Information Technology Reference
In-Depth Information
perhaps, has not been a serious error in
informa-
tion
system two centuries ago, but it is so today.
Over the recent decades, after the 2nd world
war, the human population has grown 2,5 times
and the production, including the exploitation
of the planet Earth and its natural resources and
preconditions of humankind survival, has grown
7 (seven) times (Plut, 2009). In one single year
around 2000 the addition GDP of the world was
bigger than the entire GDP of 1900 (Brown, 2008;
Korten, 2009; Taylor, 2008; etc.). But the planet
Earth did not grow bigger, but depleted - actually,
our own natural preconditions of life got depleted.
Many researchers are warning: this can last no
longer, so do the above cited ones. The industrial
paradigm of the socio-economic life has helped
humankind over the recent two centuries, but it
is ruining humankind now, and has done so for
several recent decades. It must change into another
paradigm, with which humankind will be able to
survive.
Innovation
may no longer be only tech-
nological for the same socio-economic paradigm,
which needs
innovation
of its own essence.
This is possible. Science has created means of
engineering and social technologies for humans
to enjoy a new paradigm and survive, once they
decide to change/innovate their own habits. This
tackles the influential ones, first of all, of course.
The big majority is adaptive to them anyway. Thus,
the point is: are the influential ones free-riders of
cooperative? Under the power of free-riders, the
exploitation of the nature and related humans in
processes of so far will go on and ruin humankind,
leaving a dying-out planet Earth to our children
and grandchildren, not to some distant-time gen-
erations to come.
The right information, thus, exist, but it is
blocked off from application by a wrong infor-
mation.
Over the same recent decades the world has
accepted the dictatorship of the Chicago school
of neo-liberal economics (Toth, 2008; etc.).
Hence, the liberalistic economic theory of Adam
Smith was out of scene. Market stopped being a
competition-place and became the power-place of
monopolistic owners replacing the real competi-
tors allowing for a full insight into their business
that was local and included personal responsi-
bility of the owners, having no share-holding or
limited-liability companies dividing rights from
obligations and obscuring the business. One speaks
about an un-complete competition, officially.
Humankind has three options to choose from:
1. To go on like over the industrial period,
although the practiced model has been in-
troduced when the amount of humans and
exploitation of the planet Earth used to be
equal to a tiny fragment of the amount of
today. This practice will ruin the natural pre-
conditions of human survival of the current
civilization in a few years, a few decades at
best.
2. To undertake measures like those in 2008-
and 2009-, when governments and compa-
nies have been moving chairs around the deck
of the Titanic vessel facing the iceberg, rather
than radical shifting their direction to avoid
the iceberg. The consequences will be the
same as with the option one, perhaps a few
years later. Our children and grandchildren
will receive a dying planet Earth rather than
a life of well-being.
3. To radically innovate the practices of so far
to add sufficiency to efficiency, including
replacing the official measures like GDP
and alike with the one of human happiness.
How can this be done?
Over the same recent decades, tacitly and
step-by-step in literature and political documents
of United Nations, European Union and some
international businesses' unions, social respon-
sibility was added to owners' responsibility. If
the ownership/property concept of the ancient
Roman law's definition that ownership means
the owner's right to use and abuse the owned
property (including the dependent humans such
Search WWH ::
Custom Search