THE BEADY EYE ASK’S. WHAT SORT OF LIFE DO YOU WANT AND WHERE ARE WE GOING WITH AI?

19 Saturday Aug 2023

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE ASK’S. WHAT SORT OF LIFE DO YOU WANT AND WHERE ARE WE GOING WITH AI?

Tags

, , ,

( Ten minute read)

No matter what sort of life you might wish for it will be governed by technology, that you have little or no control over or of.

Is this true?

I want my life back. I want my soul back.

I don’t want my life to be fodder for Data harvesting.

I want digital blockchain ownership rights, so I can trade my investment into technology against profit seeking algorithms. 

I want to bring us back to a more practical reality, which is that technology is what we make it, and we need to stop abdicating our responsibility to steer technology toward good and away from bad.

I don’t think any technology has some deterministic endpoint. 

But there’s a catch.

Data is only as valuable as the insight you derive from it now or in the future. If we’re to avoid technological extremism we’re going to have to draw a line in the sand somewhere.

We know that, at the very least, some technologies are harming our natural world, our societies and, ultimately, ourselves, turning everything into Data.

According to a prediction from Gartner, “By 2024, 30% of digital businesses will mandate DNA storage trials. This is a future that can only arrive when we learn to unlock the storage and computing capabilities of nature that have allowed life to thrive for billions of years.

Throughout human history, it has always taken significant resources to store data. Therefore, data has been stored only to the extent that it makes economic sense, if data cannot yield value, it is no longer an asset but rather a liability.

If all is turned it data stored in the cloud, the exponential growth of data will overwhelm existing storage technology. The average person makes 35,000 decisions per day.

————

So where are we?

By way of this vicious technological cycle, we are consciously causing the sixth mass extinction of species.

Technology destroys places.

Aside from the oceans, rivers, topsoil, forests, mountains and meadows, it helps us massacre and pollute with ever-improving precision and speed, its complex set of cogs quickly spreads us out all over the world, safe in the knowledge that we can stay in touch with loved ones via technologies that offer what is really only a toxic substitute for real connection and time together.

It is badly injuring, perhaps fatally, rural communities, luring their youth into industrial and financial centres – cities – whose existence is premised, as the American writer and environmentalist Wendell Berry said, on the devastation of some other far-flung place, which consumers don’t have to look at thanks to the out-of-sight, out-of-mind distance afforded by technology.

And now look at the state of us.

Capitalism’s survival now depends not just on recapturing all of this data but the CO2 it is a releasing.

Workers must work and produce value. Capital must exploit them, connected, by a peculiar sort of invisible cable, to the global network of quarries, factories, courtrooms, mines, financial institutions, bureaucracies, armies, transport networks and workers needed to produce such things. Reflective of a generic, transient and whimsical culture, spending more time watching porn than we do making love. Because we stare into screens instead of eyes, while social media are making us antisocial.

Technology destroys people.

We’re already cyborgs (pacemakers, hearing aids) of a sort, and are well on our way to the type of Big Brother dystopia of the techno-utopians. Our toxic, sedentary lifestyles are causing industrial-scale afflictions of cancer, mental illness, obesity, heart disease, auto-immune disorders and food intolerances, along with those slow killers, loneliness, clock-watching and meaninglessness.

If one rejects technology that means no laptop, no internet, no phone, no washing machine, no tapped water, no gas, no fridge, no television or electronic music; no anything requiring the copper-mining, oil-rigging, plastics-manufacturing essential to the production of a single toaster or solar photovoltaic system.

It destroys our relationship with the natural world. It first separates us from nature, while simultaneously converting life into the cash that oils consumerist society.

Without biodiversity, life on earth as we know it would cease to exist.

And it’s not just about rare or endangered species, it’s everything from genes and bacteria to entire ecosystems like forests and coral reefs, not technology. So think about it this way. Biodiversity is us — it’s like a big, interconnected web where each species has a role to play, and the only way to achieve this is that we all invest and benefits from investing in  world of green energy.

Awareness of the importance of biodiversity remains low, inclusion of biodiversity in development projects is rare. Time is running out for our planet, for its people, and the delicate ecosystems that hang in the balance.  This is not the life that anyone would chose.

——————–

Rejecting technologies that my generation considers to be the basic necessities of life, one might instead of making a living to pay bills, make a living of ones life, denouncing complex technology simply by renouncing it.

Our cultures need to make a Faustian pact, (a pact whereby a person trades something of supreme moral or spiritual importance, such as personal values or the soul, or data for some worldly or material benefit, such as knowledge, power, or riches ), on my behalf, with Speed, Numbers, Homogeneity, Efficiency and Schedules, are not listing when I say I want my soul back.person on a smartphone

Our brains have become wired to process social information, and we usually feel better when we are connected. Social media taps into this tendency.  “

When you develop a population-scale technology that delivers social signals to the tune of trillions per day in real-time, the rise of social media isn’t unexpected. It’s like tossing a lit match into a pool of gasoline.

About 3.5 billion people on the planet, out of 7.7 billion, are active social media participants. Globally, during a typical day, people post 500 million tweets, share over 10 billion pieces of Facebook content, and watch over a billion hours of YouTube video.

Social media has become a vehicle for disinformation and political attacks from beyond sovereign borders.

What can we do about it?

We’re at a crossroads. What we do next is essential, so I want to equip people, policymakers, and platforms to help us achieve the good outcomes and avoid the bad outcomes.

People obtain bigger hits of dopamine — the chemical in our brains highly bound up with motivation and reward — when their social media posts receive more likes.

Researchers found that on Twitter, from 2006 to 2017, false news stories were 70 percent more likely to be retweeted than true ones. Why? Most likely because false news has greater novelty value compared to the truth, and provokes stronger reactions — especially disgust and surprise.

Social media is an attention economy, and businesses want you engaged. How do they get engagement? Well, they give you little dopamine hits, and … get you riled up. That’s why I call it the hype machine. We know strong emotions get us engaged, so [that favours] anger and salacious content.

Simply counting clicks is not enough.

To understand how we got here and how we can get somewhere better.

We need to.

Interduces automated and user-generated labelling of false news, and limiting revenue-collection that is based on false content. However tagging some stories as false makes readers more willing to believe other stories and share them with friends, even if those additional, untagged stories also turn out to be false.

To allows people to find out what information companies have stored about them for data portability and interoperability, so consumers would own their identities and could freely switch from one network to another. We need to embrace this longer-term vision of a healthier communications ecosystem.

This can be achieved with Blockchain plate forms.

Blockchain is a shared, immutable ledger that facilitates the process of recording transactions and tracking assets. An asset can be tangible (a house, car, cash, land) or intangible (intellectual property, patents, copyrights, branding). Virtually anything of value can be tracked and traded on a blockchain network, reducing risk and cutting costs for all involved.

A blockchain network can track orders, payments, accounts, production and much more. And because members share a single view of the truth, you can see all details of a transaction end to end, giving you greater confidence, as well as new efficiencies and opportunities

Each block is connected to the ones before and after it.

These blocks form a chain of data as an asset moves from place to place or ownership changes hands.
The blocks confirm the exact time and sequence of transactions, and the blocks link securely together to
prevent any block from being altered or a block being inserted between two existing blocks.
Each additional block strengthens the verification of the previous block and hence the entire blockchain.
This renders the blockchain tamper-evident, delivering the key strength of immutability. This removes the
possibility of tampering by a malicious actor — and builds a ledger of transactions you and other network
members can trust.
With blockchain, as a member of a members-only network, you can rest assured that you are receiving
accurate and timely data, and that your confidential blockchain records will be shared only with network
members to whom you have specifically granted access.
If things continue without change, Facebook and the other social media giants risk substantial civic
backlash and user burnout. Ask me to stay on social media to speak out about the technology issue,
make a comment.  All human comments appreciated. All like clicks and abuse chucked in the bin.  Contact: bobdillon33@gmail.com

THE BEADY EYE ASK’S: FROM HERE INTO THE FUTURE WILL TECHNOLOGY’S BE THE ONLY DIFFERENCE BETWEEN GENERATIONS?

17 Thursday Aug 2023

Posted by in DIFFERENCE BETWEEN GENERATIONS, Uncategorized

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE ASK’S: FROM HERE INTO THE FUTURE WILL TECHNOLOGY’S BE THE ONLY DIFFERENCE BETWEEN GENERATIONS?

Tags

,

( Fifteen minute read)

We could be the first in human history to leave our children nothing.

No greenhouse-gas emissions, no poverty, and no biodiversity loss but they say that the attention spam of the generation of social media is only eighth minute.

So here are a few facts.

We have 8 billon of us on the earth, with around 35 mega cities, built on the back of fossil fuels, feed by monocultural farming. 4% of all animals are wild, all the rest are domestic. There is no technology that will save humanity against Climate change.

Only if we put the Earth first will there be a future generation.

There will be no encore. 

————

When we talk about generational differences, we no longer can just identify differences between generations, but we can identify differences within generations as well.

Technology is the catalyst for the rapidity with which generations now evolve. Change, hitherto that was a gradual process, has become, for us, cataclysmic.

It has become a tidal wave that threatens to overwhelm us.

A decade to-day is the equivalent of a generation, and standards and values topple over like ninepins.

Take smartphones for example. They have only been in widespread use for a decade, but they’re now so fundamental to our daily lives that it’s hard to remember life without them.

How could we possibly see those who can remember life before the smartphone as part of the same generation as those who’ve known nothing else?

If we name each generation based on the technological conditions it experienced, generations may soon encompass only a few years apiece. Slicing the population into ever-narrower generations, each defined by its very specific relationship to technology, is fundamental to how we think about the relationship between age, culture, and technology.

They include the digital natives, the net generation, the Google generation or the millennials.

But generation gaps did not begin with the invention of the microchip. What’s new is the fine-slicing of generational divides, the centrality of technology to defining each successive generation.

It’s not politics or sociology, because they don’t move fast enough, it has to be video based.

We’ve moved from a view of generations as biological “in the sense of the generation of a butterfly from a caterpillar,” as Hentea puts it, to a view of generations as sociological. By no longer limiting political power to a defined group but rather encouraging political participation across social strata.

At the same time, democratization paradoxically created generational categories.

With aristocratic privileges abolished and duties diminished, the Internet generation provided a fall-back for social belonging:

Not everyone can belong to my generation, so the vestigial desire for distinction is satisfied, but at the same time, no one remains without a generation, so the democratic impulse toward equality is met.

Since the dotcom bubble burst back in 2000, technology has radically transformed our societies and our daily lives. Today over half the global population has access to the internet. At the same time, technology was also becoming more personal and portable greatly shaped how and where we consume media.

While these new online communities and communication channels have offered great spaces for alternative voices, their increased use has also brought issues of increased disinformation and polarization.

It is indisputable that thanks to technology, we are getting a chance to live a life our predecessors could not even dream about.

The next generation is not going to sit and read policy and procedure manuals. Nor are they going to spend their time dealing with complex reports.

If the role of technology in shaping an emergent generational consciousness seems obvious, but no one attributes the evils of the age to its machines. By growing up with mobile devices and social networks, the skills they bring into the workplace for collaborative capabilities is profound compared to what we saw with Millennials just 10 years prior.

————-

However as we know each generations live in the shadow of the generation before it.

The technology there are using are filtrated with all the positives and negative of the generation before them.

But do all tech advancements bring sole good to our lives?

Or, maybe, the impact of tech innovations is quite ambiguous.

It’s easy to become desensitized to the importance of innovations and advancements for the overall progress of society.

All countries share responsibility for the long-term stability of Earth’s natural cycles, on which the planet’s ability to support us depends. We are the first generation that can make an informed choice about the direction our planet will take. Either we leave our descendants an endowment of zero poverty, zero fossil-fuel use, and zero biodiversity loss, or we leave them facing a tax bill from Earth that could wipe them out.

There’s no sugar-coating the truth that different generations interact with technology differently.

Advancements in technology have already tapped into every area of life. There is a dedicated mobile app for everything.

Every living person today can be considered part of a digital generation, because — no matter how much we engage with technology — we are living in a digital-first world. Of course, the degree to which each person is comfortable and willing to embrace technology is also dependent on when and where they entered the world.

To some degree, it’s actually something we’re born into, depending on how tech-forward the world was when we entered it.

Technology is ever-evolving and each digital generation adapts to these advancements at their own pace.

However the digital generation can be considered as encompassing only people who were born into or raised in the digital era, meaning with wide-spread access to modern-age technology such as smartphones, tablets, computers, and digital information like the internet.

There are differences in the motivations underlying technology behaviour in each generational group, and there may be variances in the way each generational group uses and gets engaged with technology.

Research findings indicate that millennials mostly use and get engaged with technologies for entertainment and hedonic purposes. They use technology as a means to go after their aspirations and dreams, looking to gather and share information that quickly moves them and their ideas forward.

They are prone to act faster once they make a decision and technology has made a true quantum leap, with augmented reality, blockchain, artificial intelligence, and 3D printing being just a few examples of the most recent inventions.

The days of simple demographic segmentation are gone.

With every new generation, the access to limitless amounts of data has created a much more complex level of fragmentation and micro-segmentation.

To day the average person has an attention span of just 8 seconds.

Digital citizenship now applies to everyone but not everyone is the same in any generation, and everyone is subject to different economic circumstances regardless of their generation.

Though it may be tough to predict which advancements technology would bring next, some innovations are already changing our beliefs about the world around us.

Clearly, technology by itself is neither good nor bad.

It is only the way and extent to which we use it that matters.

While some people want just, to sit back and watch the world burn.

We are now the generation under constant surveillance, sharing our data with companies all the time online. Tracing our shadows that allows them to get a glimpse into the digital traces you’re leaving – how many, what kinds, and from what devices.

The use of surveillance cameras in modern society has always been divisive, requiring governing bodies to perform a fine balancing act between respecting the nation’s civil liberties and keeping its citizens safe and secure. It’s a multi-layered issue incorporating many dimensions, including technology, legislation, code of ethics and conduct, and one that triggers conversation year-round.

When the Covid pandemic hit, a number of governments rolled out or extended surveillance programs of unprecedented scale and intrusiveness, in the belief, however misguided, that perpetual monitoring would help restrict people’s movements and therefore the spread of the virus.

It’s important to ask when technology adds value, and for whom.

If technology can indeed aid in pandemic response and recovery, it is essential to have open, inclusive, transparent, and honest public discussions on the appropriate type of public digital infrastructure people need to thrive.

The rush to embrace digital contact tracing has opened a Pandora’s box of privacy.

As the technology develops, we are seeing more sophisticated AI being integrated into surveillance systems and facial recognition technology, in particular, is creating a stir in terms of practice and legislation. Surveillance is a vast and varied topic and one that can present some very emotive and social issues, as well as legislative and technological ones. Without real reflection on the rights implications, there’s a real risk of deepening inequality and vesting considerable power to coerce and control people in governments and the private sector.

Any deployment of technology should be rooted in human rights standards, centred on enabling people to live a dignified life.

It’s up to every digital citizen — whether they’re a digital native or digital immigrant — to practice cyber safety and, in turn, instil it in digital generations to come.

New technologies such as virtual visits, chatbots are being used to delivery healthcare to individuals, especially during Covid-19.

The ability to understand and respect someone else’s feelings is always important but even more so online. That’s because written communications and online interactions, such as text messages and social media comments, are often missing the nonverbal cues we have in the physical world that give us a well-rounded understanding of someone else’s stance.

Every user of the internet has a right to privacy. Still, we share  The law still applies when we’re online

On the downside, some technological developments prove to be a curse rather than a blessing. Overindulgence in the use of digital apps and smart devices, overreliance on online tools may sometimes lead to tragic effects.

If you believe that technological conditions profoundly shape the life experience and perspectives of each successive generation, then those generations will only get narrower.

Doesn’t the leap from Facebook to Snap Chat constitute its own profound generational divide?

If we name each generation based on the specific technological conditions it experienced during childhood or adolescence, we may soon be dealing with generations that encompass only a few years apiece. At that point, the very idea of “generations” will cease to have much utility for social scientists, since it will be very hard to analyse attitudinal or behavioural differences between generations that are just a few years part.

I do expect new social platforms to emerge that focus on privacy and ‘fake-free’ information, or at least they will claim to be so. Proving that to a jaded public will be a challenge. Resisting the temptation to exploit all that data will be extremely hard. And how to pay for it all? If it is subscriber-paid, then only the wealthy will be able to afford it. But at the end of the decade, humans will still be humans, and both greed and generosity, love and hate, truth and lies, will likely still exist in the same proportions as they do today.

We are looking to technology to lead us towards a carbon-neutral world but there are other factors at work, [to] the growth of authoritarian governments and social inequalities.

Climate change will change the temperatures up or down till a tipping point plunges us into a non reversible disaster, with consequence of unimaginable survival.

We are headed toward an increasingly panoptic society, as represented by the Chinese government’s emerging social credit scale. In other words, just as digital world is shaping the physical world, physical world shapes our digital world as well.

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

Contact : bobdillon33@gmail.com

THE BEADY EYE ASK’S: HAVE YOU EVER WONDERED JUST HOW MUCH A GOAL IN FOOTBALL COST?

12 Saturday Aug 2023

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE ASK’S: HAVE YOU EVER WONDERED JUST HOW MUCH A GOAL IN FOOTBALL COST?

( Five minute read) 

Most of the world is football mad however the world pays a high price for a goal considering the  amount of prize money that a victorious Gladiator could expect, which varied depending on the time he lived.

In the Year 177 AD, Gladiators could get between 12 and 60 Sesterces if they were slaves and 15 to 75 sesterces if they were auctoratii. Free Veteran Gladiators without an owner, could negotiate their pay.

Since they were Veterans with a huge reputation and a corresponding fan base they would make much more than 12-75 sesterces per fight.

The highest-paid gladiators might make up to 5000 sesterces around £50 “of our present money”.

Well here is the answer.

Top 10 highest-paid soccer players in the world (September, 2022)

1. Kylian Mbappe = $125 million total ($105 million salary + $20 million endorsements)

2. Cristiano Ronaldo = $113 million ($53 million salary + $60 million endorsements)

3. Lionel Messi = $110 million ($62 million salary + $48 million endorsements)

4. Neymar = $91 million ($56 million salary + $35 million endorsements)

5. Mohamed Salah = $39.5 million ($24.5 million salary + $15 million endorsements)

6. Eden Hazard = $31.3 million ($28.6 million salary + $2.5 million endorsements)

7. Andres Iniesta = $30 million ($23 million salary + $7 million endorsements)

8. Raheem Sterling = $29.4 million ($21.4 million salary + $8 million endorsements)

9. Kevin de Bruyne = $29 million ($25.5 million salary + $3.5 million endorsements)

10. Antoine Griezmann = $27.5 million ($22 million salary + $5.5 million endorsements)

                                            —————————-

Ranking Club Average Attendance Average Matchday Income per game (£)
1 Manchester United 74,498 3.96 million
2 Arsenal 59,898 3.1 million
3 Liverpool 52,983 3.01 million
4 Tottenham Hotspur 54,216 2.92 million
5 Chelsea 40,437 2.08 million
6 Manchester City 54,143 2.08 million
7 West Ham United 58,336 1.23 million
8 Newcastle United 51,121 1.9 million
9 Southampton 30,435 0.77 million
10 Brighton 30,425 0.77 million
11 Everton 39,043 0.59 million
12 Leicester City 31,814 0.59 million
13 Crystal Palace 25,455 0.5 million
14 Fulham 24,371 0.47 million
15 Wolverhampton 31,030 0.46 million
16 Watford 20,016 0.44 million
17 Cardiff City 31,408 0.37 million
18 Burnley 20,534 0.36 million
19 Huddersfield Town 23,340 0.25 million
20 Bournemouth 10,532 0.21 million

Infographic: How much does a goal cost Premier League spectators? | Statista

When it comes to matchday income, gate receipts is by far the most significant resource. However, its importance varies between one club and another based on several factors, including the capacity of the stadium and the general status of the club.

Matchday income is the total revenue generated by a club when hosting a match on home turf. In the Premier League, the home side exclusively receives the money generated from gate receipts. Every season, each club hosts 19 league fixtures, and is entitled to earn all the cash generated from its home games.

Naturally, box office income is the largest percentage of the matchday revenue, but it also includes food and beverage sales, as well as merchandise sales. For instance, Tottenham Hotspur is believed to generate around £800,000 per game from food sales. 

On the other hand, TV money made up almost 60% of the clubs’ incomes, while commercial revenues averaged around 27% of the total income.

The Premier League clubs paid out an astonishing grand total of over £261m on striker salaries last season, this divided by how long the strikers spent playing shows just how much they pay per minute.

Arsenal pay their strikers the highest amount of £3,721.37 per minute,

The average Blues fan (who regularly attended matches at the Stamford Bridge) spent £1,648 during that campaign.

The up and coming World cup tournament in Qatar has also incurred a human cost as well as a financial one. The total outlay paid out by Qatar is staggering, around $ 7 billion.

————————– 

I want you now to close your eyes and picture the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland,

Now what comes to mind?

Membership has its privileges. And before you can buy a ticket for 19 grand, you must be a member of the Economic Forum which costs a mere 52,000. And remember, that’s only if you’re invited.

For most it’s billionaires, CEOs, and world leaders hobnobbing in the Alps, but not for me.

It’s the $43 hot dog or Caesar salad, just short of $ 60 bucks.

Don’t get me wrong I love sport.

But how did we get here?”

The answer lies in decades of peddling the myth that wealth and success flow from personal endeavour and skill, and that poverty and failure are due to personal shortcomings.

The reality that most wealth and success stems from a mix of good fortune and the appropriation of other people’s resources and labour over centuries. 

Yes, a handful of individuals with exceptional talents can make a quantum leap from poverty to fortune, but most are constrained by the realities of an economic system that has, for decades, seen a reduction in the share of  wealth going to those reliant on their own labour for income. 

I’d be interested to see what responses would be to questions such as this (considering that poverty is the main cause of world problems nowadays)

It’s 2020 now. Look what’s happened because of humanity! Australia is on fire! The endangered list is now 41,416! You know how big that number is, that’s a really big number! People think climate change doesn’t exist, yeah, people only believe things when they cause problems. Maybe people will believe climate change exists if every country is on fire.

People make fun of this topic but don’t! It is a serious problem and if we don’t solve it we all will die because of our actions.

Is there such a thing as Global Cooling? Probably not, but I like the sound of it.

There are too many people who don’t and can’t have enough, and it’s detrimental to continue to add to the population so rapidly. Of course, if those who selfishly own so much for themselves or to save so future generations of their family will also be wealthy would just share with those who are here and in need..


Gareth Southgate 

At the moment we have the Woman’s world cup , Harry Kane – Spurs – just sold to Bayern München – 86 million.

So why pressurise FIFA the world governing body to let every goal in the coming World Cup in Qatar to contribute to reliving poverty.  Lets say 50,000 per goal.  

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

Contact: bobdillon33@gmail.com

THE BEADY EYE SAY’S. THE FIRST OF OUR CURRENT CHALLENGES WITH CLIMATE CHANGE IS TO ADMIT THAT WE WILL NOT STOP IT.

10 Thursday Aug 2023

Posted by in 2023 the year of disconnection., Climate Change.

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE SAY’S. THE FIRST OF OUR CURRENT CHALLENGES WITH CLIMATE CHANGE IS TO ADMIT THAT WE WILL NOT STOP IT.

Tags

, , , ,

( Fourteen minute read)

Why is this so ?

We lack the collective will to address climate change because of the way our brains have evolved over the last two million years..

As individuals, we know what we can do about climate change. But addressing the issue also requires collective action on a scale that exceeds our evolutionary capacities. The larger the group, the more challenging it gets.

We know that climate change is happening, but cognitive biases that ensure our initial survival make it difficult to address, complex, long-term challenges that now threaten our existence, like climate change.

They impede our ability to take action, now hamstringing our ability to respond to what could be the largest crisis humanity has ever created or had to face. An older lady clasps her chest and shouts while fires rage in the background behind a large house in Greece

Prevention is no longer an option.

The natural systems that regulate climate on the planet are already changing, and ecosystems that support us are shifting under our feet, undermining many of the ecological foundations of our ability to provide for basic needs.

Clearly, one of the key challenges is going to be how the burden is distributed, and how we respond to the vulnerability of people to climatic shifts and adjustments – from drought and floods, to health issues ranging from disease to heatstroke, to food security, to environmental migrations.

And, of course, our actions now – given the delay between emissions and impact – will harm people in the future. So our responsibilities of justice now extend over vast stretches of geography and time.

We will be a climate-challenged society for the foreseeable future, immersed in a long age of adaptation.

But that information hasn’t been enough to change our behaviours on a scale great enough to stop climate change. And a big part of the reason is our own evolution.

The same behaviours that once helped us survive are, today, working against us. We imagine we live in a rational, enlightened society. In such a place, experts would identify issues to be addressed, and goals to be reached, in response to our creation of climate change. Scientific knowledge would be respected and accepted (after peer review, of course), and policy would be fashioned in response.

Ignoring climate change in the short term has benefits both to individuals and to organizations.

Climate change is a nonlinear problem.

When a function increases slowly at first and then accelerates, though, that causes problems, because people extrapolate that function linearly,  without obvious consequences until suddenly there is a significant problem.

Many effects of climate change are distant from most people.

People conceptualize things that are psychologically distant from them (in time, space, or social distance) more abstractly than things that are psychologically close. When there are weather disasters that are probably a reflection of climate change (like wildfires or extreme storms), they tend to happen far away from where most people live.

As a result, most people are not forced to grapple with the specifics of climate change, but rather can treat it as an abstract concept.

Abstract concepts simply don’t motivate people to act as forcefully as specific ones do.

Only when you and me and others experience this future threat in the present (rather than something that is still a generation away) will it have enough motivational force to get us to engage in actions that take more effort today.

Consider what you’d be willing to forgo today knowing that in one generation there will be serious, catastrophic consequences because of inaction.

Ultimately, we have to be willing to be explicit about the values we are acting on.

If we choose to enrich our lives in the present at the cost of the quality of life of future generations, that is a choice of values that we rarely like to make explicitly. We have to be willing to look in the mirror and say that we are willing to live our lives selfishly, without regard to the lives of our children and grandchildren.

And if we are not willing to own that selfish value, then we have to make a change in our behaviour today.

WHEN THE LAST INSECT DISSAPEARS SO DOES OUR FOOD CHAIN.

Why People Aren’t Motivated to Address Climate Change.

Even more challenging, however, is the reality that our emissions undermine the environments of vulnerable people elsewhere:

Unfortunately, climate change involves a combination of factors that make it hard for people to get motivated.

In the case of climate change, there are sceptics who argue that it is not certain that the influence of human activity on climate will have the dire consequences that some experts have projected.

People are much better with obvious threats like that nasty dog at the door than they are with threats that escalate quickly and nonlinearly.

Now we have entered a new era in the human relationship with climate change, with a variety of broad and different challenges.

So how might we begin to address the challenges of climate justice?

We may be dealing with an issue with a level of complexity that human beings are simply not capable of addressing. Climate change will certainly challenge our adaptive abilities more than anything else the species has faced.

It will demand multi-scale, widely-distributed, networked, flexible, anticipatory, and adaptive responses on the part of governments from the global down to the local.

Climate change will require a radical re-thinking of the very nature of governance, and the adoption of new forms

We are capable of changing our currently destructive relationship with the rest of nature.

Key here is the reality that, in bringing climate change upon ourselves, we have demonstrated that the very construction of how we immerse ourselves in the natural world, and how we provide for our basic needs, is simply not working.

In fact, our relationship with nature is undermining the lives we’ve constructed.

Our continued refusal to recognise ourselves as animals embedded in ecosystems has resulted in the undermining of those systems that sustain us.

That’s our key problem, our central challenge.

Many groups and movements are rethinking and restructuring the ways we interact with the natural world as we provide for our basic needs – around sustainable energy, local food security, and even crafting and making. These new materialist movements offer alternative ways of relating to the nonhuman systems that sustain us, and illustrate the possibility of redesigning and restructuring our everyday lives based in our immersion in natural systems. After 30 years of failing in our response to climate change, we may yet demonstrate that human beings still have the capacity to adapt.

The good news is that our biological evolution hasn’t just hindered us from addressing the challenge of climate change. It’s also equipped us with capacities to overcome them. How we communicate about climate change influences how we respond.

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

Contact: bobdillon33@gmail.com

THE BEADY EYE SAY’S. WITH CLIMATE CHANGE WE AIN’T SEEN NOTHING YET.

10 Thursday Aug 2023

Posted by in Climate Change., Climate refugees., CO2 emissions, Environment

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE SAY’S. WITH CLIMATE CHANGE WE AIN’T SEEN NOTHING YET.

( Five minute read)

Never mind the rising temperature, the rising seas, the rising migration, the rising costs, the rising dormant microbes , the rising fires, the rising floods, the rising food shortages, the rising in action.

The enormous, unprecedented pain and turmoil caused by the climate crisis is often discussed alongside what can seem like surprisingly small temperature increases – 1.5C or 2C hotter than it was in the era just before the car replaced the horse and cart.

Wildfire

But the single digit numbers obscure huge ramifications at stake.

We have being and will be building a civilization based on a world that doesn’t exist anymore.

Cranking up the temperature of the entire globe, within little more than a century is, in fact, extraordinary. Our oceans alone are now absorbing the heat equivalent of five Hiroshima atomic bombs dropping into the water every second.

We have now unmoored ourselves from our past, as if we have transplanted ourselves onto another planet.

The difference between 1.5C and 2C is a death sentence with world’s governments currently failing to avert a grim fate, for the sake of GDP – Re election – call it what you want, no amount of global warming can be considered safe and people are already dying from climate change. The fingerprint of climate change on recent extreme weather is quite clear.

Across the planet, people are set to be strafed by cascading storms, heatwaves, flooding and drought. Around 216 million people, mostly from developing countries, will be forced to flee these impacts by 2050 unless radical action is taken.

At 1.5C, about 14% of the world’s population will be hit by severe heatwaves once every five years. with this number jumping to more than a third of the global population at 2C.

Beyond 1.5C, the heat in tropical regions of the world will push societies to the limits, with stifling humidity preventing sweat. A severe heatwave historically expected once a decade will happen every other year at 2C. Nearly one in 10 vertebrate animals and almost one in five plants will lose half of their habitat. Ecosystems spanning corals, wetlands, alpine areas and the Arctic “are set to die off” at this level of heating.

Heat the world a bit more than 2c and a third of all the world’s food production will be at risk by the end of the century as crops start to wilt and fail in the heat.

Earth’s hotter climate is causing the atmosphere to hold more water, then releasing the water in the form of extreme precipitation events.

Meanwhile, in the past 20 years the aggregated level of terrestrial water available to humanity has dropped at a rate of 1cm per year, with more than five billion people expected to have an inadequate water supply within the next three decades.

Virtually all of North America and Europe will be at heightened risk of wildfires at 3C of heating.

A disquieting unknown is the knock-on impacts as epochal norms continue to fall.

What if permafrost melting or flooding cuts off critical roads used by supply chains? What if storms knock out the world’s leading computer chip factory? What happens once half of the world is exposed to disease-carrying mosquitos?

We don’t understand the non-linear effects,

The climate crisis is beginning to take a toll on food production.

Despite the rapid advance of renewable energy and, more recently, electric vehicles, countries still remain umbilically connected to fossil fuels, subsidizing oil, coal and gas to the tune of around $11m every single minute.

By the end of this year the world will have burned through 86% of the carbon “budget” that would allow us just a coin flip’s chance of staying below 1.5C.

A scenario approaching some sort of apocalypse would comfortably arrive should the world heat up by 4C or more, and although this is considered unlikely due to the belated action by governments, it should provide little comfort.

Every decision – every oil drilling lease, every acre of the Amazon rainforest torched for livestock pasture, every new gas-guzzling SUV that rolls onto the road – will decide how far we tumble down the hill.

The action is far too slow at the moment.Free Global Warming Ecology photo and picture

Playing down the potential worst effects of global heating and climate breakdown is nothing less than climate appeasement.

It does nothing to help spur the urgent action that is required, and by underplaying the climate threat, works – intentionally or not – to encourage a grudging and cautionary approach to emissions cuts that we simply can no longer afford.

Make no mistake, this is a war.

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

Contact: bobdillon33@gmail.com

THE BEADY ASK’S. BACTERIA IS NECESSARY FOR LIFE BUT COULD NEW ANCIENT MICROBES RELEASED BY CLIMATE CHANGE END IT.

09 Wednesday Aug 2023

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY ASK’S. BACTERIA IS NECESSARY FOR LIFE BUT COULD NEW ANCIENT MICROBES RELEASED BY CLIMATE CHANGE END IT.

Tags

( Four minute read)

Humans coevolved with their microbial partners and parasites for hundreds of thousands of years.

No matter how hard you try getting rid of bacteria is a futile task.  Bacteria is in the air we breath.

Here are few that live in you, on you, with exotic names, to terrify you.

Salmonella is a very common bacteria so common that you may not realize that it actually lives in your intestines.

 E.coli  like Salmonella, that is perfectly healthy and safe when it lives in your intestines, but can be harmful.

Campylobacter bacteria, are very common and are found in the organs and muscles of many livestock animals, birds and are also present in soils.

Pseudomonas is a very common family of bacteria and is found all over the world. Found in soil, water, on plants and healthy people often have Pseudomonas bacteria living on their skin, in their hair and in places like their armpits.

Micrococcus is a very common genus of bacteria that has many different species. These bacteria are found all around us, including in the dust we find in our carpets and on our furniture in our homes.

Staphylococcus aureus or S.aureus an opportunistic bacteria, is found on our skin, in our nose, armpit, groin and other warm parts of your body  is a bacteria that lives, with little to no impact on our health, in our noses and throats. It lives within our lungs and on our mucous membranes.

Bacillus bacteria are a group of bacteria that are found commonly in the environment but can cause illness in humans.

Clostridium perfringens another common bacteria that is found in the environment and in the intestines of many animals is  This bacteria is found all around us and in most cases is harmless.

There you have it, a few bacteria’s that usually live peacefully with us, day today. However, when the conditions are right, they can make our lives miserable and uncomfortable.

If we ignore them, we are looking at our lives through a keyhole.

They guide the construction of our bodies, releasing molecules and signals that steer the growth of our organs. They educate our immune system, teaching it to tell friend from foe. They affect the development of the nervous system, and perhaps even influence our behaviour. They contribute to our lives in profound and wide-ranging ways; no corner of our biology is untouched.

In 2019, 7.7 million deaths around the world were found to be linked to bacterial infections. That equals 1 in 8 of all global deaths. It makes bacterial infections the second largest cause of death globally.

Three unknown species have been discovered growing on the ISS, but don’t break out the anti-bac wipes just yet, because there are bacteria that live in solid rock, metabolising radioactive waste, and even some that survive in boiling water.

Imagine if all microbes on the planet suddenly disappeared.

On the upside, infectious diseases would be a thing of the past, and many pest insects would be unable to eke out a living. But that’s where the good news ends because there would be complete societal collapse only within a year or so, linked to catastrophic failure of the food supply chain.

Over the past decade or so, the list of medicines we can use against harmful bacteria has been dwindling. At the same time, other disease-causing organisms – fungi, viruses and parasites – are also developing resistance to the drugs.

Bacteria are when it comes to straight numbers, the biggest population of organisms that exist on Earth. Bacteria can be found almost anywhere on the planet. The total estimate of bacteria that live around us is five million trillion trillion.

Sounds like a bunch of trillions, but the number would look like this: 5,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000. An easier way of putting this would be ‘’five with 30 zeros after it’’ or, if you are a strict mathematician: 5 x 10 to the 30th power.

Somebody calculated, taking the average size of bacteria into account how much distance would all the bacteria stacked on top of each other. As it turns out, that long chain of bacteria would extend for a trillion light-years.

Out of all the bacteria that exist around us, less than one percent would, technically speaking, be considered dangerous.

Without a doubt, the stability of the Earth’s system largely depends on the world of bacteria.

There are more than 400 species of bacteria that make up the gut microbiome, helping digest food, ward off harmful pathogens, and synthesize vitamins.

The global antibacterial products market size was valued at USD 27.04 billion in 2020 and is expected to pass 30 billion this year.

We are surrounded by infections.

The release of just 1 per cent of pathogens trapped in the planet’s melting ice could pose a real risk of damage to the Earth’s ecosystems and potentially threaten human health, according to a new study.

As a society, we need to understand the potential risk posed by these ancient microbes so we can prepare for any unintended consequences of their release into the modern world.

COVID-19 is or was a virus not a bacteria.

Extreme weather events have come to dominate the disaster landscape in the 21st century.

To give some context, 689 million people – more than 9% of the world’s population – live on less than $1.90 a day.

The world’s 10 most affected countries are spending up to 59% of their GDP on the effects of violence. 2% reduction in the global impact of violence is roughly equivalent to all overseas development aid in 2019.”

With climate change releasing new ancient microbes the risk is no longer simply a fantasy.

With the state of the planet deteriorating, instead of working together to solve our problems, we spend time blaming, shaming, and attacking others—and the problems only escalate.

The question is how far do we have to go before we ask people in conflict to look beneath their differences to discover their shared needs.

Ajax kill all known clingon’s  but remember we are tethered to the Earth.

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

Contact: bobdillon33@gmail.com

THE BEADY EYE ASK’S: OUT OF A POPULATION OF ALMOST 340 MILLION IS THIS THE BEST THE USA CAN OFFER ITS PEOPLE FOR THE NEXT PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION – JOE BIDEN OR DONALD TRUMP.

09 Wednesday Aug 2023

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE ASK’S: OUT OF A POPULATION OF ALMOST 340 MILLION IS THIS THE BEST THE USA CAN OFFER ITS PEOPLE FOR THE NEXT PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION – JOE BIDEN OR DONALD TRUMP.

( Eight minute read)

America is a Consumer Nation and its elections are all about money with the true sources of funds becoming increasingly opaque.

With the world’s most powerful military, a huge economy, home to many entrepreneurs it has created many iconic products which are highly sought after around the world.

However it didn’t invent steel, the car, radar, the gas or steam turbine, the television, the ships propeller, the aircraft carrier or even the steam catapult or angled flight deck. They definitely didn’t invent the steam engine, the railway, or the first mechanical computer. They didn’t invent the loom, or even the gun. They didn’t discover Penicillin, build the first successful VTOL aircraft, the first jet airliner, the first jet fighter or even the first jet engine, the hovercraft, the ships propeller, or the Bessemer converter so they could invent steel.. They didn’t invent the aircraft carrier, the battleship, the television (oops I already mentioned that one),and trust me I could add more..

Television – John Logie Baird – Not American

Telephone – Alexander Graham Bell – Not American

Radio – Gugliemo Marconi – Not American

World Wide Web – Tim Berners-Lee – Not American

Cars – Carl Benz – Not American

Penicillin – Alexander Fleming – Not American

Pasturisation – Louis Pasteur – Not American

Jet Engine – Frank Whittle – Not American

Splitting the Atom – Lord Ernest Rutherford – Not American.

Discovery of Radiation – Marie Curie – Not American.

Now we know what they didn’t invent, please tell us what they did.

They did invent.

The USA gave the world some of the greatest programmers, scientists, biologists and physicists.

Tupperware, defibrillator, Video games, the bill of rights, the Kul Klux Klan, motion pictures, light bulbs, advances in agronomy, Norman Borlaug awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for a lifetime of work to feed a hungry world,  the telephone, Microwave ovens, industrial robotics, Washing machine, Television, Hollywood films, Fast food, the integrated circuit, the laser, the PC, the transistor, the Webb telescope,  Calvin and Hobbes – Apple and Facebook.

What is the single greatest American Invention? 
I think the answer is America itself. It keep being re-invented all the time.
 The current contenders contributions.

Biden’s flagship victories.

The approval of a $1.2 trillion infrastructure package, a $1.9 trillion coronavirus relief package,  appointed 41 federal judges, reinstated a national freeze on federal executions, re-joined the international Paris Climate Accord, overturn Trump-era ban on openly transgender members of the U.S. military, reduce the rate of national unemployment, chaotically ended the war in Afghanistan, imposed several sanctions on Russia for its invasion of Ukraine, released 180 million barrels of oil from the country’s Strategic Oil Reserves.

Overall, Biden’s tenure as president has been the proverbial “glass half full, half empty.

Trump’s presidency may be best remembered for its cataclysmic end.  A four-yearlong storm of tweets, rallies and on-air rants that ended in a mob riot and historic second impeachment. Trump didn’t repeal Obamacare — he accidentally bolstered it. Arguably the most consequential decision Trump made involving American workers was something it chose not to do: He declined to implement a so-called “emergency temporary standard” when the coronavirus pandemic hit.

Cannabis is now legal in some form in 36 states, meaning that a majority of Americans have some form of legal access even though the drug remains officially illegal at the federal level.  It’s easier to prosecute financial crimes like money laundering.  On gas emissions, Trump went the opposite direction from the rest of the world, he made it possible to follow the Pentagon’s money. His biggest legislative achievement was arguably the $1.5 trillion tax cut package Republicans pushed through Congress, which he said would super-charge the economy. Rallied the world against China’s 5G dominance, doled out billions in aid to farmers shrinking the food safety net — a lot.

————

Sure, not everyone can run for president. Anyone under the age of 35 is out, as are those born overseas and non-residents of 14 years or more.

It helps to be well-known, popular and to sit on an eye-watering pile of money;

The 2020 presidential election cycle, for example, cost candidates a combined US$5.7 billion ($A8.37 billion), more than the GDP of several small countries. But even with all that considered, the pool of possible surely could not be reduced to the same two candidates as 2020.

So, why then are the odds of Biden and Trump going head-to-head once again so good?

With only ten of the 45 former presidents unable to secure second terms, incumbent presidents generally have a pretty good shot at winning a second term in office..

More than half of American voters do not want Biden to run in 2024, but dissatisfaction with a sitting president isn’t new. For example, 60% of Americans did not want Reagan to run again in 1984, despite him having a relatively high approval rating at the time. No prominent Democrat officeholders appear willing or have enough support from the party or the public to suggest a challenge would be successful.

The reality is, despite being 80 and sometimes appearing frail, Biden is an electable leader. He won the popular vote in 2020 by more than 7 million votes and a 4.5% victory margin.

Trump’s campaign to reclaim office is the first attempt of any former president to regain office after losing in over 130 years.

Almost all the Republican primary challengers are reluctant to openly criticise the former president. They have stood him even amid the two recent criminal indictments, which would ordinarily present a golden opportunity for opponents to give their own campaigns an edge.

The major question facing the party is, if not him, then who? And the party is coming up short with a more compelling answer. But, at this point in the election cycle, despite the wants of the majority of Americans, and no matter how uninspiring – 2024 looks to be 2020 all over again.

The extremes are now feeding off each other, allowing both parties to ignore the voices of the exhausted majority. This is exactly why so many Americans are fed up with Washington.

The truth is there is more that unites as Americans than that which divides us.  Consumerism.

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

Contact: bobdillon33@gmail.com

THE BEADY EYE ASK’S. WILL CLIMATE CHANGE LEAD TO MORE WARS?

08 Tuesday Aug 2023

Posted by in 2023 the year of disconnection., Arms Trade., Carbon Emissions., Climate Change., Climate refugees., CO2 emissions, Collective stupidity., Fourth Industrial Revolution., Human Collective Stupidity., HUMAN INTELLIGENCE, Human values., Humanity., Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Life., Migrants/Refugees., Militarism., MISINFORMATION., Mr Putin., Natural World Disasters, Northern Ireland., PAIN AND SUFFERING IN LIFE, Palestinian- Israel., Reality., RUSSIA/ UKRAINE/ US/ NATO/ EU, State of the world, Survival., Sustaniability, Telling the truth., The common good., The cost of war., The essence of our humanity., The Obvious., The state of the World., The world to day., THE WORLD YOU LIVE IN., THIS IS THE STATE OF THE WORLD.  , Ukraine/ Russia., Unanswered Questions., VALUES, War., Wars, What Needs to change in the World, Where's the Global Outrage., World Organisations.

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE ASK’S. WILL CLIMATE CHANGE LEAD TO MORE WARS?

Tags

, ,

( Six minute read)

It’s one of the most important questions of the 21st century:

You always have a higher potential for violent conflict when the survival conditions of groups of people are threatened.  This is a very basic principle.

Will climate change provide the extra spark that pushes two otherwise peaceful nations into war?

The obvious answer is yes.

You can see this when you look at events that are already happening, like land conflicts due to desertification, or various resource conflicts around the world.

There are currently 27 ongoing conflicts worldwide. A quarter of the entire global population lives in conflict-affected areas. This year, it is estimated that at least 274 million people will need humanitarian assistance. But it’s important to remember that the causal links between climate and conflict are rarely direct.

However there has always been an empirical connection between violence and climate change which has persists across 12,000 years of human history.

We now  live on a planet expecting changes to temperature or rainfall in the coming decades—which will come faster and stronger than the many natural climate changes of the past.

This is the situation the world finds itself in today.

Conflict is on the rise. Millions are displaced. International law is disregarded with impunity, as criminal and terrorist networks profit from the division and violence.

The reasons for the outbreak of conflict range from territorial disputes and regional tensions, to corruption and dwindling resources due to climate change.

Take the Syrian war for example.

Nearly 11 years after it started, the Syrian refugee crisis remains the largest displacement crisis worldwide (13.2 million, including 6.6 million refugees and more than 6 million internally displaced people). At least 2 million people are living in tented camps with limited access to basic services.

Lasting more than 60 years, the conflict in Myanmar (previously called Burma) remains the longest ongoing civil war in the world.

The cost of war is almost unfathomable with conflicts driving 80% of humanitarian needs.

In 2016, the cost of conflict globally stood at an astonishing $14 trillion. That’s enough to end world hunger 42 times over.

For the seventh year in a row, global military spending is increasing, exceeding trillions’ for the first time.

Just imagine what the world could do with that money if conflicts were to end worldwide.

——-

If you’re looking for the causes of climate change, it’s us—the overconsuming, fossil-fuel-burning North and West.

If you want to get serious about climate change, worrying about the small-scale details of conflicts in Africa is missing the point.  It’s us.

Twentieth-century wars were fought over land, religion, and economics. But the wars of the 21st century will be fought over something quite different: climate change, and the shortages of water and food that will come from it with mass migration leading to social disruption and potentially violent conflict.

I think this will become more apparent over the next decade or so. You can see it already in Europe.

I suspect we’re going to see more nativism, more xenophobia, and more talk of building walls on our borders.

If you look deeply at the source of future conflicts, I think you’ll see a basic resource conflict at the bottom of it all.

The thin veneer of civilization.

‘ Overwhelmed by the disaster, people could not see what was to become of them and started losing respect for laws of god and man alike,” Thucydides wrote.

Do we have the institutions, the structures, the systems of cooperation we need to deal with this problem?

I don’t think we have an existing structure of peacekeeping that can hold up under these conditions — or at least I’m not encouraged by what we’ve seen so far.

Can Western democratic society, which is built on a system of limitless growth and productivity, change its destructive relationship with nature?

No, modern liberal democratic societies are successful at improving the lives and freedoms of people who live in them but the problem is that their systems are based on the exploitation of nature and our environment, and we’re sort of trapped in this paradigm.

Climate change is a threat multiplier, which means it amplifies problems already facing the world.

Stressors such as poverty, political instability, and crime are magnified by increased droughts, floods, or heat waves. Of the 25 countries deemed most vulnerable to climate change, 14 are mired in conflict.

The climate crisis is altering the nature and severity of humanitarian crises.

As the world gets hotter, mayhem could spread.

Humanitarian organizations are already struggling to respond and will not be able to meet exponentially growing needs resulting from unmitigated climate change.

I think one of the things that clearly exacerbates matters is when the issues become politicized.

It’s going to take a combination of both personal action and systemic change to combat climate change. One is not a substitute for the other, and doing one without the other won’t solve the issues we face.

How civilized will we remain?

Climate change will be a small hole through which we glimpsed what always lies below the thin crust we lay across the seething magma of nature, including human nature.

Recycle. Fly less. Eat less meat.

These are some of the ways that we’ve been told can slow climate change.

But the inordinate emphasis on individual behaviour is the result of a marketing campaign that has succeeded in placing the responsibility for fixing climate change squarely on the shoulders of individuals.

With immensely powerful vested interests aligned in defence of the fossil fuel status quo, the societal tipping point won’t happen without the active participation of citizens everywhere aiding in the collective push forward.

While humongous industries continue to shirk responsibility, lobbying against change and top-down regulation. Nothing decivilizes more quickly and surely than war.

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

Contact: bobdillon33@gmail.com

So watch the video, learn the facts, and form your own conclusions.

. https://youtu.be/RnWoFJmqCF8

THE BEADY EYE ASK’S: WILL A QUANTUM COMPUTER SOLVE THE WORLD PROBLEMS?

31 Monday Jul 2023

Posted by in #whatif.com, Quantum computers., State of the world, Sustaniability, Technology v Humanity, The Future, THE WORLD YOU LIVE IN., THIS IS THE STATE OF THE WORLD.  , WHAT IS TRUTH

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE ASK’S: WILL A QUANTUM COMPUTER SOLVE THE WORLD PROBLEMS?

Tags

, , ,

( Five minute read)

We have very limited ability at this stage to imagine the applications of quantum computing, but down the road in the near term they could solve countless problems – and create a lot of new ones.

In order to prepare for what is coming.

Educate ourselves on the reality of Quantum Computers, and the impacts they could have around the world is now paramount if we wish to keep the values we place on life.

Soon will come a time when trusting a quantum computer will require a leap of faith.

Every year, new computers are being developed that are faster and smarter than ever before. But if you really want to take things to the next level, you’ve got to go quantum.

This new frontier of humanity could open hitherto unfathomable frontiers in mathematics and science.

Quantum’s industrial uses are boundless.

In the future, we will rely on everywhere in the world having access to quantum technology, but with risks, to national-security migraine. Its problem-solving capacity will soon render all existing cryptography obsolete, jeopardizing communications, financial transactions, and even military defences.

Modern warfare and national–security mechanisms are grounded in the speed and precision of decision making. If your computer is faster than theirs, you win.

The digital devices in our everyday lives – from laptop computers to smartphones – are all based on 0s and 1s: so-called ‘bits’. But quantum computers are based on ‘qubits’ – the quantum 0s and 1s that are altogether stranger, but also more powerful. (So-called quantum particles can be in two places at the same time and also strangely connected even though they are millions of miles apart.)

They will pave the way for systems that can solve complex real world problems that the best computers we have today are incapable of.Entanglement

Currently, computers solve problems in a simple linear way, one calculation at a time.

A quantum computers could do multiple calculations all at the same time, millions of miles apart, mirroring each other’s actions instantaneously, transporting information from one chip to another with a reliability of 99.999993% at record speeds.

——-

Now that we understand what AI is capable of we also need to know its limits.

Before long, much of the material on the internet will have been written, or at least co-written, by AIs.

What will happen when AIs are being trained on texts they have written themselves?

The amount of data consumed in this way keeps going up and up.

What happens when data runs out?

——-

Generative AI is in a Cambrian explosion of capability.

Generative Ai, is now creating art, make music, generate synthetic humans, birth artificial influencers and celebrities, literally generate video from text, and threaten to upend our notions of creativity, art, public domain, copyright, and the nature of reality itself.

This is just the beginning, the ultimate thing for AI to create is more of itself.

When maybe AI is also at the point where it can start writing the code that will make its own AI even better.  And that’s like where the true singularity is … when it can kind of set itself to improve itself, when it can start to improve itself better than what a human can.

It’s impossible to speculate what society could truly look like in such a situation.

But I think in most of our lifetimes we’re going to experience that. Exciting is one word for that.

Another is terrifying.  Machines that can outthink humans. Your brain is the most intelligent learning algorithm in the universe that we know so far. The truth is that for now, AGI remains a fantasy.

Even if AGI is never achieved, the self-teaching approach may still change what sorts of AI are created.

The rapid development of AI that can train itself also raises questions about how well we can control its growth. If AI starts to generate intelligence by itself, there’s no guarantee that it will be human-like.

Whether this will happen, and how it will progress if it does is impossible to know, but there’s no guarantee that humanity as we know it would survive such a time, or that the vast AI entities potentially created by such an explosion would be benevolent to life as we know it.

I think that really where AI can be empowering is in that long tail when there’s like non-consumption with the alternative, where you could not afford to create that content in the first place.

And you can imagine that with like these very obscure topics.

You could even imagine that for news where maybe there’s something that happened in your local neighbourhood where only 20 people want to read that article and then it doesn’t make sense for a human to write it.

Generating artificial intelligence is all ready producing images like a photographer, creating music like an artist, selling like a sales rep, diagnosing disease like a doctor, and (gulp!) writing text like a human.

The technology could potentially also be used to design drugs more quickly by accurately simulating their chemical reactions, a calculation too difficult for current supercomputers. They could also provide even more accurate systems to forecast weather and project the impact of climate change.

Rather than humans teaching machines to think like humans, machines might teach humans new ways of thinking.

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

Contact: bobdillon33@gmail.com

THE BEADY EYE SAY’S: WHEN IT COMES TO CLIMATE CHANGE THE ENTIRE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY NOW ACCEPT THE PHYSICAL SCIENCE BASIS FOR CLIMATE CHANGE.

29 Saturday Jul 2023

Posted by in Climate Change.

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE SAY’S: WHEN IT COMES TO CLIMATE CHANGE THE ENTIRE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY NOW ACCEPT THE PHYSICAL SCIENCE BASIS FOR CLIMATE CHANGE.

Tags

, , ,

( Seven minute read)

Scientists have made climate change appear difficult but it’s not difficult to understand.

All living things respond to climate and changes in the climate, even if these changes are subtle and temporary. Our own experience of climate throughout our lifetimes, along with scientific records, also proves that climate change is happening. Weather is simply the set of atmospheric conditions at one location at one limited period of time. Climate, however, involves the average condition of the atmosphere over a long period of time (such as across a few decades or more) at a given location.

At timescales of thousands of years beyond human lifetimes, climate responds to the precession (slow rotation or “wobble”) of Earth’s axis, the planet’s tilt (obliquity), and the changes to the elliptical shape (eccentricity) of Earth’s orbit.

These phenomena interact with one another to determine the amount of sunlight (and thus solar heating) different parts of Earth’s surface receive during different seasons of the year.

Global and regional climates are changing too quickly for many forms of life to adapt and survive.

But this is not the whole story.

There is unequivocal evidence that Earth is warming at an unprecedented rate. Human activity is the principal cause.

Earth’s climate is on a path to warm beyond the range of what has been experienced over the past millions of years.

The range of uncertainty for the warming along the current emissions path is wide enough to encompass massively disruptive consequences to societies and ecosystems: as global temperatures rise, there is a real risk, however small, that one or more critical parts of the Earth’s climate system will experience abrupt, unpredictable and potentially irreversible changes. Disturbingly, scientists do not know how much warming is required to trigger such changes to the climate system.

When people are confronted with a difficult problem, they tend to disengage. In addition to that, beginning in the mid-eighties, Big Oil began a concerted campaign to sow doubt in the public’s mind; is the climate really changing, or is this just more variations in the weather?

The current warming is happening at a rate not seen in the past 10,000 years. It is undeniable that human activities have produced the atmospheric gases that have trapped more of the Sun’s energy in the Earth system. This extra energy has warmed the atmosphere, ocean, and land, and widespread and rapid changes in the atmosphere, ocean, cryosphere, and biosphere have occurred.

Most of the warming occurred in the past 40 years, with the seven most recent years being the warmest. The years 2016 and 2020 are tied for the warmest year on record.

This is why our planet is in trouble.

Why are our leaders, in government and industry, not telling us the truth about climate change?

The answer is simple:

Because they can’t. What is happening to the climate is bad news, and bad news does not get votes, or increase profits.

There is no need to inflate the magnitude of what is happening. It is time for us all to face the “cruel truth” that has been overlooked for too long.

The reality is confronting enough. If humans put too much carbon back in the atmosphere, there’s only one thing that can happen. The Earth will get hotter, maybe too hot.

It is not possible for modern man to combust fossil fuels, put the carbon back in the atmosphere, and still expect the current lifestyle to continue.

In order to counteract climate misinformation.

1200 'Scientists' Claim That Climate Change Is Not Real. Here's The Truth

The list of records broken is itself unprecedented.

200 million people in the world, more than three times the UK population, will live below the tideline by the end of this century if levels continue to rise.

In the Hollywood blockbuster ‘The Day After Tomorrow’, ocean currents around the world stop as a result of global warming, triggering a new Ice Age on Earth. That may have been science fiction but scientists say the terrifying prophecy could soon become a reality.

The heat in the northern Atlantic Ocean has now pushed beyond what climate models predicted. The Atlantic Ocean current which drives the Gulf Stream could collapse at ‘any time’ from 2025 thanks to climate change.

A study published this week gives a further insight into what this might mean.

It suggests the climate system known as the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation could shut down faster than previously thought – by about 2050, or possibly as soon as this decade – if emissions are not cut soon. The risk of an earlier ocean circulation breakdown has increased, with potentially disastrous and rapid ramifications for temperatures, rainfall and sea level rise. Similarly, the amount of sea ice around Antarctica continues to be far below previous record lows.

The Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation last collapsed 12,000 years ago.

The Gulf Stream system could collapse as soon as 2025, the impact would be devastating. Such a scenario is ’95 per cent certain.

This is not actually worse than we expected. It is the brutal reality of what scientists told us would happen.

Heat waves kill more people than fires, floods and cyclones. A study found extreme heat killed more than 61,000 in Europe alone last year.

Imagine the headlines if we knew about that in real time.

Human emissions are permanently adding the equivalent of an El Niño to the global system every five to 10 years.

The good news from scientists is that rapid action can still make a significant difference and limit future damage.

It would mean ruling a line under new fossil fuel developments where there are alternatives – that is, virtually all of them – and taking a war-footing approach that genuinely prioritised accelerating the transition that every major scientific body and government agrees is necessary.

It wouldn’t mean pretending the gas industry is a climate solution, or that nuclear energy is a serious climate solution. Nor is carbon capture and storage on track to be more than a niche technology, and paying for carbon offsets can’t justify fossil fuel use.

It would mean leaders acting as though they could persuade the public of what’s required, rather than living in fear of how they might respond.

Polls suggest a majority in many countries are open to action. Now’s our chance.

Alternatively, politicians could continue not delivering on the commitments made in Paris eight years ago and wait for another month as devastating as July 2023 before doing more. One thing we can say with confidence: It is likely to come around soon enough.

America’s Independence Day was celebrated on July 4th. That is the same day the Earth’s temperature was hotter than it has been at any time in history.Sea ice melts from white into turquoise pools off Baffin Island, Nunavut, Canada. Between 1979 and ...

I don’t think it’s going to be anything that we can do as man to influence that to any great degree.

But I will tell you, again, looking at the past 4,000 or 5,000 years of human history, there’s a strong correlation between the rise and fall of temperature and the rise and fall of civilizations. And it’s just opposite of what we’re being told.

Going forward, who are you going to believe?

One only has to look at both major parties in the UK, currently diluting their plans to combat the climate crisis.

It’s hard to believe (due to politicians chopping and changing of their views and actions) that a new oil field ( Rosebank) where operation emission alone (not counting any emissions from burning the oil and gas it is likely to produce) – are likely to reach 5.6m tonnes of carbon dioxide, driving a coach and horses through any climate commitments.

Are there really people at the top of either of the main parties calling for abandonment of green policies.

You can bet your nannie that there are.

It is not my role to tell people what they should do or must believe about the rising threat of climate change but the consequences will devastate economies, infrastructure and political stability. We face risks of abrupt, unpredictable and potentially irreversible changes, and responding now will lower the risk and cost of taking action.

The verbal is over.

Its time to pour trillions/ trillions into providing non repayable grants before the lights go out.

( See previous posts. Placing 0.05% World Aid commission on all activities that are not sustainable )

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

Contact: bobdillon33@gmail.com