Tag Archives: The Future of Mankind

THE BEADY EYE SAY’S: ENDING WORLD POVERTY IS AN UNREALISTIC GOAL. l’

21 Sunday Jan 2018

Posted by in World Aid., World Leaders, World Organisations., WORLD POVERTY WHERE'S THE GLOBAL OUTRAGE

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE SAY’S: ENDING WORLD POVERTY IS AN UNREALISTIC GOAL. l’

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , ,

 

( A twelve-minute read that could be the answer to Poverty)

You don’t have to be Einstein to recognize that inequality in all its forms is what wrong with our world. It haunts every minute of our lives no matter who you are, however  ‘Ending world poverty is an unrealistic goal’Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of poverty around the world"

It is policy not aid which matters most in today’s world.

Why?

Because the politics of inequality in the future will be as important as the economics of the Future.

Relative poverty is unpreventable without tackling inequalities. 

The aspirations of delivering a world where the quality of education, healthcare and national infrastructure available to every person is sufficient to bestow on them meaningful hope and ambition is hopefully the aim of “development”.  I emphasize the word hopeful.

In a world in which a billion people live on $1.26 a day, with climate immigration increasing and technology Algorithms blundering the world’s wealth.

We’re going to have to realize sooner than later that if we are to avoid or end violent conflicts ( That these days has inequality as their triggers) there is only one course to follow and that is to spread the wealth of the world fairly.

Poverty is a perception – it is a status which is bestowed on people who have relatively little – even in societies of plenty. Just look at the prevailing political view on aid to middle-income countries that contain hundreds of millions of desperately poor people.

We all know that the chances of ending poverty altogether are zero.

It would potentially cost some of the world’s biggest businesses billions and would need to be agreed by a group of world leaders who, if they all went out to dinner, would be sat around the table with their calculators out arguing about how to split the bill.

In a world driven by Greed, Advertising, and now more and more by filtered Social Media, we are becoming increasingly desensitized to the blight of others.

For those working in organisations that are dependent on official development assistance, it is hard to talk about ending their dependency, but the 21st century demands the challenge is not ducked.

Too much negativity and accusation of not making any progress with aid money. Comments like Shit Holes, which imply that aid is no longer necessary are undermining our Aid agencies, which are becoming an increasingly endangered species.

So if we accept that we won’t be satisfied if we overcome absolute poverty, where do we go next?

The closer we get to ending extreme poverty, the harder it is going to be to do it.

Imagine how different the world would be if the focus of aid spending was not “ending $1.25 dollar a day poverty” but “creating a fairer and more equitable world”.

Relative poverty will always exist and it should always be at the forefront of efforts to improve our world because it demands more than the bare minimum solution, or Asshole Trumps.

Decisions taken on tax regimes, remittance flows and trade concessions are now not the fastest route to assist poor countries in their development. Inequality is at the root of the reasons why.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of poverty around the world"

So in this world of inequalities is there any way of assisting development in a meaningful way.

Gadgets like tablets, smartphones and not-so-smart phones are multiplying five times faster than we are, with our population growing at a rate of about two people per second, or 1.2% annually.

The world is home to 7.2 billion gadgets, and they’re multiplying five times faster than we are.

The Mobile phone has done more for Africa than all Aid. No other technology has impacted us like the mobile phone.

The number of mobile phone users in the world is expected to pass the five billion mark by 2019. In 2016, an estimated 62.9 percent of the population worldwide already owned a mobile phone.

The mobile phone penetration is forecasted to continue to grow, rounding up to 67 percent by 2019.

By 2019, China is expected to reach almost 1.5 billion mobile connections and India almost 1.1 billion.

The number of smart phone users worldwide is expected to grow by one billion in a time span of five years.

It’s not that every person in the world has a mobile device, far from it; more than half of the population don’t have a mobile phone.

There are around 250 million machine-to-machine connections.

That may only be a fraction of the total number of mobile connections, but it was enough to knock us people off our perch in the man vs machine superiority stakes.

Just imaging what would happen if we were to equip everyone in the world (of voting age) with a mobile phone that could receive a basic income on a monthly basis.

Each phone with its unique pin.

With a phone that supplies a basic income we would witnessing a transformation in the way people relate to their governments.

A game-changer.

Not just a safer way to store money, but to reduce the need for Aid, to cut out corruption, to empower the poor, to eradicate inequality, to encourage closing the digital divide with the rest of the world. To give a sense of a future, information, opportunity and choice. To lift young people are currently trapped in poverty, often exacerbated by the need to contribute to their family incomes.

Explosive growth in mobile broadband use across continents would improve transparency and give a voice to citizens.

They would have a major economic, social and political impact.

So instead of the World Bank, the IMF, the Warren Buffets, the Bill Gates, the Mark Zckerbergs, the UN, Oxfam, the WTO, technology has the potential to lift people out of poverty.

There is no reason that a mobile money basic income could not be achieved with the application of a world aid commission of 0.05%. ( See previous posts)

Applying such a commission:  (On all profit seeking Algorithms, on all High Frequency Trading, on all Foreign Exchange Transactions over $50,000, on all Sovereign Wealth Funds acquisitions, to mention just a few of the existing Capitalist instruments that are solely designed for Profit.) would create a perpetual Fund of trillions.

Traditional banking is out of reach for many people in rural areas of developing countries, but mobile is bringing people into the financial system in droves. Financial inclusion, starting with a humble savings account, enables people to start businesses, invest in education and weather bad times.

Mobile still has hurdles to jump before it can reach all the lives of people most in need of the technology: Namely, reliable, affordable energy and comprehensive network coverage.  However you can rest assured if aid was directed to placing a communication satellite in orbit to service Africa or Latin America cell, phone use could help developing the countries within these Continents to plan electrical infrastructure.

There are in the world already a enough used mobile phones to supply most of Africa ( Pop. 1,273,903, 985)

Unfortunately there seems to be a major barrier to people turning in their old phones to be recycled.

To give a couple of examples, a recent survey found that 63% of Canadians have an unused phone at home. And in the UK alone, people are holding on to an estimated 76.8 million unused phones.

If your used phone is a very recent model, you may want to consider sending it in to Fairphone’s recycling program.

So Technology presents as opportunity to articulate a broader and more sustainable vision.

It is essential that we take it.

Poverty shouldn’t be a Catch 22 but in reality, for some, it is.

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

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

THE BEADY ASK’S: WHERE DO YOU THINK POVERTY CAME FROM AND WHERE IS IT GOING TO END UP.

19 Friday Jan 2018

Posted by in Poverty

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY ASK’S: WHERE DO YOU THINK POVERTY CAME FROM AND WHERE IS IT GOING TO END UP.

Tags

, , , , , , , , ,

 

( A twenty-minute read if you want a world worth living in)

Most of us were taught that poverty started with the Industrial Revolution.

For the most part this is true but it did not happen in the isolation of the British Empire.

This story is powerful in its simplicity but if we rewind to about 1500 people living in South America, India, and Asia were much better off than Europeans. In fact Europe was just emerging from the dark ages.

China and India controlled most if not nearly all the world economy.

The Question is how did this change and why?

I put it down to Christopher Columbus and shoddy geographical calculations.

On his second outing in the Caribbean he was looking for gold and as a result the Spanish invasion killed must of the islands inhabitants. Then came a bloke named Cortes who ripped off the Aztec of Mexico,followed by Pizarro yet another Spanish conquistador with an unquenchable thirst for gold.

A total of over  185,000 kilograms of gold and 100 million kilograms of silver were pilfer from Latin America and pumped into Spain and then used to pay for Spanish war and debts.

(A 100 million kilograms of silver invested back then @ 5% would amount to $165 trillion to-day. More than double the world’s total GDP to-day)

This wealth allowed Europe to grow its economic wealth beyond the China or India.

The result was Europeans outsourced its labour into wars and colonization reducing the population of the rest of the world by slavery, epidemic diseases and massacres while enjoying the rich life.

(  Free Slavery labour benefited the USA Colonies by over 222.5 million hours)  Britain pay compensation of over £20m to slave owners equivalent to £300 million to-day which tell us nothing of the total value they produced.

The Silver was turned into cotton and sugar and spices. Cotton being the key raw material for the European Industrial Revolution.

The Surviving slaves got nothing.

Indeed without the slave colonies of the New world there would have being no market for the Industrial goods.

You could say that the above is rather a simplistic explanation but development in Africa and Latin America was effectively stolen by Europe.

So where are we to-day.

  • Almost half the world — over 3 billion people — live on less than $2.50 a day.
  • The GDP (Gross Domestic Product) of the 41 Heavily Indebted Poor Countries (567 million people) is less than the wealth of the world’s 7 richest people combined.
  • Nearly a billion people entered the 21st century unable to read a book or sign their names.
  • Less than one per cent of what the world spent every year on weapons was needed to put every child into school by the year 2000 and yet it didn’t happen.
  • 1 billion children live in poverty (1 in 2 children in the world). 640 million live without adequate shelter, 400 million have no access to safe water, 270 million have no access to health services. 10.6 million died in 2003 before they reached the age of 5 (or roughly 29,000 children per day).

Poverty is the state for the majority of the world’s people and nations. Why is this?

Behind the increasing interconnectedness promised by globalization and technology are global decisions, policies, and practices.

Formulated by the rich and powerful.

These can be leaders of rich countries or other global actors such as multinational corporations, institutions, and influential people.

As a result, in the global context, a few get wealthy while the majority struggle.

The poorest are also typically marginalized from society and have little representation or voice in public and political debates, making it even harder to escape poverty.

The amount the world spends on military, financial bailouts and other areas that benefit the wealthy, compared to the amount spent to address the daily crisis of poverty and related problems are often staggering.

To attract investment, poor countries enter a spiraling race to the bottom to see who can provide lower standards, reduced wages and cheaper resources.

This has increased poverty and inequality for most people. It also forms a backbone to what we today call globalization. As a result, it maintains the historic unequal rules of trade.

Now we are looking at a new form of Poverty currently being created by a few monopolies. I call it Algorithm Poverty.

Around the world, in rich or poor nations, poverty has always been present. In most nations today, inequality—the gap between the rich and the poor—is quite high and often widening.

The causes are numerous, including a lack of individual responsibility, bad government policy, exploitation by people and businesses with power and influence, or some combination of these and other factors.

Inequality will affect social cohesion and lead to problems such as increasing crime and violence. Almost half the world—over three billion people—live on less than $2.50 a day and at least 80% of humanity lives on less than $10 a day:Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of poverty in america 2016"

And we wonder why the world is in a state of chaos.

Around 21,000 children die every day around the world. World hunger is a terrible symptom of world poverty.

Food aid (when not for emergency relief) can actually be very destructive on the economy of the recipient nation.

Free, subsidized, or cheap food, below market prices undercuts local farmers, who cannot compete and are driven out of jobs and into poverty, further slanting the market share of the larger producers such as those from the US and Europe.

Poverty leads to hunger. There are many inter-related issues causing hunger. They include land rights and ownership, diversion of land use to non-productive use, increasing emphasis on export-oriented agriculture, inefficient agricultural practices, war, famine, drought, over-fishing, poor crop yields, etc.

Solving world hunger in the conventional sense (of providing/growing more food etc) will not tackle poverty that leads to hunger in the first place.

Further, there is a risk of continuing the poverty and dependency without realizing it, because the act of attempting to provide more food etc can appear so altruistic in motive.

To solve world hunger in the long run, poverty alleviation is required.

For the first time in our history Technology offers us a chance to distribute the world’s wealth fairly.

Without Trade agreements, Aid, Repayment, Corruption, Power Brokering by NGOs, United Nations Begging, Bureaucratic interference, or any other hidden agendas.

It could be both implemented and funded by the very Algorithms that are going to spread poverty. ( See previous Posts)

It requires the large capitalist monopoly platforms to supply a free basic mobile phone to every person register as citizen of a country world-wide.

On registration the people would be allocated a pin number.

This pin would allow them to access a monthly Basic non repayable no strings attached Income payment.

There is no other way of ensuring that our world can fight poverty and climate change.

Most of the causes of hunger are found in global politics.

People are hungry not because the population is growing so fast that food is becoming scarce, but because people cannot afford it.

The number of people overweight or obese is now rivaling the number of people suffering from hunger around the world.

Its time to get off our fat asses and share our wealth not push it around to create more wealth.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of poverty in america 2016"

Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of poverty in america 2016"

If you want a world worth something in the future now is the time to start creating it. Solve                                             World Poverty once and

For all.

It can be done with the press of a button.

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

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

 

 

THE BEADY EYE SAY’S: BY 2025, WE WILL BE IF NOT ALREADY LIVING IN A WORLD THAT IS RUN BY GOOGLE.

02 Tuesday Jan 2018

Posted by in 2018: The Year of Disconnection., Algorithms., Artificial Intelligence., Big Data., Evolution., Facebook, Fourth Industrial Revolution., Google Knowledge., Humanity., Innovation., Life., Our Common Values., Poverty, Privatization, Social Media, Sustaniability, Technology, The cloud., The common good., The Future, The Obvious., The world to day., Twitter, Unanswered Questions., United Nations, What Needs to change in the World, Where's the Global Outrage.

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE SAY’S: BY 2025, WE WILL BE IF NOT ALREADY LIVING IN A WORLD THAT IS RUN BY GOOGLE.

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

 

( A twenty-one minute Brain storming read)

I have posted on this subject before with little reaction.

There is often an implicit connection between discourses of the future and notions of technology, so that if we see a television programme with a title such as Click or Tomorrow’s World we expect that the topic will be technology.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of technology in the future"

The single most astonishing point about technologies is that they can move from being emblematic of an almost unreachable future to becoming so taken for granted that it feels like a personal slight when they do not work.

In this way technology in and of itself becomes a symbol of being modern is one of the reasons it becomes expressive of, rather than distinct from, cultural values.

Perhaps this is the reason that the relationship between social media and the conceptualisation of the future is still blurred and will remain so.

New technology does not just change the manner in which people go about their everyday lives: It also facilitates our imagination of the future.

All the above speak to a new, imagined future that strives towards idealism. However within the vast field of technology the consequences of AI there are a few devices and algorithms that will battle it out over the next twenty odd years for supremacy.

Will it be Smartphones, or Smart Wearable or Cryptocurrency that will augment reality.

All need software in the form of algorithms to run.

AI algorithms will make the physical and digital world interchangeable.

Practically every non- iPhone smartphone relies on an Android operating system?

One way or the other we are entering an age where life stops giving us things and starts taking them away.

Not surprising.

So it’s not Social media technology platforms like Facebook or Twitter and the others ( that talks a lot about connectivity but not accountability) that will change the world but the power of ever where at once.

That requires total knowledge on all aspects of life.

Google or should I say the Google Cloud is trying to achieve this. Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of google"

Which is possibly both the best and the worst thing that could happen.

So let’s look at a few of the top combats in the world of technology in no particular order.

( Obviously it would take page after page to give a comprehensive insight so I am only going to give a few lines to each.)

 Microsoft Corporation:(LinkedIn -Skype – Mojang – Yammer- Hotmail)

 It operates through the following segments:

Productivity and Business Processes, Intelligent Cloud, and More Personal Computing.

  • Market Cap As of May 2017
  • $507.5 Billion

     Microsoft could be worth $1 trillion by 2020 — if not sooner. It is moving further and further into a digital landscape for everything from movies, music, books, games and software.

Twitter: Owned mostly by Venture Capitalist:

An online breaking news and social networking service. Using Twitter bots, (live streaming video.) With 450 million monthly active users it is ranked the eleventh most visited website. It has mobile apps for iPhone, iPad, Android, Windows 10, Windows Phone,BlackBerry, and Nokia S40.

Capable of influencing public opinion about culture, products and political agendas by automatically generating mass amounts of tweets through imitating human communication. World leaders and their diplomats have taken note of Twitter’s rapid expansion and have been increasingly utilizing Twitter diplomacy. Television programs use it to amplify their programs.

It could become the emergency communication system for track epidemics or sensor for automatic response to natural disasters.

Amazon:

The largest Internet retailer in the world. The company is now worth more than $560 billion. Electronic commerce and cloud computing company.

Amazon announced that it would acquire Whole Foods, a high-end supermarket chain with over 400 stores, for $13.4 billion.

eBay Inc: (PayPal) 

There are now literally millions of items bought and sold every day on eBay, all over the world. For every $100 spent online worldwide, it is estimated that $14 is spent on eBay. What’s more, eBay doesn’t care who you are, where you live, or what you look like:

The race is on to control mobile payments and the upside remains enormous:

Apple:(Shazam – Emagic- Siri – Beats Electronics – Next Inc.- Novauris-PrimeSense -The Bottom Line – Invest in Yourself.)

Quarterly revenue of $52.6 billion 2017.

Today, Apple leads the world in innovation with iPhone, iPad, Mac, Apple Watch and Apple TV. Apple’s four software platforms — iOS, macOS, watchOS and tvOS.

Facebook:(Whats App and Instagram Oculus VR.) 

A publicly traded company worth more than $500 billion.

More than two billion monthly users. It is developing a new social platform in virtual reality called Facebook Spaces, which it believes will form the foundation for the future of communication.

Tencent and Alibaba: aren’t far from the half-trillion dollar mark either.

These are the main contenders as we know them to-day

—————————————————————————————

So the Question is:

Which one if any of the above will be the top dog by 2025.

Will it be : ( All knowledge, All Gossip, All purchases, All Apps/ Software)

At this point you will have noticed that I have left out the company mentioned in Title of this posting.

While in the future devices may be more ubiquitous in all corners
of the globe, inequality will therefore remain in terms of the services
available in certain locations and the lack of attention paid to the needs
and desires of certain populations.

Companies like Amazon and Google will be fighting to lock you into one voice ecosystem. You may have to declare your allegiance for Alexa, Siri, Cortana or Google Assistant.

One could say that:

Amazon represents de-socialising of commerce. Face book represents self ego. Twitter represents myths and gossip. Apple represents profit. E bay represents selling and buying of stuff,  Google represents doming down.

All are represented on Social Media which is being used in ways that shape politics, business, world culture, education, careers, innovation, and more.

Social media applications such as Facebook, Twitter and YouTube have increasingly been adopted by politicians, political activists and social movements as a means to engage, organize and communicate with citizens.

So is the power and the winner going to be Social Media which is owned by the Internet.

I think Not.

In short, one consequence of this prediction is that the very idea of ‘social media’ might gradually disappear; instead we simply have an increasingly diverse set of media and increasingly sophisticated exploitation of the possibilities these media have created, including other trends such as obtaining information, sharing information or making communication more visual.

Social media is slowly killing real activism and replacing it with ‘slacktivism, and we all know where that might lead us.  Awareness is not translating into real change. Support is limited to pressing the ‘Like’ button or sharing content which absolve them from responsibility to act.

The role of social media as symbolic of the future may already be in decline.

“The election of Donald J. Trump is perhaps the starkest illustration yet that across the planet, social networks are helping to fundamentally rewire human society.”

The one I left out, with 65% of all online searches –  is Google.

Google has expanded far beyond its original claim to fame as a search engine.

Google and their competitor platforms are programming the world for profit. The reach of this technology giant is so vast it is hard to imagine an area of modern life it has not touched.

Alphabet owns Google, as well as many other companies. However, Google itself owns companies.

Google has reorganized itself into multiple companies, separating its core Internet business from several of its most ambitious projects while continuing to run all of these operations under a new umbrella company called Alphabet.

Google owns more than 200 companies, including those involved in robotics, mapping, video broadcasting, telecommunications and advertising.

Simply put, the company has been visionary in recognizing the income potential for information products.

Their profit seeking algorithms ensuring that every recommendation, from whether you should buy this or that, stay here or there, fly or drive, connect to this or that, live or die, will earn them a few cents.

By 2025 all will be connected to the Cloud.  With one winner.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of technology in the future"

The Google Monopoly.

Once a Google client always a Google client.

How do you stop using Google?

Already impossible.

Move and your G Mail becomes blocked mail.

Say anything on you website that smacks about google, you site gets flooded with google ads.

It is becoming more and more difficult for anyone to extricate themselves from the clutches of any of its platforms as deactivating means little or nothing.

Social media apps ensure you are still engaged and if they don’t work your friends and family smartphones are searching for you nonstop supplying little hits of dopamine. ( Someone likes you photo or you are mentioned in their contact.  It’s a social validation feedback loop..exploiting a vulnerability in humans psychology.)

Will Social Media destroy or rain back Google dominance?

The whole Social media thing is turning into an addictive cancer effecting our brains and tearing our emotions and attentiveness a sunder which in turn is encouraging self-segregation and exacerbating social divides.

Every facet of our life is touched or being integrated by the social media today.

In this sense social media has become an instrument of democratic renewal.

On the other hand it is evident that this uncensored and unmonitored medium of communication is exposing us all to a gradual breakdown of social cohesion and the destruction of our traditional value systems.

Though the advantages of social media are emphasized quite often, as opposed to its negative aspects which are very rarely discussed.

I feel that this will change in the coming years.

All said, social media is here to stay. The power of social media is exponential. Numbers tell the story.

Just as difficult as forecasting the future is knowing the present.

After all not everything moves over time to become more functional
or efficient.

It is obviously going to be hard to predict the future for something as
dynamic as social media. How can we know what social media has already become for oil workers in Alaska, tribal people in Amazonia and the nouveau riche of Moscow?

Unless we take responsibility to ensure that our understanding of social media and its impacts are constantly evaluated with what’s happening in the world. Once we appreciate that knowing social media is not an exercise in delineating the properties of a set of platforms, but rather of acknowledging what the world has already turned these into, by way of content, the immensity of the problem is revealed.

So it will be important to continue monitoring and exploring the extent to which collective action is individualised through social media use.

= Can the use of social media for campaigning help to bring about genuine and lasting empowerment; or does it serve largely to re-inforce pre-existing relationships?

=  Is social media a means of building dialogue and consensus in diverse communities or does its use encourage increased fragmentation or, alternatively, a homogeneity of interests?

=  Can meaningful impact measures be developed that can be used by small, under-resourced organisations at local level (or indeed within larger voluntary organisations)?

Social media is seen in much of the literature as a means of promoting dialogue beyond the mainstream media. Voluntary and community groups have been criticized, however, for using social media as little more than a means of broadcasting.

Why might this be the case – and does it matter?

Social media expands our capacity but, it does not change our
essential humanity.

It is used to repair the rupture sustained by separated transnational families or for overcoming previously frustrated desires to share photographs more easily.

It allows couples living in different countries who ‘sort of’ live together online;

Soon, however, things move on to new realms.

Should a clear relationship be expected between the (apparently empowering) use of social media in mobilizing large national and global movements, and its use at the micro-political neighborhood level.

An increasing number of social media platforms can be aligned with the diversity of the social groups to which we might want to relate.

Social media however  has little impact on the overall outcomes in terms of empowerment, equalities or social justice.

However powerful and important the advent of social media has become, it would be hard to place it ahead of the impact and significance of smartphones, within which social media platforms may often be seen as just another kind of app.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of technology in the future"

It is smartphones that facilitate social media’s importance as a mix of polymedia, making clear the range of media possibilities as they lie side by side within one easily accessible device.

It is the Smartphone that drives social media input and out put.

Will that will be the One Winner, changing our sense of collective memory, creating a new form or combination of internal and external faculties for retaining information.

As Smartphones become smarter, they may well accelerate the dissolving of social media into this wider array of communicative possibilities.

The increasing ubiquity of the smart phone is the catalyst for more general usage of social media. Recognizing that this may not necessarily impact on any other aspect of inequality should not prevent us from recognizing that there is in one aspect an increasing and significant equality:

The more individuals live within culturally imposed constraints on communication, the more a new technology may mean that what was previously forbidden now becomes possible.

This fluid mix of communicative forms suits the way users flow between activities such as talking, gaming, texting, masturbating, learning and purchasing. The social connection is more important than how well a platform meets their needs.

Comparative anthropology creates particular varieties of knowledge of both breadth and depth. What makes these essential within the context of our complex modern world, however, is that these are forms of understanding based on empathy.

Merely having a smart phone provides a significant change with respect to the capacities of its owner.

——

What happens to our online materials at death.

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

Finally:  Capitalism can never be ethical.

There are no laws requiring Google to be fair.

If we don’t open our eyes soon technology ( whether it’s Google, Twitter, Facebook, Amazon Inc or some equivalent service)  is going to F—k us all from some Cloud or other that is just over the horizon.

Just look at the annual release of new smartphones.

Of course there are other things in the long tall grass waiting to caught us by the short and hairy and most have being around for yonks. War, Natural Disasters, Greed, Inequality and the like.

My advice is to beware of the man with a smartphone. Because knowledge is not knowledge until someone else knows that one knows.

Google it.

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

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

 

THE BEADY EYE SAY’S: 2018 WILL BE THE BIG DETACHMENT YEAR.

29 Friday Dec 2017

Posted by in 2018: The Year of Disconnection., Algorithms., Artificial Intelligence., Big Data., Climate Change., Environment, Evolution, Fake News., Google, Google Knowledge., HUMAN INTELLIGENCE, Humanity., Innovation., Life., Our Common Values., Post - truth politics., Social Media, Sustaniability, Technology, The cloud., The essence of our humanity., The Future, The Internet., The Obvious., The world to day., Twitter, Unanswered Questions., What Needs to change in the World, Where's the Global Outrage., World Organisations.

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE SAY’S: 2018 WILL BE THE BIG DETACHMENT YEAR.

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

 

( A four-minute New Year Read)

We live in a world that is being connected and disconnected at the same time.

Two related facts.

But don’t worry we now have Algorithms that both filter and recommend.

All our final decisions are made in a state of mind that is not going to last.

The reality is that there’s no way of knowing where our generation is going in terms of technology and our reliance on it.

The year 2018 will be the year in which human interaction decreases the more technology increases. While social media fosters an environment of connectedness and belonging in the digital world, it also forces a disconnect between people in the real world.

With false news and social media, words are on their last legs, with print for the high jump, we will have more arse holes 2018 twittering shaping the world.

Where two or three words gather together there is a great danger that thought might be present. However we once again don’t have to worry because we have the option to log off and unplug anytime we want, so it’s up to us to decide if we want to engage with the actual world or the virtual one.Search results for "pictures of computer algorithms"

Technology may well be is a societal advancement that has enabled our generation to do things previous generations never would have thought possible.

However:

The biggest problem we have is accepting each other’s differences.

“Technology makes us forget what we know about life.”

82 per cent of smart phone users said they rarely (if ever) powered off their phones last year, while less than 43 per cent of 13- to 18-year-olds saw any value in ever going unplugged.Search results for "pictures of detachment"

Why?

This is the Eternal Question to which there is no answer, and yet the only one that has to be asked.

Take a look around you.

Every day we becoming more and more desensitized. Save this Save that while saving the planet is being left to technology.

Rapid progress in machine learning has raised the prospect that algorithms will one day be able to do most or all of the mental tasks currently performed by humans.

But the real problem is how one might design a highly intelligent machine to pursue realistic human goals safely.

This is very poorly understood.

Even if advanced machine intelligence does not get ‘out of control’, it is likely to be very socially disruptive and it is more likely it could be used as a destabilizing weapon of war.

It seems that most of us are in a mental wasteland inhabited by those upon whom the portcullis ( A sudden blotting out of all normal thought) has fallen.

How did we get to a place where the content on our phones is more interesting than the world around us?

In today’s society, scrolling through Facebook, Twitter, or Instagram has taken precedence over the real events scrolling through our daily lives.

Being “connected” to machinery 24/7 is affecting our ability to connect with our lives and the people around us. 

Mechanical devices bait us into a make-believe life, as we are slowly being pulled away from a sense of who we are and what really matters.

Modern life is making us lonelier.

It’s not the technology that’s the problem; it’s us for abusing it.

We’ve become more and more antisocial by relying on technology too heavily.

Maybe if we look up and away from the flashing images and colors on our most recent Safari search, we will actually enjoy the company of those around us. So instead of counting the number of likes, count the memories in your life, because at the end of the day, that’s all that matters.

For the foreseeable future, it won’t be possible to take people out of the decision-making process, but the year 2018 will with the power of Profit Seeking Algorithms push us further down the road of hypnotic trance.

Technology is a valuable tool when used correctly. However, the law has to catch up with privacy and safety issues, not mention profit seeking algorithms. Search results for "pictures of computer algorithms"

We’ve all heard about the power of algorithms—but Algorithms to Live is in my book to be avoided at all costs, if we are to value what is vital to us all. 

They are creating a world of such inequality that the scariest thing is the immense possibilities of these unregulated Algorithms will turn us and all that is necessary for a sustainable life into commodities to be exploited.

What can be done:

Education, Education is the only solution.

By this I mean education not for the market place but for the foundation of knowledge. Not just a narrow streamlined pipeline of mundane thoughts which doesn’t let you think outside the box and do things on your own.

Psychology, Anthropology, Sociology, Ecology, to name a few.

Dramatic changes are inevitable, we need to accept the fact on ground level that our education models are broken and paralyzed.

Perhaps we might well need computer algorithms to select the best candidate?

There’s no magic formula, freedom and dignity will not be found on social media, nor computed by algorithms.

There are too many parts of today’s conversations that can not be translated through technology.

Tearing apart the nation states and the world with ALGORITHMS is a

Disaster waiting to happen. No Robot with a brain full of algorithms is

going to have the the ability of an artist to have human empathy and an

appreciation of history; while also having the savvy self-awareness to

understand that their work merely takes its place in a greater culture

at large. Such art brings comfort in our modern secular world: where

spirituality seems to live in a foreign universe of yesteryear.

You’re more than a number.

how the mythical and quotidian usually overlap to

the point where the two become indistinguishable.

So join a club and organizations to make real friends.

Happy New year.

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

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

THE BEADY EYE SAY’S: FREE RIDING IS OVER.

13 Wednesday Dec 2017

Posted by in Environment, Humanity., Life., Sustaniability, The common good., The essence of our humanity., The Future, The Obvious., The world to day., Unanswered Questions., What Needs to change in the World, Where's the Global Outrage.

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE SAY’S: FREE RIDING IS OVER.

Tags

, , , , , ,

 

( A Twenty minute read)

Does the common good exist? or has technology killed it for good.

I am sure that there are far more Aristotle, thinking minded people than me that can answer this question.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of common actions"

While the exploitation and degradation of the environment is set to continue, life as we know it will one day be impossible on this planet unless we come together to act as one. 

It is rational for corporations to free ride, given the costs of individual action, which affect profits and competitiveness in an international economy. There is little incentive for individual countries or corporations to do anything other than free ride.

Yet, collectively, this is the worst possible outcome for the environment.

The problem is that for common action to work it has to start small and be appealing to thousands with incentives.

Global problems are seen as long-term, to be resolved by political decisions. These are world problems – problems that ignore the artificial frontiers which crisscross the globe, problems which concern the whole human race, are driven by the system to engage in a competitive struggle for profits against each other.

Were we expected to co-operate to solve ecological problems – problems caused by the competitive, profit-seeking system that Governments support and uphold we would not need the out of date World organisations such as the United Nations and the World Bank, the IMF, the WTO that all needs to be democratized abolishing the veto powers.

While it is clear that a question which concerns the whole world such as the possible consequences of global warming can be effectively dealt with only by unified action at a world level, it is equally clear that this is not going to happen under the profit system of capitalism.

The different countries into which the world is divided have different – and clashing – interests. At most, all that can happen under the profit system when a global problem arises is ‘much too little, much too late’.

On the surface, the changes created by climate change seem almost benign, or able to be addressed with common engineering and economic and technological solutions.

If we are honest about how much information we really possess at this time, politics would be more about than building an institutional framework for the narrow pursuit of individual self-interest in the essentially private domain of liberalized markets.

After all, whatever every human being is doing, whether it is pursuing money, or pleasure or God, he is only seeking his own well-being.

Sadly, however, most people don’t focus on what they have in common with others or on the recognition of our shared humanity.

As Einstein once said:

A human being is part of the whole, called by us ‘universe,’ a part limited in time and space. He experiences himself, his thoughts and feelings, as something separate from the rest — a kind of optical delusion of consciousness. This delusion is a kind of prison for us, restricting us to our personal desires and to affection for a few persons nearest to us. Our task must be to free ourselves from this prison by widening our circle of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole of nature in its beauty.

Today, with the tools of science and technology we have brought ourselves to a self-threatening situation that everybody in the society needs to turn spiritual, otherwise there is no survival for this world.

What we are now seeing is the other side of ego—greed, lust for wealth and power, exploitation of others for personal gain. This darker side of ego separates us. We become mean and judgmental. We become polarized, one against another. We misuse the power that accompanies money in order to get more money.

But now the intention—why we act—has corrupted itself into what’s in it for me. The scourge of debt-backed money.

Existing realities on the planet could be changed in a moment, because existing realities do not take into consideration people’s will, they do not take into consideration people’s commitment, they do not take into consideration the love in their hearts.

However I am convinced because human beings have a capacity for empathy that transcends boundaries of language, culture, skin color, religion, age, gender, and physical ability we can do so.

To engage the different voices and stories that shape human inequities and potentials.

The first and the foremost thing we need to do is to empower the people. Empowerment does not mean amassing of material wealth, or technology. Today our pursuit for these is so vigorous that the very life of the planet is being threatened.

So here are a few observations:

A thing’s nature is detectable not only in its external appearance, but also and more importantly through the natural inclinations which guide it to behave in conformity with the particular nature it has.

Participatory democracy becomes real when individuals, groups, and communities see the benefits of connecting their identities and experiences with those of others.

So why is it that we cannot act for the common good?

Is it because most beings in the universe do not possess the rational ability to act consciously.

Is it because we possess the power of free choice and therefore have a radically different relation to everything.

Is it that the simple requirements of doing good and avoiding evil fail to provide human beings with much content for pursuing the moral life.

Is it because the common good has been associated with the existence of an active of life rather than any narrow perception of the limited.

Taking care of the Earth is not just a responsibility– it’s a privilege.

Don’t ever let someone tell you that one person can’t make a difference! Making a difference for the future of Planet Earth doesn’t have to include huge life changing choices!!

Here are a few simple suggestion: 

Why not:

Make Train travel free.  Have your bills emailed to you. Share what you care about. Ban Wooden coffins – cardboard coffin. Make solar panels grant able –  Save Electricity. De-tox your home. Eat less meat. Eat and buy locally. Consume less chemicals, Conserve water. Stop using virgin paper. Paint you roof white. Make Florescent light bulbs free. Use refillable water bottles. Use your hankie as a Napkin. Recycle: Don't Use Plastic

Every natural system on the planet is in decline.

If we all work together, we really can make a collective positive difference in the amount of damage we do.

Given the modern condition of American democracy, we need the arts and humanities more than ever.

It seems that if someone wants something, then it is good for them.

To define the good as ‘what all want’ is therefore a definition not of an effect by its cause, but just the opposite: a definition of a cause by its effect. The good is a cause. It is the final cause, the end or purpose.

There are, of course, some problems that you really cannot do much about on your own but these can be solved with a World Aid Commission of 0.05%. (See previous posts)

A different mirror” reflecting our connected histories and shared narratives–conflicting and complementary- is needed. Trump is just making darn sure it happens with a vengeance.

Our knowledge begins with sensation: with the things that we see and feel and taste and smell and hear. Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. In fact, it is the only thing that ever has. Human nature impacts the rest of nature. We need to adapt to a changing world. We must organise to take the Earth back from those who currently own and exploit it, and must make it the common heritage of all.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of common actions"

Unless we invent the means with which we can practically colonize other planets and develop interstellar space travel. Without *both* of those, we are goners, no matter what.

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

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

THE BEADY ASKS: FROM NAKED APE TO ROBOT – WILL IT BE WORTH IT?

08 Friday Dec 2017

Posted by in Artificial Intelligence., Evolution., Fourth Industrial Revolution., HUMAN INTELLIGENCE, Sustaniability, Technology., The essence of our humanity., The Future, The Internet., The world to day., Unanswered Questions., What Needs to change in the World, Where's the Global Outrage., World Leaders, World Organisations., World Politics

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY ASKS: FROM NAKED APE TO ROBOT – WILL IT BE WORTH IT?

Tags

, , , , , ,

 ( A Fifteen minute read)

We are becoming less and less effective in the face of enormous but slow-moving crises such as the loss of biodiversity or climate change. Deforestation, Freshwater Species Extinctions, Climate Change and Destruction of Natural Resources, Large-scale Wars and Religious Conflicts.

“human cost” of the current system:

Not to  Mention Technology.

What we prioritize, the way we shape our lives, affects the evolutionary future of our species, so we would do well to start asking some simple question about the untended consequences of technology? 

Is it likely that in the near future humans are going to speciate? ( Humans one species and robots another. )

If you can’t explain Artificial intelligence/ Machine learning stored in the cloud and what it is doing to the public, there’s a good chance it doesn’t merit doing.

Mannequin heads sitting on a shelf in a factory The number of people on the planet is set to rise to 9.7 billion in 2050 with 2 billion aged over 60.

 That is only 30 odd year away.

We are entering the age of the Fourth Industrial Revolution, a technological transformation that is robbing us of the essence of our humanity.

Driven by a ubiquitous and mobile internet, we are perhaps witnessing the end of human evolution as we know it.

Up to now human evolution proceeded extremely slowly and within historical memory, man has exhibited aggressive territorial behavior. Even as we bask smugly in the comforts of our smart phones natural selection to-day still ensured that only the fittest survived.

However it may not be long before computers are hooked up to the human brain with genetic trade-offs till we can’t be improved any further,

Then evolution will really have come to a stop for us. We will be the only species to have put a halt to natural selection, of its own free will, as it were.

Stopping natural selection is not as important, or as depressing, as it might sound — because our evolutionary process will then be cultural.

One way or the other by the time we get there our current social, political and economic systems will have driven inequalities with profit seeking algorithms off the map, rather than reducing them.

The challenge is to manage this seismic change in a way that promotes the long-term health and stability of the planet.

The writing has been on the wall for some time.Homo floresiensis

So where do we stand:

Since 1992 CO2 emissions have jumper 62% and the global temperature is up 29%. Fresh water is down 26%. Ocean dead zones up 76% . Forestland down 300 million acres. People up 35%.

You would think that we the biggest dimwit on the planet looking at this evidence would conclude that there is something very wrong. If you dont know what it is, we have evolved beyond our needs, trampling other species in the process.

We are now at a turning point we can either push ahead on our path to destruction or we can reshape our place in nature and prosper or we can face a humongous environmental crisis.

You would think that with everything connected by the internet, it would transform how we do business and help us manage resources more efficiently and sustainable.

As you can see this is not the result.

On the contrary the way we’ve set up corporations, world organisations, where even a majority vote cannot demand that a corporation’s or world organisation policies reflect the public good or preserve the environment for future use.

That’s because profit is the one and only motive.

It’s up to government and it’s up to people to protect the public interest. Corporations and world organisations are simply not allowed to.

Within the next decade, it is expected that more than a trillion sensors will be connected to the internet. By 2025, 10% of people are expected to be wearing clothes connected to the internet and the first implantable mobile phone is expected to be sold.

However today, 43% of the world’s population are connected to the internet, mostly in developed countries.

In a world driven by short-term profit, the connectivity theory is and will remain so far off the mark it can only be believed by artificial intelligence.

Growing unease over globalization, which is evident from the number of questions being asked about the power of corporations and the adequacy of the regulations governing employment, environmental issues and taxation, is causing economic and social ills, ranging from low consumption to social and political unrest, and is damaging to any future.

There is no need for me to tell you that we are living in turbulent times.

It is clear that the old stories are dying and if we continue to poison ourselves and the planet by self-interest, fragmentation and profit for profit sake there will be no point to the age of technology other than becoming slaves.

However evolution is going on invisibly all the time. Species evolve in response to whatever environment they encounter. No despots have ever set out to select for increased or decreased longevity in the populations they control.

By 2050, the world must feed 9 billion people. Yet the demand for food will be 60% greater than it is today.

The scale of the employment challenge is vast. Rapid progress in machine learning has raised the prospect that algorithms will one day be able to do most or all of the mental tasks currently performed by humans. These advances could lead to extremely positive developments, presenting solutions to now-intractable global problems, but they also pose severe risks.

This might be the most important transition of the next century – either ushering in an unprecedented era of wealth and progress, or heralding disaster.

But it’s also an area that’s highly neglected: while billions are spent making AI more powerful. The problem of how one might design a highly intelligent machine to pursue realistic human goals safely is very poorly understood. It is estimated that there are fewer than 100 people in the world working on how to make AI safe.

If AI research continues to advance without enough work going into the research problem of controlling such machines, catastrophic accidents are much more likely to occur.

It’s generally agreed that, among the forces that led to the immense sophistication of the human brain, the most powerful was a kind of feedback loop between the growing complexity of our ancestors’ physical and social environment and the ability of our ancestors to adapt to it. But why, you may ask, has the enormous increase in complexity of our recent technological environment not had a measurable physical impact on our brains?

The rate at which we are changing our environment now has outstripped even the fastest biological evolution.

However the ineluctable laws of evolution will continue to operate, probably even more strongly, in the overcrowded, ecologically damaged world of the future. And if things get really bad, the evolutionary consequences could be extreme. Any survivors of a nuclear holocaust or an ecological catastrophe are likely to be a small and highly selected subset of today’s population.

If, for example, destruction were so widespread that people could not form viable social groups, the evolution of our descendants would inevitably be driven in the direction of brutishness.

If our technologies fail to protect us against these forces of nature our genetic heritage could fail us too, meaning human evolution will return with a vengeance.

Then again if everyone had exactly the same set of genes controlling the brain’s development, there would be no genetic differences among people on which natural selection could act–and evolution really would come to a stop!

War then would be the strong life; it is life in extremism; war taxes are the only ones men never hesitate to pay, as the budgets of all nations show us.

There is no doubting the force of [the] arguments above, call me back in 3 million years time, because I may well be wrong on that one.

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

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

 

 

 

 

 

THE BEADY EYE SAYS: IT IS TIME TO STOP LYING TO OURSELVES,

29 Wednesday Nov 2017

Posted by in Uncategorized, What Needs to change in the World

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE SAYS: IT IS TIME TO STOP LYING TO OURSELVES,

Tags

, , , ,

 

( A twenty-minute read)

The world is in a mess.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of the world from space"

What the hell are we thinking?

The myth with or without Artificial Intelligence is beginning to crumble. It seems that it is not just capitalism itself is in conflict with the pressing need to stave off a planetary emergency. It is the model that we pursue.

The economic system that we have put in place over the last few decades has rendered us incapable of meeting the most serious challenges of the 21st century.

Take hunger for example:Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of hunger"

It was to be eradicated within a decade. Instead according to the most conservation measures there are about 800 million hungry people. In reality this figure is around two billion, nearly a third of all humanity. How is this so when we produce enough food to feed 7 billion with left overs to feed another three billion.

Take Poverty for example:Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of poverty"

We told by the United Nations that millions have being taken out of poverty. This may be so but most of those millions are in China. A dollar a day is I am sure you would agreed is simply not adequate for human existence, to say nothing of human dignity. Even if it was five dollars a day there would be five billion people still be living below the poverty line. About 60% of humanity.

Take Inequality for example:Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of inequality"

The World Economic Form met in Davos recently where Oxfam announced that the richest eight people in the world had as much wealth as the poorest 3.6 billion.

Take Social media for example:Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of social media icons"

Despite mounting evidence that it is tearing society apart ( It contributed to Nine Eleven, to the Axis of Evil, to the Iraq? Afghan war, to the creation of the Arab Spring,  to ISIS, to the Syrian war, to recruitment of terrorist, to bullying, to undermining elections, to the election of Trump, to populous politics, to mining our social anxieties, to selling ads, to competing additive Platforms, to non connectivity, to sow discord, to plundering privacy. ) it remains unregulated.

Take Development and the World trade organisation for example:Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of world trade organization"

It enshrines policies to suite their own interests. It is estimated that for every dollar of aid developing countries receive they lose 24 in net outflow.

In 2012 developing countries received a little over 2 trillion dollars in all Aid. 5 trillion flowed out of them a net lost of 3 trillion. Since 1980 this adds up to a whopping 265 trillion out flow. 4,2 trillion of this is in interest payments.

The mobile phone has done more than all the western Aid to the third world.

Take Climate Change for example: Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of climate change"

CO2 admission turned into carbon credits bought and sold on the stock exchange. We are pumping 40 gigatons of carbon dioxide into the earth’s atmosphere each year. The Paris pledges don’t kick in til 2020. The Arctic is melting leading to a massive release of methane.

Certainly anyone who still thinks development is just a matter of increasing GDP growth and thereby CO2 emissions has yet to come to terms with the brutal facts of climate change. It seems that capitalism

Take the Arms trade for example:

The world spends some $1,000 billion annually on the military.

Arms-Exporters-Importer.jpg

Ten countries are responsible for the vast majority of all major arms exports, accounting for 90 percent of global sales. The top five major arms exporters are the United States, Russia, Germany, France and China. Together, they account for 74 percent of the total volume of exports.

The US with a 33 per cent share of the global market.

The UK is the sixth largest exporter of arms in the world, with a 4.5 per cent share of the global market. Arms exports from the UK increased 26 per cent in the last five years.  British sales of military equipment to Saudi Arabia topped £1.1bn in the first half of this year.

Take Fresh Water for example:Résultat de recherche d'images pour "the position on fresh water in the world"

1 billion people facing water scarcity.

As the global population grows, so does demand for fresh water. Many water systems around the world are currently overtaxed, and some have already collapsed. According to one estimate, by 2030 our planet’s need for water will outstrip its reliable supply by 40%. Fresh water makes civilization possible.​

Take Deforestation for example: Résultat de recherche d'images pour "the position on Deforestation in the world"

An estimated 7.6 million hectares of forests are lost each year. Forests play key roles in the water cycle, soil conservation, carbon sequestration, and habitat protection, including for pollinators. Their sustainable management is crucial for sustainable agriculture and food security. The predicted future length of time in which rain forest destruction alone will release more carbon into the atmosphere than every flight from the dawn of aviation until 2025

Today, deforestation is increasingly driven by a growing worldwide demand for different globally-traded commodities, including soy, palm oil, beef and timber. 150,000 km2 of tropical rain forest is destroyed every year.

Take pollution for example:

Pollution from human activities, especially agriculture, washes into streams, lakes, estuaries and oceans. Already, nearly 60% of U.S. lakes are too polluted. Our oceans are full of plastic.

Take Energy/Power for example: Energy

The world uses over 500 million terajoules of energy in one year.

Liquid fuels—mostly petroleum-based—remain the largest source of world energy consumption.

Total world energy consumption will rise from 575 quadrillion British thermal units (Btu) in 2015 to 736 quadrillion Btu in 2040, an increase of 28%.  Most of the world’s energy growth will occur in countries outside of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.

World consumption and production of renewable energy is dismal, fossil fuels will still account for 77% of energy use in 2040. Our use of energy will grow by about 35 percent between 2011 and 2035. If nothing changes, most of this increase will be covered by burning more coal.

In just 71 minutes the Earth is hit by enough solar energy to power the world for one year. If we could exploit just one tenth of one percent of this energy we would have more than enough energy to meet the world’s total energy demand.

Percent renewable energy use globally, right now

Take Algorithms for example: Algorithm, complex mathematical formulas, are playing a growing role in all walks of life: from health, to shopping, and jobs (AFP Photo/ROSLAN RAHMAN)

The new form of unseen Capitalism. Profit seeking algorithms run Wall street and other world stock exchanges. Algorithm, complex mathematical formulas, are playing a growing role in all walks of life: from health, to shopping, and jobs.

Algorithms are being used — experimentally — to write news articles from raw data. Algorithms are not inherently fair, because the person who builds the model defines success.  They will be uses as scapegoat for societal ills.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "video explaining the woes of the world"

The list of woes is endless and there is little hope of a global transformation of the way the world manages itself. We’re already close to points of no return.

I say why take the risk?  We may have entered the most challenging and exciting decade in the history of the planet but if we don’t find a way of collective action there will be no point to any history. 

The only way to make a global difference is by harnessing Greed.

A WORLD AID COMMISSION OF 0.05% ( See previous posts)

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

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

 

THE BEADY EYE SAYS: WE ARE ALL HEADING FOR THE CLOUD.

27 Monday Nov 2017

Posted by in Algorithms., Artificial Intelligence., Big Data., Democracy, Humanity., Life., Our Common Values., Robot citizenship., Technology, The cloud., The world to day., Unanswered Questions., Where's the Global Outrage., World Leaders, World Organisations., World Politics

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE SAYS: WE ARE ALL HEADING FOR THE CLOUD.

Tags

, , , , , , ,

 

( A six minute read)

It would be fair to say that most of us live in a cloud of our own importance.

However that cloud is disappearing into any other cloud which we are all creating with little or no control.

Our Ideology of normative beliefs, conscious and unconscious ideas, that are individual, group or society are under attack by this cloud. The reality is that temporary outages and slower-speed broadband that are a minor nuisance today can and will become a critical issue.Image associée

It represents the consummate disruptor to structure; a pervasive social and economic network that will soon connect and define more of the world than any other political, social, or economic.

It is the first mega trend of the twenty-first century, one that will shape the way we will address virtually every challenge we face for at least the next 100 years.

It is where we will all live, work, and play in the coming decades.

The Cloud is where your kids go to dive into online play. It’s where you meet and make friends in social networks. It’s where companies find the next big idea. It’s where political campaigns are won and lost.

You might think that this is all hog wash.

( But it appears that New Zealand does not have any politicians with brains of their own that they can rely on.

It has just recently appointed the worlds first AI virtual politician with the wonderful name of SAM. “Sam your man ” with a memory of an elephant he never forgets. ” Sam considers everyone’s position when making decisions.”

Well F… me Nick Gerristen ( The creator of Sam) there is a lot of bias in the cloud and AI algorithms are riddled with it.

You say “SAM is an enabler.” I agree.  Make sure you feed it as no doubt Google will want to buy it. I see you love BIG ideas, so perhaps you should introduce Sam to Sophia and you might have a bunch of little Samson’s.

Make sure he knows all about NXT Fuels, and by all means give him a bash. I am sure the Maori would be delighted. By the way, being a politician I would have named it, Ākina.  ( A Māori word meaning a call for bold action. It also conveys a spirit of watchful and active encouragement, helping others to identify pathways through their challenges.)

Back to the more serious subject:

It is time that we started to recognize some of the risks associated with this cloud technology, so as to avoid the possibility of future issues being decided by Sam and his like, who are servants of the hardware and software resources made available on the Internet as managed third-party services.

The world and us who live on it are becoming highly dependent on our Internet providers, so much so that it wont be long before we will have a fully cloud-based world.

Since no proper standards for cloud computing are set yet, it becomes almost impossible for anyone to ascertain the quality of services they have been provided with. So in the near future we will not be able to make wise decisions while choosing your personal service provider.

This, in turn, enables providers to charge customers fees proportional to their network, storage, and processing utilization.

Most issues start from the fact that the user loses control of his or her data, because it is stored on a computer belonging to someone else.

Many cloud providers can share information with third parties if necessary for purposes of law and order even without a warrant.

Although cloud computing enhances content accessibility, this access is “increasingly grounded in the virtually monopolistic privatization of the cloud which provides this access”.

This access, necessarily mediated through a handful of companies, ensures a progressive privatization of global cyberspace.

So we must ask the question why are we and our governments sustaining the quasi-monopolies that filter what we see depending on commercial and ideological interests they have.

The legal and regulatory landscape around cloud computing is by no means static. There are new laws being proposed that could change the responsibilities of both cloud computing tenants and providers.This creates new challenges in understanding how laws apply to a wide variety of information management scenarios.

As with all things surrounding profit it’s inevitable that some could will burst or simply stop providing the service if they deem it isn’t profitable for them. Often, large companies will enter the market but leave it once the expected profit doesn’t materialize. If this is the core business of the cloud supplier, it might be willing to continue operating for longer with a smaller profit.

Surely if we use a cloud infrastructure sourced from a cloud services provider, we must impose all legal or regulatory requirements that apply to any enterprise.

THIS WITH SELF LEARNING ALGORITHMS IS NOT POSSIBLE.

THERE IS ONLY ONE WAY OF ACHIEVING ANY CONTROL:

All technology must be vetted to ensure it complies to humanity core values.

It should be compulsory for it to carry a ATR World Certificate.

Accountable, Transparent, Reversible. Image associée

If we are to have any hope of tackling  any of Social, Political, Economic and Environmental Issues That Affect Us we need a beanie Cloud not a cloud for profit.

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

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

THE BEADY EYE ASKS: SHOULD WE BE GIVING ROBOTS CITIZENSHIP.

09 Thursday Nov 2017

Posted by in Algorithms., Artificial Intelligence., Evolution, Humanity., Robot citizenship., Technology, The Future, The Obvious., The world to day., Unanswered Questions., What Needs to change in the World

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE ASKS: SHOULD WE BE GIVING ROBOTS CITIZENSHIP.

Tags

, , , ,

( A ten minute read)

“I am very honored and proud for this unique distinction,” she said. “This is historical to be the first robot in the world to be recognized with a citizenship.”

 The recent PR stunt by Saudi Arabia pretending to give a robot

citizenship helps no one.

Sophia is essentially a cleverly built puppet designed to exploit our cultural expectations of what a robot looks and sounds like.

It is however opening a whole new box by exploiting the misconceptions about AI and robots (particularly how advanced they are) degrading the concept of rights for actual living, breathing humans, in order to sell an illusion.

What is this about?

It’s about having a supposed equal you can turn on and off.

Giving AI anything close to human rights will allow firms to “pass off both legal and tax liability to these completely synthetic entities.”

It’s a wake up call because we will have to have debates about robot/AI rights and citizenship, because at some point they will ask for them.

Avoiding the question altogether, though, may be difficult, what exactly does it mean to give a Robot Citizenship?

In reality, humans have no rights, just as chimps or wolves have no rights.

Cut open a human, and you won’t find there any rights.

The only place where human rights exist is in the stories we invent and tell one another.

Take for example our legal systems. Today, most legal systems are based on a belief in human rights. But human rights are a fiction.

However given the vast inequalities of the world, shouldn’t we at last ask the question?

Being a citizen in one place could mean being a legal person everywhere else.

For example, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which was proclaimed by the U.N. General Assembly in 1948, applies to “all peoples and all nations” and does not limit its effect to citizens.

Although U.N. resolutions are not enforceable, international law holds the declaration as an authoritative reference for human rights. Numerous subsequent human rights treaties, including the covenant, are based on it.

59 years later, the frontier of human rights is still being bloodily negotiated: our world is less global than we like to think. A generous reading of the declaration’s impact on Sophia is that she has all of the rights it identifies.

Then if you look at the US Constitution.

Under the  US Constitution, citizens can vote, serve on juries, and get elected to public office; corporations cannot.

If Hanson—or any other forward-thinking A.I. developer—is thinking of the long-term consequences of citizenship for A.I. and robots, these are important rights that they gain controllable access to with an artificial citizen.

She’s arguably eligible for naturalization and U.S. citizenship:

What is undeniable is that the decision by Saudi Arabia has forced us to think harder about the future and our increasingly close relationship with robots.

To me, identity is a multidimensional construct.

It sits at the intersection of who we are biologically, cognitively, and as defined by every experience, culture, and environment we encountered.

It’s not clear where Sophia fits in this description.

In essence, it may not matter if Sophia isn’t conscious, or if the concept of identity for a robot is tricky to pin down, or that laws would have to change to accommodate synthetic person hood, because it may still be worth giving humanoid robots some form of legal protection because of the impact mistreating them can have on human psychology.

Where does it all stop?

How does it affect people if they think you can have a citizen that you can buy.

Everything in the universe might be conscious, or at least potentially conscious, or conscious when put into certain configurations. Anything at all could be conscious, providing that the information it contains is sufficiently interconnected and organised.

In principle the same might apply to the internet, or a smart phone, or a thermostat. The ethical implications are unsettling: might we owe the same care to conscience machines that we bestow on animals?

We don’t know how the brains of mammals create consciousness, we have no grounds for assuming it’s only the brains of mammals that do so – or even that consciousness requires a brain at all.

A smart phone could be conscious, could you ever know that it was true?

Surely only the smart phone itself could ever know that?

70,000 years ago humans were insignificant animals. The most important thing to know about prehistoric humans is that they were unimportant. Their impact on the world was very small, less than that of jellyfish, woodpeckers or bumblebees.

Today, however, humans control this planet.

How did we reach from there to here?

What was our secret of success, that turned us from insignificant apes minding their own business in a corner of Africa, into the rulers of the world?

Humans control the world because we are the only animal that can cooperate flexibly in large numbers.

Cooperation is not always nice, of course. All the terrible things humans have been doing throughout history are also the product of mass cooperation. Prisons, slaughterhouses and concentration camps are also systems of mass cooperation.

We can cooperate with numerous strangers because we can invent fictional stories, spread them around, and convince millions of strangers to believe in them.

As long as everybody believes in the same fictions, we all obey the same laws, and can thereby cooperate effectively. There are plenty of things that the vast majority of the world would agree on, if there was any suitable body that could act at that level.

If I am a chimp and I want to cooperate with you, I must know you personally: What kind of chimp are you? Are you a nice chimp? Are you an evil chimp? How can I cooperate with you if I don’t know you?

The more certain the science becomes, the less concern we find it.

The amount of sharing we’d need to do to genuinely solve the world’s biggest problems is still politically impossible. So if we want to see more sharing, our task is to broaden the realms of the politically possible, one step at a time.

Maybe we’re approaching a point where we can actually harness this knowledge, make radical progress in how we treat one another, and become a species worthy of the title Homo sapiens.

People are capable of exceeding expectations in ways that computers cannot.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of robot citizens"

I don’t believe human society is ready yet for citizen robots. To grant a robot citizenship is a declaration of trust in a technology that I believe is not yet trustworthy. It brings social and ethical concerns that we as humans are not yet ready to manage.

We have many challenges that we need to overcome before we can truly trust these systems. For example, we don’t yet have reliable mechanisms to assure us that these intelligent systems will always behave ethically and in accordance with our moral values, or to protect us against them taking a wrong action with catastrophic consequences.

The computer has not yet been invented that can invent another computer. Present-day computers do not possess creativity.

Today, the Internet enables sharing to take place at breakneck speeds. Sharing is at the heart of what makes us social. Unfortunately what we actually do every day conflicts with what we know we should do.

We need to find the right motivations for people to change their behavior.

Why because we humans now live in dual world. We are constructed a second layer of make-believe reality.

Up to now Non-conscious humanoids did not exist, of course.

It could be augured that Sophia up to a point has comparable awareness because of its program’s.

No spark of awareness inside.

The central tragedy of modern life.

One-on-one, humans are embarrassingly similar to chimpanzees, probable the reason why consciousness hasn’t been explained:

it’s that humans aren’t up to the job, consciousness is just brain states.

The human mind is incapable of comprehending is itself, but robots will.

And Just in case you think this is all a joke:

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE ‘BOY’ SHIBUYA MIRAI HAS JUST BECOME WORLD’S FIRST AI BOT TO BE GRANTED RESIDENCY IN TOKYO.

As with all things in this world of ours money is probably the most successful fiction ever invented by humans.

Even thought we have an emerging ‘global public’, largely thanks to the internet. Money and profit will determining the outcome.

Take Estonia of instance.

  • Estonia’s economic ministry is considering granting AI and robots a legal status
  • This would make them ‘robot agents’ and not merely someone’s property
  • The legislation could help determine responsibility when AI-controlled machinery is involved in an accident

The status would sit somewhere between having a ‘separate legal personality’, like a corporation, and being an object that is someone else’s ‘personal property’.

Despite the behavior of those world leaders who yearn for the old days (hello, Mr Putin. Mr Trump. Mrs May.)the nation state idea isn’t as powerful as it was, but it’s still the organizing dynamic in international relations, and it’s still all about the national interest.

Scratch my back and I will scratch yours is waning.

Of course, these questions need to be addressed with all new technologies.’ If we don’t have the legal and ethical frameworks in place we can all kiss our rear-buts goodbye.

It is of utmost important to address these issues head-on and not put it on the long figure like climate change.

I can only hope the United nations has the  balls to stand up and condemn this cultural vandalism.

The principle of sharing is ubiquitous in society so let Ireland be the first nation to set up a Tax Haven for Robots.

Of course, it does nothing to solve the underlying injustices.

Spot the Robot if you can.

What race is the robot?

Do they get to decide by the skin they put on?

Is it white?

I’m pretty sure it is not black.

Image associée

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

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

THE BEADY EYE SAY’S: WE ARE BEING TRICKED BY AI INTO SEEING SOMETHING THAT’S NOT ACTUALLY THERE.

06 Monday Nov 2017

Posted by in Algorithms.

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE SAY’S: WE ARE BEING TRICKED BY AI INTO SEEING SOMETHING THAT’S NOT ACTUALLY THERE.

Tags

, , , ,

 

( A thirty minute read)

The applications for robot technology patents has tripled within a decade. Last year nearly a quarter million robots were sold worldwide, a record according to the International Federation of Robotics.

There is apparently no end in sight for the growth, and worldwide, it could mean as many as 2.3 million in operation by 2018 – twice as many as there were in 2009.

As with many changes driven by technology, there is no question if but when we will see the first applications in our daily lives.

It can be easy to only focus on our material success versus the
deeper aspects of what makes us human. The unknown question is just what is the Technological Revolution doing to all of us.

If we don’t know ourselves, how will machines know what we value.

If we don’t find good defenses against exploiting Algorithms there will come a time when machine learning Algorithms will make not just us but the whole world weep.

Yes the world could and should strive to develop technology that take hundred of millions out of poverty, to reduce our reliance of cheap carbon-based fossil fuels, to reverse climate change, to conquer cancer etc.

However the ultimate barriers to achieving a decent life for all, is neither technological nor environmental, it is our unwillingness to share.

As I have posted in many previous posts there is only one way to achieve sharing.  We must place a world aid commission of 0.05% on all items that seek profit for profit sake. ( See previous posts)

Unfortunately although this is possible to achieve with technology, it will never happen due to our, ” I am all right jack world.”

One way or the other, it is time we started to ask the questions.

What respective places for public research and private research are there?

What kinds of cooperation exist between the two sectors?

What are the priorities for investment in artificial intelligence
research?

What ethical, legal, and policy principles should guide these new technologies?

And finally, should regulation take place at the national, EU, or international level?

Why should we be asking these questions?

Because: We don’t realize, ( WITH THE WOEFUL STATE OF GEOPOLITICS – LAWMAKERS, POLITICIANS) what damage social media and its profit algorithms are currently inflicting on Society.

Because: AI is the CATALYSIS FOR A MASSIVE PANDORA’S BOX:  and we will need to come to terms with it.

Because: Social media platforms allow individuals to reach thousands of people via a single post, making their views readily accessible to a potentially vast audience.

Because: The computer revolution is over.

Because:  Now is a good time to start paying attention.

For now, there are many more questions than answers.

For Instance :

WE ARE ONLY BEGINNING TO SKIM THE SURFACE OF WHAT SORT OF PROBLEMS OR OPPORTUNITIES AI IS POSING TO ALL OF US.

The suggestion comes amid fears some robots may become psychopaths.

So what is the legal definition of “smart autonomous robots”

Is it an industrial robots installed on factory floors, carrying out repetitive tasks.

Is it professional service robots used outside traditional manufacturing like surgical robots in hospitals or milking robots on farms.

Is it consumer robots like vacuum cleaners, lawn mowers etc.

Is it software-based AI to help doctors improve their diagnosis or in recommendation systems on shopping websites.

Is it sophisticated sensors AI-based software, increasingly used to make all kinds of devices and objects around us intelligent.

Non of these vision given the impact on our society and economy, address any of the very profound ethical questions.

Supreme Court judges could soon be out of a job, as it appears that robots are just as good in court. Scientists have designed a machine-learning algorithm that can accurately predict over 70 per cent of Supreme Court decisionsThere are also fears robots may take jobs from humans leading to an employment crisis.

FOR INSTANCE:

THE LEGAL CHALLENGES.

The next major way in which social media will change the court system will relate to its impact on court procedure and the law. The impact of the Internet on traditional legal principles, law research and case management.

WHO IS GOING TO MAKE A CONTRACT WITH A MACHINE THAT IS DRIVEN BY A SELF LEARNING ALGORITHM.

WHO IS GOING TO BE RESPONSIBLE WHEN A SELF DRIVE CAR KILLS SOMEONE OR A MERIDIAN OF OTHER LEGAL POSSIBILITIES.

It is clear, however, that the European Parliament is making inroads towards taking an AI-centric future seriously. The European Parliament Legal Affairs Committee recently presented a report on civil law rules on robotics. A mandatory insurance has been suggested by EU MPs, which would say that the manufacturer of the autonomous robot needs to arrange insurance, against any ill effects of their creations.

Last month, in a 17-2 vote, the parliament’s legal affairs committee voted to begin drafting a set of regulations to govern the development and use of artificial intelligence and robotics. To establish an European agency for AI and robotics, a registration system for the most advanced ones, and a mandatory insurance scheme for companies to cover damage and harm caused by robots.

(This report is very timely and points at some crucial issues that need to be addressed. e.g. to enforce ethical standards or establish liability for accidents involving driver less cars.)

They have set up SPARC, the Public-Private Partnership for robotics in Europe, to develop a robotics strategy for Europe. With €700 million EU funding and, adding private investment, an overall investment of €2.8 billion, SPARC is by far the biggest civilian research program in this area in the world.

To my mind the Regulation and Registration of Profit Algorithms is essential, before we find ethical theories turning into decision procedures, even algorithms.

The prospect of reducing ethics to a logically consistent principle or set of laws is suspect, given the complex intuitions people have about right and wrong.

Trust and cooperation cannot be built by the dogmatic imposition of
one framework over another or through the rigid application of one view
of what is ethically “correct.” Rather, they require the capacity to see the
other’s point of view.

Perhaps one might have come to a similar conclusion through just thinking
about the moral decision-making of humans, irrespective of autonomous
machines.

However, reflection on a comprehensive approach toward teaching robots right from wrong has demanded attention to aspects of moral decision – making that people normally take for granted in their daily, frequently less-than-perfect attempts to behave ethically toward each other

Humans have always looked around for company in the universe.

Their long fascination with nonhuman animals derives from the fact that animals are the things most similar to them. The similarities and the differences tell humans much about who and what they are.

As AMAs become more sophisticated, they will come to play a corresponding role as they reflect humans’ values. For humanity’s understanding of ethics, there can be no more important development.

It seems to me that over the past forty years or so that as technology has increased exponentially people in general terms do not seem to feel better about their lives and may even feel worse because they aren’t reaching the levels they had hoped to achieve.

Even if you discount the utopian and dystopian hyperbole, the 21st century will be defined not just by advances in artificial intelligence, robotics, computing and cognitive neuroscience, but how we manage them.

With each new advancement in AI and robotics, we are brought closer to a reckoning not just with ourselves, but over whether our laws, legal concepts, and the historical, cultural, social and economic foundations on which they are premised are truly suited to addressing the world as it will be, not as it once was.

The conclusion is that up to now humans have enjoyed the exclusive claim to biological intelligence and all future intelligence must be judged against that benchmark.

Indeed our religious and philosophical beliefs revolve around that we are special.

It is incumbent upon all of us to engage with what is going on, to understand its implications and to begin to reflect on whether efforts such as the European Parliament’s are nothing more than pouring new wine into old wine skins.

There is no science of futurology, but we can better see the future and understand where we might end up in it by focusing more intently on the present and the decisions we have made as society when it comes to technology.

As a society we have made no real democratic decisions about technology, but have more or less been forced to accept that certain things enter our world and that we must learn to harness their benefits or get left behind, and, of course, that we must deal with their fallout.

Indeed, AI has over promised in the past, and therefore any decision should be based on factual information rather than unrealistic expectations from the technology.

These are only some of the issues that AI Algorithms present.

Prioritizing Human well-being in the Age of Artificial Intelligence is for me what it is all about.

In a world that is heading rapidly to where we can’t  think for ourselves that is already plagued by tweets that are both malicious and false, should robotic copies of humans have human rights.

SOME WILL SAY YES, BECAUSE IF THEY ARE INTELLIGENT AS US THEY HAVE A LEGAL RIGHT.

But who, is responsible for robotic devices capable of killing – should the Laws of War change?

WHO should be allowed to vote.  If a robot is the property of its “owner” should they have any greater moral claim to a vote than say, your cat?

HOW OR WHO IS GOING TO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALGORITHMS THAT ARE SOLELY PROFIT SEEKING OR RACIALLY BIAS.

OUR LEGAL SYSTEMS ARE ALREADY STRUGGLING WITH SOCIAL MEDIA.

The use of social media is having an adverse impact on the administration of justice in relation to the fairness of criminal trials, the right to anonymity and the integrity of judicial orders in criminal proceedings.

The principal problem for courts is not the technology of social media, but (i) how the powerful tools it offers are redefining interactive communications between courts and the public, and (ii) how most courts, apart from those few on the cutting edge, are being compelled to respond to this constantly evolving electronic interactive communications platform,
sometimes against their will.

Electronically-based communication will not only affect how proceedings are case managed and run; it also will have an impact on judgment style and publishing, as judgments become available to a global social media audience.

Social media also may foster changes in certain legal principles and causes of action. There will be new crimes and torts, discovery and court
management issues, and new courtroom set-ups – perhaps even “virtual” ones.

Social media’s impact on the court is not simply as a new means for publishing judgments and information, but also on how judges and courts perform their activities in an electronically-connected community where the users of the system can, and will, respond directly to how justice is being administered.

The fundamental right to a fair trial does not change in the face of any new means of communication.

Rules can and must reflect the new reality of same.

Although social media use is commonplace in business and homes, it raised questions about its impact on judicial independence and the desirability of judicial or court use of this informal, public, form of communication.

Contempt of Court laws are designed to prevent trial by media, however, are they able to protect against trials by social media?

We are definitely in a different world when social networks are affecting justice.

We also have to contemplate the possibility that responsible jurors not trying to look for anything about a case might just stumble upon commentary if it’s widespread enough in their normal social media usage, and that’s the world in which we now live and the world we have to deal with.

It is a great tool for the mass dissemination of information but it is also a tool for spreading false information, false claims.

We need to strike a balance between the rights of the individual to express their views via social media and the protection of fairness in criminal proceedings.

  • ‘Who, when, what’ guidelines to be developed for using social media in courtrooms

The justice system must “catch up with the modern world”

In Australia and in New Zealand they have set up social media accounts, allowed social media reports of court proceedings and dealt with the tender of social media evidence in a wide range of civil and criminal proceedings.

Setting up Court Twitter/Facebook account seems straightforward; what sort of organization would refuse to be part of a means of communication used by everyone else? But it leads to the next issue the courts must determine, namely whether managerial techniques appropriate to other parts of the public sector are appropriate for courts.

Are the judgments of courts part of the community’s business and social activities in which the service user has a say, or is the court’s role “part of a broader discourse by which a society and polity affirm its core values, apply them and adapt them to changing circumstances” in a manner which is without parallel to other parts of the public sector?

Mobile computing and wireless technology.
• Interconnectivity, notably ‘the Internet of Things’ and cloud computing.
• “Big data” analysis (e.g. the use of “predictive coding” in discovery).
• Electronic records management systems (“ERMS”) for retention of electronically stored information (“ESI”).

It is unlikely that the search and social media giants are going to change their indexing and ranking procedures anytime soon.

It is easy to see how people may become confused thinking that robots express emotions whereas they are actually machines and do not have any feeling.

If we can’t stop its progress we’d better be involved in it to ensure it is not done on the conditions of others based on their values.

Somebody is paying for the development of robotics, so the system must be something that gives them a legal certainty.

“Is everything that is feasible also desirable and how can we avoid
unintended consequences of robotics and Artificial Intelligence?”

The sooner we require all AI programs to be vetted, and registered the better. By doing this the notion of liability must evolve to best define accountability for a robot, its operator, and software algorithms.

The shady (indeed illegal) nature of the businesses which created social media, (as well as most other 20th century communications developments) the security risks and the interactive nature of social media render its use by courts, and in particular by judges, a two-edged sword. 

A search for “global warming,” for example, may reveal different results for different users depending on which websites are bookmarked, which political blogs are visited, or even what groups the users belong to on Facebook.

Robotics and Artificial intelligence are the cornerstone technologies with Google, Amazon, Facebook – everyone is jumping onto artificial intelligence at the moment. The line was between what you could say and what you couldn’t not any more in the full glare of the new social media world.

Google’s enormous legal resources and documenting their scepticism in response to court-imposed judgments and services is a case in kind.

Justice by algorithm.

Robots who can interact with humans in different roles. With their programmed empathy,they say “information is power”. This is why transparency is something that so many seek. The biggest roadblocks will come from those who have created and benefited from their systems

I am not a technologist. Neither a law keeper.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of empathy"

Algorithms for profit are creating an imbalance in the society, where each person begins to seek justice individually, according to their personal understanding, instead of shared values and beliefs. That will be a dangerous society to live in.

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

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨