Tuesday, August 7, 2018

Ethical Users



A few things bring me to this notable Ian Malcolm moment from Jurassic Park.

First, the film “Fat Man and Little Boy” (more on that later), the story of the Manhattan Project told by Paul Newman and Dwight Schultz.

The war in Europe was over, and there was no chance the Japanese could develop an atomic bomb. Robert Oppenheimer, then, saw no reason for the United States to pursue such a weapon.

But the United States forged onward (if the ethics and timeline of this movie are to be believed), developed the atomic bomb, and dropped two of them on Japan to end the war.

Thus began the Cold War.

Would it have begun regardless?

I don’t know. Because the Americans had their German scientists, as did the Russians. Was one government more ethical than the other?

I’m not smart enough to know.

Then there’s this: A toolkit developed for app developers and web designers and unicorn-creators, meant to put the should into the could of Silicon Valley.

Its purveyors tout the toolkit’s ability – properly and thoughfully executed will help companies avoid the should/could “dormroom conundrum,” though there are ifs and whens big enough in their program to drive a truck through.

Can such toolkits help avoid unintended consequences?

Maybe they can make them less likely, but eliminate them? Not hardly. Humankind, in all its ingenuity, kindness, guile and ugliness will always find a way to twist what’s made to their own ends, be the ends good or evil.

For the same reason Ian Malcolm chides the scientists of Isla Nublar: There was no discipline to attain [the use].

Before the Everyone Can Publish days of the Internet, there was discipline, in the form of gatekeepers, agents, bosses, editors, and the weeding of the mediocre from the great.* There was discipline in getting the kind of job that would get you on the air, listening to editors and agents to the point your book could get published.

No more. Now anyone with a wild thought and a little bit of cash and talent can get “published,” without the discipline that once ruled the universe. Or at least throttled it to a great extent.

The genie of the Internet won’t go back into the DARPA-opened bottle.

The idea of EthicalOS is laudable – when companies apply it dispassionately. I’m sure, taking this back to Zuckerberg or any of the big Internet poohbahs of today, they’d claim their product would pass the test with flying colors. Or at least have slightly better than dormroom reasons to support the blind spots they didn’t see in their own products.

The magic of the Internet is its freedom. That is also its curse. And users and companies – complicit or blind to their own unethical practices – will always find ways to usurp the tools created.

And we as users have changed. We’re willing to give up things – like data – in exchange for things like Facebook or Instagram.

We could well come up with an EthicalUser checklist, wherein we outline what we’re willing to give up in favor of what benefits we receive.

That checklist could include a willingness to develop deeper thinking and analytical skills so we can detect and avoid the fake news – at least the fake news we disagree with, because pick anyone, and there’s fake news they want to believe.

Don’t believe me? Here’s what Clay Shirky has to say – pre-Trump:

There's no way to get Cronkite-like consensus without someone like Cronkite, and there's no way to get someone like Cronkite in a world with an Internet; there will be no more men like him, because there will be no more jobs like his. To assume that this situation can be reversed, and everyone else will voluntarily sign on to the beliefs of some culturally dominant group, is a fantasy. To assume that they should, or at least that they should hold their tongue when they don't, is Napoleonic in its self-regard. Yet this is what the people who long for the clarity of the old days are longing for.

(Shirky’s piece is well worth reading in full.)

The genie that is the Internet isn’t going back into the bottle. Users have to decide what tradeoffs they’re willing to make, whether they’re dealing with EthicalOS or the Wild West.

*Which doesn’t explain Terry Brooks, but you see what I mean.

No comments: