3 ms·

"...Like Lanier’s book, though in a very different register, it risks presenting the Internet as both the manifestation and cause of all of our deepest problems

"...Like Lanier’s book, though in a very different register, it risks presenting the Internet as both the manifestation and cause of all of our deepest problems..." A friend of mine sent me a link recently with some stuff that Taleb's currently working on. The internet, the collection of data storage and transmission instantaneously anywhere on the planet, is not a problem. The problem is that humans are hard-wired for small social groups, not mobs. What we need is some new sense of morality and common wisdom around what's an appropriate piece of technology to make and use and what isn't. It's very, very reminiscent of how hard drugs was first introduced to transport and commercialization. At first it was open season, with lots of pain and loss of life as a result. Then there was a ton of over-reaction. Hopefully the pendulum is swinging back the other way, towards liberalization and education. As a libertarian, it's tempting to rant at government for making so many drugs criminal 100-120 years ago, but it might have been the best of a bunch of bad choices at the time. Likewise, busting up Big Tech could end up being a bad idea in the long-term and the best thing we can do right now to return some sanity to public discourse. I'll leave that to others to decide. But something needs to be done. Something drastic, I'm afraid.

spacehome 8y ago
Unfortunately, it looks like we're wired for mobs, too. Participants in mobs act very differently and self-report afterwards that the subjective experience is an altered state. It sounds like echos of an evolutionary history that had a fair bit of mobbing.
- DanielBMarkham 8y ago
  I completely agree. It's interesting to look at the history of warfare and how it relates to population density. In general, as farming got more and more advanced, large-scale warfare really took off. The difference was that people were limited geographically. So tribal chiefs (and later dictator/kings/lords) were able to geographically isolate and deal with unrest. This has fallen apart several times. The French Revolution comes to mind. The Chinese "People's Courts". In each case you had tens of thousands or more in a self-reinforcing feedback loop driving one another emotionally. These things do not end well. So if it's a choice between strong, totalitarian governments, the emotional mob-rule we're currently developing, and some controls on tech? Count me as a vote for some controls on tech. From here it looks like all three are happening simultaneously anyway. Better to choose your poison than get all three.

spacehome 8y ago

Unfortunately, it looks like we're wired for mobs, too. Participants in mobs act very differently and self-report afterwards that the subjective experience is an altered state. It sounds like echos of an evolutionary history that had a fair bit of mobbing.

DanielBMarkham 8y ago
I completely agree. It's interesting to look at the history of warfare and how it relates to population density. In general, as farming got more and more advanced, large-scale warfare really took off. The difference was that people were limited geographically. So tribal chiefs (and later dictator/kings/lords) were able to geographically isolate and deal with unrest. This has fallen apart several times. The French Revolution comes to mind. The Chinese "People's Courts". In each case you had tens of thousands or more in a self-reinforcing feedback loop driving one another emotionally. These things do not end well. So if it's a choice between strong, totalitarian governments, the emotional mob-rule we're currently developing, and some controls on tech? Count me as a vote for some controls on tech. From here it looks like all three are happening simultaneously anyway. Better to choose your poison than get all three.