Things to Come is a movie from the 1930s, based on a work by HG Wells. It predicted society's downfall due to war, and the rebuilding of the world under the rule of scientists, engineers, and other seekers of truth. At a time when Europe was devastated by war, and unrest was still approaching rapidly, Wells looked ahead at what could happen if selfish gain was pursued instead of knowledge or the benefit of all mankind. The movie makes many points which are still valid today, but thankfully we are approaching the results in the movie without resorting to annhilation before building a technocracy.

I know I'm probably using the term "technocracy" wrong in the rest of the document. I use it to mean a society where technology is the means for existence, as opposed to capitalism where supply-vs-demand is the means for existence.

Every job I've ever worked began with me learning the various tasks required, but once it is discovered that I'm talented with technology in general, immediately I'm categorized with many titles - "The Guy who can Find the Missing Files on the Network Drive", "The Guy who knows How To Stop the Blinking Red Light on the Fax Machine", or more sinisterly "The Guy Who Knows Too Much about The Servers, So We Better Keep an Eye on Him". Every office has one, in varying levels of education. It ends up being a relative position. There's no application to fill out, no criteria to fulfill, other than that you know more than everyone else. My boss used to be the computer expert in the office, until I arrived. It wasn't that she failed in her abilities; the change was entirely due to the level of knowledge. My boss happenned to have a high level of computer knowledge, but had not kept up with technology changes as me. The title of Copier King is rarely ever challenged. Raw knowledge cannot be disreputed, and if a different, better solution is reached by someone else, the wizened Technocrat will adsorbthe new information for later use. To argue a valid fact is death to a technocrat -- since knowledge is raw power itself, only by amassing a database of facts can a Warlord of Blinking Green Lights retain his position within society.

Every time our political candidates says something really, really stupid about technology, the sound of rolling eyes gets louder and louder. Even the most novice computer user laughed snidely over Bill Clinton's amazement at an animated screen saver a few months ago. The internet has empowered everyone. By connecting computers with a common language for communication, a new world was created where everyone got a chance to start out on an even keel. The terms which deliniate the social strata on the internet all relate to levels of knowledge: a "newbie" is the lowest level of naivety, a "script kiddie" is a hacker with minimal programming learning under their belt, and stupid questions are immediately flamed by the more knowledgeable users. Since words are the primary ammunition within this new world, the intelligence of the typist is their only means for asserting their power. Having knowledge makes you a leader in the pack, and needing the data makes you a follower.

Even hackers, in their infinite computing knowledge, still are only able to prey on the failings of education of their prey. A server with an unpatched security hole is easy pickings for a hacker, not because it is weak, but because either it's administrator or the writer of the software did not actively take the steps to fix the problem due to either not knowing the problem was there, or not knowing there was a fix, or not knowing that there was an attacker in the first place. Knowledge is the entirety of all defense and offense on the internet. The power of the computer only allows for actions to be executed faster, not stronger, and not more effectively.

Espionage is a word that I think needs to be used more often in computing terms. Open source programming was designed to foil computing espionage, by placing their product and the fruits of their labors open for all to see. Everyone else, however, is full of obscured data and information which is of use to everyone else. Everyone is constantly being monitored on the internet in some sense. All this acquired information makes for an economy based on knowledge. Products are designed based on information gained from related and unrelated sources; there's a license to look into your internet home that manufacturers don't have when it comes to your real-world home. Datamining can be focused, or avoided all together, but it will still occur wether anyone likes it or not. Information is the source of all profit as well -- Microsoft was less of an innovator than a company which recognized useful information, grabbed hold of it, and used it to their advantage. The first companies to profit from the internet were the search engines & portals. The people with all the information either directly or indirectly sold that data to the people who needed it. Napster facilitates transfer of legal and illegal files, and once legal action is taken against them, they are able to cough up the names of thousands of users who transfered the illegal files in question. They are not a contractor building a highway over which stolen goods are trucked; they are a information adsorbing internet entity, tracking and following the moves of their voluntary users. Data is power, data is profit, and data is what sets apart a leader from a follower.

There is still the need for social leaders, though. To promote someone to President of a company just because they know all the hotkey strokes in the company-approved wordprocessor isn't going to make a company profits. If the old-world president, however, doesn't realize that a leader in this day and age needs technological learning, they will fail at their job as surely as a Faxlord would fail at ensuring corporate profitability. Their inability gives the technologically endowed employees an edge. A VP needing charts and graphs for a meeting will inevitably turn the raw data over to one of the people they supervise. They don't realize that the data is the power, and once a technocrat is given free range with facts, they are stronger because of it. The release of information isn't comparable to giving the employee company account numbers, but it can develop into that employee being the person shareholders turn to for answers. A technocratic employee's Quickbasic macros become the gauges of corporate success, not the cooperative decisions of old-world executive officers. In a corporate world where VPs need their employees to compile data, create graphs, get the printer to work in color, make 20 stapled copies, email the original dataset to Finance, and fax everything to the 4 district offices, it becomes clear who actually has the power over how things are done.

Society on the whole still looks towards people of strong character to be role models. The people of the media are looked to for their beauty and their ability to demonstrate emotion realistically. Sports stars are given the purpose to show that they are the strongest, the fastest, and the best strategists. The beginnings of a technocracy are leeching into society at the pocketbook. Eventually, over time, these people who are looked to as leaders for their knowledge will become leaders because of common respect for them as people themselves. Their thirst for knowledge will continue, and their characteristics will become the level people strive for in their lives, not to lose 50 pounds to resemble their media rolemodels, or to be able to benchpress 300 pounds to emulate their sporting rolemodels. The mind will be the source of admiration, The Photocopier Autocrat will shake off the "king for a day" status, and HG Wells' theoretical utopia will become reality.