Jump to content
  • entries
    8
  • comments
    64
  • views
    2,159


19 Comments


Recommended Comments

I amend:) especially today:) I do not have the numbers but how many people had their informatios shared from others, given freely from others in the internet age. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this comment


Link to comment

That would pretty much be anyone with a smart phone.

 

Even tbe senior citizen with all those plastic rewards card attached to their keyring.

 

It is hard not to freely share your information. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this comment


Link to comment

@richardmurray & @Troy  I hadn't thought about involuntary ways we share our stories.   

 

I was thinking more about how we share moments, and events with each other.  For example, I can tell a part of your story, Troy, that took place at Brooklyn Tech because it was my journey too. Or Richard, I can share a little of your writing journey as I know it from AALBC because both of us look for ways to get our words to the masses. :)

 

But your responses allow my little observation to become so much more than I'd realized. 

 

Data analysts can collect all the information in the world;  sift through it and concoct part of our stories but it will never be accurate. It will always lack intimacy. 

 

Humans are too fluid.   We possess innate ability to connect with another human in a way that allows us to feel what the other person is feeling in that moment.  

 

This is one reason, Artificial Intelligence will never become the standard.  It can never  be intimate - because it doesn't understand vulnerability.  Such as the intimacy of community.   In a community, we allow ourselves to see others and  " be seen" by them.  

 

Looking through our data and trying to figure out the human experience is as hard as looking through our excrement and understanding  WHY we eat the things we do.  To know WHY we eat, takes sharing a meal and feeling the nuances of the story we tell.  

Speaking of meal and stories,  -Amistad author Michael W. Twitty,  won the James Beard Foundation Award for his book - The Cooking Gene.

 

But I digress. 

 

I happened to stumble on this early tedtalk yesterday and while the speaker rambles on, he expands on this concept  when he said  "emotional empathy, feeling with the other person"  

 

His talk reminded me of why it is a lot easier to turn humans into robots than it will be for Artificial Intelligence to reach the level of humanity.  Humans will always have shared stories; AI, not so much.

 

  • Thanks 2

Share this comment


Link to comment

I see @Mel Hopkins:) yes, one member in the masses at a time:) 

 

Nice line Data analysts can collect all the information in the world;  sift through it and concoct part of our stories but it will never be accurate. It will always lack intimacy. 

 

For me, artificial intelligence will never be truly intelligent. Merely an illusion alluding to intelligence that serve the vanity in humans to be masters to something. 

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this comment


Link to comment
11 hours ago, richardmurray said:

Merely an illusion alluding to intelligence that serve the vanity in humans to be masters to something.

 

@richardmurray , interesting perspective and one that makes a lot of sense - especially with the history of humans seeking to control each other. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this comment


Link to comment
On 5/3/2018 at 10:31 AM, Mel Hopkins said:

it is a lot easier to turn humans into robots than it will be for Artificial Intelligence to reach the level of humanity

 

I never heard this before, but it is a brilliant observation.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2

Share this comment


Link to comment

The esteem commentary here is encouraging and I'm especially happy to hear Black folk speak this way. All too often people tend to hide from themselves, who they are and how they feel. While I'm no great admirer of anyone putting all their cards on any table unnecessarily, I do believe anyone with something to hide exposes everything about her/his self.

 

Machine learning, AI, data mining, analysis, etc., does indeed seek to learn in efforts to control and manipulate to gain some advantage over others; to little avail, because there is no 'human' touch (or intimacy). There may be an advantage, however, when people, government advance programs based on such intelligence; what they think they see or know, because a person's true feeling, beliefs, and principles get ignored in all the excitement of so-call innovative technics of 'social engineering,' (use of centralized planning in an attempt to manage social change and regulate the future development and behavior of a society).

 

Thanks guys, for giving me an additional way of seeing things.

 

  • Like 2

Share this comment


Link to comment

Fair-housing advocates plan to file a lawsuit Tuesday against the Department of Housing and Urban Development and Secretary Ben Carson for suspending an Obama-era rule requiring communities to examine and address barriers to racial integration, The Washington Post reported. 

 

Three fair-housing groups have signed onto the lawsuit, which claims the suspension was unlawful because it didn’t provide proper public notice or a chance for public comment, the Post reported. 

 

The 2015 rule required more than 1,200 communities receiving billions of federal housing dollars to draft plans to desegregate their communities — or risk losing federal funds. 

 

Carson, who described efforts to desegregate American neighborhoods as “failed socialist experiments,” suspended the rule in January, allowing local and state governments to continue receiving HUD grants without compliance with the full requirements of the Fair Housing Act, the Post reported. 

  • Like 1

Share this comment


Link to comment

@Richard Murray, yes sir, I don't recall hearing that specially because they promised so many ludicrous polices. But to witness this 'heartless' move in real life only adds to my sense of hatred for Trump/Carson. To think of the plight elderly Blacks, children and widows without protection from the elements, without a place to call home or hope for a future. Not even talking about how worse matters are going to get for Black folk. Or is that a 'blood red' light at the end of this tunnel?

  • Like 1

Share this comment


Link to comment
20 hours ago, richardmurray said:

every machine purpose stem from its creator, not itself 

 

@richardmurray  ... OMG!!!  this is true of everything we create.

Understanding the creator reveals the creator..

I knew this to be true of my writing ... to read me is to know my heart - (good bad or indifferent).   BUT now looking from your perspective I'd say this is true of what we consume.  

On 5/6/2018 at 8:50 AM, Kalexander2 said:

I do believe anyone with something to hide exposes everything about her/his self.

 

 

@Kalexander2., 

 


"It's not that I have something to hide.  It's that I have nothing I want you to see."  ~ANON  (Netflix) 

10 hours ago, Kalexander2 said:

allowing local and state governments to continue receiving HUD grants without compliance with the full requirements of the Fair Housing Act, the Post reported. 

 

@Kalexander2 If I understand this premise correctly, if  the state is receiving the money - then why aren't officials distributing the HUD funds based on needs  - rather than using the cash to integrate communities.   One challenge, however,  is to make sure millionaires such as Fox News Sean Hannity don't get the HUD money  and then fix up buildings in areas - and charge exorbitant amount of rent for each apartment. 

 

https://www.11alive.com/article/news/sean-hannity-under-fire-for-allegedly-using-hud-money-to-help-buy-housing-property-in-georgia/85-548596246

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this comment


Link to comment

@Mel Hopkins true:)  but, what separate a baby from a program is a baby while it is created at least physically through parents, its design is special. the parents can not determine what it will be, like all the rest created from humans. 

@Kalexander2 yes , the one key thing that black people must state or remember is that our vote would not had changed it. The presidential election in the u.s.a. is fifty elections. whomever get the majority vote in a state gain all their electoral votes, except for two states, where the votes are divided upon the percentage. Black people do not have a majority vote in any state in the usa, and the white vote this past election voted as a block for donald trump. The black vote voted against trump, all non white votes , voted against trump  side carson, but none of them separately or together did and do have the quantity to win it alone, as the white vote proved. 

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this comment


Link to comment

@Mel Hopkins: Distribution of HUD funds go the developers, builders, and the banks; planners and local housing commissioners who determine community needs decide who get those monies. It's the slop-sided policies and plutocrats who decide community integration; and richer friends in 'lower' places, the louder their voice. HUD, an offshoot from FHA still stand for White community advancement; helped by Black community leaders. Sean Hannity is just another 'bidder' whose RFP procurement application holds greater weight.

 

A better solution would be for more Black developers and builders influencing the community to stand-up to local housing commissioners and demand fair bidding and selection practices. But with RFP contracts going to the most popular, wealthier developers and builders which Black business (usually) depend on as sub-contractors; good luck with that! Your valid concern is one which has been in debate for at least several decades now.

 

@Richard Murray: AND THERE IT IS, in a nutshell. Everywhere we turn the cards are stacked againsgt the Black community. And if the 'popular majority vote' fail, then there's the 'electorial college' to put the slack in favor of White advancement. Though for selection of the president, the electorial college promote policies of the majority, which States recognize. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this comment


Link to comment

@ Richard Murray: Not exactly, Mr. Murray; a child can be programed to be whatever the parent wants; priest, serial killer, politician, fool, wise man, etc. Although a child can learn to be any of these things without guidance, there is always some external/internal influence.  However, just as there's no guarantee a machine will take the program it's imbrued with, or continue functioning as expected, nor is it guaranteed a child will turn-out as expected.

 

For instance, Donald Trump, constantly ridiculed by his father who said he was too soft, weak, a loser, etc., find validation by pointing out the faults in others, calling them losers, "you're the loser, not me because I can make you suffer." This is to say not all guidance turns out opposite, some just turn out to be side-ways or misguided. 

Share this comment


Link to comment

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Add a comment...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...