Project 2 – Valuable vs Wasteful Tech Within a Community

A community I really value is the community in Carrabassett Valley where Sugarloaf mountain is located. This community is especially important to me because it has managed to stay very localized and secluded, but also maintains a population with very similar interests/ lifestyles. This community being  developed in the middle of nowhere at a ski mountain, has caused a very small community of die hard skiers to be the only people residing in this area. Most members have been there their whole life, whether it was for weekend visits in the winter or for the entirety of the year. I really have found it so amazing how localized and positive this community has managed to stay since I’ve been apart of it. Especially looking at other ski mountain communities and seeing the industry and the spread of population take over the community and ruin the similarity the individuals there used to maintain. 

Two technologies I would keep in this community would be the camera and speakers. The camera is one of my favorite technologies strictly because of how it is almost able to capture more than the eyes are able to at some points. This can be particularly useful especially in a skiing community. Pictures and videos of skiing can capture something that happens so fast it is hard for the eyes to fully take in everything that occurs. As for the speakers, I’ve found loud music or concerts to be one of the best ways to bring a large group of people together and inspire them or connect them. Whenever there is bands or live music at Sugarloaf it seems to connect everyone and anyone is welcome to have a good time. I don’t feel like either of these technologies have terrible repercussions, speakers may cause sound pollution, but that is relative and can be controlled, so I’m not too worried. 

I would remove cell phones and computers. I think removing both of these would benefit the community greatly because it would encourage interaction. Growing up in this community it was still pretty rural, and I got to see first hand how welcoming it can feel when you can talk or interact with anyone you could potentially encounter within a community. Well I have found it especially useful to use the cell phone as a means of communication while on the ski mountain, I think there are other means of enabling this communication without all of the other features that come with the average cell phone now. Walkie talkies for example, were extremely common in the community before the rise of cell phones. As for computers, I don’t feel like there’s anything they’re really necessary for within that community besides business perhaps, but I think as the past has proven there are ways around that. 

I’m not sure how communities can control the tech within them. I say this because I don’t know exactly what defines membership to specific communities, therefore don’t know how you could know who to enforce said rules upon. For example, within my community at Sugarloaf, there’s the locals, people who live there year round and most likely work there. Then there’s property owners, who will consider themselves Sugarloafers, but will typically only be in the area on weekends in the winter, lastly there are regulars, people who don’t own property in around the community, but are often at the mountain, so much so some of them may consider themselves a part of the community. I feel like this is a very special case where you have a community with lots of different levels to it, and in that case enforcing something like this would have to start with which levels you’d want to enforce what on, and figure out exactly how to identify who belongs on each level.

Research the ecological and human footprint of producing each of the tech items or platforms. (for example, one of your readings gives data about the carbon cost of machine learning computing), and find out who typically produces the items and what their working conditions are.

The wastes from camera production include:”resins, oils such as cutting oil, solvents used for cleaning parts, and metals including iron, aluminum, and brass. The metals and resins are remainders or cuttings from manufactured parts and powder-fine cuttings and dust. The wastes are sorted by type and recovered; they are recycled or treated as industrial wastes by firms specializing in these activities.”

Camera manufacturers are well aware of the hazards associated with their processes and are careful to observe environmental regulations and sensitivities both in the country of manufacture and in receiving marketplaces.

(http://www.madehow.com/Volume-3/Camera.html#ixzz66EpXimM6)

Nikon made 3 major changes in 2012 as apart of an initiative to reduce co2 emissions. The three major initiatives were: Using simulations to dramatically reduce the number of prototypes, Improving optical glass testing efficiency to reduce time from development to stable mass production by two-thirds, and Reducing waste glass by improving the precision of lens pressing

(https://www.nikon.com/about/sustainability/highlight/1803_co2/index.html)

Sony on the other hand is doing things like recycling excess heat to reduce total energy consumption, they have also done things to reuse and lower the footprint from air conditioning. A lot of Sony’s work to shrink their footprint is related to altering the factory conditions.

The raw materials of a stereo speaker are as follows:  “The frame is made from stamped iron or aluminum. The permanent magnet is a ceramic ferrite material consisting of iron oxide, strontium, and a ceramic binder. The cone, surround, and spider are made of treated paper coated with an adhesive glue. The voice coil consists of a plastic bobbin with fine gauge insulated copper wire wound around it”.

(http://www.madehow.com/Volume-7/Stereo-Speaker.html)

As for byproducts and waste: Scrap metal from the frame and scrap paper from the cone are sent to recycling plants for reclamation. Exotic materials such as strontium must be disposed of according to government regulations.

(http://www.madehow.com/Volume-7/Stereo-Speaker.html#ixzz66EpuxC4D)

As for speakers, I couldn’t really find any information on how companies are doing things to help reduce waste with speakers. There was a couple small companies attempting to make eco-friendly speakers, but not many being made by any mainstream companies.

Then suggest how having the tech produced in your favorite community would impact that community. This should be both benefits like, AI can help cut costs and improving accuracy of medical imaging interpretations; and drawbacks, for example, if smartphone waste is recycled in dumps in Africa or Asia, and people who do this are destitute and harmed by the process, imagine this as happening in your  own community). This helps you evaluate some of benefits and the “externalities” mentioned in The Story of Stuff.

Production of cameras and speakers in Carrabassett Valley would definitely lead to a large amount of waste as both of these are electronics which typically contain plastic and metals. Cameras have many benefits as they can used to store information, provide security, or used to record a piece of history for any reason. But the production of cameras would create a large amount of co2 emissions as well as physical waste like resins and metals. The production of speakers would also create a large amount of waste and emissions, and bring less economic benefits. In terms of economic efficiency, speakers wouldn’t be the best technology to keep in the community. I chose to keep them though because I feel like they can deliever emotional benefits to people in many different situations. Certain things like concerts or performances help connect people together, and listening to music alone can also be used as a form of meditation.

Finally explain in more detail who should help decide these questions and how the decisions might be made.  For example, could AI itself help evaluate which tech would benefit humans if given enough data? Or do we need ethics committee, as in hospitals to help set policy? Or do we need regulations as we have for food safety, or pharmaceuticals?

I don’t think we are at a point or close to a point where AI should be responsible or in control of the production of certain tech. I do think there is a way we can use democracy to determine the choices we should make in order to reduce waste and live a greener life. I think the public could vote on a group of people which includes certain requirements like experience in a certain field of science. Then said group could propose certain regulations which would be set in place nationally around the production and assembly of all the physical technologies we’re creating every day. Having people with a thorough understanding of how we deal with waste and why we need to change our production methods is extremely important to helping solve this problem.