Globalization/Growth:
- How do we ensure equal growth in the future?
- How is the government fossilized?
- Why does it matter if government "innovates" itself?
- Which systemic risk that Ian mentions do you think is the most pertinent and the one that has the most power to destroy or guide our future growth in globalization?
- As innovation speeds up and productivity increases, what is the most pressing possible threat to humanity? If productivity reduces employment, what solutions or ideas does Erik offer?
WATER:
- Had you ever considered the issue of water and its grave importance to our global and individual future before exposure to the content of session?
- What are your thoughts about water now?
- What opinions or facts discussed in the material for this session about water do you agree with or disagree with? Why?
From the reading The World's Water Challenge:
- What accounts for the rapid increase in water demand?
- What steps should the international community take to address this crisis?
- Which is more likely to cause a quicker and more effective change: large scale policy changes or individual awareness/decisions?
I will be the first :)
ReplyDeleteJust want to comment some 'water issues'. I think, the information provided in the reading section was absolutely essential. I can't agree more that water is really an oil of the Future and maybe we will witness more conflicts around this resource. The chain 'population growth-food production-water consumption' is also worth thinking as well as the notion that growth in the agriculture leads to enormous demand on water. In this case I want to provide some facts about Ukraine. Nowadays our government considers agriculture as one of the prioritized spheres. There is a strong intension to speed up this industry. However, nobody in the country thinks about modernization of technologies to meet the new goals as well as no one worries about the sustainability and country's water resources (despite the fact that some regions of Ukraine are suffering from water deficiency). So, participants from Ukraine, what do you think about this problem? I also have a comment about water and geopolicy. Few months ago I found an interesting article about the reasons of Libyan war and among others there were water (Nubian Sandstone Aquifer System) and Kaddafi’s desire to built the Great Manmade River. What do you think about this fact?
Another comment from Ukraine here:) Globalization&Growth questions
ReplyDeletePlease forgive my lame thesises.
(1)‘Growth’ is, well, a complex term. It’s a complex of values, eg. military power, economic power, intellectual potential, technology, prosperity and simply the contentment. With all these values, or vectors, the world of equal growth is nowadays as mythical as Atlantis or Eldorado.
“When we lose the right to be different, we lose the privilege to be free”.
Ch. Evans-Hughes
The key point is we all have different purposes. There are people who make us want what they want us to, openly or indirectly changing our perception of things and processes around (‘soft power’, as named by respected Mr. Joseph Nye). And it’s not even about some secret society or political plot, all this comes from land we were born in, families we were raised in, people we have ever talked to, books we read and stories we are told. These factors form our own perception of reality, and these factors are always different.
“If society fits you comfortably enough, you call it freedom”,
Robert Frost once said.
The only way to ensure equal growth is to ensure a proper peaceful intercourse of these perceptions, to create a society where intellectual inheritance of any culture, as well as of any individual, is not suppressed but becomes a carefully treated sprout in a garden of global prosperity.
It’s not about ‘right or wrong’ or even ‘equal’ way to evolve. I’s not about telling someone what is right or wrong. We are all different. It’s about being flexible enough to accept any point of view and to use it on your own purpose.
“Freedom is not worth having if it does not connote freedom to err. It passes my comprehension how human beings, be they ever so experienced and able, can delight in depriving other human beings of that precious right”, from Ghandi. A dangerous pitfall in this course is ‘hatred’ in any of its guises. ‘Hatred’ is a tool much more efficient than ‘love’, and is used much more widely today. Xenophobia, homophobia, chauvinism, racism, nazism etc. etc. shall vanish. But that is what comes as a result of cultural interaction, political flexibility, economic and intellectual development of the global society.
(2, 3) At this rate, the government policy is of great value, though it’s not only government fossilized. It’s the society ruled by government and sometimes unable to understand the thrilling changes that happen to our world. The government doesn’t really take care, neither of the profits nor on the risks of global community. The level of xenophobia, rejection of differences is still high. And as we still have vertical power system in most communities, it’s very important for positive changes to come from the upper power. Unfortunately, in some countries we still have it vice versa (like re-criminalization of homosexuality in Ukraine and Russia).
(4) This negative processes, alongside with the growing pace of migration, result in inner and international conflicts. Weakness of the government, its inability (or unwillingness) to adequately react towards world changes leads to the growth of “lower” powers – criminals, terrorists, neo-nazi groups start acting widely.
ReplyDeleteThe other key problem is globalization requiring instant renovation of technology, as the quicker the world’s interconnection grows, the quicker negative factors are spread (such as epidemies, totalitarian sect activity, destructive doctrines, as well as natural&techno disasters caused by exponential growth of technology, etc.), and this requires immediate reaction within the global society. If the society is not mature enough to overcome the arising problem, won’t it lead us to a total distinction?
5.People and the machines' collaboration brings wonderful results, exactly as Mr.Brynjolfsson says. Even this VC would hardly be possible without a range of services and stuff. Yet it seems to me that the problem is not the 'machines against humanity' racing. It's people using machines (as well as other people) as a tool for racing.
The question is who will have these rapidly improving technologies, and there are some key problems which seem to arise.
The first problem is intellectual racing. Society for its most part no longer keeps pace with the rapid growth of technology. And those who can't afford proper training&education for themselves are left behind (In my country, women are particularly vulnerable, as it is more difficult for them to find a job without higher education and outstanding abilities). Same goes to companies who prefer to reduce number of staff instead of educating the employees to co-work with the technology&stuff.
It's not about 'equal goods' for everyone, it's about 'equal opportunities for everyone'. And a question is, what solution should be found on that purpose.
The other problem is a 'physical' race. To use new technologies one needs new equipment - better and up-to-date. And since intellectual property depreciates gradually (more and more services are free to use), technology becomes a matter of material status, not of actual need.The society is made to consume, and it eagerly agrees to consume. As a result, noone wins the race, except the producing companies. Even more, is it worth wasting nature, using cheap human resourses in developing countries and more for another teenage girl to post another duckface on Instagram?
Ray Bradbury once said, "People are idiots. They made a lot of stupid things: costumes for dogs, marketing managers and stuff like the iPhone, getting nothing but a sour aftertaste. If we'd worked to develop science, explore the Moon, Mars and Venus... who knows what the world would have been like? Humanity would be able to travel through space, but it chose consuming instead - drinking beer and watching soap operas."
Do you agree with that statement?