It’s 2018

“The future belongs to those who believe in the beauty of their dreams.” Eleanor Roosevelt

For the first time in human history, something unexpected happened. An artificial creation put a stop to natural evolution. It might be the lack of imagination or inability to dream big, but regardless what the reasons are, the result is the same – Technology is now the dominant force that dictates our path forward.

2018 might be flag as the year where new abilities to codify our lives pave the way for yet unexplored individual quantification models, new devices will discover that they can also have a voice in the idea that everything is now connected and “smart.”

Artificial Intelligence will continue to spark our imagination, and even so, we don’t get it, I trust that the big companies will find a way to make money from our innocent ignorance.

Automation will continue to grow and together will 3D printing, will open up new opportunities, mainly in the manufacturing area but also for individuals.

We will still download apps and tap on screens. Apple will come up with a new color for their iPhone and will probably improve on old ideas. Google and Amazon will strengthen their penetration to take over our cognitive functions. Yet at the end of the day, I can only hope for awakening and investments in new interaction models, ones that are focused on value rather than apps and content.

Cryptocurrencies will raise more interest from individual, companies, and governments but as long we do not have an adult leader and a new set of monetary values, nothing will be revolutionized.

Politics will still suck.

2018 shouldn’t be the year of technological answers. It should be the year of human questions. The irony is that while we came to the point of no return where technology suppresses the natural powers of evolution, it is technology that will yet if used correctly, it will enable us to imagine and dream prominent than ever before.

The moral compass of autonomous driving cars

1. A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.

2. A robot must obey orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.

3. A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.

Isaac Asimov’s “Three Laws of Robotics.”

1. A robot may not harm humanity, or, by inaction, allow humanity to come to harm.

In a perfect world, these points should explain how machine ethics is separate to a human one — or in other words: what keeps human on top of the food chain. Likely for me, we do not live in a perfect world so I can allow myself to challenge the status-quo.

“Throughout history, whenever we tried to “enslave” free minds to bow to our wishes, that journey always ended up in bloodshed.” Continue reading “The moral compass of autonomous driving cars”

The da Vinci gap

Imagine a future guided by the principles found in the pre-computation era of science-fiction (everything before the 50s). A culture that tackles the holistic challenges, where social changes are cherished and respected, — a culture in which innovators and leaders understand that vision, passion, and creation are the backbone of the progress of development. Imagine a world where we’re being led to fully explore the potential behind the promise of a better-united life.

A world where we break thought fixation and shape our future.

The present evolution

Concepts, dating from the 20th century and before are evolving, becoming more refined and, sometimes, useful. The 2016 package-as-a-reality-show-and-push-it-to-the-masses is all about super smart little things we never knew we needed. Big players promise artificial intelligence and virtual reality. And super-thin, big screens.

Simply put, what sounded terrific but really turned out pretty crappy the last time around keeps coming back, improving with each iteration. Continue reading “The da Vinci gap”

The fourth wave – Digital God

When we think about the future of humanity and technology, we tend to embrace the “action”-minded Hollywood model of the changes we are about to face. While there are voices that fuel the fear of the day that machine will wake up, I see the potential for a new dawn of humans, that can stretch the understanding of reality beyond the senses that define our perception into a vast new landscape that re-code the rules of the universe.

Our capacity to “understand technology” is diminishing as fast as the capabilities of technology are maturing, (I call this a reversed Moore’s law) and it is this wave of exponential progress that redefines our future. Continue reading “The fourth wave – Digital God”

The intention economy

The current structure of most enterprises is base on 18th-19th-century infrastructure, rules, and perceptions. The medium that channels the company’s ability to scale and expand its core business is outdated and anchored in a hierarchy made of paper.

Most business models revolve around one central management entity. Much like the Swift in banking, you can create a psychological consensus for “single point control” as long as you work in the comfort zone of one unique industry, country or even a local geographic location. Continue reading “The intention economy”

Our new normal

We barely learned to crawl into this new world of “the digital realm, ” and we have already crossed to the point of no return. — What is going to happen next is interesting, our reality is not our only reality. Emerging “parallel circular causality” universes will be our new normal.

Our interactions will echo effects across these universes and return to influence the original actions themselves.

Interaction zero

By Jon Seneger, Vadim Dubrov, Aric Dromi

– The future of interactions has no interaction!

“Can zero interaction models support both states of user certainty or uncertainty?”

• Certainty: Command/Event/Place/Time driven interaction. (Need/Want)

• Uncertainty: Desire/Exploratory/Impulse driven interaction. (Wish)

With many user experience and interactive design discussions are still focused on expanding established, but outdated interaction models. Ever since the first dream of a calculus machine, there has been a desire to have a verbal interaction model. Yet the efforts of the last 30 years have been mostly focused on the “Glass Window”, enhancing the looking glass effect. Initially, this window wasn’t portable, and the content is existing behind the Glass could only be created, activated and manipulated by physical interaction with mechanical devices like mouse, keyboard or joystick. Once the “Window” was made portable, and the Glass touchable, the digital natives’ primary access to the digital world became tapping on the glass. Continue reading “Interaction zero”

Digital Alphas


Imagine waking up in a new state of existence, to a time when we are part of everything, and everything is part of who we are. We have full control of our surroundings, our body, our brain.

When we think about the future, we tend to think about a world powered by technological gadgets, body enhancements and artificial intelligence, autonomous cars or even flying cars. Yet, maybe the real potential of the future will not be technology for technology, but the new generation of humans that occupy the digital landscape and redefine the boundaries of reality. Continue reading “Digital Alphas”


R2D2 is probably one of the most sensitive, emotional beings that are not a creature of nature by definition. Yes, there is that philosophical question of what is a beast of nature. After all, robots are created by the human witch created in the image of God. But if we leave that aside for a second, from R2D2, HAL, BB8 and others, robots triggered our imagination for years, up to the point we’ve now started materializing their science fiction potentials and made them a permanent member of our society.

Robots are here to stay. They already control many aspects of our reality, they work in our factories. They help us in our gardens and farms as well as our homes, they work in stockrooms, serve drinks, mix medicine, they write articles, give us legal advice, help us invest money, diagnose us, drive us from one place to another and much more.

These machines we have created are the perfect representation of physical supremacy.

A few years ago I wrote about the feeling we’ve developed towards machines around us, and while they are not human, we started trusting them to the point we feel secure to outsource not just decision making but also part of our cognitive functions — memory for example. How many telephone numbers, we remember? Or how many of us still memorizing facts about history, politics, science? We trust the connection to the accumulated digitized knowledge and the touchpoint in our pocket to always be there, providing answers.

Are we “building” the next level of human evolution?

I ask myself, is it essential for robots and machines to feel? After all, what we call real is not a “thing you can touch” but our brain constructs of multi perceptions point of view. We think we know, and therefore it’s real, but it’s only but our consciousness managing expectations. Is it essential that we believe that robots can feel? Or we’d like to explore their empathy towards us?

We are creatures of association, meaning, we view the world through internal filters. We tend to place ourselves as the narrative of everything that we hear and compare someone else experiences to the one we construct within our internal mental models — and even so that experience is theoretic, we relate to it on an emotional level.

The way we build robots reflects our basic human needs. We try to teach them how our brain operates and by doing so, we encapsulate our views of the theory of mind inside machines (miserably I might add). By doing so, we’re missing the idea that when we are done, we’ll end up with a new reality of them and us.

I believe that were placed here to develop ourselves and evolve continually. Now when we came to the point where technology is not just a machine in a factory, but a natural, seamless interface that literally connects directly to our emotional brain. Shouldn’t we use that to extend our existing beyond the organic matter and encapsulate ourselves as part of an AI service platform that can enrich our experiences via holistic intelligence & emotional dispositions?

Perhaps the way to teach machines to feel is to merge with them. Creating a new species, one that is not looking at technology as an external part of our body and mind, but looks for ways to relate to our brain as an algorithm and define a hierarchy of needs that doesn’t rely on physical dexterity.


Evolutionary Awareness

We do not just live in a new world but in a world that is continually reinventing itself and at a dizzying rate.

We, as humans were given an unusual advantage in comparison to the rest of the animal kingdom. Our brain is capable of constructing a model of the world that can calculate the effect of causality in relation our points of view.

So far, most of the data we use to build our model with comes via our senses and while one cannot argue on the substantive qualities of external objects, the content of only physical data is not enough to “predict” the behavior of complex living creatures. To do so, we must understand their state of mind — feel what they feel.

Language is yet another valuable tool in this process. It enables us to capture new definitions of reality and build our development upon previous existing fundamental building blocks we already carry within us — our qualia.

Qualia are individual instances of subjective, conscious experience. It is a single entity, different from the brain yet affected by it — it is our inner experiences of experiences.

The (human-machine) functional convergent evolution –

For the past years, we have witnessed an exponential growth in technologies such as computation power, biotech, artificial intelligence, neuro-engineering, instant accessibility, flow and data mixing, automation (and more). While we are just at the beginning of this journey, these technologies evolved to create a transparent interaction ecology that for the first time positions us, humans, as part of the perception of reality rather than reality itself. — We shifted from observing the information, to become part of the information itself and as such we now can be connected and understand the world via knowledge that is external to our existence.

Our qualia can experience experiences that are anchored in our brain but use external digital sensations and senses to paint the image of substance.

These evolutionary constraints are re-creating our reality, and because of our ability to calculate it is implications and potential are still at its embryo phase, we have to ask if “what we know that we know” is enough to predict how our current action can impact our species.