
The end of smartphone innovation - allenleein
http://ben-evans.com/benedictevans/2017/3/22/the-end-of-smartphone-innovation
======
fullshark
> I increasingly think that augmented reality is the next fundamental platform
> shift.

I read these articles and everyone seems to be operating from the assumption
that a fundamental platform shift is inevitable and coming within the next few
years.

Is it really unthinkable that smart phones that you carry around in your
pocket are the dominant platform for the next 50+ years?

~~~
arglebarnacle
I wouldn't rule it out, but no computing hardware platform has ever been
dominant for 50 years before so there are reasons to believe we're not about
to get started with that kind of cycle now.

Mainframes, minicomputers, desktop personal computers, laptops, and now
tablets and smartphones. Maybe we have reached the end (for 50 years at
least), but I think the safer bet is that the next big technology 30 years
from now will be something that surprises us, not something we already have or
could easily predict having wide adoption.

~~~
coldtea
>*I wouldn't rule it out, but no computing hardware platform has ever been
dominant for 50 years before so there are reasons to believe we're not about
to get started with that kind of cycle now.

"Mainframes, minicomputers, desktop personal computers, laptops, and now
tablets and smartphones" \-- yes, so we had like 5 generations of computing
hardware platforms. And we began with so premature and begging for improvement
technologies (when they started in the 50s) and so large form factors that we
had Moore's law going on for decades until a few years past.

Now we've reaching physical limits in CPU shrinking, and we have components so
small (e.g. Apple Watch) than if they were any smaller you couldn't handle
their buttons, or fit a camera lens, or speakers, or a large enough screen in
there.

My point is, just because something has been going on for 5 generations of
form factors, it's nowhere near enough evidence to be meaningful statistically
or otherwise to deduce it will go on forever.

A turkey is fed every day by the farmer for months on end. But after 300+
observations that make it think feeding is never ending and inevitable there
comes thanksgiving.

~~~
mr_overalls
> if they were any smaller you couldn't handle their buttons

Voice-interfaced intelligent agents like Siri/Alexa/etc will continue to
evolve.

Given a sufficiently advanced AI, buttons won't be needed for most computing
tasks - any more than stirrups and a bridle were needed to drive the first
automobiles.

~~~
bigato
I don't like talking to my devices, specially because most of the time I'm
around other people and I don't want to share what I'm doing with them.

------
coldcode
Throughout history most technological improvements could not be predicted
ahead of time. In 2005 few people thought mobile phones would change much at
all. In the 1950's the President of IBM supposedly said there was a market for
maybe 5 computers in the world. In 1990 no one thought there would be a global
network for anyone and everyone that would change the world a few years later.
I assume whatever will happen next will be a surprise to most people, although
in hindsight you might have noticed what was coming.

~~~
phil21
> In 1990 no one thought there would be a global network for anyone and
> everyone that would change the world a few years later.

This this may be in danger of going into pedantic territory, I don't feel this
is true at all. The prevailing discussion in the late 80's/early 90's on the
tech boards (BBS) I frequented were all talking about networking and how
computers were one day all going to be interconnected.

In fact FIDONET and the like probably had already met that bar, in an early
PoC sense. Lots of folks in that space had the vision of at least a nationwide
network of 24x7 connected bbs' if not the entire picture. You also had a lot
of guys working in private industry, who operated small "national" or regional
networks between a few sites at that point.

I still remember a day in 1994 when I played Chess over the Internet with
someone in South Africa - thinking that holy crap, the world we had been
dreaming and talking about for 10 years finally was coming true.

~~~
nostrademons
"The future is here. It's just not evenly distributed."

It's almost guaranteed that _somewhere_ out there, the next big thing is
incubating amongst a group of passionate enthusiasts who are certain it's the
next best thing. It's just that most of humanity thinks they're crazy geeks.

That's what it was like with the Internet. I got on it in 1994 and couldn't
convince anyone else it was worth paying attention to. By 1995, gifted &
talented enrichment programs were starting to suggest all their students check
it out. By 1996, I could convince my parents to pay for it. By 1998 a bunch of
our family friends were putting their life savings into dot-coms.

~~~
Atheros
So let's make a list of all of the things that have a group of passionate
enthusiasts who are certain it's the next big thing. I can only think of two
things:

* Bitcoin

* Self driving vehicles

~~~
nostrademons
Smart home. Virtual reality. Drones. Smartwatches (yes, some people still
really like theirs). Rust. AI. IPFS. Federated wikis.

Probably others too. The scale that we're talking about is ~1000s of people,
not millions. This doesn't even register in the news media - hell, HN probably
has close to a few thousand people online _at any given time_ , and there are
1000s of forums like Hacker News on the Internet.

------
jansho
How about the opposite of innovation? A new generation of dumb phones that
reminds you who's the real boss in life. My ideal one would be:

\- it's small, maybe 3"

\- it's super light

\- still feels substantial when you do hold it though

\- has basic functions (call, text, alarm) but with updated modern interface

\- max 3 apps if you reaally can't get away without them (e.g. whatsapp)

\- sophisticated non-intrusive tech embedded (e.g. Track if lost phone, able
to take dictation)

\- fiercely anti-snoop

\- super robust, will be fine even if thrown over cliff, chewed by toddler,
stamped on et cetra

Edit: formatting

~~~
CrackpotGonzo
A friend and I were thinking the same about 3 years ago and set out to make an
e-paper "smarter" dumb phone. Turns out it's really hard to build a good dumb
phone in 2017, especially given the phasing out of 2G.

We landed on the same idea of a less distracting phone, 4" screen, 4G support,
and more privacy than existing smart phones.

You can check it out here if you'd like. Curious to hear what you think.
[https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/siempo/the-phone-for-
hu...](https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/siempo/the-phone-for-humans)

~~~
mikegioia
Full screen, non-tactile keyboard is a non-starter IMO.

~~~
canuckintime
Which tactile keyboard phone are you currently using, if you don't mind
sharing?

------
simonh
Anybody remember Lawnmower Man? VR and AR have been the next big thing for
most of my lifetime now and I'm a child of the 60s. In fact, didn't Google
Glass already prove ordinary people don't want computers strapped to their
faces? I think it will be a niche, like smart watches. It will be a nice
little business, like the Watch is for Apple.

~~~
IshKebab
No Google Glass sucked for other reasons. The voice interface didn't work very
well, the screen was in an awkward position, there we no socially acceptable
reason to wear them, they cost $3k and their most compelling feature over a
smartphone was hands-free first person video recording.

Compare that to something like Snap's Spectacles which basically took Glass's
best use - hands free first person video recording - but use a sensible
button-based interface, cost $130 and are sunglasses which are totally
socially acceptable.

I think people are also more willing to wear crazy things on their heads when
the _do_ actually offer something new and innovative, e.g. the Vive or
Hololens. Nobody is saying "OMG nobody is going to wear the Hololens in
public; you'll look like a total arse". They're saying "Woah Hololens actually
does good AR for the first time ever."

~~~
ThomPete
Google Glass sucked as a consumer product, it works fine as a business
product.

~~~
matthewmacleod
Google glass also sucked as a business product.

~~~
ThomPete
No its doing ok actually. In factories

------
Sir_Cmpwn
I have a Samsung Galaxy S5 running LineageOS. It has a replacable battery and
I have replacements (and have replaced it once so far). I will be keeping it
until it breaks, because it's more than fast enough to do everything I demand
from my phone and I have no reason to spend hundreds of dollars to buy the
latest and greatest in planned obsolescence.

~~~
tluyben2
My mother (in her late 60s) has my S5 and she complains it is too slow; does
Lineage make a difference?

~~~
Sir_Cmpwn
The stock ROM is full of garbage. This is true of any phone. For a while I
kept an image of my phone with the stock ROM in case I needed to restore it,
which I had stripped down of most of the crap by rooting it and removing a
bunch of stuff. There are well over 200 unnecessary packages installed that
include spyware, bloatware, adware, and uselessware. The only explanation I
have is planned obsolecense. LineageOS is as fast for me today as it was when
I first installed it (back when it was still CM).

~~~
tluyben2
Okido. Will that exactly that then. I thought Samsung would be Ok and did not
want to risk my mother having to do anything tech :)

------
drops
Is there even a reason to buy a new smartphone nowadays? They get a bit
flatter, get bigger screens, but overall we reached the point where their
progress kinda flatlined. They have everything an average user could want
since early 10s.

~~~
vbezhenar
I bought iPhone 4S few years ago, and now with new iOS it's very slow, so I'm
going to buy new smartphone soon. It has some hardware problems, but new
software really killed it. Same story with iPad 3.

I hope that current smartphone generation will be able to sustain longer, I
don't like buying new things every 2-3 years.

~~~
orbitur
The 4s will be 6 years old this year, and iOS 10 dropped support for it in
2016. The iPhone 5 will likely not be compatible with iOS 11 when it arrives
in September.

I think 5 years is a pretty good run, and it seems like the standard now.

If you bought your 4s 2 years ago, that's on you. If you're buying your phones
used, then it's in your best interest to not buy a phone that's already 3
years old.

~~~
vbezhenar
4S became less usable with iOS 7 and that's 2 years. It started to lag. With
iOS 9 it's almost unusable and that's 4 years. I bought my phone new, just
after iPhone 5 was released.

------
djhworld
I have a Nexus 5 from 2013 or whenever it was they released it, still going
strong.

I don't see that much innovation in newer phones to warrant an upgrade, at
least in the sense of spending hundreds of pounds on what amounts to be a
slightly faster processor and the promise of Android O.

The only thing I can think of that might force my hand, outside of the phone
breaking, is the security updates (Google no longer supports the Nexus 5 - so
it will be stuck on Android 6 indefinitely)

~~~
arkitaip
I have a Nexus 4 and functionality wise it's all I need but the random reboots
and UI glitches are getting really annoying. Like that time I was on hold for
30 minutes and the phone decided a random reboot was needed.

~~~
daptaq
My Nexus 4 is is still doing well, except for the battery I had to replace
once already. The trick was to install cyanogenmod, remove all Gapps, and get
all software from F-Droid. I use the KISS launcher, have no social networks
that run in the background (except for WhatsApp), and so on. All in all it's a
pleasant experience, even though there might be an occasional bug from time to
time.

If it weren't for the battery, I would have no reason to replace the phone,
ever.

~~~
jholman
If we're comparing, my Galaxy Nexus is still serving my needs just fine, with
all original parts, still running stock Android 4.3. It does all the phone
stuff, plus Maps, car-share apps, games, Chrome, wifi tethering, music, etc.
Chrome's a bit sluggish, though.

Maybe Lineage would speed up Maps/Chrome. Hmn.

------
overgard
The more I think about it, the more I think the word "innovation" obscures
thinking. If you boil it down, "innovation" just means "change in a novel
manner". That doesn't mean _good_ change, just unexpected change. It's easy to
say "apple isn't innovating anymore", but what else does a smart phone need?

------
wykydtron
I still think smart phones that dock and become full PC work stations would be
great.

~~~
eloisant
I don't really see the point.

Sharing data/settings already works great with the cloud.

You still get the same bulk as carrying around PC+phone.

The only reason is that maybe it's a bit cheaper because you use the same CPU
for both, but the drawbacks (not being able to use both at the same time,
slower proc for the PC) don't make it worth.

~~~
dredmorbius
It's already possible to carry ~256 GB to 1 TB data on a device, MicroSD
format. With a storage array (a battery of MicroSD cards), multiple TB.

Local wired (or Bluetooth) data transmission will beat the Cloud on
performance, not rely on third party security, and be immune from
interruptions.

I see strong potential for movement away from the cloud.

------
rsync
I think we should give credit where credit is due - Apple has "solved" three
form factors:

\- the laptop

\- the tower workstation

\- the smartphone

Maybe we should use something other than laptops ... maybe there is an as-yet-
unforeseen device that our computing work should shift to. Until such time, we
use laptops, and apple solved the laptop with the macbook air. There's nowhere
to go from here but spec improvements. That's why they are desperately adding
weirdo things like the touchbar - the form factor has been solved.

Same with tower workstations. You're not going to beat the cheesegrater mac
pro. All you can do is bump the specs. This is a _good thing_ \- they _solved_
that form factor. Unfortunately Apple has other priorities than churning out
low volume, non-sexy updates to an under-the-desk device.

Finally, the smartphone: Apple solved that form factor with the iphone.
Everything since then is really just an iphone with different sizes and
different little details. They are all just monolithic touchscreen slabs.
Maybe there is some new form factor waiting to be discovered, but that's a new
product category - that would be real innovation and would be a jump just like
the jump from dumbphones to smartphones. But for now, what we have are
smartphones and they are all really just iphones - because the problem has
been solved.

~~~
JohnJamesRambo
Wow, you have a different view of "solved" than I do.

------
clubm8
Is endless innovation desirable?

I have an iPhone 6s. I like it. I'd like to see longer battery life and higher
storage capacity in future models, but otherwise it's a good phone.

I don't want it thinner - in fact, I'd be happy if they added some heft so I
didn't need a case, without one it feels like it is about to fall out of my
hand. (This might allow for a removable battery, which would also be useful)

I don't want a dumbphone - I like having access to all my music and podcasts.
And I like being able to do secure texts and calls with Signal. Privacy
advocates seem to fetishize burners and feature phones, but a "dumb" Nokia
blasts out everything in the clear.

~~~
valuearb
Thinner, lighter phones are easier to hold and get used more. Thin phones won
because anyone who wants more grip or battery can always add a case.

Thicker, bigger battery phones fail because no case can make them lighter.
They only address a niche while thin addresses everyone's needs.

And sealed batteries won because they can fit more capacity. Few people prefer
carrying (and charging) two 8 hour batteries to a 10 hour sealed battery.

~~~
ValentineC
> _Few people prefer carrying (and charging) two 8 hour batteries to a 10 hour
> sealed battery._

I carry around a small USB battery pack these days (multiple if I'm
travelling). I find the concept of external batteries better — the recharging
process is seamless as compared to having to shut off the phone to switch
batteries.

~~~
nradov
I can swap batteries and be back online in less than a minute. That's far more
seamless than having a bulky external battery plugged in to a fragile, awkward
USB connector.

------
unlmtd
When the patents of the piston engine ended, the combustion engine saw
tremendous innovation. So as long as the monopoly is in place, only the
military will get hand held computers, and everyone else will get toys. IP is
fraud.

~~~
Clubber
>IP is fraud.

I wouldn't go that far. IP is a carrot for development. Imagine if you spend a
decade and $100K developing an idea, and just when it started taking off,
Oracle or somebody copied it and took the entire market. That can and does
still happen, but at least you have legal recourse with IP laws.

It was originally a way to foster innovation for a maximum of 28 years, then
the works would enter the public domain to be improved upon. Over the years,
the copyright duration has become ridiculously long, negating the social
benefits of it's existence.

The fundamental concept is sound, it's when it's perverted to help the wolves
rather than the sheep that it stinks.

~~~
Zigurd
Even the phrase "intellectual property" is highly tendentious. It implies
property right where there are none. What you get from the patent office is a
temporary government granted monopoly.

Often, as with, for example, spectrum, the people holding the license tend to
view the object, and not the government granted license, as their perpetual
property.

~~~
sbov
Depends upon how you look at it. I find the idea of property rights a bit
funny because every physical thing you can own exists because in the past
someone murdered the fuck out of people to own what it's made from.

In that regard, intellectual property is the only property not built on human
suffering.

------
bigato
It's not unreasonable to think about 10, 20 or even 30 years with mostly
incremental improvements and no ground-breaking changes in both smartphones
and smartwatches. I list some examples below. Several of them are already
under development, and some are already available but just not cheap yet.

\- Batteries that can be fully charged in 5 minutes;

\- Autonomy to go for a month without a charge, achieved by the combinations
of new technologies in batteries, screens, chips and better software;

\- Scratch and shock resistant screens that can be equally visible on daylight
and at night, maybe by working like and colored e-reader screen when there's
enough ambient light available, thus making reading more comfortable;

\- Some kind of battery charging technology that improves over the awful usb
connections that we have nowadays, whose cable connectors don't last much;

\- Better cameras that rival today's DSLR. There are some experiences going on
using several small combined cheap sensors in a single smartphone to achieve
results in the DSLR range;

\- Cheap and fast disk storage over say, 10 TB, as fast as RAM;

\- Cheap and fast data connection at any location of the planet. Like
streaming HD netflix in your tent in the middle of a blizzard in Antartida;

\- High quality, small, wireless earphones whose batteries last for a week
without recharging;

\- Simpler, faster and more efficient development plataforms;

... And I'm sure you can add a few more. Each of these are changes that
separately would not be considered exactly ground-breaking, but all of them
together could bring mobile computing to a whole new level.

~~~
untoreh
when I think about smartphone innovation I generally think about all the level
of automation that could be done with for example tasker for android, if only
smartphones could pull sensors data and substantially eliminate overheating,
we could have a seamless experience with very little interaction needed,
probably not even touch inputs. Smartphones today are sleeping most of the
time, they are not dumb, but very much lazy. The benchmarks war has done a ton
of harm...look! this device hits 200k on this benchmark, too bad battery dies
after 3hours if you keep that up, btw you might also feel an uncomfortable
heat in your hands...

------
Animats
Samsung says they're going to introduce a foldable smartphone with the display
wrapped around the outside.[1] This provides a small display for routine use
and a 7" display when desired.

[1] [http://bgr.com/2017/01/11/samsung-foldable-smartphones-
relea...](http://bgr.com/2017/01/11/samsung-foldable-smartphones-release-
date/)

------
zimbatm
The smartphone is a concept, a portable computer with Internet connectivity
and a touch screen as a primary mode of interaction. I don't think we should
limit our thinking to it's actual form. The key bit is the portable, connected
computer. How we interact with it and the form of the actual device is
hopefully going to evolve.

------
tutufan
A phone with volume buttons that actually and intuitively worked--in practice,
not just in theory--would be innovative.

A phone that incorporated debouncing on its touch screen would be innovative.

A phone that didn't require high manual dexterity in order to avoid tapping
the wrong thing would be innovative.

~~~
asafira
Innovative, maybe technically yes. But in reality, these are not really game
changers.

------
debt
Seems direct connection and solar charging are the next major innovations.

So like no internet to talk to a friend through a phone from phone to phone(if
you can call them a phone at that point).

Also if Apple or google get into the solar game by putting a super high
efficiency panel on the phone that might change the world. They work at such
large scales that it's likely drive the overall cost of solar panels through
the floor so solar cars solar fridges solar tiles solar showers idk solar
anything similar to what they did with quadrocopters.

Those would likely be the two main points of world changing ground breaking
innovation I'd see. Idk how they'd achieve either of those things on the
technical side but they have enough money to find out.

~~~
nradov
You can already buy solar charger cases but I doubt a mainstream manufacturer
would ever integrate solar cells directly into a smartphone. That would add
cost, weight, and bulk for a feature few consumers want. A solar panel doesn't
work in your pocket.

------
erikb
I don't know. I don't see any big innovation coming next. Just because we
don't see one doesn't mean we have to force one of the creative things that
aren't market ready yet to be that next innovation. When the iphone hit it hit
big time. Everybody knew immediately that this will be a game changer. AR, VR
are just like that. The only thing that really let's me "wow" is AI and all
its applications we haven't considered yet like autonomous cars. But this may
happen next year or in five years or maybe even just in 20 years. And on the
road there something else might happen that is totally unexpected to most of
us.

------
sandGorgon
one word - fuchsia.

[https://fuchsia.googlesource.com/](https://fuchsia.googlesource.com/)

~~~
emsy
Knowing Google, Fuchsia was probably started as a mean to kill yet another
product.

~~~
rocky1138
You're getting downvoted but your vocalization has some merit. I looked at the
link and decided not to bother reading it since it'll probably get closed down
in a few years, so what's the point?

~~~
emsy
People seem eager to forget, given that Google Talk was discontinued not even
a week ago.

~~~
rocky1138
The real nail in the coffin for me was when they killed Google Reader for no
good reason. What a shame.

------
Magnets
It doesn't mean there isn't any improvement. Phone cameras are getting so
incredible now that you really don't need to carry a P&S and with things like
HDR+, OIS, 4k video you'll get better results.

People have been saying that smartphones replaced cameras for years, but now
they are not just a replacement but actually better.

There has still been innovation with dual cameras, finger print sensors, laser
focus, better LED flash, USB type C and monthly Android security patches will
probably encourage people to upgrade after they reach EoL for a device.

~~~
orbitur
My $200 Canon P&S that I bought in 2013 still takes better low-light pics than
my iPhone 7.

Phones are good enough, sure. But top of the line phones still can't do low-
light very well.

~~~
jp555
Bit better in low light, but can you edit your RAW pics on it? How about
editing 4K video? Of course I'm being facetious, but top of the line
smartphones are pretty great cameras generally speaking. Man I wish I could
have changed the crappy OS in the P&S cameras I used to use, and now I can
pick the camera/video shooting app I prefer. Plus edit & upload pics from the
device.

------
vit05
Snapchat could become the most successful entrant in AR. Especially after the
launch of the first version of Spectacles. They already have an audience that
likes to make, see and share new things. You could consider them as a niche
company in media and hardware sectors. Other companies are clearly focused on
produce one solution to everything before know how people will like to use,
for what purpose. They are the only company that is pursuing produce something
Cool that people will like to use on streets.

------
jaddood
I agree that the time of smartphone innovation is gone, and I'd argue it's
been gone since years, but still breathing the last breaths.

On the other hand, I do not think AI is the next big thing. It is a good
candidate to be so, but there should exist much better guesses we can make.
You should have a product, not simply a way of doing something or a
technology. You need to sell a product, so pure AI won't do anything.

But even if it doesn't do much by itself, it should play a big role in the
coming S curve (as the article names it.)

Good article!

~~~
camillomiller
Well, multitouch was not a product. You need a technology and then products
that successfully build upon it. Exactly what's not happening with VR for
consumers (but applications in the b2b sector are much more interesting I
gotta say)

------
tlow
This article is naive to the HUGE patent library Apple will be capitalizing on
for iPhone 8, which will be a device to see. I've heard to called as ambitious
as the original iPhone.

To the comments on platform shift, might you call it a paradigm shift? If so,
Thomas Kuhn, the man who popularized that phrase in his book "On the Nature of
Scientific Revolutions" argues that individuals within a revolution would
likely not be aware of such a fact.

------
rockarage
Smartphone Innovations is far from over it is just harder.

Upcoming innovations:

1.)Superior camera: Incredible Low Light sensitivity, Incredible compensation
/ correction for camera shake, will be better than any current implementation.

2.)AR support: example:
[http://www.waverlylabs.com/](http://www.waverlylabs.com/) This earpiece will
work with a smartphone app.

------
aluhut
I'm going to jump on the AR train when implants become mainstream. Glass and
those watches seem silly to me as a normal consumer. The professional
applications I've seen recently look quite useful so I'm very positive about
future development in this sector.

------
tempodox
Funny that he should put a Magic Leap video in his article. I thought the
consensus is that this is actually really fake, as opposed to the iPhone. The
mechanical turk of the 18th century was also fake, but that didn't mean
mechanical chess players were the next big thing.

~~~
ghshephard
Evans has seen / played around with the Magic Leap tech, and he is pretty
certain it's the real deal.

~~~
valuearb
The effect may be a real deal, but is the box still the size of a
refrigerator?

------
faragon
There will be no end, until everything gets into the smartphone, in my
opinion. Tablets are in decadence, and laptops will fall dramatically once
convenient operating system support for external screen appear (e.g. a la
Windows 10) on Android and iOS.

~~~
empath75
Smartphone screens are just too small for certain tasks.

~~~
faragon
Sure. That's the point of using external screens (e.g. dumb "docking
stations", converting any phone into a laptop).

------
ancarda
>Apple and Google won (Google only outside China, of course)

Could someone explain this? My understanding was few in China used an iPhone
and Android is extremely popular? Is that now out of date given Apple's recent
pushes into the Chinese market?

~~~
ajross
iPhones are actually pretty popular in China, broadly comparable to their
market share elsewhere (I don't have numbers). But while Android dominates,
it's not "Google" Android. The phones don't ship the GMS app suite and don't
integrate with the Google services stack.

------
exabrial
I think we'll just keep removing features and raising the price :/

------
std_throwaway
I don't think this is true. Phones are still getting bigger and thinner while
battery life only decreases slightly. This game can be played indefinitely.

~~~
TheSpiceIsLife
I don't believe it's possible to slightly decrease battery life indefinitely.

Also, there is a limit to thinness. Maybe the rest of the phone could be
hidden in an alternate universe and the only thing that protrudes in to our
realm is the direct visual cortex stimulator.

We'll see.

~~~
camillomiller
*we'll feel

Ftfy

------
api
PCs took a lot longer to stop innovating, but they were (and still are for
desktops) an open platform.

------
dredmorbius
Think Hegelian.

The smartphone gave us pocket comms and information. Unfortunately, with the
Jevons paradox and Gresham's Law impacting on our fundamentally limited
attention -- _rivality is the counterpoint of virality_ \-- we're in a world
in which distractions, distortions, impositions, agency, and privacy are up
for grabs.

Contra several assertions within this thread, we've seen information systems
and regimes which have lasted far beyond 50 years: speech and language
themselves, early writing systems, clay tablets, papayrus, block printing,
moveable type, increased literacy, ever cheaper and faster publishing methods,
voice, image, moving image, and broadcast. More recently networks with some
degree of peer-to-peer _and_ mass comms integrated.

There have been advances and regressions. When Gutenberg first pulled the
lever on his press in Europe, there were 30,000 books on the continent. Not
30,000 _titles_ , but 30,000 _books_ , total. There were 50 million by the end
of the century, nearly a billion by 1800. Reproduction rates went from about
120 impressions an hour, to over one million with the steam-powered rotary
presses of the late 19th century and early 20th, which promoted populist wars
in Cuba, the Philippines, and the muddy trenches of Normandy.

Liberalisation in the 19th century lead to a fundamentalist backlash amongst
early 20th century religious groups, particularly in the United States, the
descendents of which are still active in creationist, young-earth, and global-
warming denialist cults.

Mobile devices of today strike me as akin to patent-medicine and radium-water
peddlers of an earlier age. We're waking up to the fact that these
technologies have _both_ positive _and_ negative elements. The boosters, ben-
evans amongst them, keep preaching more and faster, shades of the jetpack,
flying car, meal-in-a-pill, and plastic-prefab-house fantasies of the 1930s
through 1960s.

Instead, we realised that not all marketing claims are justified, that
pollution presents real hazards, that there's something to be said for
modestly-traditional housing and clothing styles (the 1990s grunge fad looked
little like _Lost in Space_ or _Space 1999_ ).

We're discovering that our social networks and bubble-filtered news meshes
poorly with liberal democracy, or carefully-cultivated brand-consciousness, in
the case of YouTube. Spam and phone solicitations crowd out what few moments
of uninterrupted time we can find -- the technorati now revel in _not_ being
connected, rather than jacking in to their email every five minutes. A
practice which was freakish in 1999, naff today.

Among the largest disruptions of the 1990s was a small local events-and-items
listing which was passed about via email. Turns out that it accomplished, at
far less cost, and price, what newspaper classifieds did at the time.

Whilst Moore's Law appears to be winding down in terms of chip density and
capacity, the _cost_ component of it isn't, and we still have the fact that
computing costs are falling by roughly an order of magnitude each decade. This
means that what Google accomplished in the 1990s, Facebook could achieve at
roughly 1/10 the cost, and today's Emerging Threats will be able to achieve at
1/10 the cost of Facebook, 1/100th that of Google.

It also means that the cost horizon is shifting, from _making_ and _obtaining_
compute devices, to _managing_ and _organising_ them. If you're interested in
getting a log of conditions over the life of a package shipment, you can slap
a $5 SOC unit in the packaging and have it phone home when it finds WiFi (or
4GL) at its destination. In ten years, that will be a $0.50 SOC, in twenty,
$0.05.

We're likely to have tens or hundreds of billions of such devices, all around
us. Which at such price-points, won't be worth the time to property engineer,
secure, harden, or patch.

Collectively, these will have a considerable amount of processing power.

And though most of these devices won't be tied in to physical systems, that
compute power might be put to use finding those that are and ... persuading
them in various ways. Lights. Heating systems. Automated vacuums. Industrial
control machinery. Drones. Self-driving vehicles.

Food for thought.

