We don’t know enough about trustworthiness when it comes to our use of digital products and services. What does it mean precisely? How will we know it when we see it? What design principles could encourage more of it? How do we talk about it and champion it?
We need to research such questions so we may offer up some pragmatic answers that make a difference in the world.
“Support” has become a euphemism for coughing up some money. We use it here in its broadest sense.
There are many ways to support our mission here beyond the financial. For example, software engineers are often found to donate their time and skill to open-source projects, but what does it mean for everyone else to support such initiatives? After all, such projects need marketing and branding skills and legal expertise and trial users and domain specific experience and community builders and evangelists – to name just a few things – as much as they need coders. We can play matchmaker, and we can build a movement.
Our understanding of the Tech We Trust ecosystem may identify unnecessary duplication of effort in some areas, but it’s quite possible that we’ll also identify things that need to happen that no-one is working on just yet. That’s where we can step in directly.
We know we need to co-operate here because if anything the market appears on the whole to be pulling us in the wrong direction. It does so because it seems the business case for Tech We Trust isn’t as strong as the alternatives, if a business case even exists in parts at all. Money is therefore tight. If we can corral tens of thousands of members to each contribute a small membership fee each and every year, we can invest collectively in building Tech We Trust for the World We Want.