The end of the world as we know it

[bascule]

If there's one thing which has remained more or less constant throughout human evolutions it's been... humans, or more to the point our brains. We've seen some incremental genetic changes which have improved performance but more or less humanity has existed on a timescale which precludes any major revisions to the overall design.

 

Meanwhile, we've evolved into a society beseiged with information overload. To quote historian James Burke, "Never before in history have so many known so little about so much of the world around them." By this he's referencing the grid, the complex set of human interdependencies which allow us all to pool our resources and collectively attempt to solve all our own problems by solving other problems for someone else. Nobody can possibly comprehend how "the grid" as a whole works, it's the most complex contrivance that has ever existed.

 

That's about to change...

 

Neurotechnology and the Semantic Web will make information ubiquitous. Anyone with a neural implant will have access to all of human knowledge any time, anywhere. Any assumptions in our internal ontology of the world will be replaced by scientific knowledge, or at least a consensus of what everyone else is thinking.

 

The Internet is slowly being transformed into an enormous information sorting machine. Blogs/podcasts are the start of this, but after the Semantic Web transforms the entire Internet into one big ontology (and projects like the Semantic MediaWiki allow all information everywhere to be easily cross-referenced) we can start using a Markov Process to solve the access issue that has always existed with the distribution of ideas... someone may have good ideas but have no way of finding someone else who wants to hear those ideas. Similarly, those looking for good ideas have a terrible time finding them because they have to sort through so many bad ideas when people without any reputation are given equal access.

 

A Markov process lets you essentially sort out the "dumb people" from the "smart people" by building a reputation system which functions more or less in the same manner as Google's PageRank. Everyone starts out on an even playing field, then the algorithm looks at who's paying attention to who.

 

Anyway, once we have:

 

1) An ontology describing all of human knowledge

2) A way of ranking those who contribute to the development of the ontology so as to sort the beneficial from the pathological

3) Ubiquitous access to this ontology at the speed of human thought

 

The rate at which society evolves will increase dramatically. Anything which improves the way in which the above operate will further compound this rate.

 

I think all of this will happen within our lifetimes. It really spells out the end of human society as we know it, when all of the fundamental problems with human interaction and thought have been removed and we are able to think, collectively, at the speed of light.

 

Science has been trying to get there. We can see that all of the sciences are fundamentally interconnected. I would say everything naturally follows from physics, which is trying to find an exact description of the ontology of the universe itself. That's perhaps one of the most important pursuits imaginable, but it's become so complex as to be completely inaccessible to the vast majority of the population.

 

Anyway, just some ideas I thought I'd bouce off everyone...

[ecoli]

I'd to think of it as an evolution of human society rather then an END. Things would be different...not over completely. Plus I see some other problems with what you propose. Such as the creation of new knowledge, that will still have to be done.

[john5746]

People of influence aren't always the most intelligent. We will still have celebrities having more influence than educated people on a subject.

[Red_Ninja]

For an alleged 'intelligent' species, human society is utterly stupid, and largely dispicable and reprehensible.

 

The global economy is essentially a glorified pyramid scheme, with a few hundred centi-millionaires and billionaires who are so rich that they get richer by doing nothing, and at the same time literally tens of thousands starving each day.

 

Human technology is amazing. Our social technology is creaking and ancient.

 

"Peak Oil" is nearly upon us. 2004 saw the lowest number of mega-oilfields come online since sometime in the 20s as I recall. Supply will soon dwindle (how long will they keep finding excuses such as terrorism for increasing oil prices?) while demand continues to grow (look at the growth of economies such as China or India). We can't, or won't, find an alternative to oil - largely because it threatens the economic interests of people who are so rich they live in a rareified bubble of opulence and don't come into contact with the 'great unwashed'. These people will always have oil because they're so few and so wealthy. These people will ensure, as organised religion did for thousands of years, that the human race returns to the dark ages.

 

All the above is just my opinion naturally, but it can be viewed in very simple terms. We are witnessing a battle between 'infinite' growth and finite resources. There can only be one winner and we know which that is.

 

Despite all this I live in hope that we can find some kind of redemption before it is too late. Sorry for the melancholy post

[Merrisil]

I think all of this will happen within our lifetimes. It really spells out the end of human society as we know it, when all of the fundamental problems with human interaction and thought have been removed and we are able to think, collectively, at the speed of light.

 

 

I wonder if this is how the Borg got started.

[Nevermore]

It's the end of the world as we know it, and I feel fine.

Am I the only one who was reminded of the REM song by the title?

[ecoli]

It's the end of the world as we know it' date=' and I feel fine.

Am I the only one who was reminded of the REM song by the title?[/quote']

 

no, you're not.

[-Demosthenes-]

Definitely not.

[imatfaal]

!

Moderator Note

 

I have split Cladking's thread necromancy off to a new thread in Philosophy. Cladking you might want to expamd upon your point in that thread to engender discussion

 

http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/72011-epistemology-science-and-technology/