In actuality, the real next cognitive entity quietly self assembles in the background, mostly unrecognized for what it is. And, contrary to our usual conceits, is not stoppable or directly within our control.

We are very prone to anthropocentric distortions of objective reality. This is perhaps not surprising, for to instead adopt the evidence based viewpoint now afforded by “big science” and “big history” takes us way outside our perceptive comfort zone.

The fact is that the evolution of the Internet (and, of course, major components such as Google) is actually an autonomous process. The difficulty in convincing people of this “inconvenient truth” seems to stem partly from our natural anthropocentric mind-sets and also the traditional illusion that in some way we are in control of, and distinct from, nature. Contemplation of the observed realities tend to be relegated to the emotional “too hard” bin.

This evolution is not driven by any individual software company or team of researchers, but rather by the sum of many human requirements, whims and desires to which the current technologies react. Among the more significant motivators are such things as commerce, gaming, social interactions, education and sexual titillation.

Virtually all interests are catered for and, in toto provide the impetus for the continued evolution of the Internet. Netty is still in her larval stage, but we “workers” scurry round mindlessly engaged in her nurture.

By relinquishing our usual parochial approach to this issue in favor of the overall evolutionary “big picture” provided by many fields of science, the emergence of a new predominant cognitive entity (from the Internet, rather than individual machines) is seen to be not only feasible but inevitable.

The separate issue of whether it well be malignant, neutral or benign towards we snoutless apes is less certain, and this particular aspect I have explored elsewhere.

Stephen Hawking, for instance, is reported to have remarked “Whereas the short-term impact of AI depends on who controls it, the long-term impact depends on whether it can be controlled at all,”

This statement reflects the narrow-minded approach that is so common-place among those who make public comment on this issue. In reality, as much as it may offend our human conceits, the march of technology and its latest spearhead, the Internet is, and always has been, an autonomous process over which we have very little real control.

Seemingly unrelated disciplines such as geology, biology and “big history” actually have much to tell us about the machinery of nature (of which technology is necessarily a part) and the kind of outcome that is to be expected from the evolution of the Internet.

This much broader “systems analysis” approach, freed from the anthropocentric notions usually promoted by the cult of the “Singularity”, provides a more objective vision that is consistent with the pattern of autonomous evolution of technology that is so evident today.

Very real evidence indicates the rather imminent implementation of the next, (non-biological) phase of the on-going evolutionary “life” process from what we at present call the Internet. It is effectively evolving by a process of self-assembly. The “Internet of Things” is proceeding apace and pervading all aspects of our lives. We are increasingly, in a sense, “enslaved” by our PCs, mobile phones, their apps and many other trappings of the increasingly cloudy net. We are already largely dependent upon it for our commerce and industry and there is no turning back. What we perceive as a tool is well on its way to becoming an agent.

There are at present an estimated 2 Billion Internet users. There are an estimated 10 to 80 Billion neurons in the human brain. On this basis for approximation the Internet is even now only one order of magnitude below the human brain and its growth is exponential.

That is a simplification, of course. For example: Not all users have their own computer. So perhaps we could reduce that, say, tenfold. The number of switching units, transistors, if you wish, contained by all the computers connecting to the Internet and which are more analogous to individual neurons is many orders of magnitude greater than 2 Billion. Then again, this is compensated for to some extent by the fact that neurons do not appear to be binary switching devices but instead can adopt multiple states.

Without even crunching the numbers, however, we see that we must take seriously the possibility that even the present Internet may well be comparable to a human brain in processing power. And, of course, the degree of interconnection and cross-linking of networks within networks is also growing rapidly.

The emergence of a new and predominant cognitive entity that is a logical consequence of the evolutionary continuum that can be traced back at least as far as the formation of the chemical elements in stars.

This is the main theme of my latest book “The Intricacy Generator: Pushing Chemistry and Geometry Uphill” which is now available as a 336 page illustrated paperback from Amazon, etc.

Netty, as you may have guessed by now, is the name I choose to identify this emergent non-biological cognitive entity.

As a complete novice to this I paid for google adwords and the response was terrible, so obviously I’m doing something wrong. Starting points for novices would be great. New websites like ours can’t afford masses of advertising in the beginning but still need to be seen.

peter-dow. blogspot. co. uk

Scotland needs to grow its economy, not counter-productively grow the political prisoner population.

Scotland’s economy will thrive with academic freedom and civil liberties but is now being crushed as the police state threatens to lock up our brightest and best educated as political prisoners.

I urge readers not to deny the truth about Nicola Sturgeon’s police state. She means well but she has no grasp of the details of the abuses that the police state is getting away with under her nose.
__

I also wish they’d published the whole top 50.

Happens all the time in our industry.

That’s a bit of an understatement. 🙂 I agree.

They will have looked at imported materials and stocks and decided to postpone future purchases while the £ is low.

Once those stocks reach a critical level, there is likely to be a jump in purchases whether or not the £ rate has improved.

Uses to do it all the time when buying copper.

I believe the average time spent self employed is about 10 years. If they then have some more years to go before they reach state pension age they will gain some extra pension.

Just eat less if you have not worked off the calories with exercise.

I certainly supported Cameron when he came to power and his continuation of aggressive austerity may have been necessary; I have kept an open mind on that. When he proposed a fundamental but impossible renegotiation followed by a referendum, a similar trick to the one that Wilson had pulled earlier in my life, I realised I could no longer support him. When he came to power without the balance of the liberal democrats I saw the eventual result as inevitable. Some conservative friends told me that the innate conservatism of the electorate would ensure him a victory. I thought that was nonsense. When I realised that almost no one including the PM were prepared to say anything positive about the almost miraculous success of the EU in stabilising Europe at a time of enormous difficulty in coming to terms with globalisation I knew what the result would be. People predicted we would sleepwalk to Brexit and we have and they were right. That we can now restrict the free movement of people from the EU, however daft this is for our economy, means that we cannot get a deal to sell our services without restriction in Europe. Perhaps increased sales of Dyson handdryers to India will compensate.

Thanks Andrew, it’s 100% true that perception unavoidably becomes truth when history is being written.
But if I might argue from the point of view of someone who spent time with the now former PM, there is another reading. And that is, if you will allow me to use a metaphor, is one of a skilled batsman playing an extremely sticky wicket against hostile bowling of the calibre that existed in the West Indies during the 1980s. The shots were not always pure, and while the intention was to score for the team, sometimes survival to face the next delivery was the best possible outcome.