�ݺ�ߣ

Editor's Notes

• #2: \n
• #3: let me start by proposing why you shouldn’t listen to me about this\n\nhttp://www.flickr.com/photos/f-r-a-n-k/3076017847\n
• #4: I’m not Umair\nUmair writes for HBR about new economies\n
• #5: I’m not Rushkoff\nauthor has been considering major cultural shifts for years\n
• #6: this is a test – I haven’t done this before\nyou are guinea pigs – ran through once 15 min\nnot here to give you packaged advice – but question assumptions\nlet’s start a conversation\n\nhttp://www.flickr.com/photos/mjjames/2767816850/\n
• #7: but let me explain why you should let me start\n(and 50 pictures to go)\n\nhttp://www.colectiva.tv/wordpress/lang/en-us/aparatos-auditivos-de-guerraacoustic-listening-devices/\n
• #8: I work for frog\nwe have a studio just down the street\nwe’re hard to define but let me try\n\n
• #9: we have a long history developing products\n1980s: everything got vented, mice got shapely, our bad.\napple, sony, sun sparcstation, next\n\nhttp://www.flickr.com/photos/frogdesign/4188877150\n
• #10: we’ve grown up since then\n2000 frogs\n(yes, we call ourselves that)\n
• #11: we still design objects\n(you can see these at the stadiums)\nbut products are integrated\n
• #12: so now we have to consider much more:\nthe business ecosystems our clients live in,\nwhat it’s possible to build, technically and organizationally\nconsumer behavior and preferences\n(I shifted focus from technology to strategy)\n\n
• #13: which means we’re applied futurists\nI use three forces\neconomy is a gamble\ntechnology is easy\nculture is interesting\n\n
• #14: the future can go many ways\nthe edges may not merit preparing\nbut considering them is important for defining problem space\n\n
• #15: Ultimate utopia.\nAI smarter than us, takes care of us\nor maybe nanotechnology and synthetic biology empower us to do anything\ncool, let’s go home!\n(sorry, Paul Allen just put a big wet blanket over this)\n
• #16: Jared Diamond has studied the history of fallen civilizations\nthere are a lot of parallels with our own\nlet’s give up and stock our bunkers\nthose are very extreme edges\nlet’s find something more mundane`\n
• #17: Michael Eysenck says we are on a treadmill\nwe will keep working and buying to maintain a hedonistic setpoint\n\n\n
• #18: one need that drives us is showing off\nit was once war paint or trophies or symbols of piety or loyalty\n\nhttp://www.flickr.com/photos/hypergenesb/1135545/\n
• #19: this behavior is so engrained economists forgot to think about it until 100 years ago\nfirst crack in rational agents\nwearing nice suits but forgetting why\n\nhttp://www.flickr.com/photos/mk1971/2110205333/\n
• #20: at present mainstream consumers make conspicuous purchasing decisions based on wealth display\nthis is what I mean by “opulence”\nconspicuousness is human nature, but will it always be display of wealth?\n\n\nhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Mcmansion_under_construction.jpg\n
• #21: but we don’t have to use display of wealth for these ends\nwhy might opulence end?\nenvironment, economy, culture\n\nhttp://www.flickr.com/photos/thenovys/3825908169/\n
• #22: technology doesn’t want to go backwards, but the world might\n
• #23: we could run out of oil, or coal (or at least not keep up)\nlittle things: peak helium\n\nhttp://www.flickr.com/photos/azrainman/991225765/\n
• #24: we know our climate is changing\nmaybe weather starts disrupting us\ninterfere with business-as-usual or destroy what we’ve built\n
• #25: governments may impose constraints, as california is enacting carbon controls\n\nhttp://www.flickr.com/photos/9067772@N07/567465036/\n
• #26: which segues to economic forces, changes in the flow of money\n\nhttp://www.flickr.com/photos/benelsen/4269214255/\n
• #27: some believe the growth we’ve experienced since WWII is built on ponzi schemes\nconservative: social security, debt, entitlements will end\nliberal: land use policies, corporate subsidies will end\neither way, disruptive, maybe a “hiccup” in spending power\n\nhttp://www.flickr.com/photos/r80o/62199526/\n
• #28: just hit 7 billion people worldwide\nbut developed nations have a baby shortage\nfewer young people to work, less growth will slow spending\n\n(kid with beer is doc searls of “cluetrain manifesto”)\n\nhttp://www.flickr.com/photos/docsearls/426419336/\n
• #29: it’s become fashionable lately to decry a lack of innovation in the US\n(hey!)\nthe creative class has been relatively stable, but there are concerns that might not last\n\nhttp://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/Apollo_11\n
• #30: news: P&G is taking the advice of citigroup.\n“consumer hourglass theory” predicts reduction of middle class\n
• #31: opulence has been around for a long time\nbut people are fickle\n
• #32: biggest effects in food choices (and rise of vegetarianism)\nbut all sectors are seeing gradual increases attention to sustainable products\n
• #33: we’re urbanizing, and have more social encounters\nsocial interaction is a reward of it’s own and reduces some opulence drivers\nalso makes culture even more quick to change\n(so does the Internet)\n\nhttp://www.flickr.com/photos/sea-turtle/2318227177/\n
• #34: occupy movement is hard to pin down, but it is consistent in decrying wealth\nwhat if the 99% stop wanting to look like the 1%?\n(almost titled this “design for the 99”)\n
• #35: Steampunk isn’t “just” fashion, it’s hacking\nMaker faires and craft shows and etsy\nRecently the Critical Engineering Manifesto has called for hackable products (DCMA backlash getting real)\n\nhttp://www.flickr.com/photos/topgold/3992836156/\n
• #36: what’s next?\nnot squalor\n\nhttp://blog.mybeautifuladventures.com/2009/09/22/south-africa-day-11-s.aspx\n
• #37: some good news for a lot of you\nbrands are display, will always matter as shortcuts for identity\n(branding is orthogonal to opulence, specific brands aren’t)\n
• #38: many of the environmental disruptions could be addressed with a shift to digital opulence\nwe can flaunt experiences that indicate wealth\n[who checks into airports?]\n\nhttp://www.mobilebehavior.com/2010/07/29/perspective-carnegie-mellons-jesse-schell-on-mobile-and-the-art-of-game-design/\n\n
• #39: or we can be more direct\nvirtual shoes are not made in sweatshops\n(no, redmond doesn’t count)\n
• #40: and of course a cultural shift toward social wealth can be reflected in digital opulence\n[who has a sense of their klout score?]\n
• #41: (first vocabulary word)\nmore nobly, we could shift to eudemonia\nAristotle saw not just hedonism but this pleasure of striving. trying, creating, winning as in sport and art\n\nhttp://www.britannica.com/bps/media-view/97560/1/0/0\n
• #42: going completely virtual sounds good.\nso does finding happiness without consumption.\nbut let’s talk about realistic ways business can react\n
• #43: dematerialization is getting a lot of attention in sustainability initiatives, e.g. reducing paper consumption\nbut we can also reduce status symbols. frog’s open floorplan means less office space, waste, I don’t need to buy fancy furniture to make my office lush\n\nhttp://www.flickr.com/photos/mcfarlandmo/3274597033/\n
• #44: (another vocabulary word)\nwe can virtualize our products. buckminster fuller called this ephemeralization, and the iPhone is a killer example.\nmany fancy gadgets are now just apps (not very opulent, unless you count “i am rich”)\nI don’t know how sharper image survives\n
• #45: but we’ll always sell real objects, so how will that change if wealth-conspicuous consumption wanes?\n
• #46: it’s a given that ID has a lot to do with lowering our footprint\nI stole this slide from hartmut esslinger, who points out it’s broader than we think\n\n
• #47: sustainable materials are a part of that\nbut what jony ive is doing is deeper\nmaking sexy accessible - are macbooks a status symbol anymore?\n\n
• #48: this is affordable housing in hollywood. it was built cheaply, but doesn’t look institutional\nthis surprises everyone, because we expect the proletariat to suffer poor design\n\nhttp://www.theatlanticcities.com/design/2011/10/affordable-housing-doesnt-scream-affordable/326/\n
• #49: we do a lot of digital design and interaction\nhow might these experiences change?\n
• #50: gamification is tired, but harmless\nat it’s best, it’s eudemonia\nif you’re a game wonk, now you have philosophy backing you\n
• #51: boasting is huge.\nI still want to brag, even if I don’t have an SUV in my driveway.\nso let me brag about what I support\n
• #52: or let me brag about what I read. even better, reading a book doesn’t have to cost me anything, but I can still use it as a status symbol with goodreads\n
• #53: and, of course let me create something and share it.\nthis is best of both worlds, eudemonia and status display.\n\nhttp://reface.me/applications/21-farmville-art-masterpieces/\n
• #54: a lot of people here are in marketing (I once was, as well) how might we adapt?\nbeware wealth display.\nunless opulence is your thing. financial wealth isn’t going away.\n
• #55: but if social wealth rises, then brands that have the right stories will thrive.\nshannon was recently asked about her toms, and didn’t answer about cost or exclusivity (as with prada) but with the benefit to others.\n
• #56: and in this hypothetical future, using a brand to add a sheen of wealth won’t work.\nyou need to lead with product design.\nmarketing could be completely “show” and “discuss”\n
• #57: and I know this crowd is already engaged in cluetrain conversations.\nbut a benefit: highlighting what your customers are saying helps bring them pride without gold plating. resilient to post-opulence\n
• #58: \n
• #59: \n