I offer the bottom two quadrants represent how humans tend to think of all complex topics in binary fashion.
For example, the Medicaid debate recently was simply whether or not people would lose coverage, not that it delineates changing the whole dynamic of Medicaid, which it does, and whether that’s what was desired
Interesting post. It helped me to imagine the quadrants by adding an archetype persona to the mix. I matched 'Pie sliced based on new rules' to a banker. 'Pie is changing' is an entrepreneur. 'Pie is fixed' to a Tennis player. 'Pie sliced by today's rules' matches the bureaucrat.
Great post. Well said. I will buy the book. More importantly, thanks for sharing your perspective. Some great posts as well. @StClair, @Joachimsthaler.
Another example: Blockbuster and Netflix! Contrary to some writing, Blockbuster did not ignore Netflix, they invested in the same technology but they did pile it on an old system.
Perhaps the point is: when consumer behavior changes, investing in a technology and piling it on an old system fails. But if consumer behavior does not change, deploying technology like AI to enhance productivity for example is just good enough
Blockbuster vs Netflix is a great example not just because of the demand-side issues aournd consumer behavios but also becuase of the supply-side issues where blockbuster was locked into a local inventory holding model while netflix worked. with a national inventory hlding model. That was the key advantage that blockbuster could never replicate even if it copied the services. In fact, copying Netflix's model on a local invenotry model only weakened Blockbuster further.
Another excellent post, was just thinking when the book going to land after reading the Joker post. I am really curious if we will have enough time to get to Q4, I believe some tech giant and people in positions of changing the system know it deep down, but are they willing to sacrament the position and power they have built out over time to help nudge the society and the economy towards a win-win-win state
While people feel things are changing, they tend to misunderstand that it is the court itself what is changing, leading to a new game, with different dynamics. Inertia is difficult to override.
IMHO the knife that slices the pie is not firmly in any single hand, but its action is also unfolding as the "new order aware" players deploy their actions to get more of the pie.
Great to see how it all comes together in the book.
Great observations. Agreed, there is a third way between hype and doom. I call myself a skeptical progressive. Short-term pessimist but long-term optimist. We'll need to solve a lot of problems and the change will hurt. But humanity will survive this transformation and come out better.
Excellent post, and look forward to the book.
I offer the bottom two quadrants represent how humans tend to think of all complex topics in binary fashion.
For example, the Medicaid debate recently was simply whether or not people would lose coverage, not that it delineates changing the whole dynamic of Medicaid, which it does, and whether that’s what was desired
Yes, that is true. A lot of what I've written in this book applies way beyond AI.
Interesting post. It helped me to imagine the quadrants by adding an archetype persona to the mix. I matched 'Pie sliced based on new rules' to a banker. 'Pie is changing' is an entrepreneur. 'Pie is fixed' to a Tennis player. 'Pie sliced by today's rules' matches the bureaucrat.
Great post. Well said. I will buy the book. More importantly, thanks for sharing your perspective. Some great posts as well. @StClair, @Joachimsthaler.
Another example: Blockbuster and Netflix! Contrary to some writing, Blockbuster did not ignore Netflix, they invested in the same technology but they did pile it on an old system.
Perhaps the point is: when consumer behavior changes, investing in a technology and piling it on an old system fails. But if consumer behavior does not change, deploying technology like AI to enhance productivity for example is just good enough
Blockbuster vs Netflix is a great example not just because of the demand-side issues aournd consumer behavios but also becuase of the supply-side issues where blockbuster was locked into a local inventory holding model while netflix worked. with a national inventory hlding model. That was the key advantage that blockbuster could never replicate even if it copied the services. In fact, copying Netflix's model on a local invenotry model only weakened Blockbuster further.
Ordered! Summer 🌞 Reading 🌟
Another excellent post, was just thinking when the book going to land after reading the Joker post. I am really curious if we will have enough time to get to Q4, I believe some tech giant and people in positions of changing the system know it deep down, but are they willing to sacrament the position and power they have built out over time to help nudge the society and the economy towards a win-win-win state
While people feel things are changing, they tend to misunderstand that it is the court itself what is changing, leading to a new game, with different dynamics. Inertia is difficult to override.
IMHO the knife that slices the pie is not firmly in any single hand, but its action is also unfolding as the "new order aware" players deploy their actions to get more of the pie.
Great to see how it all comes together in the book.
Great one!
Great observations. Agreed, there is a third way between hype and doom. I call myself a skeptical progressive. Short-term pessimist but long-term optimist. We'll need to solve a lot of problems and the change will hurt. But humanity will survive this transformation and come out better.