Technosolutionism isn’t the answer

Christeen Rosen writes:

By the end of April, New York Times reporter Kate Murphy was explaining to readers “why Zoom is terrible.” The disappointments she outlined were not technical—the platform had resolved its privacy and software glitches—but experiential. Murphy noted the unease she felt about her connections to others, even after hours spent talking to people through a screen, because she could not always interpret the subtleties of facial expressions and body language. “These disruptions, some below our conscious awareness, confound perception and scramble subtle social cues. Our brains strain to fill in the gaps and make sense of the disorder, which makes us feel vaguely disturbed, uneasy and tired without quite knowing why,” she wrote.

Technosolutionism is also often unabashedly radical in its vision of what it might accomplish, particularly in times of crisis. One of the more enthusiastic purveyors of such reasoning, Aaron Bastani, argued recently that “the pandemic makes it clear: We need Fully Automated Luxury Communism,” his shorthand for a technosolutionist system he describes as “this technological revolution—oriented around automation, renewable energy, AI, and ever more objects resembling ‘information goods.’”

These are interesting takeaways from the long read essay- essentially, has a potential to impact the practise of “telemedicine”. I have a firm feeling that Telemedicine might just be pushed back to a home monitoring solution because of the increased wariness of the people to have video calling.

There are numerous business models that remain untested in the largest capitalist healthcare market (North America) and I am sure there will be “academic dissertations” pretty much soon around this. If you add the data regulatory mechanisms and science around this, it would get increasingly more complex.

Therefore we need a proper context- how to address the masses while accommodating the vocal minorties.