rick2's review
4.0
What an interesting book. I feel like I’m going to be mentally chewing on this one for a while. It’s good, with the caveat that I actually don’t agree with the conclusions the author has. This is kind of like reading the most compelling case against betamax circa early 1990‘s. The arguments are well-made and very convincing, but I can’t help but feel it’s a warning from a snapshot of the pre-pandemic world that doesn’t exist anymore.
The author points at the rise of big data and advent of artificial intelligence, and then sounds a warning siren against the collection of that data and it’s use to steer human decisions. She does this by looking at Google and Facebook primarily, but Amazon and others are thrown in there. The language gets a bit hyperbolic and at times over the top(if you’ve read my other reviews you know Im not one to talk here). There’s a compelling case made that the overwhelming ubiquity of these platforms and their data collection is detrimental to the long-term health of society.
I think the core problem with this book, is that even a few years removed, it seems a lot like Tipper Gore complaining about “explicit language in rap music.“ it was published in 2019 and it already feels out of touch. And I can’t quite tell if it’s because all of these technologies have crossed the Rubicon and are so enmeshed with our daily life that I can’t disentangle it from any sort of imagined alternative, or if the author actually missed the boat. Because of some issues I’ve had and my personal experiences I’m inclined to believe the latter.
Its strange because I started this book over a year ago and set it down. Only to pick it back up from the beginning this week. I remember my initial read through I struggled with the language and agreed with the concepts. This time I actually thought the opposite. The language is the typical obtuse buffoonery I would expect from a Harvard professor, but once you get into it you can develop a rhythm and cadence. It was actually the ideas this time around that struggled for me.
Back from 2016-2018ish I worked at a marketing company that was very briefly on the bleeding edge of digital lead generation and ended up being acquired by a company you’ve probably interacted with. I’ve seen the behind the scenes, witnessed the great and magical OZ, and it’s really disappointing. It’s just a bunch of dudes. And these guys are typically smart, but not that smart. And while they prioritize making money over say, global peace and prosperity or even the betterment of mankind, there’s not some pernicious blood ritual focused on grinding behavioral surplus into cash. At least I was never initiated into it.
So hearing the arguments against in this kind of technology is interesting. But it seems kind of detached from the core of what’s actually happening. Artificial intelligence isn’t a thing. Machine learning is improving but nowhere near the point where it can have malicious intent. There was a story going around a couple years ago about how a teenage girl changed her type of face moisturizer and Targets “marketing AI” figured out she was pregnant because of that. She got ads for pregnancy stuff and her dad got all upset. And everyone was so astounded at the level of intelligence that targets marketing department had. But what came out about that story later is that she literally bought a pregnancy test with her debit card. Her debit card that was tied to her account. Like this stuff is not that advanced. It’s creepy. And I think we should be seriously discussing where the limits are, talking about public and private spheres. The ability to opt out, and more visibility into what’s collected about you. Apple has taken a baby step in that direction. On a macro level there should be a level of consumer protection the same way we used the FCC to regulate television when it was emerging as the dominant form of information and entertainment.
Professor Zumoff gets into this sort of conspiratorial tone where Google is painted as big evil and Facebook is this great puppet master that controls you without you even realizing it. I don’t buy it. I don’t have any love lost for either of those companies. And I think they both probably should be dismantled under antitrust law. But I’ve worked with Xooglers and ex-Facebookers, And while they’re usually smart, in my experience they’re also usually kind of weird and not super aware of anything on a macro level beyond their very narrow band of expertise. I would’ve found a lot of the arguments more credible if instead of this sort of conspiratorial tone of “Stalin plotting against the naysayers“ there was more of a caution about dorky code jockeys maximizing their own KPI‘s. I think the author is a little too convinced of just how far BF Skinner can take us here.
That combined with the last two years of pandemic world left me shaking my head at the end of this book. I think three years ago, if I had read this book when it first came out, I would’ve agreed inherently with just about everything that was said. But having some distance from the industry and seeing some of the buffoonery that tech companies have engaged in, I think my concern is less this maniacal slide into FAANG controlling and knowing your every action. And more of a comedy of errors and mistakes that will lead us into what I would consider the destabilization of society. I think the scarier thing to me is not that Zuckerberg or Bezos have some master plan, it’s that there is no plan beyond trying to keep their empires afloat.
So I’m left with I think a real feeling of confliction. I think there are issues raised here that are very present and vital. I also think that some of this really misses the mark and the fact that it doesn’t hold up less than three years after it was written, that’s really concerning to me. What I hope is that this book can be a warning that never has to be empirically tested. There are definite deep-seated issues with the technology that we are so rapidly creating. The author does a great job of laying those out. This technology is advancing at a hyper sonic speed. I’d rather be overly cautious of the doomsday scenario painted here, than to be wrong and only realize it too late.
The author points at the rise of big data and advent of artificial intelligence, and then sounds a warning siren against the collection of that data and it’s use to steer human decisions. She does this by looking at Google and Facebook primarily, but Amazon and others are thrown in there. The language gets a bit hyperbolic and at times over the top(if you’ve read my other reviews you know Im not one to talk here). There’s a compelling case made that the overwhelming ubiquity of these platforms and their data collection is detrimental to the long-term health of society.
I think the core problem with this book, is that even a few years removed, it seems a lot like Tipper Gore complaining about “explicit language in rap music.“ it was published in 2019 and it already feels out of touch. And I can’t quite tell if it’s because all of these technologies have crossed the Rubicon and are so enmeshed with our daily life that I can’t disentangle it from any sort of imagined alternative, or if the author actually missed the boat. Because of some issues I’ve had and my personal experiences I’m inclined to believe the latter.
Its strange because I started this book over a year ago and set it down. Only to pick it back up from the beginning this week. I remember my initial read through I struggled with the language and agreed with the concepts. This time I actually thought the opposite. The language is the typical obtuse buffoonery I would expect from a Harvard professor, but once you get into it you can develop a rhythm and cadence. It was actually the ideas this time around that struggled for me.
Back from 2016-2018ish I worked at a marketing company that was very briefly on the bleeding edge of digital lead generation and ended up being acquired by a company you’ve probably interacted with. I’ve seen the behind the scenes, witnessed the great and magical OZ, and it’s really disappointing. It’s just a bunch of dudes. And these guys are typically smart, but not that smart. And while they prioritize making money over say, global peace and prosperity or even the betterment of mankind, there’s not some pernicious blood ritual focused on grinding behavioral surplus into cash. At least I was never initiated into it.
So hearing the arguments against in this kind of technology is interesting. But it seems kind of detached from the core of what’s actually happening. Artificial intelligence isn’t a thing. Machine learning is improving but nowhere near the point where it can have malicious intent. There was a story going around a couple years ago about how a teenage girl changed her type of face moisturizer and Targets “marketing AI” figured out she was pregnant because of that. She got ads for pregnancy stuff and her dad got all upset. And everyone was so astounded at the level of intelligence that targets marketing department had. But what came out about that story later is that she literally bought a pregnancy test with her debit card. Her debit card that was tied to her account. Like this stuff is not that advanced. It’s creepy. And I think we should be seriously discussing where the limits are, talking about public and private spheres. The ability to opt out, and more visibility into what’s collected about you. Apple has taken a baby step in that direction. On a macro level there should be a level of consumer protection the same way we used the FCC to regulate television when it was emerging as the dominant form of information and entertainment.
Professor Zumoff gets into this sort of conspiratorial tone where Google is painted as big evil and Facebook is this great puppet master that controls you without you even realizing it. I don’t buy it. I don’t have any love lost for either of those companies. And I think they both probably should be dismantled under antitrust law. But I’ve worked with Xooglers and ex-Facebookers, And while they’re usually smart, in my experience they’re also usually kind of weird and not super aware of anything on a macro level beyond their very narrow band of expertise. I would’ve found a lot of the arguments more credible if instead of this sort of conspiratorial tone of “Stalin plotting against the naysayers“ there was more of a caution about dorky code jockeys maximizing their own KPI‘s. I think the author is a little too convinced of just how far BF Skinner can take us here.
That combined with the last two years of pandemic world left me shaking my head at the end of this book. I think three years ago, if I had read this book when it first came out, I would’ve agreed inherently with just about everything that was said. But having some distance from the industry and seeing some of the buffoonery that tech companies have engaged in, I think my concern is less this maniacal slide into FAANG controlling and knowing your every action. And more of a comedy of errors and mistakes that will lead us into what I would consider the destabilization of society. I think the scarier thing to me is not that Zuckerberg or Bezos have some master plan, it’s that there is no plan beyond trying to keep their empires afloat.
So I’m left with I think a real feeling of confliction. I think there are issues raised here that are very present and vital. I also think that some of this really misses the mark and the fact that it doesn’t hold up less than three years after it was written, that’s really concerning to me. What I hope is that this book can be a warning that never has to be empirically tested. There are definite deep-seated issues with the technology that we are so rapidly creating. The author does a great job of laying those out. This technology is advancing at a hyper sonic speed. I’d rather be overly cautious of the doomsday scenario painted here, than to be wrong and only realize it too late.
peculiarly_reading's review against another edition
5.0
“Let there be a digital future, but let it be human, first.”
“Its roots lie partly in cowardice and partly in the worship of power which is not fully separable from cowardice.”
“Its roots lie partly in cowardice and partly in the worship of power which is not fully separable from cowardice.”
thebookmagpie's review against another edition
I immediately bounced off the writing style/authorial voice in this. I might come back to it eventually but it's a no for now.
projectazar's review against another edition
challenging
hopeful
informative
slow-paced
5.0
One of the best books I've ever read. Zuboff manages to describe in an easy to understand manner the digital panopticon created by surveillance capitalists and contextualize their approach through both a historical and philosophical lens. If you are at all worried about panopticon, online privacy, existentialism in the 21st century, or individualism, this book is a must read.
ajayasranna's review
4.0
An eye opener! I have been experiencing, with increasing frequency, how our gadgets seem to be spying on us. And I am not alone here. I have been ambivalent on the import of these transgressions for long. Shoshana Zuboff comprehensively sketches out the nature of the beast to every inch of its gory details. A scholarly piece of work, incisively dissecting the intrusive and expansionist practices of the big tech giants-google and facebook in particular. I have often heard the phrase "If you are not paying for the product, you are the product". The book turns this understanding on its head and demonstrates how, in fact, you are the raw material and not the product. That is the biggest takeway from the book for me.
The writing, however, is dense and inaccessible at times, tending to wear you down. The arguments feels repetitive towards the end. A dispassionate editor would have made a world of good to this book and increased its reach.
That said, this a magisterial piece of work on one of the most important issues our times. I recommend that you make time and acquaint yourself with the workings of the new big bad boy in town- the surveillance economy.
The writing, however, is dense and inaccessible at times, tending to wear you down. The arguments feels repetitive towards the end. A dispassionate editor would have made a world of good to this book and increased its reach.
That said, this a magisterial piece of work on one of the most important issues our times. I recommend that you make time and acquaint yourself with the workings of the new big bad boy in town- the surveillance economy.
snoopfrog's review
3.0
very scary, very important content. but dear god it needed to be 1/4 as dense of a text as it is currently