THE BEADY EYE SAY’S: If — and it’s a big if — the UK wants to keep the Good Friday Agreement, the only satisfactory option is full [EU] membership.

Tags

, ,

 

(Four-minute read)

Despite the ambiguous constitutional status of referenda in the UK and the narrowness of the vote, the main political parties fall over each other to “respect the verdict of the people”

The people, however, had  (as it is now apparent) little concept of what an out vote involved:

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

First, even if the country rapidly regrets its decision, there will be no going back to the deal the UK currently has. If Britain ever sought to rejoin the EU, it could not be on the terms of membership the country previously enjoyed. The UK’s budget rebate, exemption from Schengen and opt-outs from the euro and judicial cooperation will not be on the table again.

Second, returning to the EU on terms less palatable to UK voters will be hard to sell to them, rendering a future decision to rejoin politically implausible.

So the country now finds its self in a catch 22 scenario with the only feasible course of action is a lengthy transition period in which Britain could digest what it really means to be a member of the European Union and what it really means not to be a member.

One dimension of this scenario has received surprisingly little attention and that is at the end of this period England was to reapply.

First, the opt-out from the euro will no longer apply, with the best the UK can hope for is to emulate Sweden – legally “in derogation” of its obligation to accede, rather than having an opt-out as the UK and Denmark do – by making no effort to join.

In practice, this could be enough to enable the UK to retain the pound indefinitely, but if (and it is far from implausible) other countries accede to the euro following Brexit, leaving only one or two Member States outside, the position would be harder to sustain.

Let’s look at a transition period. What is it?

It is basically membership in all but name.

What problem is that for the EU27? Frankly speaking, none.

The alternative is to renounce the Good Friday Agreement, and then England can indeed leave the single market and customs union. Or England keeps the UK inside the European Union because democratically, that’s the only serious option.

That status comes with obligations. Applying and enforcing EU law, contributing to the EU budget, with no change in the freedom of circulation. Nothing changes, except that the Brits are not sitting at the table.

Now Brexit is done — the UK is it is no longer a member state — but it is still in the transition.

For Leavers, the conclusion is much simpler: however much they object to elements of the withdrawal deal or proposals for the future relationship, they will be worth swallowing for now because the bigger prize of leaving the EU will be all but irreversible.

The cannier pro-Brexit members of the Cabinet seem to have grasped this.

In a world of  Donald Trump’s, Putin’s, “What is the point of Brexit?”

Colloidal damage Ireland, its economy not to mention the decoupling of Northern Ireland and perhaps Scotland.

The terms of membership the UK currently has are very unlikely to be on offer in future.

The EU you may wish to rejoin will be different from the one you are leaving.

Stop being angry. Stop behaving as though you are still campaigning. And stop complaining that stupid voters chose to believe the lies of the Brexiters and not your own, more sophisticated lies.

Let’s SEE 7 MILLION MARCHING. There is just about enough time left to add “future deal” to the list. There has never been a better time to challenge conventional wisdom than after such a disaster.

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Just imagine that a new British government — because it does not feel bound by whatever the previous government did — says: ‘OK, we believe the decision to leave that way was the wrong decision and we want to reconsider.’

 

Advertisements

THE BEADY EYE SAY’S: THE HISTORICAL DNA OF ENGLAND HISTORY IS REAPPEARING IN THE BREXIT NEGOTIATIONS.

Tags

, ,

(Ten-minute read)

All of us are surrounded by history, whether we study it or not.

History lives in our social traditions, our holidays and ceremonies, our education, our religious beliefs and practices, our political and legal systems, even in our popular culture (movies and music frequently draw on historical events and people).

However now in the ever-changing technological world more than ever the passage of time usually shifts the answer to any historical questions.

It seems that everyone writes history, but it’s the winners who interpret it years later and mould a new retelling of what happened. However, I have always found that history in its written form never imparts a true picture of events other than confirming dates and places.

It is an incomplete picture you’ll always be reading something with some sort of bias.

This is never truer with the ongoing Brexit negotiations concerning the Irish border.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "the story of the british empire in pictures"

History is written according to the necessities and possibilities of current politics. But that does not mean that it is forever obscured or that any narrative is completely lost to history. Not at all.

History is in the eye of the beholder. The painful truth is, each source simply needs to be evaluated on its own merits.

Discussing the past and theorising about its meaning have never been confined or restricted to classrooms, lecture theatres or archive rooms. History is open to all who take an interest in it, regardless of their experience or credentials.

Everyone is free to consider the past and form their own conclusions. But it also has one significant disadvantage: ‘popular history’ and ‘good history’ are rarely the same things. There is a considerable gulf between historical understanding in the public domain and the history written by historians.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "the story of the british empire in pictures"

This is never truer when it comes to the history of the British Empire.

A Top-down history of the wealthy and powerful: kings, aristocrats, politicians, business moguls, innovators and influential thinkers.

A profitable balance of trade, it was believed, would provide the wealth necessary to maintain and expand the empire.

A worldwide system of dependencies—colonies, protectorates, and other territories—that over a span of some three centuries was brought under the sovereignty of the crown of Great Britain and the administration of the British government.

In the early seventeenth century those colonies were expanded and the systematic colonization of Ulster in Ireland got underway. While Ireland won dominion status in 1921 after a brutal guerrilla war, achieved independence in 1949, although the northern province of Ulster remained (as it is today) a part of Great Britain.

In 1997 the last significant British colony, Hong Kong, was returned to Chinese sovereignty

Very few British people have a decent understanding of the British Empire, which leads to a significant contingent who pine for a return to those days. Given the number of atrocities committed by the British Empire, these people have to be either ignorant or evil, and it’s obviously the former. Typically they re-write their history for patriotic purposes or downplay its importance to try to forget past problems so when they are alerted to a predictable bad outcome from an action they become emotional and angry as they don’t have the knowledge to see the emerging patterns.

Little remains of British rule today across the globe, and it is mostly restricted to small island territories such as Bermuda and the Falkland Islands. However, a number of countries still have Queen Elizabeth as their head of state including New Zealand, Australia and Canada – a hangover of the Empire.

Apart from the second World War (which is shown on TV documentaries almost continuously), most of the present-day English know little of how England acquired its wealth.

It oversaw around 412 million inhabitants or around 23% of the world’s population at the time and its legacy can still be felt keenly today, for better or worse.

The empire was not acquired by sports like cricket, tennis, croaky, football, polo, billiards, bare-knuckle boxing, followed by pink gins, or Pims with strawberries, it was acquired by wars, robbery, piracy, drugs, slavery, tea, cotton, sugar, and mercantile trading companies such as the East India Company, a London based trade business.

When our attitude to the past becomes locked into one way of thinking we only deal with the thing that seems most true for now, having abandoned the idea of Truth.

After all, who could support the invention of concentration camps, leading the slave trade, mass starvation of the Indians and Irish, Celtic ethnocide, or institutionalised rape of Native Americans?

Knowing what you’ve done, as a nation, in the past couple of thousand years, why you’ve done it and what the result was is extremely valuable. WHEN IT COMES NOT TO JUST THE IRISH BORDER BUT TO ANY FUTURE DEALS it’s not how the empire shaded into an unquestioning belief that Britain could – and should – rule the world.

We should approach the past with an open mind about different groups and classes, and let the evidence convince us. We should strive to keep history and remembrance as separate as possible.

The issue nowadays is to some extent the need for good filters, pushing away information after centuries of seeking it.

The dream of the West has been that we will live together in knowledge, but with the advent of seemingly leaderless, non-hierarchical movements Artifical intelligence would probably steward the change better than government, which has fixed commitments.

Why?Résultat de recherche d'images pour "the story of the british empire in pictures"

Because we live in a world of continual change and situational thinking every understanding is open to change, a kind of a point of view that can be undermined by a non-expert with a persuasive argument.

It seems that does not matter if the discovery precedes its invention.

The end of hierarchy and a quest for ultimate understanding seems a long way off.

After hundreds of years of British occupation, it is certain that no Irish government will ever again as it did in 1800, surrender the rights of the Irish people as a separate nation. Like Hong Kong, Northern Ireland should be repatriated.

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

 

 

THE BEADY EYE SAY’S: IF YOU ARE A HUMAN HERE IS WHAT YOU CAN BE PROUD OF .

Tags

, , , , , ,

 

(Fifteen-minute read)

Do you take pride in being a member of the most intelligent, crafty and resilient species dating back 300,000 or maybe even longer on the planet that crawled out of the water to destroy the earth?

Yes!

EVEN IF HUMANS CURBED DESTRUCTIVE ACTIONS WITHIN THE NEXT FIFTY YEARS, IT WOULD TAKE BETWEEN FIVE TO SEVEN MILLION YEARS FOR MAMMAL BIODIVERSITY TO RECOVER.

We have managed to erase a staggering 2.5 billion years of evolutionary development by driving more than 300 mammal species into extinction by the 16th century. Since then the pace of destruction has speeded up and it is projected that if we don’t do something about it we will lose another 1.8 billion years within the next five decades.

There are plenty of other things going on in the world that make me weep for humanity, Greedy, short-sighted parasitic consumers of the planet.

But when we actually look there is a lot of good in this world can we be proud of?

(Pride has perplexed philosophers and theologians for centuries, and it is an especially paradoxical emotion in most culture.)

THE LIST IS VAST FROM FIRE, THE WHEEL, NUCLEAR POWER TO WALKING ON THE MOON not to mention our Artistic and Scientific Achievements.

However, we are unable to shake off tribalism even though we have mapped the complete genome, of the human, which could have us on the cusp of creating genetic discrimination through eugenics.

CRISPR has the distinct ability to alter the course of human evolution—to improve society for the greater good or, in the wrong hands, to diminish the human experience.

On the other hand, disaster looms as humans exceed the earth’s natural carrying capacity. The conditions that sustain humanity are not natural and never have been. Since prehistory, human populations have used technologies and engineered ecosystems to sustain populations well beyond the capabilities of unaltered “natural” ecosystems.

Nature doesn’t need people. People need nature.

Nature will go on, no matter what. It will evolve.

The question is, will it be with us or without us?Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of world"

Our current technological world is reducing awareness and diminishing our ability to find meaning in the life around us. We need to spend more time unplugged and find ways to let nature balance our lives. The natural world’s benefits to our condition and health will be irrelevant if we continue to destroy the nature around us. That destruction is assured without a human reconnection to nature.

In a world where technologies will soon think, act, and behave

like humans, what can humans learn from machines?

If we build personalized digital coaching solution, a «Habit Installing» Platform, that facilitates the generation of new habits who knows what will be possible with the technologies of the future?

However, we still have a long way to go to understand there are aspects of how our planet evolves that are totally out of our control.

Artificial Intelligence is more than reality. The so-called “Technological Singularity” ― the moment when machines will be equal to and then surpass human brainpower ― is getting closer.

In the meantime, we continue to destroy, hurt, and belittle people for reasons that are mind-boggling.

On the other hand, we also have people with amazing abilities and intelligence using their gifts to better our world rather than try to make a quick buck.

Perhaps Ai greatest achievement will be to get rid of religion.

If there was no religion, then yes, I would be proud.

The terrible crimes which humans have committed on each other, have been driven and are being driven by God is on our side.

Do we have a lot we still need to work on? Yes, definitely. But we can stop giving ourselves such a hard time because every day, we’re trying to become better than we were yesterday.

We are beginning to clear up all the waste we carelessly have thrown away and finds its way into the ocean.

Deforestation is decreasing on a global scale.

Sexual discrimination is been removed.

However, Social media sites such as Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter are saturated with posts of political opinions and are matched with comments that express not only disagreement but too often, words of hatred. Many who cannot understand others’ political beliefs rarely even respect them.

It doesn’t matter if you’re an American, a Canadian, or a Papua New Guinean. You don’t even have to be particularly fond of the ocean or have a soft spot for elephants to know that murdering a tiger for ts penis so men can have an imaginary bigger mental sexual drive is personified madness.

Cutting shark fins off to make soup is a matter of taste.   

We must align our vision and strategy with our culture, thereby impacting people’s mindset and behaviours.

This is simply about all of us coming together to do what needs to be done.

Because if we don’t, nature will continue to evolve. Without us.

With our thoughts and words, with our ideas and values, with our beliefs and emotions, we with the help of social media must design, and implement a greenfield world that shapes the future of change management through digitalization. 

We’re about to send people to another planet! We might not be so bad after all.

Nearly 1/2 of the world’s population — more than 3 billion people — live on less than $2.50 a day. More than 1.3 billion live in extreme poverty — less than $1.25 a day. 1 billion children worldwide are living in poverty. According to UNICEF, 22,000 children die each day due to poverty.

Half of the world’s prison population of about nine million is held in the US, China or Russia. Prison rates in the US are the world’s highest, at 724 people per 100,000. In Russia, the rate is 581. At 145 per 100,000, the imprisonment rate of England and Wales is at about the midpoint worldwide.

Homeless, Hungry, Broke by unwicked

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

 

THE BEADY EYE’S SING ALONG.

Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of a long way to tipperary"

It’s a long way to the next election, it’s a long way to go.

It’s a long a long way to the WTC to the sweets Trump I know.

Goodbye Brussels, Farwell the EU, its a long way to a tax haven but my heart,s right here.

Up to mighty London came the DUP as Mrs May conservatives are paved with gold.

Sure, everyone was gay, singing the song of we not stay, till  Paddy gets excited. Then he shouted to them there join us and stay.

It’s a long way to Tipperary it’s a long way to go.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of a long way to tipperary"

THE BEADY EYE SAY’S: WE MUST PREPARE FOR IRRECOVERABLE/NON REVERSIBLE CLIMATE CHANGE.

Tags

 

(Three-minute read)

Global warming is already having significant and costly effects – and these consequences will only intensify as the planet’s temperature continues to rise.

Sea level rise, more frequent and severe heat waves, growing wildfire risks, and an increase in extreme weather events — these and other consequences of global warming were once largely preventable, but foot-dragging by our elected leaders and policymakers over the past two decades means that we must now confront the dangerous new reality of rising temperatures and the serious impacts that accompany them.

It’s no question that climate change is one of the greatest challenges of our time.Windmills

It will and is impacting people and nature alike and human society is not seriously preparing for the worst impacts of climate change even though scientists have warned about them for at least two decades.

As with all global problems, it boils down to money or to be more precise the lack of it.

It is poor communities who are and will suffer the worst impacts of climate change.

It’s too late for a shift away from seeing money as wealth and instead of seeing our real wealth as being the gift of the natural world.

However, the choices we make today will determine how high temperatures rise, how severe and costly the consequences of global warming become, and what type of future our children will ultimately inherit.

IT IS TRUE TO SAY THAT tackling the structural causes of climate instability involves holding governments to account for action in line with the Paris Agreement and also challenging the destructive activities of large corporations, particularly oil companies, for their greenhouse gas pollution.

We can plant as many trees as we like, put up as many wind turbines, cover the world in solar panels, drive electrical cars, trap co2 emissions, stop eating meat, Paris climate agreements etc,

Without money and justice for the marginalized ( the canary in the mineshaft of modern society), WE ARE WASTING OUR TIME.

Why has it been so difficult to achieve meaningful solutions to global warming?

Media pundits, partisan think tanks, and special interest groups raise doubts about the truth of global warming. This barrage of misinformation misleads and confuses the public — and makes it more difficult to implement effective solutions.

We must make water-smart decisions, smarter free solutions.

LIKE CREATING A WORLD AID FUND:Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of global fund"

BY APPLYING A 0.005% COMMISSION ON ALL PROFIT SEEKING ALGORITHMS, ON ALL HIGH-FREQUENCY TRADING, ON ALL SOVERNGEN WEALTH FUND ACQUISITIONS. ON ALL FOREIGN EXCHANGE TRANSACTIONS OVER 50,000$, ON ALL GAMBLING WINS.

This will create a perpetual fund to allow technological marginalized countries to implement policies that will change not just the climate but the inequalities that dive wars, corruption, famine, pollution, and the like all creating an unsustainable world.

Greed and profit for profit sake caused the problem so let greed and profit pay to rectify the damage.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of global fund"

We have a global fund to save everything else –  why not the Earth.

IT CAN ALL BE ACHIEVED BY THE CLICK OF A BUTTON.

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

 

 

THE BEADY EYE SAY’S: THE MURDER OR DISAPPEARANCE OF JAMAL KHASHOGGI EXPOSED THE HYSTERANTHOUS HYPOCRITES WE HAVE IN THE WORLD

Tags

, ,

( One minute read )

YOU WOULD THINK THAT THERE WOULD BE A CRY FOR SANCTIONS AGAINST SAUDI ARABIA. INSTEAD, WE HAVE TO WITNESS THE HYPOCRISY OF ARM SELLING COUNTRIES JUSTIFYING THEIR SALE OF ARMS.

Saudi Arabia has called the accusations it ordered the killing of journalist Jamal Khashoggi inside its Istanbul consulate “lies and baseless allegations”.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of saudi leader"

Whether it turns out to be both it has shone a light on the hypocrisy of major foreign policies conducted by the USA, England, and others.

It’s absolutely essential that the international community says clearly that this is not something that can happen.

If it turns out that a run of the mill blok was murdered by a hit squad on foreign soil in the embassy of any country it should represent a fundamental break in how the world deals with that country.

Saudi Arabia has long been a police state.

Prince Mohammed bin Salman, despite marketing himself to the West as a progressive reformer with positive headlines and handshakes, the Saudi government has, with our help, continued a brutal war in Yemen, with dire consequences for civilians which is spiraling into one of the world’s worst humanitarian disasters. THE WAR HAS KILLED OVER 10,000 SO FAR.

Up to recently, Saudi has harassed women-driving activists. It has bullied Qatar. It’s detained the crown prince’s own family members — at his behest. It’s punished Canada for the mildest of deeds.

The sad fact right now is that the weapons purchasing power of Saudi outweighs human life.

In Saudi Arabia, where a hierarchical culture favors remote, direct leadership, Khashoggi has challenged core Saudi national values, offending not only the royals whose legitimacy he threatened but also ordinary Saudis who rely on these power structures to negotiate the difficulties of everyday life.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of saudi leader"

President Donald Trump’s response has been pitiful.

Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of saudi leader"

To date, France, the United Kingdom, Canada, and the United States have registered their “concern” about Khashoggi’s disappearance, but have yet to press Riyadh robustly for answers.

The catch 22 is:  If they do apart from arms deals the price of oil could rocket if any sanctions are applied.

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

THE BEADY EYE SAY’S: IT’S NOW OR NEVER FOR HUMAN RIGHTS.

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

 

(Fifteen-minute read)

This is not a spectator sport:

It can be nearly impossible to credibly predict all the positive possibilities and negative implications for how we live, work, govern, and organize arising from the deployment of AI.

The fact that we are deeply uncertain about how technologies will evolve in the years and decades ahead makes human rights due diligence of AI very challenging. Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of human rights abuse"

The fact that the rapid development of AI raises challenges for securing access to remedy, which can be especially challenging when humans often can’t cognitively understand how a decision is made by AI systems:

The fact that Artificial Intelligence (AI) technology is increasingly being used by businesses, governments, and other institutions to augment many fields of human endeavor.

The fact that Methodologies for implementing respect for human rights may need to integrate strategic tools such as strategic foresight, futures thinking, and scenario planning.

The fact that the global “platformization” of content (i.e., the rise of Video on Demand and online streaming platforms) shows us that guarantees of people’s access to the culture of their selection may now become beholden to digital intermediaries.

Proponents believe that the further development of AI creates new opportunities in health, education, and transportation, will generate wealth and strengthen economies and can be used to solve pressing social issues. However, the rapid growth of AI raises important questions about whether our current policies, legal systems, business due diligence practices, and methods to protect rights are fit for purpose.

The significant expansion of data collected and analyzed may also result in increasing the power of companies with ownership over this data and threaten our right to privacy.

HERE ARE A FEW OF PROBLEMS THAT ARE NOT DISCUSSED.

As the digital paradigm evolves, the pathway for human rights is likely to become more complicated, making appropriate regulation more important than ever. The realization of ESCR and the right to development centers on data democracies that are accountable.

Global policy discourses and frameworks around data have skewed the digital innovation tide in favor of developed countries… the global “platformization” of content… shows us that guarantees of people’s access to the culture of their selection may now become beholden to digital intermediaries.

Data and technological arrangements in the global South and North worryingly point to a wholesale private capture and consolidation of critical data regimes in the developing world: trade, agriculture, health, and education.

Not only does this leave citizens in developing countries vulnerable to acute privacy violations, but it also bears decisively on their economic, social and cultural rights (ESCRs). For example, in India, the acquisition of homegrown successes, such as Wal-Mart’s purchase of the domestic e-commerce unicorn, Flipkart, poses very serious outcomes for the livelihoods of small producers and traders.

Algorithm-based decision-making by companies could also perpetuate human bias and result in discriminatory outcomes, as they already have in some cases.

An algorithm is meant to complement and not necessarily displace human discernment, it is not hard to imagine a future where humanitarian assistance to refugees becomes predicated on their (technology proven) ability to viably assimilate and contribute to their host economies.

Could the trade-off for a smoother resettlement process be the exclusion of those that the algorithm will one day write off as “inadmissible” and “unsolvable”?

Technology-based decision-making also raises important questions on how the right to development will be realized.

Artificial intelligence is undermining society by promising unimaginable benefits without any intervention from governments or other world organizations.

As always we humans react to crises when it’s too late.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of human rights abuse"

Governments must create policies for effective data sharing between governments and the private sector for sectors that are of critical social importance.

More importantly, governments must create a data commons with independent oversight.

For example:

The municipality of Curitiba in Brazil, for instance, has taken the lead in passing local legislation that mandates anonymized data sharing between the local government and the ride aggregator Uber. The intention is to tap into Uber’s large and rich data sets towards better city planning and traffic management outcomes.

Governments must invest in the idea of “data as a public good” so it can work to enhance human rights.

Although nascent, experiments with models for managing big data repositories are increasing.  Such repositories can encourage domestically led innovation, with local start-ups and public agencies taking the lead in developing appropriate AI-based solutions for social problems.

These are pressing policy challenges, and such prediction models need to be closely and continuously tracked for possible social distortions and subject to institutional audit. The biases in AI is often the bias of humans. People will not rely on technology they do not trust.

Society needs to come together to consider these questions, explore solutions, and deploy AI that puts people first, protects human rights, and deserves the public’s trust.

Breakthroughs in technology—including artificial intelligence—can help fulfill the right to development, but digital technologies are not magic bullets; there is a strong role for governance.

The security of digital bits cannot be left to the cloud nor the internet of things, promoted by Amazon, Facebook, and Google with home hubs that can be hacked.

Civil society groups, governments, and others are rightly asking questions regarding the risks to human rights. In this age of global corporate presence and influence, we need to ensure that ordinary people and communities are able to stand up for their rights.

But the danger with artificial intelligence is greater than just our rights.

Everything that makes who we are comes from our brains. Without brain power, we would not have gone from flint arrowheads to the space station.

DESTROY THE BRAIN WITH AI AND WE DESTROY CREATIVITY.

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

THE BEADY EYE ASK’S: WHEN HUMANS TRANSCEND BIOLOGY, AUGMENTING IT WITH WIRELESS CLOUD AI – WILL INTELLIGENCE BE DEFINED BY US OR BY THE AI?

Tags

, , ,

 

(Seven-minute read)

No system exists in a vacuum; any individual intelligence will always be both defined and limited by the context of its existence, by its environment.

  • Currently, our environment, not our brain, is acting as the bottleneck to our intelligence.
  • The expansion of intelligence can only come from a co-evolution of brains (biological or digital), sensorimotor affordances, environment, and culture — not from merely tuning the gears of some brain in a jar, in isolation. Such a co-evolution has already been happening for eons and will continue as intelligence moves to an increasingly digital substrate. No “intelligence explosion” will occur, as this process advances at a roughly linear pace.

According to Prof Yuval Noah Harari a brain is just a piece of biological tissue, there is nothing intrinsically intelligent about it.

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

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

In his latest book, he implies that the superhuman AIs of the future, developed collectively over centuries, will have the capability to develop AI greater than themselves?

I say No, no more than any of us can.

Answering “yes” would fly in the face of everything we know — again, remember that no human, nor any intelligent entity that we know of, has ever designed anything smarter than itself.

Prof Harari (in his book Sapiens) describes how wheat with zero intelligence came to con humanity into providing it with its needs, which implies that humans had zero intelligence.

However, I say that you cannot dissociate intelligence from the context in which it expresses itself. The intelligence of an octopus is specialized in the problem of being an octopus. The intelligence of humans is specialized in the problem of being human.

In his latest book and lectures, he explores the possibility of AI combining with data and genome to create the first ultra trained intelligent machine leading to digital dictatorship.

The basic premise is that, in the near future, a first “seed AI” will be created, with general problem-solving abilities slightly surpassing that of humans. This seed AI would start designing better AIs, initiating a recursive self-improvement loop that would immediately leave human intelligence in the dust, overtaking it by orders of magnitude in a short time.

I say it will be the last invention that man need ever make, provided that the machine is docile enough to tell us how to keep it under control.

He also states that AI is a major risk, greater than nuclear war or climate change.

I agree.

AI, however, considers “intelligence” in a completely abstract way, disconnected from its context, and ignores available evidence about both intelligent systems and recursively self-improving systems.

This narrative contributes to the dangerously misleading public debate that is ongoing about the risks of AI and the need for AI regulation.

What are we talking about when we talk about intelligence?

Precisely defining intelligence is in itself a challenge.

The intelligence explosion narrative equates intelligence with the general problem-solving ability displayed by individual intelligent agents — by current human brains, or future electronic brains.

Intelligence expansion can only come from a co-evolution of the mind, its sensorimotor modalities, and its environment.

Intelligence is not a superpower; exceptional intelligence does not, on its own, confer you with proportionally exceptional power over your circumstances.

Our environment, which determines how our intelligence manifests itself, puts a hard limit on what we can do with our brains — on how intelligent we can grow up to be, on how effectively we can leverage the intelligence that we develop, on what problems we can solve.

Our biological brains are just a small part of our whole intelligence.

These days cognitive prosthetics surround us, plugging into our brain and extending its problem-solving capabilities. Your smartphone. Your laptop. Google search. The cognitive tools your were gifted in school. Books. Other people. Mathematical notation. Programming.

However the most fundamental of all cognitive prosthetics is of course language itself — essentially an operating system for cognition, without which we couldn’t think very far.

These things are not merely knowledge to be fed to the brain and used by it, they are literally external cognitive processes, non-biological ways to run threads of thought and problem-solving algorithms — across time, space, and importantly, across individuality.

It is civilization as a whole that will create superhuman AI, not you, nor me, nor any individual. A process involving countless humans, over timescales we can barely comprehend. Transcending what we are now, much like it has transcended what we were 10,000 years ago. It’s a gradual process, not a sudden shift.

Civilization will develop AI, and just march on to be ruled by an oligarchy of two or three large, general-purpose cloud-based commercial bits of software.

This is why we need to be sure that the decision logic that we programme into systems is what we perceive to be ethical. If not we will have a world full of schizophrenia.

Of course, the sensors will have to actually detect the world as it is.

Cognitive prosthetics, not our brains, will be where most of our cognitive abilities reside.

However, man cannot get rid of his body even if he throws it away. There can be no absolute transcendence of the species role while man lives.

In this case, you may ask, isn’t civilization itself the runaway self-improving brain?

Is our civilizational intelligence exploding?  No. 

Unless we are talking here about immortality one is merely talking about an intensification of the character defenses and superstitions of man.

These artificially intelligent systems never perform the same way twice, even under the exact same conditions, so how do we test that? How do we know there are any guarantees of safety? This is going to become a thornier issue as we go forward.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of AI"

 

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

 

THE BEADY EYE ASK’S : WILL THE EUROPEAN UNION SURVIVE AFTER BREXIT.

Tags

 

(FIVE MINUTE READ)

No matter how you view the European Union it was born out of the ruins of Europe after two world wars and has been mainly responsible for keeping Europe peaceful ever since.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "PICTURES of the eu in the future"

The great paradox of the European Union is that it has tried to unify Europe with uniform regulations and institutions, but these have instead generated disunion between the member states- Brexit.

IF BREXIT RESULTS IN ENGLAND ARCHIVING A DEAL THAT REFLECTS  THE DILUTION OF ANY OF THE BENEFITS ON ANY OF THE REMAINING MEMBERS IT WILL BE THE SLIPPERY SLOPE NOT JUST TO THE FOUNDATIONS OF THE SINGLE MARKET BUT TO THE WHOLE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION.

This compounded by the problems caused by the euro it could well not survive in its present form. Above all, the Euro introduced at the end of the last century has sharply divided Europe between debtor and creditor nations, and now threatens the integrity of the EU.

The euro, intended as it was to bring the countries of Europe together in a shared project and destiny, had ended up provoking division between them. Unless something changes, the distortions generated by the euro are likely to produce another crisis when the economy next turns down

If Italy goes bust it will simply fall out of the euro, risking the survival of the entire Eurozone. Italy unlike Greece is too big to be bailed out.

It’s now entirely conceivable that Italy or another Eurozone member state will one day unilaterally restore a national currency and defy the EU to stop it.

The Greek debacle neatly encapsulates the internal contradictions of the euro.

The EU is perfectly aware that its lack of accountability poses a legitimacy problem in a continent where nation states still enjoy the allegiance of their populations.

It’s pretty clear that Europe needs a new constitutional settlement.

Europe’s core national identities have resisted the EU’s attempt to replace them with a wholesale European identity, even though Europeans generally do also subscribe to a European identity.

A reformed European Union would therefore ideally move away from being a super-state in the making and seek to create unity out of that diversity.

My own hope is that Brexit will help to preserve European unity by triggering the necessary reform.

IF THE EU REMAINS BLINKERED IT ONLY HAS TO LOOK AT THE RISE OF POPULIST MOVEMENTS AND PARTIES WHICH ARE DUE TO UNCONTROLLED INFLUX OF IMMIGRANTS AND THE HIGH PERCENTAGE OF YOUTH UNEMPLOYED IN ITS SOUTHERN MEMBER STATES.

THE WARNINGS ARE CLEAR.

IF NOT RESOLVED EUROPEAN POLITICS WILL HAVE NO OPTION BUT TO RETURN NATIONALISM.

There is no alternative to the difficult reforms. They are needed in order to ensure that future generations won’t pick up the bill for past generations’ mistakes.

Any European association that succeeded the European Union would have to return some powers to the member states and would have to abandon or reform the single currency.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of the eu in the future"

IT COULD START BY SCRAPPING THE NEEDLESS WASTE OF TAX PAYERS MONEY IN ASSOCIATION WITH MOVING ITS PARLEMENT BETWEEN STRASBOURG AND BRUSSELS – €109 million per year. Further €5 million savings would come from the reduction of the travel expenses in the budgets of the European Commission and the Council.

To adjust the deep structural imbalances across the Union- IT COULD START BY CREATING EUROPEAN TREASURY BONDS TO ENABLE  INDIVIDUAL AND CORPORATE TO INVEST IN ITS INFRASTRUCTURE, ITS ENVIRONMENT, ITS ENERGY, ETC. ( SEE PREVIOUS POSTS)

The future of the EU is more reliant on public support for its continued legitimacy than ever before.

The big questions are.

Is it the driver of recent Eurosceptic party success, or do national conditions and evaluations play a more important role?

And finally, when does Eurosceptic public opinion have the ability to constrain the preferences of elites who shape jurisdictional choices in Europe?

There is an expanding rift between different types of skeptics within and across countries in terms of what they want from the EU.

One way for the EU to deal with different constituencies might be to fully embrace the diversity within its borders and provide more differentiated and flexible policy solutions.

Perhaps successful integration should not be defined as a form of harmonization or even homogenization, but rather be rooted in the principle of flexibility. A flexible rather than fixed end goal could prove a strong argument for the public to stick with the European project, even though it is fundamentally divided about what it wants from Europe.

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

 

 

THE BEADY EYE LOOK’S AT WHAT ENGLAND WILL LOOK LIKE IN A YEAR.

 

(Two-minute read)

THIS IS WHAT ENGLAND WILL BE LIKE WHETHER IT LEAVES THE EU OR NOT.

Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of england in the future"

After an entirely voluntary act of self-harm England will have lost its European identity with no obvious solutions. No longer a global economy it will struggle to be heard in the United Nations World, not to mention in the USA.

Struggling to make ends meet we will see a country that is not only insecure about its place in the world but struggling with its internal identity not to mention it’s past.

There will be no game-changing world trade deals to deal with its loss of revenue to allow a proper restructuring of funding of its infrastructure. 

London as Corporate England (which sets its own rules) will carry on, powered as ever by its own brand equity with sterling strengthen due to the race to the bottom of corporate and other taxes.

With a deepening sense of nationalism or isolationism, English politics will feed on the helplessness of the old parties, driving the youth of the country to become activism, leading to civil unrest.

All of which will strengthen the perception of a liquid world with populist solutions.

The conservative party will split with a new populist political party promoting coexistence, appreciation of diversity, liberal pluralistic democracy freedom of speech, and internationalism.

As with the Eu if opportunity and wealth are not seen to be distributed evenly populist will sweep everything in its path, becoming more anxiety driven, angrier.

( BOTH ENGLAND AND THE EU NEED TO PURSUE AN ECONOMIC POLICY THAT DEFENDS CAPITALISM AND FREE TRADE BUT ENSURES THAT THE BENEFITS OF THIS SYSTEM REACH THE MAJORITY OF THE THE POPULATION.

THEY BOTH NEED TO DEFEND A SOCIETY THAT IS BOTH FAIR AND MULTI-ETHNIC WHICH MEANS DOMESTICATING NATIONALISM BY BROADENING THE BONDS AND SOLIDARITY BEYOND THE PERSON THE FAMILY OR ETHNIC AND RELIGIOUS TIES.)

Populism will make decisions on reform that the euro area needs to ensure sustainability almost impossible to achieve.

Relationship with Ireland will start to show signs of strain over the border and fishing.

Northern Ireland will be in turmoil with a pending vote on Unity with Southern Ireland.

Wales and Scotland will still be shackled as whimpering serfs to the throne.

The cost of living will increase. The huge cost of maintaining naval and military power will come under severe criticism against the cost of the NHS and social care.

The EU will stay an integrated economic area even it fails to survive in its present form.

BOTH ECONOMIES EU AND UK WILL NOT HAVE CHANGED MUCH except for the pace of growth.

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