Nicholas Carr Says Tech 'Utopia Is Creepy' (cio.com)

itwbennett writes: It probably won't come as a big surprise that Mr. 'IT Doesn't Matter' isn't a big fan of Silicon Valley's vision for the future, a future defined by autonomous cars and the inevitable rise of robots. In his new book, 'Utopia is Creepy: And Other Provocations,' Carr takes aim at the irrational exuberance of Silicon Valley, where tech is the answer to every problem. One of the exuberances that Carr takes particular exception to is the notion that social media is a better, freer form of media than 'old' media, which maybe makes sense coming from a former executive editor of the Harvard Business Review, but he does have a point. "The old gatekeepers, to the extent they were gatekeepers, have been replaced by companies like Facebook and Google and companies that really now have become the new media companies and are very much controlling the flow of information," Carr told CIO.com's Clint Boulton.

Comments

I like technology

[NotInHere]

but only technology of the kind that I can compile myself, or at least I know I could because the source is available.

Re:I like technology

[yuriklastalov]

Not all technology is electronics. Hammers, spoons, and matches are all technology.

Which is why we're putting microchips in them so you can monitor it all on your smartphone. "Oh man, my matchbook app is telling me I'm almost out of matches. I'd better buy more!" *slams Amazon Eazy-Button* *high-fives Mark Zuckerberg standee, knocking it over awkwardly*

Utopia .NE. a good place to live

[Brett Buck]

Utopia of any sort, Plato's or otherwise, is intrinsically wrong, and completely anathema to the concept of individual liberty. I don't want a bunch of supposedly enlightened, supposedly superior masterminds controlling what goes on in *my* life.

Re:Utopia .NE. a good place to live

[Anonymous Coward]

You already *have* a bunch of supposedly superior masterminds controlling what goes on in your life, for reference: University study demonstrates that America functions as an oligarchy.

Granted, they don't micro-manage you. They control you "from a distance," as it were, allowing you just enough freedom that you don't notice the influence they have over you. But control you they do, and control them (with your puny votes) you do not.

On a more related note....

The rise of technology cannot be prevented. No level of political pressure will ever stop it. Each contributing step is in-and-of-itself innocuous, and the economic incentives to take said step are overpowering. We will have A.I. making most of our decisions for us, and we will love it that way. It is just a matter of time.

Re:If your bread is buttered, you're stoked.

[TheGratefulNet]

let me ask you: could jesus microwave a burrito so hot that even he couldn't eat it?

I could use some good news, now, jim. lay it on me, bro!

but it doesn't have to be that way...

[Narcocide]

There's too much money in social media, just like there's too much money in politics.

The old gatekeeper...

[Zargg]

No, he does not have a point about old media vs new. "Trust us, we're good gatekeepers, while those other people are BAD!" is not a good argument...

Who?

[110010001000]

Who is Nicholas Carr? Let me guess: he is a "thought leader".

I don't think anything much is gonna change

[rsilvergun]

I could be mistaken, but I'm already seeing the ruling class clamping down on the free flow of information. Police shot a black woman and had her Facebook feed disabled. I half got my hopes up that everyone having cameras would change that sorta thing but the cops learned to take the phones. But it took 'em a while to learn that. They seem to have learned the Facebook video lesson much quicker...

If I have a hope for technology it's that birth control (particularly for men) will force birth rates low enough that the rich will have to treat labor OK because there won't be enough to abuse. But then with automation they have no use for labor. So unless we're gonna drive the population to around 10,000 I think we still have a problem. After all, what good is being rich if nobody's poor to boss around?

Re:Blame Craigslist

[RichPowers]

Yep, the whippersnappers probably don't realize how profitable local newspapers used to be. Indeed, they were one of Buffett's favorite investments in the early days. From a 1977 WSJ article: "Warren likens owning a monopoly or market-dominant newspaper to owning an unregulated toll bridge. You have relative freedom to increase rates when and as much as you want." [1] When the economics are like that, you can afford prestige journalism and professional reporters.

The WSJ article also notes how Buffett made a killing buying the Washington Post Co. at a significant discount to book value; the company's huge investment portfolio wasn't factored into the stock price at the time. Fast forward several decades, and now Bezos owns the actual newspaper and WaPo brand.

While there are legitimate *technology* companies in Silicon Valley, the ad-delivery/social media "it's 1999 all over again!" outfits for some reason get all the attention. Looking at some of the large employers in the area, you realize a huge number of people earn a paycheck from firms that sell ads, make CRM software, and run social media services (in the red quarter after quarter). It's sort of like the West Coast Wall Street: too many overpaid assholes doing stuff of no useful value to human civilization. (And both groups are enabled by the torrent of easy money from the central banks, which makes all sorts of bullshit possible.)

[1] http://www.rationalwalk.com/wp...