Freedom of Expression is threatened as new laws are being established in some places to allow censorship. As a few commentators have argued, surveillance capitalism is closely analogous to medieval societies. I believe that Netflix is the most harmful technology company by far right now, in terms of depression fed and life hours destroyed in passive thoughtlessness. Recent economic shifts have created significant challenges for the investment banking industry. All have a concentration of information that can be leveraged. There is a risk that people will become less prone to take risks such as getting a new education or starting a new business, as the focus shifts very much to the immediate future.    

Zoom stock prediction 2030 – none:

 

Intelligent transportation systems use big data and cloud technology to improve transportation efficiency and reduce environmental pollution by easing traffic congestion and cutting energy consumption. When COVID broke out, intelligent technology played an active role in pandemic prevention and control, drug development, disease diagnosis and treatment, and more.

Intelligent technology gave birth to new ways of working and living, such as cloud conferencing and cloud classrooms, and contributed greatly to resuming production. Arable land accounts for only one-fifth of Israel’s land area — the country is pretty barren. Israel gets only two-thirds as much annual precipitation as China’s rainless central and western regions.

However, by using big data and AI, Israel has turned itself into a major agricultural exporter. The annual yield of cotton is 7, kg per hectare, and the annual yield of citrus fruits can be up to 4. This is the magic of intelligent technology. Each technological revolution reshaped the industrial landscape and created new industries that characterized the era.

Intelligent technology will become a new driver of economic growth, a new blue ocean for industry development, and a new engine for the high-quality development of the digital world. Bill Gates once said that we always overestimate the change that will occur in the next two years and underestimate the change that will occur in the next ten. This is exactly the mistake that many people are making with the Intelligent Revolution.

We have overestimated the development speed of intelligent technology in the next two years. However, although 5G cannot meet the requirements of diverse IoT scenarios today, we’ve perhaps underestimated the changes it will bring in the next decade. The Intelligent Revolution will bring us both unprecedented opportunities and challenges.

We envision that a fully connected, intelligent world is just around the corner. However, the reality is that most current technologies are still far from mature and reliable. Therefore, we may learn from spiders to develop cameras that meet the requirements of autonomous driving. An ant’s brain only consumes 0.

Today’s deep neural network training in the AI domain is nowhere near as efficient as an ant’s brain. If we can learn more about how the ant brain works, the industry may find new types of computing with lower power consumption and higher efficiency.

From a long-term perspective, the ICT industry is facing new challenges in the next 10 or even 20 years, and urgently needs a new round of breakthroughs. Huawei believes that by the next decade, there will be hundreds of billions of connections around the world. Broadband speeds of 10 Gbps will be available for every user. We will see a fold increase in computing power and storage capacity.

The technologies that power the generation, transmission, processing, and use of information and energy will need to evolve.

Based on these predictions and assumptions, Huawei presented, for the first time, the challenges and research directions it foresees in the next decade. These nine challenges and research directions are linked to each other. When we try to understand them based on the three pillars of our world — matter, energy, and information, the logical relationship among these challenges and research directions will become clearer to us.

Data shows that global energy consumption is growing at an annual rate of 1. According to report statistics, the pace of energy consumption has increased by 22 times since the 18th century. Therefore, low-carbon energy, broader electrification of industries, and intelligence are the path to sustainability. To build an intelligent Internet of Energy to achieve green electricity generation, storage, and consumption, advancements in the following key technologies are required.

First, management technologies. Digital technologies, such as big data, AI, and cloud, need to be integrated with the Internet of Energy to achieve bit-based watt management through an energy cloud and energy network.

Second, control technologies. Power electronics-based energy routers can be used to build intelligent energy network controllers that realize bidirectional energy flow and intelligent energy distribution. Third, energy storage technologies. New energy storage technologies, including new electrochemical and hydrogen storage mediums, need to be developed for multiple scenarios to meet these growing storage requirements.

Fourth, power electronic technologies. Wide-bandgap semiconductors, including SiC and diamond for medium- and high-voltage applications, and GaN for medium- and low-voltage applications will be needed to make energy components more efficient and compact.

The intelligent era is still in its infancy, but the next ten years promises to bring changes that are more revolutionary than ever imagined. To advance toward the intelligent world of , we need to address a range of challenges, involving connectivity, capacity, protocols, and computing power. According to William Xu, the nine technological challenges and directions for further research represent what Huawei believes is needed to achieve an intelligent world by stronger connectivity, faster computing, and greener energy.

With imagination, we can see the future, but with technology, we can get there. In his book The Inevitable, Kevin Kelly argues that there has never been a better day in the whole history of the world to invent something.

Almost unbelievable economic concentration in leading sectors. Technology and technology companies have inadvertently in most cases aided in the creation of a rolling cultural and economic disaster. Technology has not reduced educational inequalities because educational inequalities are created by families rather than schools and technology increases those family-based inequalities.

And technologies have to take some of the blame for destroying the labor markets of the middle class. But the ability of technology companies to exploit cultural and economic weakness to benefit themselves has far outpaced any outcome that could be viewed as a public good that has reduced inequalities. In the absence of drastic, non-technological intervention, these problems will only get worse rather than better.

The relatively privileged will work at least part time at home, reducing their social interactions, with serious consequences for their mental health. Important institutions will have been bankrupted in the aftermath of the pandemic. America will have fewer theaters, restaurants, coffee houses, concerts and universities. The U. Even if Trump is not reelected, other countries will have learned that America both is incapable of keeping its population healthy and is vulnerable to electing unreliable and bizarre leaders.

We can expect other countries will take steps to reduce their reliance on and interaction with the U. That will lead American high-tech corporations to relocate more and more of their research and development to other countries that will be attracting the best students and that will be able to keep the best graduates.

The shift to work-at-home will lead to social isolation and a dispersal of the population into exurbs that use more energy and destroy nature. Tech companies will increase their surveillance abilities. People will spend more time online, reducing their social interactions and making them ever more vulnerable to manipulation by advertisers and extremist politicians and groups.

The most ominous development could be a permanent shift to online education. New York Gov. Addressing the downside, the economic impact of the pandemic and of structural inequality will require major reforms in the political economies of larger countries. The COVID crisis is further centralizing power among the digital elite and among those best able to take advantage of high stock valuations for those companies that are thriving during the pandemic.

There will definitely be an expansion of applications that improve the quality of life for a large portion of users and even ameliorate the downside of digital application.

However, without serious reforms I expect that the overall trade-offs will be a net loss for the average citizen, and particularly for underserved communities. This may, of course, be masked by highly publicized applications that generally improve some aspects of life for specific communities.

My worry is too much concentrated power! While a few powerful companies are seriously interested in ethical considerations, most continue to be primarily focused on their image.

The deterioration of privacy is likely to continue as it serves the bottom line. More importantly, surveillance technologies in both democratic and more authoritarian countries will place a damper upon, if not actually suppress, free expression. We need people to speak truth to power, and to have the power to listen. And we need people to cooperate. From the vantage point of , in , people will likely be more entrenched in smaller and smaller tribes, talking only to each other and less inclined to give up what they feel they have earned.

People in developed regions will have more flexibility in work and will be continually monitored. Economic inequality will decrease because everyone will be able to access how much money people make, how much they pay in taxes, and how they contribute to their community through contributions to philanthropic causes or political campaigns.

People who make public statements or declaim something on social media about scientific or historical issues not based in fact will be immediately quashed with data. If those in power — governments and corporations — contain technology advances and manage them to their advantage, everyone will suffer over time.

I worry that the use of tracing and public health surveillance technologies and the associated supporting legislation necessary to respond to the pandemic will continue to be deployed once the pandemic justification has receded.

Some of it produces good, but it also produces so much harm for people and societies, including harassment, disinformation and inequity, and those harms seem to be gaining steam rather than losing it. The pain will be felt acutely in the developing world, where progress has been made in meeting basic needs, but the blow to the global economy will make this difficult to sustain. An expert in in the history of U. Furthermore, without action to end systemic racism, state violence and mass incarceration against Black and other marginalized Americans, we will rightly continue to have protests.

Without making strides toward providing child care and maternity leave, to creating stronger protections and more security for contingent workers, all of the technology in the world will not solve our problems. Already, we are seeing the negative effects of the existing income gap damaging our society through the rise of violent right-wing nationalism, anti-immigration sentiments and rising isolationism.

I fear we will just see increasing unrest. Republicans will likely continue to trot out their tired canards about the threats of socialism, but no party has done more to make socialism appealing to the masses than selfish conservative policies that have redistributed wealth upwards to the wealthiest, while the rest of the country is left with stagnant wages, poor health care, a degraded environment and few protections from rapacious corporate greed. The experience of work differs dramatically for those who can protect themselves and get access to preventative care and treatment and those who do not have access.

Mobile devices linked with place-based surveillance are ubiquitous as contact tracking continues. The focus should be on the issues of division based on class, race and the many flavors of gender, the clash with the immediate public health needs, which will be exhaustingly present in , and the ever-more-pressing woes of climate change.

A possible benefit would be if the United States developed a social conscience and instituted the kind of safety net that civilized countries have. This situation is unjust. If it became perpetuated, then this aspect of injustice would also be perpetuated. Our lives are already riven and sickened with injustice. I hope we can find ways to reduce injustice. Alice E. The pandemic has shown us that people can be productive without an office environment, and many people who believed they had to live in very expensive metro areas to work in their desired field will opt to live in lower cost-of-living areas while still being active participants in their workplace.

However, I do not envision system-wide reforms for some of the systemic inequities that the pandemic made highly visible. The immense difference in the U. The difference between parents who can afford to hire nannies, teachers or tutors for their children and those who cannot will manifest in greater educational inequality along lines of race, class and income level. Expansion of surveillant efforts of the state and criminal justice system will further marginalize the poor, people of color and political activists.

The use of algorithms to distribute social benefits punishes the poor, especially the elderly or those without access to the internet.

Many of the economic effects of COVID will continue to be felt five years from now, from urban centers that never fully regained their economic vibrancy to long-term salary depression on people who were laid off or entering the workforce during the pandemic.

In addition, without national-level, comprehensive privacy reform, the use of social technologies by the criminal justice system, the police and the government will continue and will further entrench unevenly distributed levels of privacy.

While in-person service jobs have provided significant employment for lower skilled workers, those industries will likely still suffer in Until there is real investment in ensuring that everyone has reliable access at home, reliable and appropriate devices not only a smartphone and the skills to use the internet for their needs, any tech-related changes that may be developed will continue to serve mostly those with more privilege and access to resources.

The very real needs facing our communities during this pandemic present challenges ripe for technical innovation and solutions, however those facing the most needs today are also those most likely without service and devices.

We need to have our collective interest in change include bringing everyone online. The role of private equity should worry everyone, as well as the continued monopolization of technology, especially AI tools entering homes. And that many of our leading technology firms take little or no responsibility in addressing the fact-free narratives that increasingly shape societal attitudes and political decisions. I fear it will be long road to recovery not only from the economic damage but the impact to trust and integrity, not to mention the unknown long-term impact from social isolation.

While we have high hopes for technology, COVID has taken the divide between digital inclusiveness and digital inequality to a new level due to the need for home schooling, remote work and telemedicine. While affordable, fast and reliable connectivity is paramount, the issues are not limited to access. Key digital obstacles include but are not limited to basic online literacy, language capabilities, understanding of relevancy and access to technical support.

Combined with increasing privacy deficits and risks of fraud, these issues are impacting several segments of society more than others. This is not surprising as older cohorts in general have not embraced a digital lifestyle and do not understand what they are missing. Tech skepticism will and should! For white-collar workers, the forced mass adoption of collaboration tools will provide some more efficient and better ways to work.

At the same time, three years of unemployment will redirect power into the hands to the corporations wielding those tools. Productivity and connection tools are uncomfortably close to remote-worker monitoring, which is also on the rise.

Technology exists today that could enforce social distancing in meatpacking plants, and yet laws enable these health and safety measures to be circumvented. We probably will have another rise of populism and anti-poor and anti-foreigner sentiment unless a National Health Service-like attitude prevails for a new morality around people being humans who are deserving of humane treatment without regard and despite differences in status and origin and ethnicity and identity. People are becoming more reliant on digital technology, thus they need to understand how it is created, understand the motives of the technological giants that make it.

This pandemic is unprecedented for a humanity that has achieved, thanks to its technological development, degrees of mobility that are a threat to strategies necessary for containing and controlling the virus. The precarious state of information literacy in all the strata of society is a danger.

Rather than creating tools in a way that allows users to solve problems as they wish, technology designers force users to think within the logic of the tools. A digital emergency should be declared, similar to that decreed in the face of climate change, in order to take measures that guarantee the individual liberties of each person, including those of information and expression.

Rescue and preserve the individual freedom of each one and stop encapsulating people as a user-product. Technological resources, mainly those based on artificial intelligence, must guarantee the interpretability of the results they yield. This applies to developments promoted by technology companies as well as to those promoted by governments. The digital environment is consolidating as a bubble that limits the possibilities of individual development and conditions communications between humans.

Our dependence on digital tools is now higher than ever. COVID is highlighting the unequal distribution of resources and power in the digital economy. Given the current distribution of capacity and resources in AI and AI ethics, given the underrepresentation of women in AI, gender equality will take a huge step backwards.

For the average woman, that would mean adapting to digital tools designed and deployed by men in all spheres of their lives employment, economic security, well-being, civic participation.

If we focus on access to work, for example, new research shows that due to COVID, the participation of women in the workforce has been set back 30 years already. As governments are digitizing services to citizens, their reliance on private technology companies is proportionally increasing, giving them more and more power. Not to underplay their expertise and capacity to contribute positively to society, but these are privately owned and managed for-profit organizations that suffer from a critical lack of women and diversity.

There is currently no legal obligation to socialize the benefits of the data they collect. Furthermore, from startups to mid-sized businesses in AI, AI expertise is either underfunded or nonexistent. Given the current landscape of uneven access to AI, the lack of large-scale efforts to help citizens understand the implications of AI and data governance, the diversity and gender crisis in AI technology companies, the nonexistence of social impact assessment frameworks, the absence of an obligation to use AI and data to achieve SDGs, I am concerned about the increasing role of technology companies in the lives of citizens in Gary A.

There is a lack of collective commitment to default processes that work primarily to the benefit of humans, such as a fundamental right to data ownership and privacy. The continued dependence by many governments on legacy processes and old technology that keep them from nimble response to citizen needs is a negative. There is a lack of widespread commitment to ethics and inclusion, leading to the continuing dehumanization of technology. While technologies hold promise, as tools of transformation, exponential speed of change minimizes the potential benefits.

It takes vision and political will to harness technologies for benefit. The lack of coordinating mechanisms among people within and across nations are negatively impacting response to [the] pandemic. Emerging cyber-civilization could improve lives only if leaders apply systems thinking and foresight management in the design of policies that ensure the traditionally marginalized communities are supported with technology access, technology education and training and economic opportunities for wealth creation and sustainable, meaningful career paths.

My worries are related to: 1 Ethics and privacy rights. Department of State recognized that without media literacy skills, our democratic institutions are threatened. The creative and cultural industries are currently at the back of the queue for support.

This will make the world a greyer place, and mental health will suffer. Lower down the scale, life will be more constrained, with many jobs keeping us locked up in our homes and personal contact minimised. On the technical side, the internet will be ever more critical to how life functions. I fear also that governments will not take the opportunity to embrace a greener regeneration. Sorry to be so pessimistic but we seem to have been cursed with a mostly short-sighted and venal collection of leaders at this juncture.

Hopefully as we acknowledge where technology leaves people and businesses behind we will leverage technology to solve for those predicted negative outcomes. One of the biggest changes will be in terms of working from home. Looking specifically at companies and people who can afford to work from home, the value of doing so will be redefined.

If it becomes commonplace for social interaction and financial transactions to happen online, those who are unable to afford high-speed internet or even the internet in general will continue to be left behind, furthering the class gap.

Generally, I hope this pandemic and the issues it has raised within our society will lead to positive innovation as opposed to further class segregation. Email is probably the last protocol in use which one can use without having to agree to terms of service with some pointless third party. They are as much a gatekeeper as Verisign.

And the final result is that participating in society while also managing to avoid the pointless rent seekers is impossible. The pandemic has changed the set of winning rent seekers, but not the fact that the public square is now under an end-user licensing agreement. Absent some unimaginable event, I cannot imagine the rent seekers being reined in.

It will also accelerate overseas work in places like India and China, where labor costs are significantly lower even for educated technology workers. I fear we will see a greater economic division and a worsening situation for workers outside of the technology arena, such as people in service industries.

Kate Klonick, a law professor at St. I believe the models those systems function under will be the longest for recovery close contact, indoors and thus the most economically damaged and least likely to recover.

I worry people will become out of practice with in-person interactions. I worry that rushing to certain types of technology to stop the spread of COVID, like contact tracing, will have terrible long-term effects on privacy with little benefit. Also, technology will kill some careers, and those who will not be able to adapt to new ways of working will lose their jobs.

The average person in my part of the world is mostly uneducated, a farmer, living in a rural area without electricity and water. So, for the average person in my part of the world, the new normal in will be worse.

I hope technology will make the world smaller and services affordable and much more reachable. Alan S. Those whose work is not so place-dependent, based on their human capital and expertise, and can be done via technology may well be winners. Others not. The others include most of the service workers who do the physical work to make the economy go, such as restaurant workers, brick and mortar retailers, agricultural and meatpacking workers, janitorial workers and many others.

Their work is primarily tied to a place, and place may well still be compromised in The private sector is very important for economic growth, but private sector institutions have to see themselves in a very different light than the past: one with a social responsibility to share the gains which stem from society, to ensure future balance and stability.

In the Western context such resources are only available to a handful of large tech corporations, who effectively form a monopoly. As these technologies are further threaded through sensitive domains, from COVID contact tracing, to determining which students get into which schools, to deciding who goes to jail and who gets bail, to determining who gets a loan and much, much else, we are increasingly ceding control to these sensitive decisions to obscure and unaccountable companies.

Because such systems are almost always developed and sold by private companies, they are hidden behind corporate secrecy, and not open to scrutiny by researchers or the public. Employee activity will be increasingly tracked, measured and analyzed through quantification, and this encroachment will have a significant negative effect on individual agency, happiness and safety.

I hope there is a renewed interest in building, deploying and adopting decentralized noncorporate infrastructure for tasks that are now provided by companies like Facebook. Such platform dominance and the perils it presents will only expand.

Everyone is already worried about the fact that four people rule the world, answerable to no one. The problem is, as usual, worst in the U. But, just as in the case of fast food, the rest of the world has been eager to import the very worst things our society produces instead of toilet paper, the only thing we do better than the rest of the world. The computerization of elections is another terrifying development.

Michael G. What happens if you, for any reason, annoy the company that maintains and licenses to you that business environment? We already are seeing the incredible power that Amazon, Facebook and Google have over the businesses and people who use their software. At some point such companies will have to be broken up unless proper laws can be crafted that rein in that power. Some form of universal basic income UBI will need to be implemented, hopefully coupled with the requirement that those who receive it must at the same time be acquiring educational credits.

Over time, more and more people will be educated via online targeted courses with targeted certifications. Only the wealthiest will be able to afford a traditional education in which they physically gather on campuses to learn philosophy, history, science, mathematics, etc.

In we can expect blanket surveillance and deeply personal data collection. But this will not be without strong voices continuing to hold corporate and governmental entities accountable.

We can expect that additional tragic events and unjust outcomes of predictive policing and data breaches will have helped create stronger public pushback against invasive technologies. A significant number of these expert respondents argued that the health crisis spawned by the pandemic and the accompanying broader dependence people have on the internet heighten threats of criminal activity, hacks and other attacks.

Michael R. One possible solution would be end-to-end encryption and cloud services that let me encrypt my data using keys only I control. But that requires networks that are reliable, ubiquitous, flexible and affordable — and interoperable.

That means a lot more than just the 5G solutions that some companies are pushing. I worry that governments are writing rules to regulate the Tech Titans and not realizing that those rules will kill the opportunities for new entrants to provide new services and compete with the established players. If Europe will not be able to counter and resist the pressure of the internet giants and reestablish ethical and human rights-based principles in the digital world, nobody else will do it for us.

It also will be important to understand the elections in the U. Those with wealth will pay to protect as much as they can their privacy and their valuable information. The new poor will simply give their identity in exchange to access to basic services that appear to be available for free. I expect an Orwellian model, albeit in somewhat softer form, to proliferate in China and nations under its growing influence, as well as in democracies that cannot effectively adjust to the triple pressures from a Depression, accelerating automation and environmental crises.

Universal surveillance can actually become a tool for both public safety and protection of individual rights, but it will require a radical rethinking of societal design, including how that surveillance is implemented. The new normal might superficially look quite a lot like the old normal, just less forward-looking and risk-taking. A sense of unease regarding the next crisis is likely to become a default state for many, with the attendant shortening of planning horizons.

There is a risk that people will become less prone to take risks such as getting a new education or starting a new business, as the focus shifts very much to the immediate future. People will still believe in innovation and new technology, yet there is a distinct risk that there will be far less investment and support for the same, as fear drives organizations and societies to take less long-term risk and focus more on a few key areas such as health care.

There are of course many things one could worry about — privacy, data security, the fragility of systems and so on — but the thing that worries me the most is that companies may cut down on the kind of long-term research and development that we will need in not just , but in decades to come. We have many communications highly centralized in a few large corporations, location data tracked by a similar handful of large corporations and are moving towards having delivery of the necessities of life increasing under the control of some large corporations.

Morgan G. There is little incentive for technology companies, especially less high-profile but more specialized ones, to avoid close cooperation with fascist regimes around the world. While there has been a lot of focus on the role of Microsoft, Google, Apple and especially Amazon and Facebook in this already, there are many others who have avoided scrutiny in this area.

I fear that there is little to stop this expansion. William L. The internet does not sleep and does not forget. People who control these firms have inordinate power now and into the future. They are quite capable of being shallow and selling out to the U. So, they will. The poor people and those who are cognitively limited will always be at a disadvantage.

Technology will be a mixed blessing in the future. Scammers took advantage of the chaos and offered fake advice on COVID to induce recipients to click on their links, which allowed them to download malware and capture personal and financial information. I worry about the extraordinary concentration of power in the hands of a tiny group of technology firms, one or two of which have shown an insouciant attitude to the various harms they were allowing, such as the use of their platforms by criminal, terrorist and extremist groups.

However, there may be a new will. Similarly, the shape and use of technology will be changed by collective decisions to use it in ways that are in the collective good. Right now, the model of viral advertising is triumphant see TikTok. It is a dreadful way to run polities, let alone international collaborations. Plus, on top of another economic shock, many of the jobs that poor people all over the world do may disappear. The big companies cannot and are not fit to make a new political space.

Meanwhile new, messy authoritarian states and old hyper-authoritarian states will use the technology without any limitation to produce compliance, satisfaction and order. We will develop better protocols to handle these issues, but we will give up privacy to do so. Privacy will be like a luxury yacht: available only to the wealthy. In , what people could trust would be technologies that support self-organizing local response to local problems. In other words, a fractal organization of response to global problems, one that is distributed rather than centralizing.

We should remember that when technology brought socioeconomic acceleration to the 21st century it also introduced new and lethal means and weapons of war.

AI is advancing human health; it is also allowing drones to choose young men as military targets. The violation that was deemed necessary in the COVID crisis should not be accepted as the definitive measure.

Experienced professionals must join young professionals to build safe algorithms to assure health protocols. Corruptors plunder the public trust.

Freedom of Expression is threatened as new laws are being established in some places to allow censorship. The COVID pandemic has been used as an excuse to withdraw individual rights and guarantees permanently. Individual freedoms and guarantees have been violated. These are fourth-dimensional fundamental rights that, from the Fourth Industrial Revolution onwards, open the need for a sixth dimension of human rights to guarantee human security and to establish equitable justice that is reinforced by access to technologies.

If this continues to be overlooked, technology will not be beneficial to the future of humanity because individuals will be unable to experience its awards. This must be tackled now for a better life in and to prevent a long economic recession. Companies are failing on security and fraud prevention. Enhanced services require access to data, but I want to have control over the ways my data are used. How can I achieve that? Technology tends to constrain my behavior by guiding it toward well-understood channels.

Tech companies need to detect this effect and respond in agile ways. How can we scale personalization and flexibility? Rigidity leads to catastrophic failures not to mention loss of customers. This means an increase in software vulnerabilities. We will see increases in the unreliability of infrastructure due to cyberwarfare from the unstable geopolitical scene.

More online theft will take place due to more desperate people — because of the economic circumstances. People may be ready to adopt contact-tracing apps during a pandemic, but these will be coupled with data mining by both governments and technology companies to increase their power and economic value.

With the increase in telehealth and closed supply chains, medical technology will increasingly harvest data from unknowing populations and use it for private profit, not necessarily public good. Already privacy is almost fictional, and the right to express ideas is being manipulated. This is twisting the political processes in democracies. See examples like the last U. The head of research at a major U.

Technology companies will be neutral players in this; simply advancing technological capabilities, by perceiving their roles as limited, apolitical entities, simply pursuing a course of technological development. Individual technologists, leaders and employees may have — and express — qualms about the potential misuse of some technological capabilities, but this will not prevent their development and deployment, although it may cause some companies to forgo involvement.

Individuals and populations will remain vulnerable to the security applications of technologies for surveillance and control. Both hostile state actors and nonstate organizations and individuals may also use improved technological capabilities to perform terroristic attacks and hacks aimed at disrupting society and harming lives such as the viral attacks on power companies in Eastern Europe.

It is now well within the grasp of most nation-states to exert sufficient control over the data passing within their borders that they can consider it a sovereign sphere. The arguments in favour of leveraging this capability to fight the pandemic are in equal parts compelling and frightening. We are, alas, at a point where the machine is running at such a rate of speed that our only options are to continue accelerating or risk the whole thing breaking apart.

Technology is the prime enabler of this situation. Despite the risks, however, the majority of political power brokers in the world seem content to send a succession of shocks through the system that not only threaten its smooth operation, they threaten its ability to work.

We are entering a phase of global society, therefore, in which the new normal requires we deal with higher stakes than at any point since World War II. I fear collapse. Better communication brings more prosperity. This a demonstrable and well-understood fact.

Tracey P. I foresee greater ICT solutions that will track, sort, leash, fence people more and more. The technologies may start as a public-health tool, but they will leapfrog into other areas such as in workplace, at play, during travel, in the smart home, the smart housing estate, the smart city, the digital twin and other national and international interconnected smart technologies or large social and technological systems.

The technologies may start as a public-health tool, but they will leapfrog into other areas such as in workplace, at play, during travel, in the smart home, the smart housing estate, the smart city. Even suggesting these ideas in some circles is to be considered as anti-progress, old school, traditionalist, impeding progress and the like.

There is also very little use of these technologies to liberate, but they are to control, and there is little scrutiny as to who gets control, and what social and technical biases will be encoded into these new technologies. The technologies will, of course, be reflecting the concerns of politicians, economists, existing legal frameworks and of course the companies that will profit from these. Interoperability and standards are our friends, but in this case, when the ecosystem of data, software, apps, code, sensors, readers, devices, platforms, massive data storage, data brokers and geodemographers, chip manufacturers, the states, the private sector and some large alliances, interoperability becomes a foe, as there will be no workaround.

Anonymity will be replaced by autonomous systems; agency by automation; heterogeneity by rule sets to sort. While most of us have been grateful for the key role that the internet has played during this time of pandemic, we have also felt forced to make some choices purely as an emergency response — choices we might not have made otherwise — about what data to share with which entities.

Given the push toward contact-tracing apps, various tech tools that offer to protect people as they return to work and other surveillance technologies being deployed in the name of health or national security, and given the vast numbers of people who are losing their jobs who might therefore feel compelled to accept privacy-invasive conditions on their employment, I believe that, out of fear and a sense of lack of choice, Americans will feel even more powerless to protect their privacy.

It is hard to know what the role of technology and technology companies will ultimately be. There are also efforts to pass some privacy-related federal laws, but the clashing agendas of various stakeholders might prevent their passing. We increasingly rely on technology to keep us safe, keep us connected, keep us employed. The lines between data collected by private companies and data collected or used by governments was already blurry; it is getting even more so now that data-sharing is seen as one way to combat the pandemic and its related challenges.

Given ongoing justified concerns about data that is purportedly collected for one purpose but then used for others, it is hard to know what the role of technology and technology companies will ultimately be.

None of these processes is good for the public nor for democracy as a whole. The more panicked the public gets during the pandemic, the more leadership may choose to normalize and enforce the adoption of these tools which will also enable lots of extra data collection by technology companies and government. It is summer of , and I am watching the not-much-discussed nexus of citizen reporting via cellphone, security video, facial recognition, cellphone tracing and the identification and potential prosecution of protesters and looters in the recent unrest.

During the pandemic an assortment of technologies have gained ground that I can only describe as disgusting. Two poster children: remote-examination proctoring systems in education and systems that allow employers to monitor and track employees working at home. There are doubtless numerous others. They are inflicting this on their consumers.

Is there going to be a recalibration on this in the vendor community, and are consumers going to vote with their dollars in support of this recalibration? As technology becomes more ubiquitous and systems potentially interoperable what are my Whole Foods app and my Withings scale telling Blue Cross Blue Shield about my health status?

The ability to monitor and surveil as corporations and governments is largely unchecked, in part because of the lack of tech savvy of lawmakers involved in public policy.

Melissa R. Large social media companies do not have good track records on these issues; if we are conducting more of our lives online, then there are more possibilities for misuse of our personal data and of negative impacts on individuals. Charles M. Both governments and the tech giants will continue to push for intruding technologies in the name of greater efficiency, including surveillance tracking of the virus and its inevitable successors, as well as marketing claims of greater fitness, well-being, etc.

Profit through data collection is a powerful engine and one difficult to resist much less regulate. As a few commentators have argued, surveillance capitalism is closely analogous to medieval societies.

Worst case: A few will be the very grand and wealthy lords and ladies e. The political dialogue around whatever happens is no longer trustworthy. When there is no trust in tech — we will find ways to destroy it. The tech companies will increasingly be blamed for their failings. All are based on manipulation of large-scale exchanges.

Some are more open than others to outside abuse. All have a concentration of information that can be leveraged. All either are regulated or have a regulated compact that protects their position. Government is far, far behind. The systems are all broken or managed by outside contractors and thus, again, set up in the interest of generating profit and power for a few rather than for the betterment of all. People will be more dependent on technology, but trust it less.

There are other ways to encourage companies to protect privacy, including mandating that they are transparent about how they do it, how much they spend and how they have failed. Some will be dark and become permanent surveillance architecture. I am afraid we will take the silent acceptance of the surveillance technology to the next level. Nothing really new here. Without legalized encryption, consider a tiny portion of a virtual day: I attend any type of virtual meeting: Everything I saw and heard at that meeting can be captured and stored digitally, for some authority or hacker to later analyze at leisure.

If I wore a virtual suit, then authorities would be able to know also everything I have felt during those virtual interactions. Sensors will flood the world, measuring whatever you can think of, including our bodies.

It is not clear who will own the data, nor what the analyses might be and what the results of that will do to us. We will face big control issues that will lead to political instability. The growing dependency on digital technology will create a paradise for hackers, so cybersecurity will be one of the top priorities, costing society trillions. Surveillance capitalism is possible partly because companies take advantage of us, but partly because of weak regulation and a social and educational failure to push back against it.

The early promise of the internet was a decentralized system in which millions of small businesses flourished. Increasingly, we have built a highly centralized system that supports mass surveillance. This is the structure we are transferring into the physical world via the Internet of Things, smart cities, connected cars, algorithmic decision-making and robots.

Often, adoption of these technologies is proceeding against what most people would want. There is loss of choice and autonomy and the loss of anonymity. Increasingly, every transaction — financial or personal — is being intermediated. People talk to their friends and Facebook takes a slice; they pay for a newspaper article and Apple takes a slice — and in both cases the data gathered is then repackaged, resold and repurposed. China, Europe and the United States weigh the value of these nodes differently.

For similar situations in the future, policymakers and businesses will not have to start from scratch in working with supply chains, medical responses and economic safety nets, rather they will have case studies for what works effectively.

Each sector of the economy will experience transformations that enable it to perform more efficiently. Individuals who understand these changes and are prepared for them will become better off. Without a mechanism for compensation to individuals, technology companies will reap the economic benefits. Several companies are proposing placing electronic health records and our genomes in accounts where we can sell our data directly to pharmaceutical companies and bypass middlemen tech companies.

Chris Savage, an expert in legal and regulatory issues based in Washington, D. Therefore, I suspect that overall privacy will be degraded as a result of these changes. After a period of protected quarantines, lockdowns and illness, they will lean more on social media to stay connected, with less concern that their data is a commodity.

Only if the service requires payment will users care, as this type of contract is well-known to be legally binding vs. Facebook selling data to third parties. Identity certification may get relegated to a consortium of big tech companies, based on their existing profiling data ownership, via social media and subscription data, in lieu or in support of state-certified identities.

A share of these experts concentrated their concerns on the future of work. They predicted a number of things to happen in the coming years: In order to survive, businesses are reconfiguring systems and processes to automate as many aspects as possible.

While artificial intelligence AI and robotics will enhance some lives, they will damage others as more work is taken over by machines. Employers may outsource labor to the lowest bidder globally. Employees may be asked to work for far less; they may have to shift to be gig and contracting workers, supplying their own equipment, and they may be surveilled at home by employers.

 

Zoom stock prediction 2030 – none:.Zoom Stock Predictions: Will the Good Run Continue?

  The future will likely require that investment banks shed non-core assets and banks should consider “zoom out” visualizing the future beyond immediate. None of these problems will be fixed by , and few areas will see In general, the predictions as ever focus on the technology and.