tl;dr - I shop a lot on Amazon. Therefore we no longer need shops. We have the internet. Therefore we no longer need universities.
The nice thing about "in the future" kind of statements is that they are impossible to disprove - especially when it is not specified how far in the future we are talking about. However, I think we are a long way from having gasoline delivered to your door and I always need to pop out for eggs, bread and milk. I also might need a hair cut in the future. Clothes are unlikely to be optional. My wife and I like to go to the movies. The kids like all kinds of shops...
Sure, the internet is affecting retail sales and education. To what extent is very difficult to predict but it is unlikely to be as drastic as the OP suggests.
I spent last year living next door to the mall. I went there for food, clothing, and some candles and that's about it. I live 1 block from a Best Buy and still buy all my electronics online, and I am happy to replace the local bookstore which died with my kindle. Thanksgiving was the last time I went into a grocery store (Peapod). Gas is just about the only thing I can't buy online and buying an electric car is becoming tempting.
edit: I did get my replacement iPhone 4gs at the Apple store, but I got my first iPhone 4gs line despite walking past the place several times a week.
PS: I expect something like a 30% reduction in retail store sales in the next 20 years, that may or may not be huge, but it is significant.
There's also the problem of what will you do with the millions of people working in retail economy, and with the assorted collapsed buying ability of the middle to lower class.
We don't just keep jobs because we need them. We also keep them because we need the distribution of wealth that they make possible --without a way to ensure that, everything collapses. There can't be a billionaire without millions of wage slaves.
Universities will shrink to coffeshops? That's a very CS/math-centric viewpoint. How are you going to do MITx with with Chemsitry? Physics? Biology? Med School? Anything that requires specialized equipment? How will you do team projects that require people to be in physical proximity to one another (building complicated things, for instance).
Universities aren't going away. At most, some programs may become "virtualized" but even then there's a lot of value add with college. They have specialized libraries and librarians to help you find information that may not be on the internet. They can afford expensive equipment and the people to take care of them. It's often useful just to be around people in your same program to talk about projects and learn from each other. It may not be $100k value add, but that just means college will get less expensive and possibly shrink, not that it will go away all together.
I'd love it if my office could be the coffee shop, or wherever I happen to be, but so far I've found that after a certain level of complexity and team size you pretty much have to be in the same room to make constant progress. I'm not sure if this is a problem with software development in general or just in the niche that I work within.
My company does a SAAS product aimed at banks. Everybody except the office manager telecommutes... sometimes. And everybody is in the office a large chunk of the time.
It's good to be able to concentrate alone, AND it's good to be able to collaborate in person.
We have GitHub (social coding!) and now MITx (social learning?) I like the idea. It's like the whole point of the Internet -- bringing people together -- has reached brick and mortar.
The comparison between the local state university and MITx is noteworthy. One of the big arguments that I hear continuously for traditional colleges is that they provide opportunities for research and are a place to make social connections. While these opportunities are a very real incentive for top schools, there are a ton of colleges and universities that add little value on these fronts (especially relative to the cost).
This whole scenario is kind of silly. I can understand the simplification in order to debate the merits of a free mass scale online education. However it's not realistic. No two candidates will ever be the same. Everyone has different levels of communication, most will think a little differently. If they're programmers, there's probably different levels of understanding of language concepts, or OOP concepts. In the scenario of one entry level candiate from a brick and mortar institution vs the candidate from MITx. I'm going to choose the person answers my questions most coherently, and writes the better code on my sample problem.
I'm going to hire the employee who i believe will work with me better, and who will produce a higher quality product. I don't care which school he/she went to.
It's a gedankenexperiment and he's invoking ceteris paribus. It's no different than isolating the velocity of two balls rolling down a slope by opting to ignore things like friction & drag in a physics problem.
This post raises a bigger question for the US: What will we do with all of the vacant retail space that is abandoned as shopping continues to go online?
I wonder if there are companies out there working on innovative ways to fill this space. After all, not _everything_ will be a coffee shop...right?
This could turn out to be true, i just hope that as paper books turn into history, we dont lose the quality associated with something going into print. The process of having enough confidence to "Print it" is pretty intense, and therefore the quality of a printed book v's any e-book or website will not match up without a significant amount of effort (which i suspect for business reasons wont get as much attention, because for business reasons you dont want to screw up a paper book)
Its an interesting concept, i think we're just not there yet. People like paper books, the only way they'll go away is if they become unaffordable or just stop being produced (in which case i'm starting a publishing company focusing on paper books!)
This somewhat assumes that the purpose of universities is to gain knowledge useful to employers. While that might be a purpose of it, universities are also screening mechanisms.
This is something by people in educational economics. While I think the author has a great point that we're looking to get workers who can get the job done, that isn't necessarily how businesses hire. The benefits from education don't just come in the form of increased human capital. Basically, you get bonus points for having the degree regardless of what it means to your human capital (there's a term for it that I can't come up with right now).
For a long time, we've heard of jobs that don't need a college degree, but that you won't get hired for without it. In fact, that's the reasoning behind getting a college degree in many majors where one doesn't have the intention of working in that area.
College is also a place where people get sorted into social groups according to smartness - social groupings that can continue well past college. After college, you meet friends of friends you had in college who also went to schools similar to your own and you get to build a network of people like you somewhat regardless of your success in life.
Finally, the appeal of letters is great. If you're "John Smith, BS", you will always be that. You will get the respect of being a college grad for the rest of your life. In a world where things seem in flux, items that we place undue weight on are comforting. Heck, the same can be said of going to a good school. If you went to Harvard, you will always have gone to Harvard - something very few people can say. No matter how much you fail at life in the future, you have proven that you're the top by having gone there.
Getting a certificate of completion from MITx isn't the same for many of these things. The fact that there aren't entrance requirements or limitations means that it isn't a certification that you're the top rung of society - just that you've learned some knowledge. Because it's so broadly available, it isn't sorting you into a social grouping. If universities are for knowledge transmission, the author is right - that these new offerings are wonderful. While maybe they should be for that purpose, I think that universities play a broader role in our society (I'm not saying it's a good or desirable role, just a role). They prove to others that I was accepted as not just someone they could transmit knowledge to, but a really smart person well above what would be needed to pass the courses. They connect me to other smart people who will become my social group as well as professional networking group. They make sure that no matter what I do in the future, I've proven that I'm one of the smart ones - one of the elite. My neighbor with a high-school diploma may make millions as a real-estate agent, but I'm a college grad! I can still feel proud (and maybe a little smug) because someone has certified that I'm part of the top of society - and no one has done that for him!
This is something by people in educational economics. While I think the author has a great point that we're looking to get workers who can get the job done, that isn't necessarily how businesses hire. The benefits from education don't just come in the form of increased human capital. Basically, you get bonus points for having the degree regardless of what it means to your human capital (there's a term for it that I can't come up with right now).
You are right, Universities provide that "appeal" but going forward, that won't matter anymore. Things just will change as people start realizing that that is shallow and start placing importance on gaining knowledge itself. The appeal then would be, how much you know, your expertise rather than where you went to school at. It is evolving and will continue to accelerate and the state of the economy will act as a catalyst. IMO.
Could this be extended to a need for startups or meetups that focus entirely on internet-based education?
Something akin to a formal book club with paid/volunteer instruction. I'm thinking about events like, "MyAwesomeEduStartup sponsors instructor [someone]'s coverage of [some MIT xCourse]."
It would definitely be cool as a community service or meetup event. I think it would be hard to get people to pay for this just yet, but maybe in the near future.
Currently there is a complex and non-transparent pricing for phones purchased bundled with a service. This is used maximize profit share, disguise cost and create market power etc.
Google tried to challenge this model. This has nothing to do with whether people buy from brick and mortar stores or online.
I bought my phone online disentangled:
http://www.clove.co.uk/
But I could have bought it online entangled:
http://www.virginmobile.com.au/shop
There are many things where I currently prefer buying online. And others where I prefer brick and mortar. The online stores are getting better more quickly than the brick and mortar stores.
It may be an issue of timing. Online shopping only took off in the last decade; the batch of consumers born after 1990 will have been exposed to internet shopping since childhood and will need much less convincing of buying anything online (than those who grew up used to buying things in stores).
There are two candidates: one from the local state school with an appropriate college degree, a second with relevant MITx certificates of completion. Let’s say all other things between the candidates are equal. Which should be chosen? It’s true that an online education is not the same as the college experience. The candidate who went to college probably enjoyed his experience more, but how much is that experience worth to a potential employer? Unless he’s a member of the same fraternity, probably not as much as the college candidate would hope. And here’s the reality: the student debt of the college candidate controls, to some extent, his salary requirements. Since the MITx candidate appears to have the knowledge required, and has no student debt, he probably can be hired cheaper.
Actually it's the inverse. The student debt accumulated will make the college graduate more desperate to accept any wage offer, and more fearful of keeping the job once there.
The debt burden makes the college graduate more desperate to work, but not for any wage. There is a hard line below which the student is unable to make payments and a softer line above that allowing for various qualities of life. The key in the analysis is if the non-grad can under-price the college grad near (or even below) that hard line for long enough to get entry level experience and thus be treated as another experienced hire.
There is also something to be said for a self-starter who drives himself through an online programme and comes out with a working understanding of a topic.
If you have two candidates who appear to have the same skill levels and only one of them has had the distinct advantage of being to a top university and then it's surely the one with the more modest education who is likely to be most talented?
Could you explain what you mean? I've done my best work in coffee shops, hands down. I've also had the most enjoyable time doing it. It's way nicer than a library or an office or a chair at home. When you have a collection of other caffinated people working near you on different projects, you are often more motivated to work yourself. The atmosphere is ambient and doesn't offer much distraction, unless you want it to.
I only get to spend about 3 or 4 hours / week in cafes these days (I have an office job) but those are some of the best work hours I get. I wish I could transition full-time to coffeeshops, and if I get a startup going I might try it.
[+] [-] tpatke|14 years ago|reply
The nice thing about "in the future" kind of statements is that they are impossible to disprove - especially when it is not specified how far in the future we are talking about. However, I think we are a long way from having gasoline delivered to your door and I always need to pop out for eggs, bread and milk. I also might need a hair cut in the future. Clothes are unlikely to be optional. My wife and I like to go to the movies. The kids like all kinds of shops...
Sure, the internet is affecting retail sales and education. To what extent is very difficult to predict but it is unlikely to be as drastic as the OP suggests.
[+] [-] onemoreact|14 years ago|reply
edit: I did get my replacement iPhone 4gs at the Apple store, but I got my first iPhone 4gs line despite walking past the place several times a week.
PS: I expect something like a 30% reduction in retail store sales in the next 20 years, that may or may not be huge, but it is significant.
[+] [-] batista|14 years ago|reply
We don't just keep jobs because we need them. We also keep them because we need the distribution of wealth that they make possible --without a way to ensure that, everything collapses. There can't be a billionaire without millions of wage slaves.
[+] [-] georgemcfly|14 years ago|reply
Universities aren't going away. At most, some programs may become "virtualized" but even then there's a lot of value add with college. They have specialized libraries and librarians to help you find information that may not be on the internet. They can afford expensive equipment and the people to take care of them. It's often useful just to be around people in your same program to talk about projects and learn from each other. It may not be $100k value add, but that just means college will get less expensive and possibly shrink, not that it will go away all together.
[+] [-] justinhj|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] dsr_|14 years ago|reply
It's good to be able to concentrate alone, AND it's good to be able to collaborate in person.
[+] [-] ctdonath|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] gregheo|14 years ago|reply
We have GitHub (social coding!) and now MITx (social learning?) I like the idea. It's like the whole point of the Internet -- bringing people together -- has reached brick and mortar.
[+] [-] EzGraphs|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] swalsh|14 years ago|reply
I'm going to hire the employee who i believe will work with me better, and who will produce a higher quality product. I don't care which school he/she went to.
[+] [-] bayleo|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] LukeRB|14 years ago|reply
I wonder if there are companies out there working on innovative ways to fill this space. After all, not _everything_ will be a coffee shop...right?
[+] [-] HeyLaughingBoy|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] reinhardt|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] verelo|14 years ago|reply
This could turn out to be true, i just hope that as paper books turn into history, we dont lose the quality associated with something going into print. The process of having enough confidence to "Print it" is pretty intense, and therefore the quality of a printed book v's any e-book or website will not match up without a significant amount of effort (which i suspect for business reasons wont get as much attention, because for business reasons you dont want to screw up a paper book)
Its an interesting concept, i think we're just not there yet. People like paper books, the only way they'll go away is if they become unaffordable or just stop being produced (in which case i'm starting a publishing company focusing on paper books!)
[+] [-] antidaily|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mdasen|14 years ago|reply
This is something by people in educational economics. While I think the author has a great point that we're looking to get workers who can get the job done, that isn't necessarily how businesses hire. The benefits from education don't just come in the form of increased human capital. Basically, you get bonus points for having the degree regardless of what it means to your human capital (there's a term for it that I can't come up with right now).
For a long time, we've heard of jobs that don't need a college degree, but that you won't get hired for without it. In fact, that's the reasoning behind getting a college degree in many majors where one doesn't have the intention of working in that area.
College is also a place where people get sorted into social groups according to smartness - social groupings that can continue well past college. After college, you meet friends of friends you had in college who also went to schools similar to your own and you get to build a network of people like you somewhat regardless of your success in life.
Finally, the appeal of letters is great. If you're "John Smith, BS", you will always be that. You will get the respect of being a college grad for the rest of your life. In a world where things seem in flux, items that we place undue weight on are comforting. Heck, the same can be said of going to a good school. If you went to Harvard, you will always have gone to Harvard - something very few people can say. No matter how much you fail at life in the future, you have proven that you're the top by having gone there.
Getting a certificate of completion from MITx isn't the same for many of these things. The fact that there aren't entrance requirements or limitations means that it isn't a certification that you're the top rung of society - just that you've learned some knowledge. Because it's so broadly available, it isn't sorting you into a social grouping. If universities are for knowledge transmission, the author is right - that these new offerings are wonderful. While maybe they should be for that purpose, I think that universities play a broader role in our society (I'm not saying it's a good or desirable role, just a role). They prove to others that I was accepted as not just someone they could transmit knowledge to, but a really smart person well above what would be needed to pass the courses. They connect me to other smart people who will become my social group as well as professional networking group. They make sure that no matter what I do in the future, I've proven that I'm one of the smart ones - one of the elite. My neighbor with a high-school diploma may make millions as a real-estate agent, but I'm a college grad! I can still feel proud (and maybe a little smug) because someone has certified that I'm part of the top of society - and no one has done that for him!
[+] [-] kiba|14 years ago|reply
I believe it's called signaling.
[+] [-] hariis|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] imperialWicket|14 years ago|reply
Something akin to a formal book club with paid/volunteer instruction. I'm thinking about events like, "MyAwesomeEduStartup sponsors instructor [someone]'s coverage of [some MIT xCourse]."
It would definitely be cool as a community service or meetup event. I think it would be hard to get people to pay for this just yet, but maybe in the near future.
[+] [-] lnanek|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] artsrc|14 years ago|reply
Google tried to challenge this model. This has nothing to do with whether people buy from brick and mortar stores or online.
I bought my phone online disentangled:
But I could have bought it online entangled: There are many things where I currently prefer buying online. And others where I prefer brick and mortar. The online stores are getting better more quickly than the brick and mortar stores.[+] [-] rafd|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|14 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] Navarr|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] batista|14 years ago|reply
Actually it's the inverse. The student debt accumulated will make the college graduate more desperate to accept any wage offer, and more fearful of keeping the job once there.
People hiring love this kind of dependance.
[+] [-] JumpCrisscross|14 years ago|reply
There is also something to be said for a self-starter who drives himself through an online programme and comes out with a working understanding of a topic.
[+] [-] arethuza|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Anirak|14 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] rsanchez1|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] cryptoz|14 years ago|reply
I only get to spend about 3 or 4 hours / week in cafes these days (I have an office job) but those are some of the best work hours I get. I wish I could transition full-time to coffeeshops, and if I get a startup going I might try it.
[+] [-] jonybluz|14 years ago|reply
[deleted]