The community of technologists developing extended reality (XR) technologies, including virtual reality, augmented reality, and mixed reality devices and software, needs a conscience from within. Imagine a government using XR systems for functions such as immigration enforcement. What will the government do with the additional information that XR can collect (motion-based data, body-based data, biometrics, location-based data, etc.)? Who can hold companies accountable before their products are released to the public?
The development of XR technology brings new potential dangers that arise from the amount of body-based data that can be collected about individuals and their surroundings, and the creation of experiences that are much more immersive than ever before. Some tech workers have already expressed concerns about potential dystopian uses of the technology they help develop. These concerns may especially arise for those involved in developing and launching products, such as software engineers, product managers, UI/UX designers, and data scientists. In these roles, tech workers are in the unique position of being the tech experts in the room with a front-row seat to the endless possibilities and potential harms of technology. Technology itself has no innate mechanism to determine what is right and what is wrong. Therefore, tech workers need to think about what role they have in developing the space, not just by contributing the knowledge they have, but also with a conscience from within. This requires them to develop products that not only meet the demands of their employers and push the boundaries of their ability to innovate, but also to do no harm to users in the products and experiences they develop.
It is important to recognize that new product development is primarily shaped by parameters given by executives who set the priorities of the company, and product managers who make strategic and tactical decisions. The ability of technologists to shape their conscience within XR is further complicated by the reality that the only influential players in the market are giants such as Google, Meta, Microsoft, and Apple. The concentration of large technology companies impacts technologists’ job mobility and decision-making, which is primarily driven by competition and market factors.
There are also examples of tech employees taking an ethical stand against corporate priorities. Amazon employees rallied to block the sale of Amazon’s facial recognition products to law enforcement. The “NoTechForIce” movement protested for an end to Palantir’s data-mining contract with immigration authorities. Similarly, Google employees resisted Google’s Project Maven, an AI program that analyzes drone surveillance footage in battlefields. In these examples, tech employees influenced decisions about the use of their company’s products, forming a source of bottom-up alternative governance. As we enter the XR era and technology becomes increasingly rapid and invasive, tech employees will have a greater responsibility to foresee and prevent dystopian uses of the products of their work.
While tech workers must work within the constraints of company priorities, tech workers still hold the technical expertise necessary to maximize XR products and experiences. In addition to their technical skills, tech workers are also directly involved in the problem-solving process of product development, which may raise issues that other cross-functional team members who do not have the same level of understanding of the potential impact on users may not consider. Additionally, tech workers, who are in the early stages of emerging technology development, are the primary architects of the features that companies implement. Their participation in the process of XR development and in the feedback loop to managers and designers with the expertise provides a critical opportunity for tech workers to put controls in place and make ethical product design decisions before harm is caused to users.
While we advocate for XR tech workers to be more active in social movements for a more equitable and fair application of new technologies, it is also important to recognize the practical difficulties workers face in mobilizing and resisting their employers’ problematic involvement in certain law enforcement and military applications. As recently as April 17, several employees were fired and arrested for protesting Google’s provision of cloud computing and AI services to the Israeli government and military. They believe Google is acting unjustly in Gaza. The current tech sector has failed to foster an environment that supports employee unionization and mobilization, so employees are often hesitant to speak out against their employers, considering their jobs and economic stability are at stake. Currently, the tech sector is the largest employer of H-1B visa holders. These visa-holding employees are even more vulnerable and may be less motivated to speak out against their employers, even though they may be aligned with underrepresented groups. Additionally, the tech sector is still struggling to deliver on the diversity and inclusion that its leaders claim to value. A lack of diversity leaves the tech sector, including the XR sector, more likely to make ethically questionable and outdated decisions that further exclude many minority communities.
But recognizing these challenges does not mean that tech workers should insulate themselves from solidarity with contemporaneous social movements. Rather, they can explore alternative ways of pursuing fair and ethical applications of technology in ways that are less conflictual with employers and more directly beneficial to communities in need.
As tech workers face the challenge of holding companies accountable from the inside, they must think creatively about how they can influence how XR is shaped from the ground up. As workers protected by U.S. labor law, potential threats to their job security highlight the need for tech workers to work with community and movement lawyers to strengthen their knowledge of the legal rights and protections afforded to them.
While unionization may not be an immediate solution for the technology industry, where many layoffs have occurred due to market pressures, management decisions, and technological advances, tech workers are still entitled to protections against discrimination and to remedies provided through public services such as the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), which is mandated to address systemic discrimination against workers. Another way obstacles to unionization can be overcome is by establishing organizations such as the Tech Workers Coalition, which brings tech workers and organizers together to work together.
Tech workers who have decided to take action but are struggling to find support at work can consider the whistleblower process. It is worth noting that even though whistleblowing is a long-standing method of individual activism, external support often does not fully align with the advocate’s needs and has always been subject to dangers beyond the individual’s control. However, whistleblowers are protected under federal whistleblowing laws, and reporting potential violations of federal law to Congress protects their identity and minimizes the risk of retaliation. In addition to this, there are technology-specific guidelines and platforms, such as the Tech Worker Handbook, that connect individual whistleblowers and address the vulnerabilities faced by individual whistleblowers, providing them with relevant resources and a support community. Whistleblowers are not isolated from support from others and can strategically collaborate with the whistleblower community, colleagues, civil society, the press, and the government. They can also consult with lawyers in relevant specialties about the potential consequences of their actions.
Tech workers are increasingly working to increase diversity in the XR industry and are contributing to organizing efforts by creating platforms where workers can organize safely or without disruption. Initiatives like Coworkers.org are leveraging existing technology to help bring workers together. Similarly, XR Inclusion is leading the charge to proactively identify and solve diversity challenges within the XR industry, recognizing the need to lead the tech sector towards a more inclusive and diverse future.
In many ways, XR also offers the opportunity to create a safe environment where tech workers can engage with each other and with organizers in a more immersive way. The potential interoperability of XR platforms also creates opportunities for tech workers to build further connections between different stakeholders and systems within the community organizing space. XR can be used to maximize resource sharing, foster more effective communication, and foster synergy between community organizers even outside of the tech industry.
In addition to receiving support from legal experts and the protection of federal law, tech workers can also get involved in their personal capacity by leveraging their expertise to strengthen the efforts of community organizers in ways that do not violate their consciences or employment obligations. Beyond specific organizations or campaigns, tech workers with knowledge of emerging XR technologies can further strengthen public interest technologies and e-citizen engagement, as well as contribute to existing efforts to bridge the digital divide that XR technologies may widen due to cost and initial accessibility barriers associated with new technologies.
As XR technology continues to evolve, it is important to recognize the pivotal role that XR tech practitioners play in shaping its ethical implementation. These practitioners are at the forefront of using their expertise and insider knowledge to advocate for the fair and responsible use of emerging technologies within the enterprise. The powerful nature of XR technology allows advocacy to take more diverse forms. If tech practitioners have the potential to overcome existing challenges in organizing, we can expect knowledge and conscience in XR development to be maintained.
