Category Archives: Technology

Starboard, a very successful activist investor with extensive operational activism experience helping boards and management teams run companies more efficiently, is taking aim at a business software company.

While CVLT today has a best-in-class product with strong technology, profitability and stock price performance has continued to languish and there are issues with the go-to-market strategy and sales efficiency. Moreover, last year, the company made the speculative acquisition of Hedvig, a company that has no revenue, for $225 million.

Technology companies like CVLT generally have a "rule of 40" where a combination of growth and operating margins should exceed 40%. The company could easily be growing in the 5% to 7% range going forward. Its operating margins are currently in the mid-teens, well short of the 25% target the company has previously set, and with a disciplined strategy, could even exceed 30%.

The company could also use a more disciplined capital allocation strategy. The acquisition of Hedvig was ill advised and Starboard would likely want the company to forego any other acquisitions until it optimized its operations. A company needs to earn the right to speculative M&A and this company has not earned that yet.

This is a situation where stockholders could greatly benefit from someone coming in from the outside to instill cost discipline. The best way to accomplish this would be through a board refreshment, and this is a board that can use refreshing three of the four directors up for re-election have an average tenure of 17 years.

Jeffrey Smith, CEO of Starboard Value LP and Chairman of Papa John's International Inc.

Brendan McDermid | Reuters

Starboard has a significant history of improving margins at technology companies from a board level, and has nominated a qualified slate of directors with backgrounds spanning operations, finance, data management and storage, technology, cybersecurity, mergers and acquisitions, cloud computing, strategic transformation, and public company governance.

Commvault was previously engaged by Elliott Management through a 13D filing made on April 2, 2018 and Elliott entered into a cooperation agreement with the company on May 1, 2018 for two board seats, both of whom are presently on the board and one of whom is up for re-election in 2020 and would be replaced by a Starboard nominee if Starboard is successful.

However, Elliott has since sold its position, so any activist pressure was immediately off the company after Elliott's exit.

Once there is fresh blood and perspective on the board, the reconstituted board can decide how to progress. The company's CEO, Sanjay Mirchandani, was just appointed in February of 2019 so he is not necessarily part of the problem.

He may just need more time to implement discipline or it is also possible that he is being restrained by the current board, and would welcome new shareholder directors on the Board.

Read more about the Activist Spotlight column new to CNBC here.

More here:

Activist investor Starboard, which has track record of big returns in tech, finds its next target - CNBC

OAKLAND, Calif. In one of the most far-ranging attempts to halt the spread of the coronavirus, Apple and Google said they were building software into smartphones that would tell people if they were recently in contact with someone who was infected with it.

The technology giants said they were teaming up to release the tool within several months, building it into the operating systems of the billions of iPhones and Android devices around the world. That would enable the smartphones to constantly log other devices they come near, enabling what is known as contact tracing of the disease. People would opt in to use the tool and voluntarily report if they became infected.

The unlikely partnership between Google and Apple, fierce rivals who rarely pass up an opportunity to criticize each other, underscores the seriousness of the health crisis and the power of the two companies whose software runs almost every smartphone in the world. Apple and Google said their joint effort came together in just the last two weeks.

Their work could prove to be significant in slowing the spread of the coronavirus. Public-health authorities have said that improved tracking of infected people and their contacts could slow the pandemic, especially at the start of an outbreak, and such measures have been effective in places like South Korea that also conducted mass virus testing.

Yet two of the worlds largest tech companies harnessing virtually all of the smartphones on the planet to trace peoples connections raises questions about the reach these behemoths have into individuals lives and society.

It could be a useful tool but it raises privacy issues, said Dr. Mike Reid, an assistant professor of medicine and infectious diseases at the University of California, San Francisco, who is helping San Francisco officials with contact tracing. Its not going to be the sole solution, but as part of a robust sophisticated response, it has a role to play.

Timothy D. Cook, Apples chief executive, said on Twitter that the tool would help curb the viruss spread in a way that also respects transparency & consent. Sundar Pichai, Googles chief, also posted on Twitter that the tool has strong controls and protections for user privacy.

With the tool, people infected with the coronavirus would notify a public health app that they have it, which would then alert phones that had recently come into proximity with that persons device. The companies would need to get public-health authorities to agree to link their app to the tool.

President Trump said on Friday that his administration planned to look at the tool.

Its very new, new technology. Its very interesting, he said. But a lot of people worry about it in terms of a persons freedom.

Privacy is a concern given that Google, in particular, has a checkered history of collecting peoples data for its online advertising business. The internet search company came under fire in 2018 after it said that disabling peoples location history on Android phones would not stop it from collecting location data.

Apple, which has been one of the biggest critics of Googles collection of user data, has not built a significant business around using data to sell online advertising. Still, the company has access to a wealth of information about its users, from their location to their health.

There are already third-party tools for contact tracing, including from public health authorities and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. In March, the government of Singapore introduced a similar coronavirus contact-tracing app, called TraceTogether, that detects mobile phones that are nearby.

But given the number of iPhones and Android devices in use worldwide, Apple and Google said they were hoping to make tracing efforts by public health authorities more effective by reaching more people. They also said they would provide their underlying technology to the third-party apps to make them more reliable.

Daniel Weitzner, a principal research scientist at M.I.T.s Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory and who was one of those behind the schools contract tracing app, said Google and Apples partnership will help health officials save time and resources in developing their own applications to track the virus spread.

One challenge for third-party apps is that they must run constantly 24 hours a day, seven days a week to be effective. Google said some Android smartphone manufacturers shut down those applications to save battery life.

Apple and Google said their tool would also constantly run in the background if people opt to use it, logging nearby devices through the short-range wireless technology Bluetooth. But it would eat up less battery life and be more reliable than third-party apps, they said.

Once someone reports his or her infection to a public-health app, the tool will send the phones so-called broadcast beacons, or anonymous identifiers connected to the device, to central computer servers.

Other phones will constantly check those servers for the broadcast beacons of devices they had come near in the past 14 days. If there is a match, those people will receive an alert that they had likely come into contact with an infected person.

Apple and Google said they were discussing how much information to include in those alerts with health officials, aiming to strike a balance between being helpful while also protecting the privacy of those who have the coronavirus.

This data could empower members of the general population to make informed decisions about their own health in terms of self-quarantining, said Dr. Reid. But it doesnt replace the public health imperative that we scale up contact tracing in the public health departments around the world.

Apple and Google said they would make the tools underlying technology available to third-party apps by mid-May and publicly release the tool in the coming months. The companies said the tool would not collect devices locations it only tracked proximity to other devices and would keep people anonymous in the central servers.

Google and Apples approach aims to resolve one of the hurdles facing government and private efforts to create contact tracing applications: a lack of common technical standards. The European Commission, the executive of the 27-nation bloc, said on Wednesday that a fragmented and uncoordinated approach risks hampering the effectiveness of such apps.

Ashkan Soltani, an independent cybersecurity researcher, cautioned that surveillance tools that start as voluntary often become required through public policy decisions. China, for instance, has introduced a color-coded coronavirus surveillance app that automatically decides whether someone must stay at home or may go outside and use public transportation.

The danger is, as you roll out these voluntary solutions and they gain adoption, its more likely that they are going to become compulsory, said Mr. Soltani, a former chief technologist for the Federal Trade Commission.

Mr. Soltani said the tool could also be a way for the tech companies to pre-empt efforts by governments in the United States or elsewhere to mandate a more invasive collection of data to combat the pandemic.

The tool permits them to address the administrations ask to do something while also relieving them of the responsibility of building the app and collecting the data themselves, he said.

Natasha Singer and Jennifer Valentino-DeVries contributed reporting from New York, Adam Satariano contributed reporting from London and David McCabe from Washington.

See the article here:

Coronavirus Contact Tracing: Apple and Google Team Up to Enable Virus Tracking - The New York Times

"Technology, social media and apps are enabling us to maintain the social animal side of ourselves," says futurist Anders Sorman-Nilsson.

However, the government's proposal for a contact tracing app that requires forgoing some privacy in a bid to help protect public health is likely to test how far this focus on community goes. While details of the app are limited, the government says it will be based on Singapore's TraceTogether app. It will use bluetooth technology to store interaction data between devices and allow health authorities to alert community members who have been in contact with a confirmed case of COVID-19.

Sorman-Nilsson says Australians are likely to be prepared to give up some of their privacy, given the unique circumstances of the pandemic, as their sacrifices will be not just for their own personal wellbeing but also for the benefit of the community. "People are changing behaviours and forgoing certain things to protect the weak, the elderly and the marginalised," Sorman-Nilsson says. "In parts of Asia if you are sick you stay at home, you don't go to work, you wear a face mask not to protect yourself but to protect others. I think we will see a big shift towards that consideration of the community."

Sorman-Nilsson says coronavirus is prompting a move to utilitarianism where people are doing what is best for the people around them. "No man or woman is an island, we are all interconnected," he says. "Even on a global level this and other future pandemics, which will come no doubt, cannot be solved on an individual basis. You can't be a doomsday prepper and hide away."

Loading

Prime Minister Scott Morrison on Saturday ruled out making the app compulsory, so the proposal is for signing up to be voluntary. The government says it needs up to 40 per cent of the population to sign up to make the project effective.

Roba Abbas, a lecturer in the school of management, operations and marketing at the University of Wollongong, says the experience in Singapore suggests the percentage of the population that needs to sign up is likely to be closer to 75 per cent. "Contact tracing relies on the idea of collectivism, it relies on a collective effort, and doesn't work unless there is a community-based data driven effort to it", she says.

She also warns despite the crisis situation we cannot relax fundamental requirements of privacy, strategies for maintaining anonymity, the encryption of data, and preventing our information from landing in the wrong hands.

The government's poor track record on implementing technology in the past, including recent concerns over the privacy of digital health records, also raises red flags, says James Cameron, partner at venture capital firm Airtree Ventures.

He says the app as proposed will not track movement through GPS data, just bluetooth, and will use anonymised data based on encrypted user ID that is retained for a limited period of time. It will include a double opt-in to download the app and then to share data. "From what I have seen the privacy concerns for this sort of implementation are reasonably low risk but have to be addressed in a really open and transparent way," he says. "I think it is unfortunate the government is starting from behind on this, it is a trust-building exercise and without community support the app is not useful."

Cameron says there is precedent for Australians downloading apps such as TikTok although concerns about the company's data privacy practices have been raised; the app is used by about 20 per cent of Australians.

He wants the government to work with credible third parties on design and consider open sourcing the app. "Working with a consortium like Google and Apple and trying to integrate what they are building to the app that is designed will go a long way," he says. "The real issue here is not so much on the technical side it is how to win over the citizens and get wide-scale adoption."

Nevertheless, Cameron says he will download the app "for sure, in fact I see it as my civic duty".

Loading

However Professor Genevieve Bell, a cultural anthropologist, technologist and head of the 3A Institute at the Australian National University, says the next set of technological solutions from contact tracing to video conferencing are entering a contested space. "They don't enter a neutral landscape," she says. "Many people say 'I gave up my privacy a long time ago, I don't care' and then there are other people who say 'I do care, I do a lot to protect my privacy and that of my family'."

According to Bell we are in a societal or cultural limbo and that applies to our use of technology as well. "A whole lot of the ways we have acted before don't apply anymore, we think differently about staying at home, working at home, we have different ideas about our bodies and how they relate to time and space," she says. "We won't move back to the way the world was at the start of 2020, we will be in some way always changed by this."

Get our Coronavirus Update newsletter for the day's crucial developments at a glance, the numbers you need to know and what our readers are saying. Sign up to The Sydney Morning Herald's newsletter here and The Age's here.

Cara is the small business editor for The Age and The Sydney Morning Herald based in Melbourne

Originally posted here:

'We are all interconnected': Coronavirus is reshaping our relationship with technology - Sydney Morning Herald

UNIVERSITI Teknologi Malaysia (UTM) is committed to continue playing its role in nation development by focusing on the engineering and technology-related fields.

One of the leading research-based universities in the world, UTM is on the right platform to achieve that objective with the setting up of the Malaysia-Japan International Institute of Technology (MJIIT).

MJIIT-UTM was established with the approval of the Cabinet meeting of May 26, 2010, under the University and University Colleges Act (AUKU) amendment (2009) with full autonomy in terms of governance and finance.

We are allowed to take students without quota based on supply and demand but the number of foreign students does not exceed 50 percent, said MJIIT-UTM dean Prof Dr. Ali Selamat.

He said presently there are 426 active post-graduate students and it is expected that the enrolment will be increased by up to 560 students by 2025.

Its postgraduate studies consist of four main disciplines namely mechanical engineering, electronic engineering, chemical and environment engineering and management of technology.

These are the three main engineering branches and Japan is known the world over as a leading country when it comes to these three engineering fields, said Prof. Ali.

He added that the study of the management of technology has been specially designed and tailored to develop and produce leaders and technocrats in the business world.

Prof. Ali said career prospects were good for MJIIT graduates based on the fact that the majority of them were employed by multinational corporations (MNCs) and big companies upon graduating.

He added that demand for graduates in the mechanical, electronic and chemical and environment engineering fields was good not only in Malaysia but also in other countries.

Our graduates have an added advantage as they are exposed to the Japanese style of education, said Prof. Ali.

Precision and punctuality were very important in the Japanese work ethic, he added, and MJIIT students and graduates were expected to adapt and adopt the good traits and be able to work hard.

Prof. Ali elaborated that UTM teaching staff also has many opportunities for cooperation with the Japanese companies.

Students and the institution also benefited from the close cooperation with the Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA), and 29 Japanese University Consortium (JUC) organisations in terms of receiving research grants, staff exchanges and research cooperation.

Leave a Nest Malaysia Sdn Bhd managing director, Abdul Hakim Sahidi, obtained a Diploma in Electronic Engineering after three years at the UTM Jalan Semarak Campus in Kuala Lumpur before pursuing a Bachelors in Electronic System Engineering at MJIIT for another three years.

Im always fascinated with how technologies are created by studying electronics -- I could become a tech innovator, he said.

Abdul Hakim, who hails from Kuala Terengganu, said he chose MJIIT due to the uniqueness that it has to offer in terms of the Japanese style engineering education.

I went to Japan three times during my study at MJIIT under the student exchange programmes and it was an eye-opener for me he said.

Abdul Hakim joined the company in September 2016, upon graduating from MJIIT and was promoted to managing director in May 2019.

Aimisyahmi Harith will report to work as a sales engineer at a solar industry company in Tokyo in February 2021, after his graduation at MJIIT in October this year.

I went for the interview this March and the interviewers were impressed with me and offered the position, said the Negeri Sembilan lass.

Aimisyahmi is a final year student at MJIIT, doing a Bachelors in Chemical Process Engineering.

He plans to work with the Tokyo-based company Afterfit for at least five to 10 years and is likely to be appointed as the companys representative in Malaysia which has plans to set operations in the country.

One of the subjects that we learn at MJIIT is Ningen Ryoku which teaches us leadership, decisiveness, a challenging spirit, cooperativeness, and adaptability which are useful when we enter the working world, said Aimisyahmi.

Prof Ali pointed out that in 2020, MJIIT will distribute Financial Assistance (FA) totaling RM5 million to assist B40 low-income groups and M40 middle-class outstanding students.

Prof. Ali mentioned this FA was up to RM7,800 per year.

As long as graduates who qualify for the scholarship in the Matriculation, Foundation, Malaysian Diploma of Advanced Education (STPM), Diploma or A-levels, they can apply for this financial assistance (FA). Only Malaysians who wish to take full-time UG programmes at MJIIT -- the Bachelor of Mechanical Precision Engineering, Electrical System Engineering & Chemical Process Engineering -- are eligible for the FA.

For those interested to join or to know more about MJIIT, visit MJIIT's official website at https://mjiit.utm.my or contact them at 019-793 3799 or via email to mjiit@utm.my.

Continue reading here:

Nation-building through engineering and technology education - The Star Online

One of the more cheering responses to the present global pandemic has been the fast reaction of so many people with technical (or other) skills. Across Ireland and the world, theyve come together with initiatives to help frontline workers and scientists and sometimes, the rest of us seeking ways to cope at a time of serious need.

Often these are crowdsourced activities that use the web and social media reach to bring needed talent on board, or raise funds, or both. Some seek people with specific technical skills, such as coding or product development, while others are efforts to which anyone can contribute. Below, you will definitely find something that can use your own abilities.

One of the first big international Covid projects off the mark was one familiar to many computing old timers as it has been around for two decades in various guises, and anyone with a computer can contribute to it. The Folding@Home project, based at Washington University in St Louis and involving several major universities, has several research projects ongoing and the newest is a search to find weaknesses that can be targeted in the coronavirus.

By downloading a small program to a laptop or PC, individuals can allow the spare computing power on their home machines to become part of a vast international distributed supercomputer running simulations that look for protein-folding anomalies in the coronavirus. These could offer possible entry points for drugs to tackle the virus.

To add your machine, goto foldingathome.org, download the program, then follow the directions to choose Covid-19 as your project.

Another huge international crowdsourced project is the Coronavirus Tech Handbook at coronavirustechhandbook.com/home. It describes itself as a crowd-sourced library for technologists, civic organisations, public and private institutions, researchers, and specialists of all kinds working on responses to the pandemic.

The range of resources includes sections aimed at developers (which has updated lists of Covid-related hackathons, for example), but also, the handbook has information specifically for parents and guardians, the vulnerable, for people who are sick, for those who are grieving and for, as one section is entitled, everyone. Anyone can add information, too.

Irish organisers were the instigators of another of the earliest big international crowdsourced projects, one aiming to fill the urgent gap between the demand for and limited supply of ventilators for Covid-19 patients.

The Irish-based Open Source Ventilator project quickly picked up international steam to help design and develop portable emergency ventilators. The initiative needs the knowledge of many different types of experts. Learn more, and register your interest if you can contribute in any of a variety of ways, at opensourceventilator.ie.

Have a 3D printer? A group of Irish engineers has come together to form the Covid-19 Virtual Factory, which is organising people with access to 3D printers to produce badly needed supplies, such as protective visors, for frontline medical staff in Ireland. Theres detailed information from Engineers Ireland at engineersireland.ie.

There are also links to a Slack group for those without a printer, but who wish to contribute to the development of products in other ways. There is also a link to a fundraising page for the 3D project.

If you have some technical knowledge and can help those without in the older and vulnerable stay-at-home cohort, John Harrington is crowdsourcing expertise on smartphones, computers, tablets, wifi connections, using communications and video apps, and other home technologies for his Covid-19 Tech Help initiative. He has set up a webpage atcovid19tech.iewith more information and the project is also on Twitter at @Covid19_tech and has a Facebook page.

A handy resource listing many other corona-focused initiatives around the world is the crowdsourced list at civictech.guide/coronavirus.

If you perhaps are finding yourself with plenty of time on your hands right now and would like to get involved with crowdsourced initiatives more generally, youll find no shortage of projects that would love your help.

For example, a completely different type of project that anyone can dive into is learning to edit one of the largest crowdsourced projects ever, the Wikipedia. Dr Rebecca ONeill of Wikimedia Ireland is holding regular weekly online teaching sessions where she demonstrates how to contribute to the vast online encyclopedia. Check posts from @WikimediaIE or ONeill (@restlesscurator) to learn more.

Or, search across the huge list of projects at Zooniverse, which brings together millions of volunteers to participate in online projects that span science and the humanities across the globe. Maybe you want to help find asteroids in images from the Hubble telescope. Or track the criminal careers of Australian prisoners. Or classify sounds babies make. Or help track animal life in the French mountains. Or transcribe the work of early women astronomers.

All you have to do is register and then pick your project at Zooniverse.org.

More:

How you and your technology can help fight Covid-19 - The Irish Times

Perth-based InteliCare is planning to list on the Australian Stock Exchange under the ticker ICR, and is confident it will be one of the dominant players in the aged care monitoring market as more people opt to grow old in the comfort of their own home.

The Australian company has developed an artificial intelligence (AI) system that can support the growing desire for abled and disabled people to live independently.

Speaking with Small Caps, the companys chief executive officer Jason Waller said the system works by tracking common movements and behaviours at home.

We turn any home into a smart home by installing a range of passive sensors, then connect to an internet of things. We run the data through an AI engine then over the period of a week see what normal domestic behaviour looks like.

The data is then collected and through the systems app, the care giver receives regular updates on a persons wellbeing.

According to Mr Waller, the onset of COVID-19 makes the companys system more crucial than ever.

It allows caregivers to reduce the level of face-to face interaction which may become a transition pathway and for families to monitor people who are self-isolating.

Unlike home security systems which rely on cameras, Mr Waller said InteliCare offers peace of mind and privacy.

People dont want cameras. People dont like the feeling theyre being watched, which is why our system works very well.

The sensors are passive theyre just really on or off and therefore we dont cross that threshold of invading peoples privacy.

Mr Waller said while pendants and duress alarms have been the mainstay for years, hes confident Intelicare has an innovative product to be a major force in the market.

Its very much an emerging market. The dominant technology in this space are the pendants and duress systems that are worn around peoples necks, which is what people turn to when they have mum and dad ageing in their own home.

Unfortunately, theyre not effective. In 80% of falls, people dont use them, or theyre not charged, or they dont wear them because it makes them feel old. And in 30% of those falls, they didnt press it even when it was serviceable, Mr Waller added.

I think well be able to dominate against that pendant market. There are other players in this field looking at smart home technology. Largely they are coming out of sensor manufacturing or the security industry. They tend to be closed architecture and therefore are limited or theyre targeting B2B or B2C. We straddle both of those industries very effectively.

After an internal restructure last year, Mr Waller said he was brought in, to apply his ASX experience and commercialise InteliCares technology.

That means raising $5.5 million dollars via the issue of 27.5 million shares at $0.20 each launching the IPO on 16 March against the backdrop of the global pandemic.

It has been difficult going into the eye of the storm, but because the product is well understood by everyone, whether its brokers or clients, weve found a great reception in the market to raise those funds, Mr Waller said.

According to InteliCare, while its been a daring task to raise capital against the pandemic, it seems the telehealth industry is one exception to the rule.

The overall effect of COVID-19 for a company like us and others in the telehealth industry is going to be net positive, Mr Waller said.

There has been an acceleration of telehealth and the adoption of in-home assisted technology and secondly this crisis has highlighted you dont want to be in a nursing home, or in aged-care residence. The strong preference is to age in their home and people are coming to that realisation.

And while InteliCare is in its early commercialisation stages, demand for the product since launching has grown.

Weve seen a significant uptick in enquiries from retail clients and businesses.

Although we are WA based, we are rolling 100 systems in Victoria and the IPO funds will increase the sales expansion.

I would encourage any investors to get on board quickly, the book is open and has been well responded to, Mr Waller said.

He added the company has been able to raise above 80% of its target so far.

Read the rest here:

InteliCare seeks to bring its AI-based aged care monitoring technology to the ASX - Small Caps

Dundee educated ecologist Keith Skene tells Michael Alexander why he believes the growing environmental crisis is not about saving the Earth its about whether humans can keep their place on it.

When Angus-based ecologist and popular science author Keith Skene considers the impact the coronavirus is having on global society, he is as horrified as the next person that so many people are dying.

But at the same time, the Duncan of Jordanstone ecological design tutor describes the pandemic as really humbling for the human race because in a world thats seen everything from mass extinctions to epoch defining climate change in its 4.5 billion year history, its a reminder that humans dont rule the roost.

Coronavirus has brought everything to a standstill, he says.

Thats one of the most fascinating things about it. Dont get me wrong its horrific that people are dying. Thats not something at all that Id ever say was a good thing. But having said that, it is a very humbling experience for the human race.

Looking at the economics today stock markets collapsing around the world, transport breaking down, youve got countries in lockdown and all because of a tiny virus that you cant even see. Its extraordinary really.

Keith, 54, of Letham, is no stranger to looking at the big picture of life on Earth.

Raised in Armagh in Northern Ireland he studied botany and plant science at Dundee University. Finishing his PhD in 1997, he became an expert in ecology and environmental change. He then worked as a lecturer at Dundee University for 13 years.

Feeling increasingly frustrated about the isolated and reductionist world of academic thinking, he set up the Biosphere Research Institute in 2010.

The aim was to bring artists and scientists together to write papers and books on how to tackle the big questions about the planet and our place in it.

Focusing on the biosphere the sum of all life on Earth the research takes the view that in order to solve the significant environmental and existential problems facing humanity at present, solutions must not focus only on individuals, but must be understood at every level of organization.

In Keiths new book Artificial Intelligence and the Environmental Crisis: Can Technology Really Save the World?, published by Routledge and written before the coronavirus crisis he tackles two of the most important issues of our time: sustainability and artificial intelligence.

But more profoundly, he also explores the physical and metaphysical journey of humankind in its interaction with the Earth system and with technology, examining issues of gender, racial and cultural equality, social justice and environmental justice.

We find ourselves at one of the great intersections of our short but eventful history, says Keith.

One road, the path of incessant greed and selfishness, meets the other, the path of our increasingly ailing planet.

It is a collision course, and we are unlikely to survive the impact intact.

Our highway of consumption has laid waste to much of the Earth as we have accelerated like there was no tomorrow, using new technologies to optimize conditions for ourselves, while maximizing profit from draining the resources of our world.

We have cut ourselves off from nature, and have ignored the warnings of a silent spring, lured by the songs of the Sirens of pleasure, luxury and apathy.

The decision facing us is whether we ignore the devastation and plough steadily onwards and downwards, or whether we turn away from this ruinous path.

Sustainable thinking is no longer a sweet folk songsustainable thinking is essential thinking, if we are to avoid the calamitous crash that lies ahead.

Our current path is unsustainable, and the threats are multiple.

In his book, Keith addresses the thorny issue of whether all technology is fundamentally bad for the planet, or if, in fact, technology could be the life raft in a tumultuous sea of environmental crisis.

He says theres no doubt technology has undoubtedly helped deliver the cataclysmic collapse of the Earth system on which life depends damaging, almost beyond repair, the carefully balanced synchrony of the planet.

Its not just climate change. With a fast growing population, 50% of the worlds soil has been eroded in the last 150 years, as well as problems with water pollution, putrification and collapsing fish stocks.

Yet he emphasises that it is not the technology that instigated this devastation, but humans themselves.

This is all building up to make a really bad future, he says.

When youve got food production declining rapidly because of the soil, and then you are getting fish stocks declining rapidly because of the water pollution, then youve got a climate thats warming uptheres a complete destabilisation of the system and of course the question is what can we do about it? What should we do about it?

In his book, Keith explores whether artificial intelligence could play a key role in helping to resolve some of these fundamental existential problems.

In a world where data and information controlled by a few large companies is king, the infosphere has the potential to do immeasurable good, he says.

But there is also increasing concern that if AI really did become autonomous, sentient and creative, it could deliver a modern-day apocalypse, posing an existential threat.

Theres a chapter called Fear and Loathing in AI, explains Keith.

I write about the first printing presses that came out people thought they were the work of the devil. They looked on these printers as sinners.

All new technology brings massive challenges. A lot of the fear about AI a lot of the experts say we are nowhere near those concerns being reality yet. Weve only get nano-AI where we basically tell it what to do.

But if AI is to have an independent philosophy of life in future, what would that philosophy be?

And how could AI help the environment?

This is the key point of the book. The book focuses on what kind of intelligence should we be trying to copy. I suggest that human intelligence is actually one of the worst models because it led us to the problems that weve got. We look at some other possible models of intelligence.

Animal intelligence? Swarm intelligence? How termites even though they have a tiny brain can build a really complicated termite mine with air conditioning and all sorts of structural things.

They can do that because they work together and have a complete sharing of their plan really.

Then weve got plant intelligence thats a whole new area thats been developed recently.

And microbial intelligence thats getting quite close to viruses. How intelligent microbes are. How they work together.

Then we finish off with biosphere intelligence how the actual planet works.

Keith says the bottom line is that over 3.8 billion years, Earths biosphere has been surviving, adapting and solving problems.

For example, recovering from the asteroid strike that wiped out the dinosaurs 65 million years ago and without human input because we werent even around.

There is a real sort of framework within ecosystems that allows it to re-establish itself each time, he says.

Its like a play you can get different actors for a play but the play keeps going. Thats very like nature. Things go extinct all the time. But the story keeps carrying on really. Whether we lose our part in the play is another issue, however. Its not really a story of us saving the Earth. Its about saving ourselves really.

Here is the original post:

Artificial Intelligence and the environmental crisis: 'Can technology really save the world?', asks Tayside expert - The Courier

Schools are loaning thousands of computers to families that don't have enough computers for children learning from home. | BC School Trustees Association

Learning from home can be pretty tough to do if students dont have computers or Internet access, which is especially problematic insome remote areas of the province.

The BC Ministry of Education is therefore loaning out 23,000 computers and devices, and arranging for Internet service providers to hook up families with school age children who dont currently have Internet access.

The COVID-19 crisis has underscored the modern-day reality that computers and the Internet are not a luxury, but an important utility.

In mid-March, as part of its state of emergency over the COVID-19 pandemic, all K-12 schools in B.C. were closed. Teachers are expected to try to teach classes remotely.

But some families may have only one home computer, but more than one child, and a surprising number have no computers at all.

School districts discovered that 30% of families they surveyed had either limited or no access at all to technology needed to learn from home computers, tablets, Internet, WIFI.

There were also cases where there was only one computer in the home being used by a parent for full-time work, the Ministry of Education said in a news release.

And some remote communities have no Internet or cell phone access.

School districts have collected 23,000 computers and devices from schools across B.C. to loan to families with school-aged children, have been buying equipment, and deploying their own IT technicians to make sure students are properly hooked up.

In the cases where there is no available Internet or cell phone service in remote communities, classroom materials are being loaded onto flash drives and sent to students.

In some cases, schools are allowing students access to school computer labs, and some First Nations have opened their band offices for students.

"Boards of education know that learning solutions need to be tailored to local community needs, said Stephanie Higginson, president, BC School Trustees Association. These technology loans are one small way boards are working to ensure that the needs of some of our most vulnerable students are met during these uncertain times."

Earlier today, provincial health officer Bonnie Henry said some schools might start reopening to in-class learning by mid-May, though on a limited basis.

I absolutely think well have some children back in schools this year but it may be modified, she said.

She said it wont be a blanket return to class, however. Different strategies will likely be implemented, depending on the school district, schools and the needs of students.

nbennett@biv.com

@nbennett_biv

Original post:

More than 20,000 computers loaned to students to learn from home - Business in Vancouver

By Christine Katende

I am getting tired, she said in a painful tone. Michael is never home and the little time he is here, he is on the phone. His love for the phone has suddenly replaced our companionship. During dinner time, he wont get his hands off the phone. He even carries his phone to the bedroom.

Whatsapp, Twitter, Facebook and Instagram have replaced his family. The phone has taken over conversations we used to have as a couple. We dont talk anymore. Michael has changed from the man I used to know.

This was a conversation I had with my long-time friend, Ritah Naluwooza (not real names). The couple has been married for nine years. She says she has resorted to watching Tv soaps as a way of coping with boredom.

Let us have a candid conversation. Has technology officially become a new member of a modern nuclear family? Are couples aware that excessive phone usage is contributing to the distance that appears to be increasing in families?

Over the last two decades, technology has transformed the way we work, communicate and the nature of learning and education. Couples, parents, children, who form part of the modern family today face new and challenging choices about technology use and control.

Considering the ongoing lockdown in many countries, people are likely to spend even more time on their phones than they used to. They have to constantly communicate with their supervisors at work as well as get the work done. The time couples used to spend walking, cooking, reading books, watching movies and spending quality time is spent on the phone.

Although people are married and living together as a couple, they are worlds apart and living lonesome lives behind the curtains.

Evelyn Kharono Lufafa a relationship psychologist working with talk therapy Uganda says that every family including low income earners has embraced technology.

Borrowing a leaf from Ritah Naluwoozas story, the expert says the love for technological devices such as phones and laptops, has also led to neglect of traditional family roles, especially where both partners are working. There is less intimacy between husband and wife because the phones are connecting partners to the outside illusional world. Technology hampers family time and gets some couples suspicious, says the counsellor.

According to Kharono, even in this time when technology makes everything possible, it should never replace physical communication, especially in a family setting and intimate relationships.

Feeling of loneliness even in the presence of a partner are common lately. People are too addicted to their phones that they dont feel the value of their spouses anymore. This is dangerous to a relationship, she notes.

We can only change ourselves. It is difficult to parent an adult. However, let your spouse know that you are not comfortable with their addiction to their phone. Avoid competing with his phone for attention, as this may cause resentment. Instead. Let go of your own phone and try to do the right thing. Let your partner learn from you, advises the expert.

The counsellor advises couples to use their best moments to discuss how they feel about the position that technology has taken in their family. She says people tend to give utmost attention to their partners during their good moments because they dont feel like they are being attacked.

Kharono says choosing to learn communication skills is the best option as opposed to being preoccupied by your partners phone behaviour, as this will heighten stress.

Agree on the time when it is not acceptable to use phones at home as a couple. For example, set 8pm as a no-phone-zone. Have a small basket where phones and tablets are collected during the night. No phone or laptop engagements during supper time and bedtime or even breakfast, among other important times. These rules are supposed to couple be tailored and allow flexibility in case of an emergency.

About family time, Dr Samuel Kazimba Mugalu, the archbishop of the church of Uganda, recently called on couples to utilise the lockdown to rectify issues that had snatched away the love.

Instead of creating space, bring back that lost love, do what you used to do then, reconcile and live a peaceful life, spend time with your family besides your phone or computer, he says, adding, Prayer is critical in such times and God should always be at the centre of every marriage.

He says smart phones split the most educated and least educated couples. Thats why the user needs to realize that this can turn into an addiction if it is not regulated. People need to be mindful of their actions.

Of course, mobile devices are complementing family interactions, especially for long distance couples. But what is clear, is that there is a rise in alone together time. This means although families now spend more time at home, it is not necessarily in a way that feels like quality time.

Go here to read the rest:

Have we allowed technology to become another family member? - Daily Monitor

This article is about the use and knowledge of techniques and processes for producing goods and services. For other uses, see Technology (disambiguation).

Making, modification, usage, and knowledge of tools, machines, techniques, crafts, systems, and methods of organization

Technology ("science of craft", from Greek , techne, "art, skill, cunning of hand"; and -, -logia[2]) is the sum of techniques, skills, methods, and processes used in the production of goods or services or in the accomplishment of objectives, such as scientific investigation. Technology can be the knowledge of techniques, processes, and the like, or it can be embedded in machines to allow for operation without detailed knowledge of their workings. Systems (e.g. machines) applying technology by taking an input, changing it according to the system's use, and then producing an outcome are referred to as technology systems or technological systems.

The simplest form of technology is the development and use of basic tools. The prehistoric discovery of how to control fire and the later Neolithic Revolution increased the available sources of food, and the invention of the wheel helped humans to travel in and control their environment. Developments in historic times, including the printing press, the telephone, and the Internet, have lessened physical barriers to communication and allowed humans to interact freely on a global scale.

Technology has many effects. It has helped develop more advanced economies (including today's global economy) and has allowed the rise of a leisure class. Many technological processes produce unwanted by-products known as pollution and deplete natural resources to the detriment of Earth's environment. Innovations have always influenced the values of a society and raised new questions in the ethics of technology. Examples include the rise of the notion of efficiency in terms of human productivity, and the challenges of bioethics.

Philosophical debates have arisen over the use of technology, with disagreements over whether technology improves the human condition or worsens it. Neo-Luddism, anarcho-primitivism, and similar reactionary movements criticize the pervasiveness of technology, arguing that it harms the environment and alienates people; proponents of ideologies such as transhumanism and techno-progressivism view continued technological progress as beneficial to society and the human condition.

The use of the term "technology" has changed significantly over the last 200 years. Before the 20th century, the term was uncommon in English, and it was used either to refer to the description or study of the useful arts[3] or to allude to technical education, as in the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (chartered in 1861).[4]

The term "technology" rose to prominence in the 20th century in connection with the Second Industrial Revolution. The term's meanings changed in the early 20th century when American social scientists, beginning with Thorstein Veblen, translated ideas from the German concept of Technik into "technology." In German and other European languages, a distinction exists between technik and technologie that is absent in English, which usually translates both terms as "technology." By the 1930s, "technology" referred not only to the study of the industrial arts but to the industrial arts themselves.[5]

In 1937, the American sociologist Read Bain wrote that "technology includes all tools, machines, utensils, weapons, instruments, housing, clothing, communicating and transporting devices and the skills by which we produce and use them."[6] Bain's definition remains common among scholars today, especially social scientists. Scientists and engineers usually prefer to define technology as applied science, rather than as the things that people make and use.[7] More recently, scholars have borrowed from European philosophers of "technique" to extend the meaning of technology to various forms of instrumental reason, as in Foucault's work on technologies of the self (techniques de soi).

Dictionaries and scholars have offered a variety of definitions. The Merriam-Webster Learner's Dictionary offers a definition of the term: "the use of science in industry, engineering, etc., to invent useful things or to solve problems" and "a machine, piece of equipment, method, etc., that is created by technology."[8] Ursula Franklin, in her 1989 "Real World of Technology" lecture, gave another definition of the concept; it is "practice, the way we do things around here."[9] The term is often used to imply a specific field of technology, or to refer to high technology or just consumer electronics, rather than technology as a whole.[10] Bernard Stiegler, in Technics and Time, 1, defines technology in two ways: as "the pursuit of life by means other than life," and as "organized inorganic matter."[11]

Technology can be most broadly defined as the entities, both material and immaterial, created by the application of mental and physical effort in order to achieve some value. In this usage, technology refers to tools and machines that may be used to solve real-world problems. It is a far-reaching term that may include simple tools, such as a crowbar or wooden spoon, or more complex machines, such as a space station or particle accelerator. Tools and machines need not be material; virtual technology, such as computer software and business methods, fall under this definition of technology.[12] W. Brian Arthur defines technology in a similarly broad way as "a means to fulfill a human purpose."[13]

The word "technology" can also be used to refer to a collection of techniques. In this context, it is the current state of humanity's knowledge of how to combine resources to produce desired products, to solve problems, fulfill needs, or satisfy wants; it includes technical methods, skills, processes, techniques, tools and raw materials. When combined with another term, such as "medical technology" or "space technology," it refers to the state of the respective field's knowledge and tools. "State-of-the-art technology" refers to the high technology available to humanity in any field.

Technology can be viewed as an activity that forms or changes culture.[14] Additionally, technology is the application of math, science, and the arts for the benefit of life as it is known. A modern example is the rise of communication technology, which has lessened barriers to human interaction and as a result has helped spawn new subcultures; the rise of cyberculture has at its basis the development of the Internet and the computer.[15] Not all technology enhances culture in a creative way; technology can also help facilitate political oppression and war via tools such as guns. As a cultural activity, technology predates both science and engineering, each of which formalize some aspects of technological endeavor.

The distinction between science, engineering, and technology is not always clear. Science is systematic knowledge of the physical or material world gained through observation and experimentation.[16] Technologies are not usually exclusively products of science, because they have to satisfy requirements such as utility, usability, and safety.[citation needed]

Engineering is the goal-oriented process of designing and making tools and systems to exploit natural phenomena for practical human means, often (but not always) using results and techniques from science. The development of technology may draw upon many fields of knowledge, including scientific, engineering, mathematical, linguistic, and historical knowledge, to achieve some practical result.

Technology is often a consequence of science and engineering, although technology as a human activity precedes the two fields. For example, science might study the flow of electrons in electrical conductors by using already-existing tools and knowledge. This new-found knowledge may then be used by engineers to create new tools and machines such as semiconductors, computers, and other forms of advanced technology. In this sense, scientists and engineers may both be considered technologists; the three fields are often considered as one for the purposes of research and reference.[17]

The exact relations between science and technology, in particular, have been debated by scientists, historians, and policymakers in the late 20th century, in part because the debate can inform the funding of basic and applied science. In the immediate wake of World War II, for example, it was widely considered in the United States that technology was simply "applied science" and that to fund basic science was to reap technological results in due time. An articulation of this philosophy could be found explicitly in Vannevar Bush's treatise on postwar science policy, Science The Endless Frontier: "New products, new industries, and more jobs require continuous additions to knowledge of the laws of nature... This essential new knowledge can be obtained only through basic scientific research."[18] In the late-1960s, however, this view came under direct attack, leading towards initiatives to fund science for specific tasks (initiatives resisted by the scientific community). The issue remains contentious, though most analysts resist the model that technology is a result of scientific research.[19][20]

The use of tools by early humans was partly a process of discovery and of evolution. Early humans evolved from a species of foraging hominids which were already bipedal,[21] with a brain mass approximately one third of modern humans.[22] Tool use remained relatively unchanged for most of early human history. Approximately 50,000 years ago, the use of tools and complex set of behaviors emerged, believed by many archaeologists to be connected to the emergence of fully modern language.[23]

Hominids started using primitive stone tools millions of years ago. The earliest stone tools were little more than a fractured rock, but approximately 75,000 years ago,[24] pressure flaking provided a way to make much finer work.

The discovery and use of fire, a simple energy source with many profound uses, was a turning point in the technological evolution of humankind.[25] The exact date of its discovery is not known; evidence of burnt animal bones at the Cradle of Humankind suggests that the domestication of fire occurred before 1 Ma;[26] scholarly consensus indicates that Homo erectus had controlled fire by between 500 and 400 ka.[27][28] Fire, fueled with wood and charcoal, allowed early humans to cook their food to increase its digestibility, improving its nutrient value and broadening the number of foods that could be eaten.[29]

Other technological advances made during the Paleolithic era were clothing and shelter; the adoption of both technologies cannot be dated exactly, but they were a key to humanity's progress. As the Paleolithic era progressed, dwellings became more sophisticated and more elaborate; as early as 380 ka, humans were constructing temporary wood huts.[30][31] Clothing, adapted from the fur and hides of hunted animals, helped humanity expand into colder regions; humans began to migrateout of Africa by 200 ka and into other continents such as Eurasia.[32]

Human's technological ascent began in earnest in what is known as the Neolithic Period ("New Stone Age"). The invention of polished stone axes was a major advance that allowed forest clearance on a large scale to create farms. This use of polished stone axes increased greatly in the Neolithic, but were originally used in the preceding Mesolithic in some areas such as Ireland.[33] Agriculture fed larger populations, and the transition to sedentism allowed simultaneously raising more children, as infants no longer needed to be carried, as nomadic ones must. Additionally, children could contribute labor to the raising of crops more readily than they could to the hunter-gatherer economy.[34][35]

With this increase in population and availability of labor came an increase in labor specialization.[36] What triggered the progression from early Neolithic villages to the first cities, such as Uruk, and the first civilizations, such as Sumer, is not specifically known; however, the emergence of increasingly hierarchical social structures and specialized labor, of trade and war amongst adjacent cultures, and the need for collective action to overcome environmental challenges such as irrigation, are all thought to have played a role.[37]

Continuing improvements led to the furnace and bellows and provided, for the first time, the ability to smelt and forge gold, copper, silver, and lead native metals found in relatively pure form in nature.[38] The advantages of copper tools over stone, bone, and wooden tools were quickly apparent to early humans, and native copper was probably used from near the beginning of Neolithic times (about 10 ka).[39] Native copper does not naturally occur in large amounts, but copper ores are quite common and some of them produce metal easily when burned in wood or charcoal fires. Eventually, the working of metals led to the discovery of alloys such as bronze and brass (about 4000 BCE). The first uses of iron alloys such as steel dates to around 1800 BCE.[40][41]

Meanwhile, humans were learning to harness other forms of energy. The earliest known use of wind power is the sailing ship; the earliest record of a ship under sail is that of a Nile boat dating to the 8th-millennium BCE.[42] From prehistoric times, Egyptians probably used the power of the annual flooding of the Nile to irrigate their lands, gradually learning to regulate much of it through purposely built irrigation channels and "catch" basins. The ancient Sumerians in Mesopotamia used a complex system of canals and levees to divert water from the Tigris and Euphrates rivers for irrigation.[43]

According to archaeologists, the wheel was invented around 4000 BCE probably independently and nearly simultaneously in Mesopotamia (in present-day Iraq), the Northern Caucasus (Maykop culture) and Central Europe.[44] Estimates on when this may have occurred range from 5500 to 3000 BCE with most experts putting it closer to 4000 BCE.[45] The oldest artifacts with drawings depicting wheeled carts date from about 3500 BCE;[46] however, the wheel may have been in use for millennia before these drawings were made. More recently, the oldest-known wooden wheel in the world was found in the Ljubljana marshes of Slovenia.[47]

The invention of the wheel revolutionized trade and war. It did not take long to discover that wheeled wagons could be used to carry heavy loads. The ancient Sumerians used the potter's wheel and may have invented it.[48] A stone pottery wheel found in the city-state of Ur dates to around 3429 BCE,[49] and even older fragments of wheel-thrown pottery have been found in the same area.[49] Fast (rotary) potters' wheels enabled early mass production of pottery, but it was the use of the wheel as a transformer of energy (through water wheels, windmills, and even treadmills) that revolutionized the application of nonhuman power sources. The first two-wheeled carts were derived from travois[50] and were first used in Mesopotamia and Iran in around 3000 BCE.[50]

The oldest known constructed roadways are the stone-paved streets of the city-state of Ur, dating to circa 4000 BCE[51] and timber roads leading through the swamps of Glastonbury, England, dating to around the same time period.[51] The first long-distance road, which came into use around 3500 BCE,[51] spanned 1,500 miles from the Persian Gulf to the Mediterranean Sea,[51] but was not paved and was only partially maintained.[51] In around 2000 BCE, the Minoans on the Greek island of Crete built a fifty-kilometer (thirty-mile) road leading from the palace of Gortyn on the south side of the island, through the mountains, to the palace of Knossos on the north side of the island.[51] Unlike the earlier road, the Minoan road was completely paved.[51]

Ancient Minoan private homes had running water.[53] A bathtub virtually identical to modern ones was unearthed at the Palace of Knossos.[53][54] Several Minoan private homes also had toilets, which could be flushed by pouring water down the drain.[53] The ancient Romans had many public flush toilets,[54] which emptied into an extensive sewage system.[54] The primary sewer in Rome was the Cloaca Maxima;[54] construction began on it in the sixth century BCE and it is still in use today.[54]

The ancient Romans also had a complex system of aqueducts,[52] which were used to transport water across long distances.[52] The first Roman aqueduct was built in 312 BCE.[52] The eleventh and final ancient Roman aqueduct was built in 226 CE.[52] Put together, the Roman aqueducts extended over 450 kilometers,[52] but less than seventy kilometers of this was above ground and supported by arches.[52]

Innovations continued through the Middle Ages with innovations such as silk, the horse collar and horseshoes in the first few hundred years after the fall of the Roman Empire. Medieval technology saw the use of simple machines (such as the lever, the screw, and the pulley) being combined to form more complicated tools, such as the wheelbarrow, windmills and clocks. The Renaissance brought forth many of these innovations, including the printing press (which facilitated the greater communication of knowledge), and technology became increasingly associated with science, beginning a cycle of mutual advancement. The advancements in technology in this era allowed a more steady supply of food, followed by the wider availability of consumer goods.

Starting in the United Kingdom in the 18th century, the Industrial Revolution was a period of great technological discovery, particularly in the areas of agriculture, manufacturing, mining, metallurgy, and transport, driven by the discovery of steam power. Technology took another step in a second industrial revolution with the harnessing of electricity to create such innovations as the electric motor, light bulb, and countless others. Scientific advancement and the discovery of new concepts later allowed for powered flight and advancements in medicine, chemistry, physics, and engineering. The rise in technology has led to skyscrapers and broad urban areas whose inhabitants rely on motors to transport them and their food supply. Communication was also greatly improved with the invention of the telegraph, telephone, radio and television. The late 19th and early 20th centuries saw a revolution in transportation with the invention of the airplane and automobile.

The 20th century brought a host of innovations. In physics, the discovery of nuclear fission has led to both nuclear weapons and nuclear power. Computers were also invented and later miniaturized using transistors and integrated circuits. Information technology subsequently led to the creation of the Internet, which ushered in the current Information Age. Humans have also been able to explore space with satellites (later used for telecommunication) and in manned missions going all the way to the moon. In medicine, this era brought innovations such as open-heart surgery and later stem cell therapy along with new medications and treatments.

Complex manufacturing and construction techniques and organizations are needed to make and maintain these new technologies, and entire industries have arisen to support and develop succeeding generations of increasingly more complex tools. Modern technology increasingly relies on training and education their designers, builders, maintainers, and users often require sophisticated general and specific training. Moreover, these technologies have become so complex that entire fields have been created to support them, including engineering, medicine, and computer science, and other fields have been made more complex, such as construction, transportation, and architecture.

Generally, technicism is the belief in the utility of technology for improving human societies.[55] Taken to an extreme, technicism "reflects a fundamental attitude which seeks to control reality, to resolve all problems with the use of scientifictechnological methods and tools."[56] In other words, human beings will someday be able to master all problems and possibly even control the future using technology. Some, such as Stephen V. Monsma,[57] connect these ideas to the abdication of religion as a higher moral authority.

Optimistic assumptions are made by proponents of ideologies such as transhumanism and singularitarianism, which view technological development as generally having beneficial effects for the society and the human condition. In these ideologies, technological development is morally good.

Transhumanists generally believe that the point of technology is to overcome barriers, and that what we commonly refer to as the human condition is just another barrier to be surpassed.

Singularitarians believe in some sort of "accelerating change"; that the rate of technological progress accelerates as we obtain more technology, and that this will culminate in a "Singularity" after artificial general intelligence is invented in which progress is nearly infinite; hence the term. Estimates for the date of this Singularity vary,[58] but prominent futurist Ray Kurzweil estimates the Singularity will occur in 2045.

Kurzweil is also known for his history of the universe in six epochs: (1) the physical/chemical epoch, (2) the life epoch, (3) the human/brain epoch, (4) the technology epoch, (5) the artificial intelligence epoch, and (6) the universal colonization epoch. Going from one epoch to the next is a Singularity in its own right, and a period of speeding up precedes it. Each epoch takes a shorter time, which means the whole history of the universe is one giant Singularity event.[59]

Some critics see these ideologies as examples of scientism and techno-utopianism and fear the notion of human enhancement and technological singularity which they support. Some have described Karl Marx as a techno-optimist.[60]

On the somewhat skeptical side are certain philosophers like Herbert Marcuse and John Zerzan, who believe that technological societies are inherently flawed. They suggest that the inevitable result of such a society is to become evermore technological at the cost of freedom and psychological health.

Many, such as the Luddites and prominent philosopher Martin Heidegger, hold serious, although not entirely, deterministic reservations about technology (see "The Question Concerning Technology"[61]). According to Heidegger scholars Hubert Dreyfus and Charles Spinosa, "Heidegger does not oppose technology. He hopes to reveal the essence of technology in a way that 'in no way confines us to a stultified compulsion to push on blindly with technology or, what comes to the same thing, to rebel helplessly against it.' Indeed, he promises that 'when we once open ourselves expressly to the essence of technology, we find ourselves unexpectedly taken into a freeing claim.'[62] What this entails is a more complex relationship to technology than either techno-optimists or techno-pessimists tend to allow."[63]

Some of the most poignant criticisms of technology are found in what are now considered to be dystopian literary classics such as Aldous Huxley's Brave New World, Anthony Burgess's A Clockwork Orange, and George Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four. In Goethe's Faust, Faust selling his soul to the devil in return for power over the physical world is also often interpreted as a metaphor for the adoption of industrial technology. More recently, modern works of science fiction such as those by Philip K. Dick and William Gibson and films such as Blade Runner and Ghost in the Shell project highly ambivalent or cautionary attitudes toward technology's impact on human society and identity.

The late cultural critic Neil Postman distinguished tool-using societies from technological societies and from what he called "technopolies," societies that are dominated by the ideology of technological and scientific progress to the exclusion or harm of other cultural practices, values, and world-views.[64]

Darin Barney has written about technology's impact on practices of citizenship and democratic culture, suggesting that technology can be construed as (1) an object of political debate, (2) a means or medium of discussion, and (3) a setting for democratic deliberation and citizenship. As a setting for democratic culture, Barney suggests that technology tends to make ethical questions, including the question of what a good life consists in, nearly impossible because they already give an answer to the question: a good life is one that includes the use of more and more technology.[65]

Nikolas Kompridis has also written about the dangers of new technology, such as genetic engineering, nanotechnology, synthetic biology, and robotics. He warns that these technologies introduce unprecedented new challenges to human beings, including the possibility of the permanent alteration of our biological nature. These concerns are shared by other philosophers, scientists and public intellectuals who have written about similar issues (e.g. Francis Fukuyama, Jrgen Habermas, William Joy, and Michael Sandel).[66]

Another prominent critic of technology is Hubert Dreyfus, who has published books such as On the Internet and What Computers Still Can't Do.

A more infamous anti-technological treatise is Industrial Society and Its Future, written by the Unabomber Ted Kaczynski and printed in several major newspapers (and later books) as part of an effort to end his bombing campaign of the techno-industrial infrastructure. There are also subcultures that disapprove of some or most technology, such as self-identified off-gridders.[67]

The notion of appropriate technology was developed in the 20th century by thinkers such as E.F. Schumacher and Jacques Ellul to describe situations where it was not desirable to use very new technologies or those that required access to some centralized infrastructure or parts or skills imported from elsewhere. The ecovillage movement emerged in part due to this concern.

This section mainly focuses on American concerns even if it can reasonably be generalized to other Western countries.

The inadequate quantity and quality of American jobs is one of the most fundamental economic challenges we face. [...] What's the linkage between technology and this fundamental problem?

In his article, Jared Bernstein, a Senior Fellow at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities,[68] questions the widespread idea that automation, and more broadly, technological advances, have mainly contributed to this growing labor market problem.His thesis appears to be a third way between optimism and skepticism. Essentially, he stands for a neutral approach of the linkage between technology and American issues concerning unemployment and declining wages.

He uses two main arguments to defend his point.First, because of recent technological advances, an increasing number of workers are losing their jobs. Yet, scientific evidence fails to clearly demonstrate that technology has displaced so many workers that it has created more problems than it has solved. Indeed, automation threatens repetitive jobs but higher-end jobs are still necessary because they complement technology and manual jobs that "requires flexibility judgment and common sense"[69] remain hard to replace with machines. Second, studies have not shown clear links between recent technology advances and the wage trends of the last decades.

Therefore, according to Bernstein, instead of focusing on technology and its hypothetical influences on current American increasing unemployment and declining wages, one needs to worry more about "bad policy that fails to offset the imbalances in demand, trade, income, and opportunity."[69]

For people who use both the Internet and mobile devices in excessive quantities it is likely for them to experience fatigue and over exhaustion as a result of disruptions in their sleeping patterns. Continuous studies have shown that increased BMI and weight gain are associated with people who spend long hours online and not exercising frequently.[70] Heavy Internet use is also displayed in the school lower grades of those who use it in excessive amounts.[71] It has also been noted that the use of mobile phones whilst driving has increased the occurrence of road accidents particularly amongst teen drivers. Statistically, teens reportedly have fourfold the number of road traffic incidents as those who are 20 years or older, and a very high percentage of adolescents write (81%) and read (92%) texts while driving.[72] In this context, mass media and technology have a negative impact on people, on both their mental and physical health.

Thomas P. Hughes stated that because technology has been considered as a key way to solve problems, we need to be aware of its complex and varied characters to use it more efficiently.[73] What is the difference between a wheel or a compass and cooking machines such as an oven or a gas stove? Can we consider all of them, only a part of them, or none of them as technologies?

Technology is often considered too narrowly; according to Hughes, "Technology is a creative process involving human ingenuity".[74] This definition's emphasis on creativity avoids unbounded definitions that may mistakenly include cooking "technologies," but it also highlights the prominent role of humans and therefore their responsibilities for the use of complex technological systems.

Yet, because technology is everywhere and has dramatically changed landscapes and societies, Hughes argues that engineers, scientists, and managers have often believed that they can use technology to shape the world as they want. They have often supposed that technology is easily controllable and this assumption has to be thoroughly questioned.[73] For instance, Evgeny Morozov particularly challenges two concepts: "Internet-centrism" and "solutionism."[75] Internet-centrism refers to the idea that our society is convinced that the Internet is one of the most stable and coherent forces. Solutionism is the ideology that every social issue can be solved thanks to technology and especially thanks to the internet. In fact, technology intrinsically contains uncertainties and limitations. According to Alexis Madrigal's review of Morozov's theory, to ignore it will lead to "unexpected consequences that could eventually cause more damage than the problems they seek to address."[76] Benjamin R. Cohen and Gwen Ottinger also discussed the multivalent effects of technology.[77]

Therefore, recognition of the limitations of technology, and more broadly, scientific knowledge, is needed especially in cases dealing with environmental justice and health issues. Ottinger continues this reasoning and argues that the ongoing recognition of the limitations of scientific knowledge goes hand in hand with scientists and engineers new comprehension of their role. Such an approach of technology and science "[require] technical professionals to conceive of their roles in the process differently. [They have to consider themselves as] collaborators in research and problem solving rather than simply providers of information and technical solutions."[78]

The use of basic technology is also a feature of other animal species apart from humans. These include primates such as chimpanzees,[79] some dolphin communities,[80] and crows.[81][82] Considering a more generic perspective of technology as ethology of active environmental conditioning and control, we can also refer to animal examples such as beavers and their dams, or bees and their honeycombs.

The ability to make and use tools was once considered a defining characteristic of the genus Homo.[83] However, the discovery of tool construction among chimpanzees and related primates has discarded the notion of the use of technology as unique to humans. For example, researchers have observed wild chimpanzees using tools for foraging: some of the tools used include leaf sponges, termite fishing probes, pestles and levers.[84] West African chimpanzees also use stone hammers and anvils for cracking nuts,[85] as do capuchin monkeys of Boa Vista, Brazil.[86]

Theories of technology often attempt to predict the future of technology based on the high technology and science of the time. As with all predictions of the future, however, technology is uncertain.

In 2005, futurist Ray Kurzweil predicted that the future of technology would mainly consist of an overlapping "GNR Revolution" of genetics, nanotechnology and robotics, with robotics being the most important of the three.[87]

See more here:

Technology - Wikipedia