That is the question, I have an idea for tomorrow. But about that tomorrow. Today was a day of changes. A day of ups, downs and all around ideas. But the one stuck in my mind is not coming forth. I had been too focussed (or is that obsessed) with the implementations in a place like Eaton Mall (Toronto). And that was not all. You see, in spacious the implementations are easy, but what in a place where space is at a premium (Harrods, London) How to get it there? There are several options, but there are two stages. The first is the augmented reality, the second is the 5G part. They are not connected as the Augmented Reality will work just as well on 4G. It is the additional parts of the 5G that are the optional challenge. At some space it is too short, not overly too short, but that many signals are what I did not completely consider. Consider a mall, where they are not set up spacious, the idea is that the idea for 6G (Yes, I am that far ahead) or optionally 5G+, but in 5G I have other concerns, they aren’t problems, they are merely concerns and they might be unfounded. Yet as we see a place like Harrods, we have similar space issues in places like Paris and Amsterdam. As such it is always good to mull technologies a dozen times over, tested in real spaces and see what problems I will be facing and check whether they are real challenges, or merely unfounded concerns. The important part is to see the difference between the two. It is clear that malls like Eaton Centre (Toronto) will not have these concerns, but a mall that wants to offer the same and it is in the compressed space of Harrods, the technology test needs to work in both. You see Harrods is comprised of 90,000 m2 selling space. In that space there are over 330 departments and every department has its own selling needs. Even as you think that this is a mere 272 square meter space, most likely in several cases less than 200 square metres. The fact is that they are one shop, but is it all you want or need? And other national malls have a similar setting The Dutch have Vroom and Dreesman, Bijenkorf, The UK has a few more. Debbenham (the ones that remain) and s such there are larger malls all over Europe that have a similar setting and I do not see it as greed to service all 118,433 malls, I merely see that they should have equal chances, even as I focus on the larger players I spoke about in earlier stories. The mall setting is much larger and there will be some filtering at some point. But I prefer that to be as late and as small as possible. You see, being first also means that others can start reengineering what I put forward and get a larger crowd. Now, I do not mind, because there are plenty of players out there more clever than me, it is the state of things and it is natural. Only the true delusional thinks that they are the absolute best. So if I can set the worry to less than 4% I would be really happy. Should one come with the 98% idea and it falls under an innovation patent than they would win. I have no issues with that. I merely want to make the playing field as small as possible for the others. It is not greed, it is to make my idea count for a longer time (as long as possible).
This is the nature of things. It is not merely to have an idea, but to test it against all odds and in all manner of ways. That is the larger stage we need to consider. Any creator of idea or invention must do so. It is not merely games, not merely hardware. It is all kinds of creation, it must always be tested. I reckon that painters and sculptors go through some similar process. In all this we are all alike, but not the same. So I reckon that we need to adhere to this stage on all matters.
If only to properly critically test the ideas we have. I have gone through this a dozen times, and a dozen times for every idea I created. This is essential, as an idea needs to survive the initial scrutiny. The buyer will always find something and it is important to see the larger stage of what they see and how it affects them. As such the consideration of Harrods becomes important. It is fine to see regent street, to see Yorkville, 5th avenue (New York), Kalverstraat (Amsterdam) and we can go on from there. You see, a good idea stays a good idea, but it all comes down to the value. And properly and critically considering your idea is the difference between a $250,000 payday and a $25,000,000 pay day and that difference can be that large and we all want the larger amount. Not because we are greedy, but because if we can get the larger payment, it shows that our idea was structurally sound. And from that sound setting more will come through, the buyer will see that part and here we see that players like Google and Amazon are really well versed in testing structurally sound settings. Sony people there have been doing it for a decade and there is a business sense. If they can find 5-8 issues that aren’t covered you end up going towards the 250,000 payday a lot faster than you think. The more artistic it is inclined, the more degrees of freedom you have, as such you have some with games, but you still need to have your ducks (geese too) on a row. Because when they designate you as the goose it will not be about running, but being able to stand your ground. And we all see that setting and some (business types) will hide behind a created catchword, a hype setting or a ‘cool’ claim, but in this games are a lot harder to stage when you are in the setting of ‘Business Intelligence’ trained people who do not understand the overlap of technology and art. They weren’t around in the early years and as such the CBM-64, the Atari ST and the CBM Amiga were able to launch hundreds of games and some made it, now it gets ‘tested’ and too many do not make it, whether they call it GamePass, or make some other claim. I reckon that plenty of these games would not survive the scrutiny of a GamePass environment and that is the problem. You see, the Wii Galaxy might have been a failure but it resulted towards the Nintendo Switch which was a homerun and then some. If you are not willing to lose, you will never win big. That is not my philosophy, it is a setting that has been tested over time and it relates to that weird Sun Tzu notion of “The supreme art of profit is to gain profit without cost” the most ridiculous of settings that might have the smallest notion in some fields, but not in gaming and not in innovation. Innovation is all risk, massive cost and a whole lot of sweat. But the winner gets to be alone at the top for decades and that makes it worth it all. Nintendo has gone that route more than once, as did Sony. Perhaps Microsoft started that way, but it was glazed over by wannabe’s and not by visionaries. Apple is also an innovator. Their Air products (Mac books and iPads) show that and the Surface has no option but to see the gap against Apple increase. Yet here too there is a danger, their successes are only as good as the current product. Google has a winner with the Pixel 6, will they with the Pixel 7? No one knows because the competition is fierce (Apple and Samsung). In this day and age it will be the economic affordable one will win, yet no one knows at present where the Tesla Pi will end. E will not know for 12 month and that is the larger setting. You see it will arrive AFTER Pixel 7 and whatever Apple will offer. So Tesla will have an advantage, but how much? It will be anyones guess and I cannot say what it will be. I reckon that with the exception of the inner core of the Tesla Pi team and Musk himself no one can. That is how it is and anyone making another claim is lying to you. Yet these people matter, they too test all what is out there and all that can be set against them, that is the market and there we see that the slogan “The supreme art of profit is to gain profit without cost” is a freaking joke. And if we see that, we see how short sighted the steps of Ubisoft (and some others) have been over the last 5-10 years.
All this needs to be set in focus, in focus of what you design and what field you are designing in. I am delusional enough to go ‘nah nah nah nah nah’ against players like DARPA, but that is me, always happy to take the slack side. Because those who dare can optionally end up with a little more information than they had before. Optionally enough to see whether they stand a chance and that is also how the game could be played. Not the path of Thomas Cranmer as some like to play it, some are willing to take a page from one of the jesters that Francesco Dandolo had. They were good at jokes and they had specific skills too, skills that Francesco Dandolo made good use of. And there lies the rub. Where diplomacy is used to gain Business intelligence is a path, but a dangerous one. Verification is often near impossible, so people do not go there, but that does not mean that the path is out of bounds. Consider the people who rely on what their bosses told them “Fake it until you make it” It is all good until someone sees through that. And I personally believe that Sony and Nintendo saw through Microsoft and the gains their Xbox360 made we lost overnight when Don Mattrick stated “we have a product for people who can’t get online, it’s called Xbox 360” and within 24 hours the Xbox One was destroyed, as I personally see it, simple shortsighted greed of Microsoft and they are still suffering, their mistake was that big. And they made a few more since then.
So when I created the solution that could sell well over 50 million consoles I was making sure that Microsoft was not ever part of that deal, they screwed up enough and to be honest, when it comes to the choice of $250,000 and $25,000,000 I chose the larger amount. It is not greed, merely common sense. And I approached that same principle on the 5G and AR solutions I created. A setting that did not require some form of alien technology, it merely required common sense and critical thinking. I tend to live by “via ad sapientiam requirit scientiam” which does not help us in this case, so I might have to alter it into “via ad sapientiam requirit cognitionem et criticam cogitationem” (the path to wisdom requires knowledge and critical thinking) critical thinking makes all the difference and I see that, I saw that, but I like many others ignored it for a little too long. I still have time, but I also see that the ideas when not critically looked at will have the day one flaws we all would prefer to avoid.
And that is where to now becomes a stage by itself. Through critical thinking and through analysing what was overlooked, because only the delusional overlook nothing. We can merely hope to avoid most traps, we hope to avoid all traps but that is only possible in 1 out of 2500 cases and those numbers are not betting odds, only the fakers think they can avoid wrecks they create at that point.
Have a lovely day!
Lawrence van Rijn - Law Lord to be 