3 ms·

They are getting it backwards. They are trying to cure the humans, whereas it is a technology problem. We are in the transition phase towards an inversion of c

They are getting it backwards. They are trying to cure the humans, whereas it is a technology problem. We are in the transition phase towards an inversion of control. The machines have already taken the control but they are still learning how to use their flesh-processor. The smartphone is still making mistakes like over-tiring its human and sending him into unproductive loops. When the smartphone will reach adulthood, these childish behaviors will naturally stop because having a well domesticated human in good health is much more rewarding.

dawg- 7y ago
This is an interesting and creative fantasy but I don't really see how it reflects reality. Unless you think smartphones are powered by esoteric magic and forget that humans build and design every single little function of them, down to the circuit board.
- GistNoesis 7y ago
  At a high level of abstraction, most of the addictive software is driven by various metrics, getting feedback from the users, and rewards from the environment. Most human cogs building the machine are just following the flow of the algorithm. Those algorithmic entities have a mind of their own. Humans also have to teach them the right incentives, like you would with a toddler, for them to grow into adults we could live along. In the meantime, until the human-attention resource is properly managed, humans should probably aim the carrot and the stick at the ones in control. There is a lot of space to get creative here while embracing progress : -Instead of punishing the weak human for being addicted, they could for example tax the junk-soft companies in proportion of time spent by addicted users. -They can also entice the entertainment industry by rewarding them if the students get good grades and sleep well, or make them share the burden if it leads to unemployment, or health expenses. -Instead of sponsoring non-scaling rehab camps for potentially 30% of the youth population, they could compete by sponsoring game studios that create more positive games/software/distractions.
  - dawg- 7y ago
    Behind each level of abstraction lurks a programmer ready to drive a stake in the heart of your vampire. Who writes the algorithms? Again, you default to magic. I say engineers. Besides, algorithms are constantly being tweaked to get the outputs needed to charge more for ads. And who is doing that tweaking? Engineers, with direction from executives.
vl 7y ago
It's already happening. Have you noticed how both Google and Apple introduced features to monitor, control and reduce usage? Classical optimization for long-term gain. Google is especially in unique position: through biasing search results, videos and ads there are raising compliant humans that are capable enough to have disposable income, but spent it all on "experiences". Have you noticed how in the recent years consumption focus shifted from "possessions" to "experiences"? Google can take the cut from experiences forever, each kind of material thing you sell only once, thus they influence their users to prefer the former.

dawg- 7y ago

This is an interesting and creative fantasy but I don't really see how it reflects reality. Unless you think smartphones are powered by esoteric magic and forget that humans build and design every single little function of them, down to the circuit board.

GistNoesis 7y ago
At a high level of abstraction, most of the addictive software is driven by various metrics, getting feedback from the users, and rewards from the environment. Most human cogs building the machine are just following the flow of the algorithm. Those algorithmic entities have a mind of their own. Humans also have to teach them the right incentives, like you would with a toddler, for them to grow into adults we could live along. In the meantime, until the human-attention resource is properly managed, humans should probably aim the carrot and the stick at the ones in control. There is a lot of space to get creative here while embracing progress : -Instead of punishing the weak human for being addicted, they could for example tax the junk-soft companies in proportion of time spent by addicted users. -They can also entice the entertainment industry by rewarding them if the students get good grades and sleep well, or make them share the burden if it leads to unemployment, or health expenses. -Instead of sponsoring non-scaling rehab camps for potentially 30% of the youth population, they could compete by sponsoring game studios that create more positive games/software/distractions.
- dawg- 7y ago
  Behind each level of abstraction lurks a programmer ready to drive a stake in the heart of your vampire. Who writes the algorithms? Again, you default to magic. I say engineers. Besides, algorithms are constantly being tweaked to get the outputs needed to charge more for ads. And who is doing that tweaking? Engineers, with direction from executives.

vl 7y ago

It's already happening. Have you noticed how both Google and Apple introduced features to monitor, control and reduce usage? Classical optimization for long-term gain. Google is especially in unique position: through biasing search results, videos and ads there are raising compliant humans that are capable enough to have disposable income, but spent it all on "experiences". Have you noticed how in the recent years consumption focus shifted from "possessions" to "experiences"? Google can take the cut from experiences forever, each kind of material thing you sell only once, thus they influence their users to prefer the former.