Paulina Borsook’s Cyberselfish: A Timely Revival

Paulina Borsook and the Revival of Cyberselfish

Paulina Borsook was a writer for Wired magazine during the 1990s. In her 2000 book, Cyberselfish: A Critical Romp Through the Terribly Libertarian Culture of High-Tech, she expressed concern about the influence of libertarian ideas in the tech world. She believed these ideas had significant effects on society as we moved into the new millennium. Recently, the New York Times noted a renewed interest in her work, suggesting that her ideas are once again gaining attention.

The Hard-to-Find Cyberselfish

One sign that Borsook’s work is being rediscovered is how hard it is to find used copies of Cyberselfish. Borsook mentioned on the podcast Nerd Reich that the interest in her book has made it difficult to find in the second-hand market. As of now, it seems that you can’t easily locate it on websites like AbeBooks or Amazon.

Access to Cyberselfish

Interestingly, Cyberselfish is available to read online for free. This accessibility highlights a benefit that many people overlook. While tech companies often face criticism, they also provide widespread access to cultural resources. However, for an author like Borsook, this means she doesn’t earn royalties from her work.

Borsook’s Concerns About Tech Today

Borsook has some valid complaints about today’s tech culture. On the Nerd Reich podcast and in the New York Times article, she voiced concerns about empathy being seen as a weakness and how surveillance capitalism is now a common business practice. She also pointed out that the environmental effects of artificial intelligence are often ignored.

Wealth Disparities in Tech

Another issue Borsook highlights is the concentration of wealth among tech leaders. She finds this troubling, especially since many tech companies thrive on government-funded resources. Borsook was surprised to discover that not everyone in the tech scene shared her liberal views during her time at Wired.

Misunderstanding Libertarianism

In her critiques, Borsook seems to struggle with understanding libertarianism. In a past review, I noted that she didn’t grasp the main issues that libertarians discuss, like drug laws or education. Instead, she appeared to view libertarianism through a limited lens, missing the deeper economic and philosophical arguments behind it.

Spontaneous Order vs. Engineering Mindset

Borsook argues that libertarianism appeals to engineers’ desire for control, but this view misrepresents libertarian ideas. The concept of “spontaneous order” in libertarian thought suggests that social systems can organize themselves without central planning. This is quite different from the engineering mindset that assumes there is one best solution to problems.

Critiques of Big Tech

The main issue with Borsook’s critiques is that they often fail to connect with the libertarian influence she claims is present in the tech industry. Many of her complaints, such as the troubling alliance between tech leaders and political figures, stem from broader issues in society rather than a specific libertarian agenda.

Public Choices and Tech Impact

It’s essential to recognize that many problems associated with Big Tech arise from choices made by the public. Yes, tech companies influence culture with their algorithms, but users also play a role in how they engage with these platforms. Borsook’s perspective doesn’t fully capture the complexities of this relationship.

Borsook’s Legacy and Current Relevance

While Borsook was ahead of her time in criticizing Big Tech, her arguments are not as groundbreaking as some may believe. The recent resurgence of interest in her work shows that misunderstandings about libertarianism continue to persist. Many people who rally behind her ideas do so without fully grasping what libertarianism entails.

Final Thoughts on the Cyberselfish Revival

Borsook’s insights may resonate with many today, but they often reflect a broader discomfort with anti-government sentiments. As conversations about technology and society evolve, it’s crucial to engage with these ideas more deeply, rather than relying on simplistic critiques. A revival of Borsook’s work might bring attention to important discussions, but it should also challenge us to think more critically about the ideas we support.