This matters in policymaking, as it frames an argument that laws and rights afforded to humans should also be applied to machines carrying out automated processes.
These myths matter in policymaking because they can lead people to believe machines deserve the same rights or freedoms as humans.
Given their origins, these myths inevitably skew to the techno side of techno-social equilibrium. They pollinate the social imagination with metaphors that lead to conclusions, and those conclusions shape a collective understanding. But if we want a socially oriented future for technology, we need myths that animate the social imagination of technology rather than overwrite it.
This paragraph talks about that these myths focus too much on technology itself and ignore social impacts. These ideas shape how society thinks about technology.
There’s a competing set of interests at play: New technologies need simple metaphors to thrive, but simple metaphors aim to reduce complexity. Meanwhile, corporate boardrooms and founders believe in (or at least invest in) compelling myths and reward communications specialists for reinforcing these myths amongst consumers.
The author explains a tension that the technology needs simple explanations to spread, but those explanations often hide complexity. Companies invest in these myths because they help attract consumers.