John Lloyd says technological inventions which are aimed
at improving lives are double-edged.
“People
still talk about the geopolitics of oil. But we now have to talk about the
geopolitics of technology.”
These
words come from Craig Mundie, former head of research at Microsoft, speaking at
the Ambrosetti Forum in the palatial surroundings of the Villa d’Este Hotel on
Italy’s Lake Garda last weekend. It’s an artful phrase, the geopolitics of
technology, and it’s dropped into the “global conversation” at a well-chosen
time.
The
“geopolitics of oil” means complex and shifting political alliances linked to corporate
chess games designed to capture squares of oil and gas exploitation. The
geopolitics of technology, by contrast, will be the stuff of every sphere of
public and private life.
Also
at the Ambrosetti Forum, Vivek Wadhwa of Stanford University spelled out the
next challenges: the culling of jobs by robots; the entry of the tech companies
into the health business, armed with every kind of detail about their clients’
wellbeing; the growing solar, wave and wind power competition to energy
systems; the deadly danger Wi-Fi poses to telecom companies.
There’s
more. There’s driverless cars; the Internet of Things producing, in your home …
things you want in your home. These homes will become intelligent and managed
from afar, even abroad. Education systems will be increasingly detached from
institutions like schools and colleges, replaced by innovations like distance
learning from a cadre of super-professors. Entertainment will be increasingly
instantly available, and personalised, in the home or on the move.
And
on the darker web: drug dealing, paedophilia and weapons’ sales protected by
ultra-strong encryption; terrorism organized across continents; cyber warfare
thieving ideas and plans, and taking down computer systems of whole countries.
This
world is coming upon us. The waves of migrants from the Middle East and Africa
struggling into Europe are organized, and organize themselves, through the
social media. Uber cars are a few pecks on a smart phone away in many cities;
Airbnb rooms are replacing hotels (not the Villa d’Este, yet). We read
newspapers and books on tablets and shift our reading from newspapers to
websites like Buzzfeed, Vice and Vox, fashioned for phones and tablets, born of
the ‘Net.
Much
of this empowers us. Learning through online courses means, in theory that
everyone can go back to school. Uber cabs and Airbnb rooms mean that unused
resources are brought into play; services are provided to people who struggled
to afford them previously and options for making extra money open to those who
didn’t have them before. Those entrepreneurs and charities seeking finance can
go to crowd-funding sites for their capital; or use peer-to-peer lending or
investing platforms to get loans or investment from other individuals, with a
peer-to-peer lending company as intermediary.
It
empowers, too, in more direct ways. It allows us, at times forces us, to use
our own power and initiative where before we had been passive. It draws us into
taking more responsibility for our education, our health and our work.
Yet
these changes are double-edged. Matthew Taylor, chief executive of the Royal
Society of Arts in London, writes that “a desire for autonomy, flexibility and
fulfillment is … a big part of the shift,” but admits that “some
self-employment is involuntary, and much is low quality and low income.”
Try
convincing a licensed cab driver of the virtues of Uber (they’ve mounted
demonstrations in many cities, and convinced Paris to ban the UberPop service,
which uses part-time, unregistered drivers). Try extolling the virtues of
Airbnb to a couple who run a bed and breakfast business.
There’s
no question that we are in for a Great Disruption (there are three recent books
with that title - by the U.S. political scientist Francis Fukuyama, Australian
environmentalist Paul Gilding and UK business journalist Adrian Woolridge). And
there’s no question that those most disrupted will be the middle and working
classes - who, everywhere, have been having at best a thin time for the past
two decades, and are likely to have an increasingly insecure one.
Jobs
have been created - but many, in the service sector, are both insecure or what
the academic-activist David Graeber calls “bullshit jobs” - jobs which give
neither pleasure to their holders nor benefit to society (he instances public
relations, lobbying and telemarketing). “It’s as if,” he writes, “someone were
out there making up pointless jobs just for the sake of keeping us all
working.”
More,
the service jobs are often wearying, and don’t provide a decent living -
especially for those who live in expensive cities like New York, London or
Paris. “Gone is the era of the lifetime career,” write Nick Hanauer and David
Rolf, “let alone the lifelong job and the economic security that came with it,
having been replaced by a new economy intent on recasting full-time employees
into contractors, vendors, and temporary workers.” They imagine a young worker
in her late 20s whom they name Zoe: she works on a hotel’s front desk, a job
she does well but which she can only do for 29 hours a week - the maximum time
a worker can be employed before qualifying for benefits that cost the employer.
So
she gets gardening jobs through the TaskRabbit site; does some shifts on Uber;
rents her apartment on Airbnb while moving into her parents’ house; and
sometimes does temp work if she has time. She never takes a holiday or goes on
a date, works every day and can’t afford to buy a house, go to college or save.
This sounds extreme to me (better to have found a real worker); but not
impossible, and indicative of a trend which is quickening.
Work
- making sure it’s there, making it meaningful, giving it the dignity of being
part-constructed by the worker - will be the largest domestic issue in our
economies. Governments have to take it on (who else can mediate between
competing forces?). But citizens have to be active in their own betterment,
too. We’re past the era in which all boats rise with the tide: the geopolitics
of technology will be shaped by reversing the decline of the middle classes,
ceasing to acquiesce in vast enrichment for a few, insecurity for the many.
John
Lloyd co-founded the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism at the
University of Oxford, where he is Senior Research Fellow.
Source | http://ewn.co.za
No comments:
Post a Comment