Everyone focuses on how scamming and AI is evolving. I'm rather curious how this will affect marketing.
Celebrity endorsements is useful for building trust. I wonder if we see more or less of that in the future.
Are celebrity endorsements actually useful for building trust? Usually i view them in a negative light, thinking that they just paid someone to promote the product, rather that a genuine and organic endorsement.
> Are celebrity endorsements actually useful for building trust?
I can't imagine this is highly controversial. Of course celebrity endorsements can be useful for building trust. This is supported observationally and by years of research in marketing psychology. It's not even necessarily limited to megastars : even endorsements from niche influencers and small-fish content creators can be marketing goldmines, nevermind the kind of overnight headwinds your product can get if someone with the reach of Oprah, Rogan, Musk et al starts pushing it.
Personally, I don't know specifically about building trust, but your average person seems to be more likely to buy a product if a celebrity they like is endorsing it. At the very least, a lot more people are going to /hear/ about whatever product some celebrity is endorsing.
That's fair. I just don't get it. It's obvious to me that it's paid for and my assumption is that the person probably hasn't even used the product. So for me, yeah it doesn't work. But you're right, there's a reason these celebs keep getting insane payments for these ads.
I wonder if the rise of deepfakes will finally be the moment that gives us all sufficient incentive to adopt a real, cross-platform authentication infrastructure of some sort (public key auth, etc). There's real value in, say, the NYT being able to authenticate that a reporter's social media presence is legit, and for that reporter to be able to sign and take responsibility for their photographs. Or using your example, some sports star authenticating an ad featuring them. Unsigned media would be considered suspect. This could all be surfaced in a digestible way to users, like we have done with the HTTPS lock icon. Dunno. Probably not, but maybe.
You have to look at the incentives versus counter incentives.
Who is going to be in control of this authentication infrastructure? Private companies? Where do they get the information that is trusted? Other private companies? Governments? Why won't these social media companies try to make their own private infrastructure so they can remain in control rather than potentially allow people to leave to other platforms? How will revocation work? Will the browser have to implement support?
Also: How long before authoritarians demand we sign our stuff?
There's a bunch of different PKI-style schemes, most of which don't require trusting a single central authority. I thought KeyBase's approach struck a good balance between authentication strength & ease of use, maybe something like that could be a good fit.
The incentive would be for online platforms, especially social media, to remain a place people want to be and can have some measure of trust in, rather than be overrun by deepfake-style content.
The irony is that he did use social norms as an example that will never change. However, if we change the example to something that will _really_ never change, it's still quite accurate:
(wo)men will always need hats in cold weather.
I still haven’t purchased Dropbox. When the choice came up, it seemed important for our backups not to be made in USA.
So, indeed, a very cool replacement was SSH.
I still don’t know anyone who didn’t leave Dropbox after they jacked up the prices. A USB key is much cheaper (and reliable, at the rate at which Dropbox nukes accounts that they deem not compliant with whatever policy).
Most people I know just went with their cloud provider's sync solution once everyone added one (GDrive, iCloud, Amazon photos, OneDrive, Creative Cloud, etc.)
Can't remember the last time I saw a USB key in use anymore.
The cloud stuff is convenient, but it quickly became a commoditu
Dropbox is still better in some small ways (like delta syncs) but it wasn't enough I guess.
True! It's still a useful product, but the pressure to keep getting huge-r is always there I guess. I knew someone who worked there and they seemed pretty desperate for new initiatives (like the failed Paper). Most of their competitors have online storage as part of their product portfolio. I don't know of anything else major that Dropbox does...
Not OP but I think this mainly due to the newly supported cross platform fediverse profile capability. From the article:
"Your WordPress blog can now become a profile for the fediverse. This means your readers can follow you and receive all the latest posts from your blog directly on their preferred platform. More so, they can engage in enriching conversations by replying to your posts, with their replies reflecting as comments on your blog post, creating a synchronized and interactive experience."
Hi, I'm Charles and leading the engineering work on Twenty!
We've made the bet to invest on a tailored design for our components. Using an existing UI library is a strength to use robust components and move faster, but I've always struggled to customize it.
There is always a point where you want something custom that is not supported by the library and you start hacking into it.
On previous projects, I've almost always used existing UI libraries.
For Twenty, this is a long term project and the initial burden of creating UI components vs customizing existing ones will be marginal on the long run.
IMO, if you have strong design requirement (and you have enough resources ofc), don't go with UI librairies ; I take as much inspiration as I can from them, I may fork one but I would not hack their API
Agree, it feels like the right decision as well. The grid felt a little bit like shadcn hence I asked.
Using external libraries gives some early velocity, but most of the good looking libraries are incomplete and most of the complete ones are boring (material / bootstrap)
We want our design to match exactly Figma. Shadcn could have been an option because their approach is to have users copy/paste the code, so it could have worked. But copying styles from Figma isn't much more work, it wasn't painful
Some would say it's even a 27.3‰ increase, but I think that's a lie.