Bike messengers and technology

Better people than me have asked who deserves to own the means of production. I won't go there, or address the question of what the "means of production" really are anymore.  But I will say that this Wired story, about New York City bike messengers really got me thinking about Delhi.

"Wired" is a tech magazine, but it's also one of the best magazines out there right now.  The story, laid out online with Wired's characteristic breathtaking beauty (which hides an expensive and intricate development backend, I'm sure) is all about how bike messengers are adapting to new technologies that should theoretically be making their profession obsolete.

What I've swiftly realized about India is that its 9 per cent economic growth is really powered by about 10% of the population.  (Statistics back this up - India's current account relies heavily on software services exports, which have driven growth)  This hyper-productive, tech-saavy 10% is growing much faster than the national average, but that means that 90% of the population is basically contributing absolutely nothing to productivity growth.  (Productivity growth defined here, of course, differently from mere economic growth)

In econ class, we learned that real growth depends on a mysterious factor known as "alpha."  Economists don't really know what alpha is.  They say it might be technology.  But it does act as a multiplier, shifting GDP growth from its current trajectory into another orbit altogether.

Living in India is observing "alpha" in action.  But it's also to realize that the distribution of access to the means to create alpha is still so inherently uneven.  In New York City, bike messengers are able to adapt and improve because they have access to technologies that help them become more productive.  The very real human result is that these people can keep their jobs and take pride in what they do.

Consider the case of an Indian villager whose farm is declining in productivity every year.  There's no investment in improving farm productivity, which anyway the government doesn't need to do because they've realized (like everyone else) that while agriculture powers growth, technology is alpha.

The villager has no access to technology.  He arrives in the city looking for work and ends up doing menial labor for people who think he's stupid and lazy.  Over time, the villager might even start to believe this himself.

There is such a stark difference in the life, career and quality of life prospects for someone who has access to technology and someone who doesn't.  In India, where an elite cadre of 11-year-olds grow up clutching Blackberries but the majority of the population doesn't have an email address, the difference is really obvious. Technology is the means by which people expand their skills and productivity.  It feeds off itself and is in fact almost like learning a language - once you've mastered one device or program, others are much easier.  Children adapt to it much better than adults.  (Pranav Mistry, who engineered SixthSense with rural Indians in mind, had to create a computer interface that didn't look like a computer interface, because his target demographic didn't understand concepts like "point and click")

Nowadays, having no access to technology is little different from being illiterate, from the perspective of accessing jobs that actually add value to the economy (and are therefore well-paid.)

(Incidentally, I'm not saying that India shouldn't diversify its economy.  But that's the whole point of the Wired article - access to technology has changed every industry.  It really has multiplied what we are capable of achieving)