> It means that we re-acquire the moral resources to constrain and direct our technology. It means that we start to speak and act collectively in ways that create and reinforce real, effective norms, which can then act as a bulwark against the McLuhan-style messages which may be poisoning us all. It doesn’t mean that we reject any and all new tools, even the smartphone itself. It means that we try to become tool-users.
Ok so provide a solution that covers the next 100 years of technological development. That seems like a reasonable time period IMO to demand a plan.
That means the incentive structures that created this system would have to change entirely, otherwise you’ll reinvent the same problem in a different form. That’s usually what happens.
Why? Nobody is looking at foundational root causes of these incentives. If you do then you’ll see that the arc of humanity continues to point in the same direction, with the political cycles (1) playing out with starting regularly.
I’m not seeing any serious attempts at breaking this cycle, just lurching forward with “technology” however defined, being the only thing that regularly and cumulatively supplants human action (though it’s extremely lossy unfortunately - which is why we end up repeating so much).
The power structures never go away, they just change hands between small groups of whomever can get the most attention. Those revolutions are typically where technology leaps forward - whether you realize it or not - that’s Ukraine right now, and it’s getting wild.
The luddites proved that breaking the machines isn’t sufficient, if the whole of the society is dependent on them.
> It means that we re-acquire the moral resources to constrain and direct our technology. It means that we start to speak and act collectively in ways that create and reinforce real, effective norms, which can then act as a bulwark against the McLuhan-style messages which may be poisoning us all. It doesn’t mean that we reject any and all new tools, even the smartphone itself. It means that we try to become tool-users.
Ok so provide a solution that covers the next 100 years of technological development. That seems like a reasonable time period IMO to demand a plan.
That means the incentive structures that created this system would have to change entirely, otherwise you’ll reinvent the same problem in a different form. That’s usually what happens.
Why? Nobody is looking at foundational root causes of these incentives. If you do then you’ll see that the arc of humanity continues to point in the same direction, with the political cycles (1) playing out with starting regularly.
I’m not seeing any serious attempts at breaking this cycle, just lurching forward with “technology” however defined, being the only thing that regularly and cumulatively supplants human action (though it’s extremely lossy unfortunately - which is why we end up repeating so much).
The power structures never go away, they just change hands between small groups of whomever can get the most attention. Those revolutions are typically where technology leaps forward - whether you realize it or not - that’s Ukraine right now, and it’s getting wild.
The luddites proved that breaking the machines isn’t sufficient, if the whole of the society is dependent on them.
Anyone have a solution to break the cycle?
(1) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_cycle_theory