top of page

WHAT THE TECH

How do we find meaning among the machines?

Hey there, I'm a computer science undergrad at Berkeley. Thinking about my opportunities for using my CS skills in the future, I find myself asking a lot of questions. How do I do work that is actually meaningful and helpful to people? And, how can technology bridge barriers between people and scale bright ideas?
This futuristic world we live in can be difficult to understand, but it is important to ask these key questions and focus on impact. This blog is called What the Tech because, frankly, What the Tech is Tech... and Life... and Everything... I'm not sure. However, in these blog posts you'll find my attempts to be a heckler (or techler haha) by questioning, challenging, and trying to understand what the tech is happening with today's biggest ideas.
Let's see where this takes us! :P

Home: About

PROJECTS

file-20180509-34021-1t9q8r0.jpg

PROJECT I

To Beep or Not to Beep: Why Understanding Human Consciousness Means Better Robots

Currently, the information processing, logical side of the human mind is the part that is mainly understood and used to make helpful computers, but more complexities exist in the subconscious level that prevent technology from becoming “human.” However, artificial intelligence has come a long way towards replicating creativity, analysis, and intelligence and even offers humans an opportunity to improve their lives by changing or uploading their brains. With all these technological advances, what will it take to have a future where robots and people both have consciousness? And, if this happens, how can these two groups best function together to maximize prosperity?

Screen Shot 2018-11-28 at 12.44.56 PM.pn

PROJECT II

Slidedeck on Technology and Philanthropy

A presentation of research related to corporate philanthropy, psychological ideas such as argumentative theory, and why advancements in technology have great potential to damage society. Project III is a much more developed version of this project.

Screen Shot 2018-11-28 at 12.55.50 PM.pn

PROJECT III

The Social Good Revolution: How Corporate Responsibility can Enable Technological Innovation and Beneficially Impact Society

Abstract: In this day and age, technology is affecting people in ways it never has before. Artificial intelligence is replacing human decision making in key areas, the sensational ways in which companies use technology incur short term gains while corrupting entire populations, and unmoderated sides of the internet decrease participant responsibility and hateful groups to reach others under the guise of anonymity. All these advances pose new and concerning ethical and moral questions we’ve never seen before. The decision to build technology with the benefit of society in mind may change from being the “right” thing to being the only way technologists, companies, and the people of the world can prevent self destruction. This social good revolution is on the horizon because companies like Uber and Lyft are becoming more competitive in the realm of total societal impact. Also, companies like Pinterest and LinkedIn are realizing where their algorithms fall short of serving the needs of their customers, while others like Google are hiring teams of ethicists and setting goals for themselves regarding their impact on the world. When technology companies and their engineers are aware of the unintended consequences of their new technology, they can build better products that make everyone better off and keep the company sustained in the long term. Mission-driven development is taking off because the future of the world is increasingly at stake. However, making an impact requires more than just intention. Argumentative theory explains that individuals must interact and compare ideas in order to dismantle their confirmation bias. People are starting to care more about working for companies that make ethical decisions. They can contribute by questioning corporate intentions, expressing their opinions, and feeling confident in the social impact of the products they build. Companies can also encourage this kind of culture among their ranks by aiming for diversity of thought while hiring and being open with their decision making. These efforts incentivize engineers to work for companies and make the technology they build better satisfy the mission.
Keywords: Technology, Corporate Philanthropy, Artificial Intelligence, Ethics of Technology, Mission Driven Development, Human Decision, Argumentative Theory, Confirmation Bias, Free Speech, Total Societal Impact, Corporate Social Responsibility, Pinterest, LinkedIn, Google, Slack Uber, Lyft, Algorithmic Bias, Diversity and Inclusion, Hiring Practices

Home: Projects
Home: Blog2
Search
  • Writer's pictureTechler

Library Exercise #5

Bao, C., Application of virtual reality technology in practical teaching in Colleges. Advances in Educational Technology and Psychology (2018) 2: 205-208.

  • Virual reality is really useful in college classrooms that are trying to teach engineering because students can get onsite and up close and personal with machinery, circuits, and tools

  • Augmented reality and VR with touch screens is also an idea they are exploring

  • The costs of building and scaling this kind of technology may not be too bad.

Schuler, Douglas A. “A Corporate Social Performance-Corporate Financial Performance Behavioral Model for Consumers.” The Academy of Management Review, vol. 31, no. 3, 1 July 2006, pp. 540–558.

  • This article explores the effects that CSR (corporate social responsibility) efforts have on actual consumers - are they more or less willing to buy products if they have philanthropic efforts to support causes, employer minorities, fewer overseas operations, diversity and the environment

  • Socrates: The Corporate Social Ratings Monitor - ranks companies based on their CSR actions

  • The first study was an in depth analysis for single company on how much buyers knew about a Company’s CSR practices encourages them to buy more.

  • “Consumers’ company evaluations is mediated by their perceptions of self–company congruence and moderated by their support of the CSR domain”

Gouran, Dennis S. “A Response to Hugo Mercier and Dan Sperber's ‘Why Do Humans Reason? Arguments for an Argumentative Theory.’” Argumentation and Advocacy, vol. 48, no. 3, 2012, pp. 186–188., doi:10.1080/00028533.2012.11821767.

  • Epistemic distortions - epistemic is defined as “relating to knowledge or to the degree of its validation.” A distortion in this means people don’t really know what they don’t know

  • “the function of reasoning is argumentative. It is to devise and evaluate arguments intended to persuade”

    • Humans aren’t good at looking at the faults in their own arguments, but they can reason with other people

    • It is easier for people to argue to support their own views than find the truth

    • This leads to confirmation bias and people having ideas that are easy to argue, even if they are not necessarily better

  • Sunk cost fallacy - people subscribe to this fallacy because they don’t want to waste “children [and animals] do not seem prone to this error”

  • This resource is very dense and will take some more extensive reading to fully understand what it is talking about. This is pretty much the perfect resource for all the psychology things I want to talk about though.

Olkun, Sinan. “Self-Compassion and Internet Addiction.” The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, vol. 10, no. 3, July 2011.

  • These guys did a study on university students about how kindly they felt towards themselves and how addicted they were to the internet.

  • The results were not surprising:

    • self-kindness and mindfulness, predicted internet addiction in a negative way.

    • self-judgment, isolation, and over-identification which can be viewed as maladaptive components of self-compassion were found positively correlated with internet addiction.

    • Research on self-compassion generally demonstrated that self-judgment, isolation, and over-identification factors related positively to negative variables such as anxiety, depression, self-criticism, neuroticism, rumination, thought suppression, neurotic perfectionism, and submissive behavior.

  • These results clearly show that the internet is a place for people to isolate themselves and not interact with the real world. What exactly does that mean for companies that tout social media as the epitome of connectivity

  • This could be used for my example of the mission of large companies that harm people through privacy and addiction issues with their products.

4 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All
bottom of page