Jun 29, 2022·edited Jun 29, 2022Liked by Amy Yuki Vickers
Reading this has brought to mind Alfred Korzybski’s concept of time binding. Time binding has allowed us to learn from those who came before, depend upon each other and feel responsible for one another, and yet it is a concept that Joseph DeVito has used to help formulate the idea of static evaluation. I see more people engaging in static evaluation these days, judging people for not who they are now, but who they once were. It is a corruption of time binding and a corruption of what it means to be human, but I think it is largely influenced by the algorithms used on social media. AI retains everything, and that is where, I think, the biggest problem is. Throughout the centuries, people have made decisions about what knowledge to retain and record, and what to discard. Static evaluation does not allow for personal growth nor advancement of society.
I have a reoccurring nightmare about drowning in garbage. In some ways, humanity is experiencing this already as we drown in information that should have long ago been deleted and forgotten. I know people are frightened by AI becoming sentient, but what more people should fear is a loss of sentience among humans.
When I first saw the title of this post, I was reminded of one of the Northwest Earth Institute’s discussion courses that I wanted to take part in. It is about living simply, but is focused on a sort of mindfulness regarding technology. I took part in one of the organization’s other discussion courses, but haven’t found people in my area who are interested in this one. The link is here: https://store.ecochallenge.org/products/a-different-way
People can preview the first section from that page.
You make a lot of really good points. You wrote, "people are frightened by AI becoming sentient, but what more people should fear is a loss of sentience among humans." That's so true!
We have no choice but to become mindful about technology, but at the same time, constant mindfulness is really mentally taxing. That's why monks seclude themselves. There's currently too much responsibility put on individuals to resist when tech companies spend millions to hire really smart people to addict people to their products. I think you're right that seeking support is a good way to get through this. We must maintain a sense of connection that's independent of the technology.
The problem is regulation and A.I. ethics isn't keeping up with how platforms, Cloud services and A.I. is being utilized, militarized, harnessed and developed in secret.
“With technology, I get the sense that people feel like we’re in a game with an inevitable (not so great) conclusion. But, we invented the game. We can always change the rules.” love this
You wrote: “Perhaps it’s not that complicated, though. Maybe if we individually try to be more thoughtful and civic minded when we make our personal choices (whatever that means to us), our choices will find some natural alignment, and our world would improve without any spectacular rule changes.” I’ll just say, this is what I’m banking on! The problems of our society are too big to understand or resolve in their entirety, but I sense that by living an ethical life locally, by being good to those close at hand, the goodness will ripple outward. It sounds so bloody naive when I say it, but I don’t know how else to live.
I think that's the thing. We need to concentrate on what's in our control. If we're constantly worried about things that are outside of our control, then we get overwhelmed and end up doing nothing.
Reading this has brought to mind Alfred Korzybski’s concept of time binding. Time binding has allowed us to learn from those who came before, depend upon each other and feel responsible for one another, and yet it is a concept that Joseph DeVito has used to help formulate the idea of static evaluation. I see more people engaging in static evaluation these days, judging people for not who they are now, but who they once were. It is a corruption of time binding and a corruption of what it means to be human, but I think it is largely influenced by the algorithms used on social media. AI retains everything, and that is where, I think, the biggest problem is. Throughout the centuries, people have made decisions about what knowledge to retain and record, and what to discard. Static evaluation does not allow for personal growth nor advancement of society.
I have a reoccurring nightmare about drowning in garbage. In some ways, humanity is experiencing this already as we drown in information that should have long ago been deleted and forgotten. I know people are frightened by AI becoming sentient, but what more people should fear is a loss of sentience among humans.
When I first saw the title of this post, I was reminded of one of the Northwest Earth Institute’s discussion courses that I wanted to take part in. It is about living simply, but is focused on a sort of mindfulness regarding technology. I took part in one of the organization’s other discussion courses, but haven’t found people in my area who are interested in this one. The link is here: https://store.ecochallenge.org/products/a-different-way
People can preview the first section from that page.
You make a lot of really good points. You wrote, "people are frightened by AI becoming sentient, but what more people should fear is a loss of sentience among humans." That's so true!
We have no choice but to become mindful about technology, but at the same time, constant mindfulness is really mentally taxing. That's why monks seclude themselves. There's currently too much responsibility put on individuals to resist when tech companies spend millions to hire really smart people to addict people to their products. I think you're right that seeking support is a good way to get through this. We must maintain a sense of connection that's independent of the technology.
The problem is regulation and A.I. ethics isn't keeping up with how platforms, Cloud services and A.I. is being utilized, militarized, harnessed and developed in secret.
Wow, that's a scary thought.
“With technology, I get the sense that people feel like we’re in a game with an inevitable (not so great) conclusion. But, we invented the game. We can always change the rules.” love this
Thank you so much, Erik.
You wrote: “Perhaps it’s not that complicated, though. Maybe if we individually try to be more thoughtful and civic minded when we make our personal choices (whatever that means to us), our choices will find some natural alignment, and our world would improve without any spectacular rule changes.” I’ll just say, this is what I’m banking on! The problems of our society are too big to understand or resolve in their entirety, but I sense that by living an ethical life locally, by being good to those close at hand, the goodness will ripple outward. It sounds so bloody naive when I say it, but I don’t know how else to live.
I think that's the thing. We need to concentrate on what's in our control. If we're constantly worried about things that are outside of our control, then we get overwhelmed and end up doing nothing.