I first wrote about this topic three months ago saying trade war is merely an excuse which at that time almost none of the local commentators talked about it. They all focused on the what they saw as bullying from the U.S. side on China's export and the right of free trade. I just saw the so-called trade war just a deterrence on China's uprising thus becoming a threat to the U.S. and this view has gained more and more popularity from the local commentators now.
Yet the concern on the trade war is still brewing. People started to understand it actually has nothing to do with trade imbalance between the U.S. and China. It is just about the perceived threat from China by the U.S. and it has always been a U.S. culture to beat the challengers at their infancy and it is just part of the extension of western cowboys' character. There is no right or wrong on this mentality as it depends on one's stance. Obviously and naturally American and Chinese nationals hold different views upon the issue.
In fact it is just quite natural for America to treat China in the way it is now. America just needs an enemy! An enemy that pulls the country together. It is about America's history and its gene. Long before America's independence, the then European migrants fought with the British Empire to get rid of the control from the latter. After its independence, America has a long term plan to replace the Empire to be the number one because the former was still suffered from the global trading system that was established and controlled by the latter. There has been a long time the newly born America was struggling for survival as it was suffocated by such trading system. At that time the U.K. was really an empire, on which the sun never set. With its strong naval force and its cluster of colonies, the U.K. dominated the global trading and the Sterling Pound was the only acceptable currency.
Not until the WWI the young eagle found its opportunity and it was WWII that America finally forged its status of global leader. Prior to that the U.K. has been America's "enemy" for almost two centuries but it was WWII that made America succeeded to replace it. The Kingdom was badly hit during the WWII due to a couple of reasons. Before the WWII the U.K. was benefited from its dominance of the global trading system and earned a huge wealth from it. Manufacturing industries were just too back-breaking comparing to the easy money from trading. Many of the Kingdom's manufacturing function has shifted overseas so when WWII started to damage its homeland the Kingdom just did not has enough manufacturing capacity to cope with the military demand. The America was the only country not affected by the War yet has the ability to provide weapon. As such the Kingdom's wealth was drained much to the America. There was a conspiracy that Hitler was actually financed by the American bankers to defeat the U.K. Be it true or not, the America did replace the Kingdom!
Soon after the WWII, America found its new enemy, the USSR thus leading to the Cold War. With the collapse of the USSR the America virtually has no compatible rival and it enjoyed the dominance on global affairs for decades. Backed with its military superiority and the U.S. dollar empire, the America is literally ruling the world. However the uprising of China changes the scenario a little bit. With Xi's advocate on the Industrial 2025 in high profile, the U.S. just cannot tolerate the challenge from China as it knows well this was the way how it came all the way through to where it is now.
For decades China has practiced Deng's National Policy to develop the nation in low profile but Xi, in order to fortify his status in the Party, changed it somehow. It is yet to say if it is a wise move but judging from the U.S.'s reaction, it is determined to curb this threat. In fact China's recent rise would not has succeeded without the blessing from the U.S. over the past decades. Despite it seems China is getting stronger now and seems to be rich in opportunities over there, it is far too early be capable to piss off the giant yet. China should really learn from the lesson which Japan has had for the price of "Japan can say no". Naturally China is different from Japan whom does not has the last resort that the former has, ie., nuclear weapon and a huge population. Take a look of how troublesome the Europe is with the Syrian refugees. It could bring a big trouble to the world if China release just a fraction of its 1.4 billion population should the U.S. dare to destroy China's economy.
China knows this trump card well when playing with Trump!
2018年10月20日 星期六
2018年10月14日 星期日
Financial crisis, a black swan. Or is it?
Black swan is defined as something with very slim chance yet happened. In financial market a crash is usually attributed by black swan. It seems most, if not all, crashes were unexpected. but were they?
There is a conspiracy(?) that nowadays the few super rich families like the Rockefellers and the Rothschilds are actually the rulers of the world. With their super dominant financial strength they influence, if not manipulate, the world affairs just like balls juggling. Not only do they apparently control the business world but in fact they are the mastermind behind the curtain on many government policies, the nomination of key officials or even the result of the elections in most of the western countries.
With their men implanted into different governmental bodies and their own control on the banking system and the clearing function, money flow and investment positions are all under their monitoring. Just imagine the whole world's economy is shrunk into a gambling table, the banker know all the positions because all the bets are visible on the table.
The U.S. stock market has just experienced the second largest plunge in this year and DJIA has rebounced 287 points (1.15%). The coming Friday is the settlement day in this month so it is still too early to say a further fall is yet to come. However, disregard what the market situation will be like in this Friday the U.S. stock market will not have problem before the election in this November. Trump or the Republican need a good market sentiment to win the election anyway.
Having said so I am not so confident after the election. Most of the major stock markets in the world have seen significant adjustment from their peak but the U.S. market keeps staying at its record high level making it to be the only choice for most of the fund managers whom are bound to invest despite they all know investing in the U.S. market is just a musical chair game. After all, fund managers' bonus relies on the performance of the funds under their management. The U.S. market is the only promising place that they can invest to beat the benchmark.
According to the conspiracy theory Fleecing the Flock, it seems a perfect storm is on its way. The Theory suggests that the big master players deliberately drive a market up to lure the money from the general masses then at the high level these predators slaughter their prey by releasing a black swan to create panic in the market leading to irrational sell off. A massive wealth transfer is thus perfectly achieved.
Along with the FED's interest hike action, currencies fell against the U.S. dollar. Economy in the countries which used to be benefited by the low interest rate massive amount of U.S. dollar loan are now hit badly. New emerging markets are among these victims. Compounded with the liquidity squeeze following the FED's shrinkage on its balance sheet, low cost hot money is draining. Pressure on most of the stock markets are mounting so driving all bets on the U.S. market. All it needs is just a black swan.....
There is a conspiracy(?) that nowadays the few super rich families like the Rockefellers and the Rothschilds are actually the rulers of the world. With their super dominant financial strength they influence, if not manipulate, the world affairs just like balls juggling. Not only do they apparently control the business world but in fact they are the mastermind behind the curtain on many government policies, the nomination of key officials or even the result of the elections in most of the western countries.
With their men implanted into different governmental bodies and their own control on the banking system and the clearing function, money flow and investment positions are all under their monitoring. Just imagine the whole world's economy is shrunk into a gambling table, the banker know all the positions because all the bets are visible on the table.
The U.S. stock market has just experienced the second largest plunge in this year and DJIA has rebounced 287 points (1.15%). The coming Friday is the settlement day in this month so it is still too early to say a further fall is yet to come. However, disregard what the market situation will be like in this Friday the U.S. stock market will not have problem before the election in this November. Trump or the Republican need a good market sentiment to win the election anyway.
Having said so I am not so confident after the election. Most of the major stock markets in the world have seen significant adjustment from their peak but the U.S. market keeps staying at its record high level making it to be the only choice for most of the fund managers whom are bound to invest despite they all know investing in the U.S. market is just a musical chair game. After all, fund managers' bonus relies on the performance of the funds under their management. The U.S. market is the only promising place that they can invest to beat the benchmark.
According to the conspiracy theory Fleecing the Flock, it seems a perfect storm is on its way. The Theory suggests that the big master players deliberately drive a market up to lure the money from the general masses then at the high level these predators slaughter their prey by releasing a black swan to create panic in the market leading to irrational sell off. A massive wealth transfer is thus perfectly achieved.
Along with the FED's interest hike action, currencies fell against the U.S. dollar. Economy in the countries which used to be benefited by the low interest rate massive amount of U.S. dollar loan are now hit badly. New emerging markets are among these victims. Compounded with the liquidity squeeze following the FED's shrinkage on its balance sheet, low cost hot money is draining. Pressure on most of the stock markets are mounting so driving all bets on the U.S. market. All it needs is just a black swan.....
2018年10月7日 星期日
Correction or crash?
The below is the chart of HSI in the past 40+ years.
Hong Kong stock market has experienced 10 crashes over the past 40 years since 1969. The below is the detailed summary of each boom and bust.
From the summary, one can see the booms took from 1.5 to 6.5 years while the bust lasted from 1 month to 3 years. The shortest adjustments happened in 1989 due to the massacre in Beijing followed by the Black Monday in Wall Street in 1987 which lasted for 2 months. So far the HSI has fallen 8+ months and with about 47% adjustment for the boom magnitude from the last valley 18534 in 2016 to 33484 in this January. The duration and adjustment resemble the crash in 2011 caused by the Euro debt crisis which is the mildest one in the ten crashes in Hong Kong history. However, personally I do not see the two debt crisis were crashes despite the Greece crisis has an adjustment of 92% because the peaks before the happening of these two crashes have never exceeded their previous peak 31958 in 2007. They were merely correction, big ones only.
According to Elliot Wave Theory the HSI current cycle started in 1998 August at 6544 with wave 1 ended in 2000 March the burst of dot.com bubble followed by wave 2 ended in 2003 April. Wave 3 topped in 2007 October the suspension of HK stock connect followed by wave 4 ended in 2009 Mar so the peak in this Jan could be the top the wave 5 and this 8+ months plunge is wave A accordingly. If this cycle is established then HSI is going to be the downward trend of the existing cycle so even if there will be a rise in the future but it is merely the wave B only. The final plunge wave C is still inevitable.
Judging from the past record, a true crash usually lasted a year or so and with adjustment of around 80%. If the current fall turns out to be a correction then according to the previous ones then it should finish very soon and there will be even higher level than 33484 as well. However, the reality is that the trade war between the U.S. and China is going to be worsen. On the other hand, a global liquidity squeeze is on its way in the years to come. Despite the DJIA keeps breaking its record but chances are more likely to fall than further hike. When the fundamentals are turning sour then the probability of HSI is heading to a true crash is rising. If it is going to a crash then the past record revealed that the usual adjustment is around 80%, meaning a fall of 12,000 points from 33,484. It means there are still 5000 points to go till the 19,000 level.
However, if base on my view that the two debt crisis are big correction only then the departure point should be the valley after the suspension of HK stock through train followed by Lehman Brothers at 11345 in 2009 when QE began. Therefore the total hike is 22,139 points. With usual 80% adjustment it means a fall of 17,700 points so the valley of this crash, if really it is one, will be around 15700 level!
Hold tight, man!
2018年10月1日 星期一
Value investing, how practicable can it be?
Warren Buffett, a renowned investor, is almost the icon of value investing. There are many investors who claim they are the fans of value investing. With the success of Buffett's investing performance, it seems there is a halo on those people when they claim they are practicing value investing. There are many bloggers in the local community claiming they are big fans of value investing as well. I buy most of the ideas of value investing but I cannot say I am one of them because I hold a couple of disagreement toward the concept of value investing.
Value investing, by the term per se, puts it very clear that investment on a particular stock should be made only when the stock price is at best below its intrinsic value. Therefore understanding the value of a stock is most fundamental of this investing. In other words, without the knowledge of the value of stocks it is only empty words when one says he/she is practicing value investing. The point is that, however, buying stocks below their value is a very good concept, determination on their value is another story though.
There are many ways of valuation out there and some of them are more applicable for some industries. This is fine as long as investors can pick the most appropriate valuation tools for a particular stock. However, except those very straight forward tools like P/E and P/B which are based on audited financial reports, the other tools like PEG, DCF, DDM....etc are rather artistic meaning that it appears to be very scientific but indeed many personal judgment or estimation is needed when doing so. A slight deviation on the judgment could lead to significant difference on the outcome, ie., a stock's intrinsic value which is the cornerstone of the methodology of value investing.
As I said I like most of the ideas of value investing such as margin of safety (literally the essence of value investing), buy when others in fear and stock selection based on fundamental analysis. They are not only conceptual in theory but also practicable in real life. People may see confusion and contradictory statements in this post because at one point I questioned the effectiveness of valuation methodologies which is the cornerstone of value investing but on the other hand I said its ideas are practicable. True is it appears to be. Indeed the concept of intrinsic value is the major disagreement that I have on value investing. Let me put it this way. When one says, after using the most appropriate valuation tools for a particular stock, the intrinsic value is $X based on the personal judgment on factors A, B & C in the calculation and the data in the past financial reports. However the $X could vary in a big extent along with the different estimation on the factors A, B & C yet a purchase decision is based on, $X, the outcome of the calculation. On the other hand, many of us know that financial reports are tricky business. Apart from those management boards deliberately cheating, presentation of figures and entries of items in the financial reports are largely a drama especially for those companies with declining performance. However, data in the financial reports also play a significant part in the valuation calculation.
The concept of value investing is to buy when price is below value or to sell when value fell below price. However as I said before the value of the $X is so difficult to be determined. Peter may gets $10 while Jack and John may get $9 and $11 respectively when they use different evaluation tools and different personal judgments on the factors yet they all claim they are practicing value investing. When the figure of the value per se is so unreliable so how sensible can the decision be?
The other disagreement I hold against value investing is that the latter advocates that unless there is change on the fundamentals of a good stock, the holding is for good. We have experienced a few global stock market crashes over the past decades or more often big plunge of individual stocks. In the bad times good stocks would also be suffered from irrational selling. It was a good timing to buy though but for those whom has already heavily invested might suffer from mental stress especially when stock price hit below the margin of safety. Despite such those value investors did not panic but would not feel great neither unless they have a deep pocket to buy more. Although timing the exact moment when the market would crash is only the privilege of God but indeed there were always traces of something has gone wrong before the crash. Isn't it better to dispose the holding when the market is about to plunge to avoid the mental stress, even if just a little bit? The best of all is that one can buy more with the same amount after the crash or enjoy a higher dividend yield.
Indeed one only needs to make a few right decisions throughout his life then it is good enough to have a decent living. Do nothing between decisions and doing nothing is doing something. Boring? As Soros puts it, good investing is boring.
Value investing, by the term per se, puts it very clear that investment on a particular stock should be made only when the stock price is at best below its intrinsic value. Therefore understanding the value of a stock is most fundamental of this investing. In other words, without the knowledge of the value of stocks it is only empty words when one says he/she is practicing value investing. The point is that, however, buying stocks below their value is a very good concept, determination on their value is another story though.
There are many ways of valuation out there and some of them are more applicable for some industries. This is fine as long as investors can pick the most appropriate valuation tools for a particular stock. However, except those very straight forward tools like P/E and P/B which are based on audited financial reports, the other tools like PEG, DCF, DDM....etc are rather artistic meaning that it appears to be very scientific but indeed many personal judgment or estimation is needed when doing so. A slight deviation on the judgment could lead to significant difference on the outcome, ie., a stock's intrinsic value which is the cornerstone of the methodology of value investing.
As I said I like most of the ideas of value investing such as margin of safety (literally the essence of value investing), buy when others in fear and stock selection based on fundamental analysis. They are not only conceptual in theory but also practicable in real life. People may see confusion and contradictory statements in this post because at one point I questioned the effectiveness of valuation methodologies which is the cornerstone of value investing but on the other hand I said its ideas are practicable. True is it appears to be. Indeed the concept of intrinsic value is the major disagreement that I have on value investing. Let me put it this way. When one says, after using the most appropriate valuation tools for a particular stock, the intrinsic value is $X based on the personal judgment on factors A, B & C in the calculation and the data in the past financial reports. However the $X could vary in a big extent along with the different estimation on the factors A, B & C yet a purchase decision is based on, $X, the outcome of the calculation. On the other hand, many of us know that financial reports are tricky business. Apart from those management boards deliberately cheating, presentation of figures and entries of items in the financial reports are largely a drama especially for those companies with declining performance. However, data in the financial reports also play a significant part in the valuation calculation.
The concept of value investing is to buy when price is below value or to sell when value fell below price. However as I said before the value of the $X is so difficult to be determined. Peter may gets $10 while Jack and John may get $9 and $11 respectively when they use different evaluation tools and different personal judgments on the factors yet they all claim they are practicing value investing. When the figure of the value per se is so unreliable so how sensible can the decision be?
The other disagreement I hold against value investing is that the latter advocates that unless there is change on the fundamentals of a good stock, the holding is for good. We have experienced a few global stock market crashes over the past decades or more often big plunge of individual stocks. In the bad times good stocks would also be suffered from irrational selling. It was a good timing to buy though but for those whom has already heavily invested might suffer from mental stress especially when stock price hit below the margin of safety. Despite such those value investors did not panic but would not feel great neither unless they have a deep pocket to buy more. Although timing the exact moment when the market would crash is only the privilege of God but indeed there were always traces of something has gone wrong before the crash. Isn't it better to dispose the holding when the market is about to plunge to avoid the mental stress, even if just a little bit? The best of all is that one can buy more with the same amount after the crash or enjoy a higher dividend yield.
Indeed one only needs to make a few right decisions throughout his life then it is good enough to have a decent living. Do nothing between decisions and doing nothing is doing something. Boring? As Soros puts it, good investing is boring.
2018年9月29日 星期六
The impact of interest rate hike on property market
Yesterday Hong Kong just saw the first interest rate hike in 12 years finally despite it is the 8th hike in the U.S already. This first hike did not put much impact on the local stock market but there are more concern on the property market though.
Many experts related to the property market commented that the impact is minimal because the hike is merely 0.125% so the installment increment is just HK$60+ per every million dollar mortgage. That will translate into absolute dollars for an averaged size property around $300 per month and that should be well within the affordability. Therefore it will not bring much pressure on the property market even if a few more hikes are expected in the coming two years.
It is true that the increment on the installment amount does not and will not apply too much financial burden to existing flat owners especially to those whom became owners more than five years ago because the price of their properties have risen much already while on the other hand the outstanding loan reduced. Perhaps new owners are those most concerned.
However, the above opinion is one sided perspective only. The majority of property market, in term of quantity, is residential ones while this segment is also divided into two categories, in terms of purchase purpose, ie,, dwelling and investment. The above mentioned opinion is applicable mainly on the property owners with the former purchase purpose. Since their properties, most of the case the only one, are for own consumption and they need dwelling anyway disregard the rise of interest rate on their mortgage. They don't seem to be likely to sell their own dwellings even if there is a rather big hike in the interest rate in the future. The most possible extent of the impact is only on the people whom are currently thinking to buy their home and the increment on interest payment could likely make their purchase to be put aside. Yet there will not be a price pressure arising from a massive selling.
I think this is the rationale behind the opinion that those experts advocated the impact will be minimal. Nevertheless they ignored the view from the other category of residential owners with purchase purpose as investing. Their properties is for investment only and most likely it is only part of their investment portfolio which is constantly under review to see whether risk and return are in proper ratio. Hong Kong property market has an high degree of internationalization meaning apart from local people whom bought for own consumption as well as investment but there are also overseas owners purchased Hong Kong properties just for investment. Despite local buyers outnumbered overseas counterparts but the movement of the latter should not be underestimated especially in the luxury segment of the market.
The return of Hong Kong property investment sits around 2-3% only which is not particularly attractive especially after a consecutive 28 months upward on the price index. Investor owners, both local and overseas, mainly eye on the future appreciation on their properties rather than relying on the rental income due to the low return. Despite the forecast on continuous interest rate hike will not lead to a major correction but if the steam of the price appreciation is expected to lose somehow. The investment on Hong Kong property is no longer attractive considering the low return it can provide.
When the hope of further price appreciation becomes slimmer while the return is just 2-3%, it might trigger the smart money to look for safer place to put their investment on. Recently the yield of the 10Y U.S. Treasury Bill is 3.06% which is considered as a risk-free investment. The return of Hong Kong property investment is really unattractive considering the potential downward movement in case the Sino-U.S. trade conflict worsen in the future. Furthermore, the U.S. interest rate hike is yet at the end so the comparison starts to become against Hong Kong property.
In an highly open economy like Hong Kong, price of different investments is driven not only by local factors so being an investor in Hong Kong market should review the situation with international perspective. Local investors should put them into their overseas counterparts' shoe to see what they think and how they want to allocate their assets globally. Local investors should have a view on when there is a change in their existing allocation in Hong Kong market then what likely the outcome is.
The impact on interest rate hike could mean far more affection than just installment increment.
Many experts related to the property market commented that the impact is minimal because the hike is merely 0.125% so the installment increment is just HK$60+ per every million dollar mortgage. That will translate into absolute dollars for an averaged size property around $300 per month and that should be well within the affordability. Therefore it will not bring much pressure on the property market even if a few more hikes are expected in the coming two years.
It is true that the increment on the installment amount does not and will not apply too much financial burden to existing flat owners especially to those whom became owners more than five years ago because the price of their properties have risen much already while on the other hand the outstanding loan reduced. Perhaps new owners are those most concerned.
However, the above opinion is one sided perspective only. The majority of property market, in term of quantity, is residential ones while this segment is also divided into two categories, in terms of purchase purpose, ie,, dwelling and investment. The above mentioned opinion is applicable mainly on the property owners with the former purchase purpose. Since their properties, most of the case the only one, are for own consumption and they need dwelling anyway disregard the rise of interest rate on their mortgage. They don't seem to be likely to sell their own dwellings even if there is a rather big hike in the interest rate in the future. The most possible extent of the impact is only on the people whom are currently thinking to buy their home and the increment on interest payment could likely make their purchase to be put aside. Yet there will not be a price pressure arising from a massive selling.
I think this is the rationale behind the opinion that those experts advocated the impact will be minimal. Nevertheless they ignored the view from the other category of residential owners with purchase purpose as investing. Their properties is for investment only and most likely it is only part of their investment portfolio which is constantly under review to see whether risk and return are in proper ratio. Hong Kong property market has an high degree of internationalization meaning apart from local people whom bought for own consumption as well as investment but there are also overseas owners purchased Hong Kong properties just for investment. Despite local buyers outnumbered overseas counterparts but the movement of the latter should not be underestimated especially in the luxury segment of the market.
The return of Hong Kong property investment sits around 2-3% only which is not particularly attractive especially after a consecutive 28 months upward on the price index. Investor owners, both local and overseas, mainly eye on the future appreciation on their properties rather than relying on the rental income due to the low return. Despite the forecast on continuous interest rate hike will not lead to a major correction but if the steam of the price appreciation is expected to lose somehow. The investment on Hong Kong property is no longer attractive considering the low return it can provide.
When the hope of further price appreciation becomes slimmer while the return is just 2-3%, it might trigger the smart money to look for safer place to put their investment on. Recently the yield of the 10Y U.S. Treasury Bill is 3.06% which is considered as a risk-free investment. The return of Hong Kong property investment is really unattractive considering the potential downward movement in case the Sino-U.S. trade conflict worsen in the future. Furthermore, the U.S. interest rate hike is yet at the end so the comparison starts to become against Hong Kong property.
In an highly open economy like Hong Kong, price of different investments is driven not only by local factors so being an investor in Hong Kong market should review the situation with international perspective. Local investors should put them into their overseas counterparts' shoe to see what they think and how they want to allocate their assets globally. Local investors should have a view on when there is a change in their existing allocation in Hong Kong market then what likely the outcome is.
The impact on interest rate hike could mean far more affection than just installment increment.
2018年9月20日 星期四
Artificial intelligence, a destructive goodie?
A.I. has immersed in our everyday life with or without our awareness. Many jobs used to be done by human is now handled by computers. People see a more efficient way doing things. For example, auto spell check corrects typos and even anticipates the next words that greatly increases typing efficiency. The success of search engines are largely attributed to the employment of this technology. Most of the people, except those their jobs were replaced by A.I., embraces the convenience provided by this goodie.
However, in my earlier post myth on A.I. I am quite skeptical on this technology in the long run. It is true A.I. did bring us a lot of benefits that basically one is impossible to live without it now. The immediate drawback is jobs replaced while the ultimate concern is whether A.I., when combined with robots, will eventually become the master of human being. However, it seems there is an intermediate threat to the common folks as well.
If one agrees the concept in my post salarymen slaves that the world is factually governed by the few super rich families and most of the people in this world is only free ranged slaves to create wealth for these Families. When A.I. and robotic technology are so sophisticated that it can do most jobs at present done by people then do these super rich families still need to keep so many slaves? In their eyes slaves are nothing but tool only. Their existence serves only one purpose, ie., to work and produce value for them because so far most of the productive functions must still be carried out by human. It is something like why farmers rear milk cows but if one day milk can be manufactured without cows at all in more economical way then there is no reason to waste resources to keep them.
Just imagine in the days when doctors, composers, cooks, pilots...etc are no longer necessary. Let alone those less skillful workers. 90% of the world population becomes dispensable. There are only two categories of people still find their places in the world. The first one is of course the super rich families who are the true governors of the world while the another one is the super smart brains in my post new class of illiteracy whom are needed to maintain or further develop the A.I./robotic technology. The rest of the world population will become burden rather than assets (for wealth production). After all they still need to be fed even when they are of no value any more. Meanwhile the huge world population is one of the reasons attributed to the world pollution. On the other hand the super rich families and these smart brains can enjoy much more per capita natural resources when the dispensable population is eliminated. Isn't it a big temptation on such move?
Watch out! folks!
However, in my earlier post myth on A.I. I am quite skeptical on this technology in the long run. It is true A.I. did bring us a lot of benefits that basically one is impossible to live without it now. The immediate drawback is jobs replaced while the ultimate concern is whether A.I., when combined with robots, will eventually become the master of human being. However, it seems there is an intermediate threat to the common folks as well.
If one agrees the concept in my post salarymen slaves that the world is factually governed by the few super rich families and most of the people in this world is only free ranged slaves to create wealth for these Families. When A.I. and robotic technology are so sophisticated that it can do most jobs at present done by people then do these super rich families still need to keep so many slaves? In their eyes slaves are nothing but tool only. Their existence serves only one purpose, ie., to work and produce value for them because so far most of the productive functions must still be carried out by human. It is something like why farmers rear milk cows but if one day milk can be manufactured without cows at all in more economical way then there is no reason to waste resources to keep them.
Just imagine in the days when doctors, composers, cooks, pilots...etc are no longer necessary. Let alone those less skillful workers. 90% of the world population becomes dispensable. There are only two categories of people still find their places in the world. The first one is of course the super rich families who are the true governors of the world while the another one is the super smart brains in my post new class of illiteracy whom are needed to maintain or further develop the A.I./robotic technology. The rest of the world population will become burden rather than assets (for wealth production). After all they still need to be fed even when they are of no value any more. Meanwhile the huge world population is one of the reasons attributed to the world pollution. On the other hand the super rich families and these smart brains can enjoy much more per capita natural resources when the dispensable population is eliminated. Isn't it a big temptation on such move?
Watch out! folks!
2018年9月2日 星期日
Who are you?
We perceive the world through cognitive function in our brain. Cognition lies largely on our memory. A baby was taught that was a mug when he first saw it then this memory stayed in his brain. When he sees the same object that matches the cognition in his brain via pulling out the same image from the memory, he knows he is seeing a mug again.
In our daily interactions with the outside world, people form cognition on the outside world as well as themselves. One thinks he is a good person because he remembers he has done many good things like he is nice to people, he works hard, he cares about the people he knows....etc. All these favourable behaviour are stored as memories in his brain so he perceives himself as a good person.
Therefore memory is a cornerstone on the formation of how one perceives self, ie., who he is. This appears quite alright because memory is a very private and personal belonging that one owns one's memory and it is just stored in one's own brain and no other one has access to it so as possible to manipulate it. Or does it?
Many of us knows hypnotism can reach the subconsciousness in our mind and even manipulates it for therapy on mental issues. This is good but it could be bad as well. A reconstructed subconsciousness means a change of perception. When ill-done, the change of perception could be manipulated in favour of some ill-minded purposes.
As science advances, neuro-technologies is capable in altering one's memory or implanting segment of memory that even not exist at all. Likewise removal of some memories from the human hard drive is also feasible. Our brains appear like computer hard drives more than ever in front of those whom control these technologies. Naturally such researches need heavy funding so none of them are autonomous without any governmental sponsorship. The risk to the common folks is that "trouble markers" in the eyes of government can possibly be re-engineered to be sheeps. Salaried slaves can also be produced in mass production for a constant supply on cheap labour force while the society will be in more harmony ensuring easy ruling. With the memory manipulation technology the authorities has the access to more easily programming a person's character in order to have him/her to perform a specific task for the government.
Some may argue that how the masses will be receptive to the manipulation on their memories. Naturally like all conspiracies the project will be operated in the dark. A gadget something like the flashlight in the scientific movie "Man in Black" will erase the segment of the memory regarding the process of the manipulation so the victims are totally unaware of what has done on them.
We take it for granted that we know who we are but if your memory has actually altered. You in fact did not do something which you think you did while the memory of what you have done was removed. Are you still the actual one that you think who you are? Is what I am talking about only the episodes in scientific fiction movies? I am not really sure. I just hope that I am day-dreaming only.
In our daily interactions with the outside world, people form cognition on the outside world as well as themselves. One thinks he is a good person because he remembers he has done many good things like he is nice to people, he works hard, he cares about the people he knows....etc. All these favourable behaviour are stored as memories in his brain so he perceives himself as a good person.
Therefore memory is a cornerstone on the formation of how one perceives self, ie., who he is. This appears quite alright because memory is a very private and personal belonging that one owns one's memory and it is just stored in one's own brain and no other one has access to it so as possible to manipulate it. Or does it?
Many of us knows hypnotism can reach the subconsciousness in our mind and even manipulates it for therapy on mental issues. This is good but it could be bad as well. A reconstructed subconsciousness means a change of perception. When ill-done, the change of perception could be manipulated in favour of some ill-minded purposes.
As science advances, neuro-technologies is capable in altering one's memory or implanting segment of memory that even not exist at all. Likewise removal of some memories from the human hard drive is also feasible. Our brains appear like computer hard drives more than ever in front of those whom control these technologies. Naturally such researches need heavy funding so none of them are autonomous without any governmental sponsorship. The risk to the common folks is that "trouble markers" in the eyes of government can possibly be re-engineered to be sheeps. Salaried slaves can also be produced in mass production for a constant supply on cheap labour force while the society will be in more harmony ensuring easy ruling. With the memory manipulation technology the authorities has the access to more easily programming a person's character in order to have him/her to perform a specific task for the government.
Some may argue that how the masses will be receptive to the manipulation on their memories. Naturally like all conspiracies the project will be operated in the dark. A gadget something like the flashlight in the scientific movie "Man in Black" will erase the segment of the memory regarding the process of the manipulation so the victims are totally unaware of what has done on them.
We take it for granted that we know who we are but if your memory has actually altered. You in fact did not do something which you think you did while the memory of what you have done was removed. Are you still the actual one that you think who you are? Is what I am talking about only the episodes in scientific fiction movies? I am not really sure. I just hope that I am day-dreaming only.
訂閱：
文章 (Atom)