Jay Elwes

Much-hyped technological innovation isn’t necessarily progress

AI and BCI have the potential to be far more obtrusive and unaccountable than the most powerful search engines

A researcher uses a BCI helmet to select symbols without motor command. Credit: Getty Images 
issue 09 May 2020

Modern advances in communication technology, computer power and medical science can sometimes be so startling as to seem almost like magic. It’s easy to get excited about it all — but what happens if we get too excited? What happens if we lean too heavily on technology, convinced that it can solve all our problems? What happens if we begin to see technology in an unrealistic, hyped-up way? These are the questions at the heart of Gemma Milne’s book.

The answer — somewhat unsurprisingly — is that over-excitement is a bad thing. Hype can damage scientific progress and in some cases send it into reverse. Whether it’s in the development of nuclear fusion, the commercialisation of space or in the creation of quantum computers, ‘unmet expectations based on possibly overhyped claims will land [research] in another slump, maybe for another decade or, perhaps, forever’.

The idea that our enthusiasm for the new, which for so long has helped to drive human progress, could in fact end up holding us back is a nice one. But by the end of this broad and intellectually impressive book, it’s an argument that feels a little unconvincing.

In the section on cancer sequencing, for example, the author writes: ‘It is a brilliant innovation, but there are flaws which rarely get any coverage, meaning it is often presented without crucial nuance.’ A reasonable point. And yet there is no indication given of who is behind this misrepresentation. It is merely stated. This example — and there are many others like it — captures the book’s central problem. For all the warnings about hype and how dangerous it can be, the culprits remain invisible, unnamed and not even quoted. Instead, there are allusions to ‘hyped-up headlines’, and ‘the claims of inventors’.

Illustration Image

Disagree with half of it, enjoy reading all of it

TRY 3 MONTHS FOR $5
Our magazine articles are for subscribers only. Start your 3-month trial today for just $5 and subscribe to more than one view

Comments

Join the debate for just £1 a month

Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for £3.

Already a subscriber? Log in