Re: Social robotics, cognitive bomb
Olivier -- For a model of what our down-side-of-the-Hubbert-curve global situation might look like, and practices that might well be embraced for this inevitable de-industrialization process that cannot be stopped by any technological implementations, only slightly slowed through radical human behavior shifts: Greer, John Michael. The Long Descent: A User’s Guide to the End of the Industrial Age. Gabriola Island, B.C.: New Society Publishers, 2008. If anyone would like a pdf, ping me off list... It, as you can see, was published in 2008, but the premise, the draining of the very finite reserves of hydrocarbons, globally, and social trajectories that it imposes are the same as now, except we are a bit further along on the way down. The arrival of intensive fracking for natural gas only slowed the drain slightly, and as fracked gas resources are depleted on average far faster than conventional wells, this slow-down of the demise will be short-lived... It will be the lack of available energy that will more-or-less slowly constrict our lives from the present of excess to lives of far less in every way. Greer argues against the apocalyptic collapse that is envisioned; but also against any technological 'silver bullet' that might, against all thermodynamic laws, generate infinite energy for all to consume at will. It's a good read for understanding where/how things will likely happen (and are already happening) -- especially in terms of your transforming 'social profile' idea. Because the structure and operation of the social is deeply intertwined with the availability of usable energy sources... JH On 14/Oct/19 05:47, olivier auber wrote: Thanks César As you have understood, I am speaking from a perspective borrowed from the cognitive sciences, particularly the social signal theory. Other aspects are also developed in my book. - Executives who fly for a yes or no, do so to send social signals. - People locked in their homes and stuck on social networks do it to send social signals. - Eating beef is a social signal. - Have children too! My hypothesis is that the social profile of our species is likely to change. We will certainly not stop sending social signals, otherwise we would turn into stones. It is the shape of the profile that could evolve. It could move from the S-shaped comprising two non-competitive classes C1 and C3 and a single competitive class C2, to a z-shaped where C1 and C3 would become competitive while C2 would become less so. In my book I put forward some arguments that suggest that this transformation is underway and why we should encourage it. The consequences are enormous, including in terms of energy and the environment, because signal production is extremely energy-consuming. -- ++ Dr. John Hopkins, BSc, MFA, PhD hanging on to the Laramide Orogeny http://tech-no-mad.net/blog/ ++ # distributed via : no commercial use without permission #is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org # @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:
Re: Social robotics, cognitive bomb
Thanks César As you have understood, I am speaking from a perspective borrowed from the cognitive sciences, particularly the social signal theory. Other aspects are also developed in my book. - Executives who fly for a yes or no, do so to send social signals. - People locked in their homes and stuck on social networks do it to send social signals. - Eating beef is a social signal. - Have children too! My hypothesis is that the social profile of our species is likely to change. We will certainly not stop sending social signals, otherwise we would turn into stones. It is the shape of the profile that could evolve. It could move from the S-shaped comprising two non-competitive classes C1 and C3 and a single competitive class C2, to a z-shaped where C1 and C3 would become competitive while C2 would become less so. In my book I put forward some arguments that suggest that this transformation is underway and why we should encourage it. The consequences are enormous, including in terms of energy and the environment, because signal production is extremely energy-consuming. Olivier Auber On Mon, Oct 14, 2019 at 1:18 PM César García Sáez wrote: > Interesting approach Olivier! > > It's clear that Greta has sparked something, as latest posts in this > mailing list are about her :) > > Last week, I was thinking the same topics you discuss in the conclusions: > "To face all the challenges, environmental and others, we must invent new > ways of doing a society. To do this, we must be aware that our world is > woven with invisible (anoptical) perspectives on which we can act: our > social robotics can be overcome." > > IMHO, it's all related to generations and time. I'm 40 yo now, and I was > raised with this ideal of study and work diligently and you could retire > with good conditions. (It's breaking down due to demographics but...). > Younger generation was born inside social media: they could be famous, > feeding the social machine while being data generators. > > But for the younger generations like Greta, the message is clear: these > bastards are playing a huge party on behalf of my future!! They are flying > non-stop around the world for random meetings, they are wasting their time > producing stupid videos to feed the different algorythms ... Why should I > sit down and wait until they die to discover they wasted the planet to run > their senseless routines? > > I'm wondering if some of our habits will be seen in the future as barbaric > as middle ages ones. In particular, I have four "horsemen": > - Executives and "busy" people traveling X.000km for a meeting, or random > conference, and back in 24 hours. > - Being producing and consuming content all day long will be seen has > smoking indoors. Rude, nasty, unnecessary. > - Eating meat non stop, or beef in particular, might look as we look the > Roman empire vomit inducing feasts. > - Birth control measures could be proposed on unprecedent scales to limit > human footprint. > > These are just four kind of "design fictions" but quite aligned with > current trends. Transport, commerce, everything could change if social > norms change from this. > > Let's see how this evolves! > César > - > > El lun., 14 oct. 2019 a las 9:10, olivier auber () > escribió: > >> Besides the apparent unity of the climate processions, Greta Thunberg is >> a matter of very violent disputes in all sectors of society. One may wonder >> whether this general discord does not promise a global social warming that >> could be more dangerous than the climate’s one. I am looking here for a >> cold explanation of this phenomenon and a way to defuse it. I rely on an >> analysis grid borrowed from cognitive sciences developed in my latest book >> Anoptikon, an exploration of the invisible Internet: escaping from Darwin's >> hand. >> >> medium.com/@olivierauber/greta-thunberg-cognitive-bomb-3fcf463b9677 >> >> >> # distributed via : no commercial use without permission >> #is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, >> # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets >> # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l >> # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org >> # @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject: > > > > -- > > *César García - @lahoramaker* > ¡Descubre el mundo maker! > http://www.lahoramaker.com > # distributed via : no commercial use without permission > #is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, > # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets > # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l > # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org > # @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject: # distributed via : no commercial use without permission #is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l #
Some open questions.. some leading questions
- What Would a Knowledge Democracy Look Like - The workshop The War on Knowledge on Thursday 17th of October in Brighton’s Digital Festival. The workshop is an attempt to help flesh out questions that are around issues variously described as the "epistemic crisis” the “post truth era" the “digital tailspin” and “dark epistemology”. Preparation for the workshop generated quite a number of questioned that featured that I tried to address in an article I posted about a week ago. But for the purposes of Thursday I have sought to boil things down to a list of questions and throw them open to Nettime hoping for some some thoughts to be dropped in the “bowl". Just for info the workshop will be led by Marc Tuters and Emillie de Keulenaar of the Amsterdam based research group OiLab who have investigated the dark corners of the internet and tracked and analysed the emergence of alternative knowledge regimes. The event will also enlivened by the presence of scholars and artists from across the region (and beyond) we will also be joined by members of the Forensic Architecture group. The ideal outcome of the workshop would be to flesh out some fresh answers to the question: what would a *knowledge democracy* look like? Here are a bunch of related questions that might need to taken into account along the way: * The internet is frequently blamed for the epistemological crisis. Given that a general erosion of trust in science and its institutions and has been in train for decades to what extent can today’s version of the internet be legitimately asked to shoulder so much of the blame? * Are the tactics of far right populist movements the cause of the epistemic trouble we are in or rather an aggravating and contributory symptom? Where are the correlations that demonstrate that the internet represents a significant 'step change' in the epistemic trouble we are in ? * Can we be more precise about the relationship between the hyper polarisation of today’s politics and the knowledge question? * What other elements that need to be factored in? * Are these problems simply (as analytic philosophers might argue) problems of language, logic or perception or has the nature of how we discover (or construct) facts and truth claims fundamentally changed ? * Can the pursuit of knowledge be reduced to "various competing realities, past and present, each trying to impose its own set of values, beliefs and behaviors.” ? Doesn’t the reiteration of this post-structuralist trope play into the hands of the far right who denounce all inconvenient evidence as ‘fake news’.? * Are today’s facts more provisional and dynamic.? And if so what would that mean for how we organise society and do our politics. * If we accept that scientists and other technocratic authority figures"can’t have their facts back” (Maares) as there is "no norm to return to” then must we give up on the task deciding on more or less valid contributions to public knowledge ? * Can we evaluate the rival claims of re-establishing a relationship between citizen participation and expert knowledge e.g. “open verification” “citizens assemblies” etc ? * Is the day to day relationship between knowledge, power and the citizenry actually often quite banal as it falls under the expanding province of quasi judicial regulatory regimes and their systems. The -expertocracies- and technocracies largely inaccessible to public scrutiny or accountability? * How can this essential regime be respecified? * If the above is the case would it be useful to de-dramatise the case studies and the language of crisis, war, dark, tailspin etc or is this terminology appropriate descriptors of current conditions? (I include the name of the workshop in this critical question.) * If arriving at public facts can only happen in the public domain where are the frontiers of invention for collective action to transform the public domain and make it fit for a 21st century democracy: a knowledge democracy ? -More questions most welcome- Thanks David Garcia # distributed via : no commercial use without permission #is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org # @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:
Re: Social robotics, cognitive bomb
Interesting approach Olivier! It's clear that Greta has sparked something, as latest posts in this mailing list are about her :) Last week, I was thinking the same topics you discuss in the conclusions: "To face all the challenges, environmental and others, we must invent new ways of doing a society. To do this, we must be aware that our world is woven with invisible (anoptical) perspectives on which we can act: our social robotics can be overcome." IMHO, it's all related to generations and time. I'm 40 yo now, and I was raised with this ideal of study and work diligently and you could retire with good conditions. (It's breaking down due to demographics but...). Younger generation was born inside social media: they could be famous, feeding the social machine while being data generators. But for the younger generations like Greta, the message is clear: these bastards are playing a huge party on behalf of my future!! They are flying non-stop around the world for random meetings, they are wasting their time producing stupid videos to feed the different algorythms ... Why should I sit down and wait until they die to discover they wasted the planet to run their senseless routines? I'm wondering if some of our habits will be seen in the future as barbaric as middle ages ones. In particular, I have four "horsemen": - Executives and "busy" people traveling X.000km for a meeting, or random conference, and back in 24 hours. - Being producing and consuming content all day long will be seen has smoking indoors. Rude, nasty, unnecessary. - Eating meat non stop, or beef in particular, might look as we look the Roman empire vomit inducing feasts. - Birth control measures could be proposed on unprecedent scales to limit human footprint. These are just four kind of "design fictions" but quite aligned with current trends. Transport, commerce, everything could change if social norms change from this. Let's see how this evolves! César - El lun., 14 oct. 2019 a las 9:10, olivier auber () escribió: > Besides the apparent unity of the climate processions, Greta Thunberg is a > matter of very violent disputes in all sectors of society. One may wonder > whether this general discord does not promise a global social warming that > could be more dangerous than the climate’s one. I am looking here for a > cold explanation of this phenomenon and a way to defuse it. I rely on an > analysis grid borrowed from cognitive sciences developed in my latest book > Anoptikon, an exploration of the invisible Internet: escaping from Darwin's > hand. > > medium.com/@olivierauber/greta-thunberg-cognitive-bomb-3fcf463b9677 > > > # distributed via : no commercial use without permission > #is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, > # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets > # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l > # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org > # @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject: -- *César García - @lahoramaker* ¡Descubre el mundo maker! http://www.lahoramaker.com # distributed via : no commercial use without permission #is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org # @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:
Social robotics, cognitive bomb
Besides the apparent unity of the climate processions, Greta Thunberg is a matter of very violent disputes in all sectors of society. One may wonder whether this general discord does not promise a global social warming that could be more dangerous than the climate’s one. I am looking here for a cold explanation of this phenomenon and a way to defuse it. I rely on an analysis grid borrowed from cognitive sciences developed in my latest book Anoptikon, an exploration of the invisible Internet: escaping from Darwin's hand. medium.com/@olivierauber/greta-thunberg-cognitive-bomb-3fcf463b9677 # distributed via : no commercial use without permission #is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org # @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:
