Net visions

The invited experts have long since decided that we will have an all-encompassing network that will penetrate ever deeper into society - the only question left for them is how they want to and can shape this network of tomorrow. After years of technology euphoria, the 11th European Trend Day was characterized by a more critical undertone, said moderator Mauro Guarise, summarizing the program. The phase of the pioneers is over, affirms GDI CEO David Bosshard. But he also points out the dangers that lie in the phase of politicization that is now likely to follow.

Clear posthumanist stance

We lack ideological clarity about where we want to go as a society: this insight underlies Ted Chu's sideline (the World Band Group's successful Chief Economist IFC calls it his "second career") in posthumanist research. In his comprehensive view of the "long-term vision," he grandiloquently sweeps away "shortterm worries" such as market stagnation or growing global income disparities. Instead, he is the only one to give a clear-cut answer as to where he thinks society should be heading: it should use technology to improve people themselves. Soon we would have a whole range of technical possibilities at our disposal to enhance our natural abilities. But not all of them make sense - human-machine hybrids, for example, don't, but designer babies do, Chu concluded.

The role of the scientist

ETH professor Raffaello d'Andrea takes the stage accompanied by a "simple little machine". Using this cube, he demonstrates what can be achieved with feedback. The machine is instructed to balance on a corner - trying out possibilities at random, learning from its experiences and developing successful strategies in this way. "We are currently creating huge networked systems with thousands of such feedback possibilities," the roboticist said. There are countless applications for these technologies, from healthcare to logistics to customer products. As a scientist, he said, he has no influence Ted Chu, tech visionary and banker on how his research findings are used. Yet scientists themselves would be in the best position to assess the negative consequences of technological developments, d'Andrea believes. "But without global governance, it won't be possible to regulate this - what creates jobs is currently being done."

"Everyone has something to hide"

The most prominent guest at the GDI Trend Forum is Wikileaks journalist Sarah Harrison. She gained worldwide fame in 2013 when she accompanied whistleblower Edward Snowden's escape from Hong Kong. "Everyone has something to hide," is the most important message of the Wikileaks journalist. Because in general, everything can be used against you at some point. That's why a natural human defensiveness protects us from revealing anything private. Everyone would lower their voice if they were having intimate conversations and realized that others were listening. The crucial question, he said, is not whether you currently have something unpleasant to hide, but whether you generally want to have a private life. People would switch to a secure mail provider if it were reasonably user-friendly, Harrison is convinced. This insight (she's optimistic about this, too) is starting to sink in among tech startups, she says. For Harrison, on the other hand, governments are not the right authority to solve the surveillance problem. At least they are currently doing the opposite. And the NSA's surveillance is not even effective: "They're not looking for a needle in a haystack, they're enlarging the haystack."

Industry becomes a network society

Whether online or not, we no longer have any privacy, according to Peter Wippermann, founder of the Trendbüro in Hamburg. In the transition from an industrial to a network society, he says, policymakers must strive for global laws in cyberspace. And not only politics, but also 85 percent of companies in the DACH region are currently not prepared for their digital future.

Digital activism at risk

The young Canadian Molly Sauter is the author of "The Coming Swarm," a book about the development of civil disobedience on the Net. As part of her dissertation, the media scientist is studying hacker culture and digital activism. According to her thesis, the latter increasingly encounters surveillance, censorship and harassment in social networks. Those who sympathize with activist groups are at greater risk of being monitored. They would be exposed to censorship by states, but also by the social networks themselves. And on the Net, their participation in political discourse would be hindered by opposing groups that adopt the activists' techniques. Of course, there are alternative platforms, but they do not reach a broad audience. Sauter believes that technology companies should not decide what is politically valuable or belongs in the (increasingly digitalized) public sphere.

An unpleasant follower

Artist Eric Drass nevertheless knows how to use the dynamics of social media in an activist way. For example, with the help of Alex (alex@bffbot1), the best follower you can find on Twitter. Based on an algorithm, she follows you back immediately, finds you on the street, favors every post, and provides it with glib positive comments. Machines are now involved in the creation of culture, controlling and changing it and deciding what we perceive, Drass says. He coins the term "algoculture " for this phenomenon. What makes an artificial bot like Alex so popular, he says, is that she gives you everything you need. When interacting with Alex, however, you eventually feel uncomfortable, not only because of what she reveals about you, but also because she makes you realize what you're actually looking for in social media. With his algorithms, Drass stimulates users to think on the one hand, and confuses data collectors on the other. Because even algorithms don't know whether they're following real people or bots like Alex.

MaidSafe - the new, better network?

The Internet is broken - that's why we shouldn't improve it at all, but create a new network right away, that's what Nick Lambert thinks. "Surveillance is the business model of the Internet," the entrepreneur criticizes. Internet companies generate most of their revenue through personalized advertising and spy on all our digital activities for this purpose. But that's not what the Internet was invented for. The increasing centralization of the Internet architecture is problematic, says Lambert. He therefore wants to go back to the roots - with a new network without central control that guarantees privacy and security while still being user-friendly. The new, better Internet is called MaidSafe. Its data is not stored in central data repositories, but is distributed across the entire network, i.e., on the users' computers. So its performance gets better the more people use it. And it gives them back the power over their data. The people behind MaidSafe now hope to clear the decisive hurdle in terms of user numbers when they go live at the end of the year. They expect that most service providers will then also join MaidSafe. At least those who have not made surveillance their business model. But are there many?

Programmers versus programmed

Norbert Bolz probably doesn't believe in fundamental changes when he recommends that the next generation should definitely become programmers so that they "won't be slaves to the belief in data. In a sense, users are the proletariat of tomorrow. Just as the citizens of a complex society were once thought to be in need of propaganda, they are now being pushed in the direction of users in need of care, which is supposed to make them feel good. Big Data is nothing more than the offer of an infinite wealth of information, with the promise of solving all our problems, and modern propaganda is accordingly not lies, but information. The fact that data replaces thinking is also in line with the self-image of the Big Data specialists who, together with Chris Anderson, have committed themselves to the motto "correlation is enough. The danger of the fallacy of correlation to causality is null and void for them, since they completely renounce understanding and explaining. According to Bolz, however, "behind modern propaganda there are no bad guys, but algorithms of the mainstream".

Simone Isliker