Modern society has shifted to revolve around technological developments, with the unwavering belief that they will lead us to a better, more progressive utopia. Despite this, people have consistently shunned new innovations as they have arisen. Most recently, the emergence of generative AI has created debate on its ability to control and adapt our current reality through its acquisition of skills that could lead to the loss of employment. Proliferating polarising arguments have arisen contesting the ability for user control. On one hand, technology is believed to be a tool that can serve humanity and enhance our lives, improving the way things are done. And on the other, it comes into debate the quantity of control the user has.
We are at a point in human society where a generation has now grown up surrounded by a digital era, and it is rare to find someone not incorporating technology into their daily live. Hence, arises the idea that technology is a tool to be used by those with access to it, i.e. those who have access to the internet may use Google to resolve problems and ideas, research issues, and access digital and connective networks. All of which serve the person using them, and the use of which the user has control over. In educational studies, the use of technology becomes imperative, one must be able to access online lectures, learning, research, and information. This hub has only expanded with the involvement of generative artificial intelligence, as this allows a more defined view of the information that is provided for us, reducing search time and increasing efficiency. Moreover, AI can be used to personalise information and provision tasks that would normally take indefinite amounts of time. This can include things like, creating study planners, practice questions, or clarifying topics. In a business setting, this can include giving tailored advice on how to proceed in a way that boosts efficacy and performance. All ideas proposed require the common denominator of its user; the person that is instructing the AI to create topics is in control of what the expected outcome is to be, they have the power of decision over what the technology is to be used for. Modern technology is not comparable to other mechanical advancement which have a clear specific purpose, such as the hammer, to be used in the placement of nails. It is because modern technology is a hub for information that it is a more extensive tool and the way it is use is decided upon by the person in front of the screen.
However, this comes into heavy debate when considering that the main benefit of these advancements is that they curate a search for us. Do we really have control over what we see when search engines have preferential sponsored results? This forces technologies to become a landscape for sale, in which your attention, and information are suddenly vied for. This capitalistic-driven intent has given the opportunity for the rise of addictive social media algorithms, that deprive the person control. This also leads to widespread misinformation and lack of reliable knowledge. Everything technology provides has previously been provided by a human, creating a factor of human emotion and error, allowing for incorrect information to circulate, and creating another layer of unmanageability. The constant access and feeding of information to users through personalised algorithms has created a paradox, as feared by Ray Bradbury, that the access to an excess wealth of knowledge should make the person apathetic and unable to think critically. As such, something that was a tool for us to use, becomes something that is controlling us instead. What we see, the information we consume, is largely out of our control and in the hands of an algorithm. Furthermore, the constant feeding of images can overload our brain, suppressing its creative ability, because why imagine when it can be fed to you through a screen? All of which creates a definitive sense that not only is the content we view already curated through multiple filters but also that it holds certain control over our own output to the world.
Technology is never refused the title of tool, after all, anyone can use it how they wish to, but it is also important to acknowledge its ability to influence the user. Which leads to the conclusion that its ability to impact the user is once again decided wholly by the user itself. On a broader sense, the more the user is educated and aware of the way technology might be used to influence ones thinking, the more likely this is to reduce its impact. That is to say, should one understand the use of addictive algorithms in social medias, one is able to remove themselves from their impact, or should one understand the curation of knowledge, they are able to go out of their way to find other sources of information. Fortunately, this is not a new concept, when the rise of newspapers came about, they were controlled by the few and the spread of diverse information was limited. When the printing press and publishing made it possible for widespread publication of books, they were all Eurocentric with little to no diversity. Thus, those that are aware may go out of their way to search for books and information from a plethora of perspectives, the same applies for electronic devices, the education and intent of the user becomes more imperative to the use of technology than the purpose with which it is handled.
