3 ms·

> Didn't Rogan get like 100MM? They fund early people to get momentum and lock others in at high rates once they build out an audience.

by cma 4y ago

jrochkind1 4y ago
Have you seen the recently published _Chokepoint Capitalism_ by Rebecca Giblin and Cory Doctorow yet? I think the book could have used a lot tighter editing, it gets kind of tiresome in many parts... but the basic fundamental observation seems right to me and helps give me the mental models to recognize and describe it. "it" being the way in the internet economy those who occupy that "middleman" position can become "chokepoints" who can hold both consumers and producers hostage. Or, as Doctorow wrote in a blog post covering some similar ground: > Here is how platforms die: first, they are good to their users; then they abuse their users to make things better for their business customers; finally, they abuse those business customers to claw back all the value for themselves. Then, they die. — https://pluralistic.net/2023/01/21/potemkin-ai/ https://pluralistic.net/2023/01/21/potemkin-ai/ I'm not sure if they all die, there are a LOT of platforms around which haven't died yet, but those first steps are very recognizable in chokepoint middlemen like Spotify is for music and is trying to become for podcasts. First you give both consumers and the "business customers" (whether podcast producers or product sellers on Amazon) a great deal; then, once you've locked the consumers in you make the deal for consumers a lot worse in order to keep your business customers on your side; then, once you've locked _them_ in too (perhaps because they need you to reach the consumers, who are all on your platform), you tighten things up for business customers too, trying to extract as much money as possible from consumers and share as little of it as possible with the producers, while both have a hard time leaving you due to network effects. So, yeah, it always starts great for your users. This is how you trap them, so you can then start tightening the screws.
cccybernetic 4y ago
I find your phrasing and mindset interesting. What you suggest somewhat maliciously as "lock others in at high rates", I read as "shower them with more cash than they could ever conceivably dream of" I'd love if my employer "locked me in" at a higher rate lol.
- cma 4y ago
  I meant the equivalent here of high publisher royalty rate, high cut/fee percentage would have been more clear.

> Didn't Rogan get like 100MM? They fund early people to get momentum and lock others in at high rates once they build out an audience.

by cma 4y ago

> Didn't Rogan get like 100MM? They fund early people to get momentum and lock others in at high rates once they build out an audience.

jrochkind1 4y ago

Have you seen the recently published _Chokepoint Capitalism_ by Rebecca Giblin and Cory Doctorow yet? I think the book could have used a lot tighter editing, it gets kind of tiresome in many parts... but the basic fundamental observation seems right to me and helps give me the mental models to recognize and describe it. "it" being the way in the internet economy those who occupy that "middleman" position can become "chokepoints" who can hold both consumers and producers hostage. Or, as Doctorow wrote in a blog post covering some similar ground: > Here is how platforms die: first, they are good to their users; then they abuse their users to make things better for their business customers; finally, they abuse those business customers to claw back all the value for themselves. Then, they die. — https://pluralistic.net/2023/01/21/potemkin-ai/ https://pluralistic.net/2023/01/21/potemkin-ai/ I'm not sure if they all die, there are a LOT of platforms around which haven't died yet, but those first steps are very recognizable in chokepoint middlemen like Spotify is for music and is trying to become for podcasts. First you give both consumers and the "business customers" (whether podcast producers or product sellers on Amazon) a great deal; then, once you've locked the consumers in you make the deal for consumers a lot worse in order to keep your business customers on your side; then, once you've locked _them_ in too (perhaps because they need you to reach the consumers, who are all on your platform), you tighten things up for business customers too, trying to extract as much money as possible from consumers and share as little of it as possible with the producers, while both have a hard time leaving you due to network effects. So, yeah, it always starts great for your users. This is how you trap them, so you can then start tightening the screws.

cccybernetic 4y ago

I find your phrasing and mindset interesting. What you suggest somewhat maliciously as "lock others in at high rates", I read as "shower them with more cash than they could ever conceivably dream of" I'd love if my employer "locked me in" at a higher rate lol.

cma 4y ago
I meant the equivalent here of high publisher royalty rate, high cut/fee percentage would have been more clear.