Tech has always introduced new elements as if they aren’t optional. Imagine working in the industry for 10 years, taking one look at the iPhone, and saying no, that isn’t for me. Now imagine having really good reasons to nope it. That’s what things feel like right now, when we’ve run out of new ideas and so have resulted to forcing things on people.

And so it’s been very interesting watching people react to it, and what they stand to gain or lose out of reacting to it. I follow someone who runs a successful independent business. They answer to no boss and have no incentive to use new technology in their job. And they just hate the new thing. Hate it to hell, y’all. Won’t stop posting about how it’s bad. It is bad, of course, at least in the way that everybody is using it, but it’s also bad in that it’s a labor issue.

Speaking out about the thing is very liable to cost a person their future in the industry. Or at least that’s how it’s framed by capital, which makes people afraid to do it, regardless of how true that may be. Wouldn’t you be afraid? So instead you use it, and talk about using it, and you conveniently ignore all of the problems with it, because you are convinced you have to.

As a result, I’ve been asking myself a handful of questions whenever I see someone talking about the thing. What do they stand to gain out of it? What do they stand to lose by following their ethical center? Is their interest in it genuine, or is it forced by capital? Are they addicted? (People can get addicted to it. I forgot to mention that. I know this is very complicated.)

As mentioned, we haven’t had to navigate this sort of territory before, because issues like these weren’t as polarizing, or we justified them as net-positive “disruption” in the name of progress. The next time you hear of someone talking about new technology, I invite you to consider where they’re coming from, and what they stand to gain or lose out of their viewpoint.