Big tech products are mostly useless
theguardian.com
Big tech products are mostly useless
1–10 of 138 posts
Re: Big tech products are mostly useless
#2Unfortunately, this article seems as empty and uninteresting as the products it's criticizing. The Guardian should ask idlewords to write one for them instead.
Re: Big tech products are mostly useless
#3It’s a journalist with an opinion on something he has no expertise in. I recommend not reading it. He doesn’t understand that the toy apps that are barely usable by enthusiasts today improve rapidly until using them is mundane and normal. There’s a pg essay on how the best startups are the ones where people think it’s a toy or a feature that’s relevant.
Don’t read the article.
Re: Big tech products are mostly useless
#4My takeaway: Many technological innovations don't turn out to be world-changing events. And those that do take several years to trickle down to mainstream usage.
For those of us that keep a skeptical mindset when evaluating new technology, none of this comes as a surprise.
Re: Big tech products are mostly useless
#5Unfortunately, this article seems as empty and uninteresting as the products it's criticizing. The Guardian should ask idlewords to write one for them instead.
For us living inside the feedback loop of the tech world it might be hard to see the relative importance of some of the things. I think he brings up an interesting topic from the perspective of someone living outside of the tech world.
Re: Big tech products are mostly useless
#6I predict that AI has 5-10 more years of "mostly useless" ahead until it suddenly becomes interesting.
Another thing he criticised was the Internet of Things and other gadgets: I agree with the author on that one. I hope it dies a quick death. If there's a tradeoff between an internet-connected device that lasts 1-2 years and a not-connected device lasting 20 years, I would always chose the longer-lasting one.
Re: Big tech products are mostly useless
#7The big picture innovations take longer and arrive slower, but the small, life-enhancing improvements deliver so smoothly and consistently that you don't notice until they're taken away. It's only when you have to use a 5-year-old phone or application that you realise how much worse things were back then.
Re: Big tech products are mostly useless
#8It’s a journalist with an opinion on something he has no expertise in. I recommend not reading it. He doesn’t understand that the toy apps that are barely usable by enthusiasts today improve rapidly until using them is mundane and normal. There’s a pg essay on how the best startups are the ones where people think it’s a toy or a feature that’s relevant. Don’t read the article.
I agree! Hy Brasil is not sinking, ignore the panic mongers, there are others with more experience in these matters than you...
https://youtu.be/qJh6EQ5gv7g
Re: Big tech products are mostly useless
#9The main point of this article is mostly misguided, IMO. The real one is that you don't know which tech innovation will have a great impact before hand.
Most of the things that has big impacts are actually things we skip through. For example, we have a pretty decent camera in our pockets at all times. We take pictures constantly. The "selfie" revolution, one that has big impacts in how we perceive ourselves and want other to perceive us is enabled by having an small quality camera around. At some point passing from "terrible quality" to "good enough quality" made a jump in that. Sure, not everyone takes selfies. But it has been a big change in photography in the last 10 years or so. So big we have a new name for something it exist before.
I'm pretty sure that being able to track a run and share it on social networks is a big motivator to do exercise, for example.
I seems weird to me talking to AI, and even weirder that "the future" is calling to a shop with an AI instead of using some sort of web shop/app/whatever to get an appointment.
But who knows...
Re: Big tech products are mostly useless
#10> Every now and again, at some huge auditorium, a senior staff member at one of the big firms based in northern California – ordinarily a man...
Absolutely irrelevant to the topic. I already ignore the hype, but I think I'll also ignore this author's hyperbole.