raykurzweil   130

« earlier    

Futurist Ray Kurzweil Isn't Worried About Technology Stealing Your Job | Fortune.com
Innovation will do more good than harm, says Ray Kurzweil. He also delves into job automation loss and AI.
futurist  raykurzweil  ai  opinion  job  impact  work 
september 2017 by gilberto5757
some thoughts on the humanities - Text Patterns - The New Atlantis
"The idea that underlies Bakhtin’s hopefulness, that makes discovery and imagination essential to the work of the humanities, is, in brief, Terence’s famous statement, clichéd though it may have become: Homo sum, humani nihil a me alienum puto. To say that nothing human is alien to me is not to say that everything human is fully accessible to me, fully comprehensible; it is not to erase or even to minimize cultural, racial, or sexual difference; but it is to say that nothing human stands wholly outside my ability to comprehend — if I am willing to work, in a disciplined and informed way, at the comprehending. Terence’s sentence is best taken not as a claim of achievement but as an essential aspiration; and it is the distinctive gift of the humanities to make that aspiration possible.

It is in this spirit that those claims that, as we have noted, emerged from humanistic learning, must be evaluated: that our age is postmodern, posthuman, postsecular. All the resources and practices of the humanities — reflective and critical, inquiring and skeptical, methodologically patient and inexplicably intuitive — should be brought to bear on these claims, and not with ironic detachment, but with the earnest conviction that our answers matter: they are, like those master concepts themselves, both diagnostic and prescriptive: they matter equally for our understanding of the past and our anticipating of the future."
alanjacobs  posthumanism  2016  humanities  understanding  empathy  postmodernism  postsecularism  georgesteiner  kennethburke  foucault  stephengrenblatt  via:lukeneff  erikdavis  raykurzweil  claudeshannon  mikhailbakhtin  terence  difference  comprehension  aspiration  progress  listening  optimism  learning  inquiry  history  future  utopia  michelfoucault 
july 2017 by robertogreco
Web Design - The First 100 Years
"Today I hope to persuade you that the same thing that happened to aviation is happening with the Internet. Here we are, fifty years into the computer revolution, at what feels like our moment of greatest progress. The outlines of the future are clear, and oh boy is it futuristic.

But we're running into physical and economic barriers that aren't worth crossing.

We're starting to see that putting everything online has real and troubling social costs.

And the devices we use are becoming 'good enough', to the point where we can focus on making them cheaper, more efficient, and accessible to everyone.

So despite appearances, despite the feeling that things are accelerating and changing faster than ever, I want to make the shocking prediction that the Internet of 2060 is going to look recognizably the same as the Internet today.

Unless we screw it up.

And I want to convince you that this is the best possible news for you as designers, and for us as people."

"So while Moore's Law still technically holds—the number of transistors on a chip keeps increasing—its spirit is broken. Computers don't necessarily get faster with time. In fact, they're getting slower!

This is because we're moving from desktops to laptops, and from laptops to smartphones. Some people are threatening to move us to wristwatches.
In terms of capability, these devices are a step into the past. Compared to their desktop brethren, they have limited memory, weak processors, and barely adequate storage.

And nobody cares, because the advantages of having a portable, lightweight connected device are so great. And for the purposes of taking pictures, making calls, and surfing the internet, they've crossed the threshold of 'good enough'.

What people want from computers now is better displays, better battery life and above all, a better Internet connection.

Something similar happened with storage, where the growth rate was even faster than Moore's Law. I remember the state-of-the-art 1MB hard drive in our computer room in high school. It cost a thousand dollars.
Here's a photo of a multi-megabyte hard drive from the seventies. I like to think that the guy in the picture didn't have to put on the bunny suit, it was just what he liked to wear.

Modern hard drives are a hundred times smaller, with a hundred times the capacity, and they cost a pittance. Seagate recently released an 8TB consumer hard drive.

But again, we've chosen to go backwards by moving to solid state storage, like you find in smartphones and newer laptops. Flash storage sacrifices capacity for speed, efficiency and durability.

Or else we put our data in 'the cloud', which has vast capacity but is orders of magnitude slower.

These are the victories of good enough. This stuff is fast enough.

Intel could probably build a 20 GHz processor, just like Boeing can make a Mach 3 airliner. But they won't. There's a corrollary to Moore's law, that every time you double the number of transistors, your production costs go up. Every two years, Intel has to build a completely new factory and production line for this stuff. And the industry is turning away from super high performance, because most people don't need it.

The hardware is still improving, but it's improving along other dimensions, ones where we are already up against hard physical limits and can't use the trick of miniaturization that won us all that exponential growth.

Battery life, for example. The limits on energy density are much more severe than on processor speed. And it's really hard to make progress. So far our advances have come from making processors more efficient, not from any breakthrough in battery chemistry.

Another limit that doesn't grow exponentially is our ability to move information. There's no point in having an 8 TB hard drive if you're trying to fill it over an AT&T network. Data constraints hit us on multiple levels. There are limits on how fast cores can talk to memory, how fast the computer can talk to its peripherals, and above all how quickly computers can talk to the Internet. We can store incredible amounts of information, but we can't really move it around.

So the world of the near future is one of power constrained devices in a bandwidth-constrained environment. It's very different from the recent past, where hardware performance went up like clockwork, with more storage and faster CPUs every year.

And as designers, you should be jumping up and down with relief, because hard constraints are the midwife to good design. The past couple of decades have left us with what I call an exponential hangover.

Our industry is in complete denial that the exponential sleigh ride is over. Please, we'll do anything! Optical computing, quantum computers, whatever it takes. We'll switch from silicon to whatever you want. Just don't take our toys away.
But all this exponential growth has given us terrible habits. One of them is to discount the present.

When things are doubling, the only sane place to be is at the cutting edge. By definition, exponential growth means the thing that comes next will be equal in importance to everything that came before. So if you're not working on the next big thing, you're nothing.

A further symptom of our exponential hangover is bloat. As soon as a system shows signs of performance, developers will add enough abstraction to make it borderline unusable. Software forever remains at the limits of what people will put up with. Developers and designers together create overweight systems in hopes that the hardware will catch up in time and cover their mistakes.

We complained for years that browsers couldn't do layout and javascript consistently. As soon as that got fixed, we got busy writing libraries that reimplemented the browser within itself, only slower.

It's 2014, and consider one hot blogging site, Medium. On a late-model computer it takes me ten seconds for a Medium page (which is literally a formatted text file) to load and render. This experience was faster in the sixties.

The web is full of these abuses, extravagant animations and so on, forever a step ahead of the hardware, waiting for it to catch up.

This exponential hangover leads to a feeling of exponential despair.

What's the point of pouring real effort into something that is going to disappear or transform in just a few months? The restless sense of excitement we feel that something new may be around the corner also brings with it a hopelessness about whatever we are working on now, and a dread that we are missing out on the next big thing.

The other part of our exponential hangover is how we build our businesses. The cult of growth denies the idea that you can build anything useful or helpful unless you're prepared to bring it to so-called "Internet scale". There's no point in opening a lemonade stand unless you're prepared to take on PepsiCo.

I always thought that things should go the other way. Once you remove the barriers of distance, there's room for all sorts of crazy niche products to find a little market online. People can eke out a living that would not be possible in the physical world. Venture capital has its place, as a useful way to fund long-shot projects, but not everything fits in that mold.

The cult of growth has led us to a sterile, centralized web. And having burned through all the easy ideas within our industry, we're convinced that it's our manifest destiny to start disrupting everyone else.

I think it's time to ask ourselves a very designy question: "What is the web actually for?"
I will argue that there are three competing visions of the web right now. The one we settle on will determine whether the idiosyncratic, fun Internet of today can survive.


This is the correct vision.


This is the prevailing vision in Silicon Valley.


This is the insane vision. I'm a little embarrassed to talk about it, because it's so stupid. But circumstances compel me.

There's a William Gibson quote that Tim O'Reilly likes to repeat: "the future is here, it's just not evenly distributed yet."

O'Reilly takes this to mean that if we surround ourselves with the right people, it can give us a sneak peek at coming attractions.

I like to interpret this quote differently, as a call to action. Rather than waiting passively for technology to change the world, let's see how much we can do with what we already have.

Let's reclaim the web from technologists who tell us that the future they've imagined is inevitable, and that our role in it is as consumers.

The Web belongs to us all, and those of us in this room are going to spend the rest of our lives working there. So we need to make it our home.

We live in a world now where not millions but billions of people work in rice fields, textile factories, where children grow up in appalling poverty. Of those billions, how many are the greatest minds of our time? How many deserve better than they get? What if instead of dreaming about changing the world with tomorrow's technology, we used today's technology and let the world change us? Why do we need to obsess on artificial intelligence, when we're wasting so much natural intelligence?

When I talk about a hundred years of web design, I mean it as a challenge. There's no law that says that things are guaranteed to keep getting better.

The web we have right now is beautiful. It shatters the tyranny of distance. It opens the libraries of the world to you. It gives you a way to bear witness to people half a world away, in your own words. It is full of cats. We built it by accident, yet already we're taking it for granted. We should fight to keep it! "
technology  web  webdesign  internet  culture  design  history  aviation  airplanes  planes  2014  constraints  growth  singularity  scale  webdev  siliconvalley  technosolutionism  boeing  intel  microsoft  cloud  raykurzweil  elonmusk  williamgibson  inequality  mooreslaw  timoreilly  software  bloat  progress  present  future  manifestdestiny 
july 2015 by robertogreco
Shoshanna Zuboff: Dark Google
"We witness the rise of a new absolute power. Google transfers its radical politics from cyberspace to reality. It will earn its money by knowing, manipulating, controlling the reality and cutting it into the tiniest pieces."

"If there is a single word to describe Google, it is „absolute.” The Britannica defines absolutism as a system in which „the ruling power is not subject to regularized challenge or check by any other agency.” In ordinary affairs, absolutism is a moral attitude in which values and principles are regarded as unchallengeable and universal. There is no relativism, context-dependence, or openness to change.

Six years ago I asked Eric Schmidt what corporate innovations Google was putting in place to ensure that its interests were aligned with its end users. Would it betray their trust? Back then his answer stunned me. He and Google’s founders control the super-voting class B stock. This allows them, he explained, to make decisions without regard to short-term pressure from Wall Street. Of course, it also insulates them from every other kind of influence. There was no wrestling with the creation of an inclusive, trustworthy, and transparent governance system. There was no struggle to institutionalize scrutiny and feedback. Instead Schmidt’s answer was the quintessence of absolutism: „trust me; I know best.” At that moment I knew I was in the presence of something new and dangerous whose effects reached beyond narrow economic contests and into the heart of everyday life."
ethics  google  surveillance  soshanazuboff  2014  business  politics  data  evil  bigdata  power  control  innovation  absolutism  ericschmidt  finance  capitalism  nsa  colonization  self-determination  reality  raykurzweil  europe 
december 2014 by robertogreco
Humans Are the World's Best Pattern-Recognition Machines, But for How Long? | Endless Innovation | Big Think
The future of intelligence is in making our patterns better, our heuristics stronger. In his article for Medium, Kevin Ashton refers to this as "selective attention" - focusing on what really matters so that poor selections are removed before they ever hit the conscious brain.
Intelligence, then, is really just a matter of being able to store more patterns than anyone else.
Pattern  Recognition  raykurzweil  patterns  brain  21stcenturyskills  intelligence 
july 2014 by rbarkman

« earlier    

related tags

1999  2000  2009  2010  2011  2013  2014  2016  2018  2020  2045  21stcenturyskills  2watch  4chan  @twitter  a.i.  abc  abcnews  absolutism  acceleration  accessibility  aclu  aging  agriculture  ai  airplanes  alanjacobs  alanturing  alfiekohn  amazon  android  apocalypse  apple  application  arischulman  arstechnica  article  articles  artificial  artificial_intelligence  artificialintelligence  aspiration  atalhualpa  authenticity  automation  aviation  backblaze  bias  bigdata  billjoy  biology  blindness  blio  bloat  blog  boeing  book-review  book  bookmarks  books  brain  bullshit  business  ca  camera  capitalism  cellular  change  chatbot  china  chrisanderson  cite:nytimes  civilization  classideas  claudeshannon  climatechange  closedloops  cloud  coding  collaboration  colonization  commonsense  communities  community  complexity  comprehension  computer  computerscience  computervision  computing  conscience  constraints  control  corneliusvanderbilt  counterculture  counterexample  country  critique  culture  currency  dailymail  dannyhillis  data  death  democracy  design  difference  diversity  dna  documentaries  documentary  douglasrushkoff  duckduckgo  ebay  ebook  ebooks  economics  ecosystem  editorial  education  eff  elonmusk  empathy  empirebuilders  energy  entretien  epub  ereader  ericschmidt  erikdavis  escape  essay  ethics  europe  evil  evolution  exponential  face  facialrecognition  fairphone  fanfiction  fauxtomation  film  finance  forecast  foucault  freedom  fridayfocus  fundraising  funny  futur  future  futurehuman  futurism  futurist  futurology  gadgets  games  gaming  gender  genetics  genius  georgesteiner  geraldsussman  google  googlereader  government  gpu  grait  growstuff  growth  guardian  handheld  health  history  hits  howardzinn  howtocreateamind  human  humanism  humanities  humanity  humanrights  humans  ibm  identity  idleness  image  impact  imperialism  incubators  inequality  innovation  inquiry  inspiration  instapaper  intel  intelligence  interesting  internet  interview  investing  ipad-ibooks  iphone  jamaiscascio  jesseschell  job  jobs  johnkeklak  johnmarkoff  kennethburke  kevinkelly  kindle  knowledge  kursweil  kurzweil  labor  larrywall  lavabit  laziness  learning  lifespan  lifestylebusinesses  listening  literature  longevity  longnow  longtail  maciejceglowski  maciejcegłowski  makers  manifestdestiny  markzuckerberg  marvinminsky  mathematics  meaning  mechanicalturk  medium  metafilter  michelfoucault  microsoft  middleages  mikhailbakhtin  mind  minecraft  mistakes  mit  mobile  mobilelearning  money  mooreslaw  motivation  movie  movies  mp3  nanotechnology  networkedsociety  neurosceince  neuroscience  news  newsblur  nicholascarr  nihilism  npr  nsa  nuclear  obituaries  online  opinion  optimism  outsourcing  pandodaily  parentmeetings  patents  patrickwinston  pattern  patternrecognition  patterns  paulgraham  perl  personal  peterschwartz  peterthiel  pharyngula  philosophy  pinboard  planes  pm  poetry  poets  police  politics  popr  posthuman  posthumanism  postmodernism  postsecularism  power  powerofculture  prediction  predictions  present  prgmr.com  privacy  profile  progress  psychology  publishing  rapture  ravelry  ray  raymondkurzweil  reader  reading-fortheblind  reading  reality  realtime  recognition  recordingindustry  reference  regualation  rejectionists  rekognition  religion  review  rewards  richardstallman  robotics  robotique  robots  samaltman  scale  schooling  schools  science  seastead  seasteading  seen  self-determination  sherryturkle  silconvalley  siliconvalley  singularity  singularité  slow  smackdown  small  smartphone  socialmedia  society  software  solar  soshanazuboff  startup  startups  stephengrenblatt  stephenwolfram  stevejobs  stevenjohnson  stevenpinker  stevewozniak  success  sundhed  surveillance  sustainability  tablet  tean  tech  technologicalsingularity  technologie  technology  technosolutionism  ted  tedtalks  temes  terence  thefuture  theory  thinking  tim_burners_lee  timferris  timoreilly  tonyrobbins  tools  toread  towatch  trailer  transcend  transcendent  transcontextualism  transhumanism  transhumanismus  turingtest  tv  tweecious  understanding  utopia  venturecapital  veronicabelmont  viatwitter  video  vintage  vintcerf  viscouscircles  visualcommonsense  voice  wealth  wealthy  weapon  web  webdesign  webdev  westworld  wikipedia  williamgibson  wired  work  wow  xmed  yahoopipes  ycombinator  zootool 

Copy this bookmark: