The White Heat of Technology and the Rapid Pace of the Changes it’s Causing is Driving Us All Nuts
Well over half a century ago one of my TV heroes was James Burke. I hung on his every word, especially during the Apollo missions which he presented for the BBC. I also loved him on the BBC’s Tomorrow’s World with its visions of a future where punch-card computers with all the processing power of a cheese grater would control our daily lives while we walked around with mobile phones the size of cricket bats and lived in houses maintained by Forbidden Planet-style robots. What I loved was Burke’s invigorating optimism.
Burke developed the idea of connections (in a programme series called Connections, no less), the notion that finding links between all sorts of unexpected concepts, processes, and materials, was at the heart of human development. Crucially, he identified that the increasing rate of making those connections in modern times was also driving an accelerated rate of change in all our lives. From that he predicted that the rate of change was going to lead remorselessly to a point when the rate of change would exceed our capacity to cope.
Burke was right. That time has arrived. And AI, with its ability to compute connections at an unprecedented level and way beyond the human mind’s capability, is already pushing change at a rate unimaginable only just a few years ago. The trouble is it’s still unimaginable because we literally cannot get our heads around what’s happening before our very eyes.
As a historian, I always try and focus on what makes our time different from others. Human beings do not change. But machines and the world around us do. I have in my house a clock made by John Tolson who was apprenticed in 1709 in London during the reign of Anne (1702–14). The clock, with a little maintenance, still works – a whirring collection of wheels and weights. The skills Tolson acquired served him for a lifetime and were good for generations of clockmakers after he died.
Today, that level of mechanization is still easily understood by human beings. Enthusiasts can still repair, and even build, such mechanical clocks just as others can rebuild 1970s motorcycles, carve wood, paint pictures, make pots and a host of other manual skills. It is entirely possible with training and experience to get one’s mind around such artefacts. Hence the 2008 completion of the brand-new 1940s Peppercorn Class A1 steam locomotive Tornado, to be joined by Prince of Wales in 2025. A bunch of enthusiasts armed with the skills, the tools, and the funding can build brand-new steam engines, just as others can build Spitfires.
But technological change means that today our houses are filled with, and our lives are ruled by, machines that are impossible for most of us even to try and understand, let alone maintain or build. You can’t fix a smartphone with a set of miniature screwdrivers (though once I did repair a computer processor with the clipped-off ends of a staple). Car maintenance is a hobby for those with old cars, not owners of current models. There are no comparable durable skills to John Tolson’s to be acquired in our digitized world. Knowledge and ability become swiftly obsolete in a relentless fury of updates.
It is also the case, as Carl Sagan pointed out, whom we were reminded of the other day in these pages by Hugh Willbourn, that we have ‘arranged things so that almost no-one understands science and technology’, despite totally depending on a world run by science. The brilliant Sagan was right, but his was a plea to set ignorance behind us. Unfortunately, we have reached the point where no amount of education is going to lead to a level of understanding that matches the pace of change that is hitting us right now.
Worse, governments are deliberately encouraging reckless change. Covid was utilized shamelessly as a pretext to digitize further our every existence and envelop us in dependence on computers, phones, and software. Environmental concerns are being used to impose change and obsolescence in every part of our lives from cars to the way we heat our homes. Regardless of what I, you, or anything else thinks about heat pumps and electric cars, we are being propelled along a travelator in which perfectly good machinery that has already been manufactured is being disposed of long before it needed to be in favour of rushing out new machines, whose carbon footprint is conveniently ignored as well as the running costs.
And if you imagined that changing to your new electric car or heat pump was going to leave you in peace for a while, forget it. Before you know it, you’ll be told both are obsolete and you need to change to newer, better, more efficient, greener replacements. All this is being done coercively through legislation, financial incentives or punishments, and gaslighting. If you can be fined for using certain vehicles in Ulez fiefdoms, then how long before you’re fined for still having an oil boiler to heat your house?
The scientific principle of hypothesizing and testing every hypothesis to destruction before it can be accepted is easy enough to understand. But it’s not intuitive to the normal human brain; we have to try hard to hold on to that way of thinking. Even scientists instinctively resort easily to preferring what they believe or would like to believe unless they can keep a grip on themselves. They are, after all, only human and they are also prey to normal human emotions like the desire to be prominent in their fields, to attract funding, to be successful, and feel worthwhile, as well as jealousy and a host of other vulnerabilities.
Belief always steps in at the point understanding gives out. For a while, from the 16th Century on, it was possible for most people to accumulate a level of scientific understanding and gradually accept the changes going round them while mastering the necessary skills to participate in that brave new world. The rewards were changes that yielded huge medical advances, the management of sewage, warmer homes, electricity and all its glories, mechanization, aviation, and a host of other innovations that have made it unthinkable we could go into reverse.
But we are no longer able in the same way to get our heads round what is driving human-caused change and the steady loss of control over our own lives. No wonder panic and the instinctive medievalism of the human mindset is setting in. I don’t think I can be alone in being frustrated by the endless updates to the electronic equipment all around us, the ceaseless changes to how we are supposed to bank, park our cars (so long we are allowed to own one), interact with the government, or any other organization. All of it is supposed to be for the better but the overwhelming effect is to make things worse, more difficult, more frustrating, and dispiriting.
This is all being compounded by an accelerating daily narrative of catastrophic change in the environment, causing us to lose sight of the fact that our planet changes all the time The last few weeks have been extraordinary with a new apocalyptic vision almost every day. They have included warming seas and now that there will have to be Ulezs for buildings, coming off the back of claims of ‘global boiling’ (made by people apparently unaware of the boiling point of water). Ludicrous waves of hyperbole that serve only to provoke fear make it impossible for any normal person to come to a balanced and informed understanding.
Unfortunately, the panic affects scientists as well. Belief also sets in as much among scientists as anyone else. There are now so many scientists, so many scientific hypotheses, so many research institutions, so many papers, concepts, claims, counter claims, critiques, and analyses – as well as the extraordinary rate of change and to say nothing of the epidemic of pseudo-science – that it’s impossible for anyone within professional science to understand or read even a small part of what they are dealing with, let alone the rest of us.
The result is that we ordinary mortals are presented with divergent scientific opinions that we cannot evaluate, each one of which we are exhorted by its proponents to accept as a certainty.
But since science is so often presented as ‘The Science’, how on earth is the average person ever going to be in a position to distinguish pseudo-science from real science?
Here’s one BBC headline from July 22nd 2023: ‘Climate records tumble, leaving Earth in uncharted territory – scientists.’ Read a bit further down the story and you get to ‘some scientists… say’. Two days earlier the BBC said: “A leading British climate scientist has told the BBC he believes [my emphasis] the target to limit global warming to 1.5C will be missed.”
Believes? Believing isn’t science, whether well-informed or not.
In this new world of a cavalcade of change, scientific opinions have entered a world of recreational competitive apocalypticism. Too many spend their time telling us what to be terrified of rather than doing what real scientists do, which is to solve problems.
What are we supposed to make of modelling? This mathematical crystal-ball gazing is a latter-day version of staring into the entrails of a sacrificial victim, a fantasy of knowing the future founded on the cult of numbers. It is another agent of driving change because it predicts futures we are then told to fall over backwards to avoid.
Most people cannot follow the maths involved but it doesn’t take a lot to discover that even modelling’s proponents don’t fully understand the maths either. Even worse, modellers come up with different models and then argue among themselves, dismissing each other’s methodology. How on earth can the rest of us decide what to believe and understand? All of them pretend to be able to predict the future. Any deviation from the mean is jumped on as an aberration and a sign of the impending end of the world. But the future has an unfortunate habit of going its own way, not the route that a gang of boffins decided it was going to, based only on the parameters they have happened to include in their models.
Then of course, the more apocalyptic the modelling prediction is, the more likely it is to be picked up by the credulous idiots in the press, gaining attention for the scientists involved and sales for the journalists. This toxic partnership, which Carl Sagan also scathingly identified as “the uninformed cooperation (and often the cynical connivance)” of the media, whips up the accelerating rate of change into a panic-fest of misinformation and confusion.
What we are therefore seeing is a backlash with an increasing reversion to belief, cult, and factionalism. It’s happening everywhere. Organized religion has been so debased by war, oppression, sex abuse and a host of other ills that new cults have emerged instead that worship causes, not gods.
All around us we can see these cults masquerading as informed and rational interest groups. I don’t need to name them. You know who they are. Like the proponents of medieval cults their beliefs are driven by a righteous and intolerant zeal that leads them instinctively to seek to crush their critics and opponents, some of whom are just as religious in their zealotry and opposition. A new Orwellian world has been unleashed. Free speech means silence. Inclusivity means exclusivity. Supposedly peaceful, the latent (and sometimes open) aggression and intolerance in the behaviour of many of these movements is clear to see.
Their actions are borne partly out of a desperate desire to cling on to some level of control in an age when control is the last thing we are in possession of. Terrified by the change they see all around them, some of them want to change everything back and hurl us into a revived Middle Ages.
Panic and anxiety are among the most unhelpful and destructive of all human behaviour, but they are the bedrock of totalitarianism. Unrestrained change is an unmatched way to make us all more controllable but it’s a moot point whether it’s being deliberately imposed on us or is something we have lost control of. It’s no wonder that panic and anxiety are integral features of dementia among some elderly people. Whatever problems we face as a society, driving us into panic and anxiety will do nothing to solve any of them properly. Panicking is likely to lead us into a world of unintended consequences.
We need a middle way – change can be stimulating, exhilarating, and the agent behind exciting improvements to all our lives, and human beings are superb at dealing with change. And perhaps I’m being over concerned. The most likely eventuality is that some dramatic new event or wholly unexpected change in circumstances, or perhaps just a change in the wind, will cause the madness to pass.
I need only end with the wisdom of Charles Mackay:
Every age has its peculiar folly; some scheme, project, or phantasy into which it plunges, spurred on by the love of gain, the necessity of excitement, or the mere force of imitation. Failing in these, it has some madness, to which it is goaded by political or religious causes, or both combined.
Charles Mackay, Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841)
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
The Connections series is excellent. It is still available on DVD. James Burke was a superb presenter, bringing clarity and WONDER to me as a child. He is still around (aged 86) and up until recently was still working I’d love to get his opinion on the present condition of mankind.
“Burke was right. That time has arrived. And AI, with its ability to compute connections at an unprecedented level and way beyond the human mind’s capability”
Guy, please remember AI doesn’t exist and let’s hope it never does! We have very powerful fast computers but thank goodness, not AI !
Yes!! I keep telling people AI is the new word for algorithm, designed to mesmerise and intimidate.
It is certainly used to mesmerise and intimidate and is at times overhyped.
But I don’t think it’s just another algorithm. Algorithms are usually specific to a task with small scope. AI learns by observing and doing, as humans do, albeit we do it better for the most part.
Hey downticker, pay your £5 and make an argument. Rude!
18 of you now. Some people just don’t get what DS is all about. Downtick and don’t make an argument – you are either lazy or you know your argument is weak.
Still hiding
Pathetic
TOF, AI is being seriously overhyped, even as a danger. One can write a computer program that learns from data in rather specific ways. But that is not AI, AI in reality needs to be able to invent, not just connect data. Invention is something that has only been seen in humans and some great apes in any significant way. Take the computer as an example, how many inventions were needed to make the ones we have today? The first was semiconductor devices, then integration of many together, then the material to make them, then the ability to make many billions on one chip with zero defects, then to make them so unbelievably small and cheap that they could be available to everyone. That is what intellegence can do. Going back to 1970, I first got contact with a real computer, an ICL 1906. It did a few thousand instructions a second, could store a few tens of thousands of numbers, used those punched card for programs and data, and could do simple repetitive tasks. Today, on my desk I have a computer that can carry out a few billion arithmetic calculations a second to produce fully synthetic realistic images… Read more »
It depends what you mean by intelligence.
Inventions don’t happen that often. We’ll see if AI invents something.
IMO AI isn’t just an algorithm as it learns by doing and observing, like humans. Of course it’s not exactly the same as human intelligence, but it’s a “thing” and something we need to understand the implications and dangers of (which are believe are many).
Downticking without a comment should be made impossible. Or, all downtickers get listed next to their ticks.
All this chaos and uncertainty would be sort of inconsequential and eventually sort itself out if the good ideas, the useful ideas and the truth were allowed to emerge from the free and voluntary actions and opinions of the population.
What makes it a problem is the intervention of the heavy hand of the state which has barged its way into every nook and cranny of our lives and seeks to dictate every one of our behaviours.
When technological and scientific advances cease to advance on their own merits and become artefacts of a some religious crusade or other, we end up in the in very frightening territory we currently find ourselves.
People just won’t accept we live in quasi-totalitarianism because they cling on to the idea that the pantomime of voting every four years for Team A or Team B somehow means they’re making the decisions and it’s all fair and good.
It’s nuts.
Tony Benn´s graph of the right angle society has turned is even more compelling.
With four variables (world population, fastest speed, no. of people one man could kill and no. of people one man could communicate with at once) plotted against time, he showed the blip caused by the Industrial Revolution in the mid-nineteenth century and then the right angle the graph turned in the latter half of the twentieth century.
Interesting. Do you have a reference for that graph (or set of graphs)? ChatGPT knows about Benn’s general ideas, but couldn’t give me anything specific about the variables you cite (at least, not in the free version I use!).
The author confuses change – which is emergent as determined by the population as a whole – and imposition of controls on the population by Governments.
Technological change is being pushed by the very low cost of capital during the last 15 years, let’s hope that a more sane cost of borrowing will snuff out much of the useless speculative junk that has proliferated with poor thought and planning behind it.
In a sense, this is the fallout of neoliberalism and Cultural Marxism merging. Neoliberalism is all about maintaining ‘the market’. The market needs protecting from shocks, so Cultural Marxism makes people afraid to say or do anything that might get them deleted from the system. So, in the long run, people’s behaviour becomes easier to control, and thus made predictable. Digital currencies mean you can stop someone going on a coffee binge one month or a chocolate binge in another month, so the market can keep coffee and cocoa supplies within set parameters; you can also charge people a premium for cooking their Christmas turkey between 10am and 1pm on December 25, thanks to their connected oven, thus encouraging them to cook at other times. The tail is wagging the dog. The scamdemic was an golden opportunity to advance surveillance technology into the territory of population manipulation and self-censorship. Almost no one dares say the Emperor is wearing no clothes now, for fear that they’ll lose their ‘privileges’: the right to a bank account, to shop with certain companies or hold events when and where they choose. Graham Linehan is a simply a bigger face. In years to come, any… Read more »
I agree with you re. James Burke. I think the use of the term “White Heat” in a political context was used by Harold Wilson at a Labour Party conference in the 1960s
You are right that bunches of enthusiasts do all sorts of creative things, not just for financial gain. In the case of the Tornado (class A1), it was not just a like for like reproduction, either. Many features were modified, either to meet modern requirements, or to make best use of available manufacturing. E.g. the boiler was made in Germany https://www.db-fzi.com/fahrzeuginstandhaltung-de/Werk-Meiningen-6282258 (part of the old East Germany) using all welded steel. A set of skills that survived on account of the political history there – in East Germany steam traction lasted for a long time compared with the west.
When it comes to car maintenance, I used to do a fair bit of that on an older one or two, but these days there is a lot of built in obsolescence, unfortunately – just like many other products.
Great article. Thank you.
Einstein got there before Sagan. He said that scientists were so specialised that they could not talk to each other, and because of this they could not see the bigger picture. He likened it to the Tower of Babel.
It isn’t just that obsolesce is a problem, most manufactured goods have a limited lifetime and are not repairable. This situation has been created because there are not enough jobs for the increasing population. There is a massive increase in data collection and processing. All largely pointless but it creates jobs. The result is a massive transfer of wealth from the consumer to the elite business owners and bankers. The consumer does not benefit in any way from replacing goods but businesses grow richer. This then results in unnecessary consumption of raw materials and the problems of recycling, and an increased use of energy.
Thought provoking article. Isn’t the real problem man’s inability to cope with uncertainty or step back and look at the bigger picture? The more affluent and comfortable the more easily frightened. We crave safety, fear death and fall prey to addictions as a distraction from reality. The answer is to encourage independent thinking at an early age. Both the natural world and technology are infinitely complex. Who knows where AI will lead to but above all we must preserve our humanity. What I’m arguing is a libertarian point of view meaning minimal government. I can but dream but I can also be true to myself.
This is my hobbyhorse and hence my moniker Oowotwnwrwyhow. Who, what, when, where,why,how? Anything that is implemented as tangible change for humanity can be analysed with these words. The “How?” is usually the difficult question. “Why” is the one that usually uncovers the lack of any business case or rationale for change.Take Net Zero. The Why leads to a whole plethora of How questions. They never answer the how properly. Where’s the plan, that’s the How? What are the milestones? How much energy is required? How do the Climate models work? How can you believe them when the climate system is chaotic? How do you model clouds? They can’t. We need an army of applied mathematicians to probe veracity of the many and often crazy pronouncements of zealots, politicians and Industrialists who’ll make the dosh. And as for AI it still sufferes from garbage in, garbage out and should be left to the intimacy of a farmer and his cows.
I loved Connections. Still got the book too. James Burke was one of the most brilliant minds on TV when I was a child. A scientist and philosopher, with boundless enthusiasm and good humour.
No one compares these days.