The problem with living through a revolution is that you have no idea how things will turn out. So it is with the revolutionary transformation of our communications environment driven by the Internet and mobile phone technology.
Strangely, our problem is not that we are short of data about what’s going on — on the contrary we are awash with the stuff. This is what led Manuel Castells, the great academic of cyberspace, to describe our current mental state as one of “informed bewilderment.” We have lots of information, but not much of a clue about what it means.
For many years, the most assiduous provider of data about the ongoing revolution has been Mary Meeker, an industry analyst who once worked for Morgan Stanley, the investment bank that acted as lead underwriter for the Netscape initial public offering in August 1995 (and thereby triggered the first Internet boom). She began making an annual conference presentation, “The Internet Report,” which acquired legendary status in the industry because it distilled from the froth some elements of reality.
Meeker is now a partner at Kleiner Perkins Caulfield & Byers, one of Silicon Valley’s leading venture capital firms, but she has not abandoned her old habits. Last week, she presented her latest annual report — now labeled “Internet Trends” — at the Wall Street Journal’s “All Things Digital” conference in California.
It is a whopping 112-slide presentation, which bears serious contemplation. Buried within it are some startling numbers. For example, Meeker estimates that there are now 2.3 billion Internet users worldwide, which is nearly a third of the world’s population and that number is growing at 8 percent a year. However, what is more startling is there are now 1.1 billion 3G mobile subscribers and that they are increasing at 37 percent per year.
What is significant about that?
Two things. First it means that already a significant proportion of the world’s population is accessing the Internet via a mobile phone rather than via a fixed-line connection. Second, smartphones currently account for less than a fifth of all the mobile phones in the world — which means that the market for Internet-enabled phones has a lot of room for further growth. So stand by for a continued increase in the number of smartphones used across the world.
If you are a mobile network provider, this is probably great news — more and more customers to fleece with expensive data plans. If you are Facebook, then it is less good news because mobile advertising is much less profitable than standard online advertising.
Slide 19 of Meeker’s deck estimates that the eCPM (short for “effective cost per mille,” or the cost per thousand impressions) for mobile ads is five times less than the desktop equivalent. This explains some of the reservations buried in Facebook’s pre-initial public offering filings to the US Securities and Exchange Commission. It may also explain why Facebook is allegedly determined to launch its own smartphone — it is best to control the hardware if you are having difficulty squeezing juice out of ads placed by others.
If, however, you are concerned about things such as freedom, control and innovation, then the prospect of a world in which most people access the Internet via smartphones and other cloud devices is a troubling one.
Why? Because smartphones (and tablets) are tightly controlled, “tethered” appliances. You may think that you own your shiny new iPhone or iPad, for example, but in fact an invisible chain stretches from it all the way back to Apple’s corporate headquarters in California. Nothing, but nothing, goes on your iDevice that has not been approved by Apple.
Even if you are not an Apple fan and sport an Android-powered mobile device, there is still the problem that your access to the Internet is regulated by a company — your mobile network provider — which is free not just to charge prohibitively for access, but also to decide what you can access and what you cannot.
This might not seem a big deal — after all, it is just capitalism doing its thing, but what it means is that with every new smartphone subscription we take another tiny, but discrete step toward a networked world dominated by powerful corporations that cannot only “regulate” the system in their own interests, but also control the speed of technological innovation to a pace that is convenient for them, rather than determined by the creativity of hackers and engineers.
This kind of dystopian outcome has long worried observers such as Harvard academic Jonathan Zittrain, who saw the rise of the tethered appliance as a threat to the creative “generativity” of the Internet.
Up to now, critics have pooh-poohed these fears as unduly fatalistic. The data in Meeker’s latest report, however, tell a different story — they point toward a tethered future in which we are the goats. Except that we will be the first goats in history who loved their tethers.
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing
A group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers led by the party’s legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (?) are to visit Beijing for four days this week, but some have questioned the timing and purpose of the visit, which demonstrates the KMT caucus’ increasing arrogance. Fu on Wednesday last week confirmed that following an invitation by Beijing, he would lead a group of lawmakers to China from Thursday to Sunday to discuss tourism and agricultural exports, but he refused to say whether they would meet with Chinese officials. That the visit is taking place during the legislative session and in the aftermath