Technology cannot overcome our economic, ecological and human relational challenges. The evidence for that is that in the past century alone we have achieved unimaginable technological prowess, but our economies, our ecosystems and human organisations have never been so unhealthy and chaotic (Allan Savory).
What if our criteria for tech adoption could really uphold the health of our soils and communities? I guess these criteria could not improve upon Wendell Berry's (the poet and agrarian writer). Can anyone here confirm they're working on tech such as Berry describes?
Nine Rules for Evaluating New Technology (from the 1987 "Why I Am Not Going to Buy a Computer", by Berry.
1. The new tool should be cheaper than the one it replaces.
2. It should be at least as small in scale as the one it replaces.
3. It should do work that is clearly and demonstrably better than the one it replaces.
4. It should use less energy than the one it replaces.
5. If possible, it should use some form of solar energy, such as that of the body.
6. It should be repairable by a person of ordinary intelligence, provided that he or she has the necessary tools.
7. It should be purchasable and repairable as near to home as possible.
8. It should come from a small, privately owned shop or store that will take it back for maintenance and repair.
9. It should not replace or disrupt anything good that already exists, and this includes family and community relationships.
