Tech Success

5 Great Apps For (Almost) Everyone

noreply@blogger.com (Zach Landes) — Fri, 29 May 2009 16:27:00 +0000

If you're like me, you are always looking for an app upgrade. You can't stand to have an adequate program when there is a better one out there, even if it's only a smidge better. At the same time, you are always on the lookout for that killer app - the one that will change the way you do X, Y, or Z. Well, with both game changers and mini-upgrades, this list is for you.

1. Spotify

This is the music program to end all music programs. Well, in truth, it doesn't have any real pluses over Rhapsody. Well, there is one: its free. Yup, unlimited streaming music, with full track controls, and playlist sharing, all in one slick lightweight desktop app. There are ads, but they are thankfully few and far between - and rank about a 3 out of 10 on the annoying-scale. Also, it is not officially available in the U.S. yet...but there are workarounds. Did I mention that this is FREE?!@!

2. Things (30-day Trial, $49.99 for license, Mac only)

Ahh task management. Love it or hate it, it is (or should be...slacker!) a big part of your day. Things offers a beautiful interface to keep track of your tasks, whether or not you use David Allen's Getting Things Done system. Tasks are searchable by custom tag, can be scheduled, and can be organized into projects and categories. Pricey? Yes. But totally worth the cash.

3. Skim

If you're like me (no one is, but just bear with me) then you read a lot of documents in PDF format. And if you're even more like me (keep bearing with me...) then you aren't completely satisfied by the Mac's built in Preview software. Skim is your answer. The first point in Skim's favor is its built in mark-up tool that allow you to save annotations directly in the metadata of your PDFs. Spiffy. The second point in Skim's favor is that it allows you to scroll through an entire document with just a scroll wheel (and trackpad gestures), unlike Preview. Point 3 is that Skim...is entirely free. Gotta call this one for Skim. Game, set, match.

4. Evernote

How beautiful is this: A tag-organizable note-taking program that syncs online. Even more pretty is the built in OCR for any and all image files that you embed in your notes. Imagine this: inspiration strikes while you're sipping your triple frap mochachino and you don't have your trusty laptop. You grab a pen and start writing THE BIG IDEA on the nearest napkin. Then, with your trusty iPhone, you snap a shot of the napkin and using Evernote's iPhone app, you add THE BIG IDEA to your notebook. When you get home, you log onto your computer and voila, there is that picture of the napkin, with the text fully searchable. Can I get a "Suh-Weet"?

5. Dropbox

Scared of losing all your files? Way too lazy to backup your files on an external drive? With dropbox, if you're online, you're backed up. It works like this: you get a folder on your drive, the dropbox, that you then can fill with whatever you want. Documents, pics, music, porn...whatever. Dropbox instantly syncs any and all changes to files in the folder with your online dropbox account. That's all there is to it. It also has shiny features, like the ability to look at all previous versions of a saved file, and a public folder for file sharing. The first 2GB are free, and its $99.99 for a 1-year subscription with 50 GB. Never email yourself a document again. Never worry about losing that precious webcam recording of your co-worker asleep at his desk. Get dropbox.

Seth Godin on Business Models

noreply@blogger.com (Zach Landes) — Tue, 05 May 2009 10:49:00 +0000

Seth Godin has a great post on rethinking business models. Even if you don't think business models are going to see revolutionary changes in the near future, the post does get one thinking critically about business models, and that can be invaluable. Check it out:

Seth's Blog: Thinking about business models

Update

noreply@blogger.com (Zach Landes) — Tue, 31 Mar 2009 14:36:00 +0000

Image via Wikipedia

It's been far too long since I posted and I wanted to update you on what I have been doing and what I will be doing.
For the last month I have been living in the library, studying for examinations and preparing my PhD proposals. This has occupied all of my time, free and otherwise. However, expect to see the following topics addressed here over the next month or so:

An Outline of the Future of Our Digital World
The Best Self-Help Books for Business--Reviewed

And more. See you soon!

Pros and Cons: An Internet Radio Roundup

noreply@blogger.com (Zach Landes) — Sat, 14 Feb 2009 11:45:00 +0000

Image via CrunchBase

Internet radio is a big deal. Millions of people are listening. And there are a ton of internet radio sites out there. The first big one was Pandora. Then came Last.fm. And then a pile of little competitors showed up. But in Spring of 2007, the royalty fees for internet radio went way up, which you'd think would result in only internet radio stations with viable business models surviving and growing. But you'd be wrong. There are still a ton of services out there, which claim to be doing internet radio right, and claim to know how to make money off of it. I've been experimenting with three of them lately, namely last.fm, grooveshark, and spotify, and I'm going to compare them briefly here.

The big name in internet radio is last.fm. On the plus side, it has an enormous catalogue (the biggest, according to them). In practice, its radio stations are pretty good at selecting music, although not customizable enough. You ought to be able to choose certain tags that you don't want and create a totally custom station. But you can't. In addition, you can't pause or play what you want, when you want it - instead, you have to play what you're given. Which brings us to our next service...

Grooveshark is pretty nifty. Why? Well, first of all because it has a nice selection of obscure tracks. But the thing that makes it really special is that you can play any song in the grooveshark library whenever you want, for free. With pause. Its a lot like having every CD ever made in your library. So, whats the catch? Well, there's a few. On the technical side, the site will often choke up, at least here in London. In addition, the user interface is underengineered. And the biggest problem? Grooveshark's two edged sword is the basis for its business model - all the music is user uploaded. So if someone's track is low quality or filled with skips, or their album is mislabeled or incomplete, there is no way of knowing without clicking "play". This is a big letdown, but of course completely fixable with some kind of rating system for tracks. Oh, and the last problem with Grooveshark - I doubt it will survive. They expect to make money by users paying to download tracks or albums. But who would do that? As long as you have the internet (which with wifi and mobile broadband means basically, everywhere), you have access to all the music. Plus, who wants to pay for tracks of questionable sound quality and completeness? If you're going to buy, you'll go to iTunes. So try grooveshark now, before it sinks under the weight of its own awesomeness.

The last "site" I am going to talk about is Spotify. It's not really a site, but instead a desktop software app. The UI is quite nice, although it's missing sharing features, a deal breaker for many. In addition, the lack of portability due to it being a desktop app is unfortunate. Who makes desktop apps anymore, really? And also on the negative side, it doesn't work in the U.S. yet, just parts of Europe. But let's get to the positives shall we? All tracks are 160 kbps Ogg Vorbis - plenty nice for all but real audiophiles. It is advertising-supported, but there are rarely any ads. Suggestions for similar music are generally very good. And you can pause and play whatever you want.

So what's the final verdict? Well, Last.fm wins. Mostly because of ease of use and social media integration/sharing features. But I continue to use all three. Last.fm when I want a nice radio station and will be an active enough listener to "love" or tweet my music. Grooveshark is for when I really want to hear a specific song, especially on a friend's computer. And spotify is really nice when I want to create a custom playlist of music, set it, and then forget it - forget it because there's no social features to deal with. I'm currently listening to spotify.

And what's the diagnosis for internet radio? It appears to me that there is plenty of room for new competitors, since no one is doing everything a user could want - and making money while doing it.

Why We Need Better International Web 2.0 Coverage

noreply@blogger.com (Zach Landes) — Mon, 09 Feb 2009 05:01:00 +0000

Image via CrunchBase

I get emails from Friendster occasionally and always forget to remove myself from the mailing list. I don't want Friendster mail because I don't want to use Friendster. Why? Because my peers are all on Facebook (or LinkedIn). I never really hear about Friendster in the web 2.0 circles anymore, either. This has me wondering...does anyone use Friendster anymore? Which brings up the further question - why doesn't Friendster just throw in the towel? Well, the answer to my first question is that, yes - Friendster is still used by many people. 90 million, in fact. It's just not very big in the U.S. and continental European markets. In East Asia, and particularly Singapore and Malaysia, it is the most popular social network! In the Phillippines, it is the second-most popular website, PERIOD.

Wow.

There are a lot of lessons here for me, but the biggest thing I've learned from my bit of research is this: Western news outlets deliver tech news through a Western lens. And that means that many of the real changes in social media, in adoption of new technologies, in the growth of companies worldwide, these things are all being largely missed by the Western tech crowd. We need better international web 2.0 coverage. We're missing the big picture.

Why Facebook and Twitter Aren't Making It Big

noreply@blogger.com (Zach Landes) — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 01:09:00 +0000

Image via WikipediaI had a great conversation with a friend of mine in VC this morning. And during that conversation, he told me about a chat he had with an executive from a major communications company. The point of the chat was this:

Communications networks can't rake it in.

Including online communication networks, like Facebook and Twitter. And why not?
Because any economic rents the communication company can extract are just that...RENTS. A financial burden that the user is unable to connect with the value he gains from the service.

Imagine it this way...a telephone company charges a monthly charge. And the consumer, he uses the phone everyday, gets a great deal of use out of it. But the monthly charge, that fee - it's value-removal. Same with twitter. If you add advertising to twitter, its just an annoyance. The user doesn't get the logical connection between the method with which he is paying for the service and the value he extracts from the service.

As my friend pointed out, you don't enjoy paying for a movie ticket, but it makes sense. You are giving 10 bucks in exchange for that seat, right then. It doesn't work that way for communications services.

This means consumers will go along kicking and screaming with just about any monetization scheme that Twitter or Facebook can come up with in their current form. The millions of users they have? Not their market. Their market is the much smaller base of businesses who can gain value from information that networks can offer.

And the big takeaway? Communication networks will always move toward being completely free.

Holy Grail of Web 2.0 - Open Source Social Media

noreply@blogger.com (Zach Landes) — Mon, 05 Jan 2009 06:48:00 +0000

Image by rigeneriamoci via FlickrIt's so strikingly obvious I'm upset that I didn't think of it before. Someone take my idea and make a lot of money. Or considering how well most social media sites have been monetizing (poorly), at least you can start a revolution.

Everyone is talking about open source. Annoyingly, there's a lot less evidence of the positive output of the open source movement than there are articles about the open source movement. If this article from maximum pc is any indication, open source hasn't caught on in a big way yet. But that doesn't take away from its potential.

And here's where its potential kicks in. Open source social media. I'm not talking about Ning, here. I'm talking about a true social media platform that can be built and expanded by the community using it. A web-based social OS, so to speak. It's a win-win for open source and for social media, and since I can't write software, I'll let YOU do it for me. Just, please, make it good.

My Nintendo DS vs. the iPhone

noreply@blogger.com (Zach Landes) — Tue, 30 Dec 2008 20:19:00 +0000

Image via WikipediaI bought an antique yesterday, and I'm glad.

I bought a Nintendo DS Lite at Fry's yesterday. 218g of cheap, shiny plastic.
In this age of the iphone, the app store, and all-in-one devices, why did I buy a 4-year-old piece of hardware that only does one thing?

The answer is design.

While the iPhone (and Touch) has the advantage of the app store, tons of functions, and well...being cool, its not a gaming device. It lacks dedicated physical controls for gaming and for now, a world-class base of game developers.

We live in a world of smart phones and a constant search for all-in-one convenience. But I've been noticing more and more lately, that there continues to be demand for one-off devices that do one thing, and do it well. How else to explain the success of Amazon's kindle or the growing market for netbooks?

And now, when I fly back to London next week, I won't be even a little bit jealous of that guy next to me playing labrynth on his iPhone. I'll be playing Zelda :)

Resurrecting the Electric Car

noreply@blogger.com (Zach Landes) — Mon, 24 Nov 2008 16:01:00 +0000

Image via WikipediaIt's alive...It's ALIVE!!

The electric car, that is.

It's almost as if every news and social network has conspired to talk about electric cars this week.

First, there was this news from San Francisco that the state of California will be investing $1 billion over 2009 and 2010 to build an electric car charging infrastructure.

Then came this article about the Chevy Volt, G.M.'s 2010 model year plug-in hybrid and purported savior.

First, regarding the Volt...I disagree with the view that the mainstream media has been taking regarding the Volt. G.M. is not so stupid to pin its hopes of comeback and profitability on a $40,000 plug-in hybrid. It's both too expensive and too radical for the mass market and I don't think the consumer environment will change a whole lot by 2010.

What the Volt is, in actuality, is a flagship model for G.M. - a harbinger of G.M.'s and the American auto industries paradigm shift to technology and features that make sense for consumers. Much of the hard work will be convincing consumers to make the jump to the enviro-friendly technology.

If the Volt, and the plug-in hybrid in general, is to catch on, it's going to happen first in California. Friday's announcement, made by three mayors and Governor Schwarzenegger, was a show of solidarity. The will of the people (of California at least), is to take environmental change head on. With the infrastructure for electric cars being built over the next few years, and the approaching release of the Tesla, Volt, and other plug-ins, the future has never looked brighter for the AC/DC automobile set.

The question remains:
Will consumers buy them?

Incredible List of Change-Promoting Social Media Networks

noreply@blogger.com (Zach Landes) — Sat, 15 Nov 2008 13:20:00 +0000

Image by Getty Images via DaylifeIn the same vein as MyC4.com and other posts I've made in the last few months, I found a list of change-promoting social media networks - 100 sites long! Props to Christina at LearningXL. Check it out and get involved!

Top 100 Networks for People Who Want to Change the World

MyC4.com - Creative Capitalism For Web 2.0

noreply@blogger.com (Zach Landes) — Wed, 12 Nov 2008 20:05:00 +0000

Image by gerrypopplestone via FlickrThis is cool: sitting in seminar today discussing African development, my Professor pulled up a website called myC4.com . Have you heard of microfinance? kiva, maybe? Well, this website takes the power of the web and the microfinance concept to the next level. On myc4.com, you can lend money to entrepreneurs. You don't have to lend the entire amount they need, which allows you to diversify away the risk of any single debtor defaulting. Coolest of all, you get to charge interest.
Basically, the entrepreneur states what interest rate they would like to pay as a maximum, and then you, the lender, make them an offer of an amount and a rate. It is up to the debtor to accept or negotiate.
This site's concept fits into a niche in social media that is forming right now, and that I have mentioned in the past. And that is using the web to get involved in a cause. But the real innovation here is that this site appeals to both those looking to do good and those looking to make a profit. It's a win-win for the entrepreneurs and for the lendors. I'm surprised it took so long for a site like this to pop up (I've been dreaming of just this concept for awhile now...). I expect we'll see a growing wave of websites built around charitable and progressive causes. And I think we'll see traditional charities desperately searching for ways to get in on the web-based fund-raising over the months and years ahead. Keep your eyes peeled.

The Power of the Boutique: Why the Web is Like Europe

noreply@blogger.com (Zach Landes) — Sun, 02 Nov 2008 15:30:00 +0000

Image via WikipediaSometimes wine helps the idea process. Or at least letting ideas flow. Last night, over a glass or three, I had a discussion with someone who works in marketing for a 5-star hotel. We quickly found ourselves discussing the merits of branding in the context of the local store or restaurant in Europe. The question is:

Why aren't chains more prevalent in Europe? Where's the Taco Bell and Walmart?

My friends point came down to this: Europeans, unlike Americans, have a strong sense of local identity, down to the village they live in. And with this local identity comes a desire for more local flavor in their retail outlets. Europeans want unique stores, with local owners. And I think this may be true to some extent. There is definitely a sense of community here built around small localities and their local businesses. And chains are a lot less common (though in London, still all over the place) than in the U.S. There are no Starbucks in Italy, for example.

It's not just about supporting local businesses however. Its also about passion. People increasingly appreciate passion. Economists talk about how one-size-fits-all production processes are increasingly being replaced by high-volume but semi-custom production. Cheap isn't enough any more. People are willing to pay for a little personalization.

And you know what: this change has happened on the internet, too.

A few years ago, around the dawn of web 2.0, people were happy to join the largest social networks and use the most popular software. Flickr, for example. But increasingly, I would argue, people are looking for more homegrown solutions. Am I the only one increasingly hearing about smugmug? Look at the incredible growth of specialist extensions for firefox and software for iPhone. This search by consumers for personalized solutions has a number of important implications.
For investors, it means there may be an increasing number of opportunities. For entrepreneurs, building a niche product is probably the best way to build a user base. Finally, for the users, more specialized options bring a better experience but also a more difficult task of integration. How does social media work if everyone is using a different medium?!

I haven't yet found the answer. Have you?

Chasing Down Entropy In Web 2.0

noreply@blogger.com (Zach Landes) — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 14:50:00 +0000

Image by luc legay via FlickrI'm hopelessly lost.

This internet, its just too darn big.

I try to keep track of my friends but to do so I have to log on to facebook and now friendfeed. I have to wade through reams of historical data on their breakfast cereal if I want to find out what the result of their job interview was a few days before. And twitter--don't get me started on twitter! There's too much information on the web; that body of information is continuously growing, and we, as users of the web and particularly social media, are being told we have to participate in that growth. ENTROPY.

You know who is really at the leading edge of reigning in this entropy? It's that dinosaur of social media, Facebook.

Yup, Facebook. You see, when I comment on someone's status update, the comment joins that persons "wall". Everything is kept in nice chronological order, from standard wall posts to event creation. Sounds kinda like friendfeed, doesn't it? Yes, but facebook is a truer digitization of human social networks - truer because it allows you to create your identity both in a profile filled with composed material, and in the actions that you take. Friendfeed on the other hand, is only about your dynamic content. Its not nearly as centralized around profiles, of course, and that means more entropy. I'm not saying I think Facebook is better than Friendfeed...one allows interaction with old friends, the other with new. But I do think that the model of decentralization, of entropy...its going to merge with the very profile-centric model of facebook. Next year's social media app is going to be Friendbook. And I'm going to enjoy getting all my dirt in one place.

The World Is So Much Bigger Now

noreply@blogger.com (Zach Landes) — Sat, 11 Oct 2008 16:44:00 +0000

Image via WikipediaI should have known better. I have a degree in modern European history. I read the economist and BBC news. I even spent a summer with a group of Americans in Greece and Turkey. But I thought the world was small. After living my entire life in the United States, having only a few foreign friends that weren't completely americanized, and having traveled little elsewhere, I saw the world through a distinctly American perspective. I don't mean to say that I am a gun-toting, McCain voting, heartland American. I'm from the San Francisco bay area. A political placement test I took in high school had me somewhere between Ghandi and Nelson Mandela. But here in London, studying at the LSE with brilliant people from all over the world and not being flooded with an America's-Eye view at every corner, I have found the World to be a much bigger place. Let's start with England - they don't have separation of Church and State here. Odd? I thought they were advanced. Perhaps there are more ways to go about things in an advanced world than I had previously imagined (though I still stick strongly to separation of Church and State!). I have met people here from Ghana, Nepal, India, Finland, the Czech Republic, and many many more places. And they all have experienced life in a different way than I have. And so have their millions of countrymen. The world is so much bigger now.

London - a New Beginning

noreply@blogger.com (Zach Landes) — Wed, 24 Sep 2008 02:03:00 +0000

Well, here I am - London!
I write this post, in fact, from the computer lab of my dormitory on High Holborn in the City of Westminster. For those of you that don't know, I moved here to take my MSc in Economic History from the London School of Economics. I am 7-10 minutes walk from campus. I went there today - its a very small, enclosed feeling place. The school is technically just buildings on city streets but it feels separate from the bustle of the city. So, what are some of the first things I've noticed that are different here?

The Grocery Store:
My local grocery store is Sainsbury's. Its a major chain here. First of all, there is no pharmacy section at the supermarket - you have to go to a separate pharmacy to get most soaps, any types of drugs, and all the other things they sell in a pharmacy. Its almost only food at Sainsbury's. Many of the foods they carry are different than in the U.S. - different brands, different names; different foods all together. In a stroll through the cereal aisle one notices that most of their favorite General Mills cereals are there, but they say Nestle on the top left corner of the box instead of the familiar American brand. Chocolate Rice Krispies are called Cocoa Pops.
At the checkout stands, the cashiers sit at rotating fabric-upholstered chairs as they work the register and it up to the patron to fill their shopping bag.

The Super Store:
Perhaps the most bizarre store experience I had was on my quest to buy towels. I was told to find a store called Argos. I walked the three blocks to its indicated location and found a small storefront. Inside, it was absolutely jampacked with people...but no products! There are absolutely no products on the floor of the store! Instead, in giant heaps, one finds 2000 page product catalogs. I was *forced* to ask a cute girl with an Eastern European accent how to buy anything. It works something like Ikea, in that the items have codes with which they are identified. You take the codes of the items you want up to the register, and they bring the items out for you. Its very bizarre. Imagine shopping at Wal Mart with only 2inch by 2inch pictures of the items and a 2 sentence description to guide you.

Sightseeing:
Today I did a fair amount of sightseeing. I hopped on the tube and 1 transfer and 20 minutes later, I was at Westminster. Big Ben and the Houses of Parliament are astonishingly ornate and beautiful. Westminster Abbey looks remarkable as well. I didn't go in them today, but will come back another time to watch the House of Commons MP's go at it. Walking down the street, I passed the entrance to Churchill's War Rooms, 10 Downing St. (the British White House), and the Horse Guard, who have to have the most boring job in the world - they just sit on top of a horse holding a sword up in one hand and are not allowed to even turn their heads! Its really quite weird to think that a persons job is to be living statuary. I made my way up to Trafalgar square with its extremely tall pedestal upon which Lord Nelson is perched, and then I crossed the street and ate at St. Martin's in-the-Field Church. In the crypt. Yup, the Cafe in the Crypt was recommended to me by a guide book and so I went down the stairs into the Church crypt where, resting on top of the tombs are dozens of tables. The food was quite good and relatively affordable - I will have to return! Most of the gravestones were well worn and barely legible but I did see dates ranging from the 18th to early 19th centuries on some of them. I wonder if people started to use regular headstones and outdoor grave sites to avert the risk of cafe development that is engendered by the design of an underground tomb. After lunch, I went to the National Gallery where I looked at paintings by Raphael, Michaelangelo, Da Vinci, Eykes, Boticelli, Rubens, and more...needless to say, it is an incredible collection!

Well, my next few days will see me registering for classes, eating some good pub food, begging for a bank account, getting a local cell phone, visiting Portobello Road market, and just generally trouncing around London. And, seeing as how its 3:30 AM here, I'd best be getting going. So, as the locals say, Cheers!

There's No Such Thing as Web 2.0

noreply@blogger.com (Zach Landes) — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 08:33:00 +0000

Image by phxpma via FlickrInspired by the following post on Friendfeed by Chris Baskind:

“Once upon a time, Web 2.0 promised to break down old structures, democratize information, and upend the elites. Now that web publishing is becoming as ossified as Old Media, what's the next big disruption?”

I responded:
Has anyone stopped to think that maybe defining technological change in terms of phase shifts and "1.0", "2.0" iterations is a silly thing to do? In all cases, the technology that comes out on a given day is only 24 hours more advanced than the technology that came out the day before. While demanding groundbreaking innovation is good motivation to make it happen, it is silly to decide that the next iteration is now, because..."it's about that time!"

Why Microsoft Will Bounce Back

noreply@blogger.com (Zach Landes) — Sun, 29 Jun 2008 21:21:00 +0000

There has been a lot of talk about Microsoft being behind the curve lately, especially in light of their recent failed attempts to purchase Yahoo!. Fact is, Microsoft is in trouble. They are in the kind of trouble that many big companies have been faced with in the past - stagnation. Stagnation is deadly, especially in the world of high tech. So, is Microsoft doomed to failure? Should we all sell our shares and get out, especially now that Bill Gates is gone?

No.

Microsoft will turn around. Why? Precisely because of all the press and discussion of its errors. Jack Welch, the great CEO of General Electric, said this about change: "When the whole world knows about your problem, the wind is at your back."
The whole world knows about Microsoft's problem, and that is why they will succeed. They will succeed because they are a company filled with smart people and they have everything going for them, except change. Yes, they have lost this round with Google adSense, but so what? If they concentrate on markets they can win in, on positive change, they will succeed. So, buy Microsoft stock today? Maybe, maybe not. But don't count them out. Everyone else is, and that's why Microsoft will succeed.

Social Web Services are Like Sex

noreply@blogger.com (Zach Landes) — Tue, 24 Jun 2008 02:48:00 +0000

...they either explode or limp into oblivion.

Chaos and Career Planning - Where To Next?

noreply@blogger.com (Zach Landes) — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 21:09:00 +0000

Image via WikipediaToday I want to write about a question that I spend 90% of my mental energy on: What am I going to do after my Masters degree?

I think sharing my ideas on this in the open blog format is best, as it a. fulfills one of the purposes of blogging (personal thoughts) b. fits into one of the categories this blog covers (personal/career development) c. allows others to see what I'm thinking and opens up the discussion (the most successful people seek the most advice, and then they have the edge to act).

Two general tracks are possible to me: more school or the working world. This is going to be a long list...I'm very confused!

1) More School
A. PhD Economic History
Besides this being just plain interesting, I could probably get into a program at Berkeley or Stanford (or an Ivy, but I love California), since this is within the same line as my previous achievements. But do I really want to be a professor? And how about that nice house I promised myself I'd be able to afford. Also, if I go straight to PhD, where do I get the money to finish paying off my prior schooling.
B. PhD Political Economy
Again, extremely interesting. Possibly more access to the kinds of applied careers I'd be interested in than with the Economic History degree. Less of a track record in this, less likely to get into a top program.
C. PhD Economics (probably Development)
Possibly the most access to applied careers that are grounded in the kind of research I am interested in. Does not play particularly well to my track record of achievement - I would have to do some major math coursework somewhere before applying.
D. MS Computer Science
Do I want to do whatever it takes to become a VC? Is this the best path? How dare I attempt to become an expert in tech without knowing how it works under the hood. I think this subject is interesting, and the applications of it even more so. I don't think I want to be an application programmer, though, unless its for my own startup.

2) Working World
A. Investment Banking
Standard path. Good pay, excellent resume item/door opener. Bills paid off fast, and heck, I do enjoy finance! I also enjoy free time :/
B. Private Equity
Well, better than I Banking since I get to be closer to the kinds of investing I am interested in - probably. Pay better, hours similar. Near impossible to get in. May require I banking experience first.
C. Any role in a Start-up
Not doing the work I want to do, but in the industry with which I want to work! The fast track to Venture Capital? Poor pay, job security, hours. Can I really work at a tech company doing something I don't necessarily love for $50,000 when I can grab a banking job doing something closer to my interest (at a micro-level) with $120,000+ up for grabs?

So there you have it. Me + career path = confusion + anguish

Help?!?!

My Number One Friendfeed Feature Suggestion

noreply@blogger.com (Zach Landes) — Mon, 16 Jun 2008 23:53:00 +0000

Ok, so that break from tech was shorter lived than I anticipated. I am only writing because I really want to get this feature down on "paper".

My Number One Friendfeed Feature Suggestion is...

Customizable Follow Tabs:

At the top of the FriendFeed web interface there are a few tabs - "friends", "rooms", "me", "everyone". I think FriendFeed needs to add the ability to create your own customizable tabs.
Let's face it - not everyone you follow is someone whose opinions you care deeply about. And thats great - when you have a lot of free time. But what if you want to read only the things a select few people are doing. Maybe this list of people includes your best friends and a few of your favorite web 2.0 luminaries like Louis Gray and Steve Hodson ;) . And what if you aren't really interested to see even these people's flicker photos all the time, or the concert they are attending (through Upcoming). FriendFeed users ought to be able to create mini lists of their favorite users, and customize (reduce) the number of services that show up in that tab. Then, the next time I'm pressed for time and have 3 minutes to find out whats happened in tech in the last 3 days, I click my "Favorites" tab, or whatever I've labeled it, and I know, without wading through myriad posts.

FriendFeed users - don't you just want this feature RIGHT NOW?!
Someone tell Paul :)

A Break From Tech

noreply@blogger.com (Zach Landes) — Sat, 14 Jun 2008 22:19:00 +0000

Starting now I am taking the next few days off from the Tech World. I will report on my deprivation on Thursday or Friday. For now, I have to deal with this research paper on the political economics of Eurozone membership! Email me or direct twitter if you to reach me!

Note: comic from here

Monetizing Twitter - The First Mover Disadvantage

noreply@blogger.com (Zach Landes) — Tue, 10 Jun 2008 16:41:00 +0000

Image via WikipediaMark Hopkins over at Mashable has a post up titled "Renting Twitter: Path to Profitability?". The basic concept of the post is to sell the twitter user's background and profile picture to advertisers. While this isn't a particularly original idea, it also isn't much of a viable model. In the words of Twitter's own Evan Williams,

Thanks for the idea. I'm not particularly optimistic about this as an overall business model for Twitter. For one thing, the percentage of users whom this would apply to is very tiny. Twitter is meant to be a communications tool for the masses. We love the Scobles and other power users, but they're kind of anomolies (by definition). The the percentage of these users who wanted to do this is even smaller -- and Twitter's share of that is smaller yet. And that's assuming this model even works.

That said, we're cool with people monetizing their own use of Twitter, in general (as long as they're above-board about it). Because it's all opt-in, if people are annoyed or not getting value, unfollow is easy.

As a side note, and for the record, while we don't mind the community brainstorming, we're not in desperate search for a business model. We have some ideas we'll try out when the time is right, but Twitter isn't going to go away for lack of one any time soon (nor will reliability issues be solved with one).

Lastly, please stop perpetuating the "Scoble is the reason that Twitter is failing" myth. We've not said that. Our system has been the problem -- and we're working on it! :)

Thanks.

What I like about this comment from Evan is that he recognizes that the time to monetize twitter is not right now. Here are the problems with monetizing right now:

1) Twitter is broken
Until Twitter gets the bugs worked out in their architecture, advertisers are going to show very little interest in an always down service. Imagine the cost structure of television ads if the more people were watching in your time slot, the more likely the channel would turn off! Superbowl ads would be worthless! This is Twitter's current status, and I am not impressed by their uptime during WWDC yesterday, considering they turned off/limited many features just to keep it from all blowing up.

2) Twitter isn't popular enough
I really don't think microblogging has reached the critical mass--or tipping point as web geeks like to say--that is required to make business models based on reaching large numbers of people, regularly, viable. And I assume that any advertising based model for twitter is predicated on these requirements. This all feeds into, I think, my most important point...

3) The first to monetize is the first to lose its users
Twitter faces competition from a number of different services. None of these services are monetized right now. They are all completely dedicated to their users, and users like this. They are used to it. If twitter becomes the first mover on monetization, and if that monetization is even the least bit invasive, users will flock to alternative services, or at least try them out. And who knows, they may be better! In which case, users will stay.

So, my recommendation to Twitter:
Check yo'self before you wreck yo'self, foo.

A Venture Capitalist At Foundry Group Tells Me...

noreply@blogger.com (Zach Landes) — Sat, 07 Jun 2008 20:33:00 +0000

...That my business model in the post below probably won't work. Seth Levine, a venture capitalist with Foundry Group, hinted to me that government buying cycles have a way of ruining any business model predicated on government purchase. It's a sad state of affairs. I think one way to overcome this would be to set an example with your product in a major test-city, say San Francisco. Based on what Seth has told me, any idea based on selling to government needs all the leverage it can get to convince the bureaucrats to take the plunge.

A Business Model For Hyperlocal

noreply@blogger.com (Zach Landes) — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 18:04:00 +0000

There has been a good deal of talk on the blogosphere about hyperlocal websites lately in response to an article in the Wall Street Journal about the Washington Post's "Hyperlocal Flop", LoudounExtra.com. Hyperlocal is seen by many as the new way to do local content, replacing your local newspaper with neighborhood and small-region-centric content, and moving away from standard "news items" to items of a more personal interest.

Fred Wilson blogged about hyperlocal yesterday, and his main point was that hyperlocal will not be successful unless it is peer produced (as opposed to being run from a news desk). I agree with this assertion.

I think communities will only exist when people have incentive to create them, and peer-produced content proves that this incentive exists. It is self-fulfilling.

I have a proposal for a hyperlocal business model, and since it will be awhile before I'm out of school, I'll share the seed of the idea here and risk some genius picking it up and running with it!
Hyperlocal Business Model:
Government Centered, Peer Produced

The product: software or web service sold to local governments (towns, counties) that allows for open debate of local issues and law.

Aids government and locals by streamlining process by which input is gathered, voices heard, and decisions made at the council level.

Also serves as a content aggregator for blogs on local issues, with a crowdsourced ranking system for sites and opinions, almost like a digg front page of ideas. Community announcements would also find a place here.

By giving local government an incentive to promote the use of the software by the citizens, it has built in promotional potential. This allows it to quickly take advantage of network effects.

Just some thoughts on a potential business model for Hyperlocal content. A brainstorm, if you will.

How Free Software Changes Everything

noreply@blogger.com (Zach Landes) — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 04:24:00 +0000

Well, that could probably be the topic of an entire book. But one thing that struck me today (a very obvious point, but I will make it, nonetheless) is the way free changes user loyalty. Or at least ought to. I was reading Walt Mossberg's Personal Technology blog today about Firefox 3.0 being the best web browser. Of course Firefox is free software, but so are all the other browsers. In his article, Mossberg declares Firefox 3.0 the best internet browser on any platform..."for now". It is this "for now" that is interesting to me. Not only does the web and the highly iterative nature of this software allow for constantly changing "bests" but, because its free and easy to replace with the new best. This means brand loyalty is a much harder thing to build on the internet for products whose use is fairly transparent--mainly easy-to-use consumer software. On the other hand, there is a fair amount of brand loyalty in the tech world, even in the area of browsers.

One way this brand loyalty builds up is through support for a company's mission: many people use firefox, not only because it is often better than Internet Explorer, but because it is opensource and released by a non-profit. Something similar is at work when some people consistently buy AMD processors despite no logical reason to do so (much slower, often more expensive, etc.).

Another trick to building loyalty is, and I've said this before, making your product a platform. Even if the next version of Internet Explorer is faster and has all the same built in features...I will still use Firefox. Why? Because of extensions! Mozilla has built a proprietary platform into Firefox, and now I am not just loyal to Firefox, I am loyal to all the little widgets and whatzits that I use on a daily basis and that I can only get in Firefox.

The moral of the story is, when software is free, having a good product can only get you so far. There has to be something more to keep users, or they will jump ship as soon as someone one-ups you, which, I'm happy to say, is guaranteed.