2020年7月24日 星期五

On Tech: Digital habits are hard to break

Technology was supposed to be all about welcoming newcomers. But is it?

Digital habits are hard to break

Ben Wiseman

Digital success can be as flimsy as tissue paper. Remember Groupon? BlackBerry went from the king of our pockets to nada in a hot minute. Heck, it seemed like we got bored of those internet cake videos in a week.

Even in technology, though, some habits can prove tenacious.

No one has been able to get large numbers of Americans to use something other than Google for all our burning questions. The world has settled into only two flavors of smartphones: iPhones and Androids. And in the United States, it’s tough to crack Amazon’s lock on online shopping.

It’s not necessarily because these products or services are better than the alternatives. They might be, but there are also strategic arts that explain why some companies endure. And there’s the power of inertia. Sometimes we do what we do because that’s what we do.

There’s nothing necessarily wrong with these habits. But we have long thought of technology as more dynamic and open to newcomers. And yet, is it?

Let’s focus on online shopping. In the United States, Amazon has at least seven times the online business of Walmart, Target, eBay or anyone else.

Amazon is really good at what it does. It sells just about every product imaginable — for good or for ill, buying is easy and stuff typically arrives reliably and fast. Prices often aren’t the cheapest, and Amazon’s website feels like it was made by 1990s robots rather than by humans with souls … but no matter.

ADVERTISEMENT

And also there’s the power of habit that Amazon cleverly reinforces. We’re on Amazon because we’re used to it, and it just works. Merchants focus their attention on Amazon because we’re all shopping there. And the Prime shopping club is essentially an incentive to never shop anywhere else.

My colleague Dai Wakabayashi chronicled this week Google’s repeated, mostly failed efforts to make it as easy as possible for merchants to sell us stuff through Google instead. Dai told me that Google is now letting merchants list many products without paying sales commissions, and it’s making it easy for them to port over information directly from their Amazon product listings. Google is trying so hard!

Google can be a scatterbrained mess, but it’s also rich and attracts billions of eyeballs every day. If it can’t persuade Americans to shop somewhere other than Amazon, that shows us something both about Amazon’s strengths and about how tough it can be to persuade us to try something different. (Worth noting: Amazon rules online but a vast majority of our consumer spending happens in stores.)

Everyone in Silicon Valley knows the history of technology winners becoming losers in a flash, so many successful tech companies live in fear of losing it all.

ADVERTISEMENT

One question for those of us who use technology, and for governments concerned about keeping competition healthy, is whether there’s something different that makes today’s tech powers more immovable than yesterday’s. This is at the heart of the upcoming congressional antitrust hearings involving four of America’s digital superpowers.

The bottom line is internet users like us benefit if lots of companies are afraid for their future and fighting hard for our attention and dollars. But in some corners of technology, that’s not really happening.

If you don’t already get this newsletter in your inbox, please sign up here.

Every fight is about data

I’m constantly struck that lots of problems about our digital lives boil down to data: who has it, who doesn’t and how it’s interpreted and kept secret.

ADVERTISEMENT

Let me give you one example: The Wall Street Journal and NBC News had details this week about Facebook previously shelving internal studies of possible racial bias on its site — including research that dug into why Black people appeared far more likely to have their accounts disabled for perceived violations of hate speech rules.

Facebook said in part that it worried these research projects relied on faulty data. Facebook doesn’t know if you’re Black, but it makes inferences about race from the information you engage with. Those inferences can be wrong, and Facebook said it didn’t want to rely on bad data.

Mind you, Facebook uses this same data to target advertising for companies who want to sell to Black people. The data was good enough for Facebook’s paying customers. (And, a former Facebook researcher tweeted that those probing possible bias didn’t rely only on Facebook’s inferences on race.)

The reason we know about this fight inside Facebook is that the company’s employees see data that we never will, and some of them were uncomfortable with how their bosses used or suppressed the information. There are similar tales at YouTube and at just about every internet superpower.

There are two crucial lessons here: First, we often think data is somehow pure and untainted by human bias, but that’s wrong. Information is gathered and interpreted by humans — or by computers programmed by humans — and is therefore subject to our whims and bias.

And second, we are hopelessly incapable of understanding the inner workings of the world’s biggest information machines because they see every morsel of information happening inside their walls and we see only what they choose to tell us. Data is power, and we have little of both.

Before we go …

  • Trying to influence the influential: George Mason University’s Global Antitrust Institute has pushed a message of restraint in antitrust enforcement to hundreds of overseas regulators and judges at lavish all-expense paid conferences in Hawaii, Tokyo and Portugal. My colleague Dai found that Google, Amazon, Qualcomm and other big tech companies helped pay for these events, which critics said presented a one-sided view of corporate regulation intended to benefit the big companies.
  • Everything is data, part deux: Another way tech companies consolidate and keep power is by harnessing data to learn about competitors and countermove against them. The Wall Street Journal wrote about Amazon appearing to use its interactions with business partners or potential ones to help develop competing products. And the tech news publication the Information wrote about Google using data from Android phones to learn about how people use rival apps.
  • My new favorite couple: I loved this New York Times article about the owners of a laundry shop in Taiwan who have become Instagram stars for posing in garments that people abandoned. “I can tell they’re elated,” said the unofficial stylist and grandson of the couple, who are in their 80s. (Check out their account for yourself. These two have got style.)

Hugs to this

May we all have the calm and grace of this bear sitting on patio furniture. (Thanks to my colleague Charlie Warzel for spotting this gem.)

We want to hear from you. Tell us what you think of this newsletter and what else you’d like us to explore. You can reach us at ontech@nytimes.com.

If you don’t already get this newsletter in your inbox, please sign up here.

Need help? Review our newsletter help page or contact us for assistance.

You received this email because you signed up for On Tech with Shira Ovide from The New York Times.

To stop receiving these emails, unsubscribe or manage your email preferences.

Subscribe to The Times

Connect with us on:

facebooktwitterinstagram

Change Your EmailPrivacy PolicyContact UsCalifornia Notices

The New York Times Company. 620 Eighth Avenue New York, NY 10018

2020年7月23日 星期四

On Tech: Big tech versus climate change

How tech companies and all of us can help slow global warming.

Big tech versus climate change

Rad Mora

A growing share of Americans are concerned about the environment, and the big U.S. tech companies would seem to be in a position to lead the way on fighting climate change.

They’re rich and staffed with smart people, and they have generally pledged to do more to reduce the carbon emissions that warm the planet.

My colleague Somini Sengupta, who writes about climate change and used to cover the tech industry, walked me through confusing climate change terms and how tech companies and all of us can help slow global warming.

Shira: What does it mean when a company pledges to go “carbon neutral” or “carbon negative?”

Somini: A company will still produce carbon emissions, but it will offset that by doing things that absorb emissions from the atmosphere — like planting forests. Trees are great! They absorb carbon dioxide. At least some portion of Amazon’s and Apple’s climate action plans involve reforestation.

But that’s not enough. Climate scientists say global emissions must be cut by half by 2030 if we stand a chance of averting the worst impacts of warming.

How do tech companies contribute to climate change, and how are they helping?

First, the industry uses lots of electricity, including for computer data centers. If much of that comes from coal, it creates a boatload of planet-warming emissions. This is a relatively easy problem to solve if companies use renewable energy, which is expanding fast and getting cheaper.

ADVERTISEMENT

Amazon, Google and Microsoft have also gotten attention for selling technology to help the oil and gas industry extract fossil fuels, which are a major source of greenhouse gas emissions. Google promised to stop.

Other areas to watch: Can Apple, Amazon and Google compel manufacturers of their devices to reduce factory emissions and switch to cleaner energy? And can they reuse and recycle the materials inside of devices? In general, recycled materials are better for the environment.

Then there’s the question of how much internet companies like Facebook are helping spread disinformation on climate science.

Is it effective for companies to pick their own paths on climate change? What about governments?

As a former technology reporter, this moment reminds me of when big U.S. tech companies didn’t want regulations on data privacy. They changed their privacy policies and promised to do better.

ADVERTISEMENT

It’s possible that big tech companies are again setting themselves voluntary targets to forestall national legislation, like on emissions standards. Both Britain and the European Union now require their countries to achieve net zero emissions by 2050. That’s bound to affect tech and every other industry.

What can we do as consumers of technology?

We can educate ourselves on what goes into the technology we buy, what the climate impacts are and how long a product might last.

We can also think about what we buy in the first place. Making shiny new things contributes to global warming. So does shipping, delivering and returning stuff. We can help by making our existing products or devices last longer by replacing the battery or making a repair, or buying used.

If you don’t already get this newsletter in your inbox, please sign up here.

ADVERTISEMENT

Three ways to enjoy scary technology

Instead of doomscrolling today, how about flopping on the sofa to take in great entertainment about … uh … nightmarish technology?

Margot Harrison, a fiction writer and editor at the Vermont newspaper Seven Days, offered us three recommendations for works dealing with malevolent technology. Her latest novel, “The Glare,” was released this month. Also check out her recent essay in The New York Times.

In this 2019 dystopian novel, the only thing scarier than the all-pervasive presence of the internet is its abrupt disappearance. The story is told in alternating sections labeled “Before” and “After.” In the former, anarchist hackers unravel the web that holds us all; in the latter, they deal with the consequences of succeeding beyond their wildest dreams.

While depicting many all-too-plausible extensions of control and surveillance technology, Maughan suggests that it’s impossible to take a simple stand for or against the machines with which our ways of life are already fused.

“Feed” by M.T. Anderson

This was the book that convinced me that young adult fiction might be especially open to exploring technological anxieties because teens have never known a world offline.

Anderson envisions a future in which everyone has an implant feeding them entertainment, social interactions and micro-targeted advertising. The concept isn’t new, but Anderson’s narrator has an unforgettable voice: Holden Caulfield with a near-lethal injection of swaggering early-aughts MTV.

The “Nosedive” episode of “Black Mirror”

No piece of fiction has channeled my personal anxieties about social media quite as effectively as this.

In a near future in which people’s status and livelihood depend directly on the ratings others give them, a young woman makes a fatal series of small mistakes that zero out her social credit. It’s a nightmare that might convince you to put down the phone.

Before we go …

  • The cyberattack deterrence isn’t working: To fight cyberattacks from China and Russia, the U.S. government for years has tried to name, shame and indict those behind them, and sometimes even counterattacked. But those punishments haven’t been sufficient to deter continued cyberattacks and disinformation operations, reported David E. Sanger, the Times national security correspondent.
  • You can’t pry this phone out of my hand: Just about every tech company in the world considers India the emerging internet gold rush, but the companies are finding one big barrier: Many millions of Indians opt for basic cellphones over smartphones. This makes life harder for Netflix, Facebook and WeChat. The Chinese tech publication Abacus looks at why the basic cellphone in India is far more appealing than that Nokia you had in the early 2000s.
  • Our national cake obsession didn’t last long: Five minutes ago, it was impossible to avoid surreal social media videos of cakes disguised as Crocs, pickles or human heads. Now the craze is dying, NBC News reported. Like any fun thing, weird cake was ruined because The Olds got into it. (I am An Old as well. I swear. It’s fine.)

Hugs to this

Please enjoy very good dog Spike romping in a meadow. (And if you don’t already, follow the dog sledder and author Blair Braverman on Twitter for lots of very good dogs.)

We want to hear from you. Tell us what you think of this newsletter and what else you’d like us to explore. You can reach us at ontech@nytimes.com.

If you don’t already get this newsletter in your inbox, please sign up here.

Need help? Review our newsletter help page or contact us for assistance.

You received this email because you signed up for On Tech with Shira Ovide from The New York Times.

To stop receiving these emails, unsubscribe or manage your email preferences.

Subscribe to The Times

Connect with us on:

facebooktwitterinstagram

Change Your EmailPrivacy PolicyContact UsCalifornia Notices

The New York Times Company. 620 Eighth Avenue New York, NY 10018