Home / News & Analysis / ‘Bodega’ Shows Silicon Valley Hates Human Communities

‘Bodega’ Shows Silicon Valley Hates Human Communities

Wealthy young millennials probably don't understand bodegas. Buzzy new startup Bodega, which aims to kill corner stores by replacing them with optimized vending machines, certainly does not. I doubt Bodega will be more than a flash in the pan, but its willful blindness to its potential social effects, once again, shows the worst of Silicon Valley.

Simply put, Silicon Valley disdains cities.

OpinionsI mean, we knew that already. The funded founders of Silicon Valley tend to be young, childless, rootless transplants, who've poured their time and passion into their business ideas and headed West, like so many others throughout history, to make it rich. Once they get there, they spend their time on campus at Google, Apple, or Facebook, not at the corner store. They hang out with other people like them, in carefully curated contexts that make them believe everyone is like them. And because they're coders and engineers, they love efficient systems.

Cities tend to be messy, with a lot of knock-on effects and ad-hoc aspects. Take the role of bodegas. Here in New York, bodegas are technically grocery stores, but the grocery-store aspect is their least interesting quality. They're fully staffed hubs of urban life. They're the safe spaces you can walk into, at night, when someone's following you on the street. They run cell phone lockers for kids at the high school down the block, which doesn't allow phones. One of them is my local UPS pick-up point. Another one is frequently full of tweens gossiping. They're also one of the remaining ways immigrants lift themselves up, generation by generation, as parents who work in bodegas pay the way for their kids to work in tech.

Bodega the startup, on the other hand, is a hotel honor bar which gets plonked into an apartment building so "centralized shopping locations won't be necessary," founder Paul McDonald told Fast Company. "Bodegas can't compete with this technology, because it is so much more expensive to have a brick-and-mortar store than a small machine," spokesman Frank Garcia told FC.

Silicon Valley has been "disrupting" things it didn't think were clean or efficient enough for awhile, without thought to the broader community effects. Usually, they're "disrupting" things in ways that would appeal to wealthy young millennial consumers and not to the poor, elderly, disabled, or its own employees. Take the Lyft Line shuttle, which cherry-picks public transit routes, in non-wheelchair-accessible vehicles, giving its workers considerably worse pay and benefits than city bus drivers.

They don't have to do things this way. When Citymapper wanted to start a bus service, it actually worked with Transport for London to integrate it into TfL's network, declaring itself to be part of the community, not better than the community.

Bodega's concept could be a good one if the founders and their funders weren't jerks. As this brilliant Twitter thread explains, there are millions of people in the US who live nowhere near walkable retail, who are mobility compromised and could really benefit from a selection of goods in or near their homes. Bodega placed in soulless exurban apartment complexes would hurt only CVS. But instead, these guys target a niche that's already filled.

One of the results of Silicon Valley-driven consolidation is that small businesses get stamped out by behemoths. Amazon killed a thousand bookstores, which paid taxes and had owners. Those owners bought things, invested in things, and sent their kids to college. Uber slaughters taxi companies. Bodega wants to clear-cut bodegas. The problem here isn't creative destruction: it's many being replaced by one, business being consolidated into fewer and fewer hands. Yes, Walmart and other big-box stores started the process, emptying out rural downtowns, but Bodega founder McDonald came from Google, a company that once said "don't be evil."


If economic efficiency is the only goal, and low prices and high profits are the only measure, communities will crumble. As I said, with Walmart and its ilk, they were crumbling already. That's no reason to actively make the problem worse.

I don't fault the bushy-tailed creators of Bodega, not really. They're just individuals with an idea who live in their bubble. I fault the venture capitalists of Silicon Valley who handed them sacks of money, "including Josh Kopelman at First Round Capital, Kirsten Green at Forerunner Ventures, and Hunter Walk at Homebrew," according to FC. We've seen a tight group of private venture capitalists become the funding for our new public services and the structure of our communities, as our politicians sit paralyzed by social division, corruption, and a lack of the desire to invest in even basic services, like buried power lines to protect from storms.

But let's hope that outrage against Bodega, flooding across the internet today, will send its creators back to the drawing board to ask: how can we build up our communities, not shatter them? In a fragile American time, that's what we need. Don't rip out our cities' little hearts for a better venture investment return.

Read more

Check Also

Facebook’s Kodi box ban is nothing new

According to recent reports, Facebook has updated its Commerce Policy to specifically ban the sale of Kodi boxes on its site – that is, devices that come with pre-installed Kodi software, which are often used for illegally streaming digital content. However, the ban is not a new one – Facebook confirms its policy on Kodi box sales hasn’t changed since last summer, and its external Policy Page – the one being cited as evidence of the new ban – was updated in December. It’s true that the changes have flown under the radar until now, though. The policy change was first reported by Cord Cutters News, and later linked to by TorrentFreak and Techdirt. The original report claims that Facebook added a new rule on its list of “Digital Media and Electronic Devices” under “Prohibited Content,” which specifically calls out Kodi boxes. It says that Facebook posts “may not promote the sale of devices that facilitate or encourage streaming digital content in an authorized manner or interfering with the functionality of electronic devices.” The Policy page lists a few examples of what this means, including wiretapping devices, jamming or descrambling devices, jailbroken or loaded devices, and, then “promoting the sale or use of streaming devices with Kodi installed.” (The only permitted items are “add-on equipment for Kodi devices, such as keyboards and remotes.”) But this ban on Kodi boxes, Facebook says, is not a recently implemented policy. According to a Facebook spokesperson, it launched a new policy last summer that prohibited the sale of electronic devices that facilitate or are intended for unauthorized streaming or access to digital content – including Kodi boxes. This policy has not changed since last summer, but its external Policy Page – this one being cited by the various reported – was updated in December 2017 to offer additional illustrative examples and more detailed information on all its policies, including the one related to unauthorized streaming devices. In other words, Facebook has been banning Kodi boxes since it decided to crackdown on unauthorized streaming devices last year. It’s just now being noticed. The ban affects all posts on Marketplace, Buy and Sell Groups, and Shop Sections on Pages. Facebook explains it takes a very strong enforcement approach when “Kodi” is mentioned with a product for sale. As Techdirt pointed out, that’s problematic because the Kodi software itself is actually legal. However, device makers like Dragon Box or SetTV have been using the open-source Kodi platform and other add-ons to make copyright infringement easier for consumers. Facebook does seem to understand that Kodi software isn’t illegal, but it knows that when “Kodi” is mentioned in a product (e.g. a device) listing, it’s very often a product designed to circumvent copyright. The company tells us that its intent is not to ban Kodi software altogether, however, and it’s in the process of reviewing its guidelines and these examples to more closely target devices that encourage unauthorized streaming. That could mean it will, at some point, not outright ban a device that includes Kodi software, but focus more on other terms used in the sale, like “fully loaded” or some sort of description of the illegal access the box provides, perhaps. (Facebook didn’t say what might change.) As for Kodi, the company says Facebook’s move doesn’t affect them. “It doesn’t impact us, since we don’t sell devices,” says Keith Herrington, who handles Business Relations at the XBMC Foundation (Kodi). He said his organization would love to talk to someone at Facebook – since they’ve never been in touch – in order to ensure that devices that are in compliance with Kodi’s trademark policy are not banned. Both Amazon and eBay have worked with Kodi on similar policies, he added. “We’ve gotten thousands of devices which were in violation of our trademark policy removed from eBay,” Herrington said. It’s unclear how well-enforced Facebook’s ban really is – I’m in Facebook groups myself where people talk about how to jailbreak “Fire sticks” and include posts from those who sell them pre-jailbroken. (It’s for research purposes. Ahem.) Industry crackdowns go beyond Facebook Facebook isn’t the only company that’s attempting to crack down on these devices. Netflix, Amazon and the major studios are suing Dragon Box for facilitating piracy by making it easy for consumers to access illegal streams of movies and TV shows. In January 2018, a U.S. District Court judge handed down a preliminary injunction against TickBox TV, a Georgia-based set-top box maker that was sued by the major studios, along with streaming services Netflix and Amazon, for profiting from the sale of “Kodi boxes.” Google has removed the word “kodi” from the autocomplete feature of Search, along with other piracy-related terms. And more recently, the FCC asked Amazon and eBay to stop selling fake pay TV boxes. It said these boxes often falsely bear the FCC logo to give them the appearance of legitimacy, but are actually used to perpetuate “intellectual property theft and consumer fraud,” the FCC said in letters to Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos and eBay CEO Devin Wenig. Why Streaming Piracy is Growing There’s a reason Kodi devices are so popular, and it’s not just because everyone is being cheap about paying for access to content. For starters, there’s a lack of consequence for consumers who do illegally stream media – it’s not like back in the day when the RIAA was suing individuals for pirating music. While there has been some activity – Comcast several years ago issued copyright infringement notices to Kodi users, for example – you can today basically get away with illegal streaming. The copyright holders are currently focused on cutting off piracy at the source – box makers and the platforms that enable their sale – not at the individual level. The rise of cord cutting has also contributed to the issue by creating a highly fragmented streaming ecosystem. Shows that used to be available under a single (if pricey) cable or satellite TV subscription, are now spread out across services like Netflix, Amazon, Hulu, Sling TV, HBO NOW, and others used by cord cutters. Customers are clearly willing to pay for some of these services (largely, Netflix and maybe one or two others), but most can’t afford a subscription for each one. And they definitely don’t want to when all they’re after is access to a single show from a network. That’s another reason they then turn to piracy. Finally, there is the fact that film distributors have forever withheld their movies from streaming services for months, creating a demand for illegal downloads and streams. Though the release window has shrunk some in more recent years, the studios haven’t yet fully bought into the idea of much smaller windows to cater to the audience who will never go to the theater to watch their movie. And when this audience is cut out the market, they also turn to piracy. Eventually, the record industry adapted to consumers’ desire for streaming, and services like Spotify and Apple Music emerged. Eventually, streaming services may be able to make piracy less attractive, too. Amazon Channels, could become a key player here if it expands to include more add-ons. Today, it’s the only true a la carte TV service available. And that perhaps – not skinny bundles – is what people really want.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Disclaimer: Trading in bitcoins or other digital currencies carries a high level of risk and can result in the total loss of the invested capital. theonlinetech.org does not provide investment advice, but only reflects its own opinion. Please ensure that if you trade or invest in bitcoins or other digital currencies (for example, investing in cloud mining services) you fully understand the risks involved! Please also note that some external links are affiliate links.