It's Time To Ignore Petty Politics and Focus On 'Transformative' Tech: Eric Schmidt (techcrunch.com) 141
Eric Schmidt, Executive Chairman at Alphabet in an interview said that we need to focus more on the possibilities of advances in biology and medicine as well as AI. But he feels people are spending "all our time arguing about political issues that are ultimately not that important." He urges people to stop doing that and work on things that are transformative. He added: "We've gone from an era where we thought about solving problems that were very, very big," he said. "We now define them as problems of special interests. Everyone's guilty. I'm not making a particular political point here." Schmidt seemed excited enough about the possibility of medical breakthroughs that Rose asked him: If he was starting over today, would he be more likely to go into computer science or biology? "Both are having a renaissance," Schmidt said.
Eric? Can you come out of the ivory tower a sec? (Score:5, Insightful)
It's all really lovely and swell that we're on the verge of making incredible medical and scientific progress and certainly we, as a species, should put our minds to such ideas.
It's just hard to argue that to people whose most pressing problem isn't curing cancer but finding a place to park the car they live in 'cause they got evicted. They might have a different idea of "important".
Re: (Score:1)
... They might have a different idea of "important".
And if we listen to them, we'll find them parking spots and new apartments. If we listen to Eric, maybe we'll cure cancer. Let's listen to the guy in the ivory tower.
Re: (Score:2)
And ensuring, in America, that 22% of children conceived will never, ever get cancer. Or anything else.
Re: (Score:2)
They are not going to shank you in the kidney... they'll shank you in the throat and take the kidney.
Re: (Score:2)
It isn't that politics needs to go away, but rather that politics needs to focus on providing direction (translation: funding) for technological solutions to the problems. For example, I've been saying for about the last fifteen years that we need to stop wasting time arguing about abortion, for two reasons:
Re: (Score:2)
I would rather end homelessness and hunger because I already have the solution to that *and* I'm genetically immune to cancer. It helps my argument that ending homelessness and hunger saves more lives and improves quality-of-life for more Americans than finding a cancer cure, although I'm not sure it helps my argument enough to cover for the fact that I personally benefit a hell of a lot from the change, too.
Re: (Score:2)
That's maybe fine for you, but how do you explain to them the difference between not having a cure for cancer and having one but not being able to afford it?
Re: (Score:2)
Also, to get extreme, it's possible to live in a mud hut and eat berries without dying. Cancer is terminal without treatment.
Re: (Score:1)
People getting evicted or not does not affect Schmidt's bottom line.
Refocusing people on profitable technologies, which he will benefit disproportionally from, does.
Same mindset as "the taxpayers should pay for teaching kids coding from the fourth grade".
Somehow, in his mind, that his "ideals" for others are synonymous with his profits, is not politics.
Re:Eric? Politics can & has killed people. (Score:3)
Whole countries have been taken down because of political decisions, so I don't consider it "Petty."
Germany essentially does not have long term debt or unfunded liabilities of consequence because they know the effect from their post WW1 collapse. Nicaragua is seeing the result of petty politics today. Argentina arguably has been held down for a century by bad politics. Brazil has its problems today because of politics. China had it.
Schmidt looks at himself as omniscient now.
Re: (Score:3)
Argentina could have basically been further developed than most European countries by now if they would have had saner politics.
I can't even say I really grasp the political divisions there -- it doesn't even seem to follow the basic left-right axis, it's like its following some z-axis of its own making.
Re: (Score:2)
Germany is doing well because it's the strongest economy in the Euro which is set up so that wealth flows there from everyone else. Whether that was the plan all along or just the result of economic fundamentalism I can't say, but it's taking the whole EU towards disintegration, at which point Europe will return to being the warzone it used to be - and that means
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
It's just hard to argue that to people whose most pressing problem isn't curing cancer but finding a place to park the car they live in
You're mixing two things that shouldn't be mixed. People working on transformative technologies versus arguing politics should follow Schmidt's advice.
And yes, there is also a social problem with a segment of the population who can't or won't work to support themselves.
Different problems for different people to solve, neither should be ignored.
.
Re: (Score:2)
Different problems for different people to solve, neither should be ignored.
What if the "transformative technology" you're working on is captive to "petty politics"?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
The issue is that I haven't heard anything new out of politics for a while.
Party A: Wants more government control except for what conflicts with their special interests group.
Party B: Wants less government control except for what conflicts with their special interests group.
Now the special interests groups swap around over time.
So politics will go to normal progress if they like it they will give it money if they don't they will not.
Re: (Score:2)
Party A: Wants more government control except for what conflicts with their special interests group.
Party B: Wants more government control except for what conflicts with their special interests group.
FTFY.
Both major parties want more government control, it's just what they want control of and what they could care less about that differs.
Re: (Score:2)
Agreed. There's no bright and shining future for everyone if we ignore the present civil unrest, particularly if things ever escalate beyond being "civil". We don't live in a vacuum, so while he may be right about what our long-term priorities should be, the amount of attention we can dedicate to them is dictated in large part by how things are operating in the short-term.
To be blunt, you are very wrong (Score:2)
Yes there is. To be very blunt, the people involved in the unrest really do not matter to technical advance. Only a small percentage of them would be of any use even if they could be interested in technical advancement, so frankly it is better for technical people to ignore civil unrest - beyond finding somewhere to work that is more isolated from the practical effects of same, which is what they have done with Silico
Re: (Score:3)
To also be very blunt, technical advance doesn't create a bright fututure - or have any impact at all - unless you can get its fruits into the hands of people. And that's pretty difficult to do if they're preoccupied with killing you.
Still wrong (Score:2)
To also be very blunt, technical advance doesn't create a bright future
Yes, it does. Hard to argue with progress that has been made on all fronts. It's also hard to untwine one technical advancement from all others...
unless you can get its fruits into the hands of people.
Since people make them, they are inherently in the hands of people. But it does not even matter if no-one ends up using it because of the tangental benefits of advancement and new ideas spreading to other fields.
To continue being blunt,
Re: (Score:2)
That's short sighted. Technology is democratizing and breaks down more barriers than political bickering ever will.
Books and literacy were the province of the wealthy and the high priests who could afford scribes to duplicate texts. Modern literacy rates would not be possible without movable type and the printing press.
Even once those technologies existed the spread of information was limited by gatekeepers who had the ability to publish using expensive machinery until things like Xerox machines and later t
Re: (Score:1)
The only computer science that matters is applied computer science. What's applied computer science? It's computer science knowledge put to work using hardware and/or software.
Advances in machine learning described in some obscure academic journal getting dusty on some obscure shelf in the basement of some college library are useless. These advances implemented using software are much more relevant.
Besides, your example of machine learning fits into what the GP wrote:
Machine learning is shaping up to be all
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah and what will that likely be used for? To predict human behavior in order to preempt behavior of individual humans. This will make it easier to cajole them back onto the treadmill.
Re: (Score:1)
not for non tech-savy users
Re: (Score:1, Troll)
You mean the labor force that stably holds around 58% of population, but has experienced a labor force bubble to 69%, and is now coming down as the population ages and retires?
Do you mean the labor force people complained about in the early-2000s because housewives started working to get a second income, claiming it was impossible to survive on a single income anymore?
Do you mean the labor force which continues to grow year after year, even as it shrinks as a proportion of the total population, and redu
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
First red flag:
I think that a UBI is our only hope to deal with a coming labor market unlike any in human history and that it represents our best hope to revitalize American civil society.
This makes me expect an "Automation is going to permanently eliminate jobs and we are entering an age of the end of work" argument. Automation is more of the same technical progress that's continued since man learned to sharpen spears to hunt more effectively; it has some attributes in common with the Industrial Revolution, which means we should look for and control the particular danger of sudden rapid transition--that is, sudden loss of lots of employment all at once; high-unemployment m
Re: (Score:2)
You seem to be extrapolating from the past into the future. Isn't that what caused the bubble that caused the crash?
Re: (Score:2)
Extrapolating from the past into the future is called "planning", and it can be done horribly wrong. Eating can be done horribly wrong, too, by eating too much, eating poisonous things, or shoving the fork through your eye.
Re: (Score:2)
And I think I was right you enjoyed the article.
Re: (Score:2)
It's more that I disagree with them in the same way you might disagree that drinking juiced hemlock and belladonna would be good for your health.
Re: (Score:2)
Some of it is Bush's fault. Much of it is Clinton's fault, no wonder he would rather badmouth Obama than take a hard look at the policies that created the crash in the first place
Re: (Score:1)
NAFTA - lets ship our jobs overseas and let in cheap labor here.
Universal Healthcare - Failed but turned into what we affectionately call Obamacare. Rates went up anyway. Maybe because it was called HillaryCare it failed. It is setting up to be ~10-15% tax on everyone who earns money in the middle class. You think your employer is going to pay for that? They just pass the cost onto you with a smaller raise (if you get one).
Commodity Futures Modernization Act - removed much of the barriers in banks to m
Re: (Score:2)
In this economy, you're better off without a job than you would be with a lot of the jobs that are offered...
Re: (Score:2)
Taking us back to the original post. Jobs for people with training in computer science and biology usually pay pretty well. The problem is that they require extensive training and society has a hard time prioritizing education to provide the training people need.
I wouldn't go to computer science or biology today. Both are oversaturated with people thinking they are the ticket to a great career. I would look at applied physics and some of the science based engineering disciplines. A new science and co
Re: (Score:3)
In this economy, you're better off without a job than you would be with a lot of the jobs that are offered...
I know a few unemployed people who will be happy to tell you that you are just talking out of your ass. Seriously, who the hell could possibly believe such a blatant falsehood?
Not a Dichtotomy (Score:3)
It's not an either/or situation - we can argue about EVERYTHING.
If your point is that some people are bad at arguing and making no sense, that's one thing.
But claiming that an argument isn't important enough to fight about just makes you look stupid.
Because the people that are getting screwed over by X definitely want to fight it.
Re: (Score:1)
It's not an either/or situation - we can argue about EVERYTHING.
No we can't!
The problem is (Score:5, Interesting)
If we don't pay attention to politics (and oftentimes, even if we do), thundering idiots who don't have the slightest understanding of science, technology and so forth get elected. And proceed to use that lack of understanding like it was something to be proud of when they pass laws.
You get idiots in Congress who don't know the difference between weather and climate, or claim that we don't have to worry about rising sea levels in coastal areas because "God promised he would never flood the earth again".
We get politicians who want "small government", unless it involves regulations on your genitals, which they seem inordinately fond of passing.
We get ones who can't even understand email regulating the Internet, ones who aren't doctors regulating medical procedures, and so on. People passing laws based on their religious beliefs and then getting a case of chapped ass if anyone dares compare it to Sharia law.
If we don't pay attention to it, it just gets worse.
Re: (Score:2)
The problem is politics *are* a form of technology, and we really are looking at the stupid stuff.
I disagree with Bernie Sanders because he has a political solution--raise minimum wage and institute a Basic Income, but no ideas on how to fund it or how it would affect the economy. He talks about creating jobs, but doesn't understand where jobs come from; he uses the same "Our infrastructure is falling apart and we'll create jobs by rebuilding it" argument as everyone else, and the basic premise is untrue
Re: (Score:2)
A Citizen's Dividend of 17% would end poverty.
I keep seeing this but a 17% dividend of what?
Re: (Score:3)
Adjusted Gross Income (the amount of money on which businesses and individuals pay taxes--for businesses, we call it net profits). I did the math in 2013, and the cost of welfare was 17.2% of AGI while the Dividend was slightly-cheaper. I advocate a long-term fixed flat funding rate for the Dividend as a way to ensure the baseline standard-of-living grows at the exact same rate as the economy.
I did a lot of work identifying risks, costs, and transitional considerations, as well as generating a variety
Re: (Score:2)
We get politicians who want "small government", unless it involves regulations on your genitals, which they seem inordinately fond of passing.
Democrats are the ones that keep changing the laws or bringing up these issues. The people you are complaining about are just reacting to that. They are only creating new regulations in response to the new regulations that Obama just created or the ones he just destroyed.
People passing laws based on their religious beliefs and then getting a case of chapped ass if anyone dares compare it to Sharia law.
This just shows how ignorant you are of the world. Countries with Sharia law murder those with different sexual orientations or other crimes against morality. And usually murdering those people in the most painful, inhumane way possible
Re: (Score:2)
Over 99% of climate scientists say that humans are the primary reason.
Primary reason for what, exactly? The Ice Caps being gone by 2015 (Al Gore) ? The Greening of Africa? The record low number of hurricanes in the Atlantic for the last 10 years in spite of all the dire predictions to the contrary?
Also, I would LOVE to point out that Consensus isn't science. Once upon a time, Piltdown Man was consensus science. Turned out to be a manipulated hoax. If the data is not reliable, the predictions fail, then the result is NOT science, it is something else.
Further, Science has yet t
In other words... (Score:2, Flamebait)
Hold the front page (Score:4, Insightful)
Things that are transformative usually involve transforming things for the worse as well as the better. Politics should protect people from that.
you first, Eric (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
And I should care because? (Score:1)
Let's see now. At a big tech company, or anywhere for that matter, if you want to get anything technologically important done you first have to win the politics game to even get your chance up to bat. I'm sure he doesn't have this problem as chairman, but his employees do. Now he's a small fish in a big pond, and he's essentially whining that he can't just have his way. Whaa crybaby, whaa.
Benefits of technology? (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Eric Schmidt needs a boot party (Score:1)
"Your political issues are not that important." Right. Anyone's concerns over an impossible national debt, never-ending war, loss of privacy, job insecurity, the disappearing middle class -- this is meaningless drivel for the little people; the proles; the rubes; according to Eric Schmidt. Spoken like a true one-percenter. I'm not surprised he thinks that way. None of these problems affect him. So perhaps what needs to happen, is that he needs to be directly affected by it. It's time for Eric Schmidt t
Transformative - (Score:1)
Transformative is making sure everyone
- has a place to live
- has food on the table
- has access to health care
- is safe from violence
- is treated with respect regardless of whatever
Those are big problems.
Re: (Score:1)
wow, you made that politically personal.
I was thinking of social structure violence
- violent crimes stemming out of poverty and drugs
- police violence
- spousal violence
There are fundamental problem with the current social structure.
Re: (Score:2)
Violent Crimes stemming from Poverty ? Define "poverty" and explain why lots of poor people NEVER commit violent crimes?
I would suggest to you, that violence stemming from Poverty is caused by lack of opportunity based on very low expectations (a kind of subtle racism), and dense public housing (city size cages). If you treat people like zoo animals, feeding, clothing them, housing them in cages, expect them to act like animals. If you treat them like equals (not lessor but equal) and hold onto expectations
Re: (Score:2)
(I am a libertarian)
Don't worry, we can tell.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Mod parent up. This has been the major weakness of us on the left for far too long: the willingness to tolerate unethical behaviour or even outright violence in the name of our goal. Soviet Union demonstrated where attempts to build a better world with the power of the dark side will inevitably go, yet some people apparently still think they can use it when it's convenient without having it domi
Sorry to have to explain this... (Score:2)
...Eric, ALL problems that affect more than a single small group are ultimately political.
To think anything else is staggeringly naive.
Look at climate change; many people misunderstand that it's a question of science. Not really. Ultimately, it's a question of focus, resources, and priorities which are POLITICAL questions. To deny that people are politically collectively vested in the results is fundamentally misunderstanding the very nature of the question.
It doesn't help that (in the US at least) that
Social issues (Score:2)
You mean those evil things called "jobs"? (Score:1)
Translation from Schmidt-ese to English:
“all our time arguing about political issues that are ultimately not that important," = "why are people worried about losing their jobs? I don't care about that! I only care about myself! "
“not doing enough things that are transformative.” = "We want to create technology designed to make sure people can't earn a living anymore, but we are getting huge push back from ordinary people! The horror!!"
"Schmidt dismissed concerns that AIs could eventuall
But... (Score:2)
The last movie was TERRIBLE. Why would... wait what? Never mind.
Re: (Score:1)
Sounds difficult, but it isn't (Score:1)
I mean, he's asking us to toss aside billions of years of evolution, natural primal instinct, conditioned reflex, etc... In the grand scheme, we are acting little different than the dogs pissing on fire hydrants marking their territory and the moneys flinging their poo. In theory, as humans, we do have the power to *flip the switch* and stop acting like animals. Like everything else the choice is personal.
Money doesn't make you smart. (Score:2)
Eric Schmidt bloviated:
"all our time arguing about political issues that are ultimately not that important."
Politics is what drives famines, for example, you fucking tool, not lack of food. We have plenty of food and medicine to go around. It's the politics of /getting it there/ to where it's needed, like drought and war zones. Politics is what kills people, or spares them, depending on a lot of things (but mostly greed, ultimately), none of which are the global capability of technology, shelter, medi
focus on the bottom line (Score:2)
Robber baron inequality levels, some romping good fun via foreign military and financial adventurism, not a little biosphere damage, and how's the middle class doing? A good exercise might be to take a walk by the Interstate and see how many homeless are living there.
A renaissance? What long dead culture are we copying from in computing and biology? Or is this some new use of the term renais
yeah, right... (Score:1)
Special Interest groups found a way around the majority rule : Courts and media.
Rich people and Corporations found a way around majority rule: Brib... errr.... lobbyists.
And the original voter qualifications are being diluted ( landowner or business man, professional, tradesman... : ie, a productive member of society ).
And now Eric pretends to be Jack Handy - "Deep Thoughts"... LOL!
Can't. Politicians declared us enemies (Score:2)
One of the 2 candidates proudly declared a large fraction of our fellow Americans "enemies" [cbsnews.com]. How can we ignore politics when the political leaders who are supposed to represent us and serve the entire population are "proud" to call every third or fourth American an enemy?
What am I missing? (Score:2)
The big data will revolutionize medicine meme has been going strong for over two decades and counting.
I often hear this rhetoric about high technology and innovative companies like 'Google' and 'Facebook' .. in many cases the same biological breakthrough meme is inevitably invoked in some way.
Just last week CNN's Fareed Zakaria ran a promotional interview with a toll from Linked In of all places with the very same nonsense about technological innovation, medical breakthroughs and all almost verbatim.
Actual
lol (Score:2)
We don't have the maturity to use the tech we have (Score:2)
All our computers and phones are spying on us. We haven't even got enough enlightenment and wisdom to use agriculture, banking systems and gun powder to make the world anything but a worse place to live. As soon as pervasive automation takes hold we'll probably mothball most of our population and just give them enough to get by through some minimum income situation.
People Ignore Politics Already (Score:2)
in an interview said (Score:2)
Did he in German speak? Or perhaps he Yoda impersonated?
Translation: (Score:1)
"Stop bitching you brainless slaves, when you're not working for me you better keep your stupid fucking head in the sand"
Eric hasn't much talent, and not sure what value (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Unfortunately, most of what that troll says is accurate. His big mistake is in thinking that everywhere else on the planet is any different, conveniently ignoring similar problems and atrocities in Asia, Africa, the Americas, and just about anywhere else on the globe. One could, by replacing the proper nouns in the rant above, make it a rant about any continent or even country in the world. Anyone want to play ad-libs below?
Re:FUCK EUROPE (Score:4, Insightful)
"Europe is far more racist than the United States, and that's despite strong prohibitions against hate speech."
And so we confront the problem - hate-thought. Good luck making that illegal.
All politics is someone's morality.
Re: (Score:2)
All politics is someone's morality.
I would counter that most politics, and most morality, is actually someone's economics. People seem to rarely follow a policy or a morality that they think will not somehow make them money.
Re: FUCK EUROPE (Score:2)
If so, then their economics are really really irrational, if not totally dysfunctional.
Re: (Score:3)
Eric sounds like a fucking cult leader.
Re: (Score:1)
Would that be communist style "collective ascension" or Nazi-style "collective ascension"? What is your preferred method for dealing with people who disagree with you? Lobotomies, psychiatric drugs, Siberian camps, or gas chambers?
Re: (Score:2)
You do realize that the point Schmidt was making was that we spend too much effort obsessing over "isms" and not enough over actually doing constructive things?
Re:FUCK EUROPE (Score:4, Insightful)
getting caught up in political garbage rather than focusing on the collective ascension of the species
The problem with "getting rid of petty politics" is that the only way to get rid of it is to impose one viewpoint. So how do we fix the transgender toilet issue? Do we tell the TG people to just shut up and use the toilet matching their birth gender? Or do we override the democratic rights of the people of North Carolina? To most people, one or the other of those is "obviously" the right solution, but we don't agree on which one. So who gets to decide? And how do we force the "losers" to accept the decision (especially if they turn out to be the majority)?
People don't even agree that "transformative technology" is a good thing. There is strong opposition to GMO. Many people fear AI. Workers don't like robots "stealing" their jobs.
Anyway, I don't really see "petty politics" as impeding tech. If anything, it is the other way around. If the politicians are busy arguing about toilets, they have less time to interfere with the economy, regulate innovators, and "pick winners". The last time the economy was truly "booming" was when the politicians were focused on Bill Clinton's blowjobs.
Re:FUCK EUROPE (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
the solutions to all the *real* issues will not be liked by their rich friends.
Rich people invest in transformative tech innovation. Poor people don't. They spend their money on food, rent, etc. By saying the law should be more progressive and less favorable to the rich, you are engaging in petty politics and impeding transformative technology. Petty concerns like jobs, livable wages, and clean drinking water are exactly what Eric Schmidt (personal net worth: $9B) is complaining about.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Rich people invest in transformative tech innovation. Poor people don't.
Rich people invest in rent-seeking. Poor people figure out new ways to do stuff. Like Elon Musk, who turned $30k into a $300M internet-Fodor's, then turned that into an internet prepaid credit-card. Or like Eric Schmidt, who worked his way from public high school to chief of Alphabet.
OK, maybe not poor poor, but technical revolutions are not started by some rich dude looking for something interesting to do with his money. Once you're rich, your main concern becomes staying rich. Technical revolutions a
Re: (Score:2)
Personally I think the politicians keep arguing about toilets
What they do is *avoid* talking about it, quite skilfully, while creating the illusion that they are very passionate about whatever the voters are passionate about.
Probably because as soon as anyone actually started a rational dialogue they'd resolve the conflicts in a matter of minutes, and then they'd have to go back to things that are real problems. You know - their jobs.
Re: (Score:1)
The petty politics of the day are designed by the rich upper class to keep the plebs like us in check. We can't get anything done as a society because people are screaming and injuring people over labels such as race, sexual orientation, and gender. Worse still, they have pumped money to teach young impressionable and uncritical minds that there are millions of variations of sex and gender.
And until every one of those have proper representation, we are not allowed to focus on advancements and can only focus