In 21st-century discourse the label 'Luddite' is often applied to people who express skepticism about AI and other new technologies.

Historically, Luddites in early 1800s England were not opposed to technology as such but protested how machines and new production methods were used against workers' rights and livelihoods.

Some modern critics argue that similar dynamics persist: small groups of powerful firms and concentrated capital shape technologies in ways that can harm workers.

A common reason for resistance today is fear of job loss or 'technological unemployment' across low- and high-skilled occupations.

People also resist because they are uncomfortable with unfamiliar technologies or lack understanding, which makes firms and institutions sometimes avoid publicly engaging with them.

High-profile warnings from figures such as Elon Musk and Stephen Hawking have helped revive a 'neo-Luddite' impulse around AI.

Some historians note original Luddites sought fair wages and better labor practices rather than a blanket rejection of machines.

Policy proposals and calls for ethical design, regulation, and inclusive access to technology are presented in the context of these concerns.

In short, many 21st‑century 'Luddites' resist change for practical reasons—job security, unequal power over how tech is deployed, and discomfort with unfamiliar systems—so addressing those concerns will help you build rapport with your supervisor.

In 21st-century discourse the label 'Luddite' is often applied to people who express skepticism about AI and other new technologies.

Title:

Content: Brian Merchant, author: “Luddites are more dangerous to the rich than Robin Hood”

The Luddites have been a great historical resource. Any showy enemy of anything that looked like technological progress has been called a Luddite. Today with generative artificial intelligence and its critics, the word has been revived. The author and journalist Brian Merchant (Iowa City, USA, 1983) saw it coming and has written a book that reviews the Luddite revolt in England at the beginning of the 19th century and its similarities with current technologies: Blood in the Machine (Blood in the Machine, currently without a planned edition in Spanish) thus explores the origins of the current revolt against big technology.

Although the book has appeared in the midst of the AI hype, Merchant began his research a decade ago: “Uber was growing and it was beginning to be seen that it was having a hard impact on taxi drivers, I heard the term Luddite from the pro-Uber sector and wrote an article titled You don't understand anything about Luddites”. Now in his book he remembers that the Luddite revolt was a labor struggle, not anti-technology, at a time when unions were prohibited. In a conversation with EL PAÍS from his residence in Los Angeles, Merchant clarifies the historical impact of the Luddites and the possible similar struggles that are being played today in Silicon Valley.

1. The Luddites were not against progress

The labor revolt over the loss of rights was more important than the destruction of textile machines: “The biggest mistake about the Luddites is to say that they were against technology and progress,” says Merchant. “They were against certain technologies because they recognized the way in which they were going to be used in their context against them as workers. It was a labor movement, against poverty, not anti-technology. The British Government began to mold them in this way almost immediately, it was keen to mock the Luddites and present the argument that they were against progress. It is very similar to how today people in positions of power in technology companies accuse those who complain about poor working conditions. It's the same story for 200 years.”

The book quotes a phrase from historian Eric Hobsbawm that explains this stage: “It was collective bargaining through riots.” According to Merchant, this tactic in a workers' struggle was very powerful for two reasons: “First, it was symbolic because everyone understood that what they were destroying was not just a machine. It was also the specific machine used to transfer wealth from the workers to the employer. Second, it was useful because they destroyed the equipment that businessmen needed.”

2. Why Robin Hood is better accepted than Ned Ludd

Ned Ludd was a legendary character. No one knows for sure if he existed. It was the legend of a teenager who would have broken the first machines at the beginning of the Industrial Revolution. In 1811, rebellious workers used his legendary name to sign letters and further scare: “Ludd probably never existed. But the incarnation of it would become a mascot, an organizational tool, a wink: a powerful 19th-century meme,” Merchant writes.

See also  The Commander of the Land Forces meets in Muscat a number of Omani military leaders

Ludd lived near Nottingham (United Kingdom), like another legendary figure who has been better treated by history. There must be a reason, says Merchant: “The Luddites organized a popular and powerful rebellion. People wrote popular songs about them. They were like Robin Hood. But it is interesting that Robin Hood has endured as a positive light, while the Luddites have not. He suggests that the myth of Ned Ludd is in some ways more dangerous to the elites and the wealthy than that of Robin Hood, which is a little more nebulous and open. The Luddites say: go ahead and break the machines of your oppression. Robin Hood says: steal from the rich and give to the poor. “I think that’s a little more tolerable.”

3. How are they similar to today's problems?

The background of the book is that the history of the Luddites is similar to what happens today in Silicon Valley, where a small group of corporations dominate new technologies. “The way technologies are developed has basically not changed. You have a handful of people with access to enough capital or political influence to be able to build a factory and use automation technologies. “Back then, the most aggressive owners didn’t ask anyone how to find a way to make this a win-win.”

Merchant has received criticism for equating the great businessmen of 19th century England with 21st century America. But there are details that he does not see that far away: “The technology development process is in some ways even more undemocratic today than then. There is this immense pool of capital available to Silicon Valley innovators through venture capital. Uber wasn't profitable for 10 years, but they had access to that capital. Did anyone really like that? Did it work for workers and delivery people? Nothing mattered, they just had more money and moved on.”

See also  Just the mystery

Title:

Content: The new is the old well forgotten.
Where in the Network there was a fashionable insult to the opponents of AI
In the Internet discourse, deep in the study of sarcastic comments of anonymous persons, you can find the term "Luddite".
This label is often referred to as people who dare to express the slightest inclination to inhibit the constant development of artificial intelligence (AI).
Related video
Interestingly, such prominent figures as Elon Musk, Stephen Hawking and Bill Gates have been awarded the Luddite Award, which is recognition of their cautionary position regarding the potential dangers associated with artificial intelligence.
During the ceremony, Robert D. Atkinson, the organizer of the award, noted: “Unfortunately, luminaries such as Elon Musk and Stephen Hawking have contributed to the feverish refraction of hands about the impending apocalypse of artificial intelligence, ” writes IFLScience.
In Focus.Technology appeared its own Telegram-channel.
Subscribe not to miss the latest and exciting news from the world of science!
Atkinson also explained: "Do we consider any of them personally Luddites?
No, of course not.
They are pioneers of science and technology.
But they and others have done a disservice to the public — and undoubtedly have helped and comforted the increasingly common neo-Luddist impulse in modern society — by demonizing AI in the popular imagination.
But how did the term come about?
Its roots can be traced back to the early 1800s in England.
Before the industrial revolution, skilled craftsmen who knew a lot about textile production made clothes using their own machines and specialized tools.
However, a situation arose when new technologies and methods of mass production appeared, as a result of which artisans were unable to compete.
The result was a movement whose purpose was the destruction of the textile industry and the destruction of new machines.
Although there is some truth to this story, it does not reflect the whole essence of the Luddite movement.
Their actions were not driven solely by a reaction to new technologies; rather, they were a response to the profound transformations taking place in their professional activities.
While it is true that they often attacked a knitting machine known as a stocking frame, as well as other mechanized fixtures, their main concern was the labor practices associated with these machines.
Kevin Binfield, editor of the Luddite and Compassionate Works, explained their motives: "They simply wanted machines to produce high-quality goods, and that these machines employed workers who had been trained and received fair wages.
It was their only concern. ”
The nickname "Luddites" comes from the nickname "Ned Ludd", an apocryphal figure who allegedly sabotaged a textile factory in 1779, although historical evidence suggests that this man was most likely a fictional one.
In a 2007 paper, researcher David Linton explained: “Some say that a young man, possibly with cognitive impairment, named Ned Ludd once misunderstood an order and accidentally broke his frame machine.
Others argue that this was done deliberately, in a fit of anger.
Whatever the motive, it seems to have become a joke phrase that whenever the machine breaks, for whatever reason, you can say something like, "Ludd must have been here."
From this construction, it is a short step to the ironic application of the name Ludd to vandalism for political purposes. "
Between 1811 and 1816, the Luddite movement held sporadic and somewhat unorganized protests, characterized by the destruction of cars and the burning of factories.
In response, the mill owners resorted to extreme measures, using deadly force against the Luddites.
In April 1812, there was a grim turning point in Huddersfield, where at least four people died at the hands of the mill owners.
In retaliation, the Luddites killed the owner of the mill, William Horsfall, who boldly declared his intention to "smear himself with Luddite blood to the saddles."
Horsfall was shot while sitting on his horse.
Faced with these uprisings, the government immediately sent thousands of soldiers to quell the protests.
Moreover, they adopted a law according to which the breakdown of cars was subject to the death penalty or sending to colonies.
Subsequently, the movement dissipated, but the stable expression "Luddite" could not accurately convey the ideals and goals of the Luddites.
Previously, Focus wrote about the first IPSO in the history of mankind.
It turns out that it was invented in Babylon and it concerns the Flood.

Historically, Luddites in early 1800s England were not opposed to technology as such but protested how machines and new production methods were used against workers' rights and livelihoods.

Title:

Content: You will not miss us!
8,008 followers
Why robots will take your job, and what to do - panic or rejoice
Why robots will take away your profession.
Increasingly, you can hear about the challenges posed by automation and cybernization to existing professions today.
And we are talking not only about unmanned vehicles and chatbots replacing call center operators, but also about programs that can calculate bank loans and insurance rates, depriving analysts and, moreover, neural networks that claim to compete with highly qualified and creative employees.
Exemption from routine or danger of unemployment?
A cause for concern or long-awaited freedom?
History of the problem
Mechanisms of ancient times.
Competition has always existed – professions disappeared and arose, people fought for jobs with each other and with technology, philosophers and economists built forecasts and tried to predict the prospects and are still doing it.
For example, you can assess how much automation threatens your profession and how quickly robots will replace you by using Will Robots Take My Job.
Aristotle was the first to think about the possibility of transferring “work ” to machines.
In the first book of his Politics, he suggested that they could evolve to such an extent that the need for human labor would disappear.
For him, quite in line with the views of work at the time, as something distracting from participation in public life and personal development, this was an extremely optimistic forecast.
“Work ” in ancient Greece was considered to be the lot of the lower classes, and the mechanisms would only liberate slaves, considered nothing but“ machines of flesh and blood. ”
The reorientation of the economy to the export of wool led to the introduction of a policy of “enclosures ”.
The real competition of a sufficiently large mass of people technology for the first time was only more than a millennium and a half later in England.
At first, the reorientation of the economy to wool exports led to the introduction of a policy of “fencing ”, in which landlords expelled farmers from the fields in order to free the territory for sheep grazing, which led to the first massive surge of“ unemployment ” – albeit not in the current sense.
The then arising vagrancy and poverty contemporary of these events, the Chancellor of England and philosopher Thomas More described the famous "sheep ate people."
However, after a few decades it became clear that no – not eaten.
The former peasants were absorbed by the growing cities, where they found a new job in textile manufactures, processing the same wool obtained from shearing sheep.
This was the first example of how, by taking away one thing, “technology ” is able to offer something different.
But we must admit: the process of urbanization was painful, the work that replaced the cultivation of land turned out to be hard and dirty, the gap with the traditional way of life was very traumatic, and the population of England as a result of hunger and the fight against vagrancy, which was conducted, including the use of gallows, decreased, according to some estimates by 30% (to understand the scale - the Soviet Union during the Second World War lost "only" 15% of the population).
Workers in a textile factory, late 18th century.
The next episode of the confrontation between people and technology occurred a century later in the same field of light industry - the invention in 1785 by Edmund Cartwright of a mechanical loom increased labor productivity forty times.
Jobs that had just been lost were once again lost.
But again temporarily – after spinning machines, others appeared and all of them demanded new resources, and their extraction – new types of labor.
Manufactures were replaced by factories, and muscle strength by the power of steam obtained from coal.
Machine Destroyers
The Luddite movement.
This time, the changes that occurred were met with bayonets - there was a movement of Luddites.
Sabotage of work and direct action: attacks on factories and the destruction of machines caused a harsh reaction of the state, which sent troops to suppress the “army of Ned Ludd ”.
It is characteristic that no one at the top bothered to convey to the workers the idea that there will still be work for them, even if not the one to which they had time to get used.
The fact is that the “top ” themselves at that time did not think too much about how all this was arranged, and people were perceived as expendable material, while the inertia of consciousness of ordinary workers who had just recovered from the transition from the agrarian to the urban way of life was also very high.
The First Industrial Revolution at the beginning of the 18th century.
The theoretical basis for the interaction of technological innovations and the masses of labor began to be summed up only by economists and philosophers of the middle of the XIX century.
They were the first to suggest that the disappearance of certain types of work in the process of technological development entails the emergence of new ones, and “work ” as a whole is not something final, which may be“ not enough ”.
The First Industrial Revolution was in full swing and the optimism of its apologists only grew stronger over time.
By the end of the century, it seemed that progress would eliminate not only social problems and contradictions, but could also rid humanity of wars.
However, while some spoke of the "Luddite delusion", others spoke of the "enslavement of the masses" and the need to hand over to the "factory workers", predicting that as long as the instruments of production are in the hands of the big proprietors, their employees will remain disenfranchised, and the lack of social security will cause explosions of unemployment at any moment.
Second wave
The Second Industrial Revolution.
The word “unemployment ” came into being at that time.
The fact is that a peasant working in the fields or a craftsman who provides for the needs of himself and the small surrounding community could not face something like this - he himself formed his employment.
When the scheme of selling labor on a strict schedule became mass within the framework of fulfilling a strictly regulated set of duties, the challenge arose to lose such an opportunity.
The Second Industrial Revolution was on the way.
The basics of streaming production were laid at the end of the 19th century, and by the beginning of the 20th century, the combination of Ford ’ s marketing strategy (he invented that the car was not an attribute of the elites, but a mass need) and the conveyor he introduced led to new changes that went beyond factories and factories.
On January 18, 1886, the first car invented by Karl Benz was released.
It was the emergence of technology on the streets of cities that brought a new wave of competition.
Look at the photos of the streets of the beginning of the last century: here they are dammed with carts, among which a lonely clumsy car is trying to maneuver, but ten years later, the only horse frightened by the roar of engines and sobbing of klaxons is clutching to the sidewalks.
Here it will be important to note how unpredictable this jump became: “At the beginning of the 20th century, the French Academy warned about an environmental disaster, which inevitably should lead to the accumulation of horse manure associated with the development of horse-drawn transport in Paris, ” recalls, reasoning about the prediction of the future Stanislav Lem.
However, note: in those regions where human labor is cheaper, technology can not replace it, as we are shown, for example, rickshaws, until recently used their own muscle power and only with a sharp drop in the cost of small vehicles motorized.
A more modern example is “computer rickshaws ” – hundreds of thousands of low-skilled Chinese, hacked captchas all day, because their work costs less than the introduction of scripts.
Technological unemployment
The line of the American unemployed during the Great Depression.
In the 1930s, Maynard Keynes, who gave the world the theory of the “social state ”, from the attempts of which many economies have not recovered so far, introduced the term“ technological unemployment ” into mass circulation.
Since then, the debate about whether the introduction of new technological solutions and opportunities can create a long-term job crisis or whether everything is limited to repurposing, when obsolete professions are replaced by new ones, and it is enough for people to change or improve their skills.
Until the end of the last decade, most experts were inclined to believe that “technological unemployment ” is always a temporary phenomenon, leading to the renewal and improvement of the professionalism of workers.
Mechanical labor was replaced by physical labor, the operator - a profession more status and highly paid than the worker, the reduction of costs leads to the release of time - these are the main theses sounded then.
Pessimistic views remained largely the domain of marginals, such as Theodore Kaczynski, famous for his terrorist struggle against progress under the name of Unabomber and primitive philosophers.
Pessimism
The first full-fledged computer in the USSR BESM-1.
Cautious voices expressing doubts about the correctness of this approach sounded even then.
And if in one of his speeches in 1962, President Kennedy said that “if people are able to invent new machines that take away their jobs, even more so are able to invent new jobs, ” then two years later, a letter from scientists and activists concerned with the problem of technological unemployment, sent to his successor, Lyndon Johnson, stated that“ a revolution in cybernetics will create a separate nation of poor, unskilled unemployed. ”.
Theorists disputed the impossibility of long-term unemployment, as did Martin Ford in the book “Light in the Tunnel: Automation, Acceleration of Technology and the Economy of the Future ” or Marshall Brains in“ Robotic Nation ”.
Gasne-Peter Martin and Harald Schumann, in their Global Trap, describe a society in which the labor of twenty percent of the population is enough for the world economy to continue to develop.
There are those who see it as a threat and a danger, like Paul Krugmann in his article “Sympathy for the Luddites ” or Frey and Osborne in“ The Future of Work. ”
In addition, in practice, it turned out that technology is not so freeing up time – for example, representatives of professions requiring high qualifications, at least in the United States today work more than 30 years ago, and technologies that provide remote access to working tools allow them not to break away from professional tasks and in their “free time ”.
It is also important that new jobs, as it was noticed at the beginning of the XXI century, are created not so much by technology as by the change in the way of life that they entail.
So in the mid-2010s, nine out of ten working people are employed in professions that did not exist a century earlier, but only 5% of the jobs that appeared from 1993 to 2013 are in high-tech areas, such as IT or telecom.
However, the question is whether this does not mean that indirectly they still arise due to technologies that provide an opportunity for development for the service sector.
Is it bad?
A shot from the film "I, Robot" (2004).
Harvard economics professor Lawrence Summers, who previously served as U.S. Treasury Secretary, said in 2014 that he no longer believes that automation will always create new jobs and that it is not some hypothetical possibility in the future; it is something that is emerging now.
In his opinion, the changes will be very global and will lead to mass unemployment not only among low-skilled employees, but also for “blue ” and“ white ” collar workers, because “there are many reasons to think that the software revolution will be even more significant than the agrarian one. ”
The robot prepares food.
However, this is what allows us to look to the future with optimism.
Summers ’ s thought of the meaning of the digital revolution echoes the position of futurologist Alvin Toffler.
As early as 1970, in his book Future Shock, he wrote that by comparing the Digital Revolution with the Industrial Revolution, we downplay its significance and it would be more correct to draw a parallel with the exit of mankind from caves and the transition from hunting and gathering to agriculture and cattle breeding.
Potentially, this means that humanity is on the verge of an unprecedented, unknown written history civilizational leap of colossal proportions.
And, due to the fact that the speed of changes in the world has increased many times and now, the fact that in the case of the end of the Stone Age, took millennia, is being carried out in front of one, a maximum of a couple or three generations, this breakthrough, of course, will be painful.
However, having reviewed the usual way of life, the attitude to it and their values, will not humanity be able to break through to the conditions of life, previously even unimaginable.
"Terminator 2: Judgment Day" (1991).
We are easily accustomed to such changes in “work ” as freelancing and remote work, quite calmly came to a repeated change of professions, instead of a continuous, decades-long“ career ” and even were able to include them in your life, saying that this is the way to find yourself.
So is it not time to begin to accustom ourselves to the idea that, as economic historian Robert Skidelsky said, “Sooner or later we will run out of work ”?
After all, freelancing and remote employment are about freedom, about leaving the “office slavery ” and searching for the way of life that is convenient for us.
Yes, to get used to the idea that the traditional “work ” is over and now we will have to independently invent what to occupy ourselves will not be easy.
It will require responsibility, but it is freedom.
Isn ’ t it time for us, joyfully exclaiming “Glory to the robots! ”, to go in search of our place in the new world?
Why robots will take away your profession.
The fact that it is not only about robots, but also about the “work ” itself and the possibility of life without it, about the risks associated with negative scenarios of confrontation between people and machines and the possibilities of overcoming them, we will talk in the next parts of the cycle.
source
If you liked this post, please share it with your friends:
And don't forget:
Subscribe to my Instagram
Link to the original source
Picture of the day
top

Some modern critics argue that similar dynamics persist: small groups of powerful firms and concentrated capital shape technologies in ways that can harm workers.

A common reason for resistance today is fear of job loss or 'technological unemployment' across low- and high-skilled occupations.

Title:

Content: 10 curious near-technological facts to expand your horizons
What do phones for the blind look like, where and when the first cell phone call was made, what font is considered the most hated in the world?
Read the answers to these and other questions in our article.
Blind people can use mobile phones
There is a special Braille technology and accessories for blind people to use mobile phones.
It uses special buttons that rise and fall, so that a person can touch and read information.
Google ’ s first tweet was incomprehensible
For the average person, the very first post of Google on Twitter was something of a nonsense.
It read: "I'm 01100110 01100101 01100101 01101100 01101001 01101110 01100111 00100000 01101100 01110101 01100011 01101011 01111001 00001010".
Translated from the binary code, it means the phrase: “I ’ m feeling lucky ”, which can be translated into Russian as“ I ’ m lucky! ” (this phrase you can see on the right button under the Google search query field).
The first cell phone call was made in New York.
The first ever mobile phone call was made in 1973 on a street in New York by Martin Cooper, an employee of Motorola.
19 years later, British engineer Neil Papworth sent the first text message.
More than 6,000 new computer viruses are created and distributed every month
This number has increased dramatically since 1990, when there were only 50 known computer viruses.
Today, 90% of emails contain malware that most people are unaware of.
Facebook has more likes than photos
More than 300 million photos are shared on Facebook every day, with 800 million likes being placed over the same period.
By the way, the heart reactions are put only 175 million per day.
The iPhones were almost in the shape of an apple.
The original design for the iPhone was in the shape of an apple.
Initially, the mobile phone was developed as a clamshell with a keypad.
In the closed state, it looked like the Apple logo.
Comic Sans is the most hated font in the world
Comic Sans was developed as a non-serious handwritten font for use in comics.
And while everyone loves to hate this tasteless font, it ’ s actually very suitable for people with dyslexia.
Due to its asymmetrical style, letters are easier to distinguish.
Internet speed at NASA — 91 GB per second
The average speed of the Internet connection for users is about 25 MB per second.
This is usually enough to watch Netflix without buffering delays.
But let ’ s face it: if there ’ s any technology company that could really benefit from the speed of the Internet, it ’ s NASA.
Nokia is the largest company in Finland
So much so that the Finns consider it a national pride.
And although we often think that Nokia is just a manufacturer of mobile phones, under this famous brand in 1865 was originally made paper.
The company took up technology in the 1980s.
Some people are afraid of technology.
People experience a wide variety of fears, and technology is no exception.
Called “technophobia, ” this fear arose during the Industrial Revolution, when workers began to fear that automated systems would deprive them of their jobs.
Similarly, this applies to modern society, as well as to people who are afraid of too advanced high technologies, such as artificial intelligence technology.
Source: https: / / udivitelnoe.
temaretik.com / 2269583156035980278 /
Dear friends!
Be sure to put likes, subscribe to the site and share your opinion in the comments!
I also recommend reading:
The world is on the verge of war with Aliens? https: / / otari.mirtesen.ru / blog / 43009838561 /
Ancient artifacts: the mystery of the “genetic disk ” https: / / otari.mirtesen.ru / blog / 43649493804 /
What does the shape of your eyebrows tell you about your character?
https: / / otari.mirtesen.ru / blog / 43192033043 /
Picture of the day
top
,,

People also resist because they are uncomfortable with unfamiliar technologies or lack understanding, which makes firms and institutions sometimes avoid publicly engaging with them.

Title:

Content: Alert
1.2 million doses of Modena are ready for the 24th vaccine.
Memoirs of the world ’ s first semi-robot
I am not going to die, but will evolve.
When the body and the machine become one, can man be truly free?
In 2017, Peter was diagnosed with asymptomatic disease, a deadly disease that lasts only two years on average.
However, he does not want to be like any other asymptomatic patient, but can only be painfully disabled until he dies. He chooses to think of himself as a white rat under the development of high-tech, and let technology replace his losing speech, movement and sensory abilities, becoming "Peter 2.0" - the first complete cyborg (semi-robot) in history.
This book, I Am Cyber-Peter 2.0, chronicles his life after he learned from his illness, and is also a book of courage, a book of technology, and a book of love.
by Peter Scott-Morgan
Protect the Fire of Hope
Because my voice had become so weak, I had to invite nearly 30 people to sit close to me in the large conference room at the EISS Innovation Centre in London.
I ’ ve spoken to a lot of big companies before, and only two of them have shown enough courage and leadership (or commitment and social responsibility?) to actually show up at the conference.
But even if there are only two large companies, the preparation for our two days to start the operation of the foundation is enough.
Of course, there were people who attended Else Information Technology, and the internationally renowned Intel company even sent a representative to the meeting – the team that worked with Stephen Hawking.
People from the Cellophane Company are also on board, along with Ester ’ s colleagues, as well as many experts involved in the production of virtual avatars, and a few key people who are critical to the foundation ’ s operations.
This is the first day of the two days of preparation, and we are ready to start the whole two days of non-stop work, incinerating the dials - both days have to be busy from 8: 00 in the morning to 8: 00 in the evening - I have to make things go smoothly.
More importantly, I must prepare for the future and keep the Foundation on track as much as possible.
Everyone in the conference room slid their chairs toward me, and I encouraged them to sit as close as possible until everyone could hear me at a volume that sounded like I was whispering.
And then I opened:
“Welcome to the inaugural meeting of the Scott-Morgan Foundation! The next two days are your last chance to hear my voice.
In order to highlight this milestone in life, I intend to make an opening statement for everyone, connecting everything from the past to the future.
In August 1984, almost 35 years ago, I published my first book: The Robot Revolution.
When I published this book, I had a great disagreement with my editor (and the professor who reviewed it) about the end of the book.
I predict the future in the book; but I am not smart enough to predict the future is so close that I should be alive when this prediction actually happens, and may prove my prediction wrong!
For me at the time, 50 years later was a very, very distant future. ”
As explained to Francis, I continue to share my concern that humanity is about to face a fork in the road, as I predicted long ago, and that we are now unwittingly choosing the wrong path, all the way to the independent development of artificial intelligence (there is a great possibility that humanity will eventually be left far behind), rather than welcoming the future of human-AI collaboration.
If humans and artificial intelligence can work together, it will allow us to accomplish things that are difficult for both humans and artificial intelligence alone.
“I never thought that in a few decades I ’ d want to reread my book. ”
When I reread the last paragraph, I have to say that the universe really played a big joke on me, when I casually used the word "extremely fragile body" in the book, and now look at my body, which can not even be picked up by the book, it makes me smile.
So I asked Andrew to read it aloud for everyone. "
Hearing my instructions, my nephew Andrew became the focus of the spotlight, and he began to read aloud:
“If we really go down the road of ‘ amplifying human intelligence ’, it ’ s possible to keep humans and robots in the same evolutionary branch, rather than watching robots leave humans in the process of evolution. ”
If reality follows this trajectory, humans will one day be able to replace their extremely fragile bodies, survive in more permanent machines, and use supercomputers to amplify human intelligence.
And I went on:
“Thirty-five years after this book was published, everyone here now has the opportunity to move the future in this direction, and we are the best representatives of what Jerry said was ‘ on the front line of change ’ … If the future happens, there is no way to make it up!
But we all know that if this is a Hollywood blockbuster — and one day our story is bound to become a blockbuster — this is the moment when things get tougher and the stakes start to increase.
After all the out-of-frame conversations, endless thrills, great ideas, and empty promises, the true heroes of the origin story — who have the stamina, their strengths, and their boundless enthusiasm to make a real difference — are finally here.
The heroes of this story are the people in front of me, and the other members of the resistance who will be physically present in a few hours, or in electronic communications.
We are the power of change! We are the core members of this resistance.
Now is the critical moment.
We have to fight the status quo, we have to change what it means to be human, and our vision is that by working with artificial intelligence, we can liberate all people and live on — even people like me can survive — but if we don ’ t succeed in taking the next step, it ’ s over.
The reason is very simple.
No one else in the world can do what we are doing; no one else in the world is trying to do what we are trying to do.
Contrary to the vision we pursue, the status quo we are about to fight is very strong; the future we are trying to reverse has been shaped by a large part of the wrong ending.
The real reason that the process will be so difficult is that our greatest challenge is not the limitations of technology – although the limitations of technology are also huge obstacles – in fact, our most powerful enemy is the human psyche.
We must have heard the negative comments of the news media, Hollywood movies, worried celebrities, and the general public that artificial intelligence is about to attack humanity.
So we must create another possibility, another way of solving the problem; let me boldly set the tone for it — a new hope.
Although we are just now taking the first step in this new direction, we have already seen those in the establishment retreat, who feel uncomfortable about having to face technology they don ’ t understand.
We have also seen many companies and many people choose to remain silent and watch, and they do not want to participate in these affairs openly, only to wait for the changes, but also feel anxious about not being able to fully grasp the situation, on the one hand, worry about the risk of damage to their reputation, but do not understand the impact of these things on themselves.
I know the mood of these people, I really do.
That's what they are.
But we're not like that.
After careful selection, I know that everyone sitting has the ability to change the world.
Take your precious time from your daily work, contribute your precious talents, and work with others to achieve our common goals.
Some of them — not just the awesome Jerry and EasyTech — are using their courage and leadership to publicly stand up for our actions on behalf of their companies, to help break the social status quo, and to prove that no matter what the universe throws at us, we can embrace change and use it to lead the way to a future that will last forever.
Starting today and ending tomorrow, we have the opportunity to show the world a different path to the future, one that can avoid human threats and be more secure – as Jerry recently wrote: “Human beings provide background, common sense, and creativity, and artificial intelligence helps to flourish. ”
"That's what we're going to do.
We want to make a strong case for all of humanity, not just talk, we want to know and do it! We want to make results and do it for the world to see.
It ’ s also important that we use our vision, willingness to take on difficult situations, and practical action to ensure that all of these efforts will survive long after we leave the world.
We want to incorporate this spirit into this unique research institution in the form of a charitable foundation.
The official goal of our charitable foundation is precisely the dream that brought us together in the first place: to ethically use artificial intelligence, virtual reality, augmented reality, robotics, and other high-tech systems to improve behavior and health for all groups of people who are physically restricted by age, disease, disability, and other physical and mental illnesses.
Against this background, our foundation was founded to explicitly and openly harness the power of innovation so that humans can live well in the event of a change in their lives — even if it ’ s due to the onset of asymptomatic disease.
Eight weeks before I can no longer speak on my own, I will have to rely on the technology developed by the Foundation.
But what we ’ re going to do over the next two days is important not just to me, but to everyone with severe physical disabilities and, ultimately, to each of us.
Of course, our foundation will become a beacon of hope, illuminating the way forward for all who can ’ t see hope, and inspiring the progress and direction of AI development around the world.
The more our fire of hope burns, the more people will be willing to join the ranks and make the fire more dazzling and moving.
But let ’ s not forget that we are the ones who are responsible for this fire of hope, and at the heart of this fire of hope will always be humanity and our humanity.
I know that we will have many major setbacks in the next two days; I know that we will panic when we find that there is a huge gap in our thinking; I know that we will be tired and make mistakes, but it doesn ’ t matter.
We are just about to embark on a beautiful journey. We don ’ t have to rush to perfect everything at this time, just take the first step toward a bright future.
I am very proud to be able to join you on this journey, and I would like to thank you all for choosing to join me on this adventure. "
This article is excerpted from “I Am Cyberberg – Peter 2.0 ” by Facebook.
Vision Hollywood Facebook Publishing Reading Windball
Extended reading
Is it a unique person or a good partner for humans? 2022 New “Social ” Study of Cats
Will humanity be extinct?
"Jurassic World: Dominating the World" is Coming Soon
The Queen fulfills her son's wish, and Camilla will become Queen!
Andrew Garfield lied to himself, lied to Emma Stone, played Spider-Man, and was called an asshole.
Related News
Chen Ming-pang ’ s new book, “My Young Master ’ s Time, ” looks back on life with sincere writing!
Chen Ming Pun The name of a man - under a cherry tree, a passer-by, feeling desolate and dry.
Wu Xianghui, famous for writing "The Boy Who Rejected the Joint Entrance Examination", sometimes had shocking remarks. Once, in order to write the book "Farewell to Korea", he went to Korea and stayed in a hotel.
This book, let you put yourself in place - "Tell me, what have you suffered?"
My friend is sick.
And she came to ask for help, but it was a difficult question: accompany me to the end.
The woman agreed, but did not think that this was a completely lonely adventure, because - even if you found the most peaceful and quiet beauty of life; even if you can have mutual fun, support, share the taste of close food reading images, chat memories together; even if they can share the same time; until the end of the day, she and her sick friend, will still be alone, Faced with their own completely different adventures...
But until then, there is still a lot to remember, the mind, the struggle, the laughter, the foolishness... and the pain of watching others suffer, and even though there is so much suffering, it will finally be laid out and revealed in the timid question, "Tell me, what have you suffered?".
The history that cannot be learned in textbooks is hidden in the history of China that has been disappeared!
Five thousand years of Chinese history as the content, vivid, lively, interesting vernacular description, the most beautiful, the best understand Chinese history story!
From prehistory, faith history era into the historical era, full of great stories, the ancestors with Titus to conquer the four neighbors, establish dynasties, from the three emperors, Yao Shun Yu Tang to the establishment of the Zhou Dynasty, and the great powers to divide the dynasty.
Read ancient texts, learn modern writing! Let Tao Yuanming teach you how to write "Creative Autobiography"
"My name is × × ×, was born in......, parents are......" Many people write autobiographies, are written according to this pattern, although the four stable, the writing has been written, but it is a bit boring to read, if you want to stand out from the many works, it is necessary to use a special way.
At this time, "telling a story" comes in handy! Although it is writing an autobiography of a character, it is still necessary to tell your own "story" as if you were writing a story.
You can use the characteristics of writing a story to add emotions and express ideas in your autobiography; or, like writing a novel, have orgasms and turns, and display creativity and humor.
In the distant Jin Dynasty, Tao Yuanming demonstrated for us the creative autobiography, even if viewed from a modern perspective, it will not be outdated.
Now let ’ s enjoy the ancient texts and write to Tao Yuan Ming.
Memoirs of the world ’ s first semi-robot
I am not going to die, but will evolve.
When the body and the machine become one, can man be truly free?
In 2017, Peter was diagnosed with asymptomatic disease, a deadly disease that lasts only two years on average.
However, he does not want to be like any other asymptomatic patient.
When you ’ re at work, you ’ re still talking to your friends in Japanese? Just change a sentence and you ’ ll be able to turn your impressions around!
Courtesy of the Japanese is necessary.
When communicating in the workplace, is your limited vocabulary not enough to fully express your ideas, or not enough respect? Japanese communication expert Takao Saito ’ s book “Japanese Vocabulary in the Workplace ” takes you through“ Upgrading Daily Conversations ”, “Inviting Others ”,“ Replacing Difficult Words ”, “Communicating Ideas ”,“ Not Repeating the Same Words ” and “Making Meetings Smooth ” Learn how to change words, replace straight words, and smoothly avoid any situations that may offend the other party.
Product recommendation
udn Forum

High-profile warnings from figures such as Elon Musk and Stephen Hawking have helped revive a 'neo-Luddite' impulse around AI.

Title:

Content: DAILY MAIL COMMENT: Clock is ticking on PM's inflation target

Anyone opening the Office for National Statistics' inflation report yesterday would have felt a sinking sense of deja vu.

For the second month in a row, consumer prices defied the optimism of most economists and, instead of tumbling into single figures, stayed above 10 per cent.

The slight fall in the rate of inflation was, of course, a modicum of good news – easing the pressure on household budgets.

But with interest rates predicted to reach 5 per cent as the Bank of England tries to cool unexpectedly stubborn inflation, it will hit mortgage holders and businesses who face higher borrowing charges.

(But don't expect the grasping high street banks to pass on rate rises to poor savers!)

(File Photo) Interest rates are predicted to reach 5 per cent as the Bank of England tries to cool unexpectedly stubborn inflation

With more ambulance workers and hospital staff set to announce strikes, the public sector must be told in no uncertain terms that pay rises must be earned, which means working harder.

Ministers must not capitulate to the unions' ruinous demands. That would embolden their extremism and risk a 1970s-style wage-price spiral.

While persistently high inflation is partly down to rising food prices, it is also due to Britain's hugely inflated energy costs.

We are over-reliant on imported fuel and while it was politically expedient for Rishi Sunak to spike Labour's guns by imposing a harsher windfall tax on oil and gas giants' profits, this has simply dissuaded those firms from exploiting the vast reserves we have under the North Sea.

The PM has staked his reputation on halving inflation by the end of the year. With the clock ticking, he must pull all the levers at his disposal to hit that goal.

March of the machines

Should we fear the march of the machines? Every major technological advance throughout history, whether it be the invention of the printing press or the splitting of the atom, has prompted a mixture of wonder and dread.

The jury is still out on how concerned humanity should be about the latest industrial revolution – artificial intelligence. AI, which enables computers to make decisions in a more 'human' way, could revolutionise the world of work, learning and healthcare – improving people's lives.

All undoubtedly exciting. But there are potential downsides too: Loss of jobs, an explosion of democracy-damaging fake news, opportunists abusing the technology to expose the public to loss and danger.

And while it may sound the stuff of lurid science fiction, can we be certain AI will not just emulate humans, but outwit them?

Even tech sector luminaries – including Tesla boss Elon Musk – have issued blood-curdling warnings about the rapid development of ever-more powerful artificial minds that even their creators don't properly understand.

They propose halting research. But this would allow malign nations such as China to take the lead on this epoch-defining technology.

Britain should convene a Cop-style international summit of sensible, freedom-loving governments on AI. By setting early rules, its benefits could be mined and every effort made to ensure this is done safely.

Our role must be to help shape this brave new world responsibly; trying to hold it back is futile.

Don't spoil King's day

For more than half a century, King Charles has been an outspoken climate activist, advocating a complete transition from fossil fuels – even before it became a fashionable cause.

So why are Just Stop Oil protesters even thinking about disrupting the coronation of a monarch who preached green virtues long before many of them were born?

The conclusion is obvious: Their imbecilic stunts have nothing to do with saving the planet – and all to do with seeking attention and spoiling the special day for millions.

DAILY MAIL COMMENT: Clock is ticking on PM's inflation target

No comments have so far been submitted. Why not be the first to send us your thoughts, or debate this issue live on our message boards.

Some historians note original Luddites sought fair wages and better labor practices rather than a blanket rejection of machines.

Policy proposals and calls for ethical design, regulation, and inclusive access to technology are presented in the context of these concerns.

In short, many 21st‑century 'Luddites' resist change for practical reasons—job security, unequal power over how tech is deployed, and discomfort with unfamiliar systems—so addressing those concerns will help you build rapport with your supervisor.


In contemporary online discourse the term 'Luddite' is often applied to people who express opposition to artificial intelligence or to slowing AI development.

Historically the Luddites were early 19th-century English workers who destroyed textile machinery they believed threatened their jobs.

Historians and commentators emphasize that the original Luddites were motivated more by labour grievances, wages, and the way machines were being used than by a simple opposition to technology.

Modern uses of the label include awarding a 'Luddite Award' to high-profile figures who publicly warn about AI and using 'Luddite' as an ironic insult in internet debates.

One central reason for 21st-century resistance is fear of job loss and 'technological unemployment' as automation and AI replace routine and some skilled tasks.

Wider economic concerns include that new technologies can concentrate wealth and power in a few large firms and be developed without democratic input or worker consultation.

People also experience technophobia, a fear of too-advanced technologies such as AI, which dates back to the Industrial Revolution and persists today.

Historical transitions were often painful, involving urbanization, harsh factory work, social dislocation, and in some cases violence and state repression.

Some analysts and economists argue that automation might not create enough new jobs quickly enough, raising concerns about long-term unemployment and social inequality.

Workers also object to how technologies are introduced when machines are used in ways that transfer wealth to owners, reduce wages, or appear to bypass training and fair employment practices.

Negative media narratives, celebrity warnings, and dystopian visions of AI can amplify public anxiety and make people more resistant to adopting new technologies.

Labeling critics as 'Luddites' can dismiss legitimate concerns about labour, safety, governance, and equity rather than resolving them.

If you want to build rapport with a supervisor who resists technological change, focus on understanding and acknowledging their specific concerns about jobs, fairness, governance, and unfamiliar risks.

In contemporary online discourse the term 'Luddite' is often applied to people who express opposition to artificial intelligence or to slowing AI development.

Title:

Content: Brian Merchant, author: “Luddites are more dangerous to the rich than Robin Hood”

The Luddites have been a great historical resource. Any showy enemy of anything that looked like technological progress has been called a Luddite. Today with generative artificial intelligence and its critics, the word has been revived. The author and journalist Brian Merchant (Iowa City, USA, 1983) saw it coming and has written a book that reviews the Luddite revolt in England at the beginning of the 19th century and its similarities with current technologies: Blood in the Machine (Blood in the Machine, currently without a planned edition in Spanish) thus explores the origins of the current revolt against big technology.

Although the book has appeared in the midst of the AI hype, Merchant began his research a decade ago: “Uber was growing and it was beginning to be seen that it was having a hard impact on taxi drivers, I heard the term Luddite from the pro-Uber sector and wrote an article titled You don't understand anything about Luddites”. Now in his book he remembers that the Luddite revolt was a labor struggle, not anti-technology, at a time when unions were prohibited. In a conversation with EL PAÍS from his residence in Los Angeles, Merchant clarifies the historical impact of the Luddites and the possible similar struggles that are being played today in Silicon Valley.

1. The Luddites were not against progress

The labor revolt over the loss of rights was more important than the destruction of textile machines: “The biggest mistake about the Luddites is to say that they were against technology and progress,” says Merchant. “They were against certain technologies because they recognized the way in which they were going to be used in their context against them as workers. It was a labor movement, against poverty, not anti-technology. The British Government began to mold them in this way almost immediately, it was keen to mock the Luddites and present the argument that they were against progress. It is very similar to how today people in positions of power in technology companies accuse those who complain about poor working conditions. It's the same story for 200 years.”

The book quotes a phrase from historian Eric Hobsbawm that explains this stage: “It was collective bargaining through riots.” According to Merchant, this tactic in a workers' struggle was very powerful for two reasons: “First, it was symbolic because everyone understood that what they were destroying was not just a machine. It was also the specific machine used to transfer wealth from the workers to the employer. Second, it was useful because they destroyed the equipment that businessmen needed.”

2. Why Robin Hood is better accepted than Ned Ludd

Ned Ludd was a legendary character. No one knows for sure if he existed. It was the legend of a teenager who would have broken the first machines at the beginning of the Industrial Revolution. In 1811, rebellious workers used his legendary name to sign letters and further scare: “Ludd probably never existed. But the incarnation of it would become a mascot, an organizational tool, a wink: a powerful 19th-century meme,” Merchant writes.

See also  The Commander of the Land Forces meets in Muscat a number of Omani military leaders

Ludd lived near Nottingham (United Kingdom), like another legendary figure who has been better treated by history. There must be a reason, says Merchant: “The Luddites organized a popular and powerful rebellion. People wrote popular songs about them. They were like Robin Hood. But it is interesting that Robin Hood has endured as a positive light, while the Luddites have not. He suggests that the myth of Ned Ludd is in some ways more dangerous to the elites and the wealthy than that of Robin Hood, which is a little more nebulous and open. The Luddites say: go ahead and break the machines of your oppression. Robin Hood says: steal from the rich and give to the poor. “I think that’s a little more tolerable.”

3. How are they similar to today's problems?

The background of the book is that the history of the Luddites is similar to what happens today in Silicon Valley, where a small group of corporations dominate new technologies. “The way technologies are developed has basically not changed. You have a handful of people with access to enough capital or political influence to be able to build a factory and use automation technologies. “Back then, the most aggressive owners didn’t ask anyone how to find a way to make this a win-win.”

Merchant has received criticism for equating the great businessmen of 19th century England with 21st century America. But there are details that he does not see that far away: “The technology development process is in some ways even more undemocratic today than then. There is this immense pool of capital available to Silicon Valley innovators through venture capital. Uber wasn't profitable for 10 years, but they had access to that capital. Did anyone really like that? Did it work for workers and delivery people? Nothing mattered, they just had more money and moved on.”

See also  Just the mystery

Title:

Content: The new is the old well forgotten.
Where in the Network there was a fashionable insult to the opponents of AI
In the Internet discourse, deep in the study of sarcastic comments of anonymous persons, you can find the term "Luddite".
This label is often referred to as people who dare to express the slightest inclination to inhibit the constant development of artificial intelligence (AI).
Related video
Interestingly, such prominent figures as Elon Musk, Stephen Hawking and Bill Gates have been awarded the Luddite Award, which is recognition of their cautionary position regarding the potential dangers associated with artificial intelligence.
During the ceremony, Robert D. Atkinson, the organizer of the award, noted: “Unfortunately, luminaries such as Elon Musk and Stephen Hawking have contributed to the feverish refraction of hands about the impending apocalypse of artificial intelligence, ” writes IFLScience.
In Focus.Technology appeared its own Telegram-channel.
Subscribe not to miss the latest and exciting news from the world of science!
Atkinson also explained: "Do we consider any of them personally Luddites?
No, of course not.
They are pioneers of science and technology.
But they and others have done a disservice to the public — and undoubtedly have helped and comforted the increasingly common neo-Luddist impulse in modern society — by demonizing AI in the popular imagination.
But how did the term come about?
Its roots can be traced back to the early 1800s in England.
Before the industrial revolution, skilled craftsmen who knew a lot about textile production made clothes using their own machines and specialized tools.
However, a situation arose when new technologies and methods of mass production appeared, as a result of which artisans were unable to compete.
The result was a movement whose purpose was the destruction of the textile industry and the destruction of new machines.
Although there is some truth to this story, it does not reflect the whole essence of the Luddite movement.
Their actions were not driven solely by a reaction to new technologies; rather, they were a response to the profound transformations taking place in their professional activities.
While it is true that they often attacked a knitting machine known as a stocking frame, as well as other mechanized fixtures, their main concern was the labor practices associated with these machines.
Kevin Binfield, editor of the Luddite and Compassionate Works, explained their motives: "They simply wanted machines to produce high-quality goods, and that these machines employed workers who had been trained and received fair wages.
It was their only concern. ”
The nickname "Luddites" comes from the nickname "Ned Ludd", an apocryphal figure who allegedly sabotaged a textile factory in 1779, although historical evidence suggests that this man was most likely a fictional one.
In a 2007 paper, researcher David Linton explained: “Some say that a young man, possibly with cognitive impairment, named Ned Ludd once misunderstood an order and accidentally broke his frame machine.
Others argue that this was done deliberately, in a fit of anger.
Whatever the motive, it seems to have become a joke phrase that whenever the machine breaks, for whatever reason, you can say something like, "Ludd must have been here."
From this construction, it is a short step to the ironic application of the name Ludd to vandalism for political purposes. "
Between 1811 and 1816, the Luddite movement held sporadic and somewhat unorganized protests, characterized by the destruction of cars and the burning of factories.
In response, the mill owners resorted to extreme measures, using deadly force against the Luddites.
In April 1812, there was a grim turning point in Huddersfield, where at least four people died at the hands of the mill owners.
In retaliation, the Luddites killed the owner of the mill, William Horsfall, who boldly declared his intention to "smear himself with Luddite blood to the saddles."
Horsfall was shot while sitting on his horse.
Faced with these uprisings, the government immediately sent thousands of soldiers to quell the protests.
Moreover, they adopted a law according to which the breakdown of cars was subject to the death penalty or sending to colonies.
Subsequently, the movement dissipated, but the stable expression "Luddite" could not accurately convey the ideals and goals of the Luddites.
Previously, Focus wrote about the first IPSO in the history of mankind.
It turns out that it was invented in Babylon and it concerns the Flood.

Historically the Luddites were early 19th-century English workers who destroyed textile machinery they believed threatened their jobs.

Title:

Content: You will not miss us!
8,008 followers
Why robots will take your job, and what to do - panic or rejoice
Why robots will take away your profession.
Increasingly, you can hear about the challenges posed by automation and cybernization to existing professions today.
And we are talking not only about unmanned vehicles and chatbots replacing call center operators, but also about programs that can calculate bank loans and insurance rates, depriving analysts and, moreover, neural networks that claim to compete with highly qualified and creative employees.
Exemption from routine or danger of unemployment?
A cause for concern or long-awaited freedom?
History of the problem
Mechanisms of ancient times.
Competition has always existed – professions disappeared and arose, people fought for jobs with each other and with technology, philosophers and economists built forecasts and tried to predict the prospects and are still doing it.
For example, you can assess how much automation threatens your profession and how quickly robots will replace you by using Will Robots Take My Job.
Aristotle was the first to think about the possibility of transferring “work ” to machines.
In the first book of his Politics, he suggested that they could evolve to such an extent that the need for human labor would disappear.
For him, quite in line with the views of work at the time, as something distracting from participation in public life and personal development, this was an extremely optimistic forecast.
“Work ” in ancient Greece was considered to be the lot of the lower classes, and the mechanisms would only liberate slaves, considered nothing but“ machines of flesh and blood. ”
The reorientation of the economy to the export of wool led to the introduction of a policy of “enclosures ”.
The real competition of a sufficiently large mass of people technology for the first time was only more than a millennium and a half later in England.
At first, the reorientation of the economy to wool exports led to the introduction of a policy of “fencing ”, in which landlords expelled farmers from the fields in order to free the territory for sheep grazing, which led to the first massive surge of“ unemployment ” – albeit not in the current sense.
The then arising vagrancy and poverty contemporary of these events, the Chancellor of England and philosopher Thomas More described the famous "sheep ate people."
However, after a few decades it became clear that no – not eaten.
The former peasants were absorbed by the growing cities, where they found a new job in textile manufactures, processing the same wool obtained from shearing sheep.
This was the first example of how, by taking away one thing, “technology ” is able to offer something different.
But we must admit: the process of urbanization was painful, the work that replaced the cultivation of land turned out to be hard and dirty, the gap with the traditional way of life was very traumatic, and the population of England as a result of hunger and the fight against vagrancy, which was conducted, including the use of gallows, decreased, according to some estimates by 30% (to understand the scale - the Soviet Union during the Second World War lost "only" 15% of the population).
Workers in a textile factory, late 18th century.
The next episode of the confrontation between people and technology occurred a century later in the same field of light industry - the invention in 1785 by Edmund Cartwright of a mechanical loom increased labor productivity forty times.
Jobs that had just been lost were once again lost.
But again temporarily – after spinning machines, others appeared and all of them demanded new resources, and their extraction – new types of labor.
Manufactures were replaced by factories, and muscle strength by the power of steam obtained from coal.
Machine Destroyers
The Luddite movement.
This time, the changes that occurred were met with bayonets - there was a movement of Luddites.
Sabotage of work and direct action: attacks on factories and the destruction of machines caused a harsh reaction of the state, which sent troops to suppress the “army of Ned Ludd ”.
It is characteristic that no one at the top bothered to convey to the workers the idea that there will still be work for them, even if not the one to which they had time to get used.
The fact is that the “top ” themselves at that time did not think too much about how all this was arranged, and people were perceived as expendable material, while the inertia of consciousness of ordinary workers who had just recovered from the transition from the agrarian to the urban way of life was also very high.
The First Industrial Revolution at the beginning of the 18th century.
The theoretical basis for the interaction of technological innovations and the masses of labor began to be summed up only by economists and philosophers of the middle of the XIX century.
They were the first to suggest that the disappearance of certain types of work in the process of technological development entails the emergence of new ones, and “work ” as a whole is not something final, which may be“ not enough ”.
The First Industrial Revolution was in full swing and the optimism of its apologists only grew stronger over time.
By the end of the century, it seemed that progress would eliminate not only social problems and contradictions, but could also rid humanity of wars.
However, while some spoke of the "Luddite delusion", others spoke of the "enslavement of the masses" and the need to hand over to the "factory workers", predicting that as long as the instruments of production are in the hands of the big proprietors, their employees will remain disenfranchised, and the lack of social security will cause explosions of unemployment at any moment.
Second wave
The Second Industrial Revolution.
The word “unemployment ” came into being at that time.
The fact is that a peasant working in the fields or a craftsman who provides for the needs of himself and the small surrounding community could not face something like this - he himself formed his employment.
When the scheme of selling labor on a strict schedule became mass within the framework of fulfilling a strictly regulated set of duties, the challenge arose to lose such an opportunity.
The Second Industrial Revolution was on the way.
The basics of streaming production were laid at the end of the 19th century, and by the beginning of the 20th century, the combination of Ford ’ s marketing strategy (he invented that the car was not an attribute of the elites, but a mass need) and the conveyor he introduced led to new changes that went beyond factories and factories.
On January 18, 1886, the first car invented by Karl Benz was released.
It was the emergence of technology on the streets of cities that brought a new wave of competition.
Look at the photos of the streets of the beginning of the last century: here they are dammed with carts, among which a lonely clumsy car is trying to maneuver, but ten years later, the only horse frightened by the roar of engines and sobbing of klaxons is clutching to the sidewalks.
Here it will be important to note how unpredictable this jump became: “At the beginning of the 20th century, the French Academy warned about an environmental disaster, which inevitably should lead to the accumulation of horse manure associated with the development of horse-drawn transport in Paris, ” recalls, reasoning about the prediction of the future Stanislav Lem.
However, note: in those regions where human labor is cheaper, technology can not replace it, as we are shown, for example, rickshaws, until recently used their own muscle power and only with a sharp drop in the cost of small vehicles motorized.
A more modern example is “computer rickshaws ” – hundreds of thousands of low-skilled Chinese, hacked captchas all day, because their work costs less than the introduction of scripts.
Technological unemployment
The line of the American unemployed during the Great Depression.
In the 1930s, Maynard Keynes, who gave the world the theory of the “social state ”, from the attempts of which many economies have not recovered so far, introduced the term“ technological unemployment ” into mass circulation.
Since then, the debate about whether the introduction of new technological solutions and opportunities can create a long-term job crisis or whether everything is limited to repurposing, when obsolete professions are replaced by new ones, and it is enough for people to change or improve their skills.
Until the end of the last decade, most experts were inclined to believe that “technological unemployment ” is always a temporary phenomenon, leading to the renewal and improvement of the professionalism of workers.
Mechanical labor was replaced by physical labor, the operator - a profession more status and highly paid than the worker, the reduction of costs leads to the release of time - these are the main theses sounded then.
Pessimistic views remained largely the domain of marginals, such as Theodore Kaczynski, famous for his terrorist struggle against progress under the name of Unabomber and primitive philosophers.
Pessimism
The first full-fledged computer in the USSR BESM-1.
Cautious voices expressing doubts about the correctness of this approach sounded even then.
And if in one of his speeches in 1962, President Kennedy said that “if people are able to invent new machines that take away their jobs, even more so are able to invent new jobs, ” then two years later, a letter from scientists and activists concerned with the problem of technological unemployment, sent to his successor, Lyndon Johnson, stated that“ a revolution in cybernetics will create a separate nation of poor, unskilled unemployed. ”.
Theorists disputed the impossibility of long-term unemployment, as did Martin Ford in the book “Light in the Tunnel: Automation, Acceleration of Technology and the Economy of the Future ” or Marshall Brains in“ Robotic Nation ”.
Gasne-Peter Martin and Harald Schumann, in their Global Trap, describe a society in which the labor of twenty percent of the population is enough for the world economy to continue to develop.
There are those who see it as a threat and a danger, like Paul Krugmann in his article “Sympathy for the Luddites ” or Frey and Osborne in“ The Future of Work. ”
In addition, in practice, it turned out that technology is not so freeing up time – for example, representatives of professions requiring high qualifications, at least in the United States today work more than 30 years ago, and technologies that provide remote access to working tools allow them not to break away from professional tasks and in their “free time ”.
It is also important that new jobs, as it was noticed at the beginning of the XXI century, are created not so much by technology as by the change in the way of life that they entail.
So in the mid-2010s, nine out of ten working people are employed in professions that did not exist a century earlier, but only 5% of the jobs that appeared from 1993 to 2013 are in high-tech areas, such as IT or telecom.
However, the question is whether this does not mean that indirectly they still arise due to technologies that provide an opportunity for development for the service sector.
Is it bad?
A shot from the film "I, Robot" (2004).
Harvard economics professor Lawrence Summers, who previously served as U.S. Treasury Secretary, said in 2014 that he no longer believes that automation will always create new jobs and that it is not some hypothetical possibility in the future; it is something that is emerging now.
In his opinion, the changes will be very global and will lead to mass unemployment not only among low-skilled employees, but also for “blue ” and“ white ” collar workers, because “there are many reasons to think that the software revolution will be even more significant than the agrarian one. ”
The robot prepares food.
However, this is what allows us to look to the future with optimism.
Summers ’ s thought of the meaning of the digital revolution echoes the position of futurologist Alvin Toffler.
As early as 1970, in his book Future Shock, he wrote that by comparing the Digital Revolution with the Industrial Revolution, we downplay its significance and it would be more correct to draw a parallel with the exit of mankind from caves and the transition from hunting and gathering to agriculture and cattle breeding.
Potentially, this means that humanity is on the verge of an unprecedented, unknown written history civilizational leap of colossal proportions.
And, due to the fact that the speed of changes in the world has increased many times and now, the fact that in the case of the end of the Stone Age, took millennia, is being carried out in front of one, a maximum of a couple or three generations, this breakthrough, of course, will be painful.
However, having reviewed the usual way of life, the attitude to it and their values, will not humanity be able to break through to the conditions of life, previously even unimaginable.
"Terminator 2: Judgment Day" (1991).
We are easily accustomed to such changes in “work ” as freelancing and remote work, quite calmly came to a repeated change of professions, instead of a continuous, decades-long“ career ” and even were able to include them in your life, saying that this is the way to find yourself.
So is it not time to begin to accustom ourselves to the idea that, as economic historian Robert Skidelsky said, “Sooner or later we will run out of work ”?
After all, freelancing and remote employment are about freedom, about leaving the “office slavery ” and searching for the way of life that is convenient for us.
Yes, to get used to the idea that the traditional “work ” is over and now we will have to independently invent what to occupy ourselves will not be easy.
It will require responsibility, but it is freedom.
Isn ’ t it time for us, joyfully exclaiming “Glory to the robots! ”, to go in search of our place in the new world?
Why robots will take away your profession.
The fact that it is not only about robots, but also about the “work ” itself and the possibility of life without it, about the risks associated with negative scenarios of confrontation between people and machines and the possibilities of overcoming them, we will talk in the next parts of the cycle.
source
If you liked this post, please share it with your friends:
And don't forget:
Subscribe to my Instagram
Link to the original source
Picture of the day
top

Historians and commentators emphasize that the original Luddites were motivated more by labour grievances, wages, and the way machines were being used than by a simple opposition to technology.

Modern uses of the label include awarding a 'Luddite Award' to high-profile figures who publicly warn about AI and using 'Luddite' as an ironic insult in internet debates.

One central reason for 21st-century resistance is fear of job loss and 'technological unemployment' as automation and AI replace routine and some skilled tasks.

Title:

Content: 10 curious near-technological facts to expand your horizons
What do phones for the blind look like, where and when the first cell phone call was made, what font is considered the most hated in the world?
Read the answers to these and other questions in our article.
Blind people can use mobile phones
There is a special Braille technology and accessories for blind people to use mobile phones.
It uses special buttons that rise and fall, so that a person can touch and read information.
Google ’ s first tweet was incomprehensible
For the average person, the very first post of Google on Twitter was something of a nonsense.
It read: "I'm 01100110 01100101 01100101 01101100 01101001 01101110 01100111 00100000 01101100 01110101 01100011 01101011 01111001 00001010".
Translated from the binary code, it means the phrase: “I ’ m feeling lucky ”, which can be translated into Russian as“ I ’ m lucky! ” (this phrase you can see on the right button under the Google search query field).
The first cell phone call was made in New York.
The first ever mobile phone call was made in 1973 on a street in New York by Martin Cooper, an employee of Motorola.
19 years later, British engineer Neil Papworth sent the first text message.
More than 6,000 new computer viruses are created and distributed every month
This number has increased dramatically since 1990, when there were only 50 known computer viruses.
Today, 90% of emails contain malware that most people are unaware of.
Facebook has more likes than photos
More than 300 million photos are shared on Facebook every day, with 800 million likes being placed over the same period.
By the way, the heart reactions are put only 175 million per day.
The iPhones were almost in the shape of an apple.
The original design for the iPhone was in the shape of an apple.
Initially, the mobile phone was developed as a clamshell with a keypad.
In the closed state, it looked like the Apple logo.
Comic Sans is the most hated font in the world
Comic Sans was developed as a non-serious handwritten font for use in comics.
And while everyone loves to hate this tasteless font, it ’ s actually very suitable for people with dyslexia.
Due to its asymmetrical style, letters are easier to distinguish.
Internet speed at NASA — 91 GB per second
The average speed of the Internet connection for users is about 25 MB per second.
This is usually enough to watch Netflix without buffering delays.
But let ’ s face it: if there ’ s any technology company that could really benefit from the speed of the Internet, it ’ s NASA.
Nokia is the largest company in Finland
So much so that the Finns consider it a national pride.
And although we often think that Nokia is just a manufacturer of mobile phones, under this famous brand in 1865 was originally made paper.
The company took up technology in the 1980s.
Some people are afraid of technology.
People experience a wide variety of fears, and technology is no exception.
Called “technophobia, ” this fear arose during the Industrial Revolution, when workers began to fear that automated systems would deprive them of their jobs.
Similarly, this applies to modern society, as well as to people who are afraid of too advanced high technologies, such as artificial intelligence technology.
Source: https: / / udivitelnoe.
temaretik.com / 2269583156035980278 /
Dear friends!
Be sure to put likes, subscribe to the site and share your opinion in the comments!
I also recommend reading:
The world is on the verge of war with Aliens? https: / / otari.mirtesen.ru / blog / 43009838561 /
Ancient artifacts: the mystery of the “genetic disk ” https: / / otari.mirtesen.ru / blog / 43649493804 /
What does the shape of your eyebrows tell you about your character?
https: / / otari.mirtesen.ru / blog / 43192033043 /
Picture of the day
top
,,

Wider economic concerns include that new technologies can concentrate wealth and power in a few large firms and be developed without democratic input or worker consultation.

People also experience technophobia, a fear of too-advanced technologies such as AI, which dates back to the Industrial Revolution and persists today.

Historical transitions were often painful, involving urbanization, harsh factory work, social dislocation, and in some cases violence and state repression.

Some analysts and economists argue that automation might not create enough new jobs quickly enough, raising concerns about long-term unemployment and social inequality.

Workers also object to how technologies are introduced when machines are used in ways that transfer wealth to owners, reduce wages, or appear to bypass training and fair employment practices.

Negative media narratives, celebrity warnings, and dystopian visions of AI can amplify public anxiety and make people more resistant to adopting new technologies.

Title:

Content: Alert
1.2 million doses of Modena are ready for the 24th vaccine.
Memoirs of the world ’ s first semi-robot
I am not going to die, but will evolve.
When the body and the machine become one, can man be truly free?
In 2017, Peter was diagnosed with asymptomatic disease, a deadly disease that lasts only two years on average.
However, he does not want to be like any other asymptomatic patient, but can only be painfully disabled until he dies. He chooses to think of himself as a white rat under the development of high-tech, and let technology replace his losing speech, movement and sensory abilities, becoming "Peter 2.0" - the first complete cyborg (semi-robot) in history.
This book, I Am Cyber-Peter 2.0, chronicles his life after he learned from his illness, and is also a book of courage, a book of technology, and a book of love.
by Peter Scott-Morgan
Protect the Fire of Hope
Because my voice had become so weak, I had to invite nearly 30 people to sit close to me in the large conference room at the EISS Innovation Centre in London.
I ’ ve spoken to a lot of big companies before, and only two of them have shown enough courage and leadership (or commitment and social responsibility?) to actually show up at the conference.
But even if there are only two large companies, the preparation for our two days to start the operation of the foundation is enough.
Of course, there were people who attended Else Information Technology, and the internationally renowned Intel company even sent a representative to the meeting – the team that worked with Stephen Hawking.
People from the Cellophane Company are also on board, along with Ester ’ s colleagues, as well as many experts involved in the production of virtual avatars, and a few key people who are critical to the foundation ’ s operations.
This is the first day of the two days of preparation, and we are ready to start the whole two days of non-stop work, incinerating the dials - both days have to be busy from 8: 00 in the morning to 8: 00 in the evening - I have to make things go smoothly.
More importantly, I must prepare for the future and keep the Foundation on track as much as possible.
Everyone in the conference room slid their chairs toward me, and I encouraged them to sit as close as possible until everyone could hear me at a volume that sounded like I was whispering.
And then I opened:
“Welcome to the inaugural meeting of the Scott-Morgan Foundation! The next two days are your last chance to hear my voice.
In order to highlight this milestone in life, I intend to make an opening statement for everyone, connecting everything from the past to the future.
In August 1984, almost 35 years ago, I published my first book: The Robot Revolution.
When I published this book, I had a great disagreement with my editor (and the professor who reviewed it) about the end of the book.
I predict the future in the book; but I am not smart enough to predict the future is so close that I should be alive when this prediction actually happens, and may prove my prediction wrong!
For me at the time, 50 years later was a very, very distant future. ”
As explained to Francis, I continue to share my concern that humanity is about to face a fork in the road, as I predicted long ago, and that we are now unwittingly choosing the wrong path, all the way to the independent development of artificial intelligence (there is a great possibility that humanity will eventually be left far behind), rather than welcoming the future of human-AI collaboration.
If humans and artificial intelligence can work together, it will allow us to accomplish things that are difficult for both humans and artificial intelligence alone.
“I never thought that in a few decades I ’ d want to reread my book. ”
When I reread the last paragraph, I have to say that the universe really played a big joke on me, when I casually used the word "extremely fragile body" in the book, and now look at my body, which can not even be picked up by the book, it makes me smile.
So I asked Andrew to read it aloud for everyone. "
Hearing my instructions, my nephew Andrew became the focus of the spotlight, and he began to read aloud:
“If we really go down the road of ‘ amplifying human intelligence ’, it ’ s possible to keep humans and robots in the same evolutionary branch, rather than watching robots leave humans in the process of evolution. ”
If reality follows this trajectory, humans will one day be able to replace their extremely fragile bodies, survive in more permanent machines, and use supercomputers to amplify human intelligence.
And I went on:
“Thirty-five years after this book was published, everyone here now has the opportunity to move the future in this direction, and we are the best representatives of what Jerry said was ‘ on the front line of change ’ … If the future happens, there is no way to make it up!
But we all know that if this is a Hollywood blockbuster — and one day our story is bound to become a blockbuster — this is the moment when things get tougher and the stakes start to increase.
After all the out-of-frame conversations, endless thrills, great ideas, and empty promises, the true heroes of the origin story — who have the stamina, their strengths, and their boundless enthusiasm to make a real difference — are finally here.
The heroes of this story are the people in front of me, and the other members of the resistance who will be physically present in a few hours, or in electronic communications.
We are the power of change! We are the core members of this resistance.
Now is the critical moment.
We have to fight the status quo, we have to change what it means to be human, and our vision is that by working with artificial intelligence, we can liberate all people and live on — even people like me can survive — but if we don ’ t succeed in taking the next step, it ’ s over.
The reason is very simple.
No one else in the world can do what we are doing; no one else in the world is trying to do what we are trying to do.
Contrary to the vision we pursue, the status quo we are about to fight is very strong; the future we are trying to reverse has been shaped by a large part of the wrong ending.
The real reason that the process will be so difficult is that our greatest challenge is not the limitations of technology – although the limitations of technology are also huge obstacles – in fact, our most powerful enemy is the human psyche.
We must have heard the negative comments of the news media, Hollywood movies, worried celebrities, and the general public that artificial intelligence is about to attack humanity.
So we must create another possibility, another way of solving the problem; let me boldly set the tone for it — a new hope.
Although we are just now taking the first step in this new direction, we have already seen those in the establishment retreat, who feel uncomfortable about having to face technology they don ’ t understand.
We have also seen many companies and many people choose to remain silent and watch, and they do not want to participate in these affairs openly, only to wait for the changes, but also feel anxious about not being able to fully grasp the situation, on the one hand, worry about the risk of damage to their reputation, but do not understand the impact of these things on themselves.
I know the mood of these people, I really do.
That's what they are.
But we're not like that.
After careful selection, I know that everyone sitting has the ability to change the world.
Take your precious time from your daily work, contribute your precious talents, and work with others to achieve our common goals.
Some of them — not just the awesome Jerry and EasyTech — are using their courage and leadership to publicly stand up for our actions on behalf of their companies, to help break the social status quo, and to prove that no matter what the universe throws at us, we can embrace change and use it to lead the way to a future that will last forever.
Starting today and ending tomorrow, we have the opportunity to show the world a different path to the future, one that can avoid human threats and be more secure – as Jerry recently wrote: “Human beings provide background, common sense, and creativity, and artificial intelligence helps to flourish. ”
"That's what we're going to do.
We want to make a strong case for all of humanity, not just talk, we want to know and do it! We want to make results and do it for the world to see.
It ’ s also important that we use our vision, willingness to take on difficult situations, and practical action to ensure that all of these efforts will survive long after we leave the world.
We want to incorporate this spirit into this unique research institution in the form of a charitable foundation.
The official goal of our charitable foundation is precisely the dream that brought us together in the first place: to ethically use artificial intelligence, virtual reality, augmented reality, robotics, and other high-tech systems to improve behavior and health for all groups of people who are physically restricted by age, disease, disability, and other physical and mental illnesses.
Against this background, our foundation was founded to explicitly and openly harness the power of innovation so that humans can live well in the event of a change in their lives — even if it ’ s due to the onset of asymptomatic disease.
Eight weeks before I can no longer speak on my own, I will have to rely on the technology developed by the Foundation.
But what we ’ re going to do over the next two days is important not just to me, but to everyone with severe physical disabilities and, ultimately, to each of us.
Of course, our foundation will become a beacon of hope, illuminating the way forward for all who can ’ t see hope, and inspiring the progress and direction of AI development around the world.
The more our fire of hope burns, the more people will be willing to join the ranks and make the fire more dazzling and moving.
But let ’ s not forget that we are the ones who are responsible for this fire of hope, and at the heart of this fire of hope will always be humanity and our humanity.
I know that we will have many major setbacks in the next two days; I know that we will panic when we find that there is a huge gap in our thinking; I know that we will be tired and make mistakes, but it doesn ’ t matter.
We are just about to embark on a beautiful journey. We don ’ t have to rush to perfect everything at this time, just take the first step toward a bright future.
I am very proud to be able to join you on this journey, and I would like to thank you all for choosing to join me on this adventure. "
This article is excerpted from “I Am Cyberberg – Peter 2.0 ” by Facebook.
Vision Hollywood Facebook Publishing Reading Windball
Extended reading
Is it a unique person or a good partner for humans? 2022 New “Social ” Study of Cats
Will humanity be extinct?
"Jurassic World: Dominating the World" is Coming Soon
The Queen fulfills her son's wish, and Camilla will become Queen!
Andrew Garfield lied to himself, lied to Emma Stone, played Spider-Man, and was called an asshole.
Related News
Chen Ming-pang ’ s new book, “My Young Master ’ s Time, ” looks back on life with sincere writing!
Chen Ming Pun The name of a man - under a cherry tree, a passer-by, feeling desolate and dry.
Wu Xianghui, famous for writing "The Boy Who Rejected the Joint Entrance Examination", sometimes had shocking remarks. Once, in order to write the book "Farewell to Korea", he went to Korea and stayed in a hotel.
This book, let you put yourself in place - "Tell me, what have you suffered?"
My friend is sick.
And she came to ask for help, but it was a difficult question: accompany me to the end.
The woman agreed, but did not think that this was a completely lonely adventure, because - even if you found the most peaceful and quiet beauty of life; even if you can have mutual fun, support, share the taste of close food reading images, chat memories together; even if they can share the same time; until the end of the day, she and her sick friend, will still be alone, Faced with their own completely different adventures...
But until then, there is still a lot to remember, the mind, the struggle, the laughter, the foolishness... and the pain of watching others suffer, and even though there is so much suffering, it will finally be laid out and revealed in the timid question, "Tell me, what have you suffered?".
The history that cannot be learned in textbooks is hidden in the history of China that has been disappeared!
Five thousand years of Chinese history as the content, vivid, lively, interesting vernacular description, the most beautiful, the best understand Chinese history story!
From prehistory, faith history era into the historical era, full of great stories, the ancestors with Titus to conquer the four neighbors, establish dynasties, from the three emperors, Yao Shun Yu Tang to the establishment of the Zhou Dynasty, and the great powers to divide the dynasty.
Read ancient texts, learn modern writing! Let Tao Yuanming teach you how to write "Creative Autobiography"
"My name is × × ×, was born in......, parents are......" Many people write autobiographies, are written according to this pattern, although the four stable, the writing has been written, but it is a bit boring to read, if you want to stand out from the many works, it is necessary to use a special way.
At this time, "telling a story" comes in handy! Although it is writing an autobiography of a character, it is still necessary to tell your own "story" as if you were writing a story.
You can use the characteristics of writing a story to add emotions and express ideas in your autobiography; or, like writing a novel, have orgasms and turns, and display creativity and humor.
In the distant Jin Dynasty, Tao Yuanming demonstrated for us the creative autobiography, even if viewed from a modern perspective, it will not be outdated.
Now let ’ s enjoy the ancient texts and write to Tao Yuan Ming.
Memoirs of the world ’ s first semi-robot
I am not going to die, but will evolve.
When the body and the machine become one, can man be truly free?
In 2017, Peter was diagnosed with asymptomatic disease, a deadly disease that lasts only two years on average.
However, he does not want to be like any other asymptomatic patient.
When you ’ re at work, you ’ re still talking to your friends in Japanese? Just change a sentence and you ’ ll be able to turn your impressions around!
Courtesy of the Japanese is necessary.
When communicating in the workplace, is your limited vocabulary not enough to fully express your ideas, or not enough respect? Japanese communication expert Takao Saito ’ s book “Japanese Vocabulary in the Workplace ” takes you through“ Upgrading Daily Conversations ”, “Inviting Others ”,“ Replacing Difficult Words ”, “Communicating Ideas ”,“ Not Repeating the Same Words ” and “Making Meetings Smooth ” Learn how to change words, replace straight words, and smoothly avoid any situations that may offend the other party.
Product recommendation
udn Forum

Labeling critics as 'Luddites' can dismiss legitimate concerns about labour, safety, governance, and equity rather than resolving them.

If you want to build rapport with a supervisor who resists technological change, focus on understanding and acknowledging their specific concerns about jobs, fairness, governance, and unfamiliar risks.