Well, I'm struggling with this myself. Should we be cynical because the world around us has been cynical historically? I prefer not to be cynical - to be blunt I don't mean to belittle anyone, but being cynical is just boring. I am an empathical being so I understand that some people might think "boring" is inapropriate, but I try to elevate the discussion. Sadly Russia often through history has chosen to be cynical and the war in Urkaine is of course no exception. Cynism is a yoke that enslaves and prevents innovation. Humans are able to follwo different patterns of behavior, lets call one pattern the "clan vs clan" pattern. In the "clan vs clan" pattern hierarchies are created through violience and groups fight against each other for power. This pattern is what runs the matrix that criminal gangs operate in. The pattern is "self balancing" since its basically the people with most violence capital that calls the shots. However, this pattern fails to provide for the many, abundance flows to those with power and there's not so much cause for innovating for your own sake since your work will just end up in the hands of the powerful. I beleive you can see in Russia and in countries where cartels run the business that they are less effective in providing for the many. In Russia the answer to this is to work with spirituality - the Russian orthodox church has been tied into the power structures and Russia tries to promote its orthodoxy abroad in attempts to gain influence, but just like the rest of the power structures it is corrupt.
I beleive that Europe deserves a better future than falling into cynicism, not least the eastern parts. Its like resuming the dark ages. Its hard to predict the future and I don't know what will happen. Sadly weapons and armed conflict will most likely play a role, but I think that we must reason more broadly to really solve the conflict. Beating cynicism with cynicism is just cynical. People have an abillity, even if it may be suppressed in some people, to be reasonable.
Teachers sare another example. I think many of us actually want to work for a bigger cause. Its just that the system is so to say rigged so that your attention flows in the direction of making money instead of trying to save the world. What doctor or teacher does teh best job? The one who only looks at the paycheck or someone who feels responsible?
This is interesting. How does AI stuff fit in this list? All AI stuff uses data that has been gathered without conscious consent and the resulting models may be used in malicious ways. How should we stand on that?
What kind of international law can we expect in the future? A law that is constantly broken by various maleficent actors? Of course we've heard them complain that the current order is run by the west and harmful to others. What are the alternatives? A hundred cables?
> According to Johnson the US has never endorsed the ICC because it's a "direct affront to our own sovereignty. [...] We don't put any international body above American sovereignty and Israel doesn't do that either," he added.
God I have developed such a distaste for political opinions. Everyone thinks they're right and everyone sees the various maleficent actors in others.
"constantly broken by various maleficent actors" is a pretty good description of the past of international law. There is no reason to expect the future to be any different.
These days noone seems to have peace to the world as a dream and driving force. I grew up in the spirit that we should try to achieve peace everywhere. Nowadays when people think about war they think about cool technology, who wins all the resources and they think earning money selling weapons. If WW3 really gets off I feel pretty sure it's going to end in science fiction with AI, robots and lasers, it's no longer just stories. Perhaps we will all end up in a Skynet/Terminator scenario? When the technology is there, who will end up controlling it - big tech or the technology itself? I stopped caring about making innovations a couple of years ago - noone is ever trying to mitigate the doomsday. We're not this dumb, we could use our innovations to do some real good.
The number of comments on this post is quite telling.
Hope to see ya all in another future, not the one we're heading for. I just wish people did care.
We've been made accustomed to fast feedback. Technology moves rapidly and therefore gives us quick feedback (dopamine). Peace processes move slowly and therefore gives less dopamine for those involved. Now, what would the junkie in you choose to pursue?
I know what you mean, but the problem is that people make these critical decisions based on fashion. IME, in my anecodotal and subjective observations, that's what drives most of them and it's maddening. More specifically, they seem to shop between different 'brands', like consumers (perhaps a product of conditioning), and then like loyal consumers they support whatever the brand sells.
It's like making food and shelter into fashion - are you going to stop eating this year? What's the brand selling? Starvation?
Depending on angle we could see different dumb things in the pandemic. I'm not sure which specific dumb thing you're referring to.
Intelligence is, as I see it, distributed both in space and time. What is stupid in a local time/place context may turn out to be part of a process that ends up creating something great. Of course it could also be the other way around.
New innovations - gives you PTSD every day. Computeres and technology used to be fun. It hasn't been for years. We're building ourselves a horrible future. If it wasn't my main income I would have stopped using them and moved into the woods long ago. I've seen this comming. It's no wonder that birth rates are plummeting world wide. The only help I can think of is divine intervention or if someone has a very well hidden plan to work it out. For authenticity to work it needs to be universal and I'm not sure that is the case.
The birth rates are plummeting because people are taking longer to start their lives. Women are in school until 23 and tend to change partners at 26. This means there is a 9 year window of being marriable for children until 35 at which fertility dramatically declines. I'm talking about five trips to an IVF clinic or 75% chance of conception using donor eggs for a just a single child.
I don't want to see this too negatively though. In principle the pool of women who stay fertile longer will outproduce women who lose their fertility too early. It also means there is genetic selection for longer lifespans in general.
As someone who knocked up their wife, who is well over 35, this year, I think your understanding of the drastic drop off in fertility at that age is exaggerated.
All of what you said I do expect to be the expectation past 40 though.
Yes, same story for me. But I got out of it in 1999. I seem to have mentally foreseen the crash coming and it portrayed itself as a mood disorder.
I know many of you will disagree with me on this, but I also think a large problem is the increase in both extremely low frequency, and radio frequency, electromagnetic fields.
No one can tell me that the bloody nose I get whenever I use laptops that emit high levels of low frequency electromagnetic radiation is psychosomatic.
Some ten years ago I relalized that the tech industry has little regard for what the socetietal consequences of tech developments will be. Since then work has not been fun in the same way. For example, social media fun to use, but when you think about it, it is just using our human vanity and desire to be seen to gather as much data from us as possible to use in ways that the users will never imagine. These uses of will not be in best intrest of the users, but of the business that collect the data. I foresaw that giving away strong encryption for free, will give criminals the tools they need to build there own empires. My thesis was proved by encrochat. Of course that service was exposed, but of course theere will be new ones, harder to crack. As for AI the dice has been rolled, no way to put it back. We have been taugth that it is fun to develop new technology, that progress is good and to earn as much as possible. Who teaches us to philosophize about the consequences? Wouldn't it be better if our developments were saving the world and our human race? We are tapping the life out of our planet.
Social media doesn’t primarily exist to gather data.
Social media companies’ primary mission is to keep people hooked auch that they can show them more ads.
The data collection and targeting is ok order to better target these ads.
There is no big conspiracy to somehow do something unimaginable with that data
Social media exists so that profits can be made from advertising. And that implies the gathering of data.
Invoking the word "conspiracy" is a cheap way to dismiss any argument. No conspiracy was asserted by the GP. And any time there is hidden information and people are similarly motivated it can appear to be a conspiracy. This could be why whenever I play poker everyone else at the table seems to be conspiring to take my money away . . .
...and of course, at the end of the article, the author offers to sell some kind of project assessment. My assessment is that it is not money that will buy greatness. You need to have engagement. This is why this kind of project seems to be doomed from the beginning. Large enterprises are sadly not driven by highly motivated people. The project scope is humongous. You have all kinds of legacy to take into account. To compare with Uber, which has a platform written from scratch by a (probably) highly motivated team is just ... whishful thinking. It is just very hard to create a common goal and motivated people in such a large project. Throw in a global consulting firm and you have recipe for disaster. I've worked for 14 years as a developer consultant and I know that the top priority goal is to get the customer to pay the bills, if your project produces something great it is nice, but the thing that will get the bosses moving are unpaid invoices. Nowadays I'm with a product company
Rant: Sooner or later some person will use all the data to something no good. I predicted some 8 years ago that criminals would start using encryption in the same way military does. It scared me. Encro happened; Criminal networks using encryption to plan murder, smuggle drugs, human trafficking etc. Data has been called the new oil, businesses are more and more finding ways to refine it. Will it be for their good? Yes. Will it be for your good? Just as long as it does not conflict with their good? By the businesses giving away features ("the first one free"); look at the ever better search results or all the long lost friends in social media; you are lured into giving away your data because it helps you. The problem is that our machines and even business models have become so complicated that it is hard for people to know all the logic and data flows. Can anyone without a comp sci University degree discuss strengths and weaknesses in various encryption methods? Journlists, politicians, public opinion? As engineers, programmers, mathematicians, nerds etc we don't see the problem because a) this stuff is paying our bills b) it's just so much fun to use your intellect to conceive new thingsno one thought about. All the code I've written has been mathematically proven? (Well...)
Of course, I have waited for some 20 years for techageddon and it hasn't happend (that I know of?). Can we learn from history? What about mr Murphy, the guy with the law? Why is the debate so just...nowhere?
Well, never mind, back to sleep then, take the pills, leave the kids at school, wait for the paycheck, make another payment on the mortgage. By the way, the kids love the phones, filters are so much fun, facial recognition is soo practical. Why would anyone be intrested in my emails, phonecalls, age, preferred gender, facial patterns, voice patterns, habits, bad habits; I'm no politician or famous person. I bet their phones and mine are protected by some...kind agency. Social media is way better than school. If everyone can find you in your underwear in social media, you are so much not just a weirdo, just like everyone else. Gig economy is freedom. What was the name of that new Russian "rocket" - САТАН, what does that even mean? Why can't they just use 7-bit ASCII? Elon's got it all figured out for us. People usually don't take opportunities to make dishonest money. Don't worry, icy chills may be trained to be ignored. The dating app will help you conceive children of the appropriate IQ. Those paranoid brain cells are just wasting your energy. Life will be so much freer without. We'll blame big pharma later and then some network / streaming service may use it for entertainment.
TLDR: Of course you already know that the spelling of powerful in Swedish is kraftfull. Kraftful is so much more fun. It translates into power ugly
