|
|
|
|
|
|
by TeMPOraL
2438 days ago
|
|
|
Thanks for the clarification on both points. You've changed my mind a bit about the update capability - I suppose any wireless protocol necessitates a software update capability because it's exploitable remotely (e.g. from outside the house), and you'll never get it bug or vulnerability free the first time. But this then calls into question the utility of consumer-level IoT as a whole. It's nice to be able to operate devices remotely from wherever you are, but this immediately creates a very large category of problems. > Competition would prove out which model is best, though, so no need to think too hard about it. Unfortunately, I'm not convinced of that, for several reasons. Information asymmetry - non-tech consumers can't evaluate these products, so vendors designing bad products have competitive advantage. Thanks to recurring revenue, service-backed devices can be at much lower price points than their service-independent counterparts, and most customers are very price-sensitive. Add in surveillance and data mining, and the price can be lowered even further. User-hostile business models have a distinct competitive advantage, because they offer immediate benefits but the costs are deferred. Therefore, I don't think competition alone is going to solve it. |
|
|
We competed head-on every single day with companies that lied like it was a national pastime, and we beat them handily. I think it is because good people tend to make the best products. There's an efficiency increase from passion, and all it takes is one good leader to unlock a team of hundreds or thousands of good people. I believe it is enough to take to the bank against shady practices.
That said, I do support better antitrust laws, we need to update them for the 21st century tech oligopolies + IP-stealing/currency-manipulating nation-states.
But all it takes is one good motivated person like you or me to Make The World A Better Place (™ HBO Silicon Valley). So let's get to it...!