Toggle light / dark theme

Future Observatory

Posted in 3D printing, automation, big data, biological, bionic, bioprinting, biotech/medical, bitcoin, business, chemistry, climatology, complex systems, computing, cosmology, counterterrorism, defense, driverless cars, drones, economics, education, energy, engineering, environmental, ethics, existential risks, finance, food, futurism, general relativity, genetics, geopolitics, government, hardware, health, human trajectories, information science, innovation, law, life extension, lifeboat, media & arts, mobile phones, nanotechnology, neuroscience, nuclear energy, nuclear weapons, particle physics, philosophy, physics, policy, polls, posthumanism, privacy, robotics/AI, science, scientific freedom, security, singularity, space, space travel, supercomputing, surveillance, sustainability, transparency, transportation | Leave a Comment on Future Observatory

www.FUTURE-OBSERVATORY.blogspot.com JANUARY/30/2014 HEADLINES. By Mr. Andres Agostini

lbaCancer Researchers Identify New Drug to Inhibit Breast Cancer

Cancer Researchers Identify New Drug to Inhibit Breast Cancer

Russia, US to join forces against space threats
http://voiceofrussia.com/news/2014_01_29/Russia-US-to-join-forces-against-space-threats-1145/

The rise of artificial intelligence
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/digital-life/digital-life-news/the-rise-of-artificial-intelligence-20140122-317g3.html

MIT and Harvard release working papers on open online courses
http://www.kurzweilai.net/mit-and-harvard-release-working-papers-on-open-online-courses?utm_source=KurzweilAI+Weekly+Newsletter&utm_campaign=cbb093c38b-UA-946742-1&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_147a5a48c1-cbb093c38b-282009765

13 Quotes That Show Why Libertarian Tech Billionaire Peter Thiel Is A Scary Genius
http://www.businessinsider.com/peter-thiel-quotes-2014-1?op=1#ixzz2rr4DD75T

Quantum cloud simulates magnetic monopole
http://www.nature.com/news/quantum-cloud-simulates-magnetic-monopole-1.14612

North Korea possesses two-thirds of the world’s rare earths
http://www.impactlab.net/2014/01/24/north-korea-possesses-two-thirds-of-the-worlds-rare-earths/

Recent discovery of quantum vibrations in microtubules inside brain neurons corroborates controversial theory of consciousness
http://www.impactlab.net/2014/01/21/recent-discovery-of-quantum-vibrations-in-microtubules-inside-brain-neurons-corroborates-controversial-theory-of-consciousness/

The internet population in China hit 618 million in 2013 with 81% connected via mobile internet
http://www.impactlab.net/2014/01/20/the-internet-population-in-china-hit-618-million-in-2013-with-81-connected-via-mobile-internet/

The Bitcoin ATM Has a Dirty Secret: It Needs a Chaperone
http://www.wired.com/wiredenterprise/2014/01/bitcoin_atm/

Can Science Save Modern Art?
http://www.fastcodesign.com/3025595/asides/can-science-save-modern-art

Welcome to the 2020s (Future Timeline Events 2020–2029)

2070–2079 timeline
http://www.futuretimeline.net/21stcentury/2070-2079.htm

Lemur Studio Design develops mine detector in a shoe
http://www.gizmag.com/lemur-studio-saveonelife/30569/

CERN experiment produces first beam of antihydrogen atoms for hyperfine study
http://phys.org/news/2014-01-cern-antihydrogen-atoms-hyperfine.html

Architects build the jellyfish house around a floating pool

wiel arets architects build the jellyfish house around a floating pool

Monitoring Drugs Flowing in the Bloodstream
http://www.mdtmag.com/news/2014/01/monitoring-drugs-flowing-bloodstream

$1.7 million personal submarine lets you ‘fly’ underwater
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/17-million-personal-submarine-lets-you-fly-underwater/

Computing with silicon neurons: Scientists use artificial nerve cells to classify different types of data
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/01/140128094539.htm

10 technology trends to watch in 2014
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/10-technology-trends-to-watch-2014/

The year ahead: Hot ICT tech trends in 2014
http://www.marsdd.com/2014/01/28/year-ahead-hot-ict-tech-trends-2014/

5 Futuristic Trends That Will Shape Business And Culture Today
http://www.fastcoexist.com/3025012/futurist-forum/5-futuristic-trends-that-will-shape-business-and-culture-today

Stephen Hawking says there is no such thing as black holes, Einstein spinning in his grave
http://www.express.co.uk/news/science-technology/455880/Stephen-Hawking-says-there-is-no-such-thing-as-black-holes-Einstein-spinning-in-his-grave

Google’s Ray Kurzweil predicts how the world will change
http://jimidisu.com/?p=6013

Celebrating water cooperation: Red Sea to Dead Sea
http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2014/01/celebrating-water-cooperation-r-201412072619203800.html

7 Trends For 2014
http://blogs.sap.com/innovation/innovation/seven-trends-2014-01242649

8 Quick Ways to Unlock Your Creative Potential
https://www.openforum.com/articles/8-quick-ways-to-unlock-your-creative-potential/?intlink=us-openforum-exp-mostrecent-3

Exploring Mars Habitability – Opportunity Updates Our Understanding of Our Planetary Neighbour

Exploring Mars Habitability – Opportunity Updates Our Understanding of Our Planetary Neighbour

DAILY QUOTE: By Michael Anissimov utters, “…One of the biggest flaws in the common conception of the future is that the future is something that happens to us, not something we create…”

RECOMMENDED BOOK:

Radical Evolution: The Promise and Peril of Enhancing Our Minds, Our Bodies — and What It Means to Be Human by Joel Garreau
ISBN-13: 978–0767915038

Regards,

Mr. Andres Agostini
www.ThisSuccess.wordpress.com
www.xeeme.com/AAgostini

I don’t consider myself as someone with nostalgia for the past. Certainly the past is fascinating and worth studying – historically, archaeologically, astronomically, etc. – but I don’t consider it worth pursuing again, all while abandoning everything we’ve achieved thus far. I reach to the stars, though keep a distant memory of what I’ve learned in the past.

One of my fears, however, as we continue journeying into the exponentially brightening light of the future, is that we – as a global, interconnected community – lose sight of the reasoning why we’ve taken up the future rather than the past. I advocate abandoning neither the future, nor the past. Reason being because the past plays an important role in shaping our future. We lose sight of the past, we may just lose sight of our present and future.

While I fear I may be at err for quoting such a dooms-dayer publication, George Orwell’s famous book Nineteen Eighty Four teaches the lesson, “He who controls the past controls the future. He who controls the present controls the past.” Orwell is the last person I’d prefer learning lessons from, but in this respect he’s correct.

I am a Transhumanist. My goal of the future is an enhanced one, where our species transcend their biological limitations by evolving via science and technology. I consider Luddism, Malthusianism, Nihilism, Primitivism and Religious Fundamentalism as a direct enemy to the Transhumanist cause – an enemy of the future, not to mention the present day.

However, I believe their preference for nature and the past isn’t completely miscue. The past, as I’ve said before, plays an important role in our future, just as I’d argue that nature plays a subsequent role as well.

I’d argue that the nostalgia for the past in which Luddites, Primitivists, etc. have is the direct result of a misinformed understanding of what the past truly was like, thus a lack of appreciation in how the present science and technology helped us become a smarter, healthier and safer peoples.

This is why I fear what I fear – I fear of our people losing their way as Luddites, Primitivists, etc. have in the past and present. In consequence, we start deluding ourselves of a misguided future inspired from a phony past. As we continue pressing forward in developing a bright future with the help of science and technology, we should also dedicate some time in stopping what we’re doing, to look and think back, and to ensure ourselves that we’re not making mistakes we’d committed beforehand.

What I propose is something similar to what Muslims of the Islamic faith practice every year throughout the world – they call it Ramadan. Let me first explain that I am not religious whatsoever. I just happen to be friends with several Muslims and know first hand how happy they are once their month-long fasting is complete. You could say they even grow a higher appreciation of what they have as a result of temporarily letting it all go for this event of theirs.

A month long fasting? Surely they wouldn’t survive not eating and drinking liquids for an entire month! To which you’re correct. It’s not entirely a month long. In reality, Ramadan adheres to certain regulations, such as:

  • Just before dawn they have a pre-fast meal, known as suhoor;
  • Just after sunset they have a fast-breaking meal, known as iftar; and
  • If you are ill, pregnant, a diabetic, etc., then the month long fasting is not required.

Understand, I am not advocating that Transhumanists stop eating, though I hear the biohacker community have a certain fascination for what is known as intermittent fasting. What I am advocating here is a time of the year we take a step back and look at everything we’ve accomplished and for what reasons. For the Muslim community, Ramadan plays the role of relaxation, remembering all that they acquire, and an understanding for those who may be less fortunate.

For the Muslim community, letting go of their food for a month, which they work hard for and thrive on, is their means of gathering a greater perspective on why they are as they are today. It’s also, of course, a way of temporarily letting go of materialist desires, which in turn helps them sympathize with those less fortunate and subsequently look out for them more often.

For us, as Transhumanists, our means of thriving isn’t so much food than it is our scientific endeavors and technological developments. While I wouldn’t go so far as recommending an entire month of temporarily letting go of our scientific projects, technology, etc., it also wouldn’t hurt us to at least dedicate a day, or a week, away from it all.

Back in early October of last year, Kris Notaro, who is the Managing Director of the nonprofit think-tank Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies, decided to go on a week long techno-fasting. To simply get away from it all…temporarily, of course. At first I found this amusing, poking fun at it, sending him an image-based observation of how his techno-fasting will go.

The more I think about it, though, the more I then realize how we were both correct! He had every right in dedicating a week off from everything, to sit back and really take in perspective of it all. Just as I feel I’m correct that the techno-empowering feeling would be what you’d succumb to as a result.

For Muslims, eating little as they once did many years ago enhances their appreciation of what they now have in contrast to what they didn’t have beforehand. I believe we could achieve a similar feat by temporarily limiting, if not completely withholding, ourselves from the science and technology we thrive on.

A day, or a week, where we don’t use the technology we take for granted today would, in my opinion, enhance our appreciation for said technology, and possibly even enhance our ambitions through a greater understanding of what it was like before science and technology came to our aid. Maybe a month away from it all wouldn’t be a bad idea either!? Not as a means of showing us how great the past was, but quite the contrary – in retrospect, we’d come to remind ourselves why we’re doing what we’re doing and why the past isn’t something we should have misguided nostalgia over.

There are reasons why we stopped going bare feet in favor of shoes; there are reasons why we abandoned primitive herbal alternative meds for real, evidence-based medication and healthcare; there are reasons why we abandoned the typewriter for the keyboard; snail mail for email; corded phones for cellphones and Skype; etc. etc. etc.

To lose perspective of why we did what we did could result in everything we despise – misguided tendencies of nostalgia for the past, adhering to both the naturalistic fallacy and appeal to nature.

So I propose a techno-ramadan! A time each year that we all simply let go of it all and really breathe in, per se, everything we’ve done, are doing, and going to do; a time of deep meditation and reflection – Buddhist cyborgs! Perhaps then we could achieve what our enemies have failed in – a true understanding of the past, present, and future, insofar as we learn from and enhance our lessons of the past to ensure a much brighter Transhumanist future.

The article above was originally published as a blog post on The Proactionary Transhumanist, and subsequently re-published on the Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies.

The Future of Spage-Age Management, Today! by Mr. Andres Agostini at http://lnkd.in/d7zExFi
T R A N S    7
This is an excerpt from the conclusion section o, “…The Future of Spage-Age Management, Today!..,” that discusses some management strategies. To read the entire piece, just click the link at the end of article:

BEGINNING OF EXCERPT.

Mr. David Shaw’s question, “…Andres, from your work on the future which management skills need to be developed? Classically the management role is about planning, organizing, leading and controlling. With the changes coming in the future what’s your view on how this management mix needs to change and adapt?…” This question was posited on an Internet Forum, formulated by Mr. David Shaw (Peterborough, United Kingdom) at http://lnkd.in/ba6xX-K on October 09, 2013.

This P.O.V. addresses practical and structural solutions, not onerous quick fixes. THIS P.O.V. WILL BE COMMUNICATED UNAMBIGUOUSLY AND EMPHATICALLY.

For instance, Stuart A. Copans asserted, “…Study the past if you would divine the future…” And Edmund Burke pointed out, “…You can never plan the future by the past…”
2014-01-17_002550
To set the stage properly, I will start with an enlightening quote by Albert Einstein.

“…The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them…”

Or, it could be better noted:

“…The significant problems we face [today] cannot be solved [in the future] at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them [in the past]…”

One other thing that must now be considered is a primordial axiom that is instrumental and widely considered here. That is, “…everything is related to everything else…”

Working with the second largest oil group in the world (PDVSA, with 54,000 active employees. PDVSA is Citgo’s parent company), that group wanted me to only institute beyond-insurance risk management.
T R A N S      9
You see, when they were to incur in a loss (potential disruption), it did not suffice to them to have the indemnity payment from the insurance and reinsurance pool.

On January 1982 I officially started serious thinking about “…beyond-insurance risk management…” And since then all the way throughout this date. Conversely, insurance-based risk management is the old guard while beyond-insurance risk management is the vanguard.

Many experts and even scientists and futurists speak about empirical management with the sole perspective of unimplemented theoretical notions (that is, with too many unanswered questions and unlearned lessons). BUT THE MATTER IS, HAVE THEY REALLY EXERCISED THE ACTUAL RESPONSIBILITY OF DIRECTLY MANAGING A LARGE, GLOBAL ENTERPRISE SUCCESSFULLY? WHAT EXACTLY IS THE APPLIED EXPERIENCE IN THE FIELD THAT THEY POSSES?

QUESTION: What PRECISELY have said scientists and futurists directly manage in the practical theater of operations? How, in the world, can they speak with grounds about practical management solutions? What are the accurate details of their proven track record? Really?

QUESTION: In all truth, What are their applied methodologies?

Let’s see an example of a large misconception now.

A West-Coast Futurist states that organizations and people must have “…the capacity to adapt and learn now how to prepare for risks…” According to him, How exactly does one institute his futuristic “…risk management…”? Then, he suggests that a) Risk Monitoring, b) Risk Analysis, c) Risk Sensing and d) Risk Management are a function of Strategic Risk Forecasting. Indeed!
T R A N S     2
My long professional and practical experience in the fields of applied management, corporate planning and risk management consultation, strategy and associated services with major organizations and corporations extends to more than thirty years.

I have instituted all-encompassing beyond-insurance risk management (TAIRM) to more than a dozen of global institutions of unparallelled reputation hereunder.

That is, I have over thirty year of proven, practical “…beyond-insurance risk management…” experience.

Many of these institutions, including the WorldBank, have issued either written evidence or letter of references of the services provided.

Whenever I speak hereby about how I practice “…risk management…”, I will only be referring to scientifically-driven beyond-insurance risk management and never ever be referring to financially-driven risk management.
S U C C E S S
“…Management of Risk and Insurance…” does not ever equate to beyond-insurance risk management.

It is now important to assert that “…COSO Risk Management…” and “…Enterprise Risk Management…” are never beyond-insurance risk management.

“…Management of Captive Insurance Companies…” does not ever equate to beyond-insurance risk management.

“…‘Risk Management’ (so-called) by Insurance and Reinsurance Brokers…” does not ever equate to beyond-insurance risk management.

Under the financial focus, institutional and corporate firms “…transfer risks…” (so called) to insurance and reinsurance companies (suboptimal or ineffectual choice).

Under the TAIRM focus, institutional and corporate firms manage risks optimally through the systems approach with the applied omniscience perspective (optimal decision).

The word “…system…” is here used in its ample meaning and does not hereby refer to computer systems.

Receiving indemnity payments was observed as insidious mediocrity by this petroleum group. After all, one must realize that they are not a primarily financial system “player” but an institutional incumbent mostly exercising ownership and profit of fixed assets (organically). Obviously, the financial aspects and those of their liquid assets were also important to them.

The high-raking executives of most of these global institutions know that insurance and reinsurance companies have rampant financial ambitions as if they were investment banks.

And, as a consequence, many of them displace (divert) the legally-stipulated “premium reserves” (financial provisions to indemnify the losses to insureds and reinsureds) in order to seize additional and unlawful gains out of said reserves.

These insurance and reinsurance companies do the prior by financially reengineering the allocated portions of the premiums designated to pay for covered losses.

As many insurance and reinsurance companies doctor and manipulate the sacred premium reserves, they make extraordinary and illegitimate earnings while loosing great solvency and their ultimate ability to indemnify duly covered losses.

Most insurance and reinsurance companies view themselves as enjoying blood-related “family relationships” with banks, stock market firms and many other private “players” within the financial system.
trans 27
Global corporations do not want their corporate insurance policies to be subjected to outright malfeasance and other ups and downs (whether systemic or not) by any “agent” of the financial system, chiefly the insurance and reinsurance companies.

Consequently, management by insurance and reinsurance companies is never beyond-insurance risk management.

Thus, it was insidious mediocrity because this petroleum group’s executives strongly believed that these risks can be stopped before morphing into losses (disruption potentials) if a previous appropriate work was previously designed and in place.

As many governmental agencies and other prominent global corporations, PDVSA did not want a “…financial system…”-driven risk management option. All of these institutions wanted a central and on-site solution through systems approach with the applied omniscience perspective.

Yes, by law and in general, you still need “worker’s compensation,” “directors and officers,” “kidnap and ransom,” “legal expenses,” “product liability” and “life insurance.”

BUT IN ORGANIZATIONAL AND BUSINESS SETTINGS, “…Transformative and Integrative Risk Management…” (explained below) turns corporate and institutional insurance irrelevant and worthless. The great majority of corporate and institutional risks ─ through TAIRM ─ can be optimally managed without insurance and reinsurance. In the process, you are additionally making a huge saving by not paying exaggerated commissions and bonuses to insurance and reinsurance brokers. “Brokers” (“…sales reps…”) of what? Indeed!

We are all professionally and managerially concerned about legalistic and litigious: regulations, frameworks, zeitgeists and Weltanschauungs. But these are not the only perils requiring holistic countermeassuring.

And issues presented by violation of Governance, Compliance and Controls also required a much more holistic countermeassuring.

By way of illustration, only managing issues concerning Governance, Compliance, Controls and Intellectual Property is never ever “…beyond-insurance risk management…”

Nearly all lawyers and economists see “…risk management and insurance…” as a financial and legal approach.

Just about all accountants see “…risk management and insurance…” as a comptroller’s methodology.

The majority of actuaries see “…risk management and insurance…” as a statistical methodology.

Most auditors see “…risk management and insurance…” as a governance and compliance and intellectual property methodology.

To the highest degree, economists and financiers see “…risk management and insurance…” as a financial-transaction methodology.

The great majority of corporate planners see “…risk management and insurance…” as a strategy approach.

Nearly all human resources managers see “…risk management and insurance…” as a psychological approach.

CIOs, CISOs and CTOs, I.T. managers and I.T. risk managers see “…risk management and insurance…” as a computational methodology.

Almost all lawyers, economists, financiers, accountants, business administrators, auditors, corporate planners, actuaries, human resources managers, CIOs, CISOs, CTOs, I.T. managers and I.T. risk managers are not sufficiently right because their focus and pursuit fail to consider the physicist’ and engineer’s all-rounded criteria.
T R A N S     5
BEYOND-INSURANCE RISK MANAGEMENT AND TAIRM COMPREHENSIVELY CONSIDER LAWFULNESS (INCLUDING INTELLECTUAL PROPERTIES), GOVERNANCE, COMPLIANCE, CONTROLS, BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION, ACCOUNTING, AUDITING, STATISTICS, ACTUARIAL SCIENCES, CORPORATE PLANNING, HUMAN RESOURCES, ECONOMICS AND FINANCE, I.T. AND TECHNOLOGY, AS WELL.

EXTREMELY IMPORTANT:

Supplementary, Andres likewise indicates, “…Transformative and Integrative Risk Management (TAIRM) is also implemented in order to prevent technological surprises to the savvy organization seeking this advice and service by TAIRM, but also to create disruptively technological surprises (managerial ‘…Sputnik Moments…’) for the enterprise’s competitors…”

This notion is better understood when the axiom “… strategy is a function of a grander beyond-insurance risk management program and not the other way around…” is fully accepted and practiced.

In one line, Transformative and Integrative Risk Management (TAIRM) is absolutely “Skunkworks,” “Space Age,” “Wargaming” and Technocratic Management. Hence, non-status quo management. While others insist on “…thinking outside the box…” (inconsequential), TAIRM focuses on strong-sense and critico-creative thinking!

To illustrate this function and responsibility better, I.P. takes care of the tangible and intangible integrity of the operating building and corresponding premises and other assets, including the personnel. If one employee is selling secrets of trade or consuming illegal substances, I.P. is watching and acting upon.

I.P. does corporate counterintelligence and operates on it. I.P. incumbents are, for example, also responsible to designing, developing and instituting corporate plans pertaining to emergency preparedness, emergency response, disaster recovery, business restoration (partial function), business continuity (partial function) and business sustainability (partial function) to give you a brief idea.

I.P. also supervises and controls road and air ambulances and other medical and non-medical evacuation systems. I.P. is also responsible for preventive exercises and drills to massive evacuations in case of earthquakes, floods, fires and riots, among other perils.

Transformative and Integrative Risk Management fully contemplates, tackles, advises and operates on instrumental enhancement of the corporate provisions by Integral Protection organizations (sometimes called “departments” and others “divisions”). Have you ever seen an insurance or reinsurance company with these major duties before an organizational client?

And only and partly because of that, insurance and reinsurance companies are, by far, outside of the realm of beyond-insurance risk management and TAIRM.

TAIRM, too, has vast managerial applications for law enforcement and counter-terrorism “activities.” However, the majority of incumbents of public office are in the backyard playing political “games” and don’t possess neither a legitimate interest, nor an appropriate comprehension of techniques and methodologies, conducive to more stable “…national security…” doctrines and policies in actuality.

Many incumbents of public office don’t even have a designated budget to act upon.

Additionally and by way of example, Asian presidents are techies and fluidly communicate on Science, Technology, Engineering and Math issues (that is, STEM careers).

In the mean time, the counterparts in the West are chiefly held hostage to law, sociology and economics, with an overwhelming powerless feeling in technologically advanced conversations. All of this about the heads of state here have been publicly substantiated by Bill Gates.

Please remember: “… THE FUTURE IS NOT AN ECHO OF THE PAST…”

In today’s technologically-driven world, strategic trend evaluation cannot be done using only algorithms.

I do take into account both. I also practice “Analytics” and “Diagnostics” and have nascently become interested on what Cambridge University’ and Royal Society’s Sir Martin Rees, PhD. calls the “…Science of Complexity…”

Once again, TAIRM is vastly more into qualitative analyzes than quantitative analyzes.

You see, every problem has an underlying mechanism. Once you deeply comprehend how it operates, you can influence (via throughput) on the final outcomes (from known inputs to desired outputs) to your continuous advantage.

It can be logically argued that the term “…throughput…” has a Latin language equivalent by the term modus operandi. To this end, GE’s chairman and CEO Jack Welch, PhD. also mentioned, “…To get to the guts of why things happen…”

I have done extensive research globally throughout many places, institutions and years, from the U.S. marketplace, Lloyd’s of London, Swiss RE, Tokyo Marine Group, and way further beyond to make a lengthy story brief.

I have also become directly knowledgeable (not “bookish,” but factual, empirical and as per the educated battlefield practicalities) of beyond-insurance risk management practices by many large, industrial enterprises and agencies such as NASA.

The NASA Projects Mercury, Gemini, and Apollo and the Intercontinental Ballistic Missile (Minuteman ICBM) initiative, comprehending that he or she or it cannot take those to the local insurance and reinsurance underwriter, yet these enterprises (management) initiatives have been successfully instituted.
NASA
To further illustrate the above, the Military-Industrial Complex and companies such as Boeing and Lockheed Martin, along with NASA ─ through their own methods ─ were pursuing their projects and programs without resorting to insurance and reinsurance companies at all.

I became knowledgeable with an in-all-truth polymath and an outright “Rocket Scientist,” a physicist, a systems engineer and a doctor in science, who was directly responsible for the reliability concerning: the NASA Projects Mercury, Gemini, and Apollo. At NASA he was Dr. Wernher von Braun’s right hand! I treasure all of his e-mails, letters and other materials.
2014-01-16_183630
To the utmost enhancement of my fortune, I have, for many years now, worked with the most daring, capricious and enlightened clients (minds) that one can imagine ever.

They all were seeking managerial and industrial “miracles” only (sic). WHILE GIVING THEM THEIR OUTRIGHT MIRACLES, I HAVE EXPERIENCED DRAMATIC OVER-LEARNING EXPERIENCES.

I once met a Scottish executive who told me that beyond-insurance risk management methodology by DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency), NASA, Boeing, Lockheed Martin and Royal Dutch/Shell Group was “…esoteric…” I still treasure his e-mail.

This so-called “esoteric” beyond-insurance risk management approach by DARPA, NASA, Boeing, Lockheed Martin, Shell and a multitude of global corporations has been first instituted since the end of the 1950s. It is been in increasing utilization and betterment for about fifty-four years to this date.

What these institutions have successfully performed, transforming global civilizations and progress for Life, is un-apologetically and extremely uncomfortable for traditionalists whose ethos, cosmovisions and belief systems are fixed on the fossilized past and bonded to a myriad of obsolete assumptions, outdated notions and utter fallacies. The number of ignoramuses of supine ignorance is a breathtaking existential risk for humankind to deal with.

To further underpin this statement, I will share Peter Drucker’s quote, “…The greatest danger in times of turbulence is not the turbulence; it is to act with yesterday’s logic…” And also that of Dr. Stephen Covey, “…Again, yesterday holds tomorrow hostage .… Memory is past. It is finite. Vision is future. It is infinite. Vision is greater than history…” And that of Sir Francis Bacon, “… He that will not apply new remedies must expect new evils, for time is the greatest innovator …”

And that of London Business School Professor Gary Hamel, PhD., “…You cannot get to a new place with an old map…” And that of Alvin Toffler, “.….The future always comes too fast and in the wrong order…”

And that of Brad Leithauser, “…It reminds us that, in our accelerating, headlong era, the future presses so close upon us that those who ignore it inhabit not the present but the past …”

And that of Robert Kennedy, “…The future is not a privilege but a perpetual conquest…”

And that of Thomas Friedman, “…People are always [and wrongfully] assuming that everything that is going to be invented must have been invented already. But it hasn’t…” THIS QUOTATION IS HUGELY IGNORED.

ON THE FINAL ANALYSIS, WE MUST READILY ACCEPT FORCEFUL NOVEL REALITIES INSTANTANEOUSLY.

Dee Hock, CEO Emeritus of Visa International, stated: “…The problem is never how to get new innovative thoughts into your mind, BUT HOW TO GET OLD ONES OUT …”

As you know, Japanese corporations and institutions are into intensive Kaisen and Toyota Production System (TPS). Regarding advanced quality assurance and continuous improvement, these approaches have been demonstrated indispensable. But their practitioners are always attempting to manage risks through said approaches without any success.

TPS is also known as “…Thinking People System…”

Toyota’s CFO and the Production Director have their jaws dropped ─ while being observed by their own Chairman and CEO ─ when I carefully demonstrated to them the flaws of Kaisen and TPS in managing risks compared to the ample breadth and depth of scope by the “..Transformative and Integrative Risk Management…” (TAIRM).

Although they were in a major technical bewilderment, they hired me (as Mitsubishi Motors did before) to institute the advanced risk management of a self-funded and self-administered health-care benefit program for some seven-hundred Toyota employees and their respective eligible dependents. Both cases were turnkey undertakings.

TNT Express’ engagement was the implementation of advanced risk management of a self-funded and self-administered health-care benefit program for some five-hundred TNT Express employees and their respective eligible dependents. It was a turnkey undertaking.

Regarding a regional state, I implemented beyond-insurance risk management of a self-funded and self-administered and universal health-care benefit program for some 700,000 citizens (beneficiaries).

TAIRM has been extensively instituted ─ regarding numerous industrial and operational risks ─ in many petroleum joint ventures by corporations such as Shell, Statoil, Exxon, Mobil, BP, Conoco, ENI and Chevron, among others.

Global corporations are greatly into beyond-insurance risk management.

TAIRM seriously considers and utilizes, among many other systems, every Western and Eastern quality assurance methodologies (both from civilian and military spheres).
F U T U R E       S C I
Subsequently, I expanded, revised and enhanced greatly this practice, after twenty-one years of applied experience, and carefully designed, developed and created my own proprietary methodology and professional, trade secret, “…Transformative and Integrative Risk Management…” (TAIRM) back in 2005 (continually updated and upgraded to date).

a) “…HUMAN KNOWLEDGE IS DOUBLING EVERY TEN YEARS [AS PER THE 1998 STANDARDS]…” [*]

b) “…COMPUTER POWER IS DOUBLING EVERY EIGHTEEN MONTHS. THE INTERNET IS DOUBLING EVERY YEAR. THE NUMBER OF DNA SEQUENCES WE CAN ANALYZE IS DOUBLING EVERY TWO YEARS…” [*]

j) “…The world has profoundly changed … The challenges and complexity we face in our personal lives and relationships, in our families, in our professional lives, and in our organizations are of a different order of magnitude. In fact, many mark 1989 ─ the year we witnessed the fall of the Berlin Wall ─ as the beginning of the Information Age, the birth of a new reality, a sea change of incredible significance ─ truly a new era ─ Being effective as individuals and organizations is no longer merely an option ─ survival in today’s world requires it. But in order to thrive, innovate, excel, and lead in what Covey calls the new Knowledge Worker Age, we must build on and move beyond effectiveness [long-held assumptions, fallacies and flawed beliefs and faulty conventions]…Accessing the higher levels of human genius and motivation in today’s new reality REQUIRES A SEA CHANGE IN THINKING: a new mind-sets, a new skill-set, a new tool-set ─ in short, a whole new habit…”

END OF CITATION.

[*] All citations and quotations are from the Futuretronium Book.

NOTWITHSTANDING, THE HUMAN RACE MUST DECIDE WHICH DETERMINATION TO MAKE ABOUT SAID FORCES QUICKLY.

To the end above, Prof. Gary Hamel, Ph.D. argued, “…Denial is tragic. Delay is deadly …” And Albert Einstein determined, “…It has become appallingly obvious that our technology has exceeded our humanity … We shall require a substantially new manner of thinking if mankind is to survive.…”

And Dr. Aubrey de Grey, PhD. establishes, “…To solve a very complicated problem, you generally need a fairly complicated solution [in advance]…”

Churchill observed that we must get prepared when we cannot predict. Hence, we need to discern the dynamic (driving) forces reshaping the present and future and their impacts on our industries and organizations and professions TODAY.

This we, all managers, must do daily without a fail (and increasingly so).
T R A N S    4
The “…increasingly so…” MUST be nonlinear and supremely exponential. According to mathematics, nonlinear entails, “…not in a straight line…” (that is, that “grows” geometrically or exponentially).

Stated simply, nonlinear growth equates to most unevenly explosive growth.

“…Here and Now…” is, put simply, the endless entry point into the future.

As a result, Marcus Aurelius Antoninus commented, “…Never let the future disturb you. You will meet it, if you have to, with the same weapons of reason which today arm you against the present …”

And as a consequence, German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche indicated, “…It’s our future that lays down the law of our today…” NIETZSCHE IS HEREWITH SUGGESTING THAT THE PRESENT IS A FUNCTION OF THE FUTURE.

Whatever is happening in the West, China is, at the moment and by way of example, drastically booming.

As an important point to note, the Futurist Gerald Celente advises, “…If you don’t attack the future [today], the future will attack you…” And John Galsworthy said, “…If you don’t think about the future, you cannot have one.…”
trans28
Now, we must concentrate, as a laser-beam pointing precision, on the upsides by the Technological Singularity as well as the downsides by the Disruptional Singularity.

To have a quick and ready look into the future today, one can also ─ free of any obligations ─ join the Forum “…Becoming Aware of the Futures…” at http://lnkd.in/WUm7zA

Or one can also ─ free of any obligations ─ join the Forum “…Future Awareness…” at http://lnkd.in/bjg9UDd

Or one can also ─ free of any obligations ─ join the Forum “…The Disruptional Singularity…” at http://lnkd.in/dXgRkAT

As a manager to me so-called “…insurance…” is not “risk protection” but a financial device that just PARTLY indemnifies you from SOME losses and ONLY SOMETIMES.

AND “LOSS INDEMNITY” IS NEVER RISK MANAGEMENT.

In my case, a loss (disruption potential) is the un-managed and uncontrolled unleashing of pent-up energy. Once pent-up energy is unleashed, it can create (upside risks) or destruct (downside risks).

To cope with the future is to cope with changed changes (upside risks and downside risks) today. And the entirety of the planet is inundated with massive, increasing changed changes.

All incumbents and practitioners must perceive that management is turning itself into a highly scientific field and practice without a fail. Believe it or not, management is literally going into applied “…Rocket Science…”

By way of example, the expression “…Keep It Simple, Stupid…” has been radically replaced by “…Keep It Scientific, Savant…”

And notions as those of Thomas Paine’s “…common sense…” are now absurd and rendered ineffectual and counterproductive by representatives of institutions such as DARPA, NASA, MIT and Stanford University.

Common sense is radically replaced by SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE.

So called “…out of the box…” thinking is impious and outrageous mediocrity by the 21st-century standards and practices.

“…Out of the box…” thinking will bankrupt you easily.
T R A N S
And the “…power of simplicity…,” unless is applied by a consummated polymath, is a chat about rubbish.

Managing is an art, practice, technology and science.

Change is going abusively “…auto…” and “…techno…” and “…in vivo…” and “…infotech…” and “…cyborg…” and “…digital…” and “… neuro…” and “…bio…” and “…transbio…” and “…nano…” and “…nanotech…” I am not afraid to proclaim.

BEYOND THE MANAGERIAL CHALLENGES (DOWNSIDE RISKS) PRESENTED BY THE EXPONENTIAL TECHNOLOGIES AS IT IS UNDERSTOOD IN THE TECHNOLOGICAL SINGULARITY AND ITS INHERENT FUTURISTIC FORCES IMPACTING THE PRESENT AND THE FUTURE NOW, THERE ARE ALSO SOME GRAVE GLOBAL RISKS THAT MANY FORMS OF MANAGEMENT HAVE TO TACKLE WITH IMMEDIATELY.

THESE GRAVE GLOBAL RISKS HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH ADVANCED SCIENCE OR TECHNOLOGY. MANY OF THESE HAZARDS STEM FROM NATURE AND SOME ARE, AS WELL, MAN MADE. FOR INSTANCE, THESE GRAVE GLOBAL RISKS ─ EMBODYING THE DISRUPTIONAL SINGULARITY ─ ARE GEOLOGIC, CLIMATOLOGICAL, POLITICAL, GEOPOLITICAL, DEMOGRAPHIC, SOCIAL, ETHICAL, ECONOMIC, FINANCIAL, LEGAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL, AMONG OTHERS.

THE DISRUPTIONAL SINGULARITY’S MAJOR RISKS ARE GRAVELY THREATENING US RIGHT NOW, NOT LATER.

Vast hazards by the Disruptional and Technological Singularities are the combined downsides by and to the globalization.

New science and its intrinsic risks are further discussed herewith. Please see the following accordingly:

Sir Martin Rees, Ph.D. noticed, “…Science is emphatically not, as some have claimed, approaching its end; it is surging ahead at an accelerating rate. We are still flummoxed about the bedrock nature of physical reality, and the complexities of life, the brain, and the cosmos. New discoveries, illuminating all these mysteries, will engender benign applications; but will also pose NEW ETHICAL DILEMMAS AND BRING NEW HAZARDS. How will we balance the multifarious prospective benefits from genetics, robotics, or nanotechnology against the risk (albeit smaller) of triggering utter disaster? .… Science is advancing faster than ever, and on a broader front: bio-, cyber- and nanotechnology all offer exhilarating prospects; so does the exploration of space. BUT THERE IS A DARK SIDE: NEW SCIENCE CAN HAVE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES; IT EMPOWERS INDIVIDUALS TO PERPETRATE ACTS OF MEGATERROR; EVEN INNOCENT ERRORS COULD BE CATASTROPHIC. THE ‘DOWNSIDE’ FROM TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY TECHNOLOGY COULD BE GRAVER AND MORE INTRACTABLE THAN THE THREAT OF NUCLEAR DEVASTATION THAT WE HAVE FACED FOR DECADES. AND HUMAN-INDUCED PRESSURES ON THE GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT MAY ENGENDER HIGHER RISKS THAT THE AGE-OLD HAZARDS OF EARTHQUAKES, ERUPTIONS, AND ASTEROID IMPACTS…”
T R A N S     13
To underpin the motion by Sir Martin Rees, see also the following.

The term [technological] singularity entered the popular science culture with the 1993 presentation at the VISION-21 Symposium sponsored by NASA Lewis Research Center and the Ohio Aerospace Institute, March 30–31, 1993, by Professor of Mathematics Vernor Vinge (San Diego University).

Correspondingly, Professor Vinge, PhD. indicated, “…Within thirty years, we will have the technological means to create superhuman intelligence. Shortly after, the human era will be ended … Is such progress avoidable? If not to be avoided, can events be guided so that we may survive? These questions are investigated. Some possible answers [and some further dangers] are presented…”

An even deeper exploration on existential risks is better achieved through the reading of the following three materials:

1.- “…Our Final Hour: A Scientist’s Warning…” By Sir Martin Rees, PhD. at http://lnkd.in/bHkBp4S

2.- “…Existential Risks: Analyzing Human Extinction Scenarios…” By Professor Nick Bostrom, PhD. at http://lnkd.in/RsNRmm

3.- “…Prophets of Doom…” available at http://lnkd.in/bfpzAdx

THEREFORE, PRACTITIONERS AND INCUMBENTS FORCEFULLY NEED TO MOST URGENTLY AND CONCURRENTLY MANAGE A MYRIAD OF GLOBAL RISKS IN PARALLEL (SIMULTANEOUSLY) BY BOTH THE DISRUPTIONAL SINGULARITY AND THE TECHNOLOGICAL SINGULARITY. THIS IS ULTIMATELY AND DESPERATELY IMPORTANT!

ADDITIONAL MANAGEMENT CHALLENGES. PLEASE NOTICE THESE THREE PIECES:

There is, by way of example and for your consideration of increasing challenges to the management practitioner, this publication, “…Oxford Study – Half of U.S. Jobs Could Be Done by Computers…” At http://lnkd.in/b8mHPpG . Still, even more pervasive challenges to the management profession.

And there is also this article: “…Big nanotech: an unexpected future. How we deal with atomically precise manufacturing will reframe the future for human life and global society…” At http://lnkd.in/bd742Nh

And there is also this article: “…Is Your Job Under Threat From ROBOTS?.…Office Jobs Could Vanish By 2018…” At http://lnkd.in/difDxRd

Consequently, Dr. Gary Hamel, PhD. indicates, “…What distinguishes our age from every other is not the world-flattening impact of communications, not the economic ascendance of China and India, not the degradation of our climate, and not the resurgence of ancient religious animosities. RATHER, IT IS A FRANTICALLY ACCELERATING PACE OF CHANGE…”
trans 34
CONCLUSIONS

1.- Given the vast amount of insidious risks, futures, challenges, principles, processes, contents, contexts, practices, tools, techniques, benefits, rewards and opportunities, there needs to be a full-bodied practical and applicable methodology (methodologies are utilized and implemented to solve complex problems and to facilitate the decision-making and anticipatory process).

6.- Always institute beyond-insurance risk management as you boldly integrate it with your futuring skill / expertise.

7.- In my firmest opinion, the following must be complied this way (verbatim): the corporate strategic planning and execution (performing) are a function of a grander application of beyond-insurance risk management. It will never work well the other way around. TAIRM is the optimal mode to do advanced strategic planning and execution (performing).

Accordingly, Dr. Carl Sagan, PhD. expressed, “…We live in a society exquisitely dependent on science and technology, in which hardly anyone knows about science and technology…” And Edward Teller stated, “…The science of today is the technology of tomorrow …”

10.- In any profession, beginning with management, one must always and cleverly upgrade his / her learning and education until the last exhale.

An African proverb argues, “…Tomorrow belongs to the people who prepare for it…” And Winston Churchill established, “…The empires of the future are the empires of the mind…” And an ancient Chinese Proverb: “…It is not our feet that move us along — it is our minds…”

INCIDENTALLY, EVERY REALITY BEFORE THE MANAGER MUST BE BROUGHT UNDER OPTIMAL CONTROL.

As it ensues:

First! Once you realize that the most important thing to nurture is the rotational-and-translational motion revolting within and beyond the innermost core of / by you, you can do your ethics and morality. Now you have conquered bridge 1. Conquering this foundational pillar also implies that every facet and phase of your personal and professional life will be carried on with dogged solemnity.

Second! Once you do your ethics and morality, you can do your actionable knowledge for Life. Now you have conquered, and will be, as follows, securing control of bridge 2 for Life.

Third! Once your actionable knowledge is done by you, you can do your corporate planning and respective marshaled strategy. Now you have conquered, and will be, as follows, securing control of bridge 3 for Life.

Fourth! Once your corporate planning and respective marshaled strategy is done by you, you can do your systems hazard management. Now you have conquered and will be, as follows, securing control of bridge 4 for Life.
trans    21
Fifth! Once your systems hazard management is done by you, you can do your systems quality assurance management. Now you have conquered and will be, as follows, securing control of bridge 5 for Life.

Sixth! Once your cross-functional, interdisciplinary systems quality assurance management is done by you, you can do your systems reliability engineering. Now you have conquered and will be, as follows, securing control of bridge 6 for Life.

Seventh! Once your systems reliability engineering is done by you, you can do your systems risk management. Now you have conquered and will be, as follows, securing control of bridge 7 for Life.

Eighth! Once your systems risk management — with the applied omniscience perspective — is done by you, you can do your contingency planning lavishly (with thousand layers of redundancy in place) for Life. Now you have conquered, and will be, as follows, securing control of bridge 8 for Life.

Ninth! When your contingency planning is done by you, you can do your benefits (upsides and downsides). Now you have conquered, and will be, as follows, securing control of bridge 9 for Life.
trans 23
Tenth! When benefits are done by you and you become hyper-engaged into pervasively transformational self-renewal and self-challenging (in excelsis) of your own intellect, you can do your sustainability perpetually. Now you have conquered, and will be, as follows, securing control of bridge 10 for Life.

Eleventh! Now you can conceive and design your own profession and tenure while concentrating in capturing womb-to-tomb (so-called) “…success…” and its gargantuan sustainability effort. Now you have conquered, and will be, as follows, securing control of bridge 11 for Life.

Twelfth! Neither “…the secret,…”, nor the “…hidden secret,…”, nor the “…discrete secret…,” or any “…magnificent marketing stunts…” will warrant the oxygen and energy and vision that your mind, body, and souls require (sic). Now you have conquered management for Life.
trans 27
Napoleon Bonaparte (1769 — 1821) declared, “…No longer it is question simply of education … NOW IT BECOMES A MATTER OF ACQUIRING SCIENCE…”

THE MANAGER’S HYPOTHETICAL BLUEPRINT TO PRACTICAL SUCCESS CAPTURING:

(1) Picture mentally, radiantly. (2) Draw outside the canvas. (3) Color outside the vectors. (4) Sketch sinuously. (5) Far-sight beyond the mind’s intangible exoskeleton. (6) Abduct indiscernible falsifiable convictions. (7) Reverse-engineering a gene and a bacterium or, better yet, the lucrative genome. (8) Guillotine the over-weighted status quo. (69) Figure out exactly which neurons to make synapses with. (70) Wire up synapses the soonest. (71) Ask now more sophisticated questions to marshal upon.…”
trans 42
David, commented simply to you and by me:

“…I am no longer a captive to history.
Whatever I can imagine, I can accomplish.

I am no longer a vassal in a faceless
bureaucracy, I am an activist, not a drone.

I am no longer a foot soldier
in the march of progress.

I am a Revolutionary!…”

END OF EXCERPT.

Click here to view the entire writing at http://lnkd.in/bYP2nDC

Mr. Andres Agostini
Author of:
The Future of Scientific Management, Today!
The Future of Skunkworks Management, Now!
Futuretronium Book!
Superthinking!
Transformative and Integrative Risk Management!

END OF EXCERPT.

Please see the full article at http://lnkd.in/bYP2nDC

Here’s a thought experiment inspired by the Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence (SETI): Suppose in our search for beings in other galaxies, we come across a species that looks very much like us and can communicate with us reasonably well, so that it doesn’t take very long for them to understand what we’re about. In other words, they are definitely within our sphere of spontaneous sympathy. Moreover they even possess technologies that we consider relatively advanced, such as mobile phones. (After all, how else could we have recognised them as intelligent beings?) At the same time, however, they also tend to live half as long as we do – and for reasons that are quite obvious to us because they lack the sort of societal infrastructure that would enable them to live longer.

To be sure, these beings think that their lives are perfectly fine, aside from spates of internecine strife that seem to be fuelled by alien sources (perhaps the same aliens that enabled us to discover them). In any case, their culture is designed around the way they have conducted their lives for centuries. The question is whether we should violate Star Trek’s Prime Directive and substantially intervene to provide them with an infrastructure that would allow them to live longer and perhaps flourish in a way that would go beyond the sort of superficial trade relations that currently mark our maintenance of a ‘respectful’ distance from them. Here are some options:

1. No matter the cost to them or us, ‘civilising’ these aliens is an end worth pursuing in its own right – even if it ends up a gallant failure.
2. We can’t really afford much backlash from the natives, especially given that backups from Earth will not be forthcoming. So, we need to tread carefully, perhaps envisaging a long-term strategy of cultivating natives over several generations.
3. We commit to leaving the natives with some care packages and a time-limited run of advisors whose mission is to get them to use those packages as effectively as possible, so that eventually they can produce their contents for themselves.
4. We simply obey the Prime Directive and deal with them as free market traders without any particular concern for how they end up using whatever the both of us agree to have been a fair exchange of goods.

Now let us think about planet Earth, where we have the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights – and not the Prime Directive – as our guiding normative principle. Clearly, (4) would be seen as a libertarian dys/utopia that would render the Declaration irrelevant (though it may well capture China’s current policy towards the Third World), whereas (3) would be seen as the default position of most development aid. I have advocated (2) as Imperialism 2.0, and of course classic Imperialism is captured by (1).

Just as the sixteenth century European conquistadors thought they were about to discover lands of great wealth and potential superiority to what they had experienced in their homelands, our own interstellar voyagers may be subject (occasionally at least) to a rude awakening, for which we need a policy. And perhaps considering such a policy might help us to think more clearly about the aliens on our own planet – i.e. those in need of ‘development’.

sz5_JER_fuller_-_croatian_interview-300x199To think about the existential prospects that lie ahead for Humanity 2.0, or Homo futura, imagine yourself in 1900 faced with two investment opportunities for the future of personal human transport: on the one hand, a specially bred – that is, genetically modified – horse; on the other, a mass-produced automobile. Which prospect would you pursue?

The horse has been long a reliable mode of transport, whose strengths and weaknesses are well known. A faster horse may require greater skill to handle and more feed that produces more manure. But your society is already equipped to deal with those consequences. In contrast, the automobile is a new technology, albeit one that has already shown that it can equal and even surpass the horse in terms of speed and durability under a variety of conditions. However, the automobile brings its own distinctive cost-benefit calculus, as its future improvement would very likely involve both greater enclosure of the traveller and greater pollution of the environment. In the long term, the traveller’s relationship to nature would probably need to change quite drastically for the automobile to become dominant.

It is too bad that the state of genetic knowledge was not sufficiently advanced in 1900 to turn this into a real choice. Instead the horse easily appeared a less attractive long-term bet, as it was generally presumed that the upper limits of the creature’s performance had been already reached. In that case, the indefinite continuation of horse-drawn personal transport could only be defended by those who had a principled objection to mechanical transport, a position perhaps grounded in a nostalgic view of humanity’s oneness with nature. But even these people could not deny the proven effectiveness of ships and trains as machines of mass conveyance. In short, the horse was doomed. The market for personal transport underwent what Joseph Schumpeter called ‘creative destruction’. Henry Ford effectively made it worthwhile for consumers to reorganize their value priorities in a way that quickly resulted in the automobile, rather than the horse, setting the standard of personal transport.

The twenty-first century may offer us a choice rather like that of our hypothetical 1900 decision between horse and car. But now the choice would be between two different ways of continuing the human condition – alternative vehicles, as it were, to convey our existence. One involves genetically modifying ourselves and the other involves transcending the bodies of our birth altogether. These two options represent the two rather opposing directions in which contemporary transhumanism is heading.

In most general terms, ‘transhumanism’ says that the indefinite projection of our most distinctly human qualities is worth pursuing as a value in its own right – even if that means radically altering our material nature. This definition of transhumanism captures by implication all of those who might be against such a movement, not least those – typically ‘Greens’ – who believe that humanity’s current global crises stem from our attempts to minimize if not deny our commonality with the rest of nature.

The word ‘transhumanism’ was coined by Julian Huxley, a founder of the dominant research paradigm in biology today, which integrates Darwin’s account of natural history with the experimental principles of modern lab-based genetics. Huxley, following the lead of his grandfather, Thomas Henry Huxley, believed that Darwin fundamentally challenged anyone who wanted to uphold the superiority of Homo sapiens as a species. After all, the workings of natural selection suggest that all forms of life are limited by their largely innate capacities to adapt to a changing environment. In the end, any given species – including humans — should expect extinction, not immortality. From that standpoint, all the promises made by Christianity and Islam of an eternal ‘afterlife’ looked empty. Nevertheless, the Huxleys believed that there was something fundamentally correct about these religious intuitions.

Thomas Henry Huxley opposed those who held that ethics could be straightforwardly inferred from evolutionary history. On the contrary, he argued, we humans are unique in our capacity to push back, and ideally reverse, natural selection. He had in mind modern developments in law and medicine that effectively institutionalise forms of life that take humanity far from its Darwinian default settings. Thus, our conception of justice is more complex than ‘an eye for an eye’ and our interest in health goes beyond simply enabling people to cope with whatever life throws in their way. In this respect, modern society has been built to promote a progressive world-view, in which death becomes the ultimate enemy — not the ultimate resolution — of life.

Julian Huxley, equipped with a better scientific understanding, went one step further to argue that Homo sapiens is the only species equipped to comprehend the entire evolutionary process, in which case we incur a unique moral obligation to administer and direct its future course. This is the context in which ‘transhumanism’ was coined.

But even accepting humanity’s sense of cosmic responsibility still leaves us with many questions about how to proceed. Julian Huxley was himself a eugenicist who helped several biologists working in Nazi Germany, including the great ethologist Konrad Lorenz, to avoid charges of ‘crimes against humanity’ at the Nuremberg Trials. Huxley was also the principal author of UNESCO’s 1950 ‘Statement on Race’, which argued that the idea of fixed racial distinctions lacks a firm foundation in biological science. Taken together, these interventions suggest a deep acceptance of humanity’s adaptability and plasticity, in which the future should not be seen as a simple repetition of the past. Huxley supported eugenics not to reinforce long-standing racial prejudice but, on the contrary, to experiment with humanity’s untapped potential to surpass its current levels of achievement.

Whatever one makes of Huxley’s own enthusiasm for eugenics, which remained up to his death in 1975, it is clear that his existential horizons were rather limited by the standards of today’s transhumanists. For Huxley, humanity’s room for manoeuvre, while considerable, was ultimately confined to our evolutionary heritage in carbon. He envisaged altering and otherwise enhancing our genetic capacities, but not uploading our minds into silicon chips that would allow us to be resurrected as freestanding avatars. In this respect, Huxley is like our hypothetical 1900 entrepreneur investing in the idea of a genetically modified horse as the future of personal transport.

This means that the Henry Fords of our transhuman future are those who see our carbon-based bodies simply platforms for the realization of a set of ‘functionalities’ that may be more powerfully and more efficiently realized in another medium altogether. The original Henry Ford reckoned that while people may find it nice to be one with nature, at the end of the day what really mattered was how to get where you want to go as quickly as possible. Similarly, today’s silicon-based transhumanists regard our genetically endowed bodies as simply means to ends that in the future may be performed more effectively by some other means.

To be sure, relatively few share Ray Kurzweil’s dream that by 2050 human consciousness will be successfully uploaded into a computer that enables us to conceptualise and experience the world as if we were still carbon-based creatures. Nevertheless, as the saying goes, people are already ‘voting with their feet’. The amount of quality time spent on the internet suggests that people are beginning to locate the meaning of their lives more in virtual than actual reality. Of course, that tendency by itself does not guarantee that we shall realize Kurzweil’s dream. But it does provide an incentive for investment into research that might eventually realize it. The power of faith to overcome material obstacles should never be underestimated, especially when the believers are armed with science.

The ease with which Homo sapiens has managed to remake itself and the physical environment over a few thousand years – in many cases, undoing the work of billions of years of evolution – has been a source of great fear, but also of great hope. That hope involves a vision of human history in which after emerging as a distinct branch of the tree of life, our biology serves as a platform for launching a range of technologies that extend our natural capacities and with which we eventually merge to constitute the executive control centre of an ever expanding portion of the universe.

This is a world that Darwin did not envisage because, like so many other 19th century biologists, he could not imagine that the basic elements of life were governed by mathematical principles, let alone a ‘genetic code’. Indeed, Darwin’s contemporary, the man who we now consider the father of modern genetics, Gregor Mendel, was largely ignored in his lifetime precisely because he claimed to have found such principles. However, the molecular revolution in genetics that began in earnest with the discovery of DNA’s function in 1953 has increasingly brought together the expertises of computer scientists and molecular geneticists in quite literal projects of ‘bioengineering’, whereby life is built according to a mathematically specified plan from basic materials.

Regardless of whether humanity continues to believe that its progress is ultimately circumscribed by its biology, transhumanism’s own progress in the general culture may be measured by the extent to which ‘nature’ is seen not as imposing a limit on the human will, but rather as raw material, untapped potential or even capital that we might leverage into new and improved states of being. To be sure, there is no reason to think that such beliefs are self-fulfilling but they do foster a climate in which people are willing to take more risks with themselves, other people and the world at large.

Further Reading

Church, G. and Regis, F. (2012). Regenesis: How Synthetic Biology Will Reinvent Nature and Ourselves. New York: Basic Books.

Fuller, S. (2011). Humanity 2.0: What It Means to Be Human Past, Present and Future. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Fuller, S. (2013). Preparing for Life in Humanity 2.0. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Fuller, S. and Lipinska, V. (2014). The Proactionary Imperative: A Foundation for Transhumanism. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

More, M. and Vita-More, N., eds. (2013). The Transhumanist Reader. London: Wiley-Blackwell.

Visionary; Philosopher; Author of bestselling novel ‘The Transhumanist Wager’

For a few billion people around the world, Christmas is the most important and relished holiday of the year. It’s the day with the most gift-giving, the most family get-togethers, the most religious activities, and the most colorful fairy tales that children and adults almost universally embrace with sacred fervor. For many nations, no other day comes close to being as special. For this reason, it seems almost unimaginable that another day — especially an unknown one looming on the horizon — will soon unseat Christmas as the most important day in the world. Nonetheless, for humanity, the course is set. The birth of an artificial intelligence equal or greater than that of human intelligence is coming. It’s called AI Day. And once it arrives, it will rapidly usher in a new age.

For decades, the concept of a man-made intelligence matching or surpassing our own — technically called AGI (artificial general intelligence) or Strong AI — has been steeped in science fiction. Upon hearing the term AI, many people immediately think of the sentient computer HAL in Stanley Kubrick’s masterpiece film 2001: A Space Odyssey. However, what most people fail to grasp is that once AI becomes self-aware and joins with the internet, it could grow its intelligence thousands of times in just mere days, perhaps hours. Frankly, it could quickly surpass all measurements of intelligence that humans are even capable of monitoring and recognizing.

“I think that Ray Kurzweil’s estimate that we will achieve human-level Artificial General Intelligence by around 2029 is a reasonable guesstimate,” says Dr. Ben Goertzel.

Read more

By: Eray Ozkural - h+

Computing-efficency

During writing a paper for the 100 Year Starship Symposium, I wished to convince the starship designers that they should acknowledge the dynamics of high-technology economy, which may be crucial for interstellar missions. Thus motivated, I have made a new calculation regarding infinity point, also known as the singularity. According to this most recent revision of the theory of infinity point, it turns out that we should expect Infinity Point by 2035 in the worst case. Here is how and why.

Read more

Superintelligence! By Mr. Andres Agostini
BRAIN0

This is an excerpt from the conclusion section of, “…Superintelligence…” that discusses some management theories and practices. To read the entire piece, just click the link at the end of article:
BRAIN
EXCERPT.

How do I exercise my mind? What types of thinking modes I daily use?

BRAIN31. “Einsteinian Gedanke” Thinking
2. “Post Mortem” Thinking
3. “Pre Mortem” Thinking
4. “Short-Term and Long-Term” Thinking
5. “Terra Incognita” Thinking
6. “A Cappella” Thinking
7. “À la Quantum Mechanics” Thinking
8. “A Posteriori” Thinking
9. “A Priori” Thinking
10. “Against Fashionable” Thinking
11. “Against Inexpensive” Thinking
12. “Against Sloppy, Emotional” Thinking
13. “Against the whole cliche of the moment” Thinking
14. “Alpha and Omega” Thinking
15. “Applied Omniscience Knowledge” Thinking
16. “Continuous Improvement and Innovation” Thinking
17. “Edisonian Research” Thinking
18. “Over-Hauled Re-Engineering” Thinking
19. “Primum nocere” Thinking
20. “Primum non nocere” Thinking
21. “Rara Avis” Thinking
22. “Support Learning and Change” Thinking
23. A Radical yet Rigorous Strong-Sense and Critico-Creative
24. Aggregated Thinking
25. Alternatives-Exploring Thinking
26. Black-and-White Thinking
27. Bottom-Up Thinking
28. Cognitive Thinking
29. Composite Thinking
30. Compounded Thinking
31. Comprehensive Thinking
32. Cosmological Thinking
33. Counter-Cognitive Thinking
34. Counter-envisioning Thinking
35. Countering Thinking
36. Counter-intuitive Thinking
37. Counter-Intuitiveness Thinking
38. Countermeassuring Thinking
39. Counter-seeing Thinking
40. Cradle-to-grave Thinking
41. Cross-functional Thinking
42. Cross-pollinated Thinking
43. Cross-Referenced Thinking
44. Cybered Thinking
45. Cyber-Enabled Thinking
46. Deep Thinking
47. Dense Thinking
48. Discontinuous-Progression Thinking
49. Discoverer’s Thinking
50. Early-On Thinking
51. Easternized Thinking
52. Ecological Thinking
53. Engineering Thinking
54. Entomological Thinking
55. Epicentric Thinking
56. Epidemiological Thinking
57. Ex-ante Thinking
58. Exploratory Thinking
59. Exuberant Thinking
60. Factory Thinking
61. Forensic Thinking
62. Forethought Thinking
63. Forward Thinking
64. Futures Thinking
65. Futures Thinking
66. Fuzzy-Logic Thinking
67. Generative Thinking
68. Gestalt Thinking
69. Governed Thinking
70. GPS Thinking
71. Gray-areas Thinking
72. Harmonic Thinking
73. Helicopter Thinking
74. Heterodox Thinking
75. Heterodox Thinking
76. Hindsight Thinking
77. Holistic Thinking
78. Holistic Thinking
79. Horse-Seeing Thinking
80. Hyper-Geometrical Thinking
81. Illogicality Thinking
82. In-Advance Thinking
83. In-Parallel Thinking
84. In-Series Thinking
85. Inside-out Thinking
86. Integrative and Transformative Thinking
87. Interconnected Thinking
88. Interdependency Thinking
89. Interdisciplinary Thinking
90. Internetted Thinking
91. Interrelated Thinking
92. Inventor’s Thinking
93. Inward-Looking Thinking
94. Macro Thinking
95. Macroscopic Thinking
96. Metaphorical Thinking
97. Microscopic Thinking
98. Multidimensional Thinking
99. Multifaceted Thinking
100. Multilevel Thinking
101. Multi-Level Thinking
102. Multi-Perspective Thinking
103. Multi-Range Thinking
104. Multi-tasking Thinking
105. Mystified Thinking
106. Naturalist Thinking
107. Networked Thinking
108. Nonlinear Thinking
109. Non-Status Quo Thinking
110. Nuanced Thinking
111. Old-guard Thinking
112. Open Thinking
113. Orthodox Thinking
114. Outward-Looking Thinking
115. Parenthetic Thinking
116. Peripheral Thinking
117. Pluri-Filter Thinking
118. Pluri-Intent Thinking
119. Pre-“Post Mortem” Thinking
120. Preemptive Thinking
121. Pre-Forensic Thinking
122. Preter-Naturalist Thinking
123. Pseudo-Serendipitous Thinking
124. Qualitative Thinking
125. Quantitative Thinking
126. Radar Thinking
127. Radiant Thinking Irradiantly
128. Re-Engineering Thinking
129. Scenario-Method Thinking
130. Semi-Covert Thinking
131. Semigoverned Thinking
132. Semigoverned Thinking
133. Semipredictable Thinking
134. Semipredictable Thinking
135. Sonar Thinking
136. Sonar Thinking
137. Spacewalk Thinking
138. Spacewalk Thinking
139. Specificity Thinking
140. Specificity Thinking
141. Strategic Thinking
142. Strategic Thinking
143. Submarine Thinking
144. Submarine Thinking
145. Surprise-Free Thinking
146. Surprise-Free Thinking
147. Synergistic Thinking
148. Synergistic Thinking
149. Systems Thinking
150. Systems Thinking
151. Systemwide Thinking
152. Systemwide Thinking
153. Telescopic Thinking
154. Telescopic Thinking
155. Through-Paradoxes Thinking
156. Through-Paradoxes Thinking
157. Throughput Thinking
158. Throughput Thinking
159. Top-down Thinking
160. Top-down Thinking
161. Trans-Contextual Thinking
162. Trans-Contextual Thinking
163. Un-Commonsensical Thinking
164. Un-Commonsensical Thinking
165. Unconventional Thinking
166. Unconventional Thinking
167. Unconventionally-Uncommon Thinking
168. Unconventionally-Uncommon Thinking
169. Un-daydreamed-of Thinking
170. Un-Daydreamed-of Thinking
171. Undreamed-of Thinking
172. Undreamed-of Thinking
173. Unorthodox Thinking
174. Unthinkable Thinking
175. Upside-down Thinking
176. Vanguard Thinking
177. Vertical-lateral-+Thinking
178. Weird Science’s Thinking
179. Weirdo’s Thinking
180. Westernized Thinking
181. Wholeness Thinking
182. Womb-to-tomb Thinking

END OF EXCERPT.

Please see the full presentation at http://goo.gl/8fdwUP

The Future of Skunkworks Management, Now! By Mr. Andres Agostini
SIMPLICITY
This is an excerpt from the conclusion section of, “…The Future of Skunkworks Management, Now!…” that discusses some management theories and practices and strategies. To view the entire piece, just click the link at the end of this post:
SOLUTION
Peter Drucker asserted, “…In a few hundred years, when the story of our [current] time is written from a long-term perspective, it is likely that the most important event those historians will see is not technology, not the Internet, not e-commerce [not so-called ‘social media’]. IT is an unprecedented change in the human condition. For the first time ─ literally ─ substantial and growing numbers of people have choices. for the first time, they will have to manage themselves. And society is totally unprepared for it…”
SYSTEM
Please see the full presentation at http://goo.gl/FnJOlg

This is an excerpt from, “Futuretronium Book” by Mr. Andres Agostini, that discusses some management theories and practices with the future-ready perspective. To read the entire piece, just click the link at the end of article:

“…#1 Futuretronium ® and the administration and application of the scientific method without innuendos and in crescendo as fluid points of inflections ascertain that the morrow is a thing of the past…”

ADVERSARIAL
”…#2 Futuretronium ®, subsequently, there is now and here available the unabridged, authoritative eclictation and elucidation of actionable knowledge from and for the incessantly arrhythmic, abrupt, antagonistic, mordant, caustic, and anarchistic future, as well as the contentious interrelationship between such future and the present…”

“…#3 Futuretronium ®, a radical yet rigorous strong-sense and critico-creative «Futures Thinking», systems approach to quintessential understanding of the complexities, subtleties, and intricacies, as well as the opportunities to be exploited out of the driving forces instilling and inflicting perpetual change into twenty-first century…”

Read the full book at http://lnkd.in/ZxV3Sz to further explore these topics and experience future-ready management practices and theories.