Power and Progress
 |
Description
Book Introduction
- A word from MD
-
Has your life gotten a little better?We live in an era where we move, connect, create, and buy what we want faster than ever before.
The pace of technological advancement, including robotics and artificial intelligence, is astonishing.
Yet, we still live with worries about our livelihood.
Why? Because the benefits of technological advancement are concentrated in the hands of a few.
What is needed for prosperity is politics.
July 7, 2023. Social and Political PD Son Min-gyu
Why Nations Fail: A New Book by Daren Acemoglu
A masterpiece that overturns the conventional wisdom that 'technological advancement = progress'!
Daren Acemoglu, the acclaimed author of Why Nations Fail, has published his latest book, Power and Progress.
Regarded as one of the greatest economists of our time, Acemoglu is the recipient of the John Bates Clark Medal, often called the Nobel Prize in the making. For the past 25 years, he has been researching the historical origins of prosperity and poverty and the impact of new technologies on economic growth, employment, and inequality.
In Power and Progress, authors Darren Acemoglu and Simon Johnson draw on extensive research spanning past and present to present a compelling and concise argument for how political and social power "chooses" the direction of technological development and how technology can evolve to benefit everyone.
In the book, the authors challenge the vision set by the dominant class (the powerful and the elite) and argue that the power base of society must be restructured to ensure that everyone shares in the abundance brought about by technological advancements.
Technological advancements don't solve everything.
How we use it will determine how our 'brave new world' unfolds.
A masterpiece that overturns the conventional wisdom that 'technological advancement = progress'!
Daren Acemoglu, the acclaimed author of Why Nations Fail, has published his latest book, Power and Progress.
Regarded as one of the greatest economists of our time, Acemoglu is the recipient of the John Bates Clark Medal, often called the Nobel Prize in the making. For the past 25 years, he has been researching the historical origins of prosperity and poverty and the impact of new technologies on economic growth, employment, and inequality.
In Power and Progress, authors Darren Acemoglu and Simon Johnson draw on extensive research spanning past and present to present a compelling and concise argument for how political and social power "chooses" the direction of technological development and how technology can evolve to benefit everyone.
In the book, the authors challenge the vision set by the dominant class (the powerful and the elite) and argue that the power base of society must be restructured to ensure that everyone shares in the abundance brought about by technological advancements.
Technological advancements don't solve everything.
How we use it will determine how our 'brave new world' unfolds.
- You can preview some of the book's contents.
Preview
index
Prologue: What is Progress?
Chapter 1 Control over Technology
Chapter 2: The Vision of the Canal
Chapter 3: The Power of Persuasion
Chapter 4: The Cultivation of Misery
Chapter 5: Moderate Revolution
Chapter 6: Victims of Progress
Chapter 7: A Path Filled with Struggle
Chapter 8 Digital Damage
Chapter 9: Artificial Struggle
Chapter 10: Democracy Collapses
Chapter 11: Resetting the Path of Technology
Acknowledgements
About sources and references
References
Photo source
Search
Chapter 1 Control over Technology
Chapter 2: The Vision of the Canal
Chapter 3: The Power of Persuasion
Chapter 4: The Cultivation of Misery
Chapter 5: Moderate Revolution
Chapter 6: Victims of Progress
Chapter 7: A Path Filled with Struggle
Chapter 8 Digital Damage
Chapter 9: Artificial Struggle
Chapter 10: Democracy Collapses
Chapter 11: Resetting the Path of Technology
Acknowledgements
About sources and references
References
Photo source
Search
Detailed image
.jpg)
Into the book
All of this points to one of the most important things to note about technology.
It's a choice.
There are countless ways to use our collective knowledge to improve productivity, and even more ways to direct innovation.
Will digital tools be used for surveillance? Automation? Or will they empower workers by creating new tasks? In what direction will our efforts guide future progress?
We should not be too fooled by the monumental technological advances that humanity has achieved.
A shared vision can trap us.
Companies invest in areas that management believes will maximize profits.
For example, if a company decides to purchase a new computer, it must mean that it believes that the increased sales it will generate will more than offset the cost of purchasing the computer.
But in a world where shared vision drives action, things don't always work out that way.
If everyone believes AI is absolutely necessary, companies will likely invest in it even if there are other ways to organize production more profitably.
Likewise, if most researchers are focused on developing a particular type of machine intelligence, other researchers will likely follow suit, sometimes faithfully, or even blindly.
---From "Chapter 1 Control over Technology"
Lesseps had charisma, a business acumen, and ambition.
He also had connections with the French power elite and at times even received support from Egyptian authorities.
Moreover, his previous successes fascinated many of his contemporaries.
More importantly, Lesseps preached a 19th-century version of techno-optimism, believing that massive public infrastructure investment and technological progress would benefit everyone, not just Europe but the world.
This vision was what brought the French public and decision-makers in France and Egypt together with him.
Without this visionary role, Lesseps would not have had the will to undertake the project, which would stretch some 190 kilometers across the Egyptian desert, and even less would he have had the will to do so when things began to go wrong.
Technology without vision is nothing.
---From "Chapter 2: The Vision of the Canal"
The general characteristics of social power are particularly central to the vision of technology.
If you have a compelling and compelling narrative about how to enhance humanity's dominion over nature, you can set aside others, those who disagree with that view and those who suffer from it.
At best, lip service is paid to their suffering.
These problems are amplified when vision leads to overconfidence.
Now, anyone who stands in the way of that vision, or who suggests there might be another path, is considered unimportant, outdated, or holds wrong views, and therefore deserves to be ignored and crushed.
Vision rationalizes everything.
---From "Chapter 3: The Power of Persuasion"
Technological innovation and change have always been present, and decisions about what should be achieved and by whom have always been made by those in power.
Over the past 12,000 years, agricultural technology has continued to develop, sometimes dramatically.
There were times when even ordinary people benefited from rising productivity.
But the benefits flowing to a wider audience was not at all automatic.
“Broadly shared gains” could only emerge when the landed and religious elites were not powerful enough to extract all the surplus brought about by new technologies while imposing their own vision.
---From "Chapter 4: The Cultivation of Misery"
Pure automation is different.
Because it does not increase the contribution of workers to output, it does not create a need to hire additional labor.
Because of this, automation has more pronounced consequences for income distribution.
This creates a large number of winners (such as the owners of the machines) and a large number of losers (such as people who are pushed out of their jobs).
So, in places where automation is rampant, the productivity bandwagon is weaker.
What is even more painful is that in most European colonies, conditions have not improved, but rather worsened considerably.
Countries like India were seriously pushed down the path of deindustrialization by the influx of British textiles.
Countries like India and parts of Africa have become sources of natural resources that feed the ferocious appetites of the rapidly growing European industrial sector.
In places like the American South, the worst forms of oppressive labor were further intensified in the form of slavery, and vicious discrimination against natives and immigrants was intensified.
All of this happened in the name of progress.
---Chapter 6: Victims of Progress
The rapid growth of large corporations has far-reaching implications.
Many economists now worry that giant corporations wield even greater market power, using that power to stifle innovation from competitors and enrich their own managers and shareholders.
Giant monopolies are often bad for consumers, too.
Because it distorts prices and innovation.
Giant monopolies also create problems for the productivity bandwagon.
Because there is less competition to attract workers.
They powerfully amplify inequality at the top by making already wealthy shareholders even richer.
Sometimes, large corporations can share profits with workers, boosting their incomes, but another aspect of institutional change over the past few decades has made this more difficult.
It is the decline of workers' power.
---From "Chapter 8 Digital Damage"
Even as new technologies displace humans and collect massive amounts of data, they can also increase productivity, increasing demand for labor and boosting workers' incomes.
But the gains for workers can only occur if new technologies significantly increase productivity.
There is a serious problem right here today.
This is because, so far, AI has only brought about a lot of “just automation,” that is, automation that doesn’t bring much productivity gains.
When we interpret history, whether distant or recent, we often commit the deterministic error.
I think that what happened happened because it had to happen.
But often this is not an accurate interpretation.
There are many paths history could have taken.
The history of technology is no different. Today's dominant approach, defining the third wave of AI, focuses on massive data collection and relentless automation—a result of choice, not necessity.
It doesn't have to be like this all the time.
Digital technologies don't necessarily have to be used for automation, AI technologies don't necessarily have to indiscriminately reinforce the same trends, and the tech community doesn't necessarily have to be dazzled by machine intelligence without striving for machine usefulness.
Nothing in the path of technology is predetermined, and nothing about the dual-class society that the ruling class is creating today is inevitable.
---From "Chapter 9: Artificial Struggle"
Unfortunately, online democracy doesn't fit with the business models and AI fantasies of major tech companies.
In fact, online democracy stands in contrast to the technocratic approach, which sees most important decisions as too complex for ordinary people to make.
The atmosphere at most tech companies is one of geniuses working hard for the public good.
It is natural that they become the ones making important decisions.
In this approach, public political discourse is not something to be encouraged or protected, but something to be exploited and profited from.
It's a choice.
There are countless ways to use our collective knowledge to improve productivity, and even more ways to direct innovation.
Will digital tools be used for surveillance? Automation? Or will they empower workers by creating new tasks? In what direction will our efforts guide future progress?
We should not be too fooled by the monumental technological advances that humanity has achieved.
A shared vision can trap us.
Companies invest in areas that management believes will maximize profits.
For example, if a company decides to purchase a new computer, it must mean that it believes that the increased sales it will generate will more than offset the cost of purchasing the computer.
But in a world where shared vision drives action, things don't always work out that way.
If everyone believes AI is absolutely necessary, companies will likely invest in it even if there are other ways to organize production more profitably.
Likewise, if most researchers are focused on developing a particular type of machine intelligence, other researchers will likely follow suit, sometimes faithfully, or even blindly.
---From "Chapter 1 Control over Technology"
Lesseps had charisma, a business acumen, and ambition.
He also had connections with the French power elite and at times even received support from Egyptian authorities.
Moreover, his previous successes fascinated many of his contemporaries.
More importantly, Lesseps preached a 19th-century version of techno-optimism, believing that massive public infrastructure investment and technological progress would benefit everyone, not just Europe but the world.
This vision was what brought the French public and decision-makers in France and Egypt together with him.
Without this visionary role, Lesseps would not have had the will to undertake the project, which would stretch some 190 kilometers across the Egyptian desert, and even less would he have had the will to do so when things began to go wrong.
Technology without vision is nothing.
---From "Chapter 2: The Vision of the Canal"
The general characteristics of social power are particularly central to the vision of technology.
If you have a compelling and compelling narrative about how to enhance humanity's dominion over nature, you can set aside others, those who disagree with that view and those who suffer from it.
At best, lip service is paid to their suffering.
These problems are amplified when vision leads to overconfidence.
Now, anyone who stands in the way of that vision, or who suggests there might be another path, is considered unimportant, outdated, or holds wrong views, and therefore deserves to be ignored and crushed.
Vision rationalizes everything.
---From "Chapter 3: The Power of Persuasion"
Technological innovation and change have always been present, and decisions about what should be achieved and by whom have always been made by those in power.
Over the past 12,000 years, agricultural technology has continued to develop, sometimes dramatically.
There were times when even ordinary people benefited from rising productivity.
But the benefits flowing to a wider audience was not at all automatic.
“Broadly shared gains” could only emerge when the landed and religious elites were not powerful enough to extract all the surplus brought about by new technologies while imposing their own vision.
---From "Chapter 4: The Cultivation of Misery"
Pure automation is different.
Because it does not increase the contribution of workers to output, it does not create a need to hire additional labor.
Because of this, automation has more pronounced consequences for income distribution.
This creates a large number of winners (such as the owners of the machines) and a large number of losers (such as people who are pushed out of their jobs).
So, in places where automation is rampant, the productivity bandwagon is weaker.
What is even more painful is that in most European colonies, conditions have not improved, but rather worsened considerably.
Countries like India were seriously pushed down the path of deindustrialization by the influx of British textiles.
Countries like India and parts of Africa have become sources of natural resources that feed the ferocious appetites of the rapidly growing European industrial sector.
In places like the American South, the worst forms of oppressive labor were further intensified in the form of slavery, and vicious discrimination against natives and immigrants was intensified.
All of this happened in the name of progress.
---Chapter 6: Victims of Progress
The rapid growth of large corporations has far-reaching implications.
Many economists now worry that giant corporations wield even greater market power, using that power to stifle innovation from competitors and enrich their own managers and shareholders.
Giant monopolies are often bad for consumers, too.
Because it distorts prices and innovation.
Giant monopolies also create problems for the productivity bandwagon.
Because there is less competition to attract workers.
They powerfully amplify inequality at the top by making already wealthy shareholders even richer.
Sometimes, large corporations can share profits with workers, boosting their incomes, but another aspect of institutional change over the past few decades has made this more difficult.
It is the decline of workers' power.
---From "Chapter 8 Digital Damage"
Even as new technologies displace humans and collect massive amounts of data, they can also increase productivity, increasing demand for labor and boosting workers' incomes.
But the gains for workers can only occur if new technologies significantly increase productivity.
There is a serious problem right here today.
This is because, so far, AI has only brought about a lot of “just automation,” that is, automation that doesn’t bring much productivity gains.
When we interpret history, whether distant or recent, we often commit the deterministic error.
I think that what happened happened because it had to happen.
But often this is not an accurate interpretation.
There are many paths history could have taken.
The history of technology is no different. Today's dominant approach, defining the third wave of AI, focuses on massive data collection and relentless automation—a result of choice, not necessity.
It doesn't have to be like this all the time.
Digital technologies don't necessarily have to be used for automation, AI technologies don't necessarily have to indiscriminately reinforce the same trends, and the tech community doesn't necessarily have to be dazzled by machine intelligence without striving for machine usefulness.
Nothing in the path of technology is predetermined, and nothing about the dual-class society that the ruling class is creating today is inevitable.
---From "Chapter 9: Artificial Struggle"
Unfortunately, online democracy doesn't fit with the business models and AI fantasies of major tech companies.
In fact, online democracy stands in contrast to the technocratic approach, which sees most important decisions as too complex for ordinary people to make.
The atmosphere at most tech companies is one of geniuses working hard for the public good.
It is natural that they become the ones making important decisions.
In this approach, public political discourse is not something to be encouraged or protected, but something to be exploited and profited from.
---From "Chapter 10 Democracy, Collapse"
Publisher's Review
★★★★★
A must-read for anyone concerned about the fate of democracy.
- Michael Sandel (author of Justice: What's the Right Thing to Do?)
★★★★★
“In an age of seemingly unstoppable trends of relentless automation and concentrated wealth and power, this book reminds us that we can and must reclaim control.”
- Abhijit Banerjee and Esther Duflo (2019 Nobel Prize in Economics, authors of Good Economics for Hard Times)
★★★★★
"Do powerful new technologies naturally benefit us all? Did the Industrial Revolution bring happiness to our ancestors 150 years ago? Will artificial intelligence bring us even greater happiness today?"
- Jared Diamond (Pulitzer Prize-winning author of Guns, Germs, and Steel)
★★★★★
This is an important book that should have come out sooner.
- Angus Deaton, 2015 Nobel Prize in Economics
★★★★★
History clearly shows that technological progress does not automatically lead to greater prosperity.
Advances in technologies like artificial intelligence could result in benefits only for a privileged few.
- Niall Ferguson, Senior Fellow, Hoover Institution, Stanford University
Does technological advancement equal progress?
A bold reinterpretation of economics and history that challenges conventional wisdom.
Daren Acemoglu, the acclaimed author of Why Nations Fail, has published his latest book, Power and Progress.
Regarded as one of the greatest economists of our time, Acemoglu is the recipient of the John Bates Clark Medal, often called the Nobel Prize in the making. For the past 25 years, he has been researching the historical origins of prosperity and poverty and the impact of new technologies on economic growth, employment, and inequality.
In Power and Progress, authors Acemoglu and Johnson draw on extensive research spanning the past and present to present a compelling and concise argument for how political and social power "chooses" the direction of technological development and how technology can evolve to benefit everyone.
In the book, the authors challenge the vision set by the dominant class (the powerful and the elite) and argue that the power base of society must be restructured to ensure that everyone shares in the abundance brought about by technological advancements.
Conventional economic wisdom has been that as technology advances, everyone's standard of living will improve.
Adam Smith, who is called the father of modern economics, believed that 'the introduction of better machinery almost automatically leads to higher wages for workers,' and Edmund Burke, a British philosopher and politician who is considered the first modern conservative, also said that 'the laws of commerce are the laws of nature and the laws of God.'
For a long time, most economists have assumed that technological progress directly increases the productivity of capital, labor, or both.
Of course, many people knew that while technological advancement brings benefits, it also inevitably brings some ill effects.
But those blinded by 'techno-optimism' believe that "humanity is wise enough to control its own knowledge, and if there is a social cost to achieving amazing innovations, the solution lies in inventing even more useful ones (p. 25)."
We firmly believe that if we prioritize investing in and pushing forward with developments that will be valuable in the future, the resulting "minor" and "secondary" problems will be solved by future science and technology.
However, the direction of technological development is determined by a small number of elites and powerful people, and the wealth that comes from progress fills their pockets.
They have always set their vision in a direction that benefits them, and to realize that vision, they have pushed back and sacrificed countless people in the name of the common good.
The reason this was possible was because they had the 'power' to persuade the majority of people to go in the direction they wanted.
Such things often happened openly, and even if the vision later turned out to be horribly flawed, such failures did not remove those in power.
In this book, the authors challenge deeply held beliefs, demonstrating that the prosperity brought about by technological progress is anything but automatic, and offering bold insights into how we can "choose" the path of our inexorable technological progress to benefit all.
Advances in AI won't automatically bring a golden future to everyone.
The illusion of "progress" is blinding your eyes and ears.
Before it's too late, we need to ask ourselves who technological advancements are ultimately for.
In November 2022, OpenAI quietly released ChatGPT to the world.
ChatGPT, which was not expected to receive much attention as it was considered a 'research preview', is making unprecedented history.
After its launch, it gained tremendous momentum through word of mouth, and within six months, 900 million people, or 11 percent of the world's population, were using ChatGPT.
Goldman Sachs predicted that chatbots could boost productivity and increase global GDP by about $7 trillion, while also analyzing that AI automation could lead to the loss of 300 million jobs.
So, will ChatGPT and AI bring prosperity to all of us?
When social media first emerged, it was initially expected to have a beneficial impact on democracy by serving as an open forum for citizens to expose corruption and violence and create a forum for wise political discourse.
But now it has become a hotbed of disinformation and extremist hate speech.
Facebook has not taken responsibility for the harmful content that is indiscriminately uploaded to its platform, and instead, has modified its algorithm to display provocative content that people are likely to be interested in at the top with the aim of increasing “user engagement,” which has contributed to the rapid spread of misinformation and deepening political polarization.
The Chinese government is investing heavily in AI technology for surveillance.
They direct major tech companies to collect and analyze massive amounts of private data, ostensibly to prevent potential rebellions, and they instantly censor and delete politically sensitive information, blocking public access.
With the powerful Chinese Communist Party investing heavily in surveillance technology, this has provided an incentive for Chinese tech companies to develop such technologies first, and the only area in AI where China currently outperforms the United States is data.
Even AI tools developed for surveillance and repression are being exported beyond Xinjiang to non-democratic countries.
Giant corporations like Amazon monitor workers, strictly manage work schedules, and even monitor workers' break times in the name of increasing productivity.
Some degree of monitoring may be a reasonable prerogative of the employer.
But highly surveilled environments reduce workers to robots, humiliate them, and create dangerous situations where they have to meet demanding work schedules and work standards.
In fact, the accident rate at Amazon fulfillment centers was twice the overall average, and accidents were more frequent during peak seasons when workloads were particularly high.
In all of the above cases, the opinions of citizens who would be harmed or affected by the 'choices' of large corporations and powerful governments were not gathered.
These digital technologies have enabled corporations to generate enormous profits, while undemocratic countries like China have been able to effectively monitor and control their populations.
These digital tools may have helped workers become more productive, increase profits, and help companies manage their workforces.
For institutions and governments, the technology to collect and monopolize data has become an invaluable tool for centralizing power and effectively controlling citizens.
However, these technologies ultimately lowered social welfare and undermined democracy.
Can we still affirm that ‘technological advancement equals progress’?
In their book, Acemoglu and Johnson examine the political, economic, and social landscape of the past 1,000 years, identifying moments when technological advancements have led to outcomes far from shared prosperity.
Improved and systematized agricultural techniques did not bring wealth to the peasants who made up nearly 90 percent of the population at the time.
In the late Middle Ages, sea routes opened up and some people in Europe amassed enormous wealth through Atlantic trade, but behind the scenes, there were millions of slaves transported on those ships.
During the Industrial Revolution, the invention of innovative machinery greatly increased factory production, but workers were exploited and forced into oppressive environments.
Technological advancements don't solve everything.
How we use it will determine how our 'brave new world' unfolds.
Shared prosperity depends on our choices.
Break free from the narrow vision aimed at by those in power
Sharp suggestions to move toward shared prosperity
Acemoglu and Johnson directly challenge these optimisms and offer a wealth of examples of how we could achieve "shared prosperity."
Technological advancements have certainly brought abundance to this world.
It is self-evident that life today has become significantly more comfortable and convenient compared to the lives of our ancestors hundreds of years ago.
According to the authors, a key reason we enjoy the benefits of progress today is because generations before us “made” progress happen in a way that led to shared prosperity.
The reason most people in the world today have a higher standard of living than their ancestors did is because in the industrial societies that preceded us, citizens and workers organized themselves to challenge the upper class's control over technology and working conditions and to force a more equitable sharing of the gains from technological advancement.
(Page 19)
The authors argue that for new technologies to benefit everyone as they are developed and advanced, they must augment existing human tasks, thereby enhancing human capabilities, and create new tasks, thereby offsetting the displacement of workers.
Furthermore, in order to share the prosperity brought about by technological advancements, we must be able to listen to the voices of people in more diverse places and establish an inclusive 'vision'.
Shared prosperity becomes more feasible when workers, on the other side of capitalists and businessmen, have the power to speak out and resist.
The Industrial Revolution in Britain brought new industrial machinery and brought in countless fortunes, but it also forced many ordinary people into poor working conditions and a severely polluted environment.
As people organized and stood up to the tech establishment, the government's vision was reset and the narrative shifted to one that benefited everyone.
Similarly, in the early 20th century, Henry Ford of the Ford Company introduced a 'minimum wage' system and provided training for workers in new technologies when mass production techniques were introduced to factories and worker defections became frequent.
This has resulted in the creation of new blue-collar jobs while also increasing worker productivity.
As narratives change and people organize, social pressure increases and the seemingly unchallenged direction of "progress" can shift.
It will probably not be an easy task.
But it is not impossible.
A must-read for anyone concerned about the fate of democracy.
- Michael Sandel (author of Justice: What's the Right Thing to Do?)
★★★★★
“In an age of seemingly unstoppable trends of relentless automation and concentrated wealth and power, this book reminds us that we can and must reclaim control.”
- Abhijit Banerjee and Esther Duflo (2019 Nobel Prize in Economics, authors of Good Economics for Hard Times)
★★★★★
"Do powerful new technologies naturally benefit us all? Did the Industrial Revolution bring happiness to our ancestors 150 years ago? Will artificial intelligence bring us even greater happiness today?"
- Jared Diamond (Pulitzer Prize-winning author of Guns, Germs, and Steel)
★★★★★
This is an important book that should have come out sooner.
- Angus Deaton, 2015 Nobel Prize in Economics
★★★★★
History clearly shows that technological progress does not automatically lead to greater prosperity.
Advances in technologies like artificial intelligence could result in benefits only for a privileged few.
- Niall Ferguson, Senior Fellow, Hoover Institution, Stanford University
Does technological advancement equal progress?
A bold reinterpretation of economics and history that challenges conventional wisdom.
Daren Acemoglu, the acclaimed author of Why Nations Fail, has published his latest book, Power and Progress.
Regarded as one of the greatest economists of our time, Acemoglu is the recipient of the John Bates Clark Medal, often called the Nobel Prize in the making. For the past 25 years, he has been researching the historical origins of prosperity and poverty and the impact of new technologies on economic growth, employment, and inequality.
In Power and Progress, authors Acemoglu and Johnson draw on extensive research spanning the past and present to present a compelling and concise argument for how political and social power "chooses" the direction of technological development and how technology can evolve to benefit everyone.
In the book, the authors challenge the vision set by the dominant class (the powerful and the elite) and argue that the power base of society must be restructured to ensure that everyone shares in the abundance brought about by technological advancements.
Conventional economic wisdom has been that as technology advances, everyone's standard of living will improve.
Adam Smith, who is called the father of modern economics, believed that 'the introduction of better machinery almost automatically leads to higher wages for workers,' and Edmund Burke, a British philosopher and politician who is considered the first modern conservative, also said that 'the laws of commerce are the laws of nature and the laws of God.'
For a long time, most economists have assumed that technological progress directly increases the productivity of capital, labor, or both.
Of course, many people knew that while technological advancement brings benefits, it also inevitably brings some ill effects.
But those blinded by 'techno-optimism' believe that "humanity is wise enough to control its own knowledge, and if there is a social cost to achieving amazing innovations, the solution lies in inventing even more useful ones (p. 25)."
We firmly believe that if we prioritize investing in and pushing forward with developments that will be valuable in the future, the resulting "minor" and "secondary" problems will be solved by future science and technology.
However, the direction of technological development is determined by a small number of elites and powerful people, and the wealth that comes from progress fills their pockets.
They have always set their vision in a direction that benefits them, and to realize that vision, they have pushed back and sacrificed countless people in the name of the common good.
The reason this was possible was because they had the 'power' to persuade the majority of people to go in the direction they wanted.
Such things often happened openly, and even if the vision later turned out to be horribly flawed, such failures did not remove those in power.
In this book, the authors challenge deeply held beliefs, demonstrating that the prosperity brought about by technological progress is anything but automatic, and offering bold insights into how we can "choose" the path of our inexorable technological progress to benefit all.
Advances in AI won't automatically bring a golden future to everyone.
The illusion of "progress" is blinding your eyes and ears.
Before it's too late, we need to ask ourselves who technological advancements are ultimately for.
In November 2022, OpenAI quietly released ChatGPT to the world.
ChatGPT, which was not expected to receive much attention as it was considered a 'research preview', is making unprecedented history.
After its launch, it gained tremendous momentum through word of mouth, and within six months, 900 million people, or 11 percent of the world's population, were using ChatGPT.
Goldman Sachs predicted that chatbots could boost productivity and increase global GDP by about $7 trillion, while also analyzing that AI automation could lead to the loss of 300 million jobs.
So, will ChatGPT and AI bring prosperity to all of us?
When social media first emerged, it was initially expected to have a beneficial impact on democracy by serving as an open forum for citizens to expose corruption and violence and create a forum for wise political discourse.
But now it has become a hotbed of disinformation and extremist hate speech.
Facebook has not taken responsibility for the harmful content that is indiscriminately uploaded to its platform, and instead, has modified its algorithm to display provocative content that people are likely to be interested in at the top with the aim of increasing “user engagement,” which has contributed to the rapid spread of misinformation and deepening political polarization.
The Chinese government is investing heavily in AI technology for surveillance.
They direct major tech companies to collect and analyze massive amounts of private data, ostensibly to prevent potential rebellions, and they instantly censor and delete politically sensitive information, blocking public access.
With the powerful Chinese Communist Party investing heavily in surveillance technology, this has provided an incentive for Chinese tech companies to develop such technologies first, and the only area in AI where China currently outperforms the United States is data.
Even AI tools developed for surveillance and repression are being exported beyond Xinjiang to non-democratic countries.
Giant corporations like Amazon monitor workers, strictly manage work schedules, and even monitor workers' break times in the name of increasing productivity.
Some degree of monitoring may be a reasonable prerogative of the employer.
But highly surveilled environments reduce workers to robots, humiliate them, and create dangerous situations where they have to meet demanding work schedules and work standards.
In fact, the accident rate at Amazon fulfillment centers was twice the overall average, and accidents were more frequent during peak seasons when workloads were particularly high.
In all of the above cases, the opinions of citizens who would be harmed or affected by the 'choices' of large corporations and powerful governments were not gathered.
These digital technologies have enabled corporations to generate enormous profits, while undemocratic countries like China have been able to effectively monitor and control their populations.
These digital tools may have helped workers become more productive, increase profits, and help companies manage their workforces.
For institutions and governments, the technology to collect and monopolize data has become an invaluable tool for centralizing power and effectively controlling citizens.
However, these technologies ultimately lowered social welfare and undermined democracy.
Can we still affirm that ‘technological advancement equals progress’?
In their book, Acemoglu and Johnson examine the political, economic, and social landscape of the past 1,000 years, identifying moments when technological advancements have led to outcomes far from shared prosperity.
Improved and systematized agricultural techniques did not bring wealth to the peasants who made up nearly 90 percent of the population at the time.
In the late Middle Ages, sea routes opened up and some people in Europe amassed enormous wealth through Atlantic trade, but behind the scenes, there were millions of slaves transported on those ships.
During the Industrial Revolution, the invention of innovative machinery greatly increased factory production, but workers were exploited and forced into oppressive environments.
Technological advancements don't solve everything.
How we use it will determine how our 'brave new world' unfolds.
Shared prosperity depends on our choices.
Break free from the narrow vision aimed at by those in power
Sharp suggestions to move toward shared prosperity
Acemoglu and Johnson directly challenge these optimisms and offer a wealth of examples of how we could achieve "shared prosperity."
Technological advancements have certainly brought abundance to this world.
It is self-evident that life today has become significantly more comfortable and convenient compared to the lives of our ancestors hundreds of years ago.
According to the authors, a key reason we enjoy the benefits of progress today is because generations before us “made” progress happen in a way that led to shared prosperity.
The reason most people in the world today have a higher standard of living than their ancestors did is because in the industrial societies that preceded us, citizens and workers organized themselves to challenge the upper class's control over technology and working conditions and to force a more equitable sharing of the gains from technological advancement.
(Page 19)
The authors argue that for new technologies to benefit everyone as they are developed and advanced, they must augment existing human tasks, thereby enhancing human capabilities, and create new tasks, thereby offsetting the displacement of workers.
Furthermore, in order to share the prosperity brought about by technological advancements, we must be able to listen to the voices of people in more diverse places and establish an inclusive 'vision'.
Shared prosperity becomes more feasible when workers, on the other side of capitalists and businessmen, have the power to speak out and resist.
The Industrial Revolution in Britain brought new industrial machinery and brought in countless fortunes, but it also forced many ordinary people into poor working conditions and a severely polluted environment.
As people organized and stood up to the tech establishment, the government's vision was reset and the narrative shifted to one that benefited everyone.
Similarly, in the early 20th century, Henry Ford of the Ford Company introduced a 'minimum wage' system and provided training for workers in new technologies when mass production techniques were introduced to factories and worker defections became frequent.
This has resulted in the creation of new blue-collar jobs while also increasing worker productivity.
As narratives change and people organize, social pressure increases and the seemingly unchallenged direction of "progress" can shift.
It will probably not be an easy task.
But it is not impossible.
GOODS SPECIFICS
- Date of issue: June 30, 2023
- Page count, weight, size: 736 pages | 1,074g | 152*223*35mm
- ISBN13: 9791193166147
- ISBN10: 1193166144
You may also like
카테고리
korean
korean
![GQ KOREA Mark (Monthly): December [2025]](http://librairie.coreenne.fr/cdn/shop/files/8ef265dbbfbf186523ed75ba7319009d.jpg?v=1765340328&width=3840)
