Watch three visionaries in AI & bioengineering each explain the positive potential of what's coming in their fields in short conversations with me at a recent event in San Francisco
I think you're missing one ... societal _trust_ ... sure AI, bio-engineering and knowledge-composition are all sexy but as a species, our "superpower" vs other animals is co-ordination, (though tool-making, and written language are also high). To coordinate (rather than compete in zero-sum games) requires some degree of overlapping word-views, from which trust can emerge. I point out the early form of contract was convenant (as in Judeo witness by God) under seal. If you look at real property, we've progressively moved from social trust (I know XYZ and can shame/guilt you for failure) to institutional trust (courts, cultural norms, business practices).
We are in the process of converting this trust to computational law (RegTech) which means a separation of state-sovereignty towards more effective superclusters
i'm hearing we can likely fall back on Maslow's hierarchy of needs (health, security, societal coherence) to establish WHY we should use AI, biotech, and new energy moving forward.
WHAT to do will be a challenge. Expect conflicts between the role of government versus individual liberty. The role of government v NGOs. Conflicts between developing nations and developed nations. Conflicts between nations that are democracies and nations that are autocratic.
HOW to act will be an even bigger challenge with groups advocating for equity v merit, humans v nature, rights v privileges, etc.
So, i expect we will clumsily stumble forward and coalesce much later... not unlike the era of globalization.
Yes, you outline some of the big challenges. That is generally what I am turning to develop more in the book version of this project. I will be doing monthly essays on pieces of that iteration, and the next physical event in the fall will focus on the economic implications and how the economy will need to morph in the next 25 years. In other words, what to do. Or what we could do.
It feels a bit understated what Arthur Smith says (below or above): "Expect conflicts between the role of government versus individual liberty." Because that is like calling "WW2 was an unfortunate hickup on the way to economic equilibrium", or explaining religious warfare by saying "Some people believe different things, so there were some minor disagreements". Also: "Global nuclear war may cause some adjustments in stock market pricing".
I might as well add: "Artificial Intelligence with make Trump smarter and his followers will become really nice folks" This appears to be a good description of the Peter Leyden visionary insight.
I guess I should continue in this fashion, just to fit into this futuristic cult here: "Artificial Intelligence, if it works out as planned, will cause an extra 50 million unemployed people within 10 years, but since the perpetual Trump administration is known for loving kindness, all these folks and their families will be taken care of in the most merciful Christian way by the richest MEGA Maga churches, since they took over the work of the Social Security Administration"
Naa, forget it, I will look for a job at the Onion.
not really sure what point(s) you are trying to communicate. i'll give it a go though:
1.) the future is bleak (expect economic wars, religious wars, nuclear war)
2.) AI is sarcastically promised to change political views you don't like
3.) AI will do far more harm than good (almost anti-malthusian) like was predicted about many innovations
4.) the role of government is to take care of people (save the oppressed from oppressors)
5.) government love and kindness fixes everything - well except $35 trillion debt, increasing % of nation on welfare, growing wealth gaps, growing tax gaps (40% pay zero income tax, top 10% pay 70% of tax)
6.) Christianity will sarcastically pick up where government fails
I think you're missing one ... societal _trust_ ... sure AI, bio-engineering and knowledge-composition are all sexy but as a species, our "superpower" vs other animals is co-ordination, (though tool-making, and written language are also high). To coordinate (rather than compete in zero-sum games) requires some degree of overlapping word-views, from which trust can emerge. I point out the early form of contract was convenant (as in Judeo witness by God) under seal. If you look at real property, we've progressively moved from social trust (I know XYZ and can shame/guilt you for failure) to institutional trust (courts, cultural norms, business practices).
We are in the process of converting this trust to computational law (RegTech) which means a separation of state-sovereignty towards more effective superclusters
covenant was also enforced with weapons, because some people have no shame...
institutional trust is enforced by nations with police forces and armies...
1.) please define super cluster.
2.) explain how a "supercluster" enforces property rights?
3 informative videos.
i'm hearing we can likely fall back on Maslow's hierarchy of needs (health, security, societal coherence) to establish WHY we should use AI, biotech, and new energy moving forward.
WHAT to do will be a challenge. Expect conflicts between the role of government versus individual liberty. The role of government v NGOs. Conflicts between developing nations and developed nations. Conflicts between nations that are democracies and nations that are autocratic.
HOW to act will be an even bigger challenge with groups advocating for equity v merit, humans v nature, rights v privileges, etc.
So, i expect we will clumsily stumble forward and coalesce much later... not unlike the era of globalization.
Yes, you outline some of the big challenges. That is generally what I am turning to develop more in the book version of this project. I will be doing monthly essays on pieces of that iteration, and the next physical event in the fall will focus on the economic implications and how the economy will need to morph in the next 25 years. In other words, what to do. Or what we could do.
I'm reminded of the Cluetrain Manifesto, which was influential...
It feels a bit understated what Arthur Smith says (below or above): "Expect conflicts between the role of government versus individual liberty." Because that is like calling "WW2 was an unfortunate hickup on the way to economic equilibrium", or explaining religious warfare by saying "Some people believe different things, so there were some minor disagreements". Also: "Global nuclear war may cause some adjustments in stock market pricing".
I might as well add: "Artificial Intelligence with make Trump smarter and his followers will become really nice folks" This appears to be a good description of the Peter Leyden visionary insight.
I guess I should continue in this fashion, just to fit into this futuristic cult here: "Artificial Intelligence, if it works out as planned, will cause an extra 50 million unemployed people within 10 years, but since the perpetual Trump administration is known for loving kindness, all these folks and their families will be taken care of in the most merciful Christian way by the richest MEGA Maga churches, since they took over the work of the Social Security Administration"
Naa, forget it, I will look for a job at the Onion.
not really sure what point(s) you are trying to communicate. i'll give it a go though:
1.) the future is bleak (expect economic wars, religious wars, nuclear war)
2.) AI is sarcastically promised to change political views you don't like
3.) AI will do far more harm than good (almost anti-malthusian) like was predicted about many innovations
4.) the role of government is to take care of people (save the oppressed from oppressors)
5.) government love and kindness fixes everything - well except $35 trillion debt, increasing % of nation on welfare, growing wealth gaps, growing tax gaps (40% pay zero income tax, top 10% pay 70% of tax)
6.) Christianity will sarcastically pick up where government fails
you forgot:
> environmental collapse
> destruction of democracy
> skynet
your cult sounds a bit depressing...