tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post1112205956802830672..comments2024-03-29T00:39:31.629-07:00Comments on CONTRARY BRIN: The Odd Way We Design Our DestinyDavid Brinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comBlogger25125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-44599036737694316452012-12-29T12:21:27.669-08:002012-12-29T12:21:27.669-08:00...onwards!...onwards!David Brinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-82436099765113440012012-12-29T11:00:02.973-08:002012-12-29T11:00:02.973-08:00I think people from 1967 would be very impressed w...I think people from 1967 would be very impressed with our space program. After all, we have a space station in orbit that can house up to six people from different nations. We have satellites orbiting several planets and sending pictures back to us. We have telescopes in space giving some of the most spectacular pictures ever. We landed a SUV-sized rover on Mars and are performing science that shows there was running water on Mars. And when you consider in 1967 we'd not gotten to the Moon yet? Oh hell yes, they'd be impressed.<br /><br />I think even someone from 1972 would be impressed.<br /><br />Rob H.Acacia H.https://www.blogger.com/profile/07678539067303911329noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-22807681411173805472012-12-29T06:19:32.242-08:002012-12-29T06:19:32.242-08:00Yes "expensive luxuries" people use for ...Yes "expensive luxuries" people use for stuff like checking crop prices; contacting emergency services; doing banking when the nearest bank branch is 50 miles away; sending remittances; keeping in touch with family members working overseas...<br /><br />Oh and every single damn thing westerners use phones for since the vast majority of these people have no access to landlines.<br /><br />"India's annual mean household income is almost 62 X lower than in the US."<br /><br />While I can't find any figures on India's annual mean household income, India's GDP per capita at purchasing power parity is just under $4,000 per annum and America's is $48,000<br /><br />http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_%28PPP%29_per_capita<br /><br />That's a differential of 12:1 not 62:1.<br /><br />You can buy a Nokia 1280 in India for under 1,000 rupee ($18).<br /><br />http://www.fonearena.com/mobile_phone_pricelist.html<br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />Ianhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01739671401151990700noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-4781463385208923052012-12-29T04:50:22.249-08:002012-12-29T04:50:22.249-08:00Worldbank.org begs to differ, stating that mobile ...Worldbank.org begs to differ, stating that mobile phone cost is still the major hurdle.<br /><br />Mobile airtime minute costs are lower in India (almost 6 X lower) than in the US, but don't forget that India's annual mean household income is almost 62 X lower than in the US.<br /><br />Popular they may be, cell phones are still just expensive luxuries and/or toys. Like the Pet Rock, their appeal is based on hyperbole.<br /><br />They are "destined" to go the way of the snuff box.locumranchnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-47596586517114794892012-12-29T02:39:31.916-08:002012-12-29T02:39:31.916-08:00The developing world makes good use of their pet r...The developing world makes good use of their pet rocks.Tony Fiskhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14578160528746657971noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-14478988684948313802012-12-29T00:14:00.322-08:002012-12-29T00:14:00.322-08:00"More than 5 Billion cell phones worldwide mu..."More than 5 Billion cell phones worldwide multiplied by their own proprietary service plan at a minimum cost of (say) $40/month gives us an estimated worldwide cost of $ 2.4 Trillion/yr in perpetuity."<br /><br />except that around 4 billion of those phones are in the developing world and most of them are pre-paid phones with a typical use of a dollar or so a month.Ianhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01739671401151990700noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-26651127714766499702012-12-28T22:49:59.559-08:002012-12-28T22:49:59.559-08:00Whether or not a techno-fetish like cell phones ar...Whether or not a techno-fetish like cell phones are useful or not is beside the point. <br /><br />More than 5 Billion cell phones worldwide multiplied by their own proprietary service plan at a minimum cost of (say) $40/month gives us an estimated worldwide cost of $ 2.4 Trillion/yr in perpetuity.<br /><br />That's a truck-load of finite resources to piss away on what amounts to a postmodern 'Pet Rock'.<br /><br />My point is that the idea of continual incremental "progress" is in no way historically accurate, "scientific" and/or "predestined".<br /><br />Some of you could learn a thing or two from Karl Popper.<br /><br />Best.locumranchnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-33387981762426042372012-12-28T20:34:49.407-08:002012-12-28T20:34:49.407-08:00Who would have imagined that colonizing space woul...<i>Who would have imagined that colonizing space would prove so grindingly slow -- yet by 2000 we’d refute so many cruel bigotries that citizens once took for granted, back in 1967?</i><br /><br />Granted, we eliminated some of the grosser social injustice issues. They lynchings don't happen and if they do they aren't accepted.<br /><br />Still, in 1967 there was only one black man in the US senate. In oh-so-advanced 2012 there is . . . One. Since the first black senator in 1870 there has never been more than one black senator, and there have been long stretches with none. In a country that is 13.1% black.<br />(representation in the House is better, thanks to Gerrymandering)<br /><br />I'm not sure people in 1967 would be any more impressed with our social justice advances than they would with our space program.sociotardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11697154298087412934noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-50777261194406346772012-12-28T17:58:34.905-08:002012-12-28T17:58:34.905-08:00Think I'll rest on my laurels. I predicted th...Think I'll rest on my laurels. I predicted the 21st Century will "begin" in 2014 -- as happened in 1814 and 1914. Scary. That's my big one.David Brinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-44664756968012776342012-12-28T16:18:45.800-08:002012-12-28T16:18:45.800-08:00David,
Care to update the prediction? First Presid...David,<br />Care to update the prediction? First President who is openly gay, or openly atheist, or openly Muslim, before the first human on Mars? Or any two of three? First President from a party other than Dem/Rep? First transhuman elected President?Paul451https://www.blogger.com/profile/12119086761190994938noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-81237642673531027332012-12-28T13:53:05.078-08:002012-12-28T13:53:05.078-08:00We invest in '5G Networks' & 'WiFi...We invest in '5G Networks' & 'WiFi' instead of mosquito nets or an adequate diet so millions die needlessly of malaria & malnutrition; we become stupider & stupider as we text & chatter endlessly (LOL!!) about less and less of importance; we cling to our techno-emotional crutches in an irrational fashion; and we pretend that our technological obsessions are neither immoral nor irrational.""<br /><br />Except that at the same time as we're investing in telecoms we're also investing more than ever in fighting disease and hunger and more importantly, incomes in the developing world are rising allowing people there to address those problems themselves.<br /><br />Cellphones may b an "emotional crutch" to you, but to peopel in South Africa or Bangladesh they're a vital means of communication.Ianhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01739671401151990700noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-80441608753154676952012-12-28T12:50:13.143-08:002012-12-28T12:50:13.143-08:00I said that? YipeI said that? YipeDavid Brinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-40873229624007158502012-12-28T10:22:04.164-08:002012-12-28T10:22:04.164-08:00"At this rate, who will bet me that a woman o...<i>"At this rate, who will bet me that a woman or a person of color won’t preside in the White House long before the first human being steps on Mars?"</i><br /><br />Called it! :-)Jonathan S.noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-24691680611509337132012-12-28T06:59:55.738-08:002012-12-28T06:59:55.738-08:00Something no one has thought of will change things...Something no one has thought of will change things in a manner no one is predicting. And, robots.<br /><br />(I get the feeling Google is having us verify street addresses in the capchas...)Jumperhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11794110173836133321noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-76424918763323236352012-12-28T05:26:22.069-08:002012-12-28T05:26:22.069-08:00Inertia works both ways. An object in motion remai...Inertia works both ways. An object in motion remains in motion unless acted upon by an outside force. And an object at rest tends to stay at rest unless also acted upon by an outside force.<br /><br />The object is human curiosity and progress. If we stop it, it won't start up again. And without progress and communication and all, we'd not know about the people in Africa suffering from malaria and the like. We'd all be in tiny non-connected worlds. <br /><br />What's more, this is what the Power That Were want. They want everyone to be beholden upon them and for their divine right to rule. And if there is never another ounce of progress? They'd be satisfied. And we'd die as a species.<br /><br />No. As helterskelter as it may be and while it might not be equal at times... continual progress is needed for us as a species. And for our future.<br /><br />Rob H.Acacia H.https://www.blogger.com/profile/07678539067303911329noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-61817198387031347482012-12-28T01:48:19.899-08:002012-12-28T01:48:19.899-08:00Although they are often used to imply teleological...Although they are often used to imply teleological importance, terms like "purpose", "progress", "improvement", "advancement" and "destiny" represent culturally-suspect value judgemnts which can only be defined in retrospect.<br /><br />In the first question, the questioner insists that newly-acquired knowledge in certain disciplines must necessarily represent an "advance" even though such knowledge could just as easily represent a 'dead end' that invalidates an entire line of inquiry and moves us back to 'Square One'.<br /><br />Questions regarding the sustainability of earthly human populations also asks us to assume that our 'valued' technological present will maintain its 'value' into the (indefinite) technological future even though this does not necessarily follow.<br /><br />Likewise, value questions regarding the nature of sanity & education are culture specific, yet we assume that our conceptions of each are both eternal & universal, believing that sanity & education are causally dependent even though we cannot prove that they are related at all.<br /><br />Finally, I need to point out that conceptual terms like 'Rationality' and 'Morality' are NOT necessarily synonymous. Quite the opposite. More often than not, they are mutually exclusive.<br /><br />As in the case of our 'Cell Phones', many of our most valued technological 'advances' hinder communication, complicate our lives & disrupt our society. Yet, in the name of technological progress, advancement or "destiny", we continue to throw good resources after bad. <br /><br />We invest in '5G Networks' & 'WiFi' instead of mosquito nets or an adequate diet so millions die needlessly of malaria & malnutrition; we become stupider & stupider as we text & chatter endlessly (LOL!!) about less and less of importance; we cling to our techno-emotional crutches in an irrational fashion; and we pretend that our technological obsessions are neither immoral nor irrational.<br /><br />All in the name of progress.<br /><br />Best.locumranchnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-32284255291723663012012-12-27T21:31:53.506-08:002012-12-27T21:31:53.506-08:00"they think we a gods"
{sigh} They thin...<i>"they think we a gods"</i><br /><br />{sigh} They think we left out a few letters.Paul451https://www.blogger.com/profile/12119086761190994938noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-18930656504475762072012-12-27T20:26:08.746-08:002012-12-27T20:26:08.746-08:00http://gizmodo.com/5971544/wild-dolphins-giving-gi...<a href="http://gizmodo.com/5971544/wild-dolphins-giving-gifts-to-humans-is-a-real-thing-that-happens" rel="nofollow">http://gizmodo.com/5971544/wild-dolphins-giving-gifts-to-humans-is-a-real-thing-that-happens</a><br /><br />What it says on the tin: Wild dolphins giving gifts to humans is a real thing that happens.<br /><br />Speculation in io9's comments range from "they think we a gods" to "they think we are too stupid to live".Paul451https://www.blogger.com/profile/12119086761190994938noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-69147421740574829172012-12-27T17:35:55.329-08:002012-12-27T17:35:55.329-08:00The onion reveals the true history of the Internet...The onion reveals the true history of the Internet<br /><br />http://screen.yahoo.com/onions-extremely-accurate-history-internet-235209925.htmlDavid Brinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-88023458294655883172012-12-27T16:17:45.824-08:002012-12-27T16:17:45.824-08:00The one I skipped:
"Will nation states contin...The one I skipped:<br /><i>"Will nation states continue to be important, fifty years from now?"</i><br />50 years is too short to end the nation-state. At the very least, the nation-state will unfortunately continue to be the "minimum unit of democracy" in international governance.<br /><br />So a question for others: What type of... thing... could be used to create a global, borderless, proper one-person-one-vote democracy? An activity in parallel with the nation-state/etc that starts out trivial, a hobby, but becomes more important as... the thing... develops.<br /><br />In a similar way, I was also thinking about Kickstarter. Can you imagine a system of government (or decentralised self-governance) based on that. A sort of anti-Randian polar opposite version of Libertarian society. Instead of taxation, you "vote" with your wallet on things you care about, where "rewards" are doled out on the basis of the amount you donated. Different from a corperatocracy (vote per share bought), but not socialism either. Certainly not a democracy... but still sort of democratic. And a meritocracy, in a populist kind of way. Rewarding generosity, which that makes it self-interest, but almost always less reward than what you paid, nothing like conventional investment, nor conventional "there is no society, only the self" libertarianism.Paul451https://www.blogger.com/profile/12119086761190994938noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-38296026996576188562012-12-27T16:07:53.744-08:002012-12-27T16:07:53.744-08:00The Quiz,
"Which [...] will bring about the g...The Quiz,<br /><i>"Which [...] will bring about the greatest positive changes in the next 25 years?"</i><br />Electronics. More new tech in more old objects. More computers, more sensors, more displays. But never true AI. AI will keep being a sort of "god of the gaps", we'll keep expanding tech's capabilities, but it will never seem "human-like". Any problem we solve computationally, they will be able to do a million/etc times more/better/faster than we can. It'll never just be parallel to us, always broadly dumb, narrowly genius.<br /><br />Biotech won't equal that, but at-home biotech will be open up a million minds of creativity, like '70s era personal computer clubs. Nano-tech will allow cool bulk-materials/coatings, but not nano-bots/nano-assembly. Humanity itself? I keep seeing signs of growing sanity, but god damn the other side is fighting hard; both the princes and the priests. They hate each other, but both attack us. They may actually be better at this than us.<br /><br /><i>"Which of the above will have the greatest Negative impact?"</i><br />Humans. IT. Biotech. Nano-tech. In that order. (And nano-tech's negative is limited to their creating the next asbestos/DDT.)<br /><br /><i>"Population"</i><br />No number. I think we'll muddle through and just sort of make that "sustainable".<br /><br /><i>"My own favorite ideology [will] make a better civilization."</i><br />God, I hope not. Some of the stuff I believe is... just... <i>wrong</i>. We should try to invent and advocate and test our utopias, otherwise what will the next generation sharpen their tiny little claws on? But "prescribe"? No. <br /><br /><i>"Scientific advances suggest that:<br />Destructive powers will become available to ever-smaller groups of angry people.<br />Error-detecting and problem-solving tools will become available to ever more numerous groups of sincere people."</i><br /><br />Both. But the other two (transhumanism/posthumanism) won't be an issue for the next century.<br /><br /><i>"Human decency and justice haven't kept pace with technological progress."</i> versus <i>"Wealth and technology have helped us..."</i><br /><br />Progress begets progress. Science, technology, society. Thinking about scientific progress makes us think social progress is inevitable or necessary. Social progress makes more people available for new tech, which funds and inspires development. All at the same time, in a big tangly three-way mess.<br /><br />The current lack of social progress in the US, the narrowing of distribution of wealth, may be why things feel so... wrong. And coincidentally why people are talking about technological stagnation. You guys broke the cycle.Paul451https://www.blogger.com/profile/12119086761190994938noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-31667247879218129062012-12-27T15:31:35.931-08:002012-12-27T15:31:35.931-08:00David,
Thank you and yours for saving us from the ...David,<br />Thank you and yours for saving us from the nonsensical threat.<br /><br />Rob H.,<br />Re: SpaceX from the last thread.<br /><br />I can see the Dragon design being able to land humans on Mars. It's just such a clever design. But how do they get back up again. I mean, I get refuelling from Martian CO2 produced methane and LOx, but the Dragon capsule cannot hold the tiniest fraction of the fuel required to get back to Mars orbit, let alone home. Essentially you need something like the Falcon 9 first stage. And how to you get <i>that</i> to Mars? And how do you handle the logistics of what amounts to a major sub-orbital launch on Earth, without the launch logistics and manpower available on Earth. Hell, how do you get the crew capsule back on top of it, without a launch pad or crane, using EVA-suits, and with 3-4 guys in total available for all the work?<br /><br />All,<br />Hope everyone had a Happy and/or Merry arbitrarily chosen point in Earth's orbit. Remember, all things in moderation... including moderation itself.<br /><br />(75 cratesc: you take one down you pass it around, 74 cratesc...)Paul451https://www.blogger.com/profile/12119086761190994938noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-82317027876554569932012-12-27T10:38:06.022-08:002012-12-27T10:38:06.022-08:00Which of the following fields of human endeavor wi...Which of the following fields of human endeavor will bring about the greatest positive changes in the next 25 years?<br /><br />"c. Advances in cybernetics and related fields"<br /><br />What will cause the greatest harm? The slow failure of oil as an energy technology.<br /><br />1. What is the sustainable human population of Earth, assuming that technology keeps advancing?<br /><br />None, humans cannot live sustainably, only almost so.<br /><br />2. Will nation states continue to be important, fifty years from now?<br /><br />Nation states will still be important, I don't know whether more or less.<br /><br />3. Favourite ideology:<br />technology will solve almost every problem, given time, sometimes in unexpected forms, but it will also create other problems along the way.<br /><br />4. I think there will be little progress in any of the areas stated in 25 years.<br /><br /><br /><br />5. Human tendencies towards justice have been rather impressive over the last fifty years. I think this trend will continue.Tim Whitworthhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12643082781611050627noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-33488077571696455492012-12-27T06:44:03.937-08:002012-12-27T06:44:03.937-08:00Actually, one thing about the launch and landing o...Actually, one thing about the launch and landing of a lower stage for a SpaceX Rocket is to suggest that this could be used to help humans eventually land on Mars. The process would be similar to that used by the Lunar Landers, but bringing significantly more fuel with us. There is but one question: is there water ice located on the Martian moons, and if so, is there enough to mine it for fuel?<br /><br />After all, if ice exists on those two wee moons, then they become refueling stations for rockets to gain enough reaction mass so to successfully land on Mars without needing to bring it all the way from Earth. If not... then a lander would require something more akin to the winch system used for Curiosity.<br /><br />Ultimately, the colonization of Mars will occur after either a space elevator or skyhook system is built around Mars. Again, current technologies are sufficient to allow for the building of such a system (and they could even be built atop one of the Martian volcanoes, reducing the height needed for the elevator). Once a safe and effective method of landing on Mars is established, then we'll see colonies arise on our cousin world.<br /><br />Then we'll have the next conflict as existing Martian squatters protest future geoengineers who want to drop a sizable ice asteroid on Mars to increase the density of the atmosphere the old-fashioned way, which would disrupt existing colonies. ;)<br /><br />Rob H.Acacia H.https://www.blogger.com/profile/07678539067303911329noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-58280636745998004632012-12-27T04:23:03.402-08:002012-12-27T04:23:03.402-08:00There's no poll at davidbrin.com.
Which of th...There's no poll at davidbrin.com.<br /><br />Which of the following fields of human endeavor will bring about the greatest positive changes in the next 25 years?<br /><br />"c. Advances in cybernetics and related fields" for the low-hanging fruit. And I think "d. Advances in human sanity, behavior and understanding" would be hugely helpful across the board, and contribute towards eventually developing AI.<br /><br />1. What is the sustainable human population of Earth, assuming that technology keeps advancing?<br /><br />Much more than 12 billion. algae farming, plankton farming, etc. At current progress, the hockey stick graph keeps going.<br /><br />2. Will nation states continue to be important, fifty years from now?<br /><br />Some combination of the above. More administrative power will migrate to groups like the EU, UN, etc, and some more power goes to smaller groups: banks, NGOs, Wikileaks, individuals, Anonymous.<br /><br />3. Click which statement you agree with.<br /><br />My own favorite ideology. Bit of an epistemic, definitional trap there. Of course I think I'm right, how could I think otherwise? Though I'm open to changing my mind given evidence and sound argument.<br /><br />5. Click which statement you agree with.<br />Human decency and justice haven’t kept pace with technological progress. I know we've made huge strides, but I still see all the stupid, ridiculous, obvious crap we're still struggling with: gender equality, reproductive health, human rights, everywhere the millstone of religion holding us back.<br />Nick de Verahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04348650252048751318noreply@blogger.com