TED Conversations

Martin Schoen

This conversation is closed.

Human beings need one generation to adopt to new developments i.e. to show "significant evolution"

From a German perspective - Juan gives a very comprehensive and exciting picture of the human future. I think, in one point he is making a wrong assumption. Citing his thesis "human beings in our days have to digest more data in one day, than our ancestors got to process in a lifespan."
I think this is a fundamental error.
If a farmer in 1920 was walking over his fields (weat, corn) I would think, he was collecting and retreiving more data than ourselfes by surfing 1 hour in the internet. He was using his eyes, his brain, his nose, not to forget his intuition, feeling and experience to retrieve and process the "data".
One might say "quite nostalgic"?1 I think this is not a nostalgic view to our ancestors. Today without any doubt, we have far better ways to get much more information. The only thesis I wanted to dispute is the statement - in our days we have to digest 100 times more data than our parents. The right wording - we could digest / process 100 times more data, if the evolution would have made us fit for this task. It´s an historical / anthropologic / sociologic phenomenon, that major technologic developments affecting our behaviour and our daily mode of operation, do take one generation (25 years) until they are really adopted and settled in our daily life e.g. telefon, TV, handy, computer, cars, aircraft or internet. Internet - invented in the ´60ties and made commercially available to the public in 1974 it took until 2000, that the internet got to be a useful and commonly spread communication medium.
The sucess story of mobile handphones has a similar time axis. Commercially availabe in the 80ties (1975), did I (as executive) get my first handphone from my from my company in the 1997. Handphones for everybody (housewives, Kids) did not come up before 2002/2005. Quod erat demonstrandum.

Share:

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • Sep 23 2012: "Citing his thesis "human beings in our days have to digest more data in one day, than our ancestors got to process in a lifespan."
    I think this is a fundamental error."

    Of course it is a fundemantal error: the world generates more data than before but most of it is useless and never analyzed and most of what remains is analyzed by computers and a small group of human specialists. Joe Sixpack doesn't have to analyze hundreds of times more information than his grandpa in order to survive.
    • thumb
      Sep 23 2012: Thanks John - I totally agree.... and I agree with Rhona. Its not the amount of information - the kids growing up need the right information. Which is not a million of kilobytes. Which is more related to culture, understanding and knowing to use the data to the better of the human beings. Not just learn to process Gigabytes. For that we are not designed (this is as u write "Computerintelligence"), and this will not contribute to our social or personal evolution!

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.