ANDREW KEEN

Distributed technology does not necessarily lead to distributed economics.

Millions and millions of exuberant monkeys are creating an endless digital forest of mediocrity.

Being human in the digital world is about building a digital world for humans.

For many of these people the social is just a mirror of themselves. I'm not against the social, but I want something genuinely social, not something that has been fetishized as social so that a group of people can feel better about themselves.

We don't have a choice about Facebook any more. The choice element is less obvious than it seems. Maybe the 1bn poor people and a few hundred thousand rich people can afford not to be on it.. the rest of us don't have any choice.

Free services like Wikipedia I don't think benefit anyone - they don't benefit the professional because they're not paid.

There's a lot of ideology about "free", that we can have free services, free content, it's one of the reasons why the music industry which I defend has been decimated.

Zuckerberg wants to take us back to the dorm room where we all know each other. I don't want to, I want to go to the city.

Web 2.0 is a grand utopian movement. It worships the creative amateur: the self-taught filmmaker, the dorm-room musician, the unpublished writer. It suggests that everyone--even the most poorly educated and inarticulate amongst us--can and should use digital media to express and realize themselves. Web 2.0 "empowers" our creativity, it "democratizes" media, it "levels the playing field" between experts and amateurs. The enemy of Web 2.0 is "elitist" traditional media.

We have to move away from the entirely ad-supported business because the needs of it means that it has to keep driving into privacy, and that's not good for anyone because we all need to have something about us that is secret from some people.

Distributed technology does not necessarily lead to distributed economics.

Web 2.0 is a grand utopian movement. It worships the creative amateur: the self-taught filmmaker, the dorm-room musician, the unpublished writer. It suggests that everyone--even the most poorly educated and inarticulate amongst us--can and should use digital media to express and realize themselves. Web 2.0 "empowers" our creativity, it "democratizes" media, it "levels the playing field" between experts and amateurs. The enemy of Web 2.0 is "elitist" traditional media.

We don't have a choice about Facebook any more. The choice element is less obvious than it seems. Maybe the 1bn poor people and a few hundred thousand rich people can afford not to be on it.. the rest of us don't have any choice.

We don't live in the old world. But I don't want everyone to know what I've done. We all know every kind of example we could throw out there. The world we see online is very spiteful, we all know about people who have had bad stories thrown at them. If we were more generous I might be more happy about the reputation economy.

Millions and millions of exuberant monkeys are creating an endless digital forest of mediocrity.

Free services like Wikipedia I don't think benefit anyone - they don't benefit the professional because they're not paid.

For many of these people the social is just a mirror of themselves. I'm not against the social, but I want something genuinely social, not something that has been fetishized as social so that a group of people can feel better about themselves.

We have to move away from the entirely ad-supported business because the needs of it means that it has to keep driving into privacy, and that's not good for anyone because we all need to have something about us that is secret from some people.

There's a lot of ideology about "free", that we can have free services, free content, it's one of the reasons why the music industry which I defend has been decimated.

Being human in the digital world is about building a digital world for humans.

Zuckerberg wants to take us back to the dorm room where we all know each other. I don't want to, I want to go to the city.

The key relationships in the future will not be between people, but between machines and people.