Take a photo of a barcode or cover
4.0 AVERAGE
4.0 AVERAGE
3.5 stars. Not bad at all but no where near as good as his other works in my humble opinion.
These are interesting things to consider for our future. The idea that the world will change so much in just a few decades seems startling, even though that's what has already happened since 1990 until now. But the speed of change will be even faster and more ethical questions exist. Even though technology has eliminated jobs in the past (e.g. no more telephone switchboard operators or assembly line workers in car factories, etc.), technology is at a whole new level now with algorithms.
I agree that it will be even more important to know ourselves and learn how to think about things in a critical manner. A "liberal arts" education--or what will evolve from that type of learning process--could definitely aid in achieving this. Harari says the four Cs: critical thinking, communication, collaboration, and creativity. I learned all of these through my own liberal arts education. And I enjoyed his discussion about meditation. So glad this author has that background to contribute to his ideas, as a foundational aspect. Without the experience and practice of meditation, this book, and his others, would likely be very different.
"Both politicians and voters are barely able to comprehend the new technologies, let alone regulate their explosive potential. Since the 1990s the internet has changed the world probably more than any other factor, yet the internet revolution was directed by engineers more than by political parties. Did you ever vote about the internet? The democratic system is still struggling to understand what hit it, and it is unequipped to deal with the next shocks, such as the rise of AI and the blockchain revolution." pg. 6
"At present, humankind is far from reaching any consensus on these questions. We are still in the nihilist moment of disillusionment and anger, after people have lost faith in the old stories but before they have embraced a new one. So what next? The first step is to tone down the prophecies of doom and switch from panic mode to bewilderment. Panic is a form of hubris. It comes from the smug feeling that one knows exactly where the world is heading: down. Bewilderment is more humble and therefore more clear-sighted. Do you feel like running down the street crying 'The apocalypse is upon us'? Try telling yourself, 'No, it's not that. Truth is, I just don't understand what's going on in the world.'" pg. 17
"A driver predicting the intentions of a pedestrian, a banker assessing the credibility of a potential borrower, and a lawyer gauging the mood at the negotiating table don't rely on witchcraft. Rather, unbeknownst to them, their brains are recognizing biochemical patterns by analyzing facial expressions, tones of voice, hand movements, and even body odors. An AI equipped with the right sensors could do all that far more accurately and reliably than a human.For this reason the threat of job loss does not result merely from the rise of infotech. It results from the confluence of infotech with biotech." pg. 21
"In the long run, algorithms may learn how to compose entire tunes, playing on human emotions as if they were a piano keyboard. Using your biometric data, the algorithms could even produce personalized melodies, which you alone in the entire universe would appreciate." pg. 27
"Homo sapiens is just not built for satisfaction. Human happiness depends less on objective conditions and more on our own expectations. Expectations, however, tend to adapt to conditions, including the conditions of other people. When things improve, expectations balloon, and so even dramatic improvements in conditions might leave us as dissatisfied as before. If universal basic support is aimed at improving the objective conditions of the average person in 2050, it has a fair chance of succeeding. But if it is aimed at making people subjectively more satisfied with their lot and preventing social discontent, it is likely to fail." pg. 42
"When Britain needed to decide whether it should leave the European Union, Prime Minister David Cameron didn't ask Queen Elizabeth II, the Archbishop of Canterbury, or the Oxford and Cambridge dons to resolve the issue. He didn't even ask the members of Parliament. Rather, he held a referendum in which each and every Brit was asked: 'What do you feel about it?'
You might counter that people were asked, 'What do you think?' rather than 'What do you feel?,' but this is a common misperception. Referendums and elections are always about human feelings, not about human rationality. If democracy were a matter of rational decision-making, there would be absolutely no reason to give all people equal voting rights--or perhaps any voting rights at all. There is ample evidence that some people are far more knowledgeable and rational than others, certainly when it comes to specific economic and political questions. In the wake of the Brexit vote, eminent biologist Richard Dawkins protested that the vast majority of the British public--including himself--should never have been asked to vote in the referendum, because they lacked the necessary background in economics and political science. 'You might as well call a nationwide plebiscite to decide whether Einstein got his algebra right, or let passengers vote on which runway the pilot should land.'" pg. 45
"Unfortunately, at present we are not doing much in the way of research into human consciousness and ways to develop it. We are researching and developing human abilities mainly according to the immediate needs of the economic and political system, rather than according to our own long-term needs as conscious beings. My boss wants me to answer emails as quickly as possible, but he has little interest in my ability to taste and appreciate the food I am eating. Consequently, I check my emails even during meals, which means I lose the ability to pay attention to my own sensations. The economic system pressures me to expand and diversify my investment portfolio, but it gives me zero incentive to expand and diversify my compassion. So I strive to understand the mysteries of the stock exchange while making far less effort to understand the deep causes of suffering." pg. 71
"In this, humans are similar to other domesticated animals. We have bred docile cows that produce enormous amounts of milk but are otherwise far inferior to their wild ancestors. They are less agile, less curious, and less resourceful. We are now creating tame humans that produce enormous amounts of data and function as very efficient chips in a huge data-processing mechanism, but these data-cows hardly maximize the human potential. Indeed, we have no idea what our full human potential is, because we know so little about the human mind. And yet we don't invest much in exploring the human mind, instead focusing on increasing the speed of our internet connections and the efficiency of our Big Data algorithms. If we are not careful, we will end up with downgraded humans misusing upgraded computers to wreak havoc on themselves and on the world." pg. 71-72
"Humans have bodies. During the last century technology has been distancing us from our bodies. We have been losing our ability to pay attention to what we smell and taste. Instead we are absorbed in our smartphones and computers. We are more interested in what is happening in cyberspace than in what is happening down the street. It is easier than ever to talk to my cousin in Switzerland, but it is harder to talk to my husband over breakfast, because he constantly looks at his smartphone instead of at me." pg. 89
"Zuckerberg says that Facebook is committed 'to continue improving our tools to give you the power to share your experience' with others. Yet what people might really need are the tools to connect to their own experiences. In the name of 'sharing experiences,' people are encouraged to understand what happens to them in terms of how others see it. If something exciting happens, the gut instinct of Facebook users is to pull out their smartphones, take a picture post it online, and wait for the 'likes.' In the process they barely notice what they themselves feel. Indeed, what they feel is increasingly determined by the online reactions." pg. 89
"People estranged from their bodies, senses, and physical environment are likely to feel alienated and disoriented. Pundits often blame such feelings of alienation on the decline of religious and national bonds, but losing touch with your body is probably more important. Humans lived for millions of years without religions and without nations; they can probably live happily without them in the twenty-first century too. Yet they cannot live happily if they are disconnected from their bodies. If you don't feel at home in your body, you will never feel at home in the world." pg. 90
"This might sound like science fiction, but the world's first clean hamburger was grown from cells--and then eaten--in 2013. It cost $330,000. Four years of research and development brought the price down to $11 per unit, and within another decade industrially produced clean meat is expected to be cheaper than slaughtered meat. This technological development could save billions of animals from a life of abject misery, could help feed billions of malnourished humans, and could simultaneously help to prevent ecological meltdown." pg. 119
"Both of these cases may seem to smack of racism. But in fact, they are not racist. They are 'culturist.' People continue to conduct a heroic struggle against traditional racism without noticing that the battlefront has shifted. Traditional racism is waning, but the world is now full of 'culturists.'" pg. 152
"The less political violence in a particular state, the greater the public shock at an act of terrorism. Killing a few people in Belgium draws far more attention than killing hundreds in Nigeria or Iraq. Paradoxically, then, the very success of modern states in preventing political violence makes them particularly vulnerable to terrorism." pg. 168
"The role of Judaism in the story of humankind is a bit like the role of Freud's mother in modern Western history. For better or worse, Sigmund Freud had immense influence on the science, culture, art, and folk wisdom of the modern West. It is also true that without Freud's mother we wouldn't have had Freud, and that Freud's personality, ambitions, and opinions were likely shaped to a significant extent by his relations with his mother--as he would be the first to admit. But when writing the history of the modern West, nobody expects to find an entire chapter on Freud's mother. Similarly, without Judaism you would not have had Christianity, but that doesn't merit granting much importance to Judaism when writing the history of the world. The crucial issue is what Christianity did with the legacy of its Jewish mother." pg. 188
"Yet we do not really need such complex, long-term theories to find a natural basis for universal compassion. . . On a much more immediate level, hurting others always hurts me too. Every violent act in the world begins with a violent desire in somebody's mind, which disturbs the peace and happiness of anyone else. Thus people seldom steal unless they first develop a lot of greed and envy in their minds. People don't usually murder unless they first generate anger and hatred. Emotions such as greed, envy, anger, and hatred are very unpleasant. You cannot experience joy and harmony when you are boiling with anger or envy. Long before you murder anyone, your anger has already killed your own peace of mind." pg. 205
"As we come to make the most important decisions in the history of life, I personally would trust more in those who admit ignorance than in those who claim infallibility. If you want your religion, ideology, or worldview to lead the world, my first question to you is: 'What was the biggest mistake your religion, ideology, or world-view committed? What did it get wrong?' If you cannot come up with something serious, I for one would not trust you." pg. 218
"Individual humans know embarrassingly little about the world, and as history has progressed, they have come to know less and less. A hunter-gatherer in the Stone Age knew how to make her own clothes, how to start a fire, how to hunt rabbits, and how to escape lions. We think we know far more today, but as individuals, we actually know far less. We rely on the expertise of others for almost all our needs. In one humbling experiment, people were asked to evaluate how well they understood the workings of an ordinary zipper. Most people confidently replied that they understood zippers very well--after all, they use them all the time. They were then asked to describe in as much detail as possible all the steps involved in the zipper's operation. Most people had no idea. this is what Steve Sloman and Philip Fernbach have termed 'the knowledge illusion.' We think we know a lot, even though individually we know very little, because we treat knowledge in the minds of others as if it were our own." pg. 222
"In fact, humans have always lived in the age of post-truth. Homo sapiens is a post-truth species, whose power depends on creating and believing fictions. Ever since the Stone Age, self-reinforcing myths have served to unite human collectives. Indeed, Homo sapiens conquered this planet thanks above all to the unique human ability to create and spread fictions. We are the only mammals that can cooperate with numerous strangers because only we can invent fictional stories, spread them around, and convince millions of others to believe in them. As long as everybody believes in the same fictions, we all obey the same laws and can thereby cooperate effectively." pg. 238
"I am aware that many people might be upset by my equating religion with fake news, but that's exactly the point. When a thousand people believe some made-up story for one month, that's fake news. When a billion people believe it for a thousand years, that's a religion, and we are admonished not to call it 'fake news' in order not to hurt the feelings of the faithful (or incur their wrath). Note, however, that I am not denying the effectiveness or potential benevolence of religion. Just the opposite. For better or worse, fiction is among the most effective tools in humanity's tool kit. By bringing people together, religious creeds make large-scale human cooperation possible. They inspire people to build hospitals, schools, and bridges in addition to armies and prisons. Adam and Eve never existed, but Chartres Cathedral is still beautiful. Much of the Bible may be fictional, but it can still bring joy to billions and can still encourage humans to be compassionate, courageous, and creative--just like other works of fiction, such as Don Quixote, War and Peace, and the Harry Potter books." pg. 239
Book: borrowed from the Richmond Branch Library.
I agree that it will be even more important to know ourselves and learn how to think about things in a critical manner. A "liberal arts" education--or what will evolve from that type of learning process--could definitely aid in achieving this. Harari says the four Cs: critical thinking, communication, collaboration, and creativity. I learned all of these through my own liberal arts education. And I enjoyed his discussion about meditation. So glad this author has that background to contribute to his ideas, as a foundational aspect. Without the experience and practice of meditation, this book, and his others, would likely be very different.
"Both politicians and voters are barely able to comprehend the new technologies, let alone regulate their explosive potential. Since the 1990s the internet has changed the world probably more than any other factor, yet the internet revolution was directed by engineers more than by political parties. Did you ever vote about the internet? The democratic system is still struggling to understand what hit it, and it is unequipped to deal with the next shocks, such as the rise of AI and the blockchain revolution." pg. 6
"At present, humankind is far from reaching any consensus on these questions. We are still in the nihilist moment of disillusionment and anger, after people have lost faith in the old stories but before they have embraced a new one. So what next? The first step is to tone down the prophecies of doom and switch from panic mode to bewilderment. Panic is a form of hubris. It comes from the smug feeling that one knows exactly where the world is heading: down. Bewilderment is more humble and therefore more clear-sighted. Do you feel like running down the street crying 'The apocalypse is upon us'? Try telling yourself, 'No, it's not that. Truth is, I just don't understand what's going on in the world.'" pg. 17
"A driver predicting the intentions of a pedestrian, a banker assessing the credibility of a potential borrower, and a lawyer gauging the mood at the negotiating table don't rely on witchcraft. Rather, unbeknownst to them, their brains are recognizing biochemical patterns by analyzing facial expressions, tones of voice, hand movements, and even body odors. An AI equipped with the right sensors could do all that far more accurately and reliably than a human.For this reason the threat of job loss does not result merely from the rise of infotech. It results from the confluence of infotech with biotech." pg. 21
"In the long run, algorithms may learn how to compose entire tunes, playing on human emotions as if they were a piano keyboard. Using your biometric data, the algorithms could even produce personalized melodies, which you alone in the entire universe would appreciate." pg. 27
"Homo sapiens is just not built for satisfaction. Human happiness depends less on objective conditions and more on our own expectations. Expectations, however, tend to adapt to conditions, including the conditions of other people. When things improve, expectations balloon, and so even dramatic improvements in conditions might leave us as dissatisfied as before. If universal basic support is aimed at improving the objective conditions of the average person in 2050, it has a fair chance of succeeding. But if it is aimed at making people subjectively more satisfied with their lot and preventing social discontent, it is likely to fail." pg. 42
"When Britain needed to decide whether it should leave the European Union, Prime Minister David Cameron didn't ask Queen Elizabeth II, the Archbishop of Canterbury, or the Oxford and Cambridge dons to resolve the issue. He didn't even ask the members of Parliament. Rather, he held a referendum in which each and every Brit was asked: 'What do you feel about it?'
You might counter that people were asked, 'What do you think?' rather than 'What do you feel?,' but this is a common misperception. Referendums and elections are always about human feelings, not about human rationality. If democracy were a matter of rational decision-making, there would be absolutely no reason to give all people equal voting rights--or perhaps any voting rights at all. There is ample evidence that some people are far more knowledgeable and rational than others, certainly when it comes to specific economic and political questions. In the wake of the Brexit vote, eminent biologist Richard Dawkins protested that the vast majority of the British public--including himself--should never have been asked to vote in the referendum, because they lacked the necessary background in economics and political science. 'You might as well call a nationwide plebiscite to decide whether Einstein got his algebra right, or let passengers vote on which runway the pilot should land.'" pg. 45
"Unfortunately, at present we are not doing much in the way of research into human consciousness and ways to develop it. We are researching and developing human abilities mainly according to the immediate needs of the economic and political system, rather than according to our own long-term needs as conscious beings. My boss wants me to answer emails as quickly as possible, but he has little interest in my ability to taste and appreciate the food I am eating. Consequently, I check my emails even during meals, which means I lose the ability to pay attention to my own sensations. The economic system pressures me to expand and diversify my investment portfolio, but it gives me zero incentive to expand and diversify my compassion. So I strive to understand the mysteries of the stock exchange while making far less effort to understand the deep causes of suffering." pg. 71
"In this, humans are similar to other domesticated animals. We have bred docile cows that produce enormous amounts of milk but are otherwise far inferior to their wild ancestors. They are less agile, less curious, and less resourceful. We are now creating tame humans that produce enormous amounts of data and function as very efficient chips in a huge data-processing mechanism, but these data-cows hardly maximize the human potential. Indeed, we have no idea what our full human potential is, because we know so little about the human mind. And yet we don't invest much in exploring the human mind, instead focusing on increasing the speed of our internet connections and the efficiency of our Big Data algorithms. If we are not careful, we will end up with downgraded humans misusing upgraded computers to wreak havoc on themselves and on the world." pg. 71-72
"Humans have bodies. During the last century technology has been distancing us from our bodies. We have been losing our ability to pay attention to what we smell and taste. Instead we are absorbed in our smartphones and computers. We are more interested in what is happening in cyberspace than in what is happening down the street. It is easier than ever to talk to my cousin in Switzerland, but it is harder to talk to my husband over breakfast, because he constantly looks at his smartphone instead of at me." pg. 89
"Zuckerberg says that Facebook is committed 'to continue improving our tools to give you the power to share your experience' with others. Yet what people might really need are the tools to connect to their own experiences. In the name of 'sharing experiences,' people are encouraged to understand what happens to them in terms of how others see it. If something exciting happens, the gut instinct of Facebook users is to pull out their smartphones, take a picture post it online, and wait for the 'likes.' In the process they barely notice what they themselves feel. Indeed, what they feel is increasingly determined by the online reactions." pg. 89
"People estranged from their bodies, senses, and physical environment are likely to feel alienated and disoriented. Pundits often blame such feelings of alienation on the decline of religious and national bonds, but losing touch with your body is probably more important. Humans lived for millions of years without religions and without nations; they can probably live happily without them in the twenty-first century too. Yet they cannot live happily if they are disconnected from their bodies. If you don't feel at home in your body, you will never feel at home in the world." pg. 90
"This might sound like science fiction, but the world's first clean hamburger was grown from cells--and then eaten--in 2013. It cost $330,000. Four years of research and development brought the price down to $11 per unit, and within another decade industrially produced clean meat is expected to be cheaper than slaughtered meat. This technological development could save billions of animals from a life of abject misery, could help feed billions of malnourished humans, and could simultaneously help to prevent ecological meltdown." pg. 119
"Both of these cases may seem to smack of racism. But in fact, they are not racist. They are 'culturist.' People continue to conduct a heroic struggle against traditional racism without noticing that the battlefront has shifted. Traditional racism is waning, but the world is now full of 'culturists.'" pg. 152
"The less political violence in a particular state, the greater the public shock at an act of terrorism. Killing a few people in Belgium draws far more attention than killing hundreds in Nigeria or Iraq. Paradoxically, then, the very success of modern states in preventing political violence makes them particularly vulnerable to terrorism." pg. 168
"The role of Judaism in the story of humankind is a bit like the role of Freud's mother in modern Western history. For better or worse, Sigmund Freud had immense influence on the science, culture, art, and folk wisdom of the modern West. It is also true that without Freud's mother we wouldn't have had Freud, and that Freud's personality, ambitions, and opinions were likely shaped to a significant extent by his relations with his mother--as he would be the first to admit. But when writing the history of the modern West, nobody expects to find an entire chapter on Freud's mother. Similarly, without Judaism you would not have had Christianity, but that doesn't merit granting much importance to Judaism when writing the history of the world. The crucial issue is what Christianity did with the legacy of its Jewish mother." pg. 188
"Yet we do not really need such complex, long-term theories to find a natural basis for universal compassion. . . On a much more immediate level, hurting others always hurts me too. Every violent act in the world begins with a violent desire in somebody's mind, which disturbs the peace and happiness of anyone else. Thus people seldom steal unless they first develop a lot of greed and envy in their minds. People don't usually murder unless they first generate anger and hatred. Emotions such as greed, envy, anger, and hatred are very unpleasant. You cannot experience joy and harmony when you are boiling with anger or envy. Long before you murder anyone, your anger has already killed your own peace of mind." pg. 205
"As we come to make the most important decisions in the history of life, I personally would trust more in those who admit ignorance than in those who claim infallibility. If you want your religion, ideology, or worldview to lead the world, my first question to you is: 'What was the biggest mistake your religion, ideology, or world-view committed? What did it get wrong?' If you cannot come up with something serious, I for one would not trust you." pg. 218
"Individual humans know embarrassingly little about the world, and as history has progressed, they have come to know less and less. A hunter-gatherer in the Stone Age knew how to make her own clothes, how to start a fire, how to hunt rabbits, and how to escape lions. We think we know far more today, but as individuals, we actually know far less. We rely on the expertise of others for almost all our needs. In one humbling experiment, people were asked to evaluate how well they understood the workings of an ordinary zipper. Most people confidently replied that they understood zippers very well--after all, they use them all the time. They were then asked to describe in as much detail as possible all the steps involved in the zipper's operation. Most people had no idea. this is what Steve Sloman and Philip Fernbach have termed 'the knowledge illusion.' We think we know a lot, even though individually we know very little, because we treat knowledge in the minds of others as if it were our own." pg. 222
"In fact, humans have always lived in the age of post-truth. Homo sapiens is a post-truth species, whose power depends on creating and believing fictions. Ever since the Stone Age, self-reinforcing myths have served to unite human collectives. Indeed, Homo sapiens conquered this planet thanks above all to the unique human ability to create and spread fictions. We are the only mammals that can cooperate with numerous strangers because only we can invent fictional stories, spread them around, and convince millions of others to believe in them. As long as everybody believes in the same fictions, we all obey the same laws and can thereby cooperate effectively." pg. 238
"I am aware that many people might be upset by my equating religion with fake news, but that's exactly the point. When a thousand people believe some made-up story for one month, that's fake news. When a billion people believe it for a thousand years, that's a religion, and we are admonished not to call it 'fake news' in order not to hurt the feelings of the faithful (or incur their wrath). Note, however, that I am not denying the effectiveness or potential benevolence of religion. Just the opposite. For better or worse, fiction is among the most effective tools in humanity's tool kit. By bringing people together, religious creeds make large-scale human cooperation possible. They inspire people to build hospitals, schools, and bridges in addition to armies and prisons. Adam and Eve never existed, but Chartres Cathedral is still beautiful. Much of the Bible may be fictional, but it can still bring joy to billions and can still encourage humans to be compassionate, courageous, and creative--just like other works of fiction, such as Don Quixote, War and Peace, and the Harry Potter books." pg. 239
Book: borrowed from the Richmond Branch Library.
challenging
informative
reflective
medium-paced
Some parts aged like milk (i.e. War in Ukraine), pace was good, outlook overall pessimistic
hopeful
informative
inspiring
reflective
medium-paced
informative
reflective
Politics, sociology, ecology, economics etc. A little like ‘Morality’
but more balanced.
but more balanced.
I'm on the fence about this book. The whole book is essentially a warning about where Yuval believes the future is taking us and what we should do as individuals not to fall pray to these eventualities... The three main warnings are about :
1. Technogical advancements and data collection being used to control you.
2. Climate change.
3. Nationalist or extremely religious beliefs.
Solutions:
- don't give away all your data for free online and meditate to know and control your own mind before an algorithm does it for you.
- Support local policies that reduce carbon emissions, try to reduce your own carbon footprint by being vegan, and driving electric vehicles which would force companies to cater to conscious consumers
- Focus on the good things that occur by having open borders and minimize the terrorists (who are actually a small minority) because if you live your life in fear of them then they have succeeded at their goal. He acknowledges that different cultures have different ways of living and beliefs that can clash with local populations which is what caused this to begin with, but that immigrants and locals must chose how open they would like their borders to be and if the immigrants should be required to assimilate and to what degree. Without this knowledge we can make no fair decisions.
-Also, beware of those who demand sacrifice for those beliefs (example: soldiers sacrificing themselves or others for their country/religion).
The irony of this book is that he warns of sacrificing oneself for their beliefs, but then suggests solutions that would require sacrifices in order to save the world
1. Technogical advancements and data collection being used to control you.
2. Climate change.
3. Nationalist or extremely religious beliefs.
Solutions:
- don't give away all your data for free online and meditate to know and control your own mind before an algorithm does it for you.
- Support local policies that reduce carbon emissions, try to reduce your own carbon footprint by being vegan, and driving electric vehicles which would force companies to cater to conscious consumers
- Focus on the good things that occur by having open borders and minimize the terrorists (who are actually a small minority) because if you live your life in fear of them then they have succeeded at their goal. He acknowledges that different cultures have different ways of living and beliefs that can clash with local populations which is what caused this to begin with, but that immigrants and locals must chose how open they would like their borders to be and if the immigrants should be required to assimilate and to what degree. Without this knowledge we can make no fair decisions.
-Also, beware of those who demand sacrifice for those beliefs (example: soldiers sacrificing themselves or others for their country/religion).
The irony of this book is that he warns of sacrificing oneself for their beliefs, but then suggests solutions that would require sacrifices in order to save the world
informative
reflective
medium-paced
The world would be a better place if everybody read and pondered the lessons of this book. It’s far too easy to get caught up in our own little worlds. Hearing these topics from a new perspective was stimulating and grounding at the same time