Techdirt Podcast Episode 439: The Resonant Computing Manifesto
from the resonating-further dept
Earlier today, we joined in announcing the Resonant Computing Manifesto: a call for restoring a culture of technology that empowers users and enriches their lives. The manifesto was created by a group led by Alex Komoroske, and today Alex joins the podcast for a deeper dive into what “resonant computing” means and what a better future might look like.
You can also download this episode directly in MP3 format.
Follow the Techdirt Podcast on Soundcloud, subscribe via Apple Podcasts or Spotify, or grab the RSS feed. You can also keep up with all the latest episodes right here on Techdirt.
Filed Under: innovation, podcast, resonant computing
Comments on “Techdirt Podcast Episode 439: The Resonant Computing Manifesto”
Ugh.
First of all, I don’t think this manifesto does anything truly new. There has been at least a decade of journalism exploring how big tech companies have been making their products work, with the goal of getting more clicks and more time-on-site. What does the concept of resonant computing add to the conversation?
Second, I don’t think this manifesto will work. While the podcast here mentions laws and regulation, for some reason all of the principles point to deficiencies in our software, rather than deficiencies in our economic system and our laws. This reminds me of the silly and naive way Tristan Harris seems to ask tech professionals “Pretty please stop taking advantage of us,” without doing anything to encourage people to push for better laws and regulations. The podcast also makes a strange complaint that some people want to “punish or limit the entire [tech] industry.” It seems to be laundering right-wing talking points, suggesting that the path to innovation is always to de-regulate and give super-wealthy monopolists virtually everything they want. When in reality, the only thing that has ever forced companies to innovate is to create clear and effective regulation, including antitrust, that makes them terrified of being either broken up or beaten by a competitor who serves people’s needs better. In the US, standing antitrust law has been ignored for decades and I think the problems this manifesto is worried about would be far better addressed by doing things like breaking up all the big tech companies, and require interoperability across platforms, then anything the manifesto proposes.
Finally, I wouldn’t want to live in the world created by this manifesto succeeding. AI is a weapon, pointed at all our heads, held by fascists and their collaborators. It is not a tool. It has no potential for a net-positive benefit, now or in the future. THe manifesto also subtly suggests that we should accept AI as long as it’s local, open-source, etc. But that’s not helpful. While it would address environmental and privacy concerns, it would still worsen labor issues, economic inequality, and make it much harder for people to learn new things and enjoy life.
Resonant computing? No thanks. We need to do much, much better than this.