Ethics in Wonderland: The Internet
“History doesn’t repeat itself, but it often rhymes”, commonly contributed to Mark Twain, this quote begins to illustrate the consequences that our recent and vast advancements in technology are creating. Per this quote, it is history that is commonly reflected in our present and what we may imagine in our future. What makes the vast technological advancements we have made in recent years problematic, is the lack of history we have of it. It all happened so suddenly. The television, the computer, the Internet, the smartphone, the smart watch, the smart building, the smart immune system, we continue into this digital rabbit hole full of discovery and invention aided by the tools that computers acquire us with. And its only been so long.
“Drink me”, we are told and we blindly do so, unaware of exactly what the consequences will be. “Eat me”, we oblige, and another piece of ourselves is offered into the digital realm. Privacy, autonomy, we continually fall as consumerist prey to the shiny, bewildering products and technologies that promise satisfaction, ease, and aid. We are Alice as she discovers and tries the many different pieces of Wonderland- we don’t really know what will happen if we go left or if we go right, if we drink or if we eat, or what happens when we wake up, and yet we do participate, there isn’t much of a choice.
One of my favorite quotes from the story says,
“Would you tell me, please, which way I ought to go from here?’
‘That depends a good deal on where you want to get to,’ said the Cat.
‘I don’t much care where -’ said Alice.
‘Then it doesn’t matter which way you go,’ said the Cat.
‘- so long as I get SOMEWHERE,’ Alice added as an explanation.
‘Oh, you’re sure to do that,’ said . the Cat, ‘if you only walk long enough.”
― Lewis Carroll, Alice in Wonderland
For all of the things that we created and put into the hands of users, there was no written code or means of judging it to be good or bad technology. We saw our problems, saw the opportunity that technology offered us, and we made what we imagined would solve a given problem. In some cases, some of the pieces of technology caught on and changed the ways many societies string themselves- like the smartphone. Now, those societies can’t imagine life without them. They changed our means of communication in incredible, dramatic ways. For this instance, when did we stop to think what does this mean? We didn’t. We saw the current and we jumped into it- everyone else was, why wouldn’t I? It looked harmless.
This is not to say that technology is inherently evil. Technology is actually amazing. The inventions we have and the inventions we foresee are remarkable and in many cases, remarkably good. What is worrying, is the blindness we had when jumping into it. We didn’t know where we were going, and didn’t seem to care much. So we simply walked somewhere. And now, were entering into the Internet of Things. IOT is bringing with it an evermore plethora of inventions, connected objects, offering the finite modes of which we communicate and perceive a ration of the infinite. It’s changing everything and we need to be aware of what may be at stake.
Damon Harowitz spoke of this dilemma at TEDx in Silicon Valley. He illustrated a great example of our ignorance to the ethics of technology. He asked the audience to raise their hands if they prefer iPhones, than asked them to raise their hands if they prefer Android phones. There was instant reaction amongst the members of the audience members, all showing their preference in regards to the make of their smartphone.
He than asked the audience, “Should we collect all of that guy’s data” pointing to a member in the audience, “ and use the data to make his experiences better, and to protect ourselves in case he is up to no good. Or should we leave him alone?” He asked the audience to raise their hands in favor of one or the other. The audience was participatory again. Than he asked the audience. “When trying to evaluate what we should do in this case, should we use a Kantian deontological moral framework, or should we use a Millian consequentialist one?” He asked the audience to raise their hands again in preference of either one. No one participated. Because no one knew what either option meant and so no one could think about what was right and what was wrong.
What seems to be needed is an ethical revolution designed to cater the needs of the technological age we are living in now. Aristotle, Kant, Plato, they all dove into the realm of right and wrong. That is, before the Internet. We are now living in a completely different realm, so to speak. The physical makeup and wiring of our brains is different than what they were 100 years ago, let alone 2,000 years ago. As creators, makers, sellers, hosts and users of technology, how do we decide what is right and what is wrong? How do we create safe, good, and smart pieces of technology that empower our humaneness rather than minimize it? How do we know which is good and which is bad?
In any case, we are much like Alice trying to find her way through Wonderland. Most of the time, she blindly wanders through and experiments with the different offerings the foreign land has to offer, noting which characters and things to avoid that are not enjoyable. In terms of deciding how and what we deem as good and bad in the technology that we use, buy and produce, perhaps, we can look to the past and see reflections in which we can learn from. The context is completely different- and maybe that’s what the quote meant in that history will never repeat itself. It’s different, but there is still a history to go off of as we venture further into the rabbit hole of the Internet and the growing web it continues to spin.
