Stephen Downes

This article could be much more clearly written, but the basic argument is this: a 'tech oligarchy' has emerged that uses private ownership, market concentration, venture capital, tax strategies, regulatory influence, and control over infrastructure to defend and expand its wealth. What is significant is that this tech oligarchy defines itself as significantly more intelligent than the rest of society, and that therefore the oligarchy, rather than (say) democratic processes, should define the future of society. Intelligence, on this account, is identifies with wealth accumulation; great wealth is the surest evidence of great intelligence. If that doesn't seem right to you, it is not only because you are not intelligent enough to see it, you "have no idea what's even going on at those levels." If this is true (and this is me speaking now) then the sole function of education ought to be to teach people how to acquire wealth; and the sole measure of innovation ought to be whatever people will pay for. This function alone defines what people need. But (of course) it is not true.