The Apple strategy with its new M1 computer chips is analogous to iPhone vs Android.
iPhone's integration of hardware + software + app store has a cohesion that dozens of 3rd party hardware manufacturers can't have with multiple Android versions & loosely-regulated app store.
Google has tried to reign this in by mandating manufacturer standards to get Google Apps, but it leaves much to hardware makers, who are also desperate to differentiate.
The M1 chip w/integrated RAM/GPU/APU performs better, lets Apple retain premium pricing, but unlikely to shift share.
-market is mature
-*most* software runs well on 6 yo PCs
-new ones are cheap
The 1 exception: if Apple goes HARD after gaming market, where performance matters.
The #gaming market and Apple's long-rumored pursuit of #AR/#VR are the computer world's premium pricing drivers of the future. The M1 chip fits well into that strategy and this is likely Apple's next big market - and ecosystem.
Even the richest & most successful are bound by
- social norms
- personal/business obligations
- their perceptions of themselves (remember this one...)
But some are closer to speaking - or SIGNALING - truth than others.
Qualities of The Emancipated:
✅Successful
✅Self-made
✅Wealthy (don't have to work)
✅Perpetual learners
✅Public (seek media/social media attention)
✅Clear motivations
People with this profile are *best positioned* to speak truth & model essential patterns.
1. Paris accord was toothless & symbolic. Yes, we should absolutely be at the table, but hard commitments will only come from clean innovation w/real ROI
2. College debt forgiveness is regressive pandering to elites, where the 70% who don't go to college subsidize the 30% who CHOSE to go & will soon out-earn them. It;s obscene & doesn't solve the real problem.
3. Yes, drug prices must be lowered but NOT by removing all incentive to work on important diseases by invalidating patents! (I evaluare negotiation, importation, patent reform & others in The McFuture universal healthcare podcast IdeaFaktory.com/health5)
Online voting could be done w/bank SSO. You'd sign into a secure, private voting site using your bank's credentials, where you're already verified. Like Google or Facebook login on 3rd party sites. This can also be an opportunity to give accounts & benefit xfers to poor/unbanked.
This is not unprecedented. Companies like Intuit (TurboTax) and Yodlee access your bank, broker and ADP (paycheck) accounts to pull in W-2s and financial account data.
If done on mobile, additional sensors/camera can be used to aid in the verification/authentication process.
Proposal: New Framework for Section 230 Protections
As social networks increasingly make editorial decisions, are they still "platforms" that should be protected from illegal acts by their users?
My 2 main criteria:
—banning people beyond legal requirements
—post selection
1/4
If banning people and choosing posts (whether human or algorithmic selection), they are publishers and should have comparable legal exposure.
Same even if they don't ban people beyond legal mandates.
If they do neither, section 230 should protect them.
2/4
Trickiest one is no post selection (other than user-controlled), but accounts are banned.
If there's clear banning criteria ("hate" likely too mushy & has no legal standing) AND clear path to redemption, plus some sort of follower portability, a version of 230 should apply.
3/4
Whether you diverge from your employer's interests by organizing a protest or compromise the profits of a platform you're on, you're done. You are a dependent, bound to their interests, not truth.
Even wealth isn't a perfect buffer. Truth can quickly alienate you & your family from social circles. There's too much at stake. These become your boundaries for truth.
Anonymity can liberate, but it's nearly impossible to gain moral authority or build reputation behind a veil.