Welcome to the Whistle Resistance: How a Ragtag Group of People are 3D-Printing Whistles at Scale to Keep Communities Safe

When I came across the Whistle Goblins (a.k.a. Whistle Avengers) last month, I had flashbacks to the early days of digital humanitarians (some 15 years ago). The latter were also the most ragtag group of people I’d ever met. They too used crowdsourcing and digital technology (to support humanitarian efforts, starting with their response to the 2010 Haiti Earthquake). They, too, formed strong bonds that spurred many to engage in adjacent social causes, such as human rights projects (e.g., in Syria) and digital activism (e.g., in Russia). Digital humanitarians also got pushback and learned some hard lessons along the way.

Might some of those setbacks and the evolution of digital humanitarians potentially be of value to members of the Whistle Resistance? I don’t know, but maybe it’s worth exploring? Disclaimer: I was one of the many early digital humanitarians and authored the book Digital Humanitarians (Taylor & Francis Press, 2015).

The Sound of Resistance

But first, the Whistle Resistance! Here’s what they’re up to in one (longish) sentence: 

These Goblins & Avengers (there are nearly 200 of them) are 3D-printing free whistles at scale (500,000+ in less than 2 months and radically accelerating) and shipping them for free across 49 US states and Puerto Rico (80% of orders go out within 4 days) in response to requests from a wide range of individuals and local communities who use these whistles to alert their neighbors when ICE and Border Patrol are nearby.

(These communities range from a local pet shop in Denver to libraries, community centers, coffee shops, bookstores, and others on the front lines of keeping their neighborhoods safe).

One of the Goblins, Dan, explains that the whistles serve as:

“[An] alert system built entirely at street-level and massively deployed to serve two purposes: bring your neighbors out to witness the abuses of ICE and to let those that are more at risk to know to stay in or to find shelter immediately.”

More from Dan:

“There’s a simple code system that goes along with the whistles: short staccato bursts if ICE is seen in the area and long blows if they’re actively snatching someone (though, honestly, in my experience you just blow like hell).”

Another Goblin, Heidi, who goes by Courtney Milan on Bluesky, notes that 3D-printed whistles allow “people to exercise their First Amendment right to assemble and to redress the government for grievances.” The whistles thus serve to crowdsource the application of the First Amendment, communicate early warnings to those at-risk, and bear witness (from multiple angles) to dispute false narratives. (As an aside, one of the primary technologies used by digital humanitarians of old was Ushahidi, Swahili for “witness”.) 

Photo Credit: Dan Sinker

More from Heidi: “While whistles may not stop bullets, they can stop bullies,” by making it clear that we’ll “stand up and we will watch, and we will judge you [bullies] and will remember, and you will [ultimately] not get away with it.” 

From Sean, a fellow Goblin on Bluesky:

“Renee Good and Alex Pretti were surrounded by the blasts of whistles, and they’re no longer here.

I print whistles because they make neighbors because they make neighbors come running, ensure enough people are recording, so we can believe our eyes.

But whistles mean more than that. […] many of these whistles will never get blown – but wearing one, handing one out, shows that you’re here for your neighbors.”

Sean, quoting Em, another Goblin on Bluesky: “Even if all I can do in the moment is get someone’s name, that means their family knows what happened to them.”

Never underestimate the collective power of hearing dozens of whistles, not only as deterrence to bullies (think “sousveillance”, there are more of us than you and we’re watching your every move), but also as empowering to witnesses (I am not alone, I have friends everywhere). These activities synchronize action and coordination, which can be a powerful display of resistance.

While there are multiple examples of whistles making a difference, perhaps further proof of their impact can be seen in responses from anti-Avenger types, e.g., they’re literally calling for the banning of whistles and referring to them as weapons: “hearing loss causing machines that terrorists are using against ICE.”

Their Superpower

But what is most striking to me (and equally important as the whistles themselves) is the *very* diverse cross-section of people who make up the Goblin-Avenger network. To quote Dan again, “these people include romance authors and nerdy engineers and crusty old punks and internet weirdos and every other type of person imaginable […].” Heidi, mentioned above, is a former US Supreme Court law clerk. 

More from Dan:

“Across the country there are whistle packing parties happening in church basements and bars and nonprofit offices and pretty much anywhere else that can hold some people, some tables, and boxes of whistles, zines, and bags to put them all in.”

This is ultimately their superpower, i.e., not the technology, not the whistles, but the highly diverse and caring community they’re co-creating with strong social ties and grounded in a set of shared values. This was also the superpower behind digital humanitarians. And if past is prologue, this power will outlive the whistles by a long shot. 

The technology, the 3D printers, didn’t all of a sudden decide to spontaneously print whistles. People cared, which is why some turned to 3D printers. It is the human emotion that makes all this possible, from the whistle makers to those brave souls on the frontlines in the streets. From Heidi: “It is the communities that fight fascism. The whistles are just a way to aid communities in becoming communities. And the thing we do is just a tiny part of that.”

Like digital humanitarians of old, who saw a massive earthquake in Haiti in January 2012, and wanted more than anything to find a way to help, to do something, in the case of the Whistle Resistance, “So many people were so upset and they didn’t know what to do, and we could say, here is something you can do,” says Kit, yet another Goblin (one of the romance-writers who goes by Mostly Bree on Bluesky).

The takeaway, here, is that the human act of caring is evenly distributed (across age, gender, birthplace, etc.), hence the diversity we see among Goblins and Avengers. It is a feature, and a vital one. 3D printing technology creates the opportunity to act on our innate human emotions. Technology, in this sense, can extend our humanity, creating the opportunity to display that humanity in 3D. (It can also do the exact opposite, of course. More on that later).

Back to Dan. What he writes below is also an accurate description of the early days of digital humanitarians:

“It’s all so chaotic and loosely organized as to feel like it might fly off the rails at any moment, but impossibly, it hasn’t (thanks in large part to the efforts of a small group of core members). It all runs on a handful of chats that fill with messages so quickly that I think most people put them on mute immediately. It’s all jokes and troubleshooting and moments of real human earnestness shared between folks who don’t even know each others actual names for the most part.”

These very interactions build the social ties and cohesion that can lead to the launch and support of other mutual-aid networks because the social capital has been built through this shared experience around whistles. That’s what I mean by the caring outliving the whistles; about the caring spilling out into other forms of direct nonviolent action. 

We saw this time and time again with digital humantiarians. Once they had built the social capital within their networks, and honed their skills in response to earthquakes and other humanitarian crises, they applied them to nonviolent civil resistance, election monitoring, and even to wildlife conservation. 

The Multiplier Effect

Like digital humanitarians, the Whistle Resistance is also “regenerative” in that it’s inspiring other goblins to the cause; serving as a springboard for expanded agency:

What’s more, they’re supporting a wide range of other causes.

I didn’t get into the costs of 3D printing, etc., but it should come as no surprise that the Whistle Resistance is using crowdfunding to keep the whistles and shipping free. If you’re new to 3D printing, one key ingredient is filament, pictured below.

Think of filament as the equivalent of ink for regular printers. No ink, no 2D printing. No filament, no 3D printing. So they’re sourcing massive amounts of filament through crowdfunding and partnerships.

(Side note: Remember Ethan Zuckerman’s “Cute Cat Theory of Digital Activism? Think “Cute 3D-printed Cat Theory”. Also, 3D printing has become a critical, high-growth component of specialized US manufacturing, a market valued at some $6 billion and growing rapidly. Cue a light version of Ethan’s “dictator’s dilemma”?)

In any case, when the Globlins have funding left over, they put this money to good use, showing additional positive spill-over effects of their 3D-printing bonanza:

As another Bluesky user added, “let’s not assume that all the people […] passing out whistles are doing nothing else. People – ‘wine moms,” “knitters,” who else do you think has ready access to breast milk? – are working behind the scenes for good.” They’re just not “all crowing about it on social media.” Spot on, and let’s not assume that whistle makers are doing nothing else either.

Like Digital Humanitarians

As Whistle Goblins & Avengers will be the first to say, they’re just a ragtag group of people, just like you and me; they’re not special. They simply care and together have demonstrated that yes, we can act. We can help. All of us. Everything else follows from this. This here is from Kit: 

These points also reflect the early ethos among digital humanitarians. Digital humanitarians weren’t trained humanitarians; the vast majority had never been engaged in disaster response. They didn’t ask the UN or Red Cross for permission to launch their efforts in the wake of the 2010 Earthquake; they just got it done, and at a speed and with such agility that established humanitarian organizations were simply not designed to match. This sparked quite a pushback against digital humanitarians (including accusations of being “crowd-sorcerers”). Some criticisms were based on misunderstandings, others were driven by ulterior motives, but some criticisms were absolutely valid.

As this post is already long enough, I’ll write a sequel post to share the strong pushback some pro-whistle activists are facing and, more importantly, to humbly consider potential ways forward based on lessons from digital humanitarians.

First-of-a-Kind Project on Robotics for Global Development

Launching first-of-a-kind project on Robotics for Global Development! How can robotics be used to advance the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in low and middle-income countries? What role might robotics play in tackling significant development challenges in sectors such as agriculture, climate, health, and industrial development? These questions are central to the first-ever Robotics for Development Project launched by the UK’s Foreign, Commonwealth, and Development Office (FCDO) and Frontier Tech Hub.

temp_acorn-farm-featured

While other emerging technologies like artificial intelligence receive considerable attention, the application of robotics in international development is systematically overlooked. This is especially true when looking beyond drones (aerial robotics). Think ground and ocean robotics, robotic arms, and even humanoid robotics.

We need a deeper understanding of this technology’s potential and drawbacks in the context of global development. What will this technology look like by 2030, and what will this mean for development applications? If we identify meaningful opportunities for robotics, what factors will be essential to enable the responsible, inclusive, and sustainable use of robotics to tackle global development challenges?

I’m excited to co-lead the project and am keen to connect with a wide range of experts, so please consider this an open invitation to connect on LinkedIn. We’re already preparing to launch a Strategic Foresight exercise with select experts, which will inform the development of our open knowledge products and the FCDO’s strategy on Robotics for Development.

Please forward, tag, repost 🙏


This first-of-a-kind project on Robotics for Global Development is only possible thanks to the thought leadership of the UK Foreign, Commonwealth, and Development Office (FCDO) and the Frontier Tech Hub. Specifically, Antony Herrmann and Phil Outram from FCDO have defined and set the stage for the project. They’re actively building the FCDO’s understanding of robotics, and their expertise is essential to the project. Indeed, they’re directly engaged and connecting us to key experts such as Benjamin Rosman.

On the Frontier Tech side, we get to co-lead the project with Asad Rahman, Sam Stockley-Patel, PhD, Gita Luz, and Alex Scoines, who are excellent collaborators and provide precisely the kind of leadership, expertise, insights, support, and collaborative work environment that will maximize the success of this project. And there’s more: I’ll introduce other key team members in the coming weeks.

First-ever Study on Robotics in Climate Action

The climate crisis is the defining issue of our time, and we need all hands and appropriate tech on deck to mitigate the effects of the emergency and adapt responsibly. The Climate Robotics Network is exploring the potential of robotics to scale existing climate solutions and offer novel solutions to mitigate and adapt to climate risk. Thus far, the evidence suggests that Climate Action needs some level of automation to scale. Learn more in our new study!

Climate Robotics White Paper Mosaic

Our White Paper draws on concrete Climate Robotics case studies to highlight how existing solutions can augment our capacity to tackle the climate emergency. More specifically, the case studies focus on Mangrove Restoration, Forecasting Extreme Weather Events, Scaling Wind Energy, Regenerating Corals, Collecting Ocean Data, Removing Carbon with Seaweed, Scaling Cover Crop Seeding, Automating Solar Panel Cleaning, and Expanding the Amount of Recycled Waste. These case studies yield essential insights on using robotics in Climate Action. These include insights on Scaling, Adaptation vs. Mitigation, Bits vs. Atoms, Mobile vs. Fixed Robotics, and Sudden vs. Slow Onset Disasters. 

Screenshot 2024-01-21 at 11.39.43

Using robotics in Climate Action also presents many challenges and risks, including Top-Down Approaches, Techno-Centric Thinking, Lack of Evidence and Accountability, Financing and Affordability, Safety, Privacy and Governance, Simplicity, Maintenance, Repairability, Sustainability, and last but certainly not least, Environmental Impact.

We unpack and discuss these challenges in detail and note that many are not inherent to robotics alone. The Humanitarian Tech space has faced several challenges, which means best practices and lessons learned already exist to manage these challenges. The Climate Robotics Network is actively drawing on these and other insights to inform the responsible, sustainable, and effective use of robotics in Climate Action.

Still, we face far more questions than answers in this new space; hence the need for a climate robotics network, conceptual framework, research agenda, series of white papers, summit, and knowledge base.

Video: Why Climate Robotics?

Why am I interested in Climate Robotics? For many reasons, like the fact that robots can simultaneously assess and assist climate action in unique ways. This new video in our series on “Climate Robotics in Action” explore this further. The series highlights real-world deployments of climate robotics, along with key opportunities, challenges, and risks.

Be sure to follow the Climate Robotics Network to catch future videos and get involved. You can also join us on Slack. In the meantime, feel free to share questions you’d like us to explore in future videos!

On the Decentralization of Robotics (A Story about Trouts, Magic Seeds, and Spidey Senses, Naturally)

So here’s the thing: “Robots are still being built in the same way as they have been for 70 years, since the dawn of robotics and its Taylorist and Fordist approach.” 😱 But guess what? This is about to change in fascinating ways, as Sascha Freyberg & Helmut Hauser describe in “The Morphological Paradigm in Robotics.” Published in the journal on Studies in History and Philosophy of Science and exploring the future of robotics, this enthralling study features a zombie trout, a very clever seed, and our favorite spidey sense.

(For my work on the decentralization of social good application of robotics worldwide, please see WeRobotics, an international tech nonprofit that I co-founded and led as executive director for 7+ years. Freyberg and Hauser’s insights relate to this work, as explained in the conclusion below).

Screen Shot 2023-06-12 at 18.43.48

It’s been decades, but the control approach in conventional robotics has hardly evolved: the center must constantly send signals to the periphery at each time step. More formally, morphology has no control function in robotics. The morphology of a robot refers to its structure, softness, shape, and surface properties. These properties do not act intelligently or independently from the brain (control center).

In contrast, “biological systems use morphological properties to implement intelligent behavior.” And they do so with excellent energy efficiency, robustness, and flexibility. Moreover, they’re quick to learn, even under highly noisy conditions. ”Interestingly, these highly complex tasks are often performed with extremely primitive brains–often without them at all.”

Enter the Zombie Trout

Let’s illustrate this by turning to Exhibit A from Mother Nature. Freyberg and Hauser use the curious case of “Shrödinger’s Trout” (stay with me here). The video below, captured by the Lauder Lab at Harvard, shows a trout swimming in their water tank. Water flows into the tank on the left side and straight out again on the right. “This allows a controlled laboratory environment to conduct reproducible experiments. The trout swims in a wonderfully natural movement from left to right and explores the surroundings. Or so it seems.”

youtube-video-gif

Turns out, the trout is actually attached with a nylon string because, well, it’s dead. Condolences. The point being, “no nerve signals are sent, not a single muscle is activated. Nevertheless, the trout swims in the stream in an impressively natural way, even against the flow. This swimming movement arises purely from the morphological properties of the fish’s body (its structure, softness, shape and surface properties) and their reaction to the forces of the environment (the flow). So it is the materiality of the fish that (re)acts here. Based on these observations we could say that a significant part of the normal swimming behavior can also be performed by a dead fish.”

Talk about highly energy-efficient morphology! The trout’s swimming movement is achieved without muscle power, i.e., “without energy input [or control] on the part of the fish.” This example shows that biological systems use morphological properties to implement intelligent behavior, behavior that is mistakenly attributed to the brain. But in fact, this behavior often occurs locally, at the level of the body rather than from the control center.

This need not be surprising, however. As Freyberg and Hauser remind us, “long before neurons or even brains appeared, there were already species that displayed intelligent behavior in the biological sense. Even viruses, which are usually not included in the category of living organisms, use their morphology to gain access to the host cell.” And so, conceptually, “we can say that in the trout example, the morphology has the role of a controller for the movement.”

A Very Clever Seed Indeed

It stands to reason that a “deeper understanding of morphological principles could therefore be very helpful in building more adequate bodies for robots.” Freyberg and Hauser thus turn to Exhibit B from Mother Nature: seeds of the genus Erodium

Screen Shot 2023-06-12 at 18.20.09

This curious seed has an unusual morphology that looks like a spiral. “When they fall to the ground, nothing happens until conditions are ideal. Only when it starts to rain do they react. The change in humidity affects the morphology and causes the spiral to unravel. At the same time, the unraveling bores the seed into the soil. In this case, the morphological properties of the seed have the ability to sense changes in moisture in their environment and then actively react by releasing the stored energy in the dried seed spiral.” Imagine how practical this high level of robustness would be in robotics!

The fact is, “even though the brain plays an important role in complex organisms, for some cases it can be too slow and, as a result, its intervention can be even counterproductive. For example, during the highly dynamic movement of walking or running, it is not the brain that is decisive as an instance of regulation, but the body schema. Instead of the brain controlling each muscle during walking (as in a conventional robot, for example), a combination of local and spinal neurons (outside of the brain) and morphological properties do most of the controlling.”

Spidey Sensing

Morphological properties also enable animals (humans included, of course) to translate nonlinear signals into more readily digestible information. They serve as a first filter, transforming complex environmental signals into linear data. “Morphology in this case is the first stage in the processing of information.” 

spiderweb_1050x700

Take the spider’s web, for example. In addition to the basic task of catching flies, “it’s also used as a means of communication. It is speculated that the spider uses its web as a signal processor that takes over complex non-linear filter functions.” To be sure, “spider webs can be described as non-linear dynamic systems that take on the role of a non-linear filter. There, too, is an input signal (air vibration and the movement of a trapped insect) and an output signal (mechanical vibrations).”

As Freyberg and Hauser note, “One could say that part of the computational processes has been outsourced to the morphology. That is exactly the idea of morphological computation. In order to obtain better morphologies for robots that are multifunctional and sustainable (i.e. economical and robust), it is therefore necessary to understand more precisely how morphological parameters are used in nature. That is, mere imitation is not enough. The underlying principles of operation must be realized.”

Meanwhile, Back in Robotics

The approach used in “conventional, industrial robotics not only ignores the morphological aspects, but deliberately suppresses them. Non-linear, complex dynamics, underactuation and compliance are all attributes that make computational modeling more difficult and, therefore, control more complex. […] But it is precisely these properties that enable biological systems to implement complex non-linear functionalities through their morphology and thus to simplify the control.”

Screen Shot 2023-06-12 at 18.21.41

To be sure, morphological computation can “significantly reduce the complexity of the overall task for a robot and the brain/central computer now has to do less and can be less involved and focus on other more cognitive tasks. Often the effect of this deregulation is that the digital controller only needs to intervene at specific times. For example, when the task changes, when environmental conditions change, or when the disturbance forces become too great and additional energy is needed.”

New Design Principles of Robotics

Several design principles can be derived from the above examples. 

The Soft Principle. “The morphologies involved are mostly soft, flexible or compliant. This facilitates both the interaction between agent and environment and the exchange of energy between the two. As seen in the example of the spider web, soft structures can map more complex relationships between input and output. Softness also allows for the integration and storage of information over a limited period of time.” Check out EPFL colleague Jamie Paik’s work on soft robotics and her lab’s new piece in Nature on morphological flexibility in robotics systems. 

The Freedom Principle. “Not every single degree of freedom of the system (in our case the body of the biological system) is directly regulated by control signals. However, it is important to note that we are not talking about computation in the manner of a Turing machine, which is digital, but rather about analogue, continuous computation that depends also on environmental conditions. The idea that computational functionality is implemented directly in the morphology is often expressed by using the term morphological computation.”

The Outsource Principle. “The dynamic properties of morphology are often nonlinear and complex. In general, their complexity is proportional to the complexity that can potentially be outsourced to the morphological structure. In contrast, a simple, rigid arm of a conventional robot has relatively simple dynamics and is therefore capable of only static transformation at most. However, if the morphology has dynamic and non-linear properties, then in principle it is possible to implement non-linear and dynamic computations, which are far more interesting transformations. Dynamics in this context also means integration of information over time, thus implying a memory function.”

Where We Go From Here

What if a systematic approach existed to convert computational functionality directly into the corresponding morphology? Such an approach doesn’t exist so far, but the authors believe that some of the answers may come from soft robotics materials since they often exhibit nonlinear dynamics.

In any case, the search for answers is likely to take us beyond classical areas of robotics research, thus decentralizing the exploration further. Other areas of research “can now contribute new technologies and in turn can draw inspiration from robotics. This ranges from material science and chemistry to completely new fields such as synthetic biology or minimal biology. In addition, the strong growth of additive manufacturing technologies is also playing a crucial role for this new generation of robots.”

In sum, “there is indeed a profound change in orientation happening in the field of robotics, characterized by a widening of scope and a pluralization and hybridization of approaches and principles.” As the authors note, when it comes to conventional robotics, optimization is only possible in software, “whereas Morphological Computation additionally enables adaptation in the morphology.” If we can change “both aspects (software and hardware) in a robot, then a much greater variety of behavior can be achieved,” much like we find in nature.

To conclude, if morphological computation and soft robotics are integrated into more conventional robotics, and merged with artificial intelligence, then a “completely new generation of intelligent machines might arise. The question will be what these machines and devices will be used for, since this will also shape research agendas. For even if technical inspirations are increasingly derived from natural figures and phenomena, their products always embody social functions as well as specific goals and broader consequences.”

We are thus left with several pressing questions:

How will the impact of new robots look like? Will they assist or rather constrain? Will we soon live in habitats oriented more to the needs of machinic intelligence (so-called ‘smart cities’)?

A Word of Warning from Habermas

This is where I return to my work at WeRobotics, which seeks to make the application of robotics more inclusive and equitable, as exemplified by Flying Labs. The tagline of WeRobotics is “The Power of Local.” It is essential that the pluralization of approaches and principles described above include robotics experts from and across the Majority World. So in the questions above, who exactly is the “We” here? Are we talking about the inclusive “we”? We the People? Or the “Royal We”? The exclusive “we” of the so-called “Global North”?

In Toward a Rational Society (1970), the German philosopher Jürgen Habermas describes “the colonization of the public sphere through the use of instrumental technical rationality. In this sphere, complex social problems are reduced to technical questions, effectively removing the plurality of contending perspectives.” This explains why today’s social problems are “addressed only in aspects that are susceptible to technical solutions.”

But there’s no such thing as a purely technical problem when we bring robotics into society, which means that the solutions themselves cannot be technical alone. Solutions must be social, inclusive, plural, and diverse. As Freyberg and Hauser rightly conclude, “If we want to pose such questions seriously, the interrelations of epistemic and ethical, socio-political and technical, economic and ecological factors have to be taken into consideration, and need a more encompassing theoretical and political-epistemological understanding.”

Joining the Swiss Institute of Technology at EPFL

The Swiss Institute of Technology at EPFL ranks in the Top 15 of tech institutes alongside MIT, Stanford, Berkeley, Harvard, Caltech, Cambridge, Oxford, ETH, and NTU. I’m excited to join this highly innovative and dynamic campus. The leadership position I’m taking on at EFPL is a newly created one that combines two equally engaging roles. I’ll get to focus on innovation, entrepreneurship, and robotics. More on my LinkedIn

EPFL Campus

I’m thrilled to join this prominent university given how life-changing my past campus experience has been. I’ve had the honor and privilege of studying at Stanford, Columbia, UC Berkeley, and The Fletcher School of Law & Diplomacy. I’ve also been a fellow at MIT Solve and, in 2007-2009, co-founded/directed a new program at Harvard on next-generation humanitarian technologies. I’ve been working in Humanitarian Tech and Social Innovation ever since. 

bookcoverlinkedin

Today, robotics and autonomous systems powered by breakthroughs in AI stand to play an increasingly important role in society (understatement). At EFPL, I’ll double down on open innovation and next-generation robotics to help direct their positive impact in society. I’ll work with professors, entrepreneurs and post-docs in multiple fields and programs across EFPL and Switzerland. I’m also excited to help drive cross-sector collaboration, and learn from, support, and promote some of the leading research labs in the world. Indeed, Switzerland is home to numerous world-class robotics labs, not to mention a thriving robotics startup scene. 

Campus_esplanade2-1536x864

What’s more, I’ll get to co-create and launch a robotics association at a national scale with critical stakeholders in government, industry, academia, and the social impact sector. With an economy ranked as the most innovative in the world, this role is guaranteed to be an exciting, challenging, and instructive experience, with many insights to come; insights that may also be of value to colleagues in the drones and robotics ecosystems in Africa, Asia, Latin America, Central America, the Caribbean, and the South Pacific. I’ll certainly be reaching out to them for their insights. So I’m pleased that my new role includes international outreach.

Enabling and accelerating local and national-level impact in the robotics space was a high priority of mine as Co-Founder and Executive Director of WeRobotics for 7+ years. With my former colleagues, I had the privilege of co-creating and enabling new robotics hubs in 40 countries with hundreds of entrepreneurs and changemakers and key partners in the Swiss and global robotics industry. This unique network of locally-led knowledge hubs, called Flying Labs, will always be one of my proudest (collective!) achievements. 

So, after working internationally for years, it’s time for me to work more locally: in the Swiss robotics ecosystem. Clearly, this ecosystem is an important enabler for the social impact sector globally as evidenced by the positive impact of Flying Labs worldwide. 

Rolex-Learning-Center-coquelicot-1024x576

I’ll also help to develop EPFL’s Masters and Ph.D. Program in Robotics, and may even get to teach again. I’d be keen to give talks on ethics and robotics and how to enable diversity, equity, and inclusion in the application of robotics in society, for example. So I’m thrilled that one of our upcoming experts’ meeting will focus on how tech and robotics can meet the needs and challenges of the blind and visually impaired. 

Per the job description, this new leadership position at the Swiss Institute of Technology also requires the ability to translate to various audiences, which is a passion of mine and many translational leaders. What’s more, the role calls for significant autonomy. I’m at my best when given generous amounts of autonomy in dynamic, multidisciplinary and rapid-learning environments.

In closing, three fun facts:

  • The majority of the 20+ engineers in the WeRobotics Engineering Team were EPFL graduates, including WeRobotics’ former Head of Engineering.
  • EPFL colleagues and I are organizing an experts’ meeting in Bern focused on medical cargo drones, one of the critical areas I led at WeRobotics. Bern was also where WeRobotics’ Engineering Lab was based.

I like it when life works out this way and unexpected threads of continuity, connectedness, and meaning weave together. There’s lots of good work to be done at EPFL, with some major new developments in the pipeline that will become public later this year. More importantly, EPFL’s core values resonate deeply with me: Equality and Diversity, Respect and Sustainability. So I’m excited to shift gears and call this world-class university my new home. 

Moving on from WeRobotics, with Gratitude

CDA Photo 1

It is time for a new chapter of WeRobotics to begin. This next stretch of the journey must include more diverse executive leadership. I’m thus stepping down as Executive Director of WeRobotics.* I feel deeply about this personal and professional decision, and didn’t come to it lightly or quickly. Thankfully, the WeRobotics Board has given me their full backing. With this next step, we can continue to walk the talk on diversity, equity, inclusion, localization and shift the power. Equally importantly, this new chapter presents all Flying Labs with a positive opportunity to shape the governance of WeRobotics itself.

Flying Labs are independent, locally-led knowledge hubs that combine local leadership and expertise with emerging technologies to drive positive and sustainable social impact. They’re co-created with WeRobotics but hosted and run by locally-owned organizations, companies, and/or social enterprises. WeRobotics serves as the primary enabler of the Flying Labs Network. 

Screenshot 2023-01-10 at 11.38.52

I want to express my deepest gratitude to all of you who worked with us to expand the power of locally-led action over the past 7+ years. Together, we’ve significantly expanded the quality and quantity of locally-led opportunities across multiple sectors. We also built greater respect and more robust demand for local leadership, ownership, knowledge, and expertise. How? By co-creating and co-implementing a radical decentralization and localization model with a wide range of Flying Labs in nearly 40 countries. The collective impact of this model speaks for itself.

We’ve accomplished a lot together. I can’t list every single example here, so will just share a few key accomplishments that mean a lot to me given my values, interests, and direct contributions. While I was largely responsible for catalyzing, championing, and/or coordinating the efforts below, it took our outstanding and purpose-driven teammates at WeRobotics and across the Flying Labs Network to refine these efforts, improve and extend them, and to translate them into direct, meaningful impact. We also relied on strong external partners, donors, dedicated Board Members and phenomenal interns. This was a true team effort in every sense of the word. As we all know, the myth of the lone leader is pure fantasy. 


2015WeR

In 2015, one of my WeRobotics Co-Founders — Dr. Andrew Schroeder — and I launched the first-ever program dedicated to the locally-led use of drones for disaster management (AidRobotics). Together with many Flying Labs, we built the World Food Program’s (WFP) own institutional expertise in this space over multiple years. This included WeRobotics and Flying Labs leading half-a-dozen hands-on professional trainings for country teams in Africa, Asia, Latin America, and the Caribbean, not to mention with other UN agencies, from Malawi to the Maldives. Since then, Flying Labs have led their own trainings and operational deployments in response to a wide range of disasters across the globe. What’s more, we were amongst the first to apply machine learning and AI to automate the analysis of drone imagery (building on earlier work done at QCRI). I also launched a professional, peer-reviewed online training on the use of drones in humanitarian action, the only course of its kind. 

AidRobotics was our foundational and single most active program during the first critical years of WeRobotics. In fact, this program played an instrumental role in defining WeRobotics’ values, model and mission. So it’s worth expanding on this. AidRobotics was strongly influenced by UAViators, a global professional network and community of practice I founded in 2013 with an explicit focus on localization, ethics, and best practices. In fact, the initial decentralization idea of Flying Labs actually originated from UAViators. This also explains why Nepal Flying Labs (the first Flying Labs) predates WeRobotics by well over a year, and why the first Flying Labs projects were implemented in partnership with UAViators. Our joint learnings in Nepal later informed the launch of this digital solution to coordinate drone flights in disasters.

Screenshot 2023-01-12 at 15.15.24

In fact, the entire AidRobotics Program — including the Code of Conduct, training expertise, and our deployment experience — was a direct spinoff from the open collaborations at the heart of the UAViators community. We brought to WeRobotics our strong interest in localization and locally-led action thanks to this early operational and policy engagement. We also brought our core values and a strong commitment to decentralization and locally-led action. See the section “From UAViators to WeRobotics” in this peer-reviewed publication.

The foundational work through UAViators served to catalyze the co-creation of the Flying Labs Network, which has successfully expanded the space for locally-led action in the use of emerging technologies for social impact. So the Flying Labs Network feels like the pinnacle of a long journey from when I first began working on localization and people-centered projects in 2006, within the context of early warning and response systems in humanitarian emergencies. On the tech side, I’ve been working in humanitarian technology since co-founding and co-directing the Harvard Humanitarian Initiative’s (HHI) Program on Crisis Mapping in 2007. The first time I wrote about the use of drones in humanitarian action was in 2008.

2016WeR

In 2016, we teamed up with Peru Flying Labs to launch the first-ever program dedicated to the locally-led use of drones for medical delivery (HealthRobotics). Peru Flying Labs initiated this program through an explicit request to explore the possibilities of medical drone delivery in the Amazon Rainforest. To date, WeRobotics and several different Flying Labs have carried out more locally-driven drone delivery trainings and projects in more countries than any other organization or company thanks to our strategic partnerships with WHO, the CDC, Gates Foundation, Pfizer, Johnson & Johnson, and BD, along with multiple Ministries of Health, hospitals, clinics, doctors, nurses, and patients in Africa, Asia, Latin America, the Caribbean, and the South Pacific. Furthermore, we made drone delivery far more accessible than any other organization. 

drcargo

What’s more, thanks to the leadership of Flying Labs, we were the first to enable locally-led cargo drone deliveries in Peru, Dominican Republic, Nepal, Papua New Guinea, Uganda, and the Philippines, among others. We also enabled large-scale locally-led deliveries in Madagascar. To share our learnings, I launched a professional, peer-reviewed online training on using cargo drones in health. This is still the only ongoing course of its kind. Like the AidRobotics course, it was peer-reviewed by MIT, UPenn and Direct Relief experts.  

2017WeR

In 2017, we collectively launched and grew our dedicated engineering team to make cargo drones far more accessible to Flying Labs, and to offer Flying Labs both in-house add-on technology to use drones in a broader range of social good applications. The purpose of doing so was to enable Flying Labs to become first-movers in their own countries, as opposed to foreign companies and consultants who often parachute in with little local knowledge or interest in local ownership. 

WeRWMPic

Our engineering expertise enabled both WeRobotics and Flying Labs to explore novel drone applications, including the precision release of beneficial mosquitoes to eliminate Dengue and Zika; Ladybugs to protect pecan trees and Mangrove seeds for climate change mitigation. The level of expertise needed to design and build these autonomous and drone-optimized release systems was considerable. Some members of the WeRobotics engineering team have since created a spinoff (formerly called Release Labs) to pursue related opportunities in the social impact space. I’m proud to have played a long and instrumental role in incubating this climate tech startup.

2018WeR

In 2018, we fully democratized the Flying Labs Network, enabling qualified local organizations worldwide to join the Network. We co-created a localization model with all the required guidelines and governance mechanisms to respond to the priorities and interests of local organizations. This development was important to me because of my strong interest in locally-led action and decentralization prior to WeRobotics. Fellow Co-Founder Andrew hasn’t received enough public credit for helping to shape this democratization and decentralization model, which paved the way for the Flying Labs Network to become a social movement dedicated to The Power of Local. This model ultimately enabled the Network to grow from three Flying Labs in 2018 to nearly 40 in 2023 (despite the devastating multi-year pandemic in between). You can read more about the model and its applications to other sectors here. Another proud accomplishment of 2018 was the launch of our Online Training Academy!

2019WeR

In 2019, we launched a new dedicated program to engage youth directly (YouthRobotics). WeRobotics and Flying Labs were the first to carry out hands-on youth trainings and projects in dozens of countries. These locally-led projects included aerial, terrestrial, and marine robotics. I initially took the lead in this program and secured our first funding for STEM projects. Together with multiple colleagues, we subsequently had the opportunity to co-implement these first activities in the South Pacific. This opened the door for many STEM projects that followed. As part of the YouthRobotics Program, we also teamed up with Flying Labs to co-create the first-ever picture book for children that is explicitly geared towards the importance of local knowledge, leadership, and ownership when it comes to the use of emerging technologies for social good projects. There are plans to turn this into a book series with Flying Labs.

panyouth

It’s worth noting that the three most active and impactful operational programs at WeRobotics over the past 7+ years have been the AidRobotics, HealthRobotics, and YouthRobotics Programs. This is all thanks to the dedicated WeRobotics and Flying Labs Teams who took these programs to the next level. There are many more accomplishments to write about within each of these three programs, so perhaps another book is in order! 

2020WeR

In 2020, with the COVID outbreak, I led the launch of this dedicated campaign to directly inform the appropriate use of drone technology in response to the pandemic. That same year, following our public commitment to anti-racism, I catalyzed our efforts to diversify our Board, shift our communications strategy and make the WeRobotics Team more inclusive. I’m very proud that we successfully accomplished each of the goals in our public commitment thanks to a huge team effort. I later led the launch of this shift-the-power series to document our concrete steps in shifting power with local organizations. All these efforts were central to our organizational transformation. In addition, we launched the Flying Council with Flying Labs to accelerate our Stopping-as-Success explorations. I’m a western white male who works hard to understand and reflect on my privileged role and how to transform individually. This position of power can have an impact on organizations, including WeRobotics and Flying Labs. I recognize that shifting the power is a continuous and hard-fought journey, and still have a lot to learn.

2021WeR

In 2021, we teamed up with multiple Flying Labs to fully document our joint localization and shift-the-power model, which we first began co-creating with Flying Labs in 2018. Why? Because the model was simply not getting enough visibility in policy circles, or influencing mainstream discussions on localization. We also wanted to make the model more accessible for others to adapt and adopt. So I took the lead from the WeRobotics side by working closely with many Flying Labs. As always, their insights were considerable and their input invaluable. The applied research and writing took over five months. Once completed, we launched this detailed report on our decentralization model at the Skoll World Forum to demonstrate and explain the model’s success. CDA Photo 2 - LocRep

The co-creation of this model will undoubtedly remain one of my proudest accomplishments at WeRobotics. We also used the high-profile Skoll event to formally launch the Power Footprint Project, which I’m also very passionate about. And we fully updated our Shift-the-Power strategy, along with the impact pages of WeRobotics and Flying Labs

2022WeR

In 2022, following another successful independent audit, we publicly confirmed that in 2021, WeRobotics transferred 42% of its own revenue and funding to local organizations. The industry average in the humanitarian and development space is typically 2-3%. This makes us one of the few international nonprofit organizations worldwide to accomplish such high levels of equity. We did this by walking the talk; by using our co-created localization model that clearly places local organizations first, along with local leadership, ownership, and expertise. In 2022, we also launched this dedicated call for the Power Footprint Project. The Board is exploring how best to move this project forward. 

During the second half of 2022, I worked closely with colleagues to initiate necessary organizational improvements in terms of Board oversight, governance, decision-making, executive performance reviews, accountability mechanisms, and more. I proactively reached out to the Board on this, working directly with them — and with the Head of Human Resources and Head of Finance — to ensure that WeRobotics stands on solid institutional foundations for the future. This essential work took up 120% of my own time between June and October 2022; groundwork that should enable WeRobotics to be more in line with institutional best practices in 2023. These organizational improvements are among the most important contributions I’ve made at WeRobotics. Leading a transformation agenda can be complex and result in burnout.

On the funding front, we successfully secured support from innovative partners who strongly believed in our mission throughout the years. This includes — but is certainly not limited to — The Rockefeller Foundation, Hewlett Foundation, Gates Foundation, Autodesk Foundation, Jansen Foundation, Atlassian Foundation, Fondation Botnar, Omidyar Network, Twilio Foundation, PagerDuty, MIT Solve, multiple United Nations Agencies, World Bank, Inter-American Development Bank (IADB), USAID, Australia’s Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT), BD, Pfizer, Johnson & Johnson, and more. 

There’s definitely a lot more that I’m proud of, such as our 100% success rate in passing all of our rigorous and independent audits; the many technology partnerships we’ve secured; leading our expansion into both marine robotics and terrestrial robotics; the Social Ripples systems change project; and our new and improved impact monitoring framework. Not to mention many other essential accomplishments that I wasn’t involved in, such as locally-led drone certification courses, WeShare — our knowledge sharing platform built with Flying Labs; the Labs’ Global Model; the launch of Labs Use-Cases; and many more projects featured on the WeRobotics and Flying Labs blogs, and in our Annual Reports.

To conclude, the most crucial point to take away is this: the enormous team efforts across both WeRobotics and the Flying Labs Network made all the above accomplishments possible and successful. 


2023WeR

I’m excited about the next chapter of WeRobotics and Flying Labs. The Flying Labs Network is expected to grow to well over 40 Flying Labs in 2023. There simply is no other network quite like this one. Flying Labs are already training each other and implementing joint projects with each other. This trend will increase substantially, resulting in even more network effects. As I remind all my Flying Labs colleagues during our retreats over the years: “You are each other’s single best resource!” 

Whoever becomes the next Executive Director of WeRobotics matters a lot to Flying Labs. So the WeRobotics Board will reach out to all Labs to invite their nominations for strong leadership candidates who are fully committed to our core values. This new chapter is a big positive opportunity for Flying Labs to shape the governance of WeRobotics itself. While change is never easy, the benefits are clear. The significant value-add of greater diversity in team leadership is very well proven. More diverse leadership at WeRobotics will also enable Flying Labs to gain greater access to new funding opportunities.

And don’t forget that WeRobotics has a strong Alumni Network! For example, Joseph (former Head of Drone Data and Systems); Jürg (former Head of Engineering); Seb (former Lead Engineer), and also Cameron (former Lead Engineer), amongst others, all joined the Alumni Network in the past 10 months. What’s more, the Head of HR is joining the network in the coming months, as is the Head of Finance. So WeRobotics has top-notch alumni to draw on. In fact, several alumni have already supported multiple colleagues at Flying Labs and WeRobotics. I pledge to do the same. 

When the time is right, I’ll publish a blog post to share the most important professional and personal insights I’ve gained while at WeRobotics, along with the most important lessons learned as executive director during the past 7+ years. This will include my first-hand experience and lessons learned working with a Board. I hope that sharing my learnings will be of value to others. It is essential to me that we live up to our core values externally and internally. 

It was an incredible honor and privilege to serve as the official director of this organization.* What I’ll miss the most is my dear colleagues at WeRobotics and Flying Labs; their compassion, kindness, brilliance, dedication and humor. We laughed a lot during our recent Flying Labs Retreat in Nairobi, and we cried (happy tears of gratitude), shared meals, sang, listened to powerful poetry, and even danced. It was good for the soul, as were the many in-person hugs and the energy, inspiration, determination, and brilliance that Flying Labs colleagues brought to the many discussions. I’ll miss this Flying Labs magic, the Power of Local. So I look forward to following their good work.

Screenshot 2023-01-10 at 12.11.25

In sum, I am deeply grateful to everyone who made the above contributions possible and more impactful. You all know who you are. You were there, time and time again, to expand the space for locally-led action. I’ll be forever grateful to you. Lastly, and equally importantly, I want to explicitly recognize and thank each of my colleagues for their proudest accomplishments at WeRobotics and across the Flying Labs Network. Keep shining!

Per Aspera ad Astra.
Through adversity to the stars.


* The WeRobotics Board of Directors did not approve the Co-CEO titles, which is why I’m using the approved title of ED.

Drones and the Coronavirus: Do these applications make any sense?

Want to use drones in response to COVID-19? Then read this previous post to inform your decision-making. I also published this follow-up post to suggest that drones may add more value later in adjacent crises. I wrote these posts to encourage more critical thinking around the use of drones in response to the pandemic. I don’t have all the answers, of course, but we do have questions on some of the applications that several drone companies and other organizations are promoting. The figure below from Drone Industry Insights (DRONEII) does a great job collating what we’ve come across in recent weeks.

The applications proposed under “Delivering Essential Goods and Services” on the right-hand side are already mature applications that existed years before the pandemic. The applications under “Battling the Spread of the Virus” are somewhat more novel. We thus welcome input on those specific applications. We’d be especially grateful for any additional evidence there may be to evaluate the effectiveness of these applications better.

Spraying

It appears there is little to no evidence that outdoor spraying of disinfectants or other substances (by hand or by drone) has any impact on reducing the transmission of the novel coronavirus. On the contrary, this fumigation could create public health problems and add to environmental pollution. As The Lancet Journal on Infectious Diseases clearly noted on March 5, 2020, “air disinfection of cities and communities is not known to be effective for disease control and needs to be stopped. The widespread practice of spraying disinfectant and alcohol in the sky, on roads, vehicles, and personnel has no value; moreover, large quantities of alcohol and disinfectant are potentially harmful to humans and should be avoided.” While some have suggested that outdoor spraying may help reassure local communities that the government is in control and responding, could this potentially create a false sense of safety and thus dis-incentivize physical distancing? On the other hand, the emotional reassurance and peace of mind that the spraying gives can provide crucial psychological relief, which is key to resilience. Others have suggested that the spray can keep rodents away. But thus far, only one preliminary study has been carried out, which suggests that cats and ferrets are more susceptible to being infected by COVID-19 than dogs, pigs, chickens, and ducks. We have not found any scientific studies thus far that assess the transmission of the novel coronavirus from ferrets or cats to human beings. Indoor spraying is a different question. It remains to be seen whether aerial or ground robots can be more effective at indoor spraying compared to more conventional means. Does the use of drones in this case save time? Does it save on costs? Is the technology readily available?

Temperature scanning

It is unclear how valid, reliable, or cost-effective the current technology is for very high-resolution remote scanning at a distance. For example, can relatively affordable sensors distinguish between a body temperature of 37.2C and 38.0C from 50 meters away, let alone 100 meters? The same may also be true for those proposals that aim to use drones for automated remote cough detection. In any event, not everyone displays these symptoms right away. And even if the technology does work superbly well, then what? For example, someone with a high fever and cough walks down an alleyway and is automatically spotted by a drone that detects fever and a cough. Now what? It’s rather easy to get away from a drone in an urban environment.

Audio broadcasting

We hear mixed results in the use of loudspeakers on drones to encourage physical distancing and staying home. In some of the video footage we’ve seen, it appears that those who hear these warnings from the sky don’t actually change their behaviors. Others take videos of the drones with their smartphones but otherwise go on as before. That being said, we hear from our colleagues at India Flying Labs that this application of drones has been relatively effective in certain parts of India, and that many police chiefs are actively asking for drones with loudspeakers to carry out their public awareness efforts. The messaging itself needs to be carefully crafted to maximize the potential for behavior change. Just repeating the same messages over and over, “stay home, keep your distance,” may not be very useful since many have already heard these same messages from other sources. First, the messaging should be used to offer an information service, i.e., to provide “news you can use” to local communities; to be an authoritative source of information. Second, the messaging itself must be crafted in such a way that it resonates at a hyper-local level, draw on specific local customs and local traditions, and/or have local celebrities do the messaging. Either way, crafting different messages for different age-groups and/or separate messages for men and women are good practice. Over in Tunisia, it is unclear whether this ground robot (equipped with a camera, thermal sensor, loudspeaker, and microphone) is very effective. Why not merely use a police car with similar sensors?

Cargo delivery

Using cargo drones to deliver essential medicines and to collect patient samples for COVID-19 testing is being widely promoted. Anyone who has been involved in setting up cargo drones operations knows that doing so can take a significant amount of time. Also, the local availability of reliable and affordable cargo drones, let alone trained cargo drone pilots, is likely to be limited. So the rapid deployment of new cargo drone projects in response to the pandemic is expected to face several significant constraints. That being said, for cargo drone projects that are currently (or recently) operational, these can be more easily ramped up or repurposed to support the pandemic response. Foreign drone companies with significant resources and experience may be able to set up new cargo drone services in new countries. Even then, however, if the relevant medicines to help treat COVID symptoms are not available, or if insufficient tests are available to test for the virus, then there’s no point flying any drones. That being said, there are of course other needs for medical deliveries. We hear from Panama Flying Labs that the lock-down there restricts movement based on the ID number on your national ID card. Everyone is assigned a specific window of time when they can leave their homes for essential reasons based on their ID numbers. This poses a major challenge to those suffering from chronic illnesses who need their medications refilled on a regular basis. So Panama Flying Labs has been asked to look into possible cargo drone solutions to address this problem. It remains to be seen whether doing so will be logistically feasible and whether using cargo drones will add value compared to traditional delivery methods.

Surveillance

Drones can enhance situational awareness. This explains why many have advocated for the use of drones to help enforce lock-downs, sanitary cordons, curfews, and border crossings. While this may be a relatively more effective use of drone technology in response to the pandemic, it does raise serious concerns about data privacy and data protection. These concerns are rarely addressed by those advocating for drone-based surveillance. At the same time, there are increasing concerns that many governments are taking advantage of the pandemic to impose harsher surveillance measures that may persist well beyond the end of the pandemic. We’ve also seen multiple photos of drone experts huddled together with police and other government officials to show them the live feed from their drones overhead. This does not qualify as physical distancing.


To be clear, we are not public health experts ourselves (although several leaders of Flying Labs are medical doctors). The evidence that exists on the value-added of some of the above applications is particularly thin, which means that further evidence may well make these applications far more compelling. It should also be noted that when governments and local authorities instruct local drone experts to spray disinfectants to contain COVID-19, for example, these local experts may have no choice. This may also be true for some of the other applications listed above. That being said, at the very least, it is our collective responsibility to inform these authorities about the expected added value of some of these applications.

What is important is that we keep learning at a rapid pace and take in all new forms of evidence to review the uses of drones in response to the pandemic. This doesn’t mean that drones cannot play a decisive role in supporting the response to COVID-19; it simply means that more critical thinking is necessary before launching yet another drone project to tackle the pandemic. While drones may not add as much value as we’d like in the current phase of the global health emergency, this may change soon. Either way, we’ll be sure to continue working with and learning from Flying Labs to document what works and what doesn’t work to the best of our abilities. In the meantime, we’re fans of what Nepal Flying Labs is doing in response to the pandemic. Given the drastic reduction in air traffic around the capital city, the municipalities in Kathmandu Valley finally have a chance to secure flight permissions from the Nepal Civil Aviation Authority, so that Nepal Flying Labs and partners can use their drones to create high-resolution maps of the vast area (pictured above). These very detailed maps have long been needed to inform urban planning projects led by the municipalities.

WeRobotics for Humans in a Hurry

We need to be better at communicating what WeRobotics is (and isn’t) to fellow humans. We can’t expect everyone to have the time to read through most of these blog posts and somehow immediately understand the big picture. We are keen to share more about our community, culture, and methodology. The FAQ below is a way to share more about our work. We are learning as we build. Feel free to share this post with anyone who might benefit from more clarity. It’s a quick 3 minute read. 

Is WeRobotics a for-profit company?

WeRobotics is a registered not-for-profit in the US and a tax-exempt organization in Switzerland.

Are Flying Labs for-profit companies?

Flying Labs are coordinated by local not-for-profit organizations and/or local companies. 

What is the difference between Flying Labs and WeRobotics Labs?

There are no such things as WeRobotics Labs.

Flying Labs are independently organized centers of expertise that are coordinated by local experts pin the Global South. Calling them WeRobotics Labs instead of Flying Labs might suggest they are staffed and managed by WeRobotics and belong to WeRobotics. Flying Labs are not staffed or managed by WeRobotics and are not owned by WeRobotics. Furthermore, calling them WeRobotics Labs would be disrespectful as doing so would take attention away from local experts who run their Flying Labs. Calling them WeRobotics Labs would directly undermine everyone’s efforts. 

Is FlyingLabs.org its own legal entity?

We’re using WeRobotics to co-create an independent international organization deeply rooted in the Global South and run entirely by leaders from the Global South. This has been our goal from the very start. As a first step, we are co-creating a network of country-level Flying Labs across Africa, Asia and Latin America. The second step is to secure systems change funding to co-create FlyingLabs.org as its own legal entity with its own leadership selected from and by country-level Flying Labs. We have already developed a concrete, 5-year plan and budget to launch FlyingLabs.org as its own independent entity.

What happens to WeRobotics after FlyingLabs.org becomes its own organization?

FlyingLabs.org may want to hire WeRobotics for certain projects or roles as needed. In addition, WeRobotics will offer new consulting services such as enabling other organizations to adopt the “Flying Labs Formula” at scale. Consulting projects represent around 30% of our revenue today. We will continue to grow this revenue stream to 80% of total revenue by the time FlyingLabs.org becomes its own legal entity. The remaining 20% will be grant funding to cover core.

What do you mean by “decolonizing technology for good”?

In this recent blog post, we talk about “the colonization of the public sphere through the use of instrumental technical rationality. In this sphere, complex social problems are reduced to technical questions, effectively removing the plurality of contending perspectives.” By advocating for the “decolonization of technology for good” we advocate against the reduction of complex social problems into technical problems. Equally importantly, we advocate for restoring the plurality of contending perspectives. In our case, this means strongly advocating for the Power of Local.

Decolonization is a rather loaded word.

Is that question or comment? Just kidding. Yes, decolonization is a loaded term. We discussed this at length with Flying Labs during last year’s retreat. We use the word decolonization selectively to call more attention to power dynamics, especially (but not exclusively) in the “Technology for Good” space. This may come as a surprise to some since WeRobotics co-founders are from the Global North. Thing is, we feel strongly that those with privilege have a particular responsibility to listen and call out these power dynamics where they can. This is about solidarity, which is one of our core values along with inclusion, diversity, autonomy, humanity, humility and sharing. 

Are Flying Labs independent?

Yes: We are an open network with a federated model. Hierarchy is not part of our formal culture. We co-create in an open way. As such, Flying Labs conduct their own affairs and make their own decisions. They select their own projects and partners. They run their own meetings and their own finances. They develop their own value propositions, governance models, business models and services. They write their own blog posts and many are also engaged on multiple social media platforms. WeRobotics does not have password access to any of these platforms. It should be noted that 90% of blog posts hosted on the Flying Labs blog and WeRobotics blog are about Flying Labs and published by Flying Labs. In addition, 95% of all photos and videos in these blog posts are of Flying Labs, not WeRobotics. We work hard to amplify the voices of local experts across the Flying Labs network. Furthermore, Labs do their own media interviews and also decide which conferences and workshops they want to organize or speak at.*

No: Flying Labs must follow local, national and international laws. This includes relevant aviation regulations and our Child Protection Policy, for example. In addition, Flying Labs must follow this Code of Conduct and these Flying Labs Guidelines (PDF). 

*When WeRobotics receives an invitation to speak at a conference, we transfer the invitation to Flying Labs whenever possible. This has given Flying Labs the opportunity to give presentations and keynotes in Malaysia, Japan, Dubai, Australia, Jamaica and Kenya, for example. We do the same when receiving requests for media interviews. Helping to amplify the voices of local experts is important to us.

Does WeRobotics own the data (and metadata) collected by Flying Labs?

No, Flying Labs and/or their clients own the data and metadata collected by Flying Labs. WeRobotics does not own or monetize the data or metadata collected by Flying Labs. 

Do Flying Labs pay fees to WeRobotics?

Yes, Flying Labs make annual contributions to the Flying Labs Fund. These mandatory contributions range from USD 250 to $750 depending on the type of organization that coordinates any given Flying Labs. Note that 100% of the annual contributions go directly to the Flying Labs Fund and that 100% of the Flying Labs Fund goes right back to the Flying Labs in the form of micro-grants, subsidized travel, free software, free training, retreats and more. WeRobotics does not take commissions.

Is the Flying Labs model based on a franchise model?

We frequently describe the Affiliate Flying Labs Program as being based on a franchise model. But this is simply a means to express affiliation. There’s no ownership in our case, so we ought to use a different word to describe the Affiliate Program. “Cooperative model” may be more accurate.

Is WeRobotics perfect?

LOL.

Technology for Good is Broken. Here’s How We’re Trying to Fix It.

In Toward a Rational Society (1970), the philosopher Jürgen Habermas describes “the colonization of the public sphere through the use of instrumental technical rationality. In this sphere, complex social problems are reduced to technical questions, effectively removing the plurality of contending perspectives.” This explains why today’s social problems are “addressed only in aspects that are susceptible to technical solutions” (Heijmans 2004). Yet the problems we’re facing are never just technical problems, which means that the solutions to these problems cannot be technical ones alone. Solutions must be social, inclusive, plural, and diverse.

This begs the question: why name our organization WeRobotics? For better and worse, referencing an emerging technology in the name of an organization creates more visibility.

It’s safe to say that our work with Flying Labs has garnered more attention about inequality through technology than it might have if we were an organization about inequality alone (c.f. Adebe et al. 2020). As Adebe and team rightly note, technology can “offer us a tractable focus through which to notice anew and bring renewed attention to old problems.” While the core focus of our work is very much on the broader problems of inequality, injustice, racism, discrimination, and the digital divide, framing these problems in part as a technology problem can help leverage resources and attention that might not accrue otherwise (Adebe et al. 2020).

But this is a double-edged sword. “The significant risk, of course, is that a focus on the technological aspects of a problem can restrict our attention to merely those aspects. A computing [or technology] lens can have the effect of masking and pulling political capital away from other and more insidious facets of a problem, as well as other (non-technical) means of addressing it” (Adebe et al. 2020). So for the “Technology for Good” sector, what happens when we fail to recognize this risk?

The “Technology for Good” sector is broken because technology alone is not the solution. The sector ought to be rebranded as “Not the Solution for Good” since it mostly fails to address deeper patterns of injustice and inequality.

The “Technology for Good” sector is broken because technology alone is not the solution. The sector ought to be rebranded as “Not the Solution for Good” since it mostly fails to address deeper patterns of injustice and inequality. Whenever you read the claim “X for Good” (where X = some technology), for example, you should immediately question the claim by asking:

  • Who is using that X;
  • Who defines what “good” is;
  • Who benefits from the use of X; and
  • Where is this X being used?

In our case, the ‘where’ is the Global South, yet the ‘who’ is almost always the same: technologists from the Global North.

Tech4Good

If Habermas were still writing today, he might refer to these technologists as “unwilling colonizers.” Why unwilling? Because technologists in the Global North are part of a broken political, economic, and social system that colonizes the public sphere through the use of technical rationality. Many of them are as much a product of this system as they are a victim of said system. Many recognize full well that the system is broken, which explains why they “love to see all the discourse around ethics in tech.” But at the same time, they note that “calling out tech workers who are just trying to earn an income and raise their kids for not caring enough about ethics leaves a bad taste in [their] mouth.” These self-aware technologists from the Global North must be included in the collective effort to fix the “Technology for Good” sector.

This, too, though, poses a risk as most technologists from the Global North are often not self-aware and thus look at problems in the Global South through the lens of technology alone. In doing so, they inevitably silence the plurality of perspectives. This paternalistic approach explains why “technology for good” projects in the Global South are often ineffective, unsustainable, and, at times, even harmful. To this end, and to paraphrase Adebe and team, a synecdochal focus on technology must walk a pragmatic—and tenuous—line between overemphasis on technical aspects, on the one hand, and due recognition of the work technology does to reinforce social systems, on the other.

Luckily, we do not have to walk this fine line alone.

Flying Labs in 25+ countries across Africa, Asia, and Latin America are kindly guiding us and each other along the way. They have local expertise and local knowledge. They understand local contexts and local needs. They are the plurality of perspectives needed to decolonize the public sphere and bring about systems change. They know that inclusion, diversity, and equal opportunity are not synonyms for justice or equality. These values must be complemented with actual structural transformation; for without such transformation, these values will bring those who were previously excluded into a new but equally broken system.

We need to decolonize the public sphere by changing the narrative and enabling meaningful structural change driven by local leadership.

This explains why we need to co-create a governance model which, when adopted at scale, will drive the systems change required to fix the social good sector. In sum, we need to decolonize the public sphere by changing the narrative and enabling meaningful structural change driven by local leadership. In this decolonized sphere, complex social problems are complex and tackled as such. Included in this sphere is the plurality of solutions necessary to address social issues effectively and sustainably.