The tech world has gotten so huge, self-reinforcing, and insulated from reality they can no longer even vaguely look at themselves (and their actions) as others do. They just live on a different planet than most people.
Conversely, the average tech consumer doesn't understand the technology that has slowly taken over their lives, and their designated emissaries to figure it out--politicians, pundits, regulators, journalists--understand it barely better than they do, and have their own agendas.
To say more than generalities for a moment, here's what I think is likely the core problem.
Techies take weird, improbable visions, and make them realities: some BS pitch deck to a VC, mixed with money and people, really does turn into some novel thing.
Most people work inside a legacy industry that's evolved that way over time (usually for good reasons), and they think about the future via some analogy with their present (which is a function of a long-ago past). The interruption that tech will introduce is often hard to grasp.
We have techies who are technically skilled and motivated, but who (and I'd be the first to admit it) often have narrow educations that don't let them see a bigger picture. And we have people who live in the world who don't understand technological implications. That's our mess.
Let's take a concrete example of how this shakes out. Not sure why I'm doing this, as I'm done with screaming into the FB media tornado, but I'll just go ahead:
Disinformation is not a solvable problem. It is here to stay, forever. Every election in the foreseeable future will feature massive amounts of user-generated disinformation. The only hope is to culturally adapt, as we did to other weird aspects of social media.
Why do I say that?
Facebook & Co. can take on the most egregious disinformation examples, or efforts undertaken by identifiable state actors (maybe), but it will never be able to shut it down entirely.
Assuming some semblance of free speech, ubiquitous online identity, and some amount of engagement-optimized distribution (even if crude and self-selected, like on WhatsApp), and global reach, we will always have it, full stop.
No techie I've spoken to--I'm talking people who've spent years inside FB or TWTR--think it's solvable at scale, and anyone who says so is blowing smoke up your ass.
Why do I feel confident in this assertion (that I'm sure will get trolled)?
Remember privacy? Remember how that was the biggest angle on the FB story, and how many rivers of electrons were spilled in talking about it?
Where'd that end up? Nowhere. We got GDPR, which is pointless, and if anything solidified FB/GOOG's position in Europe. Ditto CCPA.
Privacy didn't get 'solved', we merely shifted culturally to accommodate new notions of it, and now we don't think about it much (even the Privacy Industrial Complex that made a career out of this has pivoted to being a new Disinformation Industrial Complex).
Think I'm being glib and dismissive? Let's take a historical perspective.
If you sat down to a meal in the 80s, and took out a camera and took a photo of your food, while telling everyone you were sending copies to your friends, you'd have been locked up in an insane asylum.
And yet now 'Stories' (which FB ripped from Snap) is basically that, and one of its most popular features. The Beacon scandal that blew up FB in the late aughts now seems like a joke. People got worked up over that?
We'll read the current disinformation coverage the same way.
You can see the shift in polling by generation cohort. Those raised in a world where smartphones and ubiquitous sharing are just givens think about it very differently. It's the bridge generation (looks in mirror) that's mostly freaking out about it.
Note, I'm not dismissing disinfo complaints. It's clearly a real problem that's produced human suffering in places like India or Brazil. I'm questioning our ability to do anything about it at scale, while still maintaining the technology that is (i.e. forget Butlerian Jihads).
Nor am I saying there's *nothing* anyone can do about it. FB policing (or trying to anyhow) political advertisers much more severely *is* a solvable problem, and one they should undertake (and be taken to task if they slip). But that gets back to my earlier point....
Which is it's hard for anyone to discern what's worth worrying about with this immense gulf. The techies don't see the bigger picture, the public doesn't see the disruptive vision, and the chattering classes are wrapped up in exploiting the very spectacle they claim to deride.
So, we'll muddle through, as we've always done. It'll get worse before it gets better. Mistakes will be made, and then doubled-down on, again and again.
We as a species are dumb. We don't learn anything, and only technical and scientific knowledge is cumulative.
Doubt me? Compare the conversations on this service with one of Socrates' dialogues. Are we smarter now? More respectful in dialogue, more clever in our conclusions? I don't think so. We (or some us) just know how to make things like smartphones now. Best of luck. We'll need it.
technological inequality has only ever been rectified by warfare, revolution, state collapse and plague.
The way we behave is not based on reality, but on our models of reality. We need to upgrade our mental models so we can make better decisions. We need a 21st century version of Charlie Munger's mental models to better understand how the world works.
Obviously time to re-issue in paperback.
Remember all those dudes who thought that if you got scammed it was your own fault for being so vulnerable?
Those dudes run everything now.
the bigger issue IMO is how do you unwind the thought process that just because you can trick a user into doing something doesn't mean you should??
Escape the echo chamber, come to nyc where tech bros are just a poop stain on the multi displinary napkin
I'm a software engineer, & I'm growing to hate the tech industry. When I started, 30 odd years ago, excitement & hope reigned; folks like Berners-Lee lead the field.Then .com arrived, and the techies started to believe the ridiculous hype.
Tech is the new banking sector 💰💰💰
To be fair....i still believe people who are so narcissistic that they feel that the rest of us care what they are eating enough to post a picture....belong in a padded room....
Regarding emissaries there is probably an interesting compare /contrast to how industrial revolution tech (railroads, electricity, telephone) developed common good norms in a time of similarly unprecedented rate of tech/social change.
Yes! The only real solution is for people to prefer the truth over entertainment or reassurance.
Ok, I'll hop on this Elizabeth Warren/Native American testing bandwagon (gently and non-politically). I've been a @23andMe customer for a while, and have followed their ancestry updates closely.
All is more or less as expected....except for this bit about Native American.
The family is almost completely composed of Spanish peasants (from various regions) who emigrated, along with a massive wave in the late 19th-cent./early 20th-cent., to Cuba back when it was a booming economy (richer than Spain's) and worth emigrating to (Communism killed that). Also, the native population of Cuba was annihilated early on---was the first place the Spanish colonized after all. Having a native background in Cuba would be like having the same in, say, Massachusetts, particularly if you're (say) mostly Irish. Just really, really unlikely. (Note: the North African/Arab background is less mysterious. The Iberian peninsula was part of the Muslim world for centuries. It would be odd *not* to have some Arab/Middle Eastern background coming from Spain. Given the family is mostly from Northern Spain, it's small though.)
I have a Spanish passport, have been back to the ancestral villages in Spain, seen the church where my grandmother was baptized, my grandfather told me stories about growing up as the child of Spanish colonists in rural Cuba. The native bit just clashes with all the family lore.
People are weary. They get run down by the daily demands of life. Work, stress, health, money. It all adds up. THEN, when their defenses are low, they get SLAMMED with very clever, psychologically manipulative marketing. Game over. Broke and sick for life. They used to stand a chance when it was newspaper and TV ads. Now, with algorithms that prey on the data they themselves provide via social media and browsing habits? No chance. Digging an endless hole. Very smart, well educated people cannot overcome this trap.And the few that do are tempted to use that knowledge to prey on others. Those with less intelligence and agency are sheep being led to slaughter. Leaders, those who have been given the ability to initiate change in the world (you know who you are), have a responsibility to fight against those who take advantage of others, to not sit quietly under the false flag of peace. Everywhere you go, look around, nearly everyone looks miserable. The most prosperous time to be alive in human history, and people walk like zombies through life.
They were told these material goods would bring fulfillment, instead they brought debt slavery.
— Antonio Garc\xeda Mart\xednez (@antoniogm) November 15, 2018