The Safe Internet League presented updated statistics that clearly show that the influence of social networks on society continues to grow and is becoming more widespread every year. It has the most negative effect on children and teenagers, because due to their age, they are not capable of critical thinking and perceive information obtained on the Internet as the ultimate truth. Although the average level of reliability of posts published in groups and channels leaves much to be desired, so does the motivation of their authors.
In Russia there are currently about 10.5 million minors who are active subscribers to various destructive communities. Most of them spend 6 to 8 hours a day in their gadgets. Moreover, every tenth teenager checks updates on social networks several times a night, although at this time he/she should be sleeping.
However, the impact of online systems on the adult population is not much less. According to a study by the Anketolog Institute of Public Opinion, 38 percent of respondents "admitted to being addicted to social networks and messengers." And that's not counting those who chose to hide this fact. 90% of those interviewed answered "yes" or "rather, yes" to the question of whether one could say that social media is an important part of a person's life. And 46% admitted that posts posted there have a major impact on their thinking.
Does modern higher education take into account the increased dependence of society, especially young people, on information and telecommunication systems and the fact that in case of failures in their work one third of the Russian population feels annoyance, 17% - outrage and only 19% perceive the situation calmly? Are Russian universities prepared to meet the challenges of our time? For comment, Forpost turned to Vladimir Litvinenko, rector of the St. Petersburg Mining University.
- Vladimir Stefanovich, do you agree with the fact that network systems have become the main source of information for citizens today? What threats does this pose and is society able to cope with them?
- It is obvious that the world is changing rapidly, transforming the familiar environment by increasing the efficiency of communication between people. The speed of delivery and receipt of information by consumers has been reduced to a single click. The objective reality is that the ideology of the world order, based on liberal humanism, is yielding to the information-digital one. And this new philosophical current gives birth to a fundamentally different view of human evolution.
Chantal Delasol, professor of political philosophy at the University of East Paris, said with regard to her worldview: "The new century is threatened by a dual totalitarianism: Islamism and Dataitism. Dataism sees the universe as the sum of all the data in it, and defines each entity, be it a living being or a substance, as a contribution to the processing of that data. This current in the radical digital society imparts the truth that the free flow of information is of the highest value, and that its accumulation will eventually lead to a better understanding of human beings and make us all happier."
In this paradigm, there are both new opportunities and very serious threats. After all, mankind has lived, lives and will live by using minerals and other resources created by nature. But there is no place for them in the new philosophical trend. This is a very sad circumstance, since natural capital, which includes minerals, water and all the biological resources surrounding us, requires predictability and professionalism in working with it. Only then can it be turned into human, social, and natural capital. In addition, the business of extractive companies is specific and high-risk due to mining and other risks. At the same time it requires huge capital investments, which will be made only if investors understand the terms of extraction of the first ton of raw materials in the deposit and the payback period of the project as a whole.
Countries with developed economies, whose subsoil resources are usually poor and do not contain the amount of resources that would be sufficient for their successful socio-economic development, have already entered the era of dataism and digital colonization. To be convinced of the latter, it is enough to remember who owns the world's most popular social networks, video hosting sites and search engines. On the other hand, states with underdeveloped or transitional economies, but possessing unique natural capital, overwhelmingly remain committed to traditions dating back thousands of years.
The leading countries increase the gap from them, actively using the financial neoliberal mechanism for this purpose. It is based on the activities of transnational companies that extract resources from the territories of developing states, depriving them of their sovereignty and appropriating most of the natural rents that do not belong to these corporations. This conjuncture enriches Western elites but not the local populations, who are essentially being robbed. It is the network systems that are designed to influence the public consciousness of the inhabitants of these countries so that they cannot fully grasp the extent of the damage inflicted upon them, and the status quo is maintained as long as possible.
- In your opinion, is social media an absolute evil?
- Digital systems provide more opportunities for self-actualization, this is their obvious advantage and one of the reasons for their popularity in society. But at the same time, the level of values imposed by social networks is extremely low: there are no ties to obligations and group responsibility, there is an obvious promotion of simplified relationships, including the degradation of the term "friend", the lack of moral principles.
Of course, those politicians and business representatives who are currently the elite of society and have a deep level of thinking are able to assess the current threats to their countries, look beyond the horizon of events and propose a slightly different agenda. But their efforts may prove futile, because today it is already obvious: Internet platforms, if they deem it necessary, can destroy absolutely any project, any digital base, your thoughts expressed electronically, as well as your competitor, if his position is not in the fairway of their interests.
- Information and communication systems affect scientists as well. This becomes clear if you look at the scientometric databases and look at the topics of some scientific articles, especially by Western researchers. I do not want to be specific now so as not to deviate from the topic, but this feeling does arise. Do you agree with this statement?
- Science is most often thought of in society when it comes to explaining some of the uncertainties facing humanity. Or when politicians, in whose hands financial resources are concentrated, put ephemeral problems on the agenda, allocating enormous resources to solve them. For example, research into the prospects of using hydrogen to store energy produced by wind turbines and solar panels. EU states have invested billions of euros in this kind of research, but there is and will be no result because, as Elon Musk recently said, "there is no sillier way to store energy than hydrogen technology."
His voice, as well as other voices of sensible politicians, economists and scientists, are drowning in the flow of information, which is controlled by the beneficiaries of this approach - the new elites that emerged as a result of the so-called Fourth Industrial Revolution. They often use their capital not to produce final consumption goods and saturate the market, but to invest in products not yet created, which either do not exist in principle or exist as prototypes. A large part of this establishment naturally has interests in renewable energy and hydrogen startups. This is largely because they receive generous government subsidies.
As a result, scientists are often forced to engage not in those studies that are aimed at preserving the sustainability of society's development, but precisely in solving ephemeral problems. That is, science in the context of globalization of the world economy ceases to be generally accessible and begins to serve only the interests of a narrow group of interests. This is a very serious challenge, especially since network systems actively put these ephemeral problems on the agenda, forming a stable public opinion about the need to solve them as a matter of priority.
For example, Greta Thunberg, in her posts, suggests stopping hydrocarbon production "right now" and calls countries that market fossil fuels "climate hypocrites." She has 3.5 million subscribers, each post collects tens of thousands of likes, and the number of re-posts is rarely less than a thousand. It means that an extremely negative image of the mineral resources complex is spreading around the Internet like a virus.
But at the same time the fact is totally ignored that it is the cornerstone industry for civilization, the activity of which is the basis of the entire modern technological progress. If it goes away, we will all go back to the Stone Age, forgetting about computers, electric cars and wind turbines. So what should we really be talking about? The implementation of the best available technologies, which will minimize the negative impact on the environment. But the question is posed differently - users are being forced into the myth that it is possible to get rid of hydrocarbons now or in the short term, we only need to 'push', including at the expense of public condemnation of the processes of extraction and use of fossil fuels. The fact that at the current stage of scientific and technological development and in the foreseeable future it is actually impossible to abandon it, is silent. As is the question of who are the main beneficiaries of such radical ways of solving environmental problems.
- In your opinion, what kind of modern scientist should be capable of creating effective technologies that, on the one hand, increase the profitability of production, and, on the other hand, reduce the negative impact on the environment?
- There are only a few real lone scientists in the world. Moreover, the bulk of professional scientists and amateurs work on obtaining new knowledge, solving insignificant scientific problems. Few groups of professionals are making real discoveries with final results today. Soviet science, by the way, was ahead of the West in this. Research institutes, design bureaus, associations and productions were then created for specific groups of scientists. They were solving the tasks determined by the state in strictly defined terms. The result is obvious: space flight, atomic technologies, the first hydrogen-powered car, hydrogen bomb, the first welded bridge over the Dnieper, the superdeep well, and so on. Scientists created innovations and immediately implemented new knowledge in production.
Russian science even now lives largely on the groundwork created in that period. At that time new knowledge was evaluated not by the article, but by the report and internal act of research results. Scientific foundations were formed in technical universities, which received funds to involve students in science in the amount of up to 50% of all other expenses. The student drew, designed, participated in real scientific projects. He was the creator of the future. Of course, there were shortcomings in that system, but science was perceived as an engine of the economy and as a tool to solve the problem of maintaining sovereignty, which was as acute at that time as it is now.
Modern digital developments have made communication between scientists from different parts of the world more efficient; any information put online is instantly accessible to the public. At the same time, the leader, who takes the main brain involvement in obtaining new knowledge, dissolves as part of the group. Such is life, collective discovery is the trend and it will dominate.
- Is it possible to intensify the creation of breakthrough technologies in cornerstone areas for Russia, such as deep processing of raw materials? What role can universities and networking systems play here?
- Science and discovery is, first and foremost, an experiment. And it must be funded. The article is the language of the scientist. It is very important to learn how to write it correctly. Especially nowadays, there are many papers written using combinations of several other publications. This is the basis of pseudoscience. It is possible to become a part of the world scientific and educational community only if the article is created on the basis of a motivated experiment in the field of engineering research. Moreover, during it the research methodology was chosen correctly, as well as an accurate assessment of uncertainties and simplifications, which allows improving the quality and reliability of the obtained scientific knowledge.
The problem is that digital technology has not only positive but also negative significance in this niche as well. If the article has been cited more than 100 times in the last 5 years by other scientists, there is a serious struggle for its author in the network space. But who is leading it today? For example: until the 1960s, the highest engineering scientific thought in the world was printed exclusively in German. Today, however, it has been replaced by English. This is one way of making the United States a center of attraction for the best scientists from around the world. It is they who today determine the scientific progress of the American economy.
The problem of conducting systematic research and creating a pool of qualified scientists could become a planetary one in the near future. Our analysis of the job market and the training of prestigious and rare personnel has shown that the traditional approach to the demand for a graduate has changed. A good place in mining companies is becoming more accessible to graduates of our country's universities with no work experience and, for some professions and specialties, also to graduates from other countries. At the same time, networking platforms and new communication opportunities have made the competition tougher.
In parallel, the value of a college degree has been severely devalued. But at the same time, the demand for a graduate degree in high-tech and science-intensive fields has grown. Why did this happen? As a rule, these specialties require a different level of competence from graduates. They should not only have a good basic general engineering training, but also have broader interdisciplinary knowledge. Their standard level is now virtually worthless. After all, two identical diplomas can hide a large gap in the depth of knowledge of their holders.
- What exactly is the management of the University of Mines doing to make these ideas a reality?
- We have established the regularities of the labor market in our specific mineral sector of the economy and over the past five years we have made serious changes in the training of students in both the "bachelor" and "master" programs, as well as in the "specialist" program. In particular, we have significantly changed the content of the diploma, which is issued by the results of the defense of the graduation work. Thus, the graduate work of a master's student, who will not necessarily go to graduate school, but quite possibly will get a position at the production site, where he will be engaged in applied research, did not meet the requirements of the market at all. Now, in addition to the scientific section, a technological, organizational, and economic section is included.
Increased requirements for the scientific section have been introduced in the thesis of a specialist. In addition, beginning next year graduates of Master's and Specialist's degrees will be required to have at least nine and twelve additional professional competencies, respectively. With the availability of theoretical knowledge and practical skills. Industrial practice now provides for the unconditional acquisition of a working specialty and at least two contiguous skills.
Today, employers still care about where a young person who comes to work in industry studied, because companies' trust in the university environment in which his knowledge was formed remains the basis of trust in his diploma. However, without these additional professional and production competencies, it will be difficult for a graduate to compete with fellow students and other candidates, as he will not be able to prove his achievements and his involvement in the profession. This model is already yielding results today, both in companies and in our graduate school, because it allows for a more multifaceted and effective assessment of all of the candidate's capabilities for admission.
Participation in additional education programs, trainings, and other results are already taken into account and are part of the unified graduate characteristic-recommendation. It shows your strengths and weaknesses in terms of professional competence, abilities demonstrated in social activities, successes achieved in sporting events, and flexible social skills. It is a kind of ticket to the labor market or, so to say, its business card, allowing the employer to better understand the psycho-emotional model of the potential employee, and the young person - to count on the most interesting offer.
From this year we start to implement twelve 360-hour retraining programs, giving the right to get in addition to the basic diploma the second. These are highly demanded areas in digital, technological, organizational and economic areas, management of subsoil facilities, energy efficiency and a number of others.
You cannot rely solely on a diploma. It is necessary to teach students to plan their development, to achieve results in different fields of knowledge, to be socially responsible, to strive to increase their demand in the labor market. The university contributes to this and concentrates its efforts in this direction, creating a comfortable social, educational and scientific environment. The task of our scientific and pedagogical staff is not only to impart students specialized knowledge and skills, which is also not easy, but to motivate them to obtain additional competencies that will be useful to them in the future. It is also necessary to convey to young people an understanding of the new development philosophy of the global mineral sector, to encourage them to take action, and to form a different view of familiar things that do not seem to require rethinking.
The Rector's office and my colleagues, faculty and scientists, understand perfectly well the paradigm of our world's transformation. So does our mission, which is to help students not only to master knowledge and earn a degree, but also to enhance their potential through the acquisition of additional knowledge and skills. An even more important task is to educate them to be true patriots who strive for self-fulfillment exclusively in those areas that contribute to Russia's social and economic development and increase the technological sovereignty of our country.
