Paulina Borsook’s Prescient Critique of Silicon Valley’s Techno-Libertarianism Resurfaces with New Edition of "Cyberselfish"

Books analyzing the rapidly evolving technology sector often struggle to remain relevant, quickly becoming outdated as companies and products rise and fall. However, a quarter-century after its initial publication, Paulina Borsook’s "Cyberselfish" is experiencing a remarkable resurgence, lauded for its uncanny foresight into the tech industry’s ideological underpinnings and subsequent trajectory. Originally released in 2000, the book’s critical examination of techno-libertarianism in Silicon Valley is now finding a new audience eager to understand the roots of the industry’s contemporary challenges and perceived moral failings.

The revival gained significant momentum last year when Gil Durán, author of "Nerd Reich," publicly championed Borsook, declaring that she "saw it all very clearly and tried to warn us 25 years ago." This endorsement was followed by a report in The New York Times, highlighting "Cyberselfish" as a crucial text for those seeking to comprehend how the tech industry "lost its way." Now, after years out of print, "Cyberselfish" is being reissued by Tin House, featuring a new introduction by Durán and Borsook herself.

In a recent interview, Borsook described "Cyberselfish" as "almost a travelogue," chronicling her attempts to decipher the pervasive techno-libertarian influence on Silicon Valley culture. She characterizes this ideology as a "12-year-old view of the world," a "basket of beliefs" that is "violently anti-regulation." Borsook starkly points out the hypocrisy inherent in this stance, noting that "no sector of society had benefited more and suffered less from the government than these guys." Even after the dot-com crash, she observed, this uncorrected attitude continued to "percolate around, contaminating the aquifers," spreading unchecked throughout the industry.

Borsook’s journey into critiquing tech culture began inadvertently in the early to mid-1980s in the Bay Area. By the early 1990s, she started hearing "very weird, offhand remarks" from tech figures that she couldn’t reconcile. Having grown up in Pasadena, home to Caltech-JPL, she was familiar with a different kind of STEM culture—one whose members, often government-funded scientists and engineers, held a clear understanding of the government’s supportive role and lacked the self-anointed grandiosity she later observed in Silicon Valley. These earlier STEM professionals were not driven by "enlightened self-interest" in the same way. Borsook, a keen listener, was puzzled by the emerging tech elite’s anti-government rhetoric, given their substantial reliance on public investment and infrastructure.

It was her literary agent, after her MFA at Columbia, who suggested she explore this "weird subculture" in a nonfiction book, recognizing her unique observational skills. Borsook embraced the project, feeling "uniquely qualified" to address an issue no one else seemed to be examining. While other prominent tech writers, such as Steven Levy, acknowledged a libertarian streak in Silicon Valley, Borsook’s work was distinct in its deep dive, putting this philosophy under a critical microscope rather than merely celebrating the industry’s innovations. In the 1990s, most narratives about tech were overwhelmingly celebratory, making Borsook’s critical stance particularly contrarian.

Borsook clarifies that Silicon Valley, in her view, is a "multicultural place," not in terms of ethnic origin, but in its diverse internal subcultures. She distinguishes between the "Ravers" and "Gilders"—terms coined in her book. The "Gilders," named after conservative thought leader George Gilder, represent the socially conservative, reactionary, and backward-looking elements within tech. In contrast, the "Ravers," a nod to countercultural figures like John Perry Barlow, embody a more culturally liberal ethos, associated with Burning Man, experimental lifestyles, and countercultural leanings. This distinction, she notes, remains relevant today, with "Christian nationalists and conservative Catholics in positions of leadership" coexisting alongside "Burners and people having interesting experimentations with sexuality and drugs" within the effective altruist and AI communities. Her focus is on this leadership class and its cultural impact, rather than the electoral politics of the largely blue-voting San Francisco peninsula. She also acknowledges the growing precarity of employment, which often compels rank-and-file workers to tolerate leadership views they may not share.

When asked to elaborate on why techno-libertarianism is detrimental, Borsook reiterates its "12-year-old view of the world" and its "violently anti-regulation" stance. She criticizes its flawed adoption of biological concepts, suggesting a naive belief that "things evolve and they will be fine" without intervention. This ideology, she argues, ignores the vast government subsidies and R&D that enabled the tech industry’s very existence. Citing the example of tech billionaires moving to Nevada to avoid California taxes, she mocks their complaints about California’s policies, especially when they enjoy the pristine environment of Lake Tahoe—an environment meticulously preserved by "decades of government intervention and interference, environmental scientists, regulation." This, for Borsook, exemplifies a profound "inability to connect the dots and lack of history."

Borsook sees a disturbing continuity between the tech industry of her book and today’s landscape, rather than a significant shift. She pinpoints the Netscape IPO as a turning point, marking the "invasion by the finance bros" and a new "culture of flip and flee." This shift, characterized by a focus on rapid financial gains over sustainable innovation or community impact, persisted even after the dot-com crash, "contaminating the aquifers" of the industry. Companies like Airbnb and Uber, she argues, represent "strictly financial plays" that fought fiercely against regulation, acting as "Giardia in the water system" by destroying housing markets and refusing to be "good community actors." For Borsook, this reflects the same unchecked, self-justifying attitude she critiqued decades ago, fostering an environment where "sociopathy is a business virtue."

The rise of Artificial Intelligence (AI) perfectly embodies this continuous trend. Borsook views AI as a "big Ponzi scheme," driven by the same "we don’t need to be regulated" arrogance. She points to Apple’s controversial "Crush" ad, which depicted creative tools being destroyed, as evidence of the industry’s tone-deafness and detachment from the "creative class" that once revered it. The pursuit of stockholder value, she asserts, justifies questionable AI practices, irrespective of their intrinsic worth or societal impact.

The "renaissance" of "Cyberselfish" began subtly. For years, Borsook would check used book platforms, finding her book selling for negligible prices. About eighteen months ago, she noticed prices creeping up, alongside inquiries from "European academics" and unexpected social media posts hailing the book’s importance. This led her to connect with Gil Durán, whose own work on "The Nerd Reich" aligned with her critiques. The catalyst for broader recognition came when Steven Levy, writing a piece for Wired on how the tech industry went astray, interviewed Durán but didn’t quote him or contact Borsook. In response, Durán posted a powerful "rant on Bluesky," declaring Borsook had been right all along and urging support for her work. This, combined with a podcast Borsook did with Durán, caused used copies of "Cyberselfish" to become instantly scarce.

The new Tin House edition presents the book exactly as it was originally published in 2000, with no updates to the original text. Borsook wrote a new introduction detailing its unlikely return, while Durán provided a foreword. The acquiring editor’s instruction, "Don’t change a word," resonated with Borsook, who believes the book stands as an "artifact of a time and place" and its original form was precisely what new readers were seeking.

Looking ahead, Borsook expresses concern for young people entering tech who reject its toxic elements. She questions the viability of reforming large tech companies from within, noting their amorality makes them opportunistic: "if it’s not in their interest to link arms with the MAGA thing, they’ll do something different." For aspiring tech professionals, she suggests exploring "appropriate technology" or small, bootstrapped consultancies, though she acknowledges that the current investment landscape heavily favors AI or military-industrial ventures, limiting other opportunities. While uncertain about the possibility of internal reform within "hyperscalers," she hopes individuals can "spin off and maybe do something else," fostering ingenuity outside the prevailing corporate structures.