SIGNALS

Alert readers will recall that in my previous blog I questioned whether Big Tech/Big Data had monopolistic motives. And lo and behold, last week the DOJ went full antitrust nuclear. First I inspire Superman to build a computer, and now the U.S. Government and eleven state Attorneys General filed suit against Google. Never, ever, underestimate the power of Sound & Vision magazine.

Big Tech/Big Data companies have a profound effect on global societies. They offer tremendous resources, tools, and conveniences for us; it would be difficult to imagine modern society without them. But many of the services that Big Tech/Big Data provide us come with various strings attached such as potentially reducing competition, creating monopolies, and invading privacy. Those strings might be a problem for you, or you might not care at all.

I'd love to have a beer with you and discuss all this, but let's focus on one particular issue: Big Tech/Big Data's role in audio/video innovation. My observations might surprise you.

Last time I questioned whether Big Tech/Big Data could innovate in the traditional sense. Based on my personal observations, I can attest that most of my most talented students gladly took highly-paid positions with Big Tech/Big Data companies, rather than take the risk of starting their own companies, which they certainly had the skills to do. Clearly, big companies can hire the best people, have immense resources and, without question, have developed tremendously cool things.

But here's where it starts getting tricky. The size of those companies, and the number of pies they have fingers in, can lead to problems. When Big Tech/Big Data develops a new audio/video product is it to deliver the best possible sound and picture quality at its price point, or is it to distribute as many data-harvesting machines as possible? The crucial point is that the latter is certainly more profitable to them than the former. In other words, their motives may not be as pure as audio/video purists would like.

And in its pursuit of its possibly impure goals, does Big Tech/Big Data stifle true audio/video innovation? Here is my shocking answer: We've reached a plateau of sound and picture quality. It's digital, the pipes are pretty fat, and there's no sense in adding bits for the sake of adding bits. The sound and picture quality is pretty darn good, and arguably good enough for most people. Don't get me wrong – traditional audio/video companies will continue to make excellent TVs, receivers, and loudspeakers and we welcome that. But that kind of traditional innovation mainly incrementally improves sound and picture quality. That 100-year business model isn't what will create the Next Big Thing. For that we'll need another kind of innovation – big innovation – that only big companies can undertake.

Why do I say that? Because the only kinds of innovation that will truly raise the bar will entail technology that is so sophisticated that only the biggest companies will have pockets deep enough to fund the venture and assume the risk of failure, whether for technical or marketing reasons. And the only companies big enough to undertake the next generations of innovation are the Big Tech/Big Data companies.

Look at it this way: by accepting a degree of noncompetitiveness, by agreeing to work with monopolies, by forfeiting our privacy, we are funding the next generation of audio and video excellence. My crystal ball isn't clear enough to see what the next generation will bring, but I am sure that it won't come from a guy in his garage. Rather, it will come from big office buildings filled with bright engineers – probably working for Google.

I can already hear your response: Jiminy Christmas! This nutcase wants us to accept Satan as our Lord. My response is: If we want cool new products, do we have a choice?