
Andreessen: 'In 20 years, every physical item will have a chip implanted in it' - adil_b
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/internet/12050185/Marc-Andreessen-In-20-years-every-physical-item-will-have-a-chip-implanted-in-it.html
======
chx
Andreessen is overhyped. He says these bombastic things which, as bombastic
things usually do are either not original and/or usually not true. Say, one of
the most famous of his is "software is eating the world" from 2011 but Alan
Cooper (you know, the guy who invented Visual Basic) in his "The inmates are
running the asylum" book from 1998 (that's 13 years earlier) already argued
that everything already is or will become a computer with some peripherals.
That's just one example, I am not saying Cooper is original but certainly
Andreessen is not.

His examples include a modern, computerized warship which predictably
crashed... When looking at his investment, sure, people will talk about
Facebook but leave out Groupon and Zynga. The guy does not, at the end, shit
gold.

~~~
w1ntermute
> I am not saying Cooper is original but certainly Andreessen is not.

Same goes for Thiel and his "tech stagnation" theories. From _Why celebrity
“genius” Peter Thiel is grossly overrated_ [0]:

> Thiel arrived at this “contrarian contention … about 2008.” That’s odd. The
> thesis that the most recent wave of tech innovation was slowing, or would
> soon slow, was discussed in the 1990s by Neo-Schumpeterians like Carlota
> Perez, and more recently by economists Robert J. Gordon, Michael Mandel and
> Tyler Cowen, among many others.

0:
[http://www.salon.com/2014/09/11/meet_the_anti_gay_sexist_cel...](http://www.salon.com/2014/09/11/meet_the_anti_gay_sexist_celebrity_genius_why_peter_thiel_is_grossly_overrated/)

~~~
krrrh
Tyler Cowen actually dedicated his book the Great Stagnation to Thiel. It's
silly to claim that Thiel'shis ideas are _sui generis_ , but Cowen seems to
treat him as a peer at least. See also:

[https://medium.com/conversations-with-tyler/peter-thiel-
on-t...](https://medium.com/conversations-with-tyler/peter-thiel-on-the-
future-of-innovation-77628a43c0dd#.cqz7itfif)

~~~
w1ntermute
Thiel is just one of many people listed in the acknowledgements of _The Great
Stagnation_. I've previously watched the interview you linked, and was quite
surprised by Cowen's acknowledgment of Thiel as "one of the greatest and most
important public intellectuals of our entire time."

However, as the Salon article notes, Cowen himself was a latecomer to the
debate ( _The Great Stagnation_ was published in 2011). _Technological
Revolutions and Financial Capital_ [0], by Carlota Perez, was published in
2003, while Robert J. Gordon has been writing about the topic since at least
2000[1].

During the early 2000s, Thiel and Clarium Capital were incorrectly fixated on
peak oil, rather than on the real estate bubble (relevant in the short term)
or general stagnation (relevant in the long term)[2]:

> [B]y February 2009 oil prices had temporarily fallen back to almost $40
> again. And though Thiel had foreseen the real estate bubble, he still
> underestimated it. “We didn’t fully believe our own theories about how bad
> things were,” he admits.

This misunderstanding of the macro picture cost Thiel dearly, with Clarium
shrinking 90% from 2008-2010[3], as investors withdrew their money from what
was clearly a losing strategy.

0: [http://www.amazon.com/dp/1843763311](http://www.amazon.com/dp/1843763311)

1: [http://www.nber.org/papers/w7833](http://www.nber.org/papers/w7833)

2: [http://fortune.com/2014/09/04/peter-thiels-contrarian-
strate...](http://fortune.com/2014/09/04/peter-thiels-contrarian-strategy/)

3: [http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2011-01-12/clarium-
he...](http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2011-01-12/clarium-hedge-fund-
shrinks-90-as-thiel-has-third-losing-year)

------
dosh
When RFID came out, investors and media argued that all products will have
RFID embedded in just a few years.

Fast forward 10 years, we see RFID applied across logistics industry and some
parts of finance/security, but it wasn't cut out for everyone everywhere. In
the beginning, people argued that the distribution wasn't happening because
RFID wasn't cheap enough, but with the recent production costs nearing cents,
now it's evident that it's due to lack of clear use cases.

I do agree that the development of use cases requires more creativity and has
a big room for innovation, but saying there's going to be a chip in every
physical item sounds similar to "there's going to be Uber for everything."

I don't want to sound pessimistic, but I think as with all startups, you have
to start with a clear problem (other than gaming/entertainment startups) and
develop a customer value proposition compelling enough for an industry to
emerge.

I'd bet more on VR having a broader implication in the next 10-20 years, and
expect to see more digital items produced vs physical item ever created in the
history of mankind.

~~~
mkagenius
There will be computers at every desks! Oh man, they were so wrong ;)

And internet too!

~~~
paulddraper
RFID is more recent and a closer comparison.

------
modeless
This is a stupid idea. I don't want a million "smart" devices in my house with
crappy unreliable software running on them. Either they'll all be un-
updateable with bugs and vulnerabilities lasting forever, or they'll
constantly be pestering me for software updates that change their
functionality and behavior, and I don't know which is worse.

In the future I want _fewer_ smart devices than I have now. I want to replace
all my smart devices with one robot servant. Why have an internet-connected
doorknob or light switch or thermostat, with all the reliability and security
concerns that come with that, when my robot servant can unlock the door and
turn on the lights and heat when I get home? Why have ambient screens and
displays on every surface shouting information at me constantly when my robot
servant can just tell me relevant information when I need to know it? Why have
a dishwasher when my robot servant can "hand" wash the dishes? Etc.

~~~
frik
This. Exactly this.

A personal software agent will make a lot of "smart" devices and many apps
irrelevant.

See Apple's vision from early ’90s:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9bjve67p33E](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9bjve67p33E)

------
cabinpark
> The end state is fairly obvious - every light, every doorknob will be
> connected to the internet.

Why does my doorknob need to be connected to the internet? Does my fork need
to be connected to the internet as well? How about my shelf? Or my towel?

And if they are connected to the internet, who is collecting that data? Is it
secure? What will it be used for?

~~~
mdonahoe
I am reminded of this Thoreau quote:

"We are in great haste to construct a magnetic telegraph from Maine to Texas;
but Maine and Texas, it may be, have nothing important to communicate."

~~~
sixbrx
Industrial grade condescension, sounds like Thoreau all right. He could have
maybe found real wilderness at either of those places, but then mom wouldn't
have been able to bring cookies and do laundry weekly.

[http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/10/19/pond-
scum](http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/10/19/pond-scum)

------
pjmorris
As a counter-prediction, I bet that non-Internet-enabled services will become
a luxury/boutique item, e.g. doctors, dentists, and lawyers who keep paper
medical records to ensure privacy on the part of their clients.

------
joezydeco
See, the problem I have with all the IoT startups that are getting this kind
of funding (see also: Uptake, Helium) is that they have a distinctive _vision_
for IoT, which is all well and good for the backend, but the frontend is where
you can't get traction yet.

Even if you are making your own sensors (like Samsara and Helium), you still
haven't convinced me to put this into my product design. Are you giving me the
chips for free? No? Um, okay, are you second-sourcing the chip so if/when you
implode I'm not hanging in the wind? No, can't do that either. Hmmm.

So the common denominiator becomes Bluetooth or WiFi. And, at that point, why
do I really need you except for the backend? And why can't I just spin that
myself if I really needed to?

------
semerda
Sounds like the mark of a beast, some religious text have prophesied ;-)

In all seriousness this is nothing new. RFI was an initial play and the tech
is just maturing (getting smaller & better). But really will my toilet paper
have a chip and communicate with my loo to tell me how my experience was.. I
don't think so.

Will smartphones go away. I don't think so. They are the evolution of a PC.
Being human we want control over things. This means a mobile interface, a
remote control, with an intuitive interface. Whatever form smartphones will
take I doubt the interface will disappear. But they will talk to all those
chips integrated into our lives.

------
RivieraKid
Doubt it. The utility of a chip attached to a thing is access to the thing's
state - which is besides its location usually nothing. Even things where IoT
would intuitively bring the most value, such as smart remote control lights,
aren't getting that much traction. So I'd say IoT wil be much less widespread
than some people believe or wish. (Although there's one use case where IoT
might become popular - power consumption measurenment for home appliances - so
you could see real-time or monthly chart for example.)

------
jjtheblunt
News Flash: Andreessen is in the business of hyperbole.

------
Keverw
"In 10 years, he predicts mobile phones themselves could disappear" Oh wow
crazy. I doubt it. People even say laptops and desktops will disappear too,
but I doubt that too.

It seems like some day we'll live in a world where no one really owns
anything, not even a phone... Just use some table phone at a cafe... Maybe use
the chip in your arm to sign into the table phone app.

Somethings I think the future will be awesome with all this great tech, and
other times I think the tech is going to destroy us or imprison us all in a
prison without bars.

------
lowglow
I'm building Playa - [http://getplaya.com/](http://getplaya.com/) \- I want to
connect everything by providing an open service exchange for autonomous
intelligent agents. If you're interested in this stuff, I'm looking for co-
founders and people that want to help out on the project. I'm in Palo Alto and
would love to connect. Cheers. :)

Also, please excuse the docs as I'm still in the middle of writing them.

------
jjtheblunt
Andreessen is in the business of hyperbole, obviously.

------
j0e1
In another 20 years, I imagine those 'physical items' to include human beings
too.

~~~
pampa
Or, on a more optimistic note, there wont be any computers by then. We will be
left of humanity will live in caves and hunt giant mutant rabbits with bare
hands and sharpened sticks.

------
amelius
This is fine, as long as not every physical item has a unique ID, readable
without authentication from a distance.

I don't want to walk around covered in cookies.

Then again, in 20 years, AI will probably be able to ID us anyway.

------
stuaxo
When I read headlines like this, the first thought is "fuck off!" \- luckily,
it won't come true.

~~~
rvense
I often feel like I have a bunch of things to say about the Internet of
Things, but every time I try to write it down all that comes out is "I don't
want anymore crap."

------
LAMike
And a digital currency will be needed to transfer value from chip to chip

------
jsprogrammer
Even chips?

~~~
otabdeveloper
Chips already have chips in them today.

See Intel's AMT, baseband processors in phones, controllers in disks, etc.

