I have zero problem with the fail-fast, fail-earlier strategy and attitude. ultimately it's business. there is no point to continue if it's obviously not going to work. there is a catch though: do fail because of innovation (crazy, big ideas). I'd argue all these experiments, except gmail/map/wave, have 0 substance. most of them are crappy implemented, poor planed cat projects.
Unlike Microsoft, who had the will and executive ability to expand to new territories and destroy competitors, Google has a remarkable record of half-baked works and giving up. it's a joke.
I totally agree with the article except one thing: it's much much more a pleasant experience to code iOS app than Android, even without considering the fragmentation problem.
according to my understanding, there is no "fact" in science. there are observations, hypotheses (and null hypotheses if related to stats) and theories. i think "fact" is used in the article as theories or hypotheses that explain corresponding observations well enough, and over and over again.
which comes first, a good consumer product or a healthy ecosystem around it? it's a positive feedback loop thing in later stage but product always comes first. it's not a big secret but only few nailed it occasionally in a decade.
Were Steve Jobs, John Ive, Tim Cook and other Apple guys crystal clear about the theory when they started iPod/iPhone? I don't think so. Apple has a unique weapon called design and is willing to pay whatever it costs to enhance it. Its business is to use the weapon wherever there is a chance: mp3 player, tivo, mobile phone, watch and more to come. The rest is upon professors in business schools to figure out.
I think Liu is more inline with Isaac Asimov than Arthur Clarke. Liu is clearly an atheist and intentionally avoid cheap reading gratification achieved by science-religion association.
My complaint about Liu: he has a silly admiration towards Stephen Hawking probably due to his obsession with black hole. (but who doesn't?) 200 years later, people might only get to know Stephen Hawking when reading Liu's books.
I stopped reading Ni Kuang's work since 14. I'd consider comparing Ni Kuang with Liu a serious offence to Liu's readers.
In my opinion, the second and third instalments of The Three Body Problem are as good as the Foundation series. The first one, really is just a trailer.
The second one, entitled The Dark Forest is far more than Sci-fi. Personally, I interpret it as a serious international political question: could the West really tolerate any other forms of civilisation? the book gave a negative perspective.
Claim: I live in UK and I understand most of EU folks don't like to be simplified as Westerners. However, from a Chinese perspective, the cultural differences between FR/DE/UK/CA/US/AU are invisible.