5 ms·

Jaron Lanier is an interesting character. He's not just a smelly hippy. He's pretty smart but I don't buy into him being a "Silicon Valley Philosopher". No one

Jaron Lanier is an interesting character. He's not just a smelly hippy. He's pretty smart but I don't buy into him being a "Silicon Valley Philosopher". No one can predict the future. Anyways, for a rip roaring good time I highly recommend this debate on artificial intelligence featuring Jaron (https://youtu.be/Qqc0t8ghvis https://youtu.be/Qqc0t8ghvis). On the opppsing side is Martine Rothblatt (male turned female, inventor of satellite radio, found a cure for the previously incurable disease her daughter had!). The panelists are definitely capable of producing novel ideas. I view Jaron as going by his feelings more than anything. Like I doubt he has some statistical evidence for any of his claims. But I can't help but agree with him on this.

dbspin 8y ago
Most of what Lanier has to say isn't predictive - it's description and prescriptive. In other words he's not guessing at some ghastly future, he's describing the ways that social networks are manipulating behaviour right now, and some of the affects that's having. Similarly his analysis of AI is about reframing whats actually going on as digital sharecropping, rather than laying out a future course of developing. Also - should hardly need pointing out, but philosophy has never had a project to 'predict the future'. That's futurology, which I agree is largely hooey.
- nobody271 8y ago
  I know philosophy isn't about predicting the future but Silicon Valley has a strong focus on the future. I'm saying I don't think it's possible to be a "Silicon Valley Philosopher" because the industry changes so fast that you can't speculate on either thr present (as it will soon change) or the future (which we can't predict). I do like the cut of his jib. Like I said he has a few novel ideas which are always worth listening to.
gambler 8y ago
>No one can predict the future. He wrote Digital Maoism article at the peak of Web 2.0 hype. That's pretty darn good demonstration of foresight. https://www.edge.org/conversation/jaron_lanier-digital-maoism-the-hazards-of-the-new-online-collectivism https://www.edge.org/conversation/jaron_lanier-digital-maois...

dbspin 8y ago

Most of what Lanier has to say isn't predictive - it's description and prescriptive. In other words he's not guessing at some ghastly future, he's describing the ways that social networks are manipulating behaviour right now, and some of the affects that's having. Similarly his analysis of AI is about reframing whats actually going on as digital sharecropping, rather than laying out a future course of developing. Also - should hardly need pointing out, but philosophy has never had a project to 'predict the future'. That's futurology, which I agree is largely hooey.

nobody271 8y ago
I know philosophy isn't about predicting the future but Silicon Valley has a strong focus on the future. I'm saying I don't think it's possible to be a "Silicon Valley Philosopher" because the industry changes so fast that you can't speculate on either thr present (as it will soon change) or the future (which we can't predict). I do like the cut of his jib. Like I said he has a few novel ideas which are always worth listening to.

gambler 8y ago

>No one can predict the future. He wrote Digital Maoism article at the peak of Web 2.0 hype. That's pretty darn good demonstration of foresight. https://www.edge.org/conversation/jaron_lanier-digital-maoism-the-hazards-of-the-new-online-collectivism https://www.edge.org/conversation/jaron_lanier-digital-maois...