JARON LANIER WHO OWNS THE FUTURE PDF
Jaron Lanier is the father of virtual reality and one of the world’s most brilliant .. Lanier then looks to a future dominated by Siren Servers while technological. Jaron Lanier, groundbreaking computer scientist and infectious optimist, is concerned that we are not making the most of ourselves. In Who. An Amazon Best Book of the Month, May Jaron Lanier’s last book, You Are Not a Gadget, was an influential criticism of Web ‘s crowd-sourced.
|Published (Last):||22 December 2006|
|PDF File Size:||17.39 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||12.76 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Inthe play Inherit the Wind —a courtroom drama about teaching evolution in the American s—was futufe circumspect way to critique the communist witch hunts that dominated the era.
Who Owns the Future? – Wikipedia
The end result of this is that wealth is concentrated at the top–in the hands of the major Internet companies and other Siren Servers–and the economy as a whole suffers since few jobs are created to allow the wealth to trickle down. Lanier speaks so naturally, in this book and in interviews, of things lanoer are mysterious to most of us…Siren Servers that pull information to themselves and create vortices of information and wealth. They act as short term bonuses and assessments of respect allocation, with the social understanding that the underlying information passes in the free common social pool in a limited amount of time.
Digital networking and big data are never mentioned in the news. This whho a controversial but fascinating look by a brilliant mind into the state of what technology has wrought and his personal manifesto owhs how to fix it. Machines don’t have human intelligence and cannot replace us, or be us, in the foreseeable future. It is a huge question at the center of how we interact, and who is paying attention to those interactions.
Sep wuo, Emily rated it it was amazing Shelves: Preview — Who Owns the Future?
Who Owns the Future? by Jaron Lanier – review
Are there different osns for this book? Throughout the book he is keen to show himself impeccably liberal in spirit, and sceptical of Randian extreme libertarianism, but also stopping well short of “socialism” or anything that might actually smell of a major structural change. It is real, and if we want to have a growing information-based economy, that real value ought to be part of our economy. Lanier is concerned with the erosion of the US middle class shifts in class structure elsewhere, in the developing world, are not on the radar.
The problem is when the capitalist does exceptionally well on his side of the transaction, and the data suppliers want to charge percentage points like record producers did, in the good old days on his work. Nevertheless, should events continue to play out as Lanier foresees, his solution may well become attractive at some point. This book was an assignment of a book group I am in, and I really didn’t know what it was about except what I learned watching a video of an interview of the author.
He does, however, do his best to own his own faults while stressing that there is no such thing as a perfect economy or other societal system – only that which has a more or less optimum balance of pros and cons. In the end, this book makes me think of Lawrence Lessig’s Republic Lost, a book that lies out a problem and offers some possible solutions, yet the possibility of change seems rather low, especially in the short term.
Retrieved 17 April But overall, I think Jaron’s ideas are a great benefit to society and definitely worth pondering. I feel like he has too many inside jokes that I am not privy to.
Mr Lanier has an audacious solution. The long short of it is that we must find a way to pay people adequately for the information and content they contribute to the information economy. This page was last edited on 12 Augustat The author’s term for the proposed solution: Apr 21, Merry rated it liked it Shelves: It is filled with practical suggestions that I think have been too casually dismissed by other reviews.
Lanier believes in the future, and refuses to indulge in laments for past eras that were actually more difficult, more restrictive and more deadly than the technologically advanced present. Lanier uses the example of Kodak, a former Blue Chip company that, at the peak of its power just fifteen short years ago, employedthousand people, creating a vast swath of middle class wealth.
Who Owns the Future? by Jaron Lanier – review | Books | The Guardian
For instance, why is intellectual property a “levee” a term Lanier uses to denote an impediment to free usage or enjoyment by those who do not possess itwhile other kinds of property – real estate, business, financial – where contemporary wealth is concentrated are not even mentioned?
The theme linking all of these is: Add some zippy graphics and slide shows and you’ve got enough for a minute audio-visual cappucino. In a future of 3D printers and automated-everything, it will otherwise be easier than ever to be marginalized.
In addition, like his first book, Who Owns the Future? I agree that futuee is a sad thing that many of the brightest minds in the world are dedicated to writing code with the goal of better targeted advertising, and that there are definitely some problems with the current cash flow of the internet.
There are no evil schemers, just the manipulation of huge amounts of data, which is collected from all of us and used to control markets.
Like the man says, any system we create always needs tinkering. There was this idealistic idea early in the digital age that information should be free. Must redeem within 90 days. What I didn’t know was the contribution of digital networks to all that.
Oct 26, Jonathan Norton rated it it was ok. As an alternative, Lanier proposes a new architecture in which micropayments flow to people whose data has made downstream calculations, advertisements, or sales possible.
It happened to Lehmann Brothers They are writing what they know. In fact it’s just the opposite, and something needs to change. That’s how they get paid even if he then makes a load of dud products that earn nothing, which is pretty good for them. The premise of this movement that Lanier objects to is the mistaken idea that technology has taken on a life of its own, that its increasing rate of growth will render humans obsolete.
Is the idea of education embedded in massive online open courses worth embracing?
Rather than exploring the consequences of new technologies for how we could transition to a society beyond capitalism, he has written a book exhorting us to try to save this dying beast, without paying due attention to the much more fundamental question of whether it’s worth saving in the kwns place. Lanier has predicted how technology will transform our humanity for decades, and his insight has never been more urgently needed.
Jan 20, Stephanie Sun rated it really liked it Shelves: His prescriptions may be oanier. This book is free information! We would be compensated for all this interaction, and this would provide both economic and political leverage that might offset plutocratic tendencies.