yuval noah harari

yuval noah harari

intro’d to Yuval in his tedglobal london 2015 – what explains the rise of humans

on the individual level.. same as chimp..

the real difference is on the collective level…

(we) can cooperate both flexibly and in large numbers…

ie: bees can’t renegotiate the way they work.. and chimps can’t coop in large groups.. need to know each other

good and bad coop, ie: prisons, concentration camps, …

what enables us to coop in such a way: imagination...

all power to the imagination

we can coop flexibly.. with countless numbers of strangers.. because we can create and believe fictional stories.. and as long as everyone believes..

humans use language to describe reality but also to create fictional reality

human rights are just a story we have invented… take a human.. cut him open.. you find organs… but you want find any rights.. the only place you find rights is in the stories we have invented and spread around… same true of political field…ie: states, nations… not an objective reality… a mountain is an objective reality.. ; cooperations – legal fictions; money – has no objective value

money is the most effective story because it is the only story that everybody believes… not everybody believes in rights/nationalism…

ugh.. making up money.. measuring transactions/us.. is killing us

we live in a dual reality.. objective and imaginative

today… the most powerful forces in the world are these fictional entities … based on these fictional stories… entities that exist only in our own imagination

– – –

on keeping happy with drugs and computer games

rat park ness


find/follow Yuval:

link twitter


wikipedia small

Yuval Noah Harari (born 24 February 1976) is an Israeli historian and the author of the international bestsellerSapiens: A Brief History of Humankind. He is a Professor at the Department of History of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.


on the future.. and imagination

a nother way

revolution in reverse..



from wikipedia:

Harari’s main argument is that Sapiens came to dominate the world because it is the only animal that can cooperate flexibly in large numbers. He argues that prehistoric Sapiens were a key cause of the extinction of other human species such as the Neanderthals, along with numerous other megafauna. He further argues that the *ability of Sapiens to cooperate in large numbers arises from its unique capacity to believe in things existing purely in the imagination, such as gods, nations, money and human rights.

and/or.. belief in gods/nations/money/rights.. has helped us to lose our ability to cooperate.. to lose our interconnectedness..

Harari claims that all large-scale human cooperation systems – including religions, political structures, trade networks and legal institutions – owe their emergence to Sapiens’s distinctive cognitive capacity for fiction. Accordingly, Harari reads money as a system of mutual trust and sees political and economic systems as more or less identical with religions.

money as a system of mutual trust..? rather a system of mutual/privileged measuring..which is quite the opposite of trust.. blows trust up.. no? ie: 10 day care ness.. et al

He concludes by considering how modern technology may soon end the species as we know it, as it ushers in genetic engineering, immortality and non-organic life. Humans have, in Harari’s chosen metaphor, become gods: they can create species.

? or so we think..

from book:

p 27

sociological research has shown that the max ‘natural’ size of a group bonded by gossip is about 150 individuals.. most people can neither intimately know, not gossip effectively about, more than 150 human beings.. there is no need for formal ranks/titles/ law books to keep order… but once threshold of 150 ic crossed.. thing scan no longer work that way.. you cannot run a division w thousands of soldiers the same way you run a platoon.. successful family businesses usually face a crises when grow larger..

so.. we’re doing history of humans.. and comparing our capabilities to how we act in war and business..

i think we can have a way of living for over 7 bn.. if we aren’t using these man made measures..

how did homo sapiens manage to cross this critical threshold, eventually funding cities comprising tens of thousands of inhabitants and empires ruling hundreds of millions.? the secret was probably the appearance of fiction. large numbers of strangers can *coop successfully by believing in common myths..

so.. is coop successfully meaning …ie: being able to fight a war.. raise profit..

so..really saying.. in order to play a fake game of life.. have to believe a fake story..

i keep hearing this book is about the need to tell stories..  i don’t know if this type is behooving humanity


telling effectie stories is not easy. the difficulty lies not in telling the story, but in convincing everyone else to believe it

dang.. wrong kind of story.. that’s where your happy went.. ie: life as a sales pitch..

much of history revolves around the question: how does one convince millions of people to believe particular stories about gods, or nations, or limited liability companies… yet when it succeeds it gives sapiens immense power.. because it enables millions of strangers to coop and work towards common goals..

oy.. work et al..


the hunter gatherer way of life (adam and eve) differ significantly from region to region and from season to season, but on the whole foragers seem to have enjoyed a more comfortable and rewarding lifestyle than most of the peasants, shepherds, labourers and office clerks who followed in their footsteps.

affluence w/o abundance


for 2.5 mn yrs humans fed hunting and gathering.. then.. histories biggest fraud – 10 000 yrs ago – agriculture revolution


scholars once proclaimed agri rev was great leap forward for humanity.. they told a tale of progress fuelled by human brain power..


that tale is a fantasy.. no evidence that people became more intelligent w time..  foragers knew the secrets of nature long before agri rev, since their survival depended on intimate knowledge of animals they hunted and plants they gathered..  rather than heralding a new era of easy living, the agri rev left farmers w lives generally more difficult and less satisfying than those of foragers..


who was responsible (for fraud) neither kinds/priests/merchants. the culprits were a handful of plant species, including wheat, rice and potatoes. these plants domesticated homo sapiens rather than vice versa



wheat did not give better diet.. economic security.. security against violence..


the currency of evolution is neether hunger nor pain, bu  rather copies of dna helixes..  just as econ success of co is measured only by number of dollars in bank not by happiness of its employees, so evolutionary success of a species is measured by number of copies of its dna..if no more copies remain.. species is extinct..  just as co w/o money is bankrupt..

copies are what’s killing us.. copies for the myths we swim in

geno pheno gap.. making us not us 

agri rev was a luxury trap

wrong kind of luxury..


why didn’t humans abandon farming when the plan backfired..? partly because it took generations for the small changes to accumulate and transform society and, by then, nobody remembered that they had ever lived differently

science of people ness

pursuit of an easier life resulted in much hardship.. happens to us today.. college grads.. demanding jobs.. vowing will work hard to earn money that will enable them to retire.. but .. have large mortgages.. et al.. what are they supposed to do .. go back  to digging up roots.. no, they double their efforts and keep slaving away..

one of history’s few iron laws is that luxuries tend to become necessities and to spawn new obligations..

again.. wrong kind of luxury


the story of the luxury trap carries w it an important lesson. humanity’s search for an easier life released immense forces of change tha transformed the world in ways nobody envisioned or wanted.. ..



above scenario explains the agri rev as miscalculation. it’s very plausible. history is full of far more idiotic miscalculations. bu there’s another possibility. maybe it wasn’t the search for an easier life .. maybe sapiens had other aspirations.. and were consciously willing to make their lives harder in order to achieve them..


this discrepancy between evolutionary success and individual suffering is perhaps the most important lesson we can draw from the agri rev.. when we study narrative of plants such as wheat and maize, maybe the purely evolutionary perspective *makes sense. yet in case of animals.. and sapiens.. each w complex world of sensation and emotions, we have to consider how evolutionary success translated into individual experience..

schooling the world.. stripping land .. making it produce one thing rather than diverse.. doesn’t make sense.. makes money.. but not sense..


the stress of farming had far reaching consequences.. was foundation of large scale political and social systems.. these forfeited food surpluses fuelled politics, wars, art and philosophy.. fuelled peasants.. more and more people to cram together in to large villages.. but then food surpluses and transportation were not enough.. so .. ie: affluent lawyers..


the problem at the root.. is that humans evolved for millions of years in small bands of a few dozen individuals. the handful of millennia separating the agri rev from thd  appearance of cities, kingdoms empires was not enough time to allow an instinct for mass coop to evolve..

? thinking.. holmgren indigenous law.. and eagle and condor legend.. and that now we have means to facil 7 bn.. being one together and being one in solitude.. all the inbetween ..

via 2 convos

ie: hlb via 2 convos that io dance.. as the day..[aka: not part\ial.. for (blank)’s sake…]..  a nother way


mythology, the ancient sociolgists would have thought, could not possible enable millions of strangers to coop on a daily basis.

but that turned out to be wrong. myths, it transpired, are stronger than anyone could have imagined.. when the agri rev opened opps for the create of crowded cities.. people invented stories about great gods, motherlands and joint stock co’s to provide the needed social links.. while human evolution was crawling at its usual snail’s pace, the human imagination was building astounding networks of mass oop, unlike any other ever seen on earth..

? if talking econ.. deadly networks..

taxes, corp’s.. B and bs..


code of hierarchy even w/in family..


like hammurabi’s code, the american founding document promises that if humans act according to its sacred principles, millions of them would be able to coop effectively.. living safely and peacefully in a just and prosperous society..declaration of independence..


just as people not ‘created’.. certainly not evolve to be ‘equal’..  equally, there are no such things as rights in biology.. there are only organs, abilities and characteristics.. birds fly not because thy have a right to fly but because they have wings..

equity.. everyone getting a go everyday..


we believe in a particular order not because it is objectively true, but because believing in it enables us to coop effectively and forge a better society.. imagined orders are not evil conspiracies or useless mirages..  rather, they are the only way large numbers of humans can coop effectively..

disagree.. hugely disagree.. and this seems to be big theme as to how we get to betterness…


an imagined order cannot be sustained by violence alone. it requires some true believers as well… ..impossible to org an army solely by coercion..  some of the commanders.. must truly believe in something..


how do you cause people to believe in an imagined order such as christianity, democracy or capitalism? first, you never admit that the order is imagined.. you always insist that the order sustaining society is an objective reality created by the great gods or by the laws of nature.


you also educate people throughly.. from the moment they are born, you constantly remind them of the principles of the imagined  order.. which are incorporated into anything and everything.. ie: fairy tales, dramas, paintings, songs,, propaganda, architecture, recipes, fashions..


most people do not wish to accept that the order governing their lives is imaginary, bu tin fact every person is born into a pre existing imagined order, and his/her desires are shaped from birth by its dominant myths. our personal desires thereby become the imagined order’s most important defences

voluntary compliance et al

friends give advice often tell each other ‘follow your heart’ but the heart is a double agent that usually takes its instructions from the dominant myths of the day and the very recommendation to ‘follow your heart’ was implanted in our minds by a combination of nineteenth century romantic myths and 10th cent consumerist myths.. ie: coke.. do what feels good..


even what people take to be their most personal desires are usually programmed by the imagined order..ie: let’s consider the popular desire to take a holiday abroad.. there’s nothing natural or obvious about this.. people today spend a great deal of money on holidays abroad because they are true believers in the myths of romantic consumerism..

not the same as following your heart.. diff.. begs we detox.


the dollar, human rights and the us of america exist in the shared imagination of billions and no single individual can threaten their existence.

these imagine orders are inter subjective, so in order to change the we must simultaneously change the consciousness of billions of people, which is not easy.. a change of such magnitude can be accomplished only with the help of a complex organisation such as a political party an ideological movement or a religious cult..

however to establish such complex org’s it’s necessary to convince many strangers to coop w one another.. and this will happen only if these strangers believe in some shared myths.. it follows that in order to change an existing imagined order, we must frist believe in an alt imagined order

or.. let’s try just believing in ourselves.. in listening to our hearts.. everyday.. true.. this change begs 7 bn leap.. the sync matters.. but today we can facil that chaos..

there is no way out of the imagined order..

there wasn’t.. perhaps.. but today we can..


large socieites foun din some other species such as ants and bees are stable and reislient becaseu most of the info needed to sustain them is encoded in the genome. .. its dna programmes teh necessary behaviors forwhaver role it wil fulfil in life.. hives can be very comlex social sgructure containignmny diff kindns of workers.. such as harvesters, nurses and cleaners bu t so far researchers ahve failed to locate lawyer bees. bees don’t need lawyers becaseu there is no danger that tehy migh forget or violate the hive constitution. the queen does not cheat the cleaner bees of their food, andd they never go on strke demanding higher wages

not about humans being that different.. more about humans not listening deep enough like bees and ants do..

the fact that bees and ants don’t have lawyers..bankers.. B.. we should listen to that..

it’s not that we need them and ants/bees don’t.. it’s that they are listening to the rhythm.. and we aren’t.. we never have.. so we don’t think it’s possible..for us to have that sync.. rhythm.. not that it can’t happen for us.. it’s that we don’t trust us..

but humans do such things all the time (violate..cheat.. demand wages).. because the sapiens social order is imagined, humans cannot preserve the critical info for running it simply by making copies of their dna and passing these on to the progeny.

they don’t need to.. the rhythm is already in us.. we just have to quit drowning it out

a conscious effort has to be made to sustain laws/customs, procedures/manners.. otherwise the social order would quickly collapse

it already has collapsed.. the innate order has been buried.. so this fake order.. which you are calling imaginary order .. which is kind of bad.. because it’s more coercive/propaganda ish.. than imaginary.. (imagination will drive us beyond our innate rhythm.. everyday).. and since it’s collapsed.. we’re using this man made violence to keep us inline (laws.. customs.. et al)

ie: when hammurabi passed his dna to his offspring, it did not encode his ruling that a superior man who killed a commoner woman must pay thirty silver shekels.. hammurabi deliberately had to instruct his sons in the laws of his empire, and his sons and grandsons had to do the same

huge red sign.. that that is not what we should be doing.. if we have to teach it.. (not to mention how ridiculous this ie of what is being passed).. pretty good change it’s not us..

empires generate huge amts of info. beyond laws, empires ahve to keep accounts of transactions and taxed, inventories aof miliatary supplies and merchant vessels.. and

? says who..?

for millions of years people stored info in a single place – their brains. unfortuenately the human brain is not a good storage device for empire sized databases for three main reasons

there’s a reason we can’t store that .. storing empire databases is not us

1\ capacity is limited 2\ humans die 3\ brain adapted to store only particular types of info..

all the stuff listed.. math.. blah blah.. measure..judge .. b/B


unfortunately, complex human societies seem to require imagined hierarchies and unjust discrimination

not true..  coerced/manufactured societies have them.. but they don’t work.. and it certainly isn’t a requirement for humanity to live out its interconnectedness.. in fact.. we can’t if we keep on w the hierarchy ness..

hierarchies serve an important function. they enable complete strangers to know how to treat one another w/o wasting the time and energy needed to become personally acquainted..

?.. what?.. you mean how to play the game.. how to treat one another is already in us.. covered up in a lot of us.. most of us.. but already there..


in g b shaw’s pygmalion, henry higgins doesn’t need to establish an intimate acquaintance w eliza doolittle in order to understand how he should relate to her..

shaw communication law..

not all people get people get the same chance to cultivate and refine their abilities. whether or not they have such an opp will usually depend on their place w/in their society’s imagined hierarchy

yeah.. that’s exactly what we have the means to change now.. everyone.. every one.. getting a go everyday.. equity


for complex commercial system to function, some kind of money is indispensable..

ok.. but commercialism is killer to humanity..so money is not indispensable..  it’s the poison.. that measuring ness.. of transactions/us.. killer


money is thus a universal medium of exchange that enables people to convert almost everything into almost anything else..

perhaps.. but we don’t need it for relationship.. and affluence.. and.. it messes with us more than it aids ..exchange ness is killer

because money can convert, store, and transport wealth easily and cheaply, it made a *vital contribution to the appearance of complex commercial networks and dynamic markets..

contributing to the death of us


even if we wanted to finance pure science unaffected by political, economic or religious interests, it would probably be impossible.. our resources are limited after all.. ask a congressman to allocate an additional million to nsf for basic research.. to channel limited resources we must answer questions such as what is more important..


alive/awake/free people/artists.. that’s what’s most important..

we have the means for 7 bn scientists.. everyday.. not impossible.. just blocked..


money has been essential both for building empires and for promoting science. but is money the ultimate goal of thee undertakings, or perhaps just a dangerous necessity..

neither..  we don’t need money.. empires.. we don’t need to promote science.. if we’re all free..


most people don’t appreciate just how peaceful an era we live in. none of us was alive a thousand years ago, so we easily forget how much more violent the world used to be.. and as wars become more rare they attract more attention. many more people think about the wards raging today in afghanistan and iraq than about the peace in which most brazilians and indians live..


what about indian farmer suicides.. what about..

war in 2000 killed 830 000.. suicide 815 000  and rising..

how is this not violence..?  how is this peaceful?

holy cow


the decline of violence is due largely to the rise of the state..

incarceration.. kids on drugs prescribed by parent/drs.. ugh..

what about the refugee situation..?


today humankind has broken the law of the jungle.there is at last real peace, an not just absence of war..


book published 2015

holy cow


the last 500 yrs have witnessed a breathtaking series of revolutions. the earth has been united into a single ecological and historical sphere. the econ has grown exponentially, and humankind today enjoys the kind of wealth that used to be the stuff of fairy tales..

sorry .. but that’s crap..

maybe a handful of people have what you say.. but they are lonely too.. it has to be all of us..

ie: evicted; the divide; dirty warsBanaz Mahmod; incarcerationKalief Browder ; refugees;… and on and on..

science and the industrial rev have given humankind superhuman powers and practially limitless energy

is that why ie: puerto rico is still w/o power..? and 33 000 some names were just released of those that have died escaping via ocean..

the social order has been completely transformed, as have politics, daily life and human psychology..

really..? changed to more being diagnosed as bi polar.. more as in more money spent on meds..?

ie: outside mental health et al

but are we happier..


so far historians have avoided raising thee questions.. not to mention answering them.. they have researched.. politics, society, econ, gender, disease, sexuality, food, clothing.. yet they have seldom stopped to ask how these influence human happiness.. since humans generally use their capabilities to alleviate miseries and fulfil aspirations ti follows that we must be happier than our medieval ancestors and they must have been happier than stone age hunter gatherers..

but his progressive account is unconvincing..

affluence w/o abundance et al


this romantic insistence on seeing a dark shadow behind each invention is a dogmatic as the belief in the inevitability of progress. perhaps we are out of touch w our inner hunter gatherer, but it’s not all bad. ie: over last two centuries modern medicine has decrease child mortality from 33% to less than 5%. can anyone doubt that this made a huge contribution to the happiness not only of those children who would otherwise have died, but also of their families and friends..

1\ we’ve made other things much worse.. zoom out.. the balance is staggering.. 2\ if we were free.. we’d have more improvements that just child mortality rate


the first step is to define what is to be measured..

the first step is to stop measuring..

krishnamurti free will law


there is only one historical development that has real significance. today, when we finally realise that the keys to happiness are in the hands of our biochemical system, we can stop wasting our time on politics and social reforms, putsches and ideologies and focus instead on the only thing that can make us truly happy: manipulating our biochemistry. if we invest billions in understanding our brain chemistry and developing appropriate treatments, we can make people far happier than ever before, w/o any need of revolutions. prozac for ie does not change regimes, but by raising serotonin levels it lifts people out of their depression.

dang man.. read outside mental health.. at least..


meaning of life.. huxley’s disconcerting world is based on the biological assumption that happiness equals pleasure. to be happy is no more and no less than experiencing pleasant bodily sensations.. since our biochem limits the volume and duration of these sensations the only way to make people experience  high level of happiness over an extended period of time is to manipulate their biochem system.

but that defn of happiness is contested by some scholars.. kahneman…


find meaning to life.. increase human knowledge.. fights to defend homeland.. build new co’s

so perhaps happiness is sync ing one’s personal delusions of meaning w the prevailing collective delusions..  does happiness really depend on self delusion..?


happiness based on feeling pleasant sensations.. then re engineer biochem.. if asked on feeling meaningful.. then delude selves.. is there a their alt..?.. to know truth about self..


the only thing we can try to do is to influence the direction scientists are taking. but since we might soon be able to engineer our desires too, the real question facing us is not ‘what do we want to become’ but ‘what do we want to want’ those who are not spooked by this question probably haven’t given it enough thought.


is there anything more dangerous than dissatisfied and irresponsible gods who don’t know what they want..


Scott Santens (@scottsantens) tweeted at 3:01 AM – 25 Nov 2017 :

“There will always be jobs if people are prepared to work for sufficiently low wages. But the big question is whether people are going to be better off as a result of automation in the future. Some will. Some won’t.” https://t.co/xytBkJ8bRO #basicincome https://t.co/u6lJ111eAH (http://twitter.com/scottsantens/status/934361278763724801?s=17)

In his bestselling book Homo Deus, the Israeli historian Yuval Noah Harari makes a simple point about why the future of work may differ drastically from its past. Since the Industrial Revolution, he writes, “As old professions became obsolete, new professions evolved, and there was always something humans could do better than machines.” People in developed countries went from “fields and flocks” to industrial jobs, and then into service industries. “Yet this is not a law of nature,” he points out, “and nothing guarantees it will continue to be like that in the future.” ..t.. With many jobs in service industries on the verge of being automated away, what new work will there be for the millions of people who currently do them?

working for pay..not a law of nature

There are two broad schools of thought about what is happening to paid employment in the 21st century…

1\ technology ..does away with some jobs, it usually creates others.

2\ The other view is more downbeat, and points to the possible dawn of what Harari describes as “the useless class”: large numbers of people who will have no economic value. In this view of things, we need to accept that if paid employment will soon be in much shorter supply, we have to come up with radical answers – starting with the introduction of a universal basic income..t

let’s go root radical – ie: money less.. for all of us

ie: hlb via 2 convos that io dance.. as the day..[aka: not part\ial.. for (blank)’s sake…]..  a nother way

we’re all going to have many careers and jobs over our long working lives now. We’re going to be employed and self-employed – that distinction’s going to go, I think. But the important thing is to have really good basic education, plus some cultural traits like resilience, curiosity and adaptability… and at various points, we’re all going to have to retrain.” ..t .. – Aviva’s chief digital officer is Andrew Brem @abrem

cure ios city.. no train .. detox


march 14 2018

What’s Next for Humanity: Automation, New Morality and a ‘Global Useless Class’


“Liberal democracy trusts in the feelings of human beings, and that worked as long as nobody could understand your feelings better than yourself — or your mother,” he said. “But if there is an algorithm that understands you better than your mother ..t..and you don’t even understand that this is happening, then liberal democracy will become an emotional puppet show,” he added. “What happens if your heart is a foreign agent, a double agent serving somebody else, who knows how to press your emotional buttons, who knows how to make you angry, how to make you bold, how to make you joyful? This is the kind of threat we’re beginning to see emerging today, for example in elections and referendum.”

deeper problem is that most of us are not ourselves..  algo is simply 1\ labeling you w inhumane metrics .. 2\ from observations of a manufactured you.. no comparison to 1\ your being ness  2\ a mother’s knowing ness

black science of people/whales

In the 20th century, discrimination was used against entire groups based on various biases. It was fixable, however, because *those biases were not true and victims could join together and take political action. But in the coming years and decades, Mr. Harari said, “we will face individual discrimination, and it might actually be based on a good assessment on who you are.”

*biases in algos not true.. so fixable.. if we’re wise enough to not miss the opp

as it could be

If algorithms employed by a company look up your Facebook profile or DNA, trawl through school and professional records, *they could figure out pretty accurately who you are..t.. “You will not be able to do anything about this discrimination first of all because it’s just you,” Mr. Harari said. “

*so not true.. metrics don’t even come close


Ira Socol (@irasocol) tweeted at 5:51 AM – 5 Aug 2018 :
Important Read: Yuval Noah Harari: ‘The idea of free information is extremely dangerous’
https://t.co/rhatD0tt5F (http://twitter.com/irasocol/status/1026073143381843968?s=17)

His new book, 21 Lessons for the 21st Century, is an exploration of the difficulties that confront us at the present.

We must invest more resources in the psychological resilience of people.


from ben

Nice article by Yuval Noah Harari on how AI exacerbates inequality — he gets some major stuff right, but over-idealizes “liberal democracy”.Actually AI is merely amplifying imperialistic and inegalitarian dynamics intrinsic to large-scale capitalism..https://t.co/cc6hFcgqyF

Original Tweet: https://twitter.com/bengoertzel/status/1036258828596039680

In the past, machines competed with humans mainly in manual skills. Now they are beginning to compete with us in cognitive skills. And we don’t know of any third kind of skill—beyond the manual and the cognitive—in which humans will always have an edget

cure ios city

1 yr to be 5 et al

What’s more, AI enjoys uniquely nonhuman abilities, which makes the difference between AI and a human worker one of kind rather than merely of degree. Two particularly important nonhuman abilities that AI possesses are connectivity and updatability..t

indeed.. let’s focus on that.. go deeper than traffic, disease, et al ie: augmenting human interconnectedness

mufleh humanity lawwe have seen advances in every aspect of our lives except our humanity – Luma Mufleh

People will need to retrain and reinvent themselves not just once, but many times..t

like everyday.. bravery to change mind

Just as in the 20th century governments established massive education systems for young people, in the 21st century they will need to establish massive reeducation systems for adults. But will that be enough? ..t

how about ed (rev of everyday life) for all of us.. via 2 convos that io dance.. as the day..

AI makes it possible to process enormous amounts of information centrally.

ai as in augmenting interconnectedness.. ie: listening to and facilitating 7bn cure ios cities .. every day

 we need to place a much higher priority on understanding how the human mind works—particularly how our own wisdom and compassion can be cultivated..t

perhaps rather.. more a focus on listening-to/faciling us than understanding us

ie: as it could be

In the 21st century, data will eclipse both land and machinery as the most important asset, so politics will be a struggle to control data’s flow..the race to accumulate data is already on..t

matters little if data is illegit.. ie: from whales in sea world

time to try self-talk as data

So we had better call upon our scientists, our philosophers, our lawyers, and even our poets to turn their attention to this big question: How do you regulate the ownership of data?..t

by making ownership irrelevant..

via ie: gershenfeld something else law.. tech as it could be

the most important contribution you can make is to find ways to prevent too much data from being concentrated in too few hands, and also find ways to keep distributed data processing more efficient than centralized data processing. These will not be easy tasks. But achieving them may be the best safeguard of democracy.

we could do that by getting back to meadows undisturbed ecosystem.. but it would be a best safeguard for humanity rather than democracy (whatever that is)


Yuval Noah Harari (@harari_yuval) tweeted at 4:36 AM – 5 Sep 2018 :
Last night’s @nytimes-hosted conversation between @bariweiss and me is now available online. To watch the full talk, visit: https://t.co/FSES01kEhH
#21_Lessons https://t.co/Esv49NNGGD (http://twitter.com/harari_yuval/status/1037288350728814593?s=17)

71 min interview/convo

4 min – the key is to have global coop.. because whatever you do in order to be effective it has to be done on the global level.. t.. no nation.. no matter how powerful can do it themselves..

global do over via augmenting interconnectedness

6 min  – it’s not enough to have an agreement.. you need to have real trust..  on a global level.. otherwise we have very little chance


7 min – i don’t know how.. (to have global trust – ie w china).. but if we don’t solve this problem then we’re in a very bad situation

8 min – whoever wins the ai arms race.. humanity will lose

perhaps we see ai as augmenting interconnectedness

i don’t know how to gain trust w ie: us and china.. i think what’ you’re doing now is not working.. but this is a key issue for humanity.. far beyond geopolitics.. interests of single nation.. this is the kind of tech that will reshape future of life itself..

11 min – the three big problems human today (nuclear war, climate change, tech disruption) .. all can only be solved by a global coop

12 min – nationalism is not eternal.. not even natural..t

nationality: human

tribalism is natural.. long term history of human beings.. we are definitely social.. and being part of a group.. is in our nature.. but chief characteristic in group is that it’s an intimate community.. you know the other people.. the chief characteristic of nations.. appeared only in last 5000 yrs or so.. which is yesterday morning in evolution.. is that you don’t know these people.. i don’t know 99.9% of people in israel..

13 min – it’s really kind of miracle of culture.. not nature.. that you can thru ed/propaganda and thru a lot of cultural manipulation that you can get millions of complete strangers to care about one another.. to feel that they are part of the same community.. this has been very difficult.. and this is something which is not natural to homo sapiens.. it’s not bad.. it’s done a lot of good for humanity.. but it does mean that going beyond the nation is not impossible..

14 min – going from being loyal to 100 people you know to 100 mn people you don’t know.. that’s very difficult

i don’t buy that.. i think it’s just difficult because we keep trying to manufacture it.. w/in a capitalist/market/money driven society to boot.. i think that would be natural.. non thinking.. easy.. if ie: everyone where doing whatever they wanted .. whatever they coudn’t not do.. their art.. (gershenfeld something else law)

to go from 100 mn people you don’t know to 8bn people you don’t know.. that’s far easier..

16 min – the most important problems today are scientific.. and if you don’t bridge the gap between science and politics/public.. then can’t really understand what’s happening in the world

17 min – philosophers have been preparing for this moment for 1000s of yrs..  w almost zero impact on the rest of humanity.. because it was most of the time irrelevant.. but now these problems are suddenly becoming practical problems of engineering and of politics.. so this is the time .. for philosophers and the historians and the people in the humanities to go out there and talk about these issues.. it is suddenly very very urgent..

18 min – what you are seeing is engineers taking over.. perhaps philosophers just too patient.. engineers are impatient.. you need to decide ethical/philosophical questions now

19 min – if you want to study something really practical in the 21st cent..  philosophy is a good bet.. more than ever before

22 min – stories are tools.. we don’t think in facts/stats/equations.. so if want to org people together.. need to tell people a story they can grasp and id with.. the story doesn’t need to be true.. it needs to be effective..

let’s try a nother way book

is your aim truth.. or social cohesion.. all the successful  reach the conclusion that social harmony is much more important than truth..

not binary

23 min – on judging stories i would say.. what is the impact on suffering in the world.. a good story is a story that reduces suffering in the world

these things.. as far as our scientific understanding goes are just myth.. human rights is just a story we tell ourselves.. they are not a biological reality.. not written in our dna.. not part of nature


24 min – problem when we can’t tell diff between story and reality

a story needs to adapt (in ref to all men are created equal w inalienable rights) and be compatible w present day realities.. and the realities change.. the ecological/economic realities change.. in many cases because of tech changes

is econ reality – as i’m guessing you’re refer ing it

25 min – (asked to show how tech creates story of life, liberty and pursuit of happiness) so.. take the idea of liberty and free will.. that i make my own decisions freely and this is the highest authority in the world.. in a world where nobody has tech to hack human beings..  to predict choices and manipulate desires.. this story was excellent and brought a lot of benefit.. but once you have tech to hack humans.. to decipher and eliminate their desires.. a blind faith in free will becomes more and more dangerous.. because the easiest people to manipulate are the people who believe that all their decisions reflect some mysterious free will

krish free will law

26 min – so.. why should we care about the cambridge analytica scandal.. so what .. hacked by russians.. so what.. all human choices reflect their free will .. we have this shield.. that protects us from all these kinds of manipulation.. no body can manipulate me.. maybe others… but not me.. and these are the easiest people to manipulate

27 min – to develop a healthy skepticism about this idea.. that my desires reflect my free will .. it was always good to be a bit skeptical about your desires.. but it’s extremely important to be skeptical today..

in order to hack human beings: 1\ good understanding of human bio esp brain  2\ need a lot of good computing power.. never had this before

28 min – (question on impact of telling people they don’t have free will).. it will demand a lot of changes in many fields.. the most obvious is the legal field.. the idea that we punish people for making bad choices..  that should be out

agree..  alternative: your own song and gershenfeld something else law

ie: bill cosby.. we don’t punish him for bad choices.. we should send him to jail for several other things.. first of all .. if you have the kind of brain that makes these decisions.. then society should be 1\ protected from you.. it’s not a punishment for free choices.. but you need to protect people.. and secondly 2\ deterrence.. the brain when it makes its decisions takes into account what society does and thirdly and most importantly.. 3\ therapy.. if you have the kind of brain that makes these decision that harm other people and that harm you.. we should try and help/cure you

29 min – interviewer (@bariweiss): this sounds like a very slippery slope to eugenics to me.. the idea that we should protect people from people w bad brains.. rather than judging them on their actions

yes.. that’s one of the dangers.. but this danger won’t go away just because we say.. oh.. we believe in free will.. so we don’t care about it.. the more data we amass about individuals.. and the better we understand what’s really happening inside the brain.. the temptation to go in those dangerous directions is going to get bigger and bigger

so .. begs we focus more on getting back to an undisturbed ecosystem ..where everyone is doing whatever they want (gershenfeld something else law.).. and trusting and facil ing that  ie: augmenting interconnectedness

30 min – b: who is telling the most compelling stories right now

good question.. compelling in sense of …. convincing people..  compelling story and good story are totally two diff things.. what we see now is a resurgence of a lot of nostalgic fantasies.. of nationalism and religion..  as 20th cent stories are in danger of collapsing.. nostalgia becomes very compelling

31 min – ie: that there are basic truths that will be there forever.. no matter bio/tech changes.. this is now very tempting.. problem is.. doesn’t offer any serious vision for future of human kind and how to deal w these problems..

how do we know that.. ? we’ve never tried that angle.. and what if it is the truth angle..

mufleh humanity lawwe have seen advances in every aspect of our lives except our humanity – Luma Mufleh

ie: a problem deep enough that it gets at something that is the essence of humanity.. something our souls have and will always crave.. ie: 2 needs

32 min – (if had a kid).. would most importantly try to tech what is the diff between fiction and reality.. and most important test is the test of suffering.. if you want to know whether an entity is real.. ask.. can is suffer.. a nation/corp/currency cannot suffer.. no mind/feelings..  all these things are just stories we created.. human-beings/animals are real..

i don’t know which stories will dominate in 2050.. but i do hope people will retain this ability

33 min – we invented the rules of football.. to play .. you need to convince 22 people of this story.. if get caught up.. fighting et al.. that person has lost sense of reality.. easy to see there .. much more difficult in ie: nations, money

35 min – (on question of new book) meditation won’t be the solution.. i meditate for 2 hrs a day.. i know how difficult it is.. i’m under no illusions that 8 bn people are going to start meditating everyday.. and even if they did.. they will take it in all kinds of very problematic directions..

yeah.. not meditating per se.. but self talk could do it.. ie: self-talk as data.. augmenting those convers.. could do it

when you just sit there w your mind.. and you cannot distract yourself w your smart phone et al.. you just sit there and have to observe your mind as it is.. this is so difficult.. and often what you see is so shocking and so painful.. that the temptation to take it in all kinds of various directions is very serious.. and we have a lot of ie’s from history ie: more people were killed/persecuted in the name of the religion of love – christianity – than in the name of any other idea in human history

exactly..  but 8bn people could iterate on that ..3 min a day.. as detox ( 2 convos that io dance.. as the day..).. getting us back to us..

36 min – the religion of love turned out to be the most intolerant religion.. buddhism has its own share of skeletons in the closet.. it’s just.. humans are so difficult

well.. because 1\ it wasn’t really love  and/or  2\ we were basing it on religion (whole ballpark of problems there).. but mostly because 3\ most people are other people.. ie: we’re looking back at history as reality when really it’s like studying whales in sea world..

37 min – things that look wonderful on a small scale.. when you try to scale it up to mn’s bn’s people.. all kinds of like crusades.. tend to crop up

i don’t think we’ve every tried to scale up something truly wonder/love ful.. we’ve just tried to scale up things that seemed to work on small scale (because it was too small to see the pitfalls).. begs we go for ginorm small ness..

i think we miss (what i understand as) vision of ie: jo freeman.. esp because we aren’t getting to the root of the problem first.. if it’s truly the root.. the need to make it scale becomes irrelevant.. it can’t not

b: see and i would say this is an argument against the kind of global coop you’re imagining.. that’s what makes me skeptical/pessimistic of it.. as you’ve argued convincingly in these three books.. humans are barely able to look beyond.. i mean the nation was even a stretch.. (y: yeah.. a very big stretch).. so how are we going to get to the global thing

it’s going to be difficult.. and maybe we’ll fail.. but we have to try.. because i just don’t see.. the fact that this is maybe the only way to solve our major problems doesn’t guarantee we actually succeed.. maybe it’s the only way and we won’t be able to do it

i wish you could hear me.. as it could be..

try this: undisturbed ecosystem  ..in the city.. as the day..

38 min – but i just don’t see how you can solve something like climate change.. bio engineering unless you have substantial global agreement on these issues..

39 min – i think the event that change my life/perception more than anything else was the end of the cold war.. 1\ if it ended in a diff way i wouldn’t be here .. nobody would  2\ achieved thru .. not direct global coop.. but not one nation alone

40 min – who gave up most power in human history.. gorbachev.. this is a big thing

b: what does that tell you.. what are you getting at when you say that.. was it that they knew they were losing

lots of people when they know they are losing.. they don’t give up.. when they gave up.. they were still in control of the most powerful/loyal army.. they had enough nuclear power to end the world.. if you had somebody else besides gorbachev..  you would have had a very diff result..  ie: when hitler saw he was losing.. he didn’t say.. that didn’t work

41 min – b reading from book: ‘revolutionary knowledge makes it to the center.. because the center is built on existing knowledge.. guardians of the old order get to determine who gets to reach the new centers of power.. and they tend to filter out the carriers of disturbing/unconventional ideas‘ – what does this say about you.. how did you manage to smuggle yourself into the center.. to be celebrated by people like bill gates and zuckerberg.. and obama.. and every fancy person.. so .. not as disturbing s they seem.. or you’re just very good at promoting yourself

42 min – first.. i don’t know much about promotion.. all the credit for success goes to my husband/team.. i just know how to write books.. and whether the success means that my ideas are not really that disturbing for the old order.. yes.. that’s a possibility that i think about.. you know when your books fail it’s so easy to say.. they failed because they are so revolutionary.. that people refuse to listen

indeed.. we need to get more disturbing.. in order to disturb us back to our  undisturbed ecosystem

43 min – it’s a very old experience of authors and writers.. once the book is out there.. you have very little or no control about how people will read it and what they will do with it.. the ability of humans to interpret and re interpret texts and stories is absolutely astounding

44 min – i don’t know.. time will tell.. above all what i try to do in my books is to change the conversation.. i see in my books.. and esp the last book.. 21 lessons.. it’s not really a book of lessons in the sense that these are the answers to the world’s problems.. it’s really a book of questions.. the most important questions we should be dealing with.. that we are not paying attention to

ie: 2016 elections nobody was talking about ai and bio tech..

why talking about elections.. and ie: brexit debates..?  let go of all that.. if you want to disrupt enough

ie: how does brexit help us to deal w 1\ nuclear war  2\ climate change 3\ tech disruption.. we need to realize.. no nation can be independent

47 min – (on giving youth advice on what to study) nobody has any idea how job market looks in 2050..  you will need to reinvent self repeatedly.. best investment is to invest in emotional intelligence and mental balance.. most difficult problems will probably psychological..

better yet.. let’s try a nother way.. where 8bn are reinventing themselves everyday.. from the get go.. to the very end..

49 min – problem is .. most difficult thing to teach.. can’t read a book about emotional intelligence.. and most teachers are products of that (old ways) .. so we don’t have a lot of teachers able to teach these things

that’s a very good thing.. i don’t think teaching is the way to go

50 min – questions like.. what do you really want to do w your life.. are going to become far more practical.. than ever before .. *given the immense powers that tech is giving us.. t.. and the ability to change yourself/your-body/brain.. is going to put enormous philosophical challenges in front of the avg person..

so why even have a uni for that.. talking eudaimoniative surplus .. begs we let go of all we’ve fabricated and get back to rev of everyday life

*oh indeed.. ie: tech as it could be

51 min – you need to make the kind of decisions that .. for most of history were thought experiments.. ie: what would you do if you could do this/that.. you couldn’t .. it was impossible.. so why should i care about it.. but.. in a few years maybe you can

my heroes: gorbachev.. i think i owe him my life.. and i think most of humanity does.. his ability to give up power

53 min – q&a

54 min – religion maintains its importance mainly in shaping people’s id.. which is still a very important role

ugh.. ie: marsh label law and id ness

55 min – religion has lost most of its roles.. its mostly divisive.. in most cases when religions were powerful they become the handmaidens of nationalism.. supporting the state

58 min – i take great comfort from .. seeing reality clearly.. so much of the problems you need stories to seek comfort in.. if you can go beyond these stories.. many of the problems just solve themselves.. this is how it works for me

1:00 – the entire ed system is facing a huge crisis.. it’s really the first system that faces this growing crisis because it needs to confront the future.. when you think about what to teach.. no one really knows..t

so.. maybe let go of teaching things

you talk to experts in ed field and almost all of them will tell you that the system is becoming more and more irrelevant.. but what can replace it.. we just don’t know..t

or.. we’re not hearing/listening to the disruptive/crazy/hysterical ideas

listen deeper

ie: can you hear me

1:01 – there are many experiments being done.. and they work some of them quite well on a small scale.. but it’s very difficult to scale it up.. from small school to millions of teachers.. i don’t have the answer.. i don’t think anybody at present has the answer..

dang.. let go.. of thinking in terms of schools and teachers.. do you want to keep saying no answer..? or do you want to hear a way that’s (yeah.. might not work..) not been tried before

in the city.. as the day..

one of the problems is .. we already have a system.. *we don’t start from scratch.. the inertia of the system is immense..  you have all these buildings/teachers/bureaucrats.. i think this is the tip of the iceberg..  **it’s too early to expect to have the answer

*but we could start from scratch…. ie: back to 50 min – ‘given the immense powers that tech is giving us.’ we could start from scratch and it would render the assumed immensity of the current system irrelevant.. **wtf? too early.. dang

1:02 – my impression is that ed will have to switch from focusing on info and skills and more in a direction like emotional intelligence.. mental balance.. of *learning how to learn and not a particular skill

or rather.. *not blocking our natural inclination to learn

1:03 – where do i get my news from..? i real long books.. i tend to distrust short books and newspapers.. i think more in centuries than hours..  reading now about opioid epidemic

1:04 – i try to remain calm w singularity.. seems likely we’re reaching an inflection point..  one of the things that’s going to change is our imagination

1:06 – i got fed up w being told these fictional stories when i was asking.. what is the meaning of life.. what are we doing here

1:08 – gap between ability to manipulate and ability to understand consequences of manipulation..  in past did this on the planet and didn’t work so well.. now doing it on people.. this gap may result in an internal ecological collapse


Darcy Moore (@Darcy1968) tweeted at 4:25 AM – 7 Sep 2018 :
Finished listening to the audiobook of 21 Lessons for the 21st Century by @harari_yuval and am re-reading the ebook version now to clip notes (as I did with both #Sapiens and #HomoDeus) (http://twitter.com/Darcy1968/status/1038010273267736576?s=17)

in thread says: i know no finer books of our times

Darcy Moore (@Darcy1968) tweeted at 2:33 PM – 5 Sep 2018 :
@harari_yuval God. I love chapter 13! Thank you. (http://twitter.com/Darcy1968/status/1037438636105457664?s=17)

on hold – thanks library

21 lessons


Peter Vander Auwera (@petervan) tweeted at 5:51 AM – 14 Sep 2018 :
Yuval Noah Harari: the myth of freedom https://t.co/8hxE9ljUR7 (http://twitter.com/petervan/status/1040568615295229952?s=17)

Unfortunately, “free will” isn’t a scientific reality. It is a myth inherited from Christian theology. Theologians developed the idea of “free will” to explain why God is right to punish sinners for their bad choices and reward saints for their good choices. If our choices aren’t made freely, why should God punish or reward us for them?

if we didn’t have free will.. why would we be in this mess..?

Humans certainly have a will – but it isn’t free. You cannot decide what desires you have. You don’t decide to be introvert or extrovert, easy-going or anxious, gay or straight. Humans make choices – but they are never independent choices. Every choice depends on a lot of biological, social and personal conditions that you cannot determine for yourself. I can choose what to eat, whom to marry and whom to vote for, but these choices are determined in part by my genes, my biochemistry, my gender, my family background, my national culture, etc – and I didn’t choose which genes or family to have.

This is not abstract theory. You can witness this easily. Just observe the next thought that pops up in your mind. Where did it come from? Did you freely choose to think it? Obviously not. If you carefully observe your own mind, you come to realise that you have little control of what’s going on there, and you are not choosing freely what to think, what to feel, and what to want.

we just don’t know what free will is.. because of ie: black science of people/whales

Liberalism is founded on the belief in human liberty. Unlike rats and monkeys, human beings are supposed to have “free will”. This is what makes human feelings and human choices the ultimate moral and political authority in the world. Liberalism tells us that the voter knows best, that the customer is always right, and that we should think for ourselves and follow our hearts.

voting .. buying.. has nothing to do w free will

In order to successfully hack humans, you need two things: a good understanding of biology, and a lot of computing power. t

just one – a list of supposed to‘s filtered thru school.. work .. civilization ness.. et al

been going on forever.. ie: black science of people/whales

If you believe in the traditional liberal story, you will be tempted simply to dismiss this challenge. “No, it will never happen. Nobody will ever manage to hack the human spirit, because there is something there that goes far beyond genes, neurons and algorithms. Nobody could successfully predict and manipulate my choices, because my choices reflect my free will.” Unfortunately, dismissing the challenge won’t make it go away. It will just make you more vulnerable to it.

way before now.. ie: voluntary compliance – manufactured consent  – from school.. work .. civilization ness.. et al

if we understood that our desires are not the outcome of free choice, we would hopefully be less preoccupied with them, and would also feel more connected to the rest of the world

krishnamurti free will law

black science of people/whales


Johannes Kleske (@jkleske) tweeted at 6:44 AM – 11 Nov 2018 :
This. Harari takes everything SV is saying at face value, bases his future scenario on their technologies and ideas and uses their language. https://t.co/ODriFqJP6V (http://twitter.com/jkleske/status/1061615752380407808?s=17)


recognize own unacknowledged fictions


michel fb share (by jeremy lent)
this is all of us.. no? we keep using the fiction of ie: whales in sea world as our reference pt