Sunfleet

Poll: Web 2.0 is made of...

The Register has a humorous article about how random and vague definitions of Web 2.0 are. They've decided to leave it up to the readers to figure it all out.

"We thought since no one can tell us what [Web 2.0] is, except for projecting fantasies of what they think it should be, something must be done, before investors lose their shirts. So we're throwing it open to the "collective intelligence" of El Reg, as no one does funnies next generation global computing architectures quite like you on a Friday."

What do you think? Web 2.0 is made of ...

• Badger's paws
• A magic swirling ship
• Javascript worms
• Recycled copies of Esther Dyson's Release 1.0 newsletter
• Never mind, just give us the money

Article (with Poll) on the Register

More Web 2.0 hilarity:

Posted by Joan Dimicco in "In The Press"  | 

Ease-of-UseTube

"By merely combining a pent-up demand with ease-of-use you get the YouTube phenomenon. It's brain dead simple, but I'm telling you that is all there is to it."

This is a nice, to-the-point article about why YouTube has shot off the charts like a rocket.

This explanation also applies to the iPod. I had 3 (or more?) mp3 players before the iPod was invented and I was happily uploading music onto them. And then the iPod changed the industry to the point where we call mp3 radio broadcasts podcasts. How could the iPod have generated that much momentum? Ease-of-use and pent-up demand. I was willing to tolerate time consuming CD ripping, elaborate music conversion processes, and kludgy interfaces for uploading to a player. Apparently the rest of the world wasn't and Apple knew it.

Posted by Joan Dimicco in "In The Press"  | 

The Economics of Industrial Research

The front page of today's Wall Street Journal has an article about Yahoo's research lab: Hoping to Overtake Its Rivals, Yahoo Stocks Up on Academics (subscription required).

The article talks about how Yahoo is heavily recruiting academics from economics and computer science departments around the country, to amass a group of world-class researchers to tackle questions like how do you "save attractive women from unwanted solicitations on an Internet dating site."

In the past year, the company has snagged leading talents in microeconomics, Web search and artificial intelligence from universities such as Cornell and Carnegie Mellon, and industrial labs including those of Microsoft Corp. and International Business Machines Corp.

Their goal is to avoid being trumped by Google again. To tempt the researchers, Yahoo offers up its enormous datasets that offer a rich testbed for asking interesting behavior and economic questions. Unlike AOL though, they are trying to keep the private data private:

Yahoo submits all outside requests to look at the data to a review committee. It says it has never provided search-related data to outside researchers.

There are plenty of academic research labs within industry (e.g. my home Sun Labs!), but what makes Yahoo's hiring unusual is the focus on economists. For example, Microsoft Research has 700 researchers and 0 economists. If you have access to the article, I recommend checking it out.

Posted by Joan Dimicco in "In The Press"  | 

VShake Social Network Site: I'll talk to you, but only for a fee!

The Boston Globe has an article today about a local startup called VShake: Website charges to arrange contact with major honchos

The premise is interesting: Because it is hard to get that influential person, even the one that is your friend's friend, to respond to your queries, a website where that influential person can put a price on their time could just get you that essential one-on-one conversation. If you want that meeting badly enough, you can arrange it by simply paying the entry fee. For example, if you want to chat with this yogi in a suit, you would pay $100:

The Globe article quotes one of the founders as saying:

"You might never get a reply or there is a middleman between you and the person you'd like to reach or your queries are not answered in a timely fashion," said Richberg. "The reason? People are reluctant to sacrifice their private information."

The real objects of value here are personal referrals. The reason that individuals don't hand over contact information for all of their colleagues is because they have a relationship with these people built upon mutual trust and regard. If you funnel all contact requests through to your "major honcho" contacts, these contacts will no longer have the same trust and regard for you. And because they are "major honchos," you particularly want to keep these contacts sacred.

The most interesting feature of the VShake application is the visualization of the social networks. But I'm not exactly clear on how social networks tie in to the system, because it seems the business is all about subverting existing social ties and making it a fee-for-contact service. VShake does have some discussion on the website of social network referrals, stating that if "Leslie" knows "Bill Gates," you can pay Leslie $100 to introduce you. Or you could pay Bill $10,000 directly, to meet with him. I have to say though, wouldn't Bill Gates get irritated at Leslie for doing this? And, also, do you think richest man in the world would have a one-on-one conversation with you just because you paid him $10,000? What if you paid him $1 million? I don't think there is a dollar amount you could pay. But if you could get a personal introduction......

Update: If you want to read more about why VShake might not be such a great idea, check out Stoked Brands

Posted by Joan Dimicco in "In The Press"  |  Comments[2]

Starbucking McDonald's

McDonald's is getting a new look! The article on the re-design is pretty amusing. Apparently they want to look like Starbucks. "A level has been set by Starbucks, which offers the experience of relaxed chairs and a clean environment." Hmm... I didn't realize Starbucks was responsible for introducing us to relaxed and clean eating environments, but hey, it sounds like a good direction for McD's to go.

I couldn't help but laugh out loud at this comment though:

What will the new McDonald's look like? "Think iPod: clean lines, simplicity," says Miologos [McD's VP of worldwide architecture, design, and construction].

Because we all know that iPods are a lot like fastfood restaurants. Maybe iPods are the new 3D to the design world. ;)

Posted by Joan Dimicco in "In The Press"  |  Comments[3]

Google's use of Ubuntu (umm.... what about Solaris?)

Everyone (and their mothers) have theories about what Google is up to. The lastest blogosphere chatter says that Google is developing its own operating system based on Ubuntu, the open-source Linux distribution. Google has confirmed that they are using Ubuntu internally, but they haven't said much else.

Yahoo News: Google Confirms Using Ubuntu Linux, Won't Say Why

"The report led to speculation among bloggers that Google might be readying a desktop OS to take on Microsoft Corp.'s Windows, a scenario many experts consider unlikely."

Some partial answers:

"Sun's Schwartz talks about licensing Solaris under the GPL3," 1/30/2006
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060130-6074.html

And particularly the last paragraph of:

"Google denies plans to distribute OS based on Ubuntu," 1/31/2006
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060131-6087.html

Posted by Joan Dimicco in "In The Press"  |  Comments[0]

DRM Watch

"Once the MPAA and pals have their way, you're going to pay through the nose for even the most basic of Fair Use rights. You're going to pay for the right to rewind and "re-experience" content. The Copy Prohibited Content class, complete with its asinine insta-delete feature is nothing but a back door into attacking what the content industry hates most: your ability to timeshift content." http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20051218-5797.html

Posted by Scott Nazarian in "In The Press"  |  Comments[1]