Reclaiming Tech’s Promise: The Resonant Computing Manifesto

Everyone is frustrated with the tech industry. The term “enshittification” has become popular for a reason. Companies that once provided genuine value are now focused on extracting more from users rather than improving their offerings. People used to be excited by new innovations, feeling more fulfilled after using technology that helped them do new things, communicate with new people, and create wonderful things. That sense of empowerment feels rare now, almost forgotten.

Remember when you’d use something new and feel… good? Empowered, even? When technology made you feel like you could do more, create more, connect more meaningfully? Yeah, that’s mostly gone. We’ve replaced it with engagement metrics, growth hacks, and AI slop. The tech industry spent the last decade optimizing for shareholder value, misleadingly calling it “innovation”.

But you know what? Things don’t need to stay this way. We can live in a world where technology works for us, not against us. Where we get value from it, rather than having it extract value from us. A group of us—organized by entrepreneur Alex Komoroske, who wrote about why centralized AI isn’t inevitable—decided to articulate what the alternative looks like. We want more than just vague calls for “better tech.” We need actual principles for building technology that truly works for people, instead of extracting from them.

We’re calling this the Resonant Computing Manifesto. It’s an attempt to reclaim what innovation should mean. We call this quality “resonance.” It’s the experience of encountering something that speaks to our deeper values. It’s a spark of recognition, a sense that we’re being invited to lean in, to participate. Unlike the digital junk food of today, the more we engage with what resonates, the more we feel nourished, grateful, and alive. As individuals, following the breadcrumbs of resonance helps us build meaningful lives. As communities, companies, and societies, cultivating shared resonance helps us break away from perverse incentives, and play positive-sum infinite games together.

For decades, technology required standardized solutions to complex human problems. To scale software, you had to build for the average user, sanding away the edge cases. In many ways, this is why our digital world has come to resemble the sterile, deadening architecture that Alexander spent his career pushing back against. That word—resonance—is doing real work here. It’s the opposite of what we’ve got now: software that leaves you feeling depleted, manipulated, or just vaguely dirty. Resonant computing is technology that makes you feel more capable, more connected, and more like yourself.

This matters because the current narrative is stuck between two equally bankrupt positions: either all tech is inevitably corrupting, or we should just accelerate harder into whatever the VCs are funding this quarter. Both are bullshit. Tech can be good. It requires building for people rather than metrics. And to get there, we need to call it out and demand it. I know that some of the more cynical among you will say that techies have always cloaked their efforts in the language of “empowering people” and “changing the world.” We don’t deny that. But we’d like to make it real, and to be able to use this conversation to remind everyone that technology can be good. If it follows certain principles.

So what does that actually mean? The manifesto lays out five principles to help us build resonant technology.

The Core Principles of Resonant Computing

The Resonant Computing Manifesto outlines five core principles that aim to guide the development of technology that truly works for people.

Private: Empowering Users as Stewards of Their Data

In the era of AI, whoever controls the context holds the power. Data often involves multiple stakeholders, but people must serve as the primary stewards of their own context. They should determine how their data is used. This principle is about giving users control over their personal information, ensuring that their data is used in ways that align with their values and expectations. It’s a move away from the current model where companies hoard and monetize user data without consent.

Pros and Cons

– Pros:
– User Empowerment: Users have more control over their data, which can lead to greater trust in technology.
– Privacy: Enhanced privacy protections can reduce the risk of data breaches and misuse.
– Transparency: Clear guidelines on data usage can make it easier for users to understand how their information is being used.

– Cons:
– Complexity: Implementing robust privacy controls can be technically challenging and costly.
– User Burden: Users may find it cumbersome to manage their data preferences across multiple platforms.
– Limited Data Access: Companies may have less access to user data, which could affect the development of personalized services.

Dedicated: Ensuring Contextual Integrity

Software should work exclusively for you, ensuring contextual integrity where data use aligns with your expectations. You must be able to trust there are no hidden agendas or conflicting interests. This principle emphasizes the importance of building software that is dedicated to the user’s needs and expectations, without hidden motivations or ulterior motives.

Pros and Cons

– Pros:
– Trust: Users are more likely to trust software that aligns with their expectations and values.
– User-Centric Design: Dedicated software can lead to more intuitive and user-friendly interfaces.
– Ethical Development: Ensuring contextual integrity can help developers avoid ethical pitfalls.

– Cons:
– Limited Innovation: Dedicated software may limit the scope for innovation, as developers focus on meeting user expectations.
– High Costs: Building software that aligns with user expectations can be time-consuming and expensive.
– User Resistance: Users may resist changes to software that they have come to rely on, even if those changes are beneficial.

Plural: Fostering Healthy Digital Ecosystems

No single entity should control the digital spaces we inhabit. Healthy ecosystems require distributed power, interoperability, and meaningful choice for participants. This principle advocates for a more decentralized approach to technology, where power is distributed among multiple stakeholders rather than concentrated in the hands of a few large corporations.

Pros and Cons

– Pros:
– Innovation: A pluralistic approach can foster innovation, as smaller companies and startups have the opportunity to compete with established players.
– Resilience: Distributed power can make digital ecosystems more resilient to disruptions and failures.
– Choice: Users have more choices when it comes to the technology they use, which can lead to better outcomes.

– Cons:
– Coordination: Coordinating a pluralistic ecosystem can be challenging, as different stakeholders may have conflicting interests.
– Fragmentation: A decentralized approach can lead to fragmentation, making it harder for users to find and use the technology they need.
– Regulatory Challenges: Regulating a pluralistic ecosystem can be more complex, as different stakeholders may be subject to different rules and regulations.

Adaptable: Embracing Flexibility and Customization

Software should be adaptable, allowing users to customize it to their needs and preferences. This principle emphasizes the importance of building software that is flexible and can be easily modified to meet the changing needs of users. It’s about ensuring that technology can evolve with the people who use it, rather than dictating how they should interact with it.

Pros and Cons

– Pros:
– User Satisfaction: Adaptable software can lead to higher user satisfaction, as users can customize it to their needs.
– Long-Term Viability: Adaptable software is more likely to remain relevant over time, as it can be updated and modified to meet changing user needs.
– Innovation: Adaptable software can foster innovation, as developers can experiment with new features and functionality.

– Cons:
– Complexity: Building adaptable software can be technically challenging, as developers need to ensure that it can be easily modified.
– User Burden: Users may find it overwhelming to customize software to their needs, especially if they are not technically savvy.
– Consistency: Adaptable software may lack consistency, as different users may customize it in different ways.

Collaborative: Building for Community and Connection

Technology should be designed to foster collaboration and connection, rather than isolation and competition. This principle advocates for building software that brings people together, facilitating meaningful interactions and collaborations. It’s about creating technology that enhances our social lives, rather than detracting from them.

Pros and Cons

– Pros:
– Community Building: Collaborative software can help build communities, fostering a sense of belonging and shared purpose.
– Knowledge Sharing: Collaborative software can facilitate the sharing of knowledge and ideas, leading to better outcomes.
– User Engagement: Collaborative software can lead to higher user engagement, as users are more likely to interact with technology that brings them together.

– Cons:
– Privacy Concerns: Collaborative software may raise privacy concerns, as users may be hesitant to share personal information with others.
– Coordination: Coordinating collaborative efforts can be challenging, as different users may have different goals and expectations.
– Conflict: Collaborative software can lead to conflict, as users may disagree on how to use the technology.

Conclusion

The Resonant Computing Manifesto offers a vision for a future where technology works for people, rather than against them. By embracing the principles of privacy, dedication, plurality, adaptability, and collaboration, we can build software that resonates with our deeper values and empowers us to live more meaningful lives.

The current narrative around technology is stuck between two extremes: either all tech is inevitably corrupting, or we should just accelerate harder into whatever the VCs are funding this quarter. Both positions are flawed. Tech can be good, but it requires building for people rather than metrics. By demanding resonant computing, we can reclaim the promise of technology and build a future where it truly works for us.

FAQ

What is the Resonant Computing Manifesto?

The Resonant Computing Manifesto is a set of principles aimed at guiding the development of technology that truly works for people. It emphasizes the importance of privacy, dedication, plurality, adaptability, and collaboration in building software that resonates with our deeper values and empowers us to live more meaningful lives.

Why is resonant computing important?

Resonant computing is important because it offers a vision for a future where technology works for people, rather than against them. By embracing the principles of resonant computing, we can build software that enhances our lives, rather than detracting from them.

What are the five principles of resonant computing?

The five principles of resonant computing are privacy, dedication, plurality, adaptability, and collaboration. These principles guide the development of technology that truly works for people, ensuring that it resonates with our deeper values and empowers us to live more meaningful lives.

How can I support resonant computing?

You can support resonant computing by demanding technology that adheres to the principles of privacy, dedication, plurality, adaptability, and collaboration. By advocating for resonant computing, you can help build a future where technology truly works for people.