💾 Archived View for jsreed5.org › log › 2022 › 202204 › 20220415-technology-and-agency.gmi captured on 2023-01-29 at 03:38:05. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content
⬅️ Previous capture (2022-04-28)
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
---
F(x)tec announced yesterday that mass manufacturing of the Pro1 X has finally begun. The first batch is expected to ship before the end of May.
One of the key factors in my decision to buy the Pro1 X is its support for Ubuntu Touch and Sailfish OS, as well as LineageOS and stock Android. This excites me greatly: the former two operating systems are much more customizable and give the user greater control over low-level functions than the latter two, and thus operate more like a full Linux desktop computer with a mobile-oriented interface.
The lack of access to low-level functionality is my biggest problem with smartphones as they exist today. Manufacturers, cellular service providers, app makers, content providers, and "valued business partners" are all interested in pulling as much of my attention (and my money) as they possibly can. To facilitate that goal, they need to have sweeping control over what I do with my device, how, and when, so that I can be steadily guided to their ends. My data is regularly extracted and collated. Apps are locked down to only use proprietary, company-controlled APIs. I cannot control what network requests my apps make.
Often the mechanisms to enforce this free-flow of corporate traffic is handled by system-level apps. In the name of "security", I am blocked from gaining root or administrative access to the OS, barring me from being able to remove these subversive apps. The majority of the time, the goal of this pervasive data gathering and backdooring is to serve me advertisements.
What they promise me is a supercomputer in my pocket. What they sell me is a wireless billboard.
Of course, there are also many regulatory requirements companies have to deal with when making telecommunication products. Principled governments try to prevent unscrupulous people from using technology to stalk, harm or steal from others; other governments, themselves bad actors, want to control technology as a way to repress their own citizens. Companies might want to sell products overseas, but due to export controls, cannot allow foreign customers to freely access certain underlying technology.
I have a rule of thumb about machinery and technology: to understand how powerful a tool really is, look at how heavily it's regulated by governments, and how tightly it's controlled by corporations. The more difficult it is for an average person to get permission to freely use it, the more powerful it is.
The problem, of course, is that the true power of modern computational tools is almost unfathomable. Clever use of a digital computer--and not a very powerful computer at that--can empower a user to gather physical data, perform scientific and mathematical calculations, store and edit media, automate tasks, send secure communications, and even build predictive models. These are extremely robust tools that afford the user great autonomy--and with that autonomy comes agency.
Governments want to curb that agency, whether to monopolize the ability to control you or to stop you from harming others. Companies want to curb that agency, because they would rather control it themselves and have you pay to use it. There's a reason why social media, with its immense power to organize politically and bridge societal and economic divides, has instead been manipulated by monied interests to become heavily-censored wastelands of toxic rhetoric and advertisements.
The centralization of power is always a dangerous path to take, but recent events have shown us that it might not improve our lives anyway. Heavy-handed, top-down responses to COVID-19 failed to stop the spread of the virus or curb its deadliness--even in countries with near-total lockdowns and near-universal vaccination rates. Strong dependence on a global economy, run by giant corporations, has left us vulnerable when supply chains came grinding to halt. Even without rampant inflation, a lack of externally-supplied goods combined with a lack of independent, self-sufficient economic activity leads to many previously-staple products simply running out.
Technology gives us massive opportunities to assume control over our own lives. Too many people in modern society, though, seem to be willing to give up that control in exchange for the comfortable illusion of safety and security provided by someone else. As long as we're willing to let those already in power maintain a monopoly on the keys to that power, we will continue to be vulnerable to their whims--and the whims of nature--in the future.
Simply demanding that our smartphones have unlocked bootloaders won't change that future on its own. But if we can make true open access to our daily tech a normal part of our lives, it can help establish an desire for autonomy and user control in the public conscience. That might help us to develop the agency needed to solve other problems.
---
[Last updated: 2022-04-15]