Scent Systems and Slow Technology
CES 2026 and Responsible Tech
As you may have noticed, I haven’t written yet in 2026.
This was partly circumstantial. I have been a bit distracted by the world and while awaiting news on big future plans. It might be unpopular, especially in response to the pace of technology developments (which I am watching and writing about), but I am going into this year with an interest in slowness, in slow technologies.
That said, CES 2026 came and went, so I want to mention it. CES (the Consumer Electronics Show) is one of the largest tech expositions globally, where companies showcase emerging prototypes, product launches, and concept devices. Scent technology made an appearance again this year.
Olivia Jezler via Future of Smell on Instagram, again did a great job summarizing all things related to scent at the conference. Scent showed up in a few specific genres of tech, which Jezler pointed out: diffusers, app-based systems, and automatic perfumery devices that customize scent on the spot. Air-quality monitors and breath trackers were also present as part of the health tech ecosystem. For more information, follow Future of Smell and look out for Jezler’s accompanying blog post.
As environmental monitoring becomes cheaper and more granular, room-by-room air management becomes more common. As air is measurable and controllable, it is also scentable. It seems that scent is becoming part of a managed system rather than an isolated object or event. A candle burns down. A system persists. A candle does not collect data. A system might.
The question isn’t which is better. The question is what kind of relationship do you want to have with your tech? What kind of relationship do you want with scent? Each format (candle, diffuser, app) establishes a dynamic between person, environment, and infrastructure, and this is where my reading has been nudging me recently.
I recently finished Tech Agnostic: How Technology Became the World’s Most Powerful Religion, and Why It Desperately Needs a Reformation by humanist chaplain, Greg Epstein. Technologies are rarely just tools. They are networks of relationships, values, practices, and expectations that become tangible when we ask how and why they are embedded in everyday life. The book pushes back against narratives that present technology as inevitable or neutral, urging instead a more mindful engagement with tech from design through deployment.
One of the primary takeaways for me is how much context matters: who builds the systems, who funds them, who uses them, and who is ultimately shaped by them. Technologies don’t exist in a vacuum; they are entangled with social, political, and economic logics.
Scent tech at CES is an illustrative case. On the surface, it’s about fragrance and atmosphere. But once devices are networked, app-mediated, and data-aware, questions emerge. Who controls the algorithm that suggests what to smell? What data is collected, and how is it used? Does the system serve the person, or does it serve a corporate logic of subscription and engagement? These aren’t rhetorical questions. They are infrastructural ones.
Responsible AI — An Invitation to Read with Me
Tech Agnostic pointed me toward several groups and organizations that have formed with the intention of shifting how technologies are produced and integrated into our lives, toward more humane technologies. This is where the concept of slow technology emerges.
I extrapolate a few meanings from this term. I consider slow technology to include systems developed deliberately, with care and research as the driving forces behind decisions rather than financial incentives. I also think about technologies that encourage slowness and attention for users, fostering a life of quality rather than a higher quantity of engagements.
There are now numerous organizations articulating guidelines, frameworks, and accountability structures for what “responsible” should mean in practice. One such organization is All Tech Is Human, which has published a few reports and guidelines of interest, namely, Responsible AI Impact Report (2025) and Responsible Tech Guide (2025). (Both reports are available via their library: https://alltechishuman.org/reports.)
In my next post, I will discuss what I glean from these materials. I’m going to read them intentionally, looking at what they are recommending, what is actionable, what is theoretical, and where there are unresolved tensions. I’d like to invite you to read along with me.
I hope these materials change me and how I operate. That they influence how I relate to the technologies I use, how I think about developing scent systems, and how I approach working with olfactory data. If scent is becoming infrastructural (measurable, programmable, persistent) then the ethical questions must be part of the design from the beginning. I want to have a concrete vision in how that can be done.
References
All Tech Is Human. Responsible AI Impact Report (2025). All Tech Is Human, 2025, https://alltechishuman.org/reports.
All Tech Is Human. Responsible Tech Guide (2025). All Tech Is Human, 2025, https://alltechishuman.org/reports.
Consumer Technology Association. CES 2026. CES, https://www.ces.tech/.
Epstein, Greg. Tech Agnostic: How Technology Became the World’s Most Powerful Religion, and Why It Desperately Needs a Reformation. MIT Press, 2024.
Jezler, Olivia. “Coverage of Scent Technology at CES 2026.” Future of Smell, Instagram, 2026, https://www.instagram.com/futureofsmell/.