"By extension, this means that the most important factor determining success is the user experience: the best distributors/aggregators/market-makers win by providing the best experience, which earns them the most consumers/users, which attracts the most suppliers, which enhances the user experience in a virtuous cycle."
Sadly, the reality of the virtuous circle though is: enshittification.
"...from music to video to books to art; the extent to which being “special” meant being scarce is the extent to which the existence of “special” meant a constriction of opportunity"
I don't get this. Rarity or inaccessibility has been used as marketing tool, sure. But great music and books were not scarce for a long time pre-internet. Feels like a "never mind the quality, feel the width" view of culture.
"LLMs are breaking down all written text ever into massive models that don’t even bother with pages: they simply give you the answer."
When will people stop saying that? The give an answer, yes, but is it the answer: caveat emptor.
> But great music and books were not scarce for a long time pre-internet.
For some maybe. When I was first learning to program I would drive to the local bookstore and copy down code from books out of their very small tech section. I couldn't afford to buy any of the books at the time (out of the very small selection), and they were too new for the local library to carry. Now, I can learn about almost _anything_ for free within a few clicks.
Music was similarly gated, but more so by lack of money than overall access.
"By extension, this means that the most important factor determining success is the user experience: the best distributors/aggregators/market-makers win by providing the best experience, which earns them the most consumers/users, which attracts the most suppliers, which enhances the user experience in a virtuous cycle."
Sadly, the reality of the virtuous circle though is: enshittification.
"...from music to video to books to art; the extent to which being “special” meant being scarce is the extent to which the existence of “special” meant a constriction of opportunity"
I don't get this. Rarity or inaccessibility has been used as marketing tool, sure. But great music and books were not scarce for a long time pre-internet. Feels like a "never mind the quality, feel the width" view of culture.
"LLMs are breaking down all written text ever into massive models that don’t even bother with pages: they simply give you the answer."
When will people stop saying that? The give an answer, yes, but is it the answer: caveat emptor.