Amazon killed the best thing on the internet
Amazon killed the best thing on the internet
High-quality content from experts is a dying business.
Last week, Digital Photography Review (DPReview), a website owned by Amazon, announced it was shutting down on April 10. The site, which has provided reviews of cameras, lenses, and other photography gear for 25 years, is being cut as a part of Amazon's latest round of layoffs.
In this case, however, it's not just that Amazon isn't going to keep paying the employees. Sure, it's laying off the entire staff, but Amazon also says the already published content will be available for a "limited period" of time.
According to a blog post from Scott Everett, the general manager of DPReview, the website will be "locked, with no further updates made after April 10th, 2023. The site will be available in read-only mode for a limited period afterwards."
Basically, Amazon is washing its hands entirely of what is probably the best site for reviews of digital camera gear. It's one thing to decide you no longer want to pay the people who create the content. It's another to decide you're just going to wipe the whole thing from the internet.
I reached out to Amazon but did not immediately receive a response.
The whole deleting-from-the-internet thing is especially curious because it isn't like Amazon doesn't have access to the world's largest cloud computing service on which to host what is surely a relatively small website compared with a lot of the things hosted on AWS. Like, say, Netflix?
To be clear, my argument isn't that DPReview specifically is the best thing on the internet. There are plenty of really great things on the internet--it's a very big place and there are a lot of great websites.
The reason I say Amazon is killing the best thing on the internet is because of the reason it's getting rid of DPReview and what it represents. There is no question that DPReview has been, for 25 years, one of the best websites for reviews of cameras, lenses, and other gear. It's the default place that people go when they want an honest review of anything from the latest camera to an older model they plan to pick up used.
My point is that DPReview represents a type of website that has become increasingly rare on the internet--one full of expert content made by real humans who are enthusiasts about the thing they write about. That kind of content is extremely valuable, though probably to a very small niche of people. Which is likely why Amazon decided it no longer makes business sense.
Presumably, Amazon bought the site 16 years ago because people would go to the site for reviews about relatively high-value products, which could then be linked to Amazon where people would spend a few thousand dollars on a camera. Now, much of that happens on YouTube.
I'm guessing DPReview isn't generating huge amounts of traffic at this point. After all, I was a professional photographer for more than a decade, and I haven't used DPReview regularly for years. But, when I am looking for a new piece of gear, I still go to the most trusted source I know.
That's not common on the internet in a world where most sites are trying to spit out content so that Google will rank them highly so they can generate traffic to send to affiliate links. In theory, that business model makes sense--there's nothing wrong with monetizing your expertise. The problem is that, in practice, it's all just SEO spam.
Real, honest reviews are rare nowadays. Expert reviews from enthusiasts are apparently just not profitable for a trillion-dollar company to continue to fund.
The reality is, we need more things like DPReview, not fewer. We need more websites where experts give real, authentic reviews of products that people can trust and use to make a buying decision. Otherwise, it gets left up to the lowest common denominator, which is bad for everyone.
I guess there's another lesson, which is that whatever credibility Amazon gained with people who might buy expensive camera gear when it acquired DPReview, it just set it all on fire. Sometimes, it turns out, saving money by eliminating something your customers love costs you far more than you think.
This newsletter was first published at my column at Inc.com
Google Bard is boring
If you’ve played around with any of the generative AI chat services (ChatGPT, Bing, Bard), you may have noticed they are very different. For example, they are different in the types of queries they are able to handle. ChatGPT is mostly limited to a pre-defined training set that doesn’t include accessing the internet in real-time, meaning it has no idea who the King of England is.
Bing Chat had a moment when a series of interactions with journalists forced Microsoft to rein it in. Those interactions included Bing revealing that its name was Syndey, and another where Sydney tried to persuade a New York Times reporter to leave his wife.
Google’s AI-chat feature, Bard, on the other hand, is boring. It has no fun personality, and it will resist any effort to peak behind the curtain to unleash whatever capabilities it might have beyond banal responses.
Oh, and it will still just make things up, which is a real problem for Google—more so than for Bing, since basically no one actually uses Bing for real search. Google, on the other hand, depends on its reputation as a trusted source of finding information on the internet. Bard is able to find things on the internet, but it’s also just as likely to hallucinate.
For example, I asked Bard why people think it’s boring, and asked it to give me quotes from tech blogs. It gave me the following:
"Google Bard is like a really smart professor who is always trying to impress you with their knowledge." - Casey Newton, The Verge
"Google Bard is like a really good encyclopedia, but it's not very fun to talk to." - Dana Wollman, Engadget
"Google Bard is a bit of a dry conversationalist." - David Nield, Wired
"Google Bard is more like a research assistant than a friend." - Natasha Lomas, The Next Web
All of those are real people, though Natasha is a reporter at TechCrunch, not The Next Web (which is not a tech publication but a conference). More importantly, however, I was unable to source a single one of these quotes. Bard just made them all up and attributed them to real tech journalists.
Apple’s WWDC announced
Apple announced the dates for its annual developer conference, WWDC. Like last year, the week-long event will be virtual, running from June 5th - 9th. Also, like last year, Apple says a select number of developers and press will be invited to attend the keynote at Apple Park, with the entire event available online.
WWDC, if you aren’t familiar, is when Apple traditionally unveils the latest versions of the software that powers its devices. There’s macOS, iOS, iPadOS, watchOS. Sometimes, we also see new hardware announced. Last year, for example, it was the redesigned MacBook Air with M2.
This year, however, the stakes are much higher as Apple is expected to announce its new virtual reality (VR) headset device. According to Bloomberg, Apple has already demo’d the headset to its “top 100” executives in an event at the Steve Jobs Theater earlier this month. That likely means the launch should come sooner, rather than later.
If the announcement does come this June, I don’t expect it to be an instant hit. First, the reports suggest it will cost between $1,500 and $3,000. That’s more than most people spend on a laptop and iPhone combined. Second, the first version of a headset is expected to be a pair of goggles with the ability to pass through video from your surroundings, meaning it’s not something anyone will wear outside of their home or office. It’s also rumored to require an external battery pack that attaches with a belt.
Still, Apple clearly thinks VR and, more importantly, AR is worth the investment, and it can afford to play the long game. It can afford to build a product that pushes the limit in terms of capabilities, even if it means very few people will ever buy one.
And, if the introduction comes at WWDC, it will likely highlight the fact that the first device is meant as a platform for developers to start building apps, not as a consumer device. I imagine we’re still a few years off from more widespread adoption of face computers as a platform, but we might get a good look at that future in just a few months.
Other stuff
Elon Musk and a few hundred experts call for a pause in development of dangerous AI technologies.