Archives for posts with tag: technology

Living the Dream

March 27, 2024 //
0

“Despite this advancing scientific knowledge,
there is much that remains unknown about both sleep
and dreams.
Even the most fundamental question
— why do we dream at all? —
is still subject to significant debate.”

“Dreaming is normal and healthy, but frequent nightmares can interfere with sleep.“

So.
We’ve figured out that dreams are something which happen inside our heads. When sleeping.
Then called them names. ‘Dreams’ if they were OK, ‘nightmares’ if not.
Interesting, isn’t it?
Then we have hallucinations. A sort of daydreaming – if you think of it – only less pleasant.

My point being that our consciousness – “our ability to observe ourselves observing” – opens up a new realm inside what we call ‘reality’.
That we live, in fact, inside a world of our own making.

‘But this is valid for all living things, right?’

In the sense that all living things collaborate – albeit involuntarily – towards the continuous reshaping of what we call ‘biosphere’… yes! Life does indeed reshape the portion of space/time where it happens.

The way I see it, life is responsible for the ‘second layer’ of what we call reality.
While we, the conscious observing cum living inhabitants, are responsible for the ‘third layer’ of what we call reality.

‘You keep saying “what we call reality”.
Would you care to elaborate?’

You see, we have developed two concepts.
‘God’ and ‘Reality’.
God is something which had suposedly made us. According to those who believe in God, we have been brought to life – along with the world we inhabit, in a voluntary manner, by the agent we call God.
On the other hand, reality – according to those who believe in ‘science’ – is the ‘place’ where we have happened to ‘evolve’.

God is something we are told about by others. Something the ‘worthy among us’ might experience first hand through ‘rapture’.
Those who believe in God consider that the original information about God had been delivered, through divine inspiration, to ‘prophets’. Or had been acquired one way or another by ‘elders’.
Those who believe in God consider that God – and his will – are inaccessible to humans. That we, ordinary human beings, are only meant to simply experience ‘God’s will’. And adapt our behaviour accordingly.

Reality is something we, the present ones, are told about by our predecessors. And something we experience through observation.
Those who believe in science consider that nobody – individually and collectively – will ever be able to know everything. Basically, those who believe in science are also convinced that reality is ultimately inaccessible to us.
Those who believe in science consider that it’s our job, as conscious human beings, to find out as much as we can about ‘reality’ and adapt our behaviour accordingly.

For somebody unwilling to take sides, there’s not much practical difference between the two sides mentioned above.
Both are states of mind. Convictions. Weltanschauungs which shape human action.
Furthermore, both mandate us to do the very same thing. Adapt our behavior to what we ‘see’!
Does it really matter whether what we ‘see’ was handed out to us by somebody or is the consequence of happenstance? Would our reaction be different? Why?

‘But God has handed out a series of commandments! For us to follow in order to be saved.
Science doesn’t provide any ‘spiritual guidance”!

I beg to differ.
The Bible – and all other sacred texts – have been written by people. Taught by people to other people.
Science – everything we know about things, including what we call ‘best practices’ – has been put together by people. And taught by people to other people.
Furthermore, technology – the manner in which we have put in practice what we know about the world, regardless of how we have acquired the information – has been put together by us. We’ve designed each and every tool we have used to transform our world into what it is today.
And it was still us who have use those tools according to our own goals.

So it is us, collectively, who are responsible for the world we live in.
For the dream we live.
And for the nightmares experienced by some of us.

Tags , , , ,
Categories awareness, collective identity, effective communication, In English, man as a measure for all things, Mutual Respect, skin in the game

Inflation II

August 18, 2022 //
1

I sketched earlier a brief description of how we got here.

Now I’ll attempt to offer an ‘alternative’ understanding of inflation. Not what it is – we all know that, but what it does.
It will be a functionalist view of the matter. Evolutionary, even.
As in ‘why do we still have inflation’. Why inflation continues to ‘survive’.

For most of our history, economy had been about solving needs.
Regardless of the market being momentarily free or not, for things to go on a balance had to be struck.
Demand had to be balanced by supply. Hence ‘price’.

Demand was mostly driven by the number of people needing something while supply was driven by the available natural resources AND by our ability to transform those resources into actual commodities.
For example, the price of wheat was influenced by the number of people living in a certain area, by the amount of arable land AND by the agricultural technology used at any given time. OK, the weather also had an impact but it was mitigated by the technology.

‘But how about imports? After all, ‘international’ grain trade is three millennia old. Ancient Athenian ships had been distributing ‘Ukrainian’ wheat all around the Aegean sea since before the Trojan war…’

Yeah, and how about emigration… the Irish had gone to America to escape famine, didn’t they?
We’ll get there. ‘Baby steps’, otherwise we may trip!

When population increased, they tried to add more arable land. If they could. If not – and/or in parallel, they tried to increase yield.
But the process was not linear. They could not ‘fine tune’ the increase of yield – by either method, exactly to the population growth. Hence the variation of price. Hence the ‘secondary mitigation measures’ – import/export and emigration.

‘OK, I understand. But prices can go both ways. Up AND down! Inflation only goes up…’

You’re speaking about individual prices. Which, indeed, go both ways.
And, yes again, inflation goes – in medium to longer time frames, only up!

You see, we have ‘price adjustments’ and (compounded) inflation.

Price adjustment is the mechanism through which the market – free or otherwise, balances the market for individual ‘items’. Encourages the consumption of wheat when the price is low and encourages the farmers to plant more wheat when the prices are high. Same thing for, say, shoe-shinning!
Meanwhile, (compounded) inflation is the mechanism through which the market – again, free or otherwise, balances itself.

‘Huh?!?’
For example, if wheat becomes too expensive, consumers (and suppliers) might decide to replace it with something else. Rice. Or potatoes.
Or, when grain prices become prohibitively low, farmers might abandon their plows and buy, say, shoe-shining tools.

‘But if rice – or anything else – would yield a lot more than wheat per the available arable land, the over all prices for food – and everything else, should go down, right? Not up…’

Well… in a rational world… maybe. That’s another long discussion.
The short version being that we usually wait for too long before making the necessary changes. Which is not necessarily wrong but that’s yet another long discussion. Only hindsight is 20/20…

Let’s say it would be possible to grow wheat and rice on the same plot of land without making any technological adjustments. If the growers would know what kind of weather would come in the next season, they would be able to plant the right crop. But they don’t. And it takes time for people to grasp the weather patterns have changed – and adjust the pertinent technology. On top of that, adjusting technology requires money.
Investment. Fresh ‘inputs’.

And who would do such a thing – plowing money into the ground, literally – without expecting an increased return? Something ‘extra’ for their effort?

In economic terms, nobody invests their money in a deflationary environment.
Why would anybody do such a thing?
Buy now when waiting till ‘tomorrow’ would make it possible to buy more for the same money?!?

That’s why inflation goes up. Period.
Cause otherwise the whole economy would become obsolete. We’d all be waiting for ‘tomorrow’.

NB.
This was a gross ‘simplification’.
A bare sketch.
Even in a deflationary environment, some prices do go up. For years overall prices have gone down – because of our increased technological prowess – while housing, education, healthcare and insurance have become more and more expensive. ‘Tilting’ the whole market.
More about this in the next post on the subject.

Tags , , , , , ,
Categories 1989, alternative ways of acquring knowledge, awareness, Bounded rationality, Choices we make, collective identity, effective communication, evolution, In English, man as a measure for all things, Mutual Respect, Psychology, skin in the game, teleology, The kind of world we are building for our children

Becoming

July 13, 2022 //
0

Art – Esthetics – Philosophy.
Techne – Science – Manipulation.
Skills – Technology – Reality 2.0

Art is, maybe, the first form of interaction between us and the place we inhabit.
The first manner in which we ‘ingest’ that place, only to regurgitate it later. The first manner in which we learn about that place and the first manner in which we express what we have just learned.
Esthetics is how we make sense of art. How we organize our ‘first impressions’ regarding the ‘place’ we live in. How we ‘edit’ those impressions in order to make them more easily understandable.
Philosophy is what we made out during the artistic endeavor to learn. The never finished product put together by our ‘digestive system’ out of the artistic interactions we have had with ‘reality’.

Techne is what we do. The transformations we impose unto things in order to make them capable to satisfy our needs. Or our whims…
Science is the process through which we gather information. The information which becomes more and more necessary as our doings take us further and further away from the original reality.
Manipulation is what we do after we consider to have amassed enough information. After we have developed a certain understanding of the world and have decided that time has come for us to ‘take what’s rightfully ours’.

You know what ‘skills’ are. What we’re ‘good at’.
Technology is how we pass our skills to other people. So that we can work in concert. To coordinate our efforts.
The outcome of which is Reality 2.0. The reality we have brought about. The new reality which constitutes reality 1.0 for those currently alive.

Tags , , , , , , , , ,
Categories 1989, alternative ways of acquring knowledge, awareness, Bounded rationality, Choices we make, collective identity, cooperation, Culture, effective communication, evolution, In English, man as a measure for all things, manipulation, Psychology, teleology

Myopia

June 1, 2021 //
0

One of my eyes is short-sighted. Both are astigmatic.
Hence my visual relationship with the ‘exterior’ is impaired. Relative to that of a ‘normal’ person…

When I took up photography, as a hobby, there were no such things as self focusing cameras. Pictures as those you are about to see were way ‘out of range’ for me.

Because of my inability to focus a camera fast enough. And because long ranged lenses were too expensive for me, in those times.

Being conscious of my limits was no cure for my frustration!

Thankfully, technology made it possible for me to indulge in my hobby!
To overcome some of my limitations.

One-Time
Monthly
Yearly

Make a one-time donation

Make a monthly donation

Make a yearly donation

Choose an amount

$5.00
$15.00
$100.00
$5.00
$15.00
$100.00
$5.00
$15.00
$100.00

Or enter a custom amount

$

As much as I love writing, I do have to eat.
And to provide for my family.
Earning money takes time.
If you’d like me to write more, and on a more regular basis, hit the button.
Your contribution will be appreciated!
Another very efficient way to help would be to share my posts.

As much as I love writing, I do have to eat.
And to provide for my family.
Earning money takes time.
If you’d like me to write more, and on a more regular basis, hit the button.
Your contribution will be appreciated!

As much as I love writing, I do have to eat.
And to provide for my family.
Earning money takes time.
If you’d like me to write more, and on a more regular basis, hit the button.
Your contribution will be appreciated!

DonateDonate monthlyDonate yearly

Tags , , , , ,
Categories alternative ways of acquring knowledge, awareness, biology, Bounded rationality, Chance, Choices we make, effective communication, In English, man as a measure for all things, Mindset, Psychology, skin in the game, Trust

The nuclear ‘option’.

May 5, 2021 //
0

Simple high-school physics teaches us about radio-active elements.
And about the fact that some of them can start a so called ‘nuclear chain-reaction‘.
For said chain reaction to start, a certain ‘critical mass‘ must exist before-hand.

As soon as that ‘critical mass’ is achieved, the reaction starts by itself. No ‘trigger’ is required since it actually triggers itself.

But there’s one more thing which has a certain relevance here.

“Concentration”.

It’s not enough for the critical mass to exist, it also needs to be concentrated enough.

If the radio-active nuclei are positioned far enough one relative to the other, the decay of each of them goes ‘unnoticed’ by the rest. None of the individual ‘explosions’ can trigger the chain reaction.
But if the nuclei are crammed together – as in an A-bomb, a split second after detonation, the reaction accelerates itself until the whole shebang goes bang.

And there’s the ‘cherished’ middle of the road. When the ‘environment’ moderates the reaction. Slows it down to ‘self-sustaining’… as it happens in the (well managed) nuclear power-stations.

And, but very rarely, in the good old nature…

‘Yeah… very interesting… but… what on Earth has any of this to do with your professed interest?
“Exploring the consequences of our limited conscience”…’

Trolling.

Very few individual humans are naturally ‘radio-active’.
And, in normal settings, they are ‘well taken care of’.

Before going forward, I’m going to return, briefly, to the ‘nuclear’ chapter of physics.
I’m sure the word ‘plutonium‘ does ring a bell with most of you.

Plutonium is a mostly ‘artificial’ – as in man-made, chemical element. A few scattered atoms can be found in nature – plutonium occurs when uranium atoms absorb ‘extra neutrons’, but the vast majority of the plutonium which exists on Earth has been produced in our nuclear reactors.

Said plutonium can be used to fuel reactors. And to make bombs.
Actually, it is far easier to concentrate plutonium for a bomb – if you have enough spent nuclear fuel, than to achieve the same result – a nuclear explosive device, starting from uranium ore.

Let me wrap this up.

Playing God can be dangerous.
We’ve been tinkering with Nature for a while now.

At one time or another, we’ve turned various naturally occurring ‘things’ into weapons.
From sticks to rocks, then metals… now chemical elements!

At first, we just picked them up and used them as they were.
Then we’ve shaped them to better fit our purpose.
And ended up changing the sub-atomic composition of Mendeleev’s elements…

Now, that we’ve reached “MAD“, we’re looking for something new.

The latest piece of technology, the Internet, is the latest addition to our Arsenal. To our weapons making factory.

Forgetting that the by-products of our previous ‘explorations’ have already proven themselves to be extremely dangerous.
The Three Mile Island, Chernobyl, Fukushima, the huge stockpile of ‘residual’ plutonium we need to somehow dispose off…

Yep. The Internet is being used to distribute – sometimes very exactly targeted, weaponized information.
Which information actually transforms the susceptible individuals into time-bombs.

Tell a guy that his freedom is constantly challenged by the government.
Then tell him the ‘Covid’ mask isn’t 100% effective.
And end up by asking him ‘why does the government demands you to wear something which is not foolproof’?

Each of those three are legitimate.

Put together, they become explosive.
They actually blow up people’s minds.
Derail people’s ability to think straight. Statistically speaking… Which is enough, of course!

What will happen when the number of ‘deranged people’ will be enough to reach ‘critical mass’?

Only God knows.
But it will certainly be far worse than whatever the ‘troll farmers’ have in mind!

Tags , , , ,
Categories 1989, alternative ways of acquring knowledge, awareness, biology, Bounded rationality, Choices we make, collective identity, corruption, effective communication, evolution, In English, man as a measure for all things, physics, Psychology, teleology

Până când?

July 28, 2019 //
0

Ieri. Treceam cu mașina pe lângă un spațiu verde în curs de amenajare.
O piațetă care avea vreo doi copacei și un tufiș amărât înghesuiți pe un petic de iarbă.
Copăceii fuseseră smulși din rădăcină, trotuarul și o jumătate de bandă din carosabil erau ocupate de un morman de panânt proaspăt basculat iar un bobcat se străduia să facă ceva ordine pe acolo.
N-am ce face și mă întreb cu voce tare: „N-ar trebui ca banii aștia să fie folosiți mai degrabă pentru astupatul gropilor din pavaj? Sau pentru canalizarea străzilor de la periferie?”
Persoana care era cu mine, 80 și ceva de ani, : „Voi, haștaghiștii, n-ați spus nimic când Băsescu construia stadioane în pantă și pârtii de schi pe versantul sudic. Din banii pe care încerca să-i economisească din pensiile noastre! Aștia măcar fac orașul frumos. După ce ne-au mărit veniturile.”

Ce înseamnă puterea precedentului… dacă cineva a făcut deja o prostie, aceasta va fi imediat folosită pentru justificarea următoarei… iar dacă acum prostia este făcută de „omul nostru” aceasta devine chiar acceptabilă…

La fel a fost și cu sistemul de justiție. Care dă din ce în ce mai multe rateuri după ce a fost folosit prea multă vreme pe post de vătrai. Vătrai cu care cei aflați la putere și-au tot tras spuza pe turtele lor, de pe turtele ‘celorlați’.
Procese întoarse la CEDO, inconsecvență în jurisprudență, oameni sastisiți…

Înțelegem și noi odată? Înainte de a ne cădea cerul de sub picioare?
De câte ori mai trebuie să sune Alexandra la 112 ca să ne vină mintea la cap?

„Ies la iveală tot mai multe amănunte revoltătoare despre modul în care ar fi acționat poliția în cazul de la Caracal. O vecină a principalului suspect susține că a sunat de două ori la 112 în noaptea de 24 spre 25 iulie, pentru a raporta o activitate suspectă în fața porții acestuia. Ea a raportat că acolo erau parcate două mașini portbagaj în portbagaj și că crede că ar putea avea legătură cu dispariția fetei. Polițistul de serviciu i-a spus să stea liniștită și a trimis-o la culcare.”

 

 

Tags , , , , ,
Categories alegerile pe care le facem, aroganta, cadre mentale, Ce tara lasam copiilor nostri?, cooperare, identitate colectiva, In limba Romana, Incredere, Justitie, Omul ca masura a tuturor lucrurilor, respect reciproc

A man and a gun

May 3, 2019 //
1

“In many ways, technology has leaped ahead of leaders and organizations, and the human element needs to catch up.”

Erica Volini et al, Introduction: Leading the social enterprise—Reinvent with a human focus

I’m afraid there is nothing new here.

‘Technology” has always been the elephant in the china shop.
Only it is very seldom that elephants enter by themselves. Anywhere, let alone in a china shop. And the mahouts who led them there were not always up to the task.

First things first.
“Technology has leaped ahead…” is an oxymoron.
Technology has always been one step behind the humans.
For no other reason than the fact that technology is a human invention. Each and every technological feat has been initiated and put in practice by a human being.

Hence ‘ ‘technology’, (wink) has leaped ahead of leaders and organizations, and the rest of the human element needs to catch up’!

Secondly, the ‘mahouts’ have a relatively easier job than those who drive the ‘rest of the human element’. Developing a technology is fairly easy but making sure that people do not hurt themselves while using it is fairly impossible.

The physical world is straightforward. It’s reaction is always the same. Once the experimenters learn what happens when they execute a certain action, the ‘response’ elicited from ‘that’ physical system by the experimenters’ consistent actions will never change.

On the other hand, people – conscious people, that is, are not that straightforward.
Being self aware, they constantly evaluate the consequences of their responses. They constantly evaluate what happens after they respond to whatever probes them from ‘outside’.
They constantly re-evaluate the consequences their actions produce upon themselves. They learn.
Only they don’t do it ‘mechanically’. Each of them has preferences and a certain freedom of will. Hence their inconsistency. Each of them learns slightly different things from the same situation. And each of them may choose to react in their own manner.
In spite of their assumptions, people are at best reasonable and never fully rational.

Bluntly put, it is fairly easy to evaluate the consequences of a gun being shot at a man but a lot harder to evaluate the consequences of a man shooting a gun.

Tags , , , , ,
Categories awareness, Bounded rationality, Chance, Choices we make, collective identity, cooperare, democracy, effective communication, In English, man induced fragility, Mutual Respect, Psychology, Transparency, Trust

Technology.

February 27, 2018 //
0

20 years ago, very few people were talking to (by?!?) themselves while walking around the city.
And most of the passers-by were tempted to call 911 because they considered the ‘talkers’ had forgotten to take their medicine.

Nowadays, when quite a lot of people walk around speaking blindly – to a naive onlooker, nobody cares anymore.

As in nobody cares to check whether the ‘speakers’ have any ear-plugs stuck in their ears…

Tags , , , ,
Categories Bounded rationality, Choices we make, collective identity, effective communication, Frames of mind, Mindset, Trust