Re: nettime Essay-Grading Software
Such as: a. raw domination b. rank servitude c. outright revolution LOL Brian! (with significant sighing on the side) -- just finished a class this morning talking with my students about this very issue ... (c) will occur at the interstice of the human encounter of Self with Other, so that it is indeed available instantly, all around, in the classroom, in faculty meetings, on the street. Reminding the students of this (and helping them establish a lived praxis based on the vitality of those encounters) is my choice, so that suggests changing (c) to 'facilitating open encounter and engagement'... [Note: You can only tick one of the boxes...] The only future I can see beyond submission to the economic destinies of robotization and outsourcing is some kind of political organization, my friends. ...snip... accumulate, accumulate, accumulate, until the last ton of coal is effectively burnt and we're all reduced to a cinder. Isn't that kinda obvious now? What's the next step? At this point I am quite pessimistic that the evolutionary drive to guarantee propagation of the species, a drive inseparable from life itself, and which includes the need for consuming any and all energy necessary for survival-to-reproduce, can be short-circuited by any altruistic or even pragmatic socio-political (community, nation-state, supra-national) agendas, ever. The social concept of 'use less' (promulgated mostly by the ever-unsatiated ?ber-consumers of the developed world) cannot trump evolutionary hard-wiring. I believe we will do exactly as you say at the end of your paragraph. That question of what to do next, now, is perhaps moot. The question of what to do, after, will present itself in the immediacy of the moment. The situation we as a species have made is not of such extremity to preclude that life in other forms will not continue, and our species will likely exist in greatly reduced numbers. This may simply provide the planet with other opportunities to re-evolve after (solar-sourced) energy has again been accumulated to a level and form that allows for another burst of life progression. This will clearly not happen in the short term of (our) human life-times. Cheers, John -- ++ Dr. John Hopkins, BSc, MFA, PhD Watching the Tao rather than watching the Dow! http://neoscenes.net/ http://tech-no-mad.net/blog/ ++ # distributed via nettime: no commercial use without permission # nettime 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
Re: nettime Essay-Grading Software
Yesterday I watched the before last episode of the Swedish serie Real Humans, on Arte, in French (I am in .fr). Eerie. Made me think of this very issue, where 'Hubos' (Human robots) would presumably make 'automated grading' even more efficient, and acceptable. Ray Kurzweil Zindabad! Over and Out. No cheers, p+4D! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real_Humans # distributed via nettime: no commercial use without permission # nettime 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
Re: nettime Essay-Grading Software
John: At this point I am quite pessimistic that the evolutionary drive to guarantee propagation of the species, a drive inseparable from life itself, and which includes the need for consuming any and all energy necessary for survival-to-reproduce, can be short-circuited by any altruistic or even pragmatic socio-political (community, nation-state, supra-national) agendas, ever. Are you sure that you adequately understand either humans or their technological environments? Humans are *not* monkeys 2.0 (typical mistake #1) and the effects of our man-made environment on the humans are neither fixed *nor* impossible to understand (typical mistake #2) -- so, you might consider that you have begun your analysis with the *wrong* premises. The pessimism you reflect is likely based on these *mistakes* and, like many others, you will find that you have no choice but to re-examine some of your fundamental beliefs. It's time to start asking some *very* basic questions about both humans and the environments they make! Mark Stahlman Brooklyn NY # distributed via nettime: no commercial use without permission # nettime 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
Re: nettime Essay-Grading Software
Patrice: Made me think of this very issue, where 'Hubos' (Human robots) would presumably make 'automated grading' even more efficient, and acceptable. Yes but this is based on another MISTAKE -- that robots are at all anything like *humans* (typical mistake #3). The meme that lingers after 50 years of *failure* by the Artificial Intelligence crowd (now represented by Ray Kurzweil and his clueless epigone at Google etc) is based on a fundamental misunderstanding about humans (typical mistake #1). As historian of technology George Dyson correctly insists, these machines are part of a *diffferent* UNIVERSE from both the humans and our other non-digital inventions (including society/culture). As he says in the preface to his 1997 Darwin Among the Machines, In the game of life and evolution there are three players at the table: human beings, nature and machines. He then updates this three-part distinction in his 2012 Turings Cathedral: The Origins of the Digital Universe, by distinguishing computers from other machines. If we can't adequately understand these distinctions, then we will have little chance of sorting any of this out! Machines will *never* become conscious or emotional or spiritual because none of that is programmed into them. They weren't designed to do any of this -- indeed, we couldn't include any of this precisely because these qualities cannot be reduced to something we can design (i.e. a result of typical mistake #1). Imagining that robots will become like humans, as the Swedes have in Real Humans, is a typical device for science fiction that is designed to amuse humans . . . and of no interest to the machines themselves -- no matter how much processing power they might have. Mark Stahlman Brooklyn NY # distributed via nettime: no commercial use without permission # nettime 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
Re: nettime Essay-Grading Software
On 26/04/13 15:52, newme...@aol.com wrote: Machines will *never* become conscious or emotional or spiritual because none of that is programmed into them. And once it is these won't be hallmarks of humanity, as is always the case with AI. # distributed via nettime: no commercial use without permission # nettime 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
Re: nettime Essay-Grading Software
On 04/25/2013 05:31 AM, nettime's avid reader wrote: The software uses artificial intelligence to grade student essays and short written answers, freeing professors for other tasks. Such as: a. raw domination b. rank servitude c. outright revolution [Note: You can only tick one of the boxes...] The only future I can see beyond submission to the economic destinies of robotization and outsourcing is some kind of political organization, my friends. To be sure, the 60s, reinterpreted and repurposed by neoliberal ideology, trained us all against any kind of hierarchy whatsoever. We are so free that power is walking all over us. The capitalist democracies have gone down the very path predicted by Weberian sociology: complete rationalization for accumulation's sake. The university is now envisioned as a largely automated service provider for the human-capital needs of corporations. That's endgame, because without a public institution for critical perception, analysis and deliberation, the only social steering mechanism is the imperative to accumulate, accumulate, accumulate, until the last ton of coal is effectively burnt and we're all reduced to a cinder. Isn't that kinda obvious now? What's the next step? # distributed via nettime: no commercial use without permission # nettime 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
