“You ever see that movie Mad Max? Yeah, that was kinda like us.”
October 22, 2021 2:44 AM Subscribe
The Intersection is a short film (YouTube, 16:25) (also Vimeo) that journeys from a violent present to a cooperative future. Commissioned by the Omidyar Network, produced by Superflux, screenplay by Tim Maughan, author of Infinite Detail.
Halfway through this, I started crying. Because it presented what has been happening with misinformation as an emergent property of technology, a void that's being filled for clicks, when there are people working, working quite hard, using vast financial resources, to tell large sections of the country that the problems they are dealing with are caused by everyone else, everyone but the ultra wealthy, or to create fundamental distrust between groups so solidarity is impossible. And I don't have a lot of hope about that atm.
And this film, which is well done, don't get me wrong, pretends we might just all come together... somehow. That the broadcast feeds will go down, somehow. And I don't think that will happen, not at long as it's profitable to spread misinformation, to whip up hatred, to spin, to lie, to hide the truth. Maybe it's just basic economics: you make things easier to produce, you get more of them. And it's very easy to create lies right now.
posted by Chrysopoeia at 10:55 AM on October 22, 2021 [3 favorites]
And this film, which is well done, don't get me wrong, pretends we might just all come together... somehow. That the broadcast feeds will go down, somehow. And I don't think that will happen, not at long as it's profitable to spread misinformation, to whip up hatred, to spin, to lie, to hide the truth. Maybe it's just basic economics: you make things easier to produce, you get more of them. And it's very easy to create lies right now.
posted by Chrysopoeia at 10:55 AM on October 22, 2021 [3 favorites]
From the Omidyar Network website: We believe digital technology can and should have a positive impact on society. We believe capitalism can still be a powerful force for good. We believe pluralism is a prerequisite for any meaningful social change.
So, capitalism is still a good thing, as long as technology has a positive impact on society, and everybody has a say. But in capitalism, technology development is driven by trying to reduce the cost of production as well as insuring profit. And in capitalism, it is definitely not a democracy. So how does this all work? Lots of progressive sounding platitudes. But aimed at what? Who is the audience for this? Progressive tending capitalists harboring guilt?
posted by njohnson23 at 2:46 PM on October 22, 2021 [1 favorite]
So, capitalism is still a good thing, as long as technology has a positive impact on society, and everybody has a say. But in capitalism, technology development is driven by trying to reduce the cost of production as well as insuring profit. And in capitalism, it is definitely not a democracy. So how does this all work? Lots of progressive sounding platitudes. But aimed at what? Who is the audience for this? Progressive tending capitalists harboring guilt?
posted by njohnson23 at 2:46 PM on October 22, 2021 [1 favorite]
Progressive tending capitalists harboring guilt?
How does progress happen? :P
"The discipline of 'progress studies' wants to figure out what drives discoveries and inventions so we can supercharge human flourishing."[1,2,3]
How does progress happen? :P
"The discipline of 'progress studies' wants to figure out what drives discoveries and inventions so we can supercharge human flourishing."[1,2,3]
This is the other huge important theme, which is that technology alone does not lead to a better world. It can only lead to a better world in the context of good moral and social systems.posted by kliuless at 2:36 AM on October 23, 2021
One thing that I do deeply believe is that our scientific and material technology has raced ahead of our moral and social technology. We need some catch-up growth in moral and social technology.
Huh. The opening was a simple, plausible extension of where we are and what it could become, but, like Chrysopoeia, I feel like there’s a leap taken that doesn’t necessarily feel earned. I have a hard time accepting that the tech companies powerful enough to warp the world in these ways would allow something as simple as protest to unseat them. If there’s a sudden moment, a tipping point where activism and protest actually led to a shutdown, it’s not shown, not earned, and, honestly, not believable.
Past that, I struggle with the everyone in a room together ending. Maybe that’s because I can’t imagine myself being willing to sit down in a circle with bigots, profiteers, and exploiters (while recognizing that it’s my unwillingness to do so that would keep me from being considered, I imagine), but there’s something very both sidesish about this to me, where the protestor/demonstrator character seems to be apologetic about their fight, as if they are somehow as much to blame as the tech person, the news guy, or the fake news parents (I thought it might be a cop out to have their daughter as a stand in, unless we’re just writing off that entire generation as too-far-gone). If someone is kicking a puppy dog, and you ask them to stop kicking the dog, you are not, in fact, just as much to blame in that situation, no matter what the puppy kicker claims.
What I’d love to see is something where the burn it all down hackers get to the moment where they can pull the plug, but then realize that it’s all connected, that pulling the plug on the social network also means eliminating vital networking systems, safety protocols, gps, electrical systems, etc, which would lead to the immediate deaths of hospitalized patients, and the long term suffering of people dependent on the networks, leaving the profiteers comfortable in their walled houses and private islands. That, or their trial for having ignored all of that, and gone ahead with it anyway. There’s a whole mess of ideas there that could be fun to unentangle, just by following the likely ramifications of any action taken to right the system.
posted by Ghidorah at 6:30 PM on October 23, 2021 [1 favorite]
Past that, I struggle with the everyone in a room together ending. Maybe that’s because I can’t imagine myself being willing to sit down in a circle with bigots, profiteers, and exploiters (while recognizing that it’s my unwillingness to do so that would keep me from being considered, I imagine), but there’s something very both sidesish about this to me, where the protestor/demonstrator character seems to be apologetic about their fight, as if they are somehow as much to blame as the tech person, the news guy, or the fake news parents (I thought it might be a cop out to have their daughter as a stand in, unless we’re just writing off that entire generation as too-far-gone). If someone is kicking a puppy dog, and you ask them to stop kicking the dog, you are not, in fact, just as much to blame in that situation, no matter what the puppy kicker claims.
What I’d love to see is something where the burn it all down hackers get to the moment where they can pull the plug, but then realize that it’s all connected, that pulling the plug on the social network also means eliminating vital networking systems, safety protocols, gps, electrical systems, etc, which would lead to the immediate deaths of hospitalized patients, and the long term suffering of people dependent on the networks, leaving the profiteers comfortable in their walled houses and private islands. That, or their trial for having ignored all of that, and gone ahead with it anyway. There’s a whole mess of ideas there that could be fun to unentangle, just by following the likely ramifications of any action taken to right the system.
posted by Ghidorah at 6:30 PM on October 23, 2021 [1 favorite]
« Older YAD KCOL SPAC | "Will all great Neptune's ocean wash this blood... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by crossswords at 7:40 AM on October 22, 2021 [1 favorite]