Hey there everyone! I am working on a startup that applies video recognition and analysis to analyze athletic performance. The more I am working in this field the more I am becoming aware of the many pitfalls and controversies that this may cause. It is interesting for me to see that sports is a field where more and more novel technologies are being applied - sometimes in favour of the players, other times as a drawback causing access to their privacy and having an impact on their future career, other times it goes in an changes the game itself completely. There are also legal aspects related to data collection as well as ethical concerns regarding fair-play, access to technology etc.
Seems to me that there is more and more technology being introduced in sports impacting the game itself (100 m. sprint, swimming, football, golf etc), and I started wondering whether there exists a framework or some base for a discussion to assess the value, ethics, etc. of introducting a new technology? It can even be from a philosophical standpoint!
In general, ethics and morals serve the ruling class. (Tricky statement, hang in there… )
For a really long elaboration on the subject, check Denise Lawrence’s “ethics and morals” on youtube.
In short: “1984” is completely based on the usage of high-tech and is now (2018) fully implemented. According to Quantum Physics the observer changes the outcome. Are you going to record both the observed and the observer? What’s the mindset of the observer and the financial powers that influence the observer?
The general question nowadays is: “can we do it”. If so, can we earn money with it.
2 times yes? GO!
It is the overly Yang oriented mindset that still dominates the boardrooms.
It is based on a poverty concept. There’ s not enough for all to be rich and famous, so we have to fight for our place in order to survive.
Nature defies that concept as shown in fruit trees… Abundant fragrance in Spring, abundant fruits loaded with the much needed Vitamine C in Late Fall and Winter.
It’s also based on Top-dog Underdog concepts which implies that I feel great when I can control others. (so that I don’t feel the limited time, space and importance of my physical presence. )
Read " The Denial of Death" for in-depth insights into the dynamics of mental disorders (which we call " normal" nowadays)
The starting question should be something like:
Does it bring benefit to all players involved over a long period of time.
Or “Should we do it” before “can we do it”.
The Hippocrates oath of doctors applies as well “at least, do no harm”.
And then, all that technology is to some extend a denial of the superiority of the Creator of human life / bodies.
I used to do programming; but asked to program not even a human being but a simple rose, I would have to say: " beyond me". Too complicated how it interacts with all other environments and keeps a balance.
So Tech enhancing humans? Don’t think so.
Tech normally replaces human functions that are merely under-developed. You could call that lazy or “a sign of the times” or both.
