If we choose to be optimistic, we might take the view that these are just teething problems which will settle down as we get more used to the changes. That does happen, of course, when new ways of doing things are coming into play.
But should we be optimistic? The problem is that when you complain that something is wrong and you’re not getting the sort of satisfaction to which you’re entitled, nobody cares. If you get a reply at all, it’s perfunctory because the element of considered human reaction is being taken out of the equation. And so the problem persists and continues to persist.
That is the current state of affairs, but should I go into quantum territory and its assertion that some level of sentience is now being exhibited by electronic components? No, because I’m not expert enough. But we have artificial intelligence looming on the horizon and we can only hope that its benevolence can be guaranteed. Otherwise, it’s a scary prospect.
The fact is, or so it seems to me, that human affairs need to be regulated by human beings, and the right sort of human beings to boot. They used to be, and everything worked fine. But that way of doing things is fast disappearing, so what sort of future do we have in prospect? Big Brother was bad enough, but suppose the real Big Brother fifty years down the line isn’t even human.
OK, maybe I’m just being a latter-day Luddite here. Then again, maybe I’m not. The Luddites were only concerned about the effect the burgeoning machine age might have on employment prospects. The route the electronic age might take could be a whole lot more frightful than that.
No comments:
Post a Comment