LAST SUMMIT FUTURE- we come to bury science fiction only natural science ai matters to those who love millennials
AdamSmith.app notes it took 10 quarters of a century for USA to listen to intel of 1 billiongirls; fortunately this happened in Clara's town the patron saint of health for mothers & infants also the Pacific Coast East birthplace of 1965 Moore's chips, and 2016 Hoppers 80 billion chip Gpu. In the most exciting AI20s.com, at EconomistWomen.com invite you to Gamify worldclassllm by celebrating greatest herstories through every community on earth's new & old worlds
2025report (est 1983 Economist) final ed invites EconomistAmerica.com: update ED's 1982 Economist Survey with Doerrs & others )Why Not Silicon Valley Everywhere/
See the world of Jensen, Li , Hassabis &&& Neumann survey What good will humans unite wherever get first access to 100+ times more tech every decade: Jensen liftoff 1996 Li & Hassabis (DeepTrain Computers) first seen in valley 2009; moment1 2012 Global Games Imagenet, moment 2a alphafold go world champon & Google Transformer Attention Before we our 1982 intervuewDoeers in 1965 the twin Clara-Tokyo .Exps appeared: Intel's 100 times moore tech per decade Tokyo olympics sighting of Satellite telecoms (EJ:see 3 leaders vision connections JFK , Prince Charles, Emperor Hiorhito) - Why not co=pilot JLHABITAT MAGIC everywhere- ie celebrate brainpower innovation maps : Jensen*Li*Hopper*Alphafold2*Blackwell*Intel*Transformer*Attention*Twins - MediateAGIChaos started up around Einsten and his revolution in margs of nature teamed up as NET: Neumann-Einstein-Turing. Sadly for 30 years the 20th C asked its 3 greatest maths brains to win atomic bomb race for allies -this left them 1951-6 to train Econonist Journalosts and others round last notes computer & brain on 2 new engines type 6 brainworking. type 7 Autonomous Intelligence Mapping
Can Economists map 8 billion human relationships to be joyful and sustainable. This centuruy old question begun by Maths Goats Neumann Eintstein et al is coming down to the wire: extinction or sustainability of speies -2030reports.com . 2 main protagonits since 1970a billion poorest asian women have mapped quarer of the world's population's development with deeer joy and sustainability than all the wealth of American-English mindsets. Somwehere in netween the majority of human intels and almost infinet ART Intels wonder what UN2 countdown to 2030 can do next...LET's start with mapping SHELFF economies : S5 She-too womens intel built communities S3 Health: S4 Ed3 S0 LandLeaders s2 Food S1*17 Financial platforms (the 100 grey=blocks of intel between Unations & WallStreets

Friday, December 7, 2018

From Joseph Nye

The current information revolution is putting transnational issues like financial stability, climate change, terrorism, cybercrime, and pandemics on the global agenda – at the same time as it tends to weaken the ability of all governments to respond. Complexity is growing. One model for the future is great power conflict or concert, but a second model involves “information entropy.” In that world, the answer to the question “Who’s next?” is “No one.”
A man photographs a WikiLeaks billboard in Los Angeles.

Courtesy of Richard Frazier/Shutterstock
While this answer is too simple, it does indicate important trends that will affect the place of the U.S. and others in the world. World politics will not be the sole province of governments, as individuals and private organizations – ranging from WikiLeaks to corporations to NGOs to terrorists to spontaneous societal movements – are all empowered to play direct roles in world politics. The spread of information means that power will be more widely distributed and informal networks will undercut the monopoly of traditional bureaucracy. As of 2018, there are about 20 billion devices connected to the internet, and most are autonomous.
Even if the U.S. remains the largest power, it cannot achieve many of its international goals acting alone. That means the case for providing leadership in multilateral institutions remains stronger than ever. In some areas of military and economic goods, unilateral American leadership can provide a large part of the answer. But on the new transnational issues, while American leadership will be important, success will require the multilateral cooperation of others: International financial stability is vital to the prosperity of Americans, but the United States needs the cooperation of others to ensure it. Regardless of potential setbacks to economic globalization, environmental globalization will increase. Climate change and rising sea levels will affect quality of life for everyone, but Americans cannot manage the problem alone. And in a world where borders are becoming more porous to everything from drugs to infectious diseases to terrorism, nations must use soft power to develop networks and build institutions to address shared threats and challenges.
In this sense, power becomes a positive-sum game. It will not be enough to think in terms of American power over others. One must also think in terms of power to accomplish joint goals, which involves power with others. The United States benefits if China improves its energy efficiency and emits less carbon dioxide. In this world, networks and connectedness become an important source of relevant power, and the most connected states are the most powerful.

The Need and the Threat

If the key to a multilateral world order is developing cooperation and valuing “power with” as well as “power over,” the opening years of the Trump administration are not encouraging. Every country puts its interests first, but the important question is how broadly or narrowly those interests are defined. Trump has shown an inclination toward narrow, zero-sum interpretations. At the same time, while Trump won the 2016 election, he did not win the popular vote, and in recent polls by the Chicago Council on Global Affairs, a large majority of Americans say globalization is mostly good for the U.S. and they continue to support multilateral engagement.
President Trump gestures during a rally in Fort Wayne, Indiana, November 5, 2018.

Courtesy of AP
At mid-term in 2018, on the four major strands of the post-1945 liberal order – security, economics, global commons, and values such as human rights and democracy – the record is mixed. Thus far, while the Trump administration has weakened American alliances, it has not destroyed them. The security regimes for restraining proliferation of weapons of mass destruction are challenged, but remain in place. The damage to economic institutions, particularly those related to trade, appears to be greater than to the monetary order (where the dollar still dominates).
On global commons issues, the Trump administration has withdrawn U.S. participation in the Paris climate accord, but the substitution of natural gas for coal continues. As for values, Trump has shown less interest in human rights than his predecessors, and has often embraced authoritarian leaders. Some defenders argue that his unorthodox style and willingness to break institutions will produce major gains, but as The Economist argues, the institutional costs of using a wrecking-ball approach may reduce American power to deal with the new transnational issues that we face.
The terms “liberal international order” and “Pax Americana” have become obsolete as descriptions of world order, but the need remains for the largest countries to organize multilateralism for public goods. Leadership is not the same as domination. There have always been degrees of leadership and degrees of influence during the seven decades of American preeminence after World War II. Now with less preponderance and in a more complex world, American provision of global public goods, in cooperation with others, may be threatened more by the rise of populist nationalism at home than the rise of new powers abroad.
***
Joseph S. Nye (@Joe_Nye) is university distinguished service professor and former dean of the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University. He has published 14 academic books, including Soft PowerThe Future of Power, and Is the American Century Over?

No comments:

Post a Comment