3 ms·

Peak tech. This feels rather behind the curve, like the author is just figuring out what we've been saying here for many years now. But the difference is that

Peak tech. This feels rather behind the curve, like the author is just figuring out what we've been saying here for many years now. But the difference is that it's now okay for an MIT professor of AI Ethics to say it. That's the crucial change. People are saying it. At the school. At the hospital. Out in public amongst friends one used to "keep up appearances" for. I can discuss it with my boss. Even my aged but highly intelligent mother pesters me about it.... "Digital technology creeps me the fuck out and I just don't want it in my life any more". The emotional, spiritual even social disadvantages now outweigh the purported advantages. For me, that's "peak-tech", which is not necessarily about demand or economics. It's the cultural turning point we're at. We built this stuff. So we better start thinking about how we're going to fix it.

Atheros 4y ago
Traditionally, the government would simply write laws making the bad things illegal. "Vacuum cleaners may not upload any information about a person's home to any server or through any network, else fines and prison." "Televisions and monitors may not, of their own volition, display advertisements, else fines and prison." Or at least very clear labeling rules. I think that the underlying problem, as is often the case, is the Citizens United ruling. Fixing that doesn't solve everything; it doesn't solve disinformation challenges, but it does take care of a lot.
- shephardjhon 4y ago
  While I mostly agree I think this one is more about older people in government simply not understanding tech and data in the age of IoT. I know they do have some small understanding because I have recently read up on SOX, HIPAA and Graham Leach Baily act which all have to do with protecting data and securing IT in some way. What they mostly boil down to is, write stuff down, make sure consumers know it, and protect your computers, and then we will make another group of qualified people who oversee the enforcement usually under the FTC or FCC and make more recommendations.
  - TheRealDunkirk 4y ago
    Yes, and we only need to look at the banking and investment sector to see how well this sort of thing actually works. These are all employment bills, written by the consulting companies who are going to be the ones to take the call from the Fortune 1000 companies that have to implement the regulations, and precious little of what happens in all of this activity actually accomplishes the stated reasons for the law.
wildrhythms 4y ago
>We built this stuff. I think a lot of engineers would prefer to not build this stuff, and are even ideologically opposed to its existence. But there is always another engineer struggling to make ends meet who will commit the code. There is little collective support within the professional engineering space to stand behind ethics in tech; moneyed interests are not just oblivious, but diametrically opposed to it.

Atheros 4y ago

Traditionally, the government would simply write laws making the bad things illegal. "Vacuum cleaners may not upload any information about a person's home to any server or through any network, else fines and prison." "Televisions and monitors may not, of their own volition, display advertisements, else fines and prison." Or at least very clear labeling rules. I think that the underlying problem, as is often the case, is the Citizens United ruling. Fixing that doesn't solve everything; it doesn't solve disinformation challenges, but it does take care of a lot.

shephardjhon 4y ago
While I mostly agree I think this one is more about older people in government simply not understanding tech and data in the age of IoT. I know they do have some small understanding because I have recently read up on SOX, HIPAA and Graham Leach Baily act which all have to do with protecting data and securing IT in some way. What they mostly boil down to is, write stuff down, make sure consumers know it, and protect your computers, and then we will make another group of qualified people who oversee the enforcement usually under the FTC or FCC and make more recommendations.
- TheRealDunkirk 4y ago
  Yes, and we only need to look at the banking and investment sector to see how well this sort of thing actually works. These are all employment bills, written by the consulting companies who are going to be the ones to take the call from the Fortune 1000 companies that have to implement the regulations, and precious little of what happens in all of this activity actually accomplishes the stated reasons for the law.

wildrhythms 4y ago

>We built this stuff. I think a lot of engineers would prefer to not build this stuff, and are even ideologically opposed to its existence. But there is always another engineer struggling to make ends meet who will commit the code. There is little collective support within the professional engineering space to stand behind ethics in tech; moneyed interests are not just oblivious, but diametrically opposed to it.