Tags

, , , , , , , , ,

***

From watching the Quest Means Business Show on CNN today –

I didn’t see the name of the guy talking about the “artificial intelligence” search engine, nor do I want to know except in order to avoid it. He admits that there is purely data mining on personal preferences and previous searches to define what search results will be made available. (pick any three cuss words and insert here to describe the creepy thinking that man was propagating.)

Now, it is annoying enough when ads are structured to be about “Marietta” when I’m on a site about Great Britain or science or engineering. If I wanted to know what was available on yahoo – I’d be using it which I don’t and if I wanted to search for something in Marietta – I’d have put that into the durn search window, which I didn’t or look it up in a phone book. But, invariably any page will tell me an ad for Marietta and the address will be yahoo.com. I hate them.

A search engine that can answer the question, “What do I need to do tomorrow?” indicates a complete lack of ethics and a thinly veiled attempt to cull and sell very personal search preferences in a cumulative manner. But, today I may need to know what goes into a chemical reaction with chlorine and cesium 137 (whatever came from the atomic atoll fallout), to any positive end-product. Last week, I may have wanted to know about the 7.1 earthquake in Honduras or wherever it was in Central America. Don’t tell me that some search engine should take away the natural search results when I put the terms, “rapid prototyping” in the window tomorrow because it is trying to figure out what the question could be in consideration of the others that came before it.

Why is it that when something works – people like this search engine idiot on the Quest show today can’t just leave that alone and go solve something that doesn’t work at all?

– cricket diane

email to quest means business, on 06-02-09

***

So, I think it was yesterday that the BBC was kind enough to broadcast a show about how several very wealthy people specifically spent their money in a short period of time, how much it was for each of them, how they spent it and sort of why. It seems that there is a good reason why those who have the means to challenge really difficult problems aren’t doing it.

They are too busy buying sweaters that say “I’m a cutie” for their dogs, flying three continents away to have lunch, buying entire towns in Eastern Europe and having body modifications made to be more beautiful, more handsome, more buff, more sexy and more desirable than God actually made anyone.

No wonder little else is getting done out of those who have the money to do something productive – it isn’t even on the menu except as a tax haven or a way to mingle with others in the same class. I’m just teasing. I know there are many philanthropies which survive because of the gifts and bounty from both rich and poor, middle class and upper crust.

And, as self-absorbed as those shown on the BBC show and egocentric to an extreme at times, it is evident that no one considers anything they do as crazy. But, maybe they should.

There is likely no one who can explain to the rich playboy in their story that there is any other valid use or place for women than in his bed to stroke his fantasies into a life experience. That is probably useless information to him anyway and who would want a decent life partner of any sex stuck with him or anyone like him, regardless of how much money he makes. It isn’t just that money doesn’t buy real love nor a joyous life, it is that money doesn’t fix damn well everything either.

What is most nauseating about this show and about those who think and act like the people which the BBC producers were highlighting, is that – one, they genuinely seem to not know any better. And two, I think of the networks of people they know and resources that are accessible to them which are used for absolutely no productive purpose whatsoever – not to solve problems, not to produce anything to make the world a better place, not to make a contribution that is valuable which they are uniquely suited to offer or specifically positioned to support bringing to the world.

And three, that each of these people are given status and respect for what they say or think simply because they have money and resources that are unavailable to most people. What’s the use – they don’t think its important, then it must not be important. But, what if they really do only believe in buying what others cannot buy to flaunt their self-importance and there really is nothing else on the menu?

There are a lot of experts on tele news including CEO’s and those people described on the BBC show mentioned above that I wouldn’t trust to get me from my house to the Kroger without getting us lost – and Kroger is only a one mile walk from where I live. There aren’t but maybe one or two that I’ve seen on any of these shows, news analysts and experts, rich people, corporate executives, stock brokers, hedge fund managers and especially politicians from Washington’s Congressional delegations and our State governments that I would follow anywhere – not even from this side of the street to the other.

And, precisely because they’d get us killed or maimed or hurt or just plain lost by doing something that would only make sense in their rarefied little rich people worlds, like checking their reflection in a mirror while walking us across four lanes of traffic on foot. Or hiring somebody to carry us from here to the other side of the street who has to use a GPS navigator to find how to get there from here.

They’d likely take us through Tennessee to get from here to the other side of the street where I live by using the route on the GPS to figure it out. That comes from hiring somebody who gets paid to do something that they could’ve done themselves. It leaves the situation open to nonconstructive manipulated and opportunistic uses for undue gain by the person who being thus employed realizes the absolute stupidity of it.

The head jackass at the Bank of America makes more money that my mind can consider but who would trust that man to get them from here to Kroger, either in a car or on foot? I wouldn’t – I wouldn’t trust him to buy a list of groceries at that store without screwing it up or having to get somebody else to do it for him and he might blow a microwave to hell, if he figured out what the buttons could do besides warm coffee, which he would never have the occasion to do anyway.

How is it that anything he has uttered or said that he thinks about something during the last twenty years has been given the respect and unquestioned faith as if it has come straight from someone who would have to know and have it right? How could he possibly know when he and others like him haven’t been living with their feet touching the pavement or the rain touching their heads, don’t buy their own groceries, can’t cook a can of beans safely enough to serve anybody, don’t mow their own grass or know how to walk around a block without getting lost, hurt, robbed or killed?

– cricketdiane

Advertisements