The 3 Rs of tech: recovered, repurposed, researched
Introduction
Today’s post revolves around the types of tech Nio Kvinnor, the intuition validation entity — built around a leadership entirely composed of women and designed to lead intuition-friendly and intuition-positive architectures into the middle of the 21st century and beyond (people, business, integrated PhD-level research) — will begin to promote.
To this point, I’ve been talking ever more openly about IT- and AI-tech, and in this sense most specifically about the need for us to be repurposing both:
https://www.secrecy.plus/hmagi
And also why:
https://gb2earth.com/research/worst
https://gb2earth.com/pgtps/isolate
Yesterday, on my LinkedIn feed, I came up with what I believe will be a radically new departure in understanding who the natural bedfellows of intuitive validation — that is to say, its biotools (built on existing tech) and its bioweapons (built on research-dependent tech) — might best be identified and worked alongside from now on in.
Download and read through this slide-deck, hosted on Nio Kvinnor, for the most up-to-date details of all the above.
A selection of the slides in this deck can be found immediately below.
So.
Here’s it’s clear that over the past few months (and further back, tbh) I’m still talking mainly about repurposing and researching both AI- and possibly related IT-tech.
Ever since this video a couple of years ago, in fact:
The subtle, yet profound, shift that occurred to me yesterday
However, yesterday’s LinkedIn, the link to which you can find directly below and the content of which is reposted today beneath, changes the playing-field considerably in my view — and yet, even so, in useful and helpfully subtle ways:
I had an idea maybe an hour ago.
What I'm looking to achieve in the attached slide-deck and other documents and pages I've been publishing recently — that is, #intuitionfriendly and #intuitionpositive #biotools (built on a repurposed existing #it) and #bioweapons (built on a research-dependent #it) — may be better served as a project with its related workstreams if we used #techsuppliers and #techpartners which, historically at least, have had little or nothing to do with #ai as it stands.
That is, if I'm looking to take us back to #privacypositive and #secrecypositive architectures as per the early days of #it and #startup (the venerable #appleii for example, with admin and user conflated in one, and storage controlled and organised by the same), in order to encourage a freer-thinking (as, indeed, we have always delivered on when using #secrecypositive technologies such as pencil and paper), NOT inhibited by the kind of #surveillancetech that we now have everywhere, then perhaps I am looking in quite the wrong places when I say we need to repurpose #ai. Maybe what we really need to do is dig up previous, much more historical #it-#tech philosophies and ways of solving storage, quasi-intelligent infrastructure & automation, and operating-system challenges.
Maybe we should scope out of my proposed #intuitionvalidation projects and workstreams ALL those corporations and potential collaborators -- big and small -- where if we take away from them what they currently do in #ai, little if anything is left.
The question being: what #bigtech and #toptiertech still add value, outwith their divisions, departments, and projects re #ai?
Maybe, just maybe, when we are in a position to answer this question, perhaps we will finally know exactly whom my bedfellows should be ...
What do we think? What do we think?
Further reading:
https://gb2earth.com/pgtps/genesis
3 types of tech: recovered, repurposed, researched
To this moment, most of us have been behaving like techies who refuse to learn the lessons of all the accelerators and incubators we’ve been pushed through.
Big tech has done this since forever: you only have to look at the latest forays into a disastrous hyping of generative AI to realise these tech-bro boys love their boys’ toys much much more than the problems the world as a collective of humanity surely needs us all to try and begin to solve.
Quite wrong, then: and wilfully so. All these years, they’ve been repurposing the real utility of innovation and invention, a utility that startup ecosystems have always been poised to deliver, for one singular goal: fill their deep pockets even more deeply. They know what they’re doing, as well as the impact it has on global wellbeing at all levels. They are guilty, in hugely premeditated ways, too.
Smaller tech has been carried along, mainly because it’s had no choice. But many of the smaller tech technologists I’ve spoken with over the years secretly wish, very much in private, that it were otherwise.
This is where we need to focus.
Myself, I’ve also been a little guilty of the same in my own discourse, though it took years for me to begin to mention specific tech as such. In any case, I’m temperamentally more engaged by outcomes — I’d like to believe that the problems I’m interested in might actually be addressed and solved some near-term day — and always agnostic about tech and its capacity to be the solution.
No tech is the only solution, now is it?
3 types of tech, then:
Recovered — a historical tech (databases instead of cloud, for example; local hard drives instead of managed facilities; conflated admin and user functions in the same person instead of remote admins and overseen users).
Repurposed — in this case, AI- and IT-tech as I have been proposing for a couple of years now:
Researched — as I have already been suggesting in a number of websites and blogposts here and there:
Conclusion: just the 3 Rs of technology …!
Essentially, what I propose reverts unconsciously but — equally — quite deliberately to good practice in startup:
Recover the historical, where it may serve a new purpose.
Repurpose the current, where it may serve a better purpose.
Research the future, where it may serve a collectively aspirational purpose.
A startup which instead of being of most use to the already wealthy, so that they can perpetuate their wealth at the expense of the rest of humanity, returns to its original purpose: enable the inventiveness of the entrepreneurial spirit many of us have latent but, even so, effervescent all the same, so that many hands wishing to make of the world a better place may finally be able to collectively make light of this labour.