I think there is a partial explanation that comes from Goodhart’s law and human desire for superstimulation, and the ease with which that type of superstimulation is now available.
Capitalism is effective at fulfilling human desires, which are measured on the level of personal tradeoffs, taken on a very short time scale. The measure is not about human progress write large, but until people’s basic needs are satisfied, the two are very well correlated; enough food, labor saving devices, etc. If we are trying to advance “human progress” than at a certain point, the individual-level, short term motive no longer suffices.
If you want longevity, you need people to be willing to pay for it now—but they aren’t. If you want space travel, you need the beneficiaries to exist now, not in a few generations. But this got worse, because we’ve found a much faster feedback loop for desires than physical progress—screens. They are dopamine devices, and they absorb almost unlimited capacity for desire. That means we’re wireheading, and any longer term goals will be ignored.
I’d be really happy to hear ideas for how this can be routed around, as short of a global pandemic to convince people to actually care about some specific technological advance like a vaccine, I don’t know what motivates society enough to overcome this.
I agree with your arguments but disagree with your value judgment—why shouldn’t digital entertainment be considered progress? What’s the point of “physical progress” once people’s basic needs are satisfied? If humanity ever becomes a Kardashev III civilization, what would we do with all that matter and energy besides creating digital Disney parks for septillions of immortal souls? What’s your vision for humanity’s future in the best case?
I think you’re asserting something I didn’t say. I said that, first, there are at least some types of digital “progress” that are akin to wireheading, and second, that this was likely a reason that progress in other domains had slowed. I did imply that if we value becoming a Kardashev III civilization, as you suggest, we can’t spend all our lives in digital space—someone needs to build the rockets, do the engineering, and colonize the galaxy. And to the extent that wireheading reduces how much we do those things, it could be a net negative.
I think there is a partial explanation that comes from Goodhart’s law and human desire for superstimulation, and the ease with which that type of superstimulation is now available.
Capitalism is effective at fulfilling human desires, which are measured on the level of personal tradeoffs, taken on a very short time scale. The measure is not about human progress write large, but until people’s basic needs are satisfied, the two are very well correlated; enough food, labor saving devices, etc. If we are trying to advance “human progress” than at a certain point, the individual-level, short term motive no longer suffices.
If you want longevity, you need people to be willing to pay for it now—but they aren’t. If you want space travel, you need the beneficiaries to exist now, not in a few generations. But this got worse, because we’ve found a much faster feedback loop for desires than physical progress—screens. They are dopamine devices, and they absorb almost unlimited capacity for desire. That means we’re wireheading, and any longer term goals will be ignored.
I’d be really happy to hear ideas for how this can be routed around, as short of a global pandemic to convince people to actually care about some specific technological advance like a vaccine, I don’t know what motivates society enough to overcome this.
I agree with your arguments but disagree with your value judgment—why shouldn’t digital entertainment be considered progress? What’s the point of “physical progress” once people’s basic needs are satisfied? If humanity ever becomes a Kardashev III civilization, what would we do with all that matter and energy besides creating digital Disney parks for septillions of immortal souls? What’s your vision for humanity’s future in the best case?
I think you’re asserting something I didn’t say. I said that, first, there are at least some types of digital “progress” that are akin to wireheading, and second, that this was likely a reason that progress in other domains had slowed. I did imply that if we value becoming a Kardashev III civilization, as you suggest, we can’t spend all our lives in digital space—someone needs to build the rockets, do the engineering, and colonize the galaxy. And to the extent that wireheading reduces how much we do those things, it could be a net negative.