Binge-viewing was just the beginning. Netflix has a plan to rewire our entire culture
Binge viewing was just the beginning. What you need to know to understand life after the end of mass culture.
Where fine dining meets the Irish goodbye
Where fine dining meets the Irish goodbye.
Imagine how much happier you’d be if you could just adjust the sound
Imagine how much happier you’d be if you could just adjust the sound.
How corporations hijacked the First Amendment
How big business hijacked the First Amendment.
Is abundance really the solution to our problems?
Peter Diamandis and Steven Kotler say that "the future is better than you think" or than we're wired to think. But is it?
In the aftermath of the FTC's settlement with Google yesterday, too many reporters fell for the line that Google used some fancy combination of executive charm and lobbying prowess to beat the federal government at its own game. You'd easily believe, from reading what has become the conventional wisdom, that Google managed to avoid any sanctions by meeting with John Kerry or paying off think tanks.
Why Apple's patent war against Samsung and Google could wind up destroying Apple itself.
Late last week, Google yanked “The Innocence of Muslims,” from YouTube in Egypt, Libya and some other Muslim nations. By that point, an ambassador and three other Americans were already dead in Libya, while riots raged across the Middle East. Still, the company’s actions left behind an uncomfortable question: Should Google pull videos from YouTube just because they make people angry and violent? Google was, in my view, right to suspend the video, given the clear and present danger of more violence. But Google’s content-removal process left much to be desired.
Network Nation: Inventing American Telecommunications By Richard R. John (Belknap Press, 520 pp., $39.95) Once upon a time, some thought it obvious that competition was a bad thing, particularly in communications. As Theodore Vail, the president of AT&T, put it in 1913, “The public as a whole has never benefited” from competition. Monopoly, he said, was the better choice. The reason, he argued, is that “all costs of aggressive, uncontrolled competition are eventually borne, directly or indirectly, by the public.” Nowadays corporate executives carefully avoid expressing such sentiments.