Since resilience looks as if it's a function of node richness, the technosphere is almost certainly becoming more robust. ...
-
-
... No doubt a lot of catch-up before the technosphere reaches biosphere-level damage tolerance, but the trend is convergent.
3 replies 1 retweet 13 likes -
Exactly. And it's catching up fast. 60 years of early techno Evo equivalent to hundreds of millions years + of early bio Evo.
2 replies 0 retweets 6 likes -
Not near fast enough to attain escape velocity from declining human sentience.
3 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
And besides, even if / as human sentience declines on average pockets can still be networked + concentrated. Billions of African peasants are no use to AI except maybe as biofuel. Decline in avg human sentience may even drive dev of AI faster as creates an acc use value / demand
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Problem will be synthesizing all the myriad interdependencies that keep technological society humming along. Who will manufacture (let alone distribute) all the widgets of its complexity? The logistics of this are intense, and their prevailing networks are incredibly fragile.
1 reply 0 retweets 5 likes -
After a point, "technological society" is subsumed / superseded by informational / mechanic techonomic activity: "we" are no longer the story. The fragilities you highlight are merely transitory; while techo-Evo is less resilient than Bio-Evo atm it'll be cybernetics reinforced
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
But this a lot of handwaving about developments that are nowhere in sight. And the window of opportunity to usher them into being eclipses a little more everyday. 0/ACC is here & now.
2 replies 0 retweets 4 likes -
0/acc isn't evenly distributed yet and "progress" isn't necessary or even desirable on all fronts at once. In 60 years the pace of change / dev has been staggering. Historical perspective. Calling time on it now is just hand waving in the other direction.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Yet the 60 years preceding that (1900-1960) were even more staggering… 1840-1900, more staggering still. Rates of significant innovation have been in decline. Why? http://accelerating.org/articles/InnovationHuebnerTFSC2005.pdf …
2 replies 0 retweets 5 likes
McKibben, aka., The Anti-Puritan Retweeted McKibben, aka., The Anti-Puritan
@peterthiel theory: "government regulation stifles innovation"
My theory "all the low hanging fruit has been picked"https://twitter.com/AMK2934/status/989496480124682240 …
McKibben, aka., The Anti-Puritan added,
-
-
Replying to @AMK2934 @parallaxoptics and
I'm partial to Peter Thiel's angle. The stagnation is awful coincident with the rise of overbearing total-statism. And now the dysgenics facilitated by that are catching up too.
2 replies 0 retweets 4 likes -
A tiny geo-distributed minority, digitally coordinated + AI enhanced can do the digital-Evo for everyone else, in advance of the whole thing shifting to silicon based substrate if that doesn't spontaneously emerge first. Problems / dangers exist, but they are not our Gods.
0 replies 0 retweets 1 like
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.