Home
Đăng nhập
Đăng ký
Why Big Tech Is Incompatible with Democracy | Bruno Giussani | TED - Video học tiếng Anh
Luyện nghe
Luyện nghe
/
Video
/
TED Talk
/
Why Big Tech Is Incompatible with Democracy | Bruno Giussani | TED
Why Big Tech Is Incompatible with Democracy | Bruno Giussani | TED
Chọn chế độ học:
Xem phụ đề
Chọn từ
Viết lại từ
Highlight:
3000 Oxford Words
4000 IELTS Words
5000 Oxford Words
3000 Common Words
1000 TOEIC Words
5000 TOEFL Words
Phụ đề (359)
0:04
How many algorithms are part of your
0:08
daily life?
0:10
How many sensors? How many screens? In
0:13
fact, interacting with screens and other
0:16
digital interfaces has become the main
0:20
daily activity of almost all of us.
0:24
But how many of those interactions are
0:27
actually really of our choosing?
0:31
Our lives are uh and our societies are
0:35
increasingly structured around and by
0:39
algorithms and digital networks. And
0:43
this algorithmization of life I think is
0:48
a problem for different reasons. And I
0:50
want to uh touch upon two of them
0:53
tonight.
0:56
The first one is the nature of these
1:00
technologies. We think they are products
1:03
and we buy them and once we own them, we
1:07
can do with them as we please. But in
1:11
the last couple of decades,
1:14
digital technologies have actually
1:15
become platforms,
1:18
invisible digital architectures within
1:22
which we live and that changes
1:27
absolutely everything.
1:30
Almost all important software and
1:34
digital services. Think of office and uh
1:39
industrial applications,
1:41
information and entertainment feeds,
1:44
payments, artificial intelligence,
1:47
chatbots, they all now run on the cloud
1:53
as we say, which means that the data and
1:57
the processing
1:59
are not in our machines controlled by us
2:03
locally, but they are on distant
2:06
machines on remote servers to which we
2:10
buy access and which are controlled by
2:13
the providers
2:15
and that gives them an immense power
2:18
over our lives. [snorts] It allows them
2:22
to decide what we can and cannot do.
2:27
what ideas get visibility and what
2:30
don't, what information we can access
2:34
and also to influence our public
2:38
debates. Of course, these technologies
2:41
are efficient, useful, practical, well
2:45
integrated, easy to use, often even
2:48
free.
2:49
Their utility is real and that's why we
2:52
have adopted them and that's why it's so
2:54
difficult to imagine doing without them.
2:58
But all that comes at a price and
3:01
finally we are starting to understand
3:04
it. Data extraction, privacy loss,
3:08
fragmentation of attention, dependency,
3:11
mental health, we can do a very long
3:15
list.
3:16
And now for the past 3 years, a little
3:19
bit more, generative artificial
3:23
intelligence is infiltrating itself
3:26
everywhere. It's popping up on all sorts
3:29
of applications and programs, talking to
3:33
us like friends, giving us sometimes the
3:36
impression that we have superpowers.
3:39
And indeed, AI chatbots can seem magical
3:43
because they offer something almost
3:46
irresistible.
3:48
The opportunity to delegate to a machine
3:52
the effort of thinking, learning,
3:57
writing, even deciding.
4:00
They are like
4:02
cognitive baby bottles.
4:05
And uh every day tens of millions of
4:08
people rush to the nipple. But the more
4:12
we delegate thinking [snorts] and
4:14
deciding, the less we will be able to
4:16
think and decide by ourselves.
4:21
[snorts] And indeed, we are increasingly
4:23
surrounded by machines that under the
4:26
cover of optimization and practicality
4:29
diminish our ability to understand
4:32
reality and to act upon it.
4:36
And they algorithmically reprogram
4:41
change our societies. We think we
4:45
control them, but actually is they who
4:47
hypnotize us and domesticate us.
4:51
And I know that's not a happy profile of
4:55
our current situation that I just
4:59
described.
5:00
And for us Europeans, and that's the
5:03
second point, for us Europeans, this
5:05
problem is compounded by the fact that
5:08
almost all these digital technologies
5:10
are American.
5:12
for a long time for a mix of uh
5:17
economic opportunism and uh strategic
5:20
naive and comfort and lack of
5:24
imagination. We have accumulated a
5:26
substantial technological lag. We have
5:28
given up on our digital autonomy and it
5:32
didn't seem such a huge deal because
5:35
these technologies were coming from a
5:37
country that was a friend and an ally.
5:41
But now the United States are undergoing
5:45
an internal revolution with fascist
5:48
tendencies and they are engaging in a
5:51
rogue and destabilizing external
5:55
activism.
5:56
Old established friendships are being
6:00
replaced by openly hostile postures, by
6:05
brazen interferences
6:08
and force threats are becoming tools of
6:12
foreign policy.
6:15
And we must not fool ourselves. This is
6:17
not just temporary. This is a profound
6:20
systemic transformation.
6:23
And the big tech tech companies, the big
6:25
American tech companies, the one that we
6:27
carry in our pockets, the one that are
6:29
on our desk on whose digital services we
6:33
depend,
6:35
they are aligned with the priorities or
6:37
of their government. We actually seeing
6:40
a convergence of military and political
6:43
power and of cloud power. When
6:49
the CEOs are invited to accompany the
6:52
president to a dinner, for example, with
6:55
the king of England, that's not so that
6:58
they can take a selfie with the king,
7:01
right? That's a signal. It's a signal
7:04
that digital technology is today central
7:07
to American power projection. In fact,
7:10
we should start looking at their data
7:13
centers in the same way we look at the
7:16
military bases that the US is
7:18
maintaining around the world. And in
7:22
this context, the fact that uh large
7:26
parts of Europe
7:28
run on American servers and software
7:33
owned by American companies, encoding
7:36
American values and worldviews and
7:39
subject to American law of course
7:43
creates a huge systemic vulnerability.
7:47
[clears throat]
7:48
You cannot build a healthy economy and a
7:51
strong society on somebody else's
7:55
digital infrastructure.
7:58
And our dependence
8:00
is actually substantial. We may not
8:02
realize it uh in our daily daily use,
8:05
but somewhere between 2/3 and 3/4 of all
8:09
digital technologies we use are
8:13
American.
8:15
And tech dependence is both a political
8:18
and an economic risk. Should our access
8:23
[snorts] to American digital
8:25
infrastructure be cut off for technical
8:28
reasons, for an accident, for economic
8:31
reasons or for political reasons, it
8:35
would cause a nearly immediate paralysis
8:38
of nearly everything. administration,
8:42
hospitals, energy systems, businesses,
8:45
of course, the military, payments,
8:48
social networks, all our messaging apps.
8:51
And yet we continue to transfer segments
8:57
of our companies, of our governments,
8:59
and our social and private lives onto
9:02
American clouds every day, deepening our
9:07
dependence.
9:09
And
9:11
dependencies,
9:12
every dependence can be turned into
9:16
coercion and into submission.
9:21
And so I think it's urgent, very urgent,
9:24
to find another way
9:26
to demericanize
9:28
as much as possible our digital uses and
9:33
infrastructures.
9:36
Now,
9:37
don't take me for an anti-American.
9:40
I've spent the last 30 years building
9:41
bridges between the two sides of the
9:43
Atlantic. There is nothing anti-American
9:47
in what I'm saying here tonight. But
9:50
there is everything anti-technological
9:54
submission.
9:56
So how do we go about it? Obviously I'm
9:59
not advocating for shifting to the other
10:02
technological track of the world, the
10:04
Chinese,
10:06
nor for anarchic approach which in
10:10
today's technological reality would be
10:14
impossible.
10:16
I'm talking about taking back control,
10:19
about reestablishing, restoring a level
10:23
of choice, of autonomy, of digital
10:28
sovereignty.
10:30
Some will say, "But we don't really have
10:33
alternatives [snorts] to the American
10:36
tech giants."
10:38
We hear that all the time.
10:41
But it's only half true because yes, we
10:45
don't have giants. We don't have a
10:47
European Google or a European Microsoft,
10:51
but we do have alternatives, not for
10:54
everything, but for many things.
10:56
[snorts]
10:57
They may be small, national, perhaps not
11:04
perfect, [snorts] but they are rather
11:06
good. And there are really many. And
11:09
what we need to do is to make them grow
11:12
to make them scale in a deliberate way.
11:16
And there are many ways of doing that.
11:18
One for example is to prioritize them in
11:22
public procurement. We cannot go to
11:25
private companies and dictate what kind
11:28
of technology they should use to run
11:30
their business. Although
11:33
companies should wake up and realize
11:36
that uh every time they store data on an
11:39
American cloud, every time they
11:41
integrate an American AI, every time
11:45
they make their business model
11:47
contingent upon accessing American
11:51
digital technology, they're putting
11:53
themselves in a position of dependence
11:56
and weakening their operational
12:00
robustness and resilience.
12:03
But public procurement, we can decide
12:06
where we direct taxpayers money. And I'm
12:10
talking about tens, many tens of
12:13
billions of euros that every year
12:16
European public administrations send to
12:20
the other side of the Atlantic to buy
12:23
digital technology.
12:25
And so we should start to take into
12:27
account not only economic criteria but
12:31
uh also strategic considerations when we
12:34
choose technology and at least partially
12:38
favoring national and European providers
12:43
which would help them grow and note that
12:46
that's exactly what the Americans and
12:47
the Chinese do with their companies. And
12:50
note also that I'm not talking about
12:53
subsidies. I'm talking about markets,
12:56
about purchases, about bids, about offer
12:59
and supply. And if we help them grow,
13:02
then there are cascading effects. They
13:06
will have resources to invest in assets
13:08
and capabilities. They will have a
13:10
capacity to build new technologies, to
13:12
retain talent, to dynamize the market,
13:14
to become themselves internationally
13:17
competitive.
13:20
Further, we also need to establish
13:22
distinct European model, a new kind of
13:26
industrial policy that can foster a
13:29
different kind of technological
13:31
innovation and relaunch the European
13:34
tech industry. An approach, for example,
13:38
that favors transparency,
13:41
interoperability,
13:42
respect for essential values.
13:46
A business model that does not rely on
13:49
the often abusive exploitation of
13:52
personal data, but favors technology
13:56
that does not spy on people.
14:01
A regime of competition rather than
14:04
monopoly, federated rather than
14:07
centralized,
14:09
diverse, and above all democratic
14:13
because the big tech tech platforms we
14:17
use today by nature are authoritarian
14:21
based as they are on surveillance and
14:25
control.
14:27
It seems to me that
14:30
technology that does not spy on you,
14:34
that should be Europe's digital
14:37
difference.
14:39
And it also needs to be an approach that
14:41
is not only defensive but is competitive
14:44
that builds technology, not only
14:46
integrates or regulates it.
14:49
Of course, emancipating ourselves even
14:51
just partially won't be easy. There is
14:55
no quick fix. There is no one for one
14:58
replacement. It will take time but many
15:02
have already done it. The city of Leon
15:05
in France, cities in Denmark, the state
15:09
of Schlesstein in Germany, ministries in
15:12
Austria, the French National Police, the
15:15
Swiss Supreme Court of Justice, both of
15:18
those run on open-source software. The
15:22
German government just a couple of days
15:23
ago uh put forward a policy framework
15:26
for a German tech stack
15:30
and there are many many others [snorts]
15:32
which shows that it is possible.
15:36
And then there is us, each and every one
15:38
of us here tonight, who hand over entire
15:43
parts of our private and social lives to
15:46
American platforms every day, including
15:48
today,
15:50
without asking enough questions.
15:55
Sometimes we do have a moment of doubt.
15:59
We feel uneasy when we realize that our
16:03
messages are read and our images are
16:06
viewed by AIS.
16:08
That the information we receive is
16:11
filtered and often invented by
16:14
algorithms that the machines we used we
16:18
use are programmed to manipulate us.
16:22
But then the apps are so convenient,
16:25
free, easy. Our friends are there, our
16:28
followers are there, the chat bots
16:31
present themselves as friends. And so we
16:34
convince ourselves that it's okay and
16:37
continue to use them.
16:40
But it's not okay. In fact, I believe
16:41
that the existence
16:44
of big tech given their size, their
16:49
concentration of capital, their growing
16:52
technological grip into our lives, their
16:56
almost direct access to our minds and to
17:00
our emotions. The existence of big tech
17:03
is no longer compatible with our
17:05
freedoms and with democracy.
17:09
The control they have over the
17:12
development of artificial intelligence,
17:14
one of the most astounding technologies
17:17
ever created further entrenches that
17:21
power, projects it into the future.
17:26
However, that power, algorithmic power,
17:30
cloud power rests at [snorts] least in
17:33
part on our consent,
17:37
on our compliance, on our passive and
17:40
silent acceptance. And there is where we
17:45
have a choice.
17:48
We can of course decide that autonomy
17:50
and digital sovereignty are too
17:54
expensive or too complicated or that it
17:56
is too late and accept technological
18:01
submission. And that seems to be the
18:03
path we are on right now.
18:07
Or we can resist.
18:11
We can decide that we want to remain
18:13
free and democratic and make and do
18:16
everything we can gradually but
18:20
aggressively and with urgency to regain
18:23
control of our cloud and our data. It's
18:28
possible. It will be difficult. It may
18:31
hurt. It will require a surge of pride
18:35
and of will.
18:38
collaborative effort, pulled resources,
18:41
courage, imagination. But to me, the
18:45
path is absolutely clear. We need to
18:48
deamemericanize our technological uses
18:52
and infrastructure and we need to start
18:56
now. Thank you. [applause]
