51–60 of 78 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Some in the gaming industry tried/are trying hard to make Netflix of gaming subscription work. Micro transactions work right now but maybe tomorrow it is subscription based gaming again.
GeForce Now has me hooked. $10/month not to own a gaming PC any more is pretty good.
That's... a very enticing option. How's the quality?
I agree that computer hardware manufacturers need to either build poor quality (selling you a new light bulb every 1000 hours) or rent things out as peak Moores law unfolds, even if some predict the litho to keep getting smaller (EUV) the CPU performance per watt will not increase, mostly because the architecture can't take advantage of the new transistors and random memory speed has been stuck for 20 years.
Or build more shit, which is already happening. A computer in your pocket, a computer in your fridge, a computer on your face (still hate that they insist on that for AR glasses and smartwatches), a computer for your car, a computer for games, a computer for your dog. Oh and you can't swap parts between them or even fix them without professional equipment and training.
So you are right quantity will expand as much as the energy supply allows it to, but we are seeing the limits of energy so maybe don't invest too heavily in 200W machines?
I'm pretty deeply sunk cost in ARM and Atom servers, and I'm considering going "more in" but hesitating because of thermodynamics, basically 100W (including EVERYTHING, router, modem, switches etc.) is the most you can operate with enough lead-acid backup to survive power cuts before things get ugly!
Gaming is ahead here, they thought subscriptions was the future 15 years ago and everyone tried to make subscription games. Then free to play with microtransactions came around and completely turned that on its head, microtransactions generates way more revenue than subscriptions! It might not apply to every field, but it is wrong to say that everything will turn into subscriptions.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Respect and power are still strong drivers
Who's going to respect you if you make the same money as a grocery store cashier? Personally I would think you're a sucker. Also what power would you have in a Communist country?
People sometimes erroneously assume that money equals power. That may be true in the west, but a more accurate statement is that money is a good proxy for power. Absent that, power moves to another useful resource that can be bartered for power.
In the old country, people were getting paid regardless so 'everyone had work' and money was a secondary consideration. As local currency became less of a good proxy for power, it immediately became about relationships ( can you ensure make this bureaucrat assign this job/flat/whatever to me? ).
And as always, some people do get power and since it was communism, quite a lot of it. Not to search very far, police had tremendous amount of power.
Communism is just a name we gave to the system. People are the same everywhere.
Subscriptions make sense for things that you get a regular recurring supply of, like milk and newspapers. They might make sense for things that you can get regular upgrades for, like software (although often the "upgrades" aren't really worth much). But they make no sense at all for durable goods that can last for years without significant upgrades, like cars. The whole point with such goods is that you pay once and…
I would never own a car. But I suppose I don't want to drive a car that is older than 3 years and I don't enjoy selling used cars. I prefer the freedom I get to just hand the car back after 3 years and don't have to think about it anymore. Also no unexpected service costs and so on.
You will own nothing and you will be happy. I am waiting all this to crumble under its own weight. The concept of ownership will not go away. It takes time the masses to realize, but eventually they will realize the truth. And will buy nothing. This ultimately will bring people down to earth and they will revolt. The picture planned by Davos elites and most powerful corporations has one big flaw. There is no way to s…
They'll give you all the shit for free so you can integrate and be a productive member of society, then rent higher quality stuff.
The factual things are: The secret services operatives highjacked the political process and subverted the economy to become Big Capitalists. Practically speaking, there is no political candidate without connections with criminal underground or ex secret service overlords.
In my humble opinion, the aftermath of the Cold War is manifested trough "The Deep States" operatives from the both sides. They exchanged know-how and now are creating unified model, a hybrid between the worst from communistic "experiments" of the past - surveillance and citizen control under "the common good" mantra, planned economy, hidden class of elites, with the worst from unregulated capitalism - the monopolies and corrupt political process.
The problem is that Western world has never seen the results of communistic regimes. They think that socialism is libertarian and are willing to fall in the same ideological trap that we have lived trough in the past.
Yes, I am for Great Reset, but in different terms. Tax the wealthiest multinationals and regulate capitalism towards free market stimulus. Capitalism implemented without lobbyist protections and with precise regulations is the most beneficial form for societies longterm.
But this will not happen. Call me a pessimist, or even nihilist but I cannot remove my realistic way of thinking, or close my eyes on my past experiences. The world is global and interconnected now. One policy implemented in Australia will come to life in some form or direct implementation in other "democratic" country.
In summary I see the world moving towards totalitarian reality pushed by common good agenda, protecting the wealthiest families trough surveillance, automation and total digital control. It will be Technologically advanced Middle Ages.
The only hope that I have is that "implementing the Great Reset" will be not effective from an economy stand point. People on the Eastern side of the world have lived in capitalistic society to little ( 30 years ). If you tell them that "they will not own nothing" they will revolt and kill the messenger on the spot.
EU planned economy (just like communistic Comecon, https://wikiless.org/wiki/Comecon?lang=en) actually will bring back the shadow economy in every Eastern Europe country.
On a first glance this will be bad. But actually this will force administration to adapt and create more realistic scenarios than this medieval billionaires dream.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> But they make no sense at all for durable goods that can last for years without significant upgrades, like cars. Which is why there is a war on durable goods, such as trying to develop viable cloud gaming to replace people's gaming computers with subscription services.
Maybe not everyone wants or can afford a gaming computer? Being able to play any game from a tablet, phone, laptop or TV is very useful. And at the current costs of hardware, and the evolution of hardware requirements, even 2-3 subscription services come out cheaper than building an equivalent gaming rig.
Edit to add: upgrading the graphics card nets another 2-3 years instead of replacing the entire machine. Which probably reduces the ceiling to closer to $40USD per month.
Subscriptions make sense for things that you get a regular recurring supply of, like milk and newspapers. They might make sense for things that you can get regular upgrades for, like software (although often the "upgrades" aren't really worth much). But they make no sense at all for durable goods that can last for years without significant upgrades, like cars. The whole point with such goods is that you pay once and…
You will own nothing and you will be happy. I am waiting all this to crumble under its own weight. The concept of ownership will not go away. It takes time the masses to realize, but eventually they will realize the truth. And will buy nothing. This ultimately will bring people down to earth and they will revolt. The picture planned by Davos elites and most powerful corporations has one big flaw. There is no way to s…
The article talks about a situation where there is more supply than demand. We can turn this around and say there is a scarcity of "demand slots", where a demand slots is the willingness of a consumer to make a single purchase.
Demand slots are limited, but at least they are "sustainable": If you have a middle class with stable jobs and disposable income, you'll have a fresh supply of demand slots each month for businesses to consume.
Subscriptions are not sustainable: There is only a limited number of subscriptions a household with constant income can take. The number of "subscription slots" has a hard limit given by the number of people employed and overall wage levels. They don't renew unless there is significant wage growth.
So if businesses want to switch from one-time purchases to subscription models to keep up growth, this new growth will hit limits even sooner.
For consumers, it will be a situation where you can either choose to be financially irresponsible - or to subject yourself to a barrage of nag-screens and intentionally worsened service each day, as every company and product you interact will try to upsell you. Also prepare to renounce and abstain from things a lot more consciously as you do today, as you'll constantly have to evaluate which functions of daily life you currently need an which you can tolerate giving up for the moment.
"Personal responsibility" is all well and good, but the term rings hollow when half of the economy depends on you making irresponsible decisions.