We Don’t Want Another Bezos, Zuckerberg or Holmes

Big Tech names walk a fine line between toxic and revolutionary

Over a decade ago, Elizabeth Holmes announced to the world that a few drops of blood could tell a doctor nearly everything about a patient's health  — a radical innovation that had the potential to change the way we view healthcare. The catch: this invention was a lie orchestrated by the fraudulent company, Theranos. 
Theranos CEO Holmes was convicted of conspiracy to commit fraud and wire fraud just last week for selling her invention to investors. The invention claimed to be able to identify issues with a patient’s health by running over 200 tests with only taking a few drops of blood. The invention never came to fruition or was peer-reviewed, but Theranos sold their technology to multi-million dollar investors such as Walgreens, Larry Ellison from Oracle, and Rupert Murdoch. The company’s deception resulted in a criminal trial, where Holmes now faces steep fines and daunting prison sentences.

A scheme such as this is the embodiment of what’s wrong with the tech world right now.

What we are seeing right now in the tech world is something so predictable that it’s ironic. Tech leaders are creating and innovating, but doing so solely in the name of personal gain and profit, without regard for the public.

Elizabeth Holmes never actually contributed to the growth of technology or science, just the size of her bank account. This is what the ethical dilemma of innovation is all about — “innovators” preying upon the hopeful wishes of the public for personal financial gain.

Santa Clara is centered at the heart of the tech world in Silicon Valley, so we must start to ask the question: is the constant compulsion to innovate and have the next best invention actually toxic rather than helpful to the public?

Holmes' actions culminated in a multi-million dollar loss to her company and others. But the worst part about it is the unkept promise of an unmatched medical breakthrough that would have changed the lives of millions. The race for notoriety and the issue of corporate greed are what drove Holmes to deceive her investors for so long, instead of on the technology she was selling.

Holmes will justifiably face consequences, but so will the public. Her actions will leave those previously expecting the technology empty-handed and without support. However, she is not alone in this “fake it till you make it” mentality.

Everyone’s favorite tech gurus Jeff Bezos and Mark Zuckerberg participate in a similar philosophy: innovate until the public becomes ignorant. Why is Zuckerberg creating a metaverse? To be quite honest, I don’t think anyone will ever truly know the answer. But, I’m almost certain in saying that it's going to precipitate numerous adverse, damaging effects on internet users.

The metaverse is quite literally transforming the physical world, transporting the interactions, activities and work we engage in daily into the virtual world. Personally, the virtual world is the absolute last thing I want right now, and I think many would agree. After being in and out of lockdowns and stay-at-home orders for the past two years, humanity has seen one of the biggest mental health crises and a tripling of depression rates among adult Americans throughout the pandemic. 

This innovation is guised as a benefit to all because of its accessibility and the fact that it could push us into another realm of technology, as Zuckerberg has self-proclaimed it as “the successor to the mobile internet.” But, what is the cost here? More isolation? More distance from others? The connectivity of the internet can only replace so much of the value that physical human interaction has, and Zuckerberg has once again taken advantage of this because innovation is the only goal in mind. 

The destructive behavior does not stop here. Bezos’s novelty spaceflight in no way contributed to the breakthroughs in the tech field because of its privatized nature, proving that his innovation has not benefited the public in any way. Instead, it burdened us. The carbon emissions produced were unnecessary and damaging, and its inaccessibility demonstrates the harmful pattern of innovating for personal gain. 

Technological innovation now struggles to better the community because it sucks a certain goodness out of the public. Thus, we see how innovation has succumbed to the magnetism of wealth, ego and power.