You Are Not a Gadget: A Manifesto

by Jaron Lanier

Book Overview

In You are Not a Gadget digital guru and virtual reality pioneer Jaron Lanier reveals how the internet is deadening personal interaction, stifling genuine inventiveness and even changing us as people.... This description may be from another edition of this product.

• Format: Hardcover
• Language: English
• ISBN: 0307269647
• ISBN13: 9780307269645
• Release Date: January 2010
• Publisher: Knopf Publishing Group
• Length: 209 Pages
• Weight: 0.87 lbs.
• Dimensions: 0.9" x 5.9" x 8.5"

Customer Reviews

Lanier ahead of his time on humans in high tech

This book is so readable and insightful on separating how we use technology from how it can wind up using humans. Before the dangers of runaway interconnectivity became headlines, Lanier was showing us a practical view on how to learn to drive computer tecnology more deliberately for useful results, not just distracting sizzle effects. Thought provoking, one of several of his titles well worth a read!

The Coming Down of Great Expectations

The first thing that must be said about Jaron Lanier's "You Are Not a Gadget: A Manifesto" is that it a very intricate book, full of several different arguments and lines of thought. It might be best to say that it is a manifesto containing several submanifestos. His arguments against the current directions in "web 2.0" technology are many and multifaceted, taking us through questions of the effectiveness of capitalism, how culture evolves, whether there can really be "wisdom in crowds," and even the nature of what "human" is. If we have to sum up the book into an overall point or argument, here's how I'd do it: web technology, which was hoped to lead to vigorous innovation and individualization, has done precisely the opposite. On the consumption side, the idea of the "wisdom of crowds" has made the group (Lanier says "hive mind") more important and more "real" than voices of individuals. On the production side, the internet has led less to innovative production than to the recycling of old ideas in new forms, while making it hard for inventors/pioneers to make a living being creative. (Yes, I know I am missing some things in this description but, as mentioned, Lanier's work is very hard to sum up with concision.) Lanier believes that there are two big reasons for this. First, we are not using our conception of humanity to drive how we shape technology so much as we are allowing technology to shape how we define humanity. A shining example is our faith in the "wisdom of crowds" as exemplified by our increasing obsession with all things wiki. Lanier reminds us that, in reality, there is no such "wisdom in crowds" because crowds are simply collections of individuals making individual decisions. (I would also add that "wisdom of crowds" is a literal impossibility as wisdom can only happen embodied in a point-of-view, of which a crowd has none.) Secondly, Lanier believes that innovation may be lagging behind expectations because of our belief in the "information wants to be free" model. Yes, this has benefits, like offering information in a way that is accessible to...well...most. But it has the disadvantage of removing the incentives provided by markets out of a market. Lanier often uses the example of music and art: it was thought that the internet would allow more artists to make livings off of their art by removing the middle-men and allowing artists direct access to consumers. But with so much free content and exponentially increased competition, it is becoming even harder for artists to (a) get noticed in the milieu and (b) make a living off of their creativity. While Lanier does not directly champion capitalism (he does contemplate its goods and bads), I think it is fair to argue that Lanier is championing a market system as the surest spur to innovation. Here, I must quote him directly: ""Why are so many of the more sophisticated examples of code in the online world - like the page-rank algorithm in the top search engines or like Adob

Finally someone wrote this book!

There have been several book-length arguments about how the Internet has degraded content, culture, and creativity. Previous books in this vein have included Clifford Stoll's Silicon Snake Oil, Mark Helprin's Digital Barbarism, and Andrew Keen's The Cult of the Amateur. The first two of these are unreadable, and Keen's book is undone by his snarky tone. Jaron Lanier's You Are Not a Gadget is not only far better than any of these but is also the only one that offers cogent explanations for why the Internet is the way it is, not just opinionated rants. He explains how technological design decisions made 30-40 years ago led to aspects of the Internet that are undesirable, such as repressions of positive human qualities such as individual creativity, industriousness, and responsibility. He also shows how Internet content business models benefit no one except so-called "lords of the cloud" such as Google and Facebook; moreover, they lead to devaluation of content from both cultural and economic perspectives. He tackles the emerging "Music 2.0" business models that Internet polyannas/apologists expect to thrive in the new age and debunks them one by one. Some of the theoretical and philosophical arguments Lanier makes in this book are hard to follow (the philosophy stuff in Part 1) or seem far-fetched (the discussions of cephalopods towards the end). But I view them as part of his effort to create a serious framework to back up his assertions. This book needs to achieve the same level of notoriety as the Cluetrain Manifesto of ten years ago. It's just as important.

Thought provoking and worthy of your time.

In his book You Are Not a Gadget: A Manifesto, Jaron Lanier becomes a solitary voice in the wilderness shouting as loudly as he can that all is not well with the virtual world nor with the tools that make the virtual world possible....software and computers. That this book was written by an insider from the world of the Internet should get everyone's attention. Jaron Lanier is a household name for those who follow the world of computers and virtual reality and his book is nothing more than a manifesto warning us that there is a dark side to the Internet. Even innocuous websites such as Facebook and Google, "lords of the cloud" do not escape Lanier's expose. "Emphasizing the crowd means de-emphasizing individual humans" and that, in the end, leads to "mob" behavior. Utterly true. As I flipped through the book, the point that resonated most loudly to me was the impact `anonymity' has had on our virtual world (and maybe the real world as well). I can remember visiting a chat room that was dedicated to "Books and Literature" in 2000 or 2001. As a librarian I was naturally drawn to a space that I thought would be filled with others like me who had a love of the written word and for good books. Did that assumption back fire? You bet! What I found was a chat area filled with virtual people who wanted to chat about anything but books and literature. If I were to post a question about what people were reading or what they thought of a given book I was torn (virtually) from limb to limb. Having served in the military I have a pretty good operational understanding of foul language, and I'm pretty good at throwing the words around when necessary. However, that this language would be used in that particular venue by people who could remain anonymous was a shock. I'm pretty certain that most of the visitors to that website hadn't read a book in years and had no problem violating the most basic rules of civility. Lanier is correct when he argues that this is not a step in the right direction. (Please forgive this personal observation) Obviously I'm a fan of the virtual world. I post reviews online for free (which is another point Lanier makes) but the joy isn't the posting of reviews but in reading the books; real books. What Lanier has to say should be of interest to all of us. You Are Not a Gadget is written for the ordinary reader with a minimal background in computers. Lanier floats from idea to idea not necessarily fully exploring a point, but instead simply raising an issue and then moving on. Very effective! I predict that You Are Not a Gadget is destined to become a cultural icon in the future. We now point to books such as Silent Spring by Rachel Carson and I'm Ok, You're Ok by Dr. Thomas Harris as books that changed society and altered the future. I suspect that You Are Not a Gadget may become that type of sign post. I highly recommend. Peace always.

one of the best books in a long while

This is a very interesting book. Its a critique of the "internet culture" which has up until now been mostly beyond challenge. The author hits exactly on the key problems of the culture: Collectivism, mob mentality, conformity and the marginalization of the individual. He also hits upon the problem that small decisions made by individuals can lock people into mindsets or patterns of behavior. Its an excellent book in highlighting the problems of the era. But it doesn't really provide any easy answers about how to change things. And the unfortunate truth is that many of the problems are less to do with technology than human nature. The joke of "free" software is that it isn't "free" at all. It always comes with a licence agreement which spells out that duties of the individual to the "collective". The innovation of Linux and its licence over the works that had preceeded it was that any additions to Linux belonged to the collective. An individual can't ever own anything. Wikipedia is even worse. Want to create your own facts or history? Create a web-page where you say something about a particular subject, then quote the webpage as the source for what you want to say on Wikipedia. Suddenly your web page is the equal of any scholarship in the whole of human history. In pointing to the growth of mob mentality across society and the accompanying anti-intellectual climate, the author has hit upon *the* key philosophical issue in the new century. This is important and necessary book that deserves to be read. ===== While my review remains positive, I want to point out one major problem in the book. The account of events on p. 125-126 is full of misinformation and errors. The LISP machine in retrospect was a horrible idea. It died because the RISC and MIPS CPU efforts on the west coast were a much better idea. Putting high-level software (LISP) into electronics was a bad idea. Stallman's disfunctional relationship with Symbolics is badly misrepresented. Stallman's licence was not the first or only free software licence. Where stallman was unique was in that his licenses are more about enforcing the rights of the collective and claiming the work of others than anything to do with making things free. And often the growth of the so-called culture was being driven by personal feuds with the BSD community, with Symbolics and with anyone who dared touch the holy EMACS editor. Much of the time, the so-called movement seemed more about picking fights and asserting control than anything to do with makings things free. And the irony of Linus Torvalds is that he didn't follow in their footsteps. Stallman and company were driven by flawed collectivism into a massive failed project known as "Hurd". Linus was successful in that he brought an individualist mindset, a simple set of ideas and the ability to get along with other people to his effort. Linux isn't that way anymore, but the reasons that Linux (with no reasources) was successful and the Hurd (with