3 ms·

>> but I think that power will be diffused across society as the cost of production falls I feel like this is the kind of optimistic sentiment, expressed over

>> but I think that power will be diffused across society as the cost of production falls I feel like this is the kind of optimistic sentiment, expressed over the years, that this essay is countering. Empirically, we've seen the opposite. Yes, "software ate the world." But no, it hasn't diffused anything. Once upon a time, it was expensive to press records or print books. Someone had to bankroll it, and so record labels and book publishers became. What actually happened when music and print digitized? Did they go to a flat, federated, diffused or disintermediated structure. No. They got more centralized. Unaffiliated musicians and TV/film makers work for the youtube or spotify. They have no control or influence over those companies, and have no power. In fact, they have less power than before because they, unlike the platforms, are decentralised. >> Music - democratised as the means of production are cheaper but the incumbents are not dead yet, however their position is becoming untenable. Untenable in theory. Sure, there is no need for someone to bankroll record pressing or book printing anymore. Hello zero marginal cost abundance. Yet, labels and publishers still exist. The industry structure is more centralised and more intermediated. Above labels/publishers are amazon, netflix, spotify, apple or google.... the new top of the pyramid. OOH, we can believe our own 2004 speculative reasoning about digital economics... and what is or isn't tenable. OTOH, we can look at reality in 2021 and accept the prevailing trends. Youtube, spotify, itunes, amazon, netflix and future monopolies are what abundance looks like, not Wikimedia, Linux or the www. We were wrong. Abundance has not impacted economic structures the way we expected. We have what we had before, but now with a tech monopoly at the top.

grey-area 6y ago
I disagree that music and publishing have become more centralised. I have seen the death of the book publishing industry first hand - from the outside it might appear relatively unscathed, from the inside it has been hollowed out and is untenable. Publishers are clinging on but increasingly irrelevant and their margins are non-existent, which pushes their quality down, which undermines their business model further. They will survive another generation though on nostalgia and with steadily declining sales. They simply don’t have a viable business model any more. Sure we’re not living in the utopian future some imagined but that does not mean the transformation was not profound and ongoing. The transformation is far from over in those that were vulnerable to the internet and many industries have only just started being consumed.
- dalbasal 6y ago
  I see the author is here, so I feel kind of weird defending the position for him. What the heck though (sorry benedict)... The point isn't that technology hasn't had an impact, or that software didn't really "eat the world." Old businesses and industries do have to adjust, and sometimes fail. That's not the point either. The point is "what comes after?" or rather, "how do these industries look now?" The answer to that is closer to "same as it was in 2005" than it is to "what we expected would happen in 2005." IIRCC self publishing is still at 5%-10%. How does book publishing work today, 13 and 30 years after kindle and the wordwideweb were digitised publishing? A writer sits around wondering who they need to shag to get a publishing deal. If they're lucky, they get a publishing deal, like in 1988. Then Amazon sells it. Maybe publishing is going through a technology induced lean years. Maybe a lot of them will go out of business. News publishing has gone through crisis moments, where they beg politicians to make Google and FB share some ad revenue back with them. What has not happened is diffusion, disintermediation or somesuch. Creators or consumers aren't more empowered. From the outside, it's business as usual and the outside view is what counts. I remember Seth Godin's take on the kindle. At first he was excited. New medium, new message. Then he was disappointed. Digital books would cost the same. That meant the goal was to keep everything the same. There would be no penny-per page business model. No nonfiction equivalent of a short story. Amazon would be chasing deals with publishers, not opening up to new people. Jeff was right. Seth was wrong. I share a lot of your sensibilities. But when reality contradicts theory, we need to adapt the theory. The same is true of most large industries touched by digitization. Some (like publishing) had tumultuous transitions. Some (like banking) had pretty cushy transitions. In almost no cases has "economic untenable" logic proved out. Banks have not evolved into lean, mostly software, organisations. They've gotten bigger and hairier. Is this "tenable?" Maybe not, but it is the norm.
  - grey-area 6y ago
    OK I see where we disagree I think. You (and the author) think this transformation is over, I think it's just starting. IIRCC self publishing is still at 5%-10%. How does book publishing work today, 13 and 30 years after kindle and the wordwideweb were digitised publishing? A writer sits around wondering who they need to shag to get a publishing deal. If they're lucky, they get a publishing deal, like in 1988. Then Amazon sells it. This is not an accurate summary no. Today an author doesn't need a publishing deal to get in front of millions of readers in a way they most definitely did in 1988. They can set up a web page and sell their book themselves (and many are doing so). Just to pick one example, this book is self-published[1] and has its own website, on Amazon - Publisher : CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform. There are certainly problems, Amazon is a predatory monopoly which will suck the margins out of any successful seller on its platform, but the entire industry is being shaken and self-publishing is growing in importance. Many of the old publishers see this coming but have no idea what to do about it, they're either watching their business slowly die or moving online selling curated content and leaving books behind. To pick another example, video, channels like youtube and twitch have lead to the rise of internet celebrities not chosen by any producer or channel, but who set up their own stall and sell themselves. Gaming channels like steam or mobile have led to a boom in indie game studios and small games. There are certainly excesses and mistakes involved in that, but it is an entirely new mode of production enabled by the internet, and again I think it's in its infancy. It's not a fad which is going away - broadcast TV itself is going away and being replaced by a more interactive mode, it just doesn't know it yet. So I don't agree the information revolution is over, it's only just beginning and will probably take about 50 more years at least to play out fully. We only just started carrying powerful internet connected computers in our pockets about a decade ago; the implications of that alone are far-reaching. [0] http://momtestbook.com http://momtestbook.com

grey-area 6y ago

I disagree that music and publishing have become more centralised. I have seen the death of the book publishing industry first hand - from the outside it might appear relatively unscathed, from the inside it has been hollowed out and is untenable. Publishers are clinging on but increasingly irrelevant and their margins are non-existent, which pushes their quality down, which undermines their business model further. They will survive another generation though on nostalgia and with steadily declining sales. They simply don’t have a viable business model any more. Sure we’re not living in the utopian future some imagined but that does not mean the transformation was not profound and ongoing. The transformation is far from over in those that were vulnerable to the internet and many industries have only just started being consumed.

dalbasal 6y ago
I see the author is here, so I feel kind of weird defending the position for him. What the heck though (sorry benedict)... The point isn't that technology hasn't had an impact, or that software didn't really "eat the world." Old businesses and industries do have to adjust, and sometimes fail. That's not the point either. The point is "what comes after?" or rather, "how do these industries look now?" The answer to that is closer to "same as it was in 2005" than it is to "what we expected would happen in 2005." IIRCC self publishing is still at 5%-10%. How does book publishing work today, 13 and 30 years after kindle and the wordwideweb were digitised publishing? A writer sits around wondering who they need to shag to get a publishing deal. If they're lucky, they get a publishing deal, like in 1988. Then Amazon sells it. Maybe publishing is going through a technology induced lean years. Maybe a lot of them will go out of business. News publishing has gone through crisis moments, where they beg politicians to make Google and FB share some ad revenue back with them. What has not happened is diffusion, disintermediation or somesuch. Creators or consumers aren't more empowered. From the outside, it's business as usual and the outside view is what counts. I remember Seth Godin's take on the kindle. At first he was excited. New medium, new message. Then he was disappointed. Digital books would cost the same. That meant the goal was to keep everything the same. There would be no penny-per page business model. No nonfiction equivalent of a short story. Amazon would be chasing deals with publishers, not opening up to new people. Jeff was right. Seth was wrong. I share a lot of your sensibilities. But when reality contradicts theory, we need to adapt the theory. The same is true of most large industries touched by digitization. Some (like publishing) had tumultuous transitions. Some (like banking) had pretty cushy transitions. In almost no cases has "economic untenable" logic proved out. Banks have not evolved into lean, mostly software, organisations. They've gotten bigger and hairier. Is this "tenable?" Maybe not, but it is the norm.
- grey-area 6y ago
  OK I see where we disagree I think. You (and the author) think this transformation is over, I think it's just starting. IIRCC self publishing is still at 5%-10%. How does book publishing work today, 13 and 30 years after kindle and the wordwideweb were digitised publishing? A writer sits around wondering who they need to shag to get a publishing deal. If they're lucky, they get a publishing deal, like in 1988. Then Amazon sells it. This is not an accurate summary no. Today an author doesn't need a publishing deal to get in front of millions of readers in a way they most definitely did in 1988. They can set up a web page and sell their book themselves (and many are doing so). Just to pick one example, this book is self-published[1] and has its own website, on Amazon - Publisher : CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform. There are certainly problems, Amazon is a predatory monopoly which will suck the margins out of any successful seller on its platform, but the entire industry is being shaken and self-publishing is growing in importance. Many of the old publishers see this coming but have no idea what to do about it, they're either watching their business slowly die or moving online selling curated content and leaving books behind. To pick another example, video, channels like youtube and twitch have lead to the rise of internet celebrities not chosen by any producer or channel, but who set up their own stall and sell themselves. Gaming channels like steam or mobile have led to a boom in indie game studios and small games. There are certainly excesses and mistakes involved in that, but it is an entirely new mode of production enabled by the internet, and again I think it's in its infancy. It's not a fad which is going away - broadcast TV itself is going away and being replaced by a more interactive mode, it just doesn't know it yet. So I don't agree the information revolution is over, it's only just beginning and will probably take about 50 more years at least to play out fully. We only just started carrying powerful internet connected computers in our pockets about a decade ago; the implications of that alone are far-reaching. [0] http://momtestbook.com http://momtestbook.com