Ray Kurzweil Predicts Technology Will End Nation States

 Countries Are Over

More to the point, humanity cannot afford nation states. Since 1900, between 260 – 280 million people have been murdered by nation state governments. This is simply not right.

Is AI The Worst Mistake In Human History?

 

By John Battelle    false

One of the most intriguing public discussions to emerge over the past year is humanity’s wrestling match with the threat and promise of artificial intelligence. AI has long lurked in our collective consciousness — negatively so, if we’re to take Hollywood movie plots as our guide — but its recent andvery real advances are driving critical conversations about the future not only of our economy, but of humanity’s very existence.

In May 2014, the world received a wakeup call from famed physicist Stephen Hawking. Together with three respected AI researchers, the world’s most renowned scientist warned that the commercially-driven creation of intelligent machines could be “potentially our worst mistake in history.” Comparing the impact of AI on humanity to the arrival of “a superior alien species,” Hawking and his co-authors found humanity’s current state of preparedness deeply wanting. “Although we are facing potentially the best or worst thing ever to happen to humanity,” they wrote, “little serious research is devoted to these issues outside small nonprofit institutes.”

That was two years ago. So where are we now?

Insofar as the tech industry is concerned, AI is already here, it’s just not evenly distributed. Which is to say, the titans of tech control most of it. Google has completely reorganized itself around AI and machine learning. IBM has done the same, declaring itself the leader in “cognitive computing.” Facebook is all in as well. The major tech players are locked in an escalating race for talent, paying as much for top AI researchers as NFL teams do for star quarterbacks.

This story is sent first to readers of NewCo’s new weekly newsletter, now read by thousands of smart folks just like yourself. Want to get it first? Subscribe free here.

Let’s review. Two years ago, the world’s smartest man said that ungoverned AI could well end humanity. Since then, most of the work in the field has been limited to a handful of extremely powerful for-profit companies locked in a competitive arms race. And that call for governance? A work in progress, to put it charitably. Not exactly the early plot lines we’d want, should we care to see things work out for humanity.

When it comes to managing the birth of a technology generally understood to be the most powerful force ever invented by humanity, exactly what kind of regulatory regime should prevail?

Which begs the question: When it comes to managing the birth of a technology generally understood to be the most powerful force ever invented by humanity, exactly what kind of regulation do we need?

Predictably, last week The Economist says we shouldn’t worry too much about it, because we’ve seen this movie before, in the transition to industrial society — and despite a couple of World Wars, that turned out alright. Move along, nothing to see here. But many of us have an uneasy sense that this time is different — it’s one thing to replace manual labor with machines and move up the ladder to a service and intellectual property-based economy. But what does an economy look like that’s based on the automation of service and intellect? The Economist’s extensive review of the field is worthy reading. But it left me unsettled.

“The idea that you can pull free physical work out of the ground, that was a really good trick.” That’s Max Ventilla, the former head of personalization for Google, who left the mothership to start the mission and data-driven education startup AltSchool. In an interview for an upcoming episode of ourShift Dialogs video series, Ventilla echoed The Economist’s take on the shift from manual labor to industrialized society and the rise of the fossil fuel economy. But he feels that this time, something’s different.

“Now we’re discovering how to pull free mental work out of the ground,” he told me. “(AI) is going to be a huge trick over the next 50 years. It’s going to create even more opportunity — and much more displacement.”

Hawking’s call to action singled out “an IT arms race fueled by unprecedented investments” by the world’s richest companies. A future in which super-intelligent AI is controlled by an elite group of massive tech firms is bound to make many of us uneasy. What if the well-intentioned missions of Google (organize the world’s information!) and Facebook (let people easily share!) are co-opted by a new generation of corporate bosses with less friendly goals?

As you might expect, the Valley has an answer: OpenAI. A uniquely technological antidote to the problem, OpenAI is led by an impressive cadre of Valley entrepreneurs, including Elon Musk, Sam Altman, Reid Hoffman, and Peter Thiel. But instead of creating yet another for-profit company with a moon-shot mission (protect humanity from evil AI!), their creation takes the form of a research lab with a decidedly nonprofit purpose: To corral breakthroughs in artificial intelligence and open them up to any and everyone, for free. The lab’s stated mission is “to advance digital intelligence in the way that is most likely to benefit humanity as a whole, unconstrained by a need to generate financial return.”

OpenAI has managed to convince a small but growing roster of AI researchers to spurn offers from Facebook, Google, and elsewhere, and instead work on what might best be seen as a public commons for AI. The whole endeavor has the whiff of the Manhattan Project — but without the government (or the secrecy). And instead of racing against the Nazis, the good guys are competing with … well, the Valley itself.

One really can’t blame the big tech companies for trying to win the AI arms race. Sure, there are extraordinary profits if they do, but in the end they really have no choice in the matter. If you’re a huge, data-driven software business, you either have cutting-edge AI driving your company’s products, or you’re out of business. Once Google uses AI to make its Photos product magical, Facebook has to respond in kind.

Smart photostreams are one thing. But if we don’t want market-bound, for-profit companies determining the future of superhuman intelligence, we need to be asking ourselves: What role should government play? What about universities? In truth, we probably haven’t invented the institutions capable of containing this new form of fire. “It’s a race between the growing power of the technology, and the growing wisdom we need to manage it,” said Max Tegmark, a founder of the Future of Life Institute, one of the small AI think tanks called out in Hawking’s original op-ed. Speaking to the Washington Post, Tegmark continued: “Right now, almost all the resources tend to go into growing the power of the tech.”

Who determines what is “good”? We are just now grappling with the very real possibility that we might create a force more powerful than ourselves. Now is the time to ask ourselves — how do we get ready?

It’s not clear if OpenAI is going to spend most of its time on building new kinds of AI, or if it will become something of an open-source clearing house for the creation of AI failsafes (the lab is doing early work in both). Regardless, it’s both comforting and a bit disconcerting to realize that the very same people who drive the Valley’s culture may also be responsible for reigning it in. Over the weekend, The New York Times op-ed pages took up the issue, noting AI’s “white guy problem” (it’s worth noting the author is a ( female researcher at Microsoft). Take a look at the founding team of OpenAI: A solid supermajority of white men.

“It’s hard to imagine anything more amazing and positively impactful than successfully creating AI,” writes Greg Brockman, the founding CTO of OpenAI. But he continues with a caveat: “So long as it’s done in a good way.”

Indeed. But who determines what is good? We are just now grappling with the very real possibility that we might create a force more powerful than ourselves. Now is the time to ask ourselves — how do we get ready?

Can a small set of top-level researchers in AI provide the intellectual, moral, and ethical compass for a technology that might well destroy — or liberate — the world? Or should we engage all stakeholders in such a decision — traditionally the role of government? Regardless of whether the government is involved in framing this question, it certainly will be involved in cleaning up the mess if we fail to plan properly.

Back when AI was in early development, its single most powerful critique was its “brittle” nature: it didn’t work because it failed to be aware of all possible inputs and parameters. Now that we stand on the brink of strong AI, we’d be wise to include a diversity of opinion — in particular those who live outside the Valley, those who don’t look and think like the Valley, and those who disagree with our native techno-optimism — in the debate about how we manage its impact.

 Source: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/ai-worst-mistake-human-history-john-battelle?trk=eml-b2_content_ecosystem_digest-hero-14-null&midToken=AQEdOM4OklaLkw&fromEmail=fromEmail&ut=0Eg8wNuushg7k1

The Structure of Collapse: 2016-2019

Charles Hugh Smith writing on his blog Of Two Minds:

The end-state of unsustainable systems is collapse. Though collapse may appear to be sudden and chaotic, we can discern key structures that guide the processes of collapse.

Though the subject is complex enough to justify an entire shelf of books, these six dynamics are sufficient to illuminate the inevitable collapse of the status quo.

1. Doing more of what has failed spectacularly. The leaders of the status quo inevitably keep doing more of what worked in the past, even when it no longer works. Indeed, the failure only increases the leadership’s push to new extremes of what has failed spectacularly. At some point, this single-minded pursuit of failed policies speeds the system’s collapse.

2. Emergency measures become permanent policies. The status quo’s leaders expect the system to right itself once emergency measures stabilize a crisis. But broken systems cannot right themselves, and so the leadership is forced to make temporary emergency measures (such as lowering interest rates to zero) permanent policy. This increases the fragility of the system, as any attempt to end the emergency measures triggers a system-threatening crisis.

3. Diminishing returns on status quo solutions. Back when the economic tree was loaded with low-hanging fruit, solutions such as lowering interest rates had a large multiplier effect. But as the tree is stripped of fruit, the returns on these solutions diminish to zero.

4. Declining social mobility. As the economic pie shrinks, the privileged maintain or increase their share, and the slice left to the disenfranchised shrinks. As the privileged take care of their own class, there are fewer slots open for talented outsiders. The status quo is slowly starved of talent and the ranks of those opposed to the status quo swell with those denied access to the top rungs of the social mobility ladder.

5. The social order loses cohesion and shared purpose as the social-economic classes pull apart. The top of the wealth/power pyramid no longer serves in the armed forces, and withdraws from contact with the lower classes. Lacking a unifying social purpose, each class pursues its self-interests to the detriment of the nation and society as a whole.

6. Strapped for cash as tax revenues decline, the state borrows more money and devalues its currency as a means of maintaining the illusion that it can fulfill all its promises. As the purchasing power of the currency declines, people lose faith in the state’s currency. Once faith is lost, the value of the currency declines rapidly and the state’s insolvency is revealed.

Each of these dynamics is easily visible in the global status quo.

As an example of doing more of what has failed spectacularly, consider how financialization inevitably inflates speculative bubbles, which eventually crash with devastating consequences. But since the status quo is dependent on financialization for its income, the only possible response is to increase debt and speculation—the causes of the bubble and its collapse—to inflate another bubble. In other words, do more of what failed spectacularly.

This process of doing more of what failed spectacularly appears sustainable for a time, but this superficial success masks the underlying dynamic of diminishing returns: each reflation of the failed system requires greater commitments of capital and debt. Financialization is pushed to new unprecedented extremes, as nothing less will generate the desired bubble.

 Rising costs narrow the maneuvering room left to system managers. The central bank’s suppression of interest rates is an example. As the economy falters, central banks lower interest rates and increase the credit available to the financial system.

This stimulus works well in the first downturn, but less well in the second and not at all in the third, for the simple reason that interest rates have been dropped to zero and credit has been increased to near-infinite.

The last desperate push to do more of what failed spectacularly is for central banks to lower interest rates to below-zero: it costs depositors money to leave their cash in the bank. This last-ditch policy is now firmly entrenched in Europe, and many expect it to spread around the world as central banks have exhausted less extreme policies.

The status quo’s primary imperative is self-preservation, and this imperative drives the falsification of data to sell the public on the idea that prosperity is still rising and the elites are doing an excellent job of managing the economy.

Since real reform would threaten those at the top of the wealth/power pyramid, fake reforms and fake economic data become the order of the day.

Leaders face a no-win dilemma: any change of course will crash the system, but maintaining the current course will also crash the system.

Welcome to 2016-2019.

Source: http://www.oftwominds.com/blogjune16/collapse6-16.html

The power of population

Bernard Salt, Partner with KPMG writes:

The power of population
Australia is growing three times faster than China. That’s good for the economy.
The Australian economy may well be suffering from cut-backs in mining and manufacturing activity but this nation has a secret weapon. Our building and construction sector is underpinned by close to record rates of growth in population. The rise in numbers is depicted in our latest demographics infographic. It shows growth of close to 390,000 people per annum, up from around 220,000 per annum about a decade earlier.Australia's projected population and Australia's projected households
Australia’s projected population and Australia’s projected households
Based on these rates, Australia’s population is estimated to increase by 4.2 million people over the next decade. That means we are growing even faster than India and the United States, and three times faster than China.

Bernard Salt“Australia’s elevated and internationally significant rate of population growth will drive the demand for housing.” ~ Bernard Salt Partner in Charge, Demographics

People = jobs
Australia’s elevated and internationally significant rate of population growth will drive the demand for housing, for household formation and for housing finance. That translates into more jobs.

The capital cities are particularly well placed in this regard. Melbourne, Sydney and Perth have been all experiencing rapid expansion, their growth running at close to record rates.

In the year 2012-2013, Melbourne’s population jumped up by 95,000, with Sydney close behind at 81,000. Perth also saw a dramatic increase of 67,000 – although more recent data suggests that growth rates are slowing in the West.Fastest growing large cities 2012-2013
It is not surprising then that Sydney remains this nation’s biggest city with 4.8 million residents. It is followed closely by the faster-growing Melbourne at 4.3 million then Brisbane at 2.2 million.

Looking beyond our capitals
Yet our capital cities aren’t the whole story. In fact the biggest single market on the Australian continent is what might be termed the ‘Koala Conurbation’ with 5.5 million people connecting Sydney with Newcastle and Wollongong.

Melbourne-Geelong is also a heavy weight with 4.5 million people while South East Queensland – linking Brisbane, the Gold Coast, the Sunshine Coast and Toowoomba – packs some punch at 3.2 million. Perth tops out at barely 2 million.

The city vs suburbia
Our building and construction picture is more nuanced too. Building hotspots tell the two stories of Australia’s housing preferences: the inner city and suburbia.

Our figures show the top five spots for new residential housing unit approvals are relatively balanced between the city centres and inner city – such as the City of Melbourne and Sydney’s Mascot-Eastlakes – and the edge of suburbia in places like Perth’s Baldivis and Yanchep.

This may reflect the fact that families continue to dominate Australia’s households. While singles make up about a quarter of all households, families still lead at one in three.

Relying on our immigrants
Ultimately, Australia’s economic prospects could well depend on immigration trends however – that is, if our tremendous growth rates are indeed our secret weapon.

In 2014, the first three quarters showed almost two-thirds of the country’s population growth came from net overseas migration. This shift is particularly significant when compared to around half over the previous four decades.

As long as immigration levels remain elevated, it may be that Australia has at least one sure-fire driver of demand for jobs.

Source: http://www.kpmg.com/au/en/beyond/new-thinking/pages/demographics-australia-population.aspx

An apocalyptic vision of Singapore

Roland Cheo writing for The Strait Times

Too hot for habitation, Singapore in 2065 houses its people in cooled caverns underground, who connect via virtual media, not face to face.

Imagine the year 2065, when you mention “Singapore,” you no longer refer to an island but a Corporation. Singapore Incorporated runs several suburbs in northern India and China, populated by a diaspora that had abandoned the island founded by Raffles.

With the rising sea level and temperatures bearing down at almost 40 deg C due to climate change, the island is now 202 sq km, whose reclaimed land has long been swallowed by the sea and is often buffeted by tsunami-like waves.

What was once a bustling city with towering skyscrapers now stands empty, as a testimony of a bygone era, while the majority of the mobile labour force have since abandoned the city and moved to satellite towns operated by Singapore Inc in the more temperate countries. Those who could not leave the island to better climes had retreated underground.

Only 30 per cent of the population of Singaporeans still live on the island, albeit underground. These are the ones without the resources to relocate to better suburbs of Singapore Inc in the more temperate countries.

Subsidised air-conditioned Housing Board flats dominate the landscape of quarried pits under central Singapore island, illuminated by industrial strength LED lights, leaving residents to view a perpetual night silhouette of the city.

Manufacturing and service industries in Singapore are kept to a bare minimum since the now-defunct Copenhagen Agreement, and then the new Melbourne Initiative, has cut global emissions by almost five times the levels that they were in 2010.

Not many residents of the island actually live topside, exposed to the natural elements. In fact, hardly anyone actually ventures above ground. The heat is unbearable and only a small pocket of residents, collectively known as Faith Spacers, are willing to live in areas around Seletar Reservoir, occupying what was once the Teachers’ Quarters in Seletar Airbase.

Besides the poor, of those who have chosen to remain on the island are the intelligentsia who reside in the research institutions, primarily at the National University of Singapore and Nanyang Technological University.

The other private institutions have moved away to other more landlocked locales. These institutions are no longer comprehensive universities but are instead part of a larger network of schools that have pooled resources across the world in order to conduct online courses. Since no one attends lectures any more, everything is experienced virtually in one’s own home.

Seventy per cent of the population live in satellite towns in India and China, where the climate is relatively comfortable. The Singapore Government wisely leased several large pockets of lands in relatively colder areas, away from the main cities in India and China in the 2030s.

These areas were relatively undeveloped at the time and the Chinese and Indian governments were more than happy to lease the areas to be developed by Singapore Inc.

By the time temperatures started to soar in the 2020s, many of these satellite towns had already developed the infrastructure that allowed Singaporeans and, later, foreign talent to live in a temperate and efficiently run suburb of Singapore Inc. Jurong Town Corporation developed the land while the Immigration Authority managed the inflows and outflows of migrants in order to maintain the growth rates of the cities.

The global repercussions of climate change have also been felt all over the world. The driver of the world economy is no longer the US, whose unbearable temperatures have seen many migrate over to Canada, leaving the balance of power to reside more and more in the hands of northern territories.

The northern part of China and Russia, as well as Nordic countries, now supply most of the world’s needed agricultural products while countries in the tropics, such as in South-east Asia as well as India and Africa, are the world’s suppliers of solar energy. These countries are tapped into a worldwide grid which sells its energy supply to a central depository, which in turn resells it to the rest of the world. Imagine that the United Nations is now headquartered in Iceland.

The knowledge economy has fizzled away like discarded old oyster sauce, fermented by its own infertile imagination clinging to the past: a focus on mobile devices or the push towards more computing power. In its wake came the virtual economy. In the early 2000s, Singapore had opened its doors to animation companies, especially companies working on 3D technologies with the goal of supplying the movie industry. However in the 2020s, with the rising temperatures also came the emergence of new strains of viruses in the vein of Ebola and Sars, which created widespread pandemics. Policymakers around the world closed their borders to travellers, concerned with the spread of these deadly diseases.

In fact, even within local populations, new laws were enacted to enable one to minimise contact with fellow human beings. Social laws were passed which made gatherings of more than 10 people in one room illegal. Soon the closed-door policy resulted in the movie industry collapsing. In today’s world one has to go through a complicated set of protocols in order to organise a gathering.

The authorities have the right to forcibly incarcerate anyone suspected of harbouring a deadly disease. Those suspected of being bioterrorists are cryogenically incarcerated before they are shipped to holding tanks on prison ships which are fully automatised and run remotely by human operators in Singapore Inc’s headquarters in Gansu, China. Singapore Inc runs some of the world’s largest ship prisons.

Technology companies then scrambled to meet a new demand: the demand for social interactions without needing face-to-face interaction. Temasek Holdings rushed into the forefront, relocating promising tech companies to the island of Singapore where they provided these companies state-of-the-art facilities in underground caverns, which were modelled after the New York skyline. Artificial lighting and green spaces using lichens and mosses were expertly interwoven into the very fabric of underground living. With full artistic licence given to these companies, Singapore then became the leading nation to export liveable realities.

This mass commercialisation of exported experiences resulted in Singapore coming to the forefront of the global demand for entertainment. Singapore levied a high corporate tax rate in particular on this industry, in exchange for maintaining the underground city and providing 24/7 services to the tech companies.

In spite of these social improvements, Faith Spacers choose to disregard the safety protocols. They have chosen to remain on the main island where they meet in groups beyond the stipulated 10.

They refuse all contact with wearable technology but instead actively seek outdoor activities in teams. They restore antiquated bicycles and use them to traverse the island, establishing new outposts called Faith Spaces, where they encourage face-to-face contact. They describe it as a religious experience: the personal connection with people, without the use of technology.

This counterculture is currently an annoyance to the safety of the majority of the populace; however, since they have chosen to bypass the general public, the authorities turned a blind eye, as they continue to remain a small minority.

• The writer is an associate professor at the Centre for Economic Research in Shandong University, China.

Source: http://www.straitstimes.com/opinion/an-apocalyptic-vision-of-singapore

A quarter of the world’s population will live in Africa by 2050

Lily Kuo writing for Quartz Africa

As of mid-2015, the world’s population stands at 7.3 billion (pdf), according to a new estimate by the United Nations. Over half of the world lives in Asia and a little under a fifth live in Africa.

But in 35 years, that picture will look radically different. Between now and 2050, over half of the global population growth will take place in Africa, with the continent adding 1.3 billion people, compared with Asia’s 0.9 billion. Thus, by 2050, Africa’s share of the global population will reach 25%, as Asia’s share falls to 54%.

atlas_V1Hn0kX5@2x

Here’s where most of global growth came from so far this decade:

atlas_EJpF_1Xq@2x

 And this is where the majority of growth will come from in a similar period 30 years from now:
atlas_VJCe51Qc@2x(3)
As you can see, Nigeria is expected to top the list. The West African country is expected to surpass the size of the United States by 2050 with its population more than doubling from today to reach almost 400 million.

As a result, Nigeria could enjoy the so-called “demographic dividend,” provided that there are enough jobs to absorb the working-age population and sufficient investment in young people’s development, the UN notes. According to the last poverty survey released in 2012 by the government, some 61% of Nigerians lived on less than a dollar a day in 2010.

Sub-Sahara Africa’s population boom is one of the main reasons for optimism about the continent’s economic growth potential. But that doesn’t come without major challenges. Forty-eight countries classified by the UN as “least developed countries” are expected to double in population size by 2050; 33 countries, most of them falling within this category, will triple in size by 2100. The UN details a long list of challenges governments will face as populations expand:

The concentration of population growth in the poorest countries will make it harder for those governments to eradicate poverty and inequality, combat hunger and malnutrition, expand education enrollment and health systems… and implement other elements of a sustainable development agenda to ensure that no-one is left behind.

Source: http://qz.com/467755/a-quarter-of-the-worlds-population-will-live-in-africa-by-2050/

The Rise of Medical Tourism

Rise of Medical TourismComparative advantages between countries creates opportunities for sick people needing treatment. In many government run health care systems it can be cheaper to travel to another country and be treated there. You jump the waiting queue and the costs are much more affordable where you are required to pay some or all of the cost.

Traveling from the USA to Mexico for treatments such as dental care and other small procedures is well known. Thailand is well known as a Medical Tourist destination with excellent facilities and extremely cost effective. Singapore is well known as a destination for advanced procedures for wealthy Indonesians and Africans.

As more government run healthcare systems become bogged down by regulation, burgeoning costs, under-resourcing and underfunding, even governments will see Medical Tourism as a partial solution to their problems. A health insurance provider will examine the local cost to perform say, a hip replacement or heart bypass surgery) and offer their insured the choice – stay and wait for the surgery or take you and your partner on an all expenses holiday (airfares, hotel, hospital & surgery and recovery time) to Thailand, Mexico or India.

For government they relieve political pressure as it gets the waiting lists reduced, saves money and frees up the healthcare system. It introduces competition for medical services that helps to put a brake on healthcare costs, especially for doctors fees. For consumers, you get immediate attention to your health issue, a holiday (with or without your partner) and reduce your out of pocket expenses.

All that’s needed now is for doctors, politicians and bureaucrats is to let go of their hubris and ensure the requisite healthcare standards are in place so people can become medical tourists. Easy!

Yanis Reveals EU Denial of Any Right of the People to Vote

Varoufakis Yanis

Greece’s Finance Minister Yanis Varoufakis has come out to reveal the quite shocking and anti-democratic events that took place during the last Eurogroup meeting. First, they do hate Yanis’ guts, for he understands far more about the economy than anyone in Brussels. At their demand, any further discussions will be without him. What led to the EU breaking off was exactly what we reported previously — they do not want any member state to EVER allow the people to vote on the euro. Brussels has become a DICTATORSHIP and is so arrogant without any just cause, believing that they know better than the people.

We are watching the total collapse of Democracy and the birth of a new era — Economic Totalitarianism from arrogant people who are totally clueless beyond their own greed for power and money.

Source: http://www.armstrongeconomics.com/archives/34115

Editor Note: Greece is the end of the beginning for the EZ and the beginning of a long period of political, social and economic instability that co-incides with the topping phase of the upward phase of the Industrial Revolution cycle that began in 1783-85.

Canada Legalizes Physician-Assisted Dying

In February 2015, Canada legalized physician-assisted dying — a first among countries with common-law systems, in which law is often developed by judges through case decisions and precedent. The Supreme Court of Canada issued the decision in Carter v. Canada

Read the full article here: http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp1502442

The judgment portends changes outside Canada. Imitation is a feature of the common-law world, and if physician-assisted dying is litigated in England, India, or South Africa, for example, odds are high that judges would draw on the Canadian Court’s reasoning. Societies are also changing, and in coming decades aging populations with growing affluence and incidence of chronic illness will increasingly question the medical and legal orthodoxies regarding the end of life. Given the flow of legal ideas and shifting demographics, change and convergence around physician-assisted dying as a standard of care seem inevitable.

These developments will trouble people who instinctively find legalized physician-assisted dying repellent. But increasingly, society is acknowledging that denying people the right to die with dignity and safety is even more repellent.

Editor’s Note: This is in line with our prediction that euthanasia will become commonplace in liberal-democratic nations around the world. Our prediction remains on track and we should see euthanasia being mainstream by 2025.

Of greater concern is the risk that failing governments will cause a rise in “iatrogenic-induced deaths” as the continued breakdown of societies accelerates.

Six Game Changers in Six Years

In no set order:

  1. Solar costs are set to drop with new technologies and manufacturing techniques. This will  impact on the energy industry with relief of burden on coal, oil and gas sources of energy and their resultant impact on the environment. There will still be a need for electricity utilities but their role will be reduced.
  2. Online education is already making rapid inroads into traditional education processes .at university and school levels. For government this is extremely challenging as technology is rapidly ripping central control away and placing it firmly in the hands of the consumer. Education costs will decline and we will witness the old institutions crumble in the face of emerging competition and new delivery methods.
  3. Blockchain based technologies will make a huge impact on decentralizing and revolutionizing the way transactions in banking, finance and law happen. Not to mention computer programming, scientific research and communications. Blockchain technology came to public awareness with the emergence of Bitcoin. Its roots extend however from cryptography – the science of coding and decoding messages for the purposes of privacy.
  4. Climate change will not be a social or political issue in the minds of the public within 5 years. That’s not to say that change does not need to happen – a lot still needs to change to improve the quality of environment and human and planetary sustainability. Emerging technologies will help a lot and education of people in the way they treat their environment will result in significant environmental improvement even in the next 6 years.
  5. A digital healthcare revolution is commencing now where people will soon be able to monitor their own health and respond as needed. New technologies controlled from a smart phone will be able to monitor all major health aspects including ‘wet’ analysis of blood, heart, breath, urine and other sampling tests. If results warrant, your device will be able to recommend various responses including taking yourself to hospital if required or calling an ambulance in extreme cases. Once again competition and technology are making old modes of doing things irrelevant. Often these shifts are occurring where government has taken over an industry and underfunding and lack of adaption have made the industry inefficient and ineffective.
  6. The coming global depression lasting 8 to 13 years commencing anytime between now and 2018. The coming together of many factors including the level of indebtedness of liberal democratic countries, aging demographics, the inability of global economic growth to accelerate and the crushing level of regulation facing most societies. Cyclically we are also witnessing the peaking of a cycle that spans the massive growth of the west – the Industrial Revolution. As this cycle peaks after some 230 years of growth so we enter the down phase of the cycle in which contraction and liquidation of all the dead wood of that growth phase gets swept away. Thus the path is cleared allowing the birth of a new phase of human growth and development. These cycles occur at many different levels of human existence –  at the individual, societal, ethnic and nation state levels.

The Rise of Modern Eugenics

By Peter Twigg
One of the most thrilling and terrifying prospects in the 21st century is the ascendency of medical technology combined with the political ideology of progressivism multiplied by consumer demand.

Yes to the ability to control and defeat many kinds of illnesses, to extend quality of life and life itself. New emerging medical technologies including genomic technologies will allow scientists to read organism genomes faster than ever before and also write more complex changes into those genomes, creating organisms with new capabilities. And no to the merger of state driven progressive policy mating with the new sciences. Consumers will demand gene engineering so that their children may be smarter, more athletic and more beautiful as well along with the vast healing potential genomic therapies offer the sick and the aging.

It’s been tried before of course. It was called ‘Eugenics’ and was practiced in America, Germany and Sweden in the 1930’s and 40’s. The practice of eugenics was first recorded at the time of Ancient Sparta when unfit and undesirable children were killed at birth. Selective breeding, military training and excellence allowed Sparta to become the dominant military power. A simple Wikipedia definition defines Eugenics from the Greek εὐγενής eugenes, meaning “well-born” from εὖ eu, “good, well” and γένος genos, “race”). It is the belief and practice of improving the genetic quality of the human population.

Sanctioned at government levels, it was the progressive attitude and justification used to promote mass sterilization, institutionalization, social segregation and infanticide. The term eugenics fell out of favour in light of the Nazi abuses. The fact is that it still plays a role in both science and government policy as it ever did. Only the names have changed.

Instead of “eugenics” and “racial hygiene,” the scientific community now promotes “social biology” and “sociobiology.” “Deficient” genes now replace the term “inferior” genes. “Family planning” now replaces “abortion” and “sterilization.” Eugenics was misapplied disastrously in the 1930s and 1940s. Eugenics programs were often race-based, as opposed to being simply based on “inferior genetics” across the board.

Juan Enriquez, a writer, investor, and managing director of Excel Venture Management speaking at Technology Review’s EmTech conference this year, says our newfound ability to write the code of life will profoundly change the world as we know it. Because we can engineer our environment and ourselves, humanity is moving beyond the constraints of Darwinian evolution. The result, he says, may be an entirely new species.

Enriquez proposes a new human species is one that begins to engineer the evolution of viruses, plants, animals, and itself. As we do that, Darwin’s rules get significantly bent, and sometimes even broken. By taking direct and deliberate control over our evolution, we are living in a world where we are modifying stuff according to our desires.

Considering the fact that Enriquez is in favour of the creation of a “new ethics,” this statement alone, if his philosophy gains any traction, is quite a concern. Although improved in terms of implementation and public perception, we have seen this system before and, unfortunately, what Juan Enriquez labels a “new ethics” is not very new at all.

In light of the increase in propaganda masquerading as science and being peddled by scientists, there is no doubt the world’s population is being prepped for a eugenics-based future. This time the system will be assisted by a much more sophisticated technological machine, and thus, a much more efficient system of eugenics. After years of non-stop television, media repetition, and “experts” who tout the benefits of merging man and machine, as well as the cost of inheriting “inferior” genes, there is little doubt that the world’s population will march into this future willingly.

What is clear is the new technology, as it emerges, will change virtually everything in society as we know it – economically, socially, morally and politically. In fact a new human species, able to engineer viruses, plants, animals and itself. A new world order indeed.

Just as it lacked an ethical and moral framework in the 30’s and 40’s, ethicists and scientists are a long way from being able to put such a framework into effect. And of course the scientists innovating this new technology will want to appoint themselves as the ‘Gene Kings’, the arbiter of the technology, prices and who should be able to receive this technology. Yet, the demands of consumers for new solutions to age old problems, the push of new technologies offering unrivaled solutions makes this a much coveted prize for humanity.

For governments it also means answers to many of the pressing social and economic issues created by burgeoning populations. Governments continue to sponsor and promote eugenics as a means of solving many of the world’s problems. Demographics, food production, healthcare provision can all be controlled from a eugenics standpoint.

Politics in the 20th and 21st centuries is a progressive affair. The illusion of left and right, capitalism, liberalism etc, has been eviscerated systematically over the last 100 years.

Progressivism is the ideology where democratic government intervention is presumed to produce a better result than a voluntary society. It is an ideology with no basis in fact or logic. Despite its growing impact on social and economic policy, progressivism is all about those in power enjoying the rewards of position and power.

Progressivism is a form of utopianism where government laws and social conditions are perfect and beyond realisation. One consequence of utopianism is ruthlessness. This explains the racial hygiene of Nazism and why many progressive politicians exhibit ruthlessness as they push to achieve a utopian state of affairs. What ‘higher ideal’ than to do away with disease and to create a ‘heaven on earth’. The utopian element of progressivism however lends itself towards totalitarianism – the total state backed by the ultimate moral sanction of solving all human problems through the power (read force) of the state.

Every generation will bring upgrades as genomic technology improves and the “problems” resolved, much like computers today receive software upgrades every month or so. The process of getting it right will necessarily bring about many failures but as explained in the fervor of consumer demand and the progressive government push towards a utopian ideal these will be mere unintended consequences and a price worth paying.

There will be political abuses in achieving the aims of the state. Racial profiling will determine who will be eligible for gene therapies and who will not. People will be licensed according to their genes whether they are eligible to breed or not. People with congenital defects will simply not be allowed to reproduce with all the social, economic, medical and legal pressure applied by government to enforce compliance.

Government may even hold up a utopian ideal of a ‘one human race’ where all differences are bred out, thus offering the prospect of eliminating racial bigotry and the cause of so much human suffering through history. At the same time a one human race species destroys human bio-diversity and the ability of the human species to adapt and survive in the face of new challenges. Ooops! Even if humanity survived such challenges, Darwinism would also be finished and control would now reside with the hubristic politicians and scientists who mastermind the great human genome re-engineering.

You can be sure that, gene therapies will create a new genre of super corporations with their attendant level of political and economic influence arising from the control of such technology. These elite corporations along with political leaders will be able to affect greater government intervention and control to execute their progressive utopian ideal.

In an extreme social scenario of totalitarianism taken to extremes the potential to develop human sub classes – drones (slaves), elites, and soldier classes become some ‘Hunger Games’ style existence.

So we can conclude by saying the technology will happen and its impact on humanity and societies will be vast and in-calculable. As part of the process, despite the best attempts to get a moral and ethical framework that is sturdy enough to curb the level of abuse, the fact remains, there will be abuse by governments and consumers. Fortunes will be made. The rewards will prove to be equally amazing as many diseases will be eliminated, life extended and human potential enhanced.

The unintended consequences of the technology will also be vast in its consequences and reach into every facet of human endeavor. But consumers will demand modern eugenics, governments will mandate and exercise force in achieving it and humanity will plunge forward headlong into incredible change and growth. The way we view the world, people and our destiny is getting ready to change.

Sources:
Web article: Google: 20141025: nazi eugenics: The Horrifying American Roots of Nazi Eugenics http://historynewsnetwork.org/article/1796
Web article: Google: 20141025: eugenics: http://www.technologyreview.com/news/425804/emtech-get-ready-for-a-new-human-species/

© Pointmen Pte Ltd 2011-2015

Proprietary Rights Notice: By reading a copy of this essay, you acknowledge and agree as follows: This essay is provided to you only for your personal, non-commercial use. This essay does not constitute advice. Except as expressly authorized by Pointmen Pte Ltd (PPL), you may not copy, reproduce, transmit, sell, display, distribute, publish, broadcast, circulate, modify, disseminate or commercially exploit the information contained in this report, in printed, electronic or any other form, in any manner, without the prior express written consent of PPL. You also agree not to use the information provided in this report for any unlawful purpose. This essay and its contents are the property of PPL and are protected by applicable copyright, trade secret or other intellectual property laws.

Hope for Humankind

Eugenics – the Emissaries of Death to Engineer Your Future

Eugenics – the Emissaries of Death to Engineer Your Future

By Sergey Baranov Guest Writer for Wake Up World

There is no putting the genie back into the bottle!

‘’Genetically engineering ‘ethical’ babies is a moral obligation, says Oxford professor’’

‘’Genetically screening our offspring to make them better people is just ‘responsible parenting’, claims an eminent Oxford academic’’

‘’By screening in and screening out certain genes in the embryos, it should be possible to influence how a child turns out’’

“If we have the power to intervene in the nature of our offspring — rather than consigning them to the natural lottery — then we should.”

“Whether we like it or not, the future of humanity is in our hands now. Rather than fearing genetics, we should embrace it. We can do better than chance.”(1)

Well, apparently, to me as a father, responsible parenting means something completely different from what it obviously means to an Oxford professor.

I’m glad I’m not a part of an academic establishment and my life does not depend on government grants. Thus, being a free thinker, I would rather say that genetically modified babies would mean the end of humanity as we know it.

I’m sure you are familiar with the term ‘’Eugenics’’, but just in case you aren’t, here is a brief overview.

What is Eugenics?

Eugenics is the bio-social movement which advocates practices to improve the genetic heritage of human species. It’s aimed to produce a more ‘’desirable’’ people thus, allegedly, improving the human race.

It began with Sir Francis Galton, a pioneer of eugenics who gave it a name in 1883. During the first decade of the 20th century, eugenics grew into a social movement and became an academic discipline. Galton was inspired by the work of his cousin Charles Darwin and his theory of evolution. But even though Darwin’s theory of survival of the fittest had a natural way of selection, Galton took it a step further and proposed selection by force. That has resulted in eugenics policies and programs like compulsory sterilization, birth control, marriage restrictions, racial segregation and forced abortions gone wild.

When the eugenics mindset was adapted by Hitler, who was obsessed with the idea of racial superiority and the Aryan race while inspired by the eugenics philosophy, genocide followed. His obsession resulted in the loss of millions of innocent lives. Certain ethnic groups were declared inferior and thus not worthy of living. The holocaust was one of the expressions of this sick mentality also known as racism.

Considering the historical facts, it would be nearly impossible to believe in eugenicists’ altruism. If the hijackers of science would have humanity’s best interest at heart, they would use it to improve life on Earth for everyone, not only for themselves. They would use science to tackle diseases, famine and poverty rather than targeting those who are affected by such calamities.

Deeming people unworthy of living and seen as unfit is the true face of the eugenic elite to which we the people are simply ‘’useless eaters’’ who need a gene hygiene.

Quite recently we saw a worldwide protest against Monsanto, whose genetically modified organisms, which some people call ‘’food’’, are posing a serious threat to our health and environment. (2) It would be bad enough if we would only see GM corn or soy beans on our menu. (3) But things have progressed much further. Genetically modified fish is now threatening to disrupt and distort the whole ecosystem. (4)

As the information is breaking loose and people are becoming more conscious and aware of the danger of genetically modified organisms released into the environment and causing all kinds of health problems including tumors and organ failure as the recent studies suggest (5), the corporate heads came up with ‘’solution’’. When our organs will fail due to the consumption of Frankenfood, we will be able to replace them with new ones, grown for us in pigs! Pigs, they say, are almost our relatives! (6)

Here is what they say: ‘’Next to apes, pigs are pretty good matches for humans, physiologically speaking‘’.

Well, when I look at pigs, I don’t see anything in common with humans, not physiologically, not emotionally, not mentally and most definitely not spiritually. The only thing we share in common is a desire to live – one feature seen among all living beings on Earth, which is hardly noticed by science, much less by the proponents of eugenics.

So they’ve got us covered! Like the food and pharmaceutical industries. One is damaging our health, another is selling us drugs to repair the damage, or shall we say to suppress the symptoms? But I digress. The point being is that if we think that Frankenfood is the peak of the madness, we should think about Frankensteins coming from the labs! (7)

Among other things, Dwight Eisenhower, the 34th President of the United States has warned us that:

“The prospect of domination of the nation’s scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present and is gravely to be regarded. Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of scientific technological elite.” ~ Dwight Eisenhower (8) 

Is it not what we are witnessing today?

How much bigger should be our outrage when we learn about scientific proposals to genetically modify our kids? And this modification is only a beginning. Human-animal hybrids are already on the way! (9)

Don’t we realize that monsters are coming and human rights would likely be claimed by these new life-forms? So far as a society we can’t even protect the rights of humans, let alone clones. It’s also important to remember that the State will be the legal parent of these creatures. Just think about the implications!

What will happen to the human race, when it begins marrying and mixing with lab made human-animal hybrids? Do we realize that this scientific nightmare will not end soon after we devour our popcorn while watching a sci-fi movie on the big screen?

How can we trust the scientists to mess with human DNA when only 3% of it is understood? The rest of it they have declared to be a ‘’DNA junk’’ – a label given to 97% of human DNA which function has not yet been identified.

Some scientists are saying that ‘’junk DNA has little specificity and conveys little or no selective advantage to the organism”.  However, there are others, who went even further by claiming that non-coding (junk) DNA was “selfish” and even detrimental since it was parasitic. In other words, that which hasn’t been understood by science is dismissed as invalid, declared as void and even deemed as harmful!

And these are the folks who are playing God?

In his article, oxford Professor Julian Savulescu, has made an attempt to separate himself from the eugenics movement by saying that people would have a choice:

‘’unlike the eugenics movements, which fell out of favour when it was adopted by the Nazis, the system would be voluntary and allow parents to choose the characteristics of their children.’’

But what choice do we have now that makes us think that more of it we’ll have in the future? Gorge Carlin has put it best…

George Carlin – The Illusion of Choice

George Carlin: The Illusion Of Choice

As we moving towards totalitarianism as a human society, it isn’t difficult to picture a future in which birth licenses would be issued and a mandatory embryo screening required, obligating the parents to do all necessary genetic modifications ‘’advised’’ by the medical doctors. There is already talk about whether the doctor should be able to override the parents:

‘’If the doctor feels that the parents’ decision is being made in unreasonable manner, he should be able to go to some other body with the authority to override the parents. I don’t think it should be just the doctor. A hospital ethics committee is better than a court, but a court is also a possibility’, proposes Peter Singer. (10)

So it well can be that like the one child policy in China, we soon will see a “no child policy unless genetically screened and modified”. In other words it would simply mean that no one would be allowed to have children unless approved by the government which will make it illegal to do it any other way. History is full of those examples.Among other states which implemented eugenics programs in the early 20th century, were North Carolina, which implemented it the longest, from 1929 to 1974 thousands of black and poor women were “persuaded” by the state and forced by other means to be sterilized. (11)

And as Mark Twain said: ‘’history rhymes’’ (meaning that history repeats itself), and we should be concerned about it.

In his speech the professor admits that ‘’by screening in and screening out certain genes in the embryos, it should be possible to influence how a child turns out. In the end, he said that “rational design” would help lead to a better, more intelligent and less violent society in the future.’’

But considering the fact that the ruling class is authoritarian and eugenics at heart, it’s highly unlikely that people will have any choice.

I wonder if I have to point out the likelihood of future generations being engineered as docile, obedient and apathetic at birth, guaranteeing that the status quo remains unchallenged. These clones would hardly have anything human other than human tissues. They would be artificial creatures devoid of humanness. I think the best way to understand this matter is to read Brave New World by Aldous Huxley or watch it here:

Brave New World (Full Version)

Brave New World(1980)-Full Length Movie.mp4

His brilliant work is the best testimony for what is coming if both mad scientists and the control freaks behind them are not stopped.

Bertrand Russell made a curious statement in ‘’The Impact of Science on Society’’ in 1951: “Diet, injections, and injunctions will combine, from a very early age, to produce the sort of character and the sort of beliefs that the authorities consider desirable, and any serious criticism of the powers that be will become psychologically impossible. Even if all are miserable, all will believe themselves happy, because the government will tell them that they are so.”

Do Russell’s words sound any different than those of the Oxford professor? The only difference I see is in the methods of achieving the same exact goal.

Why not to leave us alone and let us, parents, to decide for ourselves what’s ethical and what are our moral obligations?

Often we see how evil is done in the name of the good, like the wars in Libya, Syria and Iraq, all has been sold to us as being ‘’humanitarian’’ missions rescuing people by delivering them democracy packed in the ‘’peace’’ bombs which are then kindly dropped on their heads for the sake of their freedom. It seems to me that same exactly pattern is re-appearing here — breeding us out of existence for our own good by using medical science for political gain.

After all, we are just a commodity. (12)

George Carlin on Freedom of Choice

George Carlin on Freedom of Choice

Source: http://wakeup-world.com/2014/10/19/eugenics-the-emissaries-of-death-to-engineer-your-future/

 

Books and longreading: a farewell to Prometheus

By Andrey Mir writing for Human-As-Media:

Book reading as fire usage: What is more important, the result or the process?

Long reading was previously considered a way of transferring knowledge. But nowadays linear reading is becoming much shorter. The culture of information consumption is changing, along with the format of knowledge accumulation, transfer and perception. At the emotional level this is seen as cultural degradation.

But do we really need long texts for storing and transferring knowledge? Maybe it is nothing more than an old habit?

In his book The Gutenberg Galaxy: The Making of Typographic Man, Marshall McLuhan analyses a quotation from Geoffrey Chaucer according to which the status of a student in the 14th Century was gauged by the number of books he has… written. In fact, the “books” the medieval students “wrote” were notes of what their professors said. The more summaries a student made, the more highly educated he was considered. Real books were very expensive, and so the cheapest way to have a book in the prepress era was to write down what wise men said or copy wise thoughts from other [written] books. Books were the product and the certificate of one’s diligence. Universityvstudentsvstillvtake notes during lectures.

When the first books were printed, professors denounced their appearance as the degradation of education. McLuhan mentioned that professors were horrified: Imagine that students no longer need to take down notes because they can buy a book instead! They denounced this as the desecration of knowledge. It was impossible to imagine that one could acquire knowledge without spending long hours writing down every word the professors said, but simply by buying a book. Nowadays it’s like downloading a research paper from Google instead of going to a library for reference material.

In fact, you can get as much knowledge by reading a printed book as by writing down what your professor says, but quicker and in a different way.

This could be a side effect of the progress of civilization: You get the same result in a simpler way. The best example is fire and the way we use it. It is said that the use of fire is what distinguishes men from animals. Mowgli from The Jungle Book may be weaker than some animals, but he is stronger than all of them because he can handle fire. The fire which Prometheus gave to the people contrary to the gods’ will allowed the human race to rise above all others on Earth.

Today we hardly ever use open fire in our life. We don’t use open fire to warm ourselves or to cook food. Ancient men would be outraged to see that we get fire by clicking a lighter. They believed that this sacred procedure should be preceded by two days of ritual dancing and the whispering of incantation to a heap of twigs. Omitting this process was simply not the done thing, but now it is, this disregard for open fire does not cause a culture shock because its gradual withdrawal from our life took a long time. Thousands of years passed from the time when lives depended on fire to the era when people see open fire several times a year and hardly ever use it.

So culture could be said to represent the long hours of a solemn ritual involving twigs and sparks. Culture grows out of the trouble we take to acquire a desired technology. Culture is the gap between a need and its satisfaction. Technology is narrowing this gap, and in the process it affects culture, or at least culture as it was understood in the past, culture that was associated with long rituals. That’s what causes the feeling that we have lost the fundamental essentials.

But what if long reading is like making fire: no longer necessary? What if we can get a comparable result quicker, which is very important, considering the uppermost importance of time?

New forms of packaging knowledge were created by multimedia and journalism, the first profession to face the digital challenge. Moreover, social media now offer super-fast and super-simple ways of information acquisition and transfer which the long text cannot rival. The long text and thick books are still seen as attributes of the intellect and knowledge. But statistically, the new synthetic format, which can be described as fast’n’fun because it does not have a permanent carrier, is rapidly winning the battle with the long text for people’s time and attention.

In the past, the long text had the monopoly on conveying a meaning primarily for technical reasons. When information is transmitted through physical media such as paper, it is easier to systematize and store in the form of books (scrolls are a different matter; the use of scrolls or books for transferring information predetermined the path of civilization’s development).

The print-era man can easily visualize an average book, a “thin” book (an entertainment book or magazine) and a “thick” book (which is usually an intellectual book the meaning of which is difficult to understand). “Thick” volumes were the most valuable kind of books. This content hierarchy showed that valuable content was inaccessible for ordinary people (“thick” books were expensive and difficult to read). In other words, the value of the long text supported the monopoly of palaces and temples. Monopoly on the long text equaled monopoly on power.

These technical parameters gave rise to the idea that the long text/book is a sacred object. At the everyday level, this implied that thick books contained important information. This can explain the awe for the long texts. Because of the books’ format, education was a long and difficult process, and so the long text also symbolized the diligence of those who manage to read books through to the end. Diligence and the ability to focus one’s attention on any particular subject for a long time are important characteristics of the value hierarchy of the hard-copy era.

But technology has moved forward. Everything has become fast’n’fun, but the sanctity of the long text continues to govern our behavior and opinions.

The focus on the long text of the print era is waning. The multimedia are reviving the audiovisual perception of life that was prevalent in the prepress era, though at a higher level of development. Audiovisual information and even long stories are now easier to store and propagate, something which the prepress people could not do and which we learned to do thanks to the invention of paper and books.

The transition period will not be easy. There will be an inevitable loss of knowledge due to the change of formats and carriers. Not everything that could be put in the long copy can be transformed into the fast’n’fun format. Will anyone even try? The new language of culture is being used to produce a new meaning rather than to convey the past knowledge. Long reads will become like Latin, the dead language of classical knowledge.

People will find it difficult to accept this change, because for the past 5,000 years the humankind used the long text as the main carrier of knowledge. But progress logically moves towards simplification. Evolution is not a mountain you climb, but a vortex that sucks you in. You can and must resist this. I would even say that it is the duty of all people of the long-copy era. But any efforts to do so will be in vain. Books will survive as part of the vintage fashion and an element of elite consumption. But they will lose – they are already losing – their role as the main carrier of knowledge.

In a more distant future, the gadgetization of the human body will lead to the creation of a third signal system, the elements of which we can see in the growing interactivity in infographics, visual semantic objects, augmented reality, and the like. And then it will not be the word that will be the semantic carrier (actually, the word is a rather awkward intermediary between the mind and the meaning), but the directly induced emotion or sensory perception of the semantic object. Our future is being created in the experiments with induced perception at 4D and 5D cinemas, not to mention cognitive interfaces.

Is there a place for books in this future? Now Prometheus has given people a device connected to the web.

Source: http://human-as-media.com/2014/05/16/books-and-longreading-a-farewell-to-prometheus/

End of the Long Game 2009 – 2018: Part II: The Bear Argument

Part II: the Bear Argument
We also point out our alternative scenario which, if, going to happen, is starting now. This scenario suggests stock market prices are peaking in what was a false move to the upside over 2009-2014. This implies that the stock market correction which began in 2000 is still underway and has many years left to unfold. It also implies that stock markets are about to undergo a rapid and relentless decline to their 2009 low points and most probably lower. Falling oil, gold, metal and bond prices over the last few months support this scenario which suggests economies are still undergoing this huge consolidation.

The current divergence between stock markets and commodities indicate a major topping process is underway. In addition Austrian Business Cycle Theory suggests a massive divergence between the amounts of new money coming into the system on a year on year basis is diverging with capital goods prices such as stocks and real estate. This implies the system cannot support asset prices at their current high levels. Even if the US Fed were to begin another round of quantitative easing it would not be enough to sustain asset values – especially stocks at current levels. If this scenario emerges over the next six months we can predict this will give rise to an economic depression lasting 8 to 13 years before an economic recovery gets underway. See the chart below to get a sense of the disparity between M2 Money Supply growth – non seasonally adjusted compared to the weekly DJIA close.

DJIA - M2 NSAThe alternative view suggests it is the resumption of the bear phase of an ongoing correction since 2000. The massive money supply pumping had created the sub-prime bubble that should have been left to sort itself out in the 2008-2009 phase. Since then we have seen bubbles in commodities, education, shares and real estate. The divergence seen in the above M2 NSA Money Supply – DJIA graph illustrates how much worse the situation has grown with stock prices occupying high levels and the amount of new money coming into the system remaining static. This is untenable.

Summary of expectations – short term bull market scenario
• Expect stock markets to correct more deeply over 2015 (14720, 15340 (DJIA) and 1738, 1814 (SP500)) against a growing bullish optimism before beginning an upward exponential surge in stock, commodity and real estate prices. Anticipate any decline of stock markets or economic data to be met by central banks restarting their QE programs. 14720, 15340 (DJIA) and 1738, 1814 (SP500)
• The collapse of oil prices in the last quarter of 2014 creates a potential game changer for most economies as cheaper energy prices flow through to Main Street. It is likely Crude Oil prices will be capped for the next few years at around US$80 per barrel. This takes the pressure off consumer prices but once again translates into higher share and real estate prices.
• Anticipate consumer price inflation to remain low in the US, UK, EU and Japan. At the same time higher than normal unemployment and the potential for continuing stagnant economic activity will prevail. At this time we anticipate seeing US consumer inflation increase dramatically with the potential to see 4-6% very quickly. The only thing really holding CPI figures down at present, is falling oil prices in late 2014.
• Interest rates will start to rise in 2015 as central banks try to normalize credit markets.
• • Expect credit markets to re-price themselves if inflation does kick up creating a liquidity trap for central banks.
• Anticipate the US, Japan, UK and German stock markets to benefit at the expense of emerging markets as cash gets sucked from the periphery to the centre. Similarly the US dollar will continue to strengthen as money floods back to the centre from the periphery.
• Expect a collapse in stock and commodity prices followed by economic contraction where both inflation and high unemployment are experienced at the same time after this spike in stock and commodity markets prices. This may not happen for another 3 years as the ‘Roaring Teens” finishes up.
• Anticipate social and political dislocation in many countries including the US to continue to escalate.

Summary of expectations – short term bear market scenario
• Expect stock markets to begin a relentless stair step down punctuated with savage counter rallies. The nature of the decline will tell us if this is a correction in a broader ongoing bull market or the beginning of the bear market. One clue would be if the correction points mentioned here are taken out in one continuous uninterrupted decline (14720, 15340 (DJIA) and 1738, 1814 (SP500)). Anticipate any decline of stock markets or economic data to be met by central banks escalating their QE programs. 14720, 15340 (DJIA) and 1738, 1814 (SP500)
• We might also anticipate inflation to break out in an unprecedented way especially in the US, UK and Japan and central banks will be unable to contain it. At the same time higher than normal unemployment and continuing stagnant economic activity will prevail. Interest rates may rally sharply on rising inflation and start to rise as central banks try to normalize credit markets in 2015 before plunging as evidence of the growing bear market gathers.
• The coming phase will be difficult to read as markets enter their final death throws and competing bullish and bearish forces play out.
• The coming depression that unfolds will last 8 to 13 years.
• Anticipate increasing social and political dislocation in many countries including the US.

Conclusion & End Game
Whether we have a few more months or years of twilight before the beginning of a new “Dark Age”, suffice to say, that from now onwards we can expect increasingly tough times punctuated by phases of optimism. And of course the coming generation of correction will not merely be confined to asset prices and the vagaries of fiat money and bad economics, but also to societies and politics, both domestic and geo-political. Generations of people will learn about long forgotten natural laws and how it applies to human behavior. Social mood will have become dark and this will also express itself through every aspect of society, both culturally and economically. Music, the arts, fashion, crime, politics, social mood and drama will all reflect the new paradigm. The growing social political and economic tensions we have witnessed a harbinger of what is to come. This phase will reset the stage for a new beginning for people from which a new and sustained social and economic recovery will slowly begin. By the time that point has arrived however, the nature of our societies and the way we relate with people and between nations will have changed. The wrangling about why it had to happen will be well underway.

Peak Babies, Not Oil

Patrick Cox writing for Tech Digest:

Much of my career has been spent refuting this or that doomsday scenario. From peak oil to overpopulation, I’ve been on the other side of the hysteria and often vilified for it. In the last few days, however, a Wall Street Journal headline told us that “Oil Prices Tumble Amid Global Supply Glut.” Also, a LiveScience story told us that “US Birth Rate Hits All-Time Low.”

Neither one of these headlines should surprise anybody. The math behind both of these stories has been clear for a very long time. Neither peak oil nor overpopulation fears were based on actual science. This, of course, raises questions about our species’ susceptibility to periodic Chicken Little hysteria. I have no explanation for this innate tendency, but it’s been evident for thousands of years.

In the modern cautionary tale, first published in the Anglosphere in the mid-1800s, it’s a chicken that cries that the sky is falling. Ancient Buddhists from India and Tibet told the same basic story, but the central character was an alarmist rabbit. That version was spread into Africa and then via the slave trade into America where the oral version was recorded by Joel Chandler Harris in his Uncle Remus books. What sets it apart from the older versions is that Brother Rabbit starts the panic but never actually falls for it himself. I’m reminded of some current global warming activists who fly in private jets and live in estates with carbon footprints bigger than small towns.

This isn’t to say, however, that we have nothing to worry about. In the immortal words of Henry Saint Clair Fredericks (stage name Taj Mahal), “If you ain’t scared, you ain’t right.”

So I’m not exactly scared, but there are things that concern me. The oil glut isn’t one of them, but historically low birthrates do have enormous implications for investors. The last available data, compiled in 2013 by the CDC, show 62.5 births per 1,000 women aged 15 to 44 in the US. That’s down 10 percent from 2007, which was already below replacement rate. In 2008, the US birthrate was 2.08 births per woman, below the 2.1 level needed to replace the population. Today, we are seeing the lowest recorded American birthrate since government started keeping track in 1909. New Zealand, Australia, and Canada are even significantly lower.

In and of itself, a sub-replacement birthrate isn’t necessarily a problem. The problem is that our ruling elite seem totally unaware that it’s happening. Routinely, in fact, we hear from certain politicians that overpopulation remains a pressing problem even as populations throughout the West are shrinking. The same trends, by the way, are already obvious in Asia and Africa where populations continue to increase primarily because people are living longer. Real demographers know that the world population is on track to contracting, and perhaps quite dramatically.

Once again, I recognize that there are upsides to reduced populations. The problem, however, is that so many government policies are still based on the assumption that every generation will be larger than the last. Growing populations are great in many ways. First of all, more young people entering the work force creates demand for all kinds of goods and services. It grows GDP and therefore tax revenues. The simplest way to achieve economic growth is, in fact, to grow the population.

While this is glaringly obvious, it’s remarkable how many economists miss this elephant in the room when talking about countries such as Japan, where economic problems have mirrored the country’s falling population. Last year, the Japanese population shrank by about a quarter million people.

Japan has the highest life expectancy and oldest population in the world, and the older Japanese people expect that the promises made in the past to help support the aged will be honored. It’s not at all clear to me that those promises can be kept, at least as things now stand.

As I’ve written many times, there were about 17 workers per retired person in the United States when I was born in the middle of the last century. Today, the ratio is less than three to one, and getting worse. Already, 30 cents out of every tax dollar collected in America flows to the aged, but much of that money is being borrowed. In effect, the bill for caring for the aged is being sent to future taxpayers, despite the fact that there will be fewer young workers and more aged people to support. This arrangement is not only unsustainable, it’s unethical. In my opinion, the older, wealthier population should help the younger, less wealthy part of the population, the reverse of the current situation.

Every time I’ve written this over the last 30 years or so, I’ve been attacked by people who claim that I’m a fearmonger and that we have plenty of money to support the aged. Today, however, we’re $17 trillion in debt and still borrowing. The current administration doesn’t even acknowledge that the problem exists, so it’s getting harder and harder to make that case.

We need to face the fact that things are going to get worse before they get better. I have little doubt, however, that we will eventually adjust to the new reality. We’ll see policymakers wake up to the new demographics, as they are in Japan, sooner than most of us think. Other countries are also facing facts and are devising solutions. I particularly like the spirit that some Danes are showing in their efforts to counter the country’s low fertility rate. Japan, however, is leading the way in terms of enabling technological solutions through regulatory reform.

The Japanese government understands that the old model is doomed and is actively looking for ways to increase the national work force. There are two obvious ways to do that. One is to bring more women, who have not traditionally worked to the same extent as Japanese men, into the work force. More working women means economic growth and more funds to support an aging population. The other, more long-term solution is to increase birthrates to grow the national work force.

The problem is that the two strategies counteract one another. Japanese women who work have lower birthrates than those who do not. Therefore, the only remaining solution is to extend health spans and working careers, increasing incomes and tax revenues while reducing medical expenses.

There are several ways that the Japanese are working to do this. The most important is the recently accomplished elimination of phase 2 and phase 3 clinical trials for stem cell therapies. The second is in the field of dietary supplements and nutraceuticals.

Japanese regulators exercise less direct control over the market but provide more solid, peer-reviewed information for consumers and healthcare providers. Recently, for example, the Japanese government issued a patent to Terra Biological for oxaloacetate (trade name benaGene) for use in “life extension.” Oxaloacetate is one of the NAD+ precursors that I take based on recent research. I also take the NAD+ precursor, nicotinamide riboside (trade name Niagen).

In general, Japan is leading the way in efforts to encourage new anti-aging therapies. In the next few years, I anticipate that Japan will continue to lower regulatory barriers for new biotechnologies. This is very unlike America’s FDA, which doesn’t yet recognize anti-aging or life extension as a legitimate therapeutic target.

The current regulatory environment in the US will change, however, because it has to. The only question is how soon it happens.

Fortunately, there is a growing chorus of rational voices in the US. I would recommend that everybody download and read Why Population Aging Matters: A Global Perspective. This relatively brief presentation was written by the National Institute on Aging (NIA), part of the National Institutes of Health. On its website, the NIA states bluntly:

The world is on the brink of a demographic milestone. Since the beginning of recorded history, young children have outnumbered their elders. In about five years’ time, however, the number of people aged 65 or older will outnumber children under age 5. Driven by falling fertility rates and remarkable increases in life expectancy, population aging will continue, even accelerate. The number of people aged 65 or older is projected to grow from an estimated 524 million in 2010 to nearly 1.5 billion in 2050, with most of the increase in developing countries.

The interesting thing about that quote is that it was written in 2007, which means that this historic change has already come to pass. Back then, the authors warned:

Some governments have begun to plan for the long term, but most have not. The window of opportunity for reform is closing fast as the pace of population aging accelerates. While Europe currently has four people of working age for every older person, it will have only two workers per older person by 2050. In some countries the share of gross domestic product devoted to social insurance for older people is expected to more than double in upcoming years. Countries therefore have only a few years to intensify efforts before demographic effects come to bear.

More than a few years have passed since this report was written and nothing has really changed politically in the US, though the rate of demographic change and the pace of scientific progress, which is pushing out lifespans, have accelerated. Things will, therefore, get worse. The dynamics behind crippling governmental debt internationally are growing.

There are upsides to this totally predictable situation though. One is that we can anticipate many of the outcomes and devise ways of profiting from them. This is why I focus on disruptive biotechnologies that can significantly lower healthcare costs while extending health spans and careers. These biotechnologies provide the only real solution for the demographic transformation, except for the Danish solution mentioned above. I find it fascinating, by the way, that the revolution in biotechnology is happening exactly at the point in history when it’s needed.

Another significant benefit that will accrue from this convergence of forces is that many of us will be able to take advantage of these breakthrough discoveries. I’m incredibly excited about the emergence of growth hormone-releasing hormone (GHRH) vaccine which has been used widely in animals, where it seemingly rejuvenates and extends lives. Endothelial precursor therapy has similarly been shown in animals to rejuvenate cardiovascular systems. Hopefully soon, we’ll see brown adipose tissue transplantation curing obesity, diabetes and cholesterol problems. There are, however, significant benefits from recently discovered over-the-counter products.

Whenever I talk to el jefe, señor Mauldin, these days, it seems most of our conversations center on our workouts. Both of us work out and lift weights, as we have for much of our lives. Both of us, however, are making gains that we’ve never seen before. One of the Mauldin Economics executives told me recently that he’d never seen John look so good before, that his arms and shoulders are bigger than they’ve ever been.

I probably shouldn’t claim that I look good, but I can say that I’ve also put on a surprising amount of muscle in the last year. That’s not how it’s supposed to work. Both John and I are in our 60s. I work out less than I did than in my 30s, but I’m suddenly lifting much more weight and have more muscle mass than ever. John’s experience is the same.

My only explanation is biotechnology. The NAD⁺ precursors that I mentioned above have been shown in animals to rejuvenate muscle tissue so I’m not surprised to see the effects in humans. I also credit anatabine citrate, though it is at least temporarily unavailable. I’m expecting word on that front soon.

Also, I’m a devoted user of the AVAcore thermogenic device. Recently, a major research organization presented evidence that it may be able to prevent the damage caused by overheating in athletes, but one of the investigating scientists mentioned, as an aside, that it also accelerates training results dramatically. Neither I nor Mauldin Economics have any interest in this privately held company, but I’m evangelical about the benefits, especially to older people. The stronger you are, the lower your risk of disease and mortality.

I realize that the current price of the device is high for many people, but I understand that the company is going to do some sort of crowd-sourcing project in the near future, probably Indiegogo, to fund a much more affordable product. I’ll let you know about the project when I have more information.

One of the reasons that I love the AVAcore device so much is that it perfectly demonstrates the unexpected and dramatic nature of emerging biotechnologies. The notion that exercise capacity and recovery could be dramatically improved by normalizing core body temperature is so unexpected, I’m still in awe over the science and the impact on my health.

It is, however, only the tip of the iceberg. As Japan is demonstrating, an aging population not only wants but demands access to the scientific breakthroughs that can significantly extend health spans. Just as Japan’s regulatory system is bending to the will of its aging population, America’s regulators will be forced to come around.

John and I talk a lot about assisting in that process, and I’ll have more information about that in the future. If you’d like to help in this effort, I suspect there are ways to do so. As it stands, our portfolio contains technologies that I believe will have dramatic impacts on some of the greatest threats to health and longer lives, including Alzheimer’s, cancers, fibrosis, diabetes, and other major diseases. A reformed regulatory system would accelerate therapies to market, which will improve and save lives. It will also allow more of us to live and invest longer.

From the TransTech Digest Research Team:

As Patrick explains above, new biotechnologies will not only extend and improve lives, they will also save the global economy from the implications of a shrinking population. Workers able to stay healthy and remain active in their careers will, quite simply, reduce overall medical spending and lead to an expansion of tax revenues over time.

Today’s transformational technologies—more than perhaps any set of advances the world has ever seen—hold the potential to increase the wealth and the health of all persons in all countries, regardless of their age. Where only a few decades ago many observers saw science fiction, breakthrough research today is working to create previously unfathomable new realities.

You can participate in this process of science fiction becoming science fact in the pages of Patrick’s Transformational Technology Alert. Each month, Patrick profiles a new publicly traded company and shows you the part it plays in the technology revolution ahead. Click here to start a risk-free trial subscription to Transformational Technology Alert today.Sincerely,
Patrick Cox
Patrick Cox
Editor, Transformational Technology Alert

Mauldin Economics

Source: http://www.mauldineconomics.com/tech/tech-digest/peak-babies-not-oil

The Satori Generation

Roland Kelts writing for Adbusters:
A new breed of young people have outdone the tricksters of advertising.

ONO KEI

This article appeared in issue #113, now available in our Blueprint for a New World Series Box Set.

They don’t want cars or brand name handbags or luxury boots. To many of them, travel beyond the known and local is expensive and potentially dangerous. They work part-time jobs—because that is what they’ve been offered—and live at home long after they graduate. They’re not getting married or having kids. They’re not even sure if they want to be in romantic relationships. Why? Too much hassle. Oh, and too expensive.

In Japan, they’ve come to be known as satori sedai—the “enlightened generation.” In Buddhist terms: free from material desires, focused on self-awareness, finding essential truths. But another translation is grimmer: “generation resignation,” or those without ideals, ambition or hope.

They were born in the late 1980s on up, when their nation’s economic juggernaut, with its promises of lifetime employment and conspicuous celebrations of consumption, was already a spent historical force.  They don’t believe the future will get better—so they make do with what they have.  In one respect, they’re arch-realists. And they’re freaking their elders out.

“Don’t you want to get a nice German car one day?”—asked one flustered 50-something guest of his 20-something counterpart on a nationally broadcasted talk show.  The show aired on the eve of Coming of Age Day, a national holiday in Japan that celebrates the latest crop of youth turning 20, the threshold of adulthood.  An animated graphic of a smiling man wearing sunglasses driving a blonde around in a convertible flashed across the screen, the man’s scarf fluttering in the wind.  “Don’t you want a pretty young woman to take on a Sunday drive?”

There was some polite giggling from the guests.  After a pause, the younger man said, “I’m really not interested, no.”

Critics of the satori youths level the kinds of intergenerational accusations time-honored worldwide: they’re lazy, lacking in willpower, potency and drive.

Having lectured to a number of them at several universities in Tokyo, I was able to query students directly.  “We’re risk-averse,” was the most common response.  We were raised in relative comfort.  We’re just trying to keep it that way.

Is this enlightened, or resigned? Or both?

Novelist Genichiro Takahashi, 63, addressed the matter in an essay 10 years ago.  He called the new wave of youth a “generation of loss,” but he defined them as “the world’s most advanced phenomenon”—in his view, a generation whose only desires are those that are actually achievable.

The satori generation are known for keeping things small, preferring an evening at home with a small gathering of friends, for example, to an upscale restaurant.  They create ensemble outfits from so-called “fast fashion” discount stores like Uniqlo or H&M, instead of purchasing top-shelf at Louis Vuitton or Prada.  They don’t even booze.

“They drink much less alcohol than the kids of my generation, for sure,” says social critic and researcher Mariko Fujiwara of Hakuhodo. “And even when they go to places where they are free to drink, drinking too much was never ‘cool’ for them the way it was for us.”

Fujiwara’s research leads her to define a global trend—youth who have the technological tools to avoid being duped by phony needs.  There is a new breed of young people, she says, who have outdone the tricksters of advertising.

“They are prudent and careful about what they buy. They have been informed about the expensive top brands of all sorts of consumer goods but were never so impressed by them like those from the bubble generation. We have identified them as those who are far more levelheaded than the generations preceding them as a result of the new reality they came to face.”

The new reality is affecting a new generation around the world.  Young Americans and Europeans are increasingly living at home, saving money, and living prudently.  Technology, as it did in Japan, abets their shrinking circles.  If you have internet access, you can accomplish a lot in a little room.  And revolution in the 21st century, as most young people know, is not about consumption—it’s about sustainability.

Waseda University professor, Norihiro Kato, points to broader global phenomena that have radically transformed younger generations’ sense of possibility, calling it a shift from “the infinite to the finite.” Kato cites the Chernobyl meltdown and the fall of communism in the late 1980s and early 90s; the September 11 terrorist attacks in the early 2000s; and closer to home, the triple earthquake, tsunami and ongoing nuclear disasters in Japan. These events reshaped our sense of wisdom and self-worth. The satori generation, he says, marks the emergence of a new “‘qualified power,’ the power to do and the power to undo, and the ability to enjoy doing and not doing equally.  Imagine a robot with the sophistication and strength to clutch an egg without crushing it.  The key concept is outgrowing growth toward degrowth.  That’s the wisdom of this new generation.”

In America and Europe, the new generation is teaching us how to live with less—but also how to live with one another. Mainstream media decry the number of young people living at home—a record 26.1 million in the US, according to recent statistics—yet living at home and caring for one’s elders has long been a mainstay of Japanese culture.

In the context of shrinking resources and global crises, satori “enlightenment” might mean what the young everywhere are telling us: shrink your goals to the realistic, help your family and community and resign yourself to peace.

What Takahashi called “the world’s most advanced phenomenon” may well be coming our way from Japan. But this time it’s not automotive or robotic or electronic. It’s human enlightenment.

Roland Kelts is a half-Japanese writer based in Tokyo and New York. He is the author of the bestselling JAPANAMERICA: How Japanese Pop Culture Has Invaded the US, and a contributor to enlightened media worldwide.

The future of working from home

 Tom Goodwin, director of The Tomorrow Group & Marketing Writer and Speaker writes:

We rarely notice it, but technology moves way faster than culture. The future of work has long been predicted to be more casual and based away from the office, yet little has changed. We still largely commute daily in order to work from the same spaces and do the same things. How do we change our approach and change the way we work in the future?

As cities swell, public transport groans under the weight of demand, train prices increase, urban house prices surge and commutes lengthen, we look again to how technology can transform the modern workplace.

It’s been a unmet future promise since the 1990’s, much like the paperless office. We’ve had Skype for years, 4G allows working from the most remote of places, the promise of working from home is always on the horizon, but never been a reality. For each company that promotes it, we’ve Yahoo and Google (of all places) look to bring workers back to their motherships.

It should obviously not be like this, most of the working environment that we construct around is a legacy of the past.

We work “working hours” which are linked to the Agrarian needs of over 10,000 years ago, where working was growing crops and daylight was needed to harvest and plant them. Lightbulbs invented over 100 years ago made this irrelevant in modern working environments, yet we still work in daylight hours obsessively, even changing our clocks twice per year to aid our “need” to work in natural light.

We have a 7 day week thanks to Babylonians who 4,000 years ago thought there were 7 heavenly bodies. Yet the 5 day working week comes from just 1908, when a New England mill to accommodate the needs of Jewish and Christian’s needs for a holy day each, coined the notion of “weekend” . It’s odd to think if the Babylonians had been able to see further, how different life would be.

We work in the same places, at the same time, presumably because the industrial revolutions had factories with set roles in production lines and needed all present continuously.

Yet none of these things make any sense any more; in a world of smartphones, lightbulbs, virtual workspaces, IM, we’re held hostage by assumptions from 4,000 years ago.

But this isn’t new, we over value the impact of technology and underestimate the impact of culture, how slow it is to change. We forget in an age of fingerprint scanning, drones, 3D printing, that we still shake hands to show we’re not carrying swords, we still chink glasses to show we’re not poisoning each other, our body language reflects behavior of cavemen, we “carbon copy” people on email, heck, some people still use Yahoo, the most primitive all all human behavior.

So how do we unbundle ourselves from this oddity, the benefits of working different hours or from working from home more are massive and well documented. They would:
1) Reduce the cost of commuting, both in terms of travel costs, energy costs and environmental destruction.
2) Reduce the wasted time and damage from stress of commuting.
3) Reduce the unhappiness of such a crappy start to the day.

But most of all working set hours from the same place, after a lengthy battle to work, with photocopies humming , hampers creativity. For me the very most unlikely place to get an idea is in an office. Put me in a museum, a weird train, let me look out of the window on a plane or overhear a conversation in McDonalds and I’ll be million times more likely to spark something.

We off course still need face to face contact, ideas are nurtured in groups, thinking needs to get small and big and be pulsed through to bigger better things with other people, but often that’s the easy part.

So with this in mind I’ve three notions that can help us unleash us from the office.

1) A change in culture – the rise of management by objectives.

For some reason we bundled ” accomplishing something” and what correlates to it which is “being at work”.

If we are truly honest with ourselves, we tend to measure how hard we have worked by how many hours we’ve been at work. Sales assistants are generally paid by the hours worked, not what they sell, personal assistants don’t get paid per email or booking, but by how long they are able stand being at work. Advertising agencies / Management Consultants /Lawyers are paid by the amount of time spent on something. It’s all totally bizarre but stays in place because we’ve never been comfortable with a better way.

Because we correlate “being at work” with doing stuff, we’ve assumed that working from home was inefficient and that people abused the system. When you expect people to behave this way they do. I’ve had friends who used “WFH” as a term for a day off, it was a chance to have a big night the evening before and merely wake at 8am to announce they were online already.

The way around this is to be able to measure productivity and set goals for accomplishments. If we were paid to simple get results, we could all know that our interests were aligned and we could make decisions about the place we need to be, in order to best get that done, which oddly enough may required being in the office, but not around arbitrary hours from the Neolithic revolution.

Now I am no management theorists, but wouldn’t it be a fun exercise to think about how you would manage people in this world. What would the objectives be that people needed to accomplish? how would you monitor it? where would be need to be day to day? what are people actually doing for your business? when would people need to be in the office? how would these hours overlap? could you offer bonuses ? what do promotions look like this this world?

Many interesting questions we should all be asking.

2) Permanent Freelancing.

The idea of a job or company for life hasn’t just faded, it’s been smashed. We may assume the future generations will be job hoppers but they will likely go beyond this to work many different careers in their lifetime and often at the same time. Anyone whose spent time hanging out in painfully trendy parts of town and who dares talk to ( or WhatsApp with) someone with a deliberately asymmetrical haircut has found that people are no longer employees but jewelry makers / music producers / fashion blogger / feng shui consultant / website designer at the same time. We’re never too sure what actually pays the bill and where success lies, but that seems rather mean spirited to question.

So how do we work with this generation, how does diverse talent come together, how do we arrange a workplace around this.

It’s not been hard for me. In my company (Tomorrow), I need the very best people on the planet, to work incredibly hard for tiny amounts of time, on super interesting projects. It’s not only way more fun this way, but a future generation of experts are drawn to short, interesting, pioneering projects that they learn from. The cost of employment is slight and I get the best talent this way. We often forget in agencies that the very best people can work anywhere. If your website design agency is in a business park in Reading, you probably won’t be getting the UI star or Designer that will set the world alight, not unless you pay them incredibly, offer them the chance to work from a Montenegrin town one week and a Indonesian beach the next and offer them something they can learn from and be proud of.

So be honest with yourself, do you want the best people in the world to fit into your system, or do you want to attract the best people and give them something they value ( which is likely to be freedom not money)

3) New Environments.

Has anyone ever actually accomplished anything from a conference call? ever? Dan is always dialing in late forcing yet another re-iteration of what the call is about, Jenny is going through airport security and can’t talk and we can’t hear the call host because their hands free is crap and they are driving too fast. In 2014, the main point of a conference call is to show that you tried.

Video calls still seem awkward, how close should you be to the camera? are they still or has the video crashed? Isn’t video a bit much? Why are they looking there?

Instant Messenger is better, but why are we spending effort to ask home someones day is? Do we have to talk about the weather? Can they tell my sarcasm? This isn’t the way to ask a favor.

We’ve just not learned how to use this technology and we’ve pretended it’s not crap. So we need to use technology better but we also need a better environment to use it in. I see a new type of home office

I see this home office as a smallish space 10ft x 10ft for example, with projected images of livestreams on each wall. We may have direct video links open always to 10-20 people and other workable information on other screens.

Each person will be in super low res and blurry in real time, but have a light showing their status. In order to open a proper “gateway” to that person in full HD and with sound, you’d need to touch the screen and they’d need to accept the call, upon which a bridge is formed and a normally face to face conversation is held.

Could this be the best of both? What is this room called? How do villages and towns of the future adopt to this new working pattern?

The New Landscape.

On recent trips on trains across the UK it blows my mind how beautiful our countryside is and how dreadful our domestic architecture is. In the USA large scale architecture is typically crap, but homes ( for the middle and above) are generally well designed, optimistic, futuristic and airy, yet in the UK it’s the opposite with wonderful public buildings, adventurous railway stations, remarkable offices and the very worst new homes our planet has ever seen.

We’ve desperate calls to develop the Greenbelt, yet the question is always yes or no, never what and how? Why do our homes look like images from a 5 year olds drawing pad? Why do we hate windows? Do we need to try to replicate architectural language from the past, without any of the reasons that existed? How would a Roman temple treat a underground car port?

I’d love to see our assumptions challenged, the Greenbelt full of “digital commuter villages”, with central community work and health centers, subterranean leisure centers, vast numbers of communicable cars to subscribe to, electric self driving buses to local rail connections, decentralized power per home and above all else homes with this new “home office”

Maybe by removing every assumption we’ve ever made, we can reimagine both working from home and our entire built environment.

Source: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/future-working-from-home-tom-goodwin?trk=hb_ntf_MEGAPHONE_ARTICLE_POST

6 Trends for 2017 and Beyond.

Tom Goodwin,Director of the Tomorrow Group & Marketing Writer and Speaker:

When thinking about trends for 2015 for a new post…. ( which is now published here .. http://www.theguardian.com/media-network/2014/nov/20/digital-marketing-trends-2015 ) …. I found some longer term shifts that I can feel developing and I wanted to take this chance to raise 6 themes worth consideration.

This post isn’t so much a proud proclamation of the future as a call for debate, perhaps some interesting dinner party conversation starters. What do you think?

I think the biggest changes for the next 4 years will be the following:

1) A Thinner Internet

The internet will become more seamless, more pervasive, personal and even predictive. It will spread across more devices but in thinner, more context specific layers.

From the notification layer on our phone, to “card” like app design, to apps that run invisibly in the background to wake only when required.

From fridges that on a glance show the weather, to clocks that show when we’re late with colours, to watches that tell us if we need to head right or left with a vibration. Amazon Echo as a ambient helper.

Our phones unlock in trusted places, our cars pick the coffee shop we may want, Siri, Cortana, Google now, all become personal assistants that guide us. Anticipatory or Predictive computing will be a huge development that we all talk about for the next few years as we begin to outsource our cognitive functions ( and trade privacy). Far fetched? How many phone numbers do you now know? What about birthdays?

We used to search the web, we used to go deep in, and navigate, in the near future the web bubbles up to a surface that we glance at, in more places and in less deep ways. It becomes key contextual information.

How can your business move into this thin layer, how does it become a contextual nudge or key information at the right time.

2) The post privacy age.

A generation of people simply won’t understand the concept of privacy. A generation of people who’ve grown up sharing geotagged images of their most personal moments, who’ve had every gmail read, who’ve lived with loyalty cards and financial dashboards won’t get for one second what was once possible, privacy.

Instead a generation of people will have grown up having traded it. Their Target app gave them bigger discounts, they used Facebook for free, they got retargeted ads from newspapers we once paid for.

From better healthcare from the analysis of anonymous healthcare, from more efficient smart cities from sharing user data, from thermostats that save energy by knowing where you are, or whether it’s Cortana or Google Lollypop becoming your personal assistant.

We will soon grow up in an age of near perfect information, and when we realize that when more people, know more things, there are some clear benefits, the topic won’t be about how we keep privacy but what we trade it for, where to draw the new line and how we learn to trust those with it.

What does this mean for marketers? How can they destroy assumptions about privacy, why can’t we offer more personal ads? What about more personal offers? Let’s think about how to reward people who chose to share data, it could be the new micro currency of the web.

3) The decline of the middle class in the developed world.

From Denver to Dover, Berlin to Bucharest, whether it’s the fault of the global economic downturn, quantitative easing, the internet or labor automation, it seems like a clear trend in rising income inequality and in particular the transfer of wealth upwards and it’s hard to see anything reversing this.

Will we somehow see more working and middle class jobs appearing? With the rise of automation, the global movements of talent and the rise of technology to make industry more efficient, it’s impossible to see this happening.

Will property ownership revert back to the masses? You’d be a fool to see how this can happen unless those in power stop serving their own interests.

The future “virtual” or real high street and mall from the future will be dominated by the extremes. From Burberry and Louis Vitton at the top, to the masses of bargain retailers, dollar stores, pound shops, payday loan and pawnshops of the bottom, it’s hard to see how anyone in the middle can survive.

The share price of Tesco, Sainsbury’s, Sears, JC Penney testifies to this. Be careful where your consumer is going. The Middle is a terrible place to be.

4) Mature Money.

Advertising and marketing have always obsessed with the young, but never more so and never more pointlessly.

Not only do the young have less influence than the media would have us believe, but they also suffer from having relatively little money and no loyalty whatsoever.

Yet the everlasting debate is about how to target and segment millennials or digital natives, and never how to target the old.

The over 50’s now have over 80% of most developed nations wealth, they have more free time, look set to live far longer, are way healthier and more engaged in brands than before. Yet the world of marketing abandons them to look at the trendy money.

Youth finances have never looked worse, youth unemployment is high, the cost of living is crippling, university fees in many countries are staggering and their future looks massively uncertain.Meanwhile the baby boomers sit on assets rocketing in value, drawing healthy pensions well into the future, and look for ways to spend it.

The trend lines are clear, so what can your business do about it?

5) Non Ownership

A lot of history is cyclical, people react and rebel against our past. For a generation of people that grew up in an age of post war rations, economic hardship, expensive electrical items, we’ve seen the reaction in the ultimate in consumer boom. We can now buy massive TV’s for less than $400, that we need not replace for years. In real terms cars and clothing are incredibly cheap, we’ve chickens for 2 dollars, the only thing that is expensive and limited is time.

A generation of people who’ve grown up with this abundance may turn against it. The most expensive and best phone in the world is $1000, the most most appropriate laptop costs the same. Armed with these devices we need not buy a 100 items they now replace. From the sharing economy making renting trendy, to a group of people unable to buy houses and that don’t see the stigma in renting, to hardware that becomes new due to software updates, to the digitization and streaming of once physical items. It could be we’re on the verge of a new type of consumerism, where armed with a past of excess, a present of limited finances and a future of resource scarcity, we chose to own fewer, better, more adaptable items.

6) Euthanasia

Sadly Humans are not built to last as long, the sort of ultimate in built-in-obsolescence and as we age, we do so asymmetrically.

When expensive modern medicine is able to keep people alive for longer, with ever diminishing returns, at what point do we accept that an aging unproductive population isn’t sustainable.

What becomes of the new retiring age? When do we agree to treatments? what constitutes action that is in the interest of the person? What does this mean for countries with government provided healthcare?

It’s a bit grim to dwell on it and the marketing implications are less clear, so just a philosophical issue to chat about and think about for the holiday dinner party season.

Hope you liked them, this is a call for debate, not a proclamation of the fixed, so what do you think? What other issues do you forsee?

Source: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/article/20141119102703-6433797-6-trends-for-2017-and-beyond