Thank you for this article, Ann, and for all that you are doing to mitigate climate change. I realize that your audience for this publication is government leaders as opposed to corporate executives; however, as you say, the two are inextricably intertwined. I wonder whether we need to consider painting this picture with two-brushes: a very wide one and a fine one? The broad brush strokes about the connection between global capital markets and the pandemic was extremely insightful. But the fine brush strokes around corporate response I feel like could use greater definition. The statement "Silicon Valley’s future ambition is to worsen inequality further by pushing even more economic activity online" is a very broad and bold claim. While some may have that "future ambition" to worsen inequality, I am hopeful that there are just as many or more Silicon Valley executives and investors who are awakening to the climate reality and their role in changing it.
For better or for worse, our ability to mitigate climate change will rest in part on corporate response. I tend to favour an inclusive and critical lens for bringing those on board who are ready to step forward.
Thank you Adam for this thoughtful comment. You are right this was a polemic - and as such very broad brush, as you kindly put it. Someone with a finer brush might have pointed out that Silicon Valley execs are not consciously pursuing such a goal, even if their work and innovations help meet the goal. Second, that Silicon Valley execs are sincerely concerned about 'climate reality'. Still I am not fully persuaded. One has only to think of Silicon Valley billionaires like Peter Thiel,(who may have moved to LA, but who is definitely part of the SV community). He a) dedicates enormous sums to "making machines truly intelligent" and b) shares Ayn Rand's ideology. The global 'platform' companies Amazon, Google, Uber, Facebook to name a few do not consider the employment consequences - and therefore social and economic consequences of their innovations. Some would argue: why should they? That is a matter for the government/state...and I would agree. But some of these billionaires played a big (lobbying) part in disabling regulation of their activities...
Finally, while I do acknowledge your point, in my defence, these posts are necessarily short...and meant to stimulate thought and debate...So thank you for your contribution...
Thank you for this article, Ann, and for all that you are doing to mitigate climate change. I realize that your audience for this publication is government leaders as opposed to corporate executives; however, as you say, the two are inextricably intertwined. I wonder whether we need to consider painting this picture with two-brushes: a very wide one and a fine one? The broad brush strokes about the connection between global capital markets and the pandemic was extremely insightful. But the fine brush strokes around corporate response I feel like could use greater definition. The statement "Silicon Valley’s future ambition is to worsen inequality further by pushing even more economic activity online" is a very broad and bold claim. While some may have that "future ambition" to worsen inequality, I am hopeful that there are just as many or more Silicon Valley executives and investors who are awakening to the climate reality and their role in changing it.
For better or for worse, our ability to mitigate climate change will rest in part on corporate response. I tend to favour an inclusive and critical lens for bringing those on board who are ready to step forward.
Thank you Adam for this thoughtful comment. You are right this was a polemic - and as such very broad brush, as you kindly put it. Someone with a finer brush might have pointed out that Silicon Valley execs are not consciously pursuing such a goal, even if their work and innovations help meet the goal. Second, that Silicon Valley execs are sincerely concerned about 'climate reality'. Still I am not fully persuaded. One has only to think of Silicon Valley billionaires like Peter Thiel,(who may have moved to LA, but who is definitely part of the SV community). He a) dedicates enormous sums to "making machines truly intelligent" and b) shares Ayn Rand's ideology. The global 'platform' companies Amazon, Google, Uber, Facebook to name a few do not consider the employment consequences - and therefore social and economic consequences of their innovations. Some would argue: why should they? That is a matter for the government/state...and I would agree. But some of these billionaires played a big (lobbying) part in disabling regulation of their activities...
Finally, while I do acknowledge your point, in my defence, these posts are necessarily short...and meant to stimulate thought and debate...So thank you for your contribution...