That points to another lesson, which is that the remedy to technology-related problems very often involves more technology. Airbags and other improvements in safety features, for example, mean that in America deaths in car accidents per billion miles travelled have fallen from around 240 in the 1920s to around 12 today. AI is being applied as part of the effort to stem the flow of extremist material on social media. The ultimate example is climate change. It is hard to imagine any solution that does not depend in part on innovations in clean energy, carbon capture and energy storage.
這就引出了另一個教訓，即解決技術相關問題通常需要更多的技術。例如，安全氣囊和其他安全設施的改進意味著，在美國，每行駛十億英里的交通事故死亡人數已經從20世紀20年代的240人左右下降到今天的12人左右。人工智能正在被應用，作為阻止極端主義材料在社交媒體上流動的努力的一部分。最后一個例子是氣候變化。很難想象有什么解決方案不部分依賴于清潔能源、碳捕獲和能源儲存方面的創新。
The most important lesson is about technology itself. Any powerful technology can be used for good or ill. The internet spreads understanding, but it is also where videos of people being beheaded go viral. Biotechnology can raise crop yields and cure diseases— but it could equally lead to deadly weapons.
最重要的教訓是技術本身。任何強大的技術都可以用于好的方面，也可以用于壞的方面。互聯網傳播信息，但這里也是人們被砍頭的視頻被瘋傳的地方。生物技術可以提高作物產量，治愈疾病，但同樣可以制造致命武器。
Technology itself has no agency: it is the choices people make about it that shape the world. Thus the techlash is a necessary step in the adoption of important new technologies. At its best, it helps frame how society comes to terms with innovations and imposes rules and policies that limit their destructive potential (seat belts, catalytic converters and traffic regulations), accommodate change (universal schooling as a response to industrialisation) or strike a trade-off (between the convenience of ride-hailing and the protection of gig-workers). Healthy scepticism means that these questions are settled by a broad debate, not by a coterie of technologists.
技術本身沒有中介：正是人們對此做出的選擇塑造了這個世界。因此，技術鞭策是采用重要新技術的必要步驟。處于最佳狀態，它有助于構建社會如何對待創新，并實施規則和政策來限制它們的破壞性潛力（安全帶、催化轉換器和交通規則），適應變化（對于工業化的回應——普及教育）或達成平衡（在叫車的方便和非正式員工的保護之間）。健康的懷疑主義意味著這些問題是通過廣泛的辯論來解決的，而不是由一群技術專家來解決的。
Fire up the moral engine
點燃道德引擎
Perhaps the real source of anxiety is not technology itself, but growing doubts about the ability of societies to hold this debate, and come up with good answers. In that sense, techno-pessimism is a symptom of political pessimism. Yet there is something perversely reassuring about this: a gloomy debate is much better than no debate at all. And history still argues, on the whole, for optimism. The technological transformation since the Industrial Revolution has helped curb ancient evils, from child mortality to hunger and ignorance. Yes, the planet is warming and antibiotic resistance is spreading. But the solution to such problems calls for the deployment of more technology, not less. So as the decade turns, put aside the gloom for a moment. To be alive in the tech-obsessed 2020s is to be among the luckiest people who have ever lived.
也許焦慮的真正來源不是技術本身，而是人們越來越懷疑社會是否有能力控制住辯論，并拿出好的答案。從這個意義上說，技術悲觀主義是政治悲觀主義的癥狀。然而，這里面有一種令人不安的安慰:一場悲觀的辯論總比沒有辯論強。總的來說，歷史仍然為樂觀主義辯護。工業革命以來的技術變革幫助遏制了從兒童死亡率到饑餓和無知等各種古老的罪惡。是的，地球正在變暖，抗生素耐藥性正在蔓延。但是解決這些問題需要更多的技術部署，而不是更少。因此，在這十年即將到來之際，先把悲觀情緒放在一邊。生活在癡迷科技的21世紀20年代，是有史以來最幸運的人之一。
譯文由可可原創，僅供學習交流使用，未經許可請勿轉載。
評論
打印
