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

bobdillon33blog

~ Free Thinker.

bobdillon33blog

Tag Archives: The Future of Mankind

THE BEADY EYE SAY’S; HERE ARE THE BIG QUESTIONS THAT ARE YET TO COME WHEN IT COMES TO TECHNOLOGY.

19 Wednesday Feb 2020

Posted by bobdillon33@gmail.com in #whatif.com, 2020: The year we need to change., Algorithms., Artificial Intelligence., Big Data., Digital age., DIGITAL DICTATORSHIP., Digital Friendship., Fourth Industrial Revolution., Google, Google it., Google Knowledge., Human values., Humanity., Life., Modern day life., Our Common Values., Reality., Sustaniability, Technology, Technology v Humanity, The common good., The Future, The Obvious., The state of the World., The world to day., Unanswered Questions., War, WHAT IS TRUTH, What Needs to change in the World, Where's the Global Outrage., World Leaders

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE SAY’S; HERE ARE THE BIG QUESTIONS THAT ARE YET TO COME WHEN IT COMES TO TECHNOLOGY.

Tags

Algorithms trade., Algorithms., Artificial Intelligence., Big Data, Capitalism and Greed, Distribution of wealth, Inequility, Technology, The Future of Mankind, Visions of the future.

 

Thirty-minute read.

Who owns what?  What’s our purpose in life?  What are the values that we believe in? How do we think and make decisions?  What do we mean by work?  Can our work ever have true meaning unless it is to serve others?

What will help us all think deeply about the questions we need to ask and answer?

Climate change or technology.

However, for many of us, the answers to these questions differ in our working lives, compared with our personal lives, with family, friends and neighbours.

Were a ruling elite like Google to impose a command-and-control, fear-driven culture in which power is abused and the outcomes are social and economic misery for the vast majority?

Our reaction, if we are to go by what is now observable, will be So what? Now what?

MAKING sure companies compete fairly is a tricky business. The firms being regulated know far more about their business than those doing the regulating;

“Artificial intelligence is the future, not only for Russia but for all of humankind.” Says Putin. “Whatever country comes to dominate this technology will be the “ruler of the world.”

His rhetoric is entirely appropriate. Automation and digitalization have already had a radical effect on international systems and structures.

Technology can easily be referred to as the scientific knowledge to the practical problems we are experiencing in the world today.

On the other hand, its core strategy is to gobble up market share with profit-seeking algorithms.

Our environments are all so full of technology to the point that most of the time we take it for granted.

So are we all becoming personified idiots?

Technology has a great impact on all the fundamental aspects of all our cultures including laws and how they are enforced, language, art, health care, mobility, education and religion.

The obvious problem with all of this is that countries will not own or be in control of the technologies.negative effects of technology

While we all sit back and accept the benefits technology it also brings manipulation on a  worldwide scale with our future in the hands of only a handful of corporations and the vast amount of people that are okay with that.

It’s hard to argue against innovation. It’s hard to argue against greater choice, more convenience and lower prices.

One way or the other it is also hard to underestimate the fundamentally different rules that Google /Amazon/ Facebook/ Apple/ Baidu play by.

Hiding behind forked rhetoric that the data they collect does no harm as it is anonymous.

You do not need to know who you are. It is enough to know what you consume, your habits, your tastes, and where you are, through the IP address, the GPS of the mobile, or your Google account. Your name, or your phone number, is not important to sell you things.

Blurring the borders of privacy. Replacing real-life communication.

And on top of it, violent games and videos killing empathy and bring destruction into an individual’s life. Plagiarism and cheating are increase while analysis and critical thinking decline, ending up in social isolation.

(We now have a new perverse sexual harassment of Cyber flashing which is not against any law. Why? Because our laws cannot keep up with the speed of change)

Commercial technology like Smartphones, I pads, Home Alexa/Echo and there like is about creating another consumer touchpoint for their robust ecosystem of e-commerce, services, and media taking advantage of less sophisticated consumers and trick them into consuming items for short-term satisfaction and long-term pain.

Originally created to serve faithfully to humanity, digital devices are revealing their harmful impact on our lives.

We should all be careful what we wish for.

There’s an argument made by big corporations for each country to charge corporations the lowest possible tax rate, to loosen environmental regulations down to zero, and to eliminate employee protections. All so that a country’s commodity producers can be the cheapest ones.

The voice market war has only just begun.

The contenders:

Amazon-Echo v Google-Alexa.amazon-echo-google-home

Once they figure out how to improve their recommendations and push more people to make regular household purchases via voice it will lead to an explosion in voice-based shopping.

Google already has one of the most valuable brands in the world.

Google maps have virtually no meaningful rival.  Gmail…Google basically controls our handheld existence.

Google controls your life, literally, even if it costs you to believe it.

Google trackers have been found on 75% of the top million websites.

When you search on Google, they keep your search history forever.

Google is a company that offers almost all its products for free because the money is earned by selling the data it collects with those products, to advertisers and companies.

Last year Google made over $161 billion in total revenues.

As it is the premier search engine in the U.S., Europe, and many developing countries Google has the tools to control much of the world.

That’s just Google then you have Amazon.

With around 225 million customers around the world, Amazon wants to deliver everything you want to your doorstep, including Foods anywhere in the world. ( 300 items a second) These days half of all product searches start on Amazon.

Our lust for cheap, discounted goods delivered to our doors promptly and efficiently has a price.

Amazon has done a lot of good for consumers by expanding choice, making shopping far more convenient and by delivering extraordinary product value.

Yet, we can’t–and shouldn’t–ignore the profound effect that Amazon is having on just about every corner of the retail world they set their sights on.

Amazon is selling its facial recognition technology, known as Rekognition, to law enforcement agencies.

First and foremost, Amazon isn’t required by its investors to make any real money.

For us the Great unwashed there’s always the opportunity to cut a corner, sacrifice lifestyle quality and suck it up as they race to grab a little more market share.

With their algorithms, they tell you what restaurants you have to eat in, choose your music, label your photos associating them with each family member or friend that appears in them, pay for your purchases, suggest the movies you should see, and the apps that may interest you.

When in fact the searches we do, what websites we visit, what products we look at, where are we, your medical history, your political beliefs, your associations with others your employment prospects, everything from the womb to the grave is collected and analyzed

Before I hear you calling me a hypocrite I also have used Amazon.

If this scenario prevails, would this be really the way information is supposed to be organized?

In short, does the fact that an algorithm is able to provide more relevant information than a human justify this scenario?

These big brands platforms are more powerful than governments. They’re wealthier. If they were countries, they would be pretty large economies. They’re multinational and the global financial situation allows them to ship money all over the world.

Can we do anything to make a difference?

We need to be supporting the development of an efficient circular economy.

Why?

Because sustainability is an unstoppable force.

Let’s not race to the bottom.

Country’s population size will become less important for national power as small countries that develop a significant edge in AI technology will move far above their weight.

Ultimately, however, winning and losing will not be determined by which country gains the most growth through AI. It will be determined by how the entire global community chooses to leverage AI — as a tool of war or as a tool of progress.

They can eliminate rules protecting clean water, air or consumer safety, but they will always find a way to be cheaper or more brutal than you.

We all assume that Google, Facebook, Amazon, Apple, are spying our activity and up to now advertiser is not interested in your name when they are it will be too late and the winner will be Inequality.

So what does all this mean and what are we all going to do about it when we’ve stopped talking about it?

Once you start to connect all the invisible dots together the impact on society will, in the end, be down to the people that use the technology they have to be responsible for it and if they use it irresponsibly they have to be held accountable.

A Footnote:

For me, there is little point in Jeff Bezos setting up an Earth fund when Amazon is one of the biggest promoters of pollution. Pretending to be a do-gooder.

The brown box doesn’t begin to address the larger issue: Each year in the United States alone thrown paper in the trash that represents approximately 640 million trees or roughly 915,000 acres of forest land.

Amazon ships an average of 608 million packages each year, which equates to (an estimated) 1,600,000 packages a day.

Then when we talk about energy consumption, we’re talking about the sources of energy that generate our power: oil, coal, natural gas and alternatives like solar, wind, hydropower and biofuels.

How much electricity they use and the bill is, god only knows, so its no wonder that they have contracts with oil and gas companies.

Now consider that people conduct over 1,6 billion searches per day, and you get a massive energy footprint of roughly 12.5 million watts.

Is e-commerce reducing or increasing our carbon footprint?

Google’s worldwide operations, collectively worldwide use about 2.26 million megawatt-hours per year to power its global data centre operations, which is equivalent to the power necessary to sustain 200,000 homes.

In 2018 Google generated 39.12 billion dollars earnings out of which it paid 243 Million a day in electricity.

This is only an educated guess.

The link between global warming and energy demands is obvious. Surely both of these players should be investing in Green energy.

There’s a deafening silence from pundits and elites and columnists and politicians on our joint self-destruction.

They are simply going on pretending it isn’t happening.

We don’t, as societies or cultures, value learning or knowledge or magnanimity or great and noble things, anymore.

The average person has become a tiny microcosm of the aspirations and norms of elites. We’re the only people on earth who thwart our own social progress, over and over again — and cheer about it.

We are caught in a death spiral now. A vicious cycle from which there is probably no escape. The average person is too poor to fund the very things — the only things — which can offer him a better life:

The result is that a whole society grows poorer and poorer.

Unable to invest in themselves or one another, people’s only real way out is to fight each other for self-preservation, by taking away their neighbour’s rights, privileges, and opportunities — instead of being able to give any new ones to anyone.

Though it’s too late to escape for them, let us hope our governments regulate their algorithms for profit sake.

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

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this:

  • Share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window) WhatsApp
  • More
  • Share on Mastodon (Opens in new window) Mastodon

THE BEADY EYE SAY’S: WE CAN NO LONGER BE CERTAIN ABOUT ANYTHING.

06 Thursday Feb 2020

Posted by bobdillon33@gmail.com in 2020: The year we need to change., Algorithms., Artificial Intelligence., Digital age., Fourth Industrial Revolution., Human values., Life., Technology, The essence of our humanity., The Obvious., The world to day., Unanswered Questions., WHAT IS TRUTH, What Needs to change in the World, Where's the Global Outrage.

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE SAY’S: WE CAN NO LONGER BE CERTAIN ABOUT ANYTHING.

Tags

Algorithms trade., Algorithms., Artificial Intelligence., Big Data, Technology, The Future of Mankind

 

 Twenty four-minute read.   

We have no idea how the world will look in twenty years never mind fifty when most of this generation will be in their seventies but it is now becoming clear beyond any doubt that AI and its algorithms are drastically changing the world we live in both for the good and bad.

There is one thing for certain artificial intelligence will have and is having a more profound effect than electricity or fire. 

It will not just hack our lives our brains, it will hack or very existence.

It might well warn us about climate change, the coronavirus but it will as it is manipulate our needs and wants and beliefs. It will effectively be controlling people for both commercial and political purposes. 

Given the force of this technology to have any control left we need meaningful regulations, if not we might as well just surrender to the algorithm, which is becoming so complex that no one will understand them.

The reality is that most of us are giving rivers of free information to Big data to an extent that we will soon be unable to think for ourselves.

If we don’t get a grip by the time you reach the seventies your futures and the future of the next generations will be decided at random by nonelected platforms.  

If this is so, the decision-making process for us all become a thing of the past.

The outlook for Ai is both grim and exciting. 

Already we see data collected affecting elections, with our ability to know what is fake and what is true at the mercy of Social Media run by algorithms.  

We all know their faces: Google, Microsoft, Amazon, Facebook, Apple, Baidu in China, Twitter, Alibaba, to name a few who are already transforming the basic structure of life.

Taken together they form a global oligopoly.

These unregulated platforms are competing for dominance all with a conflict of interests. Hence their algorithms.

The chances of self introducing regulations that will affect or stop their development is pie in the sky. 

Its time we stopped thinking about AI in kind of scientific terms.

Why?

Because algorithms are making critical decisions about our lives and the tech-driven approach to governance is growing. Because any particular scenario will be far from what we think is true today and we are running out of time to do anything about it.

If we are to call a spade a spade there is no or little understanding as to how to regulate these emerging technologies.  Even if there were governments and world institutions that could do so they are largely unequipped to create and enforce any meaningful regulation for the public benefit.

 The problem is how does one regulate an Algorithm that learns. 

You might happy ceding all authority to algorithms and their owners if so you don’t have to do anything they will take care of everything.

If not algorithms are watching you right now to ensure that you do not read this post and if you do read this post they will use one of the most powerful tools in their arsenal of big data – split and divide – False News and repetition thereof for example. 

It won’t happen overnight since development cycles often take years but our collective past will become a less reliable guide and we will have to adapt to the unknown. 

Unfortunately teaching the unknown without mental balance is a disaster in waiting. 

It might be easy now to laugh at this but unless we make our voices heard instead of like clicks it will not be climate change that changes us but race bias that is already programmed into Tec world.

We’re starting to see money examples where these algorithms are prone to the kinds of biases and limitations that we see in human decision making and increasingly we are moving towards algorithms that are learning more and more from data.

 I say, learning from this data almost institutionalizes the biases.

Why?

Because they are trying to personalize the media they curate for us. They’re trying to find for us more and more of the kinds of content that we already consume.  

So what if anything can be done?

Even if we do eventually introduce regulations they will have little effect unless we find a way of sharing the benefits of AI.

The problem is that our institutions, our education models are not able to keep up with the developments in Artificial Intelligence. We are becoming more and more detached from and in decision making, contributing, and rewards.

So our governments are leaving it to the market, to the big Tec companies themselves.

If you are expecting some kind of warning when AI finally get smarter than us then think again.

I say our algorithms are hanging out with the wrong data, profit for profit sake. 

In reality, our electronic overlords are just getting started with the smartphone, the I.Pads, Alex etc taking control.  We have to think about other measures, like is there a social contribution, and what is the impact of this algorithm on society?

This requires transparency.

But how do you create transparency in a world that is getting so complex?

Here is my solution.

Pharmaceuticals are considered as the most highly regulated industries worldwide and every country has its own regulatory authority when it comes to the drug development process.

(World Health Organization (WHO), Pan American Health Organization (PAHO), World Trade Organization (WTO), International Conference on Harmonization (ICH), World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) are some of the international regulatory agencies and organizations which play essential role in all aspects of pharmaceutical regulations related to drug product registration, manufacturing, distribution, price control, marketing, research and development, and intellectual property protection.)

Why not put in place a new World Governing Body to test and control Al algorithms. To act as a guardian of our Basic Human Values.

If this is not done it will remain impossible to truly cooperate with an AI or a corporation until such entities have values in the same sense that we do.

So:

All Companies already using algorithms should be legally required to submit the software programs running their algorithms for audit, by an independent team to ensure that our human values are complied with.

This audit could be done by a United Nation’s programme that is agreed to world wide.

The audit process (Because algorithms are constantly evolving as they gather more data.) has to be somewhat continuous like every ten years similar to Control technique. We might also need an algorithm to monitor the auditing algorithm to ensure it is not contaminated while it goes through its refresh-cycle of the Algorithm it is auditing. 

Then they must be made transparent with a certification of acceptable behaviour.   

Transparency for end users actually is very basic.

It’s not like an end-user wants to know the inner details of every algorithm we use.

But we would actually benefit knowing what’s going on at the high level.

For example, what kinds of data are being used by the algorithms to make decisions?

Recommend transparency measures.

Keeping in mind that these algorithms are being deployed and used by humans, and for humans, anyone impacted by decisions made by algorithms should have the right to a description of the data used to train them, and details as to how that data was collected.

The public, have little understanding or access to information about how governments are using data, much of it collected quietly, to feed the algorithms that make decisions about everyday life. And, in an uncomfortable twist, the government agencies themselves often do not fully understand how algorithms influence their decisions.

Having more and more data alone will not solve the problems, gender bias, race bias.

Perhaps the notion of control may only be an illusion.

It won’t be long before they are latching on to life forms.  For example, there’s a type of machine learning algorithm known as neuro labs, and these are modelled on the human brain. What’s happening in these algorithms is they’ve taken lots of data, and they learn how to make decisions like humans have made.

I think this field hasn’t yet emerged.

Humans aren’t changing that much. But the algorithms, the way they’re created, the technological side of it, continues to change, continues to evolve. And trying to keep those things in sync seems to be the greatest challenge.

In a world where algorithms are deciding who gets what, how machine decisions are made, and how the two, can work together.

Because we are going to use these systems so much that we have to understand them at a deeper level, and we can’t be passive about it anymore because the consequences are very significant, whether we’re talking about a democracy or you know, I’m curating news stories for citizens, or we talking about use by doctors in medicine, or used in the courtroom, and so on.

It is going to be extremely important as we roll out algorithms in more and more important settings going forward we start understanding what drives trust in these machines. Understanding what are some socially important outcomes of interest, so that we order these algorithms against these socially important outcomes, like fairness and so on.

Given everything we know about the world and indeed the universe as a whole does anyone seriously believe that nationalism and popularism will help us with this technological problem. 

Let’s talk about what data are collected about us.

It is far too late to be talking about privacy that is what gets abused.

Let’s fight against everything that we can control that limits our freedom. Whether it’s an algorithm, hungry judge or greedy state backed the wrong econometric model…

We need to rethink how we do education, we have to rethink how we do regulation, and firms also need to stand up and do a better job of auditing and taking responsibility as well.

Of course, none of this will happen.

Humans are more likely to be divided between those who favour giving Algorithms and Ai significant authority to make decisions and those opposed to it with both justifying whichever position while Algorithmic logic drives greed and inequality to a point where we will lose control of transparency completely.

To stay relevant as Yuval Noha Harari says in his Book 21 Lessons for the 21st Century “we will need to be asking the questions -how am I where am I.”

There testing rarely go beyond technical measures which are causing society to become more polarized making it more unlikely that we can appreciate other viewpoints.

Just knowing that an algorithm made the decision would be a good place to start.

Was an algorithm used?

If so who does it belong to?

What kinds of data did the algorithm used?

Today, algorithms and artificial intelligence are creating a much more frightening world. High-frequency trading algorithms already rule the stock exchanges of the world.

Personally, I would neither overestimate nor underestimate the role and threat of algorithms. Behind every smart web service is some smarter web code.

So we need to make sure their design is not only informed by knowledge of the human users, but the knowledge of their design is also suitably conveyed to human users so we don’t eliminate the human from the loop completely.

If not they will become a black box, even to the engineer.

All our lives are constrained by limited space and time, limits that give rise to a particular set of problems that are being exploited by profit-seeking algorithms. 

There’s so much data out there to be analyzed. And right now it’s just sitting there not doing anything. So maybe we can come up with a solution that will at least get us started on it.

It is a fascinating topic because there are so many variables involved.

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

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this:

  • Share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window) WhatsApp
  • More
  • Share on Mastodon (Opens in new window) Mastodon

THE BEADY EYE ASK’S: WHY IS IT THAT WE ARE ALLOWING ALGORITHMS TO RUN OUR LIVES.

28 Tuesday Jan 2020

Posted by bobdillon33@gmail.com in 2020: The year we need to change., Algorithms., Artificial Intelligence., Climate Change., Digital age., DIGITAL DICTATORSHIP., Evolution, Fourth Industrial Revolution., HUMAN INTELLIGENCE, Human values., Humanity., Inequality, Innovation., Modern day life., Post - truth politics., Reality., Robot citizenship., Sustaniability, Technology, The common good., The Future, The Internet., The Obvious., The state of the World., The world to day., Unanswered Questions., WHAT IS TRUTH, What Needs to change in the World, Where's the Global Outrage., WiFi communication.

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE ASK’S: WHY IS IT THAT WE ARE ALLOWING ALGORITHMS TO RUN OUR LIVES.

Tags

Algorithms trade., Algorithms., Artificial Intelligence., Big Data, Distribution of wealth, Inequility, Technology, The Future of Mankind, Visions of the future.

(Twenty-minute read)

Technology is getting increasingly personal.

With algorithms becoming the masters of social media are we all just becoming clickbait?

Devices are providing immediate information about our health and about what we see, where we go and where we have been.

Our lives are being shaken to their very core.

With 5G technology what we experienced at the moment will pale in comparison to the vast array of possibilities carried under its belt by this new generation of wireless connectivity, which is being built over the foundations of the previous one.

It will allow millions of devices to be connected simultaneously.

All stakeholders – business, government, society and individuals – will have to work together to adjust so these technologies and rapid changes are harnessed for the development of all, not just profit.

Swathes of the globe will be left behind.

Regardless it is no longer just about repetitive factory jobs rather an increase in inequality globally.

It is not only a moral imperative to ensure that such a scenario does not happen as it will pose a risk to global stability through channels such as global inequality, but migration also flows, and even geopolitical relations and security.

We already live in a world that has been profoundly altered by the Fourth Industrial Revolution. Yet there is not much debate on the likely size of the impact.

Why?

Because there are such divergent views it is difficult to measure.

But within the next decade, it is expected that more than a trillion sensors will be connected to the internet. By 2024, more than half of home internet traffic will be used by appliances and devices that are connected to internet platforms.

With almost everything connected, it will transform how we live never mind how we do business.

If there is no trusted institution to regulate it we can kiss our arses.

Now is the time to make sure it is changed for the better.

The internet of things will create huge amounts of data, raising concerns over who will own it and how it will be stored. And what about the possibility that your home or car could be hacked?

The internet is great for ideas, but ultimately, the things that will amaze you are not on your computer screen.

Artificial Intelligence may well invent new life forms but if we as humans do not contrive and manage global acceptable ethical parameters for all its forms – (bioengineering, gene editing, nanotechnology, and the algorithms) that run them we are more than idiots.

As Yuval Noah Harari says in his most recent book ( 21 Lessons for the 21st Century) ” There is no such thing as ‘Christian economics’, ‘Muslim economics’ or ‘Hindu economics’ ” but there will be Algorithms economics run by big brother. 

The digital age has brought us access to so much information in just a few clicks of the mouse button or the remote control everything from the news, Tv programmes with the internet becoming somewhat glorifying sensationalism rather than giving us the truth.

The question is.

Are the technologies that surround us tools that we can identify, grasp and consciously use to improve our lives?

Or are they more than that:

Powerful objects and enablers that influence our perception of the world, change our behaviour and affect what it means to be human?

What can we do?

The Second Industrial Revolution and the Third Industrial Revolution have lead us to this revolution the Fourth Industrial Revolution which can be described as the advent of “cyber-physical systems” involving entirely new capabilities for people and machines.

Unlike previous revolutions, it is not the world as a whole that will see any of its benefits or disadvantages it is individuals and groups that could win – or lose – a lot.

Unfortunately, expanded connectivity does not necessarily lead to expanded or more diverse worldviews it will be the opposite with our increased reliance on digital markets.

At the moment it’s just not very evenly distributed nor will it be.

At best we can moan about it and hope that climate change shifts our reliance on biomass as primary sources of energy.

Back to Clickbait.

The issue with clickbait is that the reader or site visitor is being manipulated into clicking something that is misleading.

Clickbait is not one-dimensional. Each time you run a Google search, scan your passport, make an online purchase or tweet, you are leaving a data trail behind that can be analysed and monetized.

Most clickbait links forward a user to a page that requires payment, registration or a series of pages that help drive views for a specific site.

It can also point to any web content that is aimed at generating online advertising revenue.

We’re all guilty of being gullible of clicking links online but Clickbait websites are notorious for spreading misinformation and creating controversy in the name of generating hits.

Have you not ever felt that you’re being played as dumb individuals whenever you watch the news or scroll through a media site?

Thanks to supercomputers and algorithms, we can make sense of massive amounts of data in real-time. Computers are already making decisions based on this information, and in less than 10 years computer processors are expected to reach the processing power of the human brain. A convergence of the digital, physical and biological spheres challenging our notion of what it means to be human.

Today, 43% of the world’s population is connected to the internet, mostly in developed countries.

Cooperation is “the only thing that will redeem mankind”.

We can use the Fourth Industrial Revolution to lift humanity into a new collective and moral consciousness based on a shared sense of destiny, and that’s until 6G comes along or living robots.

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

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

Share this:

  • Share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window) WhatsApp
  • More
  • Share on Mastodon (Opens in new window) Mastodon

THE BEADY EYE SAY’S. IS IT TO BE GDP OR RIP. THERE IS NO REASON THAT EVERY BUILDING SHOULD NOT HAVE SOLAR PANELS.

17 Friday Jan 2020

Posted by bobdillon33@gmail.com in Climate Change.

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE SAY’S. IS IT TO BE GDP OR RIP. THERE IS NO REASON THAT EVERY BUILDING SHOULD NOT HAVE SOLAR PANELS.

Tags

Capitalism vs. the Climate., Climate change, Extinction, The Future of Mankind, World aid commission

 

(fifteen-minute read)

Irreversible by 2030. 

Up to 200 million people could be displaced by climate change by 2050.

50% of all carbon emissions are emitted by the richest 10% of the world’s

population.

Half of the world’s coral reefs have died in the last 30 years.

 At our current rate of consumption, we’d need 1.7 planets to support the

demand on the earth’s ecosystems.

Greenhouse gas levels are at an all-time high.

Have we lost all common sense!

So why are governments not enacted a simple law requiring solar panels on homes?

The main reason is.

None wants to foot the bill – GDP greed- 

it is being turned into a product to sell – Bio this Bio that  – Carbon Credits – etc.  

climate change

It’s a vicious circle.

What is required is a step towards a circular CO2 economy.

Take Air condition for example.

As the climate grows hotter, there’s more need to stay cool.

It is projected that there will be 1.6 billion new AC units to be in use by 2050 throughout the world.

Air conditioners consume huge amounts of energy and that’s adding to climate change. It pumps out heat straight into the atmosphere. Using powerful greenhouse gases called hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), thousands of times more potent than carbon dioxide.

Surely it would be not that difficult technically to add CO2 capture functionality to an A/C system. The necessary technology is already commercially available.

Once collected, water and CO2, can be converted into renewable hydrocarbon fuels into renewable synthetic oil.

Office buildings throughout cities could produce more than 120 million gallons. The same process could happen on buildings everywhere.

If this additional cost was added to the mortgage of a new home, the purchaser would actually be in the pocket, because the mortgage costs on the additional £2,000 will be less than the energy costs savings that the solar panels bring.

When will we come to our senses?Solar panels

The amount of sunlight received by the earth in one hour is more than the total energy used by the entire world for an entire year!

Solar panels and wind turbines coupled with energy storage offer better hope for tackling climate change.

Harmless benign solar panels producing useful heat energy and saving harmful emissions.

There is no valid reason to wait ten twenty or thirty years not to start using it.

It could replace current fossil fuels like coal and gas for generation of electricity that produces air, water, and land pollution.

It could be achieved in five years.

We all know.

That, Climate Change has led to an increase in flooding and hurricanes due to disturbed weather patterns.

That climate change is happening and perhaps faster than expected.

That, Higher carbon dioxide concentration is making oceans acidic and killing marine life, like corals.

That, Climate change causes extinct of species from Sub-Arctic Boreal forests to tropical Amazon forests.

That, Higher temperatures result melting of polar ice caps, reducing habitats for wildlife and also increase sea level.

That, Irregular rainfall or increasing droughts affect agriculture and livelihoods of the weaker sections of society globally.

That Emissions are blamed for the rise in global temperatures, and changes in weather patterns leading to a cascade of effects.

That, the momentum for change is currently too slow.

That, given that climate change is inevitable, we are not doing nearly enough to save hundreds of millions of people from a miserable future.

That, the worst effects are yet to come. Submersion and loss of land displacing people.

That, the current targets would put the world on track for 3C of warming, which will ultimately lock in irreversible sea-level rises of perhaps two metres.

That, the greatest difference would be to nature. 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.A firefighter battles a wildfire in California

Against the above background it’s a line in the sand and what it says to our species is that this is the moment and we must act now.

What we are witnessing is patchy international efforts to prevent it from happening.

On one hand, we have Sir David Attenborough, “So we have to realise that this is not playing games. This is not just having nice little debates and arguments and then coming away with a compromise. This is an urgent problem that has to be solved.

”https://youtu.be/r-91umZ7cQE

On the other hand, I am sure he would puke at hippocras of countries declaring Climate Emergency and then bailing out Airlines.

The truth is that this is a global problem that will require a global solution.

We can’t shy away from that.

The Glasgow 2020 event with 30,000 delegates could be key to the fight against climate change only if China, India and—most importantly the US, participation in any future multilateral agreements.

If the UK is not stable enough to act as a diplomatic facilitator ahead of the summit (The Conservative manifesto devoted just two pages to climate change, skirted the issue) perhaps it might be a good idea to move it to Australia where the 30,000 delegates can witness first hand the effects A HEATING CLIMATE CAN DO.

Of course, this is not going to happen.

So how might be achieved other than Boris “Get Net Zero Done.”

It will be one of the first major tests of the UK’s influence on the world stage after it leaves the EU.

Collins Glacier in King George Island, Antarctica.

The main sticking points of international climate diplomacy are well known.

There are tensions between so-called ‘Global North’ and ‘Global South’ countries over financial and technological flows in aid of decarbonisation, and debates over how best to support those most vulnerable to climate risks, such as island nations.

If we are unwilling to make profit pay market-based instruments need to be sensibly designed to not negate the disproportionate costs of climate change on different groups.

What appears fundamental to the success of market-based instruments to reduce emissions is how government actually spend the revenue they generate.

If revenue is reinvested in other, complementary policies—especially supporting those on low incomes—and there is a consistent political and public dialogue, market-based instruments might work like Green Government bonds.

The problem is that none of the market-based instruments can be policed and will not produce the necessary funds to tackle the problems.

Because climate change does not affect everyone equally there is only one just solution we must make a profit for profit sake foot the bill, it will produce a perpetual world fund. ( See the previous post on a world aid commission of 0.05%)

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

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

Share this:

  • Share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window) WhatsApp
  • More
  • Share on Mastodon (Opens in new window) Mastodon

THE BEADY EYE ASK’S: IS THE ACCELERATING TECHNOLOGY AND THE ONGOING REVOLUTION IN INFORMATION MAKING THE WORLD SO COMPLICATED IT IS NOW BEYOND OUR UNDERSTANDING.

11 Saturday Jan 2020

Posted by bobdillon33@gmail.com in Algorithms., Artificial Intelligence.

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE ASK’S: IS THE ACCELERATING TECHNOLOGY AND THE ONGOING REVOLUTION IN INFORMATION MAKING THE WORLD SO COMPLICATED IT IS NOW BEYOND OUR UNDERSTANDING.

Tags

Algorithms trade., Algorithms., Artificial Intelligence., Big Data, Community cohesion, Distribution of wealth, Earth, Technology, The Future of Mankind, Visions of the future.

 

 

The plain truth can often be so obvious as to be invisible.

There are so many obstacles to change on the scale we so desperately need.

We are fast reaching a point that no humans can or will be able to understand the world we live in.

We pass this way just once.

Artificial algorithms are taking over.

Yuval Noah Harari in his latest book ( 21 lessons for the 21st Century) puts his finger on the problem.

” In the coming century biotech and infotech will give us the power to manipulate the world inside us and reshape ourselves, but because we don’t understand our own minds, the changes we will make might upset our mental system to such an extent that it too might brake down.

Surely its time we stop being the free fodder that feds big data. It’s much harder to struggle against irrelevance than against exploitation.

What will be the point to education if algorithms make us redundant?

It is difficult to discern world-wise whether there is any sincere conversation on AI Ethics.

Is it being addressed by any of the big tech companies or are they just giving token nods to what is right or wrong, while taking advantage of all human beings out there?

Are there just pushback from the outside organisations.

What we are witnessing is their profit growth with economic disparity worldwide increases at a starting rate. This certainly rings true if one looks at the state of the world with people judged by their wealth.

So what is the ethics of creating a sentient life form on a planet that is burning?

Perhaps it will be for the best if we continue not to understand the planet we all live on and leave it to AI to sort us out.

Or can we now start contributing to better governance solutions?

If we don’t grasp the nettle soon there will be no coming back.

To have any relevance now and in the future, we need billions to take to the streets to demand the sustainability of our planet (Human vote with their feet, not Social media) before profit-making goes underground.

When it comes to making the world a better place, corporations are often accused of apathy (the flip-side of blind self-interest). But if consumers are truly committed to social change, they must answer the same challenge.

If we can get consumers to make mindful shopping choices, to support brands that act responsibly and to purchase goods from those that dedicate a portion of the sale proceeds to causes, we are well on our way to re-purposing everyday purchases.

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

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

and become

Share this:

  • Share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window) WhatsApp
  • More
  • Share on Mastodon (Opens in new window) Mastodon

THE BEADY EYE ASK’S. WILL 2020 BE THE YEAR OF THE BIG MELT OR THE BIG FRY.

02 Thursday Jan 2020

Posted by bobdillon33@gmail.com in #whatif.com, 2020: The year we need to change., Climate Change., Evolution, HUMAN INTELLIGENCE, Humanity., Life., Modern day life., Our Common Values., Politics., Populism., Post - truth politics., Purchasing Power., Reality., Social Media, Sustaniability, Technology, The common good., The essence of our humanity., The Future, The Obvious., The state of the World., The world to day., Unanswered Questions., WHAT IS TRUTH, What needs to change in European Union., What Needs to change in the World, Where's the Global Outrage., World Aid., World Leaders, World Organisations.

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE ASK’S. WILL 2020 BE THE YEAR OF THE BIG MELT OR THE BIG FRY.

Tags

Apathy., Artificial Intelligence., Capitalism and Greed, Capitalism isn't working, Capitalism vs. the Climate., Earth, Environment, Global warming, Inequility, Information gap., Technology, The Future of Mankind, Visions of the future.

 

(Fifteen-minute read) 

 

It looks like being both.

We are the first generation to know we’re destroying the world, and we could be the last that can do anything about it.

SO AS IF YOU DON’T ALREADY KNOW WHAT NEEDS TO CHANGE HERE IS YOUR CHANCE TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT.  

We need to recognize that everything we do, every step we take, every sentence we write, every word we speak—or don’t speak—counts. Nothing is trivial.

Take personal responsibility.

We need to use social media – this is one of the most effective ways to get brands to listen to you, so tell them that you want a change.

Why?

Because, unfortunately, the politicians who dominate the world stage are, depressingly, mostly cut from the old cloth, and the leadership challenges they face, are particularly complex and will require different skills — notably a clearer vision among leaders of organisation’s shared purpose.

Because the digital revolution is far from over the pace of change only seems to be quickening when in fact it is causing isolation. 

Because, we are allowing non-regulated large technology platforms to become too powerful, using their size to dominate markets and we are not paying enough attention to how the tools they create can be used for ill –  like device addictions, as we drown in notifications and false news feed posts.

Because there is an increasing imperative for all of us to respond to climate change.  Which will and is challenging our lives developing on a daily bases right in front of our eyes into our biggest need to act as one.

How can any of this be achieved? 

How will the changing political, economic and environmental landscapes shape the world?

Don’t get caught up in the how of things. Don’t wait for things to be right in order to begin.

Because in our age of tectonic geopolitical shifts, “alternative facts,” and conflicting narratives, our routine everyday life is losing sight of our true goals and aspirations.

Because with the rise of short-sighted populism we will solve nothing, other than feeding the great unwashed with short term gratification.

We need to write a piece of software that eliminated malware, viruses and all of that crap. 

We need to show our political leaders that they want to change, to understand our common humanity.

We need to try to put yourself into another person’s headspace and accept people for who they are and what their beliefs are.

We need to collaborate and push for policies that complement both sides of the political spectrum.

We need to make wasting our resources unacceptable in all aspects of our life.  Every product we buy has an environmental footprint and could end up in a landfill. The impact of plastic pollution on our oceans is becoming increasingly clear, having drastic impacts on marine life.

We need to be more conscious about what we buy, and where we buy it from. Living a less consumerist lifestyle can benefit you and our planet.

We need to use our purchasing power and make sure our money is going towards positive change.

We need to realize that what we eat contributes around a quarter of global greenhouse gas emissions and is responsible for almost 60% of global biodiversity loss.

We need to be supporting eco-friendly products.

We need to try to waste as little food as possible, and compost the organic waste we can’t eat.

We need to make education free for all.  Start educating not for profit but for a better understanding of what is the common values of life.

We need to stop asking the world’s smartest scientists to find us more time and to reverse gravity’s effect on our lives.

We need to stop killing each other. Countries start wars and people die and more people are in poverty.

We need to create out of profit for profit sake a World Aid fund with perpetual funding. (See previous posts) A new nonprofit called Carbon Offsets to alleviate address Climate change and Poverty. 

We need to realize that all significant change throughout history has occurred not because of nations, armies, governments and certainly not committees. They happened as a result of the courage and commitment of individuals. Believe that you can and will make a difference. 

The genesis for change is awareness so I need to stop. 

This year will not only be another opportunity for the leading minds in media in all its forms to highlight consumption for consumption sake.

However, if they wanted to spread a message that helps us all they would ban advertising that promotes consumption for consumption sake/profit. 

Feel free to add your priorities. With rapid innovations in technology and open access to data its no longer “wait and see.” We need to stop the huge feeling of apathy. 

The coming year, let alone the next decade looks unpredictable.

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

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this:

  • Share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window) WhatsApp
  • More
  • Share on Mastodon (Opens in new window) Mastodon

THE BEADY EYE SAY’S; WE CANNOT TRUST TECHNOLOGY TO COME TO THE RESCUE.

10 Tuesday Dec 2019

Posted by bobdillon33@gmail.com in Climate Change.

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE SAY’S; WE CANNOT TRUST TECHNOLOGY TO COME TO THE RESCUE.

Tags

Capitalism vs. the Climate., Climate change, Earth, Environment, Extinction, Technology, The Future of Mankind, World aid commission

 

( A Crucial twenty-minute read)

Climate change is accelerating and we know that it is the world’s greatest collective action problem.

The global climate is probably the most complex of all complex systems to which humans belong.

It’s more than a quarter of a century since the leaders of the world, gathered in Rio de Janeiro in 1992, committed their countries to avoiding “dangerous anthropogenic interference in the climate system” by signing the UN convention on climate change.

Climate protesters prior to the COP23 talks in Bonn, Germany

We know we have to tackle climate change –as do the politicians.

We know that it’s rational for an individual country not to drastically reduce greenhouse gases, given most economies are heavily based on energy resources that emit them.

Yet, if all nations act that way — indeed, that’s what’s happening — most countries will eventually be worse off due to the cumulative impacts of all our emissions.

Put another way, what’s better for each individual country in isolation is actually worse for the planet as a whole. Conversely, what is worse for each individual country, overtime would be better for the planet.

Unlike other policies, climate change is cumulative.

We know that climate summits highlight the science, but achieve little or nothing-

The First World Climate Conference was held on 12–23 February 1979 in Geneva as was the second the third.

Here is the list

Contents

1995:  Berlin, Germany

1996:  Geneva, Switzerland

1997: Kyoto, Japan

1998: Buenos Aires, Argentina

1999: Bonn, Germany

2000: The Hague, Netherlands

2001: Bonn, Germany

2001: Marrakech, Morocco

2002: New Delhi, India

2003: Milan, Italy

2004: Buenos Aires, Argentina

2005: Montreal, Canada

2006: Nairobi, Kenya

2007: Bali, Indonesia

2008: Poznań, Poland

2009: Copenhagen, Denmark

2010: Cancún, Mexico

2011: Durban, South Africa

2012: Doha, Qatar

2013: Warsaw, Poland

2014: Lima, Peru

2015: Paris, France

2016: Marrakech, Morocco

2017:  Bonn, Germany

2018: Katowice, Poland

2019: Bonn, Germany

2019: Madrid, Spain

A lot of talking while the ice melts, our lands burn, and our oceans rise and our Co2 emissions are traded on an Ecosystem Marketplace’s – Carbon offsetting- Cardon Cap and trade systems.

The longer we wait to address it, the bigger the problem it becomes and the harder it gets to solve, fueling a feedback loop that makes solutions ever more difficult.

Imagine getting taxed before you put that money into your fund and then not living long enough to reap the payoffs of your fund.

That’s happening with climate change, on a global scale.

However, we must realize that climate is a much broader, systemic problem that can not be tackled solely by making how important our everyday choices are.

We know that behind the energy and climate change hypocrisy is in all of us.

You’re a hypocrite for advocating on climate change while using fossil fuels.

Such arguments are shallow because virtually everyone depends on these fuels somehow.

Trying to make people feel guilty for their carbon-intensive activities doesn’t actually get them to change their behaviour.

Nobody wants to change unless they really, really have to.

We know that transforming endemic corporate behaviours that are devastating the planet requires whole industries to move together, and fast.

We need bold, industry-wide coalitions for change.

We need to bring industry leaders together to agree on reforms to the parts of the business that are irrelevant to customers but of grave importance for our environment.

However business cannot tackle climate change on its own and we don’t have time to wait for individual companies to each go on their own sustainability journeys.

We know that enacting policies today to cut greenhouse gas emissions won’t have a discernible impact on global warming for decades, if not centuries.

We know that investors are in effect expecting returns on assets in companies that eventually must be written off for the planet to be safe.

The private sector can either destroy the planet or replenish it.

We know what needs to be done.

This means that sustainable savings are the number one solution to climate change and the effects are larger than rooftop solar, solar farms, afforestation and electric vehicles combined.

To do this is laying down a clear challenge.

But unfortunately, not all carbon footprints are created equally.

This makes it a tough sell and begs the question to what degree people are willingly taking concrete steps to lower their lifestyle’s impact on climate change, or why people are not.

The why not, is because for most people it’s still intangible and not well understood even considered a Hoax because of Fake news’ or ‘inconvenient truth that there is no problem and hope that it disappears by itself.

The willingness is rhetoric like flight shaming which is near the top of the list of hypocrisy charges.

No press release can obscure the fact that time is not on our side.

We need to cap our carbon emissions now not in ten years.

Increasingly missing from this picture above is the support of governments that operate on 2- to 6-year election cycles.

Technology is bringing down the price of switching to green alternatives, not least renewable energy. So what is stopping governments from making these technologies available with affordable Green Grants to one and all Now?

With most countries more engrossed by their internal domestic political squabbles the reasons are political or financial, not scientific.

The science isn’t that difficult to explain but instead of explanations we are presented with statements of facts with an only simple explanation and no real substance, CO2 is like a blanket.

A Chinese man wears a mask to guard against air pollution in Beijing. Much of Eastern and Central China is regularly blanketed by a thick smog caused by coal power plants and industrial production, both of which fuel global warming and climate change, direct results of consumer culture.

Yet there is a troubling gap between the serious reality depicted by climate change science and the level of concern among all of us.

Worry and action are two different things.

Climate change is a direct consequence of the widespread, now globalized, mass production and consumption of goods, and of the material construction of our habitat that has accompanied it. Yet, despite this reality, production and construction continue unabated.

If we believed that a systemic response to climate change was an equally shared responsibility, was our responsibility, we would be responding to it.

Until we do that, we’re all climate change deniers.

( See Post – suggestion a World Aid commission of 0.05% )

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

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

There are no right or wrong answers, just your insights.

 

 

 

 

Share this:

  • Share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window) WhatsApp
  • More
  • Share on Mastodon (Opens in new window) Mastodon

THE BEADY EYE ASK’S: IS IT TIME TO REGULATE SOCIAL MEDIA PLATFORMS WITH LAWS.

25 Monday Nov 2019

Posted by bobdillon33@gmail.com in 2019: The Year of Disconnection., Algorithms., Democracy, Digital Friendship., Elections/ Voting, Facebook., Fourth Industrial Revolution., Google, Humanity., Modern Day Democracy., Modern day life., Our Common Values., Politics., Reality., Social Media, The common good., The essence of our humanity., The Obvious., The pursuit of profit., The state of the World., The world to day., Twitter, Unanswered Questions., What Needs to change in the World, World Politics

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE ASK’S: IS IT TIME TO REGULATE SOCIAL MEDIA PLATFORMS WITH LAWS.

Tags

Algorithms., Capitalism and Greed, Facebook and Society., Google/Amazon/Facebook/Twitter, Platforms regulation/laws., Social Media, Social media platforms., The Future of Mankind

 

 

(Ten-minute read) 

The beady eye is far from the first voice to ask this question and it certainly will not be the last.

We might even come to “question whether we still have free will.

There is no doubting that the social web has created amazing opportunities to learn, discover, connect, but its downside as it penetrates our daily lives is becoming more and more prevalent in the creation of our future lives and the societies we live in.

If the public discussion is shifting increasingly to online fora, and those fora are having more and more influence over democracy it becomes increasingly important to apply principles to them. 

Honest political debate is essential for the health of a democracy.  

If discussions of import move into space where they can be readily censored, then we will simply no longer live in a society with a free exchange of ideas, because the playing field will always be tilted.

One only has to look at how social media platforms are amplifying what is wrong with the world.  

While we all reveal a huge amount of personal information online we are losing the ability to determine honest facts that democracy depends.

Basically, companies that run social media platforms are monopolies or near-monopolies in their areas of operation, and the only way we can achieve the desired outcomes is through clear, effective legal regulations. 

We can’t always control how others use their platforms but we can apply the same regulations that govern all other forms of Media.

The public cannot rely on these company’s self-regulation, because self-regulation raises more questions than it answers.

The fact is that the formation of a platform takes place in a vacuum, whereas the formation of any competitors do not, so they cannot be considered parallels in any way. 

If we take companies like Facebook and Google they both derive most of their revenue from advertising. They essentially constitute a duopoly because they have access to the best data about individuals. Every memory, picture, emoji, song, video, link, gripe, fear, hope, want, dream and bad political opinion posted is mined and monetized as data.

As a result of their algorithms, they are creating and reinforcing divided and insular online communities that do not interact with people or information with which they disagreed.

At the end of the day, how Facebook and Google conduct their businesses undermines privacy and raises questions about ethical behaviour in the uses of our information and their role in society.

The Internet is a “utility” like water or electricity. It is essential to modern life, not an optional subscription service.

Determining how to regulate Facebook or any other platform may first require some kind of definition of what it is.

Facebook brags about connecting us to our family and friends — but it also about directly influencing the outcomes of elections across the globe.

It sits on top of industries including journalism, where it, together with Google, essentially controls the distribution channels for online news and, in effect, the way people discover information about politics, government and society.

They ( Google, Facebook, Twitter,etc) have figured out how to take advantage of this dynamic to distribute false information about political candidates and hot-button political issues in order to drive up traffic and advertising revenue.

Protecting our community is more important than maximizing their profits.

They are given protections that no one can sue them for any reason — that is Google and Facebook nither are responsible for the fake news that appears on their sites.

They are completely shielded from any responsibility for the content that appears on their service.

Changes to legal protection (which has been interpreted by judges to provide a safe harbour for online platforms even when they pay to distribute others’ content and decline the option to impose editorial oversight) would likely be devastating to online platforms like Google and Facebook and would transform the way people interact across the entire internet.

However, with legal protection, sites like these could be held responsible for libellous comments posted by readers, Google could lose lawsuits over potentially false or defamatory information surfacing in search results, and Facebook could be sued for any potentially libellous comment made by anyone on its platform against any other person.

The legal bills to defend against libel and defamation claims would be enormous.

We all need protection and the ability to request platforms to provide us with control over online information by making it accessible and removable at an individual’s request.

The government, on the other hand, has a regulatory intent to protect citizens from content that is obscene or violent.

Should Facebook and their like be regulated?

A question that is never going to end. 

However, until we recognize that there is no fool-proof safeguard to keep horrific content away from the eyes of children we rely on huge fines to the detriment of us all. 

Till then with all internet platforms deflecting criticism, social media will be more psychologically damaging than anyone expected. 

We need a radical shift in the balance of power between the platforms and the people.

It is beyond comprehension that we tolerate the present position.

Or is it? When you see the below.   

Would you ever be prepared to use a nuclear weapon?

This question is increasingly put to politicians as some kind of virility test.

The subtext is that to be a credible political leader, you must be willing to use an indiscriminate weapon of mass destruction.

We should be baulking at the casual way in which political discourse on this topic has developed which is politically unacceptable and morally despicable. 

If a mainstream politician unblinkingly said that they would use chemical weapons against civilians there would be uproar. If a self-proclaimed candidate for prime minister boasted that they would commit war crimes, it would be a national scandal. Nuclear weapons should be seen no differently. 

It’s time that nuclear advocates spelt out the reality of what their position means.

The human race is so good at speaking, it’s lost the art of listening.

It might be easy to brush away the febrile atmosphere online as a nasty byproduct of free expression: I don’t want Facebook having everyone’s verified identities. I do want their platform and other platforms to be held responsible legally for content that is false, racest, hateful, rightwing fascist propaganda.  

I do know that if the big platforms, as they already do in part, forced some verifiable information to back up use, we could tame this wild west with legal requirements

I’ll give up on the consensus-building when I can open a platform knowing who to hold legally responsible.  


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

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this:

  • Share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window) WhatsApp
  • More
  • Share on Mastodon (Opens in new window) Mastodon

THE BEADY EYE ASK’S: WILL ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE SEE THE END OF DETERMINING MEANING.

23 Saturday Nov 2019

Posted by bobdillon33@gmail.com in Algorithms.

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE ASK’S: WILL ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE SEE THE END OF DETERMINING MEANING.

Tags

Algorithms trade., Algorithms., Artificial Intelligence., Technology, The Future of Mankind, Visions of the future.

 

(Five-minute read)

We all know that new data-driven technology is transforming our society.

Our digital society is creating new and profound challenges and carry significant ethical risks to us all.

To be human means that you are persuadable in every single moment.

If you need any evidence of this you don’t have to look any further than the current impeachment hearing in the USA and England with its general election.

The troubling influence algorithms have on how we make decisions are now treating the foundations of our Societies.

Algorithms are now usually a component in a broader decision- making process involving human decision-makers. Far from being neutral and all-knowing decision tools, complex algorithms are shaped by humans, who are, for all intents and purposes, imperfect.

Determining the meaning of sensory input is one of the most constantly ongoing, and important, functions of any brain. By refining our awareness, we transform existence into beauty, thinking into philosophy.How Artificial Intelligence Will Revolutionize Our Lives

Our increasing reliance on artificial intelligence is destroying the meaning of life.

Few of us understand them or the implications they are having or will have. .

They are taking the creativity away from the decision-making process for instance.

They could turn us humans into mush-minded creatures who can’t be bothered to make our own choices.

What if the new algorithm rated my friend and another woman as a 90% match, would that mean he would simply trust the algorithm and go straight for a proposal of marriage?

Important parts of our lives are being run by AI without sufficient scrutiny.

Self-learning systems are not autonomous systems however they could lead to a Master Algorithm that could match Einstein’s theory of relativity in its world-transformative power.

Algorithms are changing our relationship with each other, with doctors, police, politics, work, health care.

They are at work where ever you look. When you do a web search, machine learning chooses the results you get. Interactive processing allowing the software to learn automatically from patterns. Algorithms are not only being used just to make a profit but life-changing decisions, from your Credit rating, how your will and who you will vote for.

With machine learning, you are programming a computer to learn by itself.

Amazon uses them to recommend products; Netflix uses them to recommend movies; Facebook and Twitter use them to choose which posts to show you.

Pretty much everything that happens online involves machine learning.

So are we putting to much trust in smart systems that learn from data?

The systems are only as good as the data it learns from.

Their goal is to provide software that can reason on input and explain on output by becoming classifiers and predictors.

Alexa – Google is an example. Like most machine-learning algorithms, Google not only analyses our behaviour: it shapes it. This goes round and round until one viewpoint dominates people’s thinking. It will control the information its algorithm pays attention to and the secretive nature of algorithms means people cannot scrutinise the decisions they make.

Since much of the data that is feed into AI’s is imperfect and bias the decision processes built on top of the Ai’s need to be made open to scrutiny.

Why?

Because Algorithms learn differently than us. They look at things differently.

It might enhance the speed, precision and effectiveness of human efforts but in the long run, it will replace our decision making.

They are also moving into areas where the benefits to those applying them may not be matched by the benefits to those subject to their ‘decisions’— We have to demand to know what kind of influence these algorithms have over us.

Google is an algorithm that we are all familiar with, but it is far from being the only algorithmic decision-making tool to influencing our daily lives.

What can be done to combat their growing influence?

Governments should play their part in the algorithms revolution in two ways

Governments should produce, publish, and maintain a list of where algorithms with significant impacts are being used.

The index to the internet should be a public instrument, owned and controlled by the public. It should be a public utility. It should be an index, pure and simple – not a tracking device or a mechanism of manipulation, put the control of algorithms back into the hands of the people that are affected by them.

Government oversight of such algorithms, where they are used by the
public sector, and to co-ordinate departments’ approaches to the development and
deployment of algorithms and partnerships with the private sector.

Governments should offer significant rewards for societies that can find the right combination of market-driven innovation and regulation to maximise the benefits of data-driven technology and minimise the harms.

We must subsequently make decisions that require value judgements and trade-offs between competing values.

New functions and actors, such as third party auditors, may also be required to independently verify claims made by organisations about how their algorithms operate.

Many of the most consequential algorithms currently being used in the public and private domains are complex and opaque, making it hard to attribute accountability to their actions.

Humans are often trusted to make these trade-offs without having to explicitly state how much weight they have put on different considerations. Algorithms are different. They are programmed to make trade-offs according to unambiguous rules.

The ethical questions in relation to bias in algorithmic decision-making vary depending on the context.

For example, High-frequency trading is an algorithm-fueled method of buying and selling stocks – among other things.

The fact that while the problematic implications of many algorithms have been exposed, we may have only just begun to skim the surface.

Improving transparency, however, is no easy task.

Companies with algorithmic products would lose their competitive edge if they were forced to make their algorithms public.

Transparency is not enough. In fact, because algorithms are quite complicated.

This is a simple matter.

What is required is a means of certification as to whether an algorithm is safe or fair to use.

Who knows, an algorithmic slider could, one day, form part of our daily lexicon. But, in the meantime, algorithms need to be managed; ensuring those with the power to shape our lives do so with some code of conduct.

In the end, all technology revolutions are propelled not just by discovery, but also by business and societal need. We pursue these new possibilities not because we can, but because we must.

As I have already said  “To be human means that you are pursuable in every single moment”

This morning without any action on my part through the post I am in receipt of an Amazon prime video card.

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

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

Share this:

  • Share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window) WhatsApp
  • More
  • Share on Mastodon (Opens in new window) Mastodon

THE BEADY EYE ASK’S. WHY IS TIME SO CONTROVERSIAL?

17 Sunday Nov 2019

Posted by bobdillon33@gmail.com in 2019: The Year of Disconnection., WHY IS TIME SO CONTROVERSIAL?

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE ASK’S. WHY IS TIME SO CONTROVERSIAL?

Tags

Different Aspects of Time, Quantum reality, The Future of Mankind, WHY IS TIME SO CONTROVERSIAL?

 

( In your own time read)

Hickory Dickory dock,
The mouse ran up the clock.
The clock struck one,
The mouse ran down,
Hickory Dickory dock.

The concept of “time” is a weird one and it is getting weirder. 

Isn’t it possible that kazillions of years ago, there wasn’t anything at all, not even time?

Of course, this is the question that defies an answer, as it requires the answer to what time is.

There is no other concept that captures the imagination more than the idea of time travel – the ability to travel to any point in the past or future.

But the future is constantly being transformed into the past with the present only lasting for a fleeting moment. Everything that you are doing right now is quickly moving into the past, which means we continue to move through time.

Time has direction, always advances. Time has an order, one thing after another. Time has duration, a quantifiable period between events. Time has a privileged present, only now is real. Time seems to be the universal background through which all events proceed, such that order can be sequenced and durations measured.

You cannot literally see or touch time, but you can see its effects.

Up to now, this appears to be true.

Then along came Quantum Mathematics.

Quantum Mathematics says our choice in the present moment affected what had already happened in the past…. Quantum effects mimic not only instantaneous action-at-a-distance but also, influences future actions on past events, even after these events have been irrevocably recorded.

Reality does not exist unless we are looking at it.

So matter is a derivative from consciousness.

Another words the present can only be defined by the process of becoming correlated with our surroundings.

It suggests that we are living in a holographic-type of universe with no time.

Time is now a prime conflict between relativity and quantum mechanics.

In quantum language, they say energy disperses and objects equilibrate, because of the way elementary particles become intertwined when they interact — a strange effect called “quantum entanglement.”

Therefore the backdrop for the steady growth of entanglement throughout the universe is, of course, time itself.

So is time irreducible, fundamental, an ultimate descriptor of bedrock reality?

Apparently not.

Or is it our subjective sense of flowing time, generated by our brains that evolved for other purposes, an illusion?

Why am I relevant or an Illusion?  Time may not be what time seems, so are giving false importance to the present moment?

Is time really a second picture, then change really. Its an illusion, because there’s nothing that’s changing; it’s all just there — past, present, future.

Quantum physicists are unmasking a more fundamental source for the arrow of time and many assert that time is an illusion.

We all have the illusions, at any given moment, that the past already happened and the future doesn’t yet exist, and that things are changing.

But all I’m ever aware of is my brain state right now.

I’m looking at you; you’re nodding your head. Without that change, we wouldn’t have any notion of time.” Change is real, but time is not.

Confused yet? 

At the deepest foundations of nature, time is not a primitive, irreducible element or concept required to construct reality but what reality depends on what time is.

Time is like space, in that every event has its own coordinates, or address, in space-time.

Time is tenseless, all points equally “real,” so that future and past are no less real than the present.

When you try to discuss time in the context of the universe, you need the simple idea that you isolate part of the universe and call it your clock, and time evolution is only about the relationship between some parts of the universe and that thing you called your clock.”

If the new line of quantum research is correct, then the story of time’s arrow begins with the quantum mechanical idea that, deep down, nature is inherently uncertain.

But how can a single piece of matter exist and express itself in multiple states, without any physical properties other than time?

There is no “true” state of the particle; the probabilities are the only reality that can be ascribed to it. (A particle is a minute fragment or quantity of matter.)

Quantum uncertainty then gives rise to entanglement, the putative source of the arrow of time this could replace human uncertainty in the old classical proofs as the true source of the arrow of time. The system as a whole is in a pure state, but the state of each individual particle is “mixed” with that of its acquaintance. The two could travel light-years apart, and the spin of each would remain correlated with that of the other.

Entanglement.

The essence of relativity is that there is no absolute time, no absolute space everything is relative. Absolutely nothing existed but we are all bound by time and space.

To be anywhere, everywhere or nowhere at all.

Because no observer has knowledge of a distant event, or the simultaneity of different events until they are unambiguously in that observer’s past something else exists.

Something that exists outside of time and space. Invisible but needs an environment to exist in, but what?

Some kind of untranscendence is essential.

Is this possible?

No observer has ever witnessed nothing if it had, there would still be absolutely nothing now.

Time by itself doesn’t do anything. Why would anything just “show up”

Therefore absolutely nothing existed. Why? Because, if absolutely nothing ever existed, there would still be absolutely nothing!

What did exist?

No gravity, no dark matter, no atoms, not a particle of anything. No air at all. No dust at all. No light at all.No elements, No molecules.

A “wave” of potentials, that does not take up a part of space, expressing itself in the form of multiple possibilities collapsing into one single path.

A void.

Because the beginning must have been able to exist without depending on anything else.

Something has no beginning. The eternal something is eternal. It has always existed independent of another. More importantly, It alone has always existed. If this something has any needs it can fulfil those needs for itself.

But how does it choose which path, out of multiple possibilities, it will take?

Eternal something must choose to change things.

What does that mean?

It means that no event can take place without the say-so of the Eternal something.

There is nothing in existence that can arbitrarily, by chance, influence it to produce something else.

Chance does not even exist. Chance itself cannot be produced by chance.

Chance is a force that must be produced by the Eternal something, or it does not exist.

It would have to be produced by the will of the Eternal something and to produce Something Else — out of nothing — requires an incredible amount of power.

So there was always a time when there was something in existence.

Time cannot exist without space, and likewise, space cannot exist without time so the universe as a whole is in a pure state.

Time emerges out of something more fundamental — something nontemporal, something altogether different.

But time is not transparent with no material substance that can be measured or observed.  It has no end or beginning, it’s eternal and therefore does not exist.

We cannot and will not ever establish the reality of the awaiting future as time’s arrow is not steered by human ignorance.

According to the quantum mathetics, a“wave” is a wave until it is “measured” or “observed.” as with a spin or for that matter anything else.

If we look at the most recent pictures from Hubble which has helped to refine estimates of the universe’s age down to roughly 13.75 billion years, we are looking at light emitted some 13 billion years in the past.

This is calculated by the constant speed of light to convert time to distance.

Time = distance / speed.  = 299,792,458 metres per second.

Is this true?

As we never observed the velocity of light in vacuum propagating at a different velocity it is deemed to be right and the mainstream scientific community carried on believing in the fallacy that the speed of light is always constant.

But according to Quantum light from any observer’s perspective cannot always be measured to be constant.

Therefore the time interval between two events is not equal for all observers.

Since we cannot travel at relativistic speeds at or close to the speed of light, we have no points of reference to compare the nature of light to.

Because the faster you travel through space, the slower you travel through time (to an outside observer this is flawed.) it is causing time dilation.

This conversion factor is not constant,

The best we can say is that the invariance of the speed of light is dependant on the nature of space-time. Its planet-bound behaviour must be different than light emitted in other parts of the known universe.

It is simply a conversion factor between space and time.

Our concept of motion only comes from gravity and friction and acceleration, not time.

If we were made up of nothing but photons of light, how would that being see the universe?

The being would see everything at a standstill, nothing would be moving not even light itself nor time.

Where do the property of ‘mass’ come from?

If we manage to discover the above we will discover where time comes from because the source light is travelling at our speed, no matter how fast you go.

Back to the beginning.

The beginning must have the ability to produce something other than itself.

The arrow of time does not seem to follow from the underlying laws of physics, which work the same going forward in time as in reverse. This is one aspect of time’s arrow that remains unsolved. The nature of time itself or why it seems different (both perceptually and in the equations of quantum mechanics) is outside the three dimensions of space.

Sometimes you have to have the idea at the right time.

Even what we perceive as solid objects all are manifestations of wave energy forms entanglement, with information becoming increasingly diffuse, but it never disappears completely. Like all energy consciousness is never gained or lost, it simply changes form.

The arrow of time is an arrow of increasing correlations between the void and consciousness energy.

It is known that outer extremities of the universe are expanding technically faster than the speed of light.

Technology may end up creating a new race…cloning, other forms of biotechnology, artificial intelligence, etc but avoid is avoid.

This is bound to be of massive interest to any future societies for nothing matters … only humans make it so.

We don’t live in the universe, we are part of it.

Every molecule we move, everyone we touch, every penny we spend impacts others.

From an everyday point of view, our minds perceive that an object should behave like a wave or a particle, quite independently of how it is measured.

It has nothing to do with the question of “Why are we here?”, as one person has suggested, it’s more a case of “Where are we going?”

Unfortunately one would have to outlive the universe to witness it.

Particles arrived at a state of equilibrium, and their states stopped changing.

If we could change the past, it would create an infinite number of paradoxes.

The only reason I feel like I have a past is that my brain contains memories lost in time.

It is only when one unifies the concepts of science and spirituality that one begins to see the real nature of the universe. It is this consciousness and through the interference pattern of energy waves that gives rise to us, all that we perceive and that which we do not.

Has anyone travelled in the future?

Astronauts can travel a few nanoseconds into the future.

Think about that for a moment, the observer caused the wave function, which generates an interference pattern.

If we are, to be honest with ourselves, we had better think twice before dismissing the possibility that the void had a visitor called time.

Imagine going back in time 3000 years and encountering people convinced that the world is really a flat disc. When you hear this you tell them that they are mistaken, that the world is really round. But you become quite embarrassed when they ask you to prove it to them and you find that you can not.

After all, their experience conforms to the idea that the earth is really flat.

Its time to stop.

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

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this:

  • Share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window) WhatsApp
  • More
  • Share on Mastodon (Opens in new window) Mastodon
← Older posts
Newer posts →

All comments and contributions much appreciated

  • THE BEADY EYE ASKS. ARE YOU A MEAT PROXIE? August 28, 2026
  • THE BEADY EYE SAYS BEFORE ITS TOO LATE WE MUST BUILD A GLOBAL FRIENDLY FUTURE. August 21, 2026
  • THE BEADY EYE SAYS. August 20, 2026
  • THE BEADY EYE SAYS: YOUR BELIEFS DON’T COME FROM OBJECT REALITY—— THEY ARE STORIES YOUR MIND CONSTRUCTS, FEELS INTO, AND THEN DEFENDS AS TRUTH. August 15, 2026
  • THE BEADY EYE SAYS. THERE IS OFTEN TALK ABOUT HUMAN RIGHTS, BUT IT IS ALSO NECESSARY TO TALK OF THE TRUTH AND RIGHTS OF HUMANITY. August 14, 2026

Archives

  • August 2026
  • July 2026
  • June 2026
  • May 2026
  • April 2026
  • March 2026
  • February 2026
  • January 2026
  • December 2025
  • November 2025
  • October 2025
  • September 2025
  • August 2025
  • July 2025
  • June 2025
  • May 2025
  • February 2025
  • January 2025
  • December 2024
  • November 2024
  • October 2024
  • September 2024
  • August 2024
  • July 2024
  • June 2024
  • May 2024
  • April 2024
  • March 2024
  • February 2024
  • January 2024
  • December 2023
  • October 2023
  • September 2023
  • August 2023
  • July 2023
  • June 2023
  • May 2023
  • April 2023
  • March 2023
  • February 2023
  • January 2023
  • December 2022
  • November 2022
  • October 2022
  • September 2022
  • August 2022
  • July 2022
  • June 2022
  • May 2022
  • April 2022
  • March 2022
  • February 2022
  • January 2022
  • December 2021
  • November 2021
  • October 2021
  • September 2021
  • August 2021
  • July 2021
  • June 2021
  • May 2021
  • April 2021
  • March 2021
  • February 2021
  • January 2021
  • December 2020
  • November 2020
  • October 2020
  • September 2020
  • August 2020
  • July 2020
  • June 2020
  • May 2020
  • April 2020
  • March 2020
  • February 2020
  • January 2020
  • December 2019
  • November 2019
  • October 2019
  • September 2019
  • August 2019
  • July 2019
  • June 2019
  • May 2019
  • April 2019
  • March 2019
  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • January 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • November 2015
  • October 2015
  • September 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • June 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • October 2014
  • September 2014
  • August 2014
  • July 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • February 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013
  • October 2013

Talk to me.

benmadigan's avatarbenmadigan on THE BEADY EYE LOOKS AT THE EXP…
Jason Lawrence's avatarJason Lawrence on THE BEADY EYE ASK’S: WIT…
benmadigan's avatarbenmadigan on THE BEADY EYE ASK’S: WHA…
bobdillon33@gmail.com's avatarbobdillon33@gmail.co… on THE BEADY EYE SAYS: WELCOME TO…
Ernie's avatarOG on THE BEADY EYE SAYS: WELCOME TO…

7/7

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

My Blog; THE BEADY EYE.

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

bobdillon33@gmail.com

Free Thinker.

View Full Profile →

Follow bobdillon33blog on WordPress.com

Blog Stats

  • 104,182 hits

Blogs I Follow

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

The Beady Eye.

The Beady Eye.
Follow bobdillon33blog on WordPress.com

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.

unnecessary news from earth

WITH MIGO

The Invictus Soul

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

WestDeltaGirl's Blog

Sharing vegetarian and vegan recipes and food ideas

The PPJ Gazette

PPJ Gazette copyright ©

Privacy & Cookies: This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use.
To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here: Cookie Policy
  • Subscribe Subscribed
    • bobdillon33blog
    • Join 222 other subscribers
    • Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
    • bobdillon33blog
    • Subscribe Subscribed
    • Sign up
    • Log in
    • Report this content
    • View site in Reader
    • Manage subscriptions
    • Collapse this bar