The article keeps confounding free will with authority over society, and morality itself. But these are all different (see footnote * ). Harari complains that

The article keeps confounding free will with authority over society, and morality itself. But these are all different (see footnote * ). Harari complains that "Dataism" (and email) makes us "... tiny chips inside a giant system that nobody really understands". But individuals always were just small parts of a great ecosystem that nobody understands. But even with SMTP, we are still big enough to live our lives well for ourselves and loved ones. We can also try to improve society -- but the results will be small and unpredictable. He shows the same confusion of indivdual freedom with social control when he says: > in a humanist society, ethical and political debates are conducted in the name of conflicting human feelings, Well that's a pity, because in a liberal society, they should be debates about human rights. Your feelings about gay pride or religion should not give you authority to control others, but your rights might set some bounds. As far as I can tell, Harari has learned that modern biology is starting to see life and the mind as an information system. He accepts this science, but doesn't like it. So he tries to build some confused link to the Big Data giants. Now there a good reasons, well known at HN, to disaprove of those guys. But Harari's reasoning is not even wrong. *: e.g. The RC church emphasises individual free will, claims its own temporal authority, and teaches that God is the ultimate moral authority.