Machine, Wealth, Leisure, Write It!

LCom linked a nicely interesting article on kurzweilai.net. Is AI Near a Takeoff Point? in which author J. Storrs Hall cross-references a lot and quotes Sun Microsystems co-founder and sw-engineer Bill Joy who in turn wrote in wired quoting and commenting Austrian born robotic Hans Moravec.

A 2 Paragraph Quote from B.J. ref. H.M. "There are two separable questions here: Should humanity as a whole build machines that do all its work for it? And, if we do, how should the fruits of that productivity be distributed, if not by existing market mechanisms?

If we say yes to the first question, would the future be so bad? The robots, properly designed and administered, would be working to provide all that wealth for mankind, and we would get the benefit without having to work. Joy calls this "a textbook dystopia", but Moravec writes, "Contrary to the fears of some engaged in civilization's work ethic, our tribal past has prepared us well for lives as idle rich. In a good climate and location the hunter-gatherer's lot can be pleasant indeed. An afternoon's outing picking berries or catching fish—what we civilized types would recognize as a recreational weekend—provides life's needs for several days. The rest of the time can be spent with children, socializing, or simply resting."

As for the second question, about distribution, perhaps we should ask the ultra-intelligent AIs what to do."

Our comments What makes that text so interesting are the questions it poses. It rounds up some of the more interesting answers too. It crucibly leaves out one possible development that Herbert Frank described in a sophisticated fashion in his Dune sequel. Anti machine computing rebellion. I commented in this sense on Chris' log.

The net realization from this is that it's time to broaden the good ole AI debate again. It has been pushed into a near invisible niche twice or even 3 times since its inception. Not good. Let us give it some prominence. Let us keep in mind also that it is a dangerous and complicated debate that could easily accelerate anti machine aggression if, like in the past, its promoters do nothing but create awe, false promises and irritation with people at large and more so with the political elites. Clear thinking and understanding is badly in need. But the debate also requires a lot more work and participation from non computing experts if not participation by all the population at large. Tough communication work is waiting. Might be not funny but will be necessary.

Addendum Just detected that motzes finds the story to be "yet another annoying chapter of kurzweil's dilemma". I asked her why.

Yet Another Addendum Contrary to what Joy and Moravec seem to believe we did not give up our birthright of leisure in the Faustian bargain of agriculture, rather our foremothers and forefathers and not we, the fictive humanity, rather acquired leisure in that bargain for the first time in exchange for work, a thing that also did not exist before that deal. Such lazy aphoristic thinking in the humanities is typical of the post 1870 superiority complex of the professionals in the so called exact sciences. And I still left out the subtleties caused by the differences between animal and plant oriented agriculture.

A final statement Yiyeh tov (means "will be fine") Why? Because there are many allies, not least the universe which contrary to what many scientists believe is good by nature.

ANTSCD: Writing The history, development and evolution of the world's writing systems

P3K pointed us to an equally (compared to the one above) important text on the evolution of writing systems. Krysstal.com is a United Kingdom based educational and information web site by Kryss Katsiavriades and Talaat Qureshi in London. On first sight it looks like an excellent place to easily study topics like language, football, physics, democracy and more.

Media systems and writing systems even more so, despite all of the academic traditions, are still understudied in my opinion. The emergence of sites like this one fit nicely into the current McLuhan revival.

Marshal McLuhan's books have suffered a lot of intentional and unintentional misunderstanding by half competent study and and large gaps in the knowledge of the evolution of humanity's media systems.

La plupart de la historical and political analysis is still strongly biased to West Eurasian history.

Weakly connected and unbalanced pieces of half knowledge are a very dangerous thing, ideologically. Then and again ideas can play large and tragic roles in the material world. Take care.

But then again: It's a pity we won't live forever, still it's getting better all the time, somehow.