THE BEADY ASKS: WHERE IS ALL OF THIS WIFI COMMUNICATION LEADING US.

Tags

, , , , , ,

 

This post continues with the theme of Intelligence.  (Four minute read)

The Beady eye has in previous post addressed the chaotic world of social media under the headings of are we all being Googlefied, Twitterised, and becoming Selfied by Facebook.

THIS VERY MOMENT PROGRESSION is TOWARDS MONITORIATION by WiFi.

It’s hard to imagine what life would be like without the internet. Afficher l'image d'origine

Social media sites have taken over our lives with most people existing in a rapidly moving and complex world.

People are living in a world ‘saturated by media sounds and images.

It’s even harder to even imagine that 10 years ago there was no Facebook or Twitter!

With Facebook becoming more of a medium for self-promotion.

So here is my feeble attempt to cast an overview of what is happening to society as a result of what I call the continuing dissociation with real life.

The world as it is represented by society today has become a very big place with the internet changing the world and revolutionised the way we live.

Social media websites are some of the most popular haunts on the Internet and they are revolutionized the way people communicate and socialize on the Web.

On the other hand social media binds together communities that once were geographically isolated, greatly increasing the pace and intensity of collaboration. Suddenly the world could be accessed at the touch of a button. Gone were the days when we were waiting for information and doing hours of research at the local library.

People in the Western world would rather live without TV than without internet access.Afficher l'image d'origine

Now comes WiFi.  The potential for WiFi is endless. It seems we welcome new or improved technology with open arms just about every day.

We are well on the road to paperless administration and functioning. There is Wire Free WiFi Dog Fence. WiFi technology has just approved a brand new next-gen WiFi 802.22 technology that could allow your home network to span up to 60 miles! There are mi-light smart tech wi-fi bulb. There is Wave WiFi Technology. There is Wi-Fi technology module for moving cars which will enable people to access high-speed Internet while they are traveling.

There are plans to ‘connect’ whole cities. A whole city can be provided by WiFi by deploying internet routers at distant positions.

It surrounds society from the minute we wake up to the late hours we go to bed at night. Whatever the form of media, it is a reliable source of keeping up to date on all the latest technology, from iPod shuffle, to the iPhone, in the modern society today.

I do not believe that with WiFi, technology has any bounds. 

It has taken over our lives but it seems like that happiness is diminished and we are on the threshold of autonomous crowd monitoring via devices using sensor networks to track people. 

Our obsession with our smartphones has not only changed the way we spend time, but the way we feel and think.

 I HATE being out in public and seeing people on their phones. It seems that we can’t enjoy the world around us for an hour without retreating back into that safe little digital box.

The rise of social media is definitely correlated with the rise of narcissism in our society. Our self-esteem depends on how many likes we get, how many followers we get, if someone texts us back.

By now, we are all aware that social media has had a tremendous impact on our culture, in business, on the world-at-large.

Make no mistake: email, Facebook and Twitter-checking constitute a neural addiction. With social media there is a paper trail for everything.

However, aside from seeing your friends’ new baby on Facebook, or reading about Justin Bieber’s latest brush with the law on Twitter, what are some of the real impacts, both positive and negative, that social media has had on our society?

The real question is:

Is it Intelligent to create entire cultures of people who do not trust the government intelligence linkages to the carriers who don’t wish “their every move, message and meme to be indexed, analyzed and categorized by Big Brother and big business.

Has the truth disappeared in a culture that relentlessly promotes avarice and excess as the good life, consumerism is essentially expected.

Every politician worth his salt now needs to jump on the social media bandwagon. This is because social websites have played an important role in many elections around the world.

Majority of people in the world believe that they live in a modern society and have more technology resources available such as the internet, TV, Radio and newspapers to know the causes behind the events that happened in the past or happening in the present.

Television is becoming more than a passive watching device as content viewing spans other devices.

Households are spending more time online.

  • In order to deal with it, we need shortcuts.

We cannot be expected to recognize and analyze all the aspects in each person, event, and situation we encounter in even one day.

It leads me to think that we’re all kind of in this big, worldwide reality television game. We’re all competing to see who has the best life with the best boyfriend or girlfriend having the best meals on the best vacations with the best families and the best dogs. By the time you make it home there is nothing to talk about because you’ve spoken about everything all day through social media or you’ve looked through each other’s social media feeds.

Social networks offer the opportunity for people to reconnect with their old friends and acquaintances, make new friends, trade ideas, share content and pictures, and many other activities. (in a kind of weird, impersonal cyber way) 

Accessing patient’s notes instantly is a massive progression in patient care. In future, scans, x-ray results, blood pressure checks and cholesterol checks could be all scanned straight into a patient’s notes.

When you stop having offscreen interaction, you lose empathy.

You lose the ability to have genuine reactions to real problems and real things.

Digital technologies have not only created potent new social networks but also dramatically altered how culture works. Digital crowds now serve as very effective and prolific innovators of culture—a phenomenon I call BRAINWASHING .

One of the biggest changes that is taking place is that we all contributing to cultural branding.

If you look at crowd cultures grabbed the critiques and blew them up, pushing industrial food anxiety into the mainstream you begin to realize why in the Western World we have a rising problem with obesity.

News about every major problem linked to industrial food production—processed foods loaded with sugar, carcinogenic preservatives, rBGH in milk, bisphenol A leaching from plastics, GMOs, and so on—began to circulate at internet speed.

Parents worried endlessly about what they were feeding their kids.

Crowd culture converted an elite concern into a national social trauma that galvanized a broad public challenge, but on the other hand it is targeting novel ideologies flowing out of crowd cultures and converting them into profit.

In cultural branding, the brand promotes an innovative ideology that breaks with category conventions. Companies leapfrog the conventions of their categories to champion new ideologies that are meaningful to customers.

You have mind share branding, is one that companies have long relied on.  It treats a brand as a set of psychological associations (benefits, emotions, personality).

You have purpose branding, in it, a brand espouses values or ideals its customers share, to turn what was once serendipity into a rigorous discipline.

On top of all of this you have.

Entertainment “properties”—performers, athletes, sports teams, films, television programs, and video games—are also hugely popular on social media.

On top of that it is nearly impossible to escape the invasion of advertising and online petitions.  Social media allows companies to leapfrog traditional media and forge relationships directly with customers.

There is no limit on the possibilities of how much further joining forces the various forms of mass communication with technology will go.

In the end the more mass communication evolves the more the world and society changes with it.

While propaganda has been around for almost a thousand years, only recently (last 100 years) with the advent of technologies that allow us to spread information to a mass group has it evolved to a scientific process capable of influencing a whole nation of people. They have also served to rally people for a cause, and have inspired mass movements and political unrests in many countries.

The public have an insatiable curiosity to know everything. Except what is worth knowing.Afficher l'image d'origine

Remember, the technologies out there might seem like the greatest thing since sliced bread, but if they don’t help meet learning objectives, if the audience isn’t taken into account, if logistical considerations aren’t thought about and if the instructor isn’t comfortable with the technologies then they are much like the bard wrote, “full of sound and fury and signifying nothing”.

In conclusion, the biggest change is.  Separation. 

When we can’t see someone through OUR OWN EYES, it’s creates distrust : IT WILL BECOME HARDER to love them. 

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

industrial food ideology.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

watching biased news channels, or participating in violent video games.

Most of what we hear about in the world today comes to us as it is broadcasted through the television news networking stations and the Radio broadcasts throughout the day….

 

 

In an era of email, text messages, Facebook and Twitter, we’re all required to do several things at once. But this constant multitasking is taking its toll.

Each time we check a Twitter feed or Facebook update, we encounter something novel and feel more connected socially

 

 

While mass media targets the individual in short-term intervals, the overall influence on them has been established as the consumer moves from one impressionable age category to another.

 

 

 

Be aware of the general perspective that others use to frame the problem or issue at hand, because accepting their frame on their terms gives them a powerful advantage.

Be sensitive to situational demands however trivial they may seem: group norms, group pressures, symbols of authority, slogans, and commitments.

THE BEADY EYE ASKS:WHAT IS IT ABOUT US THAT MAKES US WHOLLY INCAPABLE OF RESPONDING? TO CLIMATE CHANGE- IS IT GREED OR ARE WE JUST PLAIN STUPID.

Tags

, , , , , ,

 

It’s a beautiful hot day, 34 celsius.

The Olympics are in full swing with its opening message long forgotten by those how win a medal.

The world since the first farmer grew two carrots has had its winners, losers, wars, famines, rich, and poor, you name it the World has weathered all.Afficher l'image d'origine

You could be a faitheist  and say  “What happens happens”  but as Lone Man ( Isna la wica) ( late 19th century Teton Sioux said ” I have seen that in any great undertaking it is not enough for a man to depend simply upon himself.”Afficher l'image d'origine

I have written on Climate Change before the Paris Agreement and after.

Since then every day of the week there is some new evidence that the climate is changing.

The global meltdown has begun.

Long predicted and long denied, the effects of climate change are arriving faster than even the gloomiest prophets expected.

The earth is dying, yet those who spread this message are treated as dangerous and mad.

This week we learnt that the Arctic ecosystem is collapsing.

Three weeks ago, marine biologists reported that almost all the world’s coral reefs could be dead by the end of the coming century.

One month ago, the Red Cross reported that natural disasters uprooted more people in 1998 than all the wars and conflicts on earth combined.

The demographer Dr Norman Myers calculates that 25m people have already been displaced by environmental change, and this will rise to 200m within 50 years.

The London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine reports that nine of the 10 most dangerous diseases carried by insects and other vectors are likely to spread as a result of global warming.

You would think that with our combined World Intelligent we would be by now well beyond the point of discussing the implementation of the Paris Agreement.

Not on your Nelly.

And yet, far from addressing this coming catastrophe, we curse or mock anyone who draws attention to it.

What is it about this pattern of living that demands that those who challenge it must be treated as if they were dangerous or mad?

Is it just plain stupidity or that we have found the key to undying happiness, the transactable elixir of life?

What is it about this crisis, what is it about us, that makes us wholly incapable of responding?

Is it the drive to make more money than you could possibly need, to buy more goods than you could possibly enjoy, is a species of mental illness. Success in this system brings not happiness, but, at best, an alleviation of the pain required to sustain it. Even its beneficiaries are also its victims.

Climate change is perhaps the gravest calamity our species has ever encountered. Its impact dwarfs that of any war, any plague, any famine we have confronted so far. It makes genocide and ethnic cleansing look like sideshows at the circus of human suffering.

To date we have not reached the necessary number of countries to represent 55% of global emissions to sign up to the agreement to implement the Paris Agreement. (Which I advocate will have little effect as the agreement has no means of enforcing anything agreed.)

Negotiations and meetings have been marred by special interest groups trying to prevent effective action to combat climate change. In addition, there has been a lack of political will to take effective steps and measures.

Many large corporations, have opposed climate change treaties seemingly afraid of profit impacts if they have to make substantial changes to how they do business.

All countries are affected by, and contribute to, the buildup of greenhouse gases, and should be willing to join in the effort to stop it. However, it is far from easy to agree what to do, and how to do it….

Because : Poor countries face the brunt of the problems caused by global warming, and point out that most of the current global warming are the results of the rich countries’ pollution.

Current consumption patterns also see far more greenhouse emissions per person in the rich countries than the poorer ones.

As evidence of climate change mounts the impacts will be worse for more vulnerable people around the world, and could destabilize the world economy.

However, some are ( Donald Trump) still trying to undermine climate change action through deception.

The EU is in crisis, and the USA will be soon.

Brazil’s “interim” government, led by Michel Temer, signed an emergency loan to the State of Rio de Janeiro to help finance infrastructure for the 2016 Olympics. The bailout was conditional to selling off the State’s public water supply and sanitation company, the Companhia Estadual de Águas e Esgotos (Cedae).

What will it take to persuade us to stop using the world as our punchbag?

Many are agreed that climate change may be one of the greatest threats facing the planet.

All the words, pledges, agreements mean nothing without the political will, and financial backing.

There is only one way to make any difference worthwhile happening world-wide and that is to tap into World Greed.

Profit for Profit sake.Afficher l'image d'origine

By placing a World Aid commission of 0.05% on all High Frequency Financial Transactions, on all Sovereign Wealth Funds Acquisitions, on all Foreign Exchange transactions over $20,000, on all Lottery wins over $100000, on all gambling.

This would create a perpetual Fund of trillions to tackle Climate Change.

Will it happen.

Not without all of us demanding it of the United Nations.

The Earth is the mother of all people and all people should have equal rights upon it.

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

 

 

 

THE BEADY EYE ASKS: IS THERE ANY INTELLIGENCE BETWEEN DONALD TRUMPS EARS

Tags

,

 

Another post within the theme of Intelligence – 5 minute read.

Is Donald Trump proving that intelligence without intelligent judgment is worthless.Afficher l'image d'origine

The argument that only a very bright man could have been such a successful businessman only reveals the understandable fact that few of us ever interacted with billionaires. Very bright billionaires exist, but they are no more common than very bright professors or plumbers or doctors.

IQ= business success.

Around two-thirds of people have an IQ between 85 and 115. About 5% score higher than 125, and about 5% score below 75.

So despite Trump’s assurances about how smart he is. Is he an utter inflated jackass or is he indeed intelligent.Afficher l'image d'origineTrump has served no public office and his candidacy has been bedevilled with controversy.

This is the man who once said that illegal Mexican immigrants were mostly murderers and rapists, who pledged to stop Muslim migration and who asked the question: “If Hillary Clinton can’t satisfy her husband what makes her think she can satisfy America?”

He graduated from Pennsylvania with a Bachelor of Science degree in economics and anthropology.

He generally expresses himself in an extremely unsophisticated and sophomoric manner. He doesn’t just see himself as a man, he sees himself as a brand. And that’s what he’s been selling his whole life. The election is just one more sales pitch.

How he got off the ground is disputed. “It has not been easy for me,” Trump told an audience in 2015, “my father gave me a small loan of a million dollars.”

That’s misleading.

The company that Donald took over in 1971 – the Trump Organization – was essentially the family business rebranded, and at various points in his career his father helped either as a silent partner, guarantor of loans or by providing capital to keep the wheels oiled. For instance, when one of Donald’s casinos floundered, Fred bought $3.5 million in gaming chips – but didn’t use them.

So who is he?

He was born on June 14, 1946 in Queens, New York. His mother, Mary, came from an island off Scotland. His father, Frederick Christ Trump, was of German descent.

In 1977, Donald married the beautiful Czech athlete and model Ivana Zelnickova Winklmayr – and their shoulder-padded, gold-plated marriage turned them into a yuppie king and queen. In 1985, they bought their very own Versailles: the 118-room Mar-a-Lago estate in Palm Beach, Florida. Parts of the estate were turned into a resort for private members.

In 1991, Divorce proceedings began with Ivanka.

Donald was having an affair with the actress Marla Maples, a relationship that would also end in legal separation in 1999. In 2004, Donald married the Slovenian-born model Melania Knauss. Two of the guests at the wedding were Bill and Hillary Clinton.

His key to success is make an unreasonable demand in order to strike a deal for less but which still leaves him the winner. As he wrote in his 1987 manifesto The Art of the Deal: “Sheer persistence is the difference between success and failure.”

The Trump title had been used to sell “water, Israeli energy drinks, cologne, Virginian wine, vodka, furniture” – and, most controversially, a university.

People assume that because of his sometimes questionable business successes, that he must be intelligent and sharp.

The answer is that Trump apparently has few or no aides who would ask such a question.

In fact, at least with regard to foreign policy, Trump has boasted about consulting with himself.

With a man who operates by such a strange mix of calculation and egomania, it’s hard to tell how much method is in the madness. He’s picked fights with celebrities that seem designed just to gain attention.

The big myth about Trump that needs exploding is the idea that he stumbled into politics without a game plan. Again, that’s branding.

The reality is that his carefully choreographed flirtation with the presidency goes back decades. He has so far defied the rules of American politics and has succeeded because, for all his many flaws, his instincts are far closer to those of the average American than his rivals can match.

Ultimately, Trump has won votes for the same reason that he’s been a success in business. The sales pitch has been smart and God forbid many people rather like the product.

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

THE BEADY EYE ASKS: SHOULD THE OLYMPICS HAVE A PERMANENT HOME.

Tags

,

( ANOTHER POST ON WORLD INTELLIGENCE –  4 minute read)

The Olympics are here, and I’m not sure how to feel about it.

This post examines THE INTELLIGENCE OF RETURNING THE OLYMPICS GAMES TO A PERMANENT HOME – RATHER THAN HOST THE GAMES IN A DIFFERENT COUNTRIES EVERY FOUR YEARS.

On the one hand, I’m thrilled that a South American city is hosting the Olympic Games for the first time. In an age of fear and loathing, the Parade of Nations and spectacle of countries competing peacefully is most welcome.
Afficher l'image d'origine

On the other hand, do such benefits justify the Brazilian government and private investors spending somewhere between $12 billion and $20 billion—roughly the gross domestic product of Iceland—to host the Summer Olympics?

Do they justify shelling out all that money on an event that will probably generate only $4 or $5 billion in revenue?

The question is:

Why in this age of technologies should we spend billions to move the greatest sport show around the world when it does not matter where it is held.

The ancient Greeks held the Olympic Games in Olympia, and only Olympia, for centuries.

“This set-up seemed to work fine.”

In the late 19th century, the French intellectual Pierre de Coubertin revived the Olympics, which had lapsed in the fourth century when the Roman Emperor Theodosius banned “pagan cults.”

Coubertin’s intention was to rotate the competition among European and American cities, in an effort to promote “peace” and an “international” spirit.

For much of the twentieth century, the staging of the Olympic Games represented a manageable burden for the host cities. The events were held in developed countries, either in Europe or the United States, and in the era before television broadcasting, hosts didn’t expect to make a profit. Instead, the games were publically funded, with these advanced countries better positioned to bear the costs due to their larger economies and more advanced infrastructure.

In recent years, many Olympic host cities have had to reckon with corruption, ballooning costs, under investment in public services in the run-up to the Games, and projects that don’t help—and sometimes harm—much of the population.

Once the festivities end, cities are frequently left with a load of debt and a bunch of useless mega structures.

How about when the bankrupt Rio government can’t pay for security and other basic services, and when Olympic funds have largely gone toward the construction of stadiums, housing, and subway lines that will benefit the rich more than the poor?are not unique to Brazil.

The jobs created by Olympics construction are often temporary, and unless the host region is suffering from high unemployment, the jobs mostly go to workers who are already employed.

Ultimately, there is little evidence for an overall positive economic impact. Much of the profit brought in by hotels, chain restaurants, and construction firms goes to international companies rather than remaining in the local economy.

A growing number of economists argue that both the short and long-term benefits of hosting the games are at best exaggerated and at worst nonexistent, leaving many host countries with large debts and maintenance liabilities.

Instead, many argue, the bidding and selection process should be reformed to incentivize realistic budget planning, increase transparency, and promote sustainable investments that serve the public interest.

All of this can be achieved by removing many of the autocratic government’s jockeying to host the Olympics these days by returning the Games to their home Greece.

So let’s consider the feasibility of making Greece (the original home of the Olympic Games) once more the host country on a permanent basis and ending the costly Olympics rotation that take many forms.

Of course the choice of a permanent home for the Games would be highly contentious. But such a responsibility could be exercised imaginatively, and even used as a form of developmental aid.

No matter how much costs are defrayed by the IOC and others, can any one country really bear the burden of hosting an event as massive as the Olympics every four years?

Yes it could.

Greece could ease its debt crisis by selling land, establishing a Summer Olympics city, and year-round convention and training center, on a sparsely inhabited Greek island.

The location, like the Vatican, could be granted neutral status, the Greek government would provide territory and infrastructure, and the IOC and its member states would fund construction by issuing bonds or loans based on future media revenues.

In the long run the financial savings would be massive. Greece would essentially be renting out its Olympics infrastructure.

The games are growing rapidly, with the number of Summer Olympics participants almost doubling and the number of events increasing by a third during the 1960s.

Every Olympics since 1960 has seen major cost overruns.

Since the leaders of Russia and China aren’t accountable to voters, they are free to spend as much as $50 billion on the competition. Meanwhile, in many democracies, support for hosting the Olympics is waning—especially amid concerns about economic stagnation and income inequality.

Costs spiraled to over $45 billion for Beijing’s Summer Games in 2008, over $50 billion for the Winter Games in Sochi, Russia, in 2014, and an estimated $20 billion for Rio de Janeiro in 2016.

Los Angeles is the only city to turn a profit on hosting the Olympics, finishing with a $215 million operating surplus.in large part because the city was able to almost totally rely on already existing infrastructure.

Despite exceptions such as the 1984 Olympics in Los Angeles and the 1992 Olympics in Barcelona, “in most cases the Olympics are a money-losing proposition for host cities.”

In 1972, Denver became the first and only chosen host city to reject its Olympics after voters passed a referendum refusing additional public spending for the games.

But wouldn’t installing the Olympics in one country tarnish the global nature of the Games?

No it would not.

After all where you win a gold medal is of no consequence it is the passion that counts. The Olympics would still be a celebration of human diversity.

Of course there is the other option. 

Take advantage of modern technology to hold a “decentered” Olympic Games where different cities simultaneously host different athletic events.

This option has many drawbacks security wise, cost wise, and with every change of venue, millions of staff-hours of know-how are lost.

“Decentering” the Olympic Games would at once make the competition more global by diversifying host countries and less global by not gathering athletes in one place.

Another alternative.

What if the IOC granted long-term hosting rights to one city, which in turn could sell rights to host each Olympic Games to a different country?

So the IOC could offer this exclusive right to a developing country that desperately needs foreign investment.

Is it reasonable to expect a city to serve as the permanent site of the Games, but then relinquish the right to host it and get all the glory?

These alternatives are far from perfect.

Imagine, for instance, Kenya organizing the opening and closing ceremonies in London.

For me there is little point running around the world with a flame that was conceived by Adolf Hitler for the 1936 Berlin Olympics Games.

If sport want to contribute to World Peace it should be detached from Drugs and Politics.

Just think what it should achieve.  Not only could it be the saving of the European Union. It could generate thousands of jobs and save a generation of young people from a life on the shelves of despair.

If all the Sport Federations of the World and those who are honored to compete demanded a Permanent Home for the Olympics it would happen.

Yet the status quo may prevail.

Promising proposals like these are unlikely to get serious consideration from the International Olympic Committee, which is reaping rewards from the current arrangement, even if most inhabitants of host cities are not.

Afficher l'image d'origine

 

 

 

 

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

 

 

 

 

 

THE BEADY EYE ASKS IS NUCLEAR POWER STILL AN OPTION.

Tags

, ,

This post is continuation on the theme of Intelligence.

( A three-minute read)

I will endeavor to examining the World Intelligence surrounding individual subjects, one specific subjects at a time.

Intelligent or Insane.

IT IS HOPE BY DOING SO IT WILL STIMULATE YOU THE READER TO CONTRIBUTE RATHER THAN PRESSING THE LIKE BUTTON.

Here is my first Contribution.Afficher l'image d'origine

We are by now acutely aware that the resources of the earth are finite and that many of our activities are polluting the earth to an unacceptable degree. If we persist along our present course, we are heading for an irreversible disaster, that will make our present worries pale into insignificance.

Given the difficulties that confront nuclear power, the effort required to overcome them is justified only if nuclear power potentially can make a significant impact on the major challenges of global warming, electric supply,and security.

So why are we suckered into thinking that this is so.

It is easy to envision renewed interest in nuclear power, as the world’s nations embrace a low-carbon future, but as of 2014, with more than 100 serious nuclear accidents and incidents it would seem insane to persist with Nuclear Energy other than space travel.

Fifty-seven accidents have occurred since the Chernobyl disaster, and about 60% of all nuclear-related accidents have occurred in the USA.

Today, roughly 60 nuclear plants are under construction worldwide, which will add about 60,000 megawatts of generating capacity — equivalent to a sixth of the world’s current nuclear power capacity. So don’t expect the nuclear industry to go quietly.

We should be cautious in our optimism for the nuclear option.

With nuclear power comes the associated problems of its waste disposal, which have yet to be addressed effectively.

Nuclear power is no longer an option.

Here is why.

When there is a problem with nuclear power, it is sure to be large, persistent, and biocidal for the persistence of life on Earth.

Accidents always happen; can we afford an accident with nuclear power?

Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant killed 20,000 and lead to huge radioactive contamination of main land Japan.
Every day 272,152 liters of radioactive water goes into the Pacific which will eventually contaminate the entire Pacific Ocean.
The reactor NO 4 has at this very moment 1300 fuel rods keep in a leaking pool. There are 11,400 rods in total comparable to 14,000 times the radiation released by atomic bomb dropped by the American on Hiroshima at the end of world war two.
According to Jota Kanda an oceanographer at Tokyo University of Marine Science and Innovation the plant continues to leak 10 billion Becquerels of cesium a 137 a day into the Pacific. It’s also leaking huge quantities of  iodine-131 – a radioactive fission product that can enter the food chain into the air.
Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant in the USSR exploded in April 1986 it only released at least 100 times the radiation of the atom bombs dropped on Nagasaki and Hiroshima.

The worst case scenario could play out in death to millions if not billions.

Both Chernobyl and Fukushima have left a legacy of large-scale radioactive contamination of the environment that will persist for years to come. Over 572 million people among 40 different countries got at least some exposure to Chernobyl radioactivity. A total of 22,800 radiation-induced cancers, excluding thyroid cancers, among this group of 572 million people.

In short, Chernobyl is by far the worst nuclear power plant accident of all time.

Fukushima in contrast, was an unfortunate natural disaster – caused by a tsunami that flooded reactor basements.

Even if there is on accident to close an out of date Nuclear Plant like the Hanford Nuclear Reservation sits on the plains of eastern Washington is a mind-boggling expensive problem.

A total of nine reactors operated at Hanford which was decommissioned 70 years ago. The reactors have left behind 56 million gallons of radioactive waste. Recent reports [indicate] new breaches in the tanks holding the nuclear waste.

The US government has hired private contractors to build a plant that will solidify the waste and prepare it for permanent safe storage.

The project will cost an astonishing $110 billion … making it what many believe to be the most expensive, and extensive, environmental remediation project in the world.

You could say that nothing like Chernobyl or Fukushima will ever happens again.. but if it were to happen here is what you can look forward too.

Radioactive elements, by-products of the nuclear fission process lodge in different part of you body for varying lengths of time. Strontium 90-28 years in your teeth; Iodine 131-8 days in your thyroid gland; Radon 222-4 days in your lungs; Plutonium 239-24,400 years in your lungs; Krypton 85-10 years in your lungs; Cadmium 137-30 years in your muscles; Plutonium 239-24,400 in your ovaries or testes; Strontium 90-28 years; Radium 226-1,620 years; Plutonium 239-24,000 years in your bones.

We must recognize that the deployment of nuclear fuel cycle world-wide will not simply “jump” to a new reality.

A policy directed to a single solution is inadequate.

The foundation of a secure energy system is to need less energy in the first place, then to get it from sources that are inherently invulnerable because they’re diverse, dispersed, renewable, and mainly local.

We’re in a new economic era in which renewables are cheap and getting cheaper, and there’s no place anymore for nuclear.

You would think that we’re should be no longer faced with a choice between plutonium and carbon.

You would be wrong.

British government officials approached nuclear companies to draw up a coordinated public relations strategy to play down the Fukushima nuclear accident just two days after the earthquake and tsunami in Japan and before the extent of the radiation leak was known.

Perhaps they have just seen the light putting a hold on the building of Hinkley Point by the EDF and a Chines Sovereign Wealth Fund.

Under plans agreed by Osborne, China’s state nuclear operator will pay for a third of the £18bn cost of building Hinkley Point and would later be given the opportunity to wholly build and run its own plant on UK soil. This would give Beijing control of a big chunk of the UK’s power supply.

Hinkley Point, which it now estimates will cost £37bn in subsidies and relies on untested technology of experimental reactors to be deployed in the plant.

Electricity generated from the plant, which will provide seven per cent of the UK’s power,and was going to be bought by the government at a fixed price of £92.50 per kilowatt-hour when production begins in 2025, rising in line with inflation for 35 years.

And all of the above is just the tip on the iceberg.

The world is awash with nuclear weapons, which defies Intelligence other than self-destruction. The only sane reason for nuclear weapons is an attack by a aliens or a meteorite.

Germany is the only European country to announce an accelerated shutdown of its nuclear reactors.

The 2011 Fukushima disaster showed the world that nuclear power is clearly fundamentally unsafe.

If the money pumped into nuclear had been spent on renewables, then the payoff would have been much greater per-euro invested.

Renewables are ready to take over from nuclear. In fact, we could be producing 100% of our energy from renewables by 2050, and the technology is already ready for market – particularly if the subsidies for fossil fuels and nuclear are cut. Furthermore, if we don’t start using renewable now then we may never make the switch, so this is the chance to take that first step.

Iran says it needs nuclear power to guarantee its energy security, and Europe’s diplomatic efforts to convince it otherwise would be much easier if it could be demonstrated that civilian nuclear energy was unnecessary. If Europe really wants a nuclear-free world, then it has to commit to abandoning nuclear technology completely.

So the beady asks whether nuclear power stations have had their day?

With cheaper, greener, more sustainable options becoming more readily available the big question for governments across the world is: “Can we really afford to put more money into upgrading, or rebuilding, our creaking nuclear power stations?” We suspect that market forces, as well as environmental concerns, may dictate the answer.

One way or the other nuclear power is teetering on the brink.

Over the next few years, France must take a critical decision as to whether it will continue to bankroll its nuclear industry, with as much as half of its 58 reactors set to reach their designed 40-year age limit by the onset of the 2020s.

By 2050, almost all of America’s near 100 remaining reactors will be more than 60 years old by 2050 and, with cheaper fuel alternatives abundantly available, the impetus to upgrade these ailing and costly facilities seems distinctly lacking.

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

 

 

 

 

 

THE BEADY EYE LOOKS AT THE FUTURE OF HUMAN INTELLIGENCE.

Tags

, , , , , ,

Follow on from previous post ( 5/7 minute read)

Having just posted an overview of Future of Artificial Intelligence it would be remiss of me not to address the Intelligence that is creating the AI in the first place.Afficher l'image d'origine

So here another fascinating subject.

The future of humanity is often viewed as a topic for idle speculation.

It is therefore practically important to try to develop a realistic mode of futuristic thought about big picture questions for humanity.

This post will only scrap the skin of the subject Intelligence.

As I have said; Technology” in its broadest sense, include not only gadgets and machines but also techniques, processes, and institutions, and our intellects.

There are many questions like if Artificial Intelligence is to become self learning will it in turn accelerate our ability to improve human DNA and create even better minds or will we with our basic intelligence be left asking Google just what is Intelligence?

Perhaps we will experience a positive feedback loop from the behavior of these learning algorithms resulting in a enhanced human surrounded by vast machine intellects.

Or are we going to be looking at myriad types of intelligences at play:

With the ordinary human rapidly losing the ability to comprehend what is going on around them; familiar humans interacting with ever-improving computer minds, are we going to experience a future with a diversity of both human and machine intelligences. For the first time, sentient beings of many different types will interact collaboratively to create ever greater advances, both through standard forms of communication and through new technologies allowing brain interfaces.

We may even see human minds uploaded into cyberspace, with further hybridization to follow in the purely virtual realm. These uploaded minds could combine with artificial algorithms and structures to produce an unknowable but humanlike consciousness.

This is just the beginning of “shared thought.” Far future vision is the spread of our non-biological intelligence to the four corners of the universe, infusing our deliberate will directly upon its fate.

If we are able to break the speed of light barrier we could have a universal omnipresence within a few centuries.

Human intelligence is disappearing into  big data and large-scale network.

Is it our destiny?

In any case, let us all hope the boundaries of reality continue to expand the unknown at least as fast as our ability to consume and understand it, lest we be caught in the forever loop of The End is Just the Beginning.

So let me with my basic Intelligence ask you the reader.

What is Intelligence?

It is clear that human intelligence has changed since the emergence of the very first hominids.

Artificial Intelligence machines will soon be equaling the power of human thought-with all of its complexities and richness and perhaps even outstripping it.

General intelligence can be described as the ability of an individual to acquire and apply knowledge and thus, can be passed down from generation to generation.

Environmental and migrational factors have influenced human intelligence since we emerged for the caves but evolution has not yet had a chance to catch up to the rapid progress we have made as a society and might not due to human circumvention of natural selection.

The migration of people to all areas of the earth along with the industrialization of modern society has abstracted modern man from our ancestors.

A greater importance has been placed on cognitive ability and intelligence to allow us to function in modern society. But to say that human intelligence has evolved to the point of stagnation is quite absurd.

I would say because of the need to work for survival is now greatly lessened we are now in a state of limbo where there is no evolutionary pressure, unless there is a dramatic change in the environment, or we are not able to support as many people living on the earth.

And I also believe that the evolution of human intelligence will cease some time in the distant future.

The detailed inner workings of a complex machine intelligence (or of a biological brain) may turn out to be incomprehensible to our human minds—or at least the human minds of today.

It may seem incredible, or even disturbing, to predict that ordinary humans will lose touch with the most consequential developments on planet Earth, developments that determine the ultimate fate of our civilization and species.

The human minds might not be capable of understanding the physics of the atomic realm. That’s because we may already be running into the genetic limits of intelligence.

Ordinary humans of the future will come to accept machine intelligence as everyday technological magic, like the flat screen TV or smart phone, but with no deeper understanding of how it is possible.

Today, no more than a fraction of a percent of the population has a good understanding of quantum physics, although it underlies many of our most important technologies:

So the potential for improved human intelligence is enormous. Cognitive ability is influenced by thousands of genetic loci, each of small effect.

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.

Vaclav Smil – the historian of technology who has argued that the past six generations have seen the most rapid and profound change in recorded history – maintains that the 1880s was the most innovative decade of human history.

It has taken us so far as to change our little make-shift huts to buildings that touch the sky, and to change our raw meat into seven-course meals

Humanity has enough intelligence to move into outer space and explore other worlds on the other hand we don’t seem to have the Intelligence to see or resolve the problems confronting us today.

Why?

It’s not that we lack the Intelligence to do so.

People are unable to fathom the full consequences of their decisions.

If you look around you I am sure you will agree that we have an awful long way to go before we reach basic Intelligence in order to live in peace and cherish the world we live on.  Afficher l'image d'origineAfficher l'image d'origine

Because the currency of evolution is neither hunger nor pain but rather copies of DNA helixes.

The discrepancy between evolutionary success and individual suffering is perhaps the most important lesson we can draw from our intelligence so far.

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

 

 

THE BEADY EYE LOOKS AT THE FUTURE OF AI.

Tags

, ,

AI is not just an important topic, but by far THE most important topic for our future.Afficher l'image d'origine

Self-driving cars, war outsourced to robots, surgery by autonomous machines – this is only the beginning.

If you’re old enough to drive today, there’s a good chance your children will never learn to drive.”

The imminent arrival of self-driving cars also brings up serious questions about our relationship with technology that we have yet to resolve.

How much control of our lives do we want to give over to machines – and to the corporations that build and operate them?

A new AI algorithm could revolutionize democracy and transform healthcare. Its called artificial swarm intelligence.

One of the most obvious uses of this form of AI would be in politics, both for voters selecting candidates and politicians making policy decisions, or a group of doctors could use it to combine their collective intelligence in order to make more accurate diagnoses.

 We’d teach computers to be computer scientists so they could bootstrap their own development.Afficher l'image d'origine

If you’re like me, you used to think Artificial Intelligence was a silly sci-fi concept, but lately you’ve been hearing it mentioned by serious people, and you don’t really quite get it.Afficher l'image d'origine

There are three reasons a lot of people are confused about the term AI:

1) We associate AI with movies.

2) AI is a broad topic 

3) We use AI all the time in our daily lives, but we often don’t realize it’s AI.

So let’s clear things up.

First, stop thinking of robots. A robot is a container for AI.

Secondly, you’ve probably heard the term “singularity” or “technological singularity.” This term has been used in math to describe an asymptote-like situation where normal rules no longer apply.

Finally, while there are many different types or forms of AI since AI is a broad concept, the critical categories we need to think about are based on an AI’s caliber. There are three major AI caliber categories:

As of now, humans have conquered the lowest caliber of AI—ANI—in many ways, and it’s everywhere.

Artificial Narrow Intelligence is machine intelligence that equals or exceeds human intelligence or efficiency at a specific thing.

A few examples:

Cars are full of ANI systems. Your phone is a little ANI factory.Your email spam filter is a classic type of ANI.

When you search for a product on Amazon and then you see that as a “recommended for you” product on a different site, or when Facebook somehow knows who it makes sense for you to add as a friend? That’s a network of ANI systems, working together to inform each other about who you are and what you like and then using that information to decide what to show you.

Same goes for Amazon’s “People who bought this also bought…” thing—that’s an ANI system whose job it is to gather info from the behavior of millions of customers and synthesize that info to cleverly up sell you so you’ll buy more things.

Google Translate is another classic ANI system

When your plane lands, it’s not a human that decides which gate it should go to. Just like it’s not a human that determined the price of your ticket.

The world’s best Checkers, Chess, Scrabble, Backgammon, and Othello players are now all ANI systems.

Google search is one large ANI brain with incredibly sophisticated methods for ranking pages and figuring out what to show you in particular. Same goes for Facebook’s News feed.

And those are just in the consumer world.

Make AI that can beat any human in chess? Done.

As computer scientist Donald Knuth puts it, “AI has succeeded in doing essentially everything that requires ‘thinking’ but has failed to do most of what people and animals do ‘without thinking.

Make one that can read a paragraph from a six-year-old’s picture book and not just recognize the words but understand the meaning of them?

That’s a whole other ball game.

Sophisticated ANI systems are widely used in sectors and industries like military, manufacturing, and finance (algorithmic high-frequency AI traders account for more than half of equity shares traded on US markets.)

ANI systems as they are now aren’t especially scary.

At worst, a glitchy or badly programmed ANI can cause an isolated catastrophe like knocking out a power grid, causing a harmful nuclear power plant malfunction, or triggering a financial markets disaster.

ANI is a precursor of the world-altering hurricane that’s on the way.

Each new ANI innovation quietly adds another brick onto the road to AGI( Artificial General Intelligence)  A machine that can perform any intellectual task that a human being can. Creating AGI is a much harder task than creating ANI, and we’re yet to do it.

Then we have ASI.( Artificial superintelligence)  “an intellect that is much smarter than the best human brains in practically every field, including scientific creativity, general wisdom and social skills.” Artificial Superintelligence ranges from a computer that’s just a little smarter than a human to one that’s trillions of times smarter—across the board

Or as Aaron Saenz sees it, our world’s ANI systems “are like the amino acids in the early Earth’s primordial ooze”—the inanimate stuff of life that, one unexpected day, woke up.

Google is currently spending billions of dollars trying to do it.

The field of robotics and sophisticated AI programming are now being used to develop robots that can be a major threat to humanity. For instance, one of the robots that is used for the nation’s border protection is controlled by remotes. Lethal robots have been developed in some countries where one soldier can trigger multiple aerial as well as ground attacks!

But advances are getting bigger and bigger and happening more and more quickly.

This suggests some pretty intense things about our future, right?

We are on the edge of change comparable to the rise of human life on Earth. — Vernor Vinge

Kurzweil believes that the 21st century will achieve 1,000 times the progress of the 20th century.

“The world 35 years from now might be totally unrecognizable,”

Most of us think linearly, when we should be thinking exponentially.

In order to think about the future correctly, you need to imagine things moving at a much faster rate than they’re moving now.

If you look only at very recent history. Between 1995 and 2007 saw the explosion of the internet, the introduction of Microsoft, Google, and Facebook into the public consciousness, the birth of social networking, and the introduction of cell phones and then smart phones.

A new, huge Phase 2 growth spurt might be brewing right now.

If I tell you, later in this post, that you may live to be 150, or 250, or not die at all, your instinct will be, “That’s stupid—if there’s one thing I know from history, it’s that everybody dies.” And yes, no one in the past has not died.

Logic also suggests that if the most advanced species on a planet keeps making larger and larger leaps forward at an ever-faster rate, at some point, they’ll make a leap so great that it completely alters life as they know it and the perception they have of what it means to be a human—kind of like how evolution kept making great leaps toward intelligence until finally it made such a large leap to the human being that it completely altered what it meant for any creature to live on planet Earth.

Building skyscrapers, putting humans in space, figuring out the details of how the Big Bang went down—all far easier than understanding our own brain.

As of now, the human brain is the most complex object in the known universe.

Build a computer that can multiply two ten-digit numbers in a split second—incredibly easy. Build one that can look at a dog and answer whether it’s a dog or a cat—spectacularly difficult.

The science world is working hard on reverse engineering the brain to figure out how evolution made such a rad thing—optimistic estimates say we can do this by 2030.

Once we do that, we’ll know all the secrets of how the brain runs so powerfully and efficiently and we can draw inspiration from it and steal its innovations.

Creating the technology to reverse human aging, curing disease and hunger and even mortality, reprogramming the weather to protect the future of life on Earth—all suddenly possible.

Also possible is the immediate end of all life on Earth.

As far as we’re concerned, if an ASI ( Artificial Superintelligence ) comes to being, there is now an omnipotent God on Earth—and the all-important question for us is: Will it be a nice God?

How will artificial super intelligence help humanity? What really is intelligence? Does it help achieve wisdom?

Maybe dolphins are smarter than humans, you don’t see them destroying their environment making it impossible for future generations to sustain themselves. 

Could an artificial intelligence even have its own priorities, or are they something that arose through random, aimless evolution?

I expect the moment the computer becomes ASI – it shuts itself off, because it might not see a point in continuing.

Ultimately, the scary thing about the rise of intelligent machines is not that they could someday have a mind of their own, but they could someday have a mind that we humans – with all our flaws and complexity – design and build for them.

Establishing ethics, moral values and standards becomes difficult when humans are dominated by machines. Any amount of automation cannot recreate intelligence as it is a gift for mankind. Afficher l'image d'origine

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

THE BEADY EYE ASKS: IS IT TIME TO REPLACE POLITICAL PARTIES. PART THREE.

Tags

, , , , ,

I can’t help but to return to the fascinating question.Afficher l'image d'origine

WHY?

Because DIVERSITY is absolutely necessary to justice.

Because Biometric E-Voting is on the horizon with a new paradigm in political communications. Look at your desktop, and you’ll see the ways the new media are changing the political scene from the bottom up.

Because of the outmoded ways we allow politicians to make decisions on our behalf.

Because candidates who would have had no chance before the Internet can now overcome huge odds.

Because we are becoming aware of what today’s Capitalism is doing to culture.  A top-down, big-money view of politics while the unresolved tensions between morals and markets are getting worse.

Because of corporate funds in political which are devastating to the public interest.

Because more and more of the new Generation want to balance individual autonomy with civic virtue. New social media are already changing the way organizations attract supporters.

Because we need a balanced society without turning persons into clients, cogs or worse. Facebook addicts. The potential mobile universe of grassroots text messagers is now over 136 million.

Because most social mayhem now arising around us is driven by seduction and stresses of public decay under a capitalism that’s no longer tempered.

Because with today’s casino like, predatory, intensively degrading capitalism is ruining social equality.

Because if we don’t want the curtain to drop on Sapiens history we have to answer the question. What do we want to become?

Do we want a digital existence. With hundreds of cable TV channels and satellite radio stations, millions of bloggers, and literally billions of Web pages all pouring out trillions of unadulterated verbal and written diarrhea that nobody gives a shit about.

The media today are more diffuse and chaotic than ever.

Because there are thousands of other reasons but it is naive to think or imagine that we might hit the brakes and stop scientific project that are upgrading Homo sapiens into a different kind of being, or a computer with a mind inside. ( Nobody is willing to argue such a proposition as the answer is we are doing it to cure diseases and save human lives.)

So I suppose we are left with the real question that is not what we want to become, but what do we want to want?

It is obvious that we all want to live, but up to now we have not given the question of living enough thought.

In my mind no political power should have the power to declare war without asking its people first, never mind getting a United Resolution it is the Young of a country that dies.

If you don’t agree with me here have a look at what happens.

The 20th century is described as the “bloodiest”, with an estimated 187 million deaths due to the various wars combined.

The death tolls for various conflicts throughout history, the best estimates put the total death toll due to all wars at 341.7 million people.

The United States most likely has been responsible since WWII for the deaths of between 20 and 30 million people in wars and conflicts scattered over the world.

The wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan have taken a tremendous human toll on those countries. As of March 2015, approximately 210,000 civilians have died violent deaths as a result of the wars. The number of displaced people exceeded 50 million in 2013.

Our subjective well-being is not determined by external parameters such as wars, salary, social relations or political rights. Biologists hold that our mental and emotional world is governed by biochemical mechanisms shaped by million of years of evolution.

Any decision that has a direct effects should be put to the nation as a whole not delegated to those that happen to be in power at any given time.

So here is my suggestion.

In this age of instant communication there should be a Free Government App (for argument sake called Vote Now.)

Afficher l'image d'origineThis App delegates an unique password to all.

When any political party in power want to commit a country to any project that will cost the nation let’s say over 6 billion.

We the people of the country are asked to approve or disapprove the project within a given number of days, weeks or whatever.

The app provides all relevant information connected to the project.

The E-voting system using biometric enables a voter to cast his vote using internet without additionally registering himself for voting in advance and going to a polling place. Why not an App.

This App will stop governments from sell of the country’s natural resources to Sovereign Wealth Funds and cut out lobbyist and any form of corruption.

Here are a few recent UK decisions that should have been put to the people.

For examples 300 odd sitting Conservative MP under the leadership of a Prime Minister Theresa May (a Prime Minister that has no mandate) recently voted in favour of spending over £31bn over the lifetime of the programme, including adjustment for inflation over that period, and an additional £10bn as a “contingency” to renew four worthless submarines carrying Trident nuclear missiles.

It’s no wonder they got cold feet on the total lifetime cost of the planned Hinkley Point C nuclear power plant which could be as high as £37bn. Which is was to be funded by the EDF and a Chines Sovereign Fund against 35 years of guarantee returns at twice the present cost of power.

The two new carriers that has attracted criticism over its £6.2bn cost.

Maybe I am nive but I would not let elected or non elected people sell my future.

All views and suggestions welcome.

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

THE BEADY EYE ASKS: IS IT TIME TO REPLACE POLITICAL PARTIES: PART TWO.

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

IN THE FIRST PART ON THIS BLOG I ATTEMPTED TO SHOW THAT TECHNOLOGY IS CHANGING THE WAY WE VIEW DEMOCRACY AND AS A CONSEQUENCE POLITICAL PARTIES WILL OR ARE BECOMING OBSOLETE.

For those of us who still think that because we support a particular party AND that it will deliver on its pre-election promises I can only say we are living in cloud cuckoo land.

Governance use to be understood as ‘a system of values, policies and institutions by which a society manages its economic, political and social affairs through interaction within and among the State, civil society and the private sector.

This for now holds true for the most part but it is changing as we enter the Technology Revolution.

Why?

BECAUSE MOST SOCIETIES ARE NOW A MIX OF SEVERAL CULTURES DRIVEN BY A WORLD MEDIA THAT HAS TURNED EVERY FORM OF GREED AND VIOLENCE INTO AN ENTERTAINMENT.

POLITICIANS ARE NO LONGER CAPABLE OF REPRESENTING THE PEOPLE WHO VOTE FOR THEM.

THERE IS NO LONGER ANY LONG TERM PLANNING ONLY KNEE JERK REACTIONS.

INDEED WHEN IT COMES DOWN TO THE BEAR TRUTH- THEY ARE ALL DRIVEN BY DATA ON THE ECONOMY, AND MANIPULATED BY BIG MONEY OR THE LACK THEREOF.

Where does this leave us.

Just look at the current USA presidential election. Two candidate that are viewed as a threat to world peace.

There is an urgent need not just in the United States to invest in cultural diversity and dialogue.

Culture is increasingly recognized as a cross-cutting dimension of the three economic, social and environmental pillars of sustainability.

We must strengthen social cohesion and provide sources of inspiration for renewing forms of democratic governance if we are to put a break on governance for the sake of money rather than for the values we all cherish. 

We must places more emphasis on ‘unity in diversity.’

Indigenous knowledge can direct us towards more sustainable modes of living.

Similarly, ignoring the increasingly multicultural makeup of societies would amount to negating the existence of large sections of the population, which compartmentalizes society and damages the social fabric by creating competition between the different communities over access to resources (for education, health, social services) rather than promoting a sense of solidarity.

The expansion of digital networks, for example, has sometimes helped to revitalize endangered or even extinct languages; and the development of new technologies has greatly increased the possibilities of communicating and exchanging cultural content in time and space. Moreover, in certain cultural contexts, global cities in particular, the varied cultural flows and sometimes unexpected encounters produced by globalization are reflected in a growing range of consumer habits and trends.

You might ask why more emphasis on ‘unity in diversity.

Because Cultural diversity, characterized as it is by space-time compression linked to the speed of new communication and transportation technologies, and by the growing complexity of social interactions and the increasing overlap of individual and collective identities — cultural diversity has become a key concern, amid accelerating globalization processes, as a resource to be preserved and as a lever for sustainable development.

Intercultural dialogue must be seen as a complex and ongoing process that is never completed.

Unfortunately Globalization is NOT ACHIEVING THIS but is leading inevitably to cultural homogenization. Facebook, Twitter, Linked In etc.

While it is true that globalization induces forms of homogenization and standardization, it cannot be regarded as inimical to human creativity, which continues to engender new forms of diversity, constituting a perennial challenge to featureless uniformity.

Digital technology has drastically changed the modes of producing and disseminating cultural products, and cultural industries that previously were kept separate by analogue systems of production (film, television, photography and printing) have now converged.

We can’t hold a computer program like Google hostage to our demands.

We must move away from elite level deal making by allowing diverse interests to influence and design our own debating and decision-making rules.

Take for instance the eradication of world poverty, which is an intolerable violation of human rights in terms of both the hardships and the loss of dignity it causes – must be approached in terms of each specific social and cultural setting.

No amount of money is going to make any long-term worthwhile difference.

This can only be done with massive investment in Education.

Without education we are blowing in the wind, because rights and freedoms are exercised in very varied cultural environments and all have a cultural dimension that needs to be acknowledged so as to ensure their effective integration in different cultural contexts.

Education is a fundamental human right to which all children and adults should have access, contributing as it does to individual freedom and empowerment, and to human development.

We must escape National dialogues and engage in collective world mandates, that have legal status, and are independence from the government.

We must re- invent the United Nations changing it from a gossip shop on world problems to an Organisation that is fully funded with total transparency.

Irrivalent of the changes in technology quit hoc resolutions diplomacy is not enough.

Human beings relate to one another through society, and express that relationship through culture.

New technologies have not yet rendered the older technologies obsolete.

If we are to respond to the challenges inherent in a culturally diverse world, we must develop new approaches to intercultural dialogue, approaches that go beyond the limitations of the ‘dialogue among civilizations’ paradigm. Too often, dialogue events have stressed collective identities (national, ethnic, religious) rather than identities of individuals or social groups.

We must ensure a level playing field for cultural encounters and guaranteeing equality of status and dignity between all participants in initiatives to promote intercultural dialogue involve recognizing the ethnocentric ways in which certain cultures have hitherto proceeded.

The founding Vetoes in the United Nations must be scraped by give all nations an equal voice.

While virtually all human activities are shaped by and in turn help to shape cultural diversity, the prospects for the continued vitality of diversity are crucially bound up with the future of languages, education, the communication of cultural content, and the complex interface between creativity and the marketplace.

Recent decades have witnessed an unprecedented enmeshment of national economies and cultural expressions, giving rise to new challenges and opportunities.

The emergence of genuine ‘knowledge societies’ implies a diversity of forms of knowledge and of its sources of production, We are creating Internet technological Sahara Deserts that are and will drive millions to seek a better life or wars.

Communication networks have shrunk or abolished distance, to the benefit of some and the exclusion of others.

To address the problems that derive from the grotesque inequalities and structural poverty of our world which is at the foundations of 90% of the mess we now find ourselves in. We must recognise that successful intercultural dialogue lies in the acknowledgement of the equal dignity of the participants… based on the premise that all cultures are in continual evolution and are the result of multiple influences throughout history.

All rights and freedoms have a cultural dimension that contributes to their effective exercise. It is precisely this dimension that forms the link between the individual, the community and the group, which grounds universal values within a particular society.

All communities do not experience and respond to phenomena such as globalization in the same way.

As migration flows have intensified with globalization, they have significantly modified the ethno-linguistic makeup of a number of countries and have created new linguistic and translation needs, especially in administrative, legal and medical circuits worldwide.

Characterized as it is by space-time compression linked to the speed of new communication and transportation technologies, and by the growing complexity of social interactions and the increasing overlap of individual and collective identities — cultural diversity has become a key concern, amid accelerating globalization processes, as a resource to be preserved and as a lever for sustainable development.

Finally, forms of democratic governance can be renewed by deriving lessons from the different models adopted by diverse cultures.

We the people of the world must make our collective voices heard which is becoming almost impossible due to all of the above.

If we don’t want to rule byAfficher l'image d'origine

AI has officially made its way into Google’s search algorithm.

(The artificial intelligence of RankBrain comes in the form of mathematical entities called vectors that can be understood by computers. When presented with an unfamiliar word, RankBrain will help formulate a guess at what the query was about and filter accordingly.)

There are many possibilities as to how Rank Brain could work into being a signal to direct your choice to making any decision.

Central to the many problems arising in this context is the Western ideology of knowledge transparency, which cannot do justice to systems of thought recognizing both ‘exoteric’ and ‘esoteric’ knowledge and embodying initiatory processes for crossing the boundaries between them.

Diversity of traditions and cultures has for centuries been one of Europe’s riches and that the principle of tolerance is the guarantee of the maintenance in Europe of an open society.

Take England’s recent referendum on the EU.

So far the English referendum has resulted in transitional period now represented by an unelected interim governments whose authority to press the out button and start negotiations to leave may lack legitimacy in the eyes of the public.

Political transitions are tumultuous processes that celebrate advances and suffer setbacks several times before they can conclude with a new, widely accepted constitutional order.

There is a whole new class of millionaires as the new generation takes control of banks, government, and other institutions. The stage is set for another depression and the collapse of the welfare state.

How this can be achieved I leave to you to suggest.

But I am convinced that with the smart phone we should create a new political platform where the voice of people would hold weight in decision taken by our political masters.

If every eligible voting age citizen had a phone, any project that cost over x billions could be electronically sent for approval or disapproval.

As how to finance the United Nations ( see previous post : A World Aid Commission)

Can any of what I am writing about be achieved.  Yes it Can.

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

THE BEADY EYE ASKS: IS IT TIME TO REPLACE POLITICAL PARTIES

Tags

, , , , , ,

( Six minute Read)

You might think this is a stupid thing to contemplate.

But just look around you.

Every minute on the web there is a new petition to vote on.

People are invited on Facebook and twitter to vote and for that matter to get killed ( as reported on the Shooting in Germany)

And now Hillary Clinton has just released a mobile game app that allows the user to build your own campaign headquarters by completing ” Fun” challenges to earn credit stars which you can cash in a virtual shop. You get a free Autograph and a Trump or False Quizzes and a lovely virtual plant to be watered.

You don’t have to be a genius to know what is behind the App.

And just the other day Paddy Ashdown in the UK set up a new political group called MoreUnited.UK which intends to support political candidates it agrees with – regardless of their party affiliation – with cash and on-the-ground campaigners.

So where or what next.

This is a serious question as the world is shaped by big, powerful forces or trends that nobody can control.

These forces are now driven by technology.

Right now these forces are driving the biggest change in 500 years and I don’t have to tell you that they are not all good despite the new environmental spirit.

Governments are preoccupied with cloaking democratic sovereignty in order to do business for the kept classes. A source of great social unrest, state violence, and public pressure for institutional reform. I.E. the English referendum to leave the European union.

The modern capitalist system has been charged more and more by its critics with crushing the spirit and substance of representative self government.

The subject of capitalism versus democracy is back.Afficher l'image d'origine

Market failures are having political effects: they are breathing new life into demands for fresh thinking and a new democratic politics that, so far, has not happened on any scale.

Capitalist markets have been a mixed blessing for democracy in representative form. The dynamism, technical innovation and enhanced productivity of the free market have been impressive. Equally notable with the free market is the rapaciousness unequal ( class-structured) outcomes, reckless exploitation of nature.

Pauperism mixed with plutocracy is today a feature of practically every democracy on our planet.

Enough is Enough.

With the gap between the rich and poor grows even wider there is political trouble ahead.

This is why every form of democracy worth its salt has stood against the presumption that the wealthy are ‘naturally entitled to rule.

Is capitalism the only moral economic system or a deeply flawed socio-economic system that has to be addressed by more government intervention and control? Or is it foundations no long based on individual rights? Each individual is an end in themselves and not a means to achieve the wishes of others.

If you adopt the view that capital belongs to everyone  it is the only moral system because it respects the volitional reason of the individual to engage with others and further their own happiness as they see fit and it allows them to fail and learn from the consequences if they should make a mistake.

But the above is no longer true as we enter a new form of Capitalism which Oliver Stone recently christened as ‘ SURVEILLANCE CAPITALISM, ROBOT TOTALITARIANISM .

POKEMON GO’S collects names and locations of the user. It can also access the contents of your USB storage, your accounts, photographs, network connections, and phone activities, and even activate your phone when it is on standby mode.  It reserves the right to share all the data it collects with a third parties such as advertisers. It is a sinister trade-off for playing a game that you think is free.

So the question asked in the heading of this blog is more than serious.

Are Politicians representing or will they be able to represent the people in the future?

In democratic election campaigns, do political parties any longer compete freely for votes?

Do Political parties (in this world of fast developing technologies) any longer provide a way for voters to easily identify a candidate’s positions?

As Parliaments gain greater control, the issues on which they disagree often are not goals so much as means: how best to keep the economy growing, protect the environment, and maintain a strong national defense.

Such competition is one of the hallmarks of democracy.

Parties’ views on government’s role often depend on the specific issue or program in question.

A political party use to be a group of voters organized to support certain public policies. The aim of a political party is to elect officials who will try to carry out the party’s policies. This is no longer true.

In the modern age where everything is connected to everything. 

The United States has a two-party system.

Political parties are often a standard by which a country’s political freedom can be measured. Some countries have only one political party. In China, for example, there is only one party, the Communist Party.

Democracies usually operate under either a two-party or a multiparty system. Like the United States, Britain has a two-party system. The major parties are the Labour Party and the Conservative Party, though there are active third parties.

Multiparty systems are common in Europe and other parts of the world. In this system, three or more parties each enjoy substantial support from voters. France, Germany, Israel, and South Africa are just a few examples.

In these countries there may be many parties representing a wide range of political views. Because of the number of competing parties, it is sometimes difficult for any one party to get a clear majority of the votes. In such cases, leading parties that can agree on general policies form a coalition (a combination of parties) to run the country.

In the past 30 years, party membership has dropped significantly across Europe, whereas other forms of political participation have developed.

Social Media has rapidly grown in importance as a forum for political activism in its different forms.

Social media platforms, such as Twitter, Facebook and YouTube provide new ways to stimulate citizen engagement in political life, where elections and electoral campaigns have a central role.

Personal communication via social media brings politicians and parties closer to their potential voters.

Although the presence of social media is spreading and media use patterns are changing, online political engagement is largely restricted to people already active in politics and on the Internet.

Social media has reshaped structures and methods of contemporary political communication by influencing the way politicians interact with citizens and each other. However, the role of this phenomenon in increasing political engagement and electoral participation is neither clear nor simple.

In the past few years, the way that citizens communicate with one other about politics has been fundamentally altered by the emergence of social media.

In view of recent political developments as diverse as Occupy Wall Street in the United States, the rise of Indignados in Spain, protests in Moscow and Tehran, and the overthrow of Hosni Mubarak in Egypt, it has become increasingly clear that social media are now intertwined with political activity.

However we know surprisingly little about exactly how social media affects political participation.

We are only beginning to scratch the surface of developing theories linking social media usage to political participation.

At the same time, the data being generated by users of social media represents a completely unprecedented source of data recording how hundreds of millions of people around the globe interact with politics.

The M5S Movement in Italy has evolved rapidly to become a significant political player by using social media to engage like-minded people in virtual and real life political action.

The impact of social media on political communication.

New ways of building an online campaign and the trend of personalisation in politics. The possibility to communicate directly with voters via social media is groundbreaking and essential for the development of citizens-initiated campaigning.

Well known cases such as the Obama Presidential campaign, the Arab spring uprisings and UK Uncut demonstrations.

A new concept of virtual political support.

Freedom became capitalism’s self-celebration which it largely remains.

Yet the reality of capitalism is that the mass of employees are not free inside capitalism or any other system for that matter to participate in the decisions that affect their lives ( e.g., what the enterprise will produce,what technology will it use, where production will occur, and what will be done with the profit workers’ efforts help to produce)

In fact their exclusion from such decisions modern-day employees resemble slaves and serfs.

Parliaments and universal suffrage have accompanied capitalism – an advance over serfdom and slavery. An Advance undermined by inequality of opportunity and income a discomforting fact mostly overlooked.

It is not likely that Capitalism is going to disappear in the near or distant future.

There is every likelihood with the arrival of AI ( Artificial Intelligence) that democracy as we know it will be eroded further.

At the moment it all boils down to Smart phone Democracy.

Perhaps in the near future we see a Smartphone political party.

Which might not be a bad way to go provided everyone has a Smart phone and everybody is requested to vote on any project that costs us the taxpayers  and the nation over a billion.

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨