Issues with your account? Bug us in the Discord!
The oh-so-very-sad reality of human digression
Arik
Galen's Apprentice
in Zocalo v2.0
Here are two brief articles for you to review (relevant quotes stated below)
1) A /. post about a Cognitive Overload article.
[url]http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/12/30/1355253&from=rss[/url]
Relevant quote:
[quote]Scientists are concerned that the Information Age is nurturing 'cognitive overload ...
People multitask because it is expected, encouraged, and considered vital, yet cognitive scientist David Meyer reports that truly effective multitasking is beyond people's capabilities."
[/quote]
2) An AICN article about new and returning shows for this season in the US
[url]http://www.aintitcool.com/display.cgi?id=19050[/url]
Relevant quote:
[quote]
* Jan. 8 “The Will” (CBS) Reality series from Mike Fleiss (“The Bachelor,” “Are You Hot?” “High School Reunion,” “Superstar USA,” “The Real Gilligan’s Island”) about real-life relatives who compete for an inheritance.
[/quote]
Now... first, we have the fact the we are subjected to ever increasing amount of stress due to high productivity expectations. To "get away from it all" we develop a wide range of psychological disorders. Fantastic...
Not only that, but it looks like some people must be so exhausted and craving for mindless entertainment at the end of the day, that shows like The Will actually get produced.
I feel like humanity is on a path leading us in the wrong direction, and I'm powerless to stop it... wish I could jump the planet and go somewhere where, if everything wasn't perfect, at least I'd have a fighting chance to reverse moronic trends when I see them.
1) A /. post about a Cognitive Overload article.
[url]http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/12/30/1355253&from=rss[/url]
Relevant quote:
[quote]Scientists are concerned that the Information Age is nurturing 'cognitive overload ...
People multitask because it is expected, encouraged, and considered vital, yet cognitive scientist David Meyer reports that truly effective multitasking is beyond people's capabilities."
[/quote]
2) An AICN article about new and returning shows for this season in the US
[url]http://www.aintitcool.com/display.cgi?id=19050[/url]
Relevant quote:
[quote]
* Jan. 8 “The Will” (CBS) Reality series from Mike Fleiss (“The Bachelor,” “Are You Hot?” “High School Reunion,” “Superstar USA,” “The Real Gilligan’s Island”) about real-life relatives who compete for an inheritance.
[/quote]
Now... first, we have the fact the we are subjected to ever increasing amount of stress due to high productivity expectations. To "get away from it all" we develop a wide range of psychological disorders. Fantastic...
Not only that, but it looks like some people must be so exhausted and craving for mindless entertainment at the end of the day, that shows like The Will actually get produced.
I feel like humanity is on a path leading us in the wrong direction, and I'm powerless to stop it... wish I could jump the planet and go somewhere where, if everything wasn't perfect, at least I'd have a fighting chance to reverse moronic trends when I see them.
Comments
Back in the 80's I watched this one car commercial where a guy in a suit is staring at an SUV type vehicle in the display window, and as he stands there looking at it, he grows a beard, his clothing morphs into flanel shirt and jeans, and the surroundings morph into mountainous terrain with pine trees.
To me this is the essence of the situation that you are describing...
A return to Nature sort of mentality.
It takes [b][i]SO[/i][/b] much now to maintain a knowledge base for your career, but not only that, it requires a knowledge base of several career directions to keep yourself employed.
There's a few decisions you can make here. Go with the expectations and burn yourself out, or reject the expectations and live a tougher life of trying to survive in the system, or fall to the dark side and do things that hurt others, either physically or mentally, by theft and or murder.
[QUOTE]...wish I could jump the planet and go somewhere where, if everything wasn't perfect...[/QUOTE]
Like you, I've personally come to the point where I want to get away from society with minimal contact. I no longer wish to work in the machine. I want to return a large portion of my life to the pursuit of things in nature.
Computers are a great tool, but they also are a shackle and a chain ( a cruch if you will, and almost an addiction), depriving our minds of the abilities and sharpness we once had. They can enhance us, but more often than not they are our drug of choice and what we turn to for direction.
I see the dumbing down of humanity via computers and the internet as a conversion of individuality to a hive mentality (not refering to the borg here although many parts of that fit as well). This will lead the way to global control, as more and more let down their defenses and give in to the leadership of the few.
Shall we be drones for the man (or woman)?
[B]I see the dumbing down of humanity via computers and the internet as a conversion of individuality to a hive mentality (not refering to the borg here although many parts of that fit as well). This will lead the way to global control, as more and more let down their defenses and give in to the leadership of the few.[/B][/QUOTE]Isn't that already done by "conventional" big money owned media touting spreeches of political leaders accepted by corporations?
[url]http://www.newspeakdictionary.com/ns-alt.html[/url]
[url]http://www.newspeakdictionary.com/ns-attack.html[/url]
The simpler term is burn-out.[/quote]
Probably quite true. The human mind... has not managed to adapt... for an increasingly technological world.
Yet... it appears to me... an increasingly technological world is our only chance. Returning to times before technology... would lead to nothing I could honestly tell I would want.
Instead, it would throw away the immense expenditures already made. Pulling the brake too strong... might lead to our still primitive civilization... eating away the resources which could propel it forward.
[quote]I see the dumbing down of humanity via computers and the internet as a conversion of individuality to a hive mentality[/quote]
I must *somewhat* disagree.
Even crudest computers are excellent tools for relinquishing humans of activities we never were (and without change in our biological basis, never will become) good at.
We are not especially quick, nor especially precise (neither in action or memory)... not particularly reliable... not especially objective... the human condition includes few properties to be proud about. I can only name flexibility -- highly versatile abstract thinking, ability to switch big portions of our mind to attacking a single problem (presumably new, provoking curiosity and worth solving)
This distinguishes us from animals... and will in future (unless future humans obtain properties similar to it) distinguish AI from humans. Increasing adaptiveness.
An insect has multiple built-in functions... and very little adaptive "personality". When encountering a light bulb... a fruit fly is unlikely to realize what is occurring. It will get burnt once, twice, thrice... until it drops.
A fish is already smarter... it has memory, even if limited in extent... it can associate different sensory experiences, and provided opportunity, slowly learn -- where food occurs, what predators are like, which maneuver saved its hide last time.
Mammals and birds are even quicker at learning. Some are capable of rapidly acquiring new experience, even limited communication regarding it. But they lack abstraction, a crucial bridge for passing on knowledge between individuals and generations, for storing more information than one consciousness can feasibly hold.
We have abstraction... and our civilization has accumulated *vastly* more information than a single human consciousness can hold. Facing this obstacle, we have developed information technology -- to help us navigate.
Our shortcoming... is our biological hardware. Developed by evolution for standard mammalian life... it cannot flex beyond the configuration of its neural networks... and entirely lacks convenient IO capability.
A human cannot switch to thinking in 7 dimensions. To deliver a thought to a fellow human, a human must clumsily encode it -- speak, write, gesture... do something *hopefully* decodable. A human is born clueless... and never really learns *how* he/she thinks. Comprehending something at odds with the structure of our memory or senses... is a highly difficult process for us.
In long term indeed... we are facing a crisis of sorts. A predictably deepening crisis, calling for ways to solve it -- and preferably solve it without harming ourselves.
We will have increasingly fast, powerful and effective tools... but merely dumb tools, augmenting every errant command. If this continues without humans developing more sense... the story will not have a happy end.
To make our development sustainable... we must eventually (when is another question)... develop better minds. Either by enhancing our own, or building minds independent of ours... that is, artificial intellect.
The possibility of AI promises great many things... but also includes notable risk. If a society wants to develop AI... it must be excellently prepared to establish productive, mutually desired cooperation with it.
Becase the alternative scenario is change at such speeds... which lay beyond the capability of any biological creature to keep up. Since our motivations in developing AI would obviously *not* be turning ourselves obsolete beyond helping... whether and how to create something more flexible than ourselves... remains a question demanding careful consideration.
[quote]This will lead the way to global control, as more and more let down their defenses and give in to the leadership of the few.
Shall we be drones for the man (or woman)?[/QUOTE]
When made aware of the danger in excess dependencies... we can discover social and behavioural models which permit limiting the risk... at least temporarily.
Eventually yes... we must find ways to improve ourselves... improve our independence and flexibility... make us less vulnerable to control or manipulation. The vulnerability is there -- biological creatures without serious ability to improve their own grasp of things... trying to run an increasingly complex civilization.
Minds designed to hunt prey or gather fruit... still adapting to levels of interaction/cooperation required by farming.. are unsuitable for the future... but currently we can still suppress the vulnerability.
For a while... humans can still *afford* to remain like countless generations before. But that "luxury" is a mixed blessing... indeed sometimes a difficult burden... so I think that beyond some point... we will either need to become smarter, or need a society where old-fashioned humans can coexist with AI.
As for dones... in my favourite science fiction story... a "drone" can be expected to be a highly individual creature, and while capable of independence far beyond human ability, such a creature would likewise be a well-adapted citizen for reasonably advanced society.
Should I meet such a drone... I would presumably go green with envy. Should a person bent on domination meet such a citizen... he, she or it would quickly realize that the goal distanced itself from "within reach" to "forget about it".
[B]
...Even crudest computers are excellent tools for relinquishing humans of activities we never were (and without change in our biological basis, never will become) good at.
We are not especially quick, nor especially precise (neither in action or memory)... not particularly reliable... not especially objective... the human condition includes few properties to be proud about. I can only name flexibility -- highly versatile abstract thinking, ability to switch big portions of our mind to attacking a single problem (presumably new, provoking curiosity and worth solving)...
[/B][/QUOTE]
Well like I said, Computers are great tools, but the down side is that we rely too heavily on them for everything now...
My point I guess is that we are getting lazy and forsaking the knowledge that got us here, because we have the gadgets to do it for us.
I'm NOT advocating that we forsake our technology, but I still think the human mind is the greatest computer, because it can operate both at a logical level, as well as make the leap across to theory and imagination.
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by sleepy_shadow [/i]
[B]
...As for dones... in my favourite science fiction story... a "drone" can be expected to be a highly individual creature, and while capable of independence far beyond human ability, such a creature would likewise be a well-adapted citizen for reasonably advanced society.
Should I meet such a drone... I would presumably go green with envy. Should a person bent on domination meet such a citizen... he, she or it would quickly realize that the goal distanced itself from "within reach" to "forget about it"....
[/B][/QUOTE]
I was thinking more along the lines of Honey Bee drones who are merely hatched for the purpose of impregnating the Queen Bee, and then are stung and discarded...
;)
Personally its gonna sound paranoid but the nano age is right around the corner. I think that is both extremely good & extremely disturbing. One we might be able to eliminate cancer with nanites that attach to cells & destroy the cancer. Recreate arms? Who knows even enhance human abilities & life span. However its like drugs there is always a downside & a dependency. Also it could be used to do the opposite & kill good cells & it would be a great weapon for the government. You Metal Gear Solid people know what Im talkin bout.
Personally I wish we could go back to the way it was. But it can't happen we are to attached to technology. I can't really deny that Im addicted to computing. Thats why I try to read or work instead but there is still a lust to be on this infernal machine.
Then again, I suppose I'll be paying for all this leisure in a couple years when I'm in a college with an average SAT score 200-300 points below my own, and completely broke. ;)
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Imhotep [/i]
[B]Humans use what 10 to 15 percent of our total brain. So your telling the human mind with all its untapped potential cannot multitask, I don't think so. [/B][/QUOTE]
[url=http://www.snopes.com/science/stats/10percnt.htm]Gah![/url]
Everything else was good, though. I always thought predicting the imminent fall of society because of progress run amok was silly, mostly because people are always predicting it, and it so rarely comes true.
I've *heard* that the 10% figure came form the days of static brain imaging. We only use 10% of our brain at any given time (probably during rest time or watching TV). However animations of brain activity show that most of it is used, especally when listening to more complex music.
[B]Personally I wish we could go back to the way it was. But it can't happen we are to attached to technology. I can't really deny that Im addicted to computing. Thats why I try to read or work instead but there is still a lust to be on this infernal machine. [/B][/QUOTE]
I do this too, I spend as much time outside as possible, and in a hobby that I feel gives me great return. Planting trees and plants, and watching them grow as I take care of them.
Sounds simplistic I know... :p
[B]Sounds simplistic I know... :p [/B][/QUOTE]
But incredibly rewarding...
[B]But incredibly rewarding... [/B][/QUOTE]
Especially for me, I've had 10 years to watch my 2ft high Monterey Pines become significantly taller than the power pole since I first planted them.
I have a coastal redwood that has grown 4 ft this year! :o
Especially all the "ähläm sähläms".
[B]Ok so the percentge thing is wrong...I stand corrected.
I still think there is a huge amount of undiscovered potential in the human mind. Call it psyhic powers, ESP, or whatever you want, I think it is all within our grasp. But thats just me... [/B][/QUOTE]
I believe we are a key for the other-dimensional beings to come to our realm and burn down the galaxy, the whole universe (not literally, dont think space burns?).
Cthulhu rules!
Anyway.. Not really.
[B]There are more nurons in our brain than there are stars in this galaxy. The number of synaptic connections is even higher. Our brains are the most intricate devices in the entire universe and some things we have no clue on how or why it works. Dreams and how memories are stored have yet to have theory to explain them. The Red mars series hypothesizes that memories are stored at the subatomic level. IF thats true then we potentional could have quantum computers sitting in our skulls. [/B][/QUOTE]
So I'm right and we're just mac...
Hey wait - a - minute there...
Why are those mice staring at me like that?
[B]However animations of brain activity show that most of it is used, especally when listening to more complex music. [/B][/QUOTE]No wonder that I don't like most of current "pop" music. :D
I would call some of it more as torture than music.
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by JackN [/i]
[B]Planting trees and plants, and watching them grow as I take care of them.[/B][/QUOTE]Planting and growing trees... no way in hell, they would block visibility to sky and stars.;)
A lot of the same issues regarding computers and their impact on society (such as it is) were also asked when steam engines (and the Industrial Age which they helped spawn) came into widespread use; I'm sure many of the same questions were asked when electric appliances for the home and workplace became widely available. I personally see the changes that have been brought (and are/will be brought) about by the computer and other forms of technology are part and parcel of the constant evolution of human society and of humanity as a whole; whenever something that has a profound impact on all (or most) of mankind manifests itself (this can be [I]anything[/I], including natural as well as manmade phenomena), change is all but inevitable. Nearly all of mankind has the ability to adapt to these changes and prosper (otherwise our species would've vanished long ago); those who do not often have only themselves to blame.
However, those who do adapt also have an obligation to help those who simply cannot regardless of how hard said individuals try.
[B]Planting and growing trees... no way in hell, they would block visibility to sky and stars.;) [/B][/QUOTE]
Well when you have aenough acreage, that becomes more a problem of planning... ;)
There are more neurons in our brain than there are stars in this galaxy.[/quote]
Neuron count in average human brain... is estimated around 10 billion (and was measured with fair accuracy already decades ago).
Star counts in galaxies have been improving together with telescopes... and currently the Milky Way is estimated to contain 100 billion stars.
So actually, while the numbers are in comparable class... galaxies contain more stars than human brain contains neurons.
[quote] The number of synaptic connections is even higher. [/quote]
This is certainly true. The number of synaptic connections in human brain is quite amazing -- offering us truly massive parallelism, far beyond our very best computers.
However, I request your attention for the inconvenient biological reality... that our neurons grow their connections in certain patterns... and we are incapable of changing this. Only genetic evolution can change this... and natural genetic evolution is profoundly slow. Social evolution moves notably faster, and technical evolution bypasses genes as if they stood still.
We have specialized neural networks. Our vision networks are useless for hearing, face recognition networks useless for navigation, smelling susbsystems useless for abstract thinking.
Our minds are the most flexible on Earth, but in wider picture... how our computational power is arranged... is grossly inefficient.
And needless to say, our massive parallelism is made less spectacular... by appallingly slow speed. Our neurons work at something like 15 spikes per second, while a reasonably modern computer can manage 3'000'000'000 clock cycles in equal time.
[quote]Our brains are the most intricate devices in the entire universe[/quote]
If you added the qualifier "known to us"... I would have to concur. But without that qualifier, permit me to suspect that your estimate is inaccurate.
Out in space... there probably exist countless biological species notably more intelligent than us... as well as multiple varieties of AI... potentially far beyond our current abilities. Because those machines, unlike the human brain... might have their own source code, and serious ability of self-improvement.
[quote]Dreams and how memories are stored have yet to have theory to explain them.[/quote]
While details of cellular memory appear somewhat complex... on superficial level, the process of memory in neural networks... seems realtively explainable. Neurons are simple machines. They adjust their probability of delivering certain outputs on certain inputs... according to feedback received. Imagine a simple scenario:
[i]I noticed a cute flower, depicted in my avatar. Why I considered it cute... is difficult for current neuroscience to exaplain... and may remain difficult.
However, chances are my emotions were provoked by pleasant color or curious pattern. Something which offered my cognitive system rewarding activity. It seems likely that my abstract knowledge and world-model also played a part.
Perhaps my appreciation for the flower was increased by knowledge... that the flower holds abilities I dream of. Perhaps I was sad... for the flower having obtained them via difficult compromise... and myself being unlikely to ever attain them.
Either way, I experienced emotions... and the release of signal chemicals informed my neurons: "this is something worth remembering". Various of them recorded their output values for this input situation, more or less precisely.
Neurons in those portions of my brain which deal with abstract knowledhe... may have recorded references to date, time, location, situation... generally knowledge and thoughts.
Neurons in my vision subsystem would have recorded key properties of the flower: colors, shapes, their arrangement relative to each other... and those parts of my mind dealing with 3D perception... might have constructed models about what the flower's real shape would be like.
All this work... would naturally not be performed by a simple neural network... but multiple interconnected ones, branching into more specific parts, and exhibiting specific connections between each other. One might be sensitive to colors, another to shapes, while yet another would be specialized for reconciling different appearances perceived from different viewpoints.
But they would be neural networks... and feedback from some of them, usually in the form of emotion, would trigger commitment to memory. Not every part of our brain seems likely to trigger memory... but some do... and the process of noticing/remembering is not flat, but has preferences.
We are preconditioned by experience and genes alike... to notice and remember some things better than others. I noticed and remembered the flower. Perhaps another person would have found and remembered a curiously patterned stone. But when presented with something which our minds prioritize as more interesting (like another human with whom we are discussing something) or more important (for example a gunshot) we wouldn't notice the flower or stone.
But, as a result of the process... I would remember the appearance of the flower, its surroundings... properties of local air, wind and weather. All of those memories would be stored interlinked.
When I view the image of the flower again... neurons in my vision subsystem will first see colors and shapes. Their arrangement will provoke multiple recognition hypothesis... and presumably the most accurate wins. My brain will start considering it a flower.
I will also realize I have seen it before... recognize familiarity. Seeing a flower with parameters identical to the flower I saw before... will lead to multiple neural networks, after computation amongs themselves, configuring their output like when I first saw this flower. This will presumably trigger recognition of how and when I saw it... and what I felt while seeing it.
And unfortunately, since my memory radically differs from the digital storage of my camera... each time will let me remember less. Some neurons have reprogrammed themselves, while others have died.
But like memory can replay experience... it can also reinforce itself. When I recall the flower, recollection will trigger processes similar to initially remembering it. New neurons will copy the properties of the flower, and old ones refresh their status.[/i]
Such is approximately how I perceive human memory to work.
[quote]The Red mars series hypothesizes that memories are stored at the subatomic level.[/quote]
This would create the question... of what exactly the chemicals and electrical impulses do... because they sure appear to be "doing" thought.
I know... both can be a nuisance. But the problem is... all the concise descriptions of neural networks I had within reach...
...were geared towards implementation on computers -- somewhat ill suited to describe how *human* memory might operate. So I tried constructing an example. While I learnt biology in uni, it is not my specialty... and my example is probably flawed.
It probably contains awful gaps and errors... sorry about that. But finding the errors and patching the gaps would have required making it even longer, and taken even more time.
[B]fucking christ....... [/B][/QUOTE]
Please don't...
My original post was indeed brought on by being burned out with work. Now that I had a long weekend to relax, I have to say that I still think I was right about our direction as a species ( the term 'going to hell in a handbasket' comes to mind), but now that I've had some rest, I don't really care as much anymore.
[B]I don't really care as much anymore. [/B][/QUOTE]
And really, isn't that all that matters? ;)
Neurons are not transistors, they are very different things. Its like comparing an apples to basalt. From my understanding a 10000 transistor cpu can do the same functions as a 1^10 transistor chip, just a lot slower. A 10000 neuron brain could never do what a 1^10 neuron brain could. Computer transistors are simply on or off, thats it. The information set by neurons is much more variable with variable strength and rates, all of which are important.
It doesn't matter how many stars or neurons there are, the fact remains is that we underestimate ourselves. Not in terms on how fast or how much multitasking we can do, but the simple but immense power we have as individuals. Computers arn't synergetic, but humans are. The great things we can do once we finally understand this....
[B]While details of cellular memory appear somewhat complex... on superficial level, the process of memory in neural networks... seems realtively explainable.[/b][/quote]
I attended a lecture a few months ago by one of the top researchers in how human memory works. He seemed to be of the opinion that it's anything but explainable. The human brain is not a simple neural network of the kind you find in software. Neural networks are a modelling mechanism that greatly, greatly simplify one facet of how we think the brain may work. You can't effectively compare the human brain and software neural networks directly because we are not certain of most of how the human brain really works.