The Jetsons vs The Sprawl

Ok, this gets a bit abstract, but I promise its worth it 🙏🏻

For this post I wanted to introduce our workshop results through the lens of Retro-futurism. I have a soft spot in my heart for science fiction literature of pretty much any type. William Gibson’s “Sprawl” series has found its way back onto my reading list. I originally read this as a teenager, but re-reading it today is an unnerving experience. We live in an era where the sociopolitical themes, and technological advances of this near future setting are flickering and growing into the fringes of reality. You can almost see it in your peripheral vision. A world inhibited by massive corporations, inscrutable multi-millionaires with unassailable wealth and resources, AI enabled Intrusion Countermeasures Electronics (ICE) and console cowboys. Its tangible.

Neuromancer was written in the early 80’s in what Gibson describes as a "blind animal panic", but its subject matter when held up against the backdrop of today’s world is oddly resonant, and prescient in equal measure. The rest of the books in the series only serve to drive home the message that the future seen from this historical view point was dark, gritty, impoverished for many, lavish for a vanishingly small few, unfair, and shot through with desperation and disregard for the human, both body and soul. TL;DR, its dark.

But to travel back in time a mere 20 or so years to the mid 60’s we see a different view of the future. A completely different mindset and creative process gives rise to The Jetsons. And yet, this too is a deep part of modern western thinking concerning ‘what the future looks like’. In his series of articles for the Smithsonian, Matt Novak talks about the original 1962-3 series as “as the single most important piece of 20th century futurism”. Its not a hard to see his point in this article.

Yes, its a comedy sitcom with more in common with The Flintstones than much popular science fiction. Humans colonized space, although its never really brought into the narrative. Flying cars and talking dogs are the commonplace, but the characters often express weariness of dealing with their mundane lives. The modern conveniences and ubiquitous robotics of Orbit City have given rise to a leisure economy, and they can still find something to moan about (insert canned laughter).

Why does this matter?

Why does this matter to digital security and online safety. Ask yourself the question; Are we closer to the Sprawl, or are we closer to Orbit City? I think you know the answer, unless you are a lavishly rich human being (and if you are - thanks for stopping by!)

So with that in mind, lets recap the workshop. There were three exercises in our workshop. My intention over the coming weeks is to look at the themes which arose from the group sessions.

In the first of our activities the delegates contributed ideas for the question “what motivates security behavior?” (both good and bad) in the digital realm. We asked our delegates to put their sticky notes into four different segments on a work sheet. They were labeled as “Individual”, “Social”, “Structural” and “Contextual”. These things largely speak for themselves, but lets clarify.

• Contextual motivations arise flexibly from changing circumstances, depending on the immediate environment, situation, or context.
• Structural motivations stem from stable, underlying patterns that reflect longer-term conditions or enduring arrangements.
• Individual motivations originate in the intrinsic make-up of a person; their dispositions, preferences, and aversions.
• Social motivations arise from collective dynamics or the need to coordinate, share meaning, and belong within groups or communities.

Together, these four dimensions describe the sources of motivation as they range from the stable to the adaptive, and from the personal to the collective.

Then we asked our delegates in groups, to score their inputs in terms of how well they thought they understood the evidence for this. Green shows us we understand this area and have good evidence to back it up. Yellow denotes anecdotal understanding that this is involved but less evidence to support the concept. Red denotes that this topic needs more exploration and discussion. Got it? Good – lets move on...

What do you mean, "Risk"?

In the analysis of the data we collected from this we found 5 major themes, and we were able to score them in terms of perceived priority. We collected our sticky notes, categorised them, and then counted the number of votes in each area, giving us a total vote count, and a vague aggregate picture of how our delegates considered the content of that category. First up, coming in at number 5, “Risk Perception”.

We can only act on what we are aware of. Much of the time it appears our motivations stem from a lack of connection or awareness of the scale of the problem.

We heard our delegates frequently mention that security is seen as “someone else’s problem”. The problem of compliance apathy looms large here. Its all too easy to turn a blind eye, and claim ignorance later. We heard about overconfidence leading to a false sense of security, and we also heard about how difficult it is to accurately judge the kind of risk profile you have. Lets circle back to how this looks in terms of rosy 60s retro-futurism versus our cyberpunk literature.

The comparisons

I am going to do this with each category as we progress. By the end we of the analysis we should have some good insight. There are possibly 10 more articles ahead in this series, so keep a look out.

The ironic thing is that, there are no risks in the retro-futuristic vision of sleek machines and glowing cities. Cheerful progress has air-brushed the danger of the atomic age away. Human ingenuity has solved everything and environmental, ethical, or human costs are non-existent. Our sense of danger is no longer required, so what do The Jetsons need with a concept of risk?

Alternatively, while retro-futurism hides “risk” behind “optimism”, cyberpunk exposes it as the default condition. Cyberpunk drags it into grim neon-lit alleys, showing what happens after the gold rush collapses and the toxic buildup seeps into the landscape. Retro-futurism believed technology would save us; cyberpunk assumes it either already owns us, or it can buy us, if wanted to.

One setting presents smooth futuristic beauty, the other reveals decay and dehumanisation. Together, they form a cultural feedback loop: the fantasy of safety versus the realism of survival. Cyberpunk is retro-futurism’s hangover; the world that comes when the promise of a perfect future finally breaks and the glossy advertising peels off the rotted wooden billboard. See, I told you it would make sense 🤯🥳

And for my next trick...

So whats next? This is just the first insight we have to show you. We have 4 other topics to look at just from this first activity! We also have a second set of data to show you from the workshop’s second activity.

And then, I guess I need to draw it to some kind of conclusion....  🤷🏻 So, there is literally tonnes to look forward to as I extend this analogy further, comparing the serene future we were convinced we were drifting angelically towards, versus the hard cold reality of our current world, dealing with the fall out of tech-bro fever dreams.

This project is ultimately about y’all, so we’d love to hear from you too:

👉 What retro-futurism or science fiction setting resonates with you?
👉 How does risk awareness fit into your vision of the future?

Drop your thoughts via LinkedIn, use our contact form or send us an email. Your feedback is so so so valuable. Honestly all of it!!

 | Tags: Risk, Awareness, Retro-futurism, Cyberpunk