If any product you create doesn’t inherently allow for a degraded version—one that pulls in eyeballs, that keeps users locked in and interacting—you won’t survive without having to build artificial barriers against the relentless forces of capitalism. Because the game, at its core, isn’t about delivering value anymore; it’s about maximizing attention. And if your product doesn’t serve that need, if it doesn’t have the built-in mechanism to trap people in an endless cycle, it won’t be long before you’re left scrambling to keep up. The market isn’t looking for solutions; it’s looking for a way to keep users hooked. Without that, the product won’t matter, no matter how good it is.

The point is, good engineering, like good music, or good writing, is not really necessary therefore it will not be rewarded until it becomes necessary. The thing we do is to keep thing we can’t control unnecessary

Antiques dealer, machine psychologist. http://www.musicinphasespace.com

Couldn’t have said it better myself - part of the reason the first part of Filmatree (my film industry process redesign) is called roots.

Funneling people to ‘quality’ assumes quality is objective—it’s not! What we really need are ecosystems where different voices and approaches can thrive. Garbage vs. gold is subjective anyway, and a monopsony like Max just limits the options. Creativity works best when it has many roots, not just one pipeline.

Funnel people to quality - ironically I feel like max could be this. Pull people in with Netflix garbage, funnel them up to hbo quality show. 

Plus good writing, music, etc needs garbage for contrast