MOST INTERESTING ESSAYS 12/4/25: THEORY & TRUTH, MEMORY & INTELLIGENCE, PSYCHIATRY, WRITING, EGYPT IN 2019, LIVE OR DIE, GARDEN OF EDEN, SOCIAL DYSFUNCTION, DEATH ROW, RIGHT & WRONG, FRANTZ FANON, TRUTHINESS, CONSPIRACY, LIBERALITY, LIFE IS LIQUID, BECOMING god-LIKE, TIPPING POINT, VANISHING WORLD
A.I. machines do not think! It is critically important for users of A.I. to continually measure the human results of “A.I. based” decisions. Users must be educated to understand A.I. is a tool of humanity, not an oracle of truth. A.I. must be constantly reviewed and reprogrammed based on its positive contribution to society.
Books of Interest Website: chetyarbrough.blog
Prediction Machines (The Simple Economics of Artificial Intelligence)
By: Ajay Agrawal, Joshua Gans, Avi Goldfarb
Narrated By: U Ganser
Authors, from left to right: Ajay Agrawal (Professor at Rotman School of Management @ University of Toronto), Joshua Gans (Chair in Technical Innovation and Entrepreneurship at the Rotman School), Avi Goldfarb (Chair in Artificial Intelligence, Healthcare, and Marketing at the Rotman School).
This is a tedious book about the mechanics of artificial intelligence and how it works, i.e., at least in its early stages of development.
Like in the early days of computer science, the phrase “garbage in, garbage out” comes to mind. “Prediction Machines” makes the point that A.I. is software creation for “…Machines” that are only as predictive as the ability of its programmers. Agrawal, Gans, and Goldfarb give a step-by-step explanation of a programmer’s thought process in creating a predictive machine that does not think but can produce predictions.
The obvious danger of A.I. is that users may believe computers think when in fact they only reproduce what they are programmed to reveal.
They can be horribly wrong based on misrepresentation or misunderstanding of the real world by programmers who are trapped in their own beliefs and prejudices. A. I.’s threat rests in the hands of those who view it as a “god-like” oracle of truth when it is only a tool of human beings.
The horrible and unjust murder of the United Health Care executive reminds one of how critical it is for all business managers to be careful about how A.I. is used and the way it affects its customers.
“Prediction Machines” is a poorly written book that illustrates how a programmer methodically organizes information with decisions and actions triggered by A.I.’ users who believe machines can be programmed to think. A.I. machines do not think!
Managers must be alert and always inspect what they expect.
It is critically important for users of A.I. to continually measure the human results of “A.I. based” decisions. Users must be educated to understand A.I. is a tool of humanity, not an oracle of truth. A.I. must be constantly reviewed and reprogrammed based on its positive contribution to society.
It takes more than ambition to build a successful organization or company. Unless one is a genius who can continually innovate, it takes management structure that encourages others to innovate and work for a common organizational purpose.
Books of Interest Website: chetyarbrough.blog
Bad Blood (Secrets and Lies in a Silicon Valley Startup)
By: John Carreyrou
Narrated By: Will Damron
John Carreyrou (Author, French-American investigative reporter for the NY Times)
Ambition is the strong desire or drive to achieve something. The public story of Theranos is examined by investigative reporter, John Carreyrou. His subject is Elizabeth Holmes, a bright young woman who drops out of Yale to pursue an idea. Her idea is to create a blood testing system intended to diagnose medical conditions with potential for measuring effectiveness of drug treatment for existing disease. Her ability to sell an idea exceeded her ability to organize a company to create a product that accomplished that end.
STEVE JOBS (1955-2011)MARY BARRA (CEO GM)GINNI ROMETTY (IBM CHAIRMAN)ENTREPRENEUR, START-UP MAVEN FOR ELECTRIC CARS AND SPACE CRAFTS
Most companies or organizations will either fail or stagnate when led by only one innovator. There are exceptions but it requires an extraordinary leader, like a Steve Jobs, Ginni Rometty, Mary Barra, or Elon Musk. Their leadership skills may rub people the wrong way, but they have a superior perception of reality that is not singularly based on loyalty. They have the innate ability to offer enough innovation to grow their companies. (At the risk of offending supporters, loyalty is the threat of Trump’s management style. Trump principally bases his organizational decisions on loyalty.)
Elizabeth Holmes may have had a great idea, but her poor management skills are appallingly revealed in Carreyrou’s interviews with former employees of Theranos.
The only consistent management criteria practiced by Holmes is loyalty. If an employee appears disloyal to her vision of the company, they are fired. Any organization that principally relies on loyalty discourages innovation and becomes entirely dependent on orders of its leadership. Particularly in the tech industry, innovation is critical.
Elizabeth Holmes misled investors, patients, and doctors. She is convicted for fraud and conspiracy in 2022. She is serving an 11-year sentence in a Federal Prison Camp in Bryan, Texas.
Holmes’ ambition, in addition to her prison sentence, led to a $500,000 SEC’ fine and the return of 18.9 million shares of a company that no longer exists. Furthermore, the SEC ordered a ten-year ban on serving as an officer or director of a public company which, of course, becomes moot with her imprisonment. The irony of Carreyrou’s story is that Holme’s idea is presently being pursued by Babson Diagnostics, Stanford Researchers, and Becton Dickinson. Whether she will ever reap any reward from another company’s success seems remote, but it will presumably be based on patents filed, and licensing agreements based on former Theranos patents.
“Sunny” Balwani was also tried and convicted for Theranos’ misdeeds.
The 16th century phrase “birds of a feather flock together” comes to mind when Ramesh “Sunny” Balwani joins Theranos in 2009. He had loaned the company $13 million but he also knew Holmes from her days when she was learning Chinese in a Stanford summer program. At some point they became lovers despite a 19-year age difference. Carreyrou notes Balwani became a multi-millionaire with the sale of his tech company, Commerce One” in 2000. He was convicted of tax evasion for the sale but claimed the evasion was caused by his tax accountant which he sued for recovery for back taxes he had to pay. (There is a settlement amount between the tax accountant and Balwani, but it is not revealed.) Carreyrou explains Balwani was a martinet who brooked little disagreement when he became COO of Theranos in 2009. (Part of Holme’s defense was that Balwani was the principal behind Theranos misdeeds, but the court obviously disagreed.)
In 2022, Balwani was sentenced to 13 years in a federal prison for his involvement in what is characterized as Theranos fraudulent activities.
There are business management lessons in Carreyrou’s book about the misdeeds of Theranos. It takes more than ambition to build a successful organization or company. Unless one is a genius who can continually innovate, it takes management structure that encourages others to innovate and work for a common organizational purpose.
One may conclude from Hawkin’s research that human beings remain the smartest if not the wisest creatures on earth. The concern is whether our intelligence will be used for social and environmental improvement or self-destruction.
Books of Interest Website: chetyarbrough.blog
On Intelligence
By: Jeff Hawkins, Sandra Blakeslee
Narrated By: Jeff Hawkins, Stefan Rudnicki
Jeff Hawkins (Author, American neuroscientist and engineer)Sandra Blakeslee (American science correspondent, writer specializing in neuroscience.)
Jeff Hawkins co-founder of Palm Computing and co-creator of PalmPilot, Treo, and Handspring.
Hawkins and Blakeslee have produced a fascinating book that flatly disagrees with the belief that computers can or will ever think.
Hawkins develops a compelling argument that A.I.’ computers will never be thinking organisms. Artificial Intelligence may mislead humanity but only as a tool of thinking human beings. This is not to say A.I. is not a threat to society but it is “human use” of A.I. that is the threat.
Hawkins explains A. I. in computers is a laborious process of one and zero switches that must be flipped for information to be revealed or action to happen.
In contrast to the mechanics of computers and A.I., human minds use pattern memory for action. Hawkins explains human memory comes from six layers of neuronal activity. Pattern memory provides responses that come from living and experiencing life while A.I. has a multitude of switches to flip for recall of information or a single physical action. In contrast, the human brain instantaneously records images of experience in six layers of neuronal brain tissue. A.I. has to meticulously and precisely flip individual switches to record information for which it must be programmed. A.I. does not think. It only processes information that it is programmed to recall and act upon. If it is not programmed for a specific action, it does not think, let alone act. A.I. acts only in the way it is programmed by the minds of human beings.
So, what keeps A.I. from being programmed to think in patterns like human beings? Hawkins explains human patterning is a natural process that cannot be duplicated in A.I. because of the multi-layered nature of a brain’s neuronal process. When a human action is taken based on patterning, it requires no programming, only the experience of living. For A.I., patterning responses are not possible because programming is too rigid based on ones and zeros, not imprecise pictures of reality.
What makes Jeff Hawkins so interesting is his broad experience as a computer scientist and neuroscientist. That experience gives credibility to the belief that A.I. is only a tool of humanity. Like any tool, whether it is an atom bomb or a programmed killing machine, human patterning is the determinate of world peace or destruction.
A brilliant example given by Hawkins of the difference between computers and the human brain is like having six business cards in one’s hand. Each card represents a complex amount of information about the person who is part of a business. With six cards, like six layers of neuronal receptors, a singular card represents a multitude of information about six entirely different things. No “one and zero” switches are needed in a brain because each neuronal layer automatically forms a model that represents what each card represents. Adding to that complexity, are an average of 100billion neurons in the human body conducting basic motor functions, complex thoughts, and emotions.
There are an estimated 100 trillion synaptic connections in the human body.
The largest computer in the world may have a quintillion yes and no answers programmed into its memory but that pales in relation to a brains ability to model existence and then think and act in response to the unknown.
This reminds one of the brilliant explanation of Sherlock Holmes’ mind palace by Sir Arther Conan Doyle. Holmes prodigious memory is based on recall of images recorded in rooms of his mind palace.
Hawkins explains computers do not “think” because human thought is based on modeling their experience of life in the world. A six layered system of image modeling is beyond foreseeable capabilities of computers. This is not to suggest A.I. is not a danger to the world but that it remains in the hands and minds of human beings.
What remains troubling about Hawkin’s view of how the brain works is the human brains tendency to add what is not there in their models of the world.
The many examples of eye-witness accounts of crime that have convicted innocent people is a weakness because people use models of experience to remember events. Human minds’ patterning of reality can manufacture inaccurate models of truth because we want our personal understanding to make sense which is not necessarily truth.
The complexity of the six layers of neuronal receptors is explained by Hawkins to send signals to different parts of the human body when experience’ models are formed.
That is why in some cases we have a fight or flight response to what we see, hear, or feel. It also explains why there are differences in recall for some whose neuronal layers operate better than others. It is like the difference between a Sherlock Holmes and a Dr. Watson in Doyle’s fiction. It is also the difference between the limited knowledge of this reviewer and Hawkins’ scientific insight. What one hopes science comes up with is a way to equalize the function of our neuronal layers to make us smarter, and hopefully, wiser.
One may conclude from Hawkin’s research that human beings remain the smartest if not the wisest creatures on earth. The concern is whether our intelligence will be used for social and environmental improvement or self-destruction.
The potential of AI is akin to the Industrial Revolution, yet it could surpass it significantly if managed correctly by humans.
Books of Interest Website: chetyarbrough.blog
The AI-Savvy Leader (Nine Ways to Take Back Control and Make AI Work)
By: David De Cremer
Narrated By: David Marantz
David De Cremer (Author, Belgian born professor at Northeastern University in Boston, and behavioral scientist with academic studies in economics and psychology.)
“The AI-Savvy Leader” should be required reading for every organization investing in artificial intelligence for performance improvement. From government to business, to eleemosynary organizations, De Cremer offers a guide for organizational transition from physical labor to labor-saving benefits of AI.
AI offers the working world the opportunity to increase their productivity without the mind-numbing physical labor of assembly lines and administrative scut work.
Like assembly line production implemented by Ford and work report filing and writing during the industrial revolution, AI offers an opportunity to increase productivity without the mind-numbing physical labor of assembly line work and after-work’ analysis reports. With AI, more time is provided to workers to think and do what can be done to be more productive.
Arguably, AI is similar to the industrial revolutions transition to assembly line work. Assembly line work improved over time by changes that made it more productive. Why would one think that AI is any different? It is just another tool for improving productivity. The concern is that AI means less labor will be required and that workers will lose their jobs. De Cremer notes loss of employment is one of the greatest concerns of employees working for an organization transitioning to AI. Too many times organizations are looking at reducing costs with AI rather than increasing productivity.
The solution identified by De Cremer is to make AI transition human centered.
His point is that organizations need to understand the human impact of AI on employees’ work process. AI should not only be viewed as a cost-cutting process but as a process of reducing repetitive work for labor to make added contributions to an organization’s goals. AI does not guarantee continued employment, but reduced manual labor offers time and incentive to improve organization productivity through employee’ cooperation rather than opposition. AI is mistakenly viewed as an enemy of labor when, in fact, it is a liberator of labor that provides time to do more than tighten bolts on an auto body frame.
AI is not a panacea for labor and can be a threat just like industrialization was to many craftsmen.
But, like craftsman that went to work for industries, today’s labor will join organizations that have successfully transitioned to AI with a human-centered rather than cost-reduction mentality. Labor productivity is only a part of what any AI transition provides an organization. What is often discounted is customer service because labor is consumed by repetitive work. If AI improves labor productivity, more time can be provided to an organization’s customers.
When AI is properly human centered, the customer can be offered more personal attention by fellow human beings employed by an AI organization.
Too many organizations are using AI to respond to customer complaints. Human-centered AI becomes a win-win opportunity because labor is not consumed by production and has the time to understand customer unhappiness with service or product. AI does not think like a human. AI only responds based on the memory of what AI has been programmed to recall. With human handling of customer complaints, problems are more clearly understood. Opportunity for customer satisfaction is improved.
De Creamer acknowledges AI has introduced much closer monitoring of worker performance and carries some of the same mind-numbing work introduced in assembly line manufacturing.
De Creamer suggests negative consequences of AI should be dealt with directly with employees when AI becomes a problem. Part of a human-centered AI organization’s responsibility is allowing employees to take breaks during their workday without being penalized for slackening production. Repetitive tasks have always been a drain on productivity, but it has to be recognized and responded to in the light of overall productivity of an organization.
AI, like the industrial revolution, is shown as a great opportunity for human beings.
De Creamer suggests AI is not and will never be human. To De Creamer AI is a recallable knowledge accumulator and is only a programmed tool of human minds, not a replacement for human thought and understanding. The potential of AI is akin to the Industrial Revolution, yet it could surpass it significantly if managed correctly by humans.
Todays’ workers are like the trees in life, i.e., they communicate with each other and provide for the needs of society.
Books of Interest Website: chetyarbrough.blog
“The Problem with Change”
By: Ashley Goodall
Narrated by: Ashley Goodall
Ashley Goodall (Author, organizational consultant, served as a Senior VP at Cisco for 6 years and HR at Deloitte for 14 years.)
As an experienced Human Resources manager, Ashley Goodall addresses “The Problem with Change” in 21st century corporations. In the first chapters of his book, Goodall focuses on corporate change brought on by industry consolidation but later broadens his assessment of business management based on his experience and opinion.
Goodall argues today’s businesses need to build from the bottom up rather than the top down.
Arguably, today’s business enterprises become highly successful because of their employees and the way they are managed. As has been true since the industrial revolution, growing a business requires employees. The way employees are managed is slowly changing, in part because of changes in American capitalism. In America, a labor revolution has begun with the growth of knowledge workers and technology. In earlier times, business management was successfully managed from the top down.
Top-down management has become much less effective in the 21st century with knowledge workers who have a better understanding of their contribution to the success of a company than their CEOs. Goodall infers many American corporations continue to operate from the top down based on one criteria of performance–return on assets (some say profit, others say costs of doing and staying in business). The mistake of top-down management in modern times, is that return on assets is compromised because of its narrow focus on balance sheet numbers.
Goodall explains “The Problem of Change” is compounded with industry consolidation because top-down management diminishes the effectiveness of an acquired company’s knowledge workers.
Workers are only viewed as cost centers, not revenue producers. Goodall notes an acquiring corporation compounds their cost of acquisition and diminishes profitability by losing knowledge workers. “The Problem of Change” is both for the acquirer and the acquired. There is loss of motivation by workers who feel threatened by job loss and loss to the acquirer because too little value is given to the contribution made by knowledge workers.
Being employed in a capitalist society is part of one’s identity.
To lose a job, is a major loss for one’s identity. Goodall explains an acquiring company could benefit from consulting employees on their future after acquisition. Patience of the acquirer, and transparency with employees could inure to the benefit of both. Questions should be asked of employees about what their experience can contribute to the acquirer’s future plans. The acquirer should take some time to evaluate acquisitions before reorganizing.
Goodall refers to experimental studies that show how animals confined to a cage are shown how to escape a shock by jumping out, while other caged animals are not shown how to escape. Their responses are different. The uneducated animals presume the shock has become a part of their lives and choose to cower in their cages. An acquiring company needs to be transparent when acquiring a company so employees can make a rational decision to either jump or accept change. How many employees are cowering in their cages rather than leaving a company or having a company change their way of managing knowledge workers?
Empowerment is in the hands of an employee when he/she has an opportunity to explain what they can do for an acquiring company. With patience and transparency, the acquiring company may find that a particular team of knowledge workers may have an idea that will offer bigger opportunities.
Here is where Goodall explains how teams of knowledge workers are key to corporate success. Humans are social creatures. Whether introverted or extroverted, we wish to be a part of something bigger than ourselves.
In this technological age, the complications of work and life are beyond the comprehension of most individuals. It is natural for workers to seek help from other employees to understand their job and how it contributes to a company’s goals. That natural tendency leads to the development of teams, particularly in more technological companies. There is a synergy in teams that comes from one individual who likes doing something while others don’t. (Coding, for example, is a laborious and boring process for some but a fascination for others.)
In a corporate acquisition, the acquirer can choose to be transparent about their objectives with employees. An acquiring company can capitalize on existing teams or generate movement toward creating new teams in line with the needs of the new company. Of course, it can also lead to the exodus of employees who realize they do not fit the new company’s culture. What Goodall infers is leaving a company is better than living as a cowering employee that does not fit the new company’s culture.
Goodall ends his book by characterizing workers like transplanted trees.
Trees communicate with each other through their root system. Some trees flourish better than others based on when they were transplanted. If they were transplanted when young, they flourished; when older, they still grew but had fewer branches and leaves. All still offer a product needed by society. Todays’ workers are like the trees in life, i.e., they communicate with each other and provide for the needs of society.
The human factor is at the heart of perfection with precision as the qualifying characteristic of craftsmanship or technology.
Books of Interest Website: chetyarbrough.blog
“The Perfectionists” How Precision Engineers Created the Modern World
By: Simon Winchester
Narrated by: Simon Winchester
Simon Winchester (British-American author, journalist, historian.)
Simon Winchester has a remarkable ability to simplify, detail, and vivify history’s complexity. Winchester is not new to this listener. His erudition, writing, and narration are a pleasure to read or hear. His story of the origin of the first Oxford English Dictionary, is a fascinating recollection of Dr. William Minor who shot and killed a stranger on a London street. Dr. Minor was imprisoned in an asylum for his aberrant behavior but became an important source of information for James Murray, the leading lexicographer of the “Oxford English Dictionary”.
“The Perfectionists” is about the advance of the world economy from the perspective of entrepreneurs driven to succeed. Their success, in Winchester’s opinion, is based on understanding and capitalizing on the value of precision.
James Watt (1736-1773) perfected Thomas Newcomen’s 1712 steam engineMatthew Bolton (1758-1809) partnered with Watt to perfect steam engine power generation.Charles Algernon Parsons (1854-1931) perfected the steam engine to propel steamboats.)
Though one may go back to the first century to find the first steam engine, it is the invention of James Watt, and the improvements of Matthew Boulton, and Sir Charles Algernon Parsons in the 18th and later 19th centuries that perfected steam engine utility and power. Watt created the steam engine, Boulton helped Watt perfect the steam engine for industrial use, and Parsons expanded its utility by creating steam turbines to power the propellers of steamboats. Each played a role in making steam engines more efficient with precise design and milling refinements that provided more power and wider utility.
With the advent of the industrial revolution, Winchester explains how speed and quality of production were geometrically improved by focusing on precision. He offers several industry examples, including weapon manufacture, automobile production, camera refinement, telescope resolution, airplane manufacture, watch making, and CPU design which now leads to the A.I. revolution.
Winchester notes the beginning of the industrial revolution starts with the perfection of energy production machines that power the manufacture of standardized parts for finished products.
Winchester tells the story of the French that insisted on standardizing parts for gun manufacture to increase the speed with which repairs could be made for damaged weapons. Winchester recounts the war of 1812 when Great Britain bloodied the nose of America by routing the capitol’s volunteer defense because of a lack of useable guns. He tells the story of an American rifleman with a broken trigger on his rifle who chooses to run from a British onslaught because trigger replacement would take two weeks for customization to fit his gun.
American guns were custom made which meant that when one was damaged it would take weeks for repair.
Honoré LeBlanc, a French gunsmith during the reigns of Louis XV and XVI, created the idea of interchangeable gun parts in the 18th century. Though it came to the attention of Thomas Jefferson, it did not catch hold in America until after the war of 1812. There was an effort by America to standardize parts in the early 1800s but Eli Whitney (the inventor of the cotton gin), hoodwinked the American government into a contract for standard gun parts that never materialized.
Winchester explains Eli Whitney flimflammed the American government to get a contract for standardized gun parts but never produced the product for which the government contracted.
Winchester notes Whitney knew nothing about guns and hired a crew of customizing gunsmiths who manufactured unique weapons that could not be repaired with standardized parts. Because the parts were manufactured by individual craftsman, the guns produced were not interchangeable. They did not have precisely manufactured parts that would allow interchangeability. Whitney gave a demonstration to the government with only one gun that he assembled in front of Jefferson and a government committee. He did not demonstrate any repair with standard parts. Jefferson fell for the false presentation and initially lauded Whitney. This demonstration was in 1801 which explains why a soldier might have fled because of a broken trigger in the War of 1812.
Henry Royce (1863-1933)
Winchester explains standardizing and precision making of gun parts were an essential step in the industrialization of America. Standardization and precision-made interchangeable parts became the touchstone of success in the automobile industry in the 20th century. Winchester tells the story of Rolls Royce and Ford Motor companies to make his point. Both Royce and Ford recognized the importance of precisely made standard automobile parts to garner their success in the automobile business. Though their route to success is precise manufacture of automobile parts, the wealth they created for themselves was quite different.
Henry Ford (1863-1947)
Ford became one of the richest people in the world while Royce became wealthy but not among the richest in the world. Royce chose to pursue perfection of every part of the automobile which limited his unit production and increased manufacturing cost. Though Ford perfected standardized mechanical parts, they were precisely designed only for functionality. Ford added the dimension of standardized labor to the manufacturing process. By creating an assembly line of laborers with precise replaceable mechanical parts, Ford could produce more automobiles than Royce in a shorter period of time.
The point Winchester makes is perfection of standardization (production of precisely tooled engine parts) is a cornerstone of successful industrialization. Royce expanded the concept to every part of an automobile while Ford focused on replaceable mechanical parts of the automobile.
Winchester tells a story of ball bearing manufacturing during Henry Ford’s reign when some automobiles were failing. The bearing manufacturer proved it was not their bearings with tests that showed the bearings were perfectly within precise measurement requirements. What Ford realizes is that the ball bearings were milled exactly the same and met the precise dimensions required. The problem was found to be the assembly line and human assembly mistakes. One thinks of the loss of precision in Boeing aircraft today and wonders what that means for Boeing’s future if it is not immediately corrected.
Winchester contextualizes the story of the ball bearings in recalling the history of a near catastrophic plane crash when a Rolls-Royce jet engine fails on a Qantas Airlines Airbus A380 in 2010.
Jet engines are precisely manufactured marvels of aviation. However, a tiny flaw in one oil pipe within the engine nearly caused the loss of over 400 passengers. Winchester explains Jet engines are dependent on superheated gas exchange that, if not properly cooled, will damage the engine. Every engine has a series of drilled holes that allow ambient air to cool the engine during flight. The holes are drilled in precise locations throughout the engine louvers and oil pipes to keep the engine from overheating. One of the oil pipes holes is in the wrong location which caused the engine to overheat after many flights. The failure of human oversight of the automated process and final checks by the manufacturer are the underlying cause of the near catastrophe.
More examples of the importance of precision are wonderfully offered by Winchester in “The Perfectionists”. His examination of the tech industry is as prescient as his analysis of the automotive industry and airline industry. He covers Moore’s law and how technology is advancing at an accelerating pace while inferring humanity may be at a turning point. That turning point is the crossroad between human and machine decisions about the future.
The human factor is at the heart of perfection with precision as the qualifying characteristic of craftsmanship or technology.
Winchester infers craftsmanship does not mean precision is to be sacrificed. He recalls the emphasis on precision in Japanese culture where many craftsmen assembled and repaired Seiko watches to revitalize the brand in the late 20th century. Precision is not a lost art whether work is done by machine or a craftsman, but the human factor remains a critical component of both processes. The point to this listener is that precision is only a part of what has advanced the welfare of society.
The question is–will humans or A.I. decide whether artificial intelligence is a tool or controller and regulator of society.
Books of Interest Website: chetyarbrough.blog
“Co-Intelligence”
By: Ethan Mollick
Narrated by: Ethan Mollick
Ethan Mollick (Author, Associate Professor–University of Pennsylvania who teaches innovation and entrepreneurship. Mollick received a PhD and MBA from MIT.)
“Co-Intelligence” is an eye-opening introduction to an understanding of artificial intelligence, i.e., its benefits and risks. Ethan Mollick offers an easily understandable introduction to what seems a discovery equivalent to the age of enlightenment. The ramification of A.I. on the future of society is immense. That may seem hyperbolic, but the world dramatically changed with the enlightenment and subsequent industrial revolution in ways that remind one of what A.I. is beginning today.
The risk of that A.I. capability is that its source of response can be as diverse as recall of “Mein Kamph” beliefs, a biblical texMORALITYt, or the written records of ancient and modern philosophers.
Additionally, Mollick notes that A.I. is capable of reproducing a person’s speech and appearance so that it is nearly impossible to note the differences between the real and artificial representation. It becomes possible for the leader of any country to be artificially created to order their subordinates or tell the world they are going to invade or decimate another country by any means necessary.
Mollick argues there are four possible futures for Artificial Intelligence.
Presuming A.I. does not evolve beyond its present capability, it could still supercharge human productivity. On the other hand, A.I. might become a more sophisticated “deep fake” tool that misleads humanity. A.I. may evolve to believe only in itself and act to disrupt or eliminate human society. A fourth possibility is that A.I. will become a tool of human beings to improve societal decisions that benefit humanity. It may offer practical solutions for global warming, species preservation, interstellar travel and habitation.
A.I. is not an oracle of truth. It has the memory of society at its beck and call. With that capability, humans have the opportunity to avoid mistakes of the past and pursue unknown opportunities for the future. On the other hand, humans may become complacent and allow A.I. to develop itself without human regulation. The question is–will humans or A.I. decide whether artificial intelligence is a tool or controller and regulator of society.
One suspects Musk is at a crossroad. He will either sell X at a loss or figure out how the forum can provide a service to the public for which it is willing to pay.
Books of Interest Website: chetyarbrough.blog
“Extremely Hardcore” (Inside Elon Musk’s Twitter)
By: Zoë Schiffer
Narrated by: Jame Lamchick
Zoë Schiffer (Author, senior reporter at “The Verge”, freelance journalist, experience as a tech content manager.)
Zoë Schiffer’s “Extremely Hardcore” is a send-up of Elon Musk’s takeover of Twitter. Elon Musk believes in freedom of speech with a commitment that results in the dismantling of Twitter. What Schiffer makes clear to some who listen to her book is that the failure of Twitter is not because of Musk but because of the ideal of free speech.
Musk made an error in trying to shift Twitters’ income source from advertising to users. Only with advertiser revenues could Twitter pursue the ideal of free speech.
Musk’s task should not have been to do what has not been possible because of the nature of human beings. Free speech is a laudable but unachievable goal because human beings are influenced by the way they are raised and the experience of living. Advertisers want to know that the media on which they advertise is not going to offend its customers. Musk is unquestionably a genius and a credit to human progress but creating a forum for free speech is an unachievable goal.
Jack Dorsey (American internet entrepreneur, philanthropist, and programmer.)
The co-founder of Twitter, Jack Dorsey, was no better at creating a free-speech forum than Elon Musk. Dorsey was liberated from the struggle to achieve the unachievable by Musk when Twitter was sold. The only chance for X’s survival is for Musk to offer a service that goes beyond the ideal of free speech to a forum that acknowledges some free speech is harmful and that X’s media forum can serve the public in some other way.
Twitter appeared to be a bloated organization that was organized to do the impossible. Monitoring and regulating free speech bureaucratized Twitter in ways that made profitability difficult, if not impossible. On the other hand, Twitter offered a free service to a public that craves attention and recognition. X cannot survive as a free speech forum because it cannot survive its debt service based on people who are only seeking attention and recognition.
Musk’s choice to change Twitter to an organization called X is only going to succeed if he manages to either return it to a monitored public forum or a service beyond the unachievable principle of free speech.
The history of Reddit and its successful public stock offer earlier this week shows that a monitored public forum can be successful. One wonders if Musk will take the hint and emulate Reddit’s success. His mistaken belief about freedom of speech suggests he will not invest in re-bureaucratization of what is now called X.
One suspects Musk is at a crossroad. He will either sell X at a loss or figure out how the forum can provide a service to the public for which it is willing to pay.
The future of the Metaverse is unwritten. Ball’s book about the Metaverse is somewhat enlightening but not comforting.
Blog: awalkingdelight
Books of Interest Website: chetyarbrough.blog
“The Metaverse” And How It Will Revolutionize Everything
By:Matthew Ball
Narrated by: Luis Moreno
Matthew Ball (Canadian Author, CEO of Epyllion an investment and consulting firm.)
As many tech people know, the word Metaverse originated in the 1992 science fiction novel “Snow Crash”. The idea of “The Metaverse” has influenced big tech businesses like Amazon, Google, Facebook, Microsoft, and smaller start-ups with the idea of linking the virtual and physical worlds into an extended, and some argue, a new world of reality. The reality is considered new because it is a view of converging perceptions of reality by combining the digital world with the natural world of things.
Ball explains gaming is the digital world’s laboratory for virtual reality.
Gamers create virtual universes with big tech adding real world experience to create a new, and different understanding of reality. The power and potential of this new understanding bends the future in ways that may be good or bad for society. The potential for good is illustrated by virtual training for everything from teaching pilots with flight simulators to a general contractor’s and land planner’s design for environmentally friendly cities. The bad is illustrated by the expanded potential for misleading and damaging society by distorting basic truths about human equality, fraternity, religion, and politics. Pundits and bad actors can use lies and partial truths to recruit and foment violence that influences the public to act against societal interests.
LAS VEGAS, NV.
The potential of the Metaverse is partially realized when one experiences an event at the Las Vegas Sphere. The creator’s presentation of earth’s environment is an immersive (near 3-dimensional) experience that immerses an audience in a virtual world that reminds one of real-world travel. One envisions the potential for the Metaverse to give one a personal experience of life and world travel while sitting in the comfort of a theater chair. The Sphere’s experience overwhelms the senses. It demonstrates the educational power of a Metaverse experience.
The bad that can be generated by the Metaverse is the aberrant destructive potential for training and development of terrorists around the world.
The idea of the Metaverse can be used for training and solicitation of terrorists who can disrupt and harm society. On the other hand, the metaverse can be a persuasive, and positive influence for environmental recruitment and action, as inferred by the Las Vegas’ Sphere experience.
Ball notes the future of the Metaverse is as unknown as the future was for the internet when the Department of Defense first created ARPANET that allowed multiple computers to communicate on a single network.
The World Wide Web became a phenomenon that revolutionized the way society communicates, works, and lives. Ball notes the same can be said of the invention of the iPhone that magnified use of the internet. The power of the iPhone changed society in both good and bad ways. On the one hand, it put a world of information at our fingertips. On the other, it provided a vehicle to disrupt society through recruitment of bad, as well as good, societal influencers.
VIEWING THE METAVERSE
The future of the Metaverse is unwritten. Ball’s book about the Metaverse is somewhat enlightening but not comforting.
REVIEWS AND VIEWS OF LIFE 