• Welcome to Autism Forums, a friendly forum to discuss Aspergers Syndrome, Autism, High Functioning Autism and related conditions.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Private Member only forums for more serious discussions that you may wish to not have guests or search engines access to.
    • Your very own blog. Write about anything you like on your own individual blog.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon! Please also check us out @ https://www.twitter.com/aspiescentral

Do you agree that Technology is going too far?

My fear, however, is that technology is presenting a tragic hazard to our humanity. Has anyone seen The Borg in Star Trek episodes and movies? From an engineering perspective, that is my fear of where I see us (human race) currently heading towards. We already have the beginnings of the Borg “Collective”. We call it the internet. The human to internet interface is Facebook. The most common Collective interface hardware are smart phones. Everywhere you go, you see people with their faces glued to their “collective” interface smart phone oblivious to their surroundings. Elon Musk has proposed making smart phones implantable. And the purpose of Facebook (the Collective) is not just to influence, but to program mindsets, interests, opinions and ways of thinking - where our minds no longer belong to the individual, but to the corporations programming “us”.

Over a decade ago now, in my college English class we read a book called Feed. I recall that people had something implanted in their brain that they could access for news, information, entertainment, and other things (basically a version of today's internet). It was a great book, I would definitely recommend it. English wasn't always my favorite subject, but the focus of the class surrounded around technology, with discussions of both the positive and negative consequences from it.

I am certainly guilty of spending way too much time on the internet. It is easier to go on the internet than interact with people especially for a person with ASD. But I know too much is not good and is diminishing the quality of our lives in many ways. The internet does give millions of people a platform that we didn't have previously. But my fear is truth, accuracy, and real knowledge is at risk to be drowned out by people who know little about a subject, but are great at capturing an audience online.
 
I hate the internet. If my daughter didn't need it for homeschool, I'd smash the computers and router. I have kerosene lamps packed away and a cozy fireplace. Those are real. All this virtual stuff makes no sense in my autism. Yes the flashy games catch my attention and hypnotise me, but I can do that with a deck of cards too. What I want is reality.
 
I also do not like engineering technologies for the purpose of enabling laziness or engineering for maximizing greed – designing intended fail rates into products AKA planned obsolescence or failures just after warranty periods. I am impressed with designs that are not intended to fail.
Totally agree, I find planned obsolescence particularly shameful. Also, creating false needs and fears for the sake of selling more.
 
How else are you supposed to know if there is anybody hotter than you running around out there...!?

Can you imagine,
  • "You need to do a few more sit-ups, this morning," or
  • "You're going out dressed like that --after Labor Day...!?"

It could be quite helpful though. For specific days in specific countries, you're expected to wear clothes for the occasion. Or, for example, it could have tips about your formal/semi-formal/casual outfit. And if it would also motivate you to do some exercise? Well, that would be as useful as it would be infuriating I imagine.
 
My life profession is electronics design engineering. I have spent essentially my whole life obsessed with electronics technology. And with that, my answer is a big Yes, I agree that technology is going to far, or in my opinion in a dangerous direction. I apologize in advance for the following rant!

I began to realize the “too far” thing in the early 1980’s when I started to see advertising being used to induce false opinions in their target customers. The opinions being created was to change the people’s mindset to believe their products to be better even when they were really seriously inferior. I was dismayed how effectively the advertising worked – essentially to cult levels. That was also about the time when engineer pride in their creation’s real performance, quality and lifespan began to fade in favor of “cool factor”. To this day, I detest “cool factor” and “gadgets”. I feel that designing products for the sake of “cool” is shameful, both of the engineers that design them and the people who are attracted to them. I see attraction to “cool” gadgets to be immature and childish.

I also despise designs that I call “solutions in search of a problem”, which is typically in the “cool factor” category or just engineering for the sake of engineering without a real purpose.

I also do not like engineering technologies for the purpose of enabling laziness or engineering for maximizing greed – designing intended fail rates into products AKA planned obsolescence or failures just after warranty periods. I am impressed with designs that are not intended to fail.

I don’t really fear things like Sophia the robot. I believe that consciousness is a matter of circuit complexity and the level of complexity needed for anything we would consider to be conscious is very far out of current or even near future human engineering reach. Artificial intelligence is just as stated. It’s artificial. It looks like real consciousness and may fool many, but it’s really just an improved version of a clockwork automaton (see the movie, Hugo). That doesn’t mean, however, that AI is benign. It can be used for catastrophic destruction. However, if it is used for such destruction, it will be at the hands of the designer and programmer, not the consciousness of the AI, robot or whatever.

My fear, however, is that technology is presenting a tragic hazard to our humanity. Has anyone seen The Borg in Star Trek episodes and movies? From an engineering perspective, that is my fear of where I see us (human race) currently heading towards. We already have the beginnings of the Borg “Collective”. We call it the internet. The human to internet interface is Facebook. The most common Collective interface hardware are smart phones. Everywhere you go, you see people with their faces glued to their “collective” interface smart phone oblivious to their surroundings. Elon Musk has proposed making smart phones implantable. And the purpose of Facebook (the Collective) is not just to influence, but to program mindsets, interests, opinions and ways of thinking - where our minds no longer belong to the individual, but to the corporations programming “us”.

Another example, a bit closer to home is how the humans are depicted in the movie WALL-E, where laziness enabling technology has become complete as well as being perpetually tied to the “Collective”. With little to no consciousness outside the “Collective”.

I am very proud of the truly useful, practical and beneficial technology that humanity has engineered, but now I am disappointed in where it is currently headed.

I definitely agree although I wanted to throw one fact into the discussion: the human susceptibility to propaganda. We can speak much about how new products and skilled advertisement manipulate people into buying products since the 1980s, however, I'm afraid this process has started much, much earlier than that - or maybe even it was always present. These kinds of tools, if less advanced, has influenced people for centuries - through stories, charming personalities of sellers and speakers in the square, religious gatherings, books, newspapers... It seems to be human nature at its basic - to lie and manipulate each other for one's gain. A sad fact, but humans are mostly sheep looking for a shepherd, for an easy answer to everything and an easy life. You don't need technology for propaganda and manipulation - point in case many wars and raids such as Crusades or World Wars, although technology does make it much easier, that is true.

My point being: if one looks at human history objectively, they will see that, sooner or later, technology would have been used in that exact way, just like other tools were used as such before. Humans are flawed, greedy, shallow, petty and liars. It is not due to technology or its advancement but due to human nature that the world is shaped in a way it is - and we can't change it. We can only be responsible for our own behaviour and values in life.

As such: technology isn't going too far. Humans, however, are.
 
I definitely agree although I wanted to throw one fact into the discussion: the human susceptibility to propaganda. We can speak much about how new products and skilled advertisement manipulate people into buying products since the 1980s, however, I'm afraid this process has started much, much earlier than that - or maybe even it was always present. These kinds of tools, if less advanced, has influenced people for centuries - through stories, charming personalities of sellers and speakers in the square, religious gatherings, books, newspapers... It seems to be human nature at its basic - to lie and manipulate each other for one's gain. A sad fact, but humans are mostly sheep looking for a shepherd, for an easy answer to everything and an easy life. You don't need technology for propaganda and manipulation - point in case many wars and raids such as Crusades or World Wars, although technology does make it much easier, that is true.

My point being: if one looks at human history objectively, they will see that, sooner or later, technology would have been used in that exact way, just like other tools were used as such before. Humans are flawed, greedy, shallow, petty and liars. It is not due to technology or its advancement but due to human nature that the world is shaped in a way it is - and we can't change it. We can only be responsible for our own behaviour and values in life.

As such: technology isn't going too far. Humans, however, are.

Yes, I agree 100% with everything you said.

My mention of the 1980's is just that that is when I started becoming aware of marketing deception. Clearly, selling snake oil has been around, I suppose, since before the rise of humanity.

But it is the 80's when I noticed a change in engineering goals or at least within the engineering community I knew. I could give lots of examples, but I guess that would be too off subject for this forum.

The issue I am fearful of regarding technology is that it has become a very effective tool for deception on a mass world-wide scale. I fear for humanity's outcome living in such a deceptive, ideals manipulated world. Yes that is a human thing not the technology itself, however it is humans that invented that technology - the tools to make mass deception so much easier. I'm not against technology; it is my life. However, I'm disappointed in how it is being used and what humans are doing with it.

Perhaps my Aspie induced fear of people doesn't help! o_O
 
"The last thing I want is a toilet I can talk to or a smart mirror that shows me my schedule, but... companies are making them anyway...“Your bathroom can be anything you want it to be.”
OK, but what if I want all bathrooms to remain dumb?"

People Are Talking to “Voice Activated” Paper Towel Dispensers

I don't think I like the idea of having a toilet that is smarter than I am.

I'm not sure I like the idea of a robot that is better at interpreting body language, facial expression, and intonation better than me. Maybe jealousy?
 
I can't help but wonder if society at large has simply reached a precipice. Where technology is less about innovation and more about avarice and oppression. But then some would probably cite that was a precipice reached long ago. :oops:

Where so many ethical questions of "should we" are displaced by "can we".

Leo Szilard's Fight to Stop the Bomb
 
Last edited:
"There have been so many articles published about Facebook shutting down its robots after they developed their own language. The media is just loving these clickbait titles. Some of these articles would let you believe that this was a very close call — that scientists at Facebook barely shut down the AI before it could take over the world. Fortunately, there are still sane people out there, so there have been quite a few articles explaining why all of the doomsday talk is complete nonsense (like the ones published by Snopes or CNBC). Even some of the media that originally offered a very scandalous version of this event eventually edited the content to be less dramatic (like The Independent for example).

The problem is that false but catchy news is much easier to spread than anything else."
The truth behind Facebook AI inventing a new language


"The article notes that the researchers chose not to let the bots continue developing a private language in favor of programming them to stick to plain English, given that the whole point of the research is to improve AI-to-human communication."

"The main thing lost in all the hubbub about dialog agents inventing their own language...is that the study produced significant results in terms of its core mission: training bots to negotiate with people, a task that requires both linguistic and reasoning skills.."
FACT CHECK: Did Facebook Shut Down an AI Experiment Because Chatbots Developed Their Own Language?
 
The talking bathroom scale was a real thing in the mid 80s, although it certainly didn't have the AI capabilities of Garfield's scale. Around 1984 a company put out a scale that you could step on to and it would announce your weight to you in a robotic synthesized voice.

It was actually quite innovative for the time period, a time when most PC's ran DOS directly off 5.25" floppy discs and had to have two 5.25" floppy drives-one for the OS disc, one for whatever program you were trying to run. It was people's first real encounter with electronic voice synthesization. However, a scale that announces your weight to the whole house was a losing proposition financially from day one, and few were made.

Jim Davis saw the comedy potential in the scale, and Garfield quickly had to deal with an artificially intelligent scale. At the time AI was seen almost exclusively as a negative, as a giant computer brain that would conquer and/or destroy the world. Typical of the era was the movies Colossus: The Forbin Project in 1971 (the US and USSR govts create parallel giant AI brains that unite and take over the world) and Terminator in 1984.

Also the glam rock band Styx put out an album called Kilroy Was Here in 1983 that was all about cyborgs taking over the world, the big hit was "Mr. Roboto". Also worth listening to is Computer God by Black Sabbath-it came out in 1992 and was somewhat behind the curve, but the cover art for the album Dehumanizer is worth searching Google for.

Anyway, Jim Davis was ahead of his time in seeing the comedy gold in AI. In the early 2000s the cartoon Fox Trot introduced a computer called "iFruit" that was a similar concept to the talking scale.
 
How we feel about technological advancements is not relevant. And actually it is good. Only superintelligent AI can save us anymore from ourselves. Around 2040-2075 we will see human level machine intelligence, add a few years to that and AGI will be reality.
 

New Threads

Top Bottom