Tag Archives: The Future of Mankind

THE BEADY EYE ASKS. CAN THE WORLD’S WOES BE PUT DOWN TO MONEY.

16 Saturday Jul 2016

Posted by in Capitalism, Humanity., Modern Day Democracy., Sustaniability, The Future, The world to day., Unanswered Questions., What Needs to change in the World, Where's the Global Outrage., World Aid., World Organisations., World Politics

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE ASKS. CAN THE WORLD’S WOES BE PUT DOWN TO MONEY.

Tags

, , ,

 

Money talks a powerful language. It is a factor in many things that happen and don’t happen. Wealth greases the gears of power and influence.Afficher l'image d'origine

The standard most worshipped by Western society today is financial success, and many people spend their lives pursuing it. Our idiotic species–immediately respects and gives greater credence to anyone who looks rich.

Money can bring power, and power can bring money.

Which one comes first?

Modern day technology is exposing the Capitalist system for what it is worth and as a result we are beginning to see if you focus on the world that you are presented with directly the only collective wisdom we’ve come up with is money can’t buy you love.

 

1% of the population earns 96% of the wealth in the world, and thus explains why we have such a troubled world.

It’s a struggle between the haves vs the have-nots.

The real reason people want to be rich isn’t so they can buy stuff. It’s so they can have power over others. People want influence and respect and they see that people with money have influence and respect, so they seek money.

There’s only one problem: money does not result in influence and respect – instead, influence and respect often lead to money.

Human greed seems to have no bound.

It is said that money is a good servant an a bad master too…

In today life for people money is everything. When in fact it is only an IOU.

Money can buy material happiness for limited time.

Can it buy true happiness? No.

They don’t know that there are many things bigger than money…Our morals values these are bigger than money..

The paradox of money is that although earning more of it tends to enhance our well-being, we become happier by giving it away than by spending it on ourselves.

What matters a lot more than a big income is how people spend it.

What moves the needle in terms of happiness is not so much the amount you give, but the perceived impact of your donation. If you can see your money-making a difference in other people’s lives, it will make you happy even if the amount you gave was quite small.

Life experiences give us more lasting pleasure than material things, and yet people still often deny themselves experiences and prioritize buying material goods.

People think material purchases offer better value for the money because experiences are fleeting, and material goods last longer. They think that experiences are only going to provide temporary happiness, but they actually provide both more happiness and more lasting value.

And yet we still keep on buying material things, because they’re tangible and we think we can keep on using them.

Experiences, on the other hand, tend to meet more of our underlying psychological needs. They’re often shared with other people, giving us a greater sense of connection, and they form a bigger part of our sense of identity.

We also get more pleasure out of anticipating experiences than anticipating the acquisition of material things.

Feelings of gratitude and appreciation can be very difficult to sustain.

The first measure of happiness is “evaluative.” A sense that your life is good—you’re satisfied with your life, you’re progressing towards your life goals.”

Power is money and money is power.

There are many more examples of this now than anytime in the past.

If a man who earned a standard salary wanted to run for president, he would have almost no chance at all unless he was backed by people with money.

The more money a candidate has, the farther he can get. Although the richest competitor doesn’t always win, the president is usually a very wealthy man.

I want money because to me it represents security and independence.

Real power and influence are when you can make a substantial and lasting mark on the world.

To come to the point of this post.

Capitalism has created Inequality along with the very technologies that have led us down the road to Climate Change, not to mention the present wars and the reemergence of  the Barbaric nature of humanity.

However we have power to change systems?

At present we have money starved World Organisations in need of reform.

A world media that turns, nature, wars and violence into entertainment.

There is so much information that we can only Google, Twitter, and take selfless selfies.

Long term planning is impossible or political suicide.

THE WORLD MANTRA SEEMS TO BE:  i’M ALRIGHT JACK.

We are all on hedonic treadmill WHILE OUR WORLD IS FRAGMENTING.

THERE IS ONLY ONE SOLUTION.

THAT IS TO PLACE A WORLD AID COMMISSION ON ALL ACTIVITIES THAT ARE ONLY IN EXISTENCE FOR PROFIT SAKE. ( SEE PREVIOUS POSTS) Afficher l'image d'origine

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

 

 

 

 

 

THE BEADY EYE ASKS: WHY HAS ASPIRATION ALL BUT DISAPPEARED FROM POLITICS.

22 Wednesday Jun 2016

Posted by in England EU Referendum IN or Out., Humanity., The Future, What Needs to change in the World

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE ASKS: WHY HAS ASPIRATION ALL BUT DISAPPEARED FROM POLITICS.

Tags

, , , ,

We all know that politics these days for the most part is subject to the Capital markets of the world.

You can see from the English Referendum ( On whether to leave or stay in the European Union) that the driving arguments on both sides are mostly to do with the Economy.

The economy is put before the people or the nation’s aspirations. Afficher l'image d'origine

The real question is, what level of wealth concentration is optimal for the economy or what is a human being to a business?

For many businesses a human being is perceived as ‘a consumer’ at the output end of the businesses and as ‘a worker’ at the input end of the businesses.

Therefore, it is in the best interest of the businesses to charge the humans as much as possible when they are consumers while paying them as little as possible when they are workers.

The end result of such duality is, the humans suffer, businesses make profit; wealth concentrates, the people lose completely their self-sufficiency.

This will get much worse for the humans in the near future with the Revolution of Technology and Artificial Intelligence. Afficher l'image d'origine

Let’s just imagine a near future world (say about 50 generations from now) where automation has advanced to levels that resemble human-like Artificial General Intelligence (AGI).

In such world, workers will no longer exist in any meaningful sense, because nearly all work will be done by a super intelligent automation. The businesses will perceive most human beings only as consumers. In such future, most humans will be jobless and, majority of us will have no means of production that can make us self-sufficient.

Consumers without money are useless to the businesses thus can be “discarded” (it means, literally wiped out of existence). How are we going to survive then?

 

Perhaps, some of us could survive by reverting to violent redistribution of wealth (like war for example). Such approach creates too much suffering. The correct answer is we survive together, as one species, by introducing Basic Income. It must be sufficient to ensure the existence of a wide base of consumers who, in turn, will ensure the prosperity of the businesses and the society.

As the lever of technology gets longer and longer and it takes less and less human work to get things done, the wage will be replaced by a National Dividend, a share of the robot paychecks to buy the things produced that robots don’t need.

In our current society, humans without jobs (or income) become consumers without money.

Adam Smith predicated his vision for a free market economy on the understanding that some constraints must be set in place to ensure all members of the society are self-sufficient and also, that they exchange only the surplus produce of their labour.

Do we need to wait for a future that has a human-like AGI before we consider Basic Income?

Can we introduce it today and achieve great prosperity now?

I believe the answers is, “Yes, we can have Basic income today” and we can have it in a way that is independent of political or technological circumstances i.e. a way applicable to any historical period.

Let’s see how it can be done.

Who decides what a ‘dignified’ living is?

Perhaps, a bunch of people, called a government, makes the decision while driven by their own ideas about what is ‘basic’ and ‘dignified’? Governments change, therefore, if the amount of Basic Income is determined by some political process (e.g. government’s budget justified by some ideology) then it is likely that Basic Income will turn into another tool to exert control over the people by applying control over the amount of BI.

Much more powerful approach is to implement Basic Income by using the free market as a base for estimating BI.

Let’s call it Market Driven Basic Income (MDBI).

The meaning of ‘Market Driven’ is that Basic Income will be an opposing market force to the leverage businesses (and other manmade constructs) obtain over the people due to their natural tendency to treat human beings with double standards (e.g. as ‘workers’ and as ‘consumers’).

MDBI can be defined as, the ‘most common’ outgoing spending amongst human individuals when seen as consumers and taxpayers. MDBI has to be derived from metrics that ‘capture’ only transactions from a person to a business, from a person to a government and from a person to any other ‘man-made societal construct’ (i.e. those metrics should reflect only the personal outgoing spending of the human beings, not metrics like gross output or GDI, or CPI, etc.). MDBI is a figure indicated, in part, by the free consumer markets showing what most individuals purchased the most and ,in part, by any other outgoing spending the individuals have (including taxes, fees, etc.).

Think about it, the more they (various political and economic man-made constructs in the human society) charge us (the human beings), for the goods and services they try to sell us or impose on us, the more they’ll have to pay us as Basic Income. The less they charge us the less they’ll have to pay us.

With MDBI in place they (the businesses, the government, etc.) may even ask payments from us for the air that we breathe, it will make no difference to any of us as long as most of us have to make such payments, because such payments will become ‘common’ therefore “highlighted” to influence the MDBI.

Of course this can not be achieved within a club of nations called the EU.

This why unlike England or the EU Finland marks the first commitment from a European country to implement a Basic Income experiment and will be the first experiment in a developed nation since the 1970s.

Switzerland is another country looking at adopting as part of the Swiss constitution, citizens, regardless of whether they work, would receive 30,000 Swiss Francs (about $34,000) a year.

The idea, which has a long history dating back to the 1920s (at least), is increasingly popular in policy circles and the broader population.

The German and Spanish parliaments explored it.

There is a lesson to be learned from the Brazilian soccer player Pelé, the best ever, earned $1.1 million in 1960 (adjusted for inflation). The Portuguese forward Cristiano Ronaldo made $17 million this past year. Pelé played for 350,000 television sets in Brazil. At the most recent World Cup, 700 million people watched Ronaldo.

Watch their crime levels go down and trading levels go up with more money in the hands of people ready to use it.

Just think of working for the Nations good.

We know there is a creeping colonisation of public life by corporations because we know a slow motion coup d’état is taking place by transnational organisations facilitated by our political leaders. The incontrovertible proof stares at us in the face every day with wave after wave of financial, economic, social and ecological crisis.

In the past few decades, economic growth lifted hundreds of millions out of poverty. But, at the same time, the distribution of income became increasingly skewed in favor of wealthy individuals.

What could be achieved to remove, inequality, poverty, racism, corruption, and not to mention Greed to named just a few of the aliments plaguing our Societies.

It would replace all other social welfare programs with a guaranteed basic income to make government aid more self-directed and efficient.

An unconditional basic income is what is needed to be on the ballot.

Beliefs about the reasons for poverty are critical for the willingness to redistribute income.

So, will Europe provide a guaranteed income to its citizens?

My personal view is that this is unlikely. Differences in beliefs about the reasons for income inequality, however, will continue to drive redistributive policies.

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

THE BEADY EYE ASKS: WHAT IS THE FUTURE OF THE INTERNET.

18 Saturday Jun 2016

Posted by in Humanity., The Future, The Internet., The world to day.

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

, , , ,

( A Rather long read 20th to 30th minutes)

This is a sort of follow on from the Post – These days what it means to be Human.

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

The ubiquitous presence of digital technologies and, along with it, ongoing connection of people, information, smart devices, sensors, objects etc, across intelligent networks, various types of clouds and processes is sometimes called The Internet of Everything.

By approaching it as a “thing” we risk losing ourselves in a Babylonian confusion.

That consumer fascination/applications aspect comes on top of all the real-life possibilities as they start getting implemented right now and the contextual and technological realities, making the Internet of Things one of those many pervasive technological umbrella terms, leading to genuine digital transformation opportunities in several areas, digital disruptions and, simply, business opportunities in the broadest sense.

There is no doubt that the internet is changing the way we live, work, produce and consume.

Smart meters:  To improve efficiency in energy, from a household perspective (savings, better monitoring etc.) and a utility company perspective (billing, better processes and of course also dealing with natural resources in a more efficient way as they are not endless).

Retail:  In an ongoing effort to digitize the consumer experience. Digital signage in retail outlets is in fact the big driver in 2015.

Whether our species evolves or collapses depends on what we do now with With such extensive reach, digital technologies cannot help but disrupt many of our existing models of business and government.

We become weaker when we keep giving away our power to technology–that is, to external objects. We then become dependent upon these objects, and soon get to the point where we can’t do anything for ourselves.

The number of people on the planet is set to rise to 9.7 billion in 2050 with 2 billion aged over 60.

We are entering the age of the Fourth Industrial Revolution, a technological transformation driven by a ubiquitous and mobile internet.

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.

The question is :

If almost everything is connected, will it transform how we do business and go about our daily lives and will it help us manage resources more efficiently and sustainably or will it turn all of us into Google Dummies / Amazon Consumers and how will this affect our personal privacy, data security and our personal relationships?

It is changing our ability to cross the great divide of otherness and really speak to each other in unique and powerful ways.

The growth of the digital economy, the rise of the service sector and the spread of international production networks have all been game-changers for international trade.

If the internet is not made available to all earth’s inhabitants at an affordable cost the miraculous healing awaits this planet will never happen.

Just look at the 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. All distracting us from  long-term investment, which has serious implications for global growth.

We’re already seeing and feeling the impacts of climate change with weather events such as droughts and storms becoming more frequent and intense, and changing rainfall patterns.

Insurers estimate that since the 1980s weather-related economic loss events have tripled.

There is only one way of achieving change. We must accept our new responsibility to collectively tend the garden rather than fight over the turf.

One thing we can agree on is that the internet of Things still has a long way to go and that growth of connected devices or “intelligent things” will indeed grow exponentially over the coming years. 

There is a LOT that can still be connected.

There are numerous reasons for the growing attention for the Internet of Things.

While you will often will read about the decreasing costs of storage, processing and material or the third platform with the cloud, big data, smart (mobile) technologies/devices, etc. there certainly is also a societal/people dimension with a strong consumer element.

Experts predict the Internet will become ‘like electricity’ — less visible, yet more deeply embedded in people’s lives for good and ill.

The world is moving rapidly towards ubiquitous connectivity that will further change how and where people associate, gather and share information, and consume media.

The experts agree on the technology change that lies ahead, even as they disagree about its ramifications. Most believe there will be:

  • A global, immersive, invisible, ambient networked computing environment built through the continued proliferation of smart sensors, cameras, software, databases, and massive data centers in a world-spanning information fabric known as the Internet of Things.
  • “Augmented reality” enhancements to the real-world input that people perceive through the use of portable/wearable/implantable technologies.
  • Disruption of business models established in the 20th century (most notably impacting finance, entertainment, publishers of all sorts, and education).
  • Tagging, databasing, and intelligent analytical mapping of the physical and social realms.

Here is what I see.

It is revolutionizing most human interaction, especially affecting health, education, work, politics, economics, and entertainment.

On the downside:

Interpersonal ethics, surveillance, terror, and crime, may lead societies to question how best to establish security and trust while retaining civil liberties.

More and more, humans will be in a world in which decisions are being made by an active set of cooperating devices. The Internet (and computer-mediated communication in general) will become more pervasive but less explicit and visible.

It will, to some extent, blend into the background of all we do. It will be a world more integrated than ever before.

We will see more planetary friendships, rivalries, romances, work teams, study groups, and collaborations.

We will become far more knowledgeable about the consequences of our actions; we will edit our behavior more quickly and intelligently.

It will change how we think about people, how we establish trust, how we negotiate change, failure, and success.

We will grow accustomed to seeing the world through multiple data layers. This will change a lot of social practices, such as dating, job interviewing and professional networking, and gaming, as well as policing and espionage.

With mobile technologies and information-sharing apps becoming ubiquitous, we can expect some significant improvement in the awareness of otherwise illiterate and ill-informed rural populations to opportunities missed out by manipulative and corrupt governments. Like the Arab Spring, we can expect more and more uprisings to take place as people become more informed and able to communicate their concerns.

There will be increased awareness of the massive disparities in access to health care, clear water, education, food, and human rights.

The power of nation-states to control every human inside its geographic boundaries may start to diminish.

The problems that humanity now faces are problems that can’t be contained by political borders or economic systems. Traditional structures of government and governance are therefore ill-equipped to create the sensors, the flows, the ability to recognize patterns, the ability to identify root causes, the ability to act on the insights gained, the ability to do any or all of this at speed, while working collaboratively across borders and time zones and sociopolitical systems and cultures.

From climate change to disease control, from water conservation to nutrition, from the resolution of immune-system-weakness conditions to solving the growing obesity problem, the answer lies in what the Internet will be in decades to come.

By 2025, we will have a good idea of its foundations.

The Internet will generate several new related networks. Some will require verified identification to access, while others will promise increased privacy.

The biggest impact on the world will be universal access to all human knowledge.

Will the Internet make it possible for our entire civilization to collapse together, in one big awful heap? Possibly.

But the Internet has already made it possible for us to use one of our unique graces — the ability to share knowledge — for good, and to a degree never before possible.

We have to think seriously about the kinds of conflicts that will arise in response to the growing inequality enabled and amplified by means of networked transactions that benefit smaller and smaller segments of the global population.

Social media will facilitate and amplify the feelings of loss and abuse. They will also facilitate the sharing of examples and instructions about how to challenge, resist, and/or punish what will increasingly come to be seen as unjust.

Cyber-terrorism will become commonplace.

Privacy and confidentiality of any and all personal will become a thing of the past.

Online ‘diseases’ — mental, physical, social, addictions (psycho-cyber drugs) — will affect families and communities and spread willy-nilly across borders.

The digital divide will grow and worsen beyond the control of nations or global organizations such as the UN. This will increasingly polarize the planet between haves and have-nots. Global companies will exploit this polarization. Digital criminal networks will become realities of the new frontiers. Terrorism, both by organizations and individuals, will be daily realities. The world will become less and less safe, and only personal skills and insights will protect individuals.

There will be greater group-think, group-speak and mob mentality … More uninformed individuals will influence others to the detriment of standard of living and effective government.

Governments will become much more effective in using the Internet as an instrument of political and social control. That is, filters will be increasingly valuable and important, and effective and useful filters will be able to charge for their services. People will be more than happy to trade the free-wheeling aspect common to many Internet sites for more structured and regulated environments.

The information we want will increasingly find its way to us, as networks learn to accurately predict our interests and weaknesses. But that will also tempt us to stop seeking out knowledge, narrowing our horizons, even as we delve evermore deep.

The privacy premium may also be a factor: only the relatively well-off (and well-educated) will know how to preserve their privacy in 2025.

The most neglected aspect of the impact is in the geopolitics of the Internet. There are very few experts focused on this, and yet the rise of digital media promises significant disruption to relations between and among states. Some of the really important dimensions include the development of transnational political actors/movements, the rise of the virtual state, the impact of digital diplomacy efforts, the role of information in undermining state privilege (think Wikileaks), and … the development of cyber-conflict (in both symmetric and asymmetric forms).

It is going to systemically change our understandings of being human, being social, and being political.

It is not merely a tool of enforcing existing systems; it is a structural change in the systems that we are used to. And this means that we are truly going through a paradigm shift — which is celebratory for what it brings, but it also produces great precariousness because existing structures lose meaning and valence, and hence, a new world order needs to be produced in order to accommodate for these new modes of being and operation.

The greatest impact of the Internet is what we are already witnessing, but it is going to accelerate.

More people will lose their grounding in the realities of life and work, instead considering those aspects of the world amenable to expression as information as if they were the whole world.

The scale of the interactions possible over the Internet will tempt more and more people into more interactions than they are capable of sustaining, which on average will continue to lead each interaction to be more superficial.

Given there is strong evidence that people are much more willing to commit petty crimes against people and organizations when they have no face-to-face interaction, the increasing proportion of human interactions mediated by the Internet will continue the trend toward less respect and less integrity in our relations.

The Internet, automation, and robotics will disrupt the economy as we know it.

How will we provide for the humans who can no longer earn money through labor?

The opportunities are simply tremendous. Information, the ability to understand that information, and the ability to act on that information will be available ubiquitously … Or we could become a ‘brave new world’ where the government (or corporate power) knows everything about everyone everywhere and every move can be foreseen, and society is taken over by the elite with control of the technology…

The good news is that the technology that promises to turn our world on its head is also the technology with which we can build our new world.  It offers an unbridled ability to collaborate, share, and interact.

The best way to predict the future is to invent it.

It is a very good time to start inventing the future.

The most significant impact of the Internet is getting us to imagine different paths that the future may take. These paths help us to be better prepared for long-term contingencies; by identifying key indicators, and amplifying signals of change, they help us ensure that our decisions along the way are flexible enough to accommodate change…Afficher l'image d'origine

That billions more people are poised to come online in the emerging economies seems certain. Yet much remains uncertain: from who will have access, how, when, and at what price to the Internet’s role as an engine for innovation and the creation of commercial, social, and human value. As users, industry players, and policymakers, the interplay of decisions that we make today and in the near future will determine the evolution of the Internet and the shape it takes by 2025, in both intended and unintended ways.

Regardless of how the future unfolds, the Internet will evolve in ways we can only begin to imagine. By allowing ourselves to explore and rehearse divergent and plausible futures for the Internet, not only do we prepare for any future, we can also help shape it for the better.

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

 

 

 

THE BEADY EYE ASKS : THESE DAYS WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO BE HUMAN.

05 Sunday Jun 2016

Posted by in Humanity., Innovation., Technology, The Future, Unanswered Questions.

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE ASKS : THESE DAYS WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO BE HUMAN.

Tags

In writing this post I have decided to ignore as much as possible the obvious state that humanity now finds itself in.

It goes without saying that we are in a mess.

Who we are, is defined by who we are not, and the practices of exclusion that define identity have to be recognized – an issue we are already witnessed in the context of online communities like Facebook.

In the ‘cyber’ world, it is possible to have multiple identities and ‘selves’.Afficher l'image d'origine

While technologies have become a ‘part’ of humanity, it should be considered, I believe, how they are going to change the way we exist and, moreover, to what extent they are really necessary in human life.

 The 21st Century is, more than ever, a century ‘flooded’ by the invention and expansion of new technologies. These are varied: we use smart phones, computers and other devices that supposedly ‘enhance’ the way we communicate between ourselves and also socially interact.

Already machines can process spoken language, recognize human faces, detect or emotions, and target us with highly personalized media content. While technology has tremendous potential to empower humans, soon it will also be used to make them thoroughly obsolete in the the workplace, whether by replacing, displacing,or surveilling.

 So is it possible to design intelligent systems that safely design themselves.
However, our bodies are also undergoing fundamental changes.
It is now possible to artificially increase physical characteristics and other bodily features. Our own natural biological capabilities can be extended almost endlessly.

These changes certainly influence several human aspects, such as identity, personality and much more.

Technological advances have made ‘fluid’, but superficial the way we communicate and perceive ourselves. There is no boundary when it comes to what I actually am, and what I project myself to be.

It is not possible, anymore, to discern between who is actually sitting on the other side of the screen, and what is being said online, in a chat, for instance.

Our bodies have become transcendent in the sense that they are; in some cases

not even regarded as necessary anymore. Bodies are thus not natural, lively and active agents through which we encounter and perceive others and the world,

but have become ‘replaceable.’

Technology is proposing a complete ‘denial’ of our bodily existence. A ‘body’ not that is not useful at all anymore, is becoming a recyclable item rather than rotting or burnt to a cinder.

Imagine a future scenario in which extremely powerful computerized minds are simulated and shared across autonomous virtual or robotic bodies.  Given the malleable nature of such super-intelligence— they won’t be limited by the hardwiring of DNA information – one can reasonably assume that they will be free of the limitations of a single material body, or the experience of a single lifetime, allowing them to tinker with their own genetic code, integrate survival knowledge directly from the learning of others,and develop a radical new form of digital evolution that modifies itself through nearly instantaneous exponential cycles of imitation and learning, and passes on its adaptation to successive generations of “SELF”

Not only would the lineage of such beings be perpetually enhanced by automation, leading to radical new forms of social relationships and values, but the systems that realize or govern those values would likely become the instinctual mechanism of a synchronized and sentient ” technocultural mind.”

One could say that are approaching such an era, and such a ‘technological leap’ must, or at least should, be assessed critically. It seems crucial to understand to what end, and how, technology can or should be used.

It is important to create ethical boundaries when it comes to our use of new technology.

A minority of wealthy persons and influential companies will have power over biotechnology and others, thus restricting the access of the public to this information.

Our body is an important instrument through which we perceive and discover the world. This means that the body can also be plural, malleable and ‘fluid, however, it is important; in my view, that it does not lose its essence. Our bodily features are embedded in the social world, and they are part of culture, as well as nature.

We need to create restrictions to the access of new technologies, by engaging with ethical questionings that allow a better understanding of what it actually means to have these technologies changing the way we exist.

It could be said that the boundary between what it means to be human has been crossed and it seems not be possible anymore to argue that being human means having certain physical qualities, a consciousness, and so for this post it is quite a complex task to address what does humanity mean.

Because of not only the varied theoretical concepts involved but the understanding of our relations to new technologies; also, to how these technologies have entirely changed the idea of  ” what it is to be human” We’re not the same species we were 100,000 years ago. We’re not going to be the same species tomorrow. We will become more and more software-driven species. Change the software change the species. 

 The question of ‘what it means to be human’ is deeply rooted in our bodily experiences, feelings,sensations and perceptions. It is with them that we give meaning to our existence.  We are shaped by these bodily experiences, as culture and its technological advances shape us.

We should not, hence, give more importance to one in comparison to the other.

Digital information and technology are important to us, until a point. After this, our humanity as a ‘natural resource’ must take head and claim its right to exist as biological, finite and, above all, human beings.

This cannot be replaced by technology.

That said being human these days is closely related to machines and other ‘artificial’ traits.

I suppose that in this is the start of age of ‘cyber cultures’ and new technologies.

We are on the threshold of genetically engineered ‘humans’‘ Genetically engineered’ beings that bear very similar qualities to humans but will they be dependable on something ‘greater’ than themselves, namely, their maker: The‘genetic engineer.’

Humanity is intertwined within biology and culture but humans are now capable of distancing themselves from the world, and thus creating an awareness of their own place in it.

 This is, I believe, a crucial point that needs to be taken into consideration when discussing how new technologies influence our life and thus completely change the meaning of who we are. We should be able to reflect upon ourselves, the way we deal with new technologies, and, more than ever, we need to be aware of how these will change our ways of life.

A multifaceted discussion on these topics will surely help better elucidate this new form of existence and the consequences it might bring with it.

 

Each of us has our precious things, and as we care for them we locate the essence of our humanity.

 

In the end, it is because of our great capacity for caring that I remain optimistic we will confront the dangerous issues now before us.

Helmuth Plessner’s Philosophical Anthropology is largely based upon the idea that being human means existing in a society, it means not just to exist individually, but to be shaped by others, as well as by oneself.

 

Plessner vehemently opposes a dualistic model of humanity, such as those based upon the body/mind dualism. He strongly emphasizes that we exist in a culture, but our own biological traits also mould the way we live in the world.
For the moment we shape our sociality through history by acting as ‘organic’ beings.
 

Being human is having a will to changing one’s destiny and life.

However in transhumanist visions, materiality is seen as an inactive, passive, manipulate substance, and matter is interrupted as code, a program that can be changed according to individual wishes.

The fragility of our body is being lost nowadays, the idea that we, and thus our bodies, are finite is changing.  The body has lost its ‘expressivity’ and meaningfulness, it has become but a dull and unnecessary object. 

In the future  ‘cyber cultures’ might have bodies, but they act and ‘think’ like. 
However, they are, in regard to their lifespan, or, one could say, life, expandable.
The days of the body being buried or burnt to ash are fast coming to an end with Gene Editing.
Afficher l'image d'origine

Now that we know the blueprint of Life cross species transplantation is around the corner.

While the precise form these changes will take is unclear, recent history suggests that they are likely to be welcome at first and progressively advanced. It appears reasonable that human intelligence will become obsolete, economic wealth will reside primarily in the hands of super-intelligent machines, and our ability to survive will lie beyond our direct control. 

Genetic Editing could lead to the Gene Rich and genetic discrimination leading to greater Inequality.

Man is said to have evolved from monkeys and apes…. but we still have monkeys and apes.

Afficher l'image d'origine

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

 

 

 

 
 
 
 
 

 

 
 
 
 
.

THE BEADY EYE SAYS: IF WE NOT CAREFUL DONALD TRUMP PRESIDENCY IS JUST A MARKED X AWAY.

28 Saturday May 2016

Posted by in Politics., The USA., The world to day., Unanswered Questions., Uncategorized, Where's the Global Outrage.

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE SAYS: IF WE NOT CAREFUL DONALD TRUMP PRESIDENCY IS JUST A MARKED X AWAY.

Tags

,

 

On January 20, 2017, if Trump is sworn in as the 45th president, he would suddenly gain control of the world’s most powerful military force.Afficher l'image d'origine

This is not just an American problem. Donald Trump is a threat to the entire planet.

It’s probably time to stop laughing. Trump is an authentic American and he represents the face of authentic America. It’s gone from funny to, wow, this is really scary. But nobody is losing too much sleep:

Such an event could not be happening at a better time. The world is still feeling the effects of the capitalist mainframe gone haywire. Trump has been ranked the sixth greatest threat to the global economy, putting him level with jihadi terrorism.

We, all of us, have underestimated Trump every step of the way.

The bottom line now regardless is that voters have a chance to elect Donald Trump in November. “That’s how Mussolini got in, that’s how Hitler got in.”

Money, Money, Money, it’s all about money.  He is apparently worth an estimated 8.7-10 billion dollars.

Sounds hard to believe doesn’t it?

A nation that elected its first black president just eight years ago will now rush to embrace a man who has offended Mexicans, Muslims and others. The possibility that Trump might actually win fills great swaths of the planet with dread – with the apparent and notable exception of Vladimir Putin’s Russia – with concerns over everything from trade to the nuclear trigger.

Donald Trump, the man who calls Mexicans rapists, promises to ban Muslims from entering the country, considers women little more than objects, refuses to reveal his tax returns, has never even heard of America’s nuclear deterrent, and calls for an end to the minimum wage, is doing so well that some already have him beating one of the best-known and more qualified politicians on Earth.

On top of his notorious pledge to ban Muslims, the candidate suggested that America would stop buying Saudi oil unless Riyadh provided troops to fight Isis he promised on Thursday to pull the United states out of the UN global climate accord. and to approve the Keystone XL oil pipeline from Canada. He received loud applause from the Oil Executives.

If it was not for the Constitution you would define America as a sick sick country and by historical definition the United States today is a tyranny where a swaggering billionaire is taking advantage of a “naive America”making an important contribution to anti-American sentiment around the world.

If another American president would invade Panama, would invade North Korea, would invade Vietnam, that would give China superpower status because America would weaken itself. During the election campaign, Trump has repeatedly bashed China.

If he does win he will be different surrounded by advisers telling him what to do.

First thing he should do is pull down the Statue of Liberty and erect a Selfie. Afficher l'image d'origineStatue of Liberty Inscription

 

And replace the Plaque with:     Gone to lunch.

It’s a huff choice. Afficher l'image d'origine

 

 

 

But you can rest assured you have seen nothing yet.

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

THE BEADY EYE ASKS: DID MAN CREATE GOD?

24 Tuesday May 2016

Posted by in Humanity., Life., The world to day., Unanswered Questions., Uncategorized

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE ASKS: DID MAN CREATE GOD?

Tags

, ,

The scientific attempt to explain religion has been around for over a century.

All seeing eye awesome wallpaper

They, however they are, say we are all made from the same star stuff.  Which is kind of hard to believe if you’re having your head cut off by ISIS.

I have always told my friends that I was created not born.

If you look back over history I am certainly not the first.

The principle of causation is fundamental to my claim.

So who or what created me?

If God was the beginning who began God?

I suppose that something which had no beginning has no need of a cause but on the other hand that something can begin without a cause is not only unreasonable, it is arguably inconceivable.

Consider, that if the greatest beginning of all—that of the universe—had no cause whatsoever! what would be the reason for it or us to exist.

So we left with the Big bang picture of the universe that started off very hot and cooled as it expanded is in agreement with all the observational evidence we have today.

Nevertheless it leaves a number of important questions unanswered …

Why is the universe so uniform on a large-scale?

Why does it look the same at all points of space and in all directions?

Did we create God to give it a cause or the other way around.

Scientists might never work out how life could arise by natural processes. Matter came into being without any cause; so they also have to believe that life itself popped into existence without an adequate cause.

This leave us to ponder whether the cause of the universe’s beginning must have been super-natural, i.e. non-material or spirit—a cause outside of space-matter-time. Such a cause would not be subject to the law of decay and so would not have a beginning. That is, the cause had to be eternal spirit. God created time itself.

Thus, He is not limited by anything in the universe, including the future, since God created time itself .“In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.” If we can believe this verse he did it in the dark as he created light after.

Today’s atheists, in a non-prophet organisation the origin of our universe is a vexing problem. The very state of the observable universe today presents serious problems for them, as it demands a Creator.

I have three questions for any atheists to answer:

“How did nature choose the specific laws which control the universe, as deduced from observation?”

“How did the universe start off with an initial state in such a high degree of homogeneity?” This is the initial condition required for the big bang to produce the currently observable universe.

“Why, after 13.8 billion years since the big bang, is not the universe in thermal equilibrium?” In fact, why is it so far from equilibrium?

They might point to Quantum Mechanics.

But Quantum mechanics never produces something out of nothing. Quantum fluctuation must presuppose that there was something to fluctuate.

The quantum vacuum is a type of something. It has properties. It has energy, it fluctuates, it can cause the expansion of the universe to accelerate, it obeys the (highly non-trivial) equations of quantum field theory.

Where, for starters, are the laws of quantum mechanics themselves supposed to have come from? So if you hang your theology on quantum cosmology for the creation of the universe, you would be sorely wrong as it is deficient and assumes time to exist, among other problems.

The electromagnetic arrow of time: information carried by light comes to us from the past and not the future. We remember the past and not the future.

Biology is defined by the presence of self-reproducing organisms. This reproduction process took millions of years to get us to where we are today so that nobody can really prove anything. We are said to have evolved from monkeys and apes … but we still have monkeys and apes. 

Modern man is a pretty new species, with modern humans being only 200,000 years old.  But religion is, at best, 6- to 10,000 years old (depends on where you get your source from)

So man lived for over 190,000 years and one day just got up and created a god.  Why?  What did man do for 190,000 years when there was no god? Where did the evolutionary change come from that made modern man such a genius?

Why would man, 6,000 years ago, decide that we need consistency in this life – that everybody needs to believe and think the same way? 

It’s not too long ago that we worshiped the Sun as a God.

STEPHEN HAWKING Says:

“Recent advances in cosmology suggest, the laws of gravity and quantum theory allow universes to appear spontaneously from nothing. Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the universe exists, why we exist.”

This is an abandoned theory, an old idea by people who wanted to rationalize things with their primitive knowledge.

It means that something is created out of nothing, which is impossible according to the law of conservation of mass.

Here is some of the scientific stuff which to be honest is somewhat beyond my pea brain.

The principle that matter can neither be created nor be destroyed, now part of the first law of thermodynamics.

“The Three Laws of Thermodynamics.”

The principle that matter can neither be created nor be destroyed, now part of the first Law of Conservation of Energy, states that energy cannot be created or destroyed in an isolated system.

    • The first law, also known as Law of Conservation of Energy, states that energy cannot be created or destroyed in an isolated system.
    • The second law of thermodynamics states that the entropy (iinevitable and steady deterioration of a system or society, a measure of the amount of disorder in a system.) of any isolated system always increases.
    • The third law of thermodynamics states that the entropy of a system approaches a constant value as the temperature approaches absolute zero.

Outside of the concept of time, there is also no concept of something beginning or even ending; in fact, the word “eternal” has no meaning as it suggests a linear progression into infinity, which is also another concept that does not exist within our temporal framework.

Man fumbles in dark trying to explain something completely beyond their ken and then curses and rejects it because they cannot understand it, but it does not change what it is.  How is it that so many intelligent people fall into this trap?

If one says that God must have a beginning, then they trap Him within His own creation and He is clearly outside of it.

It’s not science, it’s a choice, a belief system that allows man to believe he only has to answer to himself.

All religions are creations of man designed within their time and societies.

For me God is unconditional LOVE.

I can reach for excellence but perfection is God business.

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

 

 

 

 

 

THE BEADY EYE ASKS: IS OUR PRECONDITION OF IGNORANCE GOING TO BE OUR DOWNFALL.

16 Monday May 2016

Posted by in Climate Change., Environment, Humanity., Natural World Disasters, Sustaniability, The Future, The world to day., Where's the Global Outrage.

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE ASKS: IS OUR PRECONDITION OF IGNORANCE GOING TO BE OUR DOWNFALL.

Tags

, , ,

 

We all live our own lives but we are all subject to consequences of our own and each other’s ‘ignorance’.Afficher l'image d'origine

The problem is that we are literally ‘born in ignorance’ and raised in a world of people likewise born and raised which means then, that there is a very nearly overwhelming amount of misinformation, opinion, predisposition et cetera regarding what we ‘know’ about ourselves and how we ‘should’ deal with each other or there wouldn’t be the mass of troubles there is in the world today.

The human condition in this especially negative sense is a measure of our ignorance with respect to what we know about ourselves as ‘a life-form in its configuration space’ -biology, anthropology, the resource/environment, government/economy and ‘the nature and course of human evolution and progression’, as the idea of that whole and its parts varies throughout the world.

This has led us to a point that the idea of wealth and ownership beyond ‘base-domain human requirements’ is fundamentally antithetical to best well-being and viability in the nature and course of the life-form’.

Not only is there something of ‘a human condition’ endemic (the individuals) of people’s and nations, but one compounded by typically profound differences between their ‘autonomous’ governments and economics due to natural resources, geography, climate et cetera.

Up to now our attempts to understand nature and generally to know about things not produced by man, have turn us instead exclusively to things that owed their existence to man.

As I have said we are evolved out of ignorance and continue to be born in ignorance, and that means that even as we discover and amass knowledge – the ‘if this, then that-ness’ of matter and existence, ‘new situations’ and ‘new ignorances’ will always present something of a problem to someone as long as we exist.

Unfortunately, the new Technological age is adding to this and contrary to what is currently assumed about the proverbial ivory tower independence of thinkers, no other human capacity is so vulnerable, and it is in fact far easier to act under conditions of tyranny than it is to think.

We have entered the age of Igorance-Smart phone.

The action of the scientists, since it acts into nature from the standpoint of the universe and not into the web of human relationships, lacks the revelatory character of action as well as the ability to produce stories and become historical, which together form the very source from which meaningfulness springs into and illuminates human existence.

If like me you ponder on why it is that we seem incapable of grasping that human activities in the last two centuries have effected the Earth’s climate.

We have taken all the carbon from hundreds of million of years which had been locked up in fossil fuels and stuck it into the atmosphere in a time of two hundred years.

We don’t need to wait for the Paris Climate agreement ( Which is just a joke) there is a Methane nuclear boom under the Arctic that we could see our temperatures go up by 6c in the next 30 years.

We have buggered around with the atmosphere beyond a joke or promises.

We need some Big decisions to stop the march of climate change.Afficher l'image d'origine

Surely we are not going to wipe ourselves out through ignorance when they are so many choices but if we do at least most of us will still be ignorant.

To address the problems that derive from the grotesque Inequalities and structural poverty of our world.  Quite as hoc diplomacy is not enough. Some thing more structured is needed. Like an World Aid Commission of 0.005%. (See previous posts)

Click the Ignorant like button or make an intelligent comment.

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

THE BEADY EYE SAY’S ITS TIME FOR PREVENTION NOT AID.

15 Sunday May 2016

Posted by in The Refugees, Unanswered Questions., What Needs to change in the World, World Aid., World Organisations., World Politics, WORLD POVERTY WHERE'S THE GLOBAL OUTRAGE

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE SAY’S ITS TIME FOR PREVENTION NOT AID.

Tags

, , , , ,

Currently we have in the region of 65 million people displaced in the world.

With the combination of climate change and inequality of opportunity this is set to grow.

It is time to address the root causeS not with Aid but with preventative action.Afficher l'image d'origine

The analytical discussion, the comments on refugee causes still remain, sadly, unchanged. This has to change.  If not we are provoking an unprecedented humanitarian crises that will plunge the world into an irreversible spiral for uncontrollable miserere for all.

The reasons why people become refugees are not necessarily due to individual persecution or fear of persecution.

We have to tackle the modern refugee problems and especially the problem on how to prevent new wars and situations arise. In an increasingly complex world, massive refugee flows will likely endanger international peace and security.

Above all there is a pressing need to change situations where refugees are exploited as a weapon in a political strife. (ie, situations in which people become refugees to serve specific strategic or political purposes.)

The states of the international community can no longer ignore the victims of specific practices (which amount to persecution and massive human rights violations) only because they are still in their countries of origin.

Take Yemen’s humanitarian situation.

It is arguably the worst humanitarian crisis in the world and the world is looking the other way. The United Nations reports that Yemen has more people — 21.2 million — in need of humanitarian aid than any other country including Syria.

The last 30 years, especially the early Cold War period, besides being directly and indirectly the cause for millions of refugees, seriously impeded effective preventive actions.

The average period of time for displacements globally has grown to 17 years.

The international community (If indeed such a thing exists) should move forcefully now, while almost global cooperation is still possible.

Now is the time for a progressive development of a global approach to the refugee problem.

The approach to prevent rather than to cure is gaining acceptance as the most desirable course of action.  The preventive course is advancing towards a more proactive approach to promote human rights, democracy and peace. The call to respect human rights and humanitarian law can no longer be considered merely as lip service, but rather figures now prominently on international agendas.

It’s time to realize that we are all connected to each other and our lives are affected if terrible things happen elsewhere.

Because the United Nations is not an independently Funded World organisation we have hundreds and hundreds of UN resolutions that have all proved unworkable.

Donor fatigue is “jeopardizing its entire existing and aid programs.

“Humanitarian aid can staunch the dying, but it takes politics and money to stop the killing.”

It is obvious to all that can see that future violent conflicts will likely take the form of resource wars – which can be understood as those conflicts which are primarily waged over access to scarce resources such as rare minerals, water, or oil.

All the Aid in the world will be too late making the U.N. (if not already) powerless to further the international protection of human rights.

World politics is already going in the wrong direction.

THERE IS ONLY ONE SOLUTION. PREVENTION NOT REACTION.

To achieve prevention we must create a World Aid Commission on all transactions that are designed to create Profit for Profit sake.

A 0.005% commision on:  All High Frequency Trading.

All Foreign Exchange Transactions over ($20,000)

All Sovereign Wealth Funds Acquisitions.

These three Profit for Profit (on their own) would create a perpetual Fund of billions.

They could be complemented by all World Financial Institutions issuing World Aid bonds that are tax-free.

All suggestions much appreciated.

Keep your like clicks, comments only.

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

 

 

 

 

 

THE BEADY ASKS; IS THIS ANOTHER WORTHLESS MEETING FOR DO GOODERS.

14 Saturday May 2016

Posted by in Humanity., Politics., The world to day., Where's the Global Outrage., World Organisations., World Politics

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY ASKS; IS THIS ANOTHER WORTHLESS MEETING FOR DO GOODERS.

Tags

, , , , , ,

 

It is easy to be cynical about United Nations or for that matter about any World Organisation.

But the Secretary-General announced the first World Humanitarian Summit will be held in early 2016 in Istanbul, Turkey takes the biscuit.

The world is facing an unprecedented displacement crisis. Today, more than 60 million people are forcibly displaced as a result of violent conflicts and natural disasters.

Turkey has as we know just done a deal with the European Union for Visa to hold fleeing Refugees from War zones so they can’t get into Europe.

As a leading humanitarian donor and key policy-setter, the European Union will play a major role at the upcoming World Humanitarian Summit in Istanbul.

The purpose of the summit is to set a forward-looking agenda for humanitarian action to collectively address future humanitarian challenges. The aim is to build a more inclusive and diverse humanitarian system committed to humanitarian principles.

It’s been almost 25 years since the last time the world came together to discuss humanitarian aid.

 The European Commission provides humanitarian funding worldwide to over 200 partner organisations which implement relief actions on the ground. These include non-governmental organisations (NGOs), international organisations and United Nations agencies.
Reshaping aid at the World Humanitarian Summit to my mind seems sum what a joke and more of a NGOs nice gathering as those attending are only required to give commitments. 
Nobody respects the rules of war, or is willing to sacrifice their young to prevent and end conflict.
Leaving no one behind, and working differently to end need, do indeed require investment in Humanity. As always there is no aspiration as to how to raise the billions required to battle these inequalities.
Like the Paris Summit on Climate Change this meeting is all about hot air, with promises that will be broken as soon as they are made.
This is not the United Nations fault but if anything worthwhile comes out of the first World Humanitarian Summit it should be the reform of itself under the last two heading on the Agenda.
Its time to understand that the interconnected world we all live in is primarily driven by self-interest and corrupt gains.
For example:
Mr Cameron is presently holding a conference on corruption.  He has totally forgotten that England’s wealth was obtained by an Empire that dealt in Slavery. Plundered the world and recently had some of its elected MP fiddling expenses. Not to mention bailing out its banks with billions of taxpayers funds and is currently trying to sell bank shares back to the taxpayer how already owns them. And is now in the process of destabilizing the EU for the sake of Profit not Sovereignty.
The only way we can solve more complex innovation challenges is by tapping the global community.
The belief that anything in life is just a problem waiting to be solved, usually with the right technology fix seems to be all the rage other than watching Money electing the next USA president we are develop inequalities to represent real world situations and use them to solve problems.
There is only one commitment needed to place a World Aid Commission on all Activities that exist to generate Profit for profit sake. ( See previous posts)  The cost of the refugees world crises in 2016 is 25 billion.
Certain things catch your eye, but pursue only those that capture the heart.  Afficher l'image d'origine

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

The Beady Eye Asks : Is this the Future you want.

12 Thursday May 2016

Posted by in The Future, The world to day., Unanswered Questions., What Needs to change in the World, Where's the Global Outrage.

≈ Comments Off on The Beady Eye Asks : Is this the Future you want.

Tags

A week or so ago I wrote a Post under the heading ( The Beady Eye say’s Inequality will be the Corrosive Paint of the Future)Afficher l'image d'origine

It was very popular reading (Out of the five hundred hits there was not one comment constructive or otherwise. It asks the question whether Word Press manufacturers the hits as any reasonable person that took the trouble to read the post would have a view on its content other than Awa sum/Like.) 

Perhaps it is that Americans who were the majority of the readership can’t understand words of over four symbols and are incapable of expressing a worldview.

Let’s see what happens this time.

The question is:  Without the corset of current thinking what corrosion there is to be found in the Future.

I apologize in advance if you find this post somewhat chaotic but the subject lends itself to be so.  Ignorant as I am, I don’t think I’d ever fully appreciated what we are doing or what is being done in our name.

We all envision a sustainable, just and peaceful future where universal rights are respected to cope with ever-growing unemployment and inequality. Dreams of tomorrow, once populated by hoverboards, flying cars and holidays to Mars, now seem far less hopeful: they no longer come to us in the technicolour joy of the sixties and seventies, but in a muted, washed-out sepia.

The future looks decidedly bleak.

We seem incapable of planning beyond the next twenty or thirty years.

So are we enslaving future generations by our current lifestyles.

It seems so. The need for long-term thinking and integrating the interests of future generations in policy-making, which are indispensable for addressing challenges like climate change or biodiversity loss are sadly lacking if we are to hand a livable planet to the next generations.

So is there anything to say about the distant future?

We don’t know anything specific but we can make out the broad contours.

In my view there are four possibilities for the future of humanity.Afficher l'image d'origine

Conventional wisdom seems to assume that the whole world will converge towards a plateau of development similar to the lifestyle of the richest countries today.

So the future will look a lot like the present.

Given the interconnected geography of the contemporary world and the unprecedented destructive power of modern weaponry, its hard not to ask whether a large-scale social disaster could be contained were it to occur.

This is what fuels our fear of total extinction.

Then there is the possibility of technology breakthrough which could take many forms so advanced that to defy description.

If the first possibility were to happen it would not last.

Economic competition would become so intense and the consumption of scarce resources so profound that competition would lead to war.

So we are left with Mind Blowing technological advances to save the planet and us that live on it.

They would have to be so powerful to transcend the current limits of our collective understanding.

There is one thing certain and that is the future won’t happen on its own. Once computers can answer all our questions, perhaps they’ll ask why they should remain subservient to us all.

The stark choices we face today will shape it. Something or nothing. It’s up to all of us. We have to change the way we do things. We have to think for ourselves as only by seeing the world anew, as fresh, as strange as it was for the ancients who saw it first, then we can both re-create it and preserve it for the future.

So let’s start with the heartbeat of Capitalism.  Greed.

Corporations have great power but they are shackled to the profit motive.

Maximising Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and market efficiency – are no longer adequate goals for society.   We must develop politically compelling messages around beyond GDP indicators.

The fundamental problem remains that in the negotiation of trade-offs between economic, environmental and social policy objectives, it is economic objectives that still trump others.

Beyond GDP concepts need to be rooted in processes, goals and targets that have legitimacy.

To engage citizens and establish democratic legitimacy broader indicators that incorporate health, social and environmental statistics are needed.

We must counter the widespread assumption that efficient markets and growth at all costs deliver the best results for humanity, the environment and our societies.

The trouble is that all Social Systems will resist change whether it be Capitalism or whatever. None want to pay for the cost of change and non will.

However the Fourth Industrial Revolution, which includes developments in previously disjointed fields such as artificial intelligence and machine-learning, robotics, nanotechnology, 3-D printing, and genetics and biotechnology, will cause widespread disruption not only to business models but also to labour markets over the next five years, with enormous change predicted in the skill sets needed to thrive in the new landscape.

It is therefore critical that broader and longer term changes to basic and lifelong education systems are complemented with specific, urgent and focused reskilling efforts.

We will have to move away from Certified forms of education—to the actual content of learning.

Reforming current education systems to better equip today’s students to meet future skills requirements—as worthwhile and daunting as that task is—is not going to be enough.

65% of children entering primary school today will ultimately end up working in completely new job types that don’t yet exist.

Because we are creating a world digital divide we need to bring back Philosophy and Social Science to everyday education.

It might be possible in the future to experience the sand between your toes, feel the salt from the ocean on your lips, hear the waves and smell the seaweed, just lying in your bed at home. But we will not be able to fool the mind in the way that no matter how real the experience will feel, you will always know that it haven’t happened for real.

Even if we could it will never replace the common experience if it is not genuine.

As you know the winner in life is not the one with the most money when he dies, the winner is the person who sleeps best at night.

At the moment, we still think primarily in terms of the natural consequences of climate change.

In the future we will be struggling with issues that have both natural and social causes and impacts and Inequality will be high on this list.

There are 7.3 billion people alive today about 2/3 of the world’s population lives in Asia, a figure dominated by India and China and more than half of the global population growth between now and 2050 will occur in Africa where inequality is rampant.

This will have profound cultural implications for the whole world.

The fact that civil society is impacting this debate through the Internet is good because decisions taken by politicians today will have a major influence on the world of tomorrow.

The world has changed a lot in the last 150 years, but we humans are driven by the same basic needs as we were 150 years ago, food, sleep, sex, the feeling of being appreciated and loved.

We will see in the next 50 years the transition from an oil-dependent society, new medicine, the first steps in the development of artificial intelligence, continued exploration of space, smart systems—homes, info drones, factories, farms, grids or entire cities, more people to die from AIDS, hopefully a better state for the poor people in the world, challenges in the climate change, and new inventions that make life a little easier and entertaining for some.

The small things seem to matter more these days.

We are instrumental in infrastructure planning, embedding the belief that public and corporate desires for livability and efficiency were compatible.

We all agree that our world is precious and energy is the master resource. We all agree that there is simply aren’t enough resources in the world to replicate old approaches, or to redistribute our way to prosperity.

But globalization is not only causing severe energy challenges but contributing to dooming us all down to brainless consumers that justify our ways by signing online petitions that get no where other than highlight a problem.

But is this real power?

Ooh, good question! I think it was someone who thought of reversing the power of flash mobs – I mean it’s still about solidarity but now it’s kind of organised to maintain the balance of power in society – so everyone does their bit.

I think there’s less inequality now, do you know what I mean?

We certainly are not going to saved by religion although beliefs might make it less painful for some – bringing long-term thinking into world policy maAfficher l'image d'origineking might be better. Afficher l'image d'origine

The direction we are going we be lucky if there is any clear air or fresh water left.

What is the way forward?

Make everything that matter to life free and abundant to all.

The best way to predict the future is to create it. This can only be achieved by spreading the cost fairly.

By placing a World Aid commission on all activities that are for Profit sake. ( See previous posts)

All comments appreciated. All like clicks keep to yourself.

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨