The inflationary economic model is rapidly becoming very toxic, very harmful, very wrong due to the growth of technology. Maybe inflation was always a flawed economic model. Undoubtedly the inflationary model is now definitely ceasing to be sustainable. Inflation absolutely cannot be maintained in the future. We must begin transitioning into an deflationary model of economics, with our ultimate goal being deflation to zero price, which is a situation where every is free.
The Post-Scarcity meme is slowly growing. To boost the growth of Post-Scarcity awareness I think the tag #DeflateToZero will be beneficial. Please popularize this tag. The above large tag links to Twitter search for #DeflateToZero. The large tag below links to the Google+ search for #DeflateToZero. Please add you thoughts to the #DeflateToZero debate by tweeting, blogging, or plusing the tag.
There are various articles you can read about how robots are stealing our jobs or replacing us, there is a growing amount of news regarding the prospect of jobs diminishing in the future due to automation. The deflationary nature of personal nanofactories or 3D-printers is clear but economists have not yet grasped the future we are rapidly approaching. We really need to emphasize awareness.
Tweet #DeflateToZero
People are dimly seeing how economic growth is over, it is ending thus we must embrace the deflationary model, but economists and have not yet put two and two together thereby coming to the Post-Scarcity conclusion. In the not too distant future everybody will finally conclude everything will be free thus nobody will need to work, but to reach this conclusion people need our help. People are currently grasping dimly how all jobs will be replaced by machines but people haven't yet taken the next logical step, which is a world where everything is free. I wish everyone could grasp this truth now but it might only be in the early 20s when everyone begins accepting the inevitable: #DeflateToZero.
Update
Arising from comments on the G+ community Singularity Observatory, here is some deeper information about growth, profit, and deflation.
Currently in 2012, and for at least a few years into the future, "growth" is measured by profits not by actual growth. Things are
currently chaotic regarding our system of finances but in the future
when 3D-printing takes off there could be massive inventiveness and
development but it would not really show as "growth" (according to current standards of growth) because it is
happening off the grid, the inventiveness and development would not be via the traditional profit avenues. +Michel Bauwens
has stated the open source business model is deflationary, destroying
an estimated $60bn of annual revenue: "Even as it creates an explosion
of use value, its monetary value decreases."
Technology will continue to grow but profits will dwindle thus we need to to accept the inevitable, we need to financially deflate to zero, which means everything will be free while developmentally everything will be incredibly explosive. Inflation is the wrong route towards everything being free because a sudden drop from high prices to zero prices is massively more disruptive than the change from a deflating price to zero price. Currently prices are going in the wrong direction.
If you want to discuss this topic there is the above Singularity Observatory discussion, or you can go to KurzweilAI.
Friday, 28 December 2012
Saturday, 15 December 2012
My Response To Utopia Get Real
You can read a slightly earlier version of this blog-post, with minor editing, via Singularity Weblog, titled Utopia is Inevitable.
Someone recently alerted me to an article on Singularity Weblog written by Steve Morris, which criticised utopia via the title Utopia Get Real. Steve's criticism demands a response.
For starters let's consider the following quote from the article: "It’s all too obvious that humans simply aren’t equipped to build a Utopia or even to live in one."
Yes humans do have lots of failings. A big failing is the inability of some humans to see the almost certainty of utopia, which we're approaching. Technology creating utopia is essentially inescapable. The logic for utopia is compelling. The likelihood of technology not creating utopia is so implausible we can state utopia is inevitable.
Typical human flaws are a brilliant reason why humans are being redefined via terms such as "H+" or "Transhuman." The point is we are leaving behind the outdated human baggage regarding racism, homophobia, idiocy or any other human failings. We are becoming more than human. The Singularity is all about Transhumanism, it is about transcending limits. We are transcending human flaws, or more precisely we're surpassing inhuman flaws, we are enhancing our humanity, we're becoming more civilized, thus H+ is a common term within futurism circles.
Steve Morris is correct when he states humans aren't equipped to build or live in utopia, likewise we must note humans aren't naturally equipped to communicate instantly with anyone around the world. My point is one of augmentation. From phones to the internet, or aeroplanes to Space-stations, or reading-glasses to microscopes, humans utilize technology to become more than human. Artificial Intelligence will soon represent a truly explosive augmentation. Certainly it's clear many humans aren't equipped to contemplate utopia, but technology will solve this via augmenting humans who are ill-equipped. Our future is not one where humans are ill-equipped, it is a future where Transhumans are perfectly equipped to tackle any problem. The wonders of nanotechnology, synthetic biology, or Stem Cells clearly demonstrate our progress towards becoming more than human. I do recognise there is a long way to go, but I also note how the speed of progress is accelerating.
It is also pertinent to note how intelligence is a relatively new phenomenon for the human race. The idea of civilization is not very old. The Stone Age only ended sometime between 4,500 BC and 2,000 BC. Humans in our current form evolved no earlier than 200,000 BC. We are a young species. It is only recently humans have largely abolished slavery, or given equal rights to women. The mistakes humans have made and continue to make are purely due to our intellectually immature state. We are mere children, we are learning. Metaphorically regarding our intellects we stumble when trying to walk. Initially we could only crawl. Now we are learning how to walk therefore we often fall thus grazing our knees, but we are progressing. One day we will walk without stumbling and then we will run; shortly afterwards our intellectual capacity will become supersonic. It is a mistake to think the current culture of humans is the sole representation of intelligent civilization forever. We are changing, we are evolving, intelligence is increasing.
Steve Morris presents a typical argument about people disagreeing regarding the definition of utopia, thus he states: "Even if we had a Utopia, it wouldn’t be to everyone’s taste." This is a common fallacy, the idea of people not agreeing about what actually constitutes utopia, it is based upon a failure to understand how all conflict is arises from scarcity. Every crime, every form of dysfunctional behaviour, every disagreement, and every religion is based on scarcity. Technology relentlessly pushes us towards a Post-Scarcity situation. All forms of scarcity will be eradicated thus everyone will be perfectly satisfied. Logic in the future will be utterly dominant, all irrationality will be obsolete. The Singularity is about intelligence millions of times greater than human intelligence, we are contemplating at least 20,000 years of progress (based on the rate of progress in year 2001) condensed into only one hundred years. It is a future where everything is free, nobody dies, everybody is eternally young, all governments are abolished, crimes are abolished, and everyone is utterly self-sufficient therefore free to zoom off independently into Space, whereupon people will create strange worlds according to the desires of each individual.
If the preposterously insane situation of people disagreeing about utopia does occur in the future (it really won't but let's consider it), then it will be very easy to create a new universe, for each individual, therefore you can escape into infinity. It will be possible in the future for anyone to be utterly separate from anyone who possibly disagrees with you. The level of intelligence we are contemplating is utterly awesome thus we will leave childish worries very far behind.
Finally we should note there is a difference between Utopia the novel or place (capitalised) and utopia the concept (lower-case). My name could however be confusing because my name refers to the concept but due the capitalisation of names my surname is capitalised but that capitalisation does not mean I am a novel or place, it is merely the capitalisation of a surname and my surname is regarding the concept of utopia not the novel or place. The concept refers to a perfect system, a perfect way of life. When I state "perfect" I mean utterly flawless for all people (everybody). The future circa 2045 will be utopia for everyone. This is not fiction we are dealing with.
Someone recently alerted me to an article on Singularity Weblog written by Steve Morris, which criticised utopia via the title Utopia Get Real. Steve's criticism demands a response.
For starters let's consider the following quote from the article: "It’s all too obvious that humans simply aren’t equipped to build a Utopia or even to live in one."
Yes humans do have lots of failings. A big failing is the inability of some humans to see the almost certainty of utopia, which we're approaching. Technology creating utopia is essentially inescapable. The logic for utopia is compelling. The likelihood of technology not creating utopia is so implausible we can state utopia is inevitable.
Typical human flaws are a brilliant reason why humans are being redefined via terms such as "H+" or "Transhuman." The point is we are leaving behind the outdated human baggage regarding racism, homophobia, idiocy or any other human failings. We are becoming more than human. The Singularity is all about Transhumanism, it is about transcending limits. We are transcending human flaws, or more precisely we're surpassing inhuman flaws, we are enhancing our humanity, we're becoming more civilized, thus H+ is a common term within futurism circles.
Steve Morris is correct when he states humans aren't equipped to build or live in utopia, likewise we must note humans aren't naturally equipped to communicate instantly with anyone around the world. My point is one of augmentation. From phones to the internet, or aeroplanes to Space-stations, or reading-glasses to microscopes, humans utilize technology to become more than human. Artificial Intelligence will soon represent a truly explosive augmentation. Certainly it's clear many humans aren't equipped to contemplate utopia, but technology will solve this via augmenting humans who are ill-equipped. Our future is not one where humans are ill-equipped, it is a future where Transhumans are perfectly equipped to tackle any problem. The wonders of nanotechnology, synthetic biology, or Stem Cells clearly demonstrate our progress towards becoming more than human. I do recognise there is a long way to go, but I also note how the speed of progress is accelerating.
It is also pertinent to note how intelligence is a relatively new phenomenon for the human race. The idea of civilization is not very old. The Stone Age only ended sometime between 4,500 BC and 2,000 BC. Humans in our current form evolved no earlier than 200,000 BC. We are a young species. It is only recently humans have largely abolished slavery, or given equal rights to women. The mistakes humans have made and continue to make are purely due to our intellectually immature state. We are mere children, we are learning. Metaphorically regarding our intellects we stumble when trying to walk. Initially we could only crawl. Now we are learning how to walk therefore we often fall thus grazing our knees, but we are progressing. One day we will walk without stumbling and then we will run; shortly afterwards our intellectual capacity will become supersonic. It is a mistake to think the current culture of humans is the sole representation of intelligent civilization forever. We are changing, we are evolving, intelligence is increasing.
Steve Morris presents a typical argument about people disagreeing regarding the definition of utopia, thus he states: "Even if we had a Utopia, it wouldn’t be to everyone’s taste." This is a common fallacy, the idea of people not agreeing about what actually constitutes utopia, it is based upon a failure to understand how all conflict is arises from scarcity. Every crime, every form of dysfunctional behaviour, every disagreement, and every religion is based on scarcity. Technology relentlessly pushes us towards a Post-Scarcity situation. All forms of scarcity will be eradicated thus everyone will be perfectly satisfied. Logic in the future will be utterly dominant, all irrationality will be obsolete. The Singularity is about intelligence millions of times greater than human intelligence, we are contemplating at least 20,000 years of progress (based on the rate of progress in year 2001) condensed into only one hundred years. It is a future where everything is free, nobody dies, everybody is eternally young, all governments are abolished, crimes are abolished, and everyone is utterly self-sufficient therefore free to zoom off independently into Space, whereupon people will create strange worlds according to the desires of each individual.
If the preposterously insane situation of people disagreeing about utopia does occur in the future (it really won't but let's consider it), then it will be very easy to create a new universe, for each individual, therefore you can escape into infinity. It will be possible in the future for anyone to be utterly separate from anyone who possibly disagrees with you. The level of intelligence we are contemplating is utterly awesome thus we will leave childish worries very far behind.
Finally we should note there is a difference between Utopia the novel or place (capitalised) and utopia the concept (lower-case). My name could however be confusing because my name refers to the concept but due the capitalisation of names my surname is capitalised but that capitalisation does not mean I am a novel or place, it is merely the capitalisation of a surname and my surname is regarding the concept of utopia not the novel or place. The concept refers to a perfect system, a perfect way of life. When I state "perfect" I mean utterly flawless for all people (everybody). The future circa 2045 will be utopia for everyone. This is not fiction we are dealing with.
Thursday, 13 December 2012
Love html Code < > &lessthansemicolon
I love code. I'm definitely not an expert but I know enough to play around somewhat with the html for my pages. Here are some examples of sub-header styles I've been testing. Below I've included the code I used for "Mental Menthol Magnitude" and you can see in the second version by removing "inset" the box shadow is outside the box and I changed the shadow color too. Marvellous! The code for the less than < sign is < and the code for the greater than > sign is > and if you ever wonder what the code for a "space" is, well it's which means non-breaking space. If you want to play around with the code, live online, then visit http://www.onlinehtmleditor.net/.
Fudge Clucking Dysfunction
Bandstand Omnibus Paragliding
Mental Menthol Magnitude
<span style="background: #DEFFE1; border-radius: 11px; border: 1px solid #3DBF7C; box-shadow: #9FF5B5 0px 0px 9px 3px inset; display: inline-block; font-family: courier; font-size: 18pt; font-weight: bold; margin: 6pt 0px; padding: 10pt 17px 12px 17px; text-shadow: 0px 0.5px 1px #ffffff; vertical-align: baseline;">Mental Menthol Magnitude</span>
<span style="background: #DEFFE1; border-radius: 11px; border: 1px solid #3DBF7C; box-shadow: #C0C0CC 0px 0px 9px 3px; display: inline-block; font-family: courier; font-size: 18pt; font-weight: bold; margin: 6pt 0px; padding: 10pt 17px 12px 17px; text-shadow: 0px 0.5px 1px #ffffff; vertical-align: baseline;">Mental Menthol Magnitude</span>
Mental Menthol Magnitude
Fudge Clucking Dysfunction
Bandstand Omnibus Paragliding
Mental Menthol Magnitude
<span style="background: #DEFFE1; border-radius: 11px; border: 1px solid #3DBF7C; box-shadow: #9FF5B5 0px 0px 9px 3px inset; display: inline-block; font-family: courier; font-size: 18pt; font-weight: bold; margin: 6pt 0px; padding: 10pt 17px 12px 17px; text-shadow: 0px 0.5px 1px #ffffff; vertical-align: baseline;">Mental Menthol Magnitude</span>
<span style="background: #DEFFE1; border-radius: 11px; border: 1px solid #3DBF7C; box-shadow: #C0C0CC 0px 0px 9px 3px; display: inline-block; font-family: courier; font-size: 18pt; font-weight: bold; margin: 6pt 0px; padding: 10pt 17px 12px 17px; text-shadow: 0px 0.5px 1px #ffffff; vertical-align: baseline;">Mental Menthol Magnitude</span>
Mental Menthol Magnitude
Sunday, 9 December 2012
Augmentation of Idiots Wouldn't be Tyranny
Commenting on a blog recently, I mentioned how people with limited imaginations could be augmented. People who hypothetically wouldn't be able to enjoy or create utopia, they could be adapted to appreciate the intelligence of technology.
At first glance, from the viewpoint of current culture, it could seem Orwellian to augment humans who are ill-equipped for appreciating utopia, but a Big Brother scenario is a very mistaken viewpoint. The augmentation would be entirely voluntary, perhaps I could have worded my views better. My point regarding augmentation is that the augmentation will appear very attractive therefore people will take it without being forced.
Imagine if you gave away free iPads, including a free internet connection, people would very happily augment themselves with this technology. Note how illiterate Ethiopian children taught themselves how to read and write in foreign language (English) via free tablets with no teachers. The Ethiopian children were given the tablets and naturally they took them, without any force being needed, because children and adults are attracted to shiny things with flashing lights, especially when the electronic devices are free. Likewise if a super-intelligent-AI created some marvellous mind-augmenting devices, capable of giving you superhuman-powers, people would happily take them if the devices were given away.
Augmentation in a super-intelligent epoch via super-intelligent beings could merely be a few very wise and compelling words, but this would not be a brainwashing type of compulsion. Extreme intelligence will facilitate extremely clear expression. Humans are naturally receptive to clarity.
At first glance, from the viewpoint of current culture, it could seem Orwellian to augment humans who are ill-equipped for appreciating utopia, but a Big Brother scenario is a very mistaken viewpoint. The augmentation would be entirely voluntary, perhaps I could have worded my views better. My point regarding augmentation is that the augmentation will appear very attractive therefore people will take it without being forced.
Imagine if you gave away free iPads, including a free internet connection, people would very happily augment themselves with this technology. Note how illiterate Ethiopian children taught themselves how to read and write in foreign language (English) via free tablets with no teachers. The Ethiopian children were given the tablets and naturally they took them, without any force being needed, because children and adults are attracted to shiny things with flashing lights, especially when the electronic devices are free. Likewise if a super-intelligent-AI created some marvellous mind-augmenting devices, capable of giving you superhuman-powers, people would happily take them if the devices were given away.
Augmentation in a super-intelligent epoch via super-intelligent beings could merely be a few very wise and compelling words, but this would not be a brainwashing type of compulsion. Extreme intelligence will facilitate extremely clear expression. Humans are naturally receptive to clarity.
Saturday, 1 December 2012
We Are Gods - Jason Silva's Religious Nonsense
On Singularity Weblog I noticed an article about Jason Silva. Speaking at Sydney Opera House Jason proclaimed we are Gods now. Jason's tendency to lean towards the religious is a distortion of Singularity issues. For example I'm a deeply committed atheist, but according to Jason I'm a God now, so does this mean I don't believe in myself? The Singularity is actually very atheist.
On my Google+ page Singularity 2045, one commenter named Michelle Cameron wrote: "I've personally tuned out of any discussion Jason Silva is part of because he seems to be all razzle, amazement, and light on facts. His fanbase also seem to exhibit all the hallmarks of the new age religious."
Anecdotally, regarding the issue of religion, in the TV series House MD, people would often praise God when an incurably sick person "miraculously" recovered, but House would point out it was God who made them sick in the first place.
It is intellectually offensive, it is an detestable insult execrably smeared upon intelligence, whenever the vile tendency to drag religion into science occurs. If a terminally ill patient becomes healthy despite all odds it doesn't mean God has intervened, it is not a miracle. Likewise regarding technology improving our minds, bodies, and lives, this is nothing to do with God, it is simply advanced science. Nietzsche declared God is dead, furthermore regarding the powers of the human mind Nietzsche created the idea of the Superman. I don't like the idea of God stealing the hard work humans have done. People should employ the word "Superhuman" to describe advanced technology if their descriptive powers fumble for an appropriate term to define highly advanced science and technology augmenting our lives.
On the issue of Nietzsche we should note Nietzsche was an atheist according to Stanford university. Yes according to Nietzsche Man is a bridge not an end, but the end is not God.
Furthermore, if we are now Gods does this mean we need to kill lots of people via plagues, famines, and floods. Will we need to let our children be crucified? I can't think of anything more horrifying than being a God, well maybe few things are more horrifying but Gods are very disgusting indeed! Gods are spiteful and vindictive beings, overeager to kill or punish people. Think about how God made Job suffer, must we now persecute people of lesser intelligence and power? Jason should also consider my previous post regarding the nonsense of blaming the amygdala for fear-problems in the world.
Jason thinks I might be taking the issue of his mere metaphor too far, but there's a growing Intelligent Design taint creeping into Singularity issues. Some people with religious leanings are very clearly trying to erroneously define the Singularity religiously, which The Mormon Transhumanist Association very clearly demonstrates when they ask “Are you living in a world computed by neohuman Gods?” This is why I strongly object to the incorrect usage of God or Gods to describe the future.
On my Google+ page Singularity 2045, one commenter named Michelle Cameron wrote: "I've personally tuned out of any discussion Jason Silva is part of because he seems to be all razzle, amazement, and light on facts. His fanbase also seem to exhibit all the hallmarks of the new age religious."
Anecdotally, regarding the issue of religion, in the TV series House MD, people would often praise God when an incurably sick person "miraculously" recovered, but House would point out it was God who made them sick in the first place.
It is intellectually offensive, it is an detestable insult execrably smeared upon intelligence, whenever the vile tendency to drag religion into science occurs. If a terminally ill patient becomes healthy despite all odds it doesn't mean God has intervened, it is not a miracle. Likewise regarding technology improving our minds, bodies, and lives, this is nothing to do with God, it is simply advanced science. Nietzsche declared God is dead, furthermore regarding the powers of the human mind Nietzsche created the idea of the Superman. I don't like the idea of God stealing the hard work humans have done. People should employ the word "Superhuman" to describe advanced technology if their descriptive powers fumble for an appropriate term to define highly advanced science and technology augmenting our lives.
On the issue of Nietzsche we should note Nietzsche was an atheist according to Stanford university. Yes according to Nietzsche Man is a bridge not an end, but the end is not God.
Furthermore, if we are now Gods does this mean we need to kill lots of people via plagues, famines, and floods. Will we need to let our children be crucified? I can't think of anything more horrifying than being a God, well maybe few things are more horrifying but Gods are very disgusting indeed! Gods are spiteful and vindictive beings, overeager to kill or punish people. Think about how God made Job suffer, must we now persecute people of lesser intelligence and power? Jason should also consider my previous post regarding the nonsense of blaming the amygdala for fear-problems in the world.
Jason thinks I might be taking the issue of his mere metaphor too far, but there's a growing Intelligent Design taint creeping into Singularity issues. Some people with religious leanings are very clearly trying to erroneously define the Singularity religiously, which The Mormon Transhumanist Association very clearly demonstrates when they ask “Are you living in a world computed by neohuman Gods?” This is why I strongly object to the incorrect usage of God or Gods to describe the future.
@2045singularity I think you might be taking a literal interpretation for what is meant to be poetic an metaphorical. Enjoy your day.
— Jason Silva (@JasonSilva) December 1, 2012
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
# Blog visitors since 2010:
Archive History ▼