Tech

‘Disruption’ is a two-way street


Big Tech as we know it is built on the ethos of subversion of sanctity. Ideas, institutions, service delivery, the way I make my chair — nothing can be out of reach of technological disruption. In this vision, the tech company is a less-than-creative, skinny, innovative company that assumes a position of power, entrenched, freeing consumers from the shackles of history.

But technology can no longer claim to be the underdog (if it can). Today’s so-called tech disruptors have access, funding, and regulatory support with no challenge (or at least consent). As the current hype of tech disruption hits the markets of the Global South, this feels especially irritating for a group of Western, Silicon Valley-trained entrepreneurs with millions sponsorship dollars to call themselves the lucky innovators — and the auto rickshaw drivers, delivery workers, street vendors, and corner store retailers (all all earn less than $5 to $10 a day) as the woolly mammoths.

Despite these apparent contradictions, the original myth of breakdown persists, dominating public discussions and reinforcing a defining technological illusion. Companies conjure up images of a bloated, inefficient, or chaotic status quo. Technological intervention is seen as both necessary and good. Those “disruptions” are reduced to those who are passively receptive to whatever technological solutions will be included in the mix. After all, if the social space is static, technology will have the power to change it, but in return it can never be. Disruption is seen as a one-way street, and its positive implications remain unique to the tech company.

But the interruption is not It doesn’t just happen through venture capital and glitzy digital platforms. It is happening through users who build apps on WhatsApp for their needs. Drivers reverse engineer the popular mobile platform’s matching algorithm to make their work life better. Farmers oppose smart city plan. Governments place constraints on the use of a new technology. The streets are too complicated to be mapped. The physical infrastructure restricts different types of connections. Stolen scooters from the sidewalk.

in my own research on mobile platform in JakartaI have seen how users can develop rich social activities in response to new technologies, stamping their own identities on top of automation.

When the Grab and Gojek mobile platforms launched, they aimed to disrupt the city’s existing motorbike taxi market by creating an anonymous, efficient, and always-on driver workforce. Instead, Grab and Gojek drivers have created thousands of vibrant grassroots communities using WhatsApp and DIY hangout spaces. Starting in 2016, drivers waiting in the same area began to unite to help each other through the daily difficulties of life on the road. Over time, these loose driver groups morphed into independent, inter-company communities, organized by drivers for drivers. Each boasts its own logo, vote, uniform, clubhouse, WhatsApp group, vocabulary, and even emergency response services. Faced with the interference of technology attempting to automate relationships, drivers have leveraged their identities as platform workers to build stronger relationships around the platform. foundation.

Local history and culture have always shaped the paths to technology success and adoption. The Grab and Gojek driver communities also emerged from Indonesia’s local mutual aid activities, community-centric urbanism, and the existing microculture of motorbike taxi drivers. . Such developments are completely beyond the expectations of designers and companies. However, they have changed the way the platforms work in practice—especially by encouraging motorists to prioritize community before work and anchoring them to their chosen baselines.

These are all instances of users, infrastructure, regulation and containment of the social context and shaping the capabilities of the technology. That is, these are all instances of interrupts. However, in the Gospel of Interruptions written by Tech, they are not considered as such. There is a fine line drawn between interruption and fraud, interruption and destruction, interruption and illegality. Tech companies become the arbiter of that line.



Source link

news7g

News7g: Update the world's latest breaking news online of the day, breaking news, politics, society today, international mainstream news .Updated news 24/7: Entertainment, Sports...at the World everyday world. Hot news, images, video clips that are updated quickly and reliably

Related Articles

Back to top button