The Myth of Techno-Utopia

Posted on by

Evgeny Morozov has a book coming out later this year about the Internet and democracy in which he takes a critical look at techno-utopianism. In the WSJ today he sets out his stall.

our debate about the Internet's role in democratization—increasingly dominated by techno-utopianism—is in dire need of moderation, for there are at least as many reasons to be skeptical. Ironically, the role that the Internet played in the recent events in Iran shows us why: Revolutionary change that can topple strong authoritarian regimes requires a high degree of centralization among their opponents. The Internet does not always help here. One can have "organizing without organizations"—the phrase is in the subtitle of "Here Comes Everybody," Clay Shirky's best-selling 2008 book about the power of social media—but one can't have revolutions without revolutionaries.

Contrary to the utopian rhetoric of social media enthusiasts, the Internet often makes the jump from deliberation to participation even more difficult, thwarting collective action under the heavy pressure of never-ending internal debate. This is what may explain the impotence of recent protests in Iran: Thanks to the sociability and high degree of decentralization afforded by the Internet, Iran's Green Movement has been split into so many competing debate chambers—some of them composed primarily of net-savvy Iranians in the diaspora—that it couldn't collect itself on the eve of the 31st anniversary of the Islamic revolution. The Green Movement may have simply drowned in its own tweets.

Buzz: lest we forget

Posted on by

From Dave Winer.

Yet Google, so far, has only said they’re sorry for the “concern” they’ve caused. That shows that they’re not owning up to the breach they caused. They can’t possibly be so stupid as to not understand what they revealed about users of Gmail. It’s just the kind of weaselly response to a building crisis that PR pros tell you not to do, that covering up will only make it worse when people realize what’s really been going on. But that assumes a competent and vigilant press. That would be too much to assume in the case of Google and its coverage.

The Don’t Be Evil smokescreen was pure brilliance. As Michael Gartenberg said on Twitter, if Microsoft had done what Google did, there would already be lawsuits. It would be a scandal of huge proportion.

The NY Times won’t call it a breach of trust by Google. Instead they attribute the claim to “privacy experts.” I raised this point, and predictably people say that the Times shouldn’t make factual statements about companies who screw up anywhere but in editorials. That’s ridiculous. A fact is a fact, and belongs in reporting. It’s a fact that Google revealed sensitive information about millions of users, and now they’re scurrying to try to cover it up. And the press is helping them buy time. Why? I have no clue, but I don’t like it.

Spot on. Especially the bit about how Don’t Be Evil is a smokescreen. Corporations are not — and cannot be — moral beings. They do what they have to do, which is make money for their shareholders. Period. The best one can hope for is that they obey the law. Everything else — including “Corporate Social Responsibility” is basically hooey.

Tortured logic

Posted on by

I love the Economist for its distinctive combination of excellent reporting and crazed editorial logic. Here’s an example from the latest issue. First the email ‘teaser’ from the Editor:

Imagine a democracy where politicians representing only a tenth of the population can frustrate the will of the majority, where the legislature is divided up into absurdly gerrymandered seats, where money politics is rife, where bipartisanship has disappeared—and where nothing ever gets done. With Congress failing to do anything about health care, climate change or the deficit, that is how an increasing number of Americans see Washington. Meanwhile businesspeople and politicians in the emerging world contrast this paralysis with China’s autocratic efficiency. In our cover leader we look at the idea that Washington is broken.

So far, so good. But then:

We argue that it is wrong to blame the system, not least because it lets Barack Obama off the hook. The main reason why his laws are not passing is because they are unpopular. He has done too little to win over independents and Republicans.

Eh? These are the same republicans who are determined to vote down anything and everything proposed by the Obama administration.

This is par for the course with the magazine. Its intellectual contortions over the banking catastrophe were comical beyond belief. On the one hand it could not do otherwise but report the stupidity, venality and systemic madness of the system. On the other hand, it couldn’t bring itself to admit that really radical changes in our regulatory arrangements might be necessary.

Anonymous Kindling

Posted on by

Following my post about Charlie’s Brooker’s views on eReaders, I got this lovely email from a reader:

Reminded me of the strange phenomenon I observed in Japanese bookstores….
Without fail, and I really mean without fail, every bookstore… when you purchase a book, the attendant at the point of sale, will fit an opaque dust jacket, providing you with ‘paperback camouflage’.
I reckon the kindle and the ipad are going to be big in Japan.

Why the dust jackets? Anonymous reading my wife assures me… is culturally very important..?!?

The (other) Book of Jobs

Posted on by

According to today’s NYTimes,

SAN FRANCISCO — A handful of presumptive biographers have, over the years, tried to tell the remarkable story of Steven P. Jobs: the youthful visionary who, after being ousted from Apple, the company he helped to found, triumphantly returned to lead a new era of high-tech innovation.

But those efforts lacked one important ingredient: cooperation from Mr. Jobs himself.

Now Apple’s chief executive is set to collaborate on an authorized biography, to be written by Walter Isaacson, the former managing editor of Time magazine, according to two people briefed on the project.

The book, which is in the early planning stages, would cover the entire life of Mr. Jobs, from his youth in the area now known as Silicon Valley through his years at Apple, these people said.

Mr. Jobs, who will turn 55 on Feb. 24, has invited Mr. Isaacson to tour his childhood home, one person with knowledge of the discussion said.

Hmmm… Wonder if Mr Isaacson has checked his blood-pressure recently. He’ll need a stable reference point for the coming months.