"We are living life to show it on the networks"

In the book Guide to survive the present, the technologist and economist Santiago Bilinkis analyzes how the companies that design digital platforms and mobile applications - Google, Facebook, Amazon, Apple, Netflix, Microsoft - use all kinds of manipulation strategies to “ conquer our time and our attention ”. The dependence on screens that large technology corporations generate is functional to their businesses, but often goes against the interests of users, even to the detriment of their health . "This is the first time that a tool, as soon as we start using it, begins to use us," warns Bilinkis, who completed postgraduate studies on artificial intelligence, robotics, biotechnology, neuroscience and nanotechnology at Singularity University, located in a headquarters from NASA in Silicon Valley.

“The first thing that happened to me when the quarantine started was that the networks saturated me. The eagerness for information made me be ultraconnected the first few days and that is terrible for physical and mental health, ” says the technology specialist. “You look in the networks to calm the anguish and the only thing that the networks cause is more anguish, like the sugary drinks that you drink because you are thirsty but they make you thirsty . You look for relief in the network but the only thing that generates you is the need for more network. The quarantine made me adopt a much more drastic posture to control the connection time in networks: I implemented systems that allow to put a maximum time to the use of each application. Messaging systems have a lot of embedded mechanisms that generate the anxiety of being constantly aware of what is happening, including WhatsApp, the 'is writing', 'is online', the double tick ”...

-What networks have is that they never end ...

- Historically, any content we consumed had a beginning and an end. You started and finished a magazine, a chapter of a television series started and ended, and then there was a forced waiting period until there was another to watch. A week for a new issue of the magazine or the next chapter in the series. Now everything is there. There is nothing external that puts a stop on you, so we have to put the brake on ourselves. And you have to invent these half-artificial mechanisms so that Instagram ends, because there is always one more photo or story to watch. You have to create the limit. Platforms have a lot of mechanisms to not let you go. And the crazy thing is that the method they use to catch you is more subtle than what you think.

"Isolation is ideal for companies because you have more time and leave more of a mark. A lot of the business is that information."

-How do they do it?

-There is a powerful resource: that of slot machines . There is no dumbest game at its core than those machines. They have no ability, you pull a lever and what comes out is variable, it does not depend on how you pull the lever. However, it is the game that produces more addiction, that produces more gambling. How is it explained? There is a psychological mechanism known as intermittent variable rewards . It is as simple as every time you pull the lever sometimes nothing comes out, sometimes a small prize comes out and very occasionally a big prize comes out. That mechanism is tremendously addictive . And that's what happens every time you refresh on your Instagram wall: sometimes nothing comes out, sometimes something comes out that is a little bit good and sometimes something great. It is that timba that keeps you constantly wanting to look a little more. Constant multisensory overstimulation shattered our attention span.

-With isolation, many dimensions of life were transferred to virtuality. Is this the ideal setting for companies that design software?

- I do not want to pay conspiracy theories, but that this scenario suits them, there is no doubt. It is not just being at home, it is also having time for the screens and that many activities that were done in person, have technology as the main actor. For the boys it is attending school through remote classes, for the adults teleworking or shopping in the supermarket in a virtual way. For companies it is an ideal situation because you have more time and also because you leave more mark. Much of the business depends on the information they can capture about users. If you always did your shopping at the supermarket, there was no digital trace of your consumption habits. Now there is invaluable information for those who can handle it. Clearly it is a very convenient situation for companies, and one that forces us to raise our defense mechanisms. The other thing that is very important to do is disable all notifications.

- What does that allow you?

-I do not know when a WhatsApp arrives: it does not vibrate, it does not sound, it does not turn on lights, I have all that disabled. It is an uncomfortable barrier for those who want to contact me, because I answer when I see it, not when a message arrives. Communication comes back a little slower, more asynchronous, but it allows me to have control of my life, of my schedule, to decide when I want to connect and not be perpetually connected. And that is essential. Notifications are not intended to notify you, they are intended to interrupt and distract you. When the tool you use is a digital device, the moment you grab it, there is a lot of software inside your phone that is convenient for you to do something different from what you were about to do. It is the first tool that, when you start using it, starts trying to use you. Each platform will use the best hook available to try not to do what you intended to do and do something else. WhatsApp cannot be closed, that should be prohibited, how can there be an app that you cannot close? We should have the right to disconnect without uninstalling the programs.

"Digitally, the word addiction has a positive connotation. One Netflix category is 'series to watch you infinite chapters.'"

-Is that right to disconnect being discussed?

-It is not posed in these terms, as a right, but the heart of the problem is on the table: what type of information can companies collect and to what extent do we know what information we are collecting . Most of us are very naive at this point. Today you have a lot of applications that ask you for the location, even at times when you are not using the app. And that is unjustifiable, unless it is a mapping application. There was some improvement because when you install an app, it asks you to consent to the permissions that are granted. And that goes through social pressure, but for most people it is still very dark. You give ok because you want to use the application, without understanding much what you consented to and without much possibility of saying no.

-In the book you make an analogy between the consumption of junk food and social networks, how is that relationship?

-I like that analogy. Because people have become aware of food issues and it is obvious that your body is made of what you eat: if you eat too much fat, your cholesterol rises. If you eat poorly, you develop health problems. If we are doing macanas, we know it. With digital content that has not happened yet. Just as your body is made of what you eat, your mind is made of the digital content you consume. If you are watching documentaries on ecology your head is armed in one way and if you watch content about the life of the rich and famous it is armed in another, it is inevitable. But we don't have the same awareness that the Internet is full of the digital equivalent of junk food. A few months ago there was a graphic advertising campaign for a series channel with the slogan: "if it is addictive, it is here". That's crazy. In what other context could someone use the word addiction as a positive attribute? That happens because digitally the word addiction still has a positive connotation , it seems cool or fun. One of the Netflix categories is "series to watch you infinite chapters". We have to change the chip because addiction is bad in any context, especially one that messes with your ideology, with your consumption habits and with your interpersonal relationships.

"Before, the content we consumed had a beginning and an end. Now everything is there. There is nothing external that puts a stop to you."

- The states should have more interference in these issues and regulate unethical practices of companies?

-Ideally yes, but the problem is that in general the people who make up the governments have an alarming lack of technological familiarity. Most have a community manager who handles tweets and that is what they understand from social networks. It is not a problem specific to Argentina. When Mark Zuckerberg was questioned in the United States Congress (in 2018, for the use of personal data of Facebook users during the 2016 presidential campaign), I assure you that Zuckerberg must have been locked up for three weeks with his advisers shooting him the most difficult questions, and preparing to dodge all the bullets. But when you see the questions that the legislators asked him, they are a piece of paper. The guy was prepared to have nuclear bombs thrown at him and they shot him with a blowgun and chewed paper. You realized that the questions the legislators did not even understand what they were doing, someone had written them, and they could not re-ask them because they did not understand the answers. There is such a great asymmetry between the sophistication of the companies and the little sophistication of the officials in these matters, that it is very difficult to give answers to these problems.

-Digital hyperconnection is a very new phenomenon, from the last ten years. How does all this affect the little ones?

-Before, when you wanted to sell a baby product, you sold it to the mother. But in the late 1990s they discovered babies as a consumer target that could be targeted directly. It started with a video system called Baby Einstein , designed by a company that promised to make your kids "smarter." And what they had was a succession of very colorful images, with a type of movement and music that caused an addictive effect on the baby. You put this on him and he was dazed for hours. Then came the Teletubbies and a series of products aimed at an old target that until then was not taken into account by advertising. This generated something tremendously functional for the adults in charge, because the young children are very demanding and especially when they are bored. If you give him a toy, the boy is entertained for five or ten minutes, but if you give him a cell phone, he is entertained for three or four hours or until you disconnect it. This is very comfortable for adults but it is super harmful for boys and there is not as much awareness of it. Today we let the boys use the Internet without any accompaniment or explanation. That's crazy. And it has to do with the fact that many parents do not know the risks of the Internet and would not know how to explain them to their children. The recommendation of the Argentine Association of Padiatrics is that no device of any kind be used for up to two years. But the reality is that ninety percent of boys use devices before that age.

"The whole scheme of likes and the number of followers shattered our self-esteem. And it is not limited to teenagers."

-And how do these “mental candy” and distraction mechanisms implemented by social networks operate on self-esteem?

- The number of followers and likes are the currency in which social acceptance is traded today. Because while it was always true that there were more popular people and more withdrawn people, now it is explicit and it is public, it is in full view of everyone. The number of followers and likes is the signal to the world of how accepted you are. And obviously acceptance of others is crucial for anyone. If it was more subtle before, now everyone can see how popular or accepted you are. So, you start to modify your actions to conform to the norm and get followers and be able to show the world that you are accepted. And that leads us to start living life to show it more than to enjoy it . You go to the Perito Moreno Glacier and instead of letting yourself be flooded by the impressive grandeur of the scene, you are thinking about where the selfie will come out best and the number of likes you will have for having been there. And that pollutes every day, we spend more time thinking about what we are going to show than what we are doing. The whole scheme of likes and the number of followers shattered our self-esteem. And it's not limited to teens. Adults are as trapped as boys . At this moment we really live life to show it.

-He did a radio column that sparked controversy about how virtual classes, without planning, abruptly changed the dynamics of teachers, students and families. How do you see the post-pandemic school scenario?

-The technology well used and put at the service of our purposes is a spectacular tool. The problem is that at the moment it is being used, in general, to make us functional for the purposes of others. In the field of education we had a brutal inertia of resistance to change. Although other orders of life have changed a lot, education has changed practically nothing. My and my children's education is the same. It is as if education had not taken note that technology exists and that it offers incredible possibilities. Curiously, it is the pandemic that forced us to incorporate the technological tool and now the challenge is to think about how we use it. Because the risk we have is that it is, once again, at the service of the interest of others.

-You propose a kind of mixed teaching: that students can see some recorded classes at home and that the classroom is a space for interaction, consultation, debate, exercises, and exhibition of works. Is its application viable?

-It is quite unexplored terrain and you have to do a lot of learning work. Remote classes are not the future of education, not that we want kids locked up in their homes instead of being at school. But there are a lot of little things that happened "by accident", based on the circumstance that children cannot go to school, which are great. And that they are small blocks to build the next education. The remote classes forced us for the first time in history to seriously change assessment methods. Because the most widespread evaluation method ever was the closed-book test with factual questions that are answered from memory. That evaluation mechanism, which is useless, cannot be done now. Because Google is on the computer or cell phone where the boys have to take the exam. And they have WhatsApp to ask their partner and copy themselves. That's great. Because in life, when I have a problem and I have to write an article on a certain topic, I think who I know who knows about it and I ask, I seek help, I investigate, until I build my own discourse on the subject . And that's what an open book or “open internet” exam trains you: it is a much more interesting and richer skill than memorizing all the rivers in Europe and forgetting them the day after the test. We did it by accident and by obligation, but it's great. When the face-to-face classes can return, hopefully we will not go back in the evaluation mechanisms.

Posted on Page 12