the great global shuffle Part 2

 

the great global shuffle Part 2: who owns the future, and who gets to live in it?

We connected the world. We handed over our data. We built the machines. And now we need to ask who is actually benefiting.

Once upon a time, we were promised that technology would make our lives easier.

Computers would save us time. The internet would connect us. Smartphones would put information at our fingertips. Artificial intelligence would take care of the tedious stuff and help solve humanity's biggest problems.

And some of that has happened.

But somewhere along the way, something else happened.

Technology became an extraordinarily powerful business. A handful of enormously wealthy individuals and corporations began accumulating influence over the infrastructure that increasingly shapes our lives.

Our communications, searches, photographs, purchases, movements, workplaces and personal information became valuable commercial data.

And AI changed the conversation again.

Who is AI really being built for?

We are often presented with AI as a consumer product: a clever assistant, a chatbot, a writing tool or a way to create pictures.

But there is another market.

Governments, police agencies, military organizations and private security companies are exploring or purchasing AI systems for surveillance, facial recognition, predictive analysis, intelligence gathering, border control and other applications.

Some systems are designed to monitor populations, identify individuals, analyse behaviour or assist decisions about who receives attention from authorities.

These technologies can have legitimate applications, but they also raise serious questions about privacy, discrimination, accountability and civil liberties.

Who watches the watchers?

Who checks the algorithms?

What happens when a machine makes a mistake about a person?

And what happens when governments or corporations have access to more information about ordinary people than those people have about the institutions controlling it?

AI isn't just a new gadget. It is becoming part of the infrastructure of power.

The billionaires building tomorrow

We are living through an extraordinary concentration of wealth and technological influence.

Some of the world's richest individuals are investing in artificial intelligence, robotics, space exploration, private infrastructure and enormous computing facilities.

There is nothing inherently wrong with scientific exploration or technological ambition.

But there is something worth questioning when we can find extraordinary amounts of money for private space programmes while communities struggle with housing, healthcare, clean water and climate disasters.

We can dream about travelling to Mars, but we still have to live on Earth.

We can build increasingly sophisticated machines, but we cannot manufacture another functioning planet.

And no billionaire can purchase an entirely separate atmosphere, functioning ecosystem or stable climate.

The environmental bill for artificial intelligence

There is another part of this story that deserves far more attention.

AI requires enormous computing infrastructure.

Data centres need land, electricity, cooling systems, water and equipment.

Their construction requires concrete, steel, copper, electrical components and other materials.

As demand for computing grows, so does the pressure to build more facilities and expand electricity infrastructure.

Communities are increasingly asking difficult questions:

• How much electricity will these facilities consume?
• Where will the power come from?
• How much water will be required for cooling?
• What happens to local ecosystems?
• Who pays for new electricity infrastructure?
• Will local residents benefit from the development?
• What happens to the land and communities surrounding these projects?

And this is happening while communities are already dealing with wildfires, floods, droughts, extreme heat and other climate-related risks.

The International Energy Agency has warned that electricity demand from data centres is growing rapidly.

This is not an argument against technology. It is an argument for asking what technology costs before we build it.

Pipelines, data centres and the same old question

Whether we are discussing pipelines, LNG facilities, mining projects or enormous data centres, there is a common question.

Who gets the benefits, and who carries the consequences?

A project might generate enormous private investment, but what happens to the surrounding environment?

What happens to the water?

What happens to wildlife?

What happens to Indigenous territories and communities?

What happens to the people who live there long after the investors have moved on?

We cannot keep treating pristine land, rivers, forests and coastlines as empty spaces waiting to be developed.

They are living ecosystems.

And they are part of the systems that keep us alive.

The strange new enlightenment

There is a term being used in some technology and political circles: the Dark Enlightenment.

It describes an anti-democratic political philosophy associated with questioning or rejecting liberal democracy and advocating alternative forms of concentrated authority.

It is worth understanding because it raises questions about the relationship between wealth, technology, democracy and power.

Who should govern?

Who should have influence?

What rights should ordinary citizens retain?

And should technological capability ever become a substitute for democratic accountability?

These are not abstract philosophical questions anymore. They matter when technology can monitor, classify, influence and potentially restrict people's lives.

When do we wake up?

Back in 2013, I was worried about the sheer number of electronic devices being manufactured and connected around the world.

I was thinking about mining, manufacturing, consumption and waste.

Today, we have an even bigger picture to consider.

We have billions of connected devices, increasingly powerful AI, expanding data centres, enormous concentrations of private wealth and growing demands for energy and natural resources.

At the same time, people are struggling to afford homes, find secure employment and deal with environmental changes they did very little to create.

And the young people taking Canada to court over climate change are asking a question that should concern all of us:

What kind of future are we leaving them?

Perhaps the most important thing we can do is stop treating every new technology as inevitable progress.

Ask questions.

Demand transparency.

Protect privacy.

Protect the environment.

Insist that communities have a voice in decisions affecting their land and resources.

And remember that technology is supposed to serve humanity, not the other way around.

We don't need to stop imagining the future. We need to start asking who is designing it, who owns it, who controls it and whether there will still be a healthy planet on which to enjoy it.

The billionaires may have their eyes on the stars.

The rest of us still need clean water, breathable air, somewhere to live and a planet that can sustain life.

Perhaps it's time we paid a little more attention to the place we're standing.

Because there is no upgrade, no algorithm and no amount of money that can replace a living Earth.

Changerzz — questioning the things we take for granted.