Reflections on the Role of Technology

This is only loosely related to economics, but I thought I'd post anyways.

Bar all ethical consideration. What does technology serve to accomplish? Groopman seems to suggest that technology can be best utilized to aid the weak and the under-endowed. But in terms of evolution, such a goal is not noble. Consider, for a moment, the generally accepted doctrine that is natural selection. Under this theory, those that are apt to survive do so, and those who aren’t don’t. The elimination of the weak ensures the strength of future generations. With this consideration in mind, the problem becomes clear. If technology serves to aid the weak and elimination of the weak is necessary for evolution, then logic dictates that technology serves to hinder the progress of evolution. Such a conclusion is unnerving, and according to most, simply untrue. I am certainly no proponent of eugenics. So wherein lies the flaw?

The problem is that this model of technology’s role is overly simplified. In fact, technology (and by extension the use of machines) not only augments everyday life, but progresses human civilization as a whole.

The first part of this claim is rather easy to prove. Can anybody honestly deny that the computer or the automobile has increased mankind’s standard of living? What about the light bulb? The refrigerator? The fact of the matter is simply that new technology makes life easier, makes people more efficient. This is why economists put such a large emphasis on technological advancement; it empowers people to produce more given the natural constraint of time. For example, take something as primitive as eating. In the days of the hunters and gatherers, the majority of a person’s day was used towards salvaging enough food to survive.

Fast forward a few thousand years. A single human is now able to produce enough food to feed a thousand. All made possible through the use of machines.

Now consider technology from a social perspective. Quite frankly, I have never fully understood those that claim technology as the death of human interaction. In fact, quite the opposite is true. Think back to the days before cars, before airplanes, before telephones. Human interaction in those days was tribal and familial in nature; after all, if one wanted to interact with someone over a span of many miles, he had to get there first. Enter telephone, stage right. A message that before took days and weeks to deliver could not be delivered at a moment’s notice. Interaction between humans became instantaneous.

Some, of course, will claim that I am only discussing the beneficial extreme of technology. Yes, tools such as the airplane have advanced society, but surely evil killer robots will one day rule the planet.

But if I am to blame for only presenting best extreme of technological progress, these people are equally worthy of criticism for only presenting the worst. The truth is that our world is still light years away from a Surrogates style robot civilization. The truth is that artificial intelligence to the likes of Jarvis from Iron Man still ceases to exist. The truth is that probability wise, the chances of technology forever saving mankind is just as likely as the chances of technology destroying it. The truth is, nobody knows.

The only thing that we do know for sure is that technology will progress. And as technology progresses, so will mankind. I realize that this is a direct contradiction to my earlier conclusion about evolution; this is no mistake. There is one key, fatal flaw to my original logic. It is true that the evolution of mankind would be hindered if technology served only to aid the weak. However, technology does much more than that. Technology does not only serve to aid the weak, it serves to improve the weak. With the powers of modern technology, an individual who would normally be a drag on society can be productive and useful. A diabetic that would normally not survive can now lead a successful life as an engineer. A paraplegic can now be a world renowned doctor. Society can now find a place for the weak. But why stop there? With the advent of gene therapy, one day humans will be able to choose the genes that they want. Technology has, quite simply, made it possible for humans to transcend the bounds of traditional evolution.

So at the end of the day, what does technology serve to accomplish? What do machines contribute to our lives? On a personal level, they make our lives easier and make us more productive. On a societal level, they enable the human race to expand and grow beyond the limits designated by traditional theories. And one day, when I am sitting in my space car on my way to work on mars, I’ll reread this essay and ask myself: was any of this ever in doubt?

Some Econ Jokes

Courtesy of Economists Do It With Models

Strange Pricing Scheme

We were at Stony Creek the other day, renting some boats, when I noticed the strange pricing scheme for boat rentals. Rentals were $5 per hour with a $20 deposit. The deposit was for emergencies, cases where the boat was stolen or broken.

Upon a bit of research (aka asking my friend who is knowledged in this stuff), I found out that the standard price of one of these boats was around $150.

Now, from an incentives perspective, such a system doesn't seem to make much sense. If I wanted a boat, I would have the choice of getting it for $25 at the boat rental or getting it for $150 at retail. Ceteris paribus, I will obviously choose to take the boat from the rental place.

Now of course, there is also the moral incentive to take into consideration. For most people, the notion that taking a boat from a boat rental is stealing would be enough to prevent most people from doing so. However, as research presented in Freakonomics suggests, financial incentives can often replace moral ones.

In this case, the $20 deposit with the intention of preventing cases of theft may actually incentivize people to steal the boat by making such actions seem morally conscious (after all, you've already "paid" the $20 just in case the boat disappeared).

I'm sure that not many boats get stolen and that the park makes a profit off of the endeavor, but I still wonder how often boats get stolen at Stony Creek.

Yale Game Theory Video Course

So this has been around for quite a while, but it hasn't until recently (when I've had a bit of time) that I've actually started watching these... and they are amazing. These are basically a comprehensive set of lectures on game theory from professor Ben Polack of Yale. I've only linked the first of the set in this post, but you can find the rest of them if you just look at the related videos on youtube.

Greek Debt in Three Acts

So yes, I'm finally back after a month long hiatus... APs testing, Regional Fed Challenge, senior year and whatnot. Anyways, no better way to make a return than with the following videos on the Greek debt crisis... thanks to Chartporn for the find.


The Greek Crisis Explained, Episode 1 from NOMINT on Vimeo.


The Greek Crisis Explained, Episode 2 from NOMINT on Vimeo.


The Greek Crisis Explained, Episode 3 from NOMINT on Vimeo.