#7 New technology creates new groups of winners and losers
It is my grandma’s 101st birthday, and when I write Window #7, I think of her.
When cancer hit her, she said, “I will live until I die.” And surely, she did.
She spent her whole life putting relationships first, and she refused every attempt to rank people. To her, anyone and everyone deserved love and belonging.
The photo is of Grandma and my mother’s cousin Bruno, who arrived with one extra chromosome and brought more joy than most people know how to make room for.
New technology doesn’t share my grandma’s instinct. Every technological shift draws a new line between those who are lifted and those who are left behind. Not out of intention, but out of design.
Generative AI is one example. If you already write well, have the prior knowledge needed, reason clearly, and know how to structure information, AI becomes an amplifier. It sharpens your skills and expands your reach. But if you struggle with literacy, lack the prior knowledge, access and time, AI can widen the gap. The ones who were ahead get further ahead. The ones who needed support risk falling even further behind. This is what sociologist Robert K Merton referred to as The Mathew Effect.
What do we do with that?
There is no easy fix. But we can choose a harder, more honest approach:
design technology for the person with the fewest advantages. Not the expert. Not the early adopter. Not the person with five devices and unlimited time. But the opposite.
Design for the person who has the most to lose. If the system works for them, it will work for everyone else.
Grandma believed belonging was a right, not a reward. Technology won’t follow that principle on its own. We have to build it in.