February 2021

Surveillance Capitalism: Exposing the Power of Digital Monopolies

On January 28, I attended the online forum Medium in Conversation: How to Destroy Surveillance Capitalism. In this blog, I summarize the main points from the discussion along with some reflections on how we can respond.

Maybe at first glance, we can’t really see what surveillance capitalism has to do with AI. But the two topics walk side by side. Surveillance capitalism is sustained by digital monopolies that rely on massive amounts of personal data (hence the surveillance part). This deluge of data is fed into powerful AI algorithms which drive content curation. One depends on the other to thrive.

The Current State of Affairs

It’s a new era for Big Tech. Weeks after the de-platforming of Donald Trump—and with a new administration in the White House—the time is ripe to reexamine the power wielded by the giants of surveillance capitalism. How did corporations like Facebook, Google, and Amazon amass such power? How do we build a more open Web?

According to Cory Doctorow, If we´re going to break big techs’ dominance in our digital lives, we will have to fight monopolies. That may sound pretty mundane and old-fashioned, something out of the new deal era. Yet, breaking up monopolies is something we have forgotten how to do. The trust-busting era cannot begin until we find the political will. Only when politicians prove that they have the average citizen’s backs against the richest most powerful men in the world.

For politicians to take notice, citizens must first speak up.

What is the problem with Monopolies?

In case we need a refresher, monopoly is a bad deal for consumers. It means that the market has only one seller with the ability to set prices, and tell people what a service costs. People line up to buy their product even if it costs too much simply because they have no choice.

Facebook is a monopoly if you think of the prices it set for its ad platform. The ad buyer has very little choice allowing Zuckerberg’s empire to dictate the terms. In addition to that, the platform behemoth retains its monopoly by impeding other apps to grow.

Anticompetitive conduct in big tech has been rampant. Mark Zuckerberg bought competing apps (snapchat, instagram for example) leaving little room for competitors. Apple pursued it in the hardware side by shutting down “right to repair bills” so that people are forced to buy new phones. In effect, they dictated when your phone can be repaired or when it has to be thrown away.

These actions led to an unprecedented concentration of power where a small group of people can make decisions of global consequence.

People of the World, Unite

Is it a realistic operation to create an open web or are we too far gone? Although these forces seem impenetrable and timeless, they actually are relatively new, and have weaknesses. If it was about just changing our relationship with technology, it would be a hard lift.

Yet, according to Cory Doctorow, there is a wave sweeping the world with anger about monopolies in every domain. This discontent seek to return power to communities so they can decide their future.

It has been done before. In the beginning of the 20th century, popular discontent drove politicians to rein in powerful monopolies such as Andrew Carneggie’s control of the steel industry and Rockefeller’s Oil’s monopoly. Their efforts culminated with the passage of sweeping anti-trust legislation.

Are we reaching a tipping point with big tech in the beginning of the 21st century?

Conclusion

Surveillance Capitalism affects the entire world and can be scary sometimes. There is a need to seek freedom from the domain of digital monopolies. Once again, it is necessary to find the political will to fight for change. While legislation will not solve this problem completely, it is an important first step.

Certainly this is not just a North American problem. Some countries are already pressing these big companies to answer for their actions paving the way for a future where power is more evenly distributed.

In the next blog, I’ll provide an overview of anti-trust efforts around the world.

Integrating Technology and Religion in a Post-Secular World

This blog discusses how the post-secular can be a fitting stage for the promising dialogue between religion, science and technology.

Last Friday I “zoomed into” a stimulating academic dialogue entitled “Theology, Technology and the Post-Secular.” In it, a world-class team of scholars explored how the intersection of theology, science, and technology has evolved in the last 50 years and where it is going in the future. In this blog, I’ll provide a short overview of the conversation while also offering reflections on how the discussion enriches our dialogue in the AI theology community.

If the post-secular is our reality, it is time we learn how to build bridges there.

An Overview of the Field

The talk started with Dr. Tirosh-Samuelson asking Dr. Burdett to provide a short overview of the burgeoning field of religion and science. In the United States, the establishing of the Zygon journal of religion and science inaugurated the dialogue in 1966. In essence, the challenge was to find a place where these two can interact. Science tends to bracket the question of metaphysics (why things are the way they are) while religion lives in that space. This can often lead to misunderstanding and members of each side talking past each other.

Rejecting the notion of incompatibility, Dr. Burdett prefers to define the relationship as complex. For example, on the one hand, theology paved the way for scientific inquiry by first positing a belief in an orderly world. On the other hand, Christian Geocentrism clashed directly with Galileo’s accurate Heliocentric view. Therefore, the theologian believes in forging integrative models where conflict is not glossed over but carefully sorted out through respectful dialogue.

According to Dr. Burdett, the field is currently undergoing a shift from natural to human sciences. While the conversation started in topics like the implications Big Bang and Evolution, the focus now is on Neuroscience, questions of personhood and cognitive science of religion. The field has zoomed in from the macro view of cosmology to the micro view of anthropology.

Furthermore, the field is shying away from theoretical discussions opting instead to work on concrete questions. This new focus highlights where science and religion meet in the social-political stage. For example, how does religion and science interact when someone is considering in vitro fertilization? How do religion and science meet in people’s decision to take the vaccine? How does one comprehend the motivation of climate change deniers? These are just a few questions fueling research in this nascent field.

Image by Michael Schwarzenberger from Pixabay

A Theologian in a Tech-saturated World

In the next segment, Dr. Gaymon Bennett asked Dr. Burdett to speak about the role of the theologian in a technology-saturated world. How can a theologian tell a compelling story in the public square to those who do not align with his religious beliefs? Do religious perspectives still have a place in a secular world?

In his answer, Dr. Burdett pointed to Vatican II’s formula of Ressourcement and Agiornamiento. The first word has to do with a return to the sources, namely, the traditions and writings of the faith. It means examining carefully what we received through tradition and practices from past generations. The second points to updating that knowledge to the current context. How can these sources speak fresh insight into new evolving questions? The dual movement of reaching for the past while engaging with the present becomes a vital framework on how to do public theology in our times.

To illustrate the point, Dr. Burdett shared a personal anecdote about his journey to scholarship. Growing up in Northern California in the 1990s, he asked “what are the main driving forces shaping culture?” To him, it was clear that the rise of PCs, the Internet, and smartphones would categorically transform society. What would theology have to say about that? He wanted to know it from a technical perspective so he could see it from the inside. This is what moved him to focus his studies on the intersection of theology and technology after a stint in the industry.

Photo by Natalya Letunova on Unsplash

Grappling with the Post-Secular

Closer to the end, the conversation shifted towards grappling with the term “post-secular.” For decades, western society divided the world between the secular and the religious, with little intersection between the two. Science and technology have in effect been the major driving forces of secularism. Yet, we now find Silicon Valley, arguably the global center of this marriage, teeming with religious aspirations.

Even so, Dr. Burdett suggested that we still live in a God-haunted world. The removal of religion from public life left a jarring vacuum yet to be replaced. Along with religion was also any notion of the supernatural, all sacrificed in the altar of Modernity. Victorian poet Matthew Arnold expresses this sentiment well in the following verses from Dover Beach:

  The Sea of Faith
  Was once, too, at the full, and round earth’s shore
  Lay like the folds of a bright girdle furled.
  But now I only hear
  Its melancholy, long, withdrawing roar,
  Retreating, to the breath
  Of the night-wind, down the vast edges drear
  And naked shingles of the world.

This vacuum generated a thirst for new avenues of meaning. This in turn dethroned science as the sole arbiter of truth as it proved inadequate to fill humanity’s soul. The post-secular dashes the illusion that science and technology are sufficient to explain the world and therefore cannot be elevated above other views. Instead, it is a space where religious, mystical, and secular (scientific and technological) views are on the same footing again. The task, therefore, is to bring all these disparate perspectives into respectful dialogue while recognizing their common goals.

Reflections and Implications

Here I offer a few reflections. The first one relates to an important clarification. Throughout the dialogue, the unspoken assumption was that the relationship between religion and science was equivalent to that of religion and technology. However, it is worth noting that while science and technology are deeply intertwined today, that was not always the case. Hence, I would love to see an interdisciplinary branch that focuses on questions of religion and technology independent of science.

It was also illuminating to see scholars name a phenomenon we have been experiencing for a while now. While I have not heard of the term before, its reality resonates well. Nowhere else is this more true than in the cyber global space of social media. Given the pervasive nature of these platforms, this reality is also spilling over to other spheres of human connection. University, churches, companies, and non-profits are also becoming post-secular spaces. This is a fascinating, harrowing, and alarming development all at once.

Finally, I would add that it is not just about connecting with ultimate meaning but also about a return to nature. Whether it is the climate crisis or the blatant confession of how disconnected we are from creation, the post-secular is about digging down to our roots.

Maybe the sea of faith is not just calling us to ultimate meaning but also to encounter the oceans again.

Does God Hear Robot Prayers? A Modern Day Parable

The short video above portrays Juanello Turiano’s (1500-1585 AD) invention, an automated monk that recites prayers while moving in a circle. It was commissioned by King Philip II to honor a Friar whom he believed had healed his son. The engineer delivered a work of art, creepy but surprisingly life-like, in a time where Artificial Intelligence was but a distant dream. This Medieval marvel now sits at the Smithsonian museum in Washington, DC.

Take a pause to watch the 2 minute video before reading on.

What can this marvelous work of religious art teach us today, nearly 5 centuries later, about our relationship with machines?

In a beautifully well-written piece for Aeon, Ed Simon asks whether robots can pray. In discussing the automated monk, he argues that the medieval invention was not simply simulating prayer. It was actually praying! Its creation was an offer of thanksgiving to the Christian God and till this day continues to recite its petitions.

Such reflection opens the door for profound theological questions. For if the machine is indeed communicating with the divine, would God listen?

Can an inanimate object commune with the Creator?

We now turn to a short parable portraying different responses to the medieval droid.

A Modern Day Parable

Photo by Drew Willson on Unsplash

In an effort to raise publicity for its exhibit, the Smithsonian takes Turiano’s invention above in a road show. Aiming to create a buzz, they place the automated monk in a crowded square in New York city along with a sign that asks:

When this monk prays, does God listen?

They place hidden cameras to record peoples’ reaction.

A few minutes go by and a scientist approaches to inspect the scene. Upon reading the sign he quickly dismisses it as an artifact from a bygone era. “Of course, machines cannot pray” – he mulls. He posits that because they are not alive, one cannot ascribe to them human properties. That would be anthropomorphising. That is when people project human traits on non-human entities. “Why even bother asking why God would listen if prayer itself is a human construct?” Annoyed by the whole matter, he walks away hurriedly as he realizes he is late for work.

Moments later, a priest walks by and stops to examine the exhibit. The religious person is taken aback by such question. “Of course, machines cannot pray, they are mere human artifacts” – he mulls. “They are devoid of God’s image which is exclusive property of humans” he continues. “Where in Scripture can one find a example of an object that prays? Machines are works of the flesh, worldly pursuits not worthy of an eternal God’s attention” he concludes. Offended by the blasphemous display, the priest walks away from the moving monk on to holier things.

Finally, a child approaches the center of the square. She sees the walking monk and runs to the droid filled with wonder. “Look at the cool moving monk, mom!” she yells. Soon, she gives it a name: monk Charlie. She sits down and watches mesmerized by the intricate movements of his mouth. The child notices the etched sandals on his feet. She also pays attention to the movement of his arms and mouth.

After a while, she answers: “Yes, God listens to Charlie.” She joins with him, imitating his movement with sheer delight. In that moment, the droid becomes her new playmate.

How would you respond?

Green Tech: How Scientists are Using AI to Fight Deforestation

In the previous blog, I talked about upcoming changes to US AI policy with a new administration. Part of that change is a renewed focus on harnessing this technology for sustainability. Here I will showcase an example of green tech – how machine learning models are helping researchers detect illegal logging and burning in the vast Amazon rainforest. This is an exciting development and one more example of how AI can work for good.

The problem

Imagining trying to patrol an area nearly the size of the lower 48 states of dense rainforest! It is as the proverbial saying goes: finding needle in a haystack. The only way to to catch illegal activity is to find ways to narrow the surveilling area. Doing so gives you the best chances to use your limited resources of law enforcement wisely. Yet, how can that be done?

How do illegal logging and burning happen in the Amazon? Are there any patterns that could help narrow the search? Fortunately, there is. A common trait for them is happening near a road. In fact, 95% of them occur within 6 miles from a road or a river. These activities require equipment that must be transported through dense jungle. For logging, lumber must be transported so it can be traded. The only way to do that is either through waterways or dirt roads. Hence, tracking and locating illegal roads go along way to honing in areas of possible illegal activity.

While authorities had records for the government-built roads, no one knew the extent of the illegal network of roads in the Amazon. To attack the problem, enforcing agencies needed richer maps that could spot this unofficial web. Only then could they start to focus resources around these roads. Voila, there you have, green tech working for preserving rather than destroying the environment.

An Ingenious solution

In order to solve this problem, Scientist from Imazon (Amazon’s Institute of Humans and the Environment) went to work in a search for ways to detect these roads. Fortunately, by carefully studying satellite imagery they could manually trace these additional roads. In 2016 they completed this initial heroic but rather tedious work. The new estimate was now 13 times the size of the original! Now they had something to work with.

Once the initial tracing was complete, it became clear updating it manually would be an impossible task. These roads could spring up overnight as loggers and ranchers worked to evade monitoring. That is when they turned to computer vision to see if it could detect new roads. The initial manual work became the training dataset that taught the algorithm how to detect these roads from the satellite images. In supervised learning, one must first have a collection of data that shows the actual target (labels) to the algorithm (i.e: an algorithm to recognize cats must first be fed with millions of Youtube videos of cats to work).

The result was impressive. At first, the model achieved 70% accuracy and with some additional processing on top, it increased to 90%. The research team presented their results in the latest meeting of the American Geophysical Union. They also plan to share their model with neighboring countries so they can use it for their enforcement of the Amazon in areas outside Brazil.

Reflection

Algorithms can be effective allies in the fight for preserving the environment. As the example of Imazon shows, it takes some ingenuity, hard work, and planning to make that happen. While a lot of discussions around AI quickly devolve into cliches of “machines replacing humans”, this example shows how it can augment human problem-solving abilities. It took a person to connect the dots between the potential of AI for solving a particular problem. Indeed the real future of AI may be in green tech.

In this blog and in our FB community we seek to challenge, question and re-imagine how technologies like AI can empower human flourishing. Yet, this is not limited to humans but to the whole ecosystem we inhabit. If algorithms are to fulfill their promise, then they must be relevant in sustainability.

How is your work making life more sustainable on this planet?

Month: February 2021