Kevin Kelly tells technology's epic story
Vložit
- čas přidán 21. 02. 2010
- www.ted.com In this wide-ranging, thought-provoking talk from TEDxAmsterdam, Kevin Kelly muses on what technology means in our lives -- from its impact at the personal level to its place in the cosmos.
TEDTalks is a daily video podcast of the best talks and performances from the TED Conference, where the world's leading thinkers and doers give the talk of their lives in 18 minutes. Featured speakers have included Al Gore on climate change, Philippe Starck on design, Jill Bolte Taylor on observing her own stroke, Nicholas Negroponte on One Laptop per Child, Jane Goodall on chimpanzees, Bill Gates on malaria and mosquitoes, Pattie Maes on the "Sixth Sense" wearable tech, and "Lost" producer JJ Abrams on the allure of mystery. TED stands for Technology, Entertainment, Design, and TEDTalks cover these topics as well as science, business, development and the arts. Closed captions and translated subtitles in a variety of languages are now available on TED.com, at www.ted.com/translate. Watch a highlight reel of the Top 10 TEDTalks at www.ted.com/index.php/talks/top10 - Věda a technologie
well.. at least Dan Brown cited his source..
Ikr
Dan Brown and professor Langdon brought me here
Me too!
Brilliant talk. I especially liked the graphics at 8:03 and 8:25. They both could use some more discussion, though. The subtle interrelationships between energy, matter, entropy, extropy, technology and life deserve a more thorough treatment.
Its ´really a great pleasure to follow the ideas of Kevin Kelly on the distinct role of technology in our lives and how it evolved! There is o much to learn in a simple and entertaining fashion...!
Compare this, for instance, wit the thinking and writing of futurist and sc-fi author Stanislaw Lem.
Buena empleabilidad de contexto para abrir nuestra mente.
Dr. Michio Kaku, George Friedman and Kevin Kelly are my heroes. Brilliant minds and brilliant thinkers.
@Fensterplaetzchen
Because Michio Kaku is one of the founders of string theory. He is also one of the few scientists who can clearly explain extremely complex issues in a way in which others can understand. His lectures are awesome to behold and I have only seen him on videos. I really like his Type I,II,III civilizations.
As you said ,You appreciate our attention
I am so grateful for your attention to this gigantic force
I'll check that out, in return, I suggest you look up Jacque Fresco, really inspiring man
this talk starts slow but gets really good.
Dan Brown brought me here. Great story tho
this is a MUST see for everyone!!!
Susan Blackmore's Memes and Temes TED Talk is like this too.
In 1962 published a book "Silent Spring" by Rachel Carson, who was the starting point for the "environmental movement" as we know it today. In the book, the writer expressed great concern over the human (industrial) processing of wild and including the use of pesticides (DDT), which kills by nature.
Brilliant, brilliant, brilliant!
Truelly Fantastic.
Good point!
I've already switched more energy-bulbs since the old ones got prohibited a couple month ago, than I switched regular bulbs all my life.
Doesn't change that they contain toxic chemicals, that musn't be thrown to regular garbage. A clear disadvantage against the old bulbs, that were, except for the wire, 100% recyclable.
this is very interesting
@ZarlanTheGreen Of course there are some exceptions such as ratings for restaurants and movies. For somethings a star system works better than a thumbs up thumbs down system. In away I suppose CZcams's thumb system is a nod toward the old "At the Movies with Gene Siskel and Roger Ebert" which so famously made thumbs up/ thumbs down popular.
Dan Brown, p. 470, “Origini”.
@Brothergeorge
my reply to u was just me verifying a CZcams bug.
You can post an empty reply....
Watch, listen to, and read anything and everything you can find by and about KK, including his book The Inevitable.
@CAlex6977 what are the errors?
incredible
@notNEWW the problem is that coal is a non-renewable energy source....its a finite amount with a definite possibility of running out.
@CAlex6977 could you point them out for me, the logical errors i mean, i want to catch as many as possible.
thanks in advance.
There is no such thing as bad technology. I could not agree more, Sir.
I haven't understood every single work, but he seems right.
We're using more space on earth than just the spot we live on.
adapt and overcome
@lightsculler read Wired Science's 2008 article on the topic. The amount of coal is actually a fraction of the estimates previously put forth. Further your suggestion still has a massive cost (likely comparable to nuclear reactors) First in research, then second and most expensive, building enough machines to process and pump the worlds CO2 output underground. That is certainly no cheap solution considering the number neccessary.
He said "Technology" 55 times :)
Cheers
Well you dont have to time travel in Ancient Greece to find the usage of Anthropology it's used even today.
Comes from Anthropos (Man - Human) and Logy that i explaned what it means.
the tungsten lightbulb wasn't a bad idea, the LED light was just a better one.
Ironically some early tungsten lightbulbs could last for much longer than even some modern lightbulbs, like decades longer. However, when customers only come to buy lightbulbs once every 50 to 100 years, there's not much profit to be made, so the lightbulb companies agreed to significantly limit the time a bulb could burn so they would actually turn a profit. An ironic step backwards
One of these early long-lived lightbulbs can be observed at the Livermore-Pleasenton Fire Department in Livermore, California. It was installed and switched on in 1901 and has been lit ever since.
1) I did check it out. Original response still applies as science does not judge accuracy by acclamation. In any case, I wasn't personally criticising you, just indicating I wasn't going to be drawn on the argument, because...
2) I was HELPING you. I know the skeptics arguments very well, and your 'finite coal' argument is weak, hence they will pound on it successfully. Concentrate on stronger arguments, such as coal not being suitable AT ALL, regardless of it's availability.
He said stars are nuclear 'fission' machines :S
I wonder what Kevin Kelly would think of The Venus Project? Or anyone else in this comment section for that matter....
Their eggs had shells so thin that they broke. The result was that the number of these birds fell dramatically. Today, DDT is banned in many countries across the world, but it is still used in developing countries in the fight against malariamyg!
Many chemicals have been shown to disrupt human and animal hormones. Endocrine disrupting chemicals are largely used in industry, and from there spread to animals and humans.
I liked that one.
For a better discussion on basically the same topic, see Susan Blackmore. She really hits the nail right on the head. This guy is just poking about nearing the conclusions that she so eloquently reveals.
im saying that there is no limit to human intuition and thats the only real resource we need. in the 1800's people didn't think we would get through the 1900's but then we adapted and here we are, i would not be surprised and you should not be either, that when we do infact run out of critical resources on earth, that human intuition would find some sort of substitute and/or find new resources on other planets and/or find ways to more efficiently use our current resources.
@Fensterplaetzchen plus exotropy isn't a word
@bocbo
Almost all of the studies I have ever seen on sociopathic and predatory behavior show clear evidence of common environmental factors in their childhood. As with any other kind of behavior, the tendency only reaches an extreme when combined with a complimentary upbringing.
5:12 raw vegans don't cook food and still live?
@ZarlanTheGreen CZcams's data has shown that Thumb up and thumb down (much like 'like' and 'dislike') is a more effective system that people engage in. This is why CZcams got rid of the 5 star system because the hard data CZcams has been measuring shows that most people in a 5 star system would rate something only a 1 or a 5 star. People are inclined to polarization naturally. Most people stay clear of gray areas and choose black or white an efficient way to organize the world.
@ZarlanTheGreen CZcams doesnt care! At least you've had your say.
He used some generalisations I found misplaced, like "The European Way of dealing with new technologies" and Technology giving freedom and choices and diversity... whatever happened to those old vegatables of long ago? They got replaced. By technology. And freedom in let say a minefield? I watched the whole video, but watching AKIRA gives the same insights ;)
There are children who we can see developing bad tendencies because of the way they're being raised but there are no inherently bad children.
He wasn't anthropomorphizing technology, he was talking about natural tendencies. Just like we might say that two magnets "want" to come together but we know that its not actually a conscious want. Technology is what some biologists would call humanity's extended phenotype just like the anthill is the ants' extended phenotype.
Okay for the dummies that don't get it, thoughts are a natural phenomena. All we can do is make a choices with the thoughts we get from an unknown source. Even the choices we make are based on more thoughts...so basically the whole thing is natural phenoma without a 'you' in it at all. Get rid of your egos and meditate silly people
But isn't a choice unique? Why don't all the people make the same choices?
@CAlex6977 Youve misunderstood the metaphor. Technology responds to selection and "exotropy" in basically the same way as biological life.
I'd say everyone's born neutral. Like someone said before no one's born good nor bad. What is good and what is bad? It's up to us to interpret.
Geniuses are made not born. Everything requiers work. At least that's what I think. o.o
@CAlex6977 ok i think i see what you mean now.
The talker enumerates the general trends of evolution of life. The first point is complexity, however that is wrong, evolution do not care if it creates a simple organism or complex organism.
Your intution says it is creating complexity but that is because you do not notice the simple single cell organism which are equally diverse.
If you make a graph of species ranked by complexity, it will show an even distribution of simple and complex life forms as per the logic of evolution would predict.
@Fensterplaetzchen
Well he is selling Science and I don't mind the hyperbole.
@roborious
omg am i drunk O.o
I tend to think of endangered animal species in this way. If we cause them to die out, that's one more beautiful work of art that my descendants won't get to see. Imagine if the work of DaVinci or some important literary movement were lost forever. That's how I feel every time I read about some critically endangered endemic species that looks as if its going to be crushed under the careless foot of humanity and there's nothing we can do to stop it.
He sounds like Terence Mckenna, what he says.
@lightsculler its not one book...I guess you didnt really bother to check it out. Be ware the guy who doesnt take time to investigate. Its an article supported with multiple journals.
2.) the point is that coal is NOT as abundant as needed, nor can it solely be relied upon so your solution doesnt hold much water.
Maybe he means the technology "wants" clean water because technology is dependent on humans and humans need clean water to survive. I'm sure he's well aware that at the moment technology is not being used to achieve what is in the best interest of humans and therefore not in the interest of the perpetuation of technology itself.
@boorens18
1) 'Beware the man with one book'. I prefer not to rely on a single article for the information I use. Will not engage with someone who does.
2) My 'suggestion' was not to describe coal as a finite resource. Not sure what you mean re: 'expensive' and 'pump the worlds CO2 output underground'. That's not my position.
The issue you have engaged with does not interest me very much, just wanted to help you out since your 'finite coal resource' argument doesn't hold much water.
the lightbulb is probably the worst example for "bad" and "better"
regular lightbulbs are A LOT more friendly to our environment than energy-saving bulbs, they burn for a lot longer time, are 100% recyclable (energy-saving bulbs aren't!!!), they cost less in production and so on...
energy-saving-bulbs are a step backwards in technology.
As with pretty much any physical or psychological characteristic, both nature and nurture play a role.
So yes, you can be born with genes that will make you more likely to be violent, selfish, sadistic etc. I haven't found any twin studies on crime, (apparently the nazis had good ones... which reminds me why it's taboo to even consider the nature side of a nature vs nurture debate) but there's tons of studies linking genetics to agressiveness.
the first force is energy then the next force is mass?
as a physicist or at least a graduate of a physics and philosophy course i immediately suspect a pseudo scientist who knows no physics - force is a well defined concept and the opening statement makes no sense - the following speech about energy density sounds totally wrong to me, anyone got any quantitative info to back those statements up? i doubt it
@ZarlanTheGreen 1-2 stars just means thumb down, altogether only 5 stars. so.
Technology has taken this mans mustache.
Then Ai comes into play. Is this part of the Technium kingdom?
If you'll notice he wasn't supporting the use of DDT spraying over fields but its use in spraying homes and as an additive to mosquito nets. Yes it has downsides, there not as bad as the 2-3 million people that die of malaria every year.
I'm really not simply having a youtube argument for the sake of argument. please look into the associated costs and see if there is any better alternative for dealing with this problem. DDT is far from a perfect solution but the cost of not using it is high.
@boorens18
There is so much coal in known deposits (let alone unknown) that there's no point in making the 'finite' argument against it's use. No criticism intended, just helping out. Your anti-coal argument will only be weakened if you use the 'finite' argument.
I lost some respect for Kaku when he was asked about protocol in case scientists make contact with intelligent alien life and he seemed to support the position that the public shouldn't know about it. Otherwise he's a brilliant man.
is it just me, or ted isnt what it used to be anymore
Is the chair too big, or the man too little?
Is he umpiring a tennis match?
I love videos like these. Shows graphically how the west really does consider technology its new religion lol. I love looking at the faces when the speaker generally asks them to imagine life without technology. Hilarious
I love the video, but I'm a nitpicker.
We did not "invent" fire. We discovered fire. There is a difference, and it's an important distinction to make.
lightning has been striking trees and setting them ablaze (not to mention the other ways fires are started in nature) for hundreds of millions of years. Most of that time was long before humans existed.
Caveman didn't live beyond the age of thirty.....they didn't have the calendar back then.
All who disagree the entire talk without pointing out any evident logical error, must believe in a certain god.
I believe in a certain god and I completely agree with the talk. I'm a bit of a deist. I've always made the case that faith and science are not mutually exclusive.
When he describes the cosmic process of self-organization that's been guiding the evolution of the universe since the beginning of time, couldn't that be seen as some sort of higher power? Is it really any different than some sort of "guiding hand of God?" I.E. faith and science are not mutually exclusive. I believe they strengthen each other.
He even says "we don't know where this self organization comes from." Why couldn't it be guided by some sort of good? There's no evidence to suggest it was, but lack of evidence is not evidence to the contrary, so there's no reason why it couldn't.
Just something to think about!
@planetdarwin
think of earth as an art gallery. some part of gallery is better and more interesting than other part.. so people tends to go to that place.. even thou they know the part is already full.. whose fault is that?
there still plenty room on Earth for human.. it just people does not want to go there..
No one's born BAD! Never! They "bad" people are only made by events in life. Great people aren't necessary great parents. Being too good to or too passive while raising a child makes those "rotten" people you are refering to.
population is a joke, we have more than enough resources to support the amount of people in the world, the only reason you hear about things like world hunger and mass food shortages in 3rd world countries around the world, is that theres always someone taking the supplies from everyone. The United states actually pays farmers to NOT grow food, and we TRY to feed people, but there is almost always some political problem.
So's malaria.
Some people are born with a gift for music, a good teacher can guide that talent to greatness. Nature (talent), nurture (the teacher). Some people are born predators, or sociopaths, some people ARE born bad.
Yes everything requires work. Even if you're really smart, you can't accomplish anything without at least trying.
That said, a huge (~50% very roughly) part of IQ is genetic (and yes, it's an imperfect and biased measure of intelligence, but whatever measure of intelligence you choose, I'm willing to bet there's still going to be a huge genetic factor)
for instance... why new york is has more people than let say nebraska.? I believe nebraska has more potential than new york.
I think your analogy is using square footage for human bodies.
I get your point, but your analogy is not suitable to convey your message
@YYwb All who demand that anyone who disagrees with something must ALWAYS point out ALL logical errors, EXPLICITLY, (and when limited to 500 characters, at that), should apply the same to him-/her-self or shut up.
...and also realise that most people find their time more valuable, and that such behavior would be found annoying, anyway.
...and any who seriously say that failing to do so, implies faith in a certain god, should get used to being taken as seriously as a claimed "alien abductee".
@Brothergeorge
I know what I am talking about, but you obviously didn't get it, why you incist on me not knowing what I am talking now.
The first regular lightbulb ever ignited is still burning. the only reason why regular bulbs break is because they do not contain a vacuum. when a oxygen-molecule hits the wire, it burns through.
if they were produced correctly, they would last a lot longer then others do, beeing more efficent, wherever light is used for a short time only. switching on and off kills new bulb
im sorry if i portrayed my ideas in any sort of "far fetched" or "wishful" manner. the honest truth of it all is we ARE rats, running about in our mediocre lives trying to grab as much as we can. In fact the ONLY difference from our behavior and the behavior of rats is our technology and our ability to expand technology
We aren't really that conditioned to eating cooked meals. I mean, dogs are conditioned to eating meat, but they can still eat and extract nutrients from a variety of vegetable food. But again, dogs haven't had a need for vegetable food for a very long time, thus evolution hasn't selected dogs with gens that can tackle new kinds of plant poisons. A 200 gram chocolate plate can kill a dog. Fire technology hasn't been around for that long, we can still eat basically every thing we cook raw.
i am absolutely not saying that we are not effecting the earth, i completely agree that what america is using compared to others is ridiculous now what i am trying to say, is that if we are sitting around concerned about population growth, then we are wasting our time. Humanity can support it self almost limitlessly. I am honestly wondering where on earth you got the idea that i have "no concept of ecological footprint or resource chains" I was simply trying to produce a counter argument
the correct phrasing would be "how come that i think that your statements are wrong"
And that can be explained very easily. You didn't get that information from any source you trust before, that's why you don't believe it.
Can't blame you. I wouldn't believe any stranger in a youtube-comment without proof. But look and the facts and you see that I'm right.
there are so many things people did not consider when judging what bulb is better. warm light makes you feel warmer, saving heatingcosts
technology at 1800's? wtf man? do you homework...
Technology is the Greek word ΤΕΧΝΟΛΟΓΙΑ (Technologia) and it's actually two words.... (ΤΕΧΝΗ - ΛΟΓΙΑ (TECHNI & LOGIA) techni means (mastery, artistry, workmanship, skill, craft) and logia means "the talking about it" part.
Everything is preordained, including your thoughts.
Prove it
There are so many logical errors in this speech I find it to be really hard to watch.
Pushing the big bang is the same to me as religion pushing gods.
The universe is a slow growth within space.
Space which is purity, where there has been no thought or particularization.
And was always light until the phosphorescence began to gather together to form suns which created unphosphorescent areas from it concentrating on one place like grains spread equally on a surface and then something comes and gathers them in a pile (using the word phosphorescent just as a term not necessarily the meaning for glowing light but not concentrated which is what suns are)
Because basically if nothing existed then there would be no blockage of light or concentration of it, thus all light. And concentration of light which would create a supposed darker area because of the concentration of it.......
Hey don't blame me😇.
He 👹 started it with his big banging theory like it's real or something.
@YYwb And a video that is so-so? A video that is bad, I'd have given 2 stars. 1 star, would be for those that are despicably bad. 4 for one that is good, and five for brilliant ones.
Thumb up and thumb down, is very limiting.
Teleological explanations, antroporphizing objects and processes, energy-matter-information... I can't believe how pseudo-everything this talk is.
Goddamn thank you. I thought I was going crazy. Crap like this is why I quit college the first time and it seems over 14 years later nothing has changed
why's he sitting on a high chair?
No, DDT is bad in the human environment.
Haha, mooie oma fiets links op het podium!