I have been thinking on the seemingly inoccuous ways that those in power in design (according to the AIGA's 2016 design census, design is 73% white [Howarth, 2017]) continue to perpetuate that power in the things that they design for everyday life. For example, Ruha Benjamin describes the issue of using near infrared technologies for automated soap dispensers, in which she references a viral video that shows an automated soap dispenser responding to a White hand but not a Black hand. While Benjamin notes that there is a simple explanation: >Near infrared technology requires light to bounce back from the user and activate the sensor, so skin with more melanin, absorbing as it does more light, does not trigger the sensor. But this strictly technical account says nothing about why this particular sensor mechanism was used, whether there are other options, which recognize a broader spectrum of skin tones, and how this problem was overlooked during development and testing, well before the dispenser was installed, (p. 137). It's important to consider that even if white designers are designing with the best of intentions, it doesn't change the fact they build things to serve themselves, even without realizing: "Power provides the means to influence which use cases are relevant; which problems are priorities; and who the tools, products, and services are made to serve," (Johnson, 2019). It's not just soap dispensers that are affected by this issue: "In a related but contextually different conversation, this summer Joy Buolamwini testified before Congress with Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) that multiple audits found facial recognition technology generally works best on white men and worst on women of color," (Johnson, 2019). Scholar Mutale Nkonde advocates for racial literacy training to address some of these problems. She notes that often times the problem in mid- or large-sized tech firms is that addressing race becomes taboo, when instead the lack of conversation reinforces racist patterns and behaviors. **Some unfinished further thoughts:** How do we address this in a world that is more consistently dependent on technology for everyday tasks? Halpin and Monnin (2016) call for a [[Decentralization of Knowledge#^c1029b|decentralization of knowledge]]: the researchers note that algorithms have become so deeply intertwined with the way that the modern world collects and shares knowledge that the solution is not to eliminate them, but to empower users to take “ownership” of them. # References Benjamin, R. (2019). _Race After Technology: Abolitionist Tools for the New Jim Code_ (E-reader version). Polity. Howarth, D. (2017, January 31). _Design industry is 73 per cent white finds AIGA survey_. Dezeen. [https://www.dezeen.com/2017/01/31/design-industry-73-per-cent-white-lacks-diversity-finds-aiga-census-survey/](https://www.dezeen.com/2017/01/31/design-industry-73-per-cent-white-lacks-diversity-finds-aiga-census-survey/) Johnson, K. (2019, November 11). AI ethics is all about power. _VentureBeat_. [https://venturebeat.com/2019/11/11/ai-ethics-is-all-about-power/](https://venturebeat.com/2019/11/11/ai-ethics-is-all-about-power/)