Thursday
Mar252010
Program or Be Programmed
Thursday, March 25, 2010 at 6:23AM | in Books, Program or Be Programmed I finally decided to write this talk as a book: Program or Be Programmed, only from ORBooks.com
(And yes, they spelled Douglas wrong.)
Reader Comments (31)
I'm a "programmer" and I *do* believe you're touching an important topic here.
But that's not why I felt inclined to write a comment. The reason why I find this video noteworthy is the "head position" of your listeners. They don't look to you, but they all look down on their screens. Are they "blogging" while you talk? Or what are they doing there? This looks so awkward...
Wow. Understanding computer programming is prerequisite to understanding societal programs? I sort of see the image you convey, as if by penetrating the codes that are most accessible and which most directly guide our experiences, we will next be ready to penetrate the deeper, less accessible codes. But on a practical level, I am not sure I see how knowledge of programming can help one change policy and social structures, except tangentially.
What do you suggest on a practical level? Should we all switch to linux and learn bash commands? Learn php? What then? What general path do you suggest for the 95%+ of people who see no need to learn programming?
...and regarding the topic at hand I have some remarks:
1.) I am from Germany and although I like a lot what you are saying (in this video and in general), I'm irritated by the fact that you base a *lot* of your arguments on US realities. The US is *not* the center of the world. I'm sure you know that, but often you don't seem like you would. The corporation system is very unique to the US, as is the central banking system, but you seem to imply that it's a worldwide phenomenon.
2.) Elites. It started much earlier than writing. I believe it started with the knowledge about the movement of the stars. With priests who knew when full eclipses would occur and by that knowledge had power over the people.
3.) The power over knowledge by the elites actually shrunk over time. Knowledge about printing was much easier to obtain than knowledge about the movement of the stars, which was fiercely (and successfully) protected by the elites/priesthood over a very long time. And knowledge about programming is much easier to learn than knowledge about printing was for the people in the 15th century. Nearly all the knowledge is available and accessible right know. The only limit is the mental capacity of the people (and maybe the availability of internet access, but this is also changing rapidly).
... I still believe that you make an important point here, but maybe you should work on the nuances...
...and one last comment: When I say that the corporation and central banking systems are unique tu the US, I don't mean that we don't have corporations or central banks in the rest of the world, I just want to say that the way theses systems work in the US are quite different from the rest of the world and germany in particular (although, sadly, we are moving closer).
Those are the ten commands.
Coming soon to an ebook and real book near you!
Haha what? Really, or are you making fun of my supposition that there might be a "digital path" for us all to follow?
No - the ten commands in the rest of the talk are essentially the biases of digital media. If people are not going to learn how to program, then they at least have to understand the biases of the media space in which they are about to live.
Oh, okay -- cool. Must be too much sarcasm in my diet.
Excellent points, Doug. Poor presentation. At least 3 iterations behind. Practice what you preach. Don't preach. :)
Another thought-provoking presentation as usual. I wonder if the average person will ever catch up to the current technology (in this example programming) or forever be behind? The tough part is that the average person is capable, but most just don't care. For most, the path of least resistance is the most appealing.
I was curious about the references to "the 10 commands". In case others are similarly curious, I found the following report on http://sxtxstate.com/2010/03/12/douglas-rushkoff-program-or-be-programmed-ten-commands-for-a-digital-age/" rel="nofollow">Douglas Rushkoff, Program or be Programmed: Ten Commands for a Digital Age at South by Texas State, which lists 10 commands that presumably were shared at some other point in the presentation.
Doug: if there is another, more original, source for these commands, please post a link. Thanks.
Two comments one covers our short span & need for a totem pole / faith: Ref your old belief systems speech comment.
An alternative I noted on Google that appeals (if you need to run for the dictionary definition you lose 10 points)
Darwins Church a science for life a faith for a reason;
http://darwinschurch.com/
Love the ambiguity of the site quote “I don’t know who discovered water but it certainly wasn’t a fish!”
These comments were from http://www.foresight.org
blog about nanotechnology the comment were interesting touching on accelerated evolution through technology:
When individually we have our intel chip, (whatever) ability to process information wired up, The story will continue it is simply evolution.
“(which is smarter, one human or a thousand monkeys thinking 10 times as fast as normal?)”
= A thousand humans thinking 10 times as fast as normal.
There is nothing artificial about intelligence.
February 16th, 2010 at 4:23 AM
Not sure why you imagine the race of superintellects would reason by the same dimensions / rules. A.I. will not be A.I. 4 long as it is simply a means to accelerate what is our natural evolution. We have the cerebral capacity still to be used,
Sorry left this gem out:
John Blake
February 24th, 2010 at 9:56 PM
When hyper-linked IT nodes reach a certain level of complexity c. 2030, the resulting Emergent Order may not be discernible but it will exist. Whether sentient self-awareness will accompany this development, who knows… such issues, including holographic attributes, are entirely beyond mathematicians’ purview today.
Emergent Order is THE central question in AI (as the cliche has it, intelligence as such is not artificial; by definition, it transcends programmed design).
AI researchers can only start things off. Like “genetic algorithms”, no-one knows or can know where Emergent Order leads. When different central foci exist in competition, the result will be a second-order Emergent Organism, and so on down the line.
Just viewed your speech at SXSW.
Two thoughts
It is a strong endorsement of the Maker culture: which embraces understanding not just programming electronics but independent manufacture of all sorts of things.
Which follows on to my second thought: there is more in the world to program than computers. Each spring, right about now, my mother and I write our program for the season's garden. It is an iterative process, based on the results of previous programs and each program yields better results.
The entirety is here in audio:
The rapidshare link (25MB)
http://rapidshare.com/files/367739244/Douglas_Rushkoff_SXSW2010_Program_OrBe_Programmed.mp3
Ref; #14 Posted by joshiecakes
Love the comment, covers a lot of ground without writing a book.
Now available on viddler:
http://www.viddler.com/explore/mika2k1/videos/1/
(You're welcome!)
You strange, puppy! I'm going to stalk you again for that one. Love, Jim.
D.R. I am would be interested to see your comment to Ref : #14 Posted by joshiecakes Which IMO was so poignant.
Your principle of society being one step behind seems to be well illustrated by the empirical research described here.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rrkrvAUbU9Y
I just listened to the entire lecture. Very interesting. I would suggest reading John Taylor Gatto (http://www.johntaylorgatto.com) on the creation of modern schooling.
Since bored people are the best consumers, school had to be a boring place, and since childish people are the easiest customers to convince, the manufacture of childishness, extended into adulthood, had to be the first priority of factory schools. Naturally, teachers and administrators weren't let in on this plan; they didn't need to be. If they didn't conform to instructions passed down from increasingly centralized school offices, they didn't last long.
In the new system, schools were gradually re-formed to meet the pressing need of big businesses to have standardized customers and employees, standardized because such people are predictable in certain crucial ways by mathematical formulae. Business (and government) can only be efficient if human beings are redesigned to meet simplified specifications. As the century wore on, school spaces themselves were opened bit by bit to commercialization.
Did anyone coin a name for the new 'techno' elite? I think about this too. Maybe its unavoidable, just a natural state?
Ref "Your principle of society being one step behind seems to be well illustrated by the empirical research described here.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rrkrvAUbU9Y"
Very good or my alternative
http://www.zefrank.com/theshow/archives/2006/12/121906.html
Doug, have a look here:
This is bullshit | BuzzMachine - http://goo.gl/AT7t
I do believe that you have embraced the philosophy espoused in our tract, THE NECRO ENEMA AMALGAMATED AGENDA which was simultaneously enacted vis a vis BLAM!, a NECRO ENEMA AMALGAMATED product. Thank you for validating the NECRO ENEMA philosophy of DEVIL'S ADVOCACY and the NEA Way. Good luck with the new book.
"INTERACTIVITY IS A LIE!"
www . necroenema . com
-- Eric Swenson