Chipset-producing corporations in the context of the current economic system

Note by #moderators
The topic title was changed from “Cost of building your own mobile processor” to better reflect the resulting discussion.


Hello,

What would be the cost of building your own mobile processor instead of using Qualcomm’s?

Would love to know your thoughts on this.

Thank you

$3 to $4 billion.

Here is a nice article for you:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/jimhandy/2014/04/30/why-are-chips-so-expensive/

12 Likes

Quite impressing. Thanks for sharing!

3 Likes

Thank you for this article Douwe. Would it be possible to also get an answer from engineers in the community? How to remove this “monopoly” on processors and how to make it available to everyone? How to truly decentralize all hardware and aspects of a phone so that it’s not one company who provides a peace rather companies owned by phone owners.

eMarketer also estimates that that there will be 4.30 billion mobile phone users worldwide in 2016, representing 58.7% of the global population.

Which means, if each Smartphone user pays 2-3$, there could be a truly decentralized microprocessor company, owned by all smartphone users.

Wouldn’t that be a rather large (gigantic) community?
Lots of logistic problems, like how to organise decisions …
(The fact, that there are parts of the world, where 2 $ are a lot of money could be addressed by taking the buying power into account. Problem then might be, that people pay different shares, yet all have the same saying in decisions.)

Well, I really would love to read a more detailed concept

2 Likes

It would be the consumers who are owners. Whether all owners have a say or not or whether a team is appointed is a completely different topic that can be answered separately. Obviously, a team should be appointed but the consumers should still have a voice and vote on topics. Educate them and give them the right to vote.

The key thing is that the objective of this company is to provide processors to consumers that are NOT made by big corporates (owned by a few) but rather a company owned by all of its consumers. If you have billions, you can’t just purchase the shares of a company on the stock market. We want as many consumers to be owners. Decentralize ownership rather than give full edge to people with money.

The rules of this concept have not been set and so they are completely flexible, what it achieves is a revolution of the current push of the interest of the few vs. the interest of the masses/consumers.

A company building mobile processors with a market share you imagine – would that not be by definition a big cooperation? It is a nice idea, but what you planning is nothing more than complete redefinition how our economy works. Why not start with something smaller to and easier to tackle, like a coffee company owned by it’s buyers? Mobile System on a chips a insanely complicated, not only because of design and manufacturing complexity, but also because of patents and how to knowledge.

I would like to challenge your last point:

I might sound pessimistic, but I am pretty sure how it currently works is somewhat in the interest of the consumers/masses. If there was a majority of people just waiting to revolutionize the way consume or produce smartphones, Fairphones sales in Europe would be skyrocketing. But my experience is, that there is a lot of goodwill towards the company, but when shopping for a phone, most people have other priorities. And that is not unique to electronics: I think many people in this forum agree that Fairtrade Coffee in general is better. Today, almost every larger supermarket in Germany has a Fairtrade Coffee, but still for every ton of Fairtrade coffee beans, 33 tons of other beans are sold (16.300 [1] vs 520.000 [2]). In other words: Even when having a choice, only 3% of customers choose the Fairtrade coffee. Thinking that all customers will buy fair if they only had a choice, is very very optimistic. I assume a lot of customers are very happy with buying a new device that makes better pictures, is faster, has a better network connection and – most importantly – is new and shiny. Shopping for and the novelty of a new device is fun, after all. But it’s not sustainable and we need to continue to educate on that. That is the greatest achievement of Fairphone in my opinion, btw, getting that discussion into the mainstream.

That is no reason to not do anything at all, but currently, the better ways to achieve goals like processors that supported for a long time are technological, Google’s Project Treble or kernel releases with long time security support, or economical via press and customer pressure: We need to continue to pressure all manufacturers and Google for software and security updates for our devices for a longer time. I see some success in that way: The Fairphone 2 will probably receive the October security update pretty soon, Nokia is marketing aggressively with their promises to keep their devices up-to-date with security and OS updates. I see such things in mentioned in more and more reviews and tech news, too.

My point is: Aim high, but keep your goals realistic and work your way up from improvement to improvement.

Sources:
1: https://www.fairtrade-deutschland.de/fileadmin/DE/newsimport/Presse2016/2016_pressemappe_jahres_pk/transfair_jahres_wirkungsbericht_2015_2016.pdf
2: https://de.statista.com/themen/171/kaffee/

4 Likes

Thank you for your response Ben. To answer some of your points and give my perspective.

Maybe it would be called a “corporation” but it wouldn’t be similar to what we have right now. Those companies need to be FORCED to decentralize ownership to their consumers because if you give ownership to people with money, you’re NOT going to get the interest of the masses.

Right now, a company goes public and it’s whoever has money that can buy the most shares and essentially control that company. Do you understand how fucked up and bad that is? Do you understand that governments and central banks can easily purchase large ownership in these companies? Very high risk.

Of course I want to redefine how our economy works because right now it doesn’t really work lol. The current system is definitely not in the interest of the consumers/masses. It’s simply making the people with money in power rather than the people that are using all those products in power. Incentives don’t really align specifically when it comes to governments for example wanting control over consumer data.

That is incorrect. How you are educated and how you are brainwashed decides what you will ask and look for rather than the other way around. Take 2 million uneducated people who never went to school or college or whatever. Does what THEY want, really represent the good of the community? If the planet cares about the next “design” of the new phone, that doesn’t mean shit.

What matters is whether all of our data (emotional, messaging, location, apps, emails, etc…) is being captured, analyzed and used to create a complete replica of the planet’s direction. Big data analysis of this would allow them to do so many forecasts and predictions. THAT is power and THAT is control. I couldn’t give a fuck about my eyes unlocking my iphone lol!!! They made us so dumb and superficial.

Right now the world and the perception is all about “features” & materialism. It’s not about VALUES anymore. We are in an illusion and education of the masses is the only way out.

Thank you Ben. Would love to hear from you what you think.

I know I aim high and here I got interested in the processors industry but I’m looking at it from all industries. I would highly recommend you read up on Blockchain and Ethereum if you haven’t already. It could be the technology we use to decentralize ownership and KILL the interest of the few in favor for actual interest of the masses.

1 Like

Thanks for you input!

Of what? These are commercial companies. They need to build what their partners request. And their partners request what the consumers buy.

I think that is a different topic, isn’t it?

You are implying that companies and commercial made humans as they are, but i would like to see some proof for that. I would say that humans are as superficial and selfish as thay have always been – or maybe even better then at any time in history before.

Yes I did, but a lot of Blockchain Applications are commercial already. And when I look at what happened with Bitcoin, I am very very sceptical. I was at a Chaos Communication Congress many years ago when I first heard about bitcoin. Sadly I never managed to generate some, lost interest, but at then time, you could install the Wallet Software and generate Bitcoin on your own PC. Look at it today: Most of Bitcoin is controlled by a few miner collectives in Asia. They buy very expensive and energy hungry hardware like graphics cards and even with those they are already un-profitable months later. What a gigantic waste of resources and energy!

There is no democratic control, no rules and no regulation and it’s pure speculation. It makes me sick to think how much energy is wasted in generating a few bitcoins today.

I honestly think the change you imagine is not possible to reach with technology. Etherum might avoid the traps bitcoin fall to, and the Blockchain might a have hundreds of useful usecases. I saw one for tracing conflict (free) minerals – for example (http://mimosi.peerledger.com/). But true revolution must start with a change of mindset. And I simple assume we are in a minority with our Fairphones – in rich europe already.

5 Likes

It’s the people with the most money that are the major shareholders in all of those big corporates that basically run the world. Apple, Google, Amazon, Microsoft, Johnson & Johnson, JP Morgan, Visa, Intel, Pepsi, Coca, Walt Disney, Mastercard, Macdonals, etc… I could go on and on.

Those companies are majorly (60-75%) owned by Institutions and mostly the same institutions as top holders. Now add into the equation the fact that:

  1. 41.6% of total global personal wealth is in the US
  2. US has the highest wealth inequality in the world with a score of 80.56/100 — a measure of inequality in which 0 is perfect equality and 100 would mean perfect inequality, or one person owning all the wealth

What you get is basically a recipe for disaster. The rich (1% or whatever) owning most of those companies vs. the 99% which are the consumers. The ~SAME rich owning all of those companies. That’s even more fucked up.

Unrelated but who the fuck gets bailed out when there’s a crash? The US citizens or the big corporates which are owned by those rich people?

The scam is too obvious yet the ones who get fucked (us) fail to do anything or properly understand that the rich is basically controlling the US and its people and further increasing the wealth gap.

So to answer your questions. It’s the risk of bad intentions and behavior, which is super fucking high considering the rich are the owners of those companies vs. the 90-99% which are mainly the consumers.

Now think about it for a minute. The ~same rich dudes own all those corporates and are further increasing the wealth gap. Don’t you think they would take further actions to control and get the most out of this 90-99%? They are the ones providing you with everything you use, on a daily basis.

They have all of the tools in front of them. They own ~all of the media. They own ~all banks. They own ~all tech giants. They own the fckn government!!! Every fucking industry (Energy, Tech, Consumers, Financials, etc…).

So they have all of this data they can get through our phones/tracking device as well as any relevant data they can get from other companies. They then use this data, analyze it, create algorithms & predictions. This is happening already. I mean, I do this with my SAAS company, imagine how far the big guys would go in this haha

That’s how it is and we are in it deep right now. We’re blinded. They masterminded the biggest illusion and it’s still going on strong. We fail to realize we are already in the Truman Show.

I say companies and commercial definitely guided how humans are turning out. I invite you to watch Century of the Self. PR & Media guides and controls the mind of the crowd. Of course, not at a 100%, everything is probabilities at the end of the day, but they heavily influence it. It’s everywhere in the world and that’s a key element of control.

You can also watch this Interview: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zgmg2VFX058 from 1984 “with an ex-KGB officer and Soviet defector Yuri Bezmenov who decided to openly reveal KGB’s subversive tactics against western society.” A mush watch.

I honestly don’t believe in “History”. We’ve had what, the internet for how many years? Before that what did we have? Are we confident of what we know about WW2? Are we confident of what we know about WW1? Now how confident are we about what happened 200 years ago? lol.

We have no fucking clue and no “book” or whatever the fuck the Media pushes is going to convince me. What about all those burnt libraries and all those hidden books or the ones that don’t come to light? History is written by the winner.

Materialism has been pushed and pushed and pushed. They made the superficial what people care about. How can I be so sure? Education!!! It’s how you are raised, the values you are taught and the experiences that you have that guide you. And right now we are in the most superficial and materialist of times. It’s a further DIVISION between people. No properly educated man (values) would care about the superficial.

Of course, experiences play a big role in shaping us humans and considering TV, PR and the likes are pushing towards this superficiality and “beauty”, everything is following.

We can only see and believe the present time. It doesn’t make sense to say humans were superficial and selfish before. Just think about when humans used to live for survival. Were they superficial? Now that we don’t have to think about “survival”, we’ve lost sense of our values and what it is to be human.

We are one consciousness. We are not 6 billion people. We are one. Until we understand this as human beings, we will stay divided and we will stay superficial.

Technology is a tool that needs to be used to reach the change I’m talking about. Of course, as you said, it starts with a change in mindset, in educating and with accepting everyone else.

Us consumers have the edge, if we united like the 1% unite, we’d kill them. As simple as that.

1 Like

I couldn’t post more than 2 links in my post so had to remove them.

1 Like

This has escalated quickly and would like to get back on topic. But let’s make on think clear: This is not about “killing” anyone, not even metaphorical.[quote=“Paranoir, post:10, topic:33252”]
Now that we don’t have to think about “survival”, we’ve lost sense of our values and what it is to be human.
[/quote]

On the contrary! A struggle for survival does often not allow for moral, values or discussing social issues.

3 Likes

Well that’s your opinion Ben. For me, it is about killing the current system that has enslaved the majority of Americans by putting them in debt, not providing proper healthcare nor Education, nor anything except for Entertainment. Do you not realize how fucked up that is? They have put us in a state of complacency. Nobody will do anything about it.

It starts with educating the masses and this will kill the current system whether you like it or not because at the end of the day, the system is favoring the tiny tiny few.

I could argue the other way. This is an opinion and again, it is based on values. Wouldn’t you be more inclined to stick with your community if you were struggling for survival? Stand as one and help each other out?

Now that we aren’t struggling for survival, what’s the point of sticking as a community? We FAIL to realize the point because we’ve been flooded with bullshit and materialism.

I’m sorry for going “off-topic” but that’s pin point the topic for me lol.

Cheers

1 Like

Let’s all not be to pessimistic about the world! :sunny: In my opinion, if we just try hard enough, everything will turn out alright.

1 Like

Stefan, I wouldn’t call it pessimistic. I would call it realistic as has been proven time and time again. That’s the way the world currently works. Not assuming it already would be ignorance. The proof and evidence of it is oh so clear.

I might come out as pessimistic but I’m honest and objective with myself. This drives me and I hope to fuel a lot of people with me.

1 Like

Of course I don’t challenge the evidence you have given, but you make it sound as if there was no way out of it, other than disastrous events. I do think that humanity as a whole strives for the good. Whilst not everything is paradisiac in today’s Europe, we haven’t had a war in over 70 years (at least in the European Union). People simply tend to put more emphasis on the bad times, when we should rather be grateful for all the good things that we may enjoy.

2 Likes

Other than educating each other and uniting and breaking the divisions? What do you think is the way out Stefan? You sound overly confident in “natural evolution”, as if you completely ignore the fact and realities of the current world.

We are worse off than 70 years ago. How subjective is this sentence? You talk about war, I can talk about debt, salaries, “terrorist groups”. Hell, even my country was WAYYY better 70 years ago lol

The number of dead people doesn’t indicate whether we lived in better or worse times. In times with no Media or coverage, shit could be done differently and more violently without humans knowing a SHIT about it.

War, again, is an illusion. Making the rich richer, the poor poorer and enslaving countries by putting them in debt.

I understand that we don’t see things the same way. I see the glass half full but I also see the glass half empty. The half empty part, weirdly enough, has a lot more weight than the half full part because it’s the part that controls us.

What are all the good things that we may enjoy now? Smartphones? Convenience through technology? Absolute bull-crap vs. the downsides.

I’m really really enjoying this conversation. Happy I found this forum and got various opinions.

I don’t think there is any sentence more subjective than “everything was better 70 years ago/in my youth/in the good old days”.
Just think about democracy, enlightenment, social revolution, woman rights, lgbtqia rights, animal rights, fairtrade, eco-revolution, sustainability, recycling, pacifism, health care, …
I don’t think there was any time better to live in than now unless you were a healthy rich, white, straight man.
And of course live expectancy matters when you talk about how “good” a time is. I’m sure we can agree that worrying about your relatives dying in a war is a much worse situation than worrying about your country’s dept limit.

That’s the perfect counter argument to your thesis. Things weren’t better back in the day, you just didn’t know that they were bad because you didn’t have anything to compare with. Now people in the Middle East want democracy because they see it is possible in other countries, people in Russia want fair elections, people in North Korea want freedom and people in America want universal health care and gun control.
Back in the day you were content with what you had because you didn’t know any better.

Sure there are new issues that haven’t existed in earlier times, but they don’t compare to the issues from earlier times.
The chance to be a victim of terrorism nowadays doesn’t compare to the chance of dying in a war back in the day. Income gap doesn’t compare to feudalism. Market controlling companies don’t compare to slavery.

I don’t think positive progression comes naturally. It takes hard work, investigative reporting, demonstration, activism, political involvement, donations as well as using your spending power to support organizations that try to go further than the bare minimum of decency that the law requires. So it’s not something that comes easy or naturally, but the trend is all in all definitely positive.

7 Likes

Extremely subjective! All research indicates that globally(!), the chances to be killed by another human are lower then at any time before.
Life expectancy is up almost everywhere in the world, child mortality is low. Especially in Europe, our situation is way better then 70, 50, or even 15 years ago.
We have universal human rights, we have social security insurances.
For us to care about the social issues related to smartphone production, it was necessary to get out of the survival cycle.

5 Likes

“In times with no Media or coverage, shit could be done differently and more violently without humans knowing a SHIT about it.”

That’s actually the perfect counter argument to your thesis. My thesis doesn’t involve comparing this day & age to 50 years ago, 200 years ago, nor 10,000 years ago. My point is that we can’t compare since we don’t know shit. So I look at the current times and see the flaws rather than look back, shove my head in the sand and say: “yes we’ve evolved so much”. I’m sorry, but no.

How do you know how tribes and communities used to live 10,000 years ago and more? Who told you there wasn’t democracy, woman rights and whatever else you mention back then? Do you know the # of communities that existed? Don’t underestimate human emotions and reasoning, even 10,000 years ago.

You can’t compare current issues with issues from hundreds of years ago. You compare current issues with how it SHOULD be.

We have been brainwashed and our “progress” ruler is completely flawed. Rather than comparing “Market controlling” to slavery, how about a more logical comparison of slavery vs. modern slavery (corporate world and DEBT). It’s the same. It fits better with our times and we see it as progress, but the end is absolutely the same.

Illusions are dangerous. Don’t be tricked.

We know only what we’ve been told so let’s not be so quick to jump to conclusions on how things were in the past. It is incorrect and has been provided to you by some specific books. There are more books. There are more discoveries. What you haven’t been told is what matters.

@ben

Discoveries come with time, so of course as we go, people are going to die at a later age and have more technology and other “discovery” related advancements. It doesn’t mean anything!!!

Don’t forget that people who lived until 20, 30, 40, 50, didn’t know the future. They lived their time. The goal is to LIVE your time and be aware. Do you think they focused their efforts on increasing their life span? A part of them did. Another part discovered other things and did other things.