Is it ethical?
I haven’t read the paper yet, but I’ll be interested in comments from people who do.
Category Archives: Social Commentary
The Eloi
Are we raising a generation of them?
Silicon Valley Entrepreneurs
…are becoming oligarchs:
Like the moguls of the early 20th century, who bought and sold senators like so many cabbages, the new elite constitute a basic threat to democracy. They dominate their industries with market shares that would make the old moguls blush. Google, for example, controls some 80 percent of search, while Google and Apple provide the operating system software for almost 90 percent of smartphones. Similarly, more than half of Americans, and 60 percent of Europeans, use Facebook, making it easily the world’s dominant social media site. In contrast, the world’s top 10 oil companies account for barely 40 percent of the world’s oil production.
Like the Gilded Age moguls, the tech oligarchs also personally dominate their companies. Sergey Brin, Larry Page and Eric Schmidt, for example, control roughly two-thirds of the voting stock in Google. Brin and Page each is worth more $20 billion. Larry Ellison, the founder of Oracle, owns just under 23 percent of his company; worth $41 billion, Forbes ranked him the country’s third-richest person. Bill Gates, the richest, is worth a cool $66 billion and still controls 7 percent of his firm. Newcomer Mark Zuckerberg’s 29.3 percent stake in Facebook was worth $16 billion as of July 25, according to Bloomberg.
This combination of market and ownership concentration needs to be curbed.
…Conservatives, for their part, can only face up to the new “axis of evil” by stepping outside their ideology strictures and instinctive embrace of wealth. The increasingly monopolistic nature of the high-tech community, and its widespread disregard for the privacy of the individual, should concern conservatives, as it would have the framers of the Constitution.
This seems related to this.
Libertarians And Conservatives
Can they find common ground through the Constitution?
Preserving, protecting, and defending the Constitution, especially its Bill of Rights, provides ample grounds for unity between libertarians and most conservatives. Many of our civil liberties — dear to libertarians and conservatives both — are under assault by progressive forces.
There is much to collaborate on: preserving freedom of speech, and of the press, and of the free exercise of religion; honoring the right to peaceably assemble and petition for redress of grievances; not infringing the right to keep and bear arms; rehabilitation the right of people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonably searches and seizures; the right not to be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law. Even, casting the net a bit wider, the classical gold standard and the repeal of the Estate tax!
They’d better.
IQ
Why can’t we have an intelligent conversation about it?
Because it’s politically incorrect. All part of the Left’s war on science.
Caffeine Addiction
I started drinking coffee a few weeks ago, primarily for medicinal purposes (a couple cups in the morning). I don’t really enjoy it, and I’ve never noticed any mental effect from doing so. If I didn’t make a pot for her every morning, I probably wouldn’t bother. When I skip a day, I don’t notice anything, either. So maybe I’m sort of impervious to its effects. Of course, that could also mean that I’m not getting any of the hoped-for health benefits of drinking it.
Radical Life Extension
What do various religions think about it?
That term, used primarily by bioethicists and medical researchers, is still surfacing in mainstream conversation—most people report that they haven’t heard it before—but that’s changing quickly. Radical life extension doesn’t usually conjure Itskovian avatars, but rather a body of slightly more intuitive (but still abstract) “treatments aimed at prolonging life.” The Pew project was undertaken because leading bioethicists foresee schismatic discussion around anti-aging research and treatments to become increasingly pointed in the not-distant future. Here we have the first large-scale breakdown of public perceptions.
I found this kind of interesting:
…people who do believe in an afterlife are actually more likely to favor radical life-extending therapies.
Which is a little counter-intuitive. Then there’s this:
Radically extending life “probably wouldn’t be a problem for most” Muslims, according to Aisha Musa, a professor of religion at Colgate University. According to Musa and others, Muslims believe Allah knows the exact life span of each person from birth to death, or what the Quran calls one’s “term appointed.”
“Since you can’t really violate God’s plan for you, life extension is alright because it’s part of God’s will,” Musa said.
According to Mohsen Kadivar, a Shia theologian currently teaching at Duke, many Shia ayatollahs would likely sanction life-extension therapies as long as their object was not to extend life indefinitely. “There is a difference between life extension and immortality,” Kadivar says, adding, “The first is acceptable and the second is not acceptable, according to Islam and the Quran.”
Yes, that is a crucial distinction. As I’ve noted before, I don’t know many (or perhaps even any) people who seek immortality in the community. We just want to live as long as we want to live.
One concern — natural resources depletion, and running out of room — would be eliminated by expansion off planet, of course, something not considered by those putting together the survey. It would be interesting to see if responses change if that’s pointed out.
Matt Damon Movies
The five most destructive ideas in them. I liked this review of Elysium in comments:
Spoiler alert:
The liberals win and create a future society that makes the entire Earth into Detroit. Obamacare is in full effect and as a result — shock — there is a shortage of doctors, medicine and advanced medical equipment.
The conservatives leave the Earth (kinda aka Atlas Shrugged) and build this magnificent Space Station with all the trappings of a productive and prosperous people — replete with advanced medical technology.
Since they cannot build and create a similarly advanced and prosperous society, the liberals decide that they will take what they did not earn and ultimately (through violence and magic of course) heal everyone in the world — especially the babies.
I’ll wait until it’s on free television. I don’t really like to put any money in the hypocritical moron’s pocket.
Introverts
…in the workplace. This part struck me:
“At the heart of it, introverts and extroverts respond really differently to stimulation,” Susan Cain, author of Quiet: The Power Of Introverts In A World That Can’t Stop Talking, tells The Huffington Post. “Introverts feel most alive and energized when they’re in environments that are less stimulating — not less intellectually stimulating, but less stuff going on.”
Many workplace set ups undermine introverted employees by failing to accommodate their personalities and productivity styles — over-stimulation and excessive meetings can easily stunt their full brain power. One study showed that when introverts and extroverts are given math problems to solve with various levels of background noise playing, introverts do best when the noise is lower, while extroverts perform better with louder noise, Cain told Harvard Business Review.
Ignoring the business implications, this might explain why some people like loud restaurants, while others (e.g., me) detest them. I can be social when I need to, but my default setting is introversion, and if I’m with a group that wants to go to the Hard Rock Cafe, I have no qualms whatsoever about saying “No way.” There’s not going to be any useful social interaction when I can’t hear myself think, let alone someone else talk. I can’t imagine why anyone would ever want to do that, but EPID.
[Via Althouse]
Cryonics
“…is critical-care medicine taken to the next step.”