Friam

WhatsApp ... Death of SMS?

Classic

List

Threaded

18 messages Options

Owen Densmore

WhatsApp ... Death of SMS?

Administrator

The WhatsApp/FaceBook deal was a surprise for me, I simply wasn't hip enough to even *know* about WhatsApp.

Well, it turns out its a replacement for SMS. We folks in the US don't use SMS which originated in the cellular system early on as a way to get all of the third world able to message *very* cheaply, thus have a reason to *buy* a cell phone. That's not the case here, SMS is an expensive monthly or $.25 each. USA. Sigh.

So for what its worth, WhatsApp sneakily changed the SMS madness (virtually free for cellular carriers due to using 180 free bytes in the control channel but heck why not rip off customers) by making "messages" free.

Interesting. So the entire world can now give the finger to slimy cellular providers, but at the cost of joining yet another "service" with all your personal information. Oh well, who cares.

Even more clever, FB figured out that this would greatly enhance its service. Be nice to see how they plan to integrate it into FB, but still, at around 16Billion$. Basically they look at this as capturing the world wide cellular network.

Apparently WhatsApp and FB have very different ideas on privacy. I bet the worst one wins.

Naturally anything this big is going to be the cyberslime magnet, gold medal target. Cant wait for the first billion user leak. And no, passwords won't help. Not sure even about 2-factor.

-- Owen

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

Owen Densmore

Re: WhatsApp ... Death of SMS?

Administrator

Here's a good clip on the deal:

WhatsApp has garnered over 450 million monthly active users globally with 70% active on any given day, higher than the 62% engagement rate Facebook Inc (NASDAQ:FB) reported last quarter. It facilitates more than 19 billion sent messages and 34 billion received messages daily (a single message can be sent to multiple people), which, according to Facebook Inc (NASDAQ:FB), is similar to the size of the entire global SMS market. WhatsApp’s capabilities go well beyond text messages, with more than 600 million photos uploaded per day and more than 200 million voice messages and 100 million video messages sent per day.

On Sat, Feb 22, 2014 at 11:04 AM, Owen Densmore <[hidden email]> wrote:

The WhatsApp/FaceBook deal was a surprise for me, I simply wasn't hip enough to even *know* about WhatsApp.

Well, it turns out its a replacement for SMS. We folks in the US don't use SMS which originated in the cellular system early on as a way to get all of the third world able to message *very* cheaply, thus have a reason to *buy* a cell phone. That's not the case here, SMS is an expensive monthly or $.25 each. USA. Sigh.

So for what its worth, WhatsApp sneakily changed the SMS madness (virtually free for cellular carriers due to using 180 free bytes in the control channel but heck why not rip off customers) by making "messages" free.

Interesting. So the entire world can now give the finger to slimy cellular providers, but at the cost of joining yet another "service" with all your personal information. Oh well, who cares.

Even more clever, FB figured out that this would greatly enhance its service. Be nice to see how they plan to integrate it into FB, but still, at around 16Billion$. Basically they look at this as capturing the world wide cellular network.

Apparently WhatsApp and FB have very different ideas on privacy. I bet the worst one wins.

Naturally anything this big is going to be the cyberslime magnet, gold medal target. Cant wait for the first billion user leak. And no, passwords won't help. Not sure even about 2-factor.

-- Owen

Jochen Fromm-5

Re: WhatsApp ... Death of SMS?

In reply to this post by Owen Densmore

Yes, it is a SMS replacement. It offers SMS functionality with "iPhone bubble view", a lot of icons/smilies and easy photo and video exchange. It is very popular here in Europe, nearly everyone I see in the subway uses it. In the first year it is free of charge, in the following years about 1$. The price Facebook paid is ridiculous high, though. Apparently they seem to have paid mainly to acquire the large amount of user data.

-J.

Sent from my Tricorder

-------- Original message --------

From: Owen Densmore

Date:22/02/2014 19:04 (GMT+01:00)

To: Complexity Coffee Group

Subject: [FRIAM] WhatsApp ... Death of SMS?

The WhatsApp/FaceBook deal was a surprise for me, I simply wasn't hip enough to even *know* about WhatsApp.

Interesting. So the entire world can now give the finger to slimy cellular providers, but at the cost of joining yet another "service" with all your personal information. Oh well, who cares.

Apparently WhatsApp and FB have very different ideas on privacy. I bet the worst one wins.

Naturally anything this big is going to be the cyberslime magnet, gold medal target. Cant wait for the first billion user leak. And no, passwords won't help. Not sure even about 2-factor.

-- Owen

Roger Critchlow-2

Re: WhatsApp ... Death of SMS?

In reply to this post by Owen Densmore

There are, I believe, several larger messaging apps with strong followings outside the American market. See this article http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/05/technology/chinese-messaging-app-gains-ground-elsewhere.html about WeChat from a year and a half ago.

Is it just me, or has the future lost all it's pizzaz lately? Here's Facebook buying one of several dozen companies that -- wait for it -- let you send messages to your friends. Meanwhile Comcast/Xfinity has seen the future where -- wait for it -- you can control your TV by talking to the remote. How did the totally routine become closely watched corporate strategy?

-- rec --

On Sat, Feb 22, 2014 at 11:07 AM, Owen Densmore <[hidden email]> wrote:

Here's a good clip on the deal:

WhatsApp has garnered over 450 million monthly active users globally with 70% active on any given day, higher than the 62% engagement rate Facebook Inc (NASDAQ:FB) reported last quarter. It facilitates more than 19 billion sent messages and 34 billion received messages daily (a single message can be sent to multiple people), which, according to Facebook Inc (NASDAQ:FB), is similar to the size of the entire global SMS market. WhatsApp’s capabilities go well beyond text messages, with more than 600 million photos uploaded per day and more than 200 million voice messages and 100 million video messages sent per day.

On Sat, Feb 22, 2014 at 11:04 AM, Owen Densmore <[hidden email]> wrote:

The WhatsApp/FaceBook deal was a surprise for me, I simply wasn't hip enough to even *know* about WhatsApp.

Well, it turns out its a replacement for SMS. We folks in the US don't use SMS which originated in the cellular system early on as a way to get all of the third world able to message *very* cheaply, thus have a reason to *buy* a cell phone. That's not the case here, SMS is an expensive monthly or $.25 each. USA. Sigh.

So for what its worth, WhatsApp sneakily changed the SMS madness (virtually free for cellular carriers due to using 180 free bytes in the control channel but heck why not rip off customers) by making "messages" free.

Interesting. So the entire world can now give the finger to slimy cellular providers, but at the cost of joining yet another "service" with all your personal information. Oh well, who cares.

Even more clever, FB figured out that this would greatly enhance its service. Be nice to see how they plan to integrate it into FB, but still, at around 16Billion$. Basically they look at this as capturing the world wide cellular network.

Apparently WhatsApp and FB have very different ideas on privacy. I bet the worst one wins.

Naturally anything this big is going to be the cyberslime magnet, gold medal target. Cant wait for the first billion user leak. And no, passwords won't help. Not sure even about 2-factor.

-- Owen

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

Christopher Koch

Re: WhatsApp ... Death of SMS?

In reply to this post by Owen Densmore

Sorry to barge in like this, I've been just a lurker on this list for years. Here I am writing something.

WhatsApp is very popular in Germany/Europe. On my last trip over there I finally had to get it, too, just to communicate with friends and family.

Facebook paid way too much money. The whole thing seems to be a flop for Facebook though: I've been seeing campaigns -- ironically, on Facebook -- for deletion of WhatsApp because of "privacy concerns." Seems it's already too late for that anyway, and the advised replacement is Threema or in some rare instances telegram.org.

On 02/22/2014 11:07 AM, Owen Densmore wrote:

Here's a good clip on the deal:

WhatsApp has garnered over 450 million monthly active users globally with 70% active on any given day, higher than the 62% engagement rate Facebook Inc (NASDAQ:FB) reported last quarter. It facilitates more than 19 billion sent messages and 34 billion received messages daily (a single message can be sent to multiple people), which, according to Facebook Inc (NASDAQ:FB), is similar to the size of the entire global SMS market. WhatsApp’s capabilities go well beyond text messages, with more than 600 million photos uploaded per day and more than 200 million voice messages and 100 million video messages sent per day.

On Sat, Feb 22, 2014 at 11:04 AM, Owen Densmore <[hidden email]> wrote:

The WhatsApp/FaceBook deal was a surprise for me, I simply wasn't hip enough to even *know* about WhatsApp.

Well, it turns out its a replacement for SMS. We folks in the US don't use SMS which originated in the cellular system early on as a way to get all of the third world able to message *very* cheaply, thus have a reason to *buy* a cell phone. That's not the case here, SMS is an expensive monthly or $.25 each. USA. Sigh.

So for what its worth, WhatsApp sneakily changed the SMS madness (virtually free for cellular carriers due to using 180 free bytes in the control channel but heck why not rip off customers) by making "messages" free.

Interesting. So the entire world can now give the finger to slimy cellular providers, but at the cost of joining yet another "service" with all your personal information. Oh well, who cares.

Even more clever, FB figured out that this would greatly enhance its service. Be nice to see how they plan to integrate it into FB, but still, at around 16Billion$. Basically they look at this as capturing the world wide cellular network.

Apparently WhatsApp and FB have very different ideas on privacy. I bet the worst one wins.

Naturally anything this big is going to be the cyberslime magnet, gold medal target. Cant wait for the first billion user leak. And no, passwords won't help. Not sure even about 2-factor.

-- Owen
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

Owen Densmore

Re: WhatsApp ... Death of SMS?

Administrator

Don't both iPhone and Android have built in alternatives that just use the network? A brief search showed iPhone had one. SMS as a carrier service is so yesterday.

On Sat, Feb 22, 2014 at 12:54 PM, Christopher Koch <[hidden email]> wrote:

Sorry to barge in like this, I've been just a lurker on this list for years. Here I am writing something.

WhatsApp is very popular in Germany/Europe. On my last trip over there I finally had to get it, too, just to communicate with friends and family.

Facebook paid way too much money. The whole thing seems to be a flop for Facebook though: I've been seeing campaigns -- ironically, on Facebook -- for deletion of WhatsApp because of "privacy concerns." Seems it's already too late for that anyway, and the advised replacement is Threema or in some rare instances telegram.org.

On 02/22/2014 11:07 AM, Owen Densmore wrote:
Here's a good clip on the deal:

WhatsApp has garnered over 450 million monthly active users globally with 70% active on any given day, higher than the 62% engagement rate Facebook Inc (NASDAQ:FB) reported last quarter. It facilitates more than 19 billion sent messages and 34 billion received messages daily (a single message can be sent to multiple people), which, according to Facebook Inc (NASDAQ:FB), is similar to the size of the entire global SMS market. WhatsApp’s capabilities go well beyond text messages, with more than 600 million photos uploaded per day and more than 200 million voice messages and 100 million video messages sent per day.

On Sat, Feb 22, 2014 at 11:04 AM, Owen Densmore <[hidden email]> wrote:

The WhatsApp/FaceBook deal was a surprise for me, I simply wasn't hip enough to even *know* about WhatsApp.

Well, it turns out its a replacement for SMS. We folks in the US don't use SMS which originated in the cellular system early on as a way to get all of the third world able to message *very* cheaply, thus have a reason to *buy* a cell phone. That's not the case here, SMS is an expensive monthly or $.25 each. USA. Sigh.

So for what its worth, WhatsApp sneakily changed the SMS madness (virtually free for cellular carriers due to using 180 free bytes in the control channel but heck why not rip off customers) by making "messages" free.

Interesting. So the entire world can now give the finger to slimy cellular providers, but at the cost of joining yet another "service" with all your personal information. Oh well, who cares.

Even more clever, FB figured out that this would greatly enhance its service. Be nice to see how they plan to integrate it into FB, but still, at around 16Billion$. Basically they look at this as capturing the world wide cellular network.

Apparently WhatsApp and FB have very different ideas on privacy. I bet the worst one wins.

Naturally anything this big is going to be the cyberslime magnet, gold medal target. Cant wait for the first billion user leak. And no, passwords won't help. Not sure even about 2-factor.

-- Owen
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

Robert J. Cordingley

Re: WhatsApp ... Death of SMS?

So much technology for so much trivial and superficial purposes ... as similarly and amply portrayed (perhaps unintentionally) on Generation Like (PBS Frontline 2) ... it's all about ads.

Robert C

On 2/22/14 1:33 PM, Owen Densmore wrote:

Don't both iPhone and Android have built in alternatives that just use the network? A brief search showed iPhone had one. SMS as a carrier service is so yesterday.
On Sat, Feb 22, 2014 at 12:54 PM, Christopher Koch <[hidden email]> wrote:
Sorry to barge in like this, I've been just a lurker on this list for years. Here I am writing something.

WhatsApp is very popular in Germany/Europe. On my last trip over there I finally had to get it, too, just to communicate with friends and family.

Facebook paid way too much money. The whole thing seems to be a flop for Facebook though: I've been seeing campaigns -- ironically, on Facebook -- for deletion of WhatsApp because of "privacy concerns." Seems it's already too late for that anyway, and the advised replacement is Threema or in some rare instances telegram.org.

On 02/22/2014 11:07 AM, Owen Densmore wrote:
Here's a good clip on the deal:

WhatsApp has garnered over 450 million monthly active users globally with 70% active on any given day, higher than the 62% engagement rate Facebook Inc (NASDAQ:FB) reported last quarter. It facilitates more than 19 billion sent messages and 34 billion received messages daily (a single message can be sent to multiple people), which, according to Facebook Inc (NASDAQ:FB), is similar to the size of the entire global SMS market. WhatsApp’s capabilities go well beyond text messages, with more than 600 million photos uploaded per day and more than 200 million voice messages and 100 million video messages sent per day.

On Sat, Feb 22, 2014 at 11:04 AM, Owen Densmore <[hidden email]> wrote:

The WhatsApp/FaceBook deal was a surprise for me, I simply wasn't hip enough to even *know* about WhatsApp.

Well, it turns out its a replacement for SMS. We folks in the US don't use SMS which originated in the cellular system early on as a way to get all of the third world able to message *very* cheaply, thus have a reason to *buy* a cell phone. That's not the case here, SMS is an expensive monthly or $.25 each. USA. Sigh.

So for what its worth, WhatsApp sneakily changed the SMS madness (virtually free for cellular carriers due to using 180 free bytes in the control channel but heck why not rip off customers) by making "messages" free.

Interesting. So the entire world can now give the finger to slimy cellular providers, but at the cost of joining yet another "service" with all your personal information. Oh well, who cares.

Even more clever, FB figured out that this would greatly enhance its service. Be nice to see how they plan to integrate it into FB, but still, at around 16Billion$. Basically they look at this as capturing the world wide cellular network.

Apparently WhatsApp and FB have very different ideas on privacy. I bet the worst one wins.

Naturally anything this big is going to be the cyberslime magnet, gold medal target. Cant wait for the first billion user leak. And no, passwords won't help. Not sure even about 2-factor.

-- Owen
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

Pamela McCorduck

Re: WhatsApp ... Death of SMS?

The Internet was conceived and first implemented by a small group of government and university researchers: J. C. R. Licklider, Bob Kahn, Vint Cert, and several other pioneers. (So when I hear Silly Valley Libertarians go on and on, the best I can do is laugh.)

My question to this august group is: now that the momentum for innovation has moved to the private sector, are we going to see nothing but these trivial, mostly copycat apps that make your eyes glaze over? Is the private sector capable of genuine innovation?

Pamela

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

Russell Standish-2

Re: WhatsApp ... Death of SMS?

It's all a big ho hum here too. I very rarely use SMS (maybe 1-2
messages per month, which are effectively free, and in any case comes
out of a different budget than IP charges, which WhatsApp et al use),
as its an inferior platform to email. WhatsApp, Viber, Line just seem
to be more of the same - inferior to email, so I never bothered.

The main use I have for SMS is as an independent channel - I can send
authentication details (username by email, password by SMS) to my
users. Of course, it would be so much better if the users in question
actually used encrypted email (PGP), but for some reason, after more
than 15 years, email encryption hasn't been widely adopted.

Using an IP-based app for this purpose would be vulnerable to IP
sniffing anyway...

Cheers

On Sat, Feb 22, 2014 at 05:14:43PM -0500, Pamela McCorduck wrote:

> The Internet was conceived and first implemented by a small group of government and university researchers: J. C. R. Licklider, Bob Kahn, Vint Cert, and several other pioneers. (So when I hear Silly Valley Libertarians go on and on, the best I can do is laugh.)
>
> My question to this august group is: now that the momentum for innovation has moved to the private sector, are we going to see nothing but these trivial, mostly copycat apps that make your eyes glaze over? Is the private sector capable of genuine innovation?
>
> Pamela
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ============================================================
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
> to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

--

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Principal, High Performance Coders
Visiting Professor of Mathematics [hidden email]
University of New South Wales http://www.hpcoders.com.au
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

Owen Densmore

Re: WhatsApp ... Death of SMS?

Administrator

In Italy, when visiting friends and the school we attend, SMS is used far more often than voice. Easily 5/day during class, 2 otherwise.

On Sat, Feb 22, 2014 at 4:20 PM, Russell Standish <[hidden email]> wrote:

It's all a big ho hum here too. I very rarely use SMS (maybe 1-2
messages per month, which are effectively free, and in any case comes
out of a different budget than IP charges, which WhatsApp et al use),
as its an inferior platform to email. WhatsApp, Viber, Line just seem
to be more of the same - inferior to email, so I never bothered.

The main use I have for SMS is as an independent channel - I can send
authentication details (username by email, password by SMS) to my
users. Of course, it would be so much better if the users in question
actually used encrypted email (PGP), but for some reason, after more
than 15 years, email encryption hasn't been widely adopted.

Using an IP-based app for this purpose would be vulnerable to IP
sniffing anyway...

Cheers

On Sat, Feb 22, 2014 at 05:14:43PM -0500, Pamela McCorduck wrote:
> The Internet was conceived and first implemented by a small group of government and university researchers: J. C. R. Licklider, Bob Kahn, Vint Cert, and several other pioneers. (So when I hear Silly Valley Libertarians go on and on, the best I can do is laugh.)
>
> My question to this august group is: now that the momentum for innovation has moved to the private sector, are we going to see nothing but these trivial, mostly copycat apps that make your eyes glaze over? Is the private sector capable of genuine innovation?
>
> Pamela
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ============================================================
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
> to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

--

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Principal, High Performance Coders
Visiting Professor of Mathematics [hidden email]
University of New South Wales http://www.hpcoders.com.au
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

Parks, Raymond

Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: WhatsApp ... Death of SMS?

In reply to this post by Pamela McCorduck

If you want real MEGO, try keeping track of buzzword-intensive, copycat, security theatre, snake oil products.

Actually, I should describe them as hydra products - when we assess one and point out the problems, it gets sold to someone higher up the corporate food chain, rebranded, and a new head is grown.

Ray Parks

Consilient Heuristician/IDART Program Manager

V: 505-844-4024 M: 505-238-9359 P: 505-951-6084

NIPR: [hidden email]

SIPR: [hidden email] (send NIPR reminder)

JWICS: [hidden email] (send NIPR reminder)

On Feb 22, 2014, at 3:14 PM, Pamela McCorduck wrote:

The Internet was conceived and first implemented by a small group of government and university researchers: J. C. R. Licklider, Bob Kahn, Vint Cert, and several other pioneers. (So when I hear Silly Valley Libertarians go on and on, the best I can do is laugh.)

My question to this august group is: now that the momentum for innovation has moved to the private sector, are we going to see nothing but these trivial, mostly copycat apps that make your eyes glaze over? Is the private sector capable of genuine innovation?

Pamela

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

smime.p7s (4K) Download Attachment

Pamela McCorduck

Fwd: WhatsApp ... Death of SMS?

In reply to this post by Pamela McCorduck

This was my original message on February 22.

Begin forwarded message:

From: Pamela McCorduck <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] WhatsApp ... Death of SMS?
Date: February 22, 2014 at 5:14:43 PM EST
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>

The Internet was conceived and first implemented by a small group of government and university researchers: J. C. R. Licklider, Bob Kahn, Vint Cert, and several other pioneers. (So when I hear Silly Valley Libertarians go on and on, the best I can do is laugh.)

My question to this august group is: now that the momentum for innovation has moved to the private sector, are we going to see nothing but these trivial, mostly copycat apps that make your eyes glaze over? Is the private sector capable of genuine innovation?

Pamela

Roger Critchlow-2

Re: Fwd: WhatsApp ... Death of SMS?

Heroes of the telegraph, by J Munro:

At a second interview, Mr. Cooke told Wheatstone of his intention to bring out a working telegraph, and explained his method. Wheatstone, according to his own statement, remarked to Cooke that the method would not act, and produced his own experimental telegraph. Finally, Cooke proposed that they should enter into a partnership, but Wheatstone was at first reluctant to comply. He was a well-known man of science, and had meant to publish his results without seeking to make capital of them. Cooke, on the other hand, declared that his sole object was to make a fortune from the scheme. In May they agreed to join their forces, Wheatstone contributing the scientific, and Cooke the administrative talent. The deed of partnership was dated November 19, 1837. A joint patent was taken out for their inventions, including the five-needle telegraph of Wheatstone, and an alarm worked by a relay, in which the current, by dipping a needle into mercury, completed a local circuit, and released the detent of a clockwork.

This partnership went through a few reorganizations before being nationalized as British Telecom in 1870.

Is the private sector capable of genuine innovation?

Not when they're operating unregulated public utilities?

-- rec --

On Mon, Mar 3, 2014 at 10:42 AM, Pamela McCorduck <[hidden email]> wrote:

This was my original message on February 22.

Begin forwarded message:

From: Pamela McCorduck <[hidden email]>

Subject: Re: [FRIAM] WhatsApp ... Death of SMS?
Date: February 22, 2014 at 5:14:43 PM EST
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>

The Internet was conceived and first implemented by a small group of government and university researchers: J. C. R. Licklider, Bob Kahn, Vint Cert, and several other pioneers. (So when I hear Silly Valley Libertarians go on and on, the best I can do is laugh.)

My question to this august group is: now that the momentum for innovation has moved to the private sector, are we going to see nothing but these trivial, mostly copycat apps that make your eyes glaze over? Is the private sector capable of genuine innovation?

Pamela

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

Nick Thompson

Re: Fwd: WhatsApp ... Death of SMS?

I am working on some sort of pun about a traffic jam on the Wheatstone Bridge. I will get back to you all when I have it.

Nicholas S. Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology

Clark University

http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/

From: Friam [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Roger Critchlow
Sent: Monday, March 03, 2014 11:57 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Fwd: WhatsApp ... Death of SMS?

Heroes of the telegraph, by J Munro:

At a second interview, Mr. Cooke told Wheatstone of his intention to bring out a working telegraph, and explained his method. Wheatstone, according to his own statement, remarked to Cooke that the method would not act, and produced his own experimental telegraph. Finally, Cooke proposed that they should enter into a partnership, but Wheatstone was at first reluctant to comply. He was a well-known man of science, and had meant to publish his results without seeking to make capital of them. Cooke, on the other hand, declared that his sole object was to make a fortune from the scheme. In May they agreed to join their forces, Wheatstone contributing the scientific, and Cooke the administrative talent. The deed of partnership was dated November 19, 1837. A joint patent was taken out for their inventions, including the five-needle telegraph of Wheatstone, and an alarm worked by a relay, in which the current, by dipping a needle into mercury, completed a local circuit, and released the detent of a clockwork.

This partnership went through a few reorganizations before being nationalized as British Telecom in 1870.

Is the private sector capable of genuine innovation?

Not when they're operating unregulated public utilities?

-- rec --

On Mon, Mar 3, 2014 at 10:42 AM, Pamela McCorduck <[hidden email]> wrote:

This was my original message on February 22.

Begin forwarded message:

From: Pamela McCorduck <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] WhatsApp ... Death of SMS?
Date: February 22, 2014 at 5:14:43 PM EST
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>

The Internet was conceived and first implemented by a small group of government and university researchers: J. C. R. Licklider, Bob Kahn, Vint Cert, and several other pioneers. (So when I hear Silly Valley Libertarians go on and on, the best I can do is laugh.)

My question to this august group is: now that the momentum for innovation has moved to the private sector, are we going to see nothing but these trivial, mostly copycat apps that make your eyes glaze over? Is the private sector capable of genuine innovation?

Pamela

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

glen ropella

Re: Fwd: WhatsApp ... Death of SMS?

In reply to this post by Pamela McCorduck

FWIW, I remember the question well. I was too busy to respond in the
way I wanted to. My lack of response wasn't because it was an
uninteresting question. I didn't respond because the reasoning seemed
fallacious. I still can't respond the way I'd like to, with a full
explanation of what's wrong with the implication. But, since you
inferred an identity between lack of comment and lack of interest, I'll
throw a few inadequate words at the subject.

The most irritating part lies in the rampant equivocation around
"innovation". Qualifiers like "genuine" and "copycat" set off alarm
bells in my head. But the problems they cause pale in comparison to the
confirmation bias embedded in the term "innovation".

It also relates deeply to the recent thread about "surviving" across
infrastructure changes and the desire for zero-intelligence-tools ...
this concept that you should not need to understand how a tool works in
order to use the tool.

To me, all innovation is privately funded. It's the bringing-to-market
that is "funded" in the sense I think you mean. Every innovator I've
ever met devotes their _self_ to their inventions. They take
un-quantifiable risk and commit unquantifiable resources to the
development of that thing/process. Am I equivocating on "private"?
Perhaps. Maybe "personal" is a better word. But my point survives my
fallacy.

The people who devote their _selves_ to the construction of innovative
tools/methods, are the funders of the innovations. The bags of money we
usually refer to as "funders" follow quite closely with demand. And in
a world of zero-intelligence-tool-users, are we really surprised there's
little intelligence embedded in the tools brought to market by the money
bags?

We can consider http://healthcare.gov a fine example. Is it innovative
to socialize the risk pool in a way that "enlightened" capitalists can
tolerate (if not profit from)? I'd say, yes, absolutely. Socialized
risk is not novel. Websites aren't novel. "Esurance" isn't novel.
Etc. The money bags (governments and NGOs) brought healthcare.gov to
"market". But are we really going to say that they're the innovators?
No, I'd rather blame/credit the small cadre of socialized medicine
advocates peppered through our public citizenry (as well as many outside
the country). I also consider blaming/crediting the "capitalists" who
recognize our economy for the ecological complex system it is, yet
understand that _people_ are the innovators (as well as everything
else). And if the people are sick and dying, then our economy is sick
and dying.

But more specifically re: what I think you want to talk about -- In my
arguments with liberals, they often assert that there is no such thing
as a "free market". I agree. But there's a flipside to their argument.
It means there is no sharp distinction between public and private
money bags. E.g. Yes, Bill Gates has near autocratic control over how
his fortune is spent. But our governments were absolutely critical to
his fortune. Without our government, his fortune would not exist (as it
now exists, at least, perhaps not at all). Similarly, without the NGOs
that help build things like airplanes or semiconductors, our government
would not exist (as it exists, at least, perhaps not at all).

Every innovation is brought about from a complex interplay between the
private and public sectors. To even make the distinction is enough to
mark one as a "libertarian".

On 03/03/2014 09:42 AM, Pamela McCorduck wrote:

> This was my original message on February 22.
>
> Begin forwarded message:
>
>> *From: *Pamela McCorduck <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>
>> *Subject: **Re: [FRIAM] WhatsApp ... Death of SMS?*
>> *Date: *February 22, 2014 at 5:14:43 PM EST
>> *To: *The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
>> <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>
>>
>> The Internet was conceived and first implemented by a small group of
>> government and university researchers: J. C. R. Licklider, Bob Kahn,
>> Vint Cert, and several other pioneers. (So when I hear Silly Valley
>> Libertarians go on and on, the best I can do is laugh.)
>>
>> My question to this august group is: now that the momentum for
>> innovation has moved to the private sector, are we going to see
>> nothing but these trivial, mostly copycat apps that make your eyes
>> glaze over? Is the private sector capable of genuine innovation?
>>
>> Pamela
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> ============================================================
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
> to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
>

--
⇒⇐ glen

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

Pamela McCorduck

Re: Fwd: WhatsApp ... Death of SMS?

I’m glad to hear your views, Glen.

I do believe that the private sector has a deeply important—vital—role to play in the development and dispersion of innovation, but in the case I meant, the Internet, the real innovation came from people with an astounding vision who were able to spend from the deep pockets of government until the proof of concept was far enough along that the private sector could see the opportunities. If the vision of a small group that must nevertheless persuade government that this is a good way to spend public money is “private,” then I guess so. It is true that the medium for all this were computers that were (mostly) manufactured by private firms (though these too had their genesis in government models), plus telephone lines that had been installed by a private, regulated monopoly. Perhaps this is what you mean by the complex interplay between public and private.

We were a far richer country then, and believed our scientific and technological leadership was central to a free world. This may have been myth. In any case, we still seem to give lip service to that idea, but our money is no longer where our mouth is. In 2001, I stood by a huge architectural model at China’s MIT, and asked if it were the model for a new campus. No, my host assured me, these were just the new buildings for software research. I was stunned.

Perhaps the vision I hope for exists in the U.S. private sector. I’ll be in Silicon Valley next month to inquire. I deeply hope it does.

As for healthcare.gov, I do believe that’s a red herring in this argument. The Germans began socializing medicine under Bismarck in the 1880s. THAT was innovation. Obamacare is an overdue, unwieldy compromise among the private insurers, the medical community, and the Congress. Yes, I find it shocking and immoral that insurance companies until Obamacare were allowed to deny coverage to anyone with a pre-existing condition, and throw a pesky customer off their roles if that customer got too sick. If that makes me a socialist, so be it. Almost as bad, I know very well that I’ve been subsidizing the poor with my opaque hospital bills, but I have no idea to what extent and how. I’d really like to know that. But I do agree with you that if people are sick and dying, then our economy is sick and dying.

Pamela

On Mar 3, 2014, at 3:25 PM, glen <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> FWIW, I remember the question well. I was too busy to respond in the way I wanted to. My lack of response wasn't because it was an uninteresting question. I didn't respond because the reasoning seemed fallacious. I still can't respond the way I'd like to, with a full explanation of what's wrong with the implication. But, since you inferred an identity between lack of comment and lack of interest, I'll throw a few inadequate words at the subject.
>
> The most irritating part lies in the rampant equivocation around "innovation". Qualifiers like "genuine" and "copycat" set off alarm bells in my head. But the problems they cause pale in comparison to the confirmation bias embedded in the term "innovation".
>
> It also relates deeply to the recent thread about "surviving" across infrastructure changes and the desire for zero-intelligence-tools ... this concept that you should not need to understand how a tool works in order to use the tool.
>
> To me, all innovation is privately funded. It's the bringing-to-market that is "funded" in the sense I think you mean. Every innovator I've ever met devotes their _self_ to their inventions. They take un-quantifiable risk and commit unquantifiable resources to the development of that thing/process. Am I equivocating on "private"? Perhaps. Maybe "personal" is a better word. But my point survives my fallacy.
>
> The people who devote their _selves_ to the construction of innovative tools/methods, are the funders of the innovations. The bags of money we usually refer to as "funders" follow quite closely with demand. And in a world of zero-intelligence-tool-users, are we really surprised there's little intelligence embedded in the tools brought to market by the money bags?
>
> We can consider http://healthcare.gov a fine example. Is it innovative to socialize the risk pool in a way that "enlightened" capitalists can tolerate (if not profit from)? I'd say, yes, absolutely. Socialized risk is not novel. Websites aren't novel. "Esurance" isn't novel. Etc. The money bags (governments and NGOs) brought healthcare.gov to "market". But are we really going to say that they're the innovators? No, I'd rather blame/credit the small cadre of socialized medicine advocates peppered through our public citizenry (as well as many outside the country). I also consider blaming/crediting the "capitalists" who recognize our economy for the ecological complex system it is, yet understand that _people_ are the innovators (as well as everything else). And if the people are sick and dying, then our economy is sick and dying.
>
> But more specifically re: what I think you want to talk about -- In my arguments with liberals, they often assert that there is no such thing as a "free market". I agree. But there's a flipside to their argument. It means there is no sharp distinction between public and private money bags. E.g. Yes, Bill Gates has near autocratic control over how his fortune is spent. But our governments were absolutely critical to his fortune. Without our government, his fortune would not exist (as it now exists, at least, perhaps not at all). Similarly, without the NGOs that help build things like airplanes or semiconductors, our government would not exist (as it exists, at least, perhaps not at all).
>
> Every innovation is brought about from a complex interplay between the private and public sectors. To even make the distinction is enough to mark one as a "libertarian".
>
>
>
> On 03/03/2014 09:42 AM, Pamela McCorduck wrote:
>> This was my original message on February 22.
>>
>> Begin forwarded message:
>>
>>> *From: *Pamela McCorduck <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>
>>> *Subject: **Re: [FRIAM] WhatsApp ... Death of SMS?*
>>> *Date: *February 22, 2014 at 5:14:43 PM EST
>>> *To: *The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
>>> <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>
>>>
>>> The Internet was conceived and first implemented by a small group of
>>> government and university researchers: J. C. R. Licklider, Bob Kahn,
>>> Vint Cert, and several other pioneers. (So when I hear Silly Valley
>>> Libertarians go on and on, the best I can do is laugh.)
>>>
>>> My question to this august group is: now that the momentum for
>>> innovation has moved to the private sector, are we going to see
>>> nothing but these trivial, mostly copycat apps that make your eyes
>>> glaze over? Is the private sector capable of genuine innovation?
>>>
>>> Pamela
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ============================================================
>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
>> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
>> to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
>>
>
> --
> ⇒⇐ glen
>
> ============================================================
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
> to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

glen ropella

Re: Fwd: WhatsApp ... Death of SMS?

On 03/03/2014 02:04 PM, Pamela McCorduck wrote:
> Perhaps the vision I hope for exists in the U.S. private sector. I’ll be in Silicon Valley next month to inquire. I deeply hope it does.

I don't think you'll find it in Silicon Valley. I'd be more inclined to
hunt for it in, say, Oakland. It's not that it doesn't exist in the
valley. It's a signal-to-noise thing. Finding innovation in the ocean
of buzzword nonsense can be difficult.

> As for healthcare.gov, I do believe that’s a red herring in this argument. The Germans began socializing medicine under Bismarck in the 1880s. THAT was innovation. Obamacare is an overdue, unwieldy compromise among the private insurers, the medical community, and the Congress. Yes, I find it shocking and immoral that insurance companies until Obamacare were allowed to deny coverage to anyone with a pre-existing condition, and throw a pesky customer off their roles if that customer got too sick. If that makes me a socialist, so be it. Almost as bad, I know very well that I’ve been subsidizing the poor with my opaque hospital bills, but I have no idea to what extent and how. I’d really like to know that. But I do agree with you that if people are sick and dying, then our economy is sick and dying.

Well, I probably should have said "ACA" rather than healthcare.gov.
Sorry. I think the _law_ is an innovation, albeit a very complicated
piece, because it is a compromise... it walked a convoluted fine line
between socialism and capitalism. None of the parts are innovative, but
the composite is.

My larger point, of course, was that the things we call "innovative" are
never _actually_ beautiful... they are only called "beautiful" in a
post-hoc rationalization.

--
⇒⇐ glen

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

Russell Standish-2

Re: Fwd: WhatsApp ... Death of SMS?

In reply to this post by Nick Thompson

On Mon, Mar 03, 2014 at 12:28:44PM -0700, Nick Thompson wrote:

> I am working on some sort of pun about a traffic jam on the Wheatstone
> Bridge. I will get back to you all when I have it.
>
>
>
> N
>
>
>
> Nicholas S. Thompson
>
> Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology
>
> Clark University
>

I tried searching for this using Google, but it appears to not be on
the interwebs. Possibly an original piece from my school friend Peter
Hayles:

---------------------------------------------------------------------
WANTED
------
500,000 uF reward

For the return of Hopalong Capacity
ALIVE OR NEUTRALISED
--------------------

Description: Catswhisker moustache, crystal blue eyes, Leyden jar
complexion, potential to resist arrest, electrifying gaze, low
tolerance, ex relay driver, probing hands, under high tension, chip on
his shoulder.

Wanted for: The induction and battery of an 18 year old coil, and for
stealing her Joules.

Currently seen alight a horse riding over the Wheatstone bridge towards
his Ohm town.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Let the groans begin :)

--

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Principal, High Performance Coders
Visiting Professor of Mathematics [hidden email]
University of New South Wales http://www.hpcoders.com.au
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com