Blood in the Machine: The origins of the rebellion against Big Tech Written by Brian Merchant
Published September 2023
What happens if we resist? What if a nonprofit university drew a “not-for-profit” zone around student learning? What if it drew the line at involving ed-tech companies in anything directly related to learning and teaching?
blood in the machine We trace modern resistance to the algorithmic gig economy (think Uber drivers) to the Luddite movement of the 19th century. Los Angeles Times Technology columnist Brian Merchant argues between the fight for humane working conditions and a livable wage among Amazon warehouse workers and Luddites destroying machines to protect the jobs of skilled weavers. I think there is a direct connection between the two.
Merchant aims to rehabilitate Luddites as rational, rational, and legitimate resisters of labor-destroying technological change.
In telling the story of the origins and activities of the British Luddites in the early 19th century, Merchant emphasizes that the movement's leaders were not anti-technology. Instead, the Luddites worked with factory owners to try to discover ways for workers and machines to work together to increase productivity while preserving jobs.
Only when factory owners decided to replace skilled artisans with machines and treat workers as disposable did the Luddites destroy knitting frames and steam looms.
A common lament within the digital and online learning community is that change is impeded by “faculty resistance.” A frequently cited framework is EM Rogers' innovation diffusion theory (1962).
According to this perspective, academic change agents seeking to advance their institutions through the introduction of new technologies and methods are consistently divided from innovators (2.5 percent) and early adopters (13.5 percent) to laggards (16 percent). Until then, you will be faced with a variety of responses from teachers. .
Those who lag behind will never be convinced to adopt new technologies and methods. As such, smart university technology leaders should focus their change management efforts on the early (34%) and late (34%) majority. After all, it's the Luddites on campus who are lagging behind.
read blood in the machine, one wonders if Luddites on Campus is worth another look. I hope Merchant will enjoy the thought experiment of what would happen if early industrial societies aimed to ensure the well-being of a broad swath of workers, rather than the accumulation of wealth among a few industrialists. We are asking for it.
Assume that the purpose of technological progress is to improve the quality of life for everyone in society, rather than benefiting only the owners of the machines. In that case, the Luddites' destruction of looms and frames begins to make more sense when these machines functioned solely as instruments of coercion.
In higher education, what is the relationship between faculty affiliation and universities' increasing dependence on for-profit companies for core educational operations? Is skepticism a rational response to the growing lack of job security and autonomy of contingent faculty?
Are you a faculty Luddite? Maybe, just maybe, you're thinking of something.
what are you reading?
