Skip to main content

Gaia’s Web - Karen Bakker ***

Sadly deceased in 2023, Karen Bakker combined geographical, environmental and technology interests, a crossover that she presented in her last book, Gaia’s Web. The idea here is to make use of the abilities of modern information technology, from machine learning to specialist sensors and satellite data to monitor both the state of the environment and those who are misusing it.

As such there is some fascinating material here. Bakker shows the power of digital eco-surveillance to protect the environment from everything from overfishing to forest fires, but emphasises rightly the accompanying danger that the same technologies can be used for surveillance by states. But Bakker sometimes undermines her own powerful arguments by taking a simplistic academic’s ‘capitalism bad’ approach that fails to recognise that without capitalism we wouldn’t have all this wonderful technology. There’s hypocrisy here. 

This leads to the (highly confusing) sentence: ‘Researchers have raised concerns that some contemporary discourses about conservation conflate security and environmental concerns; in some cases, conservation agencies become use [sic] violent force against people they identify as poachers, counterinsurgents or terrorists.’ It’s not really clear what is being said, but is the argument that taking action against poachers is good, but not against terrorists?

In an effort to remain approachable, some of the text can be oversimplistic to the point of being inaccurate. As something of a fan of Nagel’s famous ‘What is it like to be a bat?’ paper, I am uncomfortable with level of anthropomorphism used in the opening story about orcas. Much of the text is effusive, sometimes leading to hyperbole such as ‘digital trackers are affixed to the tiniest of insects’. Actually it’s only possible with midsized insects. Tiny insects like thunder flies are still far too small as yet.

Topics outside the author’s direct areas of interest can feel under-researched. Sadly, we get one of the most commonly wheeled out incorrect history of science clichés: no, Ada Lovelace did not ‘write the first computer program’. Another frequently used doubtful piece of information, stated as if it were fact, is that ‘ even a handful of Google searches used significant energy - equivalent to boiling a kettle to make a cup of tea’ - but the source is the Daily Telegraph, not the original researcher behind this 2009 story, who didn’t say that, and whose figures are way out of date. (To be fair, Bakker does point to the way IT companies are reducing carbon footprint, though rather spoils this by suggesting it’s just to look good. That has to be part of it, just as it is when academics posture, but most of the IT people I speak to genuinely care for the environment.)

The problems with the book are irritating because Bakker’s message is largely right. There’s a lot that’s interesting in this book, yet it could have been so much better.

Hardback:   
:  
Using these links earns us commission at no cost to you
Review by Brian Clegg - See all Brian's online articles or subscribe to a weekly email free here
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

It's On You - Nick Chater and George Loewenstein *****

Going on the cover you might think this was a political polemic - and admittedly there's an element of that - but the reason it's so good is quite different. It shows how behavioural economics and social psychology have led us astray by putting the focus way too much on individuals. A particular target is the concept of nudges which (as described in Brainjacking ) have been hugely over-rated. But overall the key problem ties to another psychological concept: framing. Huge kudos to both Nick Chater and George Loewenstein - a behavioural scientist and an economics and psychology professor - for having the guts to take on the flaws in their own earlier work and that of colleagues, because they make clear just how limited and potentially dangerous is the belief that individuals changing their behaviour can solve large-scale problems. The main thesis of the book is that there are two ways to approach the major problems we face - an 'i-frame' where we focus on the individual ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Introducing Artificial Intelligence – Henry Brighton & Howard Selina ****

It is almost impossible to rate these relentlessly hip books – they are pure marmite*. The huge  Introducing  … series (a vast range of books covering everything from Quantum Theory to Islam), previously known as …  for Beginners , puts across the message in a style that owes as much to Terry Gilliam and pop art as it does to popular science. Pretty well every page features large graphics with speech bubbles that are supposed to emphasise the point. Funnily,  Introducing Artificial Intelligence  is both a good and bad example of the series. Let’s get the bad bits out of the way first. The illustrators of these books are very variable, and I didn’t particularly like the pictures here. They did add something – the illustrations in these books always have a lot of information content, rather than being window dressing – but they seemed more detached from the text and rather lacking in the oomph the best versions have. The other real problem is that...
Post a Comment
Read more

The Laws of Thought - Tom Griffiths *****

In giving us a history of attempts to explain our thinking abilities, Tom Griffiths demonstrates an excellent ability to pitch information just right for the informed general reader.  We begin with Aristotelian logic and the way Boole and others transformed it into a kind of arithmetic before a first introduction of computing and theories of language. Griffiths covers a surprising amount of ground - we don't just get, for instance, the obvious figures of Turing, von Neumann and Shannon, but the interaction between the computing pioneers and those concerned with trying to understand the way we think - for example in the work of Jerome Bruner, of whom I confess I'd never heard.  This would prove to be the case with a whole host of people who have made interesting contributions to the understanding of human thought processes. Sometimes their theories were contradictory - this isn't an easy field to successfully observe - but always they were interesting. But for me, at least, ...
Post a Comment
Read more