#Week 4. CHALLENGES OF THE GLOBAL INFORMATION SOCIETY REVIEW

This is my review about the paper CHALLENGES OF THE GLOBAL INFORMATION SOCIETY written by Pekka Himanen.

I read some comments on page 13 about the problems in countries like Singapore and China in the long run, since they are not democratic and limits the freedom of people. I agree that a creative person needs this freedom of speech and also to develop his mind and skills but in my view they have both. They are very pragmatic, so they allow some of their best talent to move specially to the States so they can develop and some day come back and be a leaders there. By other hand controlling people, you make sure the factories and production centres, they still rely heavily upon to develop at a 10% rate, are running without any strike or quarrel. Also having this proportion of citizens, you generate a high competition between them and also due to that, people is sometimes prone to move abroad which also is beneficial for the state.

Also it is worth mention that the benefits that USA can offer to attract talent seem to be more attractive. I think it is because the salaries they offer are the best or among them and professional development is also playing a major role since they have already set up large centres of knowledge that feed each other. However, people use to disregard that the healthcare is not included, the real state is also very expensive and the big gap between rich and poor which makes the cohabitation very difficult as it is remarked on the text.

In the business model, when it comes to generate income, it is clear that USA and China are one step forward Europe, since their people has a much more entrepreneurship approach. I think a neoliberal approach as it is followed by these 2 countries, makes the people feel this way.

Changing the topic it is interesting to mention that entertainment and health areas have been proving to be areas of continuous growing during these years as it is stated on the paper.

The fact of motivation, creativity and enthusiasm is clear playing a bigger role when developing a new idea, software,... Of course, It was still better when a worker included these features in a industrial chain but not as important as it can be in the information society.

I completely agree on the importance of a fair society, that is part of a welfare system. If you can promote opportunities for everyone, more people will be obliged to fulfil the expectations, so not being left behind. For instance, the people that are in front of the society for economic heritage, they will be forced to work hard if they want to maintain this status, otherwise someone else will take his place, so you will make a dynamic society which is in my opinion very important for the sake of it. For this reason, public and high-quality education models can be very beneficial to encourage this, as well as a public healthcare system that can make you feel safe. It is also important to encourage the practice of sports that I have experienced to be so beneficial for your body but also the mind. This last statement is now in the information society a matter to be concerned about, since children expend too much time in front of a screen.

I also agree with the text that having flexibility with the working hours is always beneficial and something I have started to see in many companies and I can see that happen in both ways, the employer and employee. What is the point of being 8 h on the workplace if there is nothing to do or why not working more when you need to fulfil a scheduled? Also, why not allowing an employee to take his time when he has personal affairs to resolve that avoid him to be 100 % focused, dedicating that much time to work.

In the regards the immigration topic, It is clear that, from an economic perspective, it is always good to incorporate new young workers, especially in a society that is ageing. We have seen that in Europe lately and I will point out Germany as a country requiring this foreign labour force to balance its ageing society and being successful on that. It is clear that if this incoming people is highly educated, the outcome will be much more beneficial. The only issue comes without the integration of these new citizens in the society they are part of, now and something where the whole community should participate and I don’t see that mentioned on the paper. This flux of people will help to improve the economic situation in the origin country source. Clear examples as already mentioned are China and India.