Podcasts about information empires

„Kultur heute schlägt alles mit Ähnlichkeit. Film, Radio, Magazine machen ein System aus. Jede Sparte ist einstimmig in sich und alle zusammen“, schreiben Max Horkheimer und Theodor W. Adorno im Kulturindustrie-Kapitel in der „Dialektik der Aufklärung“. Wo manche Pluralisierung und Buntheit erkennen wollen, sehen die Philosophen der Frankfurter Schule eine große Vereinheitlichung innerhalb des Monopolkapitalismus am Werk, die konformes Denken und Autoritätshörigkeit produziert. Die Freizeitgestaltung unterscheidet sich nicht mehr wesentlich von der Arbeitszeit. Im Akkord wird konsumiert und produziert. Auch der Unterschied zwischen einer Ware und Kulturerzeugnissen verschwimmt, wenn alles käuflich wird. Im Zeitalter von algorithmischer Sortierung, von Spotify-Playlisten und KI-generierter Kunst lohnt es sich, das Kapitel aus dem Klassiker der Kritischen Theorie noch einmal zu lesen. In der neuen Folge von „Wohlstand für Alle“ sprechen Ole Nymoen und Wolfgang M. Schmitt über die Kulturindustrie der Vergangenheit und Gegenwart. Literatur: Max Horkheimer, Theodor W. Adorno: Dialektik der Aufklärung. Philosophische Fragmente, S. Fischer. Liz Pelly: Mood Machine. The Rise of Spotify and the Costs of the Perfect Playlist, Hodder & Stoughton. Tim Wu: The Master Switch. The Rise and Fall of Information Empires, Vintage Reprint. Unsere Zusatzinhalte könnt ihr bei Apple Podcasts, Steady und Patreon hören. Vielen Dank! Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/de/podcast/wohlstand-f%C3%BCr-alle/id1476402723 Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/oleundwolfgang Steady: https://steadyhq.com/de/oleundwolfgang/about Veranstaltungen: Wir sind am 3. Mai in Zürich: https://www.millers.ch/spielplan/detail/jean-philippe-kindler-2186 Wir sind am 5. Mai in Stuttgart: https://theaterhaus.reservix.de/p/reservix/event/2318654

Why is reforming capitalism so essential? In the latest issue of Liberties Quarterly, Tim Wu argues that unregulated capitalism not only leads to economic monopolies, but also drives populist anger and authoritarian politics. In “The Real Road to Serfdom”, Wu advocates for "decentralized capitalism" with distributed economic power, citing examples from Scandinavia and East Asia. Drawing from his experience in the Biden administration's antitrust efforts, he emphasizes the importance of preventing industry concentration. Wu expresses concern about big tech's growing political influence and argues that challenging monopolies is critical for fostering innovation and maintaining economic progress in the United States.Here are the 5 KEEN ON AMERICA takeaways from our interview with Tim Wu:* Historical Parallels: Wu sees concerning parallels between our current era and the 1930s, characterized by concentrated economic power, fragile economic conditions, and the rise of populist leaders. He suggests we're in a period where leaders are moving beyond winning elections to attempting to alter constitutional frameworks.* The Monopoly-Autocracy Connection: Wu argues there's a dangerous cycle where monopolies create economic inequality, which generates populist anger, which then enables authoritarian leaders to rise to power. He cites Hugo Chavez as a pioneer of this modern autocratic model that leaders like Trump have followed.* Decentralized Capitalism: Wu advocates for an economic system with multiple centers of distributed economic power, rather than just a few giant companies accumulating wealth. He points to Denmark, Taiwan, and post-WWII East Asia as successful examples of more balanced economic structures.* Antitrust Legacy: Wu believes the Biden administration's antitrust enforcement efforts have created lasting changes in legal standards and public consciousness that won't be easily reversed. He emphasizes that challenging monopolies is crucial for maintaining innovation and preventing industry stagnation.* Big Tech and Power: Wu expresses concern about big tech companies' growing political influence, comparing it to historical examples like AT&T and IBM. He's particularly worried about AI potentially reinforcing existing power structures rather than democratizing opportunities.Complete Transcript: Tim Wu on The Real Road to SerfdomAndrew Keen: Hello, everybody. We live in very strange times. That's no exaggeration. Yesterday, we had Nick Bryant on the show, the author of The Forever War. He was the BBC's man in Washington, DC for a long time. In our conversation, Nick suggested that we're living in really historic times, equivalent to the fall of the Berlin Wall, 9/11, perhaps even the beginnings of the Second World War.My guest today, like Nick, is a deep thinker. Tim Wu will be very well known to you for many things, including his book, The Attention Merchants. He was involved in the Biden White House, teaches law at Columbia University, and much more. He has a new book coming out later in the year on November 4th, The Age of Extraction. He has a very interesting essay in this issue of Liberties, the quarterly magazine of ideas, called "The Real Road to Serfdom."Tim had a couple of interesting tweets in the last couple of days, one comparing the behavior of President Trump to Germany's 1933 enabling act. And when it comes to Ukraine, Tim wrote, "How does the GOP feel about their president's evident plan to forfeit the Cold War?" Tim Wu is joining us from his home in the village of Manhattan. Tim, welcome. Before we get to your excellent essay in Liberties, how would you historicize what we're living through at the moment?Tim Wu: I think the 1930s are not the wrong way to look at it. Prior to that period, you had this extraordinary concentration of economic power in a very fragile environment. A lot of countries had experienced an enormous crash and you had the rise of populist leaders, with Mussolini being the pioneer of the model. This has been going on for at least 5 or 6 years now. We're in that middle period where it's moving away from people just winning elections to trying to really alter the constitution of their country. So I think the mid-30s is probably about right.Andrew Keen: You were involved in the Biden administration. You were one of the major thinkers when it came to antitrust. Have you been surprised with what's happened since Biden left office? The speed, the radicalness of this Trump administration?Tim Wu: Yes, because I expected something more like the first Trump administration, which was more of a show with a lot of flash but poor execution. This time around, the execution is also poor but more effective. I didn't fully expect that Elon Musk would actually be a government official at this point and that he'd have this sort of vandalism project going on. The fact they won all of the houses of Congress was part of the problem and has made the effort go faster.Andrew Keen: You talk about Musk. We've done many shows on Musk's role in all this and the seeming arrival of Silicon Valley or a certain version of Silicon Valley in Washington, DC. You're familiar with both worlds, the world of big tech and Silicon Valley and Washington. Is that your historical reading that these two worlds are coming together in this second Trump administration?Tim Wu: It's very natural for economic power to start to seek political power. It follows from the basic view of monopoly as a creature that wants to defend itself, and the second observation that the most effective means of self-defense is control of government. If you follow that very simple logic, it stands to reason that the most powerful economic entities would try to gain control of government.I want to talk about the next five years. The tech industry is following the lead of Palantir and Peter Thiel, who were pioneers in thinking that instead of trying to avoid government, they should try to control it. I think that is the obvious move over the next four years.Andrew Keen: I've been reading your excellent essay in Liberties, "The Real Road to Serfdom." When did you write it? It seems particularly pertinent this week, although of course you didn't write it knowing exactly what was going to be happening with Musk and Washington DC and Trump and Ukraine.Tim Wu: I wrote it about two years ago when I got out of the White House. The themes are trying to get at eternal issues about the dangers of economic power and concentrated economic power and its unaccountability. If it made predictions that are starting to come true, I don't know if that's good or bad.Andrew Keen: "The Real Road to Serfdom" is, of course, a reference to the Hayek book "The Road to Serfdom." Did you consciously use that title with reference to Hayek, or was that a Liberties decision?Tim Wu: That was my decision. At that point, and I may still write this, I was thinking of writing a book just called "The Real Road to Serfdom." I am both fascinated and a fan of Hayek in certain ways. I think he nailed certain things exactly right but makes big errors at the same time.To his credit, Hayek was very critical of monopoly and very critical of the role of the state in reinforcing monopoly. But he had an almost naivete about what powerful, unaccountable private economic entities would do with their power. That's essentially my criticism.Andrew Keen: In 2018, you wrote a book, "The Curse of Bigness." And in a way, this is an essay against bigness, but it's written—please correct me if I'm wrong—I read it as a critique of the left, suggesting that there were times in the essay, if you're reading it blind, you could have been reading Hayek in its critique of Marx and centralization and Lenin and Stalin and the Ukrainian famines. Is the message in the book, Tim—is your audience a progressive audience? Are you saying that it's a mistake to rely on bigness, so to speak, the state as a redistributive platform?Tim Wu: Not entirely. I'm very critical of communist planned economies, and that's part of it. But it's mainly a critique of libertarian faith in private economic power or sort of the blindness to the dangers of it.My basic thesis in "The Real Road to Serfdom" is that free market economies will tend to monopolize. Once monopoly power is achieved, it tends to set off a strong desire to extract as much wealth from the rest of the economy as it can, creating something closer to a feudal-type economy with an underclass. That tends to create a huge amount of resentment and populist anger, and democracies have to respond to that anger.The libertarian answer of saying that's fine, this problem will go away, is a terrible answer. History suggests that what happens instead is if democracy doesn't do anything, the state takes over, usually on the back of a populist strongman. It could be a communist, could be fascist, could be just a random authoritarian like in South America.I guess I'd say it's a critique of both the right and the left—the right for being blind to the dangers of concentrated economic power, and the left, especially the communist left, for idolizing the takeover of vital functions by a giant state, which has a track record as bad, if not worse, than purely private power.Andrew Keen: You bring up Hugo Chavez in the essay, the now departed Venezuelan strongman. You're obviously no great fan of his, but you do seem to suggest that Chavez, like so many other authoritarians, built his popularity on the truth of people's suffering. Is that fair?Tim Wu: That is very fair. In the 90s, when Chavez first came to power through popular election, everyone was mystified and thought he was some throwback to the dictators of the 60s and 70s. But he turned out to be a pioneer of our future, of the new form of autocrat, who appealed to the unfairness of the economy post-globalization.Leaders like Hungary's Viktor Orbán, and certainly Donald Trump, are direct descendants of Hugo Chavez in their approach. They follow the same playbook, appealing to the same kind of pain and suffering, promising to act for the people as opposed to the elites, the foreigners, and the immigrants. Chavez is also a cautionary lesson. He started in a way which the population liked—he lowered gas prices, gave away money, nationalized industry. He was very popular. But then like most autocrats, he eventually turned the money to himself and destroyed his own country.Andrew Keen: Why are autocrats like Chavez and perhaps Trump so much better at capturing that anger than Democrats like Joe Biden and Kamala Harris?Tim Wu: People who are outside the system like Chavez are able to tap into resentment and anger in a way which is less diluted by their direct information environment and their colleagues. Anyone who hangs around Washington, DC for a long time becomes more muted and careful. They lose credibility.That said, the fact that populist strongmen take over countries in distress suggests we need to avoid that level of economic distress in the first place and protect the middle class. Happy, contented middle-class countries don't tend to see the rise of authoritarian dictators. There isn't some Danish version of Hugo Chavez in the running right now.Andrew Keen: You bring up Denmark. Denmark always comes up in these kinds of conversations. What's admirable about your essay is you mostly don't fall into the Denmark trap of simply saying, "Why don't we all become like Denmark?" But at the same time, you acknowledge that the Danish model is attractive, suggesting we've misunderstood it or treated it superficially. What can and can't we learn from the Danish model?Tim Wu: American liberals often misunderstand the lesson of Scandinavia and other countries that have strong, prosperous middle classes like Taiwan, Japan, and Korea. In Scandinavia's case, the go-to explanation is that it's just the liberals' favorite set of policies—high taxation, strong social support systems. But I think the structure of those economies is much more important.They have what Jacob Hacker calls very strong "pre-distribution." They've avoided just having a small set of monopolists who make all the money and then hopefully hand it out to other people. It goes back to their land reform in the early 19th century, where they set up a very different kind of economy with a broad distribution of productive assets.If I'm trying to promote a philosophy in this book, it's for people who are fed up with the excesses of laissez-faire capitalism and think it leads to autocracy, but who are also no fans of communism or socialism. Just saying "let people pile up money and we'll tax it later" is not going to work. What you need is an economy structured with multiple centers of distributed economic power.Andrew Keen: The term that seems to summarize that in the essay is "architecture of parity." It's a bit clunky, but is that the best way to sum up your thinking?Tim Wu: I'm working on the terminology. Architecture of equality, parity, decentralized capitalism, distribution—these are all terms trying to capture it. It's more of a 19th century form of Christian or Catholic economics. People are grasping for the right word for an economic system that doesn't rely on just a few giant companies taking money from everybody and hopefully redistributing it. That model is broken and has a dangerous tendency to lead to toxicity. We need a better capitalism. An alternative title for this piece could have been "Saving Capitalism from Itself."Andrew Keen: Your name is most associated with tech and your critique of big tech. Does this get beyond big tech? Are there other sectors of the economy you're interested in fixing and reforming?Tim Wu: Absolutely. Silicon Valley is the most obvious and easiest entry point to talk about concentrated economic power. You can see the dependence on a small number of platforms that have earnings and profits far beyond what anyone imagined possible. But we're talking about an economy-wide, almost global set of problems.Some industries are worse. The meat processing industry in the United States is horrendously concentrated—it takes all the money from farmers, charges us too much for meat, and keeps it for itself. There are many industries where people are looking for something to understand or believe in that's different than socialism but different than this libertarian capitalism that ends up bankrupting people. Tech is the easiest way to talk about it, but not the be-all and end-all of my interest.Andrew Keen: Are there other examples where we're beginning to see decentralized capitalism? The essay was very strong on the critique, but I found fewer examples of decentralized capitalism in practice outside maybe Denmark in the 2020s.Tim Wu: East Asia post-World War II is a strong example of success. While no economy is purely small businesses, although Taiwan comes close, if you look at the East Asian story after World War II, one of the big features was an effort to reform land, give land to peasants, and create a landowning class to replace the feudal system. They had huge entrepreneurism, especially in Korea and Taiwan, less in Japan. This built a strong and prosperous middle and upper middle class.Japan has gone through hard times—they let their companies get too big and they stagnated. But Korea and Taiwan have gone from being third world economies to Taiwan now being wealthier per capita than Japan. The United States is another strong example, vacillating between being very big and very small. Even at its biggest, it still has a strong entrepreneurial culture and sectors with many small entities. Germany is another good example. There's no perfect version, but what I'm saying is that the model of monopolized economies and just having a few winners and hoping that anybody else can get tax payments is really a losing proposition.Andrew Keen: You were on Chris Hayes recently talking about antitrust. You're one of America's leading thinkers on antitrust and were brought into the Biden administration on the antitrust front. Is antitrust then the heart of the matter? Is this really the key to decentralizing capitalism?Tim Wu: I think it's a big tool, one of the tools of managing the economy. It works by preventing industries from merging their way into monopoly and keeps a careful eye on structure. In the same way that no one would say interest rates are the be-all and end-all of monetary policy, when we're talking about structural policy, having antitrust law actively preventing overconcentration is important.In the White House itself, we spent a lot of time trying to get other agencies to prevent their sectors, whether healthcare or transportation, from becoming overly monopolized and extractive. You can have many parts of the government involved—the antitrust agencies are key, but they're not the only solution.Andrew Keen: You wrote an interesting piece for The Atlantic about Biden's antitrust initiatives. You said the outgoing president's legacy of revived antitrust enforcement won't be easy to undo. Trump is very good at breaking things. Why is it going to be hard to undo? Lina Khan's gone—the woman who seems to unite all of Silicon Valley in their dislike of her. What did Biden do to protect antitrust legislation?Tim Wu: The legal patterns have changed and the cases are ongoing. But I think more important is a change of consciousness and ideology and change in popular support. I don't think there is great support for letting big tech do whatever they want without oversight. There are people who believe in that and some of them have influence in this administration, but there's been a real change in consciousness.I note that the Federal Trade Commission has already announced that it's going to stick with the Biden administration's merger rules, and my strong sense is the Department of Justice will do the same. There are certain things that Trump did that we stuck with in the Biden administration because they were popular—the most obvious being the turn toward China. Going back to the Bush era approach of never bothering any monopolies, I just don't think there's an appetite for it.Andrew Keen: Why is Lina Khan so unpopular in Silicon Valley?Tim Wu: It's interesting. I'm not usually one to attribute things to sexism, but the Justice Department brought more cases against big tech than she did. Jonathan Kanter, who ran antitrust at Justice, won the case against Google. His firm was trying to break up Google. They may still do it, but somehow Lina Khan became the face of it. I think because she's young and a woman—I don't know why Jonathan Kanter didn't become the symbol in the same way.Andrew Keen: You bring up the AT&T and IBM cases in the US tech narrative in the essay, suggesting that we can learn a great deal from them. What can we learn from those cases?Tim Wu: The United States from the 70s through the 2010s was an extraordinarily innovative place and did amazing things in the tech industry. An important part of that was challenging the big IBM and AT&T monopolies. AT&T was broken into eight pieces. IBM was forced to begin selling its software separately and opened up the software markets to what became a new software industry.AT&T earlier had been forced to license the transistor, which opened up the semiconductor industry and to some degree the computing industry, and had to stay out of computing. The government intervened pretty forcefully—a form of industrial policy to weaken its tech monopolies. The lesson is that we need to do the same thing right now.Some people will ask about China, but I think the United States has always done best when it constantly challenges established power and creates room for entrepreneurs to take their shot. I want very much for the new AI companies to challenge the main tech platforms and see what comes of that, as opposed to becoming a stagnant industry. Everyone says nothing can become stagnant, but the aerospace industry was pretty quick-moving in the 60s, and now you have Boeing and Airbus sitting there. It's very easy for a tech industry to stagnate, and attacking monopolists is the best way to prevent that.Andrew Keen: You mentioned Google earlier. You had an interesting op-ed in The New York Times last year about what we should do about Google. My wife is head of litigation at Google, so I'm not entirely disinterested. I also have a career as a critic of Google. If Kent Walker was here, he would acknowledge some of the things he was saying. But he would say Google still innovates—Google hasn't become Boeing. It's innovating in AI, in self-driving cars, it's shifting search. Would he be entirely wrong?Tim Wu: No, he wouldn't be entirely wrong. In the same way that IBM kept going, AT&T kept going. What you want in tech industries is a fair fight. The problem with Google isn't that they're investing in AI or trying to build self-driving cars—that's great. The problem is that they were paying over $20 billion a year to Apple for a promise not to compete in search. Through control of the browsers and many other things, they were trying to make sure they could never be dislodged.My view of the economics is monopolists need to always be a little insecure. They need to be in a position where they can be challenged. That happens—there are companies who, like AT&T in the 70s or 60s, felt they were immune. It took the government to make space. I think it's very important for there to be opportunities to challenge the big guys and try to seize the pie.Andrew Keen: I'm curious where you are on Section 230. Google won their Supreme Court case when it came to Section 230. In this sense, I'm guessing you view Google as being on the side of the good guys.Tim Wu: Section 230 is interesting. In the early days of the Internet, it was an important infant industry protection. It was an insulation that was vital to get those little companies at the time to give them an opportunity to grow and build business models, because if you're being sued by billions of people, you can't really do too much.Section 230 was originally designed to protect people like AOL, who ran user forums and had millions of people discussing—kind of like Reddit. I think as Google and companies like Facebook became active in promoting materials and became more like media companies, the case for an absolutist Section 230 became a lot weaker. The law didn't really change but the companies did.Andrew Keen: You wrote the essay "The Real Road to Serfdom" a couple of years ago. You also talked earlier about AI. There's not a lot of AI in this, but 50% of all the investment in technology over the last year was in AI, and most of that has gone into these huge platforms—OpenAI, Anthropic, Google Gemini. Is AI now the central theater, both in the Road to Serfdom and in liberating ourselves from big tech?Tim Wu: Two years ago when I was writing this, I was determined not to say anything that would look stupid about AI later. There's a lot more on what I think about AI in my new book coming in November.I see AI as a classic potential successor technology. It obviously is the most significant successor to the web and the mass Internet of 20 years ago in terms of having potential to displace things like search and change the way people do various forms of productivity. How technology plays out depends a lot on the economic structure. If you think about a technology like the cotton gin, it didn't automatically lead to broad flourishing, but reinforced plantation slavery.What I hope happens with AI is that it sets off more competition and destabilization for some of the tech platforms as opposed to reinforcing their advantage and locking them in forever. I don't know if we know what's going to happen right now. I think it's extremely important that OpenAI stays separate from the existing tech companies, because if this just becomes the same players absorbing technology, that sounds a lot like the darker chapters in US tech history.Andrew Keen: And what about the power of AI to liberate ourselves from our brain power as the next industrial revolution? When I was reading the essay, I thought it would be a very good model, both as a warning and in terms of offering potential for us to create this new architecture of parity. Because the technology in itself, in theory at least, is one of parity—one of democratizing brainpower.Tim Wu: Yes, I agree it has extraordinary potential. Things can go in two directions. The Industrial Revolution is one example where you had more of a top-down centralization of the means of production that was very bad for many people initially, though there were longer-term gains.I would hope AI would be something more like the PC revolution in the 80s and 90s, which did augment individual humanity as opposed to collective enterprise. It allowed people to do things like start their own travel agency or accounting firm with just a computer. I am interested and bullish on the potential of AI to empower smaller units, but I'm concerned it will be used to reinforce existing economic structures. The jury's out—the future will tell us. Just hoping it's going to make humanity better is not going to be the best answer.Andrew Keen: When you were writing this essay, Web3 was still in vogue then—the idea of blockchain and crypto decentralizing the economy. But I didn't see any references to Web3 and the role of technology in democratizing capitalism in terms of the architecture of corporations. Are you skeptical of the Web3 ideology?Tim Wu: The essay had its limits since I was also talking about 18th century Denmark. I have a lot more on blockchain and Web3 in the book. The challenge with crypto and Bitcoin is that it both over-promises and delivers something. I've been very interested in crypto and blockchain for a long time. The challenge it's had is constantly promising to decentralize great systems and failing, then people stealing billions of dollars and ending up in prison.It has a dubious track record, but it does have this core potential for a certain class of people to earn money. I'm always in favor of anything that is an alternative means of earning money. There are people who made money on it. I just think it's failed to execute on its promises. Blockchain in particular has failed to be a real challenge to web technologies.Andrew Keen: As you say, Hayek inspired the book and in some sense this is intellectual. The father of decentralization in ideological terms was E.F. Schumacher. I don't think you reference him, but do you think there has been much thinking since Schumacher on the value of smallness and decentralized architectures? What do people like yourself add to what Schumacher missed in his critique of bigness?Tim Wu: Schumacher is a good example. Rawls is actually under-recognized as being interested in these things. I see myself as writing in the tradition of those figures and trying to pursue a political economy that values a more balanced economy and small production.Hopefully what I add is a level of institutional experience and practicality that was missing. Rawls is slightly unfair because he's a philosopher, but his model doesn't include firms—it's just individuals. So it's all about balancing between poor people and rich people when obviously economic power is also held by corporations.I'm trying to create more flesh on the bones of the "small is beautiful" philosophy and political economy that is less starry-eyed and more realistic. I'm putting forward the point that you're not sacrificing growth and you're taking less political risk with a more balanced economy. There's an adulation of bigness in our time—exciting big companies are glamorous. But long-term prosperity does better when you have more centers, a more balanced system. I'm not an ultra-centralist suggesting we should live in mud huts, but I do think the worship of monopoly is very similar to the worship of autocracy and is dangerous.Andrew Keen: Much to discuss. Tim Wu, thank you so much. The author of "The Real Road to Serfdom," fascinating essay in this month's issue of Liberties. I know "The Age of Extraction" will be coming out on November 10th.Tim Wu: In England and US at the same time.Andrew Keen: We'll get you back on the show. Fascinating conversation, Tim. Thank you so much.Hailed as the “architect” of the Biden administration's competition and antitrust policies, Tim Wu writes and teaches about private power and related topics. First known for coining the term “net neutrality” in 2002, in recent years Wu has been a leader in the revitalization of American antitrust and has taken a particular focus on the growing power of the big tech platforms. In 2021, he was appointed to serve in the White House as special assistant to the president for technology and competition policy. A professor at Columbia Law School since 2006, Wu has also held posts in public service. He was enforcement counsel in the New York Attorney General's Office, worked on competition policy for the National Economic Council during the Barack Obama administration, and worked in antitrust enforcement at the Federal Trade Commission. In 2014, Wu was a Democratic primary candidate for lieutenant governor of New York. In his most recent book, The Curse of Bigness: Antitrust in the New Gilded Age (2018), he argues that corporate and industrial concentration can lead to the rise of populism, nationalism, and extremist politicians. His previous books include The Attention Merchants: The Epic Scramble to Get Inside Our Heads (2016), The Master Switch: The Rise and Fall of Information Empires (2010), and Who Controls the Internet?: Illusions of a Borderless World (2006), which he co-authored with Jack Goldsmith. Wu was a contributing opinion writer for The New York Times and also has written for Slate, The New Yorker, and The Washington Post. He once explained the concept of net neutrality to late-night host Stephen Colbert while he rode a rollercoaster. He has been named one of America's 100 most influential lawyers by the National Law Journal; has made Politico's list of 50 most influential figures in American politics (more than once); and has been included in the Scientific American 50 of policy leadership. Wu is a member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. He served as a law clerk for Justice Stephen Breyer of the U.S. Supreme Court and Judge Richard Posner of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit.Named as one of the "100 most connected men" by GQ magazine, Andrew Keen is amongst the world's best known broadcasters and commentators. In addition to presenting the daily KEEN ON show, he is the host of the long-running How To Fix Democracy interview series. He is also the author of four prescient books about digital technology: CULT OF THE AMATEUR, DIGITAL VERTIGO, THE INTERNET IS NOT THE ANSWER and HOW TO FIX THE FUTURE. Andrew lives in San Francisco, is married to Cassandra Knight, Google's VP of Litigation & Discovery, and has two grown children.Keen On America is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit keenon.substack.com/subscribe

Seth Godin is an author, a marketer and a climate activist but most of all he's a teacher. He's also an incredible podcast guest. In this episode we discuss: A $50billion mistake What the internet has in common with the rail road and oil Open v closed systems Wheeler's Which and the value of the old school Smallest delightable audience (SDA™️) Tesla and crossing the chasam Cows, concrete and carbon footprint Pricing carbon fairly Was Gandhi right? How to write a book Seth Godin For more than thirty years, Seth has been trying to turn on lights, inspire people and teach them how to level up. His blog has been appearing daily for more than a decade. He has spent most of his professional life as a writer, publishing 20 bestselling books that have been translated into nearly 40 languages. These books are a great way to go deep into a concept, and he hopes many of them stand the test of time. Along the way through his career, Seth has found countless detours, interesting projects, designed to inspire and entertain you as you continue to do your work. His latest book is called THE PRACTICE. Like the one before, THIS IS MARKETING, both were bestsellers. The one before that was called Your Turn. It's illustrated and shareable and provocative. In 2015, Seth created the altMBA. It's a life-changing 30-day workshop and it's entirely possible it will change your life. It's now part of Akimbo, which is now an independently owned entity, a B corp, creating new ways to learn. More than 60,000 people have taken his online courses, including The Marketing Seminar and several on Udemy. He's a member of the Guerrilla Marketing Hall of Fame, the Direct Marketing Hall of Fame and, just recently, the plain old no-modifier Marketing Hall of Fame. Which is pretty cool. You can read Seth's free ebooks on the placebo effect and education. And there are five TED talks. He also pioneered ethical online direct marketing, now a $30bn a year industry. Seth is an industry leader and marketing royalty. To use his words: “Go, make a ruckus.”  Book Recommendations Find Seth at seths.blog The Master Switch: The Rise and Fall of Information Empires by Tim Wu. All Seth's books in one place   Other Links Neal McCullough – Hand Drawn Creative, the man behind that beautiful bit of artwork Big Marketing Meet Up – where I first met Seth and has a 2024 date already released... 14 November. Tickets available now. Andi Jarvis If you have any questions or want to talk about anything that was discussed in the show, the best place to get me is on LinkedIn or Instagram. If you want the podcast emailed to you sign up for it on the Eximo Marketing website. Make sure you subscribe to get the podcast pushed to you and if you enjoyed the show, please give it a 5* rating. Andi Jarvis, Eximo Marketing.

Shobita and Jack reflect on the US election and the future of conservatism and exciting vaccine news, and speak with philosopher and STS forefather Langdon Winner about the politics of technology today. Winner recently released a new edition of his groundbreaking book, The Whale and the Reactor: A Search for Limits in an Age of High Technology.- Langdon Winner (2020). The Whale and the Reactor: A Search for Limits in an Age of High Technology. University of Chicago Press.- Langdon Winner (2020). "The virus is a catalyst, society itself the disease."- Langdon Winner (2020). The Democratic Shaping of Technology: Its Rise, Fall, and Possible Rebirth.- Alfred Nordmann and Langdon Winner (2020). "Interview with Langdon Winner: Autonomous Technology: Then and Still Now."- Shoshana Zuboff (2019). The Age of Surveillance Capitalism: The Fight for a Human Future at the New Frontier of Power. Public Affairs.- Langdon Winner (2017) The Cult of Innovation: Its Colorful Myths and Rituals.- Langdon Winner (2010). "The Odyssey of Captain Beefheart: Rolling Stone’s 1970 Cover Story." Rolling Stone.- Tim Wu (2010). The Master Switch: The Rise and Fall of Information Empires. Oxford University Press.Transcript available at thereceivedwisdom.org

This episode we’re giving you an update on the media we’ve been enjoying not for the podcast! We talk about music, books, podcasts, comics, videos, movies, and more! You can download the podcast directly, find it on Libsyn, or get it through Apple Podcasts, Stitcher, Google Play, Spotify, or your favourite podcast delivery system. In this episode Anna Ferri | Meghan Whyte | Matthew Murray | RJ Edwards Announcements Check out our weekly "spooky" visual novel stream at twitch.tv/bookclub4m. Starting Friday, September 18th at 9pm Eastern / 6pm Pacific. Or check out the recordings on our YouTube channel Media We’ve Been Enjoying Sleepy Princess in the Demon Castle, Vol. 1 by Kagiji Kumanomata The Way of the Househusband, Vol. 1 by Kōsuke Ōno Matthew heard about both of these manga in the Best and Worst Manga of 2020 panel Coode Street Podcast The Slowdown Strides Forward Comrades Marathon (Wikipedia) Dig: A History Podcast Choice, Sterilization, and Eugenics in Twentieth Century Puerto Rico Steaming the “Nefarious Sin”: Bathhouses and Homosexuality from the Victorian Era to the AIDS Epidemic Tell the Machine Goodnight by Katie Williams The Undying by Anne Boyer In the Dream House: A Memoir by Carmen Maria Machado Turning: A Swimming Memoir by Jessica J. Lee Doing Harm: The Truth About How Bad Medicine and Lazy Science Leave Women Dismissed, Misdiagnosed, and Sick by Maya Dusenbery Black Dresses on Bandcamp Black Dresses - Eternal Nausea Mitski on Bandcamp Mitski - Nobody Sofi Tukker on Twitch Sofi Tukker - Batshit Anarchism & Police Abolition Feat. Domri Rade by Spice8Rack On Immunity: An Inoculation by Eula Biss A Christmas Prince  The Grim Dystopia of A Christmas Prince (video by Jenny Nicholson) What things need to be saved in RJ’s winter holiday RPG? Suggest something! Finish It! Podcast Journey Under the Sea episode 1 Do Nothing: How to Break Away from Overworking, Overdoing, and Underliving by Celeste Headlee Links, Articles, and Things Our “to be read” piles Matthew Anna Meghan Hark! The Holiday Music Podcast Doing Harm: The Truth About How Bad Medicine and Lazy Science Leave Women Dismissed, Misdiagnosed, and Sick by Maya Dusenbery Trailer for the new Dune movie 15 Non-fiction Technology Books by BIPOC (Black, Indigenous, & People of Colour) Authors (see all our lists here) Race After Technology: Abolitionist Tools for the New Jim Code by Ruha Benjamin Captivating Technology: Race, Carceral Technoscience, and Liberatory Imagination in Everyday Life by Ruha Benjamin Dark Matters: On the Surveillance of Blackness by Simons Browne Brotopia: Breaking Up the Boys Club of Silicon Valley by Emily Chang Inclusive Design for a Digital World: Designing with Accessibility in Mind by Regine Gilbert Girl Code: Gaming, Going Viral, and Getting It Done by Andrea Gonzales and Sophie Houser Reaching for the Moon: The Autobiography of NASA Mathematician Katherine Johnson by Katherine G. Johnson Black Software: The Internet & Racial Justice, from the Afronet to Black Lives Matter by Charlton D. McIlwain Digitizing Race: Visual Cultures of the Internet by Lisa Nakamura Technicolor: Race, Technology, and Everyday Life edited by Alondra Nelson and Thuy Linh Nguyen Tu with Alicia Headlam Hines Algorithms of Oppression: How Search Engines Reinforce Racism by Safiya Umoja Noble Hidden Figures by Margot Lee Shetterly Native American DNA: Tribal Belonging and the False Promise of Genetic Science by Kim TallBear Twitter and Tear Gas: The Power and Fragility of Networked Protest by Zeynep Tufekci The Master Switch: The Rise and Fall of Information Empires by Tim Wu Suggest new genres or titles! Fill out the form to suggest genres! Check out our Tumblr, follow us on Twitter or Instagram, join our Facebook Group, or send us an email! Join us again on Tuesday, October 6th we’ll be reading Comedic/Humourous Novels! (or fiction?) Then on Tuesday, October 20th we’ll be playing Happy Birthday Dracula!

In today’s episode, your host, Matt Hooper, is speaking with Alison McCauley! Alison is the founder and CEO of Unblocked Future as well as an author, speaker, and consultant. Her bestselling book, Unblocked: How Blockchains Will Change Your Business (and What to Do About It), answers the question: ‘Why do I need to get on board with this whole blockchain thing?’ and is helping non-technical executives all around the world to better understand how this technology will trigger change!   Growing up in a family of engineers, Alison ‘rebelled’ by becoming a social scientist. She was completely enraptured by what changes our behaviors as humans, what changes our minds — and overall: how our brains work. After she graduated, she became deeply fascinated by technology, our relationship with it, and how human behavior and emerging technologies interact. In the midst of studying this, she caught the ‘blockchain brain virus,’ and now works with organizations in adopting and leveraging new tech to drive forward a better digital future.   In this episode, Matt and Alison really dive in and take a look at how this promise of a decentralized future with blockchain is different than all previous promises, why it is a value generation system and not a value extraction system, and perhaps most notably: why and how organizations and companies need to adopt this technology! She also touches on all the work that she does in the space, how the research of her incredible book took shape, key insights from her book, and how listeners — of all different levels of familiarity with the space — can become more blockchain literate.   Key Takeaways: [:01] About today’s fantastic guest, Alison McCauley! [3:16] Alison speaks about her form of rebellion: becoming a social scientist, and how she ended up becoming involved in technology. [5:20] When did Alison first catch the “blockchain brain virus?” [8:20] What were the pools of digital discontent that this engineer (who first introduced Alison to blockchain) was describing? What was the exact moment in which her skepticism in it begin to recede? [11:30] Alison has written that the backlash of the big tech companies “happening amidst a backdrop of global discontent.” How, in Alison’s estimation, did we arrive here? And what role have the big tech firms played in leading to this discontent? [15:37] How are blockchains disruptive? And what does this mean? [17:30] Alison elaborates on what John Henry Clippinger has said about blockchain and further explains the incredible benefits and value generation of blockchain for an organization. [23:21] About the IBM Garage and how it can help you begin your blockchain journey. [24:04] Where is the proof that the blockchain ecosystem needs more established players (like banks or governments) to get involved? Historically, hasn’t there been just as much success letting developers and entrepreneurs play in the ecosystem for a longer time first before more established players jump in? Or is it so different now with blockchain because of cultural circumstances or technological differences (that have to do with blockchain itself)? [28:22] How would the solution to this great backlash (AKA this discontent for tech), who’s driving force is decentralization, be different? How will decentralization ensure that there will not be any one blockchain firm that will overtake the internet in the same way that the four or five big tech firms over the last ten years have? [31:00] Alison further elaborates on a quote from her book about the security opportunities for blockchain adoption within organizations. [31:58] Alison speaks more on the topic protecting the democratization of blockchain and making it hard for any one firm to centralize control. [33:35] Alison elaborates on keeping blockchain decentralized, as well as her advocacy for blockchain literacy. [34:46] How can one learn about blockchain literacy? (Beyond reading Alison’s book, Unblocked, of course!) [36:56] Matt thanks Alison for joining the IBM Blockchain Pulse Podcast!   Sources Mentioned: Unblocked Future Unblocked: How Blockchains Will Change Your Business (and What to Do About It), by Alison McCauley Tim Berners-Lee John Henry Clippinger IBM Garage The Master Switch: The Rise and Fall of Information Empires, by Tim Wu Sheila Warren   Follow-up with Our Guest: Alison McCauley   Looking for More Episodes? Visit ibm.com/blockchain — and for news and updates, follow @IBMBlockchain on Twitter!

In this week's episode of Adventures in Blockchain, Charles Max Wood interviews Eric Berry and Kevin Owocki, discussing open source sustainability using blockchain. Eric Berry is a panelist on Sustain Our Software podcast and runs Codefund. Kevin is the co-founder of Gitcoin. Our guests start by explaining what each of their companies does and how they help sustain open source.  Kevin explains that Gitcoin is a place you can get coin if you are a software engineer working in open source. Their mission is to support open source software. Kevin discusses how blockchain creates new hope for open source sustainability. One project Kevin introduces that helps move them towards their goal is called bounties. Bounties allow engineers to collect cryptocurrency for work they do in opensource.  Codefund is an ethical advertising platform that is specifically run to grow and sustain open source. Eric shares how they do this by inviting bloggers, application builders, and other maintainers,  to put a small bit of code on their sites that specifically advertise what they are doing. This allows them to receive passive revenue constantly without having to spend time marketing. Gitcoin and Codefund are related, Kevin and Eric share the story of how they started helping one another. When Kevin was building Gitcoin he met Joseph Lubin, co-founder of Ethereum and was invited to join ConsenSys. Using his work with ConsenSys as a stepping stone Gitcoin was able to level up. At this point, Eric reached out to Kevin because he was looking for a way to more easily distribute funds.  Next, the panel considers how sustaining open source is made easier through open source. In the blockchain ecosystem, there is a lot more liquidity and a lot less bureaucracy. Kevin explains that when people think of blockchain they only see bitcoin prices and miss all the potential that the blockchain has.  There are many problems paying people with “real” currency. For example, credit card companies take fees, transfer money across borders is difficult and worst of all there are knowledge workers that don’t have access to a stable financial system like in parts of Africa. By using the blockchain to pay these great developers can work for western companies and in open source. Eric shares how he uses the blockchain to pay maintainers and advertisers. The inbound advertisers at Codefund are already using eth and dai, which is easily turned around to pay their publishers. Currently, it is not all done on the blockchain, Eric explains what it looks like paying everyone. Codefund's goal is to eventually be completely on the blockchain and to be constantly paying their maintainers.  Taxation is something discussed on this weeks Sustain Our Software, Eric brings it up in hopes of hearing Kevin’s take on taxation in the blockchain. Kevin explains that he wrote an EIP or Ethereum improvement proposal, block reward funding for open source maintainers. The blockchain has miners who receive coin for the work they do. Those miners use an algorithm to show proof of work. Open source maintainers do work for the blockchain as well and his proposal says that maintainers should receive coin for what they do for the blockchain. The problem that some have with this idea is that it is hard to prove the software they are writing will directly impact the blockchain or that it even got done. The panel considers ways to prove the value created by maintainers and how paying maintainers show them they are valued. Burn out is a big obstacle for the maintainability of open source. Everyone has responsibilities, to family and other things and its a shame when those doing open source have to quit because they can’t meet those responsibilities. The panel discusses ways that we can help maintainers not burn out. They also talk briefly about entitlement in open source, Kevin introduces his no asshole policy. Charles asks Kevin to explain how Gitcoin’s bounty network works. The architecture of Gitcoin’s bounty network uses the smart contract in Ethereum called standard bounties, which acts as an escrow function. When an issue is posted it goes into standard bounties which holds the eth. When someone starts the work they are put in contact with the funder and when they submit their work they get paid.  Kevin explains the rules of social etiquette in the network that keeps everyone happy. He shares some of their results and statistics and explains how disputes are handled. They will be launching a new service called Gitcoin grants, which uses CLR matching. Kevin also explains how they use monthly hackathons to help the open source community. Eric takes a turn to explain what Codefund is doing to help in open source. They will be releasing a Codefund sponsorship service, this will help open source projects to find the right sponsors. He tried something similar in 2017 with some promising results but was shut down Github. Now that they have worked it out with Github they will be trying again. Charles having remembered their first attempt shares some of his feelings about Codesponsor and his excitement that they will be trying again.  To end the episode the panel reiterates how blockchain could change the financial world. Kevin compares it to how the internet changed the world, at first it was slow but it grew and changed. Charles compares it to the discovery and growth of the radio. The panel considers how the blockchain will evolve and what it could mean for the future of the world.  Panelists Charles Max Wood Guests Eric Berry Kevin Owocki Sponsors   React Native Radio Adventures in DevOps The Freelancers Show CacheFly ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ "The MaxCoders Guide to Finding Your Dream Developer Job" by Charles Max Wood will be out on November 20th on Amazon.  Get your copy on that date only for $1. ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Links Disrupting Open Source Sustainability  Sustain Our Software CodeFund GitCoin Results Gitcoin OSCoin The Master Switch: The Rise and Fall of Information Empires Join The Blockchain Developer Bootcamp https://www.facebook.com/Adventures-in-Blockchain-1180850735452512/ Picks Charles Max Wood: MaxCoders.io The United States of Trump: How the President Really Sees America Eric Berry: AirPods Case Open Collective badge project Kevin Owocki: Sustain Web3 Conference in Boulder, Colorado, Feb 2020 Kinesis Advantage2 Ergonomic Keyboard (KB600)

In this week's episode of Adventures in Blockchain, Charles Max Wood interviews Eric Berry and Kevin Owocki, discussing open source sustainability using blockchain. Eric Berry is a panelist on Sustain Our Software podcast and runs Codefund. Kevin is the co-founder of Gitcoin. Our guests start by explaining what each of their companies does and how they help sustain open source.  Kevin explains that Gitcoin is a place you can get coin if you are a software engineer working in open source. Their mission is to support open source software. Kevin discusses how blockchain creates new hope for open source sustainability. One project Kevin introduces that helps move them towards their goal is called bounties. Bounties allow engineers to collect cryptocurrency for work they do in opensource.  Codefund is an ethical advertising platform that is specifically run to grow and sustain open source. Eric shares how they do this by inviting bloggers, application builders, and other maintainers,  to put a small bit of code on their sites that specifically advertise what they are doing. This allows them to receive passive revenue constantly without having to spend time marketing. Gitcoin and Codefund are related, Kevin and Eric share the story of how they started helping one another. When Kevin was building Gitcoin he met Joseph Lubin, co-founder of Ethereum and was invited to join ConsenSys. Using his work with ConsenSys as a stepping stone Gitcoin was able to level up. At this point, Eric reached out to Kevin because he was looking for a way to more easily distribute funds.  Next, the panel considers how sustaining open source is made easier through open source. In the blockchain ecosystem, there is a lot more liquidity and a lot less bureaucracy. Kevin explains that when people think of blockchain they only see bitcoin prices and miss all the potential that the blockchain has.  There are many problems paying people with “real” currency. For example, credit card companies take fees, transfer money across borders is difficult and worst of all there are knowledge workers that don’t have access to a stable financial system like in parts of Africa. By using the blockchain to pay these great developers can work for western companies and in open source. Eric shares how he uses the blockchain to pay maintainers and advertisers. The inbound advertisers at Codefund are already using eth and dai, which is easily turned around to pay their publishers. Currently, it is not all done on the blockchain, Eric explains what it looks like paying everyone. Codefund's goal is to eventually be completely on the blockchain and to be constantly paying their maintainers.  Taxation is something discussed on this weeks Sustain Our Software, Eric brings it up in hopes of hearing Kevin’s take on taxation in the blockchain. Kevin explains that he wrote an EIP or Ethereum improvement proposal, block reward funding for open source maintainers. The blockchain has miners who receive coin for the work they do. Those miners use an algorithm to show proof of work. Open source maintainers do work for the blockchain as well and his proposal says that maintainers should receive coin for what they do for the blockchain. The problem that some have with this idea is that it is hard to prove the software they are writing will directly impact the blockchain or that it even got done. The panel considers ways to prove the value created by maintainers and how paying maintainers show them they are valued. Burn out is a big obstacle for the maintainability of open source. Everyone has responsibilities, to family and other things and its a shame when those doing open source have to quit because they can’t meet those responsibilities. The panel discusses ways that we can help maintainers not burn out. They also talk briefly about entitlement in open source, Kevin introduces his no asshole policy. Charles asks Kevin to explain how Gitcoin’s bounty network works. The architecture of Gitcoin’s bounty network uses the smart contract in Ethereum called standard bounties, which acts as an escrow function. When an issue is posted it goes into standard bounties which holds the eth. When someone starts the work they are put in contact with the funder and when they submit their work they get paid.  Kevin explains the rules of social etiquette in the network that keeps everyone happy. He shares some of their results and statistics and explains how disputes are handled. They will be launching a new service called Gitcoin grants, which uses CLR matching. Kevin also explains how they use monthly hackathons to help the open source community. Eric takes a turn to explain what Codefund is doing to help in open source. They will be releasing a Codefund sponsorship service, this will help open source projects to find the right sponsors. He tried something similar in 2017 with some promising results but was shut down Github. Now that they have worked it out with Github they will be trying again. Charles having remembered their first attempt shares some of his feelings about Codesponsor and his excitement that they will be trying again.  To end the episode the panel reiterates how blockchain could change the financial world. Kevin compares it to how the internet changed the world, at first it was slow but it grew and changed. Charles compares it to the discovery and growth of the radio. The panel considers how the blockchain will evolve and what it could mean for the future of the world.  Panelists Charles Max Wood Guests Eric Berry Kevin Owocki Sponsors   React Native Radio Adventures in DevOps The Freelancers Show CacheFly ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ "The MaxCoders Guide to Finding Your Dream Developer Job" by Charles Max Wood will be out on November 20th on Amazon.  Get your copy on that date only for $1. ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Links Disrupting Open Source Sustainability  Sustain Our Software CodeFund GitCoin Results Gitcoin OSCoin The Master Switch: The Rise and Fall of Information Empires Join The Blockchain Developer Bootcamp https://www.facebook.com/Adventures-in-Blockchain-1180850735452512/ Picks Charles Max Wood: MaxCoders.io The United States of Trump: How the President Really Sees America Eric Berry: AirPods Case Open Collective badge project Kevin Owocki: Sustain Web3 Conference in Boulder, Colorado, Feb 2020 Kinesis Advantage2 Ergonomic Keyboard (KB600)

Liam finds a new platform for teachers, and a potential protege. Ben maps out a flywheel and finds a formula to quantify the elusive product-market fit. America Before: The Key to Earth's Lost Civilization. Amazing Talker. Tim Wu, The Master Switch: The Rise and Fall of Information Empires. Ben's Product-Market fit tweetstorm --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/create-your-world/message

[REPLAY] Modern Monopolies: What It Takes to Dominate the 21st Century Economy, which explores the platform business model (Uber, Airbnb, Github).  Alex is also the founder and CEO of Applico, a company that he started in his dorm room that is since grown into a huge enterprise that helps startups and Fortune 500 innovate with platforms.  Alex and I talk about history and future of businesses and different types of business models.  There’s a lot in here for investors, entrepreneurs, and historians.  Please enjoy! For more episodes go to InvestorFieldGuide.com/podcast.  Sign up for the book club, where you’ll get a full investor curriculum and then 3-4 suggestions every month at InvestorFieldGuide.com/bookclub Follow Patrick on twitter at @patrick_oshag Books Referenced Modern Monopolies: What It Takes to Dominate the 21st Century Economy The Systems Bible: The Beginner's Guide to Systems Large and Small The Master Switch: The Rise and Fall of Information Empires Zero to One: Notes on Startups, or How to Build the Future   Links Referenced Failed Color App Applico   Show Notes 2:39  – (first question) – Exploring the history of business models from linear to platform. 5:46 – A look at the share of overall business platform companies have taken over             7:06 - Modern Monopolies: What It Takes to Dominate the 21st Century Economy 7:48 – The potential for platform businesses over the next 20 years 9:18 – Detailing the difference between a linear and a platform business 12:08 – Exploring transaction costs and core transactions across different business models 19:49 – Is the platform business model good for investors and VC’s since so many can get crushed when there’s a sole victor, or is it just for the founders and entrepreneurs.  24:35 – How the self-driving car is going to deliver more opportunity for consumer consumption 27:15 – Untapped supplies as the opportunity for new platforms and where we could see new openings 30:24 – How consolidated will things become across all platforms 33:16 – How do platform companies create a moat to keep others from replicating their business strategy 37:03 – Are there platform strategies that specifically don’t work             37:40 - Failed Color App 38:45 – Why complex systems typically don’t scale up and you should think small and easy to get started             38:47 – The Systems Bible: The Beginner's Guide to Systems Large and Small 40:02 – How the origin of so many larger companies started out small and localized, and why it makes investors more comfortable 41:37 – How Alibaba had to tweak their business model to accommodate the Chinese market 44:07 – Why are the modern monopolies better for consumers 47:52 – Exploring platforms that are asset heavy 49:00 – What do you look for as a VC to determine 52:05 – Alex’s take on whether a platform based company like Uber should be more asset heavy 54:31 – Exploring some lesser known platform businesses that Alex finds interesting 56:18 – If there is a demand in the secondary markets for a product, why don’t the primary suppliers simply raise their prices 57:03 – What Alex’s portfolio of platform-based businesses would look like 58:48 – A couple of most influential books Alex has read             59:12 – The Master Switch: The Rise and Fall of Information Empires             59:38 – Zero to One: Notes on Startups, or How to Build the Future and other Peter Thiel books 59:53 – Looking at Applico, how it started and how it become so focused on the platform business model 1:03:56 - Most memorable day for Alex  1:05:13 – Kindest person to Alex in his life 1:06:10 – What platform opportunities could exist in the financial world Learn More For more episodes go to InvestorFieldGuide.com/podcast.  Sign up for the book club, where you’ll get a full investor curriculum and then 3-4 suggestions every month at InvestorFieldGuide.com/bookclub Follow Patrick on twitter at @patrick_oshag

Alison McCauley speaks about writing her book "Unblocked: How Blockchains Will Change Your Business", about the importance of blockchain literacy for executives, why blockchain communities need organizations on their side, how organizations can get started with blockchain technology, how to take blockchain ideas into the pilot stage with possible use cases, why companies will soon have competition from their own customers, how collaboration replaces the zero-sum game of many business models, how a token-infused sharing economy could create more value in the future, and the need for decentralization. Alison also speaks about conducting research for the book, her approach to writing and structuring the book, surprises and learnings when writing the book, risks of blockchains going to the dark side, why attention harvesting should stop, and much more. Alison has a two-decades long strategy consulting career, where she advised technology-first startups and Fortune-500 companies, including PNC, Adobe, Oracle, IBM, First Data, and Verizon. She has been working with early stage teams in data science and analytics, machine learning, IoT, cybersecurity, and artificial intelligence before turning her focus to the blockchain and cryptoasset space. Alison has a masters in sociology and organizational behavior from Stanford University, and she is the author of the book "Unblocked: How Blockchain Technology Will Change the Future", available in January 2019. Alison McCauley: http://www.alisonmccauley.io, https://www.linkedin.com/in/unblocked/ Alison's book "Unblocked: How Blockchains Will Change Your Business" (out in january 2019): http://www.unblockedfuture.com Also discussed in this episode: Alex "Sandy" Pentland et al.: "The new deal on data", http://civics.com/NewDealOnData/ Tim Wu's book "The Master Switch: The Rise and Fall of Information Empires", https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/8201080-the-master-switch The Blockchain and Us newsletter To stay up to date about what blockchain pioneers, innovators and entrepreneurs from all around the world think about the future of this space, sign up for the newsletter on http://www.theblockchainandus.com.

Berichte aus der Sommerpause heute im “Literarischen Duett” Leben 3.0 Mensch sein im Zeitalter Künstlicher Intelligenz von Max Tegmark The Master Switch: The Rise and Fall of Information Empires von Tim Wu This Day in History 17.8.1979 Uraufführung Monty Python LIfe Of Brian   … Weiterlesen →

Mitch Stoltz (@mitchstoltz) is a Senior Staff Attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation. Mitch works on cases where free speech and innovation collide with copyright and trademark law. His current projects include improving the legal environment for mobile software developers and tinkerers, fighting the use of copyright as a tool for censorship, litigation on the copyright status of mandatory safety codes, and legal analysis in the field of Internet television and video. Mitch also counsels clients on Internet video technology and open source software licensing. Before joining EFF, Mitch was an associate at Constantine Cannon LLP in Washington DC, where he worked on antitrust and copyright litigation on behalf of consumer technology, advertising, medical, and transportation companies. He also represented technology companies and trade associations before the Federal Communications Commission and other agencies. Long ago, in an Internet far far away, Mitch was Chief Security Engineer for the Mozilla Project at Netscape Communications (later AOL), where he worked to secure Web browsers against malicious Internet content and coordinated the security research efforts of hackers on three continents. Mitch has a JD from Boston University and a BA in Public Policy and Computer Science from Pomona College, where he co-founded the student TV station Studio 47. When not working, he can be found tinkering with electronics or chasing new levels of suffering on a bicycle. In this episode we discussed: key issues in the FCC's controversial set-top box proceeding. why copyright law does not apply in the context of set-top box manufacturers providing access to content consumers have already paid for. Resources: Electronic Frontier Foundation OmniFocus The Master Switch: The Rise and Fall of Information Empires by Tim Wu THE NEWS Yahoo! was the latest target of what Yahoo company officials say was yet another state-sponsored hack into the servers of American institutions. It's believed to be the largest hack of a single company, according to David Gelles of The New York Times. Some 500 million Yahoo user accounts were breached. The intrusion came as company officials were putting the final touches on Verizon's proposed $4.8 billion acquisition of Yahoo! Now experts are wondering whether the transaction is going to go through. ---- Jessica Guynn at USA Today obtained an email from Google revealing the tech giant's plans to open a diversity-focused tech lab in Oakland, California. The city is more than half African American and Latino. The tech lab, which is a partnership with MIT Media Lab, is called Code Next, and it is slated to open in October. Code Next is expected to work with the Oakland Unified School District in its efforts to bring more minority students into the tech sector pipeline. ---- Jessica Guynn at USA Today also reported on Facebook's new voter registration drive, which the company launched on Friday in the U.S. The company sent out voter registration reminders that sends users to vote.usa.gov, where they are guided through the registration process. ---- VR Company Oculus is doing damage control after it was discovered that the company's co-Founder, Palmer Luckey, donated $10,000 to a group called Nimble America, which is basically a trolling site that calls itself a QUOTE “shitposting” meme generator to help drump up support for Donald Trump among younger voters. Luckey apologized to his company and its partners. He says he is a libertarian who supports Libertarian presidential candidate Gary Johnson. Kyle Orland and Ars Technica has the full story. ---- Dating app Tinder and music streaming site Spotify announced a new partnership last week. Jacob Kastrenakes at the Verge reported last week that Tinder users will now be able to see each others' last few songs they listened to. All users, whether they are Spotify users or not, will be able to feature their one favorite song on their profile. ---- Catherine Ho at the Washington Post reports that John Boehner is headed to Squire Patton Boggs-a major lobbying and law firm. Boehner has also joined the board of Reynolds American--the maker of Camel cigarettes. Boehner will reportedly not be lobbying congress but will instead be advising corporate clients on global business development. ---- Last week, the Government Accountability Office reported grim news to the President's Commission on Enhancing Cybersecurity. The report states the number of cyber incidents involving the federal government has jumped 1,300% between 2005 and 2015. Joe Davidson at the Washington Post has the story.

Summary: Where Wizards Stay Up Late: The Origins Of The Internet, by Katie Hafner The Innovators: How a Group of Hackers, Geniuses, and Geeks Created the Digital Revolution, by Walter Isaacson The Master Switch: The Rise and Fall of Information Empires, by Tim Wu Weaving the Web: The Original Design and Ultimate Destiny of the World Wide Web, by Tim Berners-Lee How the Web Was Born: The Story of the World Wide Web, by James Gillies and Robert Cailliau AOL.com, by Kara Swisher The Everything Store: Jeff Bezos and the Age of Amazon, by Brad Stone The Perfect Store: Inside eBay, by Adam Cohen Becoming Steve Jobs: The Evolution of a Reckless Upstart into a Visionary Leader, by Brent Schlender and Rick Tetzeli Infinite Loop, How Apple, the World's Most Insanely Great Company, Went Insane, by Michael S. Malone Elon Musk: Tesla, SpaceX, and the Quest for a Fantastic Future, by Ashlee Vance See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Anders and Scott discuss the impact of large corporations on innovation and competition with The Master Switch: The Rise and Fall of Information Empires by Tim Wu as the backdrop.

Professor Timothy Wu of Columbia Law School gave a free public lecture on Thursday, March 22, 2012, based on material from his most recent book, The Master Switch: The Rise and Fall of Information Empires (Alfred A. Knopf: 2010). In The Master Switch, Wu speaks of the cycle of monopolization that has beset the development [...]

In the last 20 years, the Internet has transformed the way we live, easing communication, speeding connections, spreading information, and spurring activism. But its power has prompted governments and corporations to seek to control its uses and limit access. If they succeed, it wouldn’t be the first time a new technology has revolutionized the world before being clamped down. From telephones to radio to television, information mediums have long been consolidated and regulated, often in ways that limit how we communicate and connect. Could the Internet be next, and what would it mean for our lives, our jobs, and our economy? Columbia Law School professor Tim Wu, author of The Master Switch: The Rise and Fall of Information Empires, visited Zócalo to trace the century-long struggle between flowing information and corporate control, and to ask whether the Internet will stay free.

A talk show on KZSU-FM, Stanford, 90.1 FM, hosted by Center for Internet & Society Resident Fellow David S. Levine. The show includes guests and focuses on the intersection of technology and society. How is our world impacted by the great technological changes taking place? Each week, a different sphere is explored. This week, David interviews Prof. Tim Wu of Columbia Law School, author of The Master Switch: The Rise and Fall of Information Empires. For more information, please go to http://hearsayculture.com.