But once you get chemicals arranged in self-replicating bundles, you've entered an entirely new regime: evolution by natural selection. Suddenly there's a process of cumulative change. Suddenly there's LEARNING.
-
Show this thread
-
This isn't geocentrism. Any life, anywhere in the universe, gets us out of the Age of Boredom. It's just, as far as we know (for now), life happened to arise in only one place, here on Earth.
1 reply 0 retweets 16 likesShow this thread -
So, here's our narrative: First, the Big Bang. Then 10 billion years of boredom (give or take). Then life! An explosion of learning! And 4 billion years later, here we are.
3 replies 1 retweet 23 likesShow this thread -
Now, what if we want to refine this picture? What if we allowed ourselves TWO events in our history of the universe? What's the second most important thing?
1 reply 1 retweet 11 likesShow this thread -
I know, there are many perspectives. But again, I think it's clear: humans are the next most important thing. And once again it comes down to learning. Before humans, all cumulative learning took place in genomes. But humans introduced an entirely new modality: culture.
2 replies 0 retweets 43 likesShow this thread -
Yes, brains can learn, and brains existed before humans. But brains die with their hosts, and all their hard-won knowledge has to be re-learned from scratch by the next generation.
1 reply 1 retweet 29 likesShow this thread -
Some animals pass knowledge from parents to children. But the carrying capacity of this "culture" is small and fixed. Humans were the first species with the ability to ACCUMULATE knowledge in culture, in an open-ended way.
1 reply 1 retweet 39 likesShow this thread -
So, again, our story: Big Bang. 10 billion years of boredom. Then life! And 4 billion years of natural selection. Then brains+culture! And a ~million years of cultural evolution later, with all of our farms and factories and computing devices, here we are.
1 reply 5 retweets 30 likesShow this thread -
If this view of history has merit, it suggests that the next truly transformative step will involve a new modality for cumulative learning. Is this AI? Machine learning? The answer is "definitely maybe." But we're certainly not there yet.
5 replies 1 retweet 35 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @KevinSimler
Actually, we've seen two further events at which the learning/growth rate increased as much as it did with the first human cultural learning: farming, and industry.
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes
Totally. I'm attempting to pull even farther back — but my vision gets blurry at this distance :). If you had to pick only two inflection points in all of history, what would they be?
-
-
Replying to @KevinSimler
I'm reacting to your suggestion that the next similar change is AI. We've already seen similar changes, and AI may not be a bigger step than these other ones.
0 replies 0 retweets 2 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.