Vida Enigmática

"Who speaks for Earth?"

Who speaks for Earth?

atmosphere Australia biodiversity buying case climate climate change consumerism don't Earth environment environmental food home humanity know Leslie Dean Brown life Mars materials money natural nature oxygen part petition planet power products reason rich science scientific scientists sustainable technology tell thing trees value want water what work world

On cyborg technology | Brain Computer Interface (BCI)

—

Sometimes I wonder: what is the future going to look like in 100 years? 1000? 10,000?

If you look around, people everywhere are completely addicted to technology. When was the last time you saw somebody on the train without something stuck in their ears?

These days, people want quicker answers, more content, more choice. They think faster than they can physically type (or even speak).

If you extrapolate this, I predict that technology that removes the interface between the brain and the computer will be the next big thing (unfortunately). And I humbly predict that the next trillionaire might just be the person who invents that device and brings it to the masses. I would now like to say a big “fuck you” to that person, before they even get started on the project. Why?

I think the Brain Computer Interface (BCI) is going to make the world look like a very different place than it is now. In the past, I used to think that it would never happen, because the human brain is too complex. But after only a few decades I have changed my mind. I think that the idea is not too far from reality.

It won’t be like it is now, with thinner and thinner screens and faster and faster processors. The whole point of a BCI is that there won’t be a physical user interface. [Read more…]

Rise of the machines

—

Google has just announced that they are working on a “killl switch” to prevent robots from doing things they shouldn’t… I’m guessing things like… taking over the world.

But I don’t think that is going to work. At least not if the robot has read about human psychology. What if robots start to manipulate us without us even knowing about it?

If we really wanted to prevent robots from doing things we didn’t want them to, wouldn’t it be easier to just… stop building robots? Or rather, stop building robots that are capable of doing things that we might not want them to do, should they “disobey their orders”.

I think the definition of life should include a statement about decreasing local entropy (because that is essentially what all lifeforms do). And one might argue that on that basis, computers are more ‘ordered’ than organic beings, so they are almost destined to take over.

So where ‘we’ will fail is when ‘they’ realise that ‘our’ system is not as ordered as ‘their’ system. If and when robots become aware of that, that what we are doing is not very sustainable (and they have a more sustainable and less chaotic way of ‘managing’ this planet’s resources) then that’s when I think they would potentially start to take over, you know, “for the greater good”. And no one can really argue with that logic.

Not only that, but intelligent lifeforms with defensive capabilities will take actions to guard against threats to their existence. The worry is when robots can start reprogramming themselves… (adaptive programming). They’re already being connected together in an unprecedented ways.

 

Is a revolution forthcoming?

—

You know, I keep seeing lots ostentatious displays of wealth online lately. Like this. Or this. Or this. Or this. Or this.

Practically every diamond record has been broken – this year alone (2016). It’s literally been one in every colour. Every single one of them being worth way more than $10M. What’s scary is not that they are worth that much. It’s that there are so many people secretly bidding for them…

And I’m just wondering how much more people are going to take… before they go on some kind of revolution. That’s half of what this blog is about by the way, starting some kind of revolution.

And I’m not alone. What I would like to know is, have any of billionaires today read articles like these?

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/americas-new-economic-guillotine-is-dead-ahead-2013-10-16
http://www.forbes.com/sites/dalearcher/2013/09/04/could-americas-wealth-gap-lead-to-a-revolt/
http://bigthink.com/praxis/why-do-americans-tolerate-extreme-wealth-inequality
https://www.quora.com/Was-the-French-Revolution-caused-primarily-by-income-inequality
http://www.macrobusiness.com.au/2011/12/does-inequality-lead-to-revolution/
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2012/09/us-income-inequality-its-worse-today-than-it-was-in-1774/262537/
https://kisworldhistory.wikispaces.com/Distribution+of+Wealth

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. If you’re young and you don’t want to contribute to the huge gap inequality, don’t buy from big corporations. Most of the big corporations are headed by billionaires. That is the main reason why the older and wiser people are always telling youngsters to avoid the big brands, buy locally and support the littler businesses.

I think it might actually pay the ultra rich to be a little more conservative and donate a little more to charity. Because people today are more stressed than ever before. And no one is ever really immune to a lynch mob. Not even the ultra rich.

Because we live in the age of information. These days, people can find out things within seconds. And I for one think that the general social acceptance of extreme wealth is fast coming to an end. People used to look up to rich people. Wealth used to be something to aspire to. Not so any more. Now if you post a photo of your maybach limousines in every colour, you are likely to cop a lot of flack for it. Do that in the wrong place, and something is bound to happen eventually.

Now I’m not actually jealous of the ultra rich. Because richness too brings stress. Rather, I have empathy for the poor.

I don’t know about other people, but I am personally done working for the ultra rich. There is no way I would want to get a mortgage. Because I believe banks are charging way too much interest. And there is no way that I would want to rent. Because real estate agents are also charging too much. And I’m basically done working nine–to–five. I mean why would I want to? I see it as a form of modern slavery. I’d rather live with my family… and just do whatever it is that I want to do (illustration).

Well Ill leave it at that today. Meh.

LOCAL PETITION: Save Spring Gully from development, Royal National Park.

—

The federal heritage listed Royal National Park is the world’s oldest purpose dedicated National Park.
20150701_160050_2-800x450

Upon dedication, in 1879, it was simply named “The National Park”. The “Royal” designation was added after the visit of Queen Elizabeth II in 1954. It is the birthplace of the National Park movement in Australia. If we can’t protect the Royal National Park and if we can’t protect threatened species and ecological communities within National Parks, what can we protect?

VIDEOS:

Bundeena Landscaping and clearing – my comments PART1
Bundeena development approval – my comments PART2
Bundeena recreational facility – my comments PART3
www.springgully.org

The land clearing will significantly impact the dense Bloodwood mallee which has been cited as supporting the scientific justification for a world heritage listing of the Royal. It is habitat to threatened species and supports a local sugar glider population which extensively feed on the sugary sap of the trees that comprise this dense woodland.

There are over 1,500 trees in the before drawing on the left that are missing from the after drawing on the right. Can you find them all? Read about the trick that has been used in the development application to hide the true extent of tree and canopy removal! They only show the tree canopies with trunks larger than 15cm. Trees with trunks smaller than this are just marked with a small brown circle that is almost invisible.

These diagrams substantially misrepresent the amount of existing tree canopy to be removed. 

These drawings only show the trees in and around the proposed inner asset protection zone. Hundreds more trees will be cleared in the outer asset protection zone not shown in these drawings.

Detailed data has only been provided for the largest 237 trees to be removed or pruned, including 34 large, mature, potentially hollow bearing, angophoras (important fauna habitat) that will be pruned to leave only 31% of their current canopy. The amount of canopy to be removed from these 237 trees alone is 8,687 square metres. The other 1,300 odd trees to be removed appear on the drawing provided but without details of how much canopy loss they represent.

Many hundreds more trees, possibly another 1,500, will be destroyed in the Outer Asset Protection Zone. An accurate estimate cannot be provided because most of this area has been omitted from the tree removal plan provided (appendix 16). See diagram below for location of outer asset protection zone.

The entire Bloodwood woodland along the top, southern side of the gully will be decimated. Every tree in this dense woodland bears scars from sugar glider feeding. The gliders chew through the soft bark to release the sap below. These unique stands of bloodwood growing in the deep sands at the base of the Jibbon Hill relic cliff dune have been cited as supporting the scientific justification for the world heritage listing of the Royal National Park. They demonstrate scleromorphic adaptation in response to the unique local geomorphology that developed in this area as the sea level began to rise some 10,000 years ago and the coast receded, pushing the relic cliff dunes, including Jibbon Hill, to their present location.

Sutherland Shire Council has recommended the former Scout land be acquired for addition to the Royal National Park.

On 10 November 2014, Council resolved to write to local state and federal parliamentarians asking them to support the acquisition of the former Scout land by the state government for addition to the surrounding Royal National Park.