« November 2006 | Main | February 2007 »
My friend Mike sent me this old, but still highly relevant post from last year about building an online app. Pretty funny, but pretty on the mark in many ways. Basically, build something people love to use and actually need. Additionally, if you can, make sure it helps people get lucky. Good times.
Anyone got any ideas :)?
Seattle continues to top the list of America's most literate cities.
Probably explains the stacks of books around my apartment in some way :)
Ok, so I'm not going to be writing witty news headlines soon, but it looks like the campaign I talked about here has already been pulled.
UPDATE: Looks like CH's embed code isn't working, so check the video out here
This strikes me as a precursor to what some art might look like in the future. Not just the format or the tools, but also the method of consumption.
I love the fact that we get to see the process of creating this and that it's even set to music. Would be even cooler if it was set to the virtual soundtrack of what the artist listened to while making it, if they did. In any case, it's pretty damn cool.
And if you're curious, it's even being monetized..
Robert Scoble and Dave Winer chat about innovation over in the WSJ in the context of Microsoft, debating over email whether or not the behemoth is driving or following.
I think it's worth checking out but ultimately, it's not terribly new. The interesting part to me, really, is that people struggle so hard to define innovation. If you track what these two say, their own definition of it clearly changes throughout the course of the discussion, with both moving their viewpoints a decent amount. It seems like Winer really just wants to say that Microsoft has been a follower and always will be and Scoble wants to poke holes and point out specific examples.
What I'd like to see is a broader conversation with a more constructive focus. Especially given that this last year or so has felt like "The Innovation Year" in tech media. Everywhere I turn, it feels like, I see someone talking about how to innovate, who's innovative (How come that damn Gore company keeps popping up??), who isn't innovative and why someone's innovation isn't really an innovation, but rather, a subtle tweaking.
Basically, it feels like semantic masturbation. Yeah, I said it.. semantic.
Stop arguing about what is or isn't innovation people. Start talking about actually driving change. Like it or not, big companies do it quite a bit. Microsoft, Yahoo, Google, eBay, AOL, Comcast, Starbucks.. large companies are making changes often. Small companies manage to do it as well. I'd prefer if we talked focused on change, how to drive it and what it means.
Maybe that would be innovative :)
Fascinating advertising campaign. I'm curious as to how it'll actually do and how the effectiveness will be measured. They say something to the effect of "If it works in SF, it'll work anywhere" but they're mostly talking about public acceptance. What about results??
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/11/30/BAGC2MMHUO1.DTL
So.. are we going to just end up with YouTube 2, 3, 4 etc internationally? Is this sort of playing out like the Napster scenario or is it different this time?
http://www.forbes.com/technology/2006/11/28/piracy-networks-copyright-tech_cx_ag_1129video.html
You know, I still haven't decided if I think that Bambi Francisco adds value in her analysis or just reiterates what others in the space tell her. But at the end she really hits on a good point: the social networks of today are too one dimensional
Two important posts from Battelle on GOOG:
http://battellemedia.com/archives/003129.php
Translation: crap, they have a lot of data and aren't exactly clear about what they're going to do with it, except tell you that they can do anything they want.
http://battellemedia.com/archives/003133.php
Looking forward to hearing more of his thoughts on this. They're building out CPM programs. That's been true for a while. They're looking to sell direct to the Fortune 1000. Also true for a while. The question should be: what're they trying to do that's vastly different than existing? You can bet that's the goal.
and blogged and videoblogged and distributed and shared and...
What revolution?
Media, creativity, expression, culture. All of it and then some.
I don't even need to have it explained to me, I just know it when I see stuff like this on Yahoo! Talent Show:
Who are these guys? What the hell is freerunning? And when do we get to sponsor them :)?
Recent Comments