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

bobdillon33blog

~ Free Thinker.

bobdillon33blog

Category Archives: Lock Down.

THE BEADY EYE SAYS: ITS TO LATE TOO REGULATE ARTIFICAL INTELLIGENCE – SO WHAT IF ANYTHING CAN BE DONE?

18 Thursday Feb 2021

Posted by bobdillon33@gmail.com in #whatif.com, 2021. The year for change., Algorithms., Artificial Intelligence., Big Data., COVID-19, Dehumanization., Digital age., DIGITAL DICTATORSHIP., Digital Friendship., Disconnection., Emotions., Face Recognition., Facebook, Fake News., Fourth Industrial Revolution., Google, Inequality, Lock Down., Modern day life., Modern day Slavery, POST COVID-19., Quantum computers., Reality., Robot citizenship., Social Media, Social Media Regulation., Technology, Technology v Humanity, The common good., The essence of our humanity., The Future, The Obvious., The pursuit of profit., The state of the World., The world to day., THE WORLD YOU LIVE IN., THIS IS THE STATE OF THE WORLD.  , TRACKING TECHNOLOGY., Twitter, Unanswered Questions., VALUES, We can leave a legacy worthwhile., WHAT IS TRUTH, What Needs to change in the World, Where's the Global Outrage.

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE SAYS: ITS TO LATE TOO REGULATE ARTIFICAL INTELLIGENCE – SO WHAT IF ANYTHING CAN BE DONE?

Tags

Algorithms trade., Algorithms., Artificial Intelligence., Capitalism and Greed, Globalization, Government, Inequility, Post-Covid-19, Technology, The Future of Mankind, Visions of the future.

  ( A Thirty-minute read)  Do you have a right to believe what you want? Yes, of course, but we now live in an Algorithmic driven world that is blurring the boundaries and amplifying the social tensions that are festering under the surface.  The problem is that we are allowing the building of technologies, that are making consequential decisions about people’s lives. AI is shaping people’s lives on a daily basis, but it’s an open question whether AI will become a trusted advisor or even a corrupting force.

It’s not COVID-19 that will kill us all its Profit-seeking algorithms.

However, here in this post, my main concern is whether the AI techniques will develop into quantum algorithms that will be totally out of control.  If artificial general intelligence is on the not too distant horizon, surely we should be ensuring that it is not owned by anyone corporation and that at its core it respects our core values. To achieve this we cannot surely let wealth be concentrated in fewer and fewer hands, or to be let to the marketplace, or any world organization that is not totally transparent and self-financing. We therefore as a matter of grave urgency need a new world organization that vets all technology, and algorithms. (See previous posts) As long as the ALGORITHMS don’t go to war with each other and cause something even more difficult to diagnose than a crash on the stock markets they are safe is as naive as saying ” It’s going to be Great.” AlGORITHMS are increasingly in charge of a world that is precious to us all. Basically, we’re entering the era of machines controlling everything. If we want to create new different societies with human dignity for all we need to do something about it. The difficulty of predicting the future is not just a cliche, it’s a basic fact of our existence. Part of the hypothesis of Singularity is that this difficulty is just going to get worse and worse. Yes, creating AGI ( Artificial General Intelligence) is a big and difficult goal, but according to known science, it is almost surely an achievable one. However, there are sound though not absolutely confident arguments that it may well be achievable within our lifetimes. If artificial general intelligence is on the not too distant horizon, surely we should be ensuring that it is not owned by anyone corporation and that at its core it respects our core values. If we think in months we focus on immediate problems such as the present-day wars, the Covid crisis, the Donald Trumps, the economy, if we think in decades, climate, growing inequality, the loss of jobs to automation are all presenting dangers. But if we look at life in total, science is converging on data processing and AI that is developing itself with algorithms. When intelligence is approached in an incremental manner, with strict reliance on interfacing to the real world through perception and action, reliance on representation disappears. It won’t be long before we will not be unable to distinguish the real world from the virtual world. Since there is only one real world and there can be infinite virtual worlds the probability that you will inhabit this sole world is zero.  So it won’t matter whether computers will be conscious or not. Is starting to feel like it’s every man for himself, Is possible that right now, a global crisis is upon us, Without even knowing… And the virus may not be the biggest threat, but the crisis that follows, Everyday goods that keep us alive will be gone, I’m talking, food, freshwater, medicine, clothes, fuel… Intelligence is decoupling from consciousness and soon rather than later it will be consigned to Google, Facebook, Twitter, Smartphones, and the like to make decisions that are not possible to reverse.  You might think that the above is stupid but it won’t be long before we will be witnessing the most unequal societies in history.                                  —————————— We humans will soon be living with robots that process data without any subjective experiences or consciousness or moral opprobrium. As we watch robots, autonomous vehicles, artificial intelligence machines, and the like slowly (and sometimes rapidly) permeate our world, it’s not hard to imagine them going from permeating to taking over. Algorithms are increasingly determining our collective future. It will only matter what they think about you. We are already halfway towards a world where algorithms run everything. This is why many of the issues raised in this post will require close monitoring, to ensure that the oversight of machine learning-driven algorithms continues to strike an appropriate and safe balance between recognizing the benefits (for healthcare and other public services, for example, and for innovation in the private sector) and the risks (for privacy and consent, data security and any unacceptable impacts on individuals).                                     —————————— WHAT CAN GOVERNMENTS DO?  Please regulate AI, this is too dangerous. Given the international nature of digital innovation, governments, should establish audits of algorithms, introducing certification of algorithms, and charging ethics boards with oversight of algorithmic decisions. Why? They are bringing big changes in their wake. From better medical diagnoses to driverless cars, and within central governments where there are opportunities to make public services more effective and achieve long-term cost savings. However, the Government should produce, publish, and maintain a list of where algorithms with significant impacts are being used within the Central Government, along with projects underway or planned for public service algorithms, to aid not just private sector involvement but also transparency. Governments should not just simply accept what the developers of algorithms offer in return for data access. To this end, Governments should be at the forefront of the creation of a “statutory building code”, which describes mandatory safety and quality requirements for digital platforms. Social networks should be required by law to release details of their algorithms and core functions to trusted researchers, in order for the technology to be vetted. This Law should enable the enforcement of, 
  • forcing social networks to disclose in the news feed why content has been recommended to a user.
  • limiting the use of micro-targeting advertising messages.
  • making it illegal to exclude people from content on the basis of race or religion, such as hiding a spare room advert from people of color.
  • banning the use of so-called dark patterns – user interfaces designed to confuse or frustrate the user, such as making it hard to delete your account.
  • labeling the accounts of state-controlled news organizations.
  • limiting how many times messages can be forwarded to large groups, as Facebook does on WhatsApp.
If we took the premise that people should have a lawful right to be manipulated and deceived, we wouldn’t have rules on fraud or undue influence.                                 ———————————– To days Algorithms and where we are. As data accumulates, even more so now with Covid- 19 track and trace, and now working from home we have more centralized data depositories and large centralized AI models that work off centralized or decentralized data. How does the concentration of power affect this balance that impinges on individual liberty? Our democratic institutions and public discourse are underpinned by an assumption that we can at least agree on things that are true. Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube create algorithms that promote and highlight information. That is an active engineering decision. Regardless of whether Facebook, Twitter profits from hate or not, it is a harmful by-product of the current design and there are social harms that come from this business model. Platforms that monetize user engagement have a duty to their users to make at least a minimum effort to prevent clearly identified harms. We have to focus on the responsibility of platforms. Because people are being manipulated with objectively false information, there has to be some kind of accountability for platforms. Currently, these platforms are not neutral environments they have no common understanding that there are certain things that are manifestly true with algorithms making decisions about what people see or do not see. In most Western democracies, you do have the freedom of speech. But freedom of speech is not an entitlement to reach. You are free to say what you want, within the confines of hate speech, libel law, and so on. But you are not entitled to have your voice artificially amplified by technology. The way Facebook and other platforms approach this problem is: We’ll wait and see and figure out a problem when it emerges. Every other industry has to have minimum safety standards and consider the risks that could be posed to people, through risk mitigation and prevention. There are right now some objectively disprovable things spreading quite rapidly on Facebook. For example, that Covid does not exist and that the vaccine is actually to control the minds of people. These are all things that are manifestly untrue, and you can prove that. However, algorithms are much more prevalent than that- the Apple Face ID algorithm decides whether you are who you say you are. Algorithms limit people’s worldview, which can allow large population groups to be easily controlled. Social Media algorithms tuned to your desires and want’s ensures that everything on your feed will be of interest to you without you knowing what data these algorithms use and what they aim for. Conclusion.  We are already living with large AI platforms that are monopolizing the fruits of globalization with billions being left behind. With us accepting this as if natural.
  • It will be too late when we are asking ourselves. What’s more valuable – intelligence or consciousness? Then ask yourselves what happens to society, politics, and daily life when non-conscious but highly intelligent algorithms know us better than we know ourselves?
  • Whatever view one takes on artificial intelligence ethics. You can rest assured that we will see far more nut cases blowing themselves up, far more wars over finite resources, with vast movements of people.
We have to remember that self-regulation is not the same as having no regulation. Of course, the loudest arguments for and against something often have one thing in common. They are often made by people with no desire to compromise or understand the other side. I think self-regulation, in and of itself contemplates people in power, deciding how they will act. We have to accept from history that we cannot possibly predict all adverse consequences of technology and that’s because it is not just technology that has adverse consequences, but the context in which is applied, It is impossible to regulate AI while thinking about all of its potential adverse consequences.  The seeds for harm at the design stage, or at the development stage, or at the deployment stage. We don’t have to wait for the technology to become an application before we think of regulating it effectively.  There is a need to strengthen specific provisions to safeguard individual liberty and community rights when it comes to inferred data. There is a need to balance the trade-offs between the utility of AI and protecting privacy and data.  Self-regulation within the AI industry may not be enough since it may not solve the massive differential between the people developing the technology and the people affected by it. Machine learning is the next step that they are aiming for, with the algorithms deciding the input and output completely. Inherent political and economic power hierarchies between the state and citizens and within the private sector need to be addressed because the promise of globalization is a lie when it comes to AI and prosperity for all. Algorithms are being used in an ever-growing number of areas, in ever-increasing ways, however, like humans, they can produce bias in their results, even if unintentional. We are all becoming redundant with biotechnology becoming only available to the riches of us. I don’t think that AI per se can be regulated because today it is AI, tomorrow it will be Augmented Reality or Virtual Reality, and the day after tomorrow it may be something that we can’t even think of right now. So it is important to have checks and balances in the use and access to AI that go beyond just technological means. Why? Because they are also moving into areas where the benefits to those applying them may not be matched by the benefits to those subject to their ‘decisions’—in some aspects of the criminal justice system, for example. However, technology companies are not all the same, and nor is technology the only part of the media ecosystem. It is essential to ensure a whole society response to tackle these important issues. You could require algorithms to have a trigger TO SHUT OF – to stop misinformation or terrorist groups using social media as a recruiting platform. BUT who defines what counts as misinformation? It is no longer possible for humans to fact-check so the only course of action is a world Independent Universal Algorithm that is designed to establish fairness.  While “fairness” is much vaguer than “life or death,” I believe it can – and should – be built into all AI using their algorithm. Therefore every Social network should display a correction to every single person who was exposed to misinformation if independent fact-checkers identify a story as false. (Google’s search algorithm is more closely guarded than classified secret documents with  Google Algorithm’s that now owns most of the largest data sets in the world stored in its cloud.)                                        ——————– We now have algorithms fighting with each other for supremacy on the market, prey on other algorithms in order to blunder the world exchanges for profit to such an extent that they now effectively in control of capitalism.  Take for instance, when someone says algorithmic trading, it covers a vast subject not just buying and selling large volumes of shares automatically at very high speeds by unsupervised learning algorithms. There are four major types of trading algorithms.  There are:
  • Execution algorithms
  • Behavior exploitative algorithms
  • Scalping algorithms
  • Predictive algorithms
Transparency must be a key underpinning for algorithm accountability. Why? Because it will make it easier for the decisions produced by algorithms to be explained.  (The ‘right to explanation’ is a key part of achieving accountability and tackling the ethical implications around AI.) We are only on the outskirts of mind science that presently knows little about how the mind works never mind consciousness.  We have no idea how a collection of electric brain signals creates subjective experiences however we are conscious of our dreams. 99% of our bodily activities take place without any conscious feelings. As neuroscientists acquired more and more data about the workings of the brain, cognitive sciences, and their stated purpose is to combine the data from numerous disciplines so as better to understand such diverse phenomena as perception, language, reasoning, and consciousness. Even so, the subjective essence of “what it means” to be conscious remains an issue that is very difficult to address scientifically. To really understand what is meant by the cognitive neurosciences, one must recall that until the late 1960s, the various fields of brain research were still tightly compartmentalized. Brain scientists specialized in fields such as neuroanatomy, neurohistology, neuroembryology, or neurochemistry. Nobody was yet working with the full range of investigative methods available, but eventually, the very complexity of the subject at hand-made that a necessity. The first problem that arises when examining consciousness is that a conscious experience is truly accessible only to the person who is experiencing it. Despite the vast knowledge we have gained in the field of mathematics and computer science, none of the data processing systems we have created needs subjective experiences in order to function. None feel pain, pleasure, anger, or love. These emotions are vanishing into algorithms that are or will have an effect on how we see the world but also how we live in it.   If not address now all moral and political values will disappear, turning consciousness into a kind of mental pollution. After all, computers have no minds. Take images on Instagram they can affect mental health and body image.  You might say so what that has always been the case. And you would be right up to now but because of Covid-19 government has given themselves wide-ranging powers to collect and analyze data, without adequate safeguards. If we are not careful they will have no notion of self, existing only in the present unaware of the past or future, and therefore will be unable to consciously plan for future eventualities. Unconscious algorithms in our brains rather than conscious images in a mind. If you are using a smartphone, it indirectly means that you are enjoying the AI knowingly or unknowingly. It cannot be modified unknowingly or can’t get disfigured or breakdown in a hostile environment. We should not be regulating technology but Artificial Intelligence. It is so complicated in behavior we need to be regulated it at the data level. In lots of regulated domains, there is this notion of post-market surveillance, which is where the developer bears the responsibility of how the technology developed by them is going to be used. As William Shakespeare wrote in – As you Like it.   ” All the world is a stage, and all the men and women merely players, they have their exits and entrances. ”   Sadly with AI, Machine Learning Algorithms no one knows or for that matter will ever know when they enter or exit. Probably like AI learning is actually an ongoing process that takes place throughout all of life. It’s the process of moving information from out there — to here. Unfortunately with the brain, has its own set of rules by which it learns best, unlike AI, the information doesn’t always stick. Together, we have a lot to learn. Humanity is in contact with humanity.   All human comments appreciated. All like clicks and abuse chucked in the cloud bin.        

                                              social media oligarchy where the richest participants are allowed to spread dangerous                  .                
Advertisement

Share this:

  • Tumblr
  • Email
  • Pocket
  • LinkedIn
  • WhatsApp
  • Telegram
  • Skype
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Reddit

Like this:

Like Loading...

THE BEADY EYE SAY’S : LET’S LOOK AT ON LINE SHOPPING. JUST WHO OR WHAT IS BENEFITING.

29 Sunday Nov 2020

Posted by bobdillon33@gmail.com in 2020: The year we need to change., Algorithms., Capitalism, Dehumanization., Digital age., Disconnection., Fourth Industrial Revolution., Google, Google it., How to do it., HUMAN INTELLIGENCE, Human values., Lock Down., Modern day Slavery, Online shopping., Our Common Values., POST COVID-19., Purchasing Power., Sustaniability, Technology v Humanity, The art of a handshake., The common good., The Obvious., The pursuit of profit., The world to day., Tracking apps., Unanswered Questions., WHAT IS TRUTH, What Needs to change in the World

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE SAY’S : LET’S LOOK AT ON LINE SHOPPING. JUST WHO OR WHAT IS BENEFITING.

Tags

Algorithms trade., Algorithms., Capitalism and Greed, Distribution of wealth, Online retailers, Online shopping., Visions of the future.

 

(Ten-minute read) 

Shopping used to be a social activity but Covid -19  pandemic driving up demand for online shopping has and is creating a perfect storm for retailers forcing them to radically rethink what they need to do to remain profitable.

It is said that we are more connected with the internet rather than been isolated.

With smartphones verbally this is true but we are in a world that is disconnecting its self from genuine social contact onto platforms run by algorithms for Profit to the detriment of sensibility, and sustainability of the planet we live on.

(An algorithm is a series of instructions telling a computer how to transform a set of facts about the world into useful information. The facts are data, and the useful information is knowledge for people, instructions for machines, or input for yet another algorithm.)

We are now living in a world where algorithms, or software buying agents, “go shopping” on our behalf.

Every piece of technology that you touch involves many algorithms. They live in our computers and dictate our digital lives at random invisibly existing in the abstract. 

While they fully automate the shopping process, they are capable of keep customers stuck

to one retailer and one product.

They can make thousands of calls or website visits a day.

It’s why people’s Google Search results will look different when they’re looking up things in different parts of the world, or why the ads that follow you across the web are different from your friends’. You never really see the complexities at work, simply the results. 

This sounds very much like a quasi-monopoly.

In a world where algorithms make shopping decisions on our behalf, all

bets are off that shopping will ever return to the high street.

Humans stand no chance against bots when trying to access products and services that might be in demand.

The longer the lockdowns- the more driven demand increasingly via smartphones.

The emerging Economy of Algorithms, where software agents act on our behalf, has the potential of dramatically changing the way we live, work, and think.

We need clear rules that govern the behavior of software buying agents.

We also need a coordinated approach for software buying agents to disclose who they are, in situations where they can be confused for a human.

We need regulations governing profit-seeking algorithms with control of algorithmic trading. With the right mechanisms for the protection of competition in the markets, regulating access to products and services, and enforcing minimum quality standards of algorithms that shop on our behalf. 

Shopping ads are known to produce well over 85% of retail paid Google search clicks. As such, they routinely produce a 400 to 1000% return on cash spent on ads.

Google Shopping entails how to get your product types featured on the nifty Product Ads on Google’s page search results.

Today the majority of stock market transactions are fully automated and executed by algorithms.

AMAZON Net profit roughly tripled to $6.33 billion. Its advertising business, reported $5.4 billion in sales, a 51% jump.

The real reasons that online shopping is replacing conventional shopping habits are.

Reduced overheads expand your market beyond local customers.

With online shopping, you can compare prices from hundreds of different vendors.

No pressure sales.

There are no fixed hours to shop.

One does not have to get in a car, find or pay for a parking spot, get clamped, pay parking fees, pay tolls, get mugged, spend hours in traffic jams, or have a nice day.

Online stores want to keep you as a customer, so they may offer deep discounts, rewards, and cashback if you sign up for their newsletters.

The downside however is you can’t try things on. None of them offer the on-the-spot, take-home advantage that a physical store does.

And shipping costs, are sometimes even more than the cost of what you buy. In-store shopping has no need to charge extra for shipping.

Online sales now accounting for around one-quarter of the total retail market.

There is a clear need for greater speciation, specialization, and differentiation because the consumer is in the driver’s seat, enabled by technology to remain constantly connected and more empowered than ever before to drive changes in shopping behavior in both the physical store and digital retail landscape.

Retailers are still competing with each other but also face new competitors who have different operating models and cost bases and this rate of change is showing little sign of slowing.

The greatest danger that remains with on-line shopping is Privacy and security.

These are legitimate concerns for any online shopper. Your payment information could get stolen from the site or someone who works there could copy your bank details and use them later on their own purchases. It’s also hard to immediately recognize whether an online store is real or just there to scam you.

There are tons of online shopping sites where you can buy everything from plane tickets and flat-screen TVs to food, clothes, furniture, office supplies, movies, and lots more.

Paying attention to whether or not the site uses HTTPS.

Artificial intelligent algorithms will know everything about you- where you live, where and what and when you buy, how often, your likes and dislikes, your bank account, your wife, your children, your friends, infected or not. 

If you want a life go and get it. 

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

 

Share this:

  • Tumblr
  • Email
  • Pocket
  • LinkedIn
  • WhatsApp
  • Telegram
  • Skype
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Reddit

Like this:

Like Loading...

THE BEADY EYE SAYS: AT THE MOMENT THERE IS A LOT OF HYPE THAT AFTER THE CORONA VIRUS PANDEMIC IS OVER THE WORLD WILL HAVE CHANGED.

29 Wednesday Apr 2020

Posted by bobdillon33@gmail.com in #whatif.com, 2020: The year we need to change., CORONA VIRUS., COVID-19, Emergency powers., Fourth Industrial Revolution., GPS-Tracking., Human values., Inequality., Lock Down., Modern day life., Modern day Slavery, Pandemic, Post - truth politics., Post-Covid-19, Reality., Sustaniability, Technology v Humanity, The common good., The essence of our humanity., The Obvious., The pursuit of profit., The state of the World., The world to day., Unanswered Questions., VALUES, WHAT IS TRUTH, What Needs to change in the World, World Politics

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE SAYS: AT THE MOMENT THERE IS A LOT OF HYPE THAT AFTER THE CORONA VIRUS PANDEMIC IS OVER THE WORLD WILL HAVE CHANGED.

Tags

Algorithms., Artificial Intelligence., Capitalism vs. the Climate., Climate change, Community cohesion, CORONA VIRUS., Coronavirus (COVID-19), Distribution of wealth, Inequility, Post-Covid-19, Technology, The Future of Mankind, Visions of the future.

 

 

(Fifteen-minute read) 

Obviously, where will we be in six months, a year, 10 years from now is unknown but what Covid-19 is throwing into sharp relief is just how false our beliefs about markets are. 

We all know what is needed and one could compose a list as long as your arm but all are connected to where and what we live on the Earth.

In the face of Covid-19, this has never been more obvious.

“We’re all in this together and nobody has a clear answer to a way out.”

However, when all of this is over together in lockdown will become more than an appropriate word in more ways than we might like.  

As with sheep, it is easier to control a flock when they are enclosed. 

There is a chance that the herd scenario will be the most dangerous scenario, with profound implications for all. 

Big untransparent data is a minefield to the civil liberties we enjoy at the moment.

We won’t be clapping when the freedom of choice disappears. 

So as responses to the virus evolve, how might our economic futures develop?

The main fact exposed in our societies by COVID-19 is that so many people work pointless jobs because, they make lots of money we have lots of consultants, huge advertising industry and a massive financial sector. Meanwhile, we have a crisis in health and social care, where people are often forced out of useful jobs they enjoy because these jobs don’t pay them enough to live.

In a society where exchange value is the guiding principle of the economy, the basic goods of life are mainly available through markets. This means you have to buy them, and to buy them you need an income, which comes from a job.

In other words, people are compelled to work in pointless jobs.

This is partly why so many countries were so ill-prepared to respond to Covid-19.

There are a number of possible futures, all dependent on how governments and society respond to coronavirus and its economic aftermath.

So, will, we take the opportunity of prioritization of one type of value over others.

(This dynamic has played a large part in driving global responses to Covid-19.)

First, it is quite hard to make money from many of the most essential societal services.

The best-paid jobs only exist to facilitate exchanges: to make money. They serve a no wider purpose to society.

We need a very different kind of economics if we are to build socially just and ecologically sound futures.Civil liberties under attack during COVID-19

From an economic perspective, there are four possible futures:

Descent into barbarism, robust state capitalism, radical state socialism, or a transformation into a big society built on mutual aid run by unregulated AI. 

If we want to be more resilient to pandemics in the future (and to avoid the worst of climate change) we need a system capable of scaling back production in a way that doesn’t mean loss of livelihood or our civil liberties. 

From the economic point of view, this has to be is a Green sustainable Economy because the challenge of producing less is also central to tackling climate change.

(Coronavirus, like climate change, is partly a problem of our economic structure. Although both appear to be “environmental” or “natural” problems, they are socially driven.)

From an individual point of view, the solutions are not so clear.

Should we give up our liberties for the common good?

When faced with a complete lack of evidence about a tracking policy’s long term effects crisis situations afford the state the opportunity to stretch its power into areas of life that were before beyond its reach.

Politics is plagued by a do-something bias and this question is unanswerable because we cannot know how much the forcible suppression of civil society will cost and we won’t know the benefits.

The actions of governments if not reversed when the pandemic is over or under control to date if not reversed are of magnitude more dangerous than this virus.

Thinking critically we are now confronted nonetheless with the question of who gets to make such a decision on tracking, the government on a compulsory law backed bases or the individual on a voluntary base.  

It’s a social theory question, not a medical one: how does a comparatively tiny group of people at the top of government acquire the right to make this call for all other people. How could anyone or any group attain to such a power?

This leads us to some troubling questions.

For example, What kinds of communicable diseases function to void one’s right to free movement? How deadly does the disease have to be? How contagious? 

It is not worth giving up for a problem that has existed even before our time.

After giving up this right, what other rights will follow?

Where will be the balance? Do we become mindless government slaves?

Where is the line between where our right to choose is more important than the government’s right to impose their standards on us? Even if it’s for our own good?

Governments don’t give us our rights. Our rights are ours.

If we let freedom and liberty slip away a little at a time, then we are a people who don’t deserve to be free.

Just as the government has a duty to serve us, we as a people have a duty to defend our freedom and to understand and appreciate the rewards of being a free and open society. If we as a people fail in our duty to protect our freedom, then we no longer deserve to be a free people.

Once you give up even just a little, it is unlikely you will ever get them back. The individual is all that matters when it is you.

Philosopher Bertrand Russell wrote, “Neither a man nor a crowd nor a nation can be trusted to act humanely or to think sanely under the influence of great fear.”

These times of crisis are when we must be vigilant, guarding our rights and liberties, watchful of overreach, as transparency of who, what, and how we are governed will disappear into big data run by algorithms that learn from each other owned by god only knows.   

Will the world change as we are told?  Will the draconian laws revert?  

Will this happen?

More than likely not to all three.  

Why?

Because we are in a capitalist system that cannot or is unable to manage greed, inequality, and profit for profit sake.

Because businesses, of course, want to be able to meet demand when the economy picks back up again. But, if things start to look really bad, then they won’t. So, more people lose their jobs or fear to lose their jobs. So they buy less. And the whole cycle starts again, and we spiral into an economic depression.

Because we are now facing a serious recession if not a global depression.

Our modern generations have lost so much of the sensibility, practicality, frugality, and “know-how.”  Very few of us alive today have experienced an economic depression.

The fan is spinning and something very brown is beginning to hit the economies of the world at some point they will be unable to sustain themself.…so be preemptive.

Preparing for that eventuality now is really the only way to be ready when we will actually need to be much more self-reliant for our food.

A full-on economic collapse isn’t simply a disaster threat we should look out for, if you can’t appreciate what you have, you’ll never be content even if you exceed every goal you set for yourself.

Initially, chaos will reign but people will start banding together and not spending money. Debt will become a dirty word. You can’t eat money or your smartphone so start digging your garden. Get your village to open communal gardens.

Before you throw something away as it could be re-purposed.

The prescription for solving this is simple – the government spends, and it spends until people start consuming and working again. 

However, it is my belief that this type of intervention won’t work here because we don’t want the economy to recover (at least, not immediately). 

Businesses exist to make a profit. If they can’t produce, they can’t sell things. This means they won’t make profits, which means they are less able to employ you. 

What is needed is an “anti-wartime” economy and a massive scaling back of production.

A key task for us all is demanding that emerging social forms come from an ethic that values care, life, and democracy. The central political task in this time of crisis is living and (virtually) organizing around those values.

Yes, climate change is caused by certain gases absorbing heat. But that’s a very shallow explanation. To really understand climate change, we need to understand the social reasons that keep us emitting greenhouse gases.

The dominant idea of the current system we live in is that “exchange value” is the same thing as “use value” and currently, the primary aim of the global economy is to facilitate exchanges of money. 

However, Governments are now providing people with an income in order to stop them from going to work reducing people’s dependence on a wage to be able to live.

This is viewed both by the market and governments as a temporary necessity to keep their economic where-with-all to deliver a good quality of life, so it must be protected. 

The market will always return to normal after short periods of crisis.

We do not have the right “mindset” in order to adopt the protection of life as the guiding principle of our economy. The use of profits as the primary way of organizing an economy can only continue if it is used to remove inequality on all fronts.

If it delivers a good quality of life, for all so it must be protected.

Barbarism is the future if we continue to rely on exchange value as our guiding principle and yet refuse to extend support to those who get locked out of markets by illness or unemployment.

It describes a situation that we have not yet seen.

Citizens no longer rely on employers as intermediaries between them and the basic materials of life.

We must be careful to avoid authoritarianism and massive austerity after the pandemic has peaked that will only consolidate wealth into tracking apps.

We can expect the lure of tracking citizens to infect politicians. The ideals of democracy will be surrendered to the relative security of authoritarianism. 

Likewise with Covid-19. Yes, the direct cause is the virus. But managing its effects requires us to understand human behavior and its wider economic context.

It is hard to believe but there was a time when computers didn’t control every aspect of the world, just like it is hard to believe that the world survived before electricity.

Nowadays it is hard for most to believe that people lived without cellphones.

I believe that sooner or later we will be facing a Greater Depression. While I certainly ‘hope’ not, logic is telling me that it is inevitable.

I do believe when things change, people will change also because it will become necessary. 

Which of the overwhelming number of urgent global issues should I focus my attention on first? 

Maybe you can’t save the world, but you can save your backyard.

Imagine what would happen if we all did the same?

Rather than waiting for the elected leaders to listen to your concerns, the quickest and most effective way of making a difference is to do it yourself.

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


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this:

  • Tumblr
  • Email
  • Pocket
  • LinkedIn
  • WhatsApp
  • Telegram
  • Skype
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Reddit

Like this:

Like Loading...

THE BEADY EYE ASKS. ARE WE LOOSING OUR WORKING MEMORY OR IS GOOGLE DESTROYING THEM.

23 Thursday Apr 2020

Posted by bobdillon33@gmail.com in #whatif.com, 2020: The year we need to change., Algorithms., Artificial Intelligence., Big Data., Climate Change., CORONA VIRUS., COVID-19, Digital age., DIGITAL DICTATORSHIP., Disasters., Disconnection., Environment, Google, Google it., Google Knowledge., HUMAN INTELLIGENCE, Human values., Humanity., International solidarity., Life., Lock Down., Modern day life., Our Common Values., Pandemic, Post-Covid-19, Reality., Survival., Sustaniability, Technology, Technology v Humanity, The common good., The essence of our humanity., The Future, The Internet., The Obvious., The state of the World., The world to day., Unanswered Questions., VALUES, WHAT IS TRUTH, What Needs to change in the World, Where's the Global Outrage.

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE ASKS. ARE WE LOOSING OUR WORKING MEMORY OR IS GOOGLE DESTROYING THEM.

Tags

Algorithms., Artificial Intelligence., Big Data, Capitalism vs. the Climate., CORONA VIRUS., Coronavirus (COVID-19), Extinction, Global warming, SMART PHONE WORLD, Technology, The Future of Mankind, Visions of the future.

 

 

(Twenty-minute read) 

Post COVID-19 this will become a question that we will all have to ask yourselves. 

Coronavirus came after a series of wake-up calls.

Perhaps the COVID-19 outbreak is the wake-up call the world needs to get people accustomed to the fact that because of climate change, we all now need to change our lifestyles to protect our lives. 

The COVID-19 outbreak should be a wake-up call that the economic and social costs of climate change will likely be so catastrophic – potentially many times worse than what we’re currently witnessing – that as a nation and the community of nations, we can’t afford not to take massive measures to combat and mitigate the dangers.

Confronting climate change will take a global effort far beyond any that’s been on the table so far, and far beyond the voluntary commitments in the Paris Climate accord.

We don’t yet know how long the COVID-19 outbreak will last, how many people will get sick or die, or the ultimate cost to global wealth and to people’s jobs and homes.

However, it seems obvious to say that, if we can transform the economy for a virus, we can also do so to prevent climate change.

Acres of column inches have already been written about how the Coronavirus is going to change our economies, politics, and societies forever. 

We can choose to prioritize something – in this case, human life – above the maximization of profit and even our individual freedom.

Unchecked, climate change will wreak far greater damage on our ability to live safe, profitable, happy, and free lives than COVID-19.

Despite the brief dip in emissions due to COVID-19, there is a risk that the pandemic – which is likely to dominate politics for months or even years to come – will overshadow environmental concerns. 

Mortimer Adler Said ” To regard anyone except yourself as responsible for your judgment is to be a slave, not a free man. It is this fact that the liberal arts acquire their name.”

For most of human history, the only other reliable sources of information were other people.

We are becoming symbiotic with our computer tools, growing into interconnected systems that remember less by knowing information than by knowing where the information can be found. If we know that a fact is only a Google away, then we’re not going to waste precious synaptic space on it. Better to let a server remember.

Or is it?

Feel like you’re losing grip of your memory. Google it.

Every time we recall a memory we also remake it, subtly tweaking the neuronal details. (This is why the more we remember something, the less accurate the memory becomes.) Although we like to think of our memories as being immutable impressions, somehow separate from the act of remembering them, they aren’t.

A memory is only as real as the last time you remembered it.

The brain has no interest immaculate recall – it’s only interested in the past to the extent it helps us make sense of the future.

By having memories that constantly change, we ensure that the memories stored inside our mental file cabinets are most relevant.

Although our memories always feel true – as a literal recording of the past – they’re mostly not, since they’re always being edited and bent by what we think now. And now. And now. 

And this is where the internet comes in. One of the virtues of transactive memory is that it acts like a fact-check, helping ensure we don’t all descend into selfish solipsism. ( Solipsism: The theory that the self is the only thing that can be known and verified)

By sharing and comparing our memories, we can ensure that we still have some facts in common, that we all haven’t disappeared down the private rabbit hole of our own reconsolidations.

I don’t think it’s a sign that technology is rotting our cortex – I think it shows that we’re wise enough to outsource a skill we’re not very good at.

Because while the web enables all sorts of other biases – it lets us filter news, for instance, to confirm what we already believe – the use of the web as a vessel of transactive memory is mostly virtuous. We save hard drive space for what matters, while at the same time improving the accuracy of recall.

But if a fact stored externally were the same as a memory of that fact stored in our mind, then the loss of internal memory wouldn’t much matter.

External storage and biological memory are not the same things.

When we form, or “consolidate,” a personal memory, we also form associations between that memory and other memories that are unique to ourselves and also indispensable to the development of deep, conceptual knowledge.

The associations, moreover, continue to change with time, as we learn more and experience more.

The essence of personal memory is not the discrete facts or experiences we store in our mind but “the cohesion” which ties all those facts and experiences together.

What is the self but the unique pattern of that cohesion?

Our over-reliance on google and the smartphone search engines is destroying our memories – ‘digital amnesia’. 

Google in its very nature is making us stupid, making us more likely to recall where the facts are rather than the facts themselves.

We hold the answers to just about all of life’s questions in our palms today. But that means our brains are feeling free to take some R & R.

If you have no working memory, you can have no longterm memory and you understand very little.

The growing reliance on the world wide web for fact-checking is rotting our memories.

We off-load memories to the cloud just as readily as we would to a family member, friend, or lover.

Almost all information today is readily available through a quick internet search. It may be that the internet is taking the place not just of other people as external sources of memory but also of our own cognitive faculties becoming an extension of our own intelligence, rather than a separate tool.

At this point, you might be asking why is any of this important.

Indeed, As the specter of creeping authoritarianism – as emergency disaster measures become normalized, or even permanent – it should be at the forefront of our minds. 

Because the consequences of COVID-19 will reorder society in a dramatic way, and this combined with climate change we are witnessing a tipping point as to how the world is going to work.

Unfortunately, we constructed a world that could not be more suited to a Pandemic – density everywhere- inward rural migration and now Data harvesting.

We can expect greater efforts to digitally capture and record our behavior in urban areas – and fiercer debates over the power such surveillance hands to corporations and states.

One consequence of coronavirus could be an entrenchment of exclusionary political narratives, calling for new borders to be placed around urban communities – overseen by leaders who have the legal and technological capacity, and the political will, to build them.

In other words an intensification of digital infrastructure in our cities to track the spread of COVID-19 using “big data” analysis to anticipate where transmission clusters will emerge next.

A police security robot drives on the high-speed railway station platform in Shenzhen, Guangdong province. The device, which patrols public places, warns people when they are not wearing masks, checks their body temperature and identity.

This much is certain:

Just as this disease has shattered lives, disrupted markets and exposed the competence (or lack thereof) of governments, it will lead to permanent shifts in political and economic power in ways that will become apparent only later.

It will be a time of contradictions.

Internationally, many issues that appeared pressing prior to the pandemic will likely recede in prominence once the world begins its recovery. All non-coronavirus issues will be pushed aside.

Not only because of a shared experience but also because of the mutual assistance that will be required at the same time, democracies must prevent the emergence of a big brother-style intrusion into the personal sphere by the security apparatus.

Such a thing can only occur in the absence of massive civilian oversight.

Many countries will set up committees of inquiry to find out why they and their healthcare systems were caught unprepared, humanity is destined to return to its old self after the adjustment period ends. And that, on balance, is a good thing.

Coronavirus will not end globalization, but it will change it by disrupting our lives and causing painful tragedy —it may introduce a new acceptance of unpredictability into our thinking.

This is certainly not the last time that we’re going to have these kinds of disease eruptions if we deny, delude, and delay on climate change.

We know what to do to halt climate change, we just have to do it.

Our current sense of risk — such as when it is safe to cross a road — is insufficient to deal with threats that are so dire they must be minimized; we need a complete rethink.

If we don’t we will have unregulated algorithms run the world.

How much of life can now be conducted digitally?

If we can accept canceled flights, closed schools, postponed sporting fixtures now, perhaps we can accept restraints in the future.

If we can rely on international co-operation now, perhaps we can summon the same spirit again.

At some point, a nudge will be required. If the shock of coronavirus disruption isn’t enough for us to recalibrate, what will be? 

Our Memories!

We have to recognize there will be other pandemics and be better prepared. We must also recognize that climate change is a deeper and bigger threat that doesn’t go away, and is just as urgent.

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

get inscribed into our biological memory banks. 

 

Share this:

  • Tumblr
  • Email
  • Pocket
  • LinkedIn
  • WhatsApp
  • Telegram
  • Skype
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Reddit

Like this:

Like Loading...

THE BEADY EYE ASK’S: SHOULD WE ALLOW GPS TRACKING FOR THE COMMON GOOD TO DEFEAT COVID-19

19 Sunday Apr 2020

Posted by bobdillon33@gmail.com in #whatif.com, 2020: The year we need to change., Algorithms., Big Data., CORONA VIRUS., COVID-19, Digital age., DIGITAL DICTATORSHIP., Emergency powers., Freedom, Google, GPS-Tracking., Human values., Lock Down., Modern day life., Our Common Values., Political Trust, Reality., Robot citizenship., Technology v Humanity, The common good., The essence of our humanity., The Obvious., The state of the World., The world to day., Unanswered Questions., VALUES, WHAT IS TRUTH, What Needs to change in the World, Where's the Global Outrage.

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE ASK’S: SHOULD WE ALLOW GPS TRACKING FOR THE COMMON GOOD TO DEFEAT COVID-19

Tags

Big Data, Coronavirus (COVID-19), posdt, Post-Covid-19, SMART PHONE WORLD, The Future of Mankind, Visions of the future.

 

(Ten-minute read)

Emergency powers have a tendency to kindle emergencies.

Granted most of these powers adopted by countries to stop the spread of the coronavirus are needed.

At the moment we are not concerned and willing to give up liberties that were won by the sacrifice of millions of lives before us for the common good.

We also know that in order that contact tracing could be more effective if it wasn’t voluntary. But it is vital, that our governments, that these powers (granted to governments during times of crisis) do not continue once COVID-19 is over.

The COVID-19 pandemic is barely four months old and there is no doubt that when it is over that “big data” will present new challenges as well as opportunities.

The threat of a disease as a “pretense” to justify authoritarian impulses to amass power and that technology can be used as a tool in that process could create a Big Data surveillance machine.

One present-day example comes from South Korea, which introduced an electronic system that sends out an automatic alert to people living nearby a known COVID-19 case.

Or Chinese authorities that are using software to sort citizens into color-coded categories — red, yellow, green — corresponding to their level of risk for having the virus.

Or for instance what if Google introduces a smartphone App that monitors social distancing. It will know your whereabouts down to 2 meters -7/7.

Or Governments introduce GPS to track the movements of citizens without their consent to prohibit gatherings of other 250 people. But what if the governor used that measure to stop a rival’s political rally?

But more importantly, if consumers don’t trust a smartphone-based tracking system, they can simply leave their phones at home. That would render the technology useless.

Even if voluntary it might provide people with a false sense of security if they don’t get an alert. Those who have opted out of tracking might be walking around with COVID-19 and infecting others without ever being picked up with the system.

Just think about it.

The potential in using new technology for public health surveillance to get ahead of an infectious disease outbreak must be tempting, so-called contact tracing,

There is a real danger that we could end up creating a society of untouchables. (The former name for any member of a wide range of low-caste Hindu groups and any person outside the caste system.)

Moreover, unless public health officials are involved, there’s potential to “game” the system by falsely claiming a person has the virus when they haven’t tested positive for it. That could lead to other harms, like a business intentionally undermining a rival or a political party suppressing participation.

A terror attack and a pandemic are vastly different, but both present opportunities for governments and the private sector to take on new powers in the name of keeping citizens safe.

The September 11th terror attacks led to the Patriot Act, in the USA, which gave the federal government vast new investigative powers that it claimed were necessary for the fight against terrorism.

During the HIV crises in many cases, public health officials would notify an HIV patient’s past sexual partners that they may have been in contact with somebody who had the disease, but never identified or named them.

One of the big issues at the time was the idea of doctors reporting the names of HIV patients to the states. Some states refused to accept name-based reporting so for years because they feared that it would discourage people from getting tested.

Public health and privacy rights do not need to be in opposition.

Good public health must respect civil liberties, and anything that advances human rights and civil liberties would advance public health.

So we are going to be faced with the rights of Individual freedoms against collectivism. 

The behaviors that define individualism may also enhance the likelihood of pathogen transmission, and thus may be functionally maladaptive under conditions in which pathogens are highly prevalent.

By contrast, the behaviors that define collectivism may function in the service of anti-pathogen defense, and thus be especially adaptive under conditions of high pathogen prevalence.

The question is which one will we choose or will we have a choice when all this is over.

An open-air prison-like the Gaza Strip or Equality among all. 

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

 

 

.

 

.

 

 

 

 

Share this:

  • Tumblr
  • Email
  • Pocket
  • LinkedIn
  • WhatsApp
  • Telegram
  • Skype
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Reddit

Like this:

Like Loading...

THE BEADY EYE ASK’S: NOW THAT YOU ARE IN LOCK DOWN WHAT DO YOU THINK MAKE LIFE WORTH LIVING?

12 Sunday Apr 2020

Posted by bobdillon33@gmail.com in 2020: The year we need to change., CORONA VIRUS., COVID-19, Digital age., Digital Friendship., Disconnection., Human values., Humanity., Life., Lock Down., Modern day life., Our Common Values., Post-Covid-19, Reality., Religion., Religious Beliefs., Technology v Humanity, The common good., The essence of our humanity., The Future, The Obvious., The state of the World., The world to day., Unanswered Questions., VALUES, WHAT IS TRUTH, What Needs to change in the World

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE ASK’S: NOW THAT YOU ARE IN LOCK DOWN WHAT DO YOU THINK MAKE LIFE WORTH LIVING?

Tags

Modern day life., The Meaning of Life., What Needs to change in the World, What the meaning of life means.

 

 

(Five-minute read)

I know it’s a heavy question, but now perhaps it is one of the most important questions we all have to answer in the future. 

It can be tough to notice all the amazing things that life has to offer.

Can we be satisfied with the successful pursuit of love, work, and play?

A fulfilling life can be elusive, as there aren’t any concrete factors that truly determine whether or not a person has truly found happiness. Satisfaction often yields happiness, but even the pursuit is enough to give life meaning.

For me, it is sharing that gives life meaning. 

Active listening by taking your friend’s feelings into account when making a decision and phasing out people who introduce stress or negative feelings out of your life.

The successes of your friends are important and worthy of celebrating.

Get to know them.

Find value in what you do. I.E. finding a job that aligns with your personal passions. It’s important to find a line of work that offers the amount of freedom you feel is necessary and appropriate. Accomplishing something of value.

Obsessing over past failures can’t change what happened. The opinions of others carry only as much weight as you allow them to.

Giving back. Find a cause you are passionate about and donate to it, volunteer your time, or offer your support in some way.

Remember that your strengths are a big part of what makes you great.

Forgiving can be among the hardest things to master, as often it’s the things that hurt the most that are most in need of forgiveness.

Remember, life is always worth living and there are people out there that can help.

It’s about the relationships we create, develop, support and maintain with people, colleagues, friends, and members of our family. Every person we meet adds invaluable experience to our life. Even the most complicated relationships we find ourselves in teaching us something worthwhile.

The answer rests in the ability to create, to dream and to strive to turn those dreams into reality. It’s all about big and small achievements when we prove ourselves being able to push the limits away. It’s about discovering the depths of your unlimited potential. 

By accepting what is going on and what happened, we release ourselves from oppressive judgments and wishes for things to pan out differently.

Enjoy all the little things, and with the time you will discover their profound meaning and that they weren’t little after all.

One thing that makes life more fulfilling and worth living are really connecting with the world around us. Nature. 

Religious faith may be reassuring, but science cannot objectively tell someone whether they should adhere to Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, or some other religion. It cannot even tell an individual what version of Christianity (Catholic, Baptist, Morman, etc.) or Islam (Shia or Sunni) they ought to adopt. Hence, religion and vague spiritual ideas—such as “everything happens for a reason”—can not provide an evidence-supported basis for living.

But most people, fortunately, can find lots of reasons to value their lives. 

Time does not stand still for anybody so perhaps Boris Johnston Priminster after his Coronavirus experience now realizes that sharing is what makes life go around and not get Brexit done.

One thing that makes life more fulfilling and worth living are really connecting with the world around us. If you consider your most precious memories they are probably with other people when you were doing something beyond your personal satisfaction.

Living a full, meaningful and thriving life comes down to being engaged in the world around us, not in virtual reality.

All human comments appreciated. All lie clicks and abuse chucked in the bin.

 

Share this:

  • Tumblr
  • Email
  • Pocket
  • LinkedIn
  • WhatsApp
  • Telegram
  • Skype
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Reddit

Like this:

Like Loading...

Gallery

THE BEADY EYE ASK’S. WILL THE WORLD BE EVER A SAFE PLACE.

05 Sunday Apr 2020

Posted by bobdillon33@gmail.com in 2020: The year we need to change., Artificial Intelligence., Biotechnology., Capitalism, CORONA VIRUS., COVID-19, Dehumanization., Democracy, Digital age., Disasters., Disconnection., Environment, Evolution, Fake News., Fourth Industrial Revolution., HUMAN INTELLIGENCE, Human values., Humanity., Inequality., International solidarity., Life., Lock Down., Modern Day Democracy., Modern day life., Nanotechnology, Pandemic, Political Trust, Post - truth politics., Reality., Robot citizenship., Social Media, Survival., Sustaniability, Technologically Enabled Genetics., Technology v Humanity, Technology., The common good., The essence of our humanity., The Future, The Internet., The Obvious., The pursuit of profit., The state of the World., The world to day., Unanswered Questions., VALUES, WHAT IS TRUTH, What Needs to change in the World, Where's the Global Outrage., World Aid., World Economy., World Leaders, World Organisations., World Politics, World Trade Organisation

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE ASK’S. WILL THE WORLD BE EVER A SAFE PLACE.

    (Thirty-minute lockdown read )  My previous post asked the question of what skills will be needed to rebuild …

Continue reading →

THE BEADY EYE SAY’S : Where will we be in six months, a year, ten years from now?

31 Tuesday Mar 2020

Posted by bobdillon33@gmail.com in 2020: The year we need to change., Artificial Intelligence., Capitalism, Climate Change., CORONA VIRUS., COVID-19, Dehumanization., Democracy., Digital age., Disconnection., Environment, Evolution, Fourth Industrial Revolution., HUMAN INTELLIGENCE, Human values., Humanity., Inequality, Life., Lock Down., Modern day life., Our Common Values., Political Trust, Politics., Populism., Post - truth politics., Poverty, Reality., Survival., Sustaniability, Technology v Humanity, The common good., The Future, The Internet., The Obvious., The pursuit of profit., The state of the World., The world to day., Truth, Truthfulness., Unanswered Questions., VALUES, Wealth., WHAT IS TRUTH, What Needs to change in the World, Where's the Global Outrage., World Economy., World Organisations., World Politics

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE SAY’S : Where will we be in six months, a year, ten years from now?

Tags

Artificial Intelligence., Business and Economy, Capitalism, CORONA VIRUS., Coronavirus (COVID-19), Distribution of wealth, Extinction, Global warming, Globalization, Inequility, Technology, The Future of Mankind, Visions of the future.

 

 

( An essential twenty-minute read) 



It all depends on how governments and society respond to coronavirus and its economic aftermath.

As we know COVID-19 is highlighting serious deficiencies in our existing system. 

Hopefully, we will use this crisis to rebuild, produce something better and more humane. But we may slide into something worse.

My focuses on this post are on the fundamentals of the modern economy: global supply chains, wages, and productivity.

I argue that we will need a very different kind of economics if we are to build socially just and ecologically sound futures.

In the face of COVID-19, this has never been more obvious.

——————————————————————————————–

The COVID-19 pandemic is simply the amplification of the dynamic that drives other social and ecological crises: The prioritisation of one type of value over others. 

From an economic perspective, there are four possible futures:

Descent into barbarism, robust state capitalism, radical state socialism, and a transformation into a big society built on mutual aid.

Coronavirus, like climate change, is partly a problem of our economic structure. Although both appear to be “environmental” or “natural” problems, they are socially driven.

Yes, climate change is caused by certain gases absorbing heat. But that’s a very shallow explanation. To really understand climate change, we need to understand the social reasons that keep us emitting greenhouse gases.

Likewise with COVID-19. Yes, the direct cause is the virus. But managing its effects requires us to understand human behaviour and its wider economic context.

Tackling both COVID-19 and climate change is much easier if you reduce nonessential economic activity.

The epidemiology of COVID-19 is rapidly evolving. But the core logic is similarly simple. People mix together and spread infections.

We can see from Wuhan that social distancing and lockdown measures like this are effective.

Political economy is useful in helping us understand why they weren’t introduced earlier in European countries and the US.

We are now facing a serious recession and we are living with an economic system that will threaten collapse at the next sign of pandemic.

The economics of collapse is fairly straightforward.

Businesses exist to make a profit.

If they can’t produce, they can’t sell things. This means they won’t make profits, which means they are less able to employ you.

Businesses can and do (over short time periods) hold on to workers that they don’t need immediately: They want to be able to meet demand when the economy picks back up again. But, if things start to look really bad, then they won’t. So, more people lose their jobs or fear to lose their jobs. So they buy less. And the whole cycle starts again, and we spiral into an economic depression.

In a normal crisis, the prescription for solving this is simple.

The government spends, and it spends until people start consuming and working again.

This pressure has led some world leaders to call for an easing of lockdown measures.

But normal interventions won’t work here because we don’t want the economy to recover (at least, not immediately). The whole point of the lockdown is to stop people going to work, where they spread the disease.

If we want to be more resilient to pandemics in the future (and to avoid the worst of climate change) we need a system capable of scaling back production in a way that doesn’t mean loss of livelihood.

At its core, the economy is the way we take our resources and turn them into the things we need to live.

Looked at this way, we can start to see more opportunities for living differently that allow us to produce less stuff without increasing misery.

So how do you reduce the amount of stuff you make while keeping people in work?

You have to reduce people’s dependence on a wage to be able to live.

Currently, the primary aim of the global economy is to facilitate exchanges of money. The dominant idea of the current system we live in is that exchange value is the same thing as use-value.

This is why markets are seen as the best way to run society. They allow you to adapt, and are flexible enough to match up productive capacity with use-value.

What COVID-19 is throwing into sharp relief is just how false our beliefs about markets are. 

There are lots of contributing factors to this. But let’s take two.

First, it is quite hard to make money from many of the most essential societal services-key workers low-paid employee. This is in part because a major driver of profits is labour productivity growth: doing more with fewer people – automation.

Second, jobs in many critical services aren’t those that tend to be highest valued in society. Many of the best-paid jobs only exist to facilitate exchanges; to make money.

People are compelled to work pointless jobs (they serve no wider purpose to society: ie. consultants, huge advertising industry and a massive financial sector) because, in a society where exchange value is the guiding principle of the economy, the basic goods of life are mainly available through markets.

This means you have to buy them, and to buy them you need an income, which comes from a job.

Meanwhile, we have a crisis in health and social care, where people are often forced out of useful jobs they enjoy because these jobs don’t pay them enough to live.

While state-capitalist society continues to pursue exchange value as the guiding light of the economy. It also enacts a massive Keynesian stimulus by extending credit and making direct payments to businesses.

The expectation here is that this is will be for a short period.

Could this be a successful scenario?

Possibly, but only if COVID-19 proves controllable over a short period.

Limited state intervention will become increasingly hard to maintain if death tolls rise.

Increased illness and death will provoke unrest and deepen economic impacts, forcing the state to take more and more radical actions to try to maintain market functioning.

Barbarism is the future if we continue to rely on exchange value as our guiding principle and yet refuse to extend support to those who get locked out of markets by illness or unemployment. It describes a situation that we have not yet seen.

Could this happen?

The concern is that either it could happen by mistake during the pandemic, or by intention after the pandemic peaks.

Potentially just as consequential is the possibility of massive austerity after the pandemic has peaked and governments seek to return to “normal”.

This would be disastrous. The subsequent failure of the economy and society would trigger political and stable unrest, leading to a failed state and the collapse of both state and community welfare systems.

Then there is the possibility that we could see with a cultural shift that places a different kind of value at the heart of the economy.

The state steps in to protect the parts of the economy that are essential to life: so that the basic provisions of life are no longer at the whim of the market. The state nationalises hospitals and makes housing freely available. Finally, it provides all citizens with a means of accessing various goods – both basics and any consumer goods we are able to produce with a reduced workforce.

Citizens no longer rely on employers as intermediaries between them and the basic materials of life.

Payments are made to everyone directly and are not related to the exchange value they create.

Instead, payments are the same to all (on the basis that we deserve to be able to live, simply because we are alive), or they are based on the usefulness of the work.

A Basic Universal Income.

Supermarket workers, delivery drivers, warehouse stackers, nurses, teachers, and doctors are the new CEOs.

If deep recessions happen and there is a disruption in supply chains such that demand cannot be rescued by the kind of standard Keynesian policies we are seeing now (printing money, making loans easier to get and so on), the state may take overproduction.

There are risks to this approach – we must be careful to avoid authoritarianism. But done well, this may be our best hope against an extreme COVID-19 outbreak.

Mutual aid is the second future in which we adopt the protection of life as the guiding principle of our economy. But, in this scenario, the state does not take a defining role. Rather, individuals and small groups begin to organise support and care within their communities.

The most ambitious form of this future sees new democratic structures arise. Groupings of communities that are able to mobilise substantial resources with relative speed. People coming together to plan regional responses to stop disease spread and (if they have the skills) to treat patients.

This kind of scenario could emerge from any of the others.

What hopefully is clear is that all these scenarios leave some grounds for fear, but also some for hope.

The upside of this is the possibility that we build a more humane system that leaves us more resilient in the face of future pandemics and other impending crises like climate change. 

A key task for us all is demanding that emerging social forms come from an ethic that values care, life, and democracy.

The central political task in this time of crisis is living and (virtually) organising around those values.

Not low-paid workers or National Minimum Wage or National Living Wage because their work is so vital.

Successive governments had failed to reduce inequality between rich and poor despite two decades of interventions.

We must now with an uncertain future focus more on the journey, rather than the ultimate destination.

But be no doubt that we are at a crossroad where the low pay culture that has trapped people in poorly jobs is coming to an end. 

Capitalism Inequality can not be allowed to continue. 

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

 

Share this:

  • Tumblr
  • Email
  • Pocket
  • LinkedIn
  • WhatsApp
  • Telegram
  • Skype
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Reddit

Like this:

Like Loading...

THE BEADY SAY’S: TO ANCHOR OUR UNDERSTANDING OF THE CONSEQUENCES OF THE CORONA VIRUS THE FREEDOM OF THE PRESS IS AND WILL BE VITAL.

27 Friday Mar 2020

Posted by bobdillon33@gmail.com in 2020: The year we need to change., Communication., CORONA VIRUS., COVID-19, Democracy, DIGITAL DICTATORSHIP., Disconnection., Fake News., Freedom of the Press., Honesty., Human values., International solidarity., Life., Lock Down., Modern Day Communication., Modern day life., Our Common Values., Political Trust, Post - truth politics., Reality., Robot citizenship., Technology v Humanity, Telling the truth., The common good., The essence of our humanity., The Future, The Internet., The Obvious., The state of the World., The world to day., Truth, Truthfulness., Unanswered Questions., VALUES, What Needs to change in the World, World Leaders, World Politics

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY SAY’S: TO ANCHOR OUR UNDERSTANDING OF THE CONSEQUENCES OF THE CORONA VIRUS THE FREEDOM OF THE PRESS IS AND WILL BE VITAL.

Tags

Freedom of expression, Freedom of the Press., The press.

 

(Four-minute read) 


At the moment rightly so we are all preoccupied with the consequences of our own individual lives and all indicator point to world disaster on a scale not seen by most of us. 

However, if and when we return to a semblance of normal the freedom of the press will be in jeopardy when the blame game starts, which is inevitable. 

Why will it be?

Because the present pandemic marks the emergence of a new model of watchdog function, one that is neither purely networked nor purely traditional but is rather a mutualistic interaction between the two.

What globalization, technological integration and the general flattening of the world have done is to super empower individuals to such a degree that they can actually challenge any hierarchy—from a global bank to a nation-state—as individuals.

The fear that the decentralized network, with its capacity to empower individuals to challenge their governments or global banks, is not a democracy, but could lead to anarchy.

But the alternative is to give the government a veto over what its citizens are allowed to know.

There should be relentless exposure of politician or businessman, every evil practice, whether in politics, business, or social life if we are to change the world for a better future.

False news forces us to ask how comfortable we are with the actual shape of democratization created by the Internet. It circumvents the social and organizational
frameworks of traditional media, which played a large role in framing the
balance between freedom and responsibility of the press.

Many of the problems can be laid at the feet of the Internet—fragmentation of the audience and polarization of viewpoints.

We cannot afford as a polity to create classes of privileged speakers and
press agencies, and underclasses of networked information producers whose products we take into the public sphere when convenient, but whom we treat as susceptible to suppression when their publications become less palatable.

Doing so would severely undermine the quality of our public discourse.

The risk is that the government will support its preferred media models and that the
incumbent mass media players will, in turn, vilify and denigrate the newer
models in ways that make them more vulnerable to attack and shore up the
the privileged position of those incumbents in their role as a more reliable ally watchdog.

Clarifying that the freedom of the press extends to “every sort of publication which affords a vehicle of information and opinion” and that liberty of the press is the right of the lonely pamphleteer and individual bloggers. 

Social distancing must not be allowed to turn into ruling distancing.

 Long live WikiLeaks. 

An uncomfortable fact is that a free press in a democracy can be messy at the best of times with governments around the world underestimated the coronavirus the political exploitation of the outbreak is now a reality. 

Capturing the treatment of television is less comprehensive as it is a visual medium.

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this:

  • Tumblr
  • Email
  • Pocket
  • LinkedIn
  • WhatsApp
  • Telegram
  • Skype
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Reddit

Like this:

Like Loading...

THE BEADY ASK’S: ARE WE IN LOCKED DOWN, OR ARE WE LOCKED IN, OR LOCKED UP, OR LOCKED AWAY, OR LOCKED OUT.

24 Tuesday Mar 2020

Posted by bobdillon33@gmail.com in CORONA VIRUS., COVID-19, Lock Down., Uncategorized

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY ASK’S: ARE WE IN LOCKED DOWN, OR ARE WE LOCKED IN, OR LOCKED UP, OR LOCKED AWAY, OR LOCKED OUT.

Tags

Coronavirus (COVID-19), Lock Down.

 
(Two-minute read) 
Which is it?
  How far a democratic state can go to constrain the liberties of its citizens when dealing with a medical emergency — and raises questions about how effective the measures will be. These difficulties point to the fundamental problem in keeping in check such a dangerous epidemic in a democratic country that values fundamental liberties such as the freedom to move around. At the moment the main reason for these measures is to slow down and contain the virus. The decree appears to be more of an instrument to try to persuade people to find ways to stay at home as much as possible, rather than as a list of enforceable prescriptions. Locked down, is a combination of locked in and locked out. Elevated security measures. Locked in, you cannot get out. Locked away, to keep (oneself) alone in a room or place for a long period of time. To put (someone) in a locked place (such as a prison) for a long period of time. To put (something) in a locked container, place, etc. Locked up, Jail. Locked out. Securely locked up. To become fastened. To withhold work from (employees) during a labour dispute. It can be difficult to establish where the appropriate danger sources might be so lockdown procedures should be seen as a sensible and proportionate response to any external incident which has the potential to pose a threat to the safety. There is perhaps time for draconian measures to stop the outbreak but democracies must trust their citizens, now it’s time for us to earn that trust so people and our democracy survive.    Sadly, because there are no specific risk factors for COVID-19 it won’t be the last of measures that were considered unthinkable not so long ago. At the end of that arm is a germ-bearing cell, any venture out in public carries some risks, whether the destination is a grocery store or a breath of air. We take risks without thinking, and we can minimise some of those risks. This is a strange new world we’re entering with no path to guide us. Tread carefully. Putting these restrictions in place is far easier than removing them. All human comments appreciated. All like clicks and abuse chucked in the bin.

Share this:

  • Tumblr
  • Email
  • Pocket
  • LinkedIn
  • WhatsApp
  • Telegram
  • Skype
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Reddit

Like this:

Like Loading...

All comments and contributions much appreciated

  • THE BEADY EYE SAY’S. CIVILIZATION WITH CLIMATE CHANGE WILL BE A VERY THIN VENEER. March 21, 2023
  • THE BEADY EYE SAYS: ALL AROUND THE WORLD CO2 EMISSIONS CONTINUE, WILLY NILLY March 16, 2023
  • THE BEADY EYE ASKS. WHAT WOULD IT TAKE FOR ENGLAND TO REJOIN THE EU? March 10, 2023
  • THE BEADY EYE ASKS: WHEN YOU SEE APPEALS EVERY MINUTE OF THE DAY FOR 2 TO 10 POUNDS A MONTH: TO SAVE EVERYTHING FROM CHILDEREN TO WHALES TO SCHOOL’S: JUST WHAT ARE OUR GOVERNMENTS DOING WITH OUR TAXES. March 10, 2023
  • THE BEADY EYE SAY’S: IN CASE YOU ARE WONDERING THIS IS WHERE THE WORLD IS GOING. March 2, 2023

Archives

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

Talk to me.

bobdillon33@gmail.co… on THE BEADY EYE SAYS: WELCOME TO…
OG on THE BEADY EYE SAYS: WELCOME TO…
benmadigan on THE BEADY EYE SAY’S. ONC…
Sidney Fritz on THE BEADY EYE ASK’S: CAN…
Bill Blake on THE BEADY EYE SAYS. FOR GOD SA…

Blogroll

  • Discuss
  • Get Inspired
  • Get Polling
  • Get Support
  • Learn WordPress.com
  • Theme Showcase
  • WordPress Planet
  • WordPress.com News

7/7

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

My Blog; THE BEADY EYE.

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

bobdillon33@gmail.com

Free Thinker.

View Full Profile →

Follow bobdillon33blog on WordPress.com

Blog Stats

  • 80,847 hits

Blogs I Follow

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

The Beady Eye.

The Beady Eye.
Follow bobdillon33blog on WordPress.com

Blog at WordPress.com.

unnecessary news from earth

WITH MIGO

The Invictus Soul

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

WordPress.com News

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

WestDeltaGirl's Blog

Sharing vegetarian and vegan recipes and food ideas

The PPJ Gazette

PPJ Gazette copyright ©

Privacy & Cookies: This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use.
To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here: Cookie Policy
  • Follow Following
    • bobdillon33blog
    • Join 203 other followers
    • Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
    • bobdillon33blog
    • Customize
    • Follow Following
    • Sign up
    • Log in
    • Report this content
    • View site in Reader
    • Manage subscriptions
    • Collapse this bar
%d bloggers like this: