Scan barcode
adammck's review against another edition
4.0
Lanier raises a lot of provocative points here about the trends of big data and Siren Servers / cloud computing. Warning against the economic impact of tech-fueled market disruption, he makes the case for a middle class of users feeding into the servers. In a future of 3D printers and automated-everything, it will otherwise be easier than ever to be marginalized. Compare the number of employees at Instagram to the number at Kodak in its prime, etc.
"Google might eventually become an ouroboros, a snake eating its own tail, unless something changes," he writes. "This would happen when so many goods and services become software-centric, and so much information is "free," that there is nothing left to advertise on Google that attracts actual money."
Lanier has earned his cred; he's had a hand in countless Silicon Valley endeavors, is credited for coining the term "virtual reality," counts Marvin Minsky as a mentor (and entrepreneurs like Jeff Bezos and Eric Schmidt as acquaintances and peers) and was even the first person to see himself in avatar form in a virtual environment.
His focus gets a little frayed at times and, ultimately, the solutions he presents for tomorrow's middle class feel fairly half-baked. Still, I found it to be consistently engaging, especially in comparison to the typical books on these subjects (e.g. "how big data will transform your business and make you rich!")
"Google might eventually become an ouroboros, a snake eating its own tail, unless something changes," he writes. "This would happen when so many goods and services become software-centric, and so much information is "free," that there is nothing left to advertise on Google that attracts actual money."
Lanier has earned his cred; he's had a hand in countless Silicon Valley endeavors, is credited for coining the term "virtual reality," counts Marvin Minsky as a mentor (and entrepreneurs like Jeff Bezos and Eric Schmidt as acquaintances and peers) and was even the first person to see himself in avatar form in a virtual environment.
His focus gets a little frayed at times and, ultimately, the solutions he presents for tomorrow's middle class feel fairly half-baked. Still, I found it to be consistently engaging, especially in comparison to the typical books on these subjects (e.g. "how big data will transform your business and make you rich!")
mikeerrico's review against another edition
4.0
Holy moly. I can't recommend this enough, if you want a coherent picture of our digital present, and our possible future.
sylvia_flora's review against another edition
4.0
I'm not too far into Lanier's expose on how users can leverage the value of data for their own benefit, but I'm loving what I see. He's handling a huge issue, and while it can be dense at times, he makes it manageable with some creative road-mapping. How he contends we deal with the implications of Big Data are theoretical, not scientifically-verifiable solutions. But that never stopped someone like Kierkegaard from writing, so...we'll see.
imitira's review against another edition
1.0
This is an exceptionally difficult book to read, and I'm giving up 50 pages in. As best I can determine, the subject at hand is entitlement to new, network-created economic surpluses (entirely valid debate), and the author gives every impression of winding up to some grand exposition on micropayments (certainly interesting as a technical subject), but the text is rife with false equivalencies and incredibly confusing analogies, where the author name-checks a concept that I have some rudimentary understanding of and either applies it in some bizarrely unrelated way (eg, inflation, superfluids) or misses the underlying point entirely (eg, Maxwell's Demon). I'm not completely sure that there's no merit to be found in the remaining 300-odd pages, but I'm not willing to take the risk.
matthew_p's review against another edition
4.0
Speculative by design, a strong argument for the need to rethink our digital futures from someone intimately involved in the creation of our digital present. Lanier argues for a new economy to turn the current "if you're not paying, you're the product" on it's head, enriching a persistent middle class rather than the tech elite.
Read and implement.
Read and implement.
courtofsmutandstuff's review against another edition
3.0
This book is thought provoking and well written, but is a long read despite page count. A good read for fans of dsytopias or technology, Lanier presents a simple concept (we should move to a humanistic economy) and explains it in detail over the course of the book. The concept of Siren Servers should be more mainstream and he does an excellent job of providing a basic understanding of the history of programming, and some of the upcoming problems we will face.
rachelara91's review against another edition
3.0
This book was my everest. It took 16 months of starting and stopping to read it in completion. The first half of the book flew by in a whirlwind of intrigue and critical thought but as its conclusion approached, the narrative seemed to shift abruptly from a blend of social science, economics, technology, and cultural application to a tone heavily dominated by complex economic models and name-dropping accomplishments. I wasn't going to let myself put another book down when it seemed dull just to start another to half-finish, and it was one of the most difficult commitments I have ever held myself to. I like the metaphor an earlier reviewer used likening this book to being stuck in an elevator with your most brilliant friend and an excess of wine. Lanier can be thought-provoking and profoundly articulate just as much as he can be obnoxiously braggy and far too dense. It's been one hell of a challenge to get through.
raviwarrier's review against another edition
2.0
This year I decided that I'd read books that do not conform to my world-view, just to get to know the other side's point of view. This book is one amongst those.
While the author does argue with conviction, in my opinion, they fall short of making a real point. Mainly because the ' in his case is very new and young and there's no way one can definitively say that people will not find other things to do or jobs to undertake. For example, the looms, that the author mentions, put many off their jobs is true; but it's also true that people sprung back. And it didn't happen in 2 decades. That's how old the mainstream Internet is.
Also, people who make money are the ones others perceive as adding value. Udemy has tons of trainers, but a few successful ones. This is because information spread is fast and the population at large realizes that they eventually vote with their money.
The authors attempts are commendable, but as left wanting of wisdom that he tries hard to display.
While the author does argue with conviction, in my opinion, they fall short of making a real point. Mainly because the ' in his case is very new and young and there's no way one can definitively say that people will not find other things to do or jobs to undertake. For example, the looms, that the author mentions, put many off their jobs is true; but it's also true that people sprung back. And it didn't happen in 2 decades. That's how old the mainstream Internet is.
Also, people who make money are the ones others perceive as adding value. Udemy has tons of trainers, but a few successful ones. This is because information spread is fast and the population at large realizes that they eventually vote with their money.
The authors attempts are commendable, but as left wanting of wisdom that he tries hard to display.
cetian's review against another edition
5.0
Both this and [b:Radical Markets: Uprooting Capitalism and Democracy for a Just Society|36515770|Radical Markets Uprooting Capitalism and Democracy for a Just Society|Eric A. Posner|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1519379027s/36515770.jpg|58236821] (which I haven't finished yet) seem to focus on how to make capitalism work. Which, I sugest, even radical leftists should not dismiss immediately, since today so many just want to disrupt it (and our lives as colateral damage, which their philosophy prohibits them from caring about).
Even classic capitalism (where the productive are rewarded and so on) is better than what we are heading towards at high speed. The difference in perspective consists in the following. Thinking that capitalism as such does not fulfill its promises and is an ongoing false utopia (more like a carrot in front of you), if you are a leftist. And, on the contrary, tinking that of all, capitalism is the least awfull, in the Churchill tradition, and that trying to fulfill utopias ultimatelly makes society even worse. However, it would be productive if both traditional sides treat as a common threat this too-big-to-fail above the law, 0% taxes randian entrepreneurship ideal where egoism is a virtue and the suffering of others is always their own fault.
Jaron Lanier made a work on speculative non-fiction (the expression is his, more or less in this formula). He has an agile imagination and puts it to good use. The tone of the book is quite rewarding. He creates scenarios that extrapolate from our current situation at the same time giving us some insights about alternatives. "Who owns the future" is a proposal, just like [b:You Are Not a Gadget|6683549|You Are Not a Gadget|Jaron Lanier|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1320388392s/6683549.jpg|6878840] was a manifesto. As a provocation (Lanier always uses the word utopia in a negative sense, presenting himself as pragmatic), I will say that "You are not a gadget" is for Lanier what [b:Mutual Aid|51306|Mutual Aid|Pyotr Kropotkin|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1348218981s/51306.jpg|1635591] is for [a:Pyotr Kropotkin|34296|Pyotr Kropotkin|https://images.gr-assets.com/authors/1402256567p2/34296.jpg] and "Who owns the future" is like [b:The Conquest of Bread|1113155|The Conquest of Bread|Pyotr Kropotkin|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1328694308s/1113155.jpg|1100145]. Meaning the first are the manifestos and the second are the ways to get there. This is little more than a personal way to organize ideas, though, since in no way Lanier makes a case for socialism or anarchism, quite the oposite. This book will appeal mostly, I believe, to those who are not willing to give up two specific dreams: the end of history, in Fukuyama terms, and information technology as liberation.
The actual proposal is grounded in figures from the history of technology, like in Radical Markets there is a rehabilitation of some economics. In both cases there is the advocacy that the market is the best way to garantee that all citizens have the same oportunities and become full economic agents. In Lanier's case, he wants us to rethink our current model of "it's free so you are the product". Radical Markets is in a way a bit weirder: a free market coexists and garantees the abolition of property or at least the enabling of completely shared property.
This discussion is important, specially because our culture likes metaphores of destruction and rapture. The singularity is used to describe and justify inevitability. And destruction (disruption) is taught in economics. Markets shrinks and, like Lanier warns, the place for humans too.
Even classic capitalism (where the productive are rewarded and so on) is better than what we are heading towards at high speed. The difference in perspective consists in the following. Thinking that capitalism as such does not fulfill its promises and is an ongoing false utopia (more like a carrot in front of you), if you are a leftist. And, on the contrary, tinking that of all, capitalism is the least awfull, in the Churchill tradition, and that trying to fulfill utopias ultimatelly makes society even worse. However, it would be productive if both traditional sides treat as a common threat this too-big-to-fail above the law, 0% taxes randian entrepreneurship ideal where egoism is a virtue and the suffering of others is always their own fault.
Jaron Lanier made a work on speculative non-fiction (the expression is his, more or less in this formula). He has an agile imagination and puts it to good use. The tone of the book is quite rewarding. He creates scenarios that extrapolate from our current situation at the same time giving us some insights about alternatives. "Who owns the future" is a proposal, just like [b:You Are Not a Gadget|6683549|You Are Not a Gadget|Jaron Lanier|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1320388392s/6683549.jpg|6878840] was a manifesto. As a provocation (Lanier always uses the word utopia in a negative sense, presenting himself as pragmatic), I will say that "You are not a gadget" is for Lanier what [b:Mutual Aid|51306|Mutual Aid|Pyotr Kropotkin|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1348218981s/51306.jpg|1635591] is for [a:Pyotr Kropotkin|34296|Pyotr Kropotkin|https://images.gr-assets.com/authors/1402256567p2/34296.jpg] and "Who owns the future" is like [b:The Conquest of Bread|1113155|The Conquest of Bread|Pyotr Kropotkin|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1328694308s/1113155.jpg|1100145]. Meaning the first are the manifestos and the second are the ways to get there. This is little more than a personal way to organize ideas, though, since in no way Lanier makes a case for socialism or anarchism, quite the oposite. This book will appeal mostly, I believe, to those who are not willing to give up two specific dreams: the end of history, in Fukuyama terms, and information technology as liberation.
The actual proposal is grounded in figures from the history of technology, like in Radical Markets there is a rehabilitation of some economics. In both cases there is the advocacy that the market is the best way to garantee that all citizens have the same oportunities and become full economic agents. In Lanier's case, he wants us to rethink our current model of "it's free so you are the product". Radical Markets is in a way a bit weirder: a free market coexists and garantees the abolition of property or at least the enabling of completely shared property.
This discussion is important, specially because our culture likes metaphores of destruction and rapture. The singularity is used to describe and justify inevitability. And destruction (disruption) is taught in economics. Markets shrinks and, like Lanier warns, the place for humans too.
katemilty's review against another edition
2.0
This book asks interesting questions but the solution it presents are pretty uninspiring. The biggest takeaway I have (when reviewing this book 2 years later) is that our actions online are valuable and we should be conscious of the value we create for other entities when sharing them (you’re welcome, Amazon!)