Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Which tech giants will still be around after 100 years?

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 70 posts

Re: Which tech giants will still be around after 100 years?

#61

Post by dagw »

crdoconnor wrote: post #47
DavidAdams wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm a fan of The Economist, but their big flaw is similar to Consumer Reports' problem: when they focus on their core competency (Economist: geopolitics and finance; CR: rating home appliances) they're the gold standard. But when they venture outside, such as this case of trying to give a quick overview of what makes a technology company successful over the long term, it's obvious that they're out of their depth. Sim…

Their reporting on geopolitics and finance can be very sketchy at times, too - support for the Iraq war and George Bush, for instance. Or, in the developing world, their near religious insistence that trade liberalization will solve damn near everything.

support for the Iraq war and George Bush, for instance

In what way was it sketchy? Was it just because you happen to disagree? I didn't agree with their endorsement of George Bush either, but I still think their argument for their stance was solid.

Re: Which tech giants will still be around after 100 years?

#63

Post by dagobart_ »

groby_b wrote: post #18
noiv wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed. Was expecting some kind of idea why information technology actually is a mega-trend and what possible game changers are around the corner. Just imagine only one patent on a working quantum computing device and all mentioned companies are out.

I'm not quite sure why e.g. Facebook would care about a working quantum computer, at least in the short run.

On the other hand, why would anybody assume, Facebook could ever have an interest in face recognition? But now they do.

Re: Which tech giants will still be around after 100 years?

#64

Post by jollojou »

kenjackson wrote: post #3

Horrible article. It makes an arbitrary distinction between products and ideas. I'm sure if you asked Michael Dell, even 10 years ago, what his company is about at its core -- he'd probably say something more like delivering technology to consumers and businesses, customized to fit their individual needs, and using the best processes and efficiencies to deliver at the lowest price possible. Don't bother wasting your…

The article illustrates the well-known mantra "to survive, you must adapt to your environment".

In the IT industry, incrementally developing your existing businesses will quickly lead to oblivion. IBM succeeded in the transition away from the mainframe business, and thus IBM can be seen as an example what all the companies in the industry need to do to stay afloat.

I did not find this article a waste of time. It reminds me of Thomas Kuhn's view on scientific revolutions. Most of the time people try to solve problems by using already known patterns. Every now and then somebody comes up with a completely new idea; the new idea allows its possessors to solve the problems orders of magnitude better (i.e. faster, cheaper, ...).

Re: Which tech giants will still be around after 100 years?

#65

Post by warfangle »

throw_away wrote: post #55
throwaway32 wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

dont forget that SBC was a baby bell, and thus originated from AT&T.

all the baby bells are now owned by either at&t, verizon or centurylink.

Keep in mind that Verizon was also originally a baby bell. It began as the Bell Atlantic corporation, and through a series of mergers in the 90s gained its place next to AT&T as one of the largest wireless and long distance carrier.

That's right:

The two largest cell phone companies in the country are legacies of a monopoly attempting to reassert dominance in an era of little regulation. Do we really want to return to the days of Ma Bell...?

Re: Which tech giants will still be around after 100 years?

#66

Post by lachlanj »

StavrosK wrote: post #60
lachlanj wrote: post #48

Terrible Article, I am surprised to see the from The Economist. It seems like they just want to name drop the most popular tech companies of late. Facebook has just as much chance of disappearing in 5 years as it does of being around in 100 year. Google probably has a better chance than any of these companies of being around in 100 years, they are in the oldest industry of all time. Advertising. Plus they have shown…

Google is actually in the AI business, which is why I think they're the most likely to be around in the future.

Yes, Ai which is applied to advertising. They do advertising in a very unique way but I still feel it boils down to ads. I think they will be a huge force for Ai in the future, they should be more so now, but will the make money from Ai unrelated to ads in the future? Time will tell.

Re: Which tech giants will still be around after 100 years?

#67

Post by noiv »

groby_b wrote: post #18
noiv wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed. Was expecting some kind of idea why information technology actually is a mega-trend and what possible game changers are around the corner. Just imagine only one patent on a working quantum computing device and all mentioned companies are out.

I'm not quite sure why e.g. Facebook would care about a working quantum computer, at least in the short run.

Looks like bashing Facebook leads to down votes, interesting.

But short run is not 100 years. And yes, Facebook will care from day one about QC, think data center and investors willing to burn money to foster old school technology.

Re: Which tech giants will still be around after 100 years?

#68

Post by groby_b »

noiv wrote: post #67
groby_b wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not quite sure why e.g. Facebook would care about a working quantum computer, at least in the short run.

Looks like bashing Facebook leads to down votes, interesting. But short run is not 100 years. And yes, Facebook will care from day one about QC, think data center and investors willing to burn money to foster old school technology.

As far as I know (and I haven't read too much about QC, so I might very well be totally off), QCs are only useful for a very specific set of problems. And none of those seem to map to FB problems right now.

Will that change? Sure. Will FB do internal research with QCs? Maybe, once they've progressed past the vaporware state. (Sidenote - if we observe QC less, will development work better? ;)

But a working QC will not put FB out of business any time soon. The hardware is only a tiny piece of the puzzle of quantum computing. Algorithms for QC are rare, hard to develop, and the field is in its absolute infancy.

Re: Which tech giants will still be around after 100 years?

#69

Post by noiv »

groby_b wrote: post #68
noiv wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Looks like bashing Facebook leads to down votes, interesting. But short run is not 100 years. And yes, Facebook will care from day one about QC, think data center and investors willing to burn money to foster old school technology.

As far as I know (and I haven't read too much about QC, so I might very well be totally off), QCs are only useful for a very specific set of problems. And none of those seem to map to FB problems right now. Will that change? Sure. Will FB do internal research with QCs? Maybe, once they've progressed past the vaporware state. (Sidenote - if we observe QC less, will development work better? ;) But a working QC will not…

"The hardware is only a tiny piece of the puzzle of quantum computing. Algorithms for QC are rare, hard to develop, and the field is in its absolute infancy."

Is that the description of computer technology as of 1911?

Re: Which tech giants will still be around after 100 years?

#70

Post by groby_b »

noiv wrote: post #69
groby_b wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As far as I know (and I haven't read too much about QC, so I might very well be totally off), QCs are only useful for a very specific set of problems. And none of those seem to map to FB problems right now. Will that change? Sure. Will FB do internal research with QCs? Maybe, once they've progressed past the vaporware state. (Sidenote - if we observe QC less, will development work better? ;) But a working QC will not…

"The hardware is only a tiny piece of the puzzle of quantum computing. Algorithms for QC are rare, hard to develop, and the field is in its absolute infancy." Is that the description of computer technology as of 1911?

More ca. 1930 - precursors of the Church-Turing thesis showing up. And if anybody then had predicted that "one patent on computers, and IBM is out of business", they would've been wrong too.
Post reply on HN