4 ms·

Creation is much easier today, it's true. And for a while, it looked like the old model of a few rich broadcasting/production companies making things for the re

Creation is much easier today, it's true. And for a while, it looked like the old model of a few rich broadcasting/production companies making things for the rest of us to sit at home and passivel consume was going away, replaced by a model where we all have the means to produce better and better stuff, where merit, originality, expressiveness, communication were rewarded more than the means to invest the necessary capital. It looked like livejournal, flickr, deviantart - the blogging revolution - was empowering a generation to turn off the television and engage in an active, participatory way in a global conversation. Not that passive consumption is inherently evil. I just was imagining a world where the power of creation is more evenly distributed. I'm a little sad to see that trend start to reverse. I agree that creation isn't for everyone. But the available tools have an effect. They encourage or discourage in subtle ways. The iPad's software keyboard imposes just a slight amount of friction on inputting text. That has an effect. It matters, to some however small degree, and it aggregates with every other way that Apple optimizes consumption over production. On centralized authority: again, the way you are consuming content is not the case Apple is optimizing for. They have allowed it, but their most sanctioned way is for you to buy content from their partners through their distribution channels. It's not a complete restriction, but an optimization of a certain model through UI. TFA's description of the new Kindle seems to follow, and, indeed, to go farther down this path. Meta: Not that I'm particularly offended, but why take such an abrasive tone? "Central authority bullshit," "obvious nonsense"? Do you simply not consider it a possibility that you didn't fully understand what I was trying to say, either because I communicated it poorly or because it doesn't align with your preconceived notions? I'm actually quite happy to be having this discussion, as it's one I've tried to have many times, but never got much uptake. But, why start with such a dismissive tone? I've seen so many threads start with mild, mutual abrasiveness and spiral quickly into full-out flamewar. Why take a step down that path? Is it so hard to be overtly civil? Honest question.

ugh 15y ago
The iPad and other tablets are not great tools for writing. Emails or comments on HN (another one of those things that wasn’t possible for very many people one or two decades ago) work great, longer or more complicated stuff quite often not. There are, however, quite a few use cases where tablets are better tools for content creation than, say, a PC or at least could become better tools given time and software. But I feel you are ignoring the larger picture. Tablets are currently third devices and prices have developed in such a way to actually allow for a third device. What’s wrong with a consumption oriented device when what most people were already doing was consuming? Given that creation is as simple as it never before has been and that all the tablets actually can receive all of the created content I just do not understand how tablets could threaten content creation in any way whatsoever. It seems absurd to me. Tablets are freaking awesome for content consumption of any kind and they can do quite a few other things. They are also cheap enough to make it possible to also buy a very capable PC. I … I really don’t understand how that could have any negative impact. (Meta: I actually feel very bad about my tone now. I sometimes start to furiously write stuff like that and I always regret it but hardly ever learn. I’m very sorry for my tone. It was a mistake.)
- joebadmo 15y ago
  Again, I agree that it's not one-dimensional. Tablets are making the consumption and light interaction aspects of computing accessible to a huge section of people for whom they were inaccessible before. And that's great. But the PC represented a tool that made the production aspect of computing accessible to a lot more people, too. And the web was a continuation of that trend. Tablets look like the end of that side to me. It looks like an optimization of the consumption aspect at the expense of the creation aspect. You may see it as a third device, but I think a lot of people see it as a replacement device, and those are exactly the people who could benefit most from tools that make it easier for them to produce things. I think my ultimate lament was that the way the market works, of course large companies are going to privilege consumption, because they can make more money that way. (Meta: Thanks, I accept and appreciate the apology!)
  - ugh 15y ago
    At least Apple, I think, sells music and videos and books and apps because people want them. Sure, they make some money (not much compared to the rest of the business) but they mostly do it to turn their devices into something people actually like to use. People want music, want videos, want books, want apps. The market gives them what they want. This is not a case of the market delivering something consumers don’t actually like. This is not a conspiracy of big companies to dumb people down. People are already that way. The PC didn’t help with that one bit and tablets certainly also won’t help. Again: there is no problem.
    - joebadmo 15y ago
      I think you could have used the same argument for the media distribution model that existed before PCs were widely accessible: look, everyone is sitting on the couch, watching television, clearly that's what they want. But once we gave a lot of people access to PCs, we saw an explosion of interaction, content creation, communication, participation. I don't think it's an overt conspiracy, it's just self-interest and centralized resources and power. I believe that PCs did change the way people are, and the way they think. Not everyone, maybe not even a majority, at least not overtly. But I think it had a profound effect on the culture. I believe the Web made a difference. I believe the ways we have to access the Web make a difference. You can point to dumb people continuing to be dumb and say there is no problem. I see a problem, and my solution is to talk about it, to try to get influential people to think about it, and think about making tools to empower creation by the technically lay (like me).
cwe 15y ago
This whole trope about creation vs consumption is pointing fingers in the wrong direction: why blame the iPad, when a lot of the creativity is going into tweets and likes? You mention 3 older social networks as being some kind of revolution, well, what about FB, twitter, G+, etc? We are all consuming each others creations, so the whole centralized authority bit is overblown. That's not to rip on social tools, or the iPad. Just pointing out that your global conversation has evolved, not died.
- joebadmo 15y ago
  I think the iPad is one vector. I think the social networks you mention are another. That also feels to me like a closing down, or a narrowing. I think Facebook, to take the biggest example, restricts and narrows and makes shallow our communication.[0] It reduces our interactions to shallow, superficial comments, likes, low-fidelity photos, etc. In its way, I think the move toward closed social networks is also a step backward from the open exchange of ideas that blogging represented. And I think this is partially due to the tools we've made, too. [0]: I wrote more on that here: http://blog.byjoemoon.com/post/3112676038/the-end-of-comments http://blog.byjoemoon.com/post/3112676038/the-end-of-comment... which was a response to an essay by Zadie Smith.[1] [1]:http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2010/nov/25/generation-why/ http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2010/nov/25/generat...
Steko 15y ago
I think the disconnect here is you're simply seeing the ipad as a pc replacement when the reality is the ipad is a new category that while partially replacing PCs also can partially replaces many other things: books, magazines, newspapers, the radio on your desk, the bedside clock, photo albums, etc. Someone like Ugh or myself sees you call all of this awesome a "step back" and laughs. I think you've sold the iPad short too early. Intent or not it will be a huge device for content creation the same way the iphone is a huge device for content creation -- the best camera you have is the one you have with you and as Flickr attests, iPhone 4 is used by millions every day for creation. Similarly the iPad will be huge and Apple has already recognized this with signature first party apps like GarageBand, iMovie, Pages, Numbers. I have a feeling in years to come a lot of musicians will say that the best keyboard, drum set, guitar, etc that you have is the one you have with you. Do you like to write sometimes? There's an app for that. When you're not at your desk will the best typewriter be the one you have with you? Probably. Do you like to draw and doodle sometimes? There's an app for that. When you're not at your desk will the best drawing and painting studio be the one you have with you? Probably.
- sgns 15y ago
  Awesome take – it seems to suggest that what we're seeing is the creation of a new mobile nexus for people's work, slowly replacing the desktop as the center of our 'tool lives'. EDIT: Replacing the desktop – AND drawing plenty of other old technologies into this new one.

ugh 15y ago

The iPad and other tablets are not great tools for writing. Emails or comments on HN (another one of those things that wasn’t possible for very many people one or two decades ago) work great, longer or more complicated stuff quite often not. There are, however, quite a few use cases where tablets are better tools for content creation than, say, a PC or at least could become better tools given time and software. But I feel you are ignoring the larger picture. Tablets are currently third devices and prices have developed in such a way to actually allow for a third device. What’s wrong with a consumption oriented device when what most people were already doing was consuming? Given that creation is as simple as it never before has been and that all the tablets actually can receive all of the created content I just do not understand how tablets could threaten content creation in any way whatsoever. It seems absurd to me. Tablets are freaking awesome for content consumption of any kind and they can do quite a few other things. They are also cheap enough to make it possible to also buy a very capable PC. I … I really don’t understand how that could have any negative impact. (Meta: I actually feel very bad about my tone now. I sometimes start to furiously write stuff like that and I always regret it but hardly ever learn. I’m very sorry for my tone. It was a mistake.)

joebadmo 15y ago
Again, I agree that it's not one-dimensional. Tablets are making the consumption and light interaction aspects of computing accessible to a huge section of people for whom they were inaccessible before. And that's great. But the PC represented a tool that made the production aspect of computing accessible to a lot more people, too. And the web was a continuation of that trend. Tablets look like the end of that side to me. It looks like an optimization of the consumption aspect at the expense of the creation aspect. You may see it as a third device, but I think a lot of people see it as a replacement device, and those are exactly the people who could benefit most from tools that make it easier for them to produce things. I think my ultimate lament was that the way the market works, of course large companies are going to privilege consumption, because they can make more money that way. (Meta: Thanks, I accept and appreciate the apology!)
- ugh 15y ago
  At least Apple, I think, sells music and videos and books and apps because people want them. Sure, they make some money (not much compared to the rest of the business) but they mostly do it to turn their devices into something people actually like to use. People want music, want videos, want books, want apps. The market gives them what they want. This is not a case of the market delivering something consumers don’t actually like. This is not a conspiracy of big companies to dumb people down. People are already that way. The PC didn’t help with that one bit and tablets certainly also won’t help. Again: there is no problem.
  - joebadmo 15y ago
    I think you could have used the same argument for the media distribution model that existed before PCs were widely accessible: look, everyone is sitting on the couch, watching television, clearly that's what they want. But once we gave a lot of people access to PCs, we saw an explosion of interaction, content creation, communication, participation. I don't think it's an overt conspiracy, it's just self-interest and centralized resources and power. I believe that PCs did change the way people are, and the way they think. Not everyone, maybe not even a majority, at least not overtly. But I think it had a profound effect on the culture. I believe the Web made a difference. I believe the ways we have to access the Web make a difference. You can point to dumb people continuing to be dumb and say there is no problem. I see a problem, and my solution is to talk about it, to try to get influential people to think about it, and think about making tools to empower creation by the technically lay (like me).

cwe 15y ago

This whole trope about creation vs consumption is pointing fingers in the wrong direction: why blame the iPad, when a lot of the creativity is going into tweets and likes? You mention 3 older social networks as being some kind of revolution, well, what about FB, twitter, G+, etc? We are all consuming each others creations, so the whole centralized authority bit is overblown. That's not to rip on social tools, or the iPad. Just pointing out that your global conversation has evolved, not died.

joebadmo 15y ago
I think the iPad is one vector. I think the social networks you mention are another. That also feels to me like a closing down, or a narrowing. I think Facebook, to take the biggest example, restricts and narrows and makes shallow our communication.[0] It reduces our interactions to shallow, superficial comments, likes, low-fidelity photos, etc. In its way, I think the move toward closed social networks is also a step backward from the open exchange of ideas that blogging represented. And I think this is partially due to the tools we've made, too. [0]: I wrote more on that here: http://blog.byjoemoon.com/post/3112676038/the-end-of-comments http://blog.byjoemoon.com/post/3112676038/the-end-of-comment... which was a response to an essay by Zadie Smith.[1] [1]:http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2010/nov/25/generation-why/ http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2010/nov/25/generat...

Steko 15y ago

I think the disconnect here is you're simply seeing the ipad as a pc replacement when the reality is the ipad is a new category that while partially replacing PCs also can partially replaces many other things: books, magazines, newspapers, the radio on your desk, the bedside clock, photo albums, etc. Someone like Ugh or myself sees you call all of this awesome a "step back" and laughs. I think you've sold the iPad short too early. Intent or not it will be a huge device for content creation the same way the iphone is a huge device for content creation -- the best camera you have is the one you have with you and as Flickr attests, iPhone 4 is used by millions every day for creation. Similarly the iPad will be huge and Apple has already recognized this with signature first party apps like GarageBand, iMovie, Pages, Numbers. I have a feeling in years to come a lot of musicians will say that the best keyboard, drum set, guitar, etc that you have is the one you have with you. Do you like to write sometimes? There's an app for that. When you're not at your desk will the best typewriter be the one you have with you? Probably. Do you like to draw and doodle sometimes? There's an app for that. When you're not at your desk will the best drawing and painting studio be the one you have with you? Probably.

sgns 15y ago
Awesome take – it seems to suggest that what we're seeing is the creation of a new mobile nexus for people's work, slowly replacing the desktop as the center of our 'tool lives'. EDIT: Replacing the desktop – AND drawing plenty of other old technologies into this new one.