Player Piano
Player Piano is a novel by Kurt Vonnegut. It was his first novel, in fact, published in 1952. The main theme of the novel was the mechanization of society. It’s a good book, better than most in fact though not Vonnegut’s best work. It is however his most prescient work.
So what, right? Don't worry, this isn't a book report.
I was reminded of the novel this morning by a news story from yesterday’s Wall Street Journal that, rather inexplicably, has yet to explode on the internet. I received it as part of a subscription-only package of media-related news clips that arrive in my work inbox from the fine folks at SNL Kagan each day so I can’t provide a direct link but here’s the relevant headline and paragraph:
“Google reportedly turns to algorithm to retain top employees”
“The Wall Street Journal reported May 19 that the search giant is now using such a system to help predict which employees are most likely to quit. In particular, the tool is helping to identify which employees feel underused, which is a common problem cited among those who consider leaving for another company.”
This would normally be the point where I would mention how impossible it is to satirize real life in the 21st century because so much of it is already a satire of itself but I won’t bother with that now. It’s a cliché already. Instead I will mention that I think, perhaps, if Google put enough people to work on developing and refining the algorithm to identify underused employees then they won’t have any underused employees. I might also mention that it must be nice to work for a company where you can feel underused as opposed to 99% of the rest of us working slobs who feel overworked, under-titled, underpaid and absolutely certain The Company will throw us away like so much used toilet paper the millisecond they’ve squeezed every bit of utility out of our aging heads.
Of course the mechanization of society will continue unabated as long as more and more people continue spending their waking hours interacting with machines instead of each other. According to Nielsen’s quarterly “Three Screen Report” which I also received as an upstanding member of the media world, the roughly 285 million Americans who live in television households spend an average of 153 hours a month in the first quarter of 2009 watching TV in their own homes, a 1.2% increase over the same span in 2008. The 131 million Internet video watchers spent about 3 hours a month watching video on the web on top of their TV habit, up 13% over the same span in ‘08. Finally the sliver of folks (13.4 million) who consume video on their mobile devices spent about 3 ½ hours a month watching said video on the mobile devices a 52% increase over the first quarter of 2008.
None of this, by the way, counts any television viewing people did outside their home, i.e. while visiting other people or in bars and restaurants or airports or hotels or any public spaces.
What does one have to do with the other? Well, I have a sneaking suspicion that the more time we all spend with machines and also with fictionalized, two dimensional representations of actual human beings instead of spending time with human beings (either watching or interacting) the more like machines and caricatures we will all become. The more like machines and caricatures we become the more easily we are managed by algorithms. Those that don’t will likely be marginalized pushed to the outskirts of society. It is not far-fetched to see a future where the failure to conform to the algorithms is regarded as unpatriotic, even treasonous because the conformity will be needed to keep the engines of commerce running ever more efficiently since lack of conformity means one can’t be managed by an algorithm and dammit, it costs money to put a human in charge of something to observe and think.
How’s your algorithm doing today friends? Are you following your instructions? You’d better be. Or you’d better fake it. If you don’t know how just look on the Web or on the TV or on your smart phone. All the answers that you need can be provided by technology. It is a wonderful life here in the future.
So what, right? Don't worry, this isn't a book report.
I was reminded of the novel this morning by a news story from yesterday’s Wall Street Journal that, rather inexplicably, has yet to explode on the internet. I received it as part of a subscription-only package of media-related news clips that arrive in my work inbox from the fine folks at SNL Kagan each day so I can’t provide a direct link but here’s the relevant headline and paragraph:
“Google reportedly turns to algorithm to retain top employees”
“The Wall Street Journal reported May 19 that the search giant is now using such a system to help predict which employees are most likely to quit. In particular, the tool is helping to identify which employees feel underused, which is a common problem cited among those who consider leaving for another company.”
This would normally be the point where I would mention how impossible it is to satirize real life in the 21st century because so much of it is already a satire of itself but I won’t bother with that now. It’s a cliché already. Instead I will mention that I think, perhaps, if Google put enough people to work on developing and refining the algorithm to identify underused employees then they won’t have any underused employees. I might also mention that it must be nice to work for a company where you can feel underused as opposed to 99% of the rest of us working slobs who feel overworked, under-titled, underpaid and absolutely certain The Company will throw us away like so much used toilet paper the millisecond they’ve squeezed every bit of utility out of our aging heads.
Of course the mechanization of society will continue unabated as long as more and more people continue spending their waking hours interacting with machines instead of each other. According to Nielsen’s quarterly “Three Screen Report” which I also received as an upstanding member of the media world, the roughly 285 million Americans who live in television households spend an average of 153 hours a month in the first quarter of 2009 watching TV in their own homes, a 1.2% increase over the same span in 2008. The 131 million Internet video watchers spent about 3 hours a month watching video on the web on top of their TV habit, up 13% over the same span in ‘08. Finally the sliver of folks (13.4 million) who consume video on their mobile devices spent about 3 ½ hours a month watching said video on the mobile devices a 52% increase over the first quarter of 2008.
None of this, by the way, counts any television viewing people did outside their home, i.e. while visiting other people or in bars and restaurants or airports or hotels or any public spaces.
What does one have to do with the other? Well, I have a sneaking suspicion that the more time we all spend with machines and also with fictionalized, two dimensional representations of actual human beings instead of spending time with human beings (either watching or interacting) the more like machines and caricatures we will all become. The more like machines and caricatures we become the more easily we are managed by algorithms. Those that don’t will likely be marginalized pushed to the outskirts of society. It is not far-fetched to see a future where the failure to conform to the algorithms is regarded as unpatriotic, even treasonous because the conformity will be needed to keep the engines of commerce running ever more efficiently since lack of conformity means one can’t be managed by an algorithm and dammit, it costs money to put a human in charge of something to observe and think.
How’s your algorithm doing today friends? Are you following your instructions? You’d better be. Or you’d better fake it. If you don’t know how just look on the Web or on the TV or on your smart phone. All the answers that you need can be provided by technology. It is a wonderful life here in the future.
Comments
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ukeHdiszZmE
"I can give you my complete assurance that my work will be back to normal...."
"I'm afraid Dave"