Author is one step away from the realization that Capitalism is the culprit, and technology is just the vector.
Technology has never been the problem: there’s nothing wrong with genetic engineering, AI, etc. They can (and have) been used for good.
The problem has always been the “greed is good” sociopaths using it for evil.
The problem is the tech is no longer addressing and solving existing problems. It is only being inserted into working systems to collect data and fees, breaking the processes.
Tech isn’t the problem. It’s the people in charge of it. It’s the capitalism/neo-feudalism controlling the politics.
tech is not the problem, corporations are.
Open-source technology absolutely is making the world better.
Open source analytics tools are still pushing for ad-driven business models that make the world (and the content) worse. Open source LLMs still waste computational power and pollute. And the list continues. Some open source technologies serve a good goal, some contribute to make the world as bad as some non-OSS.
That is what naked prehistoric apes said about technology called clothes and domestication of plants and animals and cave paintings.
My phone struggled to load the site to order a single cold brew, pop-ups to install the custom App kept obscuring the options, and I had to register with my phone number, email address, and first and last name to buy a $5 cup of coffee.
Then walk out. Don’t reward the bullshit with your money. The coffee shop ain’t gonna give a shit if you keep buying coffee just to go home and complain on your blog.
Or… ask the staff for a menu, order with them, respectfully let them know how you feel about the qr/app thing (unlikely it was their decision to implement but they can pass on the complaint), and if they’re unwilling to take your order (which is hopefully unlikely at this point) feel free to make a little stink (if you feel inclined) and walk out. Still ok to complain on your blog about being spammed with the app but I’d rather try the obvious options first rather than expect the owners to heuristically discover via non-returning customers that we really don’t want the app.
That is, if the coffee/food/service is good, otherwise yea fuck em
Came here to say this. I will never be compelled to install an app on my phone by an eatery the first time I go there. That is severely hostile design. Don’t willingly inconvenience yourself just to freely provide them your tracking info to sell.
Weird seeing an Australian using a picture from a place in Belgium
I had an Amazon bot lie to me. I told it some item didn’t show up and I wanted a replacement. It said it would send one and it would show up in my orders. It never did. So I requested a refund later. So tedious.
If you use and consequently support scummy Amazon you fully deserve it.
Oh I’m so sorry someone asked for an enamel pin from Amazon. Maybe next time someone asks me for a gift from somewhere I’ll subject them to a purity test.
apology not accepted
I disagree about such a generalization.
There are very few instances where people decide to be dumb and use technology for it but in general my life is much better thanks to technology.
My job exists due to technology, the Internet allows me to work from home, a washing machine washes my clothes, I can order food in the middle of a meeting and have it delivered on my lunch pause, I can speak to my family half a world away everyday, with video, for free, I can have the answer to any question in seconds from my a tiny device in my pocket, my car brakes automatically if I’m distracted (and heats up before I sit down in the morning)… you get the deal.
I hear you, but the writer isn’t concerned with “can”: If you replaced “can have the answer to any question in seconds from my a tiny device in my pocket” with “must” then you can see their dissatisfaction.
if I went to a restaurant and was told that I had to install and use their app to order their food, I would fucking leave. If it was the only restaurant left in town then I’d have much less choice in the matter. The insidious nature of technology is that it changes “can” with “must”.
I agree, and good for you for leaving the restaurant. You could open a competing restaurant that doesn’t use apps and let people vote with their wallets. It’s not the nature of technology, its the decision of some people who are bad at knowing their customers. I don’t “have to” wash my clothes in the washing machine, but you bet I won’t even think about doing it manually. Forcing the use of an app is like only offering a vegan selection. If your customer didn’t ask for it you are going to have a bad time. If you are the only place in town is a monopoly problem, and a different discussion.
Having to use an app to order food might be slightly annoying, but it beats working 12h a day in the field to feed my familiy. It’s the firstest of first world problems.
In fantasy land you can open a competing restaurant. Back here on earth not only is that not an option for 99% of the population, most people are stuck with the couple choices they have in town and when tech comes in and forces the enshitificstion of services in order to pump stock price you’re stuck just eating this shit forever. That’s the problem. You seem to believe in “the invisible hand of the free market” when that simply doesn’t exist. Consumers aren’t rational. Investors aren’t rational. And the market is anything but free. Big tech is working really hard to make sure they have a stranglehold on every industry to make it worse and trap people into using their platforms.
but it beats working 12h a day in the field to feed my familiy.
btw, people didn’t work 12 h a day in the field
the long work days are a result of capitalism. yes, progress has increased average work hours, instead of decreasing them.
People back then didn’t have Healthcare, cars or iPhones. I like all of those.
Communist countries work even longer hours, look for instance 996 in China.
I don’t agree. Technology in itself is not helpful nor harmful. It’s a tool like a hammer or a knife or a pen and a block of paper.
I agree if one says that technology makes it easier to do harm.:) People and their motives and actions are the same as always, since the stone age and ago.
Technology is not neutral, and philosophers have known this since the middle of the 20th century. See for example Heidegger, Ellul, Arendt.
Technology makes us relate to the world and others in a distorted way. Instead of speaking to you directly, and see your face and features, I relate to you through pure text… A whole lot of important factors disappear as I do. Compare this then to politics, earth, society, where technology have the same effect
Instead of speaking to you directly, and see your face and features, I relate to you through pure text… A whole lot of important factors disappear as I do.
Yes. That’s an aspect to keep in mind.
I think distorted is a bit negative. Communication with filters, yes. I see advantages and disadvantages. It really depends on the case. It’s technology-bound but not exclusive to the digital age - Letters existed before.
Advantages: asynchronity, time to think and reply. Use of different media. Less stressful because less information to process - there is a reason why video telephony isn’t mainstream. Less bias, for all you know I could be Gregor Samsa - you don’t see my gender, age, skin, clothing style. just my text. Disadvantages: misunderstandings can become more likely, since you dont know me. It’s more time consuming to talk through an issue… and so on.
See for example Heidegger, Ellul, Arendt.
Would you recommend one specific article or book?
For recommendations you can’t go wrong with Martin Heidegger’s The Question Concerning Technology. It’s a difficult read without previous knowledge of Heidegger’s philosophy (or phenomenology), but the essay is so influential that there is plenty of secondary literature on it, from videos to podcasts to texts.
His argument, in essence, is that technology is a way of being that makes everything appear as resources for technology to use. As we become a technological society we see people as “human resources”, nature as a depot to be emptied: wind as power, rivers as kinetic energy, the ground as a chest of minerals.
The same phenomenon can also be seen in everything that digital technology does to the persons and society. For example Cambridge Analytica, they are an expression of technology as a way of being, and what they see is untapped resources to be harvested for political gain.
The argument is so influential that Arendt appropriated it to argue that technological/scientific politics will always become self-deluding without actual human intervention. Ellul argued that the technological society becomes self-referential, so that technology creates new issues that we can only solve with technology, which creates new issues (and so on). In the end we become able to do anything… but unable to either stop the cycle or understand what is going on.
Thanks. From your answer I get that there is some philosophical basic knowledge which I’m missing.
If nothing else, now I have heard the name Heidegger in this context.:)
