I would put it differently, that any major technical innovation will change the balance of power between people and institutions, and so have political conseque

I would put it differently, that any major technical innovation will change the balance of power between people and institutions, and so have political consequences. You have to deal with those the only way we know how—by engaging with the messy, frustrating, difficult human institutions that we all rely on. Because people are involved, you can't anticipate the social effects of any technology. It's the problem Soros calls 'reflexivity'—systems with people in the feedback loop don't behave like dumb systems; they take your own motives into account and change their behavior! So just deploying the stuff and hoping for some kind of complicated socio-technical bank shot that gets you the outcome you want is unlikely to work. You can say "I don't care what the consequences are", but you can't pretend there will be no consequences, or that you can predict them. That whole concept of the 'inversion in political life' belongs to Zeynep Tufekci, to whom all credit is due for it. I agree that it is brilliant. She is a profound thinker about this stuff. If you're not already familiar with her work, you're in for a treat. For your last question, this is what I am trying to figure out in organizing Tech Solidarity, and I wish I had any answers. It is very, very hard.