78
4 Google as God?
But let’s now have a look at the question of how the complexity of the world is
expected to grow. The possibility to network the components of our world creates ever
more options. We have, in fact, a combinatorial number of possibilities to produce
new systems and functionalities. If we have two kinds of objects, we can combine
them to produce a third one. Connecting them in various ways, these three kinds
of objects allow us to create six ones, and those already 720. This is mathematically reflected by a factorial function, which grows much faster than exponential
(see the red curve in Fig. 4.1). For example, we will soon have more devices than
people communicating with the Internet. In about 10 years from now, 150 billion (!)
“things” will be communicating with the Internet. Thus, even if we realize just every
thousandth or millionth of all combinatorial possibilities, the factorial curve will
eventually overtake the exponential curves representing data volumes and computational power. It has probably overtaken both curves already for some time. Due to
limited communication bandwidth, an even smaller fraction of data can be processed
centrally, such that a lot of local information, which is needed to produce good
solutions, is ignored by centralized optimization approaches.
In other words, attempts to optimize systems in a top-down way will become
less and less effective—and cannot be executed in real time. Even revolutionary new
technologies such as quantum computing are unlikely to change this (see Appendix
4.3). Paradoxically, as economic diversification and cultural evolution progress, a
“big government”, “super-government” or “benevolent dictator” would increasingly
struggle to take good decisions, as it becomes more difficult to satisfy the diverse local
expectations and demands.
51 This means that any attempt to govern our increasingly
complex world in a top-down way by centralized control is probably destined to fail.
Given the situation in Afghanistan and Iraq, Syria, Ukraine, and the states experiencing the Arab Spring, and given the financial, economic and public debt crisis,
have we perhaps lost control already? Are we fighting a hopeless battle against
complexity?
52
4.11 Appendix 1: Democracy and Freedom—Outdated
Concepts?
These days, many people seem to be asking: “Are the concepts of freedom and
democracy obsolete?” Let us look into this. The “freedom of will” or “freedom of
decision-making” has, in fact, been questioned many times and for various reasons.
For example, some religions believe that our destiny is predetermined. If this were
true, then our life would basically be like playing back a 3D movie. We would not have
any possibilities to choose, but also no responsibility for what we do. Consequently,
51 Communication rates will also keep imposing serious limitations on centralized top-down control.
52 Simplifying our world by homogenizing or standardizing it would not fix the complexity problem.
It would rather undermine cultural evolution and innovation, thereby causing a failure to adjust to
our ever-changing world.
4 Google as God?
But let’s now have a look at the question of how the complexity of the world is
expected to grow. The possibility to network the components of our world creates ever
more options. We have, in fact, a combinatorial number of possibilities to produce
new systems and functionalities. If we have two kinds of objects, we can combine
them to produce a third one. Connecting them in various ways, these three kinds
of objects allow us to create six ones, and those already 720. This is mathematically reflected by a factorial function, which grows much faster than exponential
(see the red curve in Fig. 4.1). For example, we will soon have more devices than
people communicating with the Internet. In about 10 years from now, 150 billion (!)
“things” will be communicating with the Internet. Thus, even if we realize just every
thousandth or millionth of all combinatorial possibilities, the factorial curve will
eventually overtake the exponential curves representing data volumes and computational power. It has probably overtaken both curves already for some time. Due to
limited communication bandwidth, an even smaller fraction of data can be processed
centrally, such that a lot of local information, which is needed to produce good
solutions, is ignored by centralized optimization approaches.
In other words, attempts to optimize systems in a top-down way will become
less and less effective—and cannot be executed in real time. Even revolutionary new
technologies such as quantum computing are unlikely to change this (see Appendix
4.3). Paradoxically, as economic diversification and cultural evolution progress, a
“big government”, “super-government” or “benevolent dictator” would increasingly
struggle to take good decisions, as it becomes more difficult to satisfy the diverse local
expectations and demands.
51 This means that any attempt to govern our increasingly
complex world in a top-down way by centralized control is probably destined to fail.
Given the situation in Afghanistan and Iraq, Syria, Ukraine, and the states experiencing the Arab Spring, and given the financial, economic and public debt crisis,
have we perhaps lost control already? Are we fighting a hopeless battle against
complexity?
52
4.11 Appendix 1: Democracy and Freedom—Outdated
Concepts?
These days, many people seem to be asking: “Are the concepts of freedom and
democracy obsolete?” Let us look into this. The “freedom of will” or “freedom of
decision-making” has, in fact, been questioned many times and for various reasons.
For example, some religions believe that our destiny is predetermined. If this were
true, then our life would basically be like playing back a 3D movie. We would not have
any possibilities to choose, but also no responsibility for what we do. Consequently,
51 Communication rates will also keep imposing serious limitations on centralized top-down control.
52 Simplifying our world by homogenizing or standardizing it would not fix the complexity problem.
It would rather undermine cultural evolution and innovation, thereby causing a failure to adjust to
our ever-changing world.