Amy Gallo, HBR contributing editor, discusses a useful tactic to more effectively deal with conflict in the workplace: understanding whether you generally seek or avoid conflict. Each personality style influences how you approach a particular conflict, as well as how your counterpart does. Gallo talks about how to escape the common pitfalls of conflict seekers and conflict avoiders, so that you can improve your work and your relationships. She’s the author of the HBR Guide to Dealing with Conflict.
Who governs digital trust?
Doctorow framed the question this way: "Computers are everywhere. They are now something we put our whole bodies into—-airplanes, cars—-and something we put into our bodies—-pacemakers, cochlear implants. They HAVE to be trustworthy."
Sometimes humans are not so trustworthy, and programs may override you: "I can’t let you do that, Dave." (Reference to the self-protective insane computer Hal in Kubrick’s film "2001." That time the human was more trustworthy than the computer.) Who decides who can override whom?
The core issues for Doctorow come down to Human Rights versus Property Rights, Lockdown versus Certainty, and Owners versus mere Users.
Apple computers such as the iPhone are locked down—-it lets you run only what Apple trusts. Android phones let you run only what you trust. Doctorow has changed his mind in favor of a foundational computer device called the "Trusted Platform Module" (TPM) which provides secure crypto, remote attestation, and sealed storage. He sees it as a crucial "nub of secure certainty" in your machine—-but only to the extent that it is implemented to allow owners to choose what they trust—-not vendors or governments.
If it’s your machine, you rule it. It‘s a Human Right: your computer should not be overridable. And a Property Right: "you own what you buy, even if it what you do with it pisses off the vendor." That’s clear when the Owner and the User are the same person. What about when they’re not?
There are systems where there is a credible argument for the authorities to rule—-airplanes, nuclear reactors, probably self-driving cars ("as a species we are terrible drivers.")—-but at least in the case of cars, and possibly in the other two, it will not make us safer; it will make us less safe. The firmware in those machines should be inviolable by users and outside attackers. But the power of Owners over Users can be deeply troubling, such as in matters of surveillance. There are powers that want full data on what Users are up to—-governments, companies, schools, parents. Behind your company computer is the IT department and the people they report to. They want to know all about your email and your web activities, and there is reason for that. But we need to contemplate the "total and terrifying power of Owners over Users."
Recognizing that we are necessarily transitory Users of many systems, such as everything involving Cloud computing or storage, Doctorow favors keeping your own box with its own processors and storage. He strongly favors the democratization and wide distribution of expertise. As a Fellow of the Electronic Frontier Foundation (who co-sponsored the talk) he supports public defense of freedom in every sort of digital rights issue.
"The potential for abuse in the computer world is large," Doctorow concluded. "It will keep getting larger." —Stewart Brand
You should be, according to our economics contributor Peter Martin. Wages are growing by an average of 1.9 percent while house prices are running away at nearly 20 percent a year in some cities. Why is it happening and how will it end?
Duration: 15min 47sec Broadcast: Wed 5 Apr 2017, 9:00pm Published: Thu 6 Apr 2017, 11:13am
In recent weeks, our comments section has been filled with request to define a term we use constantly on this show: neoliberalism. For people who like buzzwords parsed and spelled out, this hour’s for you.
There are countless avenues that neoliberalism can lead us through: from the dismal science of efficiency and austerity to the dismal politics in Washington on both sides of the aisle. In our neighborhoods, neoliberalism may mean the defunding of our public schools as well as the deregulation of our public services. It’s driving impulse may be the ruthless privatization of everything in existence: from parking meters to prisons. It’s affective influence can transform our personal relationships, both intimate and platonic; gamifying our everyday relationships and turning the dating pool into a competitive market. Through the co-option of feminist and anti-racist struggle, it can disguise class enemies as “woke” allies. Through the commercialization of our artistic works and the corruption of our scientific research, it can convert our greatest human achievements into metrics on a spreadsheet.
So, instead of pursuing a single definition in this show, we’ve enlisted an all-star cast of public thinkers to discuss where they see neoliberalism creeping into their daily life and work.
"There were humans long before there was history," writes Yuval Noah Harari. Professor Harari’s book "Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind" is an international best-seller.
You have heard of the slow food movement…now, there’s a "slow professor" movement.
Two university professors say they feel time-crunched, exhausted and demoralised. They say they are being asked to be more efficient at the expense of more thoughtful teaching.
Really, we’re being encouraged to stay away from the really big questions because they’re going to take too long to think through. You want to pump out as much stuff as quickly as you can. That’s going to have a consequence for how thoughtful things are. - Barbara K. Seeber
Maggie Berg, a professor of English at Queen’s University, and Barbara K. Seeber, a professor of English at Brock University, are co-authors of The Slow Professor: Challenging the Culture of Speed in the Academy.
Berg and Seeger argue universities squeeze as much intellectual capital out of professors as possible, and closely monitor the output of their mental exertions.
They spoke to Michael about their book and their mission to "reclaim the intellectual life of the university."
This episode is a dream come true. I have long been a fan of Kevin Kelly – THE Senior Maverick at Wired magazine and the sherpa of the technium.
He is here to talk about his new book The Inevitable: Understanding the 12 Technological Forces That Will Shape Our Future.
How does technology shape what it means to be human?
How does the nature of authority change as we move from texts to screens?
What class would Kevin Kelly add to a minister’s theological education?
What can we learn from the Amish about adopting technology?
Is Big Brother a necessary evil?
“The price of absolute personalization is absolute The-Inevitable-HCtransparency.”
What would Kevin Kelly do if he was made Czar of Technology?
What would a democratic world-wide government look like?
Yes, but what is it that philosophers do exactly? Do they ask hard questions or come up with hard answers or both? Does what they do differ from what scientists do, and why don’t scientists care about philosophy? This week, we ask three philosophers what they do and why they do it.
At a time of year when supernatural events are on many minds - angelic visitations, a baby born of a virgin - The Philosopher’s Zone looks at the paranormal and at how one Australian university teacher is helping his students to learn how to evaluate claims about the miraculous.
God, freedom and immortality - three of the key concerns of metaphysics - were given short shrift by major philosophical movements in the twentieth century. Yet, not in Australia. In a talk delivered this year at the Melbourne Writer’s Festival, the philosopher John Bigelow of Monash University looks at why metaphysics is big down under.
Page 1 of 11Older