The goal of privacy is not to protect some stable self from erosion but to create boundaries where this self can emerge, mutate, and stabilize.

In reality, though, control and centralization are not inherently antithetical to innovation; if we have come to believe the opposite, then "the Internet" is partly to blame.

We must not fixate on what this new arsenal of digital technologies allows us to do without first inquiring what is worth doing.

If Amazon’s dream of a world without gatekeepers becomes reality, then the company itself will become a powerful gatekeeper.

Information technology has been one of the leading drivers of globalization, and it may also become one of its major victims.

It's true that virtually all new technologies do trigger what sociologists would call 'moral panics,' that there are a lot of people who are concerned with the possible political and social consequences, and that this has been true throughout the ages.

The message I'm trying to send is that technology is political, and that many decisions that look like decisions about technology actually are not at all about technology - they are about politics, and they need to be scrutinized as closely as we would scrutinize decisions about politics.

As smart technologies become more intrusive, they risk undermining our autonomy by suppressing behaviors that someone somewhere has deemed undesirable.

I worry that as the problem-solving power of our technologies increases, our ability to distinguish between important and trivial or even non-existent problems diminishes.