Apr 04

Three questions for evaluating a technology (or rather, an implementation of a technology):

Posted on by

Three questions for evaluating a technology (or rather, an implementation of a technology):

1. Does the technology have the potential to benefit everyone equally?

2. What are the risks and rewards?

3. Does the technology more strongly promote autonomy or dependence?

I would add the words “or interdependence” to the third question.

Originally shared by Singularity Hub

INTERVIEW: Star Trek or Mad Max? Why What Happens in the Future Is Up to Us http://suhub.co/2oyLfIN

Apr 02

I don’t work long hours. I don’t find it productive.

Posted on by

I don’t work long hours. I don’t find it productive.

Apparently I’m not alone in this.

Originally shared by Guy Kawasaki

” If some of history’s greatest figures didn’t put in immensely long hours, maybe the key to unlocking the secret of their creativity lies in understanding not just how they labored but how they rested, and how the two relate.” http://bit.ly/2nZ63bI

Apr 01

The latest edition of Compelling Science Fiction features my story “Aspiration Value”.

Posted on by

The latest edition of Compelling Science Fiction features my story “Aspiration Value”. It’s near-future SF, sparked off by a YouTube lecture I saw from a futurist and entrepreneur where he suggested, in passing, that in future people might make money by having affiliate links visible to passers-by who could use them to buy the clothes they were wearing.

Anyone who’s ever tried to make money online (including by indie publishing) knows it’s not easy. So that’s where I started.

http://compellingsciencefiction.com/stories/aspirationvalue.html

Mar 30

One of the things I take from this: you know how supervillains always have these huge bases and elaborate machinery,…

Posted on by

One of the things I take from this: you know how supervillains always have these huge bases and elaborate machinery, but there’s no sign of anyone who works on making them – just one toadying minion and a few incompetent guards? Well, we’re getting closer to having that old trope become a bit more realistic.

Originally shared by Singularity Hub

These 6 Trends Are Retooling Manufacturing as We Know It http://bit.ly/2nfwk2g

Mar 30

“Everyone should read this and that says a lot because I’m not a fan of male writers but the female characters are…

Posted on by

“Everyone should read this and that says a lot because I’m not a fan of male writers but the female characters are so well written and they aren’t the wimpy kind either than need saving. In fact I reckon if anyone needs saving it would be Sparx first.”

Yeah, pretty much what I was going for.

Also:

“I’m a big fan of stories that represent who we are. I hadn’t realised how important it was to also have stories set in places familiar to us as well.”

Yep.

https://www.nixwhittaker.com/single-post/2017/03/30/Review-Auckland-Allies-by-Mike-Reeves-McMillan
Mar 30

A more pessimistic vision of the future than I usually share.

Posted on by

A more pessimistic vision of the future than I usually share. I think unduly so (though they do acknowledge that some are optimistic). There are definitely big challenges ahead, though, and few governments are prepared for them; many haven’t caught up with the technology that exists today, let alone thought about what’s on the near horizon.

Originally shared by Winchell Chung

Just look at all those robots

https://theoutline.com/post/1316/fourth-industrial-revolution-developing-economies

Mar 28

This is not the same as GM crops (introducing DNA from another organism); it’s editing the existing organism’s DNA…

Posted on by

This is not the same as GM crops (introducing DNA from another organism); it’s editing the existing organism’s DNA as a faster version of selective breeding.

It’s still not fast, though, partly because the genetics of crops are not well understood yet.

And, of course (something the article doesn’t address), the big problem with genetically manipulated crops isn’t that they’re somehow “dangerous”; it’s that they’re owned by the large corporates that develop them, who use their monopoly power and leverage for their own benefit, not that of the farmers or consumers (or the environment).

Also not addressed: a large part of the problem with the food supply is, and has been for decades, not the amount of food that can be produced worldwide, but the logistics of distributing it to where it’s needed. And political barriers and corruption are a big part of that.

That’s without even getting into the question of food waste.

(Sorry, food and nutrition are interests of mine, and something I’ve studied at a university level; they’re complicated, and a lot of the problems are people problems, not technology problems.)

Originally shared by Singularity Hub

How to Feed 9.7 Billion People? CRISPR Gene Editing For Crops http://bit.ly/2nfpxFL