My 2016

Category : Personal Thoughts
Posted on by

Ever since I started writing here, I’ve done a year end post summarizing what I’ve done in the past year. These posts are mostly for me, so that I can look back and remember what I did, what I was thinking and what was important to me each year. Previous versions (2000s, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015). Here’s what I did in 2016.

2016 followed on from 2015’s main two themes: focus and growth. In 2015, I started the process of eliminating distractions from Magma Partners and Andes Property and in 2016 I focused even more. I took Derek Sivers’ mantra of Hell Yeah! or No! that I started to implement at the end of 2015 to heart and said no to things that I wasn’t 100% excited about.

I not only implemented this framework for deciding to invest in new Magma portfolio companies, but also for speaking engagements, events, press opportunities, writing opportunities and more. Along the same lines, Tim Urban’s Your Life in Weeks helped me revalidate that time is my most precious resource. Thanks Derek and Tim.

I spent ~5 months in Chile, ~1 in other Latin American countries and the rest in the US. 6 months is the most I’ve spent in the US since 2010. It was good to be back more than a few months per year and I really enjoyed getting back to doing more business in the US. It was also great to see my family and friends more than I have for the past few years. My Mom finished a book project she’d been working on for multiple years and I was happy to be able to help her get it designed, edited and printed. (more…)

Tech Will Allow a Family to Live Well on $3500 per Year

Category : Political Science & Economics
Posted on by

So far, I’ve talked about some of the downsides of the massive change from AI and path dependency:

I wrote about how being compensated for our data might be a way out. But what about some other potential good news?

“Competing Without Software Is Like Competing Without Electricity” – Naval Ravikant

As technology impacts every industry and becomes as ubiquitous as electricity, we will see the vast majority of industries behave like the computer and software industries do: getting better each year, while deflating in price.

As Sam Altman, the head of YCombinator puts it: (more…)

Should We Be Paid to Train the AI Algorithms?

Category : Political Science & Economics
Posted on by

If it’s free, you’re the product. If it’s extremely subsidized, you’re probably the product, too. Facebook is free. You’re the product. Google and Gmail are free. You’re the product. Mechanical Turk is cheap, you’re the product. Uber is cheap, you’re the product. Tesla self driving cars are add on features. You’re the product. Snapchat is free. You’re helping them build the best facial recognition database out there. They’re “paying” you with access to use their service.

Tesla needs a few billion miles of driving data to train its computer program to react to all situations. How does Tesla get this data? By tracking all car trips and adding it to the database. Once they have enough data, cars can react to nearly all situations. They’ve used massive amounts of each persons’ data to train the program.

All of the companies I listed above are using free or highly subsidized products to train their algorthims to further automate away humans. Is this bargain fair?  That everyone who uses free and subsidized services are contributing to training the AI? The AI that will later run that market and create massive benefits for the company that captured all of this data that people freely gave it? (more…)

The On Demand Economy Is At Best A Bandaid, Not a Solution

Category : Political Science & Economics
Posted on by

We know we’re going through massive change. And that things are moving faster than ever. Our politics are harming those who they claim to protect. One potential savior is the on demand economy. On demand economy proponents claim people will be Uber drivers, freelance writers, freelance attorneys, accountants, video editors, programmers. People won’t buy things, they’ll just lease them (and they’ll be happy). It’s true, some people will live like this and be happy. But the on demand economy is just a bandaid on a wound that requires an emergency room visit. And it might be worse. It might be like giving adrenelline to someone who’s already bleading out.

The labels “on demand economy” or “sharing economy” don’t accurately characterize these new business models and work arrangements. One of the new “jobs” rates airbnb accommodations based on cleanliness, if the photos are real etc. Their job is to make sure it doesn’t smell bad. They’re on demand airbnb smellers. While that’s a new job that maybe be needed, it’s not a job that will pay living wages and give people dignity.

We have similar problems in most other “sharing economy” companies. It’s like making people into code, shuttling them from place to place and only paying them when they can work. It’s many a business owners’ dream: pay workers only when they can work, don’t pay benefits and make workers compete against each other. Look at Amazon’s Mechanical Turk, where workers are paid pennies to complete mundane tasks and train the AI. Turkers are already protesting that they’re people, not algorithms. Contrast the sharing economy with Henry Ford’s dream of paying his workers so that they could afford his product. We’ve come a long way.

This competition structures incentives to create a massive race to the bottom. These companies make economic sense for the first people who use them, but don’t make sense for workers in the long term. Just look at Uber driver income in any new city. Uber pays big bonuses when they come into a new market where there are few drivers. Drivers earn $100k+ in places like Philly and LA. But as soon as more drivers get on the platform, wages go to as close to zero as possible as Uber lowers fares and ups its commission.

For on demand services like design, programming, creative writing etc, the developing world will always win these price wars. Just look at Upwork…there’s $2/hour video editors that do a great job. As Seth Godin put it, “we can’t out obedience the competition.” It’s a race to the bottom.

On demand economy websites will help some people go through the transition from stable jobs to our new AI enabled future, but competition that drives compensation, working conditions and best practices to the lowest common denominator will be the norm. Airbnb smellers are a new job, but not something that’s going to give satisfaction or a wage that supports a family in the near future.

Photo credit: synx508