|
||||
|
|
||||
|
Friday, November 30, 2018
Press Release: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office releases 2018-2022 Strategic Plan
Five Ways To Boost Inclusivity Within Your Organization; Forbes, November 28, 2018
Jeff Thomson, Forbes; Five Ways To Boost Inclusivity Within Your Organization
Wrong. Diversity includes sexual orientation, religious affiliation, ethnicity, disability, socioeconomic status, age and personality traits.
There’s a similar misconception that these are all things your HR managers are exclusively responsible for. Wrong again. Yes, HR plays an important role, but D&I must be a standard that is set from the top down, and that means at the CEO level. There is a good reason for this: D&I initiatives, properly implemented, give organizations an edge. The research doesn’t lie; according to Deloitte’s “Global Human Capital Trends” survey, 78 percent of respondents now believe D&I is a competitive advantage.
And it is. From a business perspective, D&I can help increase a company’s bottom line, drive innovation and create more opportunities for growth – attracting more top-tier talent. As a CEO, I believe there’s unquestionable value in the D&I initiative within the professional membership association I lead. But I’ve also witnessed its impact firsthand on the finance and accounting industry. At IMA® (Institute of Management Accountants), we’ve committed ourselves to ensuring that our members and staff, and ultimately the businesses they serve, feel represented, heard and included.
Here’s how you can do the same.
How to Boost Inclusivity Within Your Organization"
"Let’s dispel a myth for a moment. Diversity and inclusion (D&I) are only about race and gender. Right?
Wrong. Diversity includes sexual orientation, religious affiliation, ethnicity, disability, socioeconomic status, age and personality traits.
There’s a similar misconception that these are all things your HR managers are exclusively responsible for. Wrong again. Yes, HR plays an important role, but D&I must be a standard that is set from the top down, and that means at the CEO level. There is a good reason for this: D&I initiatives, properly implemented, give organizations an edge. The research doesn’t lie; according to Deloitte’s “Global Human Capital Trends” survey, 78 percent of respondents now believe D&I is a competitive advantage.
And it is. From a business perspective, D&I can help increase a company’s bottom line, drive innovation and create more opportunities for growth – attracting more top-tier talent. As a CEO, I believe there’s unquestionable value in the D&I initiative within the professional membership association I lead. But I’ve also witnessed its impact firsthand on the finance and accounting industry. At IMA® (Institute of Management Accountants), we’ve committed ourselves to ensuring that our members and staff, and ultimately the businesses they serve, feel represented, heard and included.
Here’s how you can do the same.
How to Boost Inclusivity Within Your Organization"
Wednesday, November 28, 2018
Pennsylvania High Court Finds Duty to Safeguard Employee Information; Lexology, November 26, 2018
Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP, Lexology; Pennsylvania High Court Finds Duty to Safeguard Employee Information
"The Pennsylvania Supreme Court handed the state’s employees a major legal victory last week when it decided that employers have an affirmative legal responsibility to protect the confidential information of its employees...
In reversing two lower courts, the justices ruled that, by collecting and storing employee’s personal information as a pre-condition to employment, employers had the legal duty to take reasonable steps to protect that information from a cyber-attack...
The ruling revives a proposed class action lawsuit against the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center and one of its hospitals, UPMC McKeesport, after a 2014 data breach in which hackers allegedly stole the personal information of 62,000 former and current employees...
Whether the ruling is viewed narrowly as confined to its facts, or more broadly as establishing a general legal duty to safeguard confidential information, there is little question that the decision marks an important development in tort law governing data breach cases...
The case is Dittman et al. v. UPMC, Case No. 43 WAP 2017."
"The Pennsylvania Supreme Court handed the state’s employees a major legal victory last week when it decided that employers have an affirmative legal responsibility to protect the confidential information of its employees...
In reversing two lower courts, the justices ruled that, by collecting and storing employee’s personal information as a pre-condition to employment, employers had the legal duty to take reasonable steps to protect that information from a cyber-attack...
The ruling revives a proposed class action lawsuit against the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center and one of its hospitals, UPMC McKeesport, after a 2014 data breach in which hackers allegedly stole the personal information of 62,000 former and current employees...
Whether the ruling is viewed narrowly as confined to its facts, or more broadly as establishing a general legal duty to safeguard confidential information, there is little question that the decision marks an important development in tort law governing data breach cases...
The case is Dittman et al. v. UPMC, Case No. 43 WAP 2017."
Monday, November 26, 2018
This is the only Trump syndrome we need to worry about; The Washington Post, November 25, 2018
E.J. Dionne Jr., The Washington Post; This is the only Trump syndrome we need to worry about
"The past week has shown that those who feared Trump’s despotic inclinations were neither deluded nor alarmist. His shameful indifference to the killing and dismembering of the Saudi journalist and Post contributor Jamal Khashoggi was an act of cold collaboration with Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman’s coverup...
But all the tax cuts and judges in the world won’t compensate for the cost to the United States of abandoning any claim that it prefers democracy to dictatorship and human rights to barbarism. The syndrome we most need to worry about is denial — a blind refusal to face up to how much damage Trump is willing to inflict on our system of self-rule, and on our values."
"The past week has shown that those who feared Trump’s despotic inclinations were neither deluded nor alarmist. His shameful indifference to the killing and dismembering of the Saudi journalist and Post contributor Jamal Khashoggi was an act of cold collaboration with Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman’s coverup...
But all the tax cuts and judges in the world won’t compensate for the cost to the United States of abandoning any claim that it prefers democracy to dictatorship and human rights to barbarism. The syndrome we most need to worry about is denial — a blind refusal to face up to how much damage Trump is willing to inflict on our system of self-rule, and on our values."
Saturday, November 24, 2018
How to Talk to People, According to Terry Gross: The NPR host offers eight spicy tips for having better conversations.; The New York Times, November 17, 2018
Jolie Kerr, The New York Times; How to Talk to People, According to Terry Gross:
The NPR host offers eight spicy tips for having better conversations.
"In a subsequent chat, our roles reversed, Ms. Gross offered her thoughts on how to have a good conversation.
“Tell me about yourself,”
a.k.a the only icebreaker
you’ll ever need
Those
are the only four words you need to navigate a potentially awkward
conversation, whether on a blind date or at a cocktail party. Ms. Gross
avoids asking more pointed questions (for example, “What do you do for
work?”) that presume information to be true."
Major Tim Peake reveals what ground control wants in an astronaut; The Guardian, November 24, 2018
Ian Sample, The Guardian; Major Tim Peake reveals what ground control wants in an astronaut
"Some of the most crucial questions on the application form are disarmingly simple. One asks applicants to explain in 750 words why they want to be an astronaut. Quoted in the book, Gerhard Thiele, a former head of ESA’s astronaut division in Cologne, tells Peake: “We’ve had people who write five pages.” Attention to detail matters, says Peake. In space you need to sweat the small stuff.
Another asks if applicants are happy to move to Cologne, home to ESA’s astronaut training centre. The agency is looking for more than a yes. Asking how the agency will support them in their move, and help with any family, shows responsibility and the confidence to question authority, Peake says."
"Some of the most crucial questions on the application form are disarmingly simple. One asks applicants to explain in 750 words why they want to be an astronaut. Quoted in the book, Gerhard Thiele, a former head of ESA’s astronaut division in Cologne, tells Peake: “We’ve had people who write five pages.” Attention to detail matters, says Peake. In space you need to sweat the small stuff.
Another asks if applicants are happy to move to Cologne, home to ESA’s astronaut training centre. The agency is looking for more than a yes. Asking how the agency will support them in their move, and help with any family, shows responsibility and the confidence to question authority, Peake says."
Friday, November 23, 2018
Addressing the Crisis in Academic Publishing; Inside Higher Ed, November 5, 2018
Hans De Wit and Phillip G. Altbach and Betty Leask, Inside Higher Ed; Addressing the Crisis in Academic Publishing
[Kip Currier: Important reading and a much-needed perspective to challenge the status quo!
I just recently was expressing aspects of this article to an academic colleague: For too long the dominant view of what constitutes "an academic" has been too parochial and prescriptive.
The academy should and must expand its notions of teaching, research, and service, in order to be more truly inclusive and acknowledge diverse kinds of knowledge and humans extant in our world.]
"We must find ways to ensure that equal respect, recognition and reward is given to excellence in teaching, research and service by institutional leaders, governments, publishers, university ranking and accreditation schemes."
[Kip Currier: Important reading and a much-needed perspective to challenge the status quo!
I just recently was expressing aspects of this article to an academic colleague: For too long the dominant view of what constitutes "an academic" has been too parochial and prescriptive.
The academy should and must expand its notions of teaching, research, and service, in order to be more truly inclusive and acknowledge diverse kinds of knowledge and humans extant in our world.]
"We must find ways to ensure that equal respect, recognition and reward is given to excellence in teaching, research and service by institutional leaders, governments, publishers, university ranking and accreditation schemes."
Tuesday, November 20, 2018
Emattled and in over his head, Mark Zuckerberg should — at least — step down as Facebook chairman; The Washington Post, November 19, 2018
Margaret Sullivan, The Washington Post; Emattled and in over his head, Mark Zuckerberg should — at least — step down as Facebook chairman
They don’t blame-shift."
"Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg once set out a bit
of digital-world wisdom that became his company’s informal motto: “Move
fast and break things.”
After the past week’s
developments, the 34-year-old should declare mission accomplished — and
find something else to do for the next few decades.
Because he’s shown that he’s incapable of leading the broken behemoth that is Facebook.
Leaders — capable leaders — don’t do what Zuckerberg has done in the face of disaster that they themselves have presided over.
They don’t hide and deny.
They don’t blame-shift."
Monday, November 19, 2018
The walls are closing in on Trump, says “Enemies: The President, Justice & the FBI” author Weiner; Salon, November 18, 2018
Melanie McFarland, Salon; The walls are closing in on Trump, says “Enemies: The President, Justice & the FBI” author Weiner
[Kip Currier: Good advice from author Tim Weiner in the Q & A exchange below, for anyone writing and creating:]
[Salon's Melanie McFarland] "Why does the series end at the Comey firing and his testimony? I'm imagining that a number of people who view it may have questions as to why it halted there, given everything that's happened since.
[Tim Weiner] It's the fact of Mueller and Comey, the two men who ran the FBI from the fall of 2001 to the spring of 2017 — 15 and a half years — who are now, by turns, special counsel and star witness.
It’s reminding people about how they teamed up to stop President Bush's assault on the Constitution, and trying to drive home that when Trump fired Comey, the counter-intelligence investigation into the Russian attack on the 2016 election became a criminal investigation, led to the appointment of Mueller and lead to a charge for Mueller that he could investigate anything. He was not delimited to the question of Russia.
You can bet your bottom dollar that there is going to be a sequel. And we talked, the directors, producers and Alex and I, we talked more than once about, you know, when we get to that Sunday in November, what Mueller brings the hammer down on that Friday? The grand jury meets on Fridays.
And you know, we decided we'd just saddle up and start again.
You know, I've been a reporter on deadline most of my life. You gotta press the button. You gotta hit 'send.’
A book needs a back cover. So we've got to decide what is the strongest structure that we can present."
[Kip Currier: Good advice from author Tim Weiner in the Q & A exchange below, for anyone writing and creating:]
"You know, I've been a reporter on deadline most of my life. You gotta press the button. You gotta hit 'send.’"
[Salon's Melanie McFarland] "Why does the series end at the Comey firing and his testimony? I'm imagining that a number of people who view it may have questions as to why it halted there, given everything that's happened since.
[Tim Weiner] It's the fact of Mueller and Comey, the two men who ran the FBI from the fall of 2001 to the spring of 2017 — 15 and a half years — who are now, by turns, special counsel and star witness.
It’s reminding people about how they teamed up to stop President Bush's assault on the Constitution, and trying to drive home that when Trump fired Comey, the counter-intelligence investigation into the Russian attack on the 2016 election became a criminal investigation, led to the appointment of Mueller and lead to a charge for Mueller that he could investigate anything. He was not delimited to the question of Russia.
You can bet your bottom dollar that there is going to be a sequel. And we talked, the directors, producers and Alex and I, we talked more than once about, you know, when we get to that Sunday in November, what Mueller brings the hammer down on that Friday? The grand jury meets on Fridays.
And you know, we decided we'd just saddle up and start again.
You know, I've been a reporter on deadline most of my life. You gotta press the button. You gotta hit 'send.’
A book needs a back cover. So we've got to decide what is the strongest structure that we can present."
Mark Zuckerberg’s ‘War’-Like Style Is Driving Top Executives Out: WSJ; The Daily Beast, November 18, 2018
The Daily Beast; Mark Zuckerberg’s ‘War’-Like Style Is Driving Top Executives Out: WSJ
"In June, with Facebook under siege for its role in the Cambridge Analytica debacle, CEO Mark Zuckerberg gathered top executives in a previously unreported meeting to tell them that the company was at “war” and that he would change his leadership style accordingly, according to The Wall Street Journal. Zuckerberg’s shift to a more aggressive leadership style has led to “unprecedented turmoil” in the upper ranks of the tech giant, the Journal reports..."
"In June, with Facebook under siege for its role in the Cambridge Analytica debacle, CEO Mark Zuckerberg gathered top executives in a previously unreported meeting to tell them that the company was at “war” and that he would change his leadership style accordingly, according to The Wall Street Journal. Zuckerberg’s shift to a more aggressive leadership style has led to “unprecedented turmoil” in the upper ranks of the tech giant, the Journal reports..."
Facebook deserves criticism. The country deserves solutions.; The Washington Post, November 18, 2018
Editorial Board, The Washington Post; Facebook deserves criticism. The country deserves solutions.
"WHAT HAPPENS now? That is the essential question following the New York Times’s troubling investigation into Facebook’s response to Russian interference on its platform. The article has prompted sharp criticism of the company from all quarters, and Facebook deserves the blowback. But Americans deserve solutions. There are a few places to start."
"WHAT HAPPENS now? That is the essential question following the New York Times’s troubling investigation into Facebook’s response to Russian interference on its platform. The article has prompted sharp criticism of the company from all quarters, and Facebook deserves the blowback. But Americans deserve solutions. There are a few places to start."
Yes, Facebook made mistakes in 2016. But we weren’t the only ones.; The Washington Post, November 17, 2018
Alex Stamos, The Washington Post; Yes, Facebook made mistakes in 2016. But we weren’t the only ones.
"Alex Stamos is a Hoover fellow and adjunct professor at Stanford University. He served as the chief security officer at Facebook until August...
First, Congress needs to codify standards around political advertising. The current rules restricting the use of powerful online advertising platforms have been adopted voluntarily and by only a handful of companies. Congress needs to update Nixon-era laws to require transparency and limit the ability of all players, including legitimate domestic actors, to micro-target tiny segments of the population with divisive political narratives. It would be great to see Facebook, Google and Twitter propose helpful additions to legislation instead of quietly opposing it.
Second, we need to draw a thoughtful line between the responsibilities of government and the large technology companies. The latter group will always need to act in a quasi-governmental manner, making judgments on political speech and operating teams in parallel to the U.S. intelligence community, but we need more clarity on how these companies make decisions and what powers we want to reserve to our duly elected government. Many areas of cybersecurity demand cooperation between government and corporations, and our allies in France and Germany provide models of how competent defensive cybersecurity responsibility can be built in a democracy."
"Alex Stamos is a Hoover fellow and adjunct professor at Stanford University. He served as the chief security officer at Facebook until August...
It is time for us to come together to protect our
society from future information operations. While it appears Russia and
other U.S. adversaries sat out the 2018 midterms, our good fortune is
unlikely to extend through a contentious Democratic presidential primary
season and raucous 2020 election.
First, Congress needs to codify standards around political advertising. The current rules restricting the use of powerful online advertising platforms have been adopted voluntarily and by only a handful of companies. Congress needs to update Nixon-era laws to require transparency and limit the ability of all players, including legitimate domestic actors, to micro-target tiny segments of the population with divisive political narratives. It would be great to see Facebook, Google and Twitter propose helpful additions to legislation instead of quietly opposing it.
Second, we need to draw a thoughtful line between the responsibilities of government and the large technology companies. The latter group will always need to act in a quasi-governmental manner, making judgments on political speech and operating teams in parallel to the U.S. intelligence community, but we need more clarity on how these companies make decisions and what powers we want to reserve to our duly elected government. Many areas of cybersecurity demand cooperation between government and corporations, and our allies in France and Germany provide models of how competent defensive cybersecurity responsibility can be built in a democracy."
Sunday, November 18, 2018
To regulate AI we need new laws, not just a code of ethics; The Guardian, October 28, 2018
Paul Chadwick, The Guardian; To regulate AI we need new laws, not just a code of ethics
"For a sense of Facebook’s possible future EU operating environment, Zuckerberg should read the Royal Society’s new publication about the ethical and legal challenges of governing artificial intelligence. One contribution is by a senior European commission official, Paul Nemitz, principal adviser, one of the architects of the EU’s far-reaching General Data Protection Regulation, which took effect in May this year.
Nemitz makes clear the views are his own and not necessarily those of the European commission, but the big tech companies might reasonably see his article, entitled “Constitutional democracy and technology in the age of artificial intelligence”, as a declaration of intent.
“We need a new culture of technology and business development for the age of AI which we call ‘rule of law, democracy and human rights by design’,” Nemitz writes. These core ideas should be baked into AI, because we are entering “a world in which technologies like AI become all pervasive and are actually incorporating and executing the rules according to which we live in large part”.
To Nemitz, “the absence of such framing for the internet economy has already led to a widespread culture of disregard of the law and put democracy in danger, the Facebook Cambridge Analytica scandal being only the latest wake-up call”."
"For a sense of Facebook’s possible future EU operating environment, Zuckerberg should read the Royal Society’s new publication about the ethical and legal challenges of governing artificial intelligence. One contribution is by a senior European commission official, Paul Nemitz, principal adviser, one of the architects of the EU’s far-reaching General Data Protection Regulation, which took effect in May this year.
Nemitz makes clear the views are his own and not necessarily those of the European commission, but the big tech companies might reasonably see his article, entitled “Constitutional democracy and technology in the age of artificial intelligence”, as a declaration of intent.
“We need a new culture of technology and business development for the age of AI which we call ‘rule of law, democracy and human rights by design’,” Nemitz writes. These core ideas should be baked into AI, because we are entering “a world in which technologies like AI become all pervasive and are actually incorporating and executing the rules according to which we live in large part”.
To Nemitz, “the absence of such framing for the internet economy has already led to a widespread culture of disregard of the law and put democracy in danger, the Facebook Cambridge Analytica scandal being only the latest wake-up call”."
Facebook and the Fires; The New York Times, November 15, 2018
Kara Swisher, The New York Times; Facebook and the Fires
"Don’t Be Afraid of Self-Reflection
That
man in the mirror is typically a man, and a young, white, privileged
one, whose capacity for self-reflection is about as big as Donald
Trump’s ability to stop hate-tweeting. But self-reflection is the
hallmark of maturity and good decision-making. Of all the interviews I
have done in Silicon Valley, I keep coming back to the one I did with
Mr. Zuckerberg this summer, in which I pressed him to reflect on how his invention had caused deaths in places like India and Myanmar.
After
trying several times to get an answer from him, I got frustrated: “What
kind of responsibility do you feel?” I said I would feel sick to my
stomach to know that people died possibly “because of something I
invented. What does that make you feel like? What do you do when you see
that? What do you do yourself? What’s your emotion?”
Mr.
Zuckerberg’s answer left me cold. And also more than a little worried
for the future of his company. It’s bad enough not to be able to
anticipate disaster; it’s worse, after disaster strikes, to not be able
to reflect on how it happened.
“I
mean, my emotion is feeling a deep sense of responsibility to try to fix
the problem,” he said. “I don’t know, that’s a … that’s the most
productive stance.”
But it’s not the
most productive stance. As with those California fires, putting out the
flames is important. But understanding how they got started in the first
place, to stop it from happening again, is what actually keeps us from
hurtling over the edge."
Kurt Wagner, Recode; Facebook’s board is throwing public support behind Mark Zuckerberg and Sheryl Sandberg — who are on Facebook’s board
[Kip Currier: Take note of the deliberate choice of words in the Facebook Board's statement copied below:
That "grossly unfair" phrasing telegraphs oodles of insight into the exculpatory mindset and run-the-clock-out public relations positioning of Facebook leaders: in the words of the New York Times' 11/14/18 bombshell behind-the-scenes reporting, "Delay, Deny and Deflect".
And that "they're-doing-this-to-us" mindset is also evident in the 11/17/18 New York Times-reported words of Elliot Schrage, Facebook's former vice president of global communications and public policy, who--at an 11/14/18 Q & A for employees with Zuckerberg and Sandberg--said that "Facebook was in a difficult news cycle, and that things would eventually calm down".
"grossly unfair"
The Board doesn't say that allegations that Zuckerberg and Sandberg "knew about Russian interference and either tried to ignore it or prevent investigations into what had happened" were untrue. It says that the allegations were "grossly unfair". Those are two different things. The former is of a more objective nature. The latter is more subjective--and self-serving.
That "grossly unfair" phrasing telegraphs oodles of insight into the exculpatory mindset and run-the-clock-out public relations positioning of Facebook leaders: in the words of the New York Times' 11/14/18 bombshell behind-the-scenes reporting, "Delay, Deny and Deflect".
And that "they're-doing-this-to-us" mindset is also evident in the 11/17/18 New York Times-reported words of Elliot Schrage, Facebook's former vice president of global communications and public policy, who--at an 11/14/18 Q & A for employees with Zuckerberg and Sandberg--said that "Facebook was in a difficult news cycle, and that things would eventually calm down".
Oh, and the actual makeup of the Board? You guessed it...Zuckerberg and Sandberg are "both on Facebook’s board". So, as this Recode article wryly observes, "it looks like Facebook’s executives are throwing public support behind ... themselves."
In a sense, the well-documented history of half-truths and obfuscations (see here and here) of these conflicts of interest-riven Facebook Heads shouldn't surprise us (--read Helaine Olen's 11/15/18 WaPo piece The moral and ethical rot at Mark Zuckerberg and Sheryl Sandberg's Facebook): they're adhering to their long-standing Utilitarianism-derived principle that "the needs of the few (i.e. anyone employed by or enriched by Facebook) outweigh the needs of the many" (i.e. the world's billions
of users AND non-users who have been and continue to be impacted by
Facebook's relentlessly revenue-driven, public good-eschewing
practices).
The
incoming House of Representatives must hold Facebook and its leaders
accountable for its actions and inaction. Bring Facebook's leaders in
front of Congress, under Oath, and get the answers and remedies the
American people and the World are owed. That's the rightly fair thing to suggest demand from Facebook and the elected officials who represent us.
#FacebookAccountability]
#FacebookAccountability]
"That story got us asking: Who from Facebook might be fired for the company’s missteps?
Whoever it is, it doesn’t look like it’ll be Zuckerberg or Sandberg. At least not right now.
Facebook’s board of directors issued a public statement
defending the company’s efforts in fighting Russian election meddling
efforts following the 2016 presidential election. It also called the
story “grossly unfair.” Here’s the full statement.
“As Mark and Sheryl made clear to Congress, the company was too slow to spot Russian interference, and too slow to take action. As a board we did indeed push them to move faster. But to suggest that they knew about Russian interference and either tried to ignore it or prevent investigations into what had happened is grossly unfair. In the last eighteen months Facebook, with the full support of this board, has invested heavily in more people and better technology to prevent misuse of its services, including during elections. As the U.S. mid-term showed, they have made considerable progress and we support their continued to efforts to fight abuse and improve security.”"
Saturday, November 17, 2018
How Plato Foresaw Facebook’s Folly; The New York Times, November 16, 2018
Bret
Stephens, Opinion Columnist, The New York Times; How
Plato Foresaw Facebook’s Folly
[Kip Currier: A must-read opinion piece by Bret Stephens. Bookmark and pass on to others!
Facebook's interminable ethics failures and catastrophic abdication of any semblance of moral leadership offer glaring case studies for the essential role of ethical decision-making and accountability in organizations--not only in the technology sector but in ALL areas of civic life.
Moreover, where is Facebook’s Board amidst this moral morass? If corporate leaders will not “do the right things”, it is ethically incumbent upon Boards of Trustees to exercise the moral oversight and fiduciary responsibility with which they have been entrusted.]
"The story of the wildly exaggerated promises and damaging unintended consequences of technology isn’t exactly a new one. The real marvel is that it constantly seems to surprise us. Why?
Part of the reason is that we tend to forget that technology is only as good as the people who use it. We want it to elevate us; we tend to degrade it. In a better world, Twitter might have been a digital billboard of ideas and conversation ennobling the public square. We’ve turned it into the open cesspool of the American mind. Facebook was supposed to serve as a platform for enhanced human interaction, not a tool for the lonely to burrow more deeply into their own isolation.
It’s also true that Facebook and other Silicon Valley giants have sold themselves not so much as profit-seeking companies but as ideal-pursuing movements. Facebook’s mission is “to make the world more open and connected.” Tesla’s goal is “to accelerate the world’s transition to sustainable energy.” Google’s mantra was “Don’t Be Evil,” at least until it quietly dropped the slogan earlier this year.
But the deeper reason that technology so often disappoints and betrays us is that it promises to make easy things that, by their intrinsic nature, have to be hard...
Start over, Facebook. Do the basics. Stop pretending that you’re about transforming the state of the world. Work harder to operate ethically, openly and responsibly. Accept that the work will take time. Log off Facebook for a weekend. Read an ancient book instead."
[Kip Currier: A must-read opinion piece by Bret Stephens. Bookmark and pass on to others!
Facebook's interminable ethics failures and catastrophic abdication of any semblance of moral leadership offer glaring case studies for the essential role of ethical decision-making and accountability in organizations--not only in the technology sector but in ALL areas of civic life.
Moreover, where is Facebook’s Board amidst this moral morass? If corporate leaders will not “do the right things”, it is ethically incumbent upon Boards of Trustees to exercise the moral oversight and fiduciary responsibility with which they have been entrusted.]
"The story of the wildly exaggerated promises and damaging unintended consequences of technology isn’t exactly a new one. The real marvel is that it constantly seems to surprise us. Why?
Part of the reason is that we tend to forget that technology is only as good as the people who use it. We want it to elevate us; we tend to degrade it. In a better world, Twitter might have been a digital billboard of ideas and conversation ennobling the public square. We’ve turned it into the open cesspool of the American mind. Facebook was supposed to serve as a platform for enhanced human interaction, not a tool for the lonely to burrow more deeply into their own isolation.
It’s also true that Facebook and other Silicon Valley giants have sold themselves not so much as profit-seeking companies but as ideal-pursuing movements. Facebook’s mission is “to make the world more open and connected.” Tesla’s goal is “to accelerate the world’s transition to sustainable energy.” Google’s mantra was “Don’t Be Evil,” at least until it quietly dropped the slogan earlier this year.
But the deeper reason that technology so often disappoints and betrays us is that it promises to make easy things that, by their intrinsic nature, have to be hard...
Start over, Facebook. Do the basics. Stop pretending that you’re about transforming the state of the world. Work harder to operate ethically, openly and responsibly. Accept that the work will take time. Log off Facebook for a weekend. Read an ancient book instead."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)