When globalistic centres, right-wing organizations and the world's left request an expanding control of the information space, Harari explains to the small 1 why organization censorship is the only way to save the human species.
Israel’s author is no uncertainty able to connect people. Despite the expressive left-liberal worldview, in Poland both Mateusz Morawiecki and Szymon Holownia are delighted, and he is not spared the words of appreciation by specified academics as Sławomir Cenckiewicz. No wonder. Though it is hard to number the unrealized prophecies of the Prophet (as he described it at the time) Common Weekly) the ease in describing global trends and talent for an accessible editorial of dominant ideas causes it to inactive go under the roof as 1 of the most popular futurologists in the world.
And it just so happens that the Israeli's latest position is about connections. The title “Nexus” is “a brief past of information”, understood as the binder of a network of dependence – an evolutionary force sapiens. What Harari says distinguishes us from another species is the ability to share information and build more complex structures than a flock or a cluster.
At the outset, the author of Homo Deusa points out that the overarching function of information is not investigating the truth, but building connections. Let us remember this claim, for we will request it. At a time erstwhile generic algorithms (so-called artificial intelligence) begin to influence almost all aspect of our lives, Harari is active in the debate on the scope of freedom of speech, the power to communicate or the very nature of information.
In his opinion, belief in the belief that networks founded on fact prevail against networks based on falsehood, an expanding amount of data contributes to making the right decisions, and freedom and flow of information are the guarantor of a planet free from totalitarianism, is simply a large naivety. Harari disagrees with leading transhumanists specified as Ray Kurzweil or Elon Musk, convincing that technologies “explainably improve all aspect of human life”.
Artificial Intelligence Church
Interestingly, Harari, in his book, devotes much space to the Catholic Church, who first codified the then "information technology" in the form of the canon of Scripture, building the most enduring network in history. Even specified a declared anti-cleric, who, in criticism of the Church, goes to manipulation, half-truths, or public denunciations, cannot overlook specified a landmark minute as the establishment of the Magisterium of the Church.
However, the focus on the Catholic Church has a circumstantial purpose. In his example, he shows that even specified powerful institutions request “autocorrective mechanisms”. Although he considers the Second Vatican Council and the universal meaculpism, That is, the apology of the Church of all for everything, Harari finds the Church fundamentalally incapable to "repair" due to doctrinal attachment. According to the Israelite, they are not individual people of the Church who have disobeyed Christ’s mission, but the mission itself is false, as the Bible is to be simply the creation of a faulty mind. The state of his “trueness” is determined by the attitude towards LGBTQ, Jews, women and indigenous peoples.
However, in the era of extrahuman intelligence, capable of "redesigning bodies and minds", erstwhile he looks into the eyes of the hazard of demolition of the planet, atomic wars or bioterrorism, according to Harari, we can only be saved by "powerful institutions" – like the Catholic Church – "able to perceive and respond immediately to threats." The Israeli frequently uses maximalistic rhetoric ("survival of humans and another species") and hyperbolizes threats by building an apocalyptic atmosphere prompting fast adoption of the proposed solutions.
And as he argues, building a control strategy is not a substance of advanced technology, it is simply a political challenge. “Do we have the political will to meet him?” he asks, by default, by referring mainly to the leaders of global institutions, predicating technology corporations or individual governments as lacking specified opportunities.
Social Reputation System
Although the author of Israel makes strong diagnosis, he remains restrained in making possible proposals. possibly speaking directly, as in “Homo Deus” or “21 lessons...” would consequence in a decisive public response. It is worth recalling that, among another things, thanks to the spread of Harari's scandalous statements, the planet economical Forum cut off from Israeli activities, recognising him as drawing unnecessary attention.
As an example of adapting to the fresh times, Harari brings readers closer (not to tell) to the Chinese Social Trust strategy (Credite). utilizing known simplifications, it convinces that systems work on a akin basis peer – to – peer: TripAdvisor, Uber and another service quality assessment applications. They are also, in his opinion, social trust systems that have contributed to eliminating the privacy of taxi drivers, hoteliers or barbers.
Of course, he besides insecurely mentions the disadvantages of a totalitarian tool, and even convinces that wisely controlled networks would not require specified dramatic solutions. In this context, it proposes principles for democracy in the digital age: insecurity, decentralisation or reciprocity (supervision of all – corporations and government too). Harari's suggestions, however, cast an incredible naivety; mature democracies would voluntarily renounce powerful surveillance tools. For example, 1 of the duties outlined by Israelis would be to temporarily halt the monitoring of citizens, e.g. in time for rest.
"Is it possible to make better supervisory and selection institutions that would usage their power to support the search for fact alternatively than to increase their power?" he asks, most likely aware of the fragility of the proposed solutions.
What's the truth?
The problem is that Harari's planet is simply a zero-one communicative about the conflict of the forces of advancement and fact (represented by conservatism, monotheistic religions and natural law). “Populism” and “threat of democracy” have only Trump or Bolsonaro's face, and online trolling is always the domain of “the utmost right”.
On left-wing extremism: the green slaughter of economies, the plague of trans-mutilations, the millions of abortion victims, the consequences of demographic disaster or the deadly consequences of uncontrolled migration, there is not a word in Harari's narrative. It is not hard to see that in specified an optics the word abortion “crime” will be misinformation, and strikes by climate activists – an component of the "search for truth".
At the same time with the release of Harari's latest book, we are observing the next phase of the construction of a global censorship system. Since Trump and Brexit's first term, as many as 91 legal acts have been adopted worldwide to prevent “the spread of false or misleading information on social media”. global institutions specified as the United Nations and the planet economical Forum are taking a number of initiatives to combat "mission-information, dis-information, mal-information". The European Union is leading the way in censorship of undesirable content by establishing the Digital Services Act (DSA) or by co-creating the media Freedom Act of 2022.
Under the pretext of "defence of democracy", the integrity of elections or "integrity of information", there is simply a desire to extend the scope of control to include abortion, sex policy or Green Governance (an effort to specify misinformation on climate change). It is worth asking why akin initiatives serve? The search for fact or the concentration of power?
A akin question should besides be asked to Harari himself. Why did the stance of the defender of democracy in a man who, in 2016, put the choice “between Zuckerberg and Putin” ahead of the choice, and “21 lessons...” convince that giving up the controls of life under the management of algorithms does not should be so bad? The Israeli was besides recognized as the chief critic of the “human rights” which he felt did not exist, as there was no free will—the foundation of the election and Humanist stories.
Hard to believe Harari's abrupt democratisation. The Israeli, like many another commentators from right to left, is well aware of the dusk of demo-liberalism. However, powdering a dead body has a purpose. It should be done by quoting the author himself, rebranding campaign, so that in a planet where all behaviour is monitored and the elections designed, the public inactive sacredly believes in the triumph of democracy. For this, we request to usage information that, as Harari convinces us, is not utilized to analyse the truth, but to build a network of dependencies.
Peter Relich
Problem with legal definition of misinformation and another “harmful” messages
