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

End of a Decade

amursoftware.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 73 posts

Re: End of a Decade

#61

Post by Nasrudith »

phoe-krk wrote: post #36
pjc50 wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think he should have written "disintermediated" for those examples. There are now fewer intermediaries, maybe only a single layer - but the companies in that layer occupy almost all of it. You can publish books without having to worry about publishing and distribution - if you go through the publication-and-distribution vertically integrated monolith.

I agree. Publishing overall is substantially easier. Publishing without going through the publishing monopoly is substantially harder though.

This may be a minor distinction but it is easier to publish but harder to get reach when disconnected. This is important in a "allowed to try" way.

Generally for books and music the answer for "should I sell on Amazon, Apple, Barnes and Noble, Soundcloud, or my own website" is "yes".

In addition to convenience people are understandably leery about where they put their credit card info and the financial infastructure hasn't generally caught up although there are a few "one-off" credit card number generators.

Re: End of a Decade

#62

Post by buboard »

amursft wrote: post #43
csomar wrote: post #25

> With 6 billion people on the planet Did he just miss 1.7 billion people?

Haha, thanks. I did. Do you mind if I incorporate your point? I was speaking a bit colloquially, but the correct number would be better.

Dont forget the six people who are not on earth

Re: End of a Decade

#63

Post by buboard »

jdnenej wrote: post #14
larnmar wrote: post #9

I feel like decades stopped having distinctive identities somewhere round 2000. Previous decade-by-decade changes from the 50s to the 60s to the 70s to the 80s to the 90s were, it must be admitted, mostly aesthetic rather than being the “fundamental changes in society” that people like to pretend — people in general didn’t become greedier in 1980 and less greedy again in 1990. But there were huge changes in the aesth…

Meme culture has been massive this decade and it's not just online. I regularly see memes in street art or stickers on light posts. I also think it's just that we haven't had enough time to judge yet. In another 20 years when things have changed you can reflect on them instead of it being the current reality.

Memes are last decade. It s old technology nowadays tbh , i wonder how come kids still use it

Re: End of a Decade

#64

Post by buboard »

larnmar wrote: post #9

I feel like decades stopped having distinctive identities somewhere round 2000. Previous decade-by-decade changes from the 50s to the 60s to the 70s to the 80s to the 90s were, it must be admitted, mostly aesthetic rather than being the “fundamental changes in society” that people like to pretend — people in general didn’t become greedier in 1980 and less greedy again in 1990. But there were huge changes in the aesth…

The tyranny of rounded corners still bugs me - and these were not even novel , its a modernist aesthetic! Architecture is still ‘contemporary’ since 2000, no impressive progress there, but probably huge horizontal expansion in china.

As for music and even film - maybe they re going through a long winter? Youtube travelogues are more interesting , to me. I think gaming , and virtual socializing has lots of unexplored potential too.

I m not even sure if someone is studying this seemingly quiet cultural period. I think we need someone to record this zeitgeist . Who are the eminent intellectuals that will be remembered in 2 decades?

Re: End of a Decade

#65

Post by Nasrudith »

pjc50 wrote: post #37
larnmar wrote: post #9

I feel like decades stopped having distinctive identities somewhere round 2000. Previous decade-by-decade changes from the 50s to the 60s to the 70s to the 80s to the 90s were, it must be admitted, mostly aesthetic rather than being the “fundamental changes in society” that people like to pretend — people in general didn’t become greedier in 1980 and less greedy again in 1990. But there were huge changes in the aesth…

I feel that the 00s didn't have a well-defined "youth culture", in the sense that people used for 50s onwards where a culture and visual and musical style all combine. But the end of the 2010s definitely does have this, at least for women - Youtube/instagram have evolved a distinctive makeup style! To me the 00s is the "war decade" and the 2010s the "financial crisis decade", despite the defining events being in 2001…

I think the youtu culture thing is a result of MP3s "balkanizing" things as their music exposure is less decided by the record store.

A sock hopper in the 70s would look out of place and like lazy and out of touch writers. Now a teenage fan of Nirvana or 80s metal is normal essentially.

In comparison wit music tastes it is like a bunch of time travelers into the same high school for a bunch of anchronistic cliques together.

Re: End of a Decade

#66

Post by buboard »

ericd wrote: post #12
larnmar wrote: post #9

I feel like decades stopped having distinctive identities somewhere round 2000. Previous decade-by-decade changes from the 50s to the 60s to the 70s to the 80s to the 90s were, it must be admitted, mostly aesthetic rather than being the “fundamental changes in society” that people like to pretend — people in general didn’t become greedier in 1980 and less greedy again in 1990. But there were huge changes in the aesth…

The iPhone was introduced in 2007. I’d say that had some pretty large effects. Reusable rockets. The explosion of social media. Electric cars. A number of other things.

Facebook stopped growing around 2013. I think that trend is if anything dwindling. electric cars and rockets are niche- the big change there is the digitisation of work which makes cars obsolete.

Re: End of a Decade

#67

Post by csomar »

amursft wrote: post #43
csomar wrote: post #25

> With 6 billion people on the planet Did he just miss 1.7 billion people?

Haha, thanks. I did. Do you mind if I incorporate your point? I was speaking a bit colloquially, but the correct number would be better.

> Do you mind if I incorporate your point?

Not sure what this means. But if you mean correct the error, then you certainly should and you don't need anybody permission.

Re: End of a Decade

#68

Post by bobthepanda »

amursft wrote: post #41
thundergolfer wrote: post #5

There's a lot of.. weird stuff in here. - The idea that Apple, Amazon, and Google entering into healthcare would be taking healthcare services "away from centralized gatekeepers." What? - Two lines about Climate Change in the whole post, and the 2nd is "We’ll remember this as the decade of unfortunate procrastination." That's quite the understatement. - "We’ve also had more equal access to the good parts of economic…

thanks for the critical feedback and thoughts. as another poster put it, perhaps disintermediation would be a better word to describe it. Individuals now have power to do things that they didn't before, or for much cheaper. Can see this happening in healthcare once 'big tech' is involved. It will be good for healthcare costs at least in the United States. any suggestions to improve it? or do you think the decade will…

Decentralization in healthcare is basically not going to happen unless the US stops giving tax exemptions for employer-provided health insurance.

Re: End of a Decade

#69

Post by mirekrusin »

thundergolfer wrote: post #30
mirekrusin wrote: post #28

Tinder in the main bullet points but not cryptocurrency/blockchain (hype or not, whatever, it was big thing throughout the decade), the "big bang" of deep learning or quantum computers?

Crypto is not a normal part of “everyday living”, which is what those bullet points are concerned with.

Says who? Number of just bitcoin users is more than order of magnitude higher than number of users of tinder.

Re: End of a Decade

#70

Post by thundergolfer »

mirekrusin wrote: post #69
thundergolfer wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Crypto is not a normal part of “everyday living”, which is what those bullet points are concerned with.

Says who? Number of just bitcoin users is more than order of magnitude higher than number of users of tinder.

Really? I would not have guessed that at all, seeing as basically everyone I know my age has used a Tinder-like dating app, but maybe 1-2 have used bitcoin as everyday currency.

Got some figures?

Post reply on HN