I’m reading two books with opposing philosophies simultaneously: You Are Not A Gadget by Jaron Lanier and Everything Bad is Good for You by Steven Johnson. The former argues that technology is reducing humanity to bits of information, and the latter argues that technology is contributing to mental evolution. As my reading progresses, I’ll post some highlights from both books (provided my brain doesn’t explode).
Let’s start with Mr. Lanier, who presents the following themes in the Preface and Chapter 1: Missing Persons.
Lock-in
Technology (software, file formats, web platforms, etc.) that is inflexible in design and isn’t adaptive to a range of future possibilities can lock-in patterns of human behavior that are reductive rather than expansive and can stunt the overall course of social evolution. (Lanier uses MIDI as an example of a pervasive standard format that has unintentionally limited the potential for digital music because it is too hard to change.)
Fragmentation
Digital technologies stimulate different potentials in human nature, and current Web 2.0 designs are trending toward the reduction of users (people) to fragments. The way people engage with platforms like Twitter and wikis, by providing bits of succinct information, is ultimately toying with social engineering and changing how humans express meaning.
And the counterpoint, Mr. Johnson’s Introduction.
The Sleeper Curve
Despite the assumption that culture is being dumbed down, today’s video games, television shows, and movies are far more nuanced and advanced than those previous, and they ultimately encourage cognitive complexity that is causing culture to grow more sophisticated, not less.
Games vs. Books
Reading books is not necessarily more cognitively complex than playing video games. Video games have open ended narratives that require probing and telescoping (probe, hypothesize, reprobe, rethink), which is a basic procedure of scientific inquiry.
RELATED LINKS GALORE:
• An excellent story, Text without Context by Michiko Kakutani in the 3/17/10 issue of NY Times.
• The forthcoming book by Nicholas Carr, The Shallows, explores how the Internet is affecting our brains.
• A transcript of Caleb Crain’s talk on How the Internet is Changing Literary Style.
Here are some random notes I jotted down yesterday during Open Video Alliance’s Wireside Chat with Lawrence Lessig. Mind you, I *was* multi-tasking!
john philip sousa
infernal machines
reaction to phonograph – demise of music
technology and policy
2002 – began to change!
technology gave back
revival of the community culture that sousa celebrated
remix culture – music, Beatles white album, JZ black album, DJ Danger Mouse, grey album, girl talk remix 230 trax in a single performance.
anime music videos
technique has nothing to do with remixing importance
it’s that the technique has been democratized
2006 – another change!
youtube
facilitating a call and response in the way culture gets made and consumed
youtube video inspired spin-off youtube video inspired spin-off youtube video … millions of viewers
this begins to be precisely what sousa romanticized
rather than gathering on the back lawn
they gather on this online platform
creating bits of culture
ALL DEPENDS ON PRINCIPALS OF FAIR USE & FAIR USE CODECS
rip : a remix manifesto- movie
lib(ertarian) julian sanchez summation
new kind of amateur culture, extraordinarily professional in what it produces
walt disney’s greatest works were derived from those of the past: brothers grimm, inspired by other creative works, mickey mouse based on steamboat bill
every episode of disney’s little einsteins uses classical music or works of art
sonny bono legislation extending copyright
free culture, free codecs
a business that leverages user value through reviews, recommendations, feedback that channels people to things they want to buy
every search is a gift to google – market data provided by users working for free
on the other hand
flickr twitter yelp – build value by encouraging people to contribute something back
copyright holders are a share cropping vision of future of digital creativity
no reason to regulate amateur activity; there’s no market
with sharable licenses: consumers add value back
wild card! what does the science say: not what does the industry want it to say
Jill Magid, Lincoln Ocean Victor Eddy, 2006-2007, Courtesy Yvon Lambert Gallery, New York
The 60th anniversary of George Orwell’s science fiction opus 1984 came and went unnoticed last year. Why would such a prescient novel generate so little hubbub on its birthday? Perhaps the notion of a society numbed by perpetual war, newspeak (the reduction of language to suit ideological purposes), and constant government surveillance of the public is not that newsworthy. Do these ideas apply so aptly to the 21st century that 1984 seems redundant? Or is pointing out this trend toward total surveillance just harshing the mellow of the Net Generation who surrender their privacy with wild abandon? On my first day on Facebook, I jokingly posted my status as “Big Brother is watching you,” and was surprised by a slew of comments suggesting I was a buzzkill. Read the rest of my review on … might be good.
