Technology could alter perceptions of what or who is considered ‘elite’.
From a Western cultural standpoint, generations of societies’ elites have relied on a familiar set of factors to maintain their status.
Those factors can be summed up in a simple definition of ‘privilege’ contained in the Cambridge Dictionary: “[Privilege is] the way in which people who are rich, come from a high social class, or belong to a particular race or gender have more advantages in society than other people.”
A recent article in watoday.com.au – ‘Perth’s Best High Schools and the Powerbrokers Who Attended Them’ – named some of those considered among Perth’s privileged people.
The article asserted that the “50-strong list of the state’s most accomplished public figures has laid bare just how significant a predictor socio-economic status and education is of success.”
The list contains noteworthy insights including: the named elites who shape Western Australia’s business, civic and artistic life are mostly male, white and middle-aged or older; women are underrepresented; private and selective school graduates dominate; and a staggering 80 per cent of the elite have attended one or more universities both at home and overseas.
Their conclusions articulate what we already knew: that the privileged backgrounds, educations, and affiliations of many of the elite give them a distinct advantage over the rest of us.
I am a great one for supporting the underdog. It was therefore pleasing to see that the list contained several current ministers who are products of the state system and a few who left school before the end of year 12.
Where you went to school and what university you attended are questions often posed to work out where you belong in society’s pecking order.
Like the views expressed by non-executive director John Van Der Wielen in the article, it has taken many years for me to embrace my pathway with any degree of pride.
I attended public school and dropped out just after my 17th birthday. In the 1980s, I joined the graduate program of one of the big four banks just as the financial services sector was adopting technology that led to deployment of ATMs and bank cards. The rollout began a fundamental shift in our relationship with money and the banks.
Changing the view
But what of the next few years, and even further into the future? And given the intrusion of artificial intelligence into ever more aspects of our lives, it’s possible the way we view our society’s elite may change.
There’s no doubt awareness of AI is growing. For example, the most recent AI incursion sent the media into overdrive with the release of chatbot ChatGPT.
In the Committee for Perth’s The Future of Work report, released in 2021, space was dedicated to text generated by AI bot Jarvis, at the time powered by GPT3. In reply to the questions “What is AI?’ and ‘How can AI be applied?’, Jarvis generated three paragraphs in reply including: “Welcome to the era where machines are doing more of the thinking, with humans providing oversight and guidance”.
According to figures released by International Data Corporation (IDC) in 2022, Australia’s spending on AI systems will grow to $3.6 billion by 2025, which represents an annual growth rate of just under 25 per cent year-on-year from 2020.
Australia was ranked 11th out of the 62 countries in the Global AI Index compiled by UK-based Tortoise Media. The index is ranked in seven sub-categories and gives Australia’s score (out of 62) in terms of AI preparedness (top nation in parentheses).
The results were: talent, 15 (US); infrastructure, 38 (China); operating environment, 41 (Saudi Arabia); research, eight (US); development, four (US); government strategy, 12 (Canada); and commercial, 13 (US).
AI investment has been traditionally concentrated in the areas of customer insights and service optimisation. IDC reported that considerable funds are now being directed to creating “threat intelligence and prevention systems to identify emerging personal and infrastructure threats and improve public safety”, which is no surprise given the recent large-scale privacyrelated data breaches.
A field of discipline since 1956, AI is yet to fully mature, with online community Built In documenting bias and the weakening of ethics as two of the downsides of AI. Losses of low-skill jobs replaced by technology are cited as a reason for a potential widening of socioeconomic inequity.
Nowadays, technology knows no bounds.
Humans have a broad spectrum of emotions and bring creativity, along with the ability to relate and collaborate.
It is this that sets us apart from AI. These skills are currently in high demand, but will they be notable among the elite of the future?
- Marion Fulker is an adjunct associate professor at UWA.
