Replied to Voices on the Air (Heart | Soul | Machine)

I want to thank Dai and Doug for sharing their lives through the podcast and their writings. I’ve felt privileged to get to know them through their work and what they shared. It’s been a privilege to have met Dai through this medium because there’s buckleys I would have run into him at the pub here in Wagga Wagga. It’s a reminder of the power of technology to connect us, to find the others and its ability to share and be intimate even with those you haven’t met.

Great reflection Tim. I like your point about privilege to be given insight into Doug and Dai’s lives through the TIDE Podcast.
Listened Episode 117: A Dramatic Comeback from TIDE Podcast

Interesting conversation as always Doug and Dai.

I think my question/concern about ‘gaming’ is the use of time? With my limited downtime, I choose to use it for different things.

Also, enjoyed the short discussion about digital parenting at the end. It definitely feels like a conflicted space.

Replied to Episode 112: Running to Bangkok by Doug Belshaw, Dai Barnes (Tide Podcast)

This week, Doug and Dai discuss what’s been going on over the last couple of weeks, MozFest, MoodleMoot US, Universal Basic Income, humane technology, Creative Commons, success, decentralised apps, and more!

Dai, I was interested in your discussion of James Bridle’s book. I agree Dai with your concern about such a dystopian portrayal. That was something that I tried to get across in my post on becoming informed. Is the answer that it takes a range of voices to get to this stage?

With this in mind I am intrigued by the video you mention from Vox featuring Tristan Harris:

I liked his suggestions, but for me it is like going to McDonald’s to buy a salad. The issue is not the salad, but McDonald’s and their push for non-human consumption. I wonder about a sustainable smartphone, one that is built ethically from the outset, not one that puts the blame back on the user. As Audrey Watters argues:

I don’t want to suggest that this is something the consumer alone is responsible for – blaming consumers, for example, for looking at their phone when it vibrates or beeps or for downloading Candy Crush and trying to get all their friends to play along. The whole modus operandi of the tech industry has been to create apps that are as engaging and compelling and viral as Candy Crush. The industry views its users as highly manipulable, their behaviors as something that can be easily shaped and nudged and controlled. Maybe it’s time to rethink and regulate and restrict how that happens?

Discussing the work of Harris the other such apologists, Watters asks why we should trust them:

Why should we trust these revelations (or revelators) to guide us moving forward? Why not trust those of us who knew it was bullshit all along and who can tell you the whole history of a bad idea?

I wonder then why we should trust Harris over Bridle and wonder whether in the end they both have a particular place at the table?