Today ... started out with "classical" music. Not, exactly classical, but music that brought back some amazingly clear memories. George Gershwin's Rhapsody In Blue, Ravel's Bolero, and Edvard's Hall of the Mountain King.
I considered what has changed in the last century, then the time before that. This acceleration in technology that seems to be driving us into the future.
But there are less and less participating in those advances. And I call out the coming generations ... wondering if they understand what happened behind us. History is a gift. I wondered when the last of the classically trained musicians will fade away and everything we have is simply high definition recordings that are eventually archived indefinitely until it is all but lost. There will be those who are passionate, following tradition, but their work... their art will be less and less appreciated.
The simple will replace the complex and ... increasingly, we'll be a simpler organism for it. That... leads me into the next series of thoughts. Necessity is the mother of invention... need is slowly being replaced by want, from a creating to a wholly consuming series of culture. When you have what you need, where is the necessity? I know this is an anecdote, not a scientific theory, but it seems to be playing out pretty intensely.
This foundation for the coming generation seems laid... it's perceived to be strong, but it's riddled with holes. We're living through a series of social experiment that continue to merge into the next. I doubt that we'll have the wherewithal to stand the test of time.
Then I kick off VNV Nation's Further because ... the further you put out the timeline, you start to realize that, eventually, humanity dissolves into time. What you are, or were, has changed... and is gone forever. If you're religious, yay!, someone saved you and you've got have a clean exit off of a dirty situation... but to what end? Forever is pretty boring and bleak, if you think of it. If you're a scientist, you've already determined that you've gained immortality by uploading your consciousness somewhere. What happens then? You ... exist. Perhaps get "resleeved".
It's just not that simple. If any of that actually happens... you're still the same flawed personality, immortalized. Beginnings and, most importantly, endings are very important.
On the religious side, you can get all the forgiveness you want, but that doesn't make you yourself a better person. You're still going to be a "broken angel". As the saying goes, "Beauty is only skin deep. Ugly goes straight to the bone."
And, on the scientific side? It's like a low res copy. Whatever personality you had during your "capture" ends up being a riddled and useless computation. You are flawed code that wants to be preserved indefinitely. As a scientists, what's the point? Preserve the data in your head? Or is it a selfish sort of immortality because you're more deserving that millions of others with equivalent thoughts?
Let go gracefully. Whether you time your own exit or you cling for as long as you can possibly muster, when the time comes, just... let it go. Terry Pratchett was a good example of exactly this. *sigh* And the hole will be felt. For as long as we're alive, it will be felt. But, then what? Time passes... time always passes and memories fade.
I consider that space travel is an attempt to find "The New World" to establish a new colony, new freedoms, a fresh start. Sure. I can get behind that, but it's to the detriment of where we're at now, we don't care what we leave behind as long as we have another place to go. And, consider that, in our conquest-oriented thinking, we will destroy everything in our path, very much like Columbus did. New life forms? Heh, we'll see how this plays out, much like it did historically.
History repeats... and will continue to do so. Across the galaxy, as time passes.
If we're the only living things out there doing this, perhaps we can take our "God Given Right" to spread and consume, because, hell, we're the chosen, after all?
Gracefully... enjoy your life. Find the precious moments in it. Believe in a higher power and live like you expect that higher power expects you to. The pettiness that we hold on to, in this short term, grabbing everything we can, what, really, is the point? And what of the conceit that leads up to hating others for being different for stepping on our ideological toes?
If humanity is going to last for any reasonable amount of time, there's going to need to be a soulful audit with some long term perspective... Can anyone see that happening? Everyone is expecting the "end of the world", which is a perfect rationalization to maintain the current course to whatever end.
I hope for the best, but I'm pretty sure I see the long term outcome just as clearly as ever.
So, here's to the future I plan on experiencing! Even if I could very well be alone in doing so...
Here's to allowing myself to be an anonymous part of the heaving mass that is humanity. To love, and be loved for who and what I am right now. To experience, to wonder, to live, to fight—if necessary, and then to die. To appreciate change for what it is and adapt accordingly. To attempt to understand that which scares me and choose my stance accordingly. To defy my very nature in order to wholeheartedly embrace whatever future is coming, and, above all, to help my children to do the same.
Monday, March 16, 2015
Wednesday, March 4, 2015
The Unobvious - The Damage of the Crowd Sourced Society
Just randomly connecting dots today and I had a series of strange thoughts... I've had them before, but they seem much more poignant right now.
We have violently accepted crowd sourcing in different aspects of life that actually damages us. Let me name a few and see if you get my gist: The Stock Market, Belief, Politics, and Law.
No, these aren't really "crowd source" models, as defined, but I get this feeling that we have supplanted fact and real thought with a ridiculously loaded idea that the "wisdom of the crowds" must be right. Or, perhaps, the largest crowd must be right.
The Stock Market is, at times, completely rumor driven, to the point of being whimsical. The older, more established companies don't feel it as much, but ... when someone says, "check the stock price" as proof of failure, doesn't that strike you as dangerously assumptive? I don't deal with the stock market much. And, because of how reactive people (and bots) are to certain trends and announcements, I doubt I'll ever pay close attention to it.
What about Belief? Something as inherently subjective as belief is wielded like a hammer to, not exactly destroy but, overwhelm fact. Many people "believe" something, but when they use it as a counter to fact, a proven thing can the whimsical nature of belief really contest it? Unfortunately, yes. Yes it can. Because people are involved and ignorance thrives when we don't accept the process of how theories are proven. Unfortunately, this can be completely media driven. How to change the hearts and minds of great masses of people in an instant? Put a compelling, albeit false, statement on TV. Sell it to the nation, sell it to the world. Belief wins, at least, until we're crushed by fact.
Law and politics seems to follow the same measure, for better or for worse. A bad thing happens, so you restrict the "bad thing" without fully understanding the problem. You start outlawing symptomatic failures, not perceiving and dealing with the root of the problem. It ends up being dangerous and over-reaching. What's worse now, the over-reach continues, announcing that the symptom is actually the problem. The real problems are overshadowed by the inflamed, but ultimately trivial, that people deem more worthy.
The symptomatic failures continue and you wonder if anyone really understands the root of the problem beyond a whole pile of subjective opinions that constitute "mob reason". We've always known that mobs are not thinking, judging systems. Why do we think that this is the best way to manage and shape society in the future?
I have no idea how to fix it. It would be a process of stopgaps to make sense of the madness and not like subjective thoughts affect real world problems. A person, individually, may be smart enough, but they are definitely not loud enough. The people rule and subjective understanding destroys the nuance between fact—what makes sense-—and what is just plain stupid.
Yes, and unfortunately, I'm actually bashing democracy. But when subjective thought rules the world, there will be no room, or need, for facts.
We have violently accepted crowd sourcing in different aspects of life that actually damages us. Let me name a few and see if you get my gist: The Stock Market, Belief, Politics, and Law.
No, these aren't really "crowd source" models, as defined, but I get this feeling that we have supplanted fact and real thought with a ridiculously loaded idea that the "wisdom of the crowds" must be right. Or, perhaps, the largest crowd must be right.
The Stock Market is, at times, completely rumor driven, to the point of being whimsical. The older, more established companies don't feel it as much, but ... when someone says, "check the stock price" as proof of failure, doesn't that strike you as dangerously assumptive? I don't deal with the stock market much. And, because of how reactive people (and bots) are to certain trends and announcements, I doubt I'll ever pay close attention to it.
What about Belief? Something as inherently subjective as belief is wielded like a hammer to, not exactly destroy but, overwhelm fact. Many people "believe" something, but when they use it as a counter to fact, a proven thing can the whimsical nature of belief really contest it? Unfortunately, yes. Yes it can. Because people are involved and ignorance thrives when we don't accept the process of how theories are proven. Unfortunately, this can be completely media driven. How to change the hearts and minds of great masses of people in an instant? Put a compelling, albeit false, statement on TV. Sell it to the nation, sell it to the world. Belief wins, at least, until we're crushed by fact.
Law and politics seems to follow the same measure, for better or for worse. A bad thing happens, so you restrict the "bad thing" without fully understanding the problem. You start outlawing symptomatic failures, not perceiving and dealing with the root of the problem. It ends up being dangerous and over-reaching. What's worse now, the over-reach continues, announcing that the symptom is actually the problem. The real problems are overshadowed by the inflamed, but ultimately trivial, that people deem more worthy.
The symptomatic failures continue and you wonder if anyone really understands the root of the problem beyond a whole pile of subjective opinions that constitute "mob reason". We've always known that mobs are not thinking, judging systems. Why do we think that this is the best way to manage and shape society in the future?
I have no idea how to fix it. It would be a process of stopgaps to make sense of the madness and not like subjective thoughts affect real world problems. A person, individually, may be smart enough, but they are definitely not loud enough. The people rule and subjective understanding destroys the nuance between fact—what makes sense-—and what is just plain stupid.
Yes, and unfortunately, I'm actually bashing democracy. But when subjective thought rules the world, there will be no room, or need, for facts.
Monday, March 2, 2015
Cookie Cutter Corporate
So, I sell Enterprise IT software and hardware. Mostly VMware based solutions, others where applicable. I've primarily been pre-sales, but I'm very technical and have done plenty of hardware in my day. Not everything, mind you, but I know the nuts and bolts of how each system works, so it's not a stretch to really stick my neck out and make suggestions.
That being said, I find that I'm flying solo in certain situations where... I really do need someone with hands on experience. I'm finding that a considerable amount of new hardware that's built is done from either previous experience or sheer dumb luck of putting the right pieces together. You can't fail in situations like that, or you lose credibility. So, you throw more money at the risk factors, which makes customization and fine tuning ... an exercise in futility.
The problem with Consumer vs. Enterprise is that a "wicked fast" system is, by orders of magnitude, more expensive. It's not like, back in the day, I could pirate the software and see that it's actually a good product... no, you buy it and hope it'll do the job you want it to.
That leads to this cookie cutter philosophy that most Vendors are adopting. Bundle this, bundle that, one price to do all sorts of awesome stuff, but that price is usually about 80% more than you really need to spend if you just selected all the right materials. It's the F-35 Aircraft budget problem. One size fits all, but not really.
WHAT I NEED is I need a junkyard full of new (and some old) parts that I can build from with impunity... then, through experience, I won't be questioning whether I'm making the right decision by using the piece-parts I chose.
Of course, in our mass production world, this really shouldn't be a problem. On paper it all looks good... until it's not on paper anymore and something doesn't work quite like you expect.
That being said, I find that I'm flying solo in certain situations where... I really do need someone with hands on experience. I'm finding that a considerable amount of new hardware that's built is done from either previous experience or sheer dumb luck of putting the right pieces together. You can't fail in situations like that, or you lose credibility. So, you throw more money at the risk factors, which makes customization and fine tuning ... an exercise in futility.
The problem with Consumer vs. Enterprise is that a "wicked fast" system is, by orders of magnitude, more expensive. It's not like, back in the day, I could pirate the software and see that it's actually a good product... no, you buy it and hope it'll do the job you want it to.
That leads to this cookie cutter philosophy that most Vendors are adopting. Bundle this, bundle that, one price to do all sorts of awesome stuff, but that price is usually about 80% more than you really need to spend if you just selected all the right materials. It's the F-35 Aircraft budget problem. One size fits all, but not really.
WHAT I NEED is I need a junkyard full of new (and some old) parts that I can build from with impunity... then, through experience, I won't be questioning whether I'm making the right decision by using the piece-parts I chose.
Of course, in our mass production world, this really shouldn't be a problem. On paper it all looks good... until it's not on paper anymore and something doesn't work quite like you expect.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)