I’m impressed by the work being carried out by the DAIR Institute. DAIR stands for Distributed AI Research Institute. They say “We are an interdisciplinary and globally distributed AI research institute rooted in the belief that AI is not inevitable, its harms are preventable, and when its production and deployment include diverse perspectives and deliberate processes it can be beneficial. Our research reflects our lived experiences and centers our communities." They believe locally-developed technology better serves its communities than solutions imposed from afar.
In a recent blog, Decentralized, Locally-Tailored Technology, Nyalleng Moorosi looks at the difference between the tools that communities build for themselves, and the tools that are imposed on these communities by outsiders
He provides examples looking at the use and support pf local languages. Now that the Māori have reclaimed their native language, he says that Caleb, Māori researcher from New Zealand. insists that any technology built using this language must primarily benefit its native speakers. “Caleb's first criteria in evaluating potential collaborators is assessing who will respect his community's rights to control how their language is used.”
Kathleen, from Kenya develops language tools for Kiswahil. She is reluctant to use the current Swahili language, formally called Standard Swahili, because it is not the language of the indigenous people of Kenya,Tanzania or Mozambique, and she believes building technology that further entrenches this colonial standardisation of language risks erasing the rich diversity of African languages. “Her priority is ensuring that each language receives the respect and attention it deserves in whatever language technology she builds.”
Moorosi says socal knowledge can transform the way we build digital tools. He imagines a future in which local farmers in Lesotho can run whole markets on their phones using voice based interfaces, and in our local everyday spoken Sesotho. “By prioritizing voice interaction over text, we would ensure that most people in our community - including those who can't read, write, or type - can participate fully in these digital marketplaces” he says. “This vision for our technological future enhances our existing community practices rather than attempting to replace them.”
He concludes that “we need to trust that communities know best what solutions will work for them. The future of technology should be rooted in local knowledge and designed to serve local needs.”
Returning to the northern countries, there is a growing debate over the future of higher education, one strand of which is arguing that there should be more support and integration with local communities. In a recent article in Times Higher Education, Rahim Somani argues for a changing role for universities in the community. "Rather than relying solely on traditional instruction and theoretical discussions, universities should invest in immersive experiences like workshops, real-world projects and reflective practices. These experiences cultivate resilience, self-awareness and an understanding of failure – qualities essential for thriving in uncertain futures."
About the image
This image seeks to reveal the histories of hidden labor in computing. The base of the collage is an oil painting of Navajo women weaving. Inspired by the history of computing in 1960s Silicon Valley, where the Fairchild Semiconductor company employed Navajo women, the image collapses time to depict overlooked histories in a modern context. As Lisa Nakamura who writes, “ Looking inside digital culture means both looking back in time to the roots of the computing industry and the specific material production practices that positioned race and gender as commodities in electronics factories. This labor is temporally hidden, within a very early period of digital computing history, and hidden spatially.”