 Hello, everyone, and welcome to this conversation about how we will learn in the future brought to you by Future Tense, a collaboration of New America Slate magazine and Arizona State University. My name is Punea Mishra and I'm Associate Dean for Scholarship and Innovation at the Mary Lou Fulton Teachers College at ASU. To start us off, I will briefly introduce our speakers and then we'll jump right into our discussion on how we can learn in a technologically complicated future. And if you haven't already, I would encourage you to go and read these stories in the learning features published in Future Tense Fiction and Slate to give some context. As we know, education and learning is always about the future and the future by definition is unpredictable. This is particularly true, given the rapidly changing world that we live in, and education has been and will continue to be profoundly affected by changes in technology and science and forces like climate change globalization. And as we look to the future, imagination is critical. With our technologies these days, and fiction can help us understand what it might be to live like humans in this future, meaning identity, community, and the kinds of moral dilemmas that emerge are important for us to confront and think about, and stories in particular provide us with a unique space and opportunity to ask what if. So this set of three stories considers how learning may be shaped by new technologies how individuals institution systems confront the moral and ethical challenges involved. First up we have Simon Brown, Simon is an Australian science fiction writer, originally trained as a journalist and work for a range of Australian government departments. He's a member of the Australian skeptics and edited skeptical a handbook for of pseudoscience of the paranormal that I didn't know about you, that about you Simon and that is another connection I think we have in terms of interest. He was also an editor of Argos the journal of the Canberra skeptics, and the story we are discussing one the 2020 Sapiens plurals short fiction contest. With us we have Lee Alexander, please an award winning writer working at the intersection of technology culture and narrative. She designed stories for video games creates fiction about digital society and experiments with narrative systems. She worked in interactive entertainment and digital culture for a decade and won the 2019 award for best writing in a video game. She has been nominated for a range of awards and I won't go through the whole list. It's awesome to have you here with us. And finally, Shiv Ramdas is a multi award nominated author of speculative fiction short stories and novels. His first novel dome child was India's first mainstream cyberpunk novel. His short fiction has appeared in slate strange horizons fireside fiction podcast a lot of publications. He is a graduate of the clarion West writers workshop is previously a radio host worked in journalism advertising and event management. And Shiv and I intersect over the fact that he went for two days to the undergraduate institution that I finally got my degree from. So he was smarter than me and and escaped that system before it gobbled him up completely. So welcome to you all and it's so good to see you all again. Let me start by giving each of you a few minutes to tell us what your story was about for those who, you know may have read it a little while ago or may not know, without revealing too much so no spoilers. I want to start with you since you were the first person who started this year. So Simon, you're muted Simon. My story is, is about communication between two people in this case, I'm a hyena and a human. And they're able to communicate with each other because the new piece of technology called protein microchip, one of each is inserted in their brains, allowing them to communicate. So to speak intellectually, intellectually. And the stories about how they find common ground in communicating with each other using this new technology. So I went on to you Shiv. Sorry, Lee, because you were the next in our series. So my story is about trying to research a painting that may or may not be real. It's also about a couple that is confined, you know during a pandemic and using spatial memories and experiences of art and sound as sort of coping mechanisms, I guess. And the learning angle is sort of about data literacy as the protagonist tries to find the vocabulary to search for this half remembered piece of artwork. And at the same time her partner deals with sort of the unique stressors of remote teaching in the environment so yeah the story deals with that. Yeah, and I think there's a lot more to it than that and hopefully we'll get into some of those as well and finally on to your shift. Yeah, so my story is essentially it's set in the university. It's the story of a professor who was under the belief he was going to receive tenure for his position but instead is told he has to be part of a teaching competition with an AI. And the winner of those and the winner of the teaching competition is the one who gets the tenure and it's the story of how that particularly bizarre competition plays out and it essentially deals with stuff like financial pressures on the educational system budgets and the issue with basically short term personnel based solutions for long term systemic problems. Thank you. So I think that that I think is a great summary of one thing that connects all of these stories. So I'm going to kick off with one question but I really you guys have read the stories. I see I'm sure that you're seeing themes and connections across them. So I'd love this for this to be sort of an open conversation rather than this sort of me throwing questions at you but let's start off with one question. So one of the really interesting things about all three stories is how different they are right I mean one is about human animal communication now that is, you know two people stuck in a pandemic and you know, and dealing with university housing authority and as well as a range of challenges in communication and connection and and you know AI based educational systems right. So what is common to all of these in some ways are this idea of this mediated relationships through technology, right, and that what we gain what we lose through that process. Maybe I'll start with Lee with you. Because I think in terms of, if I look at the three stories in terms of emotional heft. I think your story has sort of really dives into that sort of the psychological and the emotional and the sociological sort of aspects of that so maybe start off with you, and then I'll go to Simon and then to share. Thank you so specifically your question is about the emotional landscape of the story I'm sorry can, can you. Yeah, no I think the emotional landscape in the context of technology mediated. Right, I mean I think that's a theme that I think connects across all three stories. Yes. So for me, I guess a lot of the cyberpunk in the futurism that I grew up with is focused on, you know, the economic impact or the hardware impact and stuff like that. I think for me, you know, specifically like as a woman growing up alongside the internet. I was sort of looking for cultural stories of how emerging technologies influence self expression. I think, because we're living in this now we sort of reach this mass adoption era in the internet almost everybody has more people than ever have a digital persona. You know what I mean, and I think your, your use of the word media or more mediated is really all now sort of mediating our interactions through this layer and, and that it isn't just a technology issue anymore it's a human issue and and that's what I kind of wanted to show through my work. You know how our self concept can be disoriented by emerging technology and certainly things like how we learn how we socialize. Thank you. I'm sorry I said Simon Simon, please. I think one of the things that struck me reading all three stories is is the essential humanity. All three stories. I think it's the importance of being as human as possible and a world where that humanity is being mediated by technology. I think to it deals with how technology changes the human condition but in three different ways. Yeah, I think it's fascinating in fact listening to these responses about how these different stories come from similar places but I get seen differently by the writers, like for me the one thing that's in common across all these stories is the aspect of the human element that relates to how humans interact with each other with regard to systems. So if you're looking at them society each of these stories has a very strong undercurrent of pressure on the protagonist to deal with the situation in a certain way, whether it is the father in Simon story was constantly like making fun of his sons being part in the experiment and that's the pressure on leaves protagonist to fit in certain laws and ways of accepting and dealing with technology and conducting the search, whether it's in my story who was pressurized into viewing the problem as an immediate face off between himself and the machine, as opposed to a larger systemic issue. So, I think these three stories all basically say the same thing in three really different ways through different mediums in a sense, even though that makes sense. And that does and I think that that's what was fascinating about the series for me is like how different these three stories are, but I think this point shift that you raise about the systems and structures that are in place whether it's project sentience. And you know what I love about each of the stories is this little telling details which speak to this larger setup within which we are working which is almost invisible to us and we talked a little bit about that shift in our webinar. And it's project sentience and there are these hints about. For instance, you know they have to look for grants that need some successes so that means there is this greater infrastructure within which this work exists, or the university and the housing authority in lead story and it actually there's a range of other organizations and structures which allow you to access information but at some level prevent you from getting it in the way that you'd like and of course, the faceless people literally in in ship story. So I'd love to get your thoughts like extending on that about, again, maybe as authors, how you construct this world, you know where you write a little short story, but there is a bigger universe around it. And I think that to me is the is pushing people, you know, the characters in different ways that they are actually being played by this larger forces that might be invisible to them. And anyone of you wants to go first please go ahead. So it's such a big question. I think we should touch upon the concept of what a near future is really because like it's a slightly fraudulent term to me in a sense because when we talk about near future what we're actually really talking about is distant present because like most stories of near future basically the present view through eyes and talk. It's essentially the slippery slope story right like we're talking about what would happen in the future if we leave things as they are in the present. And in the context of like systems I think which is a lot of the focus of what I did. I think it's really important to remember that. So we're living in this era where everyone sort of is supposed to fit into part of the system and and fulfill like this functional role within a system so we're almost sort of like automating ourselves within systems. So, which is why I thought Simon sorry was very fascinating because like it's all about the search for sentience and other species, while in the real world we're constantly like, sort of like downplaying the effect of sentience on ourselves as employees and workers. So it was a fascinating juxtaposition for me to look at. I would love to hear Lee your thoughts on what this idea of, you know, people having to fulfill their role, because in your story there are these elements of wanting to be, you know, something and then denied admission at the university and then trying to find a space where you can actually fulfill this role but you know I please. And so I really liked what ship said about looking at these concepts as systemic and as portrayals of ecosystems. And I guess, like, when we talk about what's the impact of a system. I think there are a lot of ways in which we can't be better observed than an intimate life. And so I think what you were seeing, you know, what what I wanted to do by setting a story in a capsule like that is to kind of focus on how you know how those systems impact individual life. You know, I was relating to like a lot of young people who for whom the system is breaking right underneath them as they come into adulthood, and you know the the opportunities that our parents had especially that their parents had or not there anymore and yeah this the sense of, you know, how can you even set a trajectory in a system that is constantly influx I do think you know I misunderstood the question originally but I do think that's that's a question that is asked in all three of the pieces. You know how do you self orient if the ecosystem is influx and this is a near future problem I think is as shift points out. You know, if you future isn't becomes more present ism. The more we think of it as a story of systems maturing and then declining and then the individual struggling to orient there and. Thank you, Simon. I was just going to say I remember an earlier conversation shift shift mentioned that science fiction is often about the present but also about the present moving. It's emotion and science fiction is a great way to get us. I guess we're viewing it almost viewing it like a like a vector of some kind it's got it's got direction and momentum and science fiction allows us to step outside of that vector for a little while and look at it. I think the objective that I don't have as possible to ever be ejected. And I certainly think in in my story as it's the father who expects the sun to fit into a system, which is a socially accepted system whether it's mediated by technology or not it was it was got humans want a place for everything and everything in its place that includes ourselves. I think our three stories deal with ways of reaching beyond what's expected of us as being part of the system. And sometimes that the dire consequences of trying for that sometimes more optimistic consequences. Right, right. I don't think Simon's touched on something like supremely fascinating about fiction in itself when we talk about like technology, like in terms of like magnitude in direction. Like I think, essentially, technology and innovation tends to be very scalar quantity like we always told about the magnitude of what's going to happen how important it is how great it is how new it is. And it's almost left to like people like writers of science fiction to interpret the direction it's going to take us so they actually assigned. They're basically making the scalar quantity into a vector quantity for us. And I think it provides a lot of value in that sense so I actually thought what he said was fantastic. Thank you. The scary thing about technology is you keep looking at it and suddenly something snaps you from behind and was just by you realize oh I didn't see that. Yeah, that's one I think the other thing that I think shift just build on what you just said I think that other thing fiction does it, you know, you talked about magnitude that's how we often talk about like how many people are on Facebook or have cell phones or whatever, but the the individual human experiences are individual, right, and I think that's what fiction does is I think all three stories do is place the the human and the individuals in that larger structure, and how they respond to it becomes a way for us to sort of think through these consequences. I don't know if you guys have any thoughts on that. Yeah, so there was a quest there was a statement in your story which really stuck with me. And so I'm going to put that statement there and have each of you respond to that. And this connects with this previous part about technology and you know so on. And the quest the statement or something like are you going to be okay if it is not what you thought. I'm going to repeat that because this might not have stood out for Simon you and shift, but are you going to be okay if it is not what you thought. And I just that sentence I just kept going back to that sentence, because I thought it does that not capture really something special about this relationship that we have a technology right I mean, there is always the sort of this tool or technology will solve x problem. Are we going to be okay or are you as an individual going to be okay if it is not what she thought. And I would just love to hear start with you Lee maybe and then here shave and Simons thoughts on that statement. No, Lee, sorry. No worries thank you know I'll be quick I think this just follows on what you were saying earlier about narratization and you know the rule of storytelling in science fiction. A lot of you know I'm very interested in this question of, you know, our expectation and our dream versus the reality because, you know, with a lot of us have lived long enough to see visions of the future change rapidly in our lifetime so you know we're now in the world where we have a computer in our hand all the time you know the stuff that we were told about when when a lot of the stuff that we were told about his children, you know in a lot of parts of the world is here. And you know there's, there's been you know a lot of social and a lot of all manner of consequences and impact both good and bad of this technology and I, you know, it's, it was this which you wanted I think is a powerful question for the digital age and I think it also applies to disorientation like if it's not what you thought that you know the difference between the reality and the projection. I think we're using internet, we're using digital society in a hyper real way. You know we're constructing these sort of hyper authentic versions of ourselves or of the news or of the world in virtual space. And I think the gap between, you know, you know the the medium is increasing the gap between ourselves and our conceptualization of these things so yeah like it, it not being what you thought is yeah thank you for for noticing that. Simon. I think new technology always takes this by surprise and how it's adapted by people wasn't necessarily created. And then this goes back to something like printing where, where people and authority thought printing was great they could put out rules and regulations and, you know, authorize Bibles and that sort of stuff but then people but hold a printing person put out a whole lot of other stuff which they weren't expecting to see. Everyone was kind of surprised it happens and every time we cover the new technology we're constantly surprised when someone comes up with a new way of using it. Anyway we didn't expect a way we don't like or a way that we do like but never foresaw, and I don't think that's going to change. I think it's especially applicable to communication technology and information technology where. I mean that the computers are invented to help a lot of money was put into computers in the 40s to help determine ballistics for artillery during war. But here we are using computers to talk to each other across two continents vast oceans but about about dramatically different ideas about how humanity interacts with technology and people are listening and forming opinions this time. I don't think the people originally come up with the idea of the computer had any idea to anything like this will be possible because of what they invented and explored. Yeah, I think so that's a really complex question which you very cleverly posed as like a one liner. I see you Puneer but there's a lot to this very I think and like the core of the question in terms of like. It's also about like the clue is on the tin right like we know technology isn't going to be as advertised as we envisage it because various humans are going to have access to various points of time. Social media is obviously like the easiest example right like it was supposed to be a way for me to like get cat pictures from my grandmother and like keep in touch with that one guy from high school I really had a great conversation with once. Once upon a time in 1998 and today it's like deciding like entire political regimes and it's changing governments and I don't think anybody ever envisage it becoming something of this sort right and. At a much more simplistic individualistic level I don't know if humans are actually equipped to deal with technology as just technology, like we tend to anthropomorphize everything. And like a quick headcount is actually very instructive think of how many people you know who have a Roomba who have given it a name like Sam or Bob or Mahesh or whatever very few people name their Roomba cleaning device machine. Very few people name their Wi-Fi Wi-Fi. You know, like we tend to like ascribe like humanistic values into every bit of technology we create or use. And then we're surprised when other people humanize them in different ways so it's a bit of a wibbly wobbly complex thing isn't it. I love that I love that you know my Wi-Fi is life is beautiful. And I spend a lot of time thinking of what it should be so. In fact, early on I had done some research on how people I mean looking at children playing with anthropomorphic, like these robotic dogs that Sony used to have eyeball. And it's fascinating when they play with like just a stuffed animal dog they will toss it around, but the moment this eyeball would show up they would drop on their knees, make eye contact with this little Roomba. It's fascinating how like absolutely as you said the treated it as an intentional agent. You know psychologically it was psychologically real to them even though it was, you know, and if you ask them they say oh no no it's just a robot. But our instinctual reactions would be very different in that space. I want to build on something that Simon you spoke about and I think sort of shift the dress as well. I mean if you look at the printing press, I was Simon Johnson talks of this idea of the adjacent possible. And that you know when technologies come about so so the example he gives a print is that once print came along, lots of people suddenly realized that they had bad eyesight, because you never had to peer at small print candlelight. And guess what one of the biggest industries that emerged post Gutenberg was the. These are the first accouterments apart from clothes that are always a part of our body now I mean we are all cyborgs in that sense. And that led to people playing with glass and mirrors and lenses and that led to the microscope and the telescope and suddenly you have a completely different universe that you're living in. And that's something that technology does, which is, like you said, shift it comes from people taking it and you know making meaning of it in their own ways. And, you know, and and those differences in meaning is I think what can cause conflicts at times. I don't know if there's a question here was just a thought that something that struck me as I was reminded of, and would love to hear any thoughts that you have on this. I think it's interesting that you brought brought up mirrors because I think that, you know, part of the reason that we're, you know, we get attracted to I bow or inclined to protect a robot in a way that we might not with the stuffed animal is that I think these technology is a construction of ours in our image you know what I mean and we have an attachment to it that way. So we can't help but subconsciously reflect ourselves in something that we've just in a system that we've constructed. It must reflect our own interiority in some way so I mean I think it's easy to see robots as alive as a result I don't know I just thought there was a link between your Absolutely, absolutely. So, one of the themes that sort of the story set series started from was this thing that we have at the college, an initiative called this idea of principle innovation. And basically that there are, I mean as you as known as being number one in innovation, but the question that we ask is just because we can should read this of course comes from Jurassic Park. Right. And I want to have each of you talk a little bit about some connections that you see around sort of ethical and moral dimensions that emerged in the stories. And if you can speak across the stories that wonderful and ship I'll start with you. Maybe start with your story and other connections that you see between the other two, and we'll just go around that way and feel free to interrupt and jump in. If you have any comments that you want to share in between. Wait, can you clarify that once again like you sort of cut out. Oh, I'm sorry. Is this better. Yes. Okay, so this idea of principle innovation that you know that when we are looking at technological innovation there are ethical and moral decisions and consequences to our actions and that we need to factor those in. And I saw I'd like you to speak to a to your story but also to see any connections that you saw with the other two, and then we can go in a round robin around that. But in terms of ethical consideration, I think one thing that jumps out across stories and across the world generally is and this is something that's a topic that's a little bit of like a pet peeve of mine or something that's very dear to my heart which is the concept of short term solutions versus long term problems, which is something that we constantly see all the time right like every single even. Let me just show you for instance they were all these instances where you had like a department head who was playing along with this on the face of it ludicrous idea of having a robot or an AI teaching creative writing, because in the short term she wanted to save her job. So that made sense for her to sit in those meetings. Now usually when something like this comes up it's because some person in like some budgetary department or whatever has come up with this idea because they're thinking about the fact that in six months from now they have an appraisal. So it's good for them. So all these so called systemic, a lot of these so called systemic innovations that are sold to us like we don't tend to often go into the human behind the suggestion, which I think is very interesting because a lot of these solutions are so essentially designed to affect humans more than systems themselves. So when you're telling a college professor now do your entire pedagogy sitting at home via a zoom, like that professor has to change a lot of things to do that. And it's really easy for me as an administrator to say, we will be all online zoom teaching you know what because we are into innovation and digitizing. And it's awesome and I can go to my boss and be like give my 20% bonus for this. That professor is going to have 20% less sleep for the rest of the year. Those students may or may not have 20% more or less learning for the rest of the year. And basically, like what I'm trying to get in very roundabout fashion. This was the case in this story in Simon story it was again short term thinking was a long term objective so I think the father is an extraordinarily fascinating character in Simon story even though he only appears like a couple of people. Because he's almost like the voice of the general lay society and the societal pressures that are put upon people who are trying to do slightly different things. So, at any point where a status quo or a generalized understanding of a topic was questioned. And then his dad was there to be like, no, that's not how it works. Why are you thinking this way. And then you have to be put in this place where your way doesn't really seem to be working is it like you're sitting at home right now. And all you're really doing is giving me lectures on my life. And then the dad would retreat into the background for a bit and then you come back again. So it was all that recurring thing I think the void in lead story tends to play a bit of a role like that in terms of like that empty space where we don't really have answers and people are like filling whatever is most expedient at the point of time. So once essay went into it in some more detail. I don't know if you want to touch upon that yet. But on the whole yeah this is what I think about it. Thank you. Please Simon anybody wants to go next. Like, you know, on the question of innovation, you know, what, what is actually, you know, a new idea, what is a refinement of an existing idea and what is a design evolution in the wrong direction and I think all three of the stories ask that question we have like a, we have a virtual curator we have an AI educator, and then we have an AI translator or virtual translator you know what I mean. So I think you know this question of developing these interfaces whom they serve and what kind of vocabulary populates them is germane to all three stories. And, you know, we can see sort of the holes the gaps in that understanding or sometimes made larger by what we call innovation, you know, sort of, I think in my story the character being unable to. I mean so when I wrote the story the the painting that's described in the story does exist for the it's it is my favorite painting and the scale of the painting is absolutely tremendous it really does look like two different things, depending on where you're standing in orientation to it and that is something that just absolutely physicality that cannot be replicated by looking at a digital image. And the fact in the story whereby the character is stopped on the Metropolitan website from viewing it at a larger scale that's taken from reality right like, as Shiv says it's present fiction. We're already, you know, in the name of innovation and curation and info sorting, you know, starting to garden people away from things that they might want to access. And I think, yes, the void does sort of mean that that disconnect that's occurring between people and the things that they're trying to access and I do think that theme is present in all three stories that that communication gap, you know the authority, the authority of parents or even the lack of understanding between human and animal on what should be eaten, you know what I mean, like, yeah, that's what I think about it too. Thank you. Simon. I think one of the strongest ethical moral issues, I think comes from stronger and in sheds and these stories that it doesn't mind is that a lot of organizations and systems are focused on on outcomes rather than. Students or the well being of the human and non human components involved. I think outcomes are important but they should be used to refine the tools you use for example to teach students. My wife is a teacher and she spent the best part of the last year teaching through zoom. It was saying it means there's a lot more effort and energy the days are extraordinarily long journey. But the other problem she pointed out is to me is that the students themselves don't have access to each other the way they're used to my wife, for example, can't determine what their state of mind is from their body language from who they're looking at the way they're doing with their hands where they're sitting on the desk and the students themselves can't interact with each other they can't chat, flirt, talk, exchange impromptu ideas, all that human to human close up communication stuff which humans thrive on which was essential to our well being I think have been left aside by technology by that by the zoom technology but that's at the same time we needed it. The classes couldn't stop the learning couldn't stop. But I think outcome became more important than the students themselves during that year in a very strange way, and how the technologies apply. I know things will get better I'm confident things will get better the way we use it, and the way we interact. But if we use it, instead of human contact that is we don't go back to classes when it's safe to do so because it's cheaper and easier and more efficient to just zoom. I think education will fall into view this. Thank you Simon for that and this came up, I think Lee in our conversation. So, growing up in India I got a chance to see Rodin's sculptures they were had better traveling exhibition. And to go see the thinker and Rodin is to do one thing in his culture is he either make them more than life size or slightly less than life size. And then you have the sort of odd, which you never get from seeing a picture, right, that the ratio, you know, and the thinker turned out to be much smaller than I thought it was. Plus, I have never thought that when I walk around it I can see Rodin's but I mean the thinkers but and that's a different way of getting a 360 view. It's real in some ways that that you can never get from reading the critical analysis of the sculpture or seeing all these photographs of it, or even a virtual reality 360. There is something to be said for the, for the being their experience in that museum around surrounded by all his other pieces of art. You know, so I just thought I would share that that was, it's a sort of a point I think it's funny but also I think makes a broader point. I have a question from the audience that I'd like to bring up because I think it connects Sir Ruth Schimel asks. She wonders whether you think all about how technology fills space to obviate boredom and distract from dealing with meaning and emotion fear and anxiety. And then she says that these stories are so much closer in that regard and I think I'm going to start with you Lee because I think that sort of is a team that is really powerful, but I think it is touched upon. In each of those like ship all, all your interactions happen through a screen, Simon I think the tension between the parent and the child, all of those right so maybe Lee start with you. Well I just like as, as a point of clarification I feel like probably every era in time would have some threat to intimacy posed by communication. When we talk about like, oh we can't touch and everything being coded like that's how the Victorians lived and somehow they managed to meet and marry and have intimacy you know I mean like, there's been several iterations of human communication where intimacy has been threatened. So you know I don't want to sound like, you know, anti you know social media in that way, however, I think there's definitely, you know, a new set of challenges to intimacy and communication that come with this. And yes this, this definitely I think the pandemic highlighted for a lot of people ways in which their digital relationships were like lozenges and ways they were mediating boredom or unpleasant feelings by sort of flicking thumbing the rosary of the phone screen. And like, I just feel like it's, it's exception, I think we are in the process of adjusting exceptionally as a society to a lot of, we have more exposure to each other than we've ever had. You know I think we are processing more connections to one another than we've ever had to even as we have less physical intimacy and things like that. So I do think that there's an anxiety and that there's a sense of coping. I do think that people are trying increasingly to use digital culture in a dopaminergic way like whether that's asmr or you know soothing audio lo-fi beats or you know communities around like I follow you know so many different spaces that are just devoted to liminal spaces like you know empty playgrounds or like waiting rooms and hallways and like old communal old civic buildings, like the type of things you don't see anymore because I live in the city and spend all my time online now, you know, so I don't know I think there's this nostalgia for texture. And is that negative coping or is that sort of, is that a holistic, are we transposing our senses, you know, into the digital space that you know that we're spending so much time, you know, attached to. And maybe it's not an either or right I mean maybe it's part of being human being living in these times is finding what works, you know, you know for you, Simon ship, either if you want to follow up on that. And one of the things technology is done I'm not the first to point this out is that it stops our children from being bored. When I was a kid and I got bored I got up and found things to do I discovered new ways to play or went out and sort of world a bit or contacted friends or found my parents or did a job but it seems to me that a lot of young people these days have easy access to they can find themselves playing computer game or being online with friends and social media without moving on or talking about the physical thing about moving and exercises and that's not the point the point is, I think being bored as a good driver for creativity. It allows you to explore the world forces you to explore the world in a way that you wouldn't normally do finding something to do finding something to occupy your mind finding something to occupy your hands. And this piece of artwork that humans created isn't actually created by our species was created by hermo erectus. It's a bit of a series of Chevrolet on the sea show. I think it was founded a meeting so you just imagine this, this this cousin of ours sitting on a pelvic board out of its mind, not knowing what to do waiting for the seashells to put picking one up. You know something to do. And who knows it may have been the very first piece of writing or calligraphy artwork in human history. So I think I think sometimes new technology takes that that way from a set opportunity to to be bored to discover ways of doing new things. Shift your thoughts and then we have started getting quite a few questions on the chat but I want to address one thing before we go there so quickly your thoughts before we shift gears a little bit. I do think it's important to note at this point that like this particular question is not in any sense a new question, like back in the day and we've and Simon mentioned the Gutenberg printing press. When they first started printing newspapers there was something I forget the name but I think it was something along the order of the good, good manners or something like that they call themselves society that actively campaigned against newspapers because they said people reading newspapers in public was causing lack of social interaction, which is the exact same thing that is happening with social media today right you have people complaining who everyone's looking at their phone, but it's it's not a new argument it's just a new. Well, product which is being argued against in that sense. Right. And as far as innovation goes like I think this story has been very fantastic little moment there where she mentions Vantablack and Vantablack is extraordinary interesting in this context because it's a new technology or a blackest black so to speak. And one of the first thing that happened when it came out was an artist from the UK tried to patent it for himself. So nobody else could use it. And I think that just kind of sums up the whole thing. So that is a question. Manage use the newspaper to print the manifesto. The question around economics that's coming up from one of our listeners viewers but I do want to take a little sidetrack here because I think one of the things that these three stories do and the fact that you know that she via from India sitting in South Africa, I'm from India sitting in Phoenix me you are in London right now from the US. Right. So, and I think that all of these stories have this other thing in common and I think that that's maybe that's a theme that you guys are deliberately doing this to sort of widen the range of voices and characters that exist in this space and I know we have talked about in our webinars and Simon you've taken it one more level by going interest species right or interest species in that. And so I'm wondering if that how much of that is something that you think is a part of how you work that you think about your creative work with that sort of in the back of your mind. I'll start with you shift. I do think about it in the sense that I do think a lot of science fiction especially historically has tended to get a little siloed where you know standard fantasy world like you shut your eyes you will imagine one kind of fantasy world which is basically the toilet can rip off of like this idealist version of you of Europe which doesn't actually have brown people so it is not like Europe actually in fact, but it somehow exists in these fantasy worlds. And in a larger context I think like as the world globalizes as we all get drawn like as you said each of us is effectively someone who was born somewhere and is currently sitting somewhere else on in a completely different country. So, the world is very global at this point of time like there's a lot more stuff that we can find that is in common which does not have to like point to specifics like race and when I say specifics like race I mean like we don't really have to restrict it to one particular geography one particular anything because the things that unite humans are so much more universal. And it just seems like a much more powerful well spring of story to draw on when we can draw on things that sort of like connect us all across geographies as a species rather than pointing to specific places and times and saying this is where a cool thing happened. Thank you. Simon. I think diversity is one of the main drivers of creativity. The things that we learn from people we come across from different cultures and backgrounds and stuff it just contributes so much to a way we, it opens our eyes to what what's possible in the world. And we can we can adapt it and use and then send it back again, you know that culture isn't can't be boxed to culture just flows. I think diversity is essential for culture to grow and to find new directions without it, I think we become very stale very quickly. And we get lost. So we have talked about this others not this story but another story of yours that sort of are deeply resonated with me because it allowed me to see a perspective in a very powerful way that I wouldn't have otherwise and so can you speak a little bit to this issue, you know that we're talking about now about bringing different voices into the power of the need for that. I think, generally, there was this promise made by the technology industry that was very utopian, you know, we're supposed to be this great, you know, the internet as this great equalizer and a tool as being completely agnostic of class or creating all of these things. Obviously, I think under like, you know, white supremacist capitalist like Western head of a patriarchy that, you know, hasn't been the case the technology industry is controlled by a very narrow range of voices, and therefore, you know the product and vision are a narrow range of product and vision and then at least over my lifetime at least there's been this, you know, sort of circle yank between the fiction that gets created about the technology industry and the products that it makes so that they're just trying to bring ready player one and snow crash to life. I mean, like they read the books they work in the tech industry and you know there's this weird sort of oddly out of touch optimistic boy hero loop that I'm sort of trying to sell to consciously break, you know by systematically biasing my work toward marginalized people, because, you know, again this comes back to the theme that we keep have we keep discussing as a group that you know the impacts of ecosystems are felt an intimate life, and you know the impact of ecosystems is felt most acutely an intimate life from people that are not, you know, part of this, you know, Silicon Valley centric, you know, global utopian techno capitalist, you know vision which is almost everybody is marginalized by that and, you know, I personally want to focus specifically on you know women struggling under these conditions. You know, you know people with particular identity concerns around self representation in digital space because you know we've understood that the technology environment is a more hostile and toxic place for some people than for others and is more possible for some voices to be to succeed on social than others you know race and race and and gender and all of these things play a role. And the technology you know I've experienced firsthand in my journalism career how disinterested the technology industry is in solving those problems and on biasing those data sets and in decreasing you know the impact on on people so if through fiction I can sort of tell stories that you know diversify the range of voices in in futurism. You know that's something that's really important to me and I think everyone, the other authors would share share that view as well. So I mean I have to say that of the three webinars that the only one that got hacked was the one Lee that you were the best on right, and it really stayed with me it's like no I don't mean that and that is not a coincidence right I mean and got zoom bomb and to have to live through the rest of a world. Really, I mean it's essential that these different voices be brought in and be centered and so thank you for the work that you do in that. And it just that whole incident just brought it home to me in a very palpable way because I don't get. Honestly, I didn't know, I could not even assume that was particularly to do with me. You know it's just not to draw attention but yeah and and these are things that time and again like you know the leaders of the industry do not consider those experiences when they're doing product design and and you know, the further out you go from the concerns of privileged users of the industry, the more interesting these ecosystemic impacts, the more the more complicated problems they become to solve and I think more interesting problems to solve than fulfilling like yet another, you know Christmas toy power fantasy for who you know whoever on the west coast, you know. It's important to put in at this point that when we're talking about like diversifying storytelling, it affects a lot more than simply characters, even though that's a really important aspect, like it affects how stories are told in themselves and how they are received, for instance, a lot of storytelling across the world does not follow the Cambalian three act structure, like it does not follow these so called norms and procedures of show don't tell blah blah blah. There are in fact if show don't tell was the thing we wouldn't have oral storytelling because it's all telling, which is essentially the most primal form of storytelling right so the more people and ideas we include within our storytelling across the world like the more everyone. Essentially, I don't understand an argument that more diversity can ever be a negative like how can it be bad to have more kinds of stories to read and more kinds of people to read about. There doesn't seem to be a context in which it's bad. So there's a question which is sort of a later from Michael on zoom, which speaks again expands this thing a little further is that is that regarding digital communication and spaces that still seem inaccessible to the disability community in your mind. No one can answer if comfortable and says as a clarification that that they are autistic. And I was wondering if people had any thoughts about that anybody can jump into that. So I have ADHD, a fairly chronic version of it, and I think it's very interesting what has happened over the last year, like for years and years and years we've heard that certain kinds of accessibility methods cannot be implemented they're too difficult. It's impossible we can't do it we don't have the money we don't have the technology we don't have the base, and in about like two and a half months flat in 2020 we did just because everybody needed it when the bottom line dependent on it. So, what that tells me is that these problems aren't really as big as the problem is not so much one of execution it's one of will. And I think in terms of like disabled activists and disability activists and people with disabilities across the world at this point have got like every last bit of ammo they need to make this argument at this point, like, we just did it. And now we're actually having conversations about undoing it because you know what the bottom line might get affected. So, what you're basically telling people from the community is, you're not worth it in literal terms we are putting a money valuation on it and you're not worth it. And I really think that's something that we all need to like take a minute to think about like, every time we have this conversation about the message that goes out through this conversation. It's been like very hard not to interrupt. I totally understand what you're talking about remote work has been a real blessing for me it's allowed me to accomplish a lot more. But you know, again, as she said before, we're told it's not possible until there's a financial incentive in some cases, you can make the financial case to companies and they will still decline because they're so uncomfortable with it You know, I've tried to pitch prod, you know, trying to pitch diverse projects in the technology industry whether that is a tool or an entertainment product is still an uphill battle like going to social media companies and saying look, here is a financial and a statistical and data argument for you to increase, you know, I don't know safety and moderation individual tools for users or for you to take women's privacy seriously or, you know, you for you to have a different policy on you know this or that, you know, and they just don't want to do it because it's a culture. It represents to them a cultural shift they have given away to large of a philosophical share of what they're doing I think and, and, you know, sometimes not even money will incentivize them to care about accessibility, because they don't, they, it's so important for that to them that you suffer, you know suffering is so important to their understanding to the world of the world you know. I think, I think there's a very good analogy that with the health system in some countries where countries that have a health system that works spend less money than countries with health systems that don't own health, and their health outcomes are better so it makes no financial sense, not to have universal health care. There's not one single good economic or human reason not to do it. But as other people before me, there's someone holding in a rational position now I'm at a rational argument it's going to shift. My favorite example of this entire thing of this part of the conversation is the employers who are like, you work on spreadsheets that's your job. I now require to come to this physical location and work on that spreadsheet, because I will not let you work from home. It will save us money it will save you money but no you must come here. I want to control you it's because the environment of monitoring your physical body is crucial to their notion of capital like it's. Yeah, it's, it's for what they're clinging to it's never, it's always really really loathsome yeah. So this is the problem having three people with ADHD and poor Simon who just gets out shouted. So so this connects actually to a question from Joey on the on zoom. And, and Joe yes it's a good friend of the show and factory works for Center for Science and Imagination is I think work with all of you as well so he says all of the stories engage with how technology transforms economics. So he deals with systemic precarity in the workforce the impact of austerity and the informatization of academic work shift deals with the corporatization of education and tension between budget profits and learning. And Simon with his acknowledgement and non human sentience suggests huge legal and thus economic consequences for inter species interchange. So, his question is how did the authors think about the economics of education and learning at this industries will shape the future so anybody wants to jump in first and we'll just go from there. I love this question because it brings us to the whole idea of learning which is the broader team, and sort of, as we agree to the end so. So the question of how does economics of education and learning change as these technologies enter into our words. I can't help but being an optimist and it's probably forge considering what's happened over the last year, but that technology will make education more accessible for more people and for and for less money. So the money can be spent hopefully somewhere else in education to improve the lives for these students. And that's especially in countries like in consulates like Africa countries like South Africa Botswana Zimbabwe Zambia, where they desperately want as much education they desperately want to be at school and they desperately want to go to university desperately want to make the best they can of their lives. And education is a fundamental part of that if technology can help them achieve it that's fantastic. We shouldn't throw technology, we shouldn't be down on technology because of the obvious. There's so much potential, so much that can be done, but the problem seems so intrinsic. Every time we have a new technology that seems to be the systems in place seem to take it that we're reluctant to use it to begin with and then take it and take it from us. And I don't know how you overcome that. I think one thing all these three stories do and I think they all make it fairly clear that they're doing it is that there's this distinction between technology and users of technology and I think a lot of us tend to blame technology for problems that stem from users and creators of technology. And it's been that way forever right like from the time of the Skynet stories on what Skynet is evil like nobody ever thinks to ask about the do to build Skynet. So that's one aspect of it the other aspect of it is in terms I think it's a definitional problem when you talk about value because like, okay, so take my story you have like a university. On the one hand you have a teacher who's saying, I decide what is value based on like the student learning and leaving this place more knowledgeable than they came in is value addition for me. On the other hand on the other side of the building you've got someone sitting with a spreadsheet saying, as long as we are spending less money on each student than we are earning from them, that is value. And like, as long as these two definitions and the various other ones continue to clash and we don't really have a universal definition of value addition within education. We're going to continue to come back to this economic problem of choice which is how they tend to describe all economics don't they. Lee. Yeah, I think it, I don't find it pessimistic to be systems critical you know we can be you know optimistic about potential, but you know needs to come with a close observation to you know that structural element that might cause it to just reproduce the same problems. As you correct for the bias it will reproduce the same problems so I think for me. The experience of people that I know that working education right now is very stressful as a result of this transforming landscape and the desire the need the important desire to make technology more accessible you know it is, it's coming at a cost. You know I know teachers who work incredible hours and, and you know maybe don't have the most sustainable living situations. You know, if we're making education more remote you know where is it intersecting, you know I wanted to ask in my piece where it intersects with existing care and collaboration jobs. You know, in my story shows a teacher who's student who's kind of bearing an inappropriate degree of emotional responsibility for students well being because I think you know those lines are becoming, you know more blurred when when we make, you know so accessibility for learning is great, but you know how are we going to make that viable for the people who are working in the system, you know how are we going to you know how how our how is education going to be adequately supported in a system where it's transforming. And if we don't look at, you know, if we don't look at this as a problem solving thing rather than as a blue sky thing, we might end up increasing the squeeze on our teachers and things like that. Yeah, I mean once when the pandemic started I wrote a piece of value of school, and you know we tend to think of schools as being places for academic learning. And I just made a whole case for all the different things that schools do as the fundamental economic argument is at the heart is schools keep our like babysitters for our children so that we can go and run the economy. You know, the push for like let's open schools now let's open schools now doesn't come from any deep interest in the learner or the student, it comes from, we need to get people back to work I mean, again I mean I'm this is not a judgment call one way or the other but I think it's interesting but I think it's important that we face that economic sort of reality of the situation. I'm looking at the time we are at one minute. So I think this is great to have wound it up around this issue of learning. I'm sorry to Tony Tony had a question about how learning could be transformed in the space which I would love to have asked but I need to keep to the time so me ship Simon. Thank you so much for joining. Once again, and for the pieces that you wrote, I have to give a special thanks to our three academic experts who wrote the responses. Thank you to Lova Andrea Tomer and Katrina Michael. We had three wonderful conversations with them and the individual authors, all of those are archived at the learning futures dot education dot ASU website. A big thank you to all of those who participated who watched and sent them their questions apologies to those whose questions are we could not get to. I also want to be sure to thank all the people who made the series and event possible first thanks to the future tense team including the folks at Slate, ASU Center for Science and the imagination. Thank you so much for joining us and thanks to the principal innovation team marketing and event team at MLF DC, the people at the Office of Scholarship and innovation. This has been so much fun. Thank you so much, you can reach out to me email Twitter, or go to learning futures that education dot ASU.edu, which has all the stories and everything, all the different webinars, all archived on one page. This is my work for next week, future tense event on April 22. This is the launch of Patrick Radon keeps book Empire of pain. I just did a review of it yesterday in the New York Times seems like a fascinating book, really getting into something sort of that has really, I think, transformed our country piece America in terms of the, you know, drug problem and so on. And so I think it will be a great event. So thank you again, everybody. This was great. Thank you, Lee, Shiv, Simon. This has been the high point of my last few months so I'm sorry to see it go but I'm also glad that we got a chance to do this. Thank you for doing this, but yeah. Yes, thank you. It's been it's been a blast. I've really enjoyed it. Great. We'll find some other opportunities to continue. Absolutely. Thank you guys.