Post by jeffolie on May 1, 2013 12:25:33 GMT -6
Denninger suggests that smartphones enslave one into a sale of you
to who?
To buyers wanting to sell to you
Is this enslaving or something else?
One can change to another provider with another set of contracts with essentially the same arrangement making you a sales target.
Denninger ignores that America's economy remains a 70% consumer, Services sector driven system where one voluntarily buys for the most part [mandatory health coverage anyone?]. Jobs for the most part flow from consumer buying Services and products.
How is an Apple or Android sales "ecosystem" different?
Going to a shopping center, mall, driving down main street with stores ... these are voluntary trips into a sales "ecosystem". One does not need a car in an Apple or Android sales "ecosystem" unless one wants to visit the brick and mortar stores to put your hands on the Service or products.
my jeffolie view: online and computers differ from pure business 'efficiency engines' and profits by changing to adapt to provide consumer desires of greater social and entertainment value without efficiency ... Denninger needs to accept the change.
=====================================
2013-05-01 12:46
by Karl Denninger
in Editorial
Read Between The Lines (Google, Apple)
You won't, of course. But you should.
Imagine you woke up each morning, strapped a keyboard, monitor, Wi-Fi receiver, desktop computer, camera and stereo to your body, and ventured clumsily out the door.
We regard these hand-held machines as game devices, Web browsers and messaging tools. But at heart they are like all computers before them. They are efficiency engines, a means of saving time, bridging distance, reducing cost.
The hell they are.
Yet there's something bizarre going on. Even as an estimated 130 million smartphones roam the U.S. streets, economists can't quite find them.
No kidding? That's because you're looking at this wrong.
I'll go further -- this article is outright idiotic, coming from The Wall Street Journal, a paper that claims to be "plugged in" to American business and the capital markets.
What is the common word you hear about Android and IOS (Apple)? They have an ecosystem.
What is an ecosystem?
It is an economic subset in which your activity is funneled, channeled and monitored with the intent of selling you things.
That's the exact opposite of "force multiplication" when it comes to productivity.
The IBM PC came onto the scene and made quite the difference in the common office environment because it made producing paper documents much more efficient. Ditto for fairly complex calculations (spreadsheets, etc.) The original Internet made the transmission of documents far more efficient (email) and that was a big plus too.
The original smartphone concept (e.g. Blackberries) was to extend your ability to communicate in a business context for textual content out of the office and into your suit pocket. It made a big difference there, was secure and did that essential job, just as the cell phone did for voice communication.
But the so-called "ecosystems" are the opposite; they exist for the purpose of funneling your behavior to advertisers, who then spam you with promotional messages of various sorts.
In other words you are the product and the sales model is a reverse one -- you are the one being sold!
Welcome to Scamerica!
I'd add "slave" to that but you signed up willingly for this, so "slave" is not appropriate.
But if you're wondering why the so-called "economists" aren't finding the "productivity improvements" the answer is simple -- these devices were never intended to be productivity improvement devices. They were intended to, and work very well as, devices that are used to capture you as product for Madison Avenue and then slice, dice and analyze every move you make -- where you go, what you look at and where you are when you do it, what you buy and tie all of that together to sell it to the highest bidder.
The ridiculous nature of this becomes even more apparent when you realize that they not only do all of this they get you to pay well north of $1,000 (when one includes the imputed cost on 2 year contracts) for the device that is used to market YOU to these firms!
These devices were never intended to be productivity force-multipliers, which is why they're not. They are in fact productivity diminishers, because they suck you in with intentionally addictive social memes and software that can (and often does) take your attention of what you should be doing while at work producing both ideas and things.
Idiocracy. It's not just practiced in our schools any more.
market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=220311
to who?
To buyers wanting to sell to you
Is this enslaving or something else?
One can change to another provider with another set of contracts with essentially the same arrangement making you a sales target.
Denninger ignores that America's economy remains a 70% consumer, Services sector driven system where one voluntarily buys for the most part [mandatory health coverage anyone?]. Jobs for the most part flow from consumer buying Services and products.
How is an Apple or Android sales "ecosystem" different?
Going to a shopping center, mall, driving down main street with stores ... these are voluntary trips into a sales "ecosystem". One does not need a car in an Apple or Android sales "ecosystem" unless one wants to visit the brick and mortar stores to put your hands on the Service or products.
my jeffolie view: online and computers differ from pure business 'efficiency engines' and profits by changing to adapt to provide consumer desires of greater social and entertainment value without efficiency ... Denninger needs to accept the change.
=====================================
2013-05-01 12:46
by Karl Denninger
in Editorial
Read Between The Lines (Google, Apple)
You won't, of course. But you should.
Imagine you woke up each morning, strapped a keyboard, monitor, Wi-Fi receiver, desktop computer, camera and stereo to your body, and ventured clumsily out the door.
We regard these hand-held machines as game devices, Web browsers and messaging tools. But at heart they are like all computers before them. They are efficiency engines, a means of saving time, bridging distance, reducing cost.
The hell they are.
Yet there's something bizarre going on. Even as an estimated 130 million smartphones roam the U.S. streets, economists can't quite find them.
No kidding? That's because you're looking at this wrong.
I'll go further -- this article is outright idiotic, coming from The Wall Street Journal, a paper that claims to be "plugged in" to American business and the capital markets.
What is the common word you hear about Android and IOS (Apple)? They have an ecosystem.
What is an ecosystem?
It is an economic subset in which your activity is funneled, channeled and monitored with the intent of selling you things.
That's the exact opposite of "force multiplication" when it comes to productivity.
The IBM PC came onto the scene and made quite the difference in the common office environment because it made producing paper documents much more efficient. Ditto for fairly complex calculations (spreadsheets, etc.) The original Internet made the transmission of documents far more efficient (email) and that was a big plus too.
The original smartphone concept (e.g. Blackberries) was to extend your ability to communicate in a business context for textual content out of the office and into your suit pocket. It made a big difference there, was secure and did that essential job, just as the cell phone did for voice communication.
But the so-called "ecosystems" are the opposite; they exist for the purpose of funneling your behavior to advertisers, who then spam you with promotional messages of various sorts.
In other words you are the product and the sales model is a reverse one -- you are the one being sold!
Welcome to Scamerica!
I'd add "slave" to that but you signed up willingly for this, so "slave" is not appropriate.
But if you're wondering why the so-called "economists" aren't finding the "productivity improvements" the answer is simple -- these devices were never intended to be productivity improvement devices. They were intended to, and work very well as, devices that are used to capture you as product for Madison Avenue and then slice, dice and analyze every move you make -- where you go, what you look at and where you are when you do it, what you buy and tie all of that together to sell it to the highest bidder.
The ridiculous nature of this becomes even more apparent when you realize that they not only do all of this they get you to pay well north of $1,000 (when one includes the imputed cost on 2 year contracts) for the device that is used to market YOU to these firms!
These devices were never intended to be productivity force-multipliers, which is why they're not. They are in fact productivity diminishers, because they suck you in with intentionally addictive social memes and software that can (and often does) take your attention of what you should be doing while at work producing both ideas and things.
Idiocracy. It's not just practiced in our schools any more.
market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=220311