Digital Revolution’s Winners And Losers — from Information Week by John Foley
Workers with in-demand digital skills benefit most as computers increasingly take over
everyday tasks. In this InformationWeek 500 video, MIT’s Erik Brynjolfsson discusses
how this trend could affect your enterprise.

From DSC:
I agree with Erik that a large swath of people are being left behind, mainly because of technological changes and the pace of those changes. Again I ask, can you hear the engines roar?  How can we re-train folks to take advantage of the 3+million open jobs out there? How can we reinvent ourselves as quickly as possible?
The pace has changed -- don't come onto the track in a Model T
  • Andrew McAfee: Are droids taking our jobs?
    Robots and algorithms are getting good at jobs like building cars, writing articles, translating — jobs that once required a human. So what will we humans do for work? Andrew McAfee walks through recent labor data to say: We ain’t seen nothing yet. But then he steps back to look at big history, and comes up with a surprising and even thrilling view of what comes next.
  • America’s jobs gap: 9 million — from cnn.com by Tami Luhby

SingularitySummit.com — conference website


The Singularity Summit is the premier dialog on the Singularity. The first Singularity Summit was held at Stanford in 2006 to further understanding and discussion about the Singularity concept and the future of human technological progress. It was founded as a venue for leading thinkers to explore the subject, whether scientist, enthusiast, or skeptic. The goal of the Summit is to improve people’s thinking about the future and increasing public awareness of radical technologies under development today and of the transformative implications of such technologies understood as part of a larger process.

Singularity Summit 2011 — from the nextbigfuture.com

Singularity Summit 2011 videos — from the nextbigfuture.com

What you missed at Singularity Summit 2011 — from technoverseblog.com


  • David Brin (scientist and sci-fi novelist)
  • Ray Kurzweil (inventor, restless genius, and author of The Singularity is Near)
  • Stephen Wolfram (physicist, developer of Mathematica and Wolfram Alpha, genius)
  • Dimitry Itskov (founder of Russia 2045)
  • Michael Shermer (contrarian and founder of Skeptic magazine)
  • Riley “Red Balloons” Crane (post doctoral fellow at MIT Media Lab and winner of DARPA’s balloon challenge)
  • Sharon Bertsch McGrayne (writer, author of “The Theory That Wound not Die”)
  • Tyler Cowen (economist, George Mason University)
  • Jaan Tallinn (founder of Skype)
  • Ken Jennings (Jeopardy champion and loser to Watson)
  • Dan Cerutti (IBM executive charged with marketing Watson)


Addendum on 10/20/11:

The Singularity: Five technologies that will change the world (and one that won’t) — from MaximumPC.com by David Gerrold; originally saw this in Steve Knode’s July 2011 Newsletter

Excerpt I want to comment on:

Now, let’s try a thought experiment. If we apply Moore’s law and assume that the rate of scientific advancement doubles at the same rate as the computer power that we apply to research, then we can project that we will likely accomplish a whole 20th century’s worth of scientific advancement in 5 years—by 2015. As the rate continues to double, we’ll accomplish a century’s work in 2.5 years, then 1.25 years, 7.5 months, 3 months and 3 weeks, then a smidge less than two months, one month, two weeks, one week, then 3.5 days, 1.75 days, and if you ignore Zeno’s paradox, by the end of 2020 we will be accomplishing a century’s worth of research every day, and two weeks later, every second. And after that…?

From DSC:

This is why it is critical that all of us are tapping into streams of content. We can’t be dealing with damned up “water” — but we need to access ever-flowing-streams of content. We need to learn how to learn — and like learning! We’ll also need to know how to manage learning agents in order to sort through the information overload coming at us.

What's the best way to deal with ever-changing streams of content? When information has shrinking half-lives?


Also mentioned in the above article:

  • Graphene
  • Robots
  • Bio-Fabbing
  • Universal Smart Tech

Also from Steve Knode:


From DSC:
Items re: The Singularity:

From DSC:

I don’t mean to suggest here that just because someone is pursuing the development of AI, robotics, etc. that their heart isn’t right — that’s just not accurate and such a perspective would be painting a broad and bogus swath across mankind.

But from some of the robotic and AI-related sites and blogs that I’ve seen (and not necessarily those listed above), I’m becoming a bit more skeptical of peoples’ motivations in this space, as many of these folks seem to be saying they can create better than God can.  Alternatively, some don’t believe in a Creator at all, and thus want to make themselves the ultimate creator.  When inventors, entrepreneurs, corporate leaders, military leaders, and other relevant parties have “hearts of flesh” that are compassionate, caring, and giving…these technologies can be very useful and beneficial.  But I’m more concerned if these types of technologies are warped into a pathway for power, personal gain, military applications, etc.


The State of the Heart



Also see:



© 2024 | Daniel Christian