THE BEADY EYE ASK’S: WHAT IS A MEANINGFUL VOTE.

10 Monday Dec 2018

Posted by in Brexit v EU - Negotiations., Brexit.

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE ASK’S: WHAT IS A MEANINGFUL VOTE.

Tags

,

 

(Five-minute read)

As the Brexit ‘meaningful vote’ in Parliament is delayed what, exactly, will

MPs vote on? and what will be left of a burning Britain?

Under the Bill of Rights of 1689, it is for parliament and parliament alone to

govern its own proceedings, which includes interpreting the consequences of

it’s motions.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures a meaningful vote"

So it follows that in order to have a meaning or purposes with an assigned function the people’s meaningfully vote must be a General Election.

Why?

Because without a written constitution the Crown has the final say, not forgetting that it is the EU that has the right to withhold its consent on the final deal.

God only knows these days what is meaningful.

Think about things that are meaningful to you, words of wisdom, people that inspire you, or even a piece of art that speaks to you!

We had meaningful dialogue with Donald Trump.

When it comes Brexit there is no doubting that lies made a meaningful contribution to the referendum prior to people voting out.

In a mechanical sense, Brexit would now be disturbing the workings and the structure of the European Union more but for the spirit and future perspective and meaningfulness of the European Union.

By meaningfulness, one has to ask which has the quality of having great value or significance, England or the Europen Union.

We are left with pondering just what is a stake.

Is Brexit communicating something that is not directly possible to expressed like big, consequential, earth-shattering, earthshaking, eventful, historic, important, major, material, momentous, monumental, much, significant, substantial, tectonic, weighty?

Or is it just a storm in a teacup.

As in many Brexit end-game scenarios, however, there could still be a mismatch between British and European law:

The UK parliament can do nothing to bind the rest of the EU into continuing to treat the UK as a member state.

Unless something changes, however, the UK’s membership really will—under international law, and more specifically the Article 50 procedure of the Treaty of Lisbon—simply cease on 29th March at 11pm GMT, potentially with no deal.

There is no automatic way for England to force Brussels to pay attention and interrupt the Article 50 process:

In other words, if parliament wants to stop Brexit or give time to adjust the approach, it must either use brute political pressure to change the government’s mind or otherwise change the government.

“Press Pause”

The most fundamental ground rule of the British constitution remains the same as it ever has been: The crown in parliament is law. When the crown, which in effect means the government of the day, forgets about the parliament bit, its power will not long endure.

The “traditional” means of forcing a government out—through an election after a no-confidence vote—has certainly become harder to accomplish under the Fixed-term Parliaments Act;

THEN YOU HAVE FIRST PAST THE POST VOTING SYSTEM. AN ELECTORAL SYSTEM THAT IS WIDE OPEN TO MANIPULATION THAT IS NO LONGER DEMOCRACY.

BECAUSE:

Ignoring the point that votes are supposed to have equal value, wherever you live.

Come election time, most constituencies have no prospect of changing hands. This means that the few marginal seats and the small number of swing voters, who live in them decide the government.

Now, in the new world of online campaigning, and with the ability of companies such as Facebook to produce detailed profiles of its users, first past the post is more vulnerable than ever.

When the world’s most primitive voting system is targeted by the world’s most sophisticated data outfits, democracy doesn’t stand a chance.

IF ENGLAND IS TO HAVE ANOTHER REFERENDUM ITS TIME TO INTRODUCE PR.

With proportional representation, the share of seats each party wins reflects the share of the vote they receive. There are tried-and-tested systems of PR in use across the world – and in the UK’s devolved assemblies – that keep a local constituency link and give voters far more power to decide who will represent them.

Every vote counts with PR, not just the marginal ones, so it takes millions of votes to change the final result.

PR would make elections far more resilient to the rapid evolution of big data and micro-targeting; it would free political parties from a joyless arms race in marginal constituencies, and it would make everyone’s vote matter.

Around 85% of developed countries already use some form of PR.

There you have it, not the I’s to the right nor the I’s to the left but a meaningful vote.

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

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

  

 

 

 

THE BEADY EYE ASK’S: WHY SHOULD WE IN THE EU BE PAYING THE PENSION OF A MAN WHO IS OBVIOUSLY ANTI THE EU AND ALL IT STANDS FOR.

10 Monday Dec 2018

Posted by in Brexit v EU - Negotiations., Brexit.

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE ASK’S: WHY SHOULD WE IN THE EU BE PAYING THE PENSION OF A MAN WHO IS OBVIOUSLY ANTI THE EU AND ALL IT STANDS FOR.

Tags

,

(Two-minute read)

WE ALL KNOW THAT THE EU IS IN NEED OF REFORM.

Such as THE OBSERTITY OF PAYING £150m a year in regard to moving the European Parliament once a month from Brussels to Strasbourg.

But why should the citizens of the EU continue to pay a man who has caused immeasurable harm to the institution itself?

A man who has consistently defied his oath upon becoming an MEP?

MEPs earn €101,808 a year before tax and receive thousands more in expenses for staff, travel and office costs. Farage’s pension is understood to be worth £73,000 a year and he will also be entitled to a transitional allowance worth £117,000 when he steps down as an MEP in 2019, as the UK leaves the EU.

Farage is one of eight Ukip MEPs who was investigated in 2017 for misuse of EU funds.

Farage, who has been an MEP for 18 years, has one of the worst attendance records at the parliament in Brussels and Strasbourg. He is ranked 748 out of 751 MEPs and has taken part in only 37% of votes in the current parliamentary session, according to VoteWatch Europe.

IF THERE IS a DEAL OR  NO DEAL AND THE UK RENEGES ON ITS LEGAL FINANCIAL COMMITMENTS TO THE EU –  Nigel Farage along with former British MEP’S and EU officials should be stripped of their EU Golden Parachute payment and EU Pension.

With their combined pot worth an estimated £10 million a saving of an estimated £500,00 a year in pensions.

Some time ago he was docked half his monthly MEP salary.

The EU European Council are indicating the Brexit bill will include UK budgetary rights and obligations. This will include MEPs pensions. If the UK agree to the EU’s proposals, then Nigel Farage will receive an EU pension.

ITS NO WONDER GENUINE YELLOW JACKETS ARE MAKING THEMSELVES VISIBLE.

As for keeping the symbolism of where the EU was started alive if France wants to move the parliament monthly from Brussels to Strasbourg for this purpose let France pay. French police detain a protester during clashes in Paris

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

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

 

THE BEADY EYE ASK’S THE QUESTION: WHAT ARE THE PROS AND CONS OF A UNIVERSAL BASIC INCOME.

09 Sunday Dec 2018

Posted by in Universal Basic Income .

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE ASK’S THE QUESTION: WHAT ARE THE PROS AND CONS OF A UNIVERSAL BASIC INCOME.

Tags

(Three-minute read)

With an uncertain future of increased automation, as we all watch technology make us redundant and social media tearing our society apart one of the big questions is:

Would a Universal Basic Income be a Social Vaccine of the 21st Century or a terrible idea.,

Why?

Because there is a colossal shift happing in the world, and especially in the world of work. The gigantic transformation that we call digitalization won’t mean that work disappears, but that the kind of work will change at a speed that has never happened before. Millions will either lose their jobs or invent a new one. To do so we need to be independent of technology that is now just not ruling the stock exchange but recommending what we do hear or say.

Résultat de recherche d'images pour "the pro and cons of a basic income"

Proponents of UBI say that it reduces poverty and income inequality, encourages employment and skills training, and values normally unpaid roles such as homemakers and caregivers,  it improves the health of recipients and empowers women.

Opponents of UBI say that it does not reduce poverty, that it deprives the poor of needed targeted support, provides a disincentive to work, and weakens the economy. They also say it is unaffordable and less effective than targeted aid and welfare.

So how could it revolutionise our society? How could it backfire?

It could act as a sort of security net for the millions of people who will be left jobless by the tech revolution.

It could make leaving an abusive partner easy and would unleash the potential of countless people trapped by domestic violence.

It could allow care-workers to support themselves, encouraging care work and taking pressure off public services that provide care to the sick and elderly.

It could help balance inequality by bringing everyone’s income above the poverty line.

It could cut a country’s spending by eliminating social welfare benefits, food stamps, subsidised housing.

It could contribute to the economy by recipients starting their own business.

It could if with successful implementation mean improvements in food security, stress, mental health, physical health, housing, education, and employment.

The biggest concern is that UBI would incite millions of workers to stop working. If people aren’t working, there is less taxable income. However, people may choose to stop working for reasons that benefit society as a whole, like getting a better education or caring for an elderly relative.

It raises the question is money a birthright?

Rather than reducing the overall headcount of those in poverty, a BI [basic income] would change the composition of the income-poor population and thus would not prove to be an effective tool for reducing poverty. If people are paid unconditionally, to do nothing… they will do nothing and this leads to a less efficient economy, in order to motivate people there needs to be an element of uncertainty for the future.

Of course, this leads us back to the fact for Capitalism to operate it needs poverty.

Capitalist countries are built on the ideological foundation that money is something we earn – UBI would completely change this.

Some believe that community service should be a requirement for receiving UBI as it does not cure addiction, poor health, lack of skills, or other factors that contribute to poverty.

It would be too expensive.

At a level which can guarantee an acceptable standard of living is “impossibly expensive… Either the level of basic income is unacceptably low, or the cost of providing it is unacceptably high.

These are the best argument against UBI. The cost of living would end uprising and politically there is significant bias against unconditional transfer programs.

However, the simple idea to solve inequality and revolutionise our lives with UBI lies in the power of choice.

Managing the risk of automation obsolescence while also tending to rise poverty remains one of the greatest challenges facing both advanced and developing economies. These problems won’t be solved simply with a guaranteed income nor will they be solved with present programmes that kick in when people have hit rock bottom, rather than trying to prevent them from getting there in the first place.

There are two challenges ahead with UBI.

The first is to spread the basic idea so that it continues to move from fringe to mainstream.

The second is to build it into a workable policy with a political base.

To date despite some bipartisan support, the concept has failed to gain enough traction to pass either challenge.

Surely it would be far cheaper to give people a life of dignity, than a life of desperation.

The purpose of UBI is to give every person the ability to live without being beholden to a capitalist system however without socialist additions it would be almost worthless.

Robots are not here yet to pay tax, but profit-seeking algorithms are.

For me, there is only one way to help the world and us.

(See the previous posts on a World Aid Commission)

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

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

 

 

 

THE BEADY EYE SAY’S: WE WILL NEVER KNOW THE TRUE COST OF BREXIT.

07 Friday Dec 2018

Posted by in Brexit v EU - Negotiations., Brexit.

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE SAY’S: WE WILL NEVER KNOW THE TRUE COST OF BREXIT.

Tags

,

( THREE MINUTE READ)

As Britain’s negotiations to leave the European Union enter their crunch moment, let’s be clear on one thing:

The EU doesn’t need to punish Britain for leaving; the referendum did that just fine.

To have a meaningful Parliamentary vote on a withdrawal agreement Parliament and the taxpayer require an up-to-date estimate of the settlement’s costs, as well as better information on the wider potential costs of withdrawal.

Without this, MPs and the taxpayer won’t have complete information about the potential costs of the government’s deal with the EU.

The UK’s contribution to the EU’s outstanding commitments and liabilities after 2020 is unknown.

Any estimate excludes the costs that may arise from parts of the withdrawal agreement still to be negotiated. But there are other potentially significant ongoing costs likely to arise from post-Brexit restructuring—for example, new trade and customs arrangements, replacement institutions and the costs of participating in EU programmes as a non-member state.

FOR EXAMPLE, UK payments to cover pension and benefit costs could run for decades.

A Parliamentary vote on EU withdrawal will only be truly meaningful if this information is disclosed in a timely fashion.

Is it possible to take part in the economic advantages of the European project without having to bear the associated political costs of relinquishing sovereignty?

THERE IS ONE THING ABOUT BREXIT THAT IS TRUE AND THAT IS THE COST NOT IN FINANCIAL TERMS BUT IN WHAT IT HAS UNLEASHED POLITICALLY BOTH IN ENGLAND AND THE EU ITSELF. WEAKING BOTH.

Any dividend are still too remote even to assess.

The economic impact various degrees depending who you believe.

We don’t know the shape of the Brexit deal, including what arrangements will be put in place to keep trade flowing. And Brexiters complain such exercises tend to use assumptions that favour negative results.

However, you model how the U.K. economy it would have grown had the referendum gone the other way.

Leaving without a deal is now a high possibility and it stands to reason that in the short term it will lead to lower growth which means lost income for the government, meaning it has to borrow more to meet its spending goals.

If the U.K. remains in the customs union and achieves a trade deal with minimal barriers, tariffs or otherwise, the economy will recover lost ground in a shorter time.

On the leaver’s side, it seems that economic toll doesn’t matter. They voted for “control,” for sovereignty over laws and borders above all.

There must be a solution to the conflict that is better for everyone involved than a Brexit, which would burn all the bridges.

Here is my suggestion.

Hold a peoples assembly to decide on what question or questions should be on the ballot paper in a peoples referendum.

or

Call a halt to Article 50 provided it is agreed that the Uk net contributions to the EU’s limited to 0.03% of GDP.  The cost of such a compromise would have to be borne by the other member states provided the Uk takes an active and reformist leadership role in Europe – Good for All.

Article 50 is always open it can be used TO LEAVE whenever if there is no improvement.

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

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

 

 

 

THE BEADY EYE’S OPEN LETTER : TO THE PEOPLE OF ENGLAND: I can’t see a rationale of not staying in the EU beyond furthering the rich while making the lives of the poor more miserable.

07 Friday Dec 2018

Posted by in Beady Eyes: Open Letters., Brexit v EU - Negotiations., Brexit.

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE’S OPEN LETTER : TO THE PEOPLE OF ENGLAND: I can’t see a rationale of not staying in the EU beyond furthering the rich while making the lives of the poor more miserable.

Tags

,

Dear English friends.

Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of english people"

Don’t read this if you’re easily offended. It’s about Brexit the UK but I’m not

even sure what that means any more.

On 23rd June 2016, you were asked a ludicrously banal binary question.

To leave the EU or stay in it? Two boxes, one tick. There was no manifesto. The two scenarios were not fully explained.

You were told nothing about what would happen if you opted to leave. If you were told, I don’t believe people would have voted for it because without EU money huge parts of Britain are unsustainable sovereign or not.

Even with a majority vote on an advisory referendum peddled on lies, this does not represent democracy where 16 – 18-year-olds weren’t allowed to vote on the single biggest issue to affect their future.

And you tell me this was a democratic vote?

But people bought it. Because clowns were saying – like Trump – what people *really* wanted to say but were too bound up by social mores to do so.

As far as I can see Brexit has made it ok to be racist, xenophobic, misogynistic and has given many millions license to say appalling things to complete strangers on Twitter.

But this is making Britain Great Again, isn’t it??

Of course, not all people who voted to Leave are racist. That’s like saying everybody who voted to Remain is passionate, whole-heartedly in favour of every single thing the EU does. Brexit has given racists license to spread their hate.

After two years of table banging about Project Fear and how facts explaining the dire economic, social and legal consequences of leaving the EU were all a hoax, no one in the fifth-wealthiest country in the whole world of sane mind should be compleating that an act of colossal self-harm really is an appropriate reaction.

Why?

Because now if you plough on with Article 50 to its terrible, dystopian conclusion, you won’t be able to live, work, love or study in Europe in quite the same way ever again.

The referendum was won not by UKIP but by populist papers appealing to prejudices and rage. They exploited people living in communities who were suffering under Osborne’s austerity.

And now you are being told BY EXPERTS that these communities – the communities who voted most strongly to leave – will suffer the most after Brexit.

Cop on.

I believe that instead of leaving, you need to negotiate a new Treaty with the EU.

You don’t need a divorce from the EU. You need medication and a helluva lot of counselling. But leaving – like this – because of such lies, with no plan, not enough civil servants to cope with the workload and a dire lack of trained negotiators, will mean you are likely to be fucked for lack of a better word.

Today there is a monumental effort on the part of the press to convince people that triggering Article 50 is the point of no return. It isn’t. And here’s why.

There is a European election in May next year and both France and Germany are running scared of the far right not to mention member state both would benefit greatly as has been offered to withdraw and stay in and fight your quarter for reforms.

Thanks to the Good Law Project, there is a chance that a truly democratic vote *could* succeed. If you really care about democracy and everything that brings, now’s your chance to prove it.

Demand a peoples vote.

Up to now the political architecture of Britain insulates those imposing austerity from the wrath of those on the receiving end. A refashioned British society, making it less like the rest of Western Europe, is akin to setting your house on fire and then revelling in the community spirit as neighbours come running to help extinguish the blaze.

A perverse sense of community.

16 million British voters are being fucked over. Their views – in this amazingly democratic referendum – don’t matter. The views of the 48% have been fucked right off.

This will only be a “done deal” if people don’t put up a fight for something better.

It’s about politics abandoning vulnerable people.”

You want something more than just economics.

I only hope that, as Brexit goes tits up and when the current generation dies out, the young have a chance of salvaging a decent life from this appalling mess your political leaders are creating – a slow bleed, broken monument to another age.

Setting aside the lowlights of English history  — the slave trade, colonial barbarity the global economy is now in the throes of negotiating a wrenching transition to technological economies  — with no hours contracts jobs replacing full-time positions and robots substituting for human labour this is no time to be hight and mighty.

With virtually every public agency struggling to do more with less while attending to additional problems wealthy Britons remain among the world’s most comfortable people, enjoying lavish homes, private medical care, top-notch schools and restaurants run by chefs from Paris and Tokyo.

When one looks from the outside in here is a country with a vast deficit problem, with its debt growing, spending billions on worthless Aircraft Carriers, Trident missiles while many measures of social well-being — are being ignored

The poor, the elderly, the disabled and the jobless are increasingly prone to Kafka-esque tangles with the bureaucracy to keep public support.

It not just that your democracy will be bankrupted, you will see the rats of profit abandoning the sinking ship depressing growth for years to come.

Remember that London bankers concocted a financial crisis, multiplying their wealth through reckless gambling; then London politicians used budget deficits as an excuse to cut spending on the poor while handing tax cuts to corporations.

Perhaps this is the real reason you are now looking down the barrel of a social crisis called Brexit.

Finally:

Will a peoples vote solve the impasse?

Only if the question to decide is set by a Citizens assemble and not by any political party.  

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

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

 

 

 

 

 

 

“

 

 

 

 

 

 

”

 

 

 

THE BEADY EYE SAY’S : IF WE ARE TO AVOID A MELT DOWN NOT JUST BY CLIMATE CHANGE BUT BY SOCIAL MEDIA. WE ALL KNOW THAT WE NEED TO REINVENT SOCIETY REAL QUICK,

06 Thursday Dec 2018

Posted by in 2018: The Year of Disconnection., Algorithms., Capitalism, Climate Change., Environment, Fourth Industrial Revolution., Fresh Water., Humanity., Modern Day Democracy., Our Common Values., Politics., Populism., Poverty, Social Media, Sustaniability, Technology, The essence of our humanity., The Obvious., The world to day., Trade Agreements., Unanswered Questions., War, What Needs to change in the World, Where's the Global Outrage., World Politics

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE SAY’S : IF WE ARE TO AVOID A MELT DOWN NOT JUST BY CLIMATE CHANGE BUT BY SOCIAL MEDIA. WE ALL KNOW THAT WE NEED TO REINVENT SOCIETY REAL QUICK,

Tags

, , , , , , ,

(Twelve -minute read)

Most mainstream textbooks have the word “economics” in their title as if no differentiating adjective exists.

THE NASTY REALITY IS:

AS THE WORLD POPULATION GROWS IT WILL BE TO THE DETHRONEMENT OF THE PLANT AND TO THE SUSTAINABILITY OF ANY ECONOMIC SYSTEM WHETHER IT IS CAPITALIST OR OTHERWISE AS CAPITALISM HAS ALWAYS HAD A NEED FOR POVERTY TO KEEP COST DOWN.

However, through social media, the poor are no longer invisible and the consequences of this are now beginning to becoming evident.

It is a grim truism of modern life that everything from civil rights violations and health crises to environmental degradation and educational barriers are disproportionately suffered by the people least financially and socially equipped to deal with them.

Capitalism today still represented itself as freeing serfs, slaves, etc,  with freedom becoming capitalism’s self-celebration, which it largely remains today.

Yet the reality of capitalism is different from its celebratory self-image.

IT IS NOW a form of algorithmic trading in which funds trade on the small fluctuations in asset prices without ever owning the assets, with us the powerhouse in the making of fortunes that put colossal resources in the hands of a relative few, while at the same time, see others without even the means to sustain themselves.

Combined the above with climate change and poverty and THE FORTH INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION (AS IT HAS BEEN CHRISTENED BY THE ADVANCES IN TECHNOLOGICAL) IS CREATING A CAPITALIST WORLD THAT IS REMOVING IT FROM VIEW.

DRIVEN BY CONSUMPTION PRODUCING ALGORITHMS JUST FOR PROFIT FOR THE ONE PERCENTERS, WHILE OUR GOVERNMENTS ACT LIKE THERE IS NO ALTERNATIVE TO GROWTH AT ALL COSTS.Poverty has always accompanied capitalism (as Thomas Piketty's work documents yet again).

Wherever you look you will see that enormous gap between rich and poor growing and this gap between rich and poor is now threatening to destroy us and the world we all live in.

To those who think capitalism and inequality need each other.

Capitalism requires inequality of wealth, runs this right-of-centre argument, to stimulate risk-taking and effort; governments trying to stem it with taxes on wealth, capital, inheritance and property kill the goose that lays the golden egg.

It took war and depression to arrest the inequality dynamic, along with the need to introduce high taxes on high incomes, especially unearned incomes, to sustain social peace.

Now the ineluctable process of blind capital multiplying faster in fewer hands is underway again and on a global scale with self-serving greed in the form of profit-seeking algorithms.

Anyone with the capacity to own in an era when the returns exceed those of wages and output will quickly become disproportionately and progressively richer- APPLE, MICROSOFT, E BAY, AMAZON- and when we buy their products online are in fact vote for them and their system.

The mass of employees are not free inside capitalist enterprises to participate in the decisions that affect their lives (e.g., what the enterprise will produce, what technology it will use, where production will occur, and what will be done with the profit workers’ efforts help to produce). In their exclusion from such decisions, modern capitalism’s employees resemble slaves and serfs.

So the speeding train of capitalism is “back on track,” resuming its rush toward stone walls of excess debt, stagnant mass incomes, capital relocating overseas, etc.

YOU CAN WATCH THIS PROCESS IN REAL TIME WITH  BREXIT, OR AMERICA FIRST.

In Britain, it may be true that the top 1% pays a third of all income tax, but income tax constitutes only 25% of all tax revenue: 45% comes from VAT, excise duties and national insurance paid by the mass of the population.

As a result, the burden of paying for public goods such as education, health and housing is increasingly shouldered by average taxpayers, who don’t have the wherewithal to sustain them. Wealth inequality thus becomes a recipe for slowing, innovation-averse, rentier economies, tougher working conditions and degraded public services.

All in all, you could say that no real changes have been made in global capitalism OTHER THAN IT IS NOW RUN BY ANALYSING ALGORITHMS THAT RECOMMEND WHERE, WHEN AND HOW WITH TO SATISFY SHORT TERM PLEASURE.

UNFORTUNILTY it is simply depriving us and our children of fundamental rights of a decent & caring society, fearless & dignified living, by a deprivation of the material conditions for the reproduction of society, and a failure to develop the full capabilities of human beings.

OF COURSE, our collective sense of justice is outraged as we are witnessing in the recent Paris Riots, the Climate Change Conference in Poland sponsored by coal trying to set rules to govern pledges that will be broken as soon as the ink dries and the ongoing Brexit charade which has nothing to do with peoples wellbeing.

Where does all of this leave us other than with an ominous sense of impending implosion reverberates throughout the world with national politics and culture waning no one seems to know or care.

Our TV screens with Christmas coming we are bombarded with the worst images of Capitalism – advertisers promoting materialism, alongside appeals to donate money to save everything from children in Yemen too abandoned animals.

While it is heartbreaking the worst part is that our governments are complicit.

Despite the famine, despite the bombing of a busload of school kids in Yemen countries like the US, UK, France, and Canada are still supplying the Saudis with hundreds of billions of dollars in tanks and missiles.

However, it has little effect as we look on from a distance sitting at home before our own little stages our TV’s, our I Pads, our Smartphones, our courtyards of miracles where an image sweeps across the previous one without trace.

Everything is on a reduced scale, even emotions.

That’s the trouble with shadow political power structures. Their true shape and purpose stay hidden while they capture democracy.

From all this, we shall draw some conclusions, in the absence of any convincing certainties one has to pretend that we shall solve Climate Change  (that is going to drive more inequality and eventually the extinction of our biodiversity, followed by us due to the lack of fresh water or clean air.) and currents world conflicts that are only the tip of the coming wars over diminishing natural resources.

What needs to happen?

Let’s put the plant first before space exploration, before material productivity consumption, before cultural identity, before consumerism, before America first, before Brexit isolation, before trade deals, before nuclear power, before religious beliefs, before skin colour, before short-term pleasure, before us.

Let’s go for a diverse economic system where toxic wealth inequalities are less indulged rather than a monopolised marketplace.

Let’s enshrine Water and Fresh air into all our actions.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of social media icons"

Any of the above can now only be achieved by using the power of Social media which is being used in ways that shape politics, business, world culture, education, careers, innovation, and more.

THE PROBLEM WITH SOCIAL MEDIA THAT IS HAVING A REAL IMPACT ON SOCIETY IS THAT IT IS LEADERLESS.

On one hand, it generates insights, stimulates demand, and create targeted product offerings but when people are presented with the option of ‘liking’ a social cause, they use this to opt out of actually committing time and money.

Social sharing has encouraged people to use computers and mobile phones to express their concerns on social issues without actually having to engage actively with campaigns in real life.

On the other hand, it without social media, social, ethical, environmental and political ills would have minimal visibility.

Increased visibility of issues has shifted the balance of power from the hands of a few to the masses.

Capitalism understands the above more than our world organisation or governments.

Social networks feed off interactions among people, they become more powerful as they grow. Each person with marginal views can see that he’s not alone. And when these people find one another via social media, they can do things — create memes, publications and entire online worlds that bolster their worldview, and then break into the mainstream.

Social networks are helping to fundamentally rewire human society.” Because social media allows people to communicate with one another more freely, they are helping to create surprisingly influential social organizations among once-marginalized groups – Popularism- Short-term politics with no long-term aspirations promoting social ills.

Across the globe, mobile devices dominate in terms of total minutes spent online. This puts the means to connect anywhere, at any time on any device in everyone’s hands.

Their support is limited to pressing the ‘Like’ button or sharing content.

Is it not time that we demand that our internet platforms introduce a dislike button.

So far humans have had a monopoly on decision making but we are sleepwalking with Data Analyzing algorithms eroding our societies that have the sole purpose of predicting our next purchase or move.

Artificial intelligence in its current form is mostly harmless but that’s not going to last.

Fueled by powers of machine learning with no end in sight it is encroaching into to our homes without human examples or guidance, without any knowledge of the domain beyond basic rules of promoting profit.

WHAT IF ANYTHING CAN BE DONE?

We need to ensure that Ai Systems are provable safe and beneficial, and unbias regardless of how intelligent they become.

Imagine the havoc and harm they will inflict with greater power, scope and social reach.

When developers are at a loss to explain the behaviour of their creations we will then need Ai to explain to humans why they reached certain decisions, or what their conclusions actually mean.

At the moment we are seeing poorly thought out systems released into the world without any real ethical or safety standards. Governments and our out of date international world organisation have a role to play, by introducing and enforcing standards and regulations.

Changing present capitalist corporate culture won’t be easy, but it needs to start at the top.

Just look at biotechnology some research findings are too dangerous to share with the public.

It is time we all grew up and accept some responsibility for Artifical Intelligence impact on the world.

Why?

Because AI is poised to be one of the most daunting challenges our species have ever faced,  decoupling us from human speed and timelines, operating beyond human levels of control and comprehension.

AT THE MOMENT IT IS RATHER THAN TURNING THE ATHOMISPHRIC DOWN IT IS CONTRIBUTING (IN MOST OF ITS FORM)  TO TURN IT UP.

On a deeper level, the idea of self-referential feedback may be crucial not only in the evolution of life but for its origin as well.

It may even be that the algorithmic nature of cellular automata could be the key to removing a major barrier to explaining life’s origin — defining what life is, to begin with.

It’s pretty hard to explain the origin of something if you don’t know what it is.

When the environment changes, the rules for surviving may change as well. Life’s activity generates feedback that influences the rules of life.

You can’t blame scientists for conceiving of the universe in terms familiar from their everyday life. That’s just the way that thinking works, whether it’s about the laws of nature or anything else. And you have to admit that nowadays computers have invaded everyday life so thoroughly that it’s only natural for scientists to think about nature in a computational way.

If the world is a computer, life is an algorithm, so all algorithms and how they

work, and for what reasons, should be made public to ensure both social and

  “environmental justice.” Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of computer algorithms"

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

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

THE BEADY EYE SAY’S. An empty seat representing empty voices at the Polish climate conference is just that.

03 Monday Dec 2018

Posted by in Climate Change.

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE SAY’S. An empty seat representing empty voices at the Polish climate conference is just that.

Tags

, , ,

#TakeYourSeat. A five-minute read.

Sir David Attenborough is the voice of a new “People’s Seat” at the climate change Conference presently taking place in Poland where Governments are meeting to discuss implementing the Paris Agreement on climate change.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "PICTURES OF david attenborough"

He is part of an initiative launched by the UN to bring the voice of people from around the world to the International Conference.

Negotiators at the talks will hear details of a global review on climate change-tackling efforts, and the pressure is on to work towards increasing commitments from countries by 2020.

The Paris Agreement on Climate Change has four main goals with regards to reducing emissions:

1)  A long-term goal of keeping the increase in global average temperature to well below 2°C above pre-industrial levels.

2) To aim to limit the increase to 1.5°C, since this would significantly reduce risks and the impacts of climate change.

3) Governments agreed on the need for global emissions to peak as soon as possible, recognising that this will take longer for developing countries.

4) To undertake rapid reductions thereafter in accordance with the best available science.

Against this background, Sir David Attenborough has just issued a stark warning that the collapse of civilisations and extinction of much of the natural world is on the verge.

Which on we all agreed, except for Mr Dump

Sir David articulated the following. “If we don’t take action, the collapse of our civilisations and the extinction of much of the natural world is on the horizon.”Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of the polish climate change conference 2018"

His words are perhaps the most important empty utterances of this century.

Why empty?

They called for ambitious decisions which are sufficiently detailed and comprehensive to enable the effective operation of the Paris Agreement, secured three years ago in the French capital to curb global warming.

Because without unlimited financial funding they are just that ambitions, blowing in the wind.

The World Bank recently announced it is doubling investments in climate action with 200 billion US dollars (£157 billion) for 2021-2025, including 50 billion US dollars (£39 billion) towards helping countries adapt to the impacts of global warming.

This is just pissing in the wind.

WHAT IS NEEDED IS TRILLIONS. TO TACKLE THE SOURCES OF THE PROBLEMS THAT CAN BE WRAPPED UP IN ONE WORD – INEQUALITY WHERE SOME OF THE WORLD IS SITTING IN EMPTY SEATS.

THERE IS ONLY ONE SOLUTION:

THAT IS AN WORLD AID COMMISSION OF 0.05% TO BE APPLIED WORLDWIDE ON ALL ACTIVITIES THAT ARE PRODUCING PROFIT FOR PROFIT SAKE. ( See previous posts)

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

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

 

THE BEADY EYE ASK’S: IS THERE ANY SOLUTION TO THE MESS WE SEE THE WORLD IN.

02 Sunday Dec 2018

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE ASK’S: IS THERE ANY SOLUTION TO THE MESS WE SEE THE WORLD IN.

 

(Two-minute read)

Can there ever be a single solution that can apply to all people on the globe that everyone can be convinced of, and that is so simple that everyone can understand?

WE WATCH OUR WORLD LEADERS AT G8, G7, G whatever, representing capitalism, unable to agree on anything other than I am all right jack.

We see our world organisation and countries battling for power or funds, while all the time our Air and Fresh Water continues to be polluted.

Apart from a child or the yet to be born, we all understand that our lives rely on clean air and fresh water.

What we need is for the whole world ( no matter what religion what culture, whether rich or poor) to Enshrine sustainability.

We are unable to do so because of greed and now profit-seeking algorithms so it seems that nature is going to teach us a lesson- take and don’t give back is our pending ruination.

THIS LESSON IS ARRIVING AS SPEND MILLIONS ON EVERYTHING THAT AVOIDS US HAVING TO OPEN OUR EYES AND REALIZING THAT IT IS ONLY US NOT TECHNOLOGY THAT CAN DETERMINE WHAT THE OUTCOME IS TO BE.

The paradox is this is not a result of the failure globalization but its failure to protect and provide, creating unequal societies that live for the most part in big cities.

We must end the politics of the elite and reestablish the politics of the weak. No system can remain if it does not integrate the majority of its poorest citizens.

The recent Gilets Jaunes protest in Paris must spread worldwide if the inequalities inflicted for the sake of growth at all cost is to be stopped.

#What if we all were to wear this symbol worldwide.

Yellow with a sting.

To be seen and not heard is at you pearl. Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of yellow jackets"

 

 

 

Perhaps there is someone with money and a conscious that might create a badge that could be made available online for free.

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

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

 

 

 

 

THE BEADY EYE SAY’S. NO HUMAN IS EVER GOING TO LEAVE THIS PLANET SOON. WITH THE PLANET CRYING FOR SOME TLC WOULD IT NOT MAKE SOME COMMON SENSE TO PUT FUTURE SPACE EXPLORATION ON HOLD TILL WE CAN TRUST AI.

01 Saturday Dec 2018

Posted by in Space Exploration.

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE SAY’S. NO HUMAN IS EVER GOING TO LEAVE THIS PLANET SOON. WITH THE PLANET CRYING FOR SOME TLC WOULD IT NOT MAKE SOME COMMON SENSE TO PUT FUTURE SPACE EXPLORATION ON HOLD TILL WE CAN TRUST AI.

Tags

, , ,

( FIVE MINUTE READ.)

Exploration of space is an expression of one of our finest aspects — curiosity.

To truly satisfy that curiosity we need to be participants, but humans are heavy, fragile, dirty, vulnerable, picky about their environment, and have a low tolerance for the space environment. (i.e., high energy radiation, extreme heat and cold, etc.)

The fragility of humans, our aversion for risking human life, and the all-too-human need for consumables (food, water and oxygen) require vast amounts of money to pay for the extra engineering and multiple redundant systems we demand to reduce risk to astronauts, as well as for the vastly larger support crews needed to babysit every aspect of daily life during a manned space mission.

In any exploration, reconnaissance dominates the earliest phases and realistically there is no choice between human and robotic exploration when it comes to travelling to any planet.

Robotic exploration is the only realistic game in town.

The International Space Station is no longer a platform for cutting-edge space science.

Unmanned probes can explore Mars and other planets more cheaply and effectively than manned missions can. Robotic space programs are a far more cost-effective means of advancing our scientific knowledge of the universe. And a moon colony would be a silly destiny.

Some scientists believe that artificial-intelligence software may enhance the capabilities of unmanned probes, but so far those capabilities fall far short of what is required for even the most rudimentary forms of field study.

Building a manned base on the moon makes even less sense.

Unmanned spacecraft can study the moon quite efficiently, as the Lunar Prospector probe has shown. It is not our destiny to build a moon colony any more than it is to walk on our hands.

Considering the current limited range of human exploration the countdown to sending humans to Mars is light years away never mind the rest of the solar system.

In 15 years’ time, will this be a photograph rather than an artist’s impression?

But robots aren’t heroes. No one throws a ticker-tape parade for a telescope.

A program of purely robotic exploration is inadequate in addressing the important scientific issues that make the planets worthy of detailed study.

But is the physical presence of people really required?

Telepresence—the remote projection of human abilities into a machine—may permit field study on other planets without the danger and logistical problems associated with human spaceflight.

THIS WILL NOT BE POSSIBLE UNTIL WE DEVELOPE FULLY ACCOUNTABLE ARTIFICAL INTELLIGENCE THAT IS TRUTHFUL AND TRUSTWORTHY.

HUMAN SPACELIGHT is extremely expensive. A single flight of the space shuttle costs about $450 million. Even the most optimistic experts estimate that sending astronauts to the Red Planet would cost tens of billions of dollars. Other estimates run as high as $1 trillion.

NASA LIKE HOLLOWOOD has learned a valuable lesson about marketing in the 21st century: to promote its programs, it must provide entertaining visuals and stories with compelling human characters.

Vision is the most important sense used in a field study, and no real-time imaging system developed to date can match human vision, the technology is not yet available.

Robots will never be replacements for people. Robotic spacecraft still need human direction, of course, if explorers Lewis and Clark were alive today, they would be sitting behind a computer screen.

All exploration whether Robotic or otherwise will be worthless if we have an Earth that is void of people.

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

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

 

 

 

THE BEADY EYE SAY’S: ITS TIME TO STOP THE MEDIA HIDING GLOBAL WARMING IN PLAIN SIGHT.

29 Thursday Nov 2018

Posted by in Climate Change.

≈ 5 Comments

Tags

, , , , , , , , , ,

(Seven-minute read)

Here we all are bombarded by false news, algorithms for profit, advertisements to consume more and more, living in economies that must grow in order to feed the stock exchange that is plundered by algorithms for profit.

And we ask why is it that the world cannot take climate change seriously.

BECAUSE IT IS TURNED INTO A COMMODITY – CARDON CREDITS.

Other than the worthless Paris Climate pledges that are not worth the paper they are written on the world is still in denial with these pledges that will not mobilize nations nor people or make a dent in the mood of complacency.

When we conceal the linkage between global warming and natural disasters, golden opportunities are lost.

Why the disconnect?

Although there are of course many possible reasons, certainly one of them is the shortage of attention given to climate change by the mainstream media.

Many natural disasters such as the wildfires and hurricanes are covered extensively by the national news media but with little or no mention of global warming. Thus, many viewers fail to connect the dots.

In national mainstream news reports about natural disasters, global warming is systematically backgrounded, most often not even mentioned at all.

Headline stories capture the attention of countless citizens and could have educational value re climate change.

The world’s leading climate scientists have warned there is only a dozen years for global warming to be kept to a maximum of 1.5C, beyond which even half a degree will significantly worsen the risks of drought, floods, extreme heat and poverty for hundreds of millions of people.

Perhaps if every television channel worldwide were obliged under law to allocate one weather forecast a month sole to the effects of climate change it might create some political will worldwide.

There is no point in one country or one industry reducing carbon emissions to comply with the Paris agreement pledge to keep temperatures between 1.5C and 2C.

There is a growing recognition that 2C is dangerous with 1.5C now becoming just a political concession.

Increasingly visible damage caused by climate change will shift opinion but too late to do anything about it.

The likely rise in climate-driven refugees or the danger of tipping points that could push the world on to an irreversible path of extreme warming is becoming more and more evident year by year.

Climate change is already happening.

Insects, which are vital for pollination of crops, and plants are almost twice as likely to lose half their habitat at 2C compared with 1.5C. Corals would be 99% lost at the higher of the two temperatures, but more than 10% have a chance of surviving if the lower target is reached.

Although unexpectedly good progress has been made in the adoption of renewable energy, deforestation for agriculture was turning a natural carbon sink into a source of emissions.

Carbon capture and storage projects, which are essential for reducing emissions in the concrete and waste disposal industries, have also ground to a halt.

Oceans are already suffering from elevated acidity and lower levels of oxygen as a result of climate change.

Sea ice-free summers in the Arctic is attracting oil exploration. Britain is pushing ahead with gas fracking, Norway with oil exploration in the Arctic, and the German government wants to tear down Hambach forest to dig for coal.

Reforestation is essential to all of them as are shifts to electric transport systems and greater adoption of carbon capture technology.

However, relying on the untried technology of solar radiation modification and other forms of geoengineering could have negative consequences.

The short of it?

Carbon pollution and climate change mean both more floods and droughts – making it harder and harder for farmers to grow good quality, nutritious food.

The short of it?

There are no jobs on a dead planet.

The short of it?

The time to start solving this problem is now.

For years, fossil fuel companies and utilities have been dumping CO2 into our atmosphere, changing our climate while we pay the cost.

The ones causing the climate crisis should be the ones paying for it. This would require carbon prices that are three to four times higher than for a 2C target. But the costs of doing nothing would be far higher.

We can find billions and billions to pay our sportsmen and woman, our politicians, our lotto winners, our arms and space exploration, the list is endless.

No matter how we frame or present the arguments if we want a world worthwhile living on there is only one solution we must tap into greed, (See previous posts on a World Aid Commission)

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

https://youtu.be/za4r5uWj4AY

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨