Three fears that hamper tech progress

Would the world be a better place if the government required Taylor Swift to sometimes sing off key? Obviously not, but some of those calling for shackles on tech progress seem to think so. Why is hindering tech progress a bad thing? As Bret Swanson points out, tech is where most productivity growth is happening, which means higher per capita income. Tech provides jobs: Information companies provide nearly 20 percent of the revenues of the top 20 companies in 2017 according to Fortune Magazine and probably more when one takes into consideration the importance of tech for the likes of Walmart and Costco. And tech, the source of some of the world’s most impressive innovations, enhances our work, lives, education, health care, etc. Despite these impressive benefits of tech progress, there are those who want to hold it back.

Who wants to shackle tech?

A shockingly long list of people have made arguments for limits on or investigations into some of America’s leading innovators. Among the critics is Salon’s Angelo Young who recently advocated the breakups of Amazon, Alphabet, and Facebook. Their sin? Satisfying large numbers of customers. Congressman Ro Khanna (D-CA), whose district encompasses part of Silicon Valley, has called for the government to review Amazon’s proposed acquisition of Whole Foods. His concern? Jobs might change. CUNY/Queens professor Douglas Rushkoff called for the breakup of Amazon. Why? Too many people will like the result of the Whole Foods acquisition. Underlying these oppositions to tech progress are three fears that border on phobias.

1. Fear of big things (megalophobia)

Much of the opposition to tech progress reflects a fear of large businesses. Rushkoff led his op-ed about Amazon’s proposed acquisition of Whole Foods with a quote from a friend: “It’s over. The world.” Rushkoff calls Amazon an “impending monopoly,” writes of successful companies “sucking their customers and suppliers dry,” and refers to Amazon as controlling markets. Speaking metaphorically (I hope), he even complained that millions of musicians are “penniless” because Taylor Swift is so good. Furthermore, Young is afraid of Amazon and Facebook because of their size. These fears do not seem to make much sense. Every person who buys from Amazon or searches with Google does so voluntarily. Would you be happier if Amazon had to turn away every other purchase that you attempted? Or would you be better off if half of your friends were not allowed on Facebook? Absent coercion, every sale that a company makes happens because a customer chooses the purchase and believes that it makes him or her better off. And absent government corruption or control of an essential, limited resource, a customer chooses to purchase from a seller because it has exceeded its rivals at developing reputation, relationships, quality, efficiency, and the like for that customer. Especially on the internet, customers, not companies, are in charge. This confusion over “bigness” results in part from the second fear.

2. Fear of economic thinking (phronemoecophobia)

(Okay, I made up the name. Phronemophobia is the fear of thinking. I added the “eco.”) Understanding how people make economic decisions — their motivations, information, constraints, mental processes, and options — is hard work. Doing it well requires humility because we don’t always know everything that goes into each decision made by every individual. Some of the opponents of tech progress appear to have an aversion to economic thinking. They resort to ad hominem arguments (such as calling Apple “the evil empire”), drama, and exaggeration. Sloppy economic thinking can feed the third fear.

3. Fear of technology change (techno-metathesiophobia)

(Okay. I made up this name, too, by combining technophobia and metatesiophobia.) All progress involves change, but sometimes people fear it. This fear can be found in some (but not all) of the advocates of government-imposed net neutrality who want the internet to always be as it was in the 1990s. This fear can also be found in some of the near hysteria over how tech affects privacy and fears over how Google changes its search algorithms. Khanna’s worries about changes to his constituents’ jobs reflect this fear, but he might have simply meant to leverage the fear for political gain. That was likely the case with President Obama’s complaints about ATMs causing unemployment.

Is there a fear of freedom (eleutherophobia)?

There may be a fourth fear at work — a fear of freedom — but that seems too irrational. Government officials controlling the economy may help some people feel less anxious than they would with liberal markets, but it seems that those preferring government control more often desire to see others controlled than to be controlled themselves. So when you read or hear arguments against tech progress — whether against innovations, mergers, growth, or something else — think about whether denying customers their choices really makes them better off. Maybe we all can keep calm and let tech progress.

The post Three fears that hamper tech progress appeared first on Tech Policy Daily.