Looking for WinExtra? You've found it - check out the ReBranding story as to why the change

The impossible dream – Social Technology

by Steven Hodson on January 3, 2009 · Comments

security For the past month or so I’ve had an idea percolating just beyond my grasp. I would occasionally get glimpses of what it was or what it wasn’t but never enough that I could get it down on paper – per se. I talked about the idea with Alexander van Elsas on Skype a week or so ago but as great as the conversation was it didn’t make getting all the pieces in place any easier. What I had in my head connected well enough but translating that to paper is still proving to be difficult.

The other part of the problem is like in the post I wrote about fear of thinking. It is one thing to work through an idea or concept in your head; or even talk with friends about it, but to commit it to a public viewing is nerve racking to say the least. However the bigger problem with ideas is that sometimes they just won’t let you go and you have no choice but to take the chance and let them free. This is such a case.

The germ of the dream

As enamoured as we are currently with Social Media we have become more entrapped by the services built on what Social Media is all about. Social Media is an idea – a platform of sorts – that because of its philosophy of openness and transparency gave us a new way to communicate. It was a two way communication where those that created the content could interact with those that were consuming that content.

In of itself Social Media has changed the landscape of our online lives by letting us be participants instead of just bystanders. Even though we have gotten caught up in the ways we use the new media it doesn’t change the fact that the Internet has evolved – if only ever so slightly. Even with that evolution though we are still living in a world where access to this new world is a haphazard affair.

Even with all the money being poured back into broadband expansion in the US; as the providers still make profits by the way, there are segments of our society that don’t have this type of access. As Stacey Higgenbotham at GigaOM pointed out recently the rural broadband and fibre deployments in poor neighbourhoods aren’t happening because there is no profit in it.

While we may have grown enough to be able to have something like Social Media come to life and take off we haven’t made it to the point where Social Technology makes it available to everyone – regardless of where they are or how little money they have.

Laying the groundwork of Social Technology

Previously I had posted what I referred to as the 2 Laws of Social Technology; which are as follows

  • It doesn’t matter how free you make information as it will always be inaccessible if the way to access that information is beyond the reach of the poorest person in society.
  • It doesn’t matter how accessible you make the information if the tools for using that access are beyond the reach of the poorest person in society.

While those two things may seem the same they aren’t. The first relates to the fact that social media through its philosophy of openness and transparency might be about making people participants in the creation of information; but if the poorest person in our society doesn’t have a way to take part in the creation then that content is diminished. Only when the poorest people in the world can reach out without any hindrances and be included will there be a true social media.

In regards to the second point you can make this new web as accessible as you want by whatever means you can but if you create barriers to accessing that web in the tools used to access it then nothing changes. Whether it be through data caps, speed caps, roaming charges, government or corporate intervention they are all barriers created to maximize profits and restrict access.

What Social Technology isn’t

Before we can understand what Social Technology is we have to understand what it isn’t. I wrote previously in bullet form what my thoughts were on this but I’ll expand my thoughts here.

  • Social Technology isn’t just about the Internet and neither is it just about technology. While this might seem confusing it really isn’t. We currently have a mindset where on the one hand we have the Internet and everything we do there. Then on the other hand we have the technology we use to access all that information. Social Technology suggests that there is no difference; or there shouldn’t be, between the two – they are one and the same. Without the Internet we would have no need for all these technological wonders and without all these technological tools we couldn’t access the Internet.
  • Social Technology cannot and should not be a government mandated function nor should it be controlled by the government. The first reaction people have when they hear about Social this or Social that is one of “we don’t want our tax dollars subsidizing anything”. This isn’t about socializing the Internet or the accessing of the Internet as in the idea of social welfare or similar social projects. This is about making sure that anyone regardless of where they live or how poor they are has fair and equitable access to the Internet.
  • Social Technology isn’t about friends or followers lists or the making of billions of dollars. If anything Social Technology is the foundation upon which a better Social Media could be developed. As we remove the barriers to access for all the influx of brilliant people who might never have the opportunity suddenly can be equal with the richest person in the world. The poorest person in the world will now be on an intellectual footage with the smartest people in the world. With true Social Technology there are no more borders of any kind. We would have true democratization of ideas and thoughts and as a result Social Media would blossom into what could be our golden age.

When you truly remove any and all barriers to access I really believe we would see some pretty incredible things happen but that is all part of the dream.

Why the dream will never happen in our lifetimes

First let’s look at what Social Technology would mean in regards to access – to ubiquitous access.

  • It wouldn’t matter where you were; in your car or at your desk or sitting on a park bench, you would have access. It would be as simple as flipping open you laptop, turning on your phone or sitting behind your desk – you would be connected. You wouldn’t experience the difficulties like Mark ‘Rizzn’ Hopkins did during his move to Dallas.
  • It wouldn’t matter if you were a farmer in Iowa or in the depth of the Congo you would be one step away from being connected without any worry of whether or not you could afford it.
  • You could be in London England and yet be able to pay the bills for your home in the mountains of Utah or cast your vote for your State or congressional representative. It wouldn’t matter that you were an ocean away or that you were telecommuting to your job in Australia.

In effect when you have Social Technology borders of every kind change, morph or just plain melt away. Your world changes when the barriers that we have percei
ved to be an integral part of our lives are no longer there or have changed.

The borders around our job truly change like they never have in the past. The borders of the country we live in don’t have the same power they once did because we are no longer held to them in the same way. With Social Technology everything changes – our world changes – we change.

But it is because of those very things – those changes – that I don’t believe we will see real Social Technology within our lifetimes. These types of changes are too radical and endanger too many positions of power. So the dream will probably remain a dream.

In the end

I know there are a lot of questions that can be asked about what I have written here. There are a lot of points that would need to be answered. Unfortunately I don’t have any answers – just ideas and thoughts. While I don’t see this as being something that will happen because of any government or corporate motivation – because there is none for them – I do see this as being a grassroots movement.

The Internet, Social Media and I believe Social Technology have the potential to forever change our world but it won’t happen unless the barrier of access is removed for everyone. when that happens I think we will see the floodgates of growth and change happen like no other time in mankind’s history.

My mother always said I was a dreamer at heart – I guess she was right.

Similar Posts:

Tagged as: social technology

Don't want to miss a single Shooting at Bubbles post?
Then make sure to grab our RSS feed right here and keep up to date with the cranky old fart of the Internet.
  • Steven - you are ahead of your time....that's all. Not sure what else to add other than I wish everyone saw things as clearly as you.
  • wow .. thanks Adam ... I'm kind of at a loss of words.
  • Steven,

    an excellent post. It makes me think (again) and I like that. I'm beginning to understand the complexity of the issue you are addressing. I think it is well worth a followup. You have triggered some thoughts I think I will be writing down in a post myself ;-)
  • thank you Alexander. The conversation we had via Skype did help and I look forward to your thoughts on the idea. I know I still have more that I want to write about this because it isn't an all-in-one type subject so any input is greatly welcomed.
  • the reality you assume will not be realized in our lifetime is already real .. to a mystic, a yogi, anybody with developed awareness ..

    the whole tech dance is only about out-picturing what the mind can already do ...
  • a really great viewpoint. We will always have barriers in every lifetime, unfortunately we as a society as much as we want equality, we can’t afford it and don’t really want it. If everything is equal, we have nothing to fix, to pass down – we remove motivations to continuously improve, innovate and evolve.

    Social Technology for example may be helped dramatically through the OLPC programme and so many others. We should probably start elsewhere, but just need to look at the work being done by so many philanthropists right now - foundations like the Bill and Melinda Gates or Virgin Unite to help cure disease and remove nasty things from this planet....

    These divides, have evolved quicker than anytime previously throughout history, and will continue to – however I believe we have and need divisions. Growing up, I learnt there is always someone better off than you and someone worse off...
  • We will probably always have divisions - that almost seems like human nature but with social Technology I they would be less stringent and less about classifications of people unlike what we have today. I grew up as well knowing the same as you - I have spent most of my life knowing that as well but just because we grew up with a certain class structure doesn't mean it has to be one that our grandchildren grow up with.
  • This is an important post. I only wish there were more posts like this. I like the triad of what social media isn't.

    Technology doesn't change the fundamental problems of being human. And yet we have always sought technological solutions to human problems. Religion is a technology (interface with God); government is a technology (automation of moral codes and mandates). Those solutions have offered relief at times, but have also spawned nightmares worse than the problems they sought to address.

    We are involved in relationships with technologies. These relationships are increasingly infiltrating our lives with increasing rapidity, which means we don't even have enough time to assess the relationships. In fact these relationships form so quickly that we don't even realize that we even that we're involved in a relationship.

    The fundamental problems of economic, cultural and social disparities have always come down to human values and the uses of technology. (Wealth is the manifestation technological advantage.)

    So I'm rather glad that the dream of Social Media Technology is impossible: it means that we will have to remain human in the face of our human problems. Knowing this means that if we are to help improve the lot of others we will have to be human about it, we will have to value values, value hard work, value equanimity.
  • rather than address your point in the comments Phil - because they are interesting ones - I'll be looking at them in another post about Social Technology.

    thanks
  • I appreciate the sentiment, Robert. I agree it's a noble aspiration, but I don't see it happening in our lifetimes. I see how far we've come though, as I remember the days when we learned that someday we'd be able to book our airline reservations on the computer, etc. It's quite fascinating, as is your view. Thank you for sharing it.
  • Steven:
    Instead of saying a blanket 'this won't happen in our time' i think it is worth thinking bigger. In my children's lifetime of 10 years, we went from having a few early adopters with cell phones and web browsers to a huge percentage of developed world society having one or both.

    Companies are working to make at least basic mobile access available almost everywhere - My friend Jerry just got back from Africa and reports "four bars on the Ngorongoro Crater rim" for cell service. http://yi-tan.com/wiki/yi-tan/Africa_Update?wik... will have more about that and the whole tech situation there.

    So, what do we do to make this situation better, and move the ball forward - both on the tech side, as I've mentioned, and on the Social side - to increase understanding?

    Thanks for getting this conversation started (and tip of hat to Scoble who pointed me here via socialmedian.com)
  • Kathleen Seide
    The fear factor for me with the kind of connectivity you mention is a privacy issue - "they" would always be able to know where I am if I am always plugged in and identified. I know it sounds paranoid, but...
  • I have written an excessively long novel about this, posted on my website, which also include much discussion of extending social technology to the whole world. Not an impossible dream. While people on the net have the only easy access, they can intermediate for others using good social protocols or portable devices. I think I make it sound practical. But ultimately it is self-reproductive. The larger the pool of candidates for a social role, the better it can be filled, so the incentive to expand the pool is high. As people link up this way, if linked to the right people and thus being more effective, they will make it work. It will happen, someday.
blog comments powered by Disqus