Connect with us

Tech News

Silicon Valleys’ industry monopoly is over

(TECH NEWS) For years Silicon Valley has been home to the leading tech companies but one leader believes the Valley is about to lose their monopoly.

Published

on

silicon valley

Peter Thiel, a leader in entrepreneurism and investment who made his career in Silicon Valley, has now said that he believes the Valley will no longer be monopolizing the tech industry moving forward.

The billionaire Thiel, who launched PayPal, was an early investor in AirBnB and Facebook, and launched software company Palantir Technologies, spoke at the Future Investment Initiative in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia last week and shared some of his opinions on the future of the tech world, specifically its future outside the small pocket of California we know as Silicon Valley.

“I have been investing in the technology space — entrepreneur and investor over the past 20 years in Silicon Valley — and within the area of IT, it has for the last 10, 15 years in the US and the world been extremely centered on Silicon Valley,” he said at the event.

“I think there are a lot of reasons for that, but the question is, ‘Where is the growth going to happen the next 10 years?’ And what I would tend to think is that it will be more diversified from just Silicon Valley.”

Thus far, Silicon Valley has dominated the industry due to a large concentration of driven entrepreneurs and the abundance of mentors. Even now, California sees a hugely disproportionate percentage of venture capital deals made, despite rising competition throughout the world.

Per the most recent data coming out of the 2017’s third quarter, provided by the National Venture Capital Association and Pitchbook, show a huge gap between California-based companies and their competition. New York, who had the second highest number of deals made in Q3, with 188, only reached 32 percent of the number of deals closed in California in that same time, who had 580.

Here, it is easy to limit our view to companies based in the United States. Thiel, however, believes that the next wave of technology will be the product of a more global perspective.

“There was something very paradoxical about it all being in Silicon Valley, because after all these Internet companies are global in scope,” Thiel says. “They can be built anywhere. You just need some talented people, some capital, the right governance structures and so it was always this very odd question, why all the companies of this new global technology were built in one specific place.”

He went on to say that he believes China will be a big player in tech because of some up-and-coming companies that are moving into that space and doing creative work. Not only will things grow in China, but Thiel comments, “I don’t think there is a single other place, it is not a specific city or specific country, but I think in general there is much opportunity outside of Silicon Valley.”

Thiel’s opinions certainly strike a chord; it is strange that the tech world has been so focused on one small space in California considering the global scale on which the internet and tech operates. While there is surely competition in Silicon Valley, a broadening of horizons in the tech world will only lead to higher quality and more efficient product being released to the market.

Will hails from Northern California, earned a B.A. in English from Texas A&M University, and now calls Austin, Texas home where he works at a tech startup. He likes riding his bike an ungodly amount of miles and his favorite aesthetic is an open road. If you see him around he'll likely be reading a classic American novel and drinking a Topo Chico.

Tech News

The inventor of the internet wants to give back control of your data

(TECH NEWS) Using the internet has given us access to many things, but we’ve also lost control of our data. Can the father of the internet give it back?

Published

on

Multiple monitors set up on desk with control for data enabled.

Since it was first introduced in 1989, the internet has come a long way, both in good and bad ways. With several communication tools available online, connecting with friends and family on the other side of the world hasn’t been this easy. However, it has taken away something, too — the control over our data.

Our information is everywhere. Once it’s out there, there is very little, if anything, we can do to control how it’s being used or who’s using it. But, the father of the internet, Tim Berners-Lee, wants to reinvent how users take back control of their data.

“We’re on a mission to change the way the web works and the way to basically make the web a better place for all of us,” said Berners-Lee on The Telegraph Live.

In an attempt to “fix the web”, Berners-Lee launched a privacy-focused startup, Inrupt. Using the company’s data storage technology called Solid, the tech company changes how data is stored to give you more control.

“Solid is the new way to connect to people and data. It’s an open-source web-based protocol that re-architects the way data is stored and shared,” said Berners-Lee.

With Solid, you put your personal data together into a personal online data store called a “pod”. Any kind of information can be stored in a pod such as websites visited, travel plans, health records, or credit card purchases.

The pod can be hosted on any Pod Provider, or you can host it yourself. Pods hosted on a Solid Server are fully compartmentalized from other Pods. Each one has its own set of data and access rules, and you decide who to share your data with using Solid’s authentication and authorization systems. And, you can also remove access to anyone at any time.

Inrupt was introduced back in November 2020, and the Solid technology is already being used by some large companies like the BBC and the National Health Service (NHS) in Britain.

The company’s business model is based on charging licensing fees for its commercial software, which uses Solid open-source technology. According to The New York Times, Inrupt has raised about $20 million in venture funding.

Getting data back into a user’s hands is very good. But, is it something that will quickly be adopted by everyone, including the tech giants?

Well, users will finally gain control of how they share their data. According to Berners-Lee, Solid will provide a “generic back-end store that works with all apps without modification.” This means developers don’t have to worry about creating back-ends for different apps.

And companies, what will they get out of it? According to Inrupt CEO & Co-founder John Bruce, over the years, he found that a lot of companies were “spending a great deal of time and money collecting and protecting user data.” So, “by moving the point of control of data from the organization to the user everybody wants.” (i.e. money is saved)

“This is just the beginning of how we turn the red web right side up, restore some of its original values, like how we empower everyone to participate in and benefit from a web that serves us all,” said the internet inventor. “The future of the web is a lot bigger than its past.”

Continue Reading

Tech News

This web extension protects your sensitive information while screensharing

(TECH NEWS) If you’ve ever had to share your screen, you know that sometimes, your sensitive information still slips. But this extension helps by blurring your info for you.

Published

on

Online presenter gesturing at a large Mac desktop computer, being cautious of their sensitive information.

In the time of video calls, video gatherings, and video everything, at one point or another, we will eventually need to share our screen and/or record video. When it’s time to present, there is one thing we don’t want to display to others — sensitive information.

While we can all take a good deal of precautions to make sure we don’t overshare, there is no guarantee we won’t miss something. After all, we’re human. The good thing about these modern times is that there is always someone trying to think of how to make our first world video problems go away.

Sanskar Tiwari, a software developer and educator at YouTube, found it time-consuming having to edit videos to blur over things such as API keys, account emails, passwords, etc. Plus, having to wait for videos to render made the process even longer.

To solve his problem, he created a new web extension named Blurweb. According to the website, the extension helps “people doing live screen sharing or recording video to make sure their sensitive information is secure.”

The extension does this by giving you the option to blur out things like inputs, links, email addresses, and images.

So, how does it work?

  1. Once you have the extension, you can go on any webpage and turn it on by clicking on the extension icon.
  2. When the extension is on, a tab with a Turn Off/On, Clear All, and Close option tab pops up.
  3. With the extension on, you can select any element on the page, and the tool will automatically blur it out.
  4. Once the sensitive information you want saved is blurred, you can record or share your screen without having to worry that you’re accidently displaying that information.

If you want to remove the “blur” from your elements, you can select “Clear All” and everything will go back to normal. You can also quickly toggle the tool on and off and close it once you’re finished.

Since Blurweb.app runs as an extension on the web browser, it can work on any website and even works offline. If you’d like to check it out, you preview it on their website here.

Continue Reading

Tech News

Star Citizen: A cautionary tale of Kickstarter and crowdfunding

(TECH NEWS) Why is the most funded game in history still in development and has no clear release date? Why crowdfunding as a concept cannot be seen as reliable from a backer’s perspective.

Published

on

Magnifying glass over Kickstarter URL and site, a crowdfunding website.

Kickstarter – at its core – is a brilliant idea (and I wish I’d thought of it first). Creating a funding platform to literally allow anyone to bring an idea to fruition by asking for – essentially – seed capital and investors en masse via crowdfunding is truly appealing in every sense of the word. Originally a stronghold of new inventions, gadgets, and apparel, it quickly spread into the entertainment industry as well, with hobbyist game developers, auteur filmmakers, and first time writers given the chance to use crowdfunding to breathe life into their creations.

Star Citizen first appeared on the Kickstarter platform way back in 2012 and was hailed as the next great space simulation game. The campaign was started by Chris Roberts – one of the grand masters of the genre – who created the legendary Wing Commander series while working at Origin Systems. While these might be unfamiliar to non-gamers, anyone who played computer and console games in the 80s and 90s would recognize each name as a juggernaut of the industry.

Without going into specifics, this is the equivalent of Steven Spielberg asking for money to make Montana Miles, a new franchise centered around an ace paleontologist and all around tough guy roughneck adventurer who maybe had a run in or two with certain historical societies while pursuing artifacts from an ancient and forgotten world.

Ol’ Steve is definitely gonna get backers. To really set this up, imagine he asked for money in the late 80s. That’s the kind of perfect storm situation we’d have here.

Star Citizen managed to bring in over $2.1 million from nearly 35,000 backers at its inception, and the fervor and excitement was high. This was due to the pedigree of those involved in the project and the fact that a massive space sim had not seen release in several years (the video game industry – like many others – goes through cycles, with certain properties and genres fading into and out of popularity). Fans eagerly donated, and it reached its original $500K goal quickly, with 9 people contributing $10,000 each and another 19 pledging $5,000.

Since then, additional crowdfunding was conducted by giving fans the option to buy ships and other digital goods to be used in-game, bringing the total to $339 million in the past 10 years (accounting for pre-production and other planning that was done prior to the Kickstarter campaign).

Backing up for a second, consider that I just said 10 years. Which doesn’t sound too bad until you consider that the game is still not out and has no projected release date. If you go to their website, you can be directed to their Pledge Store to purchase ships and other items for a game that isn’t even done, and last released new public material way back in 2015. A side project meant to appease and entice backers – Squadron 42 – just announced its own delay.

And the developers have more or less given no reassurance or updated timelines. The prevailing theory is that this is the result of feature creep, but even this has sparked a number of heated discussions and angry denial from the developers.

Understandably, gamers are angry, and are (perhaps justifiably) lashing out (I won’t link to Reddit or any other forums, but it’s easy to sniff these out). There’s even a (hilarious) Imgur repository of broken promises and failed deliverables against a backdrop of developer feel-good rhetoric. At least one lawsuit has been filed.

Let me take a moment here to say that the gaming industry is no stranger to delays, and has also seen games be released in broken states. The biggest recent example is Sony pulling Cyberpunk 2077 from its digital storefront and offering refunds. Cyberpunk 2077 is the biggest and most anticipated game at the moment, but has been delayed countless times, suffered numerous glitches, crashes, is otherwise unplayable on console platforms (both the Playstation 4 and Xbox One), and been called a disaster.

Let’s not even go into talking about the legacy of delayed games, which stretches from Daikatana, Duke Nukem Forever, No Man’s Sky (though it should be noted that Hello Games has worked tirelessly to rectify the game’s original dismal state against its many, many promises)… The list goes on.

But we’re getting a little off course here by looking at traditionally funded games (even if there are dozens of problems there too). In terms of pure Kickstarter-funded debacles? There’s lots of examples, including DoubleFine’s Broken Age (famous for being the first major game to be crowdfunded and a story in and of itself), SpaceVenture (now over seven years late), and whatever it was that Yogscast game was trying to do (relevant because this was one of the biggest Youtube groups at the time). What about when backers paid for the Oculus Rift, only to have it purchased
outright by Facebook before it was even released to backers?

There’s too many fascinating and infuriating rabbit holes to go through.

So let’s talk about Kickstarter directly for a bit, because if we’re going to play the blame game (hah!), then we certainly need to consider their participation. As it stands, Kickstarter continues to operate with almost no oversight, and has remained a silent and invisible actor throughout these failures. In effect, they are a neutral third party.

Even worse, Kickstarter themselves say that a creator is under zero obligation to complete their project, and relies heavily on the fact that each and every crowdfunding campaign functions in a benefit of the doubt construct. If a creator reaches funding and is never heard from again, Kickstarter maintains that not only will they not pursue any kind of legal action, but doubles down on blaming the investing audience by stating that they knew the risks upfront. Put bluntly: Kickstarter has a very convenient excuse that “art works by different rules.”

In almost all instances, this has resulted in incomplete and abandoned projects, often fueled by lies, deception, and fraud. And yet, Kickstarter has dodged any and all liability, and it’s unlikely that backers can easily exercise any kind of legal action. A similar situation would be taking a contractor to court over an unfinished job, but having no way to actually enforce restitution even under a favorable judgement.

This doesn’t even take into account that there’s a chance of a rogue backer voicing so much dissatisfaction that they sue a company into bankruptcy. Sure, this sounds like reasonable punishment, is entirely legal, and conceivably is well within the rights of that person. But even so, does the blame lie with an inexperienced creator, impossibly high standards set by a (debatably unreasonable) customer, or with Kickstarter being an enabler?

The lofty goals of Kickstarter set against this backdrop of numerous pitfalls suddenly tarnishes its efficacy and integrity, exacerbated by a laundry list of what ifs and potentialities. There’s simply too many legal issues to navigate when it comes to crowdfunding.

I’m not even going to start going into more examples of failed Kickstarter projects, outright scams, and other clear cut bits of fraud and swindling.

Real quick, I want to mention a few other things – similar crowdfunding platforms such as Indiegogo have the same issues, GoFundMe is not without its own controversies, and Valve’s digital marketplace Steam gives developers the same loophole via its Early Access program by allowing them to keep a game in a forever-limbo state.

So I guess the lesson here is that all of these crowdfunding platforms should be treated with a similar attitude you might have when playing the lottery. At the least, try to vet the creator beforehand, as there are certainly viable companies that have run successful campaigns in the past. I encourage you to read user comments on a campaign’s page, research the company in question (have they put out successful products previously?), and be financially ready to lose the money you might put into a shiny new hypothetical.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Our Great Partners

The
American Genius
news neatly in your inbox

Subscribe to our mailing list for news sent straight to your email inbox.

Emerging Stories

Get The American Genius
neatly in your inbox

Subscribe to get business and tech updates, breaking stories, and more!