Technology at the Speed of Humans


There are many people who have given voice to the dizzying pace of the “digital age” - specifically about the speed by which technology changes, grows, updates, enhances, is created and destroyed.

Similarly, we have a lot of contributions of thoughts and opinions about how this speed infiltrates our lives and the consequences to our mental and physical well-being, which we are instructed to combat with deep breathing, meditation, mindfulness, digital detoxing, and dry January (but for social media).

Yes, and…

There is a lot more to be said and discussed around how this is playing out not just for individuals making their own self-care choices, but for how communities interact with technology as a group. My spreadsheet soulmate, best friend, and work colleague Samantha Shain examined this topic in both idealistic and practical ways in her latest blog post, So, you want to leave a social media platform? Do this first!

What happens when digital/virtual/online communities have formed on platforms like Facebook or Slack, and there are valid concerns about the safety, ethics, and political alignment of the leadership of these organizations? There is a difference in how this potential conflict of values can be approached by individuals (ie. I don’t want to use Meta products so I don’t use Facebook anymore) and even organizations (ie. our organization does not want to support Marc Benioff, so we have decided to leave the Salesforce platform), and how they can be approached by digital communities - those formed and lived primarily in online digital platforms.

Samantha lays out a suggested 4-8 week process that can be used to have the important community conversations needed before making a decision to change digital platforms, and how to manage the potential move to a new platform with a community-centric approach.

But why should it take a few months to move your digital community from one platform to another? Watch, I can do it in 60 seconds or less. I just left my Facebook group by deciding not to post there anymore (5 seconds), created a Discord server (30 seconds - not counting the password reset I had to do), and now I am posting my first new community post (15 seconds). OK so I moved. Here is another 30 seconds or so for me to go back to my old Facebook group and post that I have moved and made a new server for us to be on. And goodbye to you Zuck, it is so scary and disappointing to see you join the oligarchy-in-plain-sight-illuminati.

We have the tools and knowledge to make FAST decisions and take FAST actions. I feel the pull to do this like anyone else. However, we are talking about community decisions, and community building work, which is one of the areas that I posit benefits from a Slow Technology Movement approach. Community-centric work takes time, because it requires dialogue. Lots of dialogue. Here is an example from Samantha’s article:

One group I’m in uses a popular chat app, and some members are interested in switching to a more secure chat app. This idea poses as many questions as it may answer. If we want to tighten up security, what criteria would we want to use for new people joining the chat? Should we require that everyone use a security passcode on their devices?

And once these questions are asked, we will have to deal with additional tough questions, like “what does our community look and feel like if some (maybe many) people choose not to adopt the new platform, effectively leaving (by choice but also by circumstance) the community altogether?”

This is the work of the Slow Technology Movement - to recognize that although we may have the technological option to move fast, when it comes to some parts of life and work (ie. community, relationships, trust) fast is not always the best approach. Perhaps it shouldn’t take 30 seconds to set up a Discord server for a community. Maybe it should take 10 days. Or however long it takes to first discuss the meaning of community - in general and in specifics.

Yes, we are in a very scary moment and that can’t be exaggerated. We need to ACT. But first, we need to talk to each other so that we can move as communities as well as individuals in communities. We need to literally be in community with each other. This will take longer than is technologically necessary, but hopefully it will take the right amount of time for what is humanly imperative.

Emily Hicks-Rotella

My purpose: For all mission-driven, social justice-oriented people and organizations to have the confidence and skills to learn, use and love data & technology as part of achieving their missions.

Read more from Emily Hicks-Rotella

Many email newsletters we receive start with “Dear [NAME],” - and “NAME” is magically replaced with your name. Just today, I received an email with the subject line “made me think of you, Emily (offer info inside)”. Now this was very insulting to me. The person (but mostly their automation) who sent this email to me clearly did not think of me. Maybe they had some thought of the collective “me” because they thought about everyone on their email list as a general whole. But I felt that they...

Dear friend, On Friday I’m hosting the first of what I hope to be many conversations for those of us in the social profit (new name for the non-profit) world, dealing with the deep, contradictory, messy, important topics that we face daily in our work. This week’s call is called Venting About Time and Urgency in Social Profit Work. I got into social profit work thinking that before too long, the organization I was working for would solve the issue we were addressing - closing the education...

Dear Reader, I have a large tattoo on my chest that reads “Take Risk Of Mortality” and I’d like to tell you the story of this tattoo. Originally I was struck by a line I read in a New Yorker article about Van Gogh over 10 years ago. I’m not going to pull it up on the internet to get the exact quotes - I’ll give you my undoubtedly imperfect memory about it. The article was about the passion of Van Gogh for making art and how this impacted his mind and life. The last line of the article was...