE, Modern Day Democracy., Politics., Social Media., Technology, The world to day., Twitter, Unanswered Questions., What Needs to change in the World, Where's the Global Outrage.

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Artificial Intelligence., Fair Political System., Political power., Politics of the Future, Power of Social Media, Social networking, Technology

( A ten minute read)

Some posts back I wrote a piece asking if there was any Intelligence between Donald Trump’s ears and a subsequent post on what a vote is worth. ( see previous posts)

We live in turbulent times and the structure of the source of power is changing.

Gathering political information via social media brings an increased risk of digesting information from questionable sources.

Why?

Because Facebook now dominates the news being read by young people and its domination is not just national – it is global.

It may well be time to think about what societies need to do to counter this growing, global news monopoly. Facebook may not be in the business of news production but its impact on news is already profound and not always positive.

Because it is provided by organisations or politicians that are paying Facebook for their attention. Gone are the days of the blind following the blind it’s now the misinformed following the distracted reading their news on their Facebook/Twitter feeds.

Ever since the so-called Facebook Obama election of 2008, our political discourse is shrinking to fit our smartphone screens, where we find cover political campaigns more like a horse race, rather than focusing on the issues.

Donald Trump, he’s the first candidate optimized for the Google News algorithm.

Donald Trump got the equivalent of about $55 million in free advertising space from the eight major media outlets.

Trump a vast web audience—four million followers on Twitter alone.

The best way to dominate the online discussion is not to inform but to provoke which is the changing dynamics of political races. You’re only as relevant as your last tweet. What’s important now is not so much image as a personality that bursts into focus at regular intervals without ever demanding steady concentration.

The more visceral the message, the more quickly it circulates and the longer it holds the darting public eye.

Elections are pivotal in shaping that world – for better or worse.

Up to recently elections were the voice of the people expressed by voting.

Hopefully this will remain so, however fears of a robot apocalypse mask the actual problems that we face by increasingly letting our lives be run by algorithms.

AIs will have and are having a knock-on effects that we have not prepared for.

When a computer spits out an answer we are typically unable to see how it got there.

There are algorithms all around us they may seem neutral and objective and unbiased but in a world of pervasive connectivity AI is the key to harnessing the power of electrical data prior to voting. It allows for millions of election related options that are posted online to be classified automatically and analysed to understand the pulse of an election.

Algorithms are now being used to make life-changing decisions such as when a prisoner should be given parole, or who gets elected. So it is time to forget everything you know about democracy.

Microsoft is building an A.I. empire and will appoint its leaders.

Twitter did exactly that : Producing a man who bankrupted his companies not once, not twice, but six times.

( The Trump Taj Mahal, 1991, Trump Castle, 1992,Trump Plaza and Casino, 1992, Plaza Hotel, 1992, Trump Hotels and Casinos Resorts, 2004, Trump Entertainment Resorts, 2009,) and Trump America in 2020, which currently has a National Debt bordering on 20 trillion.

Since his election to be the next President of the US the media headlines are littered with the rhetoric of powerful people in the form of CRINGING WORLD POLITICAL LEADERS CHANGING THEIR SPOTS IN ORDER TO LICK UP TO A MAN THAT HAS MANY CHARACTERISTICS OF A FASCIST.

Mr Trump’s views are some of the most extreme in American politics.

[He has:

advocated deporting nearly 11 million undocumented workers.
called for a border wall to be built between the US and Mexico.
said he would force Mexico to pay for the wall by threatening to ban Mexicans in the US from sending remittances home.
Mr Trump changed his position on abortion at least five times, alarming many social conservatives. This flexibility has convinced many social conservatives that Mr Trump cannot be trusted to appoint a Supreme Court justice who would oppose abortion rights.
Mr Trump has aggressively criticised international trade agreements.
He has repeatedly said the US should rethink its commitments to Nato, saying other member countries do not pay their fair share of the organisation’s budget. He has also floated an idea that South Korea and Japan could arm themselves with nuclear weapons – eliminating the need for US protection.]

In the last few years the Internet has borne witness to and facilitated a great deal of social and societal change.

While undoubtedly carrying the potential to do great good, the Internet has been plagued with numerous impediments NONE WORSE THAN ITS ASSISTANCE IN THE ELECTION OF DONALD TRUMP.

I am aware that the Internet cannot be blamed in isolation.

The inequalities of the Capitalist system is a major contributor, but the dumbing down by the smart phone Apps are also influencing the reasons why we cast a vote.

If you not convinced the only thing that might be more perplexing than the psychology of Donald Trump is the psychology of his supporters. It isn’t just that they are misinformed; it’s that they are completely unaware that they are misinformed.

We now find ourselves looking a man and his team of advisors that has an ultimate goal to pursue national greatness in disrespect of the cost which will take the form of a state that will be anti-democratic and totalitarian. The state needed to fulfill this goal is a state that breeds ( As did all major fascist regimes that have ever existed) political parties that spend more time arguing than implementing policies.

At the same time, there is a paradoxical here with a resurgence of interest in universalism within the international legal context and the discourse of human rights, which at this point lack a firm philosophical foundation.

With a world facing problems that requires a vast resurgence of interest in universalism.

Power use to be what goes on in the head, and what goes on is a recognition of a reason – or better and more often: various reasons – to act differently than one would have without that reason…Power rests on perceived and recognized justifications – some good, some bad, some in between. A threat can be seen as a justification, as can a good argument.

We are turning a blind eye to the day when we will have websites that are themselves artificially intelligent .

This type of power is not accountable and nobody can make it accountable. All AI decision-making is by definition, unknowable and will remain so till 2018 when a new European union comes into force giving citizens – right to an explanation.

This however will not be of much use as AI processes data in ways we can’t. Ask its creator how it achieves a certain result and you get a shrug.

These AIs brain responses are automatic, and not influenced by logic or reason.

What does it mean to act, and to act well?

We now have software writing software and soon we have unsupervised learning.

Even with all the technological advances we have seen over the last few years there still remains a large disconnect between technology and the general public.

How do we determine which actions are those which are moral, and which fall outside this sphere? And how do we negotiate the priority of all of these questions?

In fact, digital technology, particularly the internet, offers potential complications into human beings’ discussion and understanding of free will; even as the internet appears to open up options and capacities for individuals to exercise increased autonomy, it also has the potential to change the very ways in which human beings think, thereby impeding human capacities for meaningful self-reflection, a necessary if not sufficient criterion for rational autonomy.

The Internet, we’ve often been told, is a force for “democratization.

It’s worth asking, though, what kind of democracy is being promoted.

People skimmed headlines and posts, seeking information that reinforced their biases and rejecting contrary perspectives. The Internet inspired “participation,” but the participants ended up in “cloistered cocoons of cognitive consonance.”

The social networks operated by companies like Facebook, Twitter and Google don’t just regulate the messages we receive. They regulate our responses. They shape, through the design of their apps and their information-filtering regimes, the forms of our discourse.

All social networks impose these kinds of formal constraints, both on what we see and on how we respond. The restrictions have little to do with the public interest. They reflect the commercial interests of the companies operating the networks as well as the protocols of software programming.

With the instantaneous transmission of information, the internet has revolutionized the way we do business, obtain knowledge, vote, and communicate with others. Instead of a one-way relationship in which the human agent has total control as the sole actor and the tool is merely the object acted upon – a mere means to an end which the human agent has in mind, it would be more accurate today in the face of digital technology, specifically the internet, to recognize that tools also act on their users. When we create things to use for our own purposes, these tools can and do indeed act back on us, in some cases changing the very ways we think.

It is especially poignant to make this observation in the face of the development of the internet because of information technology’s potential to dramatically augment or infringe on human autonomy.

While the internet may indeed open up choices and opportunities to people that were never there before, it also has the potential to degrade individuals’ deep reading capacities, which is a dangerous threat to these individuals’ claims to free will since deep reading is necessary for meaningful introspection which is necessary to claims on rational autonomy.

On the other hand as we continue to enter the digital age, the neutrality of the internet becomes a resource that we must fight to protect, or we risk our further advancement.

Maintaining net neutrality is not simply a matter of protecting existing standards and preventing the extension of authoritative powers, but instead is a matter of establishing a new fundamental human right in the digital age. We can only hope that in unity we can break the barriers which stand between us, and in so doing, provide a living and evolving blueprint for our mutual future.

The Internet is changing the way we think about power and its interaction with economic and international relations.

A blind acceptance of a narrative provided by the Algorithmic world is not acceptable.

Therefore before the names of just and unjust can have place, there must be some coercive power to compel men equally to the performance of their covenants, by the terror of some punishment greater than the benefit they expect by the breach of their covenant, and to make good that propriety which by mutual contract men acquire in recompense of the universal right they abandon.

As a matter of urgency must establish a world governing body to overlook all technology. ( see previous posts)

When it comes to Algorithms the stakes for society are too high because AI may have arbitrarily negative consequences. Algorithms are a source of power and how they manifests themselves in the world cannot be let to the wimp of Capitalism.

If we are to read beyond the archaic dichotomous representation of international conflict, daring to create your own mind on the matter, doing so involves more than simply good intentions and determination.

It requires obtaining a new type of dignity as “selfs.”

Moreover, a willingness to engage in a dialogue concerning Being will allow for a creative and broad interpretation of man’s relationship to his world, and the responsibilities and interconnectedness that characterize it when it is not defined simply as an atomistic “standing reserve.”

This shallow consideration of the context plagues the headlines and propagates a facile belief in domineering great powers as the ‘be all and end all’ saviors of world conflict. The two leading competitors for the prize of… (peace?) in Syria leads one down a dangerous path that bolsters a bellicose Waltzian ‘balance of power’ attitude and neglects the voice of the people. This can be seen in the unacceptable bloodstains of millions around the world to this day.

The implications of Internet Freedom and its assistance or impediment has a knock on effect for International Relations as a whole.

The internet has become such an indispensable part of our everyday life that it is incredibly difficult to imagine life before it. Luckily the general public can align with interest groups via the web, thus making such groups much larger and more powerful than ever before. Unfortunately Ethicists are still confronted by the traditional questions that have plagued them since the ancients. They have been cut adrift from the context out of which they developed, searching for a foundation which is not forthcoming.

The disproportionate impact of the internet on the presidency and special interest groups only furthers the gap of influence between the public and the president.

As we move forward into an era of increasingly powerful digital technologies we have to ask the question WHY IT IS that the electrical system of one of the most powerful country can only produce two candidates that endeavored to buy with billions of $ the position of USA President.

WHEN YOU OBSERVE what are the power dynamics and systems of knowledge in our modern world, and what are their relationships to concepts of morality in general? All men having right to all things: power only exists when such an acceptance exists. Therefore where there is no commonwealth, there nothing is unjust.

The power to decide how things shall be done, the power to shape frameworks within which states relate to each other, relate to people, or relate to corporate enterprises, control over security, production, finance, and knowledge.

What is authenticity? In that respect, like all forms of honesty—intellectual and other— a principle of authenticity stems above all from a powerful sense of universal respect and love.

Charismatic’ domination derives from a population that perceives their leader to be virtuous and deserving of their dedication.

Furthermore, because people perceive their leader’s charisma as being the basis for the validity of the state’s legitimacy, one may infer that they also view their leader as a virtuous person who they understand has an inner calling to lead.

That the supporters and friends of a charismatic leader orient their interests to be in line with his/hers because they genuinely believe in the allure of their leader’s personal qualities.

Hence, because a charismatic leader is someone who many people favor, and due to them believing in his/her devotion to the state, it follows that the validity of a state’s authority under a charismatic leader is dependent on their charisma.

Efforts to engage the public are meant to sidestep the special interest groups that have dominated governmental discourse over the past several decades. The dominant theme according to the “We The People” rollout is to open a dialogue directly between the people and the administration, one that will meaningfully impact policy and legislation. Yet, the website has not led to any significant legislation at present and so far it has failed to promote meaningful interaction between the people and the presidency.

Parliament is problematic because This weakens the state and, ultimately, the nation

This writing has merely touched the surface of the issues at hand.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-37999969

THE BEADY EYE ASKS: WHAT NEXT? – CYBER WARFARE.

17 Thursday Nov 2016

Posted by bobdillon33@gmail.com in Artificial Intelligence., Big Data., Facebook, Google it., Google Knowledge., HUMAN INTELLIGENCE, Humanity., Innovation., Life., Technology, The Future, The Internet., The world to day., Twitter, Unanswered Questions., What Needs to change in the World, Where's the Global Outrage.

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

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

( Twenty minute read)

You could not be blamed if ask this question some years ago for thinking that the world is in such a mess that what coming next is beyond description, with climate change, the state of the economy, current wars, and the indifference and lack of world leadership to tackle the obvious inequalities.

You might think that one of the above is going to explode in such a manner that it is going to be the main contributed to the future.

This might to right, but there is a hidden force that is going to plunder the world called Artificial Intelligence, AI for short.

I am no scientist, clairvoyant, prophet, tech guru or loony and to be honest I am not worried by what is next.

I won’t be around by the time any of what next happens.

The future of humanity as an inescapable topic.

But be that as it may, the thesis that liberal democracy (or any other political structure) is the final form of government is consistent with the thesis that the general condition for intelligent Earth-originating life will not remain a human condition for the indefinite future.

Powerful new mind-control technologies could be deployed globally to change people’s motivation, or that an intensive global surveillance system would be put in place and used to manipulate the direction of human development along a predetermined path, one would have to wonder whether these interventions, or their knock-on effects on society, culture, and politics, would not themselves alter the human condition in sufficiently fundamental ways that the resulting condition would qualify as posthuman.

It’s easy for my generation, and the coming up generation to cast off the problems that AI is going to create in the world.

WHERE HUMANS WILL BECOME THE BOTTLENECK TO PRODUCTIVITY AND INNOVATION.

It is hardly reasonable to think of the future of humanity as a topic: it is too big and too diverse to be addressed as a whole in a single essay, monograph, post, or even 100-volume book series.

A sensible forecast of what next in technological innovations in the next 400 years is beyond our imaginations.

All I want to achieve here is to improve the accuracy of our beliefs about the future.

It is relatively rare for humanity’s future to be taken seriously as a subject matter on which it is important to try to have factually correct beliefs.

Thirty years from now, the public will be even dumber tethered to their phones, have even less social skills.

Depending on whom you ask, this moment in technological development is either a crisis for science or a revolution to hold researchers and journals more accountable for flimsy conclusions.

I would love to be able to describe what is currently happening in the revolution at this moment. However, I can’t do that because things are constantly and quickly changing. This continual change is why it is premature to write anything other than a “future history.”

Our moral obligation is to generate possibilities, to discover the infinite ways, however complex and high-dimension, to play the infinite game. While our knowledge is insufficient to narrow down the space of possibilities to one broadly outlined future for humanity, we do know of many relevant arguments and considerations which in combination impose significant constraints on what a plausible view of the future could look like.

Preparation for the future obviously does not require accurate prediction; rather, it requires a foundation of knowledge upon which to base action, a capacity to learn from experience, close attention to what is going on in the present, and healthy and resilient institutions that can effectively respond or adapt to change in a timely manner.

UNFORTUNATELY WE HAVE NO SUCH INSTITUTION, AND BY THE TIME WE HAVE IT WILL BE TOO LATE.

It will take all possible species of intelligence in order for the universe to understand itself.

The Allen Institute for Artificial Intelligence, a not-for-profit created by Microsoft unveiled a search engine it calls Semantic Scholar. It uses machine learning and other AI in an effort to significantly improve the way the academic world searches through the increasingly enormous corpus of published research.

Initially, the new search engine will focus on neuroscience and computer science research, covering over 10 million papers, but the organization plans on expanding into other subjects.

We need realistic pictures of what the future might bring in order to make sound decisions. Increasingly, we need realistic pictures not only of our personal or local near-term futures, but also of remoter global futures. Because of our expanded technological powers, some human activities now have significant global impacts.

However there might be traps that we are walking towards that we could only avoid falling into by means of foresight. There are also opportunities that we could reach much sooner if we could see them farther in advance. And in a strict sense, prediction is always necessary for meaningful decision-making.

Unless the human species lasts literally forever, it will some time cease to exist.

In that case, the long-term future of humanity is easy to describe: extinction.

(An estimated 99.9% of all species that ever existed on Earth are already extinct.) This is surely the case with regard to many aspects of the future of humanity.

There are two different ways in which the human species could become extinct:

The first is obvious blow itself to smithereens, or simply dying out, without any meaningful replacement or continuation. Environmental threats however seem to have displaced nuclear holocaust as the chief specter haunting the public imagination. Current-day pessimists about the future often focus on the environmental problems facing the growing world population, worrying that our wasteful and polluting ways are unsustainable and potentially ruinous to human civilization.

You might suppose that new kinds of threat (e.g. nuclear holocaust or catastrophic changes in the global environment) or the trend towards globalization and increased interdependence of different parts of the world create a vulnerability to human civilization as a whole.

The other not so obvious, by evolving or developing or transforming into one or more new species or life forms, sufficiently different from what came before so as no longer to count as Homo sapiens.

For example, whether and when Earth-originating life will go extinct, whether it will colonize the galaxy, whether human biology will be fundamentally transformed to make us posthuman, whether machine intelligence will surpass biological intelligence, whether population size will explode, and whether quality of life will radically improve or deteriorate: these are all important fundamental questions about the future of humanity.

There is no question that science and society will continue to co-evolve and that the technologies that will pose these risks will also help us to mitigate some risks.

In decades to come, we will control computers with our minds, not a mouse.

Technological change is in large part responsible for many of the secular trends in such basic parameters of the human condition as the size of the world population, life expectancy, education levels, material standards of living, and the nature of work, communication, health care, war, and the effects of human activities on the natural environment.

One does not have to embrace any strong form of technological determinism to recognize that technological capability – through its complex interactions with individuals, institutions, cultures, and environment – is a key determinant of the ground rules within which the games of human civilization get played out.

Other aspects of society and our individual lives are also influenced by technology in many direct and indirect ways, including governance, entertainment, human relationships, and our views on morality, mind, matter, and our own human nature.

Among the most important potential developments are ones that would enable us to alter our biology directly through technological means. Such interventions could affect us more profoundly than modification of beliefs, habits, culture, and education. If we learn to control the biochemical processes of human senescence, healthy lifespan could be radically prolonged.

The nature of this evolution is the daunting scientific questions of our time.

The first thing to notice is that the longer the time scale we are considering, the less likely it is that technological civilization will remain within the zone we termed “the human condition” throughout.

Virtual reality environments will constitute an expanding fraction of our experience.

New tools of observation and measurement, and the new technologies of knowing, will alter the character of science, even while it retains the old methods. The capability of recording, surveillance, biometrics, and data mining technologies will grow, making it increasingly feasible to keep track of where people go, whom they meet, what they do, and what goes on inside their bodies.

Nanotechnology will have wide-ranging consequences for manufacturing, medicine, and computing.

Machine intelligence, is another potential revolutionary technology.

Deep realtime simulations and hypothesis search will drive data collection.

Pattern-seeking software will be everywhere.

There will be more change in the next 50 years of science than in the last 400 years.

Technology is, in its essence, new ways of thinking.

Scientists will share”zillions” of ideas in the form of data flows sets, videos, 3-d models, software programs, graphs, blog posts, status updates, and comments on all these rich media and these content formats will connect with each other via the hyperlink.

As New informational organizations are layered upon the old. Zillionics will require a new scientific perspective in terms of permissible errors, numbers of unknowns, probable causes, repeatability, and significant signals.

The data volume is growing to such levels of “zillionics” that we can expect science to compile vast combinatorial libraries, to run combinatorial sweeps through possibility space (as Stephen Wolfram has done with cellular automata), and to run multiple competing hypotheses in a matrix.

Because of the unpredictability of the details of the new science and technology that will evolve, the details of social evolution are also unpredictable.

The Internet already is made of one quintillion transistors, a trillion links, a million emails per second, 20 exabytes of memory.

It offers us the first major opportunity to improve collective long-term memory, and to create a collective short-term working memory, a conversational commons for the rapid collaborative development of ideas.

Technological innovation is the main driver of long-term economic growth.

In a world of instant distribution, what happens to peer review?

Are we all going to end up silent, unable to express opinions, other than pressing the like button.

Will this be a world where junk gets published, and no-one will be able to tell whether a particular piece of content is good or bad?

AI is approaching the level of the human brain and is doubling every year, while the brain is not. It is all becoming effectively one machine. And we are the machine.

Here is what our American cousins think when asked about their concerns about the governance of science and technology relating to: the purposes of science; trust; inclusion; speed and direction of innovation; and equity.

When asked for their general views on technology’s long-term impact on life in the future, technological optimists outnumber pessimists by two-to-one.

(81%) OF AMERICANS believe that within the next 50 years people needing an organ transplant will have new organs custom-made for them in a lab.

Whether computers will soon match humans when it comes to creating music, novels, paintings, or other important works of art: 51% OF AMERICANS think that this will happen in the next 50 years.

Two in five Americans (39%) think that teleportation will be possible within the next 50 years. That humans of the future will be able to control the weather: just 19% thinks that this will probably happen.

53% of Americans think it would be a bad thing if “most people wear implants or other devices that constantly show them information about the world around them,” just over one-third (37%) think this would be a change for the better.

65% think it would be a change for the worse if robots become the primary caregivers to the elderly and people in poor health.

60% of men and (61% of 18-29 year olds) think it would be a bad thing if commercial and personal drones become much more prevalent in future years.

26% would, 72% would not, interested in getting a brain implant to improve their memory or mental capacity.

20% would eat meat that was grown in a lab.

66% feel that it will be a change for the worse if designer babies became possible.

By 2045, super tall buildings will have artificial intelligence ‘personalities’ and will be able to ‘talk’ to people. Homes and offices will collect and process data from various sensors to flag up when repairs are needed or when the heating needs to be turned on.

Biology, is the domain with the most scientists, the most new results, the most economic value, the most ethical importance.

Computers will keep leading to new ways of science. We want to understand how minds work and we want to understand how to apply what we know in the real world: It is likely that some subtle and difficult-to-replicate phenomena might be existence proofs that tell us something about the first.

AT THE END OF THE DAY, HUMANS FOR THE MOMENT ARE IN THE DRIVE SEAT

ITS UP TO US TO DECIDE WHAT’S NEXT.

IF WE REMAIN SILENT ALGORITHMS WILL RULE OUR LIVES.

THIS BLOG IS A WAKE UP CALL.. REMEMBER NEITHER PEOPLE NOR SOFTWARE WILL BE MUCH USE WITHOUT THE OTHER.

AS TIME GOES BY WE’LL SEE THESE AI SYSTEMS HAVING A IMPACT ON BROADER PROBLEMS IN SOCIETY. SUPPORTING HUMANS IN THE BIG DECISIONS THEY HAVE TO MAKE. WE ARE ALREADY SEEING NEW AI ALGORITHMS TAUGHT BY HUMANS LEARN BEYOND THEIR TRAINING.

RIGHT NOW SOME OF THOSE SYSTEMS RIGHTLY SO SEEM OMINOUS.

WHEN AN ALGORITHM OR WHAT EVER MAKES A DECISION, WE DON’T KNOW WHY IT MADE THAT DECISION. IT’S VERY UNLIKELY THAT THEY WILL BE NO ACCOUNTABLE OR TRANSPARENT OR THAT WE WILL BE ABLE TO QUERY THE SYSTEM.

Responsibilities for errors will be hard to pin down.

In economics, it’s been understood for hundreds of years that wealth is created when IT ACHIEVES RELIANCE. GOOGLE.

The way of science depends on cheap non-invasive sensor running continuously for years generating immense streams of data. While ordinary life continues for the subjects, massive amounts of constant data about their lifestyles are drawn and archived. There is no such thing as an objective algorithm.

The vital signs and lifestyle metrics of a hundred thousand people might be recorded in dozens of different ways for 20-years, and then later analysis could find certain variables.

The growth of the Internet of Things ensures that every aspect of our lives, on personal and industrial scales, is trackable and optimizable. This technological evolution represents a huge opportunity for business.

We live in an age of algorithms. Algorithms are the new soldiers of Capitalism.

They are just managing business the way we always have. We are not moving in any new direction.

In effect, smart machines are now collecting information about practically every facet of human activity, on a continual, pervasive and uncontrollable basis, with no option to turn off the activity.

At the core of science’s self-modification is technology it may well create new levels of meaning, but the tools for managing paradox are still undeveloped let’s hope they REMAINS SO.

A new form of decision-making “for us, about us, or with us”

The good news is that there is unconditional convergence for all in the future. The bad news is that this will not be easy to accomplish as advanced technological economies will employed themselves as usual on the way to becoming rich.

If you dont want a future ruled by Twitter, Face Book, Microsoft, Apple, and there like leave a comment.

Continue reading →

THE BEADY EYE ASKS: WHAT IS MODERN DAY LIFE?

14 Monday Nov 2016

Posted by bobdillon33@gmail.com in Artificial Intelligence., Facebook, HUMAN INTELLIGENCE, Humanity., Innovation., Life., Modern Day Communication., Modern Day Democracy., Modern day life., Social Media., Technology, The Future, The Internet., The world to day., Unanswered Questions., What Needs to change in the World, Where's the Global Outrage.

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Artificial Intelligence., Modern day life., The Future of Mankind

( The very fact that I have to indicate how long it will take to read this post in order to enhance its chances of being read, is in itself an indictment of our lifestyle)

(4/6 minutes)

We are temporal beings – born into a world that existed before us with its religion and culture, its history already written, and to make sense of this world we engage in various pastimes to get by.

YOU COULD NOT BE BLAMED FOR THINKING WHAT THE HELL IS HAPPENING TO THE WORLD YOU LIVE IN. YOU COULD PUT THE BLAME ON THE GREED OF CAPITALISM.

BUT NOT FOR MUCH LONGER.

The “economic problem” that had defined our species from the beginning is now in decline.

IT’S TIME TO UNDERSTAND THAT THE CAPITALISM as we know it will eventually need to be superseded with a post-scarcity system that is built around the new economic reality.

But what will that reality be?

Modern life is, for most of us, a kind of serfdom to mortgage, job and the constant assault to consume. Although we have more time and money than ever before, most of us have little sense of control over our own lives. It is all connected to the apathy that means fewer and fewer people vote. Politicians don’t listen to us anyway. Big business has all the power; religious extremism all the fear.

Certainly we can say that the pace of modern life, increased and supported by our technology in general and our personal electronics in particular, has resulted in a short attention span and an addiction to the influx of information.

A mind so conditioned has little opportunity to think critically, and even less chance to experience life deeply by being in the present moment. A complex life with complicated activities, relationships and commitments implies a reflexive busy-ness that supplants true thinking and feeling with knee-jerk reactions.

Modern Life today has become a series of spectacles to be viewed, not actions to be lived. We live in a world of many alarms, none of which sound our true concerns.

The difference between technology and slavery is that slaves are fully aware that they are not free.

The very shaping of history now outpaces the ability of men to orient themselves in accordance with cherished values.

We spend more time gazing at luminous screens, and clicking like buttons than voicing our concerns. Consequently, the void in quality leadership is filled ( as we have recently witness by the Election of Trump) by a charismatic or toxic leader can have disastrous results.

The science of robotics has exploded with revolutionary developments in the past few years and many more previously unimaginable breakthroughs are now on the immediate horizon.

Humanity may be on the verge of experiencing something comparable in effect to the Cambrian Explosion making it possible for machines “to replicate the performance of many of the perceptual parts of the brain,” including, fittingly enough, vision itself.

We are in the midst of a communication revolution on a par with the invention of writing or the printing press which is no doubt bring about a period of considerable turmoil and angst and the effects on economic output and human workers are certain to be profound.

The transformation of employment wrought by robots and digital communication is not restricted to manufacturing. One-half of existing jobs will be eliminated in the coming one or two decades, and there is no sector that will be immune to automation.

Just in case you think you will not be effected white-collar jobs are also on the digital chopping block.

No one in their right mind foresees any new employment sectors opening up that are or will be sufficient to swallow the displaced workers or the hundreds of millions of people entering the workforce across the planet. Not even close.

Even the prospect of ever-lower wages cannot compete with the gigantic promise of the new technologies.

These developments are going to pose direct and mortal challenges to both capitalism and democracy.

The revolutionary advances in technology are hardly a panacea; they only seem to promote ever-greater talk about the need to slash living standards and cut back on social services.

This is a supreme irony – at the exact moment far less human labour is necessary to produce more than enough to satisfy human wants and needs, the system that fostered that abundance is incapable of adapting to it.

The Internet has transformed our economies, our culture and politics, and our very way of life. The tragedy is while the declining system of Capitalism is evolving more into a decaying feudal order than providing the basis for an affluent society with social mobility we are accepting the transformation with the majority of us confused or distracted into silence.

We live in a ready-made world with ready-made values. The days of every action we take is a choice, decided upon by us and no one else are evaporating right in front of our eyes.

Many of us are manipulated into pursuing desires that are not ours. We are being willed towards fruitless endeavours by Artificial Intelligence and therefore excluded ourselves from creating a meaningful future for ourselves.

Once a pound a time these choices used to bring meaning (or not) to our life – and were the cornerstone of existentialism.

Rather than offloading the responsibility onto society or religion, each individual is solely responsible for making their life meaningful and living it authentically.

The question is are we really exercising choice or are our choices now being manipulated by malevolent Algorithms.

Existentialist philosophers teach us that we alone are responsible for creating a meaningful life in an absurd and unfair world, but is this Philosophy no longer true.

The meaning of our being must be tied up with time and our time is the revolution of technology which we accept blindly without any scrutiny or laws.

Mass culture creates a loss of individual significance, instead of engaging in authentic thought by forming our own opinions, most of us passively adopt the opinions constructed by the news.

The Truth is we have no other purpose than the one we set ourselves; no other destiny than the one we forge. Yet many of us remain in denial of our responsibilities, (No doubt this thought may seem harsh to someone who has not made a success out of his life.) but on the other hand I hope that it helps to understand that reality alone counts, and that dreams, expectations and hopes only serve to define a man as a broken dream, aborted hopes and futile expectations; in other words, they define him negatively, not positively.

As with capitalism, political democracy has hardly been experiencing a golden age of informed citizen participation and public service-minded leadership in recent years. The economic reality of extreme inequality and personal greed translates into increased corruption and cynicism in the political sphere, and that undermines effective self-government.

The United States is an extreme example, with money-drenched campaigns and abysmally low voter turnouts – especially among the poor, the young, and the dispossessed.

As the crisis deepens, however, people will return to the political realm, and it is an open question as to whether the system can respond with democratic and humane solutions. Those who greatly benefit from the status quo will likely battle against progressive change as if their lives depended on it. It could just as easily degenerate into propaganda, militarism, and tyranny. Everything rides on the outcome.

All fascist movements invariably played upon racism and chauvinism of one form or another, depending on the nation, to gee up support. It ranks among the ugliest and most shameful developments in history, and we see it re-emerging as the crisis deepens, even in nations where the scourge of fascism made that notion unthinkable for generations.

A strong commitment to reinvigorating democratic institutions, ending militarism, and guaranteeing all people a secure standard of living as the bulwark against fascism and the only way for humanity to proceed.

To end poverty would be a good place to begin. It was once commonly believed and still is by many, that great leaders were born, not made, by Twitter, Facebook or the internet.

What we consider the freedom of modern-day life is under attack from every technology that is alienate you from some part of your life.

That is its job.

Your job is to notice. First notice the difference. And then, every time, choose.

Artificial intelligence are for the moment relatively benign.

The advent of big data and artificial intelligence is creating billions in value for business. What matters most, however, at least right now, is that we begin building a pathway for human and robot relationships.

It is time we created an independent, totally transparent World Institute to vet all technology that encroaches on our freedoms and values.

Man is not a purely physical system; our thinking, feeling and willing activities do not originate in our physical parts. So it will be impossible to introduce real human mentality into machines, and studying and developing machines will never reveal our real essence; on the contrary, they deviate our attention from it.

Name(required)

Email(required)

Website

Comment(required)

”

trading freedom for security. Why?

we live an inauthentic life.

human beings have no particular purpose. It is only through our actions that we later start defining what our purpose in life is going to be. “Man is nothing other than his own project,”

humans deceive themselves into thinking that they are predestined to be what they are, shifting the responsibility of their actions onto others or onto a moral code. Reality exists only in action,

The problem is that the oppressed often don’t know they are oppressed; they view the world as one that cannot change, as “a natural situation”.“

Life is occupied in both perpetuating itself and surpassing itself; if all it does is maintain itself, then living is only not dying.” “

stationary state” society, where economic growth was unnecessary, commercialism would be reduced, human nature would evolve, and all people could develop their talents and faculties as only the wealthy few could do in the impoverished past.

	Marcela on THE BEADY EYE SAYS: ARTIFICIAL…
	اغانى on THE BEADY EYE SHINES A LIGHT O…
	bobdillon33@gmail.co… on THE BEADY EYE SHINES A LIGHT O…
	Berchmans Gannon on THE BEADY EYE SHINES A LIGHT O…
	bobdillon33@gmail.co… on THE BEADY EYE SAYS: WE ARE NOW…

bobdillon33blog

~ Free Thinker.

Category Archives: Facebook

THE BEADY EYE SAY’S: THE NEW TYPE OF NON- CONSCIOUS INTELLIGENCE DRIVEN BY NON-CONSCIOUS ALGORITHMS IS GOING TO DESTROY WHAT IS LEFT OF DECENCY IN THE WORLD.

Featured

THE BEADY EYE ASKS: IS ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE THE BREAKING POINT FOR CAPITALISM.

THE BEADY EYE ASKS: WHAT NEXT? – CYBER WARFARE.

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

The universe doesn’t care about our common sense.

With enough data, enough computing power and trial and error, there is no telling what we can find.

A world where brains have been replaced with digital computers.

In some sense, this is what software is all about: extending our intelligence.

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this: