By BOBBY HALTON
There is a great deal of energy being put into trying to find, expand, and increase our use of technology on our fireground and in other emergency operations. The efforts are being done, albeit with the best of intentions; primarily, the goal is to improve firefighter safety and survivability when we go downrange. One big concern for some of us is that the technology will get out ahead of our profession or our society. For others, technology is the answer we have been waiting for and we just are not adopting technology fast enough.
The opportunities are boundless as we continue to create new devices and tools and improve on existing ones. The society around us, our communities also ever increase the use of technologies as they become available or improve. We must be aware of how to respond when these technologies have issues—sometimes anticipated but often not. We must be thoughtful as to how we incorporate these new tools into our existing operations and decision making.
Along with the interest we all have in the new technologies and our role regarding them, there are understandably some concerns. Many speculate that we face grim times as autonomous vehicles eliminate the need for drivers, displacing truckers and cabbies. Some dream of virtually zero traffic deaths as faulty humans will no longer create accidents because of negligence, carelessness, and stupidity. Others wonder if traffic incidents of biblical proportions could occur as systems fail or malevolent actions cause thousands to crash at once.
The world of technology has made household words out of names like Jobs, Gates, and Musk—men who have helped bring new technologies into our everyday lives. Job’s Apple company and iPhones are amazing. Gates and Microsoft are equally impressive, and Elon Musk from Tesla cars to Space X continues to make new technological advances. Their thoughts and opinions are as diverse as everyone else’s as to where our digital age is going.
While some see utopia, others see a “Brave New World”; somewhere down the middle is, as always, the best way to figure when it comes to human advancements. The great American philosopher Yogi Berra once said, “It’s hard to predict, especially the future.” Although the digital age is impressive in its rate of change, scholars remind us that the age of technology beginning around 1860, with steam-powered machines paving the way for society to move from rural agrarian to urban factories and production, was far more disruptive.
It is not new, however, to worry if machines, robots, and technology may some day replace firefighters. A young boy named Cliff Jones in the 1970s once asked that very question of this magazine and received a wonderfully thought-out response from the editor. The editor opined that it was unlikely and that humans would always be involved, as the complexity of our profession was limitless. His thoughts echoed those of Alan Turing, the inventor of the computer, who remarked that despite how advanced computing could become, computers would always have a creator. Jones would become a fire chief and retire, I believe, without ever competing against a robot for promotion.
The use and integration of new technology into our operations are serious matters though, and we should be extremely conscious about how we conduct ourselves when we do so. Researchers were asked by the military to examine the effects of bringing drone footage into the process of battlefield decision making. The problem the military was encountering was termed “predator porn,” a cognitive fixation with the use of drone footage to confirm battlefield decision making.
Cognitive researchers elected to use the fire service as subjects, as our decision-making environments mirror one another’s closely. The researchers chose to recreate the Buncefield oil refinery fire using eight highly experienced, competent, and poised fireground commanders. All the commanders went through the exercise with the addition of drone footage being available to them. Seven of the eight were unsuccessful because of their preoccupation with needing to have information confirmed by the drone footage.
This study does not suggest that we not use drones; rather, it implores us to realign our existing decision-making systems to accommodate the new technology without having it completely disrupt what is currently in use. We can, if we are not aware, become enamored with technology. We can see it as the ultimate achievement and a source of fulfillment. It is not.
Today, there is a movement called “solutionism,” which believes that technology holds the answer to every problem. Interestingly, in the 1930s, there was a political movement called “the revolt of the engineers” or the technocrats. They wanted to replace governments and markets with technology. They wanted folks to adopt a “modern scientific” point of view.
The technocrats loved centralized planning, very popular with the progressive movement. They were enamored by engineers, who they believed would save American society, and they followed closely Frederick Taylor’s scientific management theories. In the United States, they never got very popular, and the movement split into several factions. In Canada, they were outlawed by the government. Disillusioned, the leader, Joshua Haldeman, left Canada and went to South Africa.
The one thing for certain is that technology marches on, and we march right along with it. Some aspects of our new tools and devices will be amazing, changing the way we work and live. These changes will bring with them new challenges. Every solution brings with it chances for failure and often unforeseeable consequences and interactions. We will adapt and adjust to the new tools and devices and consequences and we, not robots but humans, will respond to these anomalies, as the creators of whatever devices may operate cannot foresee everything.
An interesting note on epigenetics: They believe some traits, characteristics, and behaviors may be inherited. Joshua Haldeman has a grandson—Elon Musk.
RELATED
