
Big Tech’s ‘Innovations’ That Aren’t - mistersquid
https://www.wsj.com/articles/big-techs-innovations-that-arent-11567033288?mod=rsswn
======
hirundo
> What “innovation” remains in this space is innovation to keep the treadmill
> running, longer and faster, drawing more data from users to bombard us with
> more ads for more stuff.

A tweet from @iamdeveloper today:

1950: how do we get people to listen to more ads?

1970: how do we get people to watch more ads?

2000: how do we get people to click on more ads?

2020: how do we get people to be ads?

2030: people are ads now

~~~
Ancalagon
I laughed, and there's a good amount of truth to this. Although imo a lot of
the IG influencers and sponsored Youtubers already are walking advertisements.

~~~
BubRoss
That is the point that is being made.

------
Ididntdothis
It's a little ironic that his only example of "real" innovation is the moon
landing which was a huge government program he certainly wouldn't support now.

I generally agree that current big tech companies don't really do much
innovation anymore but I fear that he is just attacking the companies he
doesn't like for political reasons but leaves others out.

The whole excessive partisanship sucks. It makes you question the real motives
behind good looking ideas and unfortunately these suspicions are often
correct.

------
scarmig
The WSJ calling out exploitation of the American public at the expense of big
corporations? Wow.

The cynical motivations are transparent, but oh well. Best of luck, Senator
Hawley.

~~~
adamnemecek
Yeah. I agree with the premise but I feel like this article is a sleight of
hand to distract from non-tech companies exploiting people.

~~~
scarmig
One lens to view American politics through is as a proxy war between two
factions of the American elite. One is comprised of tech, media, and various
service firms; the other is finance and extractive industries.

The only really strategy for clipping the wings of any of those industries is
to ally yourself with the faction that doesn't represent them.

------
forgottenpass
I don't think Hawley's position or presentation are perfect, but if you can
separate the wheat from the chaff this is a really good start.

And even if you don't like it at all, let this just be another indicator that
the general population is starting to wise up to the fact the "tech" business
model has been getting more and more exploitative. You can continue
rationalizing the systems you build at your dayjob here on Hacker News, but in
the real world dang isn't around to hush the people who want to tell you to go
get fucked.

------
icr0
I don't agree with his claim that big tech advances are responsible for teen
suicide rates, and definitely don't appreciate him trying to capitalize on it
to push his own agenda.

I must say though,

>What passes for innovation by Big Tech today isn’t fundamentally new products
or new services, but ever more sophisticated exploitation of people.

Does have some truth to it

~~~
CodeMage
I'm pretty sure the claim isn't that "big tech advances" bear the sole
responsibility for teen suicide rates, but rather that they contribute to them
in a substantial way.

The atrophy of real-world relationships he mentions is not something he made
up, but rather a real problem. And I would be surprised if someone could prove
that this problem doesn't contribute to teen suicide rates at all.

------
cookie_monsta
> Silicon Valley’s giants are no longer producing better products and
> services. They’re exploiting people.

Why can't they be doing both, like industry has done since industry was a
thing?

I think the senator has a very narrow definition of innovation which for the
great part has been about combining existing elements to create something
"new". Viewed like this, there's innovation all over the place.

I do like some of the restrictions he advocates for, but I doubt they'll ever
be anything more than talking points.

------
rrss
Help me brainstorm here (genuinely):

I'm trying to think of innovations in the last few decades, but everything I
can think of is a refinement of an technology invented 50+ years ago (mostly
at bell labs) made possible by the exceptional strides in semiconductor
manufacturing. It's certainly nice to have technology spread more widely from
research labs to the general public, but I'm wondering if there are
innovations happening now that I don't know about because they aren't
widespread (yet?).

Anyone have any ideas of innovations since say 1980 other than in
semiconductor manufacturing?

~~~
033803throwaway
"Eventually we will run out of things to rip off from Douglas Engelbart"

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mother_of_All_Demos](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mother_of_All_Demos)

~~~
ASalazarMX
> The 90-minute presentation essentially demonstrated almost all the
> fundamental elements of modern personal computing: windows, hypertext,
> graphics, efficient navigation and command input, video conferencing, the
> computer mouse, word processing, dynamic file linking, revision control, and
> a collaborative real-time editor (collaborative work).

Whoa, 1968! It seems incredible that was half a century ago!

------
_bxg1
Corporations do whatever is most profitable. If we don't like what they're
doing, the only way to change it is to incentivize something else. Were the
U.S. a country with interest in funding public-works projects -
infrastructure, science, etc. - we'd benefit massively from the amount of
brainpower and energy stored up in Silicon Valley. Instead, we get more
adtech.

------
mistersquid
I posted this after hearing Professor Scott Galloway identify Hawley's article
as a "win" on "Pivot", his podcast with Kara Swisher. [0]

This week's episode covers a lot of ground and is worth listening to. It
includes topics ranging from Tesla being purchased by Volkswagen, the value of
Peloton, and the possibility that China is winning the Trump administration's
Trade War. (Disclosure: Swisher and Galloway are progressive and liberal, and
much of their commentary reflect that angle.)

[0]
[https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/pivot/id1073226719#epi...](https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/pivot/id1073226719#episodeGuid=c3d0e2fa-0241-11e9-8252-fb15b182e848)

EDIT: proofread first sentence!

------
fbonetti
> That's why I’ve proposed banning the “dark patterns” that feed tech
> addiction.

Further proof that both Republicans and Democrats are the party of big
government these days.

------
forgotpassword4
This would sound fresh if it had been written in 2011. Now, it just sounds
like it was written by a republican senator.

------
paggle
Maybe we can finally unite the Democratic focus on the “little guy” with the
Republican desire to hurt the Democratic donor class with the random number
generator of the President and get some actual legislation passed here.

------
cameronbrown
Is he really insinuating that infinite scroll and autoplay contribute to teen
suicide rates? I accept that Facebook/social media is huge part of the problem
(and many many problems), but there are many more factors at play. It's far
too easy to just scapegoat Big Tech for 100% of the problem instead of
considering _other_ causes as well.

~~~
viklove
It's ironic how you're criticizing him of being reductionist by reducing his
argument to one line from his essay. Not saying I agree with him, but your
take isn't as fresh as you think.

