Artificial Intelligence Culture Intelligent Design Mind

Tech sector guru (and ID sympathizer) says life after Google will be okay

Spread the love

People will take ownership of their own data, cutting out the giant “middle man.” George Gilder is an early sympathizer of intelligent design and taken his lumps for that. It wasn’t how the media wanted to perceive a tech sector guru.

George Gilder

His most recent book, Life after Google: The Fall of Big Data and the Rise of the Blockchain Economy, offers a more hopeful view of the world after AI, based on the creativity of uniquely individual human beings.

Gilder thinks that the enormous tech companies will be replaced by flattened hierarchies in which people take ownership of their own data, cutting out the giant “middle man.” He calls the successor era he envisions the “cryptocosm,” referring to the private encryption of data, represented by technologies such as blockchain.

Gilder believes that the big tech companies’ centralizing culture was absorbed from the universities so many current employees attended. He describes the milieu as follows:

“Focusing on stopping progress, barring new power plants, dismantling chemical facilities, mobilizing against Israel, and other reactionary pursuits, Ivy institutions are pursuing the fancies of a declining intellectual and business elite, full of chemophobic nags and luddite lame-ducks quacking away on their miasmic pools of old money as the world whirls past them.”

Flattering. Denyse O’Leary, “George Gilder: Life after Google will be okay” at Mind Matters Today More.

See also: ID friendly tech guru George Gilder on his “information theory of capitalism”

Unleash the Mind: An Intelligent Design Approach to Economics (Johnny Bartlett)

and

George Gilder in National Review on evolution (William Dembski)

3 Replies to “Tech sector guru (and ID sympathizer) says life after Google will be okay

  1. 1
    EDTA says:

    Is this the same George Gilder who wrote “Men and Marriage”, about how females are the civilizing force in society, and are therefore the ones that corral men into leading families and keeping society going? Still waiting for him to be right about that one.

    No offense meant to either gender, but society continues to disintegrate, with men and women each trying to outdo the other in the downhill rush. Just name one demographically-demonstrable way in which women have pulled men back from becoming the culturally lazy beings they are today. I know there are men who do raise families and in general try to do what is right. I’m asking what societal trend have women _reversed_ with their supposed power?

  2. 2
    kairosfocus says:

    News, GG is raising important observations as we watch corporate ownership/control — see what is in the sign-up contracts of adhesion! — of huge data and effective monopoly on networks that have become substitutes for public fora becoming part of an ugly censoring alliance of ideological, state and corporate factions wedded to political messianism. Ironically, we do not realise that those are key elements of fascism in action; which, I remind, is historically an ideology of the left (being right of Stalin does not mean anything much). Build your own, non-centralised, networking, cooperating small group/ cell based alternatives that collectively are a critical mass becomes a key. Linked, we are going to have to re-balance rights and responsibilities of platform providers vs publishers who by taking editorial function beyond mere protection of innocent reputation, civility and destructive distraction have taken moral responsibility for resulting filtered content. Where of course, Martin Niemoller long since warned of galloping incrementalism: when they came for the Jews etc I did not act as I did not have that identity, so when they came for me there was none to stand for me. As well, we have to again fight for the foundation and principles of liberty. KF

    PS: In that world, I am glad UD is using WP technology as a separately hosted blog so that hate speech accusations cannot be transmuted into censorship on no good warrant by ill-intentioned gatekeepers. I note too that nodal payment entities are being used for deplatforming, where a glance at palpable hatred for and demonising characterisation of Christians leading to destructive projection and targetting is an obvious linked issue. Where too, BTW, nebulous accusations and branding words used to carry forward mob rule then kangaroo courts of fast action injustice imposing terrible punishments on the slightest excuse are again classic techniques of fascism.

  3. 3
    kairosfocus says:

    FYI, Wiki defines blockchain:

    A blockchain,[1][2][3] originally block chain,[4][5] is a growing list of records, called blocks, which are linked using cryptography.[1][6] Blockchains which are readable by the public are widely used by cryptocurrencies. Private blockchains have been proposed for business use. Some marketing of blockchains has been called “snake oil”.[7]

    Each block contains a cryptographic hash of the previous block,[6] a timestamp, and transaction data (generally represented as a merkle tree root hash). By design, a blockchain is resistant to modification of the data. It is “an open, distributed ledger that can record transactions between two parties efficiently and in a verifiable and permanent way”.[8] For use as a distributed ledger, a blockchain is typically managed by a peer-to-peer network collectively adhering to a protocol for inter-node communication and validating new blocks. Once recorded, the data in any given block cannot be altered retroactively without alteration of all subsequent blocks, which requires consensus of the network majority.

    Though blockchain records are not unalterable, blockchains may be considered secure by design and exemplify a distributed computing system with high Byzantine fault tolerance. Decentralized consensus has therefore been claimed with a blockchain.[9]

    This means that one can use this technology to protect a key common base of information from tampering by ill-intentioned invaders or usurpers.

    Similar reasoning is what has led me to argue that broad-based stakeholder forums are a key protective mechanism for good governance. We live in a day where any high power node is vulnerable to penetration or usurpation and any bureaucracy or elite body is vulnerable to the usurpation or penetration by a cabal of enemies enabled by the naive, ill-informed and incompetents.

    Our civilisation is in the agit prop and lawfare phase of a civil war of fourth generational character. Kinetic operations lurk in the shadows.

    KF

Leave a Reply