(Mar 9, 2021 12:38 AM)Secular Sanity Wrote: I couldn’t sleep last night, so I watched it. The acting was horrible [...]
I had a choice between "Crisis" (2021) and this one, but just couldn't handle watching another drug trafficking movie. Come to find out later, "Crisis" apparently has divided and poor review ratings, despite a better(?) cast and grabbing #1 earnings for independent films at the box office on its opening weekend. So maybe both were in dime, ten cents, or two nickels decision-making airspace after all.
Quote:[...] but it did make me think.
Can you imagine an app allowing the ignorant masses to choose your fate?
"To highlight the offensiveness to liberty that democracy and majority rule is, just ask yourself how many decisions in your life would you like to be made democratically. How about what car you drive, where you live, whom you marry, whether you have turkey or ham for Thanksgiving dinner? If those decisions were made through a democratic process, the average person would see it as tyranny and not personal liberty. Isn’t it no less tyranny for the democratic process to determine whether you purchase health insurance or set aside money for retirement? Both for ourselves, and our fellow man around the globe, we should be advocating liberty, not the democracy that we’ve become where a roguish Congress does anything upon which they can muster a majority vote." (Walter Williams, Economist)
Yah, I don't buy into the beliefs quoted below that a coordinated "hive" would always make better selections than a single member, even if the collective could be blocked from depriving the individual of those free choices that contribute to crafting its own personality slash identity over time.
Basically a primitive step toward reducing us to components of a distributed mind. Gradually an internet of
group brain to brain interfaces technologically arises. What's wild is that if the voting patterns and overall "consensus narrative" of the collective intelligence could be kept opaque enough, then the individual could mistakenly assume their own brain/body is responsible for the decisions, and the collective identity (its patterns and tendencies) conflated with the local human organism as its own identity as well (akin to a broken hologram, the parts containing the whole).
One's neural activity is hidden to one's phenomenal consciousness right now, but at least both have association with the same body; and thus projecting autonomy upon the latter isn't insane in our current situation.
collective intelligence: "
The concept (although not so named) originated in 1785 with the Marquis de Condorcet, whose "jury theorem" states that if each member of a voting group is more likely than not to make a correct decision, the probability that the highest vote of the group is the correct decision increases with the number of members of the group. [...] A precursor of the concept is found in entomologist William Morton Wheeler's observation that seemingly independent individuals can cooperate so closely as to become indistinguishable from a single organism (1910). Wheeler saw this collaborative process at work in ants that acted like the cells of a single beast he called a superorganism. ... In 1912 Émile Durkheim identified society as the sole source of human logical thought. He argued in "The Elementary Forms of Religious Life" that society constitutes a higher intelligence because it transcends the individual over space and time. ... Collective intelligence was introduced into the machine learning community in the late 20th century, and matured into a broader consideration of how to design "collectives" of self-interested adaptive agents to meet a system-wide goal."