3 ms·
> There are some middle camps like Humans should control technology that should control humans like China, but roughly thats still nets out to "technology shou
by kbenson 8y ago
> There are some middle camps like Humans should control technology that should control humans like China, but roughly thats still nets out to "technology should control humans".
> However, when it comes to corporate environments, its becoming harder and harder to define humans as the control point, since there are so many corp benefits to putting technology in control.
If you're a bit lenient on how you define "technology" so that it includes policy and process, then that group of humans controlling technology controlling humans gets much larger, as it starts to define most medium to large businesses. Put in that context, it might be more accurate to think of it not in terms of technology, but systems. Humans have been using systems to control humans for millennia, and the arguments are just as old, and the system controlling the people is not a new trope either (e.g. Orwell's classic 1984). I suspect researching and regurgitating those discussions will yield interesting perspectives.
- tsunamifury 8y ago1984 specifically has not aged well to the point of its predictions becoming both trite and easily dismissible in a corporate setting. Its sort of exaggerated misery and book burning was so on-the-nose that society of course knee-jerk rejects anything associated with it. I think the lesser understood brother, A Brave New World, better illustrated how we arrived at these forms of control because we prefer them in the pursuit of happiness. Its this difficult trade-off which is inherently post-capitalistic, convenience for control, that we seem to not have a clear way to have a dialog around.