How To Break Anything

Thoughts and insights on culture and human behavior, living blissfully at the intersection of rationality and irrationality (but mostly irrationality) 
Contributors
Tags


Filed under

doomsday

 
May 9, 2010

Why machines haven't yet taken over the world

Grandmaster Maurice Ashley made a reference last week at Saatchi & Saatchi's 7x7 event about the world-changing game between Garry Kasparov and IBM's Deep Blue back in May of 1997.

It was world-changing, but not in the way the majority of chess players all collectively feared it would be.

Many thought it signaled the end of an age old institution, that some critical part of humanity was now gone forever forever on that day.

In actuality, what's happened has been quite the opposite.

Smarter and faster and more intelligent chess machines have led to even smarter/faster/more intelligent human chess players. Human players have been able to iterate within better games and iterate faster, make mistakes faster, and develop more advanced perspectives faster.

The idea here (and part of the idea behind cyborg anthropology) is that there's no actual separation between humans and machines - in the sense that 'cyborg' is human influencing/being influenced by machine, we are already cyborgs.

Nothing too profound, but just another thought on why I'm not too keen on doomsday scenarios. 

[As a relevant and timely aside: myself and Danielle Strle have begun working on the collaborative project 131//97; stay tuned on the tumblr site as it develops]

Loading mentions Retweet
Filed under  //   cyborg anthropology   doomsday  
Posted from New York, NY
Posted by Kyle Cameron Studstill 

Comments [0]

April 20, 2010

" What the Internet Is Doing to Our Brains," and some thoughts on dystopia, progress, future

via amazon.com

@calebkramer pointed me to this book; as you might expect I find the subject matter fascinating, neuroscience/perception/culture and all. I'll be reading it.

I'm mostly just curious to see how he solves the problem of "not making the same Socrates-esque case that's been made for centuries, that '[insert new media here] is ruining humanity'."

"The best-selling author of The Big Switch returns with an explosive look at technology’s effect on the mind. “Is Google making us stupid?” When Nicholas Carr posed that question in a celebrated Atlantic Monthly cover story, he tapped into a well of anxiety about how the Internet is changing us. He also crystallized one of the most important debates of our time: As we enjoy the Net’s bounties, are we sacrificing our ability to read and think deeply? Now Carr expands his argument into the most compelling exploration of the Internet’s intellectual and cultural consequences yet published. Weaving insights from philosophy, neuroscience, and history into a rich narrative, The Shallows explains how the Net is rerouting our neural pathways, replacing the subtle mind of the book reader with the distracted mind of the screen watcher. A gripping story of human transformation played out against a backdrop of technological upheaval, The Shallows will forever alter the way we think about media and our minds"

If you've been following you may have discovered that I'm not too keen on dystopian/doomsday scenarios. I'll say again that if the future is going to be a scary place, well, it's been happening for centuries.

In fact, I watched this incredibly compelling video a few hours ago on scientific progress; perhaps not directly related to the above, but something along the lines of the goodness of progress:

Loading mentions Retweet
Filed under  //   culture   doomsday   future  
Posted by Kyle Cameron Studstill 

Comments [0]

February 2, 2010

I think the concept of things being 'ruined' is absurd.

Mostly because it's hard from me to think that the last x number of years of humanity [choose your own number, anywhere from 30-3000] have been an exercise in things getting worse. I mean, when did things first start to get 'ruined'??

Most people you ask this question, should they happen to be on the 'things need saving' side of the world, will give you a very predictable answer. Humanity stopped progressing usually when they were either in their early 20's, or when they were established in their careers.

Which I of course find laughably hilarious.

 

Who will save book publishing?

What will save the newspapers?

What means 'save'?

If by save you mean, "what will keep things just as they are?" then the answer is nothing will. It's over.

If by save you mean, "who will keep the jobs of the pressmen and the delivery guys and the squadrons of accountants and box makers and transshippers and bookstore buyers and assistant editors and coffee boys," then the answer is still nothing will. Not the Kindle, not the iPad, not an act of Congress.

via sethgodin.typepad.com

 

Loading mentions Retweet
Filed under  //   doomsday   perception   time-orientation  
Posted by Kyle Cameron Studstill 

Comments [0]

My Blogroll: