tacanderson's review against another edition
5.0
If you want my full review go here
http://www.newcommbiz.com/the-future-of-technology-get-involved-or-get-sidelined/
Most interesting to me though, is that this is a book about the disruption of technology, by a writer who is the child of writers (Nick’s father is John le Carré). Nick has grown up in one of the industries most disrupted by technology, and being a member of Generation X, Nick grew up during the time that technology itself has grown up.
While Nick himself may be an early adopter and a power user of social media he also made a name for himself here in the UK as an outspoken critic of the heavy-handed approach tech companies take with their users. He has been most vocal on the Google Book Settlement. Nick took issue not with the existence of the project, but with the way in which Google went about it. It’s this outspokenness about tech that led Nick to write The Blind Giant.
What becomes apparent about Nick – and is evident in The Blind Giant - is that he is passionate about the potential of technology, and understands that it can be used for “good” just as well as “evil”. Because of his background and his current situation Nick sits balanced between the ongoing debates surrounding technology, intellectual property, publishing and privacy (I should also mention his wife is a human rights lawyer).
Nick starts the book by doing an admirable job of covering the huge topic of modern technology, specifically computing and the Internet, taking us from the early days (aka the 80s) through to modern times. For those of us that lived during this time it’s a nice bit of nostalgia. For those who weren’t paying attention and wondered where all of this tech stuff suddenly came from, it’s a good crash-course. It’s also a useful piece of history for the younger Generation Y readers who don’t know what Netscape was.
Nick then tackles, head on, many of today’s hotly debated topics. I was delighted that he took to task several of the complaints Nicholas Carr raised in his book The Shallows (aka “Google is making us Stupid”). And he discusses the debate on publishing and intellectual property and how many forces are putting it at odds with personal privacy – you shouldn’t have to give up one for the other.
The book is not long (especially compared to Nick’s novels) and at just over 250 pages Nick doesn’t have a lot of time to go deep on each topic. But what he does well is frame each topic with enough context and examples and then breaks the subject open enough for the reader to continue the debate intelligently. In fact, there is an accompanying website at www.blindgiant.co.uk where readers are encouraged to continue the debate in a forum or in posts about each chapter.
There are very few definitive conclusions made in the book and I believe this is because Nick wants to the reader to come to their own conclusions. Nick’s main point is that we created technology and (in my words, not his) that it is in fact a natural extension of our own evolutionary progress. We created technology to solve some of our more pressing problems (and to have some fun). We created technology to allow us to be more human, not less. But it won’t just sit there and regulate itself (or us) and manage how we use it. If we don’t manage ourselves and technology then at best it becomes yet another distraction, a point of stress in our lives. At worst, larger forces, like governments and corporations will turn technology into a tool to manipulate us.
Ultimately Nick argues that we need to develop our critical analysis skills. He even offers up a few tips and tools to help us along. To survive and thrive in the digital age we need to ask ourselves and each other hard questions, we need to engage in debates. We can’t sit by with optimistic expectations of the inevitable arrival of a technology utopia or with fatalistic expectations that an apocalyptic technology dystopia is inevitable.
To borrow a line from The Blind Giant:
The hard truth is: get involved, or get sidelined. The future is not set. It’s being made right now.
http://www.newcommbiz.com/the-future-of-technology-get-involved-or-get-sidelined/
Most interesting to me though, is that this is a book about the disruption of technology, by a writer who is the child of writers (Nick’s father is John le Carré). Nick has grown up in one of the industries most disrupted by technology, and being a member of Generation X, Nick grew up during the time that technology itself has grown up.
While Nick himself may be an early adopter and a power user of social media he also made a name for himself here in the UK as an outspoken critic of the heavy-handed approach tech companies take with their users. He has been most vocal on the Google Book Settlement. Nick took issue not with the existence of the project, but with the way in which Google went about it. It’s this outspokenness about tech that led Nick to write The Blind Giant.
What becomes apparent about Nick – and is evident in The Blind Giant - is that he is passionate about the potential of technology, and understands that it can be used for “good” just as well as “evil”. Because of his background and his current situation Nick sits balanced between the ongoing debates surrounding technology, intellectual property, publishing and privacy (I should also mention his wife is a human rights lawyer).
Nick starts the book by doing an admirable job of covering the huge topic of modern technology, specifically computing and the Internet, taking us from the early days (aka the 80s) through to modern times. For those of us that lived during this time it’s a nice bit of nostalgia. For those who weren’t paying attention and wondered where all of this tech stuff suddenly came from, it’s a good crash-course. It’s also a useful piece of history for the younger Generation Y readers who don’t know what Netscape was.
Nick then tackles, head on, many of today’s hotly debated topics. I was delighted that he took to task several of the complaints Nicholas Carr raised in his book The Shallows (aka “Google is making us Stupid”). And he discusses the debate on publishing and intellectual property and how many forces are putting it at odds with personal privacy – you shouldn’t have to give up one for the other.
The book is not long (especially compared to Nick’s novels) and at just over 250 pages Nick doesn’t have a lot of time to go deep on each topic. But what he does well is frame each topic with enough context and examples and then breaks the subject open enough for the reader to continue the debate intelligently. In fact, there is an accompanying website at www.blindgiant.co.uk where readers are encouraged to continue the debate in a forum or in posts about each chapter.
There are very few definitive conclusions made in the book and I believe this is because Nick wants to the reader to come to their own conclusions. Nick’s main point is that we created technology and (in my words, not his) that it is in fact a natural extension of our own evolutionary progress. We created technology to solve some of our more pressing problems (and to have some fun). We created technology to allow us to be more human, not less. But it won’t just sit there and regulate itself (or us) and manage how we use it. If we don’t manage ourselves and technology then at best it becomes yet another distraction, a point of stress in our lives. At worst, larger forces, like governments and corporations will turn technology into a tool to manipulate us.
Ultimately Nick argues that we need to develop our critical analysis skills. He even offers up a few tips and tools to help us along. To survive and thrive in the digital age we need to ask ourselves and each other hard questions, we need to engage in debates. We can’t sit by with optimistic expectations of the inevitable arrival of a technology utopia or with fatalistic expectations that an apocalyptic technology dystopia is inevitable.
To borrow a line from The Blind Giant:
The hard truth is: get involved, or get sidelined. The future is not set. It’s being made right now.
hannahswiv's review against another edition
4.0
In my current, “I’m-all-about-the-non-fiction” phase (I get one, every so often) I just finished reading Nick Harkaway’s new book The Blind Giant. The simple verdict, it’s good, go read it.
Longer version - yes, I was pre-disposed to like it, I like digital stuff and tech, I like thinking about the impact that they’re going to have, I like Nick Harkaway and his writing (otherwise I probably wouldn’t have bought the hardback). I also like the cover. It pretty.
I also really quite like the approach to the subject, which is very much, ‘I can’t be definitive, and a lot of this is going to be out-of-date in about five minutes anyway, but let’s talk about some interesting questions and start engaging our brains with them.’ I’m not an expert, or even mildly proficient, in this area, so I have no idea what ‘new’ stuff this brings to the table - but it synthesises a lot of ideas and arguments well, isn’t afraid to mention stuff that it’s going to question (and not in a beat-up and burn down the straw man type way), and is very accessible and engaging.
Longer version - yes, I was pre-disposed to like it, I like digital stuff and tech, I like thinking about the impact that they’re going to have, I like Nick Harkaway and his writing (otherwise I probably wouldn’t have bought the hardback). I also like the cover. It pretty.
I also really quite like the approach to the subject, which is very much, ‘I can’t be definitive, and a lot of this is going to be out-of-date in about five minutes anyway, but let’s talk about some interesting questions and start engaging our brains with them.’ I’m not an expert, or even mildly proficient, in this area, so I have no idea what ‘new’ stuff this brings to the table - but it synthesises a lot of ideas and arguments well, isn’t afraid to mention stuff that it’s going to question (and not in a beat-up and burn down the straw man type way), and is very accessible and engaging.
zameermfm's review against another edition
3.0
Nice though provoking insights into what technology has brought in to the human lives. His arguments are too congested and fast paced, i could not comprehend as an amature reader. Great book though
hcq's review
3.0
An interesting book. The beginning is a bit slow (at least for someone like me who lives with a serious tech guy, and who is old enough to remember the birth of the web), as it's rather a potted history of the Internet, but it picks up when it gets to Harkaway's specific ideas about the intersection of technology and the book world.
I'm curious about his view of social media, though. He says he looks at how many people a person is following (on Twitter, say), not just how many followers they have, to get a better sense of how engaged they are, and he compliments someone who is following something like 15,000 people. Call me an introvert, but I can't even begin to understand how one could do that--and still do anything else (and what's wrong with being an introvert, anyway?).
I'm reasonably engaged with the world, in Harkaway's other terms; I see people, I read books, I'm on a couple of social sites, like this one, and I try to contribute my bit to them (instead of just lurking), but...15,000?
This leads to another question, which is exactly one of quantity vs. quality. I've been on Ravelry, a knitting website, for years. It's justifiably famous for being well-designed, and that's created a problem; all the other social media sites I've seen are so poorly done by comparison, that I don't want to join!
So I'm on Ravelry and Goodreads, but I disdain Facebook. Does it make sense to say, in Harkaway's terms, that I am disengaged? There's got to be another term: Selectively engaged, maybe. Though that makes it sound as though I'm trying to stay in an echo chamber of people who agree with me, which is emphatically not right. Hmmm.
I'm curious about his view of social media, though. He says he looks at how many people a person is following (on Twitter, say), not just how many followers they have, to get a better sense of how engaged they are, and he compliments someone who is following something like 15,000 people. Call me an introvert, but I can't even begin to understand how one could do that--and still do anything else (and what's wrong with being an introvert, anyway?).
I'm reasonably engaged with the world, in Harkaway's other terms; I see people, I read books, I'm on a couple of social sites, like this one, and I try to contribute my bit to them (instead of just lurking), but...15,000?
This leads to another question, which is exactly one of quantity vs. quality. I've been on Ravelry, a knitting website, for years. It's justifiably famous for being well-designed, and that's created a problem; all the other social media sites I've seen are so poorly done by comparison, that I don't want to join!
So I'm on Ravelry and Goodreads, but I disdain Facebook. Does it make sense to say, in Harkaway's terms, that I am disengaged? There's got to be another term: Selectively engaged, maybe. Though that makes it sound as though I'm trying to stay in an echo chamber of people who agree with me, which is emphatically not right. Hmmm.
More...