Part III: They hate our way of life
[photo credit: ChrisB in SEA]
Seriously. Forget terrorists or the ever-ominous 'other' that we are told to fear. The hatred comes from within. Anyone who wants to make a buck off of you and me hates you and me. Think about it. We are 'target markets'. There are all sorts of mechanisms, government sanctioned I might add, that really really want to stop people from getting online, using the tools available and gathering. Of course there are. Don't you see that would be bad for the powers that be?
Okay...my conspiracy theories aside, let me provide you with some examples to chew on...you can make of them what you will:
- SPAM - okay...so the government was nice enough to make it illegal for the buggers to send us unsolicited emails, but it doesn't seem to slow them down. I'm sitting at well over 1,000 spam emails in my gmailbox filter, that's not counting the many that get through. And SPAM certainly doesn't stop at email. It invades everything online that is participatory. It's like a cancer. No, it IS a cancer. And worse than annoying, it turns our computers against us, it makes us trust online sources less and it brings down our tools.
- Telcos - the ever-huge bloated bullies of the communications industry. They own all of that fibre-stuff that carries our messages from point A to point B. Oh...and they set the price on what it costs for us to use it. Do they want us to share our connections? No way. That's less $$ in their pockets and they have shareholders to contend with (shareholders also hate us, and I know what you are saying, "hey, I own shares" but reBlog Post: Part III: They hate our way of lifeally, you just want to make money on those shares and you would rather not know at what price...admit it). The Telcos really hate our way of life. They hate that we start to demand lower airtime rates, unlimited SMS, cheaper connections with better speeds and play them against one another. They really hate that. And they block access to people who can't afford their inflated prices, which is a large percentage of the world, who need the voice more than anyone else. So, let's disrupt these giants.
- RIAA & MPAA - Well, it's not secret that I really really dislike this pair of old farts. There is the old crappy publishing gatekeepers (name?) and Susan Crawford has written eloquently on this subject. Why do they hate us? Well, they turn our machines against us for one. They also don't want us to enjoy music or films properly. They stop innovation. On purpose. Do you know how amazing DVD technology could be? Really stupidly amazing. Ever wonder why it hasn't gone anywhere since it's inception? Look no further than these guys. They have a really smart team of lawyers working for them who find the most miniscule chance that someone could 'abuse' the system and get something for *gasp* free and they stop any innovation on that project. Guess what, dumbasses? People find ways to subvert you anyways. You can always sue us or put in stronger regulations. Man, you could have it legally mandated that we be chained to a pole in the middle of nowhere with only an iPod and our credit card to plug into your pay for play only machine and we would find a way to steal your bad music.
- Proprietary Software - It used to be that 'loose lips sink ships', but that was before the internet. Now, keeping a secret is futile. That is why Open Source is growing. The secret there? Well, there are none. WYSIWYG to the max. Sure, it still has a long way to go before most of it is people friendly, but when it gets there it will totally screw the prioprietary dudes. Yep. That is why proprietary software companies (and news sources) hate us. They hate us abandoning their sluggish and expensive software. Man, Ubuntu is way cool. Free operating system that pairs up with lots of other free software and takes it to the people who need free software. Now, if we can get them connectivity, they will totally rain on your parade. Open source living. UPDATE: Erick Schonfeld reposts amazing article on the economics of peer production.
See? They all hate us...and there are more. I didn't want to get too political here, but I think the current government hates us and our way of life, too. But I'm Canadian and applying for an H1B, so I should probably shutup.
So, yes, we have a long way to go and an ingrained hegemony to overthrow...but with:
A. The collective unconscious
+
B. Tools for bringing those 'like minded' individuals together
We can get there.
...but we need to take it beyond the geekosphere. I'll provide some of my ideas soon. Please feel free to submit yours, too...on your blog...in the comments...on a forum...on a bathroom wall...on a cocktail napkin...on a wiki...wherever. ;) It's a collaboration.
technorati tags: thepoint, collectiveunconscious, tools, riaa, spam, mpaa, telco, telcos, proprietarysoftware, opensource
14 Comments:
I love reading your stuff especially when you get into a rant like this. I just saw the 2nd part of this so I'll check that out but wow, cool stuff.
Btw, is Riya eventually going to charge for their service like Flickr does?
got some change...?
No...no plans to charge anyone anything for Riya. We're going to do an ad supported model.
ahh... so that's where the monetize scream came from ;-)
Just wondering who is paying for it at the end? The mantra of monetizing by advertisement is not completely intellectually honest isn't it?
I'm in the other hand really afraid from these who do not want to make money...
No...monetization through ad support is not completely intellectually honest at all. Sigh. What's the answer...? I'm sure we can come up with much smarter models in the future.
What an odd thing to be afraid of those who do not want to make money...I mean, I get that you are afraid of investing time and energy into a product to have it die for lack of funds, but man, look at Firefox. I don't know if they were really ever driven by business models or monetization...it just eventually got to that...without watering down their product. That's what I like seeing. ;) And I certainly was never afraid of Firefox...but my dad is. Maybe we should examine from whence that fear derives.
T.
well, money really is a middle-man construct that moves people towards one another as common desire necessitates. before there was currency, there was a barter system. should we get rid of money? no. but if we all start providing barter services with one another, well, we'll start to feel a lot closer with each other, much more human.
people who only focus on making money are inherantly afraid of others because in order to make more (and a lot of) money, everyone else must be viewed as a competition of sorts.
these (mostly) men shape world politics and policy, whether they're in government or run big business. so if we want to start changing the world, we need to recognize these realities and create alternative *monetized* universes (if you will), which reward the very web 2.0 principles that drive us: participation, collaboration, transparency, etc.
- media 2.0
- writing 2.0
- sports 2.0
more communities, across different axis' creates endless opportunities to create monetized participation -- not filtered through a handful of uber-organizations and genres, but spread across individuals and interests.
blah, blah, blah...
I'm not going to debate you about whether or not "the government" or "big business" hates you, but I will argue that you can't ignore the physical facts of what it takes to survive. We all need food, clothing, and shelter. You can either expend energy to do those things for yourself, or you can trade your efforts in some other area with those who will provide those things to you. Money is a proxy for barter. At some point, we all have to make money, or we all have to grow our own food, sew our own clothes, and build our own homes. There is no way around this.
So you can bemoan the fact that you must use advertising to support Riya, but what is your alternative? What is anyone's alternative? If you're not paid in some way for the work you do, then you'd better have a garden in your backyard, because you're not going to survive otherwise. (And even if you have the garden, where do you get the seeds, the fertilizer, the tools??) OK, we can try the commune thing again (from the 60's), but I don't consider that a viable alternative.
At some point the open source model has to pay for itself. Because I'm not going to buy you lunch just because your software is "cool." The model doesn't have to pay for itself in traditional ways, and that's an excellent, interesting, exciting point. Yes, let's explore options beyond proprietary software, beyond selling licenses. But it can't be free. You have to pay your own way in the world. People are not going to feed, clothe, and house you just because. Even the folks at Firefox have to get paid somehow. The people who contribute to Wikipedia have to get paid. How else will they eat?
And one last point: this is NOT bad. Money is NOT evil. I know you haven’t said this directly, but it seems to be implied… If you think money is bad, or the desire to make money is bad, then you think your own survival is bad/evil--because money is just a proxy for the effort it takes to maintain your own life. If you think money is evil, then you believe that any human effort ever, throughout all of history--whether it's software, or art, or buildings, or music, or anything--is evil, because again, money is just the proxy for allowing us to trade these things between us.
Thanks in advance for allowing me to stand up on my soapbox, or if you choose not to publish this, I certainly support your right to do so, and will not resent you at all.
Regards,
Rick
Well, Riya is actually a service I would be willing to pay for. That is assuming you get the blog features going. Looking at all these startups that want to use advertising as their money maker, I just dont see how it can be that profitable. I've run various websites, some have garnered a lot of hits and our ads barely made enough to keep the servers running. It takes a massive amount of hits to make a lot of money at advertising.
Build a good enough service and people will be willing to pay for it. Riya is unique enough and good enough that you guys can ask for money for premium features like Flickr does. I was going to pay for a premium Flickr account but now I'm just waiting until Riya offically launches.
Money is a sophisticated way to exchange goods, or in other words things of values. It is not the only way but it is the most common way. I do not see in money any value of itself but only in what it represent: recognition for the value of what I’m giving/selling. Therefore I do not share your approach of identify in those who wants fair exchange of goods enemy, I do afraid from the dishonesty of claiming that there is any other fair approach.
Do you think that if I created a chair someone have the right to use it without my consent? I might choose to charge for it or not, but this is my right. When I’m creating software it is my creation and it is mine and by god I do want the recognition that it’s hold a value. If you believe that my software/service/chair has a value for you I’m expecting for a fair exchange.
Wow! Great discussion here.
Okay
@spcoon - you are brilliant. Brilliant. Love your stuff. Got some emails from people today who said, "thanks for directing us to Sean!" My pleasure. ;)
@rick - sound a little defensive. ;) I get that from people who like to make money but feel guilty about it. LOL. Good. Hey, I like to make money, too. I understand that. In my case there are two things that are at issue:
1. How much is enough? (this is where shareholders come in...no matter how much they make, they always want more)
2. Let's not put making money at the forefront. It's kind of boring. I want to see it come into play once we realize there is a viable idea here that people love.
That's all. Don't dillute it FIRST. ;)
@Paul Mendoza - good to hear! I'm glad you are excited about Riya. I'm totally excited about the improvements. It'll be a while, though, before we could ever justify charging anyone. We're in that mindset, build it first, have people fall in love with us, then find out how to make $$. For us it's pretty simple, though...people are already knocking down our doors to license the technology...;)
Yadda yadda yadda
T.
Miss Rogue,
Hmm… didn’t realize that sounded defensive. Do I feel guilty about making money? I don’t think so. But I know that after reading my post again, it was a little over the top. ;-)
Anyway, I absolutely agree with you that the making money part should come second. You’ve got to have the viable idea that people love FIRST. Everything else should flow from that. And that’s my biggest beef with “big business” as we’ve come to know it: that it tries to put lipstick (sleazy sales tactics and deceptive advertising) on the pig (the lousy product/service they’re trying to foist on us). So thanks for thinking of having something worthwhile to sell, first. I agree. I’m in marketing for a software company, and if we didn’t have a good product, I wouldn’t be here. I can’t do lipstick on the pig!
Also, I wanted to add that I think what’s exciting about the Internet is how it can enable a new way of thinking about products, markets, capital, profits, etc. Capitalism as we’ve come to know it has meant big “capital” up front, in terms of large production capabilities and/or money to hire people, equipment, etc. This necessitates the model of large scale advertising and pricing methods so that a profit can be made. But the Internet changes the cost structure—it’s so much cheaper to bring a product to market, and it’s so much easier to find the people who might be interested in buying your product, that you can start to think about making money in different ways. Look at the new wave of musicians who can produce their own music and offer it online, bypassing the multi-national entertainment/music companies entirely. They won’t become millionaires perhaps, but then, they’re not interested in that (they KNOW how much is enough!) They love their product, they want to make a decent living, and they’re connecting with their audience in ways that a multi-national corporation couldn’t even dream about. That’s very cool. Because they don’t have to spend mega-bucks producing and marketing their music, they don’t have to ask for mega-bucks in return.
And you know what? The music companies “get” it, but not in the way we think of it. They understand that this new model means the end of business as they know it. Either they drive all the big costs out of their business model—and fast—or they scramble like mad to keep prices up through DRM, litigation, etc. We’ve already see which way they’ve chosen. I think it’s a mistake. Time will tell.
Thanks, and keep up the good blogging. Your stuff is always interesting and thought-provoking.
Rick
hi:
There are bunch of things that seem out of place. First, I think SPAM is a manifestation of the decentralized, "Internet consciousness" instead of something introduced into the system to curb it. People will try to exploit resources irrespective of the end result. After all, our only goal is to survive and reproduce (as Rick mentioned). You mentioned that people will find ways to subvert attempts by big companies to control stuff. The question is will people do that for common good OR for selfish ends? SPAM is an example of people subverting technologies like blogging and email for their selfish ends. Similarly, the guy who cracked DVD region-protection did it partly because he wanted to watch those movies.
Second, the question "How much is enough" applies to ALTERNATIVES to money just as it does to money itself. Money, blog-traffic, search engine rankings, advertising media all tend to be hierarchial. Thats how human systems end up. There will big dominant people, technologies and systems and others trying to catch up.
Third, it kind of makes sense to be afraid of something thats free. If the incentive to the person giving you something for free isn't clear, then you become suspicious because it could be part of a bigger plot to take more than you are willing to part with. I guess thats how we are wired. You aren't afraid, because you understand how Firefox makes money.
Well, thats about it for now. I'd love to see your reply.
Chandrashekar
you're too kind, tara. i have a plethora of former teachers and bosses who might tell you otherwise. ;)
Post a Comment
<< Home