The Brand Age • Hacker News Board

Re: The Brand Age

#331

Post by Imustaskforhelp » Fri, Mar 06, 2026, 1:56 PM UTC

Oops. I may have written too long trying to respond to it that it got too long for hackernews haha.

I have written that comment on here now[0]

The TLDR tho of my post/comment is that Brand age that PG mentions is essentially something so linked to marketing and advertising and spending money/injecting money and becoming the differentiating factor. This can be a big thing for pure capitalists but the current forms of advertising rely on black boxes attention centralized which you have to go to ads for and this whole system feels rent seeking for the existence of livelihood/businesses extracting money from them small or large and very famously, Adam smith was against forms of rent-seeking.

Marketing to me seems like converting everything to a statistic and everything related to marketing subsequently starts having infinitely looser morals which I don't think I need to be telling everybody of. It feels like trying to capitalize on top of anything or everything without any regards to anything.

I do think that we do have some say in it. The nature of AI is that its out and there is no way of putting it back in the box especially with OSS models reaching parity and no company is putting their frontier models back and this means that AI slop is something that we just have to deal with. But instead of dealing it with brands which can inject money because they got money. It's better if we try to filter things on top of authenticity and I do feel like we have a say in this.

have a nice day.

[0]:https://smileplease.mataroa.blog/blog/i-dont-want-brand-age-...

Re: The Brand Age

#332

Post by Nursie » Fri, Mar 06, 2026, 1:57 PM UTC

zimpenfish wrote: post #324

Nursie wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Anything else I can do with my phone or laptop Most stuff, sure, but probably not - > heart rate monitoring So as someone who is cantering through middle age to a point in life close to where males in my family in older generations have experienced atrial fibrillation and other heart problems, having a heart rate monitor built into my watch that is capable of spotting early signs of this stuff is pretty cool. Havin…

> I'm considering an upgrade to one that does blood pressure too. I've got the Aktiia/Hilo band and I'd recommend it if you're wanting to keep vague[0] track of your 24/7[0] blood pressure. Needs calibrating every couple of weeks against the band but that's not an onerous procedure[1][2]. (Probably worth getting a cheapo monitor as a secondary check though - I've got a Renpho bluetooth one.) [0] It only really takes…

So I have an old fashioned "Salter" inflatable BP cuff unit that takes a few AA batteries, that I take readings on sporadically, and as I am borderline problematic (the diastolic number is usually a little high, systolic is not amazing but could be worse, no meds currently) I'm kinda/sorta looking at something that can keep track a bit more often and less intrusively.

But I was hoping that would be an updated Apple watch, as I have an 8 at the moment that does the other stuff :)

That said I understand that the BP measurements on smart watches are pretty execrable. Thanks for the info!

Re: The Brand Age

#333

Post by benrutter » Fri, Mar 06, 2026, 2:05 PM UTC

Symmetry wrote: post #322

benrutter wrote: post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suppose we're just disagreeing on definition here - but I'd at least try to make the case that if people having a single thing they think of when they hear the word Nike, is necessary for a company to be able to structure itself that way legally. Otherwise, individual manufacturing companies, don't have the financial incentive to give companies like Nike as big a portion of the profits as they do. Currently that sy…

I think you have a different understanding of what exactly a brand is than do most people. Every profession has the right to develop its own jargon that subtly redefines common words in its own way so I'm not going to say that you're wrong about what "brand" means in any absolute way, just that you're wrong to say that pg is wrong.

Fair enough - although I'd add in my defense that my take wasn't "Paul Graham is wrong", in fact I really liked the essay and agreed with a lot of it. It was more that I think there's a lot more going on with brands than the essay makes out (although you might disagree with this take too)

Re: The Brand Age

#334

Post by zug_zug » Fri, Mar 06, 2026, 2:08 PM UTC

I think the challenge of the PG essay (which to me is defined by an attempt to take the particulars of a cultural moment, romanticize the individual, and attempt generalize toward universal laws and principles) is that they are too idealistic for this cultural moment

There was a time when software was closer to a freer market and there was room for anyone to be the next google. But this moment is deeply political, tactical, and the existing incumbents have so much power that learning the intricacies of their systems may be make or break for any of your goals (e.g. how to advertise on google, or get featured on the app store, how to secure a government contract, etc). It isn't a time for abstract generalities (like chasing "golden ages")

At least I don't think anybody is or should be asking how to build "great" stuff anymore, great hasn't won in many categories. Most things that were great were so only to gain a moat and then enshittify.

I'd be really curious if he's happy where the tech-world is now, if he sees it as an oligopoly, if he sees it as meritocratic, and if he sees any hope of it getting better.

Re: The Brand Age

#335

Post by Imustaskforhelp » Fri, Mar 06, 2026, 2:11 PM UTC

alexpotato wrote: post #330

benrutter wrote: post #274

I liked reading this essay, but, I get the same vibe as a lot of PG essays. Which is, great writing and really intelligent thinking on an interesting subject, but without really being aware of ther stuff people have previously said/thought on the topic. For instance: > Brand is what's left when the substantive differences between products disappear. I think, for better and worse, brands are a lot more than that. Bran…

> I think, for better and worse, brands are a lot more than that. There is a great quote about this: "For things that are visible to other people when you use them, there are many brands. e.g clothes, cars, watches, skis, furniture etc For things that are not visible, there are much fewer brands e.g. underwear.

This might be social stigma, we will be stigmatized by society if we dont have appropriate clothes for right situations as such, we buy so many clothes that are visible depending on the number of occasions and everything because we have to look appropriate for that and this is where number of brands can stem up from too and this brand has brand value, because oh, you got that X company shirt nice.

Nobody cares what brand your underwear is because its hidden.

Such products are usually fewer brands because what matters is a huge chain supply. You most likely buy it if its available retail or not, you don't go look at an ad and say, wow I want that brand but the idea is to make familiar with it.

But even if you aren't. There are just so few brands with supply chain directly to retails that such things usually end up getting centralized and convenience of buying is the largest factor. You want to drive less to get this stuff whereas you might go far away just to get a nice pair of shirt and jeans for example something which, again has to do with the visibility of the product/social stigma

Technically, the supply chain thing also directs itself to products like cole drinks for example. You are probably drinking coke/pepsi because its available everywhere and usually the choice that you see in different drinks is just some permutation of a drink/brand which is owned by the parent company (coke/pepsi). The amounts of brands owned by pepsi/coca cola are quite a lot to be honest.

Re: The Brand Age

#336

Post by Imustaskforhelp » Fri, Mar 06, 2026, 2:24 PM UTC

benleejamin wrote: post #42

I don't think the Brand Age is as bleak as this essay suggests. Branding is not inherently unproductive, nor is it guaranteed to produce worse watches. They may be larger and less accurate , but consumers still (evidently) find value in the brand. A Grand Seiko or a Nomos or a Patek is perhaps now even more interesting & identity-productive than a watch was in the 60s. As technologists I think we're prone to dismissi…

> identity-productive

This word scares me because if identity is dependent on the type of product that you have or becomes larger part than it already is, especially within my generation at times. Then its quite scary to think.

A gaping hole of loneliness being filled with shallow identity being generated by and for consumerism.

As much as I think that what you meant was products alleviating the identity of the person, I think the chances of the identity itself being replaced by something more hollow is more likely as well.

Quite frankly,This word truly feels like something which comes out of American Psycho or reminds me so much of it.

Also, another point but I also feel the same feelings of hollowness from creating stuff with AI if we leave it autonomously as I mentioned with some aspect of consumerism although I am frugal. The similarities are quite a lot.

Money --> (Choice on what prompt/model you want your identity more associated with) --> (time) --> Product

Money --> (Choice on what product you want your identity more associated with) --> (time) --> product

And then repeat the cycle.

This has been a boom for capitalism but a loss for humanity, in my opinion.

Re: The Brand Age

#337

Post by Imustaskforhelp » Fri, Mar 06, 2026, 2:31 PM UTC

widowlark wrote: post #221

benleejamin wrote: post #42

I don't think the Brand Age is as bleak as this essay suggests. Branding is not inherently unproductive, nor is it guaranteed to produce worse watches. They may be larger and less accurate , but consumers still (evidently) find value in the brand. A Grand Seiko or a Nomos or a Patek is perhaps now even more interesting & identity-productive than a watch was in the 60s. As technologists I think we're prone to dismissi…

I took pg's point to mean that just because consumers see value in the purchase, that is not the same thing as the purchase being valuable - the race changed from 'provide the best function/value for the thing' to 'provide the most differentiated value to the consumer as an identity' and that is, for the most part, less useful.

I suppose my question with it is will our identity be associated with brands who can/do spend billions and billions of dollars on advertisements or a brand of more authenticity.

Do we as humans feel more at ease with our identity/purchases buying a brand which is known by other people because it spends billions on it/ or a niche brand/smaller shop which is more authentic but people don't know about it.

To me, it feels like the david vs goliath story. My intuition says a mix of small but not too small / something which has history that you compromise on like support/quality of product etc. and sometimes price efficacy.

Re: The Brand Age

#338

Post by fnands » Fri, Mar 06, 2026, 2:31 PM UTC

gomox wrote: post #329

From the title and the beginning, I was sure this was going to be about the imminent brand age in software with the commoditization of the software engineering discipline brought on by AI.

Yeah, either that or the commoditization of LLMs.

I.e. in the early days (2023-2025, lol), companies were mostly differentiated by the quality of their LLM, i.e. GPT-3.5 was leagues ahead of anyone else, so was for serious work the only game in town. Until recently it was basically only the US based companies (OpenAI/Anthropic) with models worth using.

Now, Anthropic and OpenAI are neck-and-neck, and Chinese models are catching up fast, and the models are becoming commodities, and as long as they reach some threshold of quality/capability, it doesn't really matter to most customers.

So now we might be reaching the branding stage of LLMs. I.e. do you go for Anthropic, who are branding themselves as the responsible ones, or OpenAI, who are branding themselves as... the innovators? Not sure what they are going for these days.

If all models are roughly equally capable, all that's left is branding.

At least those are the thoughts it provoked in me. If that's what Paul Graham meant or not I have no idea.

Re: The Brand Age

#339

Post by garethsprice » Fri, Mar 06, 2026, 2:32 PM UTC

bigstrat2003 wrote: post #226

garethsprice wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Humans are status-seeking creatures, and status is expressed through signaling. If you're rich and so are the people around you, money alone ceases to be a differentiator. Ultra-luxury brands appeal to this by adding hoops that money alone can't clear: time, loyalty, relationships. The signal shifts from "I can afford this" to "I was invited to spend my money here." Lines outside Louis Vuitton are more down-market, a…

> Of course, PG writing an essay about being too smart for fancy watches - while knowing a lot about them - is its own signaling game, just aimed at a different audience So you're saying that everyone seeks status, and even the people who say they don't are seeking status by not seeking status? That argument seems like you are overreaching. What, then, would you consider evidence that falsifies your theory?

Yes - though this isn't my theory so much as settled science. There are no substantial counter-theories to the concept that status desire is a fundamental and universal human motive.

As for falsification: you'd need evidence like subjects showing no well-being drop (self-esteem, cortisol) from lab-induced status demotions, or entire cultures genuinely indifferent to respect. Neither holds up in the data: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25774679/

John Adams put it well in Discourses on Davila (1790): "The desire of the esteem of others is as real a want of nature as hunger — and the neglect and contempt of the world as severe a pain as the gout or stone."

Re: The Brand Age

#340

Post by rswail » Fri, Mar 06, 2026, 2:45 PM UTC

dworks wrote: post #53

I watched the Macbook Neo launch video yesterday and while the product is not very exciting, the video has great production value and it showed this: People want to pay for marketing. Not that Apple's only appeal is marketing, Mac laptops certainly have pros over the bottom and mid tier Windows laptops. But having seen that video, and knowing that other have seen it, are aware of Apple and its positioning, makes peop…

What I noticed was that when I was at dinner tonight with my young twenties down to 14 nieces and nephews, every one of them knew what the Macbook Neo was, including the colors.

There was a big argument about iPad w/Pencil vs laptop, but they all said it was a good laptop for highschool/uni.

None of them have seen or used one.