Hardcover, 146 pages
English language
Published Aug. 13, 2018 by Henry Holt and Company.
You might have trouble imagining life without your social media accounts, but virtual reality pioneer Jaron Lanier insists that were better off without them. In Ten Arguments for Deleting Your Social Media Accounts Right Now, Lanier, who participates in no social media, offers powerful and personal reasons for all of us to leave these dangerous online platforms.
Laniers reasons for freeing ourselves from social medias poisonous grip include its tendency to bring out the worst in us, to make politics terrifying, to trick us with illusions of popularity and success, to twist our relationship with the truth, to disconnect us from other people even as we are more connected than ever, to rob us of our free will with relentless targeted ads. How can we remain autonomous in a world where we are under continual surveillance and are constantly being prodded by algorithms run by some of the richest …
You might have trouble imagining life without your social media accounts, but virtual reality pioneer Jaron Lanier insists that were better off without them. In Ten Arguments for Deleting Your Social Media Accounts Right Now, Lanier, who participates in no social media, offers powerful and personal reasons for all of us to leave these dangerous online platforms.
Laniers reasons for freeing ourselves from social medias poisonous grip include its tendency to bring out the worst in us, to make politics terrifying, to trick us with illusions of popularity and success, to twist our relationship with the truth, to disconnect us from other people even as we are more connected than ever, to rob us of our free will with relentless targeted ads. How can we remain autonomous in a world where we are under continual surveillance and are constantly being prodded by algorithms run by some of the richest corporations in history that have no way of making money other than being paid to manipulate our behavior? How could the benefits of social media possibly outweigh the catastrophic losses to our personal dignity, happiness, and freedom? Lanier remains a tech optimist, so while demonstrating the evil that rules social media business models today, he also envisions a humanistic setting for social networking that can direct us toward a richer and fuller way of living and connecting with our world.
Not sure if i will turn into a Cat but i am almost there, it is an eye opening reading for those who are not convinced that social network could be harmful. people think it is all about privacy but it is more than that, it is about being manipulated and worse if you do not even know that you are being manipulated.
Ich finde einiges hier wirklich hilfreich, anderes finde ich falsch und manches absurd.
Absurd ist v.a. die Vorstellung, wer nicht für Hillary gewählt hat, hat das deshalb getan, weil man von 'russian bots' beeinflusst wurde.
Was ich eher hilfreich finde, ist wie das Zusammenspiel von Hochs und Tiefs, das Soziale Medien gefühlsmäßig auslösen, Teil des Grunds sind, weshalb wir ihnen gegenüber eine Art Abhängigkeit entwickeln. Wenn man einen Tag wartet und keine Belohnungs-Likes bekommen hat, versucht man vielleicht noch eher, etwas Interessanteres zu schreiben statt wegzugehen. Man 'bleibt hängen''. Algorithmen steuern dem einen 'glitchy feedback' bei, der absolut random versucht, Leute zu einer response zu animieren - indem es sie zum Beispiel mit im Feed eingespielten posts traurig macht (weil dieser post bei ähnlich kategorisierten usern Ähnliches bewirkte). Es war nicht immer klar, welche Plattform da was anwendet - zB Facebook hat sich durchaus damit gerühmt, dass sie ihre user …
Ich finde einiges hier wirklich hilfreich, anderes finde ich falsch und manches absurd.
Absurd ist v.a. die Vorstellung, wer nicht für Hillary gewählt hat, hat das deshalb getan, weil man von 'russian bots' beeinflusst wurde.
Was ich eher hilfreich finde, ist wie das Zusammenspiel von Hochs und Tiefs, das Soziale Medien gefühlsmäßig auslösen, Teil des Grunds sind, weshalb wir ihnen gegenüber eine Art Abhängigkeit entwickeln. Wenn man einen Tag wartet und keine Belohnungs-Likes bekommen hat, versucht man vielleicht noch eher, etwas Interessanteres zu schreiben statt wegzugehen. Man 'bleibt hängen''. Algorithmen steuern dem einen 'glitchy feedback' bei, der absolut random versucht, Leute zu einer response zu animieren - indem es sie zum Beispiel mit im Feed eingespielten posts traurig macht (weil dieser post bei ähnlich kategorisierten usern Ähnliches bewirkte). Es war nicht immer klar, welche Plattform da was anwendet - zB Facebook hat sich durchaus damit gerühmt, dass sie ihre user zuverlässig 'sad' machen können, indem sie ihnen zB Reaktionen ihrer Freunde vorenthalten, sie isolieren, etc. Da hätte ich gerne Konkreteres gewusst, die Beispiele im Buch haben mich eher verwirrt. Aber auf jeden Fall fand ich die Idee sehr intriguing, dass die Manipulation unserer Gefühle durchaus stattfindet und dass negative Reaktionen uns genauso süchtig machen wie die positiven - es ist dieses Auf uns Ab, was uns dazu bringt, es immer wieder zu versuchen.
Was ich falsch finde, ist dass er darin die Grundlage einer 'Spaltung Amerikas' sieht und den Grund, dass Menschen so krass miteinander konkurrieren und sich gegenseitig vergleichen.
I read this because I was asked to write something to coincide with a re-broadcast online of a talk Lanier did about the book in 2018.
While I think Lanier does an OK job of outlining some of what's fucked about social media, this book suffers from the same delusion of Zuboff's surveillance capitalism: treating what social media does as an anomaly to capitalism, rather than a logical extension/stage of it. Lanier's pretty libertarian so it makes sense that his theory of change and his arguments for quitting social media are so "you, the reader" focused rather than collective imperatives. But much like "quitting" capitalism, quitting social media is something that requires either tremendous sacrifice or privilege to do as an individual and only really means an individual feels OK without necessarily contributing to anyone else's well-being.
In terms of readability it's not very jargon-y and relatively self-aware, …
I read this because I was asked to write something to coincide with a re-broadcast online of a talk Lanier did about the book in 2018.
While I think Lanier does an OK job of outlining some of what's fucked about social media, this book suffers from the same delusion of Zuboff's surveillance capitalism: treating what social media does as an anomaly to capitalism, rather than a logical extension/stage of it. Lanier's pretty libertarian so it makes sense that his theory of change and his arguments for quitting social media are so "you, the reader" focused rather than collective imperatives. But much like "quitting" capitalism, quitting social media is something that requires either tremendous sacrifice or privilege to do as an individual and only really means an individual feels OK without necessarily contributing to anyone else's well-being.
In terms of readability it's not very jargon-y and relatively self-aware, but there is definitely a low-key "I'm actually the smartest boy in the room" vibe to the entire book despite some very sweeping generalizations and mostly personal experience based arguments. I'd also second Mouse's point in their review about the weak citations (how is anyone referencing the Stanford Prison Experiment as a legitimate study?).
This was such a frustrating read because I agree with so many of the problems he identifies with social media, but I found his reasoning deeply flawed.
To the extent that this is a diatribe about how unpleasant social media is in his personal experience, I was mostly onboard, but the difference, I think, between a rant and a book is rigor.
His citations were mostly news articles and wikipedia entries, and he relies heavily on a superficial understanding of popular, flawed studies like the Stanford Prison Experiment. He makes bold, sweeping, and imprecise statements about the a number of things, particularly the nature of addiction and how addicts behave, without any backup or indication that he is speaking in any way besides entirely off the cuff.
I was disappointed as well in how stuck his reasoning is within the frame of capitalism and tech solutionism.
I’m not sure I have the personal fortitude to take the steps that he’s suggesting, but it’s always good to hear the arguments and data about why you should at least consider it, particularly from a technology insider.
I think the arguments are probably good, but I cannot get past the writing. Even for less than 150 pages. What a disappointment.
My notes on this book: anaulin.org/blog/book-ten-arguments-for-deleting-your-social-media-right-now/
Makkelijk te lezen boek met kritiek over social media. Veel herhalingen wel, maar dat is niet storend. Ook al is Lanier een techneut, zijn argumenten zijn voornamelijk a-technisch. Van sociaal-psychologisch (je verliest gevoel voor empathie in de social-media-omgeving) tot sociaal-economisch (op sites die flexwerk aanbieden moet je verschrikkelijk je best doen om een goede reputatie op te bouwen, waarna je voor een schijntje aan het werk gezet wordt).
Het geeft een goed beeld van de mogelijke kritiek die je kunt hebben op social media, maar geeft als enige en juiste alternatief: dumpen die accounts. Ik vraag me af of dat wel een realistisch standpunt is. En als je dan niet meedoet aan social media, zorg dan dat je in ieder geval een nette website hebt.
