Social Impact of Technology

The Social Impact of Technology There is no interrogation that technical change brings or so social change. The Industrial revolution aphorism many batch displaced from their land, to find croak in crowded metropolis factories. Serfdom was abolished and the community shifted from villages to the cities. Strong family ties, self sufficiency and the castigate to exhaust land were replaced with uncertain tenancy of land, dependency on trade and a weakening of the family unit. Economi strainy, goods and bullion abounded, and trade flourished.The merchant class profited from the wealth that was generated on the backs of the displaced population of urban workers. Children were sent to work in factories, in rescript for families to make enough money to live. The peasant class worked long sternly hours in woeful conditions with no security. The Industrial revolution led to the dementia of the working class and although many union battles generate since led to the tolerateance of better working conditions, the effects of the Industrial revolution remain.The family unit is withal more than vulner subject today with soaring divorce grade, high rates of teenage suicide, around of guild atomic number 18 either heavily mortgaged to banks or paying high rents, and no one undersurface be self-sufficient in a human beings governed by free wheel free trade. Advances in engine room, is generally non equitably sh ard inside society. People with money perplex more opportunity to aquire technology, which enables them to acquire regular more wealth. It is also important to remember that war has been and result occur to be the driving force for technology and innovation. Power and wealth atomic number 18 unalienableally tied together.Technology leads to great social economic division. Laborers be viewed as commodities and expendable. Technology leads to alienation beca design it washbowl create jobs that require no specializer knowledge. To dat e, since the industrial revolution we have seen technology used to the detriment of society. The right to occupy land has become a privelege that must be worked for and acquire and now the battle is on to moderate all the worlds food and textiles through and through ge displaceically modified germs and animals. The insidious part of GM is that there is no recall once it is released into the environment.Salmon that kick for grow ten times hurrying than normal salmon allow destroy river systems, as their unfair genetically modified advantage will see all smaller behavior forms extinguished, and genetically modified crops that are myrmecophilous on pesticides will congest organic, heritage sheds that have sustained people for thousands of years. Seeds will no monthlong be able to be harvested and replanted but the farmer will have to buy impertinent seed each year from GM seed makers. This fight is more important that the fight over open etymon because it involves the r ight of people everywhere to have clean, safe food that has non been genetically altered.Essentially GM is a tax on everyone because a indubitable will be on every seed and seeds are do to be sterile the following year. This is something to become angry nigh. The greedy corporations and individuals that indispensableness control over our food, water and land, do not care some the irreversible damage to the environment. people and animals that they cause. We have the right to eat tomatoes that are free of fish DNA, meat and milk that is free of human DNA, pigs that havent been handsome to harvest anthrax antibodies. They will neer be able to rise the safety of GM food and no long term studies have been done.Nor will GM solve the problem of soil erosion, and pollution of rivers from unreal fertilizers and pesticides. Only a return to responsible organic and biodynamic farming practices will solve these problems. The 50 harmful effects of GM food Courts are not keen to pursue pesticide makers for poisoning farmers, or GM seed makers for monopolizing the worlds seeds through patents, (through genetic engineering that not only renders the seed visionary for replanting the next year but also contaminates non-GM crops by cross pollination.already the absolute majority of the worlds seed stock is controlled by a handful of corporations see http//www. cqs. com/50harm. htm and http//www. seedsavers. net ) The internet in its current form was developed as a free exchange of information, unregulated by any one presidential term or owned by any one person or society. In its raw form it was the playground of hackers and computer geeks, who challenged the status quo. It brings close to a new era, the proficient revolution.The free flow of information, has brought about technological advances at an unprecedented rate and has made many rich and brought companies who failed to fit to a stand gloss over. How will this technological revolution impact on our socie ty? If the industrial revolution is any thing to go by, there will be winners and losers to technological revolution. E-commerce will affect the middle man and allow direct trade with consumers. Efficiency brings about lower prices for the consumer, but it is more accurate to argue that efficiency brings about greater wealth for shareholders, directors and owners.The intrinsic weave of social inter attains of trade, can be disentangled and made into a horizontal supply chain. E-commerce will create efficiencies that effectively remove the submit for a long supply chain but at the spending of social relationships. The effect of e-commerce, and the internet will impact on every society on the earth. Already, the barriers of trade between individuals in different countries are non-existent. Company contact details are absorb careable through powerful search engines, and trade can commerce between two individuals who would otherwise never have met.The internet dissolves national bou ndaries, and the consequences for cities that have developed as centers of ecesis and trade will be disastrous, if they do not embrace the technological advances in communication and trade that the internet brings. While at the similar time, free trade means fierce competition without the protection of grant wages. People are reduced to consumers and suppliers. Resisting the tide of technological change is impossible. Of variety it is possible to do line of reasoning without a website or email or mobile phone or a fax machine.People have been doing business well onward any of these gadgets were invented. But business today is about competition, and technology is about leverage. Technology can lead to alienation if it is not widely dispersed in society. The Industrial age saw the submerging of technology in the hands of the rich and powerful, allowing them to dominate and subdue the population into harsh working conditions and the social impact of the internet and computers is only vindicatory beginning, will it challenge the status quo or will it lead to greater population control?The latter is probably more liable(predicate), and many will look on this time as the golden age of the internet. Already technology like digital TV is being pushed in the stalking-horse of better quality but the benefits to those who own the systems is that they will be able to track what you watch, when you watch it, whether or not you switch off an ad, and by chance even whether that pizza ad makes you pick up the phone and call for a pizza.Knowledge is power, and with access to tapping phone lines, reading emails, reading your credit tantalise statements, knowing by GPS where you are by tracking your mobile phone, it can be a scary world, if all that knowledge and power were to be used to oppress and control. On the upside, technology has made the developed world a richer place to the detriment of the environment. Machines have allowed people to move outdoor(a) from physical work, so that now in Australia there is 100,000 accountants and 85,000 farmers.Perhaps, technology has gone(p) too far, and there are more people counting beans than ripening them Impact of technology on government The legal system is dependent on local jurisdictions under common law. Historically, one has to remember that before the age of the internet, airplanes and telephones, the vast majority of business was done locally. Technology has quick changed the way people do business but there has not adapted to the changes. There is no one body that governs world-wide trade. What are the implications?If you buy a product from a local supplier in your State, and it turns out that the item is faulty, you can go back to your supplier to work out repair or replacement and if they dont help you, you can take the matter to local Trades office or commit legal proceeding in your state. If however, you buy a product outside your jurisdiction, you must file a claim in the Sta te, where the supplier is located. You can only use a lawyer in the State where you file your action, your local llawyer can only act as a consultant and has no power to represent you in court or to serve papers.Therefore, we have a world which is governed by local laws and yet the businesses and individuals are now actively trading outside of their local area. Governments are trying to make laws about content on the internet but have no jurisdiction to enforce those laws. This has created havens in small developing countries, that are happy to accept companies that want to run online gambling websites that may be outlawed in their jurisdiction or companies that wish to reduce their tax liabilities by go-ahead up bank accounts in developing countries.We see arising now a homogenizing of local laws on issues like SPAM, and even sending a global letter from anywhere in the world involves the completion of almost equivalent forms, Governments are making agreements, in an attempt to be relevant in a world where people are able to trade more freely and where digital communication has enabled businesses to work, almost without physical boundaries. Business label and the Internet In the beginning, it was easy to start a new business.You would go to your local business registration office in your State and enforce for a business nurture. If it was taken, you would choose another name. Most people do not realize that a business name is only legitimate for the State that it is testifyed in and the only way to protect your business name is to incorporate a company. In Australia, you would lodge forms with ASIC to incorporate a company and you then have rights to use your business name exclusively in Australia and its territories.However, with the birth of the internet, your Australian company name may be the like as the name of a company overseas. This has resulted in legal action being taken, as companies tussle of business name calling and the rights to use t hose names and a court system that is unable to deal effectively with international disputes over business names and has resulted in greater cost to people who want to start a business as they must register multiple field names, take about international trademarks and find a name that has not already been taken.Even if they contact lawyers to register all the domain names and trademarks to avoid disputes(both local and international), legal action can still be taken against them. And when it comes to justice, money wins almost every time, unless companies want to move to safe havens in developing countries where they cannot be pursued in court. windup Technology has allowed man to move from manual labour of the fields to cities and machines. It has allowed bulky cities to arise, because of the urban poor that have migrated to cities for improved services and job opportunities.Technology has spawned the growth of modern society but it is also now used to control the population, i n a way the Roman Caesars could only have envisage of The economic impact of information technology has been a subject of a great deal of debate. For business economists, it is useful to identify how information technology (IT) is likely to impact the economy, because IT (defined as computer and communications technology and its applications) is likely to have a substantial impact on the economys growth during the climax decades.The reason for this is the use of IT by nearly all industries in the economys base, so that IT becomes a universal input to nearly all other makes. If IT costs decline, they can create substantial economic gains for many of the industries that use IT, because money spent on IT can be invested in other inputs and improvements in production or services. Furthermore, because business relies upon IT to do a wide eye socket of tasks and to create competitive advantage, by facilitating these tasks for end users, important gains are achieved that are difficult t o measure in a classic input-output framework.In addition, IT, seen in a larger context, should have even wider impacts on the economy, because new channels of communications, untold(prenominal) as the Internet, cellular television, and broadband applications, will provide business with new channels to reach customers and suppliers. In the past, the economic impact of IT has been subject to much debate. The productivity paradox was first proposed by Steven Roach, the chief economist at Morgan Stanley, who found that BLS data on investments in computers had a clear cast out rather than a positive impact on productivity gains in some(prenominal) major industries.Roachs paradox appeared to be valid because quite a some service industries had negative productivity gains between 1977 and 1984. Some try to explain this paradox by noting that it was difficult for workers to adjust to computers. Others noted that few computer applications made significant improvements in the amount of work most workers could do. Still additional commentators felt that the paradox was a product of poor statistical measurement.Because this paradox was driven by the negative productivity results for several(prenominal) service industries, one approach was to see if the service productivity figures were accurate. atomic number 53 study, by Joel Popkin and Company for IBM,(1) found that the BLS productivity statistics Roach used for several service sectors had important shortcomings. Most importantly, the BLS productivity data relied on output measures that did not truly reflect the changes in the nature of work in some service industries. If these are corrected in several important service industries, two things could be shown.