Hey Internet, it's been nice knowing ya...

in #technology6 years ago (edited)

We've had a information technology industry for about 50 years now. During that time "hackers" have invented the next generation of technology. The fact that Steve Jobs & Steve Wozniak created Apple after first creating illegal phone calling blue boxes, was a footnote in history. The fact that Facebook's main HQ is situated on "Hacker Way" is another footnote.

1-hacker-way-facebook-i-like-267432.jpg

The truth is that the IT sector was created as a reaction of nerds against what they felt were betrayed, victimized and disenfranchised.

The same is true of Bitcoin & the blockchain industry. The "Ron Paul" evangelists who felt their economic future had been sold down the road by federal banks and governments, created an almighty "fark you" by creating Bitcoin. Its adoption and progression was spurred by activism that was spectated on by governments, until someone said "Enough" and it stopped disrupting.

It is time to stop the disruption

The problem with activism that tries to right a wrong or change direction is that the activist is in control. They determine fate. They determine where the herd will go. Most of the time, this is against the will of power, money & governments. But the inertia is something that the smart & powerful respect and recognize. They feel that if it goes down a path that is in their interest, they will sit on the bench and watch it. When it hits critical mass, or lands on the square that they own, then they regulate to stop it from leaving their backyard.

Such is the case with Apple right now and regulation.

The incredible power that the Internet has brought us in terms of transparency, freedom of expression, freedom to create digital content anywhere in the world, etc. has become weaponized. Not by the evil extremists, but by the very mega corporations that want total control of it. Silicon Valley, and the Fortune 100 corporations that reside there.

camera-cctv-equipment-430208.jpg

This year, Europe passed sweeping laws to attempt to protect the right of privacy for the individual on the Internet. The intention here was great and it meant that finally you could demand to be removed from Google searches and that your data was owned by you and you had the right to request it, control it, and tell the mega corporations that had benefited from selling you to every advertiser that enough is enough.

When entire corporations business models are on your data value and how they can monetize it, it is not surprising. But the reality is that we willing participants have opted into this by using Facebook, Google, LinkedIn, Twitter, Instagram, etc. for free for years. We gave up our privacy rather than giving up a monthly subscription fee to use these services. And this meant that these relatively low cost to create hosted software and database companies were able to forgo your money for the money of the advertisers. You don't pay for a Google search. You don't pay to "Like" something on Facebook, and you don't pay to Tweet. At least not directly with cash. You pay with your privacy.

So here's where it gets really weird. Today I heard the latest headlines in the tech news...

Tim Cook proclaims Tech Industry regulation is inevitable

I was always curious why the head of one of the largest tech companies had spent an enormous amount of time & money out there "informing us" of this news. I mean why would he do that? What's in it for him? It isn't that he doesn't have enough to do, right? Sure, Apple's stock price is down a bit and their forecasted sales right now for Q4 2018 are down a bit. But why would the CEO of one of the largest corporations in US history be out there basically promoting regulation?

The enemies of my enemies is my friend?

We have been played for a very long time. Remember the old Who song, "Won't be fooled again?"

_46463853_who_beginning.jpg

Tim Cook and the walled garden of Apple are playing us all for fools. He is basically prodding the US congress to enact regulations against his competitors. With a looming democrat majority in the House of Representatives, Cook believes that he can get on every main stream media outlet and tell the world that regulations on the Internet are inevitable and that we should prepare for it. Why? Simple - Apple sells hardware using the 20th century business model of making profit on devices. The barrier to entry in that market is very high - much higher than a software company or a cloud computing provider. So if your competitors are Amazon, Google, Facebook, Microsoft, etc. you can send a crippling blow to them by lobbying congress to enact regulations "for the people". I mean protect individual privacy, etc. Who wouldn't want that? Some 60 yr old congressman or congresswoman is not going to argue against that because it gets them elected or re-elected.

But it is not in our interest. The choice that we have as a society to opt in and sell our privacy may be a bad choice. But it is still OUR CHOICE. Not a government. Sure, we might have been played but we chose to be played. We can also choose to not be played. But to have that choice taken from us is not only immoral and unethical, but it treats us like the same customer of Apple.

Apple - a company that for decades has taken a "you don't need to be smart to use our technology - we'll protect you and take all the sharp edges away so you don't hurt yourself". That's great for grandma's computing, but talk to a software engineer who is constantly frustrated at what they are NOT allowed to do on Apple platforms. That they cannot innovate because Apple says No. They can't release an app for an iPhone unless Apple say it is ok.

Look, we have created an amazing industry because of hackers. Hackers that created Apple. Hackers that created the disruption needed for the world to advance at the level it has for the past 50 years. But to now jail the same hackers, is a slap in the face to advancement.

Apple win because they now get the US government to force their own business model on their competitors, thereby creating dominance. If you can't invent better technology, then just kill your competitors off. By default you will be the vendor that your customers get up at 4AM and wait in line for 8 hours to buy the next piece of crap technology you produce - the one that is no real difference to last year's model. And still the technology that no one can reverse engineer or hack or make work better or different to your vision.

20140924_apple-line_0059-780x520.jpg

Meanwhile, some new startup decides they have invented some great new tech (think Steem here) and all of a sudden they want to buy some server hosting and release it. The privacy regulations then kick in.

Scaring off the future competition

Nerds are smart. But they are normally victims to bullies. This means that fear runs rampant. Sure, there are those outspoken ones that tell the world to bring it on. But they are rare. The DNA of a nerd is a quiet, soft spoken, hide in the parent's basement, etc. This is the very same creators of Apple, Microsoft, Tesla, etc. They were empowered and protected by lawyers but for the most part they are passive.

Look at what happened in the ICO space in 2018. Most got killed off. Nerds got scared that the big SEC or government would throw them in jail if they attempted to fund their new idea without going through the Goldman Sach's controlled money machine. So they stopped. The projects already in progress continued, but new ones didn't emerge to take advantage of blockchain at the level you would expect.

This is how it works. You scare away your competitors and you enjoy the riches. Apple are doing this. They are trying to play congress to enact privacy laws that benefit the Apple walled garden, kill off their competition, and stifle future threats. This means you. Your new idea. And your monthly budget will be hit by inflation.

Inflation? Why?

Because those free services you have been enjoying for decades won't be free anymore. They can't monetize on your data, so they have to find another way. Monthly subscription fees, probably. Facebook have already threatened this. YouTube do it, but offering their paid service levels that remove the ads. Spotify does it as well. Soon everything will come with some $10 or $20 a month fee to use it. And we'll just call this "inflation".

This is the end game of the free service. Often a service that we have funded with some Kickstarter project, but now is turned against us. Hope you have room on your credit card for the future monthly subscription fees you will be paying. You think that cable fees are high? Just wait.

But what about Steem, Steemit, dTube, dSound, etc?

Meanwhile we have this wonderful platform that we have created - Steem based services and dApps. They are free, right? They don't cost anything....

Yes, but here's the deal... Unless we have content that rivals YouTube, Facebook, Spotify, etc. we are nothing. We don't matter. We only matter when grandma can come to Steemit and read something of value vs. paying a monthly fee to the New York Times or Washington Post to read it there. Or that a dTube video has actual content that rivals the YouTube equivalent. If that happens, then yep - we have offered a viable alternative to the subscription model services and we win.

But we are failing in doing this. We are failing in such an epic way that I can't believe it.

Selection_999(183).jpg

The mantra that posting quantity over quality is stupid. But it is the underlying DNA of Steem. The more posts, the more upvotes, the more you "mine the blockchain" and the more Steem you generate. This sends a clear message to a content creator that it doesn't matter if your content is crap - just post it. The more you post and the higher the frequency, the more likely a whale will spot you and upvote you. Then you can enjoy the $100+ per post world of free money and you can give up your job and live like the rich & famous.

It doesn't work. Longevity is about creating something of quality - something that 5 years from now, is still relevant and is still being searched out. An immutable blockchain is perfect for that - you can't get rid of what you post on it. Yet we choose to post crap? Just for a measly amount of upvotes?

This is our chance to shine. This is our time to be the true activists and take back the Internet. But it isn't going to happen because you sell out your short term future for some crap upvotes. It comes down simply to creating such high quality content that you draw away the inertia from YouTube and over to dTube. Or you draw away the attention from Soundcloud and over to dSound. Or from Facebook or Reddit and over to Steemit.

We can seize this opportunity that Apple are playing right now. That means you invest in quality gear to create quality content. You learn how media production is done. You plan out your content - not some stupid daily dTube vlog with your cheap ass phone. Something that rivals Casey Neistat. Something that takes advantage of the low cost of entry, but respects it with the high quality of content - both in terms of storyline but also in production.

Don't try and post everyday. Unless you think you really have something to say. Something that will be valued in 5 years time. Not your opinion piece on the price of Bitcoin today. Sorry, but no one gives a crap. What will they want to read about 3 years from now, and what you do feel represents your best work? And how do you make the next one after that better?

@kenanqhd has a point...

Selection_999(184).jpg

No One Cares About Your Fucking DTube Videos

Yes, he is abrasive. But look beyond the butthurt feelings that this video might present to the core message. It needs to be said (although this isn't my specific style for saying it) and it needs to be heard.

The Opportunity is in front of you. Seize it.

Quality matters, people. Not quantity. Especially in a world where the corporations are playing us to seize monopolistic control over our Internet. Remember, we make the difference here. Don't sell yourself short and don't sell out for a quick buck because the platforms that we have right now are under threat.

We can present an alternative that matters - an alternative that isn't subject to regulations or censorship.

Sort:  

All part of the plan, my dear... ;) Every drop of cash that I can save is currently earmarked for tools, not toys. This is why I had to abandon many friends who insist on gladly throwing away their future for Nachos Bellgrande, the iPhone 23, and the playstation (integer).. but not just -any- Playstation... the special one... with the Call of Duty: 47 super-duper-deluxe Winsauce Edition-skin powdercoated on the side!!!

Fuck. That. Shit.

The internet is self-sorting into Makers and audiences... tale as old as time. When I was a boy, it was $200 Nike shoes that showed how much your parents valued you... now the zeitgeist is so greatly encultured that it's iPhones that project your worthiness.. to fools.

Good point. I think the one thing that defined my generation was a total lack of trust of any authority. This seems to be a lost art these days.

What do you think about @steemmonsters?

Out of all of the Dapps @beunconstrained they have the most viable business. In addition to generating over $800,000 USD in less than a year, they have an active community of card players and collectors.

I personally don't like video games or card games, but I am amazed that they have a viable business.

The next push for the Steem community is to build another viable business on the Steem blockchain - a business that makes more money than the standard Steem rewards.

I submitted the Tax Report business idea we were talking about to @aggroed's contest but I don't know who won yet.

On the subject of your Tax Report business idea, I had lunch with my accountant yesterday and we discussed the level of effort for US tax reporting on crypto currency transactions. He told me that in his industry, there is a general sentiment of doubt with anything to do with crypto. In fact he said that at a recent conference he was at, he was laughed out of the room for even bringing up the handling of tax reporting of crypto. It seems that the conservative "old skool" accounting industry is going to be really slow at adopting change here. That said, he is still bullish on crypto (as I am) but with 20 year timelines on this. The problem is that there are few laws and regulations for tax compliance, and multiple competing govt agencies all attempting to regulate (often with conflicts in regulations). I think it will take some time for the rules to work themselves out, and the recent move to a bear market for BTC and crypto may just make what is a hard area to regulate, something that the IRS pushes off to the "to do" pile and doesn't act upon for some time.

In the meantime, I saw your post on this and I can honestly say that you are not providing the incentive to do this based on a $20 a year fee that they could get for providing that service. The costs of software development labor is huge, and you need to provide something where someone who can make $100K a year in a job as a programmer (that is $50 an hour based on a 2,000 per year working time period), needs to be able to generate at least a year's salary in 12 months to be able to do that. At $20 per customer, that means you would need to get 5,000 customers in the first 12 months to just make as much as a single salary for this. Since the market is restricted only to US persons and it is likely that the dApp developer has to be a US person to understand the regulations (and most don't), this isn't going to fly. A more realistic price target for this would be $100 a year, since an accountant charges about $150 an hour on average and the goal here is to sell this as "Buy this software product and save yourself X hours of your accountant's time", etc. You have to have a sales pitch that is part of your business plan, and I don't see anywhere near enough money in this to get the right developers on board or to make a business out of this. This is why 9 out of 10 businesses fail in their first 18 months. You need to get the numbers right to begin with, and I think you are way short of making this a going concern based on what I read in your prospectus.

You might be right @beunconstrained I may have underestimated the amount of programming required. I thought it would be an easy job and kind of based that on the people who are building Dapps without any income outside of the Steem rewards.

Maybe I would have had a better chance at winning the contest if I set the annual report at $100 and justified it based on not having to pay an accountant $150.

Thanks for the feedback.

P.S. You might also be right about @steemmonsters but I am also suspecting that you aren't aware of how many people are actually playing (everyday).

Millions buy lottery tickets too. It is not my cup of tea.

Posted using Partiko Android

I am sure a lottery could be hosted on the Steem blockchain too if it wasn't for gambling laws.

There are millions buying lottery tickets every month / year and that is what makes lotteries a viable business.

I can't say I have any experience with @steemmonsters. Nor do I have the desire to. If I was to consider it as an investment, I would have to rate it like I rate any other investment:

  1. Does it provide a valuable service to people that they are willing to pay money to consume?
  2. Does it have better competitors that make it less desirable?
  3. Does it make the world a better place?

Not sure if this ticks the box on any of my criterion. It looks like a scam, in that it is more like a "get rich quick" scheme that something that has lasting staying power. The thing is that most of the Steem platform is a get rich quick BS scheme that is no different to the Ponzi scams of the 1980s or 1990s. If something is generally too good to be true, it normally isn't. And if something doesn't deliver a tangible benefit to people, it is a speculation - not an investment. I don't participate in speculations. When I see something that could have some value turn from being a potential to being a speculation, I get out. That is what I did with BTC and I made 1000x on my investment. But I invested in it because of its ability to be a medium of exchange. When that didn't get adopted widely, I got out and it seems that was a wise decision in hindsight. These schemes that don't offer anything of tangible value to society are just scams parading themselves in different clothes. Remember that Steem's main point is to provide an immutable platform for content and I don't see how @steemmonsters furthers that goal. I might be wrong and often am, but I wouldn't put my hard earned money into it. YMMV of course.

@beunconstrained,

Here are some of the statistics for @steemmonsters:

Screenshot_20181123-223532.jpg

Screenshot_20181123-223542.jpgScreenshot_20181123-223610.jpg

Source:
https://steemit.com/steemmonsters/@steemmonsters/286kv8-a-steem-monsters-thank-you

I believe @ned and @steemit plan to tokenize everything in the long run and @steemmonsters is an example of a card game like Magic being tokenized!

Yes, but this isn't an investment. This is a speculation - a bet or gamble on a future price point. If you are going to buy some, you are looking to get out of them at a point. If you are thinking of buying and holding (ie. investing) then you have to have something of substance that has purpose. There is no purpose here. The price is based purely on what other people think the thing is worth and I can tell you that when times go tough, a bunch of virtual trading cards are not something that people will be rushing out to buy and as a result the price can plummet. You'd be far better off buying some physical gold than this, IMHO. I don't think you are looking at this with a critical mindset. This is more of a FOMO approach to buying and that never ends well.

I am not interested in buying any cards since I don't want to play. You keep talking about @steemmonsters as an investment but what about the actual game?

People are playing the game and enjoying it, much like people play other online games. Do you think it's possible that some people purchase cards for the sake of collecting them and enjoying the online game?

Not as an investment but for entertainment?

I wasn't thinking of it as an investment as much as I was referring to it as a game. A lot of games are being played on their @steemmonsters interface everyday and people are willing to consume time and cards on their platform.

I think the vision of @ned and Steemit Inc. is also much larger and multifaceted than you imply, and as far as I know, their overall objective is to 'tokenize the web'.

@steemmonsters the game seems to be modeled somewhat after Magic, the card game.

Magic has about 20 million players worldwide and has produced over 20 billion cards. It's a viable business and I suspect that @steemmonsters at least has the potential to remain a viable business since so far it is.

I appreciate your perspective though. Let me know if you still think @steemmonsters is a scam or if you happen to change your mind after searching for their statistics.

Statistics only support a FOMO approach to buying, like 12 months ago when everyone went out to buy BTC at $15K. How did they end up? The reality is that a thing is only worth its true value. I am not convinced there is any value here at all. I'm also not convinced that Steem has any actual value, because it is flawed in the way that it operates to encourage upvoting and not encourage high quality content. Consider the recent news I read about Jeff Berwick being kicked off Facebook. He decided to find another home for his blogs & video content. When he did this (and he was one of the original evangelists of Steem), he chose to put his content on about 8 different sites, including minds.com, Bitchute, Bittube, etc. Most of these are not tokenized with Steem. Why? Because he wants to be found where the customers are. If the customers are all on Steemit, then why would he post on 7 other platforms? This is a good key indicator. He is demonstrating a cautious approach to his core business by spreading around to differing platforms, supporting the notion that no one platform has won out as the carrier of content here, and content creators will go to where the customers are. The customers are where the content is of the highest quality (hence the massive YouTube population). If you want to compete to get customer attention, you have to have something of quality and that isn't promoted or supported here as much as it should. In a world where 50% of the population do not live in the first world and suffer in poverty and low income, someone with a smart phone and an Internet connection can create a video of low quality and make a few cents of upvoting. If you put 3.5 Billion people into that camp, you end up with pure spam. This is the problem. Steemit and dTube is completely swamped with post spam that makes the experience so poor for the content consumer that they will just go somewhere else. Until that problem is rectified, guys like Berwick will move to other platforms that not only monetize but promote quality over quantity, and that is the death of Steem. So go cautiously into this market because there are many factors that will determine a worthy investment, and price charts, FOMO and group think (ie. herd mentality) is not the main reason people make millions and billions with financial investing.

The charts I presented are not based on price, but activity. There are about 3,000 people playing @steemmonsters on any given day and that number is increasing.

Thanks for the word of caution though, I am treading lightly and I'm not investing that much.


I don't think the content problem is about the Steem blockchain as much as it's about the individual platforms.

@steemit will never be competitive enough to go against the Titans since it is just a sample site. But I think someone will eventually make a Platform that promotes better content over quantity.

One thing to keep in mind is that @ned and his team has spent very little time developing @steemit the platform. Most of their time has been spent developing @steem the blockchain, and as far as I know, they are the most innovative team for developing a social network blockchain. Some of the sites just copied their source code with a few tweaks here and there.

Now that @ned is creating Destiny, he and a new team will innovate in the platform space as much as they have innovated in the blockchain space. I personally think it will work and I suspect that the 1,000,000+ @ned sold off is helping to pay for it (just speculation).

If anything, the crowd mentality is to sell right now, not buy. The only people who are buying now seem to be people who bought at much higher prices and are now averaging down and holding on 'for dear life'.

I started buying in October at $0.79 and will spread out my purchases over 12 months. I don't think that is going with the crowd as much as it is recognizing that Steem is headed towards the bottom. I think the bottom is $0.16 or something similar and the value I see in Steem the blockchain is based on @ned's performance with his team. They've developed a good blockchain and I think they will develop a good platform on the @steem blockchain come 2019.

Good luck with your decisions! @beunconstrained

Congratulations @beunconstrained! You have completed the following achievement on the Steem blockchain and have been rewarded with new badge(s) :

You made more than 900 upvotes. Your next target is to reach 1000 upvotes.

Click here to view your Board of Honor
If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word STOP

To support your work, I also upvoted your post!

Do not miss the last post from @steemitboard:

Meet the Steemians Contest - The results, the winners and the prizes
Meet the Steemians Contest - Special attendees revealed
Meet the Steemians Contest - Intermediate results

Support SteemitBoard's project! Vote for its witness and get one more award!

Coin Marketplace

STEEM 0.19
TRX 0.15
JST 0.029
BTC 63470.48
ETH 2544.22
USDT 1.00
SBD 2.72