You are not a gadget

In the article "You are not a gadget" Jaron Lanier talks about the digital revolution, specific in the 21 century. He is talking about how wrong we act with the things we do related to the internet an social networks.

In my view the article has some good and correct aspects, for example that sentence:

"Communication is now often experienced as a superhuman phenomenon that towers above individuals."

I agree completely with that point, though there are some things that contradicts with each other. The point which confused me in that context most is, that first he sais:

"“What is a person?” If I knew the answer to that, I might be able to program an artificial person in a computer. But I can’t."

He sais that he has no idea what a person is, i can understand him. But saying that, does he really has the right, if he doesnt even know how a person exactly "works", to say what they should or shouldnt do or even: "You have to be somebody before you can share yourself."

That somebody, it is a person, isn't it? So how, if he not even know what a person is, how can he now it that person is "somebody"?

In that point I completely disagree with him, I think it is a completely not objectiv way to say it, his statement is very very superficial. Maybe for me a person has so much importance, he is "somebody" for me, during another is completely disinterested in him.

At least I can say that I dont think you have to be somebody to share yourself.

"somebody". Do all the famous people were born famous? All the Youtuber, when they started, have they been already famous? I'm afraid not. When they started sharing there videos, thereselves, they were (in the perspective of him) nobodies, And now, some of them are famous, they are "somebody".