Yes, that David Byrne.
Yes that Sartre.
Here goes, first up J-P Sartre:
"So that’s hell. … I never thought You remember: the sulphur, the
stake, the grill. Oh, What a joke. No need to grill: hell is other
people”
But no, ol' J.P. says his
“L’enfer, c’est les autres” doesn't mean what I think it means.
So screw him, sometimes hell is other philosophes.
(damn fool hasn't done anything worthwhile since the cookbook anyway)
On the other hand, from Mr. Byrne's Journal, May 15, 2017:
ELIMINATING THE HUMAN
via GIPHY
I have a theory that much recent tech development and innovation over
the last decade or so has had an unspoken overarching agenda—it has
been about facilitating the need for LESS human interaction. It’s not a
bug—it’s a feature. We might think Amazon was about selling us books we
couldn’t find locally—and it was and what a brilliant idea—but maybe it
was also just as much about eliminating human interaction. I see a
pattern emerging in the innovative technology that has gotten the most
attention, gets the bucks and often, no surprise, ends up getting
developed and implemented. What much of this technology seems to have in
common is that it removes the need to deal with humans directly. The
tech doesn’t claim or acknowledge this as its primary goal, but it seems
to often be the consequence. I’m sort of thinking maybe it is the
primary goal. There are so many ways imagination can be manifested in
the technical sphere. Many are wonderful and seem like social goods, but
allow me a little conspiracy mongering here—an awful lot of them have
the consequence of lessening human interaction.
I suspect that we almost don’t notice this pattern because it’s hard
to imagine what an alternative focus of tech development might be. Most
of the news we get barraged with is about algorithms, AI, robots and
self driving cars, all of which fit this pattern, though there are
indeed many technological innovations underway that have nothing to do
with eliminating human interaction from our lives. CRISPR-cas9 in genetics, new films that can efficiently and cheaply cool houses and quantum computing
to name a few, but what we read about most and what touches us daily is
the trajectory towards less human involvement. Note: I don’t consider
chat rooms and product reviews as “human interaction”; they’re mediated
and filtered by a screen.
I am not saying these developments are not efficient and convenient;
this is not a judgement regarding the services and technology. I am
simply noticing a pattern and wondering if that pattern means there are
other possible roads we could be going down, and that the way we’re
going is not in fact inevitable, but is (possibly unconsciously) chosen.
Here are some examples of tech that allows for less human interaction:
Online ordering and home delivery-
Online ordering is hugely convenient. Amazon, FreshDirect, Instacart,
etc. have not just cut out interactions at bookstores and checkout
lines, they have eliminated ALL human interaction barring the (often
paid) online recommendations. New York has had home take-out delivery
for decades—one simply phones the local take-out place—but New York also
has never had a shortage of random human interaction.
Here’s an Amazon warehouse in Peterborough, Cambridge. Increasingly
the picking is done by a combination of humans working with robots. I
can see eight people in this picture.
Gig Jobs- TaskRabbit and other services—there are
people who perform these tasks in the gig economy, but as a client one
does not necessarily have to interact with them in a meaningful way.
Airbnb- There is no check-in desk interaction; often there is no human contact at all.
Digital music- Downloads and streaming—there is no
physical store, of course, so there are no snobby, know-it-all clerks to
deal with. Whew, you might say. There are algorithmic recommendations
on some services so you don’t even have to discuss music with your
friends to know what they like—the service knows what they like, and you
can know too without actually talking to them. Is music as a kind of
social glue and lubricant also being eliminated?
Car driver apps- There is minimal interaction—one
doesn’t have to tell the driver the address, the preferred route or
interact while paying the check.
Driverless cars- In one sense, if you’re out with
your friends, not having one of you drive means more time to chat. Or
drink. Very nice. But driverless tech is also very much aimed at
eliminating taxi drivers, truck drivers, delivery drivers and many
others. There are huge advantages to eliminating humans
here—theoretically machines should drive more safely than humans—so
there might be fewer accidents and fatalities. The disadvantages include
massive job loss. But that’s another subject. What I’m seeing here is
the consistent “eliminating the human” pattern.
Automated checkout- Eatsa
is a new version of the Automat, a once popular “restaurant” with no
visible staff. My local CVS has been training their staff to help us
learn to use the checkout machines which will replace them. At the same
time, they are training their customers to do the work of the cashiers.
Amazon has been testing stores—even grocery stores!—with automated
shopping. They’re called Amazon Go. If the items are placed perfectly on
the shelves, then sensors know what you’ve picked up, and you can
simply walk out with your “purchases” without any human contact. But they still need to get quite a few bugs out.
At some airports, one orders and pays via tablets—that
system has some bugs in it too. I watched a lot of people simply walk
away in frustration, but those bugs will get sorted someday soon.
Online Art Sales- Art is increasingly being sold online, so one can avoid any possible awkward encounters with intimidating gallery staff.
eBay- “Auctions” without the human drama and excitement.
AI-
AI is often (though not always) truly better at decision-making than
humans. In some areas, we might expect this. For example, AI will
suggest the fastest route on a map accounting for traffic and distance
while we as humans wouldn’t have the time to check all that traffic
data, and we’d be prone to taking our tried and true route. But some
less expected areas where AI is better than humans are opening up. As
Siddhartha Mukherjee writes in The New Yorker, AI is getting better at spotting melanomas than many doctors. Much routine legal work will soon be done by computer programs and financial assessments are now being done by machines....MUCH MORE
...Lastly, "Social" media- social “interaction” that isn’t really social.
While the appearance on social networks is one of connection—as
Facebook and others frequently claim—the fact is a lot of social media
is a simulation of real social connection. As has been in
evidence recently, social media actually increases divisions amongst us
by amplifying echo effects and allowing us to live in cognitive bubbles.
We are fed what we already like or what our similarly inclined friends
like… or more likely now what someone has payed for us to see in an ad
that mimics content. In this way, we actually become less connected
except to those in our group....
Same as it ever was.
Back to Sartre. I think he was an honest-to-goodness misanthrope, not the Molière kind but a real hater of humanity.
From 2015's
Existential Questions I Hadn't Considered: "Is There a Gnawing Ennui Within the Financial Industry?":
...See also:
Using's Sartre's Critique of Dialectical Reason for Managerial Decision-Making
Abstract:
This paper will offer an alternative understanding of managerial decision-making drawing from Sartre’s Critique of Dialectical Reason rather than simply Being and Nothingness....MORE
Oh joy.
Additionally, Cookin' with Jean-Paul:
October 3 -- Spoke with Camus today about my cookbook. Though he
has never actually eaten, he gave me much encouragement. I rushed home
immediately to begin work. How excited I am! I have begun my formula for
a Denver omelet.
October 4 -- Still working on the omelet. There have been
stumbling blocks. I keep creating omelets one after another, like
soldiers marching into the sea, but each one seems empty, hollow, like
stone. I want to create an omelet that expresses the meaninglessness of
existence, and instead they taste like cheese. I look at them on the
plate, but they do not look back. Tried eating them with the lights off.
It did not help. Malraux suggested paprika.
October 6 -- I have realized that the traditional omelet form
(eggs and cheese) is bourgeois. Today I tried making one out of
cigarette, some coffee, and four tiny stones. I fed it to Malraux, who
puked....MORE
And the
Grand père Jeté:
Le Blog de Jean-Paul Sartre
He hated people.
