|
Post by jdredd on Aug 22, 2010 21:55:21 GMT -5
I was looking for the Baby Boomer thread to do more speculation on the significance of the Baby Boomer Generation in history, but suddenly I realized all the stuff we went through, the hippies and the Decade of Greed and the War on Terrorism were not important. What was important was the technology we developed along the way. That is our lasting significance, not anything cultural. Also, if I've heard "Technology is neutral" once, I've heard it a million times. I beg to disagree, but I'll let you wonder why until I have more time. Meanwhile, here's something to chew on: opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/08/22/the-third-replicator/?hp
|
|
|
Post by dj on Aug 22, 2010 23:30:57 GMT -5
I was looking for the Baby Boomer thread to do more speculation on the significance of the Baby Boomer Generation in history, but suddenly I realized all the stuff we went through, the hippies and the Decade of Greed and the War on Terrorism were not important. What was important was the technology we developed along the way. That is our lasting significance, not anything cultural. Also, if I've heard "Technology is neutral" once, I've heard it a million times. I beg to disagree, but I'll let you wonder why until I have more time. Meanwhile, here's something to chew on: opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/08/22/the-third-replicator/?hpWow, jd, memes are pretty weighty culturopsycho concepts. These days on the interwebs I expect something more along the lines of "Top Ten Worst Marriage Proposals," or maybe a little more chalkboard scratching on the subject of Obama's birthplace, not a discussion of whether memes are discreet information carriers. My one cent, I think what a lot of people disregard is the concept that a meme is not a self-contained vector. It only fully gains its whole meaning with the interaction of the recipient. So a proto-meme is a vehicle carrying the first half of the gene, lets say the mama chromosomes, but does not get realized fully until fused with the recipient's contribution, the papa chromosomes. No communication is identical to another. What I type here is really going to be 30 completely different messages when read by 30 different people. I always proclaim that "I say what I mean and I mean what I say." This is to alleviate all the hoopla over the possibility that one must read between the lines to get what I'm saying. I try as sincerely and honestly as possible to use the words which when read in the order I've typed them should mean exactly what they say. However, you will hear me say something different than, say, Tired, even if you are reading the exact same words. Meaning is not a one way exchange. What I intend to say, mixed with the reader's palette of ideas, will create a meaning which is totally unique to that reader.
|
|
|
Post by jdredd on Aug 23, 2010 0:17:40 GMT -5
SO, want to hear why I think technology is not neutral? Say yes. OK, here it is, two words: Mind Control. Every day technology gets closer to machines that can read people's minds. After all, thoughts are just electrical currents. And of course, once we have machines that read people's minds, the next easy step is mind control. Welcome to the next stage in human evolution. Enjoy.
|
|
|
Post by jdredd on Aug 23, 2010 0:32:16 GMT -5
I was looking for the Baby Boomer thread to do more speculation on the significance of the Baby Boomer Generation in history, but suddenly I realized all the stuff we went through, the hippies and the Decade of Greed and the War on Terrorism were not important. What was important was the technology we developed along the way. That is our lasting significance, not anything cultural. Also, if I've heard "Technology is neutral" once, I've heard it a million times. I beg to disagree, but I'll let you wonder why until I have more time. Meanwhile, here's something to chew on: opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/08/22/the-third-replicator/?hpWow, jd, memes are pretty weighty culturopsycho concepts. These days on the interwebs I expect something more along the lines of "Top Ten Worst Marriage Proposals," or maybe a little more chalkboard scratching on the subject of Obama's birthplace, not a discussion of whether memes are discreet information carriers. My one cent, I think what a lot of people disregard is the concept that a meme is not a self-contained vector. It only fully gains its whole meaning with the interaction of the recipient. So a proto-meme is a vehicle carrying the first half of the gene, lets say the mama chromosomes, but does not get realized fully until fused with the recipient's contribution, the papa chromosomes. No communication is identical to another. What I type here is really going to be 30 completely different messages when read by 30 different people. I always proclaim that "I say what I mean and I mean what I say." This is to alleviate all the hoopla over the possibility that one must read between the lines to get what I'm saying. I try as sincerely and honestly as possible to use the words which when read in the order I've typed them should mean exactly what they say. However, you will hear me say something different than, say, Tired, even if you are reading the exact same words. Meaning is not a one way exchange. What I intend to say, mixed with the reader's palette of ideas, will create a meaning which is totally unique to that reader. I agree with everything you've said.
|
|
|
Post by Turk on Aug 23, 2010 1:29:02 GMT -5
SO, want to hear why I think technology is not neutral? Say yes. OK, here it is, two words: Mind Control. Every day technology gets closer to machines that can read people's minds. After all, thoughts are just electrical currents. And of course, once we have machines that read people's minds, the next easy step is mind control. Welcome to the next stage in human evolution. Enjoy. I not sure what thread to address as many have crossed but after reading your writings today JD I’m compelled to ask is if you’ve read “Island” by Huxley and/or “The Moon is a Harsh Mistress” by R.A. Heinlein?
|
|
|
Post by jdredd on Aug 23, 2010 1:52:53 GMT -5
SO, want to hear why I think technology is not neutral? Say yes. OK, here it is, two words: Mind Control. Every day technology gets closer to machines that can read people's minds. After all, thoughts are just electrical currents. And of course, once we have machines that read people's minds, the next easy step is mind control. Welcome to the next stage in human evolution. Enjoy. I not sure what thread to address as many have crossed but after reading your writings today JD I’m compelled to ask is if you’ve read “Island” by Huxley and/or “The Moon is a Harsh Mistress” by R.A. Heinlein? "Island", no. "Moon...", I'm sure I have. I'll have to go look them up.
|
|
|
Post by EscapeHatch on Aug 23, 2010 17:17:11 GMT -5
Musak.
|
|
|
Post by jdredd on Aug 23, 2010 22:22:02 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by jdredd on Aug 28, 2010 0:55:29 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Tired in CV on Aug 28, 2010 3:17:26 GMT -5
WOW, what shocking new information! The human brain has been evolving from the very first person. That they now have technology to measure or see this is what is new. This is just like the global warming syndrome. Technology advances and they learn how to measure something, then all of a sudden they discover a crisis, only it isn't a crisis as it is something that has been evolving, cycling all along! Now, the use of drugs is a different story and how people become dependent upon them for various desired effects. But dependency isn't anything new either, just how society changes to decide what the limits are. Then the discussion of electronic chips integrated with human thought. Again, this is another external source, like a drug, that becomes dependent upon societies approval or a specific need (as in medically moving a mechanical limb replacing a lost limb). When will it be self imposed replacement to "enhance" ones performance? Only society will determine that. Head for the hills there Stella, the brain doctors are coming for ya!
|
|
|
Post by jdredd on Aug 28, 2010 6:50:25 GMT -5
WOW, what shocking new information! The human brain has been evolving from the very first person. That they now have technology to measure or see this is what is new. This is just like the global warming syndrome. Technology advances and they learn how to measure something, then all of a sudden they discover a crisis, only it isn't a crisis as it is something that has been evolving, cycling all along! Now, the use of drugs is a different story and how people become dependent upon them for various desired effects. But dependency isn't anything new either, just how society changes to decide what the limits are. Then the discussion of electronic chips integrated with human thought. Again, this is another external source, like a drug, that becomes dependent upon societies approval or a specific need (as in medically moving a mechanical limb replacing a lost limb). When will it be self imposed replacement to "enhance" ones performance? Only society will determine that. Head for the hills there Stella, the brain doctors are coming for ya! You have your paranoia (Jihadist sleeper cells under your bed) and I have mine!
|
|
|
Post by jdredd on Sept 4, 2010 23:13:47 GMT -5
www.nytimes.com/2010/09/05/science/05robots.html?_r=1&hpw"Still, the possibility that remotely operated robots might be used by some managers as surveillance devices, or as peeping Toms, has made some in the fledgling industry nervous. “I don’t want this technology to be seen as a means of oppression,” said Trevor Blackwell, founder and chief executive of Anybots, the maker of QB, a $15,000 mobile robot that balances on two wheels like a Segway and will be shipped commercially beginning this fall." But eventually robotics will allow bosses to eliminate those annoying human employees altogether...
|
|
|
Post by Tired in CV on Sept 4, 2010 23:54:55 GMT -5
www.nytimes.com/2010/09/05/science/05robots.html?_r=1&hpw"Still, the possibility that remotely operated robots might be used by some managers as surveillance devices, or as peeping Toms, has made some in the fledgling industry nervous. “I don’t want this technology to be seen as a means of oppression,” said Trevor Blackwell, founder and chief executive of Anybots, the maker of QB, a $15,000 mobile robot that balances on two wheels like a Segway and will be shipped commercially beginning this fall." But eventually robotics will allow bosses to eliminate those annoying human employees altogether... WOW, just think, you could send your robot to work FOR YOU (maybe two or three?) while you sit on your couch! Probably do a better job too! We could END WELFARE too! Do you think robots can replace management AND the unions too? It would be a shame if THEY STILL had to work! Just think, to learn a new job it will be a matter of downloading a program, no multi-week, month or year program! Be prepared to pay for robot health care or robot workers comp in case of repairs, etc. Also will have to buy a new "program" to update them every couple of years! But they will earn the money FOR YOU! Maybe you should rent the movie "Robots"!
|
|
|
Post by jdredd on Sept 5, 2010 0:13:51 GMT -5
www.nytimes.com/2010/09/05/science/05robots.html?_r=1&hpw"Still, the possibility that remotely operated robots might be used by some managers as surveillance devices, or as peeping Toms, has made some in the fledgling industry nervous. “I don’t want this technology to be seen as a means of oppression,” said Trevor Blackwell, founder and chief executive of Anybots, the maker of QB, a $15,000 mobile robot that balances on two wheels like a Segway and will be shipped commercially beginning this fall." But eventually robotics will allow bosses to eliminate those annoying human employees altogether... WOW, just think, you could send your robot to work FOR YOU (maybe two or three?) while you sit on your couch! Probably do a better job too! We could END WELFARE too! Do you think robots can replace management AND the unions too? It would be a shame if THEY STILL had to work! Just think, to learn a new job it will be a matter of downloading a program, no multi-week, month or year program! Be prepared to pay for robot health care or robot workers comp in case of repairs, etc. Also will have to buy a new "program" to update them every couple of years! But they will earn the money FOR YOU! Maybe you should rent the movie "Robots"! Good point! I want a bunch of robots to do all my work for me! Is that what will happen, we'll all be bosses of a bunch of robots? Maybe, with sexbots, a human will never even have to talk to another human ever again if they don't want to. Will that be the way we'll avoid the mind control problem, because no one will need to control another person's mind if they have all their needs met by robots? Or will we have mind control wars simply out of sheer boredom? Will controlling other people's minds be the biggest high in the future? Or maybe drugs will get so powerful we will have all our needs for a high taken care of...
|
|
|
Post by Tired in CV on Sept 5, 2010 0:32:54 GMT -5
Good point! I want a bunch of robots to do all my work for me! Is that what will happen, we'll all be bosses of a bunch of robots? Maybe, with sexbots, a human will never even have to talk to another human ever again if they don't want to. Will that be the way we'll avoid the mind control problem, because no one will need to control another person's mind if they have all their needs met by robots? Or will we have mind control wars simply out of sheer boredom? Will controlling other people's minds be the biggest high in the future? Or maybe drugs will get so powerful we will have all our needs for a high taken care of... There are plenty of people already playing mind games with almost everybody they meet. Is that not a form of control? People in this country communicate in person almost 50% less (away from work) than they did 30-50 years ago. I would be surprised if 25% of the people know their neighbors names and talk to them on a regular basis. When you think that most of them are in the south, that really drops the numbers throughout the rest of the country. If we continue increasing the prescriptions of legal (mind altering) drugs as they have been the last 20-30 years, we will NEED ROBOTS to do the work because the person should not be drugged into space at work. I had two workers who were on such drugs. The law made me keep them (Americans with Disabilities Act; Disability Discrimination Act and the Disabiliy Act) so I had to be very careful what jobs they were assigned to because of their many restrictions. They were almost useless and somewhat dangerous.
|
|