Skip to main content

About Value and Attention

 

The other day I was in a matatu and I didn’t have a phone so my range of activities was reduced to people watching as an avenue of passing the time.

I wasn’t at the window seat so my subjects were limited to only the people in the matatu with me. I would glance at the people around me, most engrossed in their phones, with ear pods so deep into their ears one would be inclined to think they were born with them. A few years ago, a ride in a matatu or any public transport was characterized by a buzz of activities, people talked, laughed, argued, slept – but not anymore. Now we have phones, and with that, we have muted our mouths, only our eyes and ears do the talking with a little help from our fingers endlessly scrolling through our little screens.

Initially, it wasn’t surreal to find two or three people reading a book or newspaper at the matatu, it was the norm. For those who didn’t have any printed material, they resorted to eating, sleeping, or watching the outside world as it disappeared behind them, marveling at the wondrous sight out there. I personally enjoyed watching trees and banners as they vanished from my sight, the faces of people I would see for a split second as they disappeared, knowing very well that I would never see them again till kingdom come. There was a certain aura in the air anytime I traveled, some kind of poetry and romance between the machinery, the smell of gas, nature, and the people both in and out of the vessel.

Now, there isn’t that kind of romance anymore. I am not saying that people endlessly scrolling through their phones, leaving everybody else to their own devices (pun intended) is a bad thing. Far from it. It is our intellectual excellence at play. My problem is that there is no poetry, no musicality, and no enigma. Let’s abandon that argument because while in the matatu, my thoughts took a completely different turn.

Imagine when we were used to consuming large pieces of information, thousands of pages of books, without any fatigue. It was intrigue that propelled us and so for us, it wasn’t really about time or the bulkiness, it was desire. I remember reading about 700 pages of a novel in one Saturday while in high school, and I didn’t really take the time to appreciate that power, that novelty. Now, information has been condensed into tiny bits like food broken down to feed a baby whose chewing ability is still developing. Imagine blending a piece of steak so that you can just drink it in a few seconds and get it over with. Sure, you will save time, and you might get the necessary nutrients, but will you enjoy it? Here is another imagery – imagine if we could ingest alcohol the same way the sick get their water, through pipes. You will get drunk even faster than the other person who went into a bar, cuddled up with his mistress or a group of friends and got drunk the old fashioned way. But that’s not what we are after, is it? I think that’s what has changed.

It is not that we have become lazy, we have become too focused on value rather than the process. Let me explain further. You are a student, right? You are supposed to pass your exams, you know that no exam is often deeply focused on a certain topic, because you read thousands of pages only to answer a handful of questions. You have two options: to read through the entire thousands of pages, wasting your precious time in the process, or use AI and other programming models to predict for you with ultimate precision the questions most likely to be asked and then tackle the pages with those questions. You can then use the same AI to summarize everything for you, and if you are of sufficient intelligence, you can finish the whole thing in several hours – something that should have taken you weeks. If you are smart enough, you can pay someone to take the test for you altogether.

That is why I say that we have lost the poetry of it all, we are so concerned with the value that we create, the output, that we don’t care about how we look while generating that output. There is no finesse, no panache. A friend of mine explained it to me like this: imagine a man who works at a farm, waking up at 5am every morning, retreating to his bed at 10pm every night. You don’t need to be told how demanding of your physicality and strength farm work is. He has no days off. After working for months, he has the product, probably maize or beans or even some goats. He is ready for the market, but there is another predicament awaiting him – the market is controlled by forces beyond him. A broker or a middleman will make a few calls, connect the farmer to a buyer, and in the process making a killing for himself. The entire time that the farmer was toiling under the scorching sun, the broker was just lounging around, but when the time to reap where hadn’t sown came, he ran to collect. Who is to blame? You see, the value that the broker brings to the table is quite higher than the one the farmer brings. It’s not fair, but that is how it works. Being busy is no longer enough, the question is what are you busy doing?

Look at a man like Elon Musk for example. Yes, they say that he works about 16 hours a day, which is insane, but there are people who work 20 hours a day and their fortunes isn’t even a billionth of his. Let’s take a waiter who works several jobs, amounting to about 20 hours a day. Between the waiter and Elon Musk, whose work is more intellectually demanding? The kind of decisions that Elon Musk makes affects millions of people – one slip of judgement on his part can result to shifts in economies, it can cause millions to sleep on the streets. What about the waiter? He can miss an order or break a bottle of wine, and it is only him who will suffer the consequences. It also explains why people from third world countries are swarming into the western countries like bees. The people of the United States for example have understood the trick: any work that requires you to be there physically to use your hands isn’t going to pay you enough. Gradually, over time, they have gravitated towards the intellectually demanding aspects of their work, and so the other aspects that demand a lot of physicality have been left vacant for those of us in the third world economies. I think it was in one of his books that Nassim Taleb said that it costs more to design a shoe than to make it, and it costs much less time to design a shoe than to make it. Imagine the shoe designer of Nike, and then imagine the millions of people who slave away at the Nike warehouses, making the shoes. One man’s fortune is so large that it can’t even compare to the fortune of the millions combined. Perhaps it’s because with just one good shoe design, through replication, a billion shoes can be made from it. Value and output. 

Now, do I think it is a bad thing? Far from it. It is a good thing in the sense that we are experiencing a new dawn in our civilization. Imagine how the world changed when fire was invented, or electricity, or the wheel, or even the airplane. This is what history has accorded us, and we can’t afford to look at it as a curse. It is now the easiest to make a fortune, it reminds me of the Industrial Revolution. Before the likes of Andrew Carnegie, Cornelius Vanderbilt, Thomas Rockefeller, and even JP Morgan, it wasn’t easy for the child of a Nobody to become one of the richest – that was a quality accorded only to the royalties, the sons of kings. If you had ambition, you had to take up arms and earn your name. As you can imagine, that was a very tedious process. But then the industrial revolution comes, and anyone with the smarts to outmaneuver and outshine his competitors could make a homerun and become one of the richest in the world.

What we are going through is the industrial revolution reincarnate. I have seen young people with no sufficient education nor intelligence make millions and change the course of their family’s history through one sufficiently placed bet. An opportunity presented itself and they seized it.

Enough of that, let me talk about the lack of romance and the poetry of it all, because that is what drove me to write this piece in the first place. With the fact that we have artificial intelligence at our disposal, it also means that we are spoilt for choice. There are so many things that demand to be consumed by us that we won’t know which one deserves our attention. If I want to learn about a certain topic or even listen to a certain kind of music and I type in my browser ‘jazz music to listen to while sad,’ you best believe that what will appear on my screen are those with high exposure, that is the most views. My screen can only accommodate about 20 results at most – of course there are more, but my impatience won’t allow me to look at them all. So, just the 20 results are too much for me, and it doesn’t mean that just because they are the most viewed, then they are what I wanted in the first place. The algorithm only gives me what it believes I might like, and how does it know that I might like it? Well, if more people watched it and liked it, then there is a chance I might as well. It doesn’t know me personally, so it will treat me as one of the many – that’s how fucked up this is. The next issue arises. If we consume the same content, over and over, it will reach a time where there is no difference between you and me, we will be like twins or zombies – hypnotized to think the same way. I don’t know about you but I hate the idea of thinking the same. It is said that when two people think alike, then one of them is not thinking. But then, another quote which might be appropriate for this discussion is the one by Hoffer, ‘when people are free to do as they please, they usually imitate each other.’

This new frontier will strip us of our individuality, leave us naked for all to see, but nobody will mind because one man’s nakedness won’t be different from the next one. I told someone that it’s only us who can differentiate between one person and the next, do you think a cow looks at you as ugly or handsome, or learned or stupid? To a cow, we are all humans. That’s how we will become even to ourselves as far as our thinking is concerned.

Add the issue of chips in our brains and you are home. If a brain chip can synchronize itself with a man’s thoughts that it can play chess on the computer and move pieces without the person controlling it with a mouse or anything, imagine what will be accomplished in a hundred years. There are both the positive and the negative I suppose. Perhaps there will be ways to know who is thinking of committing a crime before he does, but also free thinking will suffer greatly. With our capitalism and enterprising spirit, I won’t be surprised if there will be a premium package for free thinking.

Life as we know it is disintegrating into ashes. In a way, for every technology, life changes, but our technology is quite different. Naval Ravikant claims that technology is anything that the world needs but has no way of making it yet. So, by that logic, the wheel was a technology, the salt was a technology, fire, and everything else that had an immense impact on our way of life. I read somewhere, The Singularity by Ray Kurzweil, I think, that if one was to bring back to life a person from the fifteenth century, and take them on a walk in New York City, the person would collapse and die. We can make that interesting and bring a person like Shakespeare back to life – he was a man of imagination, perhaps his mind can conceive the magnitude of civilization that we have accomplished, but he won’t survive either. In the same book, Ray says by the end of this century, we won’t have achieved 100 years of technological advancement, but an equivalent of 20,000 years of the same. Imagine that for a second.

Allow me to stop here for now, when one thinks too much, he ends up making circles thinking that he is making anew point when in fact he is just repeating himself, quite poorly in fact. Look at it the way you want to, that is free thinking right there. Enjoy it when you still can.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Rhetoric of Politics

 Let's attempt to dissect some politics, shall we? I am one of those people who pride themselves on 'not engaging in politics.' Some say that to appear sophisticated, out of the ordinary, because 'politics is a game enjoyed by retards.' I am not one of those. I just don't see the appeal. But. Hailing from a country like Kenya, politics is shoved down your throat, and you either swallow it in all its ugliness or puke it. Let's pretend to swallow it for a moment. Plato, the man who summoned philosophy and beauty from Mt. Olympus and poetry from down below, used them to make a concoction that has been keeping us intellectually drunk for more than two millennia, had a lot to say about politics. And he did all that, to borrow from Will Durant's phrase, in lordly abandon.  First off, he claims that in order to understand politics, we have to be acquainted with the nature of men, for it is the people who are the key pieces in the chess that is politics.  If we ...

Tell Me about Yourself

 Tell me about yourself. Well, my good friend, I have never really known how to answer that query—though I have used it on many occasions myself in trying to get a damsel to be softer towards me. Never really worked though. Now that I am on the receiving end of that statement, I feel like I’m in front of a panel of interviewers, and I don’t know where to start. It is always my intention, when I coin that phrase to a damsel, to leave it as open as possible so that the other person is free to talk about any aspect of themselves that they like—because there are some parts of ourselves that we would prefer remain buried and unknown. I’ll take it that way in this case as well: just blabber on and on about everything about myself that you might like to hear. Let’s start then, shall we? I am a man. A young man, though I’m not sure how long I can use that label. Minutes to me feel like days, staggering by slowly, and years go by like hours. Yes, that is a line from Skyscraper Stan’s so...

Why We Help Others

 Here we are again, dissecting an issue that's the core of most religions as we know them. Why do we help others? Should we? Do we have to?  What happens if we can help them but decide not to? The shortest answer, according to religion, is that God will punish us if we don't. But that's taking the easy way out; human nature is not that simple. Let's start by defining some terms. Morality. Plato says it is 'the effective harmony of the whole.'  Jesus said it is 'showing kindness to the weak.' Nietzsche says it is 'the bravery of the strong.' Elusive, I know. According to The Cambridge Dictionary, it is 'a set of personal or social standards for good or bad behavior and character.' Let's roll with that for now. A set of standards, personal or social, for good or bad behavior and character. By saying social or personal, that doesn't give our definition the exclusivity that we need, because there are things I would consider to be mora...