The news seems to be full of doom-laden headlines about technology. From data theft, to artificial intelligence stealing jobs, to losing traditional ways of life, it feels like every day there’s some new warning about tech taking over our lives. And as a parent I can’t help cautiously noting my children’s increasingly technology-driven lives, particularly given the impending impact of both virtual reality and AI on how they are likely to learn, develop and entertain themselves in the future. But I do also wonder, rather than assuming that everything new is a threat, whether there’s also a counter-argument that considers a more responsible approach to the consumption of technology?
A PwC study has found that AI could contribute £14tr to the global economy by 2030. And though some jobs will become automated, new ones will subsequently be created as a result of a larger and wealthier economy. It also suggests that there’s not likely to be large-scale tech unemployment because of automation. Which is all good and well, but don’t we still need to better understand these forthcoming technologies, especially if there are concerns about how they might impact our lives? After all, by actively engaging with technologies, surely we can better influence their application? The more time I spend working in the sector, the more I’m convinced of this. Which doesn’t mean I’ve been brainwashed, or become a tech utopian; it just means I’m an optimist, and a tech sceptic, and I’m pretty sure these are two states of mind that can comfortably coexist.
Back when mobile phones were just starting to become a normal extension of ourselves, people worried that we would no longer be able to remember phone numbers. But why? Does anyone feel the need to remember every number that’s stored in their phone? Would we not rather use that space in our brains for something more creative or productive?
Similarly with maps, despite now being able to use Google Earth to swoop across any part of our planet, or Google Maps to accurately navigate any forthcoming road trip in real time, people still complain that the art of map reading is being lost. But when was the last time your love of Ordnance Survey made you switch off the satnav so you could plan your route on paper? Convenience trumps nostalgia when it comes to adopting new technologies. London cab drivers with ‘the knowledge’ are still remarkable, but not all of us need to have a mental map of an entire city in order to do our jobs effectively. And the truth is, neither do they.
Creativity is another area of concern when it comes to technological advancement. For a long time, being creative was a protected human attribute; it’s what made us unique and special. But given the recent interest in AI image generators like Midjourney and DALL-E, a debate has arisen around how this might undermine traditional human-generated art.
Innovative technology doesn’t need to replace art; innovative artists will always use technology to express themselves in new ways, which could be seen as perpetuating rather than hindering creativity. Will AI compromise those jobs? Initially some, most likely, but then again photography didn’t kill off painting, and smartphone cameras haven’t killed off the SLR. Technologies themselves can’t kill off the human desire to make stuff. The rise of YouTube didn’t kill off TV, it just bred a new generation of content creators.
It’s worth noting that technological development is often dualistic. Products like duct tape, period pads, the epi-pen, microwaves, even virtual reality headsets, all come from military technological research. Which is perhaps a good point at which to sprinkle in some scepticism. The question of ethics still looms large, particularly in the context of algorithms making decisions that we’ve historically entrusted to fellow human beings. In June the Pentagon unveiled its plans for ‘responsible military AI’ – effectively permitting elements of artificial intelligence into their weaponry. The rationale being that the US is already several years behind China in this field, and if they fail to innovate, they’ll never be in a position to catch up. But does this rationale stack up ethically? Perhaps, if we believe in having the most technologically advanced defence force, but less so if our greater concerns are about machines being capable of making life-or-death decisions.
Unfortunately alarmist headlines don’t help anyone think critically about what’s really happening. The more we understand technological progress, the better we are able to manage, apply, legislate for, and benefit from it. And let’s not forget, there is so much exciting technological discovery taking place right now. Just look at DeepMind’s recent protein folding announcement for example. Rather than getting overwhelmed by the doom and gloom of tech paranoia, some of the responsibility sits with us to stay positively engaged. This way we can hopefully feel a bit more empowered to have a say in what the future might look like.
Which is what I mean by taking the stance of an optimistic tech sceptic. Come join me. And, if you really want to memorise all those numbers in your phone, you’re welcome to do that too.