Great reads....I'll read anything you post! I will listen, read and learn. I will read all the comments. I'm grateful for you and your guest writer's. I'm grateful for everyone commenting whether I agree or not. Finally a place where decency exists.
I am listening to the interview with Jaron Lanier in the Was the Internet a Horrible Mistake podcast. Is he really a distinguished visionary or a merely a demagogue enjoying the sound of his own voice?
Somehow I can't shed the feeling that his presentation, as well as the entire Silicon Valley clique influencing most aspects of our daily lives, supports the suspicion that the Internet and, especially, personal computer technology, was created as a money-making wonder toys without a second thought, let alone substantial analysis of possible consequences and implications.
In short, once again, I hear a lot of clever wordsmithing without taking any responsibility for the wrong he and the likes brought upon humanity.
I would vote for the "demagogue enjoying the sound of his voice" option. Here are the notes I took while listening to it (thinking I might be able to send them to Bari Weiss but failing that I'll just drop them here).
Weiss lists Lainer in he promo as: “one of the authors of the Internet”, Really? of all the systems in play getting the bits you are reading right now from me to you is there anything those bits touch that Lainer had anything to do with? Not as far as I know. I have never met a fellow programmer/technologist in my 45 year career that paid any attention to him. He says late in the interview that nerds don’t like him. That is true, not for what he says or his ideas but due to him being a fake. Is he smart guy? Sure. perhaps even an interesting guy, but has he had any impact on anything? Not that I can see.
To be fair, me neither. I have worked on many successful and many failed systems since my first programming job in 1976, but all have been relegated to the tech dust bin (save the last one which is still going strong). But I am not claiming otherwise.
His principle technical work was on VR and that remains a tiny inconsequential niche. I don’t even know if the work he did in that area had any influence in that niche. Is anyone reading this using VR goggles and a data glove? I very much doubt it.
He is certainly very skilled at embellishing his own importance. “when I was working hard to make the internet work”, again? how so? It's all in his head as far as I can tell.
He also just spouts facts that are simply wrong and his devotees (such as Weiss) fail to challenge them.
He says the Nazis were innovators in using television for propoganda, but this is false. They WANTED to do so, but by 1939 when the war started there were so few sets in Germany that that effort was abandoned in favor of radio.
Don’t think the printing press had a global effect? What about W.R. Hurst starting the Spanish-American war in 1898 by claiming the Maine was suck by a torpedo in Havana harbor when he made the whole thing up and the evidence is that the Maine explosion was an accident. That evidence was not available at the time but likewise there was no evidence it was a torpedo attack either. Fortunately that conflict only lasted 10 weeks but it might have been far worse.
Lainer says he would expect that the encyclopedia Americana and Britannica to have had different takes on topics (unlike the wikipedia), but is his expectation true? Where is the analysis that confirms this? Even if this were true how many users of encyclopedias in days past ever looked at more than one? So is this claim correct and even if so does it matter? I do not know the answer, but neither does Lainer.
He rails agains algorithms used to produce search results, but what is his alternative? A human can not even sort through a few hundred items, let alone millions or billions so algorithmic help is required to make the internet useful (its not like the original days where there were just a dozen or so Arpanet sites…). I do not think his “data -dignity” model is workable at all. There are already 4.5 billion internet users. Using Bari's “shoe” topic, in his data-dignity proposal there is not the slightest chance of Bari as a consumer of shoes being able to interact in some meaningful/relationship way with a curator of the “hot shoes” list if that list has any sort of following at all. And even NOW you can simply read reviews by a reviewer you like to see their opinion on shoes. If Lainer is so sure of this idea and so well connected to so many billionaires then why has he not started an alternative to Google? Talk is not only cheap, its easy.
His robot tree trimming idea is just as flawed. The economics simply do not work. Now he pays people (he doesn’t want to stereotype but “they are all hispanic”) to trim trees. Their robot replacement could indeed be programmed by (and likely would be, just as car automation is today) by getting collective input from humans. But the number of gardeners needed for that is vastly less than the number of tree trimmers employed today and so there can not possibly be sufficient income to support both the robot tree trimming company AND anything approaching the number of current human tree trimers.
If Bari Weiss really wants to do something different/interesting at Honestly, she should never interview one person alone. Instead always interview two people who have opposing views of the subject matter.
To people who have existed completely outside the trajectory of the evolution of the internet, Lainer sounds like a brilliant authority- in the absence of any opposing views.
Thank you Bari for having the courage to have written and run the important stories we have been privileged to read this past year. I share them regularly with friends and family who otherwise are often ignorant of the issues on which you focus, thanks to a “mainstream media” which is biased beyond recognition. I also of course encourage them to subscribe, so that you can continue this critical work. Bravo!
I had a similar thought, and I enjoy the movement to independent op ed and journalism. I'm going to stick around a bit longer. A couple of Bari's Common Sense contributors did a nice job of citing sources which I appreciate. Hoping they monitor our perspectives in the comments.
Proud to subscribe
$5 Subbed after seeing your CNN interview with Brian Stelter. Big believer in what you are doing. Keep up the great work.
Bari Weiss - thank you.
Very interesting discussion. I didn't buy everything he was saying, but there were a few real nuggets of truth.
Site is always high quality product and style, but badly needs the diversification in subject matter and tone these stories offer. Thanks.
Great reads....I'll read anything you post! I will listen, read and learn. I will read all the comments. I'm grateful for you and your guest writer's. I'm grateful for everyone commenting whether I agree or not. Finally a place where decency exists.
new subscriber here. Looking forward to future articles and discussions. Common sense is sorely lacking these days...
I am listening to the interview with Jaron Lanier in the Was the Internet a Horrible Mistake podcast. Is he really a distinguished visionary or a merely a demagogue enjoying the sound of his own voice?
Somehow I can't shed the feeling that his presentation, as well as the entire Silicon Valley clique influencing most aspects of our daily lives, supports the suspicion that the Internet and, especially, personal computer technology, was created as a money-making wonder toys without a second thought, let alone substantial analysis of possible consequences and implications.
In short, once again, I hear a lot of clever wordsmithing without taking any responsibility for the wrong he and the likes brought upon humanity.
I would vote for the "demagogue enjoying the sound of his voice" option. Here are the notes I took while listening to it (thinking I might be able to send them to Bari Weiss but failing that I'll just drop them here).
Weiss lists Lainer in he promo as: “one of the authors of the Internet”, Really? of all the systems in play getting the bits you are reading right now from me to you is there anything those bits touch that Lainer had anything to do with? Not as far as I know. I have never met a fellow programmer/technologist in my 45 year career that paid any attention to him. He says late in the interview that nerds don’t like him. That is true, not for what he says or his ideas but due to him being a fake. Is he smart guy? Sure. perhaps even an interesting guy, but has he had any impact on anything? Not that I can see.
To be fair, me neither. I have worked on many successful and many failed systems since my first programming job in 1976, but all have been relegated to the tech dust bin (save the last one which is still going strong). But I am not claiming otherwise.
His principle technical work was on VR and that remains a tiny inconsequential niche. I don’t even know if the work he did in that area had any influence in that niche. Is anyone reading this using VR goggles and a data glove? I very much doubt it.
He is certainly very skilled at embellishing his own importance. “when I was working hard to make the internet work”, again? how so? It's all in his head as far as I can tell.
He also just spouts facts that are simply wrong and his devotees (such as Weiss) fail to challenge them.
He says the Nazis were innovators in using television for propoganda, but this is false. They WANTED to do so, but by 1939 when the war started there were so few sets in Germany that that effort was abandoned in favor of radio.
Don’t think the printing press had a global effect? What about W.R. Hurst starting the Spanish-American war in 1898 by claiming the Maine was suck by a torpedo in Havana harbor when he made the whole thing up and the evidence is that the Maine explosion was an accident. That evidence was not available at the time but likewise there was no evidence it was a torpedo attack either. Fortunately that conflict only lasted 10 weeks but it might have been far worse.
Lainer says he would expect that the encyclopedia Americana and Britannica to have had different takes on topics (unlike the wikipedia), but is his expectation true? Where is the analysis that confirms this? Even if this were true how many users of encyclopedias in days past ever looked at more than one? So is this claim correct and even if so does it matter? I do not know the answer, but neither does Lainer.
He rails agains algorithms used to produce search results, but what is his alternative? A human can not even sort through a few hundred items, let alone millions or billions so algorithmic help is required to make the internet useful (its not like the original days where there were just a dozen or so Arpanet sites…). I do not think his “data -dignity” model is workable at all. There are already 4.5 billion internet users. Using Bari's “shoe” topic, in his data-dignity proposal there is not the slightest chance of Bari as a consumer of shoes being able to interact in some meaningful/relationship way with a curator of the “hot shoes” list if that list has any sort of following at all. And even NOW you can simply read reviews by a reviewer you like to see their opinion on shoes. If Lainer is so sure of this idea and so well connected to so many billionaires then why has he not started an alternative to Google? Talk is not only cheap, its easy.
His robot tree trimming idea is just as flawed. The economics simply do not work. Now he pays people (he doesn’t want to stereotype but “they are all hispanic”) to trim trees. Their robot replacement could indeed be programmed by (and likely would be, just as car automation is today) by getting collective input from humans. But the number of gardeners needed for that is vastly less than the number of tree trimmers employed today and so there can not possibly be sufficient income to support both the robot tree trimming company AND anything approaching the number of current human tree trimers.
If Bari Weiss really wants to do something different/interesting at Honestly, she should never interview one person alone. Instead always interview two people who have opposing views of the subject matter.
-jrg
Slow. Clap.
To people who have existed completely outside the trajectory of the evolution of the internet, Lainer sounds like a brilliant authority- in the absence of any opposing views.
Unifying narrative: Dog the Bounty Hunter has tracked Gabby’s boyfriend to China (?)
Thank you Bari for having the courage to have written and run the important stories we have been privileged to read this past year. I share them regularly with friends and family who otherwise are often ignorant of the issues on which you focus, thanks to a “mainstream media” which is biased beyond recognition. I also of course encourage them to subscribe, so that you can continue this critical work. Bravo!
I had a similar thought, and I enjoy the movement to independent op ed and journalism. I'm going to stick around a bit longer. A couple of Bari's Common Sense contributors did a nice job of citing sources which I appreciate. Hoping they monitor our perspectives in the comments.