What do you think?
Rate this book
Futureproof: 9 Rules for Humans in the Age of Automation
A New York Times bestselling author and tech columnist's counter-intuitive guide to staying relevant - and employable - in the machine age by becoming irreplaceably human.
It's not a future scenario any more. We've been taught that to compete with automation and AI, we'll have to become more like the machines themselves, building up technical skills like coding. But, there's simply no way to keep up. What if all the advice is wrong? And what do we need to do instead to become futureproof?
We tend to think of automation as a blue-collar phenomenon that will affect truck drivers, factory workers, and other people with repetitive manual jobs. But it's much, much broader than that. Lawyers are being automated out of existence. Last year, JPMorgan Chase built a piece of software called COIN, which uses machine learning to review complicated contracts and documents. It used to take the firm's lawyers more than 300,000 hours every year to review all of those documents. Now, it takes a few seconds, and requires just one human to run the program. Doctors are being automated out of existence, too. Last summer, a Chinese tech company built a deep learning algorithm that diagnosed brain cancer and other diseases faster and more accurately than a team of 15 top Chinese doctors.
Kevin Roose has spent the past few years studying the question of how people, communities, and organisations adapt to periods of change, from the Industrial Revolution to the present. And the insight that is sweeping through Silicon Valley as we speak -- that in an age dominated by machines, it's human skills that really matter - is one of the more profound and counter-intuitive ideas he's discovered. It's the antidote to the doom-and-gloom worries many people feel when they think about AI and automation. And it's something everyone needs to hear.
In nine accessible, prescriptive chapters, Roose distills what he has learned about how we will survive the future, that the way to become futureproof is to become incredibly, irreplaceably human.
It's not a future scenario any more. We've been taught that to compete with automation and AI, we'll have to become more like the machines themselves, building up technical skills like coding. But, there's simply no way to keep up. What if all the advice is wrong? And what do we need to do instead to become futureproof?
We tend to think of automation as a blue-collar phenomenon that will affect truck drivers, factory workers, and other people with repetitive manual jobs. But it's much, much broader than that. Lawyers are being automated out of existence. Last year, JPMorgan Chase built a piece of software called COIN, which uses machine learning to review complicated contracts and documents. It used to take the firm's lawyers more than 300,000 hours every year to review all of those documents. Now, it takes a few seconds, and requires just one human to run the program. Doctors are being automated out of existence, too. Last summer, a Chinese tech company built a deep learning algorithm that diagnosed brain cancer and other diseases faster and more accurately than a team of 15 top Chinese doctors.
Kevin Roose has spent the past few years studying the question of how people, communities, and organisations adapt to periods of change, from the Industrial Revolution to the present. And the insight that is sweeping through Silicon Valley as we speak -- that in an age dominated by machines, it's human skills that really matter - is one of the more profound and counter-intuitive ideas he's discovered. It's the antidote to the doom-and-gloom worries many people feel when they think about AI and automation. And it's something everyone needs to hear.
In nine accessible, prescriptive chapters, Roose distills what he has learned about how we will survive the future, that the way to become futureproof is to become incredibly, irreplaceably human.
230 pages, Kindle Edition
First published January 12, 2021
414 people are currently reading
7498 people want to read
About the author
Kevin Roose
6 books334 followersKevin Roose is an award-winning technology columnist for The New York Times, and the New York Times bestselling author of three books: Futureproof, Young Money, and The Unlikely Disciple.
He is the host of “Rabbit Hole,” a New York Times-produced podcast about internet culture, and a regular guest on “The Daily,” as well as other leading TV and radio shows. He writes and speaks regularly on many topics, including automation and A.I., social media, disinformation and cybersecurity, and digital wellness.
Before joining The Times, he was a writer at New York magazine, and a host and executive producer of "Real Future," a documentary TV series about technology and innovation.
He lives in the Bay Area.
He is the host of “Rabbit Hole,” a New York Times-produced podcast about internet culture, and a regular guest on “The Daily,” as well as other leading TV and radio shows. He writes and speaks regularly on many topics, including automation and A.I., social media, disinformation and cybersecurity, and digital wellness.
Before joining The Times, he was a writer at New York magazine, and a host and executive producer of "Real Future," a documentary TV series about technology and innovation.
He lives in the Bay Area.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 280 reviews
April 2, 2021
I greatly enjoyed 80% of this book. It's a nicely balanced examination of current thinking on automation. I worked at Automation Anywhere, one of the companies talked about in the book, and agree with the author that the optimistic pablum dished up by "visionary" founders seems served to disguise the reality of what we're talking about when we discuss automating work.
The 20% I didn't like: some of the suggestions (posed as "rules" for futureproofing oneself) won't age well, and some feel like less sophisticated responses than other authors on the matter of digital detoxing (see Shoshanna Zhuboff and Cal Newport for more thoughtful takes).
The 20% I didn't like: some of the suggestions (posed as "rules" for futureproofing oneself) won't age well, and some feel like less sophisticated responses than other authors on the matter of digital detoxing (see Shoshanna Zhuboff and Cal Newport for more thoughtful takes).
August 25, 2022
Ah, well! Another dystopian book about the rise of AI and Automation? Another catastrophic take on rise of automation? I was intrigued by the title, by it's reviews, and by the credibility of Kevin Roose.
I appreciate how well this book is written and researched (of course, what else did you expect?). Kevin talks about all the nuanced ways automation is changing the world. The book doesn't focus mainly on the ambitious challenges that Big Tech is taking up to change the world - through self-driving cars, Amazon Go stores, etc. It focuses on the big, the small, and the hidden ways that automation is changing the world.
It's not an alarmist take on automation and convincing policy makers to pass regulations favoring UBI or automation-tax. It's a realist take on accepting that automation will change your life, displace you, even, and how you can help yourself and your communities be ready for this.
Futureproof is an interesting book for me personally. I come from a long lineage for tailors, a profession that has been displaced thoroughly through textile industrialization and then gradual cultural change in India towards western fashion. I see the struggle first-hand that all my relatives face actively of a scarcity of customers and to re-skill themselves for other opportunities. Most of them have moved from tier 1 cities to more tier 3 cities where the rent is low, food is cheap, and customers exist.
My Dad switched to automobile part sales and some of my relatives followed him to that path. They've enjoyed a financial stability that the ones who didn't make the switch couldn't. Now with the increase in EV sales increasing (require less maintenance, fewer moving parts, good for the environment), all of their jobs will be displaced. Some of them have children old and stable enough to take care of them while many don't. I see the fear of that uncertainty in their eyes.
On the other hand, I work for Big Tech in Silicon Valley. I enjoy a financial stability that nobody in my family tree ever had the luxury to experience. I work on technologies that make humans an "endpoint" while they're actively being automated away by my peers in other teams.
It's an interesting juxtaposition that causes me dilemma. It's the reason why I read this book.
Honestly, I found some really good insights to help myself, a person with a higher ed degree, who reads 50 books a year and can fairly easily reskill himself. Does this book have insights to help the lower-income citizens of the world better prepare for a future? I don't know. I don't think so. But it does serve a certain important purpose.
Kevin talks about how the techno-optimists talk about "automation takes away jobs but it creates new jobs. He dismisses their optimism with data about how this has a lag period, Engels’s Pause. It's the duration between rise in profits/GDP from automation and the working class seeing an increase in their own paychecks.
It's the same phenomenon that the world is going through right now. Corporate profits are rising - Apple went from a 125bn to a 2.5tn company, Amazon from ~100bn to 1.4tn, etc since 2010 - but the wages of the working class hasn't risen appropriately. I have close friends who work in the medical industry as EMT in Silicon Valley. They get paid pretty close to minimum wage in an area where the median rent is $2730 which went up by 40% from a year ago while they as "essential workers" were out in the streets actively taking care of COVID patients.
So yeah, so much for automation improving the lives of the working class.
Although the book doesn't highlight emotional cost of displacement or public policy change recommendations, it does highlight all the little ways in which automation is changing lives and that policymakers and business owners care about increasing profits.
What does the book offer then?
I can't speak for what it offers to everyone. Personally, I shows me a mirror. A software engineer working for Big Tech in Silicon Valley. It shows me the cost of automation. It shows me the impact that automation has on the world. It shows me how true and prescient Marc was when he said, "software is eating the world."
For me, his book is a call to action. Don't throw your hands up in the air and give up. If you can, actively work towards a future that works for everyone.
So, I have a lot of reflection to do.
I appreciate how well this book is written and researched (of course, what else did you expect?). Kevin talks about all the nuanced ways automation is changing the world. The book doesn't focus mainly on the ambitious challenges that Big Tech is taking up to change the world - through self-driving cars, Amazon Go stores, etc. It focuses on the big, the small, and the hidden ways that automation is changing the world.
It's not an alarmist take on automation and convincing policy makers to pass regulations favoring UBI or automation-tax. It's a realist take on accepting that automation will change your life, displace you, even, and how you can help yourself and your communities be ready for this.
Futureproof is an interesting book for me personally. I come from a long lineage for tailors, a profession that has been displaced thoroughly through textile industrialization and then gradual cultural change in India towards western fashion. I see the struggle first-hand that all my relatives face actively of a scarcity of customers and to re-skill themselves for other opportunities. Most of them have moved from tier 1 cities to more tier 3 cities where the rent is low, food is cheap, and customers exist.
My Dad switched to automobile part sales and some of my relatives followed him to that path. They've enjoyed a financial stability that the ones who didn't make the switch couldn't. Now with the increase in EV sales increasing (require less maintenance, fewer moving parts, good for the environment), all of their jobs will be displaced. Some of them have children old and stable enough to take care of them while many don't. I see the fear of that uncertainty in their eyes.
On the other hand, I work for Big Tech in Silicon Valley. I enjoy a financial stability that nobody in my family tree ever had the luxury to experience. I work on technologies that make humans an "endpoint" while they're actively being automated away by my peers in other teams.
It's an interesting juxtaposition that causes me dilemma. It's the reason why I read this book.
Honestly, I found some really good insights to help myself, a person with a higher ed degree, who reads 50 books a year and can fairly easily reskill himself. Does this book have insights to help the lower-income citizens of the world better prepare for a future? I don't know. I don't think so. But it does serve a certain important purpose.
Kevin talks about how the techno-optimists talk about "automation takes away jobs but it creates new jobs. He dismisses their optimism with data about how this has a lag period, Engels’s Pause. It's the duration between rise in profits/GDP from automation and the working class seeing an increase in their own paychecks.
After the onset of the Industrial Revolution in the 1760s, for example, Britain’s gross domestic product and corporate profits soared almost immediately, but it took more than fifty years, by some estimates, for the real wages of British workers to rise. (This gap, which was described by Friedrich Engels in “The Condition of the Working Class in England,” is known among economists as “Engels’s Pause.”)
It's the same phenomenon that the world is going through right now. Corporate profits are rising - Apple went from a 125bn to a 2.5tn company, Amazon from ~100bn to 1.4tn, etc since 2010 - but the wages of the working class hasn't risen appropriately. I have close friends who work in the medical industry as EMT in Silicon Valley. They get paid pretty close to minimum wage in an area where the median rent is $2730 which went up by 40% from a year ago while they as "essential workers" were out in the streets actively taking care of COVID patients.
So yeah, so much for automation improving the lives of the working class.
Although the book doesn't highlight emotional cost of displacement or public policy change recommendations, it does highlight all the little ways in which automation is changing lives and that policymakers and business owners care about increasing profits.
...when the cameras and microphones were off, these executives weren’t talking about helping workers. They were fantasizing about getting rid of them completely.
What does the book offer then?
I can't speak for what it offers to everyone. Personally, I shows me a mirror. A software engineer working for Big Tech in Silicon Valley. It shows me the cost of automation. It shows me the impact that automation has on the world. It shows me how true and prescient Marc was when he said, "software is eating the world."
For me, his book is a call to action. Don't throw your hands up in the air and give up. If you can, actively work towards a future that works for everyone.
The Luddites earned their place in the history books by breaking their weaving machines, but they didn’t reverse the effects of industrialization...
I don’t judge people for wanting to unplug their devices and flee to the hills. And I’m certainly not opposed to adopting a balanced lifestyle that puts technology in its proper place. But technological abstinence is not the answer to our problems, and I believe that we have to engage with potentially harmful systems in order to influence their trajectory...
... The future is not a spectator sport, and AI is too important to be left to the billionaires and bot builders. We have to join the fight, too.
So, I have a lot of reflection to do.
February 6, 2022
Futureproof: 9 Rules for Humans in the Age of Automation isn’t one of those “technology is going to destroy the world” books — Kevin Roose loves technology and takes an honest look at how we’re using it today and our responsibility in how we choose to use it in the future. I also appreciated that this book is personal and conversational, relentlessly focused on people rather than just the technology. As Roose said, what so much of this comes down to is: "It's just people, deciding how to treat other people." It's a story of technology, but one of how it affects our lives and what we should do about it. If you love (or work in) tech and also want to think critically about it, pick this one up along with Digital Minimalism: Choosing a Focused Life in a Noisy World and Ten Arguments For Deleting Your Social Media Accounts Right Now.
January 10, 2023
3.5 star round up.
Futureproof is not about the 9 careers you should choose or nudge your kids to choose in order to be better equipped for the future of automation and AI. The book is divided into two parts. In part one, the author attempts to give a realistic assessment of what is the impact of automation and AI on the future job market, on our psyche and the society as a whole. When it comes to human vs machines, he believes he is a "suboptimist" -- not entirely an optimist but neither in total despair. In part two, he lists 9 rules that either should be built into public policies or we as individuals can follow.
AI and automation will create new jobs, but it won't be fast enough to replace the old ones, and the new jobs can not simply be filled by the displaced workers. In short, some people, perhaps a bigger and bigger portion of the population, will end up being left behind by new technologies. Well, this is not exactly news, is it? History tells that although each industrial revolution eventually brings better material goods to everyone, change is hard and the advancement in technology obviously doesn't benefit those who have already died during the transition. So, the author thinks measures are required to ease the painful transition. Is he an UBI advocate? He also thinks some automation/AI/algorithms should be avoided due to the sensitivity of the matter (re-offend rate of criminals, social benefit applications, etc...) and the algorithms' potential build-in biases. I agree that many American politicians are so backward in their understanding of new technologies that they are either clueless or totally over the top against it. Yet, those biased algorithms are not inherently so. Instead, They are reflecting the real life biases in the data gathered by real, possibly biased humans.
"In short, AI and automation certainly can improve our lives, but it is far from given that they will."
The author debunks the myth that AI and human team is better than AI or human alone. Apparently job titles do not make them robot-proof by default, but what matters is how we do in the job. Blue collar jobs that can be replaced by automation have already been replaced. Now it is the turn of white collar jobs and service jobs. The examples given are long distance truck drivers, middle managers, some types of doctors (such as radiologists), even fashion designers.
What AI can't do well (for now): highly creative jobs, jobs with high unpredictability (such as ER doctor and nurses), jobs requiring human to human interaction (such as psychologists).
The author says his mission is not teach you how to compete with machines on machines terms, i.e. learning to code, optimizing your life (why not?), pruning the personal inefficiency, but strengthening your uniquely human skills, so you are better equipped to do the things machines can't do. I find this statement strange: certainly learning how to code and learning how to strengthen my unique human skills are not against each other.
Futureproof is not about the 9 careers you should choose or nudge your kids to choose in order to be better equipped for the future of automation and AI. The book is divided into two parts. In part one, the author attempts to give a realistic assessment of what is the impact of automation and AI on the future job market, on our psyche and the society as a whole. When it comes to human vs machines, he believes he is a "suboptimist" -- not entirely an optimist but neither in total despair. In part two, he lists 9 rules that either should be built into public policies or we as individuals can follow.
AI and automation will create new jobs, but it won't be fast enough to replace the old ones, and the new jobs can not simply be filled by the displaced workers. In short, some people, perhaps a bigger and bigger portion of the population, will end up being left behind by new technologies. Well, this is not exactly news, is it? History tells that although each industrial revolution eventually brings better material goods to everyone, change is hard and the advancement in technology obviously doesn't benefit those who have already died during the transition. So, the author thinks measures are required to ease the painful transition. Is he an UBI advocate? He also thinks some automation/AI/algorithms should be avoided due to the sensitivity of the matter (re-offend rate of criminals, social benefit applications, etc...) and the algorithms' potential build-in biases. I agree that many American politicians are so backward in their understanding of new technologies that they are either clueless or totally over the top against it. Yet, those biased algorithms are not inherently so. Instead, They are reflecting the real life biases in the data gathered by real, possibly biased humans.
"In short, AI and automation certainly can improve our lives, but it is far from given that they will."
The author debunks the myth that AI and human team is better than AI or human alone. Apparently job titles do not make them robot-proof by default, but what matters is how we do in the job. Blue collar jobs that can be replaced by automation have already been replaced. Now it is the turn of white collar jobs and service jobs. The examples given are long distance truck drivers, middle managers, some types of doctors (such as radiologists), even fashion designers.
What AI can't do well (for now): highly creative jobs, jobs with high unpredictability (such as ER doctor and nurses), jobs requiring human to human interaction (such as psychologists).
The author says his mission is not teach you how to compete with machines on machines terms, i.e. learning to code, optimizing your life (why not?), pruning the personal inefficiency, but strengthening your uniquely human skills, so you are better equipped to do the things machines can't do. I find this statement strange: certainly learning how to code and learning how to strengthen my unique human skills are not against each other.
June 22, 2021
Why would you read a book on AI each year?
Because you want keep a watching eye on developments in that field and see how you can preserve a competitive edge in a world of rapid automation. And because it fascinating, both the tech in itself and the possible impact it has on what it means to be human.
Is that the only reason I do it? I think that might be bull 💩
I think the REAL reason is because I’m subconsciously terrified becoming unless.
📝 73% of US adults think that AI will eliminate more jobs than it creates. Only 23% was worried about losing their own job.
Almost all trucker interviewed dismissed the idea of being replaced by autonomous trucks:
“Computers taking this job is a pipe dream. No one can do what we do.”
Oh boy! The fallacy of everyone thinking they are above average could backfire big time. 😅
📝 Until 1987 disappearing jobs where replaced by new ones at a similar rate. This is not the case today according to MIT studies.
📝 “We’ve been here before and it turned out fine!”
Did it really? A lot of people faced quite serious consequences of previous technological revolutions; child labour in factories, the 24-7 work culture of recent years and it accompanying burnout and anxiety?
📝 “AI will make our jobs better by doing the boring parts for us”
What’s meant by better?! There is no proof for this. What has happened is that we are more stressed than ever. The effect of more efficient machinery is now affecting white collar workers. The same effect that we saw when machinery got faster and more reliable to in factories.
📝 “The Boomer Remover”:
an internal nickname for a AI project that would eliminate the need of overpaid middle management.
📝 “The Invisible Automation Problem”
It’s not the case that you will find a robot substitute sitting at your desk one morning when you get to work, and you get shown the door. The effects of automation are more sneaky.
🔹It’s pay cuts, and not hiring as many people as before.
🔸It’s downsizing because the company doesn’t perform as well as it used to, because a startup in Silicone Valley has figured out how to do something similar with less people.
🔹It’s an that gets app that keeps track on when parts on a plane needs replacement, and now old airplanes can be in service for longer, and less planes needs to be produced.
📝 “So-so automation”:
A name for system that don’t do wonders for productivity but only provide “so-so” improvements. They eliminate some jobs but are not adding enough value to society to create new ones.
An example of “so-so automation” is the self-checkout at the grocery store. It kinda works, but far from perfectly. It doesn’t make society more productive, it simply moves the effort to the consumer.
Instead of getting served by store clerks, we all work in a grocery store for 20 minutes each week....
📝 The Effort Heuristic:
People greatly prefer goods that have obvious human effort behind them. Put a human touch into what you do. That will postpone you robot replacement!
⭐️ TAKEAWAY:
Don’t be an end point!
If your job mostly involves moving information from one system to another. Get out! Get a job where you provide value through your judgment.
⚖️ VERDICT:
I really enjoyed this books focus on automation and how it provided some good insights on were its impact might occur—and why the robot takeover won’t manifest the way we might expect.
.
If you want to get a quick and practical update on the state of AI & automation then this is a good choice. Especially if you want some practical tips for how to future proof your career and postpone your robot replacement.
.
And yes; I still consider AI a cause for concern and a technology to keep an close eye on. 🤖 👀
.
⁉️What do you do for a living and how “future proof” do you estimate your line of work to be?⁉️
.
3/5
Because you want keep a watching eye on developments in that field and see how you can preserve a competitive edge in a world of rapid automation. And because it fascinating, both the tech in itself and the possible impact it has on what it means to be human.
Is that the only reason I do it? I think that might be bull 💩
I think the REAL reason is because I’m subconsciously terrified becoming unless.
📝 73% of US adults think that AI will eliminate more jobs than it creates. Only 23% was worried about losing their own job.
Almost all trucker interviewed dismissed the idea of being replaced by autonomous trucks:
“Computers taking this job is a pipe dream. No one can do what we do.”
Oh boy! The fallacy of everyone thinking they are above average could backfire big time. 😅
📝 Until 1987 disappearing jobs where replaced by new ones at a similar rate. This is not the case today according to MIT studies.
📝 “We’ve been here before and it turned out fine!”
Did it really? A lot of people faced quite serious consequences of previous technological revolutions; child labour in factories, the 24-7 work culture of recent years and it accompanying burnout and anxiety?
📝 “AI will make our jobs better by doing the boring parts for us”
What’s meant by better?! There is no proof for this. What has happened is that we are more stressed than ever. The effect of more efficient machinery is now affecting white collar workers. The same effect that we saw when machinery got faster and more reliable to in factories.
📝 “The Boomer Remover”:
an internal nickname for a AI project that would eliminate the need of overpaid middle management.
📝 “The Invisible Automation Problem”
It’s not the case that you will find a robot substitute sitting at your desk one morning when you get to work, and you get shown the door. The effects of automation are more sneaky.
🔹It’s pay cuts, and not hiring as many people as before.
🔸It’s downsizing because the company doesn’t perform as well as it used to, because a startup in Silicone Valley has figured out how to do something similar with less people.
🔹It’s an that gets app that keeps track on when parts on a plane needs replacement, and now old airplanes can be in service for longer, and less planes needs to be produced.
📝 “So-so automation”:
A name for system that don’t do wonders for productivity but only provide “so-so” improvements. They eliminate some jobs but are not adding enough value to society to create new ones.
An example of “so-so automation” is the self-checkout at the grocery store. It kinda works, but far from perfectly. It doesn’t make society more productive, it simply moves the effort to the consumer.
Instead of getting served by store clerks, we all work in a grocery store for 20 minutes each week....
📝 The Effort Heuristic:
People greatly prefer goods that have obvious human effort behind them. Put a human touch into what you do. That will postpone you robot replacement!
⭐️ TAKEAWAY:
Don’t be an end point!
If your job mostly involves moving information from one system to another. Get out! Get a job where you provide value through your judgment.
⚖️ VERDICT:
I really enjoyed this books focus on automation and how it provided some good insights on were its impact might occur—and why the robot takeover won’t manifest the way we might expect.
.
If you want to get a quick and practical update on the state of AI & automation then this is a good choice. Especially if you want some practical tips for how to future proof your career and postpone your robot replacement.
.
And yes; I still consider AI a cause for concern and a technology to keep an close eye on. 🤖 👀
.
⁉️What do you do for a living and how “future proof” do you estimate your line of work to be?⁉️
.
3/5
August 2, 2021
Futureproof offers a nuanced exploration of automation in a way that threads the needle between anti and pro-automation views and between techno-optimism and techno-pessimism. Roose's nine rules are thoughtful, sound advice, and well-argued. What detracted from this book were the unnecessary and repeated woke invocations. You can only inject white privilege, race, racism, and [insert NPR's style guide] so many times in a book about technology before it becomes contrived and ridiculous. We get it, you're one of the good ones, Kevin. 3/5
Read
November 16, 2021Deformación: Una propuesta.
En este libro, Kevin Roose presenta nueve maneras de cómo no volverse un humano obsoleto en la era de la inteligencia artificial. Voy a empezar este manifiesto demente con una muestra de mezquindad: Roose me parece un escritor competente y hasta talentoso, pero su prosa sufre de tener que ser prosa periodística. Es esto lo que Sillicon Valley piensa que es la "escritura creativa"? (Roose comenta en el libro que intenta añadir bromas a sus textos para evitar que una máquina como GPT-3 lo vuelva obsoleto, y le quiero decir que sí, mi vida -- esos chistes son lo último en lo que piensas. Podría escribirlos yo? No. Me dan risa? Tampoco). Más generalmente, su prosa sufre de lo que sufren la mayoría de escritores del Times: en un intento de apelar a la mayor cantidad de lectores posibles, pierde todo lo que la hace única. Le pasa a Roose, cuya escritura es simple y simpática pero tiene el sabor, la textura y el color del pollo hervido. (Le pasa a mi amada Andrea Long Chu que escribía esos ensayos tan bellos en n+1 y ahora que escribe para el Times -- bueno).
Pero no vengo a quejarme del estilo del libro. Ni de la tesis. Creo que algunas de sus sugerencias son útiles, otras no. Creo que Roose se enfrenta a una situación difícil: cada una de sus oraciones podría haber sido un libro entero -- de hecho, probablemente muchas de ellas lo son. Este tema es tan denso que es complicado producir un resumen periodístico efectivo; es difícil condensar en un acróstico rimado las lecciones que debemos aprender del cambio industrial más importante de los últimos mil años. Más allá de eso, no tengo ni la habilidad ni el interés en retar a Roose basándome en hechos. Lo que quiero hacer es rajar irracionalmente -- y rajar de un capítulo en particular: Rule 2, Resist machine drift.
La tesis del capítulo es: los algoritmos del internet nos están convirtiendo en personas menos individuales. Estamos agachando la cabeza, dejándonos arrastrar por la corriente, creyendo todo lo que el internet dice que somos. Roose discute brevemente la ética de estos algoritmos de recomendación basándose en citas dichas por sus creadores. Aquí una de 2017, de un ingeniero de Amazon:
“Every interaction should reflect who you are and what you like, and help you find what other people like you have already discovered. It should feel hollow and pathetic when you see something that’s obviously not you; do you not know me by now?”
Wow! Mátate. Por supuesto que no debemos dejar que nuestra humanidad se resuma a la serie de cosas que nos recomienda el algorimo. Pero Roose luego pregunta:
“Would you take that hike, wear that jacket, or loudly state that political position if there were no likes, views, or retweets hanging in the balance—if it was only about you, who you are, and what would bring you the most pleasure and fulfillment?”
Y yo estoy, bueno, fundamentalmente en contra de la idea que sí existe un hike, una chaqueta, una creencia política que sí sea capaz de resumir quienes somos. Roose parece estar de acuerdo con la idea de la cita del ingeniero de Amazon, pese a que desea presentar su libro como una alternativa a aquella forma de ver el mundo. El ingeniero cree que debe elegirlo una máquina, y el escritor cree que debes elegirlo tú, pero para ambos la conclusión es la misma: cada producto que consumes (cada elección que haces online) debe representar quién eres al fondo de tu alma y corazón.
Hacia finales del capítulo, Roose sugiere que una manera de contraarrestar el impacto que tienen estos algoritmos sobre nosotros es hacer una lista de nuestros gustos, creencias, y prioridades. Hemos de mantener esta lista con nosotros todo el tiempo para recordar a nuestro "core self", lo que nos permitirá permanecer únicos en la era de la automatización.
A esto respondo: qué hablas? El yo cambia. Al yo debe permitírsele cambiar. En tu intento de evitar que el internet tenga alguna influencia sobre tu identidad estás empleando una definición regresiva del yo que asume que existe una esencia verdadera e inmutable, como si eso fuera posible, como si eso fuera deseable. La verdad es que el internet es nuestro contexto; la verdad es que, al igual que nacer en Lima o en los 80 define nuestra personalidad, el internet --el lugar donde muchos de nosotros literalmente crecimos-- influye en quiénes somos. No intentaría identificar quién sería si no hubiera crecido en Perú; no voy a intentar identificar quién sería de haber crecido el internet. Es un ejercicio mental interesante, pero no me dice mucho sobre quién soy ahora, o sobre cómo vivir en el mundo en el que vivo. Pero si defines tu identidad en base a las cosas que consumes, por supuesto que este es un proyecto que te interesa. Si lo que consumes te representa, entonces debes buscar la mejor forma de representarte a tí mismo.
Lo que no es decir que el internet sea una fuerza completamente positiva. No, dios. Es una mierda y está llena de gente insoportable. Además, el internet potencialmente puede afectarnos más de lo que nos afectan otros factores ambientales (crecer en Lima o en los 80). Reconozco la influencia negativa de los algorimos en nosotros, pero de una manera que va más allá de gustos-valores-expresiones -- su influencia, tal vez, en nuestra experiencia personal del transcurso del tiempo. La manera en la que encauza nuestra experiencia del mundo. El internet puede producir una cierta perturbación en esa percepción, como un panel de cristal deformado por el calor. Por eso mi propuesta al problema que presenta Roose es distinta. Si él busca que nuestro yo verdadero sea legible más allá del algorimo, yo digo que tenemos que correr en la dirección opuesta. Es decir: tenemos que ser ilegibles.
La forma ideal de ser ilegible, por supuesto, es no existir. No te abras ninguna cuenta en un lugar de redes sociales. Desaparece del internet. Bórralo todo, anda a vivir a las montañas. Pero, si quieres ser una persona normal y responsable y divertida y si quieres vivir una vida mínimamente satisfactoria en la distopía neoliberal que es este mundo, recomiendo la segunda forma de ser ilegible: defórmate.
Miente. Sé incoherente. Di cosas en las que no crees. Di, ocasionalmente, cosas en las que crees, sólo para dejar de creerlas al día siguiente. Twittea cosas irrelevantes. Twittea cosas que no te importan. Twittea en la voz de gente que no eres. ¿Cómo era ese poema? "Practice resurrection." Desvarío: Comparte tu cuenta con otros usuarios. Con otros personajes. Destruye todo lo personalizado. Convierte las recomendaciones algorítmicas en cosas irrelevantes para tí.
Más importantemente, deja de esperar que otras personas te sean legibles. Deja de esperar que el instagram de alguien comunique si son cool o cringe o artsy o lo que sea. Deja de esperar que el internet te pueda revelar una verdad sobre cualquier otra persona. Estas cosas nunca serán capaces de representarnos: sugiero que abandonemos el proyecto por completo y aceptemos estas versiones deformes de nosotros mismos. De hecho, sugiero que las deformemos más: que las deformemos hasta que dejen de parecer rostros.
¿Pero no es el internet un lugar donde la autenticidad puede dar fruto a relaciones que nos hacen sentir bien? Si nos dedicamos a deformar nuestras identidades, ¿no estamos cediendo a la ironía, o al menos aceptando como inevitable el estar aislado del mundo, sin poder en realidad conectar con nadie online? No tengo espacio/ganas para responder a esta pregunta de manera adecuada, pero creo que, en primer lugar, esta no es una sugerencia contra la conexión humana o la autenticidad. Es una sugerencia contra la legibilidad del algoritmo. Es posible, me parece, ser legible a otros humanos pero no ser legible a los recommendation engines. Sería algo así como las mating calls que hacen ciertos pájaros -- ilegibles para nosotros, perfectamente comprensibles para los elegidos de sus especies.
(Y, tipo, también puedes usar Whatsapp. O sea. No todo tiene que ser en público.)
Esto puede parecer una sugerencia excesiva. Algún adulto real la aceptaría? La gente que necesita que su twitter sea LinkedIn? Personalmente quiero destruir LinkedIn, pero noten por favor que lo que estoy sugiriendo no es una lista de pasos; no estoy recomendando a nadie que comience a twittear links a uQuizes o que comience a producir memes a lo in.a.downward.spiral. No. Lo que quiero es volver a pensar la relación que hemos establecido entre el internet y la identidad, porque asumir que debe ser una línea directa, una relación 1:1, es una situación insostenible. Esta idea puede tomar muchas formas; no necesariamente tiene que verse como se ve ahora mismo, enraizada en comunidades de gente joven con, mmmmmmmmm, sensibilidades estilísticas fuera del mainstream. (Aunque, me gustaría añadir, el hecho que la ruptura más clara entre internet e "identidad real" la estén haciendo usuarios de internet jóvenes es un avance alentador). Precedentes históricos: el normcore en un extremo del espectro, el shitposting en el otro.
(Sé que el internet es un lugar joven y por eso nuestro lenguaje para hablar sobre él está tan limitado, pero qué frustrante tener que usar estas palabras (1) ridículas (2) en inglés para hablar sobre estas cosas).
Ciertas preguntas que se me vienen a la mente: ¿Cómo se ve esta elección cuando no se trata de postear, sino de comprar cosas en Amazon? (Acepta la recomendación del algoritmo; haz lo que habrías hecho antes del internet, y elige al azar; literalmente no compres nada, qué te pasa). ¿No es esto básicamente hacer trolling? (No. Expliqué eso hace tres párrafos; esto no es sobre la ironía o la crueldad. Además, quién chucha dice "trolling"? Será esto 2012?) No existe la posibilidad que estos retratos deformes ejerzan influencia sobre quienes somos en el mundo real? (Lol, no sé. Es eso posible? Es eso algo malo? Quién eres, realmente, en el "mundo real"?)
Roose sugiere la alternativa de toda la vida: "go offline." (Seré justa: también reconoce los límites del approach David Henry Thoreau). Pero algunos de nosotros no podemos ir offline. Y hoy, yo creo que los únicos acercamientos tolerables al problema de la identidad y el internet son la anulación completa (anonimato; cero cuentas; 4chan) o la identidad deforme. Definitivamente estoy sobrepensando esto; son las doce de la noche y estoy tambaleándome en esa línea que divide el cansancio y el burnout. Pero no he podido dejar de pensar en todo esto mientras leía este libro y ahora lo he escrito y queda acá, y ahora es problema de ustedes porque yo sólo voy a ir a dormir y a al fin olvidarme.
En este libro, Kevin Roose presenta nueve maneras de cómo no volverse un humano obsoleto en la era de la inteligencia artificial. Voy a empezar este manifiesto demente con una muestra de mezquindad: Roose me parece un escritor competente y hasta talentoso, pero su prosa sufre de tener que ser prosa periodística. Es esto lo que Sillicon Valley piensa que es la "escritura creativa"? (Roose comenta en el libro que intenta añadir bromas a sus textos para evitar que una máquina como GPT-3 lo vuelva obsoleto, y le quiero decir que sí, mi vida -- esos chistes son lo último en lo que piensas. Podría escribirlos yo? No. Me dan risa? Tampoco). Más generalmente, su prosa sufre de lo que sufren la mayoría de escritores del Times: en un intento de apelar a la mayor cantidad de lectores posibles, pierde todo lo que la hace única. Le pasa a Roose, cuya escritura es simple y simpática pero tiene el sabor, la textura y el color del pollo hervido. (Le pasa a mi amada Andrea Long Chu que escribía esos ensayos tan bellos en n+1 y ahora que escribe para el Times -- bueno).
Pero no vengo a quejarme del estilo del libro. Ni de la tesis. Creo que algunas de sus sugerencias son útiles, otras no. Creo que Roose se enfrenta a una situación difícil: cada una de sus oraciones podría haber sido un libro entero -- de hecho, probablemente muchas de ellas lo son. Este tema es tan denso que es complicado producir un resumen periodístico efectivo; es difícil condensar en un acróstico rimado las lecciones que debemos aprender del cambio industrial más importante de los últimos mil años. Más allá de eso, no tengo ni la habilidad ni el interés en retar a Roose basándome en hechos. Lo que quiero hacer es rajar irracionalmente -- y rajar de un capítulo en particular: Rule 2, Resist machine drift.
La tesis del capítulo es: los algoritmos del internet nos están convirtiendo en personas menos individuales. Estamos agachando la cabeza, dejándonos arrastrar por la corriente, creyendo todo lo que el internet dice que somos. Roose discute brevemente la ética de estos algoritmos de recomendación basándose en citas dichas por sus creadores. Aquí una de 2017, de un ingeniero de Amazon:
“Every interaction should reflect who you are and what you like, and help you find what other people like you have already discovered. It should feel hollow and pathetic when you see something that’s obviously not you; do you not know me by now?”
Wow! Mátate. Por supuesto que no debemos dejar que nuestra humanidad se resuma a la serie de cosas que nos recomienda el algorimo. Pero Roose luego pregunta:
“Would you take that hike, wear that jacket, or loudly state that political position if there were no likes, views, or retweets hanging in the balance—if it was only about you, who you are, and what would bring you the most pleasure and fulfillment?”
Y yo estoy, bueno, fundamentalmente en contra de la idea que sí existe un hike, una chaqueta, una creencia política que sí sea capaz de resumir quienes somos. Roose parece estar de acuerdo con la idea de la cita del ingeniero de Amazon, pese a que desea presentar su libro como una alternativa a aquella forma de ver el mundo. El ingeniero cree que debe elegirlo una máquina, y el escritor cree que debes elegirlo tú, pero para ambos la conclusión es la misma: cada producto que consumes (cada elección que haces online) debe representar quién eres al fondo de tu alma y corazón.
Hacia finales del capítulo, Roose sugiere que una manera de contraarrestar el impacto que tienen estos algoritmos sobre nosotros es hacer una lista de nuestros gustos, creencias, y prioridades. Hemos de mantener esta lista con nosotros todo el tiempo para recordar a nuestro "core self", lo que nos permitirá permanecer únicos en la era de la automatización.
A esto respondo: qué hablas? El yo cambia. Al yo debe permitírsele cambiar. En tu intento de evitar que el internet tenga alguna influencia sobre tu identidad estás empleando una definición regresiva del yo que asume que existe una esencia verdadera e inmutable, como si eso fuera posible, como si eso fuera deseable. La verdad es que el internet es nuestro contexto; la verdad es que, al igual que nacer en Lima o en los 80 define nuestra personalidad, el internet --el lugar donde muchos de nosotros literalmente crecimos-- influye en quiénes somos. No intentaría identificar quién sería si no hubiera crecido en Perú; no voy a intentar identificar quién sería de haber crecido el internet. Es un ejercicio mental interesante, pero no me dice mucho sobre quién soy ahora, o sobre cómo vivir en el mundo en el que vivo. Pero si defines tu identidad en base a las cosas que consumes, por supuesto que este es un proyecto que te interesa. Si lo que consumes te representa, entonces debes buscar la mejor forma de representarte a tí mismo.
Lo que no es decir que el internet sea una fuerza completamente positiva. No, dios. Es una mierda y está llena de gente insoportable. Además, el internet potencialmente puede afectarnos más de lo que nos afectan otros factores ambientales (crecer en Lima o en los 80). Reconozco la influencia negativa de los algorimos en nosotros, pero de una manera que va más allá de gustos-valores-expresiones -- su influencia, tal vez, en nuestra experiencia personal del transcurso del tiempo. La manera en la que encauza nuestra experiencia del mundo. El internet puede producir una cierta perturbación en esa percepción, como un panel de cristal deformado por el calor. Por eso mi propuesta al problema que presenta Roose es distinta. Si él busca que nuestro yo verdadero sea legible más allá del algorimo, yo digo que tenemos que correr en la dirección opuesta. Es decir: tenemos que ser ilegibles.
La forma ideal de ser ilegible, por supuesto, es no existir. No te abras ninguna cuenta en un lugar de redes sociales. Desaparece del internet. Bórralo todo, anda a vivir a las montañas. Pero, si quieres ser una persona normal y responsable y divertida y si quieres vivir una vida mínimamente satisfactoria en la distopía neoliberal que es este mundo, recomiendo la segunda forma de ser ilegible: defórmate.
Miente. Sé incoherente. Di cosas en las que no crees. Di, ocasionalmente, cosas en las que crees, sólo para dejar de creerlas al día siguiente. Twittea cosas irrelevantes. Twittea cosas que no te importan. Twittea en la voz de gente que no eres. ¿Cómo era ese poema? "Practice resurrection." Desvarío: Comparte tu cuenta con otros usuarios. Con otros personajes. Destruye todo lo personalizado. Convierte las recomendaciones algorítmicas en cosas irrelevantes para tí.
Más importantemente, deja de esperar que otras personas te sean legibles. Deja de esperar que el instagram de alguien comunique si son cool o cringe o artsy o lo que sea. Deja de esperar que el internet te pueda revelar una verdad sobre cualquier otra persona. Estas cosas nunca serán capaces de representarnos: sugiero que abandonemos el proyecto por completo y aceptemos estas versiones deformes de nosotros mismos. De hecho, sugiero que las deformemos más: que las deformemos hasta que dejen de parecer rostros.
¿Pero no es el internet un lugar donde la autenticidad puede dar fruto a relaciones que nos hacen sentir bien? Si nos dedicamos a deformar nuestras identidades, ¿no estamos cediendo a la ironía, o al menos aceptando como inevitable el estar aislado del mundo, sin poder en realidad conectar con nadie online? No tengo espacio/ganas para responder a esta pregunta de manera adecuada, pero creo que, en primer lugar, esta no es una sugerencia contra la conexión humana o la autenticidad. Es una sugerencia contra la legibilidad del algoritmo. Es posible, me parece, ser legible a otros humanos pero no ser legible a los recommendation engines. Sería algo así como las mating calls que hacen ciertos pájaros -- ilegibles para nosotros, perfectamente comprensibles para los elegidos de sus especies.
(Y, tipo, también puedes usar Whatsapp. O sea. No todo tiene que ser en público.)
Esto puede parecer una sugerencia excesiva. Algún adulto real la aceptaría? La gente que necesita que su twitter sea LinkedIn? Personalmente quiero destruir LinkedIn, pero noten por favor que lo que estoy sugiriendo no es una lista de pasos; no estoy recomendando a nadie que comience a twittear links a uQuizes o que comience a producir memes a lo in.a.downward.spiral. No. Lo que quiero es volver a pensar la relación que hemos establecido entre el internet y la identidad, porque asumir que debe ser una línea directa, una relación 1:1, es una situación insostenible. Esta idea puede tomar muchas formas; no necesariamente tiene que verse como se ve ahora mismo, enraizada en comunidades de gente joven con, mmmmmmmmm, sensibilidades estilísticas fuera del mainstream. (Aunque, me gustaría añadir, el hecho que la ruptura más clara entre internet e "identidad real" la estén haciendo usuarios de internet jóvenes es un avance alentador). Precedentes históricos: el normcore en un extremo del espectro, el shitposting en el otro.
(Sé que el internet es un lugar joven y por eso nuestro lenguaje para hablar sobre él está tan limitado, pero qué frustrante tener que usar estas palabras (1) ridículas (2) en inglés para hablar sobre estas cosas).
Ciertas preguntas que se me vienen a la mente: ¿Cómo se ve esta elección cuando no se trata de postear, sino de comprar cosas en Amazon? (Acepta la recomendación del algoritmo; haz lo que habrías hecho antes del internet, y elige al azar; literalmente no compres nada, qué te pasa). ¿No es esto básicamente hacer trolling? (No. Expliqué eso hace tres párrafos; esto no es sobre la ironía o la crueldad. Además, quién chucha dice "trolling"? Será esto 2012?) No existe la posibilidad que estos retratos deformes ejerzan influencia sobre quienes somos en el mundo real? (Lol, no sé. Es eso posible? Es eso algo malo? Quién eres, realmente, en el "mundo real"?)
Roose sugiere la alternativa de toda la vida: "go offline." (Seré justa: también reconoce los límites del approach David Henry Thoreau). Pero algunos de nosotros no podemos ir offline. Y hoy, yo creo que los únicos acercamientos tolerables al problema de la identidad y el internet son la anulación completa (anonimato; cero cuentas; 4chan) o la identidad deforme. Definitivamente estoy sobrepensando esto; son las doce de la noche y estoy tambaleándome en esa línea que divide el cansancio y el burnout. Pero no he podido dejar de pensar en todo esto mientras leía este libro y ahora lo he escrito y queda acá, y ahora es problema de ustedes porque yo sólo voy a ir a dormir y a al fin olvidarme.
May 29, 2023
"This is the truth about the AI revolution. There is no looming machine takeover, no army of malevolent robots plotting to rise up and enslave us. It's just people, deciding what kind of society we want."
...although these people are those few who have the world's wealth in their avarice-prone head and hands.
In this AI age, it's no use competing with machines on areas it is exactly built for—automation and computing. The author says we humans thrive and get our rewards in this age by "strengthening our uniquely human skills, so [we] are better equipped to do the things machines can't do"; emphasizing our humanity, our human agency, leaving handprints on things we do.
However brief, the author's examples of his own futureproof plan at the end of the book is worth more as they translate what all his words in all the chapters are to tangible, practicable actions. I guess those and the quote above were all I needed. But, sure, I enjoyed some of the accompanying stories.
"It's important to support the people fighting for ethics and transparency inside our most powerful tech institutions by giving them ammunition in the form of tools, data, and emotional support."
...although these people are those few who have the world's wealth in their avarice-prone head and hands.
In this AI age, it's no use competing with machines on areas it is exactly built for—automation and computing. The author says we humans thrive and get our rewards in this age by "strengthening our uniquely human skills, so [we] are better equipped to do the things machines can't do"; emphasizing our humanity, our human agency, leaving handprints on things we do.
However brief, the author's examples of his own futureproof plan at the end of the book is worth more as they translate what all his words in all the chapters are to tangible, practicable actions. I guess those and the quote above were all I needed. But, sure, I enjoyed some of the accompanying stories.
"It's important to support the people fighting for ethics and transparency inside our most powerful tech institutions by giving them ammunition in the form of tools, data, and emotional support."
June 14, 2025
Very practical and largely obvious advice. The author raises salient points about technology but nothing that was revelatory or new to me.
June 2, 2024
This book feels surprisingly prescient, published in 2021 before the advent of LLMs created a seismic shift in the tech industry. I loved the writing style (Roose does a great job living up to his own principle to be human!), the attention paid to the human impact of past industrial revolutions, and the diversity of subjects that were interviewed. Roose takes a “suboptimist” position—whose honesty I appreciated, since I feel more often exposed to a rose-colored view—advancing that the AI revolution is probably not going to create jobs at the rate that they are displaced. He also calls out that displacement might not be as obvious as pop culture has led us to believe, pointing out, for example, that Kodak employees got automated out by Instagram/Facebook, not by any developments at their own company. Roose’s 9 principles to be future-proof are printed on the cover, which is pretty cool and worth a glance if you’re at all curious about the book. Lots of fascinating and thought-provoking content in here!
March 16, 2021
RPA is taking over the back-office of corporate America. I call it the new white-collar rust belt.
As an industry CPA with a background in Accounting and MIS, I feel comfortable with my technical skill set to navigate this new wave of automation but always want to be prepared. Make sure I am ahead of the curve and filling a spot that can’t be automated.
This book is less about career protection and more about the big picture reality of AI and its pervasive control of our lives.
I love the focus and using technology and not being used by technology. I was so moved by this book that I’ve deleted my Twitter account as it wastes my time and creates no value in my life. I am addicted to my phone and Twitter (I.e. social media) seems to be the gateway drug driving my phone addiction.
This is about finding balance with technology and using it rather than letting it use you.
I read this book over the span of a few days and recommend you do the same!
As an industry CPA with a background in Accounting and MIS, I feel comfortable with my technical skill set to navigate this new wave of automation but always want to be prepared. Make sure I am ahead of the curve and filling a spot that can’t be automated.
This book is less about career protection and more about the big picture reality of AI and its pervasive control of our lives.
I love the focus and using technology and not being used by technology. I was so moved by this book that I’ve deleted my Twitter account as it wastes my time and creates no value in my life. I am addicted to my phone and Twitter (I.e. social media) seems to be the gateway drug driving my phone addiction.
This is about finding balance with technology and using it rather than letting it use you.
I read this book over the span of a few days and recommend you do the same!
June 27, 2021
I’m pretty stingy with my 5-star reviews, but this book was an easy 5 for me. It’s rare that I find a book to be both an engaging page-turner and a source of intellectual curiosity and stimulation, but Futureproof was both for me. It has made me reconsider everything I thought I knew about my education, career path, device use, work ethic, and humanity. Whether you’re somewhat curious about AI or you’re just curious about your own future, I can’t recommend this book enough.
April 13, 2021
All my reviews live at https://deedispeaking.com/.
TL;DR REVIEW:
Interesting, approachable, and compelling, Futureproof was a pleasant surprise among this kind of nonfiction. It offers both moral and practical insights, and it reads quickly.
For you if: You love technology, but you also want to think critically about it.
FULL REVIEW:
It’s always refreshing to find general nonfiction books that offer more than an extended TED Talk. Futureproof was really well executed; it’s short and to the point, with compelling points and both moral and practical takeaways.
This isn’t one of those “technology is going to destroy the world” books — Kevin Roose, who loves technology, is here to take an honest look at how we’re using it today and our responsibility in how we choose to use it in the future. Technology can make the world better, or it can be used to exploit and harm, it’s up to us. In the first part of the book, he makes the case that today, corporations are doing mostly the latter under the guise of the former. He reminds us that industrial revolutions of the past were devastating for a lot of people in the moment and raises good questions about who will get left behind this time (will it be white guy engineers? probably not). That’s not to say we shouldn’t make technological progress — just that we have a responsibility to try to take care of people, not just profits, as we do. Roose also does a pretty good job, in my opinion, of pointing out issues of privilege along the way.
In the second part, Roose offers nine suggestions for how we can navigate the changing world as individuals — for example, resisting the ease of allowing algorithms to make choices for us, cultivating uniquely human skills, remembering that AI does not have morals; people do, and continuing to think critically about how tech is being applied. (I borrowed his suggestion to put a rubber band around my phone on days when I find myself mindlessly scrolling too much — it’s not a complete barrier, but introduces friction and helps me remember that I would rather not get sucked in today.)
You love (or work in) tech and also want to think critically about it, pick this one up.
TL;DR REVIEW:
Interesting, approachable, and compelling, Futureproof was a pleasant surprise among this kind of nonfiction. It offers both moral and practical insights, and it reads quickly.
For you if: You love technology, but you also want to think critically about it.
FULL REVIEW:
“Executives, not algorithms, decide whether to replace human workers. Regulators, not robots, decide what limits to place on emerging technologies like facial recognition and targeted digital advertising. The engineers building new forms of AI have a say in how those tools are designed, and users can decide whether these tools are morally acceptable or not.
This is the truth about the AI revolution. There is no looming machine takeover, no army of malevolent robots plotting to rise up and enslave us.
It’s just people, deciding what kind of society we want.”
It’s always refreshing to find general nonfiction books that offer more than an extended TED Talk. Futureproof was really well executed; it’s short and to the point, with compelling points and both moral and practical takeaways.
This isn’t one of those “technology is going to destroy the world” books — Kevin Roose, who loves technology, is here to take an honest look at how we’re using it today and our responsibility in how we choose to use it in the future. Technology can make the world better, or it can be used to exploit and harm, it’s up to us. In the first part of the book, he makes the case that today, corporations are doing mostly the latter under the guise of the former. He reminds us that industrial revolutions of the past were devastating for a lot of people in the moment and raises good questions about who will get left behind this time (will it be white guy engineers? probably not). That’s not to say we shouldn’t make technological progress — just that we have a responsibility to try to take care of people, not just profits, as we do. Roose also does a pretty good job, in my opinion, of pointing out issues of privilege along the way.
In the second part, Roose offers nine suggestions for how we can navigate the changing world as individuals — for example, resisting the ease of allowing algorithms to make choices for us, cultivating uniquely human skills, remembering that AI does not have morals; people do, and continuing to think critically about how tech is being applied. (I borrowed his suggestion to put a rubber band around my phone on days when I find myself mindlessly scrolling too much — it’s not a complete barrier, but introduces friction and helps me remember that I would rather not get sucked in today.)
You love (or work in) tech and also want to think critically about it, pick this one up.
March 15, 2022
It was sort of scary seeing how much AI impacts our lives. I thought this book was going to be more about futureproofing your job, but the rules cover all aspects of your life. Basically, be a human. Don't try to be a machine. An interesting read!
March 19, 2024
Ky liber me dha celesin per te hapur shume dyer te te ardhmes qe po na pret. Must read!
June 13, 2022
I really enjoyed reading Futureproof by Kevin Roose. I expected quite a boring read, but in addition to being useful and insightful, this was also a very entertaining read!
June 29, 2025
Future Proof: 9 Rules for Humans in the Age of Automation is a solid read in terms of narration. The author presents the material with nuance and backs up arguments with credible evidence, which makes the book trustworthy and easy to follow.
That said, the book didn’t offer many fresh insights or deep revelations. It felt more like a summary of well-known ideas rather than a groundbreaking perspective. Also, the ending left me wanting more—it wasn’t as inspiring or motivating as I hoped, especially given the importance of the topic.
Overall, it’s worth a read if you want a clear, evidence-based overview, but don’t expect it to change the way you think about the future of work. Don’t worry about wasting your time either because it’s a quick read (I read and annotated in 1 night). solid narration and credibility, but it could have been much more impactful.
Btw I’m trying to sound polite because this was required of us to read in AP lang and it was totally useless, so I’m very salty (I literally memorized quotes from this book).
That said, the book didn’t offer many fresh insights or deep revelations. It felt more like a summary of well-known ideas rather than a groundbreaking perspective. Also, the ending left me wanting more—it wasn’t as inspiring or motivating as I hoped, especially given the importance of the topic.
Overall, it’s worth a read if you want a clear, evidence-based overview, but don’t expect it to change the way you think about the future of work. Don’t worry about wasting your time either because it’s a quick read (I read and annotated in 1 night). solid narration and credibility, but it could have been much more impactful.
Btw I’m trying to sound polite because this was required of us to read in AP lang and it was totally useless, so I’m very salty (I literally memorized quotes from this book).
March 21, 2021
Disclaimer: Kevin's publisher sent me a copy of the book because he'll be appearing on my podcast Conversations About Collaboration.
I'll cop to being a smidge dubious about the premise of this book. After all, future-proofing seems like the pricey advice of a management-consulting form.
I'm pleased to admit that I misjudged the book based upon its title. Roose offers a number of valuable insights about how we can reassert our humanity in an increasingly AI-driven present—and future. What's more, he's clearly done his research. I jotted down a number of other books on the topic that he's read and synthesized into his thoughtful book. Beyond that, his tales of how others have dealt with comparable issues throughout history serve as instructive examples and entertaining yarns.
No, we'll never be able to outperform machines on certain things. Here's the good news: We'll have the advantage over them in many other critical areas for the foreseeable future. Roose's book serves as an invaluable reminder of that fact.
I'll cop to being a smidge dubious about the premise of this book. After all, future-proofing seems like the pricey advice of a management-consulting form.
I'm pleased to admit that I misjudged the book based upon its title. Roose offers a number of valuable insights about how we can reassert our humanity in an increasingly AI-driven present—and future. What's more, he's clearly done his research. I jotted down a number of other books on the topic that he's read and synthesized into his thoughtful book. Beyond that, his tales of how others have dealt with comparable issues throughout history serve as instructive examples and entertaining yarns.
No, we'll never be able to outperform machines on certain things. Here's the good news: We'll have the advantage over them in many other critical areas for the foreseeable future. Roose's book serves as an invaluable reminder of that fact.
April 19, 2021
If people like Kevin Roose were actually in control of AI development then I feel like the future would be much safer. This was an easy, informative read. I appriciated that the style of writing was accessable and explained the complex details in a way that was easy to understand. While Roose, was calm, rational and highly informed, I still finished the book feeling an intense surge of anxiety knowing that our capitalist society does tend to care more about money making than people and that this does not bode well for the development of AI going forward.
April 11, 2021
There are few books I would recommend everyone read, but this is one of them—both because the effects of AI are so consequential and far-reaching and because this author is so clearheaded and genuinely insightful about what we should be doing to live alongside smart machines.
April 28, 2021
The author, a NYT journalist on Technology matters, delves into the questions surfacing time and again about how AI and automaton has affected and is going to affect human lives. He presents a realistic picture of the issues from his perspective - neither very optimistic (like many pundits) nor a very pessimistic one. In my opinion, he addresses the issues head-on without tip-toeing on issues like loss of jobs and/or intent of various entrepreneurs and technology developers. He then recommends a set of steps to ensure that AI and automaton is harnessed for the benefit of human beings. These can be undertaken both at personal level as well as the level of the society and states. Highly recommended reading for someone with interest in and seeking answers to these issues.
January 19, 2023
Like many people who work in the "knowledge sector" and spent more than half an hour playing around with ChatGPT-3 over the holidays, I found myself in a bit of an existential crisis. Would I have a job in the future? What does it mean that an artificial intelligence can do in 30 seconds what takes me more than an hour?
Though released a year ago, Kevin Roose - a technology columnist for The New York Times - started having the exact same thoughts and wrote Futureproof: 9 Rules for Humans in the Age of Automation.
At less than 200 pages, Futureproof is a quick read packed with practical life and career advice as we stand on the cusp of an A.I. and automation revolution. Though not all the rules are related to keeping you employable (Roose admits that some of us may need to start planning an exit strategy now), there are a lot of really good observations about keeping hold of your humanity in a world that wants people to act more like machines.
Honestly, if you work in the knowledge sector (writing, finance, insurance, etc) or you're an "endpoint" (a job that basically asks you to transfer information from one system to another), I highly recommend Futureproof. It may not save your career, but it'll give you a leg up when the A.I. scythe comes swinging.
Though released a year ago, Kevin Roose - a technology columnist for The New York Times - started having the exact same thoughts and wrote Futureproof: 9 Rules for Humans in the Age of Automation.
At less than 200 pages, Futureproof is a quick read packed with practical life and career advice as we stand on the cusp of an A.I. and automation revolution. Though not all the rules are related to keeping you employable (Roose admits that some of us may need to start planning an exit strategy now), there are a lot of really good observations about keeping hold of your humanity in a world that wants people to act more like machines.
Honestly, if you work in the knowledge sector (writing, finance, insurance, etc) or you're an "endpoint" (a job that basically asks you to transfer information from one system to another), I highly recommend Futureproof. It may not save your career, but it'll give you a leg up when the A.I. scythe comes swinging.
February 28, 2023
We think of SkyNet not spreadsheets when think of robots taking control. That and other surprising insights about how to stay relevant and, more importantly, human-centered in a world increasingly dominated by AI and algorithms is what makes this a timely book. The chapter on machine-age humanities (like reading the room and practicing analog ethics) is a rallying call for anyone feeling hopeless about competing with technology that is good at some things but still bad at others.
February 20, 2023
For someone who knows next to nothing about technology and AI and feels a general sense of unease in regards to the technology of the future, this was an introduction that wasn’t too far over my head and gave me somewhat of a foundation but also did a good job of making this topic less scary and more approachable.
August 26, 2021
Definitely liked this one. The part 1 analysis is interesting, but the practical tips in part 2 are more fun to read and more likely to be what I remember. I particularly was struck by the notion of "machine drift" and how we simply lose track of what we actually like. Pretty scary.
February 2, 2022
This book is such a great read. While preparing us for what to expect in future, this book also gives us hope, shares ideas on how to make ourselves more valuable, save our careers and future from being taken away or controlled ruthlessly by robots.
May 30, 2023
Very readable and approachable, which I value in a book about AI. Lacks pretension and gives tangible examples and questions that helped me think about my own job through the lens of AI and what work in innately human, and what isn’t. Best part? Roose believes in the humanity arrow.
July 6, 2025
A really perceptive read into how we can ensure AI doesn’t destroy the humanness of humanity. I loved learning the term “suboptimist” - optimistic about the benefits of AI, but concerned about the ways companies and programmers can intentionally/unintentionally affect our world in a negative way through algorithm choices.
While it was published in 2021, I think the concepts still hold true even with all the AI advancements in the years since.
While it was published in 2021, I think the concepts still hold true even with all the AI advancements in the years since.
April 28, 2021
Highly recommend for a down to earth, accessible, thoughtful contemplation of the changes AI and automation bring to humanity. 9 rules for humans is not alarmist but is insightful and offers real things worth doing, and real recommendations about skill sets and strengths to pursue to participate in our increasingly automated reality.
May 27, 2021
Roose presents a very balanced view of AI and automation in our world. He is neither pro or con but rather is focused on how AI and automation directly impact us on a personal level. "It's easy to see how AI could tear us apart. But it's also easy to see how it could unite us." "But none of this will happen without us. The future is not a spectator sport, and AI is too important to be left to the billionaires and the bot builders." That pretty much sums it up. If you want to avoid becoming road kill on the AI super-highway, read this book.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 280 reviews