> 2. Large incumbents use it to spread their message in a controlled manner.
> 3. Over time, the technology becomes less and less controllable and starts more and more to set its own terms of engagement.
> 4. This asymptotes towards incumbents having a choice: engage with the tech on its own terms, or become irrelevant. (“Or just ban the tech once it becomes vexatious” is most incumbents’ preferred option, but that’s not always possible.)
This also describes the Papacy's attitude towards the printing press back in the day.
> We literally only want one thing, and it’s disgusting.
Didn't China invent a magazine-fed crossbow in like the 1100s? I guess it wouldn't have been full auto, but, that's a thing in history that happened, right?
> The trend goes like this:
> 1. New technology comes about.
> 2. Large incumbents use it to spread their message in a controlled manner.
> 3. Over time, the technology becomes less and less controllable and starts more and more to set its own terms of engagement.
> 4. This asymptotes towards incumbents having a choice: engage with the tech on its own terms, or become irrelevant. (“Or just ban the tech once it becomes vexatious” is most incumbents’ preferred option, but that’s not always possible.)
This also describes the Papacy's attitude towards the printing press back in the day.
True
That you for making me look up "asymptotes"!
One more for my lexicon.
> We literally only want one thing, and it’s disgusting.
Didn't China invent a magazine-fed crossbow in like the 1100s? I guess it wouldn't have been full auto, but, that's a thing in history that happened, right?
Yep