Thursday, June 22, 2017

A more pleasant sound for using the computer keyboard

"
110. The point of view of some men is very much according to education, kind of narrow and not so intelligent, not adapting to situations and not understanding the rest of the life in the society. It would be good to vary one's way of doing and one's way to approach things according to common sense and according to the situation: sometimes it is good to be practical, sometimes one needs a good memory, or educated thinking, common sense, motion, feelings or whatever suits the situation. Likewise when working it is good to notice the landscape of life at large with it'sphenomena: with it's social contacts, happenings, journeys, approaching holidays etc. Like that one can train one's common sense and one's understanding about life.
This way a more skilled person can learn to vary the rythm of writing on computer keyboard, so that one feels somehow more comfortable and the sound is nicer, better suited to other things to do and to listening one's own views."
From my text about healthy natural ways of living http://finnishskills.blogspot.fi/2015/11/healthy-ways-of-living.html

Friday, May 5, 2017

About me as a thinker

I have written about how I learned thinking as a child and about what I have written about (some e-books, 70 blogs, 1000 videos), at http://aboutmytexts.blogspot.fi/ .
There are lots of advices in learning thinking skills in my Finnish blog http://pikakoulu.blogspot.fi of which the thinking course is in English at http://quickerlearning.blogspot.fi . In addition there are English videos about learning intelligence in my old video chanel http://www.youtube.com/khtervola .

Thursday, May 4, 2017

About humanoid robots

I was today around noon at the center of Savonlinna, which is a kind of medieval, arts, countryside and tourism oriented small town in Savo on eastern Finland. There walked aver a street an adult human, maybe Scottish or arts riented man, but walked in a way that resembled a NAO robot. A little bit later maybe the same person walked past me, walked very evenly and without properly taking social cantact, seemed to be with an atmosphere that was for some street but certainly not the right, and noticed clearly straight lines at the corners of houses but not much else. But I was thinking of robots, so maybe that's why so. Or then it was someone doing testing or practise for building a humanoid robot. Or it was a robot. Just behind her drove someone a bike very evenly, like one would imagine a robot to ride a bicycle. But on the other hand, robots are a subject that interests many. But it aren't nice to have such in the society. People form a complex network, a living organism kind of, interacting, relying on others, forming a pivcture of the world and picture of the situation that they are in. They rely both in others thinking and understandiong, and noticing things well like ahuman being, and they rely socially and emotionally, to live a good life, to get wiser, to build a better society, to grow in skills and style, to have friends too that they can rely on. And a robot does not offer such. It isn't good to misestimate a robot to be a human being. Animals are what we long for, cute, intelligent, wise, friendly, feeling and caring, kind of basic life that we long for, they do not have any of the drawbacks of robots. Even with actors there is the problem that one cannot rely on the other one for sure since maybe he/she just pretends. It aren't good to build a society with such pitfalls. If they come with having a tv, that is a reason to re-estimate, whether we need tv's so much, whether we should come back to the times of radio and photograpfs.
There are grounds for the choises in the human nature. In thoery one could teach tehm also to a robot. But the problem is that some want to use a robot a s a disguise for evil endeavours.
One can build strenght with a big group cooperating. That is s reason for cooperation, but on the other hadn all are not interested in strenght. But maybe one could check electroniccally, who is a robot and who noty.
Some people think that their job is idiotic, so they want to give it to a robot. But it should not be an acting robot. People need things to do. Maybe someone else would luike their job. I have written about learning talents and skills for one's dream job: http://nopeaoppisuus.blogspot.fi but it is in Finnish.
Some think taht pure rationality is fine. But humans can learn rationality: http://quickerlearning.blogspot.fi . The human nature fits together with the wish to be rational (even in outrageous cases, see http://workandfreetime.blogspot.fi the book at the first text entry).

The wish to build more compassionate characteristics  to ordinary computers can be one motivation for building humanoid robots. But then humanoid robots ought to look like their skill level and behaviour is, and not pretend any wiser.
Maybe engineers wanna see if they can take part in other areas of life, are their views wise enough, so they kind of think that the robot'slook too even if they are copied from humans on other professions, wouldsomehowreflect the level of engineers. But of course such detailed copying brings the impression of those other professions instead.  One can learn skills by the first text in my Finnish blog http://nopeaoppisuus.blogspot.fi .
Engineers' question seems to be: can a robot take part in everyday life? But the ordinary persons' question is: would a robot taking part in everyday life destroy much of the good sides and wisdom of everyday life? The problem is that robots are very stupid, especially in instinctual skills and wisdom & wisdom of life. So they ruin a lot. A stupid machine can be used, but it cannot be let operate by itself like a person with a good understanding and lots of good will.
Some maybe Russians and Asians think that education is somewhat robot like if they just memorized things and were forced to behave accordingly without understanding them. But humans still have common sense, social life and basic life at the level of the senses, some picture of the world, values, civilized ways and an idea of what they themselves are like and lots of communication skills. Robots are harmful largely because of their lack of communication skills: how can one stop a metallic robot which does not understand everyday language with emotional tones of voice, social content etc? The impression sis like a big metal sheet falling down with noise and sharp edges. One can maybe use such at the factory, but ordinary safety precautions require that not on the street or at homw at all.

Wednesday, March 29, 2017

What if technology's skills make us more stupid?

Human thinking ability needs landscape like views and maps. Driving a car teaches to think of things in a map like way as landscapes in which we live.
If we would have computer guided cars, we would most propably no longer think so much as maps, and so we would be much more stupid and irrational.
To some the same effect comes to some amount already beacuse of navigators. So it seems that portable map devices would be ok but not a navigator that chooses the route and gives advices.

Will there be the same kinf´d of effect from developing technology to replace other human like skills? Then it appears that some types of computer skills ought not be used fully in making life "easier" and much more stupid.
On the other hand, cars and books have made humand more intelligent. So maybe in such a direction lies the future of technology too.

Sunday, October 30, 2016

Human recognition and human-computer interaction

Some piece of news sometime in the past years said that recognition of human emotions etc by computer is practised with actors. That is just insane: acting looks different from really doing. Of course human expressions, body language, looks and tones of voice & typical reactions should be copied from real people doing real thinsg and not just from actors with who-knows-what real intentions. What one could start from is basic things humans do like watching, listening, moving and practising sports, doing practical things. And in those there are easier parts and more difficult parts, successes and failures, so that one could learn such features from those - or from ordinary photograpfs. Then one could also understand differencies in ways of thinking: ways of using the sense of sight, remembering, going things through. If thing is done exactkly the same way, it gives the same result on anyone doing, I guess, so one does not need to understand each person separately but basic features well enough, very basic enough and that's it: all human endeavours, all ways of doing gone through objectively and detailedly.

Tuesday, April 26, 2016

About internet search engines development

Internet offers lots of internet pages but all are not as good quality or as interesting as I would hope. Of the multitude of pages one finds just some recommended by search engines. So it is very important who develops internet search engines. Those should allow in a civilized way a good wide access to good quality information & other good quality content and should absolutely not be manipulative. So people with atendency to manipulation should be banned from messing with search engines. People working in the libraries have an education suited civilicedly to finding what one needs from among a large amount of information available. I think that they should get the task of developing search engines.

Tuesday, April 19, 2016

I have had these views since I was 12 years old

When I was twelve years old and was building my own objective picture of the world, I among other things got to think that since feelings were during the evolution (or because god chose them during creation because they were) useful for humans and animals, so useful that they came to be a part of the basic structure of humans and animals, then as computers get developed with the help of objective thinking toward more and more useful, it will be useful to build computers too something essentially like feelings of humans and animals. Maybe some days or some weeks later I came to tell this thought to my parents as we discussed things academically objectively, like our parents valued, and my father caught the idea and my mother once again said that I should begin writing my objective thoughts down since they interest many and are of important subjects and surely objective and I am responsible enough for that. But she made the error of asking advice from psychologists whether a 12 year old girl can write objective thoughts. And so the psycholgists ruined my life: instead of writing objective thoughts about the world, they made me write a diary about social tangles, and around the same time we went to a journey to Japan, I was cut a boys' hair cut for ten years (even though I very much wanted to be girl like and my dream job was dance instructior or a singer, of academical things I was closest to philosophy), my mom chose for me some ten years my clothes to be like engineering opriented boys' clothes and some drops were put to my eyes to make it possible to buy my firsts eye glasses and I still wear classes (even though I admire wild animals and healthy weays of living). When I finished school, I was forced to secondary school which I suffered from, and after that to university to study physics and math, in which I never figured out anything on my own - except a philosophical view on the wave particle dualism, which you can find on my video channel. Autumn 1998 (when I was 27) I started writing about how the elements of healthy natural ways of living help work efficency (See a later verion at http://workandfreetime.blogspot.fi) but was interrupted by my final work in the university studies before gradiuation.December to March. In the change of March to April I once again got enormous problems about psychologists ruining my otherwise well running lifd, which I still have, just an enormous bunch of crimes.

I have always used several perspectives at the same time in my thinking, choosing the best option from each perspective or set of values separately but finding that it fits together with the other perspectives too and with their best options. So I did not think thatr being useful should be the only criterion for god choosing some feature in creation.

So these thoughts did not need secondary school or university studies but only the first five or six years of ordinary school for kids. I did not benefit from my further stidies at all. Much more I benefited from quitting the university and getting practise in a variety of practical things and having New Age books,music and poetry hobby, since those made me more intelligent, objectively so. (see for examplemy textsabout learning thinking skills: http://pikakoulu.blogspot.fi http://quickerlearning.blogspot.fi and the e-book at http://workandfreetime.blogspot.fi , lus my video playlists about learning rationality at http://www.youtube.com/khtervola .)