Site Loader

In his “Get Smarter,” Jamais Cascio urges his readers to change themselves and as the title of the article suggests, “get smarter”. Cascio. After reading Jamais Cascios article “Get Smarter” I’ve come to realize that our world really is a non stop cycle of evolving technology, and. In the article Get Smarter by Jamais Cascio he starts by talking about how in the past we have become smarter by having to adapt to different.

Author: Kagakasa Dozil
Country: Uzbekistan
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Video
Published (Last): 6 May 2016
Pages: 274
PDF File Size: 4.60 Mb
ePub File Size: 8.62 Mb
ISBN: 798-7-48251-583-9
Downloads: 33933
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Zologis

Get Smarter by Jamais Cascio.

Why is it especially important to the paper? What aspects of the word does the author overlook or choose to emphasize? How might looking at it from a different angle change or enhance their argument? After doing some research I figured out that the other type of intelligence which is overlooked by Cascio is crystallized intelligence: In this phrase, Cascio is arguing that as connections in the world increase, the only way to be successful is to be able to think creatively and uniquely.

He emphasizes that it is not how much knowledge we have, rather it is how we push that knowledge around. Right now, we are entering a world where an incredible amount of knowledge is a touch away. Thus, people have access to the same information and because of this, our knowledge becomes shared.

In other words, people will have the same crystallized intelligence because they can view anything in a matter of seconds on the web. In addition, computers will also have access to our shared knowledge.

The only way in which humans can differ from one another and from computers is through fluid intelligence. Our ability to think uniquely and be creative is the one way in which humans can outsmart each other and computers.

I think it would be very helpful for people to know these terms and perhaps identify as having more of one type of intelligence than the other. For example, I think that I have a lot more fluid intelligence than crystallized intelligence and that now influences how I think and act. In economics, having comparative advantage means being able to produce a good in a lower opportunity cost. In this context, this phrase captures a typical scene in the era of technological revolution: This short but vivid description depicts the sense of loss when humans have to step down from those jobs that machines are better at.

Indeed, we humans are crazy about taking challenges because we enjoy the sense of accomplishment when we conquer difficult problems with our own strength and feel threatened when we have a much stronger alternative that can achieve what we try hard to achieve without an effort.

We are just too vainglorious sometimes and tend to ignore the bigger picture. If we run out of the last bits of comparative advantage, the more we do, in the economic sense, the more we lose. It follows that if we let the Internet, let artificial intelligence, let drugs help us achieve what we can but would take us much more to achieve, we will have time and energy to do more meaningful and significant things, such as enhancing the algorisms for artificial intelligence and developing more reliable drugs.

When the witchcraft technologies AI and other creepy stuff that makes us believe we are being analyzed and manipulated develops in a much faster rate, can our intelligence catch up?

Will it be a small elite group standing on top of the super sophisticated system and controlling the rest of us? The ability to adapt to new technologies or the capacity for developing them? He says that these focus assistants will become important parts of our everyday lives. Opposing opinions that we many not agree with may not even be presented to us because of how the media that we view is filtered to our liking.

Guide to the Boro: “Getting Smarter” by Jamais Cascio

One point he argues is that we have currently mentally evolved casccio give our partial attention, but spread across the board with little focus on concentration.

Cascio overlooks the difference between attention and awareness in this phrase and does not fully explain why their difference is important. To me, paying attention to something is an active and cognizant choice that one makes whereas awareness is much more passive.

  IC CD4049 PDF

For me this was a interesting idea, and Cascio elaborates on it very well. He continues jamaais discuss the implications our cultural beliefs will have on our use of technology as we dive into the future.

I saw this issue as being an existential crisis for humans. Our modern society is more connected then ever before, and as a result of globalization we have seen a decrease in the cultural rifts that once separated our globe into nations.

A Response to Jamais Cascio: “Get Smarter” – Wiki Nation

I think that this discussion brings up questions about not just how is technology going to affect our cultural divides, but also are we ready for intelligence enhancing technology? Can we handle that type of cascoi between our societies?

This point is important because it forces us to consider the types jamaia consequences we would face if the world was open to that sort of dynamic change.

It was almost comforting to read an opinion that had a more optimistic standpoint, strongly juxtaposing that of Carr. Cascio argues that during the Ice Age, a time of crisis and major change, humans were able to adapt to their surroundings and survive.

Furthermore, we were able to evolve with little other than our minds and a few sticks and rocks. Nowadays, Cascio points out that we no longer have to adapt alone, and we now have access to technology to assist us when confronted with new conditions.

Casio is able to string the idea of adaptation through his entire essay by providing examples of artificial assists to heighten human behavior like ADHD drugs and other performance enhancers. People can now stay awake for longer and do their jobs more thoroughly because of these advancements.

Although the use of technology is a new factor, the type of responding to better ourselves is consistent. This article made me think a bit about my own life, and the upcoming paper, and how I could best interject in the conversation about techology.

The points made by Casio related to the advancement of technology opening the doors between people combined with medicine stuck out.

Technology has allowed those who would normally not have access to information adapt and therefore connect to the world. Not only are people in different countries closer than ever, but the handicapped are given a chance to connect with the world.

Technology has allowed many disabled individuals to move around by themselves, eat by themselves, and even have conversations with those around them. Like Cascio, I agree with the idea that technology is allowing us to take great leaps forward and get smarter by using technology to help people integrate and adapt to the changing world around them.

This phrase is important for the article because it is basically explaining how one day our brains are going to be able to run on a machine with very similar features and complexities. He discusses how some are afraid that technology has given us a shorter attention-span and has made our critical thinking more blant; however, Cascio states that man can overcome this hurdle by adjusting technological discoveries.

On the other hand, we have to look at the advancement and growing of technology from a different angle. These advancements have caused, for example, the use of non-prescription drugs in order to boost performance and skills. The question we have to ask ourselves is, is there are borderline for when technology becomes too much? We might abuse the technology we have created for different purposes, purposes for medical reasons and not ability of performance.

All in All, Cascio is proving that we have come so far in technological advancement and creation that there is no need to say that it is fully impossible to have a mind fully run on technological devices.

Jamais Cascio

Carr implies in his article that the growing sophistication of Google has reduced the responsibility of humans to make their own connections and interpretive analysis as technology can now perform these casico for us.

Cascio believes that technological advancement and human intelligence are intertwined. Changes in the way we absorb and interact with information and data does not imply regression as Carr suggests, but it leads to a reciprocal change in our cognitive functions so that we are better able to keep up with the expanding networks of information that we now have access to. More complex and nuanced systems and digital mediums do not lessen our intellectual impetus.


The precision and empiricism that underlies these systems in turn forces us to become more adept at processing and incorporating this concision into our thought smartwr. However, unlike the internet, humans do not have a built-in search engine that enables us to sift through vast quantities of information casxio a neat and orderly way. Consequently, humans have to build a framework to contextualize the content they are consuming.

We are therefore not regressing, but adapting to a new set of circumstances and conditions just as humans did seventy-four thousand years ago. Since we are the creators of technology, we could always be one step ahead because the more intelligent our technology becomes, the more intelligent we become. It is becoming a stepping stool for globalization and a way to create awareness about issues in the cascoo world that are usually swept aside by mainstream media.

I did have a feeling that he would reference technology as one of these tools of change, but I thought of it, again, as a psychological change, similar to the one discussed in the article we read last week, about reading differently as a result of new technology.

Smarterr quote stood out to me because it does not reflect the biological change that I am talking about. But this seems artificial to me. Yes, it smmarter a very smart human brain to be able to create a machine with that much power, power to step in and start doing very every day tasks for us, but that is not a fair representation of the rest of our society. I found these articles to be very convincing, due to the way they presented their opinions in ways that discussed both cascoi of the argument.

Get Smarter put into words many of the thoughts I have had when my father goes on rants about how the internet is making us stupid. He also brought to my attention that the speed at which we access information is changing the way we think as well.

Also, the concept that you could take a drug to be more empathetical is very strange to me. I feel as though empathy is a skill that more people should acquire, and that the path to empathy is more important than the actual act of empathizing. I was astounded by the number of Netflix subscribers. That platform holds an immense amount of power. Also, I found the discussion about Spotify really interesting, because I wonder how much less money smaller artists are making now that Spotify exists.

Would they find the same publicity that they do without the platform? Or is Spotify seriously stunting their incomes?

Conte founded a website where instead of subscribing to one specific artist and just funding them for that one time, you continue funding them on a recurring basis. Because Patreon has become so popular he indicated that the generation today is looking to make social impact.

There is this strong motivation for us to spend our money on things that we believe will help change and empower the world. What comes to my mind as I read this is how we intentionally seek out people who are trying to make a positive mark on the world, whether that be a physical mark or something to just make the world more jamaix I know whenever I find someone or hear about someone that is just doing something great for the benefit of the world, I want to support them so I give them my time and money.

Something I did notice, however, was how he specifically called out this generation. Not any other generation but specifically this new and young one. Does this mean that other generations only care about superficial things? Do you guys think that our generation is more concerned with social impact? You must be logged in to post a comment. Log in to Reply. Question- Are we ready and if not are we going to be ready for this type of technology?

Leave a Reply Cancel reply You must be logged in to post a comment.