字幕表 動画を再生する 英語字幕をプリント Before I start I just want to say that this video discusses politics. While my main goal is specifically to explore the United States presidential hopeful Andrew Yang, and his lesser-known proposal of creating a department of attention economy, I realized my own political opinion will no doubt reflect itself in the video. So I will take a moment at the end to share my take on Andrew yang and my personal position on some policies. If you would prefer to see that segment first, please skip ahead. It should be titled as politics. The Democratic primary debate stage is packed. Each candidate seems to be leaning heavily on signature policies to stand out in the crowded field. Because of this, we, as potential voters run the risk of seeing the candidates as single issue politicians. I think it's important to dig a little deeper and to see what else each candidate has to offer. While learning about the different candidates, Andrew Yang's website stood out. Unlike most campaign websites, Andrew Yang's has a large page of listed policy proposals from his platform which are worth taking a look at. While I won't explore all of them in this video, I want to give a short introduction to Andrew Yang and then dive into one specific policy proposal I find particularly important: the creation of the Department of Attention Economy. In 2017 long before most politicians even decided they would enter the next presidential race, a relatively unknown entrepreneur filed for his run as a Democrat in the 2020 elections. Andrew Yang, having never held political office and previously having very little name recognition, managed to get an hour-long primetime CNN Town Hall in April 2019 and secured spot in the first round of the Democratic primary debates. Being in the startup sector since the 90s Andrew yang had an insider's view of the space and in turn the future of the American job market. He recognized that with technologies rapid rate of development there came the risk of severe automation. Yang's nonprofit, Venture for America, created thousands of jobs over the years but he recognized we needed a bigger approach to meet the challenge of technological unemployment. One major potential solution, Yang's signature proposal, is called the Freedom Dividend a form of universal basic income or UBI for short. Universal basic income is a system where the government issues a set amount of money on a recurring schedule to the citizens of the country unconditionally except for age. In Andrew Yang's freedom dividend would be $1,000 a month starting at age 18. Now this is a big idea and when taken seriously prompts a ton of questions and in-depth discussion. You can read a lot about UBI, listen to countless discussions about the pros and cons, and I encourage you to do so. But this is where I would like to take a turn and discuss another issue that Yang addresses and that I believe deserves our attention. On Yang's website under the policy link titled "reduce harm to children caused by smartphones", Andrew yang elaborates that social media and other online apps are currently being developed to capture our attention with little regard to the mental health of the person using them. This is an alarming development that becomes very obvious when you begin to track the amount of time spent on mobile devices. Our attention is actively being fought for. With the attention economy the concept begins with the idea that time, our 24 hours in a day, is the scarcest commodity we have. As other resources such as information and material possessions become less scarce, this contrast becomes more extreme. Companies are now vying for our engagement and attention to run ads or gather our information. Twitter, YouTube, Snapchat, Amazon, Reddit, Facebook. All competing for your eyes and ad dollars. they are researching and designing their products to better compete with everyone else for our time. The result? Devices and applications which at their extreme addict us and monopolize our time and attention with little regard to our health or well-being. And as of right now we do not have the framework in place to appropriately respond to the concept of an attention economy. The writer Matthew Crawford does a great job of explaining this issue... "The peculiar challenge of our present (one of them anyway) I think is that we find ourselves at a new stage of capitalism. One that's predicated on the ever more aggressive appropriation of our attention. Often by mechanized means. This makes cultivating the habits and pleasures of deep slow thinking a difficult matter. A new frontier of capitalism has been opened up by our self-appointed disruptors. It's one where you win competitive advantage by being the most aggressive in digging up and monetizing every bit of private headspace." Andrew Yang's solution is the formation of a department of attention economy. By creating a department Andrew Yang argues that we can focus on smartphones and social media, gaming and chat apps, and how to responsibly design and use them. Also, to create a best practices design philosophy for the industry to minimize the anti-social impacts of these technologies on children (and I would argue everyone) who are using them... "One of the things I'm going to do is I'm going to have a department of the attention economy and say look, we got to clean up the slot machines that are like hypnotizing and depressing our young people. Okay so what we do is were going to change the guidelines on like the timing of the reward mechanisms you have. Where it could even be that like you know a message pops up and says: 'hey you've been staring at this phone or this app for three hours you should find a human being or go outside'. " This would be a huge step forward in a time where it seems like no major institution is doing anything to protect the sovereignty of our attention. Yes, we can do what we can as individuals. We can use time tracking apps or make our screens monochrome, for example. But that still pits us busy people against the companies with teams of experts whose job it is to maximize the amount of time we spend on their platforms. Experts who have behavioral and technological tools that we don't have. It's not a fair relationship. With government articulating and addressing these issues we can at least have a chance at a level playing field. Tristan Harris is the director and co-founder of the Center for Humane Technology and co-founder of the time well-spent movement. He previously worked at Google as a design ethicist but now has dedicated his efforts to sounding the alarm about the concerns of companies hijacking our ability to focus on what's best for us... "Because we don't talk about it a handful of people working at a handful of Technology companies, through their choices will steer what a billion people are thinking today. So the internet is not evolving at random. The reason it feels like it's sucking us in, the way it is, is because of this race for attention. And it becomes this race to the bottom of the brainstem of who can go lower to get it. Just imagine there's people who have some desire about what they want to do and what they want to be thinking what they want to be feeling and how they want to be informed, and we're all just tugged into these other directions. And you have a billion people just tugged into all these different directions. Well imagine an entire design Renaissance that tried to orchestrate the exact and most empowering time well-spent way for those timelines to happen." It's clear Tristan Harris with his background and mission would be a great person to bring on board to tackle this problem. Andrew yang supports doing just that on his policy proposal page. Just by looking at this one link on Yang's site I can say it's apparent he has put some serious time into thinking about this problem we face. One that has not gained widespread political attention. But one that deserves it. Even though it is not his flagship proposal, it makes me confident as a voter to see how he's aware of a vast array of issues and is looking for solutions. A department of attention economy is a great start to formulating discussion and action to protect our shared attention spaces, and to apply guidelines to websites and apps. It makes me optimistic that this issue has a chance of being addressed on the debate stage. so a little background on my political perspective on Andrew yang in the upcoming elections I never have, nor ever see myself supporting Donald Trump due to his unpresidential behavior, awful policies, and the vast majority of political decisions. Therefore I will likely be voting Democrat no matter who the nominee is. I think Andrew yang brings a unique voice to the Democratic field and he proposes a large number of policies which I support. I'm especially interested in his policies regarding UBI, medicare for all, global warming, and of course how technology is affecting our mental health. That being said I'm looking forward to listening to all qualifying candidates in the upcoming debates and hopefully will help elect one of the Democratic primary candidates as president in 2020. Thank you for watching, and I hope to see you soon. Until next time.