Live data from Hacker News

Sundar Pichai: ‘Technology Doesn’t Solve Humanity’s Problems’

nytimes.com

101–110 of 295 posts

Re: Sundar Pichai: ‘Technology Doesn’t Solve Humanity’s Problems’

#101

Technology absolutely solves humanity's problems. There's pretty much no problem that given a large thoughtful effort, technology has not solved. The problem is that humanity is bad at choosing where to invest in technology. Our society has been set up so that orders of magnitude of more money is spent on advertising technology than clean energy, sanitation, sustainability, and ethical food production. Technology is…

> Our society has been set up so that orders of magnitude of more money is spent on advertising technology than clean energy, sanitation, sustainability, and ethical food production. Technology is not the problem. The problem is that in order to invest in "clean energy, sanitation, sustainability, and ethical food production" you need a huge amount of capital. A good way to build capital is to invest into technologie…

That's not true at all. Your thinking is dangerously wrong.

If you feel that these companies like Google are in it to make humanity better, you really need a better understanding of people. Google, Exon Mobile, Phillip Morris, and every other public company work in virtually the same way. They maximize profit. If you work at one of these companies and you don't help the company make more money, see how long you keep your job. Google is just in a different market. You may respond with why does Google invest in self-driving cars or 4g weather balloons? Very simply, to make more money. I'm not saying you can't make money from doing things to help humanity or that you shouldn't but let's be very clear, Google is not a person with a conscious. It's a system set up to make money and it will disappear as soon as it stops.

From a planning perspective, hoping large systematic changes will be brought corporations completely ignores history. The military has been behind virtually every significant technology at least in the United States. Even technologies created by corporations almost always have some sort of public assistance.

Our problem now is that corporations are seeping deeper into the centralized decision-making network we call the government. The whole point of government is to have a centralized power that can avoid the local maximums of profit motive. Corporations, in their bid to continue their existence, erode our public institutions. If we really wanted to, we could have the government mobilize trillions of dollars to solve any problem we wished. Capital may be the problem for figuring out fusion but it's certainly not the problem for clean energy, sanitation, sustainability, and ethical food production.

Re: Sundar Pichai: ‘Technology Doesn’t Solve Humanity’s Problems’

#102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those are government agencies you voted for. American citizens want leaders who bomb countries. Go vote a non-interventionist or isolationist if you want someone else. Face the truth. If you want no killing, Your enemy isn’t Google, it’s your neighbour.

I mean, I did vote for someone who doesn't want to do those things. That person lost.

And yet you fund the killing with your taxes. You know they kill, you know they need money to build the killing machines, you give them money.

Re: Sundar Pichai: ‘Technology Doesn’t Solve Humanity’s Problems’

#105
post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm a progressive, but there is no peace without being ready for war. I just hope we don't find out too late, and China has much better smart weaponry

Quick question: in this hypothetical where China presents an existential threat to the US, what happens to the Chinese economy when they invade the largest consumer of their domestically produced goods and services?

Gets redirected towards the war effort, suffers some problems after the war, and then recovers.

Assuming isolated China vs. US war, there's still the whole Europe to manufacture trinkets for.

Re: Sundar Pichai: ‘Technology Doesn’t Solve Humanity’s Problems’

#106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're certainly correct that the major problem is social, economic, and structural, but I do think there are some technologies that are inherently tricky to justify regardless of the economic structures they arise in. The atomic bomb is one obvious example of a technology that seems to be inherently bad not only for humanity, but for biological life itself. You could argue that the problem of the bomb is more-so a p…

Arguably, the dropping of the atomic bombs saved more lives in the long run by forcing the Japanese to surrender and end the war, full-stop. And arguably, nuclear weapons are keeping the world at peace. Sure, everyone has them pointed at each other, but it’s that threat that keeps us honest and peaceful. Just like how drivers in Chicago are courteous and never honk their horn - you’ll get shot if you drive like a dic…

> Arguably, the dropping of the atomic bombs saved more lives in the long run by forcing the Japanese to surrender and end the war, full-stop.

This was a popular myth that Truman started. In fact, if we’d told the Japanese we would let them keep their emperor, they almost certainly would have surrendered. The Soviets had just entered the war in the Pacific and we wanted to end it before they captured much territory. Ironic since the Japanese had no intention to risk a Soviet occupation either.

Re: Sundar Pichai: ‘Technology Doesn’t Solve Humanity’s Problems’

#108
post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The atomic bomb is one obvious example of a technology that seems to be inherently bad not only for humanity, but for biological life itself. Is it really inherently bad if it's just generating a lot of energy? Couldn't that technology be used to generate electricity?

It could, but the primary reason it was developed was to generate a lot of energy to kill as many people as possible.

Then be very careful to not extend the negativity over the entire field of nuclear physics. Atomic bomb is a very specific weapons technology. Mastery of fission and physics at atomic scale does great good already - from energy to medicine - and holds potential for even more.

Re: Sundar Pichai: ‘Technology Doesn’t Solve Humanity’s Problems’

#109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Google was enabling the DoD to be more efficient at killing people and China to be more oppressive until its workers protested. So he's right about humanity having to solve its problems but he's forgetting that Google, the corporation, is opting to make it harder for humanity to solve its problems by enabling those who do not have humanity's best interest in their heart.

> Google was enabling the DoD to be more efficient at killing people The world is complicated, and things are never as simple as that. Would you consider drones and smart bombs bad when the alternative is carpet bombing? It is always too easy to ignore the world as it is and focus on a utopian case. War will happen, with whatever tools are available.

>Would you consider drones and smart bombs bad when the alternative is carpet bombing?

Because there are more courses of action other than "drone strike" and "carpet bombing".

Re: Sundar Pichai: ‘Technology Doesn’t Solve Humanity’s Problems’

#110
post #7

To put the title into context: "Do you still feel like Silicon Valley has retained that idealism that struck you when you arrived here?" "There’s still that optimism. But the optimism is tempered by a sense of deliberation. Things have changed quite a bit. You know, we deliberate about things a lot more, and we are more thoughtful about what we do. But there’s a deeper thing here, which is: Technology doesn’t solve h…

A.k.a. we're a technology company so obviously we still need to believe this, but we're going to co-opt technoskepticism to pretend like the technology we create isn't part of the problem
Post reply on HN