A huge factor in business today is technology and some of the largest companies are those that develop and sell technologies. Therefore, it stands to reason that those who can predict the future of technology will have the opportunity to be extremely successful and wealthy. Some people, on the other hand, would rather warn the public about the future of technology in order to prevent their visions of the future from coming true. Gibson and Wu, authors of Neuromancer and The Master Switch respectively, are two of these people. Both of them have presented ideas, however different they may be, as to what the future may hold for technology and its uses yet, while aspects of both claims seem reasonable, Wu's vision seems to be the more credible of the two because of his use of evidence and his relatively close proximity to the future of technology.
Wu feared a future ruled by the corporations where the individual was solely seen as a consumer, and never a developer, of technology. Gibson, however, viewed a world where the individual could be mightier than the companies. So why is Wu's vision more credible? Despite the arguments for both, Wu has the benefit of increased time to experience the development of technologies and that of supporting evidence. Take for instance, the publishing dates of the books. The Master Switch was published in 2010 while Neuromancer was published in 1984. While in many cases this would not make a difference to an academic audience, because the topic is technology it makes a large difference because Wu has been able to experience and see the development of the Internet. This makes Wu better able to predict the future of technology, at least more so than Gibson, and his evidence from the past makes him all the more credible.
Despite Gibson's lack of evidence Wu still had one similar idea, that the presence of powerful corporations in the world of technology would continue to be prevalent. Gibson demonstrates this vision with his usage of the Tessier-Ashpool megacorporation that has been in operation for "more than two hundred years," (Gibson 184). This company has control over many things, from the space city of Freeside to the Artificial Intelligences of Wintermute and Neuromancer. In fact, with the Artificial Intelligences, the company can basically do anything that it wants, as the programs themselves demonstrate that they can do almost anything they want. In one instance, Wintermute "altered the broadcast" of an event that Case, one of the main characters, was watching (Gibson 186). Another time, Wintermute showed so much control as to have actually "killed Armitage," a real, flesh and bones, person (Gibson 201). Wu also acknowledges the presence of large corporations and uses evidence from past companies to back up his claim. Wu demonstrates that companies, like AT&T, never seem to truly die. Wu says that, "AT&T, broken up in the 1980's, by the first years of the twenty-first century managed to re-create itself, reestablishing the essential lineaments of the Bell system" (Wu 205). So if this "eternal return to consolidated order," part of the "Cycle" as Wu calls it, then it only seems natural that these giant companies would continue to be present in the future of technology (Wu 252).
While both authors agree on the presence of megacorporations they disagree on the formation of them. Wu believes that developing technologies will create, and destroy, these companies, unlike Gibson who suggests that the companies will be the ones creating technologies. Fundamentally, this is the basis of Wu's argument for the "Cycle" and his whole book in general. New technologies are developed that make older technologies irrelevant or less useful at the very least. The companies that dealt in the older technology are then disintegrated and the new companies selling the newer technology grow and prosper, at least until the next "disruptive" technology is developed (Wu 19). Wu claims that there is a typical progression for technologies, they move from "somebody's hobby to somebody's industry" (Wu 6). "So many revolutionary innovations start small, with outsiders, amateurs, and idealists in attics or garages" (Wu 18). Gibson, however, believed that it was the companies that would create the newer technologies, not vice-versa. This can be seen in Neuromancer when Armitage, through Tessier-Ashpool and Wintermute, gives a new technology to a doctor who later patents it. The doctor applied "for seven basic patents," which reportedly reversed "the usual order of things" (Gibson 161). In Gibson's future companies, not people, ruled the technologies. So when the roles were flipped and the companies lost, much like what Wu describes happening, this was out of the ordinary and quite odd.
Both of these ideas seem to be plausible, but evidence suggests that Wu is correct in his prediction. For one, it is demonstrated that most "disruptive" inventions have come from the individual, not a company. Apple computers, for instance, started in the garage of Steve Wozniak. Even the great Bell Company, predecessor to AT&T, started out with only one employee, Thomas Watson. That was it. Even if Wu’s worst fear were to come true, that corporations would close the Internet or even force the individual inventor out of the equation, his Cycle would infer that a new technology would arise that would dethrone those companies, restoring the balance of power.
Another difference between the two theories is that however powerful the corporations become Wu, unlike Gibson, believes that governments will still be active in the world. In fact, in order for Wu's future to exist, in the manner that he wishes, governments are necessary. Because of the inevitability of the Cycle, Wu calls for the use of a "Seperations Principle" which entails the use of the government to keep "those who develop information, those who own the network infrastructure on which [information] travels, and those who control the tools or the venues of access," separate from each other. Gibson's future, on the other hand, is ruled by the corporations, not the governments, of the world. As is the case with the Tessier-Ashpool corporation, the companies own property like Freeside, which they monitor and control, free of governments.
A large deviance between Wu's and Gibson's visions has to do with the use of technologies. Gibson, for instance, believes that while technology will shape the way everyone lives those who will be able to access and use a technology, like cyberspace, will be limited. For example, Case is a cyberspace "cowboy" who can access cyberspace and do on it what he pleases, but not everyone is a cowboy and, therefore, not everyone can access cyberspace (Gibson 5). Yet even though not everyone has access to it, cyberspace affects everyone. Companies that make products that people buy depend on cyberspace to store their information so that they can stay in business. Without cyberspace, ordinary people would not get the same products and services.
Unlike Gibson Wu predicts, however much he dislikes it, that everyone will be able to use a technology, like the Internet, but what information that technology can access will be limited. Wu has already stated that information technology companies proceed through a pattern of going "from open to closed system[s]" (Wu 6). That would mean that the Internet, an information technology, while still in its open phase will become closed by large companies. Information will not be as easily accessed as the owning companies will only allow access to sites that benefit them, much as the old AT&T only allowed the use of telephones made by them or RCA only allowed the use of AM radio despite FM's superiority. Still, although the information available may be limited, in order for the companies to make any money people will need the availability to use the Internet. In short, the more people that use the service the more money that the companies can make.
When comparing the claims of Wu and Gibson for their validity one must take into consideration a few large factors. First, that Gibson documented his claim twenty years before Wu. Had Gibson had the knowledge that Wu had to write his book their ideas may have been more similar. Another large factor is that Gibson’s book, Neuromancer, is a work of fiction while Wu’s is a work of fact. Despite this, both works can be analytically compared to determine which authors supposed future is more probable. First, Gibson believed that, while the future would generally be dominated by large corporations, it would be possible for the lone individual to become more powerful than the corporations. These large companies, in the world of Neuromancer, would be so powerful that governments would not exist and the corporations would instead be in charge of former government powers. Individuals would not be able to compete against these companies because they controlled the flow and development of technology. Lastly, the technology, while extremely powerful and thorough, would only be available to an exclusive group of clientele. Wu, on the other hand, would only agree with one of these points, that large corporations would play a significant role in the future of technology and, unlike Gibson, would provide evidence to support his correctness. First, he disagreed with Gibson on the point that governments would not exist because of their prior importance in controlling companies with too much power. Also, he would make a point that Gibson did not make, that the ability for individuals to overpower large corporations will come from individuals who will make “disruptive” technologies that render the larger corporation useless, otherwise known as the “Cycle”. Despite these differences however, Wu is still afraid that companies might end up having too much power over things like the Internet and controlling the individuals, much like the world that Gibson created, leaving the inventor powerless and the Cycle broken in a way that Wu abhors. Lastly, Wu suggests that if megacorporations are to exist that technology would look much different than that of Neuromancer. Instead of technology being extremely powerful yet limited in customer base, everyone would be able to purchase the technology but the technology itself would be limited and weak. Not only does this make business sense, by allowing everyone to purchase a technology more money can be made than only a few to buy it, but Wu states that this has happened before in the history of telephony and AT&T as well as RCA and the radio. Although some good points are brought up by Gibson, Wu’s use of evidence and his benefit of years more current knowledge of the subject area make his argument far more compelling to believe.
Works Cited:
Gibson, William. Neuromancer . New York: Ace Books, 1984. Print.
Wu, Tim. The Master Switch: The Rise and Fall of Information Empires. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2010. Print.
No comments:
Post a Comment