Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Life After Google, Text
Life After Google, Text
A. Since making a name for himself with the release of the international
best seller Wealth and Poverty in 1981, George Gilder has remained a literary
mainstay in the world of politics, economics, and—more recently—technology.
10 Gilder is an avid writer and commentator covering not only where we are as a
society today, but where we’re currently heading as well. In the past, Gilder has
narrowed in on the innovations of the future and predicted the decline of
technology that simply isn’t keeping up with the way society is evolving.
C. In his most recent book, Life After Google: The Fall of Big Data
and the Rise of the Blockchain Economy, Gilder is once again looking at
25 the way society interacts with technology and how it affects the lives of
consumers. We’re living at a point in history where so much of what we do, what
we see, and what we consume is controlled by an increasingly smaller group of
people. Gilder doesn’t like that and, more importantly, doesn’t think it’s good for
a society. In an era where Google seems to control nearly every facet of so many
30 people’s lives, Gilder sees an important shift in the future. A shift away from
centralized authority and control of so much of the internet today. A shift instead
to a decentralized way of interacting with the world around us; a “great
unbundling,” if you will.
35 D. For Gilder, there are a variety of reasons for this great unbundling. He doesn’t
merely believe that this is where we’re likely to head in the future, but that it’s
inevitable. According to Gilder, the current model is simply unsustainable (and
he makes a rather compelling case for why that’s true), and the introduction of
blockchain technology is exactly the innovation required to help get us on a more
40 sustainable path. There are so many different factors at play in the world today
that all lead one to this conclusion—so many that we certainly won’t be able to
cover them all here without covering the entirety of the book—but there are some
big points that are worth noting for their thought-provoking nature.
E. The first point that likely isn’t thought about often is the actual nature of
45 Google itself. Aside from the centralization of Google (or rather: “Alphabet”),
Gilder raises an interesting point about the tech giant’s model. Gilder believes
that if we take a step back for a moment and actually look at the model of Google
and its different ventures, it’s actually quite obvious that the business is not
sustainable. Google has continued to develop products that, while useful to many,
50 are offered free to consumers. While this model may work in the short term, it’s
not likely to end well.
G. Because of the ‘free’ products a company like Google offers consumers, they’re
able to (rather quickly) acquire an impressive amount of the market. From there,
Google pushes its other services for you to considering using and incorporating
into your daily routine (Apple does this as well). After everything is said and done
65 and if things went according to plan, the tech giant now has a significant portion
of consumers closer to being in a “walled garden” or “ecosystem.” We often hear
about the “Apple ecosystem” or the “Google ecosystem,” and that’s where so
many consumers are headed to nowadays. This notion of a centralized authority
controlling so much of what users see and interact with is not sustainable,
70 according to Gilder. In a recent podcast interview with Reason, Gilder explains
this concept with the host, stating that: “This model of creating economic success
on the internet by homogenizing a walled garden doesn’t replicate.”
Gilder then continues on to argue that if companies like Google and Apple can
have closed off proprietary spaces that keep people locked in to their own
75 ecosystem, then so too will countries like Iran and China. Gilder closes the point
with “In the end, the internet breaks into fragile fiefdoms and falls apart.” And
wasn’t the internet intended to connect the globe, not aid in furthering the
segmentation of it? Surely, there must be a better way.
90 I. In the case of Google, the company has been able to get away without that
foundational basis because of how they’ve inverted the traditional relationship
between company and consumer. Sitting down with Breitbart, Gilder elaborated
on this point while explaining what he sees as a crucial mistake on Google’s part.
In effect, Google has changed the relationship between customers and
95 companies to put the would-be consumers in a position much more akin to a
commodity.
“Their great mistake is addressing the issue of security successfully. One of the
reasons for free is because nobody wants to steal free stuff. So the burdens on
security for the network are greatly diminished. A free model doesn’t really teach
100 you. Capitalism is based on markets and prices and relationships with customers
who you have to serve and who have rights. This is how capitalist progress
works.”
K. There is hope, however, according to Gilder, with the advent and introduction
of blockchain technology (a stark contrast to Google’s system which isn’t security-
founded in its architecture). Really, blockchain isn’t so much a “hope” as it is a
110 natural progression. The current model carried out by companies like Google
isn’t going to be able to survive on its own. Indeed, we’re in for a great
“unbundling.”