ANG – AI Robotics continued

ANG AI Robotics continued

Hi Deb,

I don’t see technology as the problem – I see that the way we use markets as the prime measure of value as the major problem.

Technology is neutral in a very real sense, it is how we use it that matters.

It is the measures of value that we use in practice that are the single greatest determinant of how we use stuff, how we behave towards each other and reality.

So having a measure of value (money) derived from markets, that is based in scarcity, might arguably be a good idea in terms of distributing scarce commodities, but as a long term planning tool it is a nonsense, because it can only maintain value by maintaining scarcity, as anything universally abundant has zero value.

Therefore the economic system delivers exponentially greater perverse outcomes the closer we get to fully automated production.

When you combine that fundamental view of the incentive structures within markets, with the view of strategies for success expounded in Nasim Talib’s book “Black Swan”, then the exponential move to the super rich taking an ever greater share of the available pie is inevitable (within that set of contexts, but not necessarily in all possible contexts).

Choosing another context, one based in abundance values and cooperation, is an alternative structure that could possibly deliver on security, abundance and freedom for all – and the sort of freedom possible is not a freedom from consequence, or the freedom to follow any whim or fancy, as it requires us to be responsible for our actions in both social and ecological contexts, and such responsibility can never be fully defined by any set of rules – so those who look to following any set of laws for an answer will be disappointed.

So no simple answers, and there are levels of relatively simplistic approximations to very complex answers, which in a sense is all any of us can use in practice, however complex our answers may appear to others, compared to reality they must be simplistic (as reality is just that complex that should we keep on exponentially increasing our capabilities for the remainder of eternity such is likely always to be the case).

Once one can actually start to imagine such a thing, then the profundity of our ignorance can seem a little overwhelming. Humility seems an appropriate response.

Working against robotics seems entirely inappropriate, as it substantially increases the risks to survival, as mitigating the major threats from low frequency high impact events requires the sorts of engineering capacity that is only possible with large scale fully automated production, as we need to go places and do things that are just too dangerous for people.

[followed by]

Hi Deb,

I don’t see technology as the problem – I see that the way we use markets as the prime measure of value as the major problem.

Technology is neutral in a very real sense, it is how we use it that matters.

It is the measures of value that we use in practice that are the single greatest determinant of how we use stuff, how we behave towards each other and reality.

So having a measure of value (money) derived from markets, that is based in scarcity, might arguably be a good idea in terms of distributing scarce commodities, but as a long term planning tool it is a nonsense, because it can only maintain value by maintaining scarcity, as anything universally abundant has zero value.

Therefore the economic system delivers exponentially greater perverse outcomes the closer we get to fully automated production.

When you combine that fundamental view of the incentive structures within markets, with the view of strategies for success expounded in Nasim Talib’s book “Black Swan”, then the exponential move to the super rich taking an ever greater share of the available pie is inevitable (within that set of contexts, but not necessarily in all possible contexts).

Choosing another context, one based in abundance values and cooperation, is an alternative structure that could possibly deliver on security, abundance and freedom for all – and the sort of freedom possible is not a freedom from consequence, or the freedom to follow any whim or fancy, as it requires us to be responsible for our actions in both social and ecological contexts, and such responsibility can never be fully defined by any set of rules – so those who look to following any set of laws for an answer will be disappointed.

So no simple answers, and there are levels of relatively simplistic approximations to very complex answers, which in a sense is all any of us can use in practice, however complex our answers may appear to others, compared to reality they must be simplistic (as reality is just that complex that should we keep on exponentially increasing our capabilities for the remainder of eternity such is likely always to be the case).

Once one can actually start to imagine such a thing, then the profundity of our ignorance can seem a little overwhelming. Humility seems an appropriate response.

Working against robotics seems entirely inappropriate, as it substantially increases the risks to survival, as mitigating the major threats from low frequency high impact events requires the sorts of engineering capacity that is only possible with large scale fully automated production, as we need to go places and do things that are just too dangerous for people.

About Ted Howard NZ

Seems like I might be a cancer survivor. Thinking about the systemic incentives within the world we find ourselves in, and how we might adjust them to provide an environment that supports everyone (no exceptions) - see www.tedhowardnz.com/money
This entry was posted in Our Future, Technology and tagged , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Comment and critique welcome

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s