|
|
Deal Domains - You Are Not a Gadget: A Manifesto
|
List Price: $24.95
Our Price: $16.47
Your Save: $ 8.48 ( 34% )
Availability: Usually ships in 24 hours
Manufacturer: Knopf
|
Average Customer Rating:  
|
|
Binding: Hardcover
Dewey Decimal Number: 303.4833
EAN: 9780307269645
Feature: ISBN13: 9780307269645
Format: Deckle Edge
ISBN: 0307269647
Label: Knopf
Manufacturer: Knopf
Number Of Items: 1
Number Of Pages: 224
Publication Date: 2010-01-12
Publisher: Knopf
Release Date: 2010-01-12
Studio: Knopf
|
|
|
Features
|
ISBN13: 9780307269645
Condition: New
Notes: BUY WITH CONFIDENCE, Over one million books sold! 98% Positive feedback. Compare our books, prices and service to the competition. 100% Satisfaction Guaranteed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Editorial Reviews:
|
Jaron Lanier, a Silicon Valley visionary since the 1980s, was among the first to predict the revolutionary changes the World Wide Web would bring to commerce and culture. Now, in his first book, written more than two decades after the web was created, Lanier offers this provocative and cautionary look at the way it is transforming our lives for better and for worse.
The current design and function of the web have become so familiar that it is easy to forget that they grew out of programming decisions made decades ago. The web’s first designers made crucial choices (such as making one’s presence anonymous) that have had enormous—and often unintended—consequences. What’s more, these designs quickly became “locked in,” a permanent part of the web’s very structure.
Lanier discusses the technical and cultural problems that can grow out of poorly considered digital design and warns that our financial markets and sites like Wikipedia, Facebook, and Twitter are elevating the “wisdom” of mobs and computer algorithms over the intelligence and judgment of individuals.
Lanier also shows:
How 1960s antigovernment paranoia influenced the design of the online world and enabled trolling and trivialization in online discourse
How file sharing is killing the artistic middle class;
How a belief in a technological “rapture” motivates some of the most influential technologists
Why a new humanistic technology is necessary.
Controversial and fascinating, You Are Not a Gadget is a deeply felt defense of the individual from an author uniquely qualified to comment on the way technology interacts with our culture.
|
|
|
Spotlight customer reviews:
|
Customer Rating:
Summary: A treatise from a deeply-respected mind
Comment: It's been a while since I read this book- to be precise, in January (and it is now September.) Still, while 'browsing' books on similar topics, I saw this cover and was reminded of the one thing about which I felt compelled to post a favorable review. I was first exposed to the ideologies of Jaron Lanier- hailed as one of the fathers of virtual reality- while reading 'Radical Evolution' by Joel Garreau. Garreau's book, succinctly described as a profile of three perspectives on the perils and advantages of cybertechnology (again, it's been even longer since I read that book,) was where I was first 'introduced.'
Bear with me as I (seem to) digress for a moment, here. Based on other readings and the meditations they espouse, I have spent a great deal of thought on the concept of nondualistic thinking. Dualistic thinking (a bit sloppily) being defined as a philosophy which demands that something be termed as unilaterally correct while its opposite is incorrect- or, the world is black and white. Now, I am not proposing that Lanier is a thinker whose scribblings have caused me to place a greater faith in the (somewhat knee-jerk) reaction to such a statement- the world is many shades of grey. Rather, in order to alight from the intellectually two-dimensional path of dualism, one must be able to grasp a third way. It is not that Lanier's contribution to Garreau's profiles was some middle ground between Ray Kurtzweil's portrait of singularity as utopia and Bill Joy's profoundly-felt warnings against the dystopia which exponentially-encroaching technologies might wreak, but that it was an entirely original, and surprisingly uplifting, paradigm of embracing technology, not as messiah, but as tool.
In an effort to come back from the brink of my digression, 'You Are Not A Gadget' then, was a book that filled me with anticipation when I saw it on the pile of stiff-spined, brand-new hardbacks (admittedly a personal thrill) back in January because I had been so permanently impressed by Lanier's unique brand of optimism and faith in human ingenuity and adaptability in the face of rapid (and even menacing) technological change. Having admitted that it has been several months since I have read it, I take the time this evening to ramble because I recall walking away from the reading of 'Gadget,' with one concept that is shaping my interaction with a 'web' I find both irresistible and threatening (I speak of the Internet, in general,) and it is this: anonymity facilitates much of the outrageous behaviour, cruel commentary and basic indecency cyber communities sometimes engender. And Lanier's encouragement to put a human face onto a tool that is neither angelic nor demonic in nature is an interesting argument for properly using cybercommunications that heartens the eternal, if a bit worse-for-the-wear, optimist in me to grow with the times (as opposed to shrinking back from them) with confidence that any tool can be wielded successfully by the better angels of our nature. (Proper punctuation and a bit of clarity could have helped that last 'sentence' quite a bit. Forgive me, I'm a bit mentally drained at the moment. Ah, there it is! My humanity interacting with a cyber platform. Calloo, Callay!)
In short, you retain the power to influence the yawning maw of accelerated innovation, because you are not a gadget.
Jaron, I tip my hat.
Customer Rating:
Summary: A strange superposition of pessimism, optimism, and cynicism.
Comment: The content of this book is somewhat different than the many other books on the topic of technological change and its ramifications. The author of book does not really argue against technological advancement, but instead argues that certain technological changes actually prohibit better ones from occurring. In addition, sometimes the classification of these changes as advances requires that one "devalue" or "demean" the human experience, he asserts. It would be fair to classify most of the contents of this book as mere opinions, since the author does not really justify his assertions quantitatively or scientifically. Sometimes the reader gets a heavy dose of anger, cynicism, and elitism from the author, and so the book demands patience and discipline to get through. However as compared to other books that address similar topics, this one is relatively mild in tone and temperament.
The UNIX operating system, the MIDI representation of musical notes, and the file system all take a hit in the book as being "locked in" and "inalterable" developments in information technology. This means, according to the author, that any improvements to these will not happen, and further, that such a "lock-in" might happen to the very definition of what it means to be human. Uniformity, Web page templates, anonymity of commentary all he says contribute to a dull, unimaginative online presence which acts in the long run to degrade "ordinary" people. Interestingly, the does not articulate on what it means to be "ordinary", and if he did he might become aware of his (seeming) lack of respect for human beings in general.
Anonymity in online presence also seems to act as a strong perturbation to the author's psyche, but for those who have experienced anonymous criticism from this venue and in the academic world, verbal sadism is nothing new, and in the latter predates the rise of the Internet. The ugliness, cowardice, and irrationality of anonymous criticism is not likely to go away, either online or in academia, along with "proud extroversion" that the author feels has been diminished because of the "standardized" designs on social sites and Weblogs. But it must be remembered that standardization often accompanies innovation, once the bugs and limitations of the innovation have been ironed out. Economy of thought and speed of access and use are the natural consequences of standardization. And there is no sign that innovation has been stifled online or in any other field of human endeavor. Indeed, the twenty-first century is a perfect example of Schumpeterian innovation, and entire companies have been wiped out because of their failure to indulge in the hyper-competition of contemporary technological change.
As sociology based on quantitative research via statistical sampling, this book does not deliver, especially when he speaks of the tendency of crowds to revert to "bad moblike behaviors." What evidence is there of this, besides the anecdotes that are presented in the book? And what are the "sound financial principles" that were replaced by "computing clouds"? Are there any examples of attempts to "transform the conduct of science" along the lines of what the author is criticizing? This is of great interest to historians of science and philosophers of science.
The book is not without merit though, as there is an optimistic tone at the end, and some intriguing ideas for further research and investigation. One of these concerns the origin of the cerebral cortex as being in the olfactory system. Another is the delineation of two systems of language, one to serve as a descriptor and classifier, and the other having its origin in the affective part of the brain, i.e. the one that controls the emotion of displeasure. Swearing it seems, has its own module in the brain. The author is speculating a lot here, but such is the nature of innovation. He and many others continue to engage in it, and for this reason he should stop worrying and learn to love the bomb of the twenty-first century.
Customer Rating:
Summary: Digital Heresy (and about time)
Comment: This is one of those books where you read it, and you're not the same again after you do. Still, because I don't want to be too easy a grader, I hesitate to bestow the mantle of great book, even though that's what great books are supposed to do. Besides, I can't claim that it's great like Anna Karenina is great or like Habits of the Heart, which really lit me up when I read it twenty-five years ago. But as something that addresses, head-on and well, the paramount cultural issues of the current moment, OK, it's great.
Also, because I heretofore associated its author, Jaron Lanier, entirely with pioneering virtual reality software, which in most incarnations is fatuous at best, I had to be beat with a stick by one of my friends before I cracked the cover and took a look. Well, mea maxima culpa, was I wrong, and Jaron, my man, please forgive me.
What we have instead is as smart a look at the past promise of the Internet versus its present philosophy of cybernetic totalism as one could conceive of finding. And along the way he flies a strong humanistic flag in analyzing everything from the increasingly prolonged adolescence of post Internet generations to the dominant trend to dumb down human experience to approximate software rather than vice versa as the Web initially promised. Moreover, virtual reality to help amputees deal with phantom limb pain or to provide ways for surgeons to increase their skill level is anything but fatuous.
Perhaps listing representative headings from the table of contents will convey the scope of Lanier's vision: What is a Person?; An Apocalypse of Self Abnegation (about the anonymity of Web trolls and Wikipedia contributors, et al); The Lords of the Computing Clouds Renounce Free Will in Order to Become Infinitely Lucky (about how the gospel of free content will destroy the rest of the economy like it has the music biz); Retropolis (about how the Web largely recycles vintage content and commentary on vintage content and hoe Facebook takes us all back to high school); I Am a Contrarian Loop; and finally, in the section called Future Humors, Post Symbolic Communication and Cephalopods (about how the calamari steak you had for dinner used to converse with its tribe by an intricate language of color changes).
Not varied or far-reaching enough for you? Then I guess you'll have to read some other book. But for god's sake, if you find a better one, post a comment to tell me about it.
Customer Rating:
Summary: Good points, but lots of arrogance
Comment: Getting caught up in the excitement of technology, the internet, and web 2.0 is moe or less inevitable in today's society. Almost every aspect of our lives involves some form of interconnectedness brought through the magic of the web. In his book You Are Not a Gadget, Jaron Lanier explores this connectedness and what he feels is a societal approach toward Singularity (that is the wisdom of the Cloud becoming the predominant mindset). Lanier makes his case through a variety of contexts and highlights the problems he sees with today's software development and information aggregation.
While I'll be the first to admit that Lanier puts out some particularly powerful points regarding the future of communication and our use of technology, his thoughts on the subject are obscured by academic elitism and a lack of connection with mainstream society. Lanier doesn't focus on the experience that the typical user has with social media, but instead offers relatively harsh criticisms focused on how the current path of computing is ill-suited to academics and intellectuals. Lanier certainly maintains the credentials to criticize technology in such a capacity, but the internet has long since evolved from being a platform solely for only the most studious of computing enthusiast into a platform for everyone.
Lanier rails against the Open Source crowd, maintaining that some of the most favored technological devices have originated from closed design processes (he uses the iPhone as an example of this which politicizes the credibility of his claim). He also speaks out against modern music and internet multimedia content pointing out its relative lack of sophistication. In all You Are Not a Gadget takes an extremely capitalist and bourgeois approach to computing claiming that the revolutions of user-created content are spawning nothing more than poor quality, unoriginal product.
It's easy to read You Are Not a Gadget and become defensive, especially if you are one of the people enthralled with the path that web 2.0 has launched the internet down. I did find some of Lanier's points to be utterly enlightening and I think the book is worth the time to read, but I don't agree with him. His obsession with the banality of YouTube and the redundancy of Wikipedia quickly became repetitive and detracted from his overall point. I also felt that he spent a large portion of the book celebrating his own accomplishments and glorifying his own worldview. The book lacks a certain focus and direction and it's easy to feel insulted by the arrogant tone simply because Lanier works so hard to elevate his own ideal vision of the web.
Customer Rating:
Summary: Unfocused
Comment: I have to admit that half of this book went over my head. I picked it up because of Mr. Lanier's criticism of social media, and I completely agree with what he says about that. His ideas about the way "Web 2.0" is dumbing us all down sounds right on, and also his thoughts about the idea of "lock-in" were very interesting. But I found most of the book to be aimed at a much more tech-savvy audience than me. I had never even heard of the "hive mind" or the "noosphere," and Mr. Lanier seems to suffer from the familiarity that too many tech writers get, where it's assumed that the reader knows more than they do. I struggled to understand many of his concepts, especially his ideas on the financial world.
The book is simply written, but his concepts wander and looking at headings like "Goldingesque Neoteny, Bachelardian Neoteny, and Infantile Neoteny" started to be daunting. He seems to be obsessed with Wikipedia's influence, which I found weird because I hardly ever use Wikipedia and don't trust most of it, but Lanier acts as though 100% of internet users treat it like the Bible. Also, although I was not sure how I felt (agree or disagree) about all of his ideas, he totally lost my respect when he said that the video game Spore was really great. I found that game to be one of the worst video games ever and a gigantic personal disappointment, so after that I couldn't take anything Lanier said seriously. At the end of the book he seemed to go off on a personal tangent about how much he likes cephalopods, that didn't seem to fit in with the rest of the book and felt self-indulgent to me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
