It's surprising to me that Tech never seems interested in conflict resolution. A lot of issues in the world are basically negotiation problems, yet they get treated as competitive ones. A better world is probably one in which conflicts are defused early, not one in which arms races are treated as the default.
Why is that? Is conflict resolution too much of a non-tech thing and more in the realm of politics? Or is there simply no money to be made in reducing warfare and hostile nation-state competitions?
I don't have an answer for your questions but this comment really stood out to me. Maybe it's just my years in tech, but I have never thought of conflict resolution in the context of a tech problem to solve. The only format of this I can think of is anonymous forums or communications tech. Otherwise, it's very out of the box thinking which is great to see.
One example that came to mind was providing information on various sides of an issue (I’m thinking of alternative media, Wikipedia in some sense, although it’s still a bit biased.) Essentially the internet as a communication medium allows for more viewpoints to be distributed and understood. Unfortunately in practice, no one is really using it to try and understand each other and solve conflicts. Instead, they’re still trying to push certain viewpoints and exclude others.
Why is that? Is conflict resolution too much of a non-tech thing and more in the realm of politics? Or is there simply no money to be made in reducing warfare and hostile nation-state competitions?