As I get older, time seems to move faster ... but it's also true that as I get older, more is accomplished every minute.
Technology is a powerful force function. In fact, the amount of data in the digital universe effectively doubles every two years.
Every couple of years, I revisit a chart about how much data is generated every minute on the internet.
In reverse chronological order, here's 2018, 2015, and 2011.
Here's an excerpt from 2015 for some perspective:
Compared to 2008 here is what's happened with social networks:
- The number of people online has more than doubled from 1.4 billion to over 3 billion (2021 #: 5.2 billion)
- Facebook has gone from 80 million users to more than 1.4 billion (2021 #: 2.89 billion
- Twitter had 2 million accounts and now it is 300 million and counting. (2021 #: 206 million ACTIVE users after a big bot deletion)
- The number of smartphones was 250 million in 2008 and today there are more than 2 billion. That is an 800% increase! (2021 #: 6.37 billion)
Today this is what happens every minute on the web.
- 4 million search queries on Google
- Facebook users share 2.46 million pieces of content
- Email users send 204 million messages
Throughout its (pretty short) history, the internet has been arguably the most important battlefield for relevancy and innovation.
So, what does the internet look like in 2021?
DOMO via visualcapitalist
Looking at the list, we see new editions like Clubhouse and Strava. Partially due to the quarantine, you're still seeing an increase in digital cash transfers with tools like Venmo, an increase in e-commerce shops like Shopify, and an increase in (you guessed it) collaboration tools like Zoom or Microsoft Teams.
Just to pick out some of the key figures in the chart this year.
- Amazon users spend $283,000
- 6M people shop online
- TikTok users watch 167M videos
- and, Zoom hosts 856 minutes of webinars.
Before 2020, I already thought that big tech had a massive influence on our lives. Yet, somehow this past year has pushed their impact even higher.
One other thing this chart also helps put into perspective is the rapid rate of adoption. As you look at different year's charts, you can see how quickly apps have become part of the cultural zeitgeist.
How do you think these numbers will grow or change in 2022?
Bruce Willis Deepfake: The Smart Decision?
Bruce Willis is a legend of cinema, and he made many of my favorite movies of the 80s and 90s. He stayed relevant and exciting up until very recently.
Then, last year, he started releasing a slew of disappointing "straight-to-DVD" style movies that had him receiving his own award show category in the Razzies (an award show for the worst performances of the year). In 2021, they created the category "worst performance by Bruce Willis in a 2021 movie."
Vulture did an interesting interview with the founders of the Razzies where Bruce Willis comes up.
Then, it came out that Bruce Willis was diagnosed with Aphasia and was losing his ability to speak.
Suddenly, these pieces take on new meaning. They're Bruce getting as much work in as he can before he loses his voice permanently. He's trying to do what he knows how to do to make sure his wife and children are taken care of after he can no longer act.
It doesn't make the movies suddenly "great" but it was enough to get the Razzies to rescind their award.
I don't believe these last films of his dampen his well-earned legacy.
Last year, his digital twin showed up in a Russian telecom ad.
Recently, he's been in the news again for having sold his likeness to a deepfake company. It was reported on the company's website and by The Telegraph, but there are now claims to the contrary as well.
While the jury is still out on if his rights have been sold, I think it's likely you'll see more Bruce Willis deepfake content.
The question becomes, is it the right decision?
If his estate still has final approval - and there is quality control - then what's the harm?
Does the potential ubiquity, or the idea that we can always have another Bruce Willis movie, reduce the value of his movies?
Does allowing deepfakes in cinema (on TV or in film) take away roles from actors who might become stars?
We've already seen actors use deepfakes to reprise a role they did when they were younger - like Luke Skywalker or Leia from Star Wars. It's a different idea to build a new series around an actor who isn't actually acting in it.
These questions pair well with the discussion around AI-generated art and whether it should be considered art.
What do you think?
Posted at 08:49 PM in Business, Current Affairs, Film, Gadgets, Ideas, Just for Fun, Market Commentary, Movies, Science, Television | Permalink | Comments (0)
Reblog (0)