A few months ago, the top publishing companies with the world, like Hachette Book Group (owned by Lagardere) , Harper Collins Publishers (owned by News Corp) and Simon & Schuster (owned by CBS) took a gamble. They struck a deal with Amazon. This is where the e-book backfire begins.
They struck this deal to control their own titles, set their own prices, and avoid deep discounts Amazon usually requires. Sounds like a winner, right? Wrong! Partially because of this deal, e-book sales this year took a drastic decline. Maybe it’s because Amazon Kindle e-books from big publishers cost more than double of what other e-books cost. In some of these cases, it would be better off for customers to buy an old fashioned paper book. For example, Jonathan Franzen’s novel ‘Purity’, has a $15.10 price tag. That’s for a hardcover book. The e-book sales for $14.99, just 11 cents less. This is before the sales tax. We can thank Macmillan Publishers for this mess of a price. Last year, James Patterson’s ‘Invincible’ was sold on Amazon Kindle for $8.99. This year, thanks to this backroom deal with Amazon, James Patterson’s newest masterpiece ‘Alert’ will run you $14.99 on Amazon. Doesn’t sound much better than the paperback book, does it? Thank you, Hachette Book Group (in my sarcastic tone).
This should be a lesson to every corporation involved here: Listen to your customers! But no…because of their own greed, the major publishing companies upped the price and Amazon let them. Now everybody’s suffering. You could say, “They’re just looking out for the author/artist”. No they’re not. The author is suffering too. He’s missing out on royalties that could have been easily collected if they kept the prices lower. Consumers aren’t dumb. They know when they’re getting the run around. Today, we have more choices than ever. What’s stopping us from going to the competitor? Shouldn’t the publishing companies and Amazon have left well enough alone?
We at Computer Geeks want to wish everyone a happy and safe Labor Day.
In recent weeks, dating and social sites have made news for all the wrong reasons, from Ashley Madison’s hacking to the Tinder vs Vanity Fair rivalry. Two New Jersey residents strive to change the online dating culture.
Their names are Julie Surrey and Gary Spivek. They founded dating website FidelityDating.com. It’s the anti-Ashley Madison site. The Ashley Madison site says, “Life is short, have an affair”. Fidelity Dating’s site motto is, “Love is precious. Stay faithful”. Fidelity Dating is geared toward people who have been victims of infidelity and adultery, or people looking for monogamous long term relationships . Founder Julie Surrey knows what it’s like to be cheated on. Her ordeal inspired her to start this site. ?In 2006, Surrey borrowed her boyfriend’s laptop. She discovered the man she dated for years had married someone else behind Surrey’s back. Needless to say, Surrey quickly confronted the long-term boyfriend and ended the relationship. Surrey’s co-founder Gary Spivek has been married, to the same wife, for 19 years. This website pairs potential couples based on age, education, religion, and other areas of life. It’s free to join now, but come January 2016, it will cost $29.99 a month, with discounts for regular members. Fidelity Dating started in January 2015. It has several thousand members now, but I expect that number to rise.
A few thousand may seem like nothing compared to the 37 million members Ashley Madison has. But I think the tide is turning. They’re a lot of people that have been hurt in previous relationships that could use this. And there’s a of people who aren’t into hooking up. Something tells me if members of Ashley Madison get exposed, all hell is going to break loose for a lot of people. Those who’ve been jilted will flock to sites like Fidelity Dating where they’ll feel safer. Will dating sites that encourage serious relationships overtake those promoting hookups?
Disclaimer: Computer Geeks is not in the business of advertising, promoting, or slandering any dating or social website. This blog simply reports tech and online trends and then gives educated stances on such trends.
Let’s not be naive about it. You can get anything you want from a dating site or app. You can find true love, a casual relationship, a one night fling, or an adulterous affair. What are dating sites enabling?
I ask this because I read an interesting article from Vanity Fair called Tinder and the Dawn of the Dating Apocalypse. This article paints a picture of online daters just looking for one-night hook ups instead of long term relationships. The article showcases men bragging about all the women they slept with through dating apps. The women in the article aren’t portrayed too positively either. Vanity Fair particularly targets dating app Tinder, and Tinder isn’t happy with Vanity Fair whatsoever. Tinder’s PR team went on a tweet rampage defending the honor of their app. These tweets say Vanity Fair’s information was based only on 265,000 users, compared to Tinder’s millions, and just assumed that tiny number represented Tinder’s population. Tinder PR reps scolded Vanity Fair for not reaching out to them first, stating, “…that’s what journalist typically do.” Ouch! Tinder’s tweets remind us that people use Tinder for many reasons. While they admit some hook up, they insists the hook up culture has existed way before Tinder.
That Tinder tweet is correct. The hook up culture has been going on since the beginning of time, and will continue to do so. Look at websites like Ashley Madison, which facilitates adulterous relationships. Don’t even get me started of what you can find on Craig’s List. But let’s say all these dating sites stopped. You don’t think people will go to clubs or bars to find hookups? You don’t think people will throw swinger parties in their own home? I laugh when older generations say, “Back in the 1950s or ’60s, nobody had sex until they were married.” Yes people did! It just wasn’t over exposed like it is today. And that’s what these dating sites are doing, whether it’s accidentally or intentionally. They’re bringing to the surface what folks have done since the beginning of time. So what are dating sites really enabling?
In Nagasaki, Japan, a new hotel called the Henn-na just opened up. It’s nicknamed “Strange Hotel” for a reason. This hotel is run by robots!
That’s not a sarcastic catch phrase or put down, that’s the truth. A lady robot will check you in and bow to you, literally. A dinosaur robot will serve as your concierge and entertain the kids. Robots will handle your bags and give you travel suggestions. You don’t even use a room key. You use facial recognition technology. Don’t expect a hotel bar, restaurant, diner, or continental breakfast or even an in-room refrigerator, microwave, or coffee maker at Henn-na. You get snacks from a vending machine. The goal of this technology on steroids is to cut cost, save energy, and give customers an experience they’ve never have before. Though the hotel owner admits it was expensive to get the robotic system set up, he believes it will be much cheaper than human labor cost. Rooms at Strange Hotel start at around $80 a night.
Keep in mind Japan is obsessed with robot culture. They’re robots that serve as store greeters, psychiatrists, even as companions. But an all robot hotel is creepy on all levels, even for Japan. What if there is a robot malfunction? What if something goes wrong? Who are you going to report to? I know humans can be difficult to deal with at times. So I can see the appeal of an all robot hotel from that perspective. I just don’t share that perspective. According to a JD Poll, most American and Canadian travelers don’t. Most of us prefer a human being checking us in. We prefer our microwaves, refrigerators, and continental breakfasts. And what about jobs? The hotel/hospitality industry accounts for millions of jobs around the world, from minimum wage to executive jobs. How are you just going to toss all these working people out on the ground just to save the CEO money? Good luck explaining that one. And it’s still $80 a night. With the exception a handful of cities, I can still find a nice human run hotel for that much or less. Would you stay at a robot hotel?
People around my age will never know a time without ESPN or MTV. Kids today will never know a time without Netflix and Amazon. Netflix and Amazon wants to keep it that way.
According to Common Sense Media, 75% of children under age 9 has access to a smartphone. And it’s obvious how tech savvy tweens and teens are. Netflix alone makes up for a third of online traffic during peak times in North America. This sounds like a potential match made in heaven. In fact, Netflix, Amazon, Hulu, You Tube and other streaming services are slowly but surely taking over traditional family TV. Maybe that’s why Amazon came out with a show like Gortimer, the story of a 13-year-old and his fantasy adventures. This adventure/comedy show is a hit with critics and fans alike, especially with child fans. Plus, kids who grow up on streaming have more control over devices than we did over the TV. This new medium of children’s TV is making a new generation of TV producers and actors like Luke Matheny, director of Gortimer and 14-year-old Morgan Siegel, who plays Gortimer. And these aren’t your second rate shows. Many say Gortimer and other streaming children’s TV rivals anything found on Nickelodeon or Disney.
This shouldn’t surprise anybody. When you look at how Orange is the New Black and House of Cards is taking TV by storm, it was only a matter of time. There’s a lot on TV today I wouldn’t recommend to any child. The days of Saturday morning cartoons and prime time family hour are long gone. I don’t see them ever coming back. Thank goodness for streaming services like You Tube Kids and Netflix and Amazon filling in the gap, and keeping kids innocent. Would you rather have your kids go to a safe streaming environment, or take a chance with the TV screen?
There are many, many dating sites out there. There are those catering to certain races and ethnicity, those catering to certain religious groups, those looking for true love, and those just looking for a hook-up. I discovered perhaps the most exclusive dating app/site of all.
It’s called The League. They’ll be the first to tell you it’s not for everybody. In order to make The League, you have to be personally accepted by it’s founder, Amanda Bradford, and her staff. Last month, 30,000 people applied for The League app. Only 7,000, about 23%, were accepted. That’s around the percentage of applicants accepted to a top tier university. Many League app users are New York City residents. According to Bradford, selectivity is the New York way. “I do think the concept of exclusive, invite-only, hard-to-get-into, wait-in lines ? it?s very New York,? says the 30-year-old. What does it take to make The League? You can get referred by another member. You can apply through the app, then be picked, prodded, and reviewed by Bradford and/or her staff. Women have to be between 22-38; men must be between 24-44. An advanced degree and high paying job help your case. Over a third have advanced degrees, and 13% are CEO‘s and/or successful business owners. And yes, you can be kicked out. Bradford herself says she loves kicking people out, especially for immature or inappropriate behavior.
Some call this snobby dating. We here at Computer Geeks will never use this app. But I can see why The League is so attractive. In the 1970s, New York had a disco called Studio 54. It was the most exclusive disco in New York City, and probably the country. Yet, crowds lined up every night of people hoping to get in. But this app is too exclusive for me. If I use a dating app or site (and I won’t), I’d rather be meeting with ‘regular folks’, with all their flaws and imperfections. So The League can have their fantasy world where everyone is almost perfect. Isn’t it better to mate your potential mate the old fashioned way: face to face?
