Technology, in its broadest sense, means “the way we do things” – which can be manual, mechanical, and electronic. What does the way we do things say about the evolution of knowledge, and of our perspectives and priorities, over time? Does our technology reveal the mindset of its inventors, and those who use it?
Technology is the product of human knowledge, applied to a particular purpose. The applications of our technology change over time, but why do they change and what are the causes of our inventions? Are there times when we adapt to our technology, and other times when our technology adapts to us? Who – or what – determines the future course of the way we do things, and how do the rest of us have a say in the matter? Join in this ongoing dialogue as we explore the frontiers of technology from the combined perspectives of its developers and its users.
Machines process data at speeds far exceeding human brain capacity, but speed doesn’t convey the meaning of causes and effects in time. This third installment in our “human fracking” series explores the differences between machine time and human time, asking what happens to our attention, memory, and independent reasoning when algorithms set the pace of our lives.
A UNESCO report warns that large language models like ChatGPT risk creating a “linguistic dictatorship” by standardizing speech and thought while amplifying stereotypes and the loss of many words. Convincing but deceptive and poor simulations of human emotions continue to damage mental health, and some propose that we stop attaching human terms like “intelligence,” “hallucination,” and “neural network” to the algorithms to make it clearer they’re not human.
Researchers use the concepts of “human fracking” and “attention capitalism” to describe how digital platforms capture and commercialize human attention. They examine how this system operates, laws that help to sustain it, and the forms of regulation and action that could limit its effects. Proposals include stronger antitrust and privacy protections, limits on manipulative platform features and advertising, changes to tax and contract law, public education, and the creation of attention sanctuaries.
From the University of Toronto to MIT and ETH Zurich, universities worldwide are seeing rapid growth in AI ethics enrolment. As regulators struggle to keep pace with AI’s ethical challenges, the surge in student interest – together with with increased training resources for teachers and freely available information for the public – is removing barriers to responsible AI development.
AI could expand access to education, healthcare, public services, and economic opportunity, but wealthier countries and companies dominate in development and adoption. Without broader access to infrastructure, skills, data, and effective governance, existing inequalities could be reinforced. Whether AI becomes a tool for inclusion or a new source of global differences will depend on how its benefits, power, and costs are distributed.
For almost two decades, social media platforms have influenced public attention through largely opaque algorithms optimized for engagement and maximizing advertising revenue. Today, scientific evidence, legal challenges, and regulatory efforts are converging around the same question: should for-profit companies retain unilateral control over the systems that shape what billions of people see, believe, and discuss?
The Quantum Record is a non-profit journal of philosophy, science, technology, and time. The potential of the future is in the human mind and heart, and in the common ground that we all share on the road to tomorrow. Promoting reflection, discussion, and imagination, The Quantum Record highlights the good work of good people and aims to join many perspectives in shaping the best possible time to come. We would love to stay in touch with you, and add your voice to the dialogue.