A Future Machine Since the Dawn of Time

   Imagine if you will, that some form of advanced civilisation is not only able to travel through time, but also build through the expanse of time as easily as we can now build through the volume of space. If the structure were simply an observer or device used for observation, it could view all events just as a satellite can view the Earth's surface. One of the things I find most fascinating about such a structure/machine is that it could be built at any point in time, and once constructed, could potentially instantaneously exist at all points in time!


   For example, say the discovery on how to make such a miraculous thing doesn't come into existence for another ten thousand years. For the sake of having some sort of a system/visualisation let's say that the device is grown like tendrils through what you could analogise as temporal space. Once it had grown across all of this temporal expanse, from any given point in time if you could see it, it would look like it had always existed, despite not actually being built and spread until a much later "relative point" in time (relative in the sense that from the devices perspective everything is atemporal, there is no past, present, or future. All of time is laid out like a map before it).


   Just a fascinating idea I wanted to share for today!

Living in a Post Automation World: A Nietzchean/Utilitarian Reanalysis

It's been a while since my last post! School became rather heavy and I needed to prioritise. I am back now and hopefully with a vengeance!

   As of late I've been listening to a very entertaining, engaging, and insightful philosophy podcast called The Partially Examined Life

   For anyone interested in philosophy of all sorts from any educational background I would highly recommend it.

   As someone myself with no formal philosophy background (simply interested in ideas and ponderings of all sorts) I would like to comment on one of my previous posts, namely as the title of this post suggests "Living in a Post Automation World". This is spurred by my listening to the brief analysis of Nietzche's works. I would like to stress that I am eager to hear any and all comments relating to this as I am certainly no expert, and I look forward to hearing what you may think.

   To briefly review, I asserted in the relevant post that automation is expanding rapidly in both scope and ubiquity. Although this increases overall productivity worldwide, it currently has a displacing effect on the human workforce by and large, which in the long run potentially undermines peoples capacity to purchase produced goods (if they are unable to find employment). My solution in a nutshell was to allow workers directly displaced by the purchase of a given machine to then be allowed to purchase a share of that machine's productivity, thereby allowing displaced workers to collect a portion of that machines financial productivity, while also contributing to the purchase and maintenance of that machine. In the long term this could lead to a society where most people would collect wages from machine productivity without ever having to actually work (Please read "Living in a Post Automation World" to get the full idea if you haven't already).

   I would now like to introduce some Nietzchean concepts to elucidate the benefits of my position, but in a materialistic, and perhaps counterintuitevly, a utilitarian position.

   Nietzche talks about the shift from a "Master Morality" to a "Slave Morality". Master morality is such that the powerful, strong, and noble exert their will on the weak ("slaves") to promote and realise their goals, and ultimately what is good for them (specifically the individual). The slave however, is a reactionary force. The slave is interested in creating a system opposed to the master's. One based more on communal equality, and sacrificing oneself to the benefit of their peers. As Nietzche alludes, the dynamic of the slave morality unchecked has the potential to stifle greatness. One's personal aspirations must be second to that of the whole.

   According to Nietzche, we currently live in a world dominated by the slave morality (Judeo-Christian moral system). I would have to say though that simply put it would be unacceptable to enter into a master system in the traditional sense nowadays as exploiting weaker people for one's personal self expression is beyond unethical. Where this plays into a world of pure automation though is that with machines performing labour on people's behalf, essentially fulfilling the "slave" portion of the equation, it would free up more time for the pursuits that people truly wish to develop. This would lead to more great achievements as people would now have the time to create works that were not permitted before due to the excessive time and energy drain of labourious tasks. Indeed, there may even be a large portion of the population that choses not to pursue any significant development. Those that are motivated to though would be unhindered to perform great feats, at the benefit of society as a whole, enriching humanity. Every person would be in a position to live the "master" life at his or her discretion, without the exploitation of other people. In this sense we can truly achieve a balance in the master-slave dynamic. Utility is maximised for all, along with freedom of self expression.

   Another important point I would like to briefly express is that Nietzche describes society as only as good as the amount of "parasites" it can accommodate. In an automated society, the amount of "parasites" that could be accommodated is only limited by the productivity of the machines, accessibility to said productivity, and resources. All three of which are completely under humanity's control. Machine productivity can be varied according to society's needs, accessibility would need to be publicly checked to ensure that all have their basic needs appropriately met, and resources are subject to human ingenuity in gaining them.

   In closing, there are points that Nietzche makes that I find distasteful (particularly his views on democracy), and this is simply my interpretation of a small set of Nietzche's philosophy as applied to my particular ideas. I do however think that we are in a position to realise a society in which people are free to achieve their goals and greatness, while still maintaining the good of the whole.

I encourage analysis of your own below! Thanks for reading!

Living in the Post Automation World

   With the rate of automation soaring, many jobs typically performed by humans are being rendered obsolete in favour of machines. With no sign of alleviating, although production is increasing dramatically, unemployment rates are steadily rising. This leads to a conundrum. Machine production is faster, more precise, and capable of great volume at little cost. By eliminating the need for human labour though we are cutting many people's abilities to actually consume certain goods, and on an emotional level, robbing people of their ability to pursue meaning and happiness in their lives through some form of financial stability, and performance of meaningful work.

   My proposed solution to this, would be to allow employees to invest in the automation of their work. For example, if Company A plans to replace five thousand workers with a series of ten machines, those who stand to lose their employment at Company A should have the opportunity to buy in to these machines. They could purchase a percentage of that machine's cost, and be entitled to a percentage of that machine's productivity based on how much they invested. Being an investor though they would also be responsible for maintenance costs based on their ownership percentage. Companies would most likely need to cap the sellable percentage of a machine so as not to sell off all of it's productivity, and also to accommodate the number of potential buyers (for example as above, if five thousand people stand to lose, and up to fifty percent of each of the ten machines can be purchased, it all needs to be broken up so that each person has an opportunity to buy in. If not all the possible "shares" are bought, then there could be a second round of buy in by those who choose to, or have the money to buy more).

   This not only helps the company by offsetting potential machine costs from purchasing to maintenance, but the employees who buy in would still receive a monthly cheque based on their buy in amount and the productivity of that given machine. On a more global level, humanity would literally be investing in the future. The raw cost of a new machine would be shared among employees and company, as well as the ability to enjoy the fruits of it's labour. With steady investment in the latest, best performing machines, I believe we would see a dramatic rise in both productivity and efficiency of these machines. In doing this, we leave the opportunity open for people to make an income, but not necessarily require constant employment. People could then develop their hobbies, live their lives, and yet still keep the consumer market running.

   To keep income flowing for a family indefinitely, perhaps the shares purchased could be passed from one generation to the next. Once automation has reached a sufficiently high level where finding employment at a basic level of any sort becomes exceedingly difficult, perhaps companies could still hold interview processes for potential human "employees". For example, say McDonalds replaced all it's service staff with machines. As a young person with no income, I could apply for a "job" with them. If I would be someone they would have hired when they still had positions for human service workers, I would then be given the opportunity to buy a very small parentage of productivity (akin to a minimum wage type scenario).

   Automation is the way of the future, there is no sign of it stopping. To continue to improve the standard of living and adapt to the changes we are creating, this seems a necessary step so that humanity can enjoy the best of both worlds. Automation without the inability of man to benefit from such.

A Groovatron Named Paul: Part 1

   I'm Paul, your typical junior high student. I don't mean to brag but I've got some serious hall-cred, I'm the trendiest trendsetter, and nothing beats playing on my phone whilst sitting near my weirdo best friend Arthur, who, by the way, tries far too hard to be a robot. Sometimes he even thinks he is. I'm positive I've caught him taking notes in binary. I'm all he's got though, and boy is he lucky to have such a cool friend like me.

   Life was as smooth as streaming a youtube video advert free on kicked up wifi. Nice. As with any good story though, there must be a reality tearing, punch to the face it's so true realisation. It was the seventh of may, a beautiful... I was adopted. Sorry, That's the important part. I, Paul, had been adopted at a young age. I could't believe it. My mother and father were bewildered I had never caught on. They said it was "quite obvious" and found my melodramatic reaction somewhat confusing. They tried so hard to explain everything away "We're human, and… you are clearly a robot. Groovatron 2000 model to be more precise. It says so on the lower edge of your torso chassis!"

 Whatever. All these years I though I was just born with a sweet tatt. The ladies love a sweet tatt. But apparently the story of how I ended up where I am now is that some robocouple ordered me off of Ebay, but could't pay the shipping. I was sent back to the warehouse where there was some minor damage inflicted upon my groove modulator not covered by warranty. You know what else isn't covered by warranty? My GREAT sense of humour. In any case my price was slashed and I was gobbled up by my now Mum and Dad (I guess there was some truth to the story that babies are brought home by the FedEx guy). They unpacked me mint from the box, which only served to increase my value thank you, and I've been chillin mother flippin villain ever since.

   Until now that is.

   After this whole "We've only loved you for the past fifteen years because we got you for three easy instalments of $29.99" crap (my words, not theirs), I decided I needed a change. I promptly got on the first ride out of town and headed into the big city to find myself. Of course I didn't go alone. My bromo sapien Arthur was eager for an adventure. As fast as I could say "let's go" I got an enthusiastic "affirmative". And so we were off like the most hip bandits you can imagine. The beginning of great things lie ahead of us. The GREATEST things…

Societal Benefits of Extended Lifespan

   When the topic of extended lifespan comes up, many times the focus is on the negative impacts such a change would bring. Things like competition for already scarce resources, overpopulation, and an accumulation of power in the older, more powerful generations are some of the fodder used to justify that such a change towards indefinite lifespan would be less than savoury, especially for the masses. I would like to focus on the benefits such a change could bring, as well as adaptive behaviours that could come along with it. As an aside, when I say "extended lifespan" I mean extended in the healthful sense, wherein decrepitude is either put off or eliminated.

   To start, lifespan has already increased dramatically since prehistory, and particularly so in recent modern times. Some may argue that developments in medicine and sanitation are the key source of this increase, but I would say it's a positive feedback loop. As these developments allowed us to live longer, people had more time to put their minds to creating more beneficial technologies, which in turn allowed for a longer lifespan, etc. And the benefits have trickled down, I may add, at a faster and faster rate. Although the rich do benefit by affording themselves the very best there is to offer, many of us still have access to wonderful technologies. Within a few short years what was once only available to the rich soon becomes a staple of the average consumer. A greater increase in lifespan could be an enhancement on this process.

   Looking towards the future, a society that has already achieved life extending technologies will have some key beneficial changes. For one, with an extended lifespan people would feel less inclined to have children. Although many still most probably would, they may not consider it until they are very old in our current terms, perhaps only a couple per century. Such a slow in birth rates would lead to a much more manageable human population growth and allow responses to things like overpopulation to be dealt with well in advance. The "stretching" as it could be said, of a person accomplishing typical life goals (having children, buying a house, starting a career, etc.) could be beneficial to the education system as well. If a person has exponentially more time to spend learning, and trying new things, who knows what kind of innovations could follow, along with a more educated society in general. Just as an extended childhood has been advantageous for humans relative to other animals, an extended "childhood" relative to our current notions could hold unseen benefits.

   A society with a longer lifespan is also more likely to take proactive measures against future threats. Our current society is more reactive because many of the threats we are dealing with will not much affect our lives, or at least not for many years to come. If you knew for example, that the worst possible effects of climate change would have a direct impact on your life though, you would be much more willing to take action now. Although at it's base it seems selfish, this very behaviour could save humanity as a whole by allowing us the opportunity to think ahead and actually take measures in advance of serious catastrophes.

   It's always good to weigh the pros and cons of a new technology, and the promise and peril it brings with it. Our ability though to deal with the consequences of many technologies is enhanced by lifespan increases, not detracted from.

Peter Burns & the Jelly

 PB&J is the story of one young Peter Burns. Peter Burns, all of twelve years old, goes for a pleasant ocean swim one day with his close friends. Whilst partaking in frolics and the delights of the magnificent sea, a jellyfish did undulate his way, as they are wont to do. Neither grasped the consequences of this chance meeting. Just as they engaged in a caustic handshake of sorts the two were freaky fridayed by some errant wifi waves seeking a home.
 Peter Burns, once average boy, is now a genius among his new Jellyfish brethren, while the former jelly inhabitant struggles to control even the most basic functions of it's new found body. As Peter Burns now finds himself with all the time in the world, he reflects on his life, deep meaningful questions of existence, and continually invents and tests harebrained ways to attempt retrieving his body! Meanwhile, his friends do they're best to minimise the multiple ways the Jelly ignorantly threatens Peter Burns' social life and physical well being.

Ecology of Ideas

 We are currently living in a time that is unprecedented in the creation, sharing, and access to ideas. New ideas are constantly being produced by both individuals and groups alike. Some serve a purpose, others are dreams or fantasies, many are retoolings of old ideas in a fresh way, and more still are created just for the sake of existing. To me, I feel the era we are going through can be likened to a "Cambrian Explosion" of ideas. During the Cambrian Explosion in Earth's history life erupted into an unimaginable number of complex creatures which, over time and refining laid the foundation for the major domains and kingdoms of life, as well as early structures of modern ecosystems.
  This is directly relatable to the current trend we're seeing in the proliferation and rapid evolution of ideas right now. We've crossed a threshold wherein the complexity and diversity of ideas has increased dramatically along with their sheer volume. I would say we are in the process of creating an ecosystem where ideas compete for resources such as popularity, and create dynamic systems by interacting much like actual life forms. It will be interesting to see what the future holds. Will the growth go on unchecked? Or, will certain strings of ideas prove to dominate the landscape creating an interdependent system just like modern ecosystems found in nature?