It's dangerous too. We've watched Silicon Valley completely strip industries like music, movies and gaming of a wide swath of its profitability. It's the birthplace of modern XaaS offerings.
It just doesn't sit right with me that someone would suggest a conglomerate like Google is more progressive than government. It reads like a love letter to the villain in every dystopic novel.
The music and movie industry were a mafia of media executives who squeezed artists and fought technological progress even as distribution methods were changing the fundamentals of the business. I don't feel particularly bad for their loss.
I'm curious if you have a source for the claims on movies or gaming. I couldn't find anything conclusive.
It is true that revenue in the music industry dropped substantially over time, although I am not sure about profitability. The music industry has moved to digital, so wouldn't that imply that the margins are better therefore potentially more profitable? Or is streaming more expensive than pressing physical cds?
On a personal note, I think Spotify is freaking incompetent as hell, as I constantly have issues with basic shit like their Shuffle feature. I'm close to unsubscribing with them.
Not only. Neoliberals have been busy striping government of its most basic functions, and lobbyists for said tech firms are the the ones that push for lowering taxes and deregulating. So yes, they won. Bigly. But not based on merit. Silicon Valley is not producing anything valuable.
And those jobs are running on $15 subscription MRR models. I'm not unappreciative, trust me. I just also don't appreciate that they have systematically obstructed competing services. And they've done all this using the same tactics we were tearing Microsoft apart for in the 90s over shipping Windows with Internet Explorer built into the OS.
Do a search through Google for a digital whiteboard, and once you scroll past several ads, one of the first links is for Google's Jamboard. How is this creating "trillions in value, and millions of jobs via direct and indirect employment"? It's funneling more utility into the Google service model, which is "free", because your data is not.
Big Tech is as much responsible for the dwindling payouts on music and movie royalties to artists, as it is responsible for the GDPR. It's as much responsible for us not owning the media we pay for, as it is now also responsible for the half-finished, nickel-and-dime microtransactions and advertisements that litter even paid services.
Facebook: I’ve got nothing. I use FB. I guess it’s been away to keep in contact with people and it employs thousands of people who all contribute to the economy. But I really don’t have a case for it being a value creating platform.
Apple: it ushered in the app economy but more importantly, it made the idea popular of having a computer in every pocket. Even services that would never have been popular without mobile made billions of dollars. Between its employees, suppliers, and third parties it’s also been a value creator.
Amazon (Disclaimer: I work for AWS): hundreds of thousands employees and the minimum wage is $15/hour for fulfillment center workers, not to mention its enabled third party sellers to reach millions, again a value creator.
Google: while Apple first popularized the modern smart phone era. Let’s be honest, Apple’s products are out of reach for most people in the world. Android democratized the idea of a computer in every pocket. Mobile payments have done wonders for 3rd world countries.
How is this creating "trillions in value, and millions of jobs via direct and indirect employment"? It's funneling more utility into the Google service model, which is "free", because your data is not.
If Google’s ads weren’t effective, would people be buying them? Are they more effective than the third world.
We don’t have to guess whether tech has created trillions in value. It’s reflected in their market cap. The five big tech companies are worth over five trillion together. Those stocks are in pension funds, 401Ks etc. The money people make directly and indirectly are the single handedly propping up the stock markets and those pensions.
Big Tech is as much responsible for the dwindling payouts on music and movie royalties to artists
Blame the people buying subscriptions not the tech industry. Before the rise of Spotify, by 2010. Apple and all of the rest of the industry was selling DRM free music you own. Apple still does through iTunes. People decided that they wanted subscription music.
You can still pay for music you own - DRM free through Apple.
Commercial movies have never been free of copy protection. Even during the analog days of VHS and Macrovision.
Even console games have always required third party manufacturers to license copy protection from the console makers. Well at least since the mid 80s.
It just doesn't sit right with me that someone would suggest a conglomerate like Google is more progressive than government. It reads like a love letter to the villain in every dystopic novel.