A short reply to Bryan Parson’s question on crowd power.
Brian, Thank you for the feedback and question:
“The idea of technology awakening the impoverished masses, may be a catalyst for hyper-accelerated development. Is that a good or bad thing, I wonder?”
A robust argument could be made either way, depending upon exactly which technologies do get broadly democratized to the masses and when. Great debate rages over this very issue.
What about taking a look at things from a different viewpoint:
• Does it matter if it is good or bad,
Who cares. ‘Good’, ‘Bad’, by whose definition anyway? Is society not changing what is good and bad at an accelerating rate? The disruptive events in Alberta and Ireland recently are redefining what was once considered as bad into good.
• Vision and Message. Positive v Negative,
Replacing a vision of seemingly perpetual poverty with a real live (see it, touch it, feel it) vision of hope: that is a different message.
• Enough already, humanity can get on top of it for once, before it is too late, with exponential thinking,
Society spends much of its resources responding to the effects of poverty. Fewer resources are spent in eliminating poverty. Again debate rages.
We now live in an exponential world where linear thinking breeds failure. Linear thinking might argue that a cheap cell phone, internet, a few seeds and a $700 micro-loan to plant a garden and by a milk cow is all that can or should be done. Steady as she goes linear thinking.
Exponential thinking would identify that the intermittently connected crowd will grow from under 3 billion today to circa 8 billion almost continuously hyper-connected people by 2025. So will grow access to knowledge and information, exponentially.
It is difficult to see a ‘seeds and micro-loan’ policy surviving the approval of the crowd for much longer unless scaled 10x soonish. A 1 billion happy / 7 billion unhappy ratio does not bode well for the future.
It is also difficult to envisage anything other than really bold moves capturing the crowd’s attention to make this all happen. Bold moves hat can evolve into a generational vision as hinted in a post entitled ‘a futurist story about Silicon Valley and Rio de Janeiro’. https://disrupt2thrive.com/2015/05/30/a-futuristic-story-about-silicon-valley-and-rio-de-janeiro/
Moves that envisage a ratio of >7 billion happy / <1 billion unhappy for humanity by 2025.
Anyway, to reply to the question: Neither good, nor bad, just necessary. ddrp1.31.05.02015