Comment by mistersquid

Comment by mistersquid 2 hours ago

2 replies

> We don't look to Meta, who only a few years ago thought that the Metaverse would be the "next big thing" as an example of failure to identify the future, we look to IBM who made that mistake almost 30 years ago.

The grandparent points to a pattern of failures whereas you point to Meta’s big miss. What you miss about Meta, and I am no fan, is that Facebook purchased Whatsapp and Instagram.

In other words, two out of three ain’t bad; IBM is zero for three.

While that’s not the thrust of your argument, which is about jumping on the problem of jumping on every hype train, the post to which you reply is not on about hype cycle. Rather, that post calls out IBM for a failure to understand the future of technology and does so by pointing to a history of failures.

bodge5000 an hour ago

> In other words, two out of three ain’t bad; IBM is zero for three.

Many others in this thread have pointed out IBM's achievements but regardless, IBM is far from "zero for three".

  • mistersquid 8 minutes ago

    > Many others in this thread have pointed out IBM's achievements but regardless, IBM is far from "zero for three".

    I was specifically commenting in the context of this thread.* I was not trying to characterize either IBM or Meta except with reference to the arguments offered by this thread’s ancestors.

    I understood (and understand) that such scorekeeping of a company as storied as IBM is at best reductive and at worst misrepresentative.

    * Your reference to “this thread” actually addresses sibling comments to OP (ggggp), not this thread which was started by gggp.