Ben Thompson is an American technology analyst who writes a widely read newsletter called Stratechery. He also used to live in Taipei, where he lived continuously for 12 years.
But this past summer he moved back to Wisconsin, trading his urban life for a suburban one. And so his latest article starts with a more personal note, talking about what it's like to return to the US (though the larger point of the post is the intersection of robotaxis and suburbia).
I spent a summer in Taipei in my early 20's and grew to love the place after the first few weeks, and so I was expecting his re-acclimation to have been a bit more jarring. But it turns out, Ben is happy to be back and, in particular, he's happy to be back living in the suburbs.
His post even goes on to question whether the mobility transformations we are seeing today might be about to cement some kind of "end to urbanism":
What is worth considering, however, is if the last wave of urbanism, which started in the 1990s and peaked in the 2010s, might be the last, at least in the United States (Asia and its massive metropolises are another story). The potential physical transformation in transportation and delivery I am talking about is simply completing the story that started with entertainment and television in the first wave of suburbia, and then information and interactivity via the Internet, particularly since COVID. There are real benefits to being in person, just like there are to living in the city, but the relative delta to working remote or living in the suburbs has decreased dramatically; meanwhile, offices and urban living can never match the advantages inherent to working from a big home with a big yard.
Whether or not this is good thing is a separate discussion; I will say it has been good for me, and it’s poised to get even better.
I grew up in the suburbs of Toronto. I initially made the mistake of going to university in Waterloo, but I immediately started to envy my friends who were living downtown and going to the University of Toronto. So I course-corrected and transferred.
When it came time to go to grad school, I had learned my lesson: a proper urban center was a non-negotiable item. So I moved to Philadelphia and absolutely fell in love with the city's walkability, historic scale, and nightlife. It also didn't hurt that I could take a Chinatown bus to Manhattan for $10.
In fact, when I temporarily returned to the suburbs of Toronto after school — before once again moving into the city — I vividly remember missing Philly. I missed its urbanity. I missed walking everywhere. It was either that, or I just missed the good old "special" at Bob and Barbara's on South Street.
Since moving back to Toronto after school, I have yet to live beyond the confines of High Park, St. Clair Avenue, and the Don River. Maybe one day I will, or maybe I won't. The oldest parts of our city have always felt the most like home to me.
Sure, I also have a deep love for the mountains, but when I daydream about places where I could really live, my mind always goes to big cities like Paris, Tokyo, and Rio de Janeiro (city and mountains!).
I'm not here to impose my views (just write about them). We all have our lifestyle preferences. And I can appreciate that, for many, like Ben, the suburbs offer a compelling value proposition. His view is also supported by history: new technologies do often have a decentralizing effect on cities.
Cover photo by TangChi Lee on Unsplash
The word "speculation" usually has negative connotations, especially in the world of finance. That's why you'll hear people deride "condo speculators" and talk about things like crypto as being rat poison. Buying something with the sole hope that someone will pay more for it later is viewed as a negative act.
But is this a fair characterization?
Speculation is fundamental to how markets work. It happens when people bet on some unknowable future rather than on present fundamentals. This is an important feature because it's how new technologies and new business models get funded. Without it, we'd only ever fund what is knowable and what already exists.
This doesn't mean that speculation won't lead to failures — by definition it has to. It's uncharted territory. But consider what speculation has advanced along the way: railway networks, utility infrastructure, the internet, crypto, and AI, among many other things. And in the case of condo speculators, the result was that more, rather than less, housing got built.
That's a good thing.
So I think there's an argument to be made that we actually need more speculation in Canada. We need more risk taking and we need people betting on the future, even in the face of uncertainty. Because when you do that, eventually you end up creating it.
Some of you may remember that about a year ago I moved this blog onchain from WordPress to a platform called Paragraph. I've been happy with the move, though I know that my daily emails have been ending up in many of your junk boxes since then. Sorry. Hopefully that gets better over time. Given my enthusiasm for crypto, it just made sense to make the switch. I'm trying to move as much as I can onchain.
This blog is now also featured on Paragraph's homepage:
At the same time, things still feel very early. Paragraph, for example, has been experimenting with ways for writers to monetize their work. I don't care about that for this blog, but I am interested in seeing how the business models may evolve.
Ben Thompson is an American technology analyst who writes a widely read newsletter called Stratechery. He also used to live in Taipei, where he lived continuously for 12 years.
But this past summer he moved back to Wisconsin, trading his urban life for a suburban one. And so his latest article starts with a more personal note, talking about what it's like to return to the US (though the larger point of the post is the intersection of robotaxis and suburbia).
I spent a summer in Taipei in my early 20's and grew to love the place after the first few weeks, and so I was expecting his re-acclimation to have been a bit more jarring. But it turns out, Ben is happy to be back and, in particular, he's happy to be back living in the suburbs.
His post even goes on to question whether the mobility transformations we are seeing today might be about to cement some kind of "end to urbanism":
What is worth considering, however, is if the last wave of urbanism, which started in the 1990s and peaked in the 2010s, might be the last, at least in the United States (Asia and its massive metropolises are another story). The potential physical transformation in transportation and delivery I am talking about is simply completing the story that started with entertainment and television in the first wave of suburbia, and then information and interactivity via the Internet, particularly since COVID. There are real benefits to being in person, just like there are to living in the city, but the relative delta to working remote or living in the suburbs has decreased dramatically; meanwhile, offices and urban living can never match the advantages inherent to working from a big home with a big yard.
Whether or not this is good thing is a separate discussion; I will say it has been good for me, and it’s poised to get even better.
I grew up in the suburbs of Toronto. I initially made the mistake of going to university in Waterloo, but I immediately started to envy my friends who were living downtown and going to the University of Toronto. So I course-corrected and transferred.
When it came time to go to grad school, I had learned my lesson: a proper urban center was a non-negotiable item. So I moved to Philadelphia and absolutely fell in love with the city's walkability, historic scale, and nightlife. It also didn't hurt that I could take a Chinatown bus to Manhattan for $10.
In fact, when I temporarily returned to the suburbs of Toronto after school — before once again moving into the city — I vividly remember missing Philly. I missed its urbanity. I missed walking everywhere. It was either that, or I just missed the good old "special" at Bob and Barbara's on South Street.
Since moving back to Toronto after school, I have yet to live beyond the confines of High Park, St. Clair Avenue, and the Don River. Maybe one day I will, or maybe I won't. The oldest parts of our city have always felt the most like home to me.
Sure, I also have a deep love for the mountains, but when I daydream about places where I could really live, my mind always goes to big cities like Paris, Tokyo, and Rio de Janeiro (city and mountains!).
I'm not here to impose my views (just write about them). We all have our lifestyle preferences. And I can appreciate that, for many, like Ben, the suburbs offer a compelling value proposition. His view is also supported by history: new technologies do often have a decentralizing effect on cities.
Cover photo by TangChi Lee on Unsplash
The word "speculation" usually has negative connotations, especially in the world of finance. That's why you'll hear people deride "condo speculators" and talk about things like crypto as being rat poison. Buying something with the sole hope that someone will pay more for it later is viewed as a negative act.
But is this a fair characterization?
Speculation is fundamental to how markets work. It happens when people bet on some unknowable future rather than on present fundamentals. This is an important feature because it's how new technologies and new business models get funded. Without it, we'd only ever fund what is knowable and what already exists.
This doesn't mean that speculation won't lead to failures — by definition it has to. It's uncharted territory. But consider what speculation has advanced along the way: railway networks, utility infrastructure, the internet, crypto, and AI, among many other things. And in the case of condo speculators, the result was that more, rather than less, housing got built.
That's a good thing.
So I think there's an argument to be made that we actually need more speculation in Canada. We need more risk taking and we need people betting on the future, even in the face of uncertainty. Because when you do that, eventually you end up creating it.
Some of you may remember that about a year ago I moved this blog onchain from WordPress to a platform called Paragraph. I've been happy with the move, though I know that my daily emails have been ending up in many of your junk boxes since then. Sorry. Hopefully that gets better over time. Given my enthusiasm for crypto, it just made sense to make the switch. I'm trying to move as much as I can onchain.
This blog is now also featured on Paragraph's homepage:
At the same time, things still feel very early. Paragraph, for example, has been experimenting with ways for writers to monetize their work. I don't care about that for this blog, but I am interested in seeing how the business models may evolve.
Up until recently, the way to make money on Paragraph was to have readers collect your posts: Writer publishes something, readers mint it as an NFT, and then writer receives small payments in their crypto wallet. I've had a few people collect my posts over the past year, but it has not been anything of significance.
Now Paragraph is testing something new called writer coins. Instead of collecting individual posts, readers can now buy a writer's coin and support them more broadly. I just set this up on my publication and so there is now a brand-new coin in existence called $BRANDON.
One of the interesting things that I was able to do was automatically distribute this new coin to anyone who has collected one of my posts in the past and who is subscribed to my blog (with a connected wallet). If you are one of these people, you should have received something.
In theory, $BRANDON coin should increase in value as this blog develops incredible international notoriety, but in practice, who the hell knows? These experimentations are all part of the journey onchain. Some stuff will work, but many other things won't. Already though, I think you can feel product-market fit for things like stablecoins. Maybe one day the same will be true of $BRANDON.
If you'd like to try out this new feature and support the blog, click here.
Up until recently, the way to make money on Paragraph was to have readers collect your posts: Writer publishes something, readers mint it as an NFT, and then writer receives small payments in their crypto wallet. I've had a few people collect my posts over the past year, but it has not been anything of significance.
Now Paragraph is testing something new called writer coins. Instead of collecting individual posts, readers can now buy a writer's coin and support them more broadly. I just set this up on my publication and so there is now a brand-new coin in existence called $BRANDON.
One of the interesting things that I was able to do was automatically distribute this new coin to anyone who has collected one of my posts in the past and who is subscribed to my blog (with a connected wallet). If you are one of these people, you should have received something.
In theory, $BRANDON coin should increase in value as this blog develops incredible international notoriety, but in practice, who the hell knows? These experimentations are all part of the journey onchain. Some stuff will work, but many other things won't. Already though, I think you can feel product-market fit for things like stablecoins. Maybe one day the same will be true of $BRANDON.
If you'd like to try out this new feature and support the blog, click here.
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
