As humans, our identity is more than any single aspect of ourselves. Our identity is comprised of our experiences, our likes and dislikes, our family, friends, and acquaintances. Our identities inform how we relate to the world around us, and just as critical, how the world relates to us.

Likewise, your digital identity is made up of a plethora of digital information about you: what you like, who you know, where you’ve been, et cetera. This might include all kinds of online data from your banking transactions, purchases, social media posts, internet searches, and more. Altogether, this network of information creates a digital image of who you are. So what does your digital identity mean in today’s world — and how can we protect it from being manipulated by people who would use it for their own devices?

Digital Identity in the Modern World

Today, when we meet someone new, we seldom directly exchange personal information like our cell phone numbers, home address, or office location. Instead, we increasingly rely on our digital identities to introduce ourselves to the world. Thanks to the increasing proliferation of digital technology, nearly all of us have a digital identity. Even if you do your very best to stay away from social media, internet browsing, or even email, there is almost certainly some trace of personal information about you in some digital form somewhere. A bit creepy? Sure. But it’s a fact of life in the digital age.

This trend leaves some reminiscing for a bygone era when human engagements were a little more personal. But the rise of the digital identity has its own ring of authenticity. Want to get to know someone’s perspectives? Read their blog articles and posts. Interested in their hobbies or travel? Follow them on social. This approach may seem impersonal. But these pieces of our digital identities do offer the world a window into who we really are and what moves us. It’s also much easier and less invasive than what we had to do in the old days: asking each new acquaintance to explain themselves to us individually and waiting to see whether they fit into our lives or not. In this way, our digital identities capture the best of both worlds: authentic and unobtrusive.

How Does Our Identity Translate into the Virtual World?

Digital identity is important, but there is one big problem with relying on digital identity: a virtual existence can be fabricated by anyone at any time. When members of a community lack control over, or accountability for, their digital identities, trust in the system deteriorates. This makes digital identity inherently untrustworthy, particularly in our increasingly trustless society. Fortunately, however, #DecentTech offers an effective means of fixing this problem. Through decentralized digital technology, or decent tech, we can retake our power to enact real change in our communities.

A current tool to confront erosion of public trust is emerging in blockchain technology. With blockchain technology, parties can reach a consensus on a common digital history of transaction records.

Secure Identification on the Blockchain

The blockchain, a kind of shared public ledger, creates a record of the transaction that cannot be altered, so it will be clear when an asset is fraudulent. This helps to prevent fraud because a party cannot replicate a digital asset and resell it multiple times.

Industries, grassroots movements, and governments alike have expressed interest in blockchain technology. The general goal here is to create a decentralized record of transactions. The fact that the record is decentralized and unalterable by any party allows untrusted parties to transact with a safety net of trust. One example of this is the Illinois Blockchain Initiative. This state initiative is looking to blockchain as a way to securely consolidate identity information of its residents from registries across state agencies.

Our digital identities can be used to verify digital transactions across multiple platforms. For millions worldwide, this technology can open the door to a whole host of digital services and economic opportunities. The U.N. estimates that over 1 billion people on Earth have no form of legal identity. This presents many barriers to modern practicalities such as opening a banking account or buying a cell phone. But with a blockchain identity system, the previously disenfranchised can verify their identity with other users, such as financial institutions, without having to entirely rely on an ineffective, inaccessible, or unresponsive government to produce a valid ID. Further, blockchain technology can store data on a decentralized, encrypted network, which provides robust security protections. This kind of blockchain identity system allows users to maintain control of their data and grant access only to intended parties.

Thanks to innovations in decentralized technologies, we have the tools to protect our digital identities. Still, a strong societal fear of digital identity theft persists — but is this fear valid?

Building Trust in Elections

A recent survey by Atlas VPN shows many Americans fearing identity theft more than murder. This is particularly true with respect to voter fraud, which raises the potential to undermine our entire democracy. But how common is this type of identity theft, and does it impact our elections?

Unfortunately, some have used this fear to sow distrust in the validity of digital identities all together. A good example of this fearmongering tactic is the wide attempt to discredit mail-in ballots for the 2020 presidential election with allegations of voter fraud.

One common of alleged voter fraud that circulated throughout the 2020 presidential election is that anyone with the printing capabilities can steal someone’s identity — someone who is deceased, who historically has not voted, or for another reason is deemed unlikely to vote. This fraudster could then manufacture fraudulent mail-in ballots using that person’s name. There’s just one problem here: this kind of voter identity fraud is incredibly rare, and it is nearly impossible to commit on a widespread level.

Extensive research and analysis by the Voting Rights Project found just a handful (491 cases, to be exact) of vote-by-mail fraud across the entire nation in the years between 2000 and 2012. As such, claims of widespread voter fraud in the U.S. 2020 presidential election have been repeatedly dismissed by judges and election officials alike. But even so, they have taken root in the public mind. We can see this in the recently coined “Stop the Steal” slogan that has flared up on social media surrounding the election. These allegations are particularly problematic because and can seriously damage our democracy.

By utilizing the power of decentralized technology to protect digital identity, however, we can make our data and our real identities more secure than ever.

Digital Identity in a Trustless Future

Technology can support both the security of our digital identities and the sanctity of personal self-expression (in the form of political representation or otherwise). Recently, state governments have been investigating how a cohesive digital identity can help states work with citizens. Earlier this year, Colorado launched the BallotTrax system, a statewide notification program that updates mail-in voters in real-time about the progress of their ballot processing.

Colorado’s early success stands out as a model for other states to adopt in the future. BallotTrax, developed by Colorado data management company i3logix, is currently working with 15 states and the District of Columbia to help their voters track their ballots through text, email, or voice alerts. As this critical enterprise software solution for voter identification protection continues to develop, the market is sure to see more entrants in this field.

Decent Tech Solutions To Protecting Digital Identity

Public organizations and private entities alike are developing decentralized technologies that protect citizens digital identities. These decent tech applications are supporting democratic processes in Illinois and economic transactions in Delaware already. Both of these states have both recently launched their own blockchain initiatives to improve in-state transactions and consolidate and secure their citizens’ digital identities.

The Illinois Blockchain Initiative has focused on whether blockchain technology can help consolidate and secure its citizens’ digital identities. The Initiative is also aiming to create more secure, accurate, and manageable government records. Delaware is taking a slightly different approach to this application of decentralized technology. Always pro-enterprise, Delaware’s Blockchain Initiative concentrates more on streamlining business transactions for corporations through secure blockchain technology. This would ideally translate to lower transactional costs for consumers.

As technology progresses and our lives continue to move further into the digital sphere, our digital identities are becoming more and more important to our lives each day. A digital identity can be used to expand financial opportunities, verify secure transactions, and secure our personal information. We can better connect with each other, access the services we need, and even safeguard our democracies.

As we hurdle ourselves into an increasingly digital future, secure and verified identities will be an increasingly critical part of our lives. Fortunately, there are countless decent tech solutions for protecting our digital identities, and surely there are more groundbreaking innovations to come in this space.

How Decent Tech Protects Your Digital Identity was originally published in Be Decent on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

Climate change is happening. Over 97% of scientists find that human activity has contributed to the steady warming of our planet’s climate. As our leaders to nothing about it, this problem continues to get worse. But why are so many top figures in American leadership ignoring climate science? Well, believe it or not, a lot of them are in a full-blown state of denial over the irrefutable, unquestionable, sure-as-shit fact of climate change.

Top 10 Climate Deniers in American Politics

At this time, there are over 100 leaders at the top of the American government and economy who have gone on record doubting or denying climate change. Most of them (unsurprisingly) have a financial or personal interest in continuing with business as usual. And as unsurprising as it may be that so many people are happily placing power profit over people and the planet, it’s high time we call them out for it.

Here are the top people in American political, economic, and social leadership who are still denying climate change:

1. Donald Trump

Obviously.

Current-President-but-Thankfully-On-His-Way-Out Donald Trump has long dismissed climate change as a hoax. During his term he worked to roll back environmental protection rules and emission regulations, including climate work at United States National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration.

2. Jim Inhofe

Inhofe is the United States Senator from Oklahoma. He also wrote a book called The Greatest Hoax: How the Global Warming Conspiracy Threatens Your Future. This tome laid out his shameless theory that global warming is not a scientific fact but rather a grand conspiracy. He is also one of the 22 Republican Senators who signed a letter urging President Trump to withdraw from the Paris Agreement. Notably, Sen. Inhofe receives a generous amount money from the oil and gas industry. Reportedly, Inhofe has accepted over $2 million in political contributions from the fossil fuel industry.

3. Ted Cruz

Cruz, a United States Senator from Texas, rejects scientific consensus on climate change and denounces the scientific evidence supporting global warming. He, too, supported and signed the letter withdraw from the Paris Agreement and supported of TransCanada Keystone XL Pipeline.

4. Mitch McConnell

McConnell is Kentucky’s United States Senator and still was the Senate Majority leader at the end of 2020. He is known for casting doubt on well-established and peer reviewed climate science. In fact, he is a reliable vote against climate regulation and pushes back any actions his peers in Congress suggest to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. He is also one of the 22 Senators joining Injofe’s letter urging Trump to withdraw from the Paris Agreements, which means he is partially to blame for the fact that the United States as the only nation in the world not aligned with the Agreement. Oh, and he also made approving the controversial Keystone XL Pipeline a top priority on his political agenda.

5. Myron Ebell

Ebell is the director of Global Warming and International Environmental Policy at Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) and the Direction of Freedom Action. He chairs the Cooler Heads Coalition which is focused on framing global warming as a lie. He was also appointed by President Trump to lead the United States Environmental Protection Agency’s transitional team from 2016 to 2017.

6. Steve Milloy

Milloy is a Director at Murray Energy Corp., the largest privately-owned coal producer in the U.S.. He is also the Senior Policy Fellow at Energy & Environment Legal Institute despite having close ties to both the oil and tobacco companies. In addition to disputing climate change, Milloy has publicly doubted the health risks of smoking (because… ?) .

7. Patrick Michaels

Michaels was the Director of the Center for the Study of Science at Cato Institute. He authored several books and papers denying, criticizing, or minimizing climate change science and greenhouse gas emission risks. These materials have earned Michaels a reputation as an expert despite the fact that 40% of his funding comes from the oil industry.

8. David Legates

Legates is a geography professor at the University of Delaware who is also known to question fundamental climate science (come on, U. Delaware — those students pay good tuition). Speaking from the position of an expert, Legates spreads misinformation (like suggesting one outcome of burning fossil fuels and pumping more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere would be a more habitable planet for humans).

Despite being a disgraced-academic-slash-whacko, Legates was hired he was hired by the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) for a senior position in the last few months of 2020. Who knows what Trump’s motivation for that was (but then again, I also don’t understand why Steve Malloy is such a big fan of lung cancer either — so maybe it’s just me?).

9. John Cornyn

Cornyn is a United States Senator for Texas. He too signed the letter supporting the withdrawal from the Paris Agreement. He also stanchly opposed the Green New Deal, voted against banning drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, and voted against removing oil and gas exploration subsidies. Cool, thanks John.

10. Mark Morano

Former Republican aide and congressional staffer Mark Morano now runs a climate change denial non-profit called Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow, which is behind the propaganda website ClimateDepot.com. This anti-science thinktank that has received funding from ExxonMobil, Chevron, and hundreds of thousands of dollars from foundations associated with Richard Mellon to sow doubt into proven theories regarding climate change.

Climate Change is Real, Politicians are Fake

The men listed above are top figures in American leadership, but they are not representative of most Americans. In fact, more than 90% of Americans accept climate change science — and that’s because we are experiencing it for ourselves.

Without a doubt, it’s getting hotter. July 2020 tied with July 2016 as the second-hottest July on record. July 2019 still holding the top spot. And, in other parts of the world, this was the hottest year on record in all of history. The Artic Sea ice shrank to record lows, and is now just about as small as we’ve ever known it to be. Global warming is making the air drier and dustier, which makes asthma worse. It’s also making chemical and biological pollution more hazardous and contributing to the spread of disease. Warmer weather is making for deadlier storms, and drier summers are causing wildfires to burn hotter and faster every year.

You may be horrified by the catastrophic state of affairs we’ve found ourselves in and desperate to find some way to help do something about it. If so, this response makes you a realist, and I commend your brave objectivity. But many of the people running our country — the politicians and corporate leaders at the top of our centralized systems — are not as brave as you are. Instead, they live in denial.

Instead of following science, they are denouncing the fact of climate change. Why? Sometimes, it’s because doing the right thing is very hard, and other times because doing so better lines their pockets with money from the fossil fuel companies. But regardless of why they are doing it, the men listed in this article are encouraging the rollback of climate mitigation legislation. They are pushing back against international agreements designed to fight the disastrous effects of climate change.

You may recognize that the global environmental, social, and human health issues caused by climate change are real, and that’s a downer. But stubbornly insisting that they don’t affect you and your community is just burying your head in the sand. And if this is your frame of mind, I’m sorry to have to be the one to inform you that you’re in a state of full-blown denial too.

Originally published at https://axiom-communications.com on January 15, 2020.

The world is looking rather bleak these days, don’t you think?

From pollution to public health, the life-threatening challenges that we were warned about decades ago are no longer conceptual concerns that our children and our grandchildren may face one day. We are experiencing the detrimental effects of climate change, systemic corruption, social injustice, accumulating pollution, and countless other global issues. But these issues aren’t staying on the world stage. Rather, some of us are seeing them knock on our doorsteps, like a wolf in the night creeping around our neighborhoods with a mind to swallow us up whole. But why is this all happening? And what can we as decent people do to stop it?

We are seeing an increased frequency, size, and destruction of wildfires across the West. Same goes for the hurricanes across the Southeast and the tornadoes of the Midwest. The global COVID-19 pandemic isn’t giving way any time soon — it is time for an all-hands-on-deck effort to make this world a safer, healthier, and happier place to live.

But, of course, all hands-on deck has historically excused the captain. And in America, our captain is the federal government. Our leaders remain behind by filling the status quo and doing very little, or nothing at all. In fact, they actively refuse to not implement measures to stop our most threatening environmental hazards from getting worse.

However, there is a steady and trustworthy solution we can turn to. No, not our political or economic leadership: decentralized digital technology.

Millennials and Gen-Zers grew up watching their government and economic systems fail because politicians and business leaders either live in denial or put their profits before the people. But we’re a resilient bunch, and those of us most impacted by the failures of our centralized political institutions aren’t just taking it lying down. We are now seeing a mass mobilization of people innovating new ways to harness decentralized technologies (“decent tech”) in the form of environmental activism from the grassroots.

Digital technology is growing increasingly decentralized, and as is our opportunity. The implication of useful and problem-solving technology does demand that we think more deeply about decentralized technology as a tool that increases our power to stimulate positive change. That starts from the grassroots.

Decent tech innovators have distributed the power to make positive change throughout our communities and across the world. Using applications of blockchain technology, artificial intelligence (AI), edge computing, and the billions of devices in the Internet of Things (“IoT”), our centralized institutions’ pervasive failures to protect the environment are more irrelevant than ever. It also helps change our mind set to think more deeply about the decent tech and digital devices we can use as tools that increase political, social, and economic power.

The world has seen a proliferation in technology since the first industrial revolution, and over the centuries increasingly sophisticated technologies have changed the way we live, work, and interact with each other. Many people question whether we are better off for it, given the unintended consequences technology has had on us. Our privacy and personal dignity have eroded. Viral misinformation perverts our democratic processes. The internet is just as much a playground for hackers and cybercriminals as it is a sandbox for innovators and entrepreneurs.

Reasonable minds can reasonably differ regarding whether our society is better off for all the progress we have seen in digital technology over the decades. But all such critiques aside, modern technology has made water cleaner, sanitation healthier, air purer, and the environment safer for billions of people around the world. Digital solutions to real-world problems have extended the length of and improved the qualities of physical lives. And more to the point, technology has helped local communities solve their most pressing social and environmental problems — which are largely ignored by the higher-ups. In fact, computing technology is the best tool we have to protect ourselves when the people we put in power simply won’t.

We can do this by using the power of digital technologies to mobilize effective grassroots movements. And thanks to the growing trend towards decentralization, this is getting easier every day. In fact, the increasing number of technological tools that do not require lasting association with a centralized controlling organization — i.e. decent tech- are the most powerful weapons in the modern advocate’s arsenal.

About the Author:

Samantha Joule Fow is fascinated by the disruptive nature of technology, and her focus on environmental advocacy is a natural extension of her training and education in environmental policy as well as her passion for nature and the outdoors. After completing her undergraduate studies in economics, Samantha went on to earn a J.D., a Master’s in Energy Regulation and Law, and an LL.M in Environmental Law from Vermont Law School. Samantha founded technical writing and digital marketing company Axiom Communications in 2017, and she continues to advocate for positive social and environmental change as a writer, facilitator, teacher, and speaker. To see more of Samantha’s work, check out her other online publications.

Originally published at https://bedecentbook.com on October 14, 2020.

Nineteen years ago today, extremists carried out a horrific act of terror. The attack on the World Trade Center buildings marked both a defining for the Millennial generation and a turning point in America’s national security policy. It was the dawning of the age of trustlessness, a time in which outsiders are treated as enemies and facts are subjective. This is a sad state, but there is reason for hope.

Decentralized technology (“decent tech”) in the hands of decent people can and will save our planet, but the potential for this Earth-shattering technology doesn’t end with environmental applications. In fact, we can use decent tech to help us secure our borders without firing a single bullet or spilling a drop of blood.

Things Don’t Have to Stay the Way They Are

These are uncertain (and for many, unhappy) times. Diseases and violence are everywhere. Our political and economic systems are failing us. The humanitarian crisis on America’s southern border is impacting peoples’ lives in a way that will echo for generations. These are all terrible circumstances, but things don’t have to stay as they are.

Our leaders have failed to keep us safe, sure. Our economy is limping through yet another recession, yet. America’s international reputation for the protection of human rights is being replaced by a legacy of oppression. But fortunately, we can leverage the power of decent tech to leave this all behind.

There has been an ongoing movement to create more informed, deliberate, and coordinated approaches to using technology for national security. There is a mutual understanding that developing more advanced and sophisticated software will also provide for efficient and effective nonviolent partnerships.

Multiple sectors working together to share technology and knowledge is can be the foundation of nonviolent national security measures. The ultimate goals of technology in national security revolve around:

• Preserving the United States’ technological leadership,
• Supporting the peaceful use of technology, and
• Managing catastrophic risk.

Indeed, as technology advances, as does the United States national security. Technology-assisted military tools can lead to new strategies towards the developments of voluntary restraint and nonviolent conflict resolution. But what is decentralized technology actually being used for in the military and other systems supporting national defense?

Why Does the Military Use AI?

AI has been used in national security since at least WWII. Today, AI is a component of key systems within our national security infrastructure and it has become a driving force in military, information, and economic superiority. Artificially intelligent computers run data collection, analysis, and strategic creation. For the military, this means more national security resources can be can be collected and better information can be deciphered from it. This is just the type of thing that people can’t be trusted with.

Two big motivating factors in the integration of AI technology into national security is to preserve the United States leadership in technology and mitigating any catastrophic risks. All nations develop AI for a variety of military functions, and most are not weapon related. AI is being woven into fields of intelligence collection, analysis, logistics, cyber operations, information operations, command and control, and in semi-autonomous and autonomous vehicles, aircrafts, and ships.

What Can AI Do for National Security?

AI and other decentralized technologies have facilitated the building of America’s national security both domestically and globally. This is just as true in our defense against terrorism as it is in our approaches to securing our borders.

AI provides the United States with significant potential for more thorough and thoughtful national security. Machine learning has already enabled automation in processes ranging from virtual activism and advocacy for key defense policies to labor-intensive and technical activities, like capturing and assessing satellite image analysis in aerospace, cyber defense across communication lines, and nuclear control systems and regulators. With every new AI development, however, comes more advanced strategies, organization, priorities, and a reallocation of resources of all types.

Regardless of the particular applications, this much is for sure: America will use technology to expand its military force across the world. But it is one thing to ask AI to conduct facial recognition to deter crime in a busy city, and another thing altogether to command it to kill people on the battlefield based on this same assessment. The great potential for mistakes, hacking, and for other detrimental malfunctions make using AI for war an extremely risky activity.

Decent Tech Demands Decent Leadership

Technology is two-faced — it can lead facilitating virtual activism and virtual advocacy, autonomous operations, more informed decision-making, and increase the speed and scale of actions. At the same time, however, it can also be unpredictable, create vulnerabilities, and be easily manipulated. This fact alone fosters competition for innovative technology applications in the world of national security and defense. But thoughtful and purposeful applications of technology designed for warfare can prove useful and tactful without any actual threat of force.

Just as any tool, technology can be used as a weapon; whether tech tools help or hurt depends upon the intentions of the humans who are controlling the AI that’s managing more and more of our national security every day. We know too little about AI to justify asking it to use its robotic discretion to fight wars for us — but who are the people making these decisions?

Tech innovators have built platforms to increase participation and the ability to pool resources together. This has helped to raise the level of overall participation by spreading information fast and is useful for mobilizing large groups people quickly. As such, decent tech unites people and causes across the world. People are better able to share goals, methods, and communicate to and among leaders. But in truth, policymakers and civic activists aren’t always informed about the risks associated with new technologies or know how to account for security threats appropriately.

Despite this lack of knowledge, Congressional policymakers are the ones who have the power to influence the direction of decent tech for world peace. Through our collective virtual activism, we can dictate how it decent tech actually implemented in our border security and national defense systems. That way, we can instruct our leaders to use this powerful technology in more decent ways.

Protecting Ourselves Peacefully

As we mark the anniversary of an act of violence that scarred the hearts and souls of an entire generation, I hope that we all take a moment to reflect upon the self-perpetuating nature of violent acts. The more war, hatred, and oppression that we introduce in the world, the more violence springs up all around us. But as we well now, things don’t have to stay the way they are.

As technology spreads throughout local communities around the world, so does power. Placed in the hands of people who will use it for good, this increasingly decentralized technology can change the world. Artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning are growing into an integral part of modern society, and they are already finding applications in national security and defense. Moving forward, let’s work to ensure that technology is used as effectively to assist in nonviolent civic activism and the establishment of world peace.

Originally published at https://bedecentbook.com on September 11, 2020.

The new normal is chaotic. Between COVID-19, the world’s growing support for Black Lives Matter, the rippling impacts of the Me Too Movement, and other massive shifts in American life, the rippling impacts of people engaged in the pandemic economy and activism 2.0 are powerful. These changes may be tough to wrap our minds around, but they are also sowing the seeds of compassion across the global economy.

Rather than single-mindedly procuring goods and services with the highest quality at the lowest cost, people are being more mindful of the well-being of workers, their loved ones, and themselves. This is triggering a re-examination of working conditions for people in all roles and industries, and compassionate corporations are coming out on top.

Coronavirus and Social Justice in the Workplace

Businesses are facing challenges to maintaining positive workplace environments in the pandemic economy and the age of activism 2.0. This is particularly true COVID-19 begins to shine new light on economic inequities that are both perpetuating systemic oppression and making the pandemic worse for us all.

The disproportionate impacts that coronavirus is having on the women and minorities who are more likely to work in essential jobs are well documented. This is partly due to the fact that many of the workers in “essential jobs” exempt from many of America’s stay-at-home orders are women and minorities. These individuals must continue to go to their workplaces, risking exposure to the coronavirus, while also being less likely to have access to important benefits like health insurance coverage. This feeds into a self-perpetuating cycle that is only making the pandemic and the social issues being challenged through activism 2.0 even worse, as workers who lack paid sick leave are not only more likely to be women and racial minorities, they are also less likely to stay home if they feel sick.

If this isn’t bad enough, the social issues arising in workplaces in the wake of the pandemic are actually running deeper than the immediate risk posed to frontline workers. In addition to allowing our colleagues to peek into our living spaces, remote work is starting to reveal certain racial, economic, and professional divides that employees at a traditional workplace may never be exposed to. As a result of these and the myriad of other pressures facing workers in the new normal in the age of activism 2.0, many workplaces are seeing increased signs of clinical anxiety or depression. These are all humanistic issues that cost businesses money, and becoming a more compassionate and socially responsible organization may prove key to weathering the storm.

Why Invest in Corporate Social Responsibility?

Investing in a socially responsible corporate culture driven by compassion pays out in several ways. Good corporate citizens enjoy greater profitability, improved efficiency, and cheaper capital. Consider the benefits of B-Corp Certification as an example.

B-Corps are businesses that have been deemed “Beneficial,” meaning that they do business with a purpose to create value for society as well as making money. B-Corp certified businesses are obligated to consider the impact of their decisions on their workers, customers, suppliers, community, and the environment. Earning a B-Corp certification requires high standards of transparency and accountability, as well as a means of creating positive social and environmental benefit. Sound like a waste of money? It’s not.

Sustainable economic growth requires workplaces to be more equitable, inclusive, and resilient. In fact, as the coronavirus pandemic continues to spread, building a compassionate corporate culture of social responsibility may help your company survive the economic recession looming over us.

Social Responsibility for Survival

We’re staring down the barrel of another major economic recession. This is putting most businesses in survival-mode, and investing in social responsibility may prove key to surviving this economic downturn while also gaining more popularity in the age of activism 2.0.

In the last financial crisis, B-Corps were 63% more likely to stay in business than their traditional counterparts. This is partially true because many investors seek out companies that have socially responsible environmental and social practices. However, there are several significant advantages to building a more ethical corporate culture, including:

• Better brand recognition and reputation,
• Increased sales and customer loyalty,
• Reduced operational costs,
• Improved financial performance,
• New opportunities for business growth and attracting better talent,
• Easier access to capital, and more.

Now and in the future, lenders and investors will be more willing to work with an ethical company. Customers also feel better about spending their money on products and services that make the world a better place. This is particularly true during the COVID-19 pandemic, which has led to a massive increase in socially responsible consumer behavior.

Coronavirus Brings Corporate Compassion to the Spotlight

Businesses with an authentic commitment to positive social purposes integrated into their corporate culture are faring far better during COVID-19 than their more traditionally profit-centered counterparts. This is the result of a number of coalescing factors, including things like a flattened hierarchy and flexible roles in workplaces initially designed to encourage agility in these types of organizations. In addition to affording higher levels of transparency and participation in the creation of workplace culture, this approach is helping businesses adapt to the demands of the new normal.

Beyond providing a more equitable and transparent structure for workers to adapt to new policies, companies that have made efforts to be socially responsible also face external pressures to keep up with their reputation for doing good. People have become more conscious of the things they buy and the companies behind them, and many customers are watching how companies react during the crisis. This perception is particularly impactful in sectors like health care, manufacturing, food service, and delivery, which have seen an uprising of support from the public at large.

How to Become a Compassionate Corporation

Becoming a compassionate corporation requires shifting from a resource-oriented view of market operations to a people-oriented perspective. Companies that have succeeded in this regard begin by honing-in on their unique abilities to contribute to their communities and the world. For example, Google is consistently rated as one of the most socially responsible corporations in the United States. However, the tech giant didn’t become a good corporate citizen by using its deep pockets to throw money at popular issues. Instead, Google has turned a critical eye towards the social and environmental issues most relevant to its operations. In many ways, the company has become engaged in activism 2.0 itself.

First, Google is a major player in an industry marred by racial and gender inequities. Rather than succumbing to the temptations of maintaining the status quo, the company has leveraged its unique position as a top employer in tech to support diversity and female leadership. Google and its parent company, Alphabet Inc., also require massive amounts of electricity to power searches, data centers, cloud-based services, and many other heavy computing demands. To meet its own surging electrical consumption, the company has become the world’s largest corporate buyer of renewable energy. And while then-candidate President Trump was making efforts to prevent Muslims from immigrating to the United States, Google CEO Sudar Pichai spoke out to protect the company he leads from the oppressive forces of nationalistic xenophobia. Speaking from the perspective of his own experience as an immigrant from India, Pichai’s voice rose above many of the other public outcries over these policies because it reflected both a deeply personal concern and a defense of Google’s globalized workforce.

Doing Well by Doing Good in the New Normal

Being a good corporate citizen means embracing social responsibility while also meeting legal and economic responsibilities. Some business leaders dismiss socially responsible investments in non-operational, pro-social goals as little more than expensive PR campaigns. However, becoming a compassionate corporation is an investment that accrues financial benefits far exceeding any short-term boost to reputation that may result from positive press coverage. In fact, building a corporate culture of compassion and social responsibility will help companies survive the looming challenges posed by the pandemic economy.

Good corporate citizens like Google help produce higher standards of living and quality of life for the communities that support their business. These companies maintain company cultures that support social, environmental, and philanthropic activities while still maintaining profitability for stakeholders. But of course, hitting the sweet spot on this double bottom line is easier said than done.

Few companies will ever amass the resources at Google’s disposal, but the company did not become a good citizen by dumping billions of dollars into philanthropy. Rather, Google has made directed, intentional investments in social responsibility that have also helped to further operational goals. As our global economic outlook continues to grow dimmer day by day, companies need to think creatively to ensure their survival. Businesses looking for ways to manage the economic impacts of COVID-19 should consider the benefits of becoming a good corporate citizen — it may prove to be the best investment companies can make in the pandemic economy and the age of activism 2.0.

Originally published at https://bedecentbook.com on July 30, 2020.

Far too many social justice warriors have lost their lives in America’s war on hate. But progress is a prize awarded only after a hard-fought battle — and in the end, love always wins. Few of us know this as well as the equal rights activists who have been fighting the good fight for LGBTQ+ equality. They may be weary and worn, but they are winning.

Civil Rights in America

Discrimination has been standard in American life for most of our nation’s history. Women, racial and ethnic minorities, individuals with disabilities, people who questioned the binary nature of gender or sexuality, and anyone else who didn’t fit into strict social parameters were forced to suffer. They were denied economic opportunity and faced a constant threat of violence. And up until the mid-1960s, much of this disgraceful behavior was perfectly legitimate in the eyes of the law.

When John F. Kennedy took office in 1961, civil rights activists were staging demonstrations across America. In the Jim Crow South, state officials and local police did everything they could to suppress these advocates’ exercise of constitutional free expression. Peaceful protestors were beaten, attacked by police dogs, and knocked to the ground by high-pressure firehoses. But they kept getting back up, bravely determined to help America fulfill its promise of a free society and refusing to be silenced by systematic oppression.

These demonstrations continued for years until they finally caught President Kennedy’s attention. When he proposed the law that would become the Civil Rights Act of 1964, he affirmed the sentiment that America’s social justice activists had been proclaiming for generations: “this nation, for all its hopes and all its boasts, will not be fully free until all of its citizens are free.”

We established our nation on the premise that all men are created equal. But as self-evident as this truth may be, we’re still working on it.

Fighting for Pride

Freedom is fundamental to the American way of life, but it is something that our centralized authorities constantly try to snuff out. The heroes of the Civil Rights Era taught us how vigilant and insistent we must be in our opposition to widespread discrimination, and Pride is a continuation of the important lessons we have learned in the ongoing war on hate.

Pride Month is both a celebration of freedom a commemoration of the sacrifices made in the war on hate. It takes place in June to honor the Stonewall Uprising, a breaking point that launched the modern gay rights movement. In the years leading up to this pivotal event, police had been systematically raiding LGBTQ+ establishments in a consorted effort to oppress the community’s peaceful way of life. On June 28, 1969, one such raid targeted the Stonewall Inn, a gay club in Greenwich Village. Police violently forced patrons and employees out of the bar, just as they had countess times before at innumerable similar establishments. But this time, instead of shrinking away in the face of oppression, the community and its allies fought back.

Today, the LGBTQ+ community has not been subjected to the same degree of systemic abuse that that society was forcing upon them and other historically oppressed communities in the 1960s. Thanks to the efforts of generations of advocates and activists, there has been progress. Our union is more perfect than it was fifty years ago, but we still have a lot of work to do before we can call ourselves a free society.

Progress, Not Perfection

By 2019, less than half of the U.S. states have passed laws protecting people from discrimination based on sexual or gender identity. Discrimination has cost the LGBTQ+ community dearly; in 2016, between 11 and 28 percent of LGB workers reported that they lost out on a promotion at work due to their sexual orientation. Twenty-seven percent of transgender workers reported being fired, not hired, or refused a promotion because of their gender identity. Countless more have been denied access to housing, education, and social and economic opportunity simply by nature of the fact that they do not adhere to narrowminded standards that demand conformance to heterosexual, cisgender norms.

Freedom is an American ideal. Our culture values freedom as a universal and fundamental right, and we believe that people are entitled to do as they please so long as they aren’t hurting anyone. But that hasn’t stopped the powers-that-be from systematically oppressing the freedoms of homosexual, queer, and trans people who aren’t doing anything but living their authentic truth. Freedom fighters are still struggling to stifle the hate that continues to feed the beast of subjugation in this regard. But fortunately, we are constantly discovering new allies every day — including the U.S. Supreme Court.

#LoveWins

In 2004, Massachusetts became the first state to legalize same-sex marriage. Many other states followed its lead, but a decade later same-sex marriages were still not recognized on the national level. The fight for marriage equality went all the way up to the Supreme Court with the case of Obergefell v. Hodges in 2015, which ruled that the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution required all states to recognize the validity of same-sex marriages.

Refusing to accept the arguments made by the governments of Michigan, Kentucky, Ohio, and Tennessee that same-sex marriage “would demean a timeless institution,” the Supreme Court’s decision in Obergefell made marriage equality the law of the land. Thanks to the Supreme Court, all U.S. States are required to allow same-sex couples to marry. The gavel strike that closed this case hammered a massive blow to LGBTQ+ discrimination, and it inspired a new hashtag that is helping to define the spirit of progress in the era of activism 2.0: #LoveWins.

The White House celebrated the Obergefell decision on social media, sharing a video of the iconic building lit up with rainbow colors. President Obama followed up with a congratulatory tweet on what he called “a big step in our march toward equality.” He tagged the post #LoveWins, a sentiment that was echoed tens of millions of times in the days following the Supreme Court’s monumental decision. And last week, love won another Supreme Court case: Bostock v. Clayton County.

In Bostock, the Supreme Court finally afforded the LGBTQ+ community protection from employment discrimination under the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Although Justice Gorsuch expressed the Court’s opinion that banning this type of discrimination should be clear and obvious under the law, the decision took over fifty years. Two of the three plaintiffs in the case — Donald Zarda and Aimee Stephens — didn’t even live to taste the sweetness of their victory. And true to form, the Trump Administration fought hard against it. But no matter how terrible its enemies may be, love always wins in the war on hate.

Love Always Wins: LGBTQ+ Advocacy and the War on Hate was originally published in Axiom Communications on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

Just this week, Virginia became the 38th state to ratify the Equal Rights Amendment, a constitutional provision prohibiting discrimination based on sex. Hitting this critical threshold represents a historical win in the long-fought battle for gender equality in the United States — or it would have, at least, if it had been achieved by the legally-imposed deadline of 1982. Since it was nearly 30 years late, Virginia’s ratification encapsulates the spirit of America’s historical approach in this field: the law protects us from gender discrimination kind-of but not really.

For most women, gender discrimination is just a part of the fabric of daily life. It can be subversive and unintentional, or it can be overt — but the vast majority of our centralized leadership operates in a manner that suggests gender and sexual identity should be relevant factors in decisions like how much workers should be paid, whether children should be educated, and under what conditions we should have access to healthcare. The gender gap is a real threat to the health and wellbeing of women, girls, transgender, and nonbinary individuals everywhere, and it needs to be addressed. But can we eliminate the gender gap by outlawing it?

The Gender Gap is a Real Problem for Everyone

Let’s be clear from the start — the gender gap is very real. The direct difference in incomes paid to men and women in the labor force is well-documented and far from being fully closed. In 2018, gender-based pay differences in the U.S. workforce meant women had to work an extra 39 days that year to earn equal pay to their male counterparts.

One of the biggest factors in the gender pay gap revolves around the fact that most women are responsible for both the majority of unpaid family responsibilities in addition to regular paid work. Across the globe, women spend more time on housework and other unpaid tasks than men. While this work is critical for our economies and societies to function, the people performing it still must find other ways to earn the money they need to survive or depend on others for support. This state of things is not just unfair and oppressive to women, it’s a meaningful demonstration of economic waste.

For countries to be competitive in an increasingly cutthroat global economy, achieving gender equality is a must. But the gender pay gap is not going to close on its own, but the people in power are not particularly motivated to do anything about it. Most often, those who are setting national policy, allocating economic resources, leading companies, shaping markets, and determining who gets heard are not women or trans or nonbinary individuals who experience gender-based oppression personally. As a result, the powerful political and economic institutions of the world restrict women to minimum-wage, low-authority jobs.

A Century-Wide Gap

The World Economic Forum’s annual Global Gender Gap Report analyzes 149 counties on four points: economic participation and opportunity, education, health and survival, and political empowerment. While baseline health and education for women and girls is improving, worldwide performance on other factors is far from impressive. Among all groups assessed, women are the furthest behind on power and influence. The economic opportunity gap is even worse.

It’s important to recognize that the world is achieving progress towards gender equality. The gains made already are largely the result of new platforms for women where they can speak out, tell their stories, march and demonstrate together, run for office, and to improve political and economic participation. And as women continue to win elections in record numbers, the tables are turning — but this change is happening very, very slowly.

Each country has its own expediency rate for closing the gender gap, and each measured category comes with its own unique challenges to achieving. The United States is looking at 208 years of sustained progress towards gender equality before it will see its gender gap closed. Pakistan and Iran are an estimated 500 years away, and Canada and Switzerland each have just over 50 years to go. But world political and economic power structures are constantly changing, and any nation would be wise to shore up gender equality policies to protect itself from the increasingly competitive forces of the world economy.

Equality Builds Better Economies

Worldwide, gender equality is such an important factor in economic growth that is maintains a place among the United Nations’ 17 Sustainable Development Goals. Despite taking the spotlight in sustainable development, gender equality is far from being achieved. By avoiding the economic problems created by the gender gap, however, political and economic leaders self-inflicting harm onto themselves and their communities.

When women, men, transgender, and nonbinary people share decision-making power, more voices are heard. This translates to both a greater breadth of discussion for political and economic problem-solving, but perhaps even more importantly achieving equality means more people in society are being respected and effectively represented. Whether you’re running a country or a company, building a culture on this foundation puts down roots for sustained, long-term growth. Many companies have banned gender discrimination and its effects in order to protect their corporate cultures — should countries consider doing the same?

Outlawing the Gender Gap

The battle over the Equal Rights Amendment will play out in court, but the likelihood that the story will end with an constitutional amendment is pretty slim. However, with a bit of luck and a ton of lobbying, we may see the gender gap outlawed through the federal legislature.

Earlier this year United States House of Representatives passed a new law, the Paycheck Fairness Act, which intends to strengthen equal pay protects for women. With this new legislation, companies would be responsible for reporting how much they pay their employees and demonstrate that salaries are based on other factors besides on sex. Unsurprisingly, the bill is stuck in the Senate — a heavily gender-imbalanced institution made up of 75 men and 25 women — where it will likely die due to lack of bipartisan support. Republicans claim that this type of legislation discourages businesses from hiring women at all, as the transparency requirements associated with proving unequal pay serve as a deterrent.

As the (mostly male) representatives and senators of the U.S. legislature continue to debate the merits of equal pay, other nations are soaring ahead of us. Many nations have already outlawed their gender gaps — and they’re seeing some real benefits as a result.

Iceland Criminalizes the Gender Pay Gap

Iceland boasts the smallest gender disparity in the world, and it seeks to eliminate its gender gap entirely. This year, the island nation made it illegal to pay women less than men for the same work.

Iceland’s law uniquely places the burden on employers to prove they are paying their employees fairly. Employees no longer need to take their case to court to be granted on gender parity. In fact, unequal pay in Iceland is categorized like a criminal health and safety violation for employers. A large majority of other countries continue to only allow employees to address their gender gap concerns through the court systems.

With this momentously progressive move, they joined the elite group of nations that have already had these laws in place for decades: places like the UK, Russia, and Rwanda. Rwanda and Namibia are the two sub-Saharan African counties that rank among the leading nations in gender equality. Rwanda, in particular, works hard to maintain gender equality in economic and political representation.

Rwanda’s Gender Equality Assurances Program

Rwanda’s political, cultural, and economic landscape completely changed following the horrific genocide the nation experienced in 1994. In the time since the nation has been rebuilding its government and economic institutions, however, Rwanda has worked hard to ensure gender equality.

The Rwandan government maintains a Gender Monitoring Office, which exists to ensure that public programs are complying with the goals of gender equality. The Office monitors compliance to gender-related commitments across public, private, non-governmental, and religious institutions. The Office also works to oversee services offered to gender-based violence victims and improve the effectiveness of violence prevention and response mechanisms. Additionally, Rwandans are recognizing the balance of family and careers by allowing women to benefit from 3 months of paid maternity leave, thereby making it an easier adjustment for women to return to the workforce after starting families.

The benefits of improving gender equality in Rwanda have been immense. Rwandan women have contributed to many of the progressive legal reforms that are helping the nation redevelop after the genocide. They have revised the Civil Code to provide for equal inheritance and succession rights between women and men. They’ve been rooting out and eliminating corruption. Women in the Rwandan parliament have influenced labor laws to promote equal pay and fighting to end gender-based violence, harassment, and discrimination in the workplace.

Though it is not as deep as it is in most place, Rwanda still has a wage gap. Gender imbalances persist despite monumental efforts to achieve equality. The majority of Rwandan women are still faced with poverty, violence, and patriarchal attitudes. But because Rwandans see the need for gender issues to be a part of every conversation, they are actively improving the quality of life for families, education, budget, agriculture, and infrastructural development. In Rwanda today, women earn 88 cents for every dollar that men do — better than the 79 cents on the dollar U.S. women earn relative to their male counterparts, but still not full pay parity.

Gender promotion is not just a political talking point, it is becoming a best practice in Rwandan government values. Rwanda, Iceland, and other places that have recognized the damage done by gender inequality in political, economic, and social institutions have outlawed their gender gaps — and perhaps the United States should follow suit.

Should the Gender Gap be Outlawed? was originally published in Outlawed on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

Using hazardous or toxic chemicals to clean up an already compromised ecosystem can do more harm than good. This is because introducing an additional element of toxicity to an already struggling ecosystem can trigger serious unintended consequences. This happened on a major scale in 2010 with the introduction of clean-up chemicals after the Deepwater Horizon oil spill. In addition to being ineffective at preventing the spread of oil, the chemical dispersants used to break up the noxious stuff actually caused more damage to the already suffering Gulf ecosystem. Specifically, clean-up chemicals suppressed the growth of an oil-degrading bacteria, slowing the breakdown of oil in the water rather than speeding it up. But what if cleanup efforts were driven by efforts to compliment natural systems rather than compete with them?

Developing technology that supports the natural systems our planet already uses to deal with pollution is a key driver behind breakthroughs in the biotech industry. It’s a major force within the green tech movement, and innovations in this space are helping all achieve a healthier future. Oh yea, and there’s money in it — lots and lots of money.

Bioremediators Do It Better

Bioremediation projects involve human-facilitated extensions of what is already happening in nature. These natural systems add trillions of dollars in economic benefit to environmental cleanup efforts each year, but they cost almost nothing. By relying on these systems, bioremediatiators can achieve the same results as traditional cleanup methods at a lower cost. This makes bioremediation both cheaper and less-disruptive solution for cleaning up contaminated environments, especially when compared to other methods.

Bioremediation is an umbrella term describing a wide array of environmental cleanup approaches that rely on natural systems. Biodegradation, for example, is a bioremediation technology that involves recycling a complex molecule to its mineral constituents. This leads the dangerous starting compound to be broken down into less harmful molecules like CO2, H2O, and NO3. Similarly, biosorption involves using live or dried biomass to break down metallic ions and pollutants from in the environment. This method offers a cleaner alternative to the traditional remediation of industrial effluents and the recovery of pollutants from mines and other sites polluted with metals. While fully-natural solutions are the ideal in this respect, the majority of effective bioremediation is heavily dependent upon technology.

Phytoremediation involves any chemical or physical processes that use plants for degradation or immobilization of contaminants in soil and groundwater. This form of bioremediation uses plants’ abilities to metabolize various molecules in their tissues to clean up soil, air, and water. Likewise, phytosequestration (or phytostabilization) uses roots’ natural capacities to absorb, sequester, precipitate, and immobilize nearly any contaminant in the soil. Roots naturally perform rhizodegratdation, which takes place in the soil or ground water immediately surrounding plant roots. Through this process, plants naturally stimulate the rhizosphere bacteria and enhance biodegradation of soil contaminants. Phytohydraulics is another method that uses deep-rooted plants to contain, sequester, or degrade groundwater contaminants that come into contact with their roots.

Bioremediatiors use naturally-occurring organisms to break down hazardous substances into less toxic or non-toxic substances. This process uses organisms to neutralize or remove contamination from a particular area by metabolizing pollutants. Because these organisms process toxins through their unique metabolic processes, they can be far more effective than simply collecting pollutants and storing them, which is the approach taken by most environmental cleanup methods. Another benefit to bioremediation is that it is a localized solution. Bioremediation can be applied where the contamination has taken place (in situ), which avoids many of the transportation burdens associated with the cleanup of toxic and hazardous materials. This localization effect and other qualities make bioremediation a more environmentally-friendly and cost-effective solution than other cleanup methods. In fact, most bioremediation projects merely require the introduction of nutrients to stimulate the growth of microorganisms that are naturally occurring in an affected ecosystem.

Saving the Planet on the Cheap

Just like traditional environmental cleanup methods, the costs of a bioremediation project depend on circumstantial variables like the size of contaminated area, concentration of contaminants, conditions such as temperature and soil density, and whether the project is located in a remote area. Based upon these and other relevant factors, a bioremediation process could take anywhere from a few months to several years. However, one thing remains true: bioremediation among the cheapest largescale environmental clean-up methods at our disposal today.

Bioremediation offers flexible, localized environmental solutions that cost very little because the entire approach uses the microorganisms already present in our natural systems to achieve environmental goals. Certain microbes rely on oil, solvents, and pesticides as a source of food and energy. Once microbes consume contaminants, microbes convert them into small amounts of water and harmless gases. Conditions can be manipulated by amending the environment in a manner that creates the right combination of elements for microbes to flourish successfully, and bioremediators can be removed or even reclaimed once they have effectively removed toxins from the environment. For example, phytoextraction (or phytoaccumulation) occurs when plants hyperaccumulate contaminants through their roots and store them in the stem or leaf tissues. With this process, the contaminants are not degraded, but rather removed from the environment when the plants are harvested. This process is very useful for removing metals, which can be recovered for reuse by incinerating the plants in a process called phytomining.

Bioremediators perform environmental services better than we do because it involves nothing more than supporting an organism in an ecosystem doing what it does best. Bioremediation projects are more effective and efficient — all around better — than traditional clean-up methods, but in case it is easier to put a number on it, the vast biodiversity that makes all this possible provides services worth around $125 trillion a year.

Bioremediation Meets Decentralized Technology

Bioremediation technologies have harnessed the natural abilities of plants, microbes, and their ecosystems to make safe environmental cleanup possible. Tech innovators have been able to build on the work of scientists in the field to generate several well-modeled approaches to tech-assisted bioremediation.

Decentralized technologies are uniquely poised to improve the quality of bioremediation technologies. For example, blockchain technology can be used to create an automated and decentralized ledger to record, track, and validate bioremediatory information nearly instantaneously and cutting back on research and development investments substantially over time. Likewise, local communities can leverage the proliferation of sensor devices on the Internet of Things to capture and share environmental data that supports bioremediation projects. Using decentralized computing technologies, we can create that permanent, reliable, and automatically-updated systems that support bioremediation activities, facilitate the development of new discoveries, and store big data for the benefit of future users. These functions support the needs of existing tech-assisted bioremediation projects while also improving the success of similar endeavors in the future.

Tech-Assisted Bioremediation in Practice

Bioremediation technology is quickly moving from the lab to the real world. Shortly before the 2012 London Olympics, drew millions of tourists to the city, bioremediation helped transform a long-polluted area of East London. Using different green techniques, including the support of a naturally occurring microorganism called archaea, officials were able to clean up areas polluted from industry and create new spaces for wildlife habitat. This approach was similar to the extensive bioremediation efforts used to combat the devasting effects of the Exxon Valdez and Deepwater Horizon oil spills. In both cases, microorganisms were used to consume petroleum hydrocarbons and reduce the environmental impact of the spills.

If the idea of a bacterium that eats heavy metals or an archaea that consumes crude oil molecules seems too abstract for reality, prepare for things to get even weirder. Bioremediation, particularly when combined with the tracking and ledger technology available on the blockchain, may be able to help the world with its litter problem — you know, the one that launched that giant garbage island that floats around the Pacific these days.

Magic Mushrooms for Garbage Island

Different types of fungi are best suited to breaking down different types of wastes. For example, white-rot fungi has shown potential in decomposing pharmaceutical and personal care products, which contain endocrine disrupting chemical that have caused havoc in the aquatic ecosystems receiving contaminated wastewater. Extremophilic-fungi — ones that grow in extreme environments and possess a degree of tolerance to harsh conditions — are effective bioremediators for waste products from industries such as textiles manufacture, leather processing, and animal feed preparation. And to the great relief of anyone concerned about the proliferation of plastic wastes across our lands and oceans, scientists recently discovered that fungi can be used to break down plastic.

A mushroom species recently discovered in the Ecuadorian rainforest, pestalotiopsis microspora, has been observed eating polyurethane, a common type of plastic. Polyurethane plastic pollution has become ubiquitous, meaning that it’s literally everywhere. But for the most part, it ends up in the ocean — causing both general grossness and unspeakable devastation to marine ecosystems. Because of its very strong bonds, polyurethane is considered nonbiodegradable; that is, without the help of some pretty magical mushrooms.

While actually growing mushrooms on garbage island sounds more like a super challenging Minecraft project than an effective bioremediation method, leveraging the natural power of these incredible organisms could help us make leaps and bounds forward in decomposing plastic. This is especially true for plastics stuck down at the bottom of landfills, since the fungi can survive in anaerobic environments. Indeed, anyone who knows the species well knows that fungi are the odd-ball in the vast kingdom of life our planet supports, but their bioremediation potential is immense — and largely untapped.

Solving thus-unsolvable environmental problems like plastic pollution and radioactive waste by leveraging the natural environmental cleanup abilities of fungal metabolism is an exciting prospect, but nature-based technologies are characterized by their untapped power. Natural systems hold many of the secrets to helping us solve some of our most pressing environmental challenges, but Mother Nature is characteristically coy. Support from the biotech community could make leaps and bounds towards capturing some of the incredible benefits offered by natural bioremediators by simply coaxing out some of the biotech trade secrets hidden away in the cells of bacteria and fungi — and then making trillions of dollars off of it.

Cleaning Up with Tech-Assisted Bioremediation was originally published in Be Decent on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

One of the earliest patterns underlying the vast field of computer science and technology is the binary code. It’s a system that represents data by way of two opposing symbols, and it was invented way back in the 17th century by a man who believed that everything could be understood in a pattern of this or that. In a binary, things are on or off; they’re black or white; they’re male or female. But as we continue to co-evolve with our technology, binary thought is losing its place in computing just as it is in society at large — and women are benefiting from this development in a big way.

Thinking in Ones-and-Zeros

Categorizing concepts through binary thinking lies under the belly of the deeply rooted institutions within the field of computer science and technology. And unfortunately, the this-or-that distinction established by the binary code could easily be translated to us-or-them. This has translated to widespread discrimination across the STEM fields, but the gendered tropes underpinning the conversation around computing may be causing even the most forward-thinking minds to miss the forest for the trees. At the very least, binary thought is causing people to overlook computing’s much more nuanced — and nonbinary — foundations.

Widespread gender discrimination is tech’s most shameful characteristic. Only a few women have been able to establish a foothold in tech, and — particularly after a top Google employee penned an open letter supporting gender discrimination in tech — computing has often been mourned as yet another victim of the patriarchy. However, a closer look at the origins of computing reveals that women have always played an integral role in the development of this important field, and they will surely be its leaders in the future.

The Countess of Computing

The history of women in computing spans over two and a half centuries. In fact, the first recognized computer programmer was a woman — the Countess of Lovelace, Ada King.

Ada King was an English mathematician and writer who worked on a proposed mechanical computer called the Analytical Engine in the mid-1800s. King was the first person to notice the machine’s capacity for solving problems through algorithmic computation, rather than merely performing complex calculations. Her notes led to the first published algorithm, and although the engine she worked on was never tested, it is widely regarded as an early model for the modern computer.

A century before the invention of modern computing, Ada King was the first to see that a device previously relegated to number crunching was in fact capable much more. As described in her own writings, she realized the possible “expression and adaptations” of the engine to “act upon other things besides number,” such as “elaborate and scientific pieces of music of any degree of complexity of extent.” It was much more than merely this-or-that, and her perspectives foreshadowed the end of binary thinking before the first code was ever programmed.

Kilo Girls

After Ada King, Women continued to play a dominant role in the development of computer science and technology for the majority of the 20th century. In fact, computing power was once measured in “kilo-girls.” Regardless of their incredible contributions to America’s powerful technologies, however, the work of women in computing has been seen as menial and largely under-recognized.

Today, historians are well aware of women’s contributions to the development of modern computing. During World War I, Elizabeth Webb Wilson was in charge of the computer calculating bomb shell trajectories for the U.S. and its Allies. Around the same time, Mary Clem developed a system of quickly identifying errors in new punch-card calculations and Edith Clarke, the first professional electrical engineer in the United States, patented a graphical calculator for troubleshooting powerline problems. In the 1940s, women were the primary laborers behind ballistics computing during World War II. Women also worked on cryptography — including operation of Bombe machines to crack enemy code as well as early frequency hopping, which is now used widely in Bluetooth and Wi-Fi technologies.

Sadly, many of the women who gave rise to modern computing were left unrecognized and unrewarded for their efforts. Despite her incredible talents and patriotic contributions, Elizabeth Webb Wilson struggled to find work after World War I, and she ended up teaching high school math. Discrimination was even worse for black women in early computing. Katherine Johnson, Dorothy Vaughan, Mary Jackson, and others were required to do more work than their white counterparts while being offered even less recognition or opportunity for promotion.

The pattern of downplaying the importance of women’s undeniable contributions to tech continued with the invention of the first electronic and general-purpose computer: ENIAC. The computer was programmed by six mathematicians — known as the “ENIAC girls” — who worked on software while the male engineers on the team focused on hardware design. Although the ENIAC girls understood both the internal and external processes of the first computer, they were not even invited to the celebratory dinner hosted by the university to reveal ENIAC to the world.

After ENIAC, women continued to carry the development of computer technology into the future — largely without the respect or recognition they so clearly deserved.

Giving Credit Where Credit is (Over) Due

Women have been responsible for computer programming innovations critical to the success of astronomical missions, the creation of personal computer domains, and even user-friendly Mac applications. They contributed to several networks and programs that became primary foundations for the Internet. Indeed, without these brilliant and dedicated women’s, we could never have achieved many of the scientific advancements that make our modern world what it is. But binary thinking has largely relegated these women to the back indexes of computing textbooks and mitigated the meaningfulness of their accomplishments for future generations.

Frances (“Betty”) Holberton wrote the code that made it possible to enter data into a computer by way of a keyboard. Holberton also developed a generator that, “used a program to write a program,” for the first time ever. Gladys West helped calculate the technology that became GPS, which has become critical to our modern logistics and transportation infrastructure. Margaret Hamilton programmed software for computers onboard the Apollo mission, which helped launch America into a leading position in aerospace and technology worldwide. Grace Hopper developed the first compiler for programming language; although she wrote the manual, she was not even credited in it. The fact that these women and their accomplishments are overshadowed in the history of computing is largely due to discriminatory binary thinking that came to a head during the Reagan Era.

Under-representation Becomes Oppression

Women have been underrecognized and underrepresented in computing for centuries. By the mid-1980s, however, the gender disparity that was once limited to credit and recognition extended to participation. The gendered us-and-them dichotomy that dictated was to be recognized in computer science professions mutated into a binary — and extremely biased — concept of who should be work in tech at all. Women went from being under-recognized for their achievements in the tech game to not being able to play at all.

For decades, women have been discouraged from computing careers, and researchers have linked this phenomenon to the direct marketing of household computers to little boys that started in the 1980s. In 1984, the number of female computer science graduates peaked at 37%. Then it began to plummet. Today, only 18% of those graduating with computer science bachelor degrees are women, and well-documented discrimination spans from early childhood STEM education to treatment of women in Silicon Valley. However, the idea that computing is for boys is the exact type of binary thinking that modern society is turning away from, and it’s leaving room for the rise of feminist computing.

The Rise of Feminist Computing

Despite the binaries written into its earliest codes, the field of computing was never a man’s world — nor will it be in the future. Although pay inequity persists, computer science now has one of the thinnest gender-based pay discrepancies. Many women are leading the charge to diversify the field away from binary gender standards, including current efforts dedicated to making more space for diversity in tech. Initiatives include innovative marketing by universities, tailored mentoring, and scholarship opportunities. All of these efforts are designed to highlight the opportunities for meaningful creative and human-focused work, work-life balance, support for parents and nontraditional families, and — above all — the ability to shape our shared technological future in the same non-binary manner that is shaping our world.

Feminist Computing and The End of Binary Thought was originally published in Be Decent on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

Execution is an ancient practice. The beginning of recorded history on the matter dates back nearly 4,000 years to Babylon’s Hammurabi Code, and the death penalty remains legal in about 100 modern world nations — including the United States.

With that being said, executions are not popular. Only 21 countries executed prisoners last year, and more than half of the world has abolished the death penalty altogether. Presumably, this is the half that cares more about human rights and limiting government oppression over our physical bodies. So, why is America still on the other side?

Give ’em the chair (or needle, or guillotine, or noose, whatever).

The death penalty grows less and less common every year, but there have been periods of time in human history during which we have been incredibly keen on executing criminals. The now-infamous Draconian Code of Athens declared the death penalty to be the only criminal sentence allowed and dolled it out as a punishment for all crimes. King Henry VIII executed as many as 72,000 people during his reign — and this is nothing compared to the millions of people executed by modern dictators like Stalin, Hitler, and Mao.

While the death penalty still exists, it largely remains a tool of oppression. At least 690 prisoners were executed in 2018 but this figure is skewed by the fact that China — far and away the most active executioner in the world — refuses to disclose any facts regarding the thousands of death sentences suspected to be carried out by the country each year. Outside of China, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Vietnam, Iraq, and Egypt perform the most executions.

America does not execute nearly as many people as the likes as China and Iran, this comparison represents a very low bar. The governments that execute prisoners by the hundreds each year have less-than-stellar records vis-à-vis human rights, and they are certainly nothing to aspire to in this respect. Regardless, among developed democracies, America sentences to death and executes more of its prisoners than anyone else.

American Executions

In the United States, over 17,200 people have been legally executed the nation was founded. Their executions have been carried out by pressing, bludgeoning, burning, firing squad, gas chamber, hanging, electrocution, or lethal injection — and many of them did not deserve it. Children were executed under U.S. law until the Supreme Court officially ended the practice in 2005. At least American 164 death row inmates have been formally exonerated on grounds of innocence since advocates began pursuing these cases in 1973. As the number of people on death row in America continues to grow, so do revelations regarding the prevalence of bias and mistake in legal executions.

In the landmark case of Furman v. Georgia, Justice Stewart characterized all of America’s death penalty statutes as “cruel and unusual in the same way that being struck by lightning is cruel and unusual,” underscoring how arbitrary the system can be. Indeed, mistakes are made — but sometimes, innocent people end up on America’s death rows not because a judge or jury was mistaken, but rather because they were racist.

Racism, Bias, and Arbitrariness

Last year, Washington became the 20th state in the nation to abolish the death penalty. In declaring the practice unconstitutional, the state’s Supreme Court explained that executing prisoners no longer served any legitimate goals of criminal policy because the practice was so arbitrary and biased. As Chief Justice Mary Fairhurst explained, the state’s death penalty had been “unequally applied — sometimes by where the crime took place, or the county of residence, or the available budgetary resources at any given point in time, or the race of the defendant.” As a result, the practice of executing prisoners was declared a cruel and unusual practice in violation of the state constitution.

At this point in American history, there is no question that racism and bias impacts the administration of justice in capital cases. Men are far more likely to be sentenced to death upon conviction for murder than their female counterparts, and offenders from low socioeconomic backgrounds face a much higher likelihood of death by execution than wealthy people. The race of the perpetrator and the race of the victim have also proven highly significant — albeit unconstitutional — factors in sentencing a defendant to death. This systematic bias is recognized, and it has even been brought to the attention of the Supreme Court.

The 1986 case of McClesky v. Kemp challenged Georgia’s death penalty statue on the basis that it was applied in a racially biased manner. As the majority recognized, “race ha[d] infected the administration of Georgia’s statute in two ways: persons who murder whites are more likely to be sentenced to death than persons who murder blacks, and black murderers are more likely to be sentenced to death than white murderers.” The appellant was able to cite substantial evidence that objectively showed racial bias in this respect, but the Court explained that these facts are not enough to demonstrate a constitutional violation. In other words, according to the Supreme Court, systematic racial bias absolutely does exist in the administration of the death penalty in the United States, but our national leadership won’t do anything about it.

Black, brown, and poor people are systematically targeted by America’s biased capital punishment system. As controversial as this statement may feel, it’s actually a well-documented fact. And if this generally messed-up state of affairs doesn’t tug at your heartstrings, consider a more pragmatic reason why the death penalty ought to be outlawed: executing people makes America a more violent place to live for us all.

Resist Brutalization by Preserving Dignity

Crime deterrence is the principal reasoning behind maintaining the death penalty, and harsh sentences do tend to weigh into a potential offender’s decision making. It’s easy to believe that threatening execution for a particular act will dissuade people from committing it, but this isn’t always true. In fact, in some cases, the brutality of capital punishments percolates down to the very bedrock of our social structure, encouraging murder rather than deterring it.

According to one recent study, capital punishments are twice as likely to trigger an increase in murder rates rather than a decrease in killings across the jurisdiction. After assessing 27 states that carried out at least one execution between 1977 to 1996, researchers in this study found that capital sentences increased murder rates in 13 of them. Murder rates decreased thanks to capital punishment in only six states, and the remaining eight states in the study showed no correlation between capital punishment and future violence. Altogether, this evidence indicates that crime deterrence is not a reasonable basis for continuing the practice; in fact, it’s more likely that legalized executions would increase violent crimes by laying the groundwork for a more generally brutal society.

Executions Should be Outlawed Already

America should outlaw the death penalty not because experts and academics say so, but because it’s the will of the people. Even when carried out via lethal injection, executions in the United States carry an intolerably high risk of extreme pain or suffering. As a result, the vast majority of modern Americans do not believe that execution should be the punishment for murder.

But if most of the citizens of our democracy are against the death penalty, why does it still exist? Answer: because politicians are playing with peoples lives.

Nearly all (91%) of the nation’s top criminologists say that politicians support the death penalty in order to appear tough on crime. This is true from the lofts of America’s statehouses to the bases of its courtroom steps.. Elected judges and prosecutors seeking to boost influence in reelection years may pursue death penalty cases for publicity purposes. Death sentences handed down in these cases are a sign of gross perversion of justice and exemplify the very height of arbitrariness.

Our Constitution guarantees the right to liberty, including the freedom to maintain “a zone of liberty, a zone of protection, a line that is drawn where the individual can tell the Government: Beyond this line you may not go.” Constitutional liberty promotes and protects personal dignity. It recognizes the intrinsic worth of every human being and draws hard lines meant to stop our government from taking things from us that it has no right to take. The American people have drawn a line with respect to the death penalty, but the government continues to take the lives it sees fit. And until the death penalty is outlawed, it will continue to do just that.

America Should Outlaw the Death Penalty — Here’s Why was originally published in Outlawed on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.