The Treacherous Servant In Your Hand

Job Killer

Our family's current dog is a collie mix who is best behaved when he has a job to do. Which has the not inconsiderable problem that he invents jobs when he doesn't get them. So to take some of his energy out of that search, and to also vary up my running routine, I'd take him for walks that would generally go for a couple of miles. Which meant a lot of walking at night, and a lot of collecting his leavings when there wasn't a lot of ambient light.

Since I have a smartphone, and said phone has access to apps, I did the simple move of downloading a flashlight app that controlled the phone's onboard camera flash. Presto, a flashlight just when I need it, on the same device I was already holding, and as simple as can be in terms of use. For free, even. The app is still on my phone. I don't use it very often, especially now that I'm living apart from the pooch, but it's there.

Oh, and there's also this: I'm likely never buying another flashlight again in my life. The phone does that now.

In addition to dog walking, I noodle around on guitar. I play an acoustic, an electric, and am trying to get into some small measure of shape on a mandolin. That last one is an absolute bear when it comes to callouses, but the instrument that I own was a lovely gift from my wife, and the nice thing about mandolin is that there is a whole lot less people in the world who can make you feel inadequate about your skills on it. This is all a holdover from my musician days of decades past, and I keep mulling over trying to do something musical again, because it makes me happy.

There is, of course, a remarkably handy app for my phone that lets me tune my guitars, and even the mandolin. For free, even. I've downloaded that. Presto, a tuner just when I need it, on the same device I was already holding, and so on, and so on.

I've probably bought a half dozen tuners in my life, as I've never quite gotten the knack of tuning by ear, and tuners tend to disappear from kit bags and/or have unfortunate things happen to them, since they are, well, gear. I'm also likely to never buy another one again in my life, because while I'm sure the app isn't as good as the real thing, I'm also sure that my ears can't tell the difference.

Lots of people are employed in the good and honorable work of making flashlights, and guitar tuners, and cameras, and so many other things that have been disrupted by the servant in your pocket. Cab drivers, hotel chains, gas station owners, any number of retail stores that are closing en masse. More every day, it seems.

That phone is going to come for bigger targets on the food chain. Brand awareness advertising that can't prove out a benefit on a spreadsheet. The 9 to 5 workday, with its inefficent traffic patterns and it's 24/7/365 tether to the office. Premium seating at live events, starting with ticket selling, then moving to AR/VR that lets you "be" on the field or stage. The cable TV bundle, the non-intelligent home that wastes heating and cooling, the notion that someone at your local store might be able to walk you over to the item you need, rather than just seeing a line on the floor that doesn't exist for anyone but you.

All of which will be wonderful, all of which you will use without a second thought, all of which you will soon not be able to live without.

And all of which is going to force great numbers of your fellow citizens to find another means of employment.

Because the biggest enemy of employment isn't another country, or work ethic, or regulation, or any of the other bogeymen that people like to trot out whenever conversations turn from earners to takers, from "entitlements" to taxes, and so on.

It's technology. Technology that can certainly create some jobs, wonderful ones even, where the workers are fulfilled and well compensated and using tools that make them incredibly productive.

But for every single good to great job? An untold number of meh to good ones, crushed under the steel wheels of history.

Those wheels seem to be gaining speed, too.

Sure your own gig is safe from them?

* * * * *

Feel free to comment, as well as like or share this column, connect with me on LinkedIn, or email me at davidlmountain at gmail dot com, or hit the RFP boxes at top right. RFPs are always free, and we hope to hear from you soon.

Privacy, Schmivacy

Spambot with actual spam

The column this week starts with replacing a dishwasher. But you are going to have to take a big long walk to get there with me.

In some of the news that I monitor this week, there was talk of white hat hackers taking advantage of security holes in the background browsers of Internet-connected televisions, with Nefarious Potential to follow. (Your appliance may already be a spambot!)

The TVs now come with cameras and microphones as part of their rigging, so the set can (a) save energy by dimming or turning off when you leave or fall asleep, or (b) monitor your attention for marketing and advertising purposes, because offline and online is eventually all going to be one.

But let's not get sidetracked. Remember, we're going to the dishwasher.

As most Internet of Things (IoT) devices tend towards economically friendly browsers like open source and Linux, hacks are easy and updates are intermittent. The entire situation has the potential to scuttle the industry before it really gets off the ground, especially if media and/or litigation decides to make a lunch of it, and, well, that's certainly possible. If for no other reason than there is a lot of venture capital / deep pockets in the IoT space.

Which all sounds a lot more dire than I'd like to make it, if only for the following factors.

1) Privacy skews at a demographic level. People who have grown up with connected everything have also grown up with cynicism, incessant trolling and social media that has always acted as a race to the most shared. These are also the folks who are going to buy the new stuff. Privacy enhancement isn't going to move gear, at least not in comparison to price and features, and as long as the IoT gear does things that the consumer finds to be of value, they'll trade off privacy in a heartbeat. They have for, well, decades.

2) Legislation isn't likely to happen. We live in an era where consumer-unfriendly measures like an end to net neutrality are going to provide all kinds of air cover to the IoT, as if much will get done in the polarized and charged environment that seems to be the new normal in the U.S. For something as esoteric as the privacy settings on niche gadgets, this will be a golden era of being able to hide in plain sight.

3) When there's big money on the table, *always* bet against crime. A few years ago, I was extremely concerned about fraud in the display ad business, since the work could be done anywhere in the world, and all of the solutions to the problem seemed to require an unrealistic amount of human bandwidth. (My livelihood was also tied up entirely in display.)

What has happened since is that the problem, while still a major concern, has likely crested and started to recede, because Facebook and Google threw a lot of resources at it, and the rest of the industry followed the leaders. Most estimates have the majority of fraud done by a few high volume actors, which means, in all likelihood, that the net is closing in on those folks.

There's still an unacceptable number of bad actors out there, and the situation needs to get better, but it's already on the way. IoT hackers are going to have a lot of talented people trying to take them out of the game, and more will come every day. Oh, and the very best hackers will also switch over from black to white hat coding, since you can do the same work but turn it into a stable career, rather than worry about, well, prison.

At the start of a new industry, the value proposition will always seem small, and maybe even a little ridiculous. Why would anyone want their refrigerator to be connected to the Internet, especially if it adds to the cost of the unit and contributes to a security issue? But when the connectivity creates a device that self-repairs based on remote monitoring, informs (or auto-replenishes) a shopping list in ways that makes life easier, alerts the user to when produce is about to spoil, or self-corrects energy expenditure when the unit isn't being used as much, all of which saves the user money?

Well, all of that is going to be something you won't want to do without, once you have it. There will be bumps in the road, and those who choose to do without. Kind of like every tech advancement ever, or (hey! we got here after all!) kind of like when dishwashers started turning up in kitchens.

The new ones do all kinds of stuff the old ones don't do. They are dramatically better than the one we got rid of, for less money than the old one cost. The tech that's inside the unit has all kinds of sensors and gadgetry, and we have become (damn near instantly) used to the new level of service.

Oh, and in the store where we got this, they put the dishwashers next to the fridges. Which had models with digital whiteboards and browsers, next to the models that didn't.

Guess which ones got all of the foot traffic?

* * * * *

Feel free to comment, as well as like or share this column, connect with me on LinkedIn, or email me at davidlmountain at gmail dot com, or hit the RFP boxes at top right. RFPs are always free, and we hope to hear from you soon.

The AdTech Two Step

Step One: Honey, Not Those Shoes

This week in Adtech saw two sequential stories that followed a pattern that goes back, well, decades. Let's do the dance.

Step 1 -- An adtech company finds an issue that affects customers (in this case, billing). Said company reports the issue, offers a correction, and tries to get ahead of any possible PR blowback by being, well, proactive about the whole thing.

Step 2 -- Media begrudgingly admits that adtech company did the right thing in reporting the error and fixing the problem, but that Steps Must Be Taken to prevent this kind of thing from ever happening again, because without some third party being around to protect clients, they are At Risk.

This time, it was Facebook with an ad impression correction. Clients were overcharged by a fraction of a percent, because the error was only on a limited series of platform and browsers. Since the whole thing was (a) not really a big deal on the numbers, (b) happening during an era where you can't go a single hour, let alone day, without some new attraction in the So Many Rings U.S. Political Circus distracting everyone, and (c) not really enough of a reason to step away from a dominant provider, it slipped by without much notice. (And yes, last month something similar happened with Google and YouTube. You get the point.)

But for me, it sticks in the craw... because it's part of what seems to be an eternal double standard when it comes to online advertising. To wit: has anyone ever called television ads that are skipped, muted by remote control, in close proximity to controversial content, or just ignored by the viewer... unviewable or worthless?

Because that what online ads that aren't seen by the viewer, no matter the reason why, are called.

Outdoor ads are placed in venue where a known number of cars will pass by, and priced accordingly. No one knows how many of those ads are seen now, especially with an ever-increasing amount of in-car options, but as an advertiser, you'll pay for those cars just the same. Radio, print, podcasts.. all of those ads, paid for on an impression count that's optimal and theoretical.

Only digital, with its relentless ability to quantify so many things that the non-quantifiable benefit is usually disregarded, tells you how much isn't optimal. For this, it's punished, in a process that promises to go away as the world matures and the market gradually takes over for other mediums, but in the interim, we're still doing this dance.

What isn't accepted, either then or now, is that you *can* add to your branding online, because those ads aren't worthless. (Which we can tell, naturally, with metrics, because nerds, we never stop trying). It's slow and arduous, and no one wants to do it without offline air cover, but brand awareness does rise for folks who see your work online. Especially if it's well-targeted, clever, with strong offers and good execution.

You know, the same way it works offline. Because the customer and prospect base is increasingly the same in both places.

So since we know how this dance ends -- more and more marketers using data to make more and more decisions, from an ever-rising level of accountability because digital doesn't really take steps backward...

Well, can't we just skip some steps? Maybe admit that digital has impact that isn't measured, that analog is subject to all kinds of issues that has always been more or less baked into the price, and that the world is more complex than an either/or answer?

Because, well, this dance is getting old. And it's pretty clear that the music's not stopping, and that, for the most part? We're calling the tune.

* * * * *

Feel free to comment, as well as like or share this column, connect with me on LinkedIn, or email me at davidlmountain at gmail dot com, or hit the RFP boxes at top right. RFPs are always free, and we hope to hear from you soon.