Around the Web 29

The Materialist Orthodoxy 🔬.

Check out my latest AI newsletter on The Epsilon. 

Watch my latest video essay: Winners Take All  

[Talking Points]

🐍Snake handling in Christianity

🎼Only 11,600 out of 9.8 million artist profiles on Spotify earn over $100k annually.

🇫🇷Paris 2024 Olympics costs $8.7 billion vs $23.6billion at Rio. 

🇸🇬Singaporeans own the world’s most powerful passport.

🔍SearchGPT is live.

🏬Japanese supermarket chain use AI to gauge staff smiles, speech tones.

⚽EA Sports FC 25 official gameplay deep dive.

🦠On Magnetic bacteria.

🧊Mpemba Effect: When hot water freezes faster than cold water.

🦷First Fully Automated Robot Dentist.

[Longer Reads]

[I]: 🧑🏾‍🔬On Materialist Orthodoxy

If you have spent any great deal of time in US academia, say; then you know that it is no news that a materialist orthodoxy fills the air, and of course increasingly more so in the larger society. In this excellent conversation Peter Robinson of Uncommon Knowledge sat down with David Berlinski, Stephen Meyer, and James Orr to discuss materialism, the belief that only physical things exist. Which begs the question, what are physical things? 

The scientific realist and the anti-realist are conspicuously on different sides of that specific debate, but they didn’t discuss that issue, they focused on the question whether materialism can adequately explain the world, including things like mathematics and consciousness. Here are the key points from the discussion, and to recap: Materialism is the belief that only physical things exist. Some argue that materialism cannot adequately explain the world, including things like mathematics and consciousness (for example, think: does number exist?).

 The discussion expectedly dovetailed into scientism, the belief that science is the only way to understand the world, and they all sort of agree that that scientism is too narrow, leaves no room for other ways of knowing, and basically self refuting. I for one don’t see much of any reason in scientific materialism, it appears blatantly false. In fact, foremost scientists like Isaac Newton would have found it absurd. For example we can raise the question, if materialism is true, what then is the nature of the laws of nature themselves? In the discussion, James Orr argues that the idea of natural laws is a remnant of a theological concept and that materialism is not sufficient to explain them. And importantly, as I hinted earlier, science presupposes the reality of mathematics, which cannot be explained by materialism.

[II]: 💵The Art of Spending Money

There is this elderly senator from my home country who seems not to be able to stop showing off his cars, sneakers and designer clothes on Instagram, more so like a teenager that one strongly believes will outgrow such dealings, but never did. Again, he appears as though he can't help himself. I, on the other hand, don’t seem to be able to help myself psychoanalyzing him. And I made my conclusion a while ago: it must be something about his family background. Perhaps he suffered so much in childhood and was even taunted for it. 

This leads me to Morgan Housel on the art of spending money. In the podcast he discusses 13 excellent ideas related to the psychology of spending. Here are three of his points:  1) Our family background can influence your spending habits. People who grew up poor may spend more money on themselves as adults to compensate for feelings of deprivation in their childhood (reminisce of our dear senator). 2) People don't care about your stuff as much as you do (basically the endowment effect), and yet we often buy things to impress others.  3) It is not unusual for folks to spend money as a way to compete with others - people may feel pressure to keep up with the spending habits of their peers. Housel argues that thinking actively about the psychology of spending can help us make better financial decisions. And I completely agree. 

[III]: ⚒Peter Thiel: The Iconoclast

Peter Thiel is someone I like to listen to even when I disagree with his stance. He showed up recently at the Aspen Festival. I find some of the content redundant but that is only because I have devoured most of Mr. Thiel’s content I have found online. He talked about giving founders latitude, monopolies, Trump, AI, Crypto, and many other things. 

[IV]: 🧑 How to Spot High Agency People

I spent more time on X than I would normally do recently, no thanks to America's current political Landscape. Anyway, here is one of the gems I found during a mind-numbing scrolling session of my X feed.

Source: https://x.com/george__mack/status/1815461836760002962

[V]: 🇳🇴Canute the Great

I have a thing for the Vikings Series, I have watched at least about three different sets of Vikings Series in the past few years. The latest one I watched was the third season of Vikings: Valhalla. One of my motivations for watching historical dramas is that it forces me to read the actual historical events underlying the series, as it has become increasingly difficult over the years to read, say a 500-page history book, without anchoring it on a solid historical drama. 

Anyways, at this point in the series, Canute was the King of England, Denmark and Norway. He united these realms under his rule, promoted Christianity and made pilgrimages to Rome, which solidified his reputation as a devout Christian king. In the series, there is, of course, emphasis on his relationships with other characters, such as Emma of Normandy, his sons, and his advisors. And typical of what you will expect of series of this nature, there was plenty of political maneuvering. 

Also, for some reason, I initially thought that Canute was the first Viking king of England. It turns out to be his father, Sweyn Forkbeard (and I must have thought that because he was not officially crowned the King of England.) He briefly claimed the English *throne in 1013 after a successful invasion but died shortly after in 1014. His reign was short-lived, but his conquest paved the way for his son Canute to establish a more lasting Viking rule in England, consolidating power and creating the North Sea Empire (aka Anglo-Scandinavian Empire), a union of the kingdoms of Denmark, England, and Norway that existed for about three decades in the early 11th century. The season ends with Canute’s death, with the family, as expected, preparing for war. I haven’t quite finished the last episode, so I don’t know where that ended. 

[VI]: 🪨Agentic AI and the Legal Trials of Inanimate Objects

There has been some talk about giving AI rights and similar things of that nature. If you are tempted to think that that is all baloney, maybe you want to think twice because there are some historical precedents in the fact of some legal trials of inanimate objects. 

From ancient Greek trials, medieval deodands, to modern in rem jurisdiction. Trials of inanimate objects helped communities deal with misfortune and assign blame. They also served to uphold social order and express moral values. In ancient Athens, there was a special court called the Prytaneion for trying inanimate objects that caused deaths. Medieval Europe had the concept of deodands, which were objects forfeited to the crown/God when they caused death. Modern rem jurisdiction allows courts to take legal action against property (think asset forfeiture to disrupt criminal enterprises). Also see, Ecuadorian river wins court case. 

As AI becomes increasingly autonomous and embedded in crucial aspects of everyday life, from healthcare to finance, the legal system confronts the challenge of addressing its potential accountability and rights. For example, in the event of harm caused by an AI doctor, should the AI be considered a separate legal entity with responsibilities, or should liability solely rest with the manufacturer or programmer? 

Additionally, extending rights to AI can help address ethical concerns surrounding its treatment and usage. By recognizing specific rights, such as data integrity, operational transparency, and protection from harmful modifications, AI systems can be developed and utilized in an ethical manner, preventing abuses during their deployment. I am no legal expert but I wonder what the future holds for AI rights (or the lack of it), considering that our future is going to be so different from the past and this current time.

See Related.