Technology starting to scare me?

El_Duderino 09

paleoperson wrote: »

I really hate the ignorant and clueless people who use words like "luddite" and say something like "why don't you live in mudhuts" to dismiss anti-technology sentiments. Like can they really have that simple-minded a thinking process, it's so much more complicated than that. Technology can be a good or a bad thing depending on the circumstances, humans (and their evolutionary ancestors) survived pretty well for millions of years before modern technology.

So what do you do differently from the rest of us plebs?

Frunchy

Elon Musk and Stephen Hawking have both warned us about the dangers of technology and AI. This isn't the domain of tinfoil hat wearing conspiracy theorists.

xi5yvm0owc1s2b

It's also known that the Silicon Valley elite are aware of the addictive nature of some technology and keep their own children away from it.

Capt'n Midnight

We have plenty of mature technologies where the design is pretty fixed and improvements are incremental and usually driven by advances in other sectors.

Bicycle.

If you want to send a human into space it will be on an updated 1957 ICBM for now.

Ryanair are using what is essentially an updated 1957 airliner and much of the technology was flown on the B-47 in ... 1947. It's got better electronics, the engines are bigger so it only needs two of them instead of the 707's four or the six on the B-47. The engines can run hotter because there's better alloys and ceramics so they use less fuel so you can fly further. But you don't fly faster and there isn't more legroom.



CPU clock speed isn't changing much. It used to be that clock speed went up 50% a year. The first 3.4GHz CPU's came out in 2004.

Today's chips use less power and have more cores. But laptop manufacturers have compensated by fitting smaller batteries so today's entry level laptops are thinner and lighter every year but not much faster. And they wonder why people are buying tablets :rolleyes:

Hard drives have a long way to go, the roadmap is for 100TB on a drive.


The big problem is lawmakers not applying existing laws to cover new techno-scams.

prinzeugen

Patww79 wrote: »

Where do you think people keep their phones? That's one of the most stupid things I've read on here in a long time. If you're going to be a massive luddite then at least try to form something coherent.

When was the last time you stepped outdoors? 95% of people walk around with the phone in one or both hands with the face glued to it.

If they are not "calling" they are watching a video or some other crap.

And I am far from being a Luddite.

prinzeugen

Ethan Brief Underdog wrote: »

It's also known that the Silicon Valley elite are aware of the addictive nature of some technology and keep their own children away from it.

That might explain why most "hipsters" working in tech dont allow their kids near TV etc.

paleoperson

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

So what do you do differently from the rest of us plebs?

Against so many pesticides and additives in our food that have recently been confirmed to cause cancer (so much for laughing at the organic buyers now eh), against pollution, advocating for wildlife and the natural environment, against harmful practices that cheat and undermine human dignity and justice, against over-medication, against so-called "brave new world" eroding and obsoleting of humankind, etc. If you wanted to bring those things to your world fine, but it's when other people's families get affected that it's not just or right.

jimbobaloobob

paleoperson wrote: »

Against so many pesticides and additives in our food that have recently been confirmed to cause cancer (so much for laughing at the organic buyers now eh), against pollution, advocating for wildlife and the natural environment, against harmful practices that cheat and undermine human dignity and justice, against over-medication, against so-called "brave new world" eroding and obsoleting of humankind, etc. If you wanted to bring those things to your world fine, but it's when other people's families get affected that it's not just or right.

All well and good being against something but that doesn't guarantee any halt to current evolution with technology, its merely an opinion or stance you take.
You mention in a previous post that humans (and their ancestors) evolved pretty well without technology. Hmm not so sure, only last week we are told that 60% of the worlds animals have been wiped within the last 30 years, they werent all found, caught and killed with a bow and arrow, technology plays its part now no matter what. We are free to opt in or out.

From your post your against many a thing but sure that all sounds well and good but what effect have you had to bring about change? (not a personal attack by the way just curious based on your view)

paleoperson

Just thought I'd reply back to politely let you know I think your post is too stupid to be dignified with an answer.

jimbobaloobob

paleoperson wrote: »

Just thought I'd reply back to politely let you know I think your post is too stupid to be dignified with an answer.

Ah yea, i get ya, its hard alright to justify the argument of 'over medication' when its only what some of the herd say not to mention how well we have evolved to wipe of half the planets animals and think we have evolved well. Top man!.

prinzeugen

Good but old quote someone posted elsewhere that sums up technology.

"I though George Orwells 1984 was a novel. But it is now become an instruction manual"

Wibbs

FixdePitchmark wrote: »

The targeted adds are just getting a bit scary

They are using your location
Anything you do

It is freaky and ridiculously invasive.

And you can switch it all off. Don't use google, switch off location services, use more cash, ditch loyalty cards and so forth. It'll have almost zero impact on your life to do so and you'll not be tracked to nearly the same degree. That's at the moment. When China has rolled out mass facial recognition in the interests of "fighting crime" and targeting consumers, that will only get worse and it's already in the west, just to a lesser degree. It'll come in on the heels of "safety" and sure who doesn't want to be safer...

paleoperson wrote: »

I really hate the ignorant and clueless people who use words like "luddite" and say something like "why don't you live in mudhuts" to dismiss anti-technology sentiments. Like can they really have that simple-minded a thinking process.

The binary either/or mindset is surprisingly common on many subjects. Well, it's easy.

Capt'n Midnight

Wibbs wrote: »

And you can switch it all off. Don't use google, switch off location services, use more cash, ditch loyalty cards and so forth. It'll have almost zero impact on your life to do so and you'll not be tracked to nearly the same degree. That's at the moment. When China has rolled out mass facial recognition in the interests of "fighting crime" and targeting consumers, that will only get worse and it's already in the west, just to a lesser degree. It'll come in on the heels of "safety" and sure who doesn't want to be safer...

The binary either/or mindset is surprisingly common on many subjects. Well, it's easy.

nah, hide in the noise.


you don't want to be the one individual who shows up blank on the scans

Graces7

prinzeugen wrote: »

Most modern technology is there to solve a problem that does not exist.

Its there to aid people, in particular the younger generation, that are too stupid or too lazy to learn how to do basic ****.

Why do mobile payments exist? Because some people are too lazy to carry a card or cash or worse too lazy to reach in their pocket.

And it is slowly being forced on the rest of us. Soon all tv sets will have that Google assistant installed, listening to everything you say and do at home. The problem is once something is developed we are getting told we MUST use it. We don't have a choice.

Sure we do have a choice. Opt out of what you do not want to use. TV? Bin it . Refind real life?

xi5yvm0owc1s2b

prinzeugen wrote: »

That might explain why most "hipsters" working in tech dont allow their kids near TV etc.

It's because they understand that these devices are designed to be addictive. Steve Jobs didn't let his own kids use an iPad. Bill Gates strictly limited his children's screen time and didn't let them get phones until they were 14. (The average age at which a child gets his or her first phone is 10.)

A study by Deloitte found than half of Irish people think they use their phone too much. It affects people's sleep, with seven out of ten 18- to 24-year-olds saying they check their phones in the middle of the night. It affects relationships, with 90 percent of people saying they use their phone when spending time with family and friends, and one in three people saying they argue with their partner over his or her phone use. And it affects people's ability to study -- research has found that students who send and receive texts while studying do worse on tests and are less effective at note-taking.

RobertKK

https://twitter.com/XHNews/status/1060161714123984901

China with their AI news presenter.

wexie

RobertKK wrote: »

China with their AI news presenter.

Is that not just a CGI news anchor that speaks whatever data is fed into it?

While praising the achievements, Xinhua and Sogou acknowledged its limits. “I, who was wholly cloned from a real-life host, have mastered broadcasting as well as the real host,” the AI anchor said. “As long as I am provided with text, I can speak as a news host.”

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/nov/09/worlds-first-ai-news-anchor-unveiled-in-china

While that's an interesting step I wouldn't classify that as AI. Now if they could get the 'anchor' to trawl the internet, social media and other news sites, compile and present his own news bulletin it'd be something else altogether.

Hector Savage

bluewolf wrote: »

No i'm holding out for replicators

earl grey tea, hot

I'm actually drinking a nice hot cup of Earl Grey now !
The drink of choice for the Captain himself!



* not from a replicator unfortunately ...

Grayson

wexie wrote: »

Is that not just a CGI news anchor that speaks whatever data is fed into it?



https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/nov/09/worlds-first-ai-news-anchor-unveiled-in-china

While that's an interesting step I wouldn't classify that as AI. Now if they could get the 'anchor' to trawl the internet, social media and other news sites, compile and present his own news bulletin it'd be something else altogether.

Still has more personality than Pat Kenny.

BTW, they already have technology that writes news articles. All you need to do it plus it into the anchor and you're there. Wouldn't be hard to do. Especially for stuff like sports or weather which needs less context.

Grayson

Ethan Brief Underdog wrote: »

It's because they understand that these devices are designed to be addictive. Steve Jobs didn't let his own kids use an iPad. Bill Gates strictly limited his children's screen time and didn't let them get phones until they were 14. (The average age at which a child gets his or her first phone is 10.)

A study by Deloitte found than half of Irish people think they use their phone too much. It affects people's sleep, with seven out of ten 18- to 24-year-olds saying they check their phones in the middle of the night. It affects relationships, with 90 percent of people saying they use their phone when spending time with family and friends, and one in three people saying they argue with their partner over his or her phone use. And it affects people's ability to study -- research has found that students who send and receive texts while studying do worse on tests and are less effective at note-taking.

I think I might have been one of those people at one point, or at least close to ot. I ditched social media and I'm fine now. I just read news papers on my phone now and use it for utilities like booking flights, maps, spotify etc...
Social media is the thing that really gets people addicted to smart phones.

xi5yvm0owc1s2b

Grayson wrote: »

I think I might have been one of those people at one point, or at least close to ot. I ditched social media and I'm fine now. I just read news papers on my phone now and use it for utilities like booking flights, maps, spotify etc...
Social media is the thing that really gets people addicted to smart phones.

I'd agree. The Deloitte study found that 16 percent of Irish people check their phones over 100 times a day, which is around once every 9 minutes on average during waking hours. If you're that tethered to your phone, it's worth asking why.

wexie

Grayson wrote: »

Still has more personality than Pat Kenny.

BTW, they already have technology that writes news articles. All you need to do it plus it into the anchor and you're there. Wouldn't be hard to do. Especially for stuff like sports or weather which needs less context.

Would be interesting to see if, when that comes to pass, perhaps we could actually get 'the news' rather than 'the news that we feel like telling you about as filtered through our political and social views'.

AMKC

Resistance is futile You will be assimilated.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e_etbhWJoMo

AndrewJRenko

Grayson wrote: »

Still has more personality than Pat Kenny.

BTW, they already have technology that writes news articles. All you need to do it plus it into the anchor and you're there. Wouldn't be hard to do. Especially for stuff like sports or weather which needs less context.

Wouldn't be the first;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fnGaf0p9x1U

ChikiChiki

I think the speed of development in Robotics and AI is moving to fast. The world and its population are not prepared to adapt. The next 5-10 years should be interesting.

Capt'n Midnight

bluewolf wrote: »

No i'm holding out for replicators

earl grey tea, hot

MANUFACTURER FILES FOR BANKRUPTCY

3D PRINTER COMPANY ASKS CLIENTS NOT TO PRINT 3D PRINTERS

wexie

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

MANUFACTURER FILES FOR BANKRUPTCY

3D PRINTER COMPANY ASKS CLIENTS NOT TO PRINT 3D PRINTERS

reminds me of this