The Killer Drone: A Progressive Innovation?

Innovation, as well as innovative policies, are often blindly celebrated. Game changing, some would call them.¹ Need I remind you how many of us raised our hands when Niko, during his presentation, asked how many of us think innovation is a good, necessary, thing? And why wouldn’t we? I mean, who wouldn’t want to celebrate innovation? Without it we wouldn’t have some of the luxuries that we currently take for granted.

Chapter 9 of Frank’s book, The Blue State Model, is dedicated to sarcastically illuminating the blind value we place on innovation, as well as noting its downfalls. Some of the points he makes can very well be applied to one of the newest innovations to date: autonomous war drones, a video of which can be found here. Ironically, it is the Pentagon that has developed this new technology. A State-run agency, the very State that Mazzucato2 praises in her book, has led to the development of one of the most unethical innovations that breeds inequality.

Perdix Micro-Drone Demonstration

The title of a recent article in Popular Mechanics says it all, and the article itself provides more information about how the drones work. The Pentagon’s autonomous war drones, called Perdix, are extremely unsettling, both for obvious reasons and those that may not occur to you at first thought. Aside from other uses, these drones can be loaded with explosives, thus making them capable of attacking enemies (a loosely defined term) without direct human involvement. Is this something we should be celebrating? These drones do not take human lives, or their value, into account. Furthermore, the inequality that it breeds can be excused by the ideologies surrounding innovation, which celebrate making the rich richer and not worrying about the rest.¹ Is it fair to attack other nations with these technologies if they don’t have similar resources to either fight back or protect themselves? As Frank (194) put it “favouring innovation has meant bulldozing the people in its path.”¹ The potentially innocent lives that could be taken at the hands of these drones are ignored in favour of progression. When it comes to innovation, it seems that logistics often take a back seat in support of moving towards the future.¹ And, if these innovations support the economy, the more the better – right?

Maybe it’s not all bad. An outline of some of the major pros and cons of the implementation of such a technology can be found here. Perhaps they might sway your opinion in a direction other than that I have outlined. For example, drones can increase wartime efficiency. With that in mind though, increased efficiency could lead to an increase in war, which could wreak havoc on the American economy. This runs fairly contrary to the goal of innovation, which is to stimulate the economy.¹ These drones, a result of innovation, could therefore create more problems than it could solve.¹ A consideration of morals and the ethics of equality comes into play in these types of situations. Is this truly a progressive innovation? And finally, should we continue to fetishize and accept innovation with wide open arms, or be more critical about it?

1. Frank, Thomas. “The Blue State Model.” Listen, Liberal: Or, What Ever Happened to the Party of the People? Metropolitan Books, 2016, pp. 176-196. 

2. Mazzucato, Mariana. The Entrepreneurial State: Debunking Public vs. Private Sector Myths, Anthem Press, 2015. 

   

Uber hires 'flying car engineer' from Nasa

I hope this is as new to you as it is new to me. Uber is trying to create flying cars!!

Uber is hiring a former NASA engineer to create a flying car to aid transportation. This car will be under the aviation part the company."Just as skyscrapers allowed cities to use limited land more efficiently, urban air transportation will use three-dimensional airspace to alleviate transportation congestion on the ground" (BBC.com). The aim of this flying car according to Uber, is for giving customers a whole new experience and aiding fast travel than usual, due to traffic and other obstructions on land.

Not only are they creating flying cars, but they are working in collaboration with Volvo and Daimler to create self moving cars. In the case of this self moving cars, it will be disadvantageous to those using uber as a means to make their ends meet and make little income on the side. It will take away these jobs uber created and make the glory of uber as being 'cheap' more expensive for consumers.

Uber is trying to keep up with innovation by creating new forms of services that are cutting-edge and trying to stay on top of the market in competition with other tech companies.

In relations to one of the readings this week, Thomas Frank talks on how innovation may not be entirely good and pure and it usually is the company driving its own self interest to make money.
"Innovation simply acts as instruments to get around our society's traditional middle-class economic arrangements" (Frank 209).

This may seem as something beneficial in the long run but do you see potential disadvantages of this flying car or even the self moving car?


http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-38892390

Is "Heropreneurship" The New Type of Entrepreneurship?

The proliferation of crises around the world has led to a prominent increase in fascination, as well as interest in the concept “social entrepreneurship”. In today’s society, this concept has inspired numerous individuals to peruse starting a social business as it promises to solve some of the worlds toughest problems while earning money and gaining social status. That being said, these are often the individuals/agencies that are exempted from public examination as they are seen doing “valuable work”. With that in mind, Daniela Papi- Thornton (2016) in her article, “Tackling Heropreneruship”, critiques this industry by claiming that we are emerging into an area of heropreneurship in which being an entrepreneur has become trendy (1). After critically analyzing Thorton’s article, while heropreneurship as a trend has its strengths, when it comes down to social impact, the line between quick solutions and actual progress has been blurred, in addition to changing the way we fund and educate the people who inspire to be “social entrepreneurs”.

            For starters, it is important to understand the concept behind heropreneurship. Admittedly, there is no doubt that we live in a world full of tough problems which include: malnutrition, genocide, poverty, war, government negligence, and unfortunately much more. Ultimately, these are some of the world’s toughest problems due to the fact that they are often complex, multifaceted, and require much patience. Consequently, this has led to an era of heropreneurship in which everyone inspires to be an entrepreneur. Due to its heroic and feel good appeal, many individuals work towards creating an “attractive” social enterprise or demand jobs with a “social purpose”.

This is a very interesting article and worth the read! Here is the link:

https://ssir.org/articles/entry/tackling_heropreneurship

American and Canadian tech leaders React to Trump's Travel Ban

         Last week, minority President Donald Trump implemented a ban on people traveling into the United States from seven predominantly Muslim countries. This means that immigrants from Iran, Iraq, Syria, Sudan, Libya, Yemen and Somalia will be unable to enter the country for the next 120 days as will immigrants from any other country. Many have raised questions about the fact that although Trump has mentioned 9/11 as part of the justification for keeping people from certain countries out, none of the countries where the 9/11 hijackers came from, (Saudi Arabia, Egypt, the United Arab Emirates and Lebanon) made the list. UK PM Theresa May, PM Justin Trudeau and even Angela Merkel have slammed the ban. It’s carrying out has been implemented in what seems like an extremely chaotic fashion despite Mr. Trump suggesting that it is coming along nicely…

            

The backlash from world leaders, celebrities and academics has been significant. In addition, both American and Canadian tech leaders have come forward suggesting their disapproval of the ban. Apple's CEO Tim Cook noted that "Apple would not exist without immigration, let alone thrive and innovate the way [they] do" (Tech Executives Fiercely Criticize Trump Immigration Order 2017). After all, Steve Jobs’ ancestors were Syrian immigrants. In a message released to staff, Cook ensured employees that he had heard their concerns and that he shared them and that the order was not something that he supported (Tech Executives Fiercely Criticize Trump Immigration Order 2017). In a memo to his staff, Google's CEO, Sundar Pichai critiqued Trump’s order, noting that it would “prevent 185 foreign-born Google employees from entering the United States and [ordered] staff members who are traveling abroad to return to the United States immediately" (Tech Executives Fiercely Criticize Trump Immigration Order 2017).

           

Canadian tech industry leaders are also weighing in on the travel ban. CEOs from companies like Shopify and Wattpad are asking the Canadian federal government to provide visas to people displaced by the executive order (Misener, 2017). They suggest that visas would allow those who are not permanent US residents to begin the process of applying for full citizenship while continuing to work in the tech sector (Misener, 2017). The repercussions of Trump’s actions are far worse than the threat of an attack or act of violence on US soil, especially considering the fact that the average number of people in the United States killed by Americans annually averages at just about 12,000 while those killed Islamic jihadist immigrants is approximately 2. 

Attached are several links discussing the reactions of both American and Canadian tech leaders. What role do members of the tech sector have in the current political context? Are the reactions to the ban justified? How can leaders ensure that the racism, sexism and hatred Donald Trump 'spews' does not trickle down into their industries? Do tech leaders have an in that say politicians or academics might not? What role can we as Communications Studies students play in terms of voicing our opinions (whatever they may be) in a meaningful way?

http://www.npr.org/2017/01/29/512307479/tech-executives-fiercely-criticize-trump-immigration-order?utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=npr&utm_term=nprnews&utm_content=20170129

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/canadian-tech-leaders-ask-ottawa-for-temporary-visas-after-trump-order/article33818691/

http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/trump-travel-ban-technology-sector-reacts-1.3958864

Works Cited:

"Tech Executives Fiercely Criticize Trump Immigration Order." NPR. NPR, 29 Jan. 2017. Web. 01 Feb. 2017. 

Misener, Dan. "U.S. tech sector critical of President Trump's travel ban." CBCnews. CBC/Radio Canada, 01 Feb. 2017. Web. 01 Feb. 2017.

                                                                                      

The Rise of the New York Startup Scene

NewYork City is becoming an alternative for many tech companies to 'start up' and thrive and this may be because Silicon Valley is becoming too populated and expensive for new tech companies to grow. According to the article, the growth of NewYork city is due to some reasons like, 

"the rise of several prominent startups, including Foursquare and the crowdfunding site Kickstarter; the arrival of venture-backed accelerator programs to help young startups get off the ground; a pool of engineers who have come to or stayed in the city as companies like Facebook and Twitter built offices in New York; and moves by New York City’s government to encourage tech innovation" (Metz, 2012).

 Being in a place that has the presence of tech companies and a vast amount of software engineers or people that are tech savvy, there is likelihood for growth. But how big can Silicon Alley get? And how long will it be a tech hub?
Looking at it from Canadian perspective, Waterloo to be exact, there may be a presence of engineers, government encouragement and so on, but there are not that many 'prominent start ups' present and without that, this Silicon Valley North cannot grow the way it should.
Another key thing the article talks about is investments; a lot of these startups in NewYork are getting investors to help build their companies, its not comparable to that in San Fransisco, but it is aiding the tech hub in NY. The more investors a company or group of companies have, the more growth can occur, and when that happens, the whole network grows with it.
Another reason of NY's tech growth is because of the presence of a variety of resources- there is good publicity, a lot of people and a lot of people willing to spend.

What do you think are the ways in which Waterloo or Canada as a whole can become a bigger tech hub?


https://www.technologyreview.com/s/428774/the-rise-of-the-new-york-startup-scene/

How can we establish "Silicon Valley North" [Waterloo] as a global tech hub

Article: https://news.communitech.ca/news/tech-north-panel-highlights-potential-of-toronto-waterloo-region-corridor/

This article called Tech North Panel Highlights Potential of Toronto-Waterloo Region Corridor and is written by Anthony Reinhart. Reinhart covers various topics surrounding the potential enhancement of Waterloo as a major tech hub through the incorporation of Toronto's investment and human capital. It correlates well with the themes from week 5. 

In light of this weeks presentations (week 5), the themes revolved around the ability to enhance creative markets in areas to increase prosperity in terms of volume of people, fields of work, social diversification and economically. Specifically, we focused on Waterloo continually developing as Canada’s tech hub known as “Silicon Valley North”. This development of Silicon Valley North has created interest in Toronto’s financial power to increase investment into the billion-dollar tech industry. According to one of four Tech North (English tech company) founders, Daniel Debow, Waterloo’s key necessity is a multi-billion dollar corporation that can attract people to the area in search of tech-based work (Reinhart, 2017). Debow stated, “We need to have multibillion-dollar companies with thousands of jobs, and founders who make a lot of money and go off and start other companies, people don’t move here [Waterloo] because there aren’t enough big companies.” (Reinhart, 2017) These necessitated billion-dollar corporations can be made possible through financial investments from Toronto, which would allow for development of infrastructure, funding for start-ups and entice entrepreneurs to relocate to Waterloo. A key facet to the development of Waterloo as an international tech hub is the ability to create efficient transportation to and from Toronto, seeing as Toronto is a key investor and provider of human capital as well. Waterloo has definitely established itself as a major technological region in North America, however, with additional networking, investment and human traffic, Waterloo can become a global entity in the tech industry.