I am a huge Foursquare users. I registered the day that it launched at SXSW, I’m mayor of sixteen places and have checked in over 450 days. Whenever i go to a place, i immediately think of checking in. I’ve also tried out all of the competitors, such as Loopt and Gowalla. While those are ok, Foursquare was the best for me.

So, when Facebook launcehd “Places” i was curious to give it a shot. And after just a few days, I think it’s going to be a viable competitor and will keep many mainstream users from ever using Foursquare. Here’s why:

There are three reasons why people use Foursquare:

1. Socially. To tell their friends where they are so they can join them.
2. As a game. To become “mayor” of a place and to check in more than other people
3. MyWare. To log where in the world you’ve been

The first reason – to connect with your friends – is the most powerful and is the reason most people use a service like this. The main issue with Foursquare is that not many of their friends are on it, so this didn’t happen for most. It only worked this way for power users and early adopters who have other power users and early adopters as friends (people like me). This is where FB Places shine. The first day of using it, i had more friends on it than on Foursquare and it was immediately more useful for me. I could actually see where many of my friends were. Foursquare never did this well.

The second reason – to play as a game and to become a mayor – doesn’t work for FB Places. There is no game in Facebook. It’s just to connect. I can see rewards happening in the future the same way that some restaurants or shops post messages on their FB pages for free coffee or cupcakes. I actually do miss this on FB. I found myself not checking into a place this weekend for a second time because i asked myself, “what’s the point?” I knew it would annoy my friends and i was leaving soon anyway. I checked on Foursquare but not FB.

The third reason will never happen on Facebook but will on Foursquare. You can see my stats page here. It’s great to see and view all the places i’ve been. Will most users like this? Not at all. I’m a rare breed in my love of tracking myself.

To sum up, i really think FB Places is going to crush it. Despite Friday being the biggest day in Foursquare history and their claim that the rising tide will raise all ships, I think that unless Foursquare can continue to out innovate Facebook, I think FB will leave Foursquare behind in the dust. Once again, Facebook proves taht although it’s large and has an amazingly large userbase, they aren’t afraid to make big changes and innovate. This is why they are the internet king right now. Did anyone think that Yahoo! if they couldn’t buy Foursquare would actually build something. Yeah right.

There are six fights, one after another, which makes this one of the few movies with more than one major climax. Each fight could have been the big finale to any other movie: one involves a Bollywood-style dance number, one is a musical duel, and one is the big “Final Boss” that doesn’t end how you think.

The atmosphere in this film is huge. There’s both a Seinfeld and Nintendo references that i thoroughly enjoyed. The music has Beck, Metric and Broken Social Scene, along with old school 8-bit video game noises. Everything in this movie is over-the-top and excessively nerdy. From the music and sound to the look and feel of just the first thirty seconds of the film, you know exactly what you’re getting into.

Inception (8.5 out of 10)
Posted all my thoughts on this here and here

The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo (8.5 of 10) and Girl Who Plays With Fire (9 out of 10)
I saw both of these this summer. Take Batman Begins and The Dark Knight. i think Begins is a better cohesive movie, end-to-end, but Dark Knight is a great sequel with broader scope and more action. And, i think It works as a great movie only because it’s a sequel. Similarly, The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo is a better individual movie. It’s tight and complete but The Girl Who Plays With Fire is a fantastic sequel. It takes the foundation of Tattoo and really blows it out.

Considering the first movie is mostly about one person and the second is all about another, it’s amazing how well these are connected, yet also how different they are. One is a methodical while other is frantic. One is focused with only 2 characters really, while the other all over the place with over 10. Regardless, both are fantastic and worth seeing.

The Other Guys (8 out of 10)
It’s great to have Will Ferrell back. I was worried he was going down the Eddie Murphy path where his movies got worse as he got older. But The Other Guys was one of his best. If you think of all the Will Ferrell movies and the ones where he gives the best performance, i’d rank Anchorman first, Talledega Nights second and this film third (and i do think Blades of Glory is underrated). Here he’s amazing as a homely cop but even funnier when he turns into his alter ego, Gator. I’d put this up against any of his other films.

Salt (6 our of 10)
This movie was just not at all interesting to me. Angelina’s character didn’t really talk the entire time. [**Spoiler Alert**] For the entire movie, you can’t tell you if she’s on Russia’s side or US’s. Thus, you have no idea what her character really thinks of really feels. You’re just watching her maybe kill people (maybe just maim), and based on those actions you’re led to believe she’s Russian. Of course, by the end of the movie, you realize that you’ve just been manipulated by fancy editing and lack of information. Pretty lame if you ask me. I’m just mad that the director wanted to make a movie like that.

Of course, the most interesting thing about the movie is the director, Phillip Noyce. It’s the same guy who was big in the studio system decades ago, doing Patriot Games, Clear & Present Danger and others. Then he moved back to Australia and did small indie flicks like Rabbit Proof Fence and The Quiet American. When he did, he employed a woman to stay in Hollywood and just read scripts. Specifically spy scripts. This is because he’s obsessed with spies. Growing up, his dad was a spy for Australia, and as a kid he used to go through town and follow people inconspicuously. So, this type of movie was the only thing that would bring him back to the studios. And after 5 years his woman found one. This is it. You can learn more in this KCRW podcast.

While that’s cool and all, i still wish it was a better movie.

Dinner With Shmucks (5 out of 10)
One of the more disappointing comedies of the summer. Steve Carrell is more annoying than funny and the plot is just rough. Say you meet a guy who is ruining your life – he tells your girlfriend about an old girlfriend, tells her to get lost, and then destroys your house by throwing wine bottles at all walls and tables. Now imagine this guy says he’s left his keys at your house, would you make a bed for him on your couch or would you drive him home? It wouldn’t be a movie if he just goes home but it’s a bad movie because he stays – because nobody would behave like the people in this movie. Don’t ever see this film

The future is already here, it’s just unevenly distributed.   - William Gibson

I did see the future this summer – just in bits and pieces.  Let me explain….

As many of you know, i had an amazing experience at Techstars this summer. Not only did we evolve our company Kapost in a new and better direction, but we got to meet and interact with some incredible mentors and entrepreneurs.

There’s a company i worked right next to this summer called Gearbox.  This is two guys who are hard core robotics nerds – and i mean that in the best way.  They have the only desk i’ve ever seen at a startup that has soldering irons and wrenches.

When they first arrived to Techstars, it was clear that they didn’t really know the best direction to take their company.  They weren’t alone, lots of us had unclear paths.  But they had a passion for robots, gaming and mobile devices and were looking for how best to apply this. As the months passed, they decided on a direction that was well aligned with this passion – which resulted in the Orbbott or the “Gearbox Ball.”

What is it? This is a robotic ball that is controlled by your iPhone or Android device.  Not only is controlled but there are apps on your phone that you can use with the ball.  Apps like Sumo (where you play against another ball) or Golf or, my favorite, “follow me” app. This is an application where you put the phone in your pocket and the Ball just follows you around the room.  It speeds up when you’re far away and backs up if you approach it.  I don’t know why, but i love this idea.  It’s the best version of a robotic dog or cat i’ve heard of.

You can see a video below of them demo’ing their ball.  It’s a great idea. They’ve invented a whole category of toys called “Smart Toys” and i think i’ve just seen the future.  Thankfully, i was lucky enough to see it emerge from the very beginning.

First, there is some analysis done about when Leo wears his wedding ring. If you pay attention to when he has it on (clue: only in dreams), you can figure out the final scene in the movie.  That link is here

Second, this video below shows how the main score of the movie has a subliminal tune embedded in it.  Which pretty much blew my mind.  Thanks to Gawker for that.

I though the film great and here’s why. It was truly original. Sure, there have been dream movies before. But in a world where most of the films are sequels and remakes, this movie was a plot that nobody had come close to. Mental espionage is not a common genre. You could argue this was the classic heist movie where one last job is all they need to accomplish but when you’re not stealing anything but instead placing a thought inside someone’s head – it’s a bit different. So i guess the context was the original bit. I loved the introduction of the plot and explanation of the concept. Similar to how the best part of Batman Begins is when we see how Batman came to be and who is responsible, the best part of Inception is learning how this dream hijacking occurs and who is required within it. Even as hit the third act of the movie, you’re learning the details of being inside dreams.

Also similar to Batman Begins and Dark Knight, the end of the movie is disappointing compared to the beginning and middle. Thousands of people shooting and missing the good guys while they lay people out with one punch is not a clever way to end a movie that relies on thoughtfulness and intricate details. Memento probably has the best ending of a movie of the past 10 years and thus i hold Nolan to a higher standard here. He’s gotten lazy with Batman.

The women in the movie were also great. Ellen Page was a great student and has never looked more girl-like, especially when you place her next to Marion Cotillard (the woman from La Vie en Rose). The scene where the two are next to each other is like a class in the difference between what a girl is compared to a woman. Marion Cotillard was also a phenomenal femme fatal. One last woman that drags the man down, literally.

I could see this film winning a slew of Oscars, but because the idea and execution was the show not the characters, the awards are for Writing, Director and potentially Picture not for actor or actress

Some other notes:

• Great to see Tom Berenger in there. Haven’t seen him in quite a while. Loved it
• Note from JT: when cillian murphy opens the safe and there’s a paper windmill in there isn’t that a symbol for green since his father seemed to be an oil tycoon?  Interesting nuance.
• I’m not the biggest Joseph Gordon-Levitt especially since he overacted his SNL show but i thought he pulled it off.  I would have preferred James Franco who was originally cast for that role
• I think they could have done without the entire third level (snow level) madness.  It was just too much and the movie still would have been sweet if it was a more tame level or just make level 2 more detailed.

After reading Toby’s suggestion, i picked up the novel City of Thieves by David Benioff. Let me tell you, this book is really great – one of the best books i’ve read in a long time. I bought for $4 used on Amazon – do yourself a favor and get it.

The story starts with a screenwriter (the guy who wrote 25th Hour) talking to his grandfather about WWII. It’s his grandfather’s story that takes us to Leningrad in 1942 when he was 17. He gives us the core story but then leaves the interview session telling Benioff, “you’re the writer, make it up.” And he comes up with a fantastic tale

It’s not that long but is still a great story of friends, war, snipers, girls, and a box of eggs. Read it

1. Did Marty trigger the civil rights movement?
2. Isn’t it weird that George’s and Loraine’s son looks just like the guy Loraine tried to sleep with in high school?
3. How did Biff go from rapist to butler?

All that and more in the video below:

Bill -

Love the column and the podcast – read/listen religiously.

I used to play soccer in college. I’m just stating so you can see i have some credibility to what i’m about to say.

I had to write because one thing is driving me crazy. You and others keep claiming that Lebron James and other NBA stars like Dwight Howard would be amazing on the soccer field. See your recent podcast with Chris Collinsworth (here). These players are incredible athletes but this is just not the case, and anyone who has played soccer would know that if you see a 6′ 8″ guy playing against you, you would be psyched. There is no way, no matter how athletically talented they are, that would be good players. This is due to 2 main reasons: (1) foot size and (2) quickness.

To shoot or hit a long ball well, you need to hit the soccer ball with your instep, which is the top of your foot. People with big feet are notoriously bad at kicking a ball far and accurately. It’s possible, but if you’re huge (over 6’5″) it would be super tough. Quickness is another issue. Being fast on your first 3 steps is so crucial to a soccer player. You see it all the time at the top of the box, where a player is trying to get just a little bit of space to get a shot off. The bigger you are, the less quick you are. Think of Lebron trying to guard the quickest point guards all day. It wouldn’t go that well.

For both of these reasons, if you’re super small and really quick you can be the best player in the world. See Messi and Maradona (both 5’5″-ish). If you’re gigantic, you probably won’t be.

BUT, i do agree with your general idea that if the best players in America played soccer, we’d dominate. In fact, in 2006 i made up the US starting 11 if we had our pick of the best players and they were super fast, strong and quick dudes (Barry Sanders would have been ideal). That post is here

Anyway, please don’t say anymore how good of a soccer player Lebron would be. It drives me nuts.

Thanks and keep on kicking ass -

Mike Lewis

Thanks to TheBoss for bringing this to my attention

An amazing piece of trivia is that July 6th is the day that Marty McFly went to in the future.

Anyone see him out and about?

Just a great picture.

I just thought the crazy thing is we could be on a plane tomorrow. It didn’t mean anything in the game, but I didn’t want to go home. I was kind of apprehensive about losing.

All the progress US Soccer had made over the past 8 to 20 years with the introduction of an MLS team, a quarterfinal finish in 2002 and the beginning of players playing successfully in Europe would all be for naught with a loss and elimination.  It would be the ultimate disappointment and I could tell the American public would once again sour on the sport.  I would dredding hearing Chuck Klosterman and Tony Kornheiser talk about how we suck and will forever suck at the world’s game.

But then the exact opposite happens.  Three minutes from going home, we score.  A fraction from elimination and we become champions setting a record for the fewest total minutes that a World Cup group winner had been leading in its first three games: a grand total of two minutes.

Not only am i happy to watch the US play this Saturday in the 2nd round but i’m happy for soccer in America.  For the first time since i can remember am i hearing people talk about what an exciting and fun sport it is.  People are beginning to understand why the rest of the world loves it.  This game will directly lead to future successes on the pitch in future World Cups.  There’s an 8 year old right now who wants to score the next huge goal in 2032 and because of today’s victory he’s much more likely to stick with soccer than go to football or basketball.  I couldn’t happier about all of it.  As Landon Donvan said after the game,

I used to see this game we play as just a game,” said Donovan, “and I think I’ve realized particularly during this tournament that it’s more than that. It’s an opportunity to inspire. And not only inspire other people but inspire yourself and your teammates. I think tonight is going to do a lot more for me and other people than maybe we’ll realize.

I completely agree.  Congrats guys.  Good luck on Saturday

You see there are two sections: Communication and Content.  Both are directions that a company can focus on.  What’s interesting is the relationship between virality and revenue potential.   The more focused an application is on Communication, the easier and more quickly it spreads – but it can’t easily sell ads or monetize.  The more Content-centric an application is, the easier it is to monetize (ads are more relevant with higher CTR) but it’s hard to get the app to spread and grow.

Facebook started, of course, as a closed network for college students where they could “connect” and communicate.  As the statement above would suggest, this caused it to spread very quickly.  And it did.  However the site wasn’t making much  money.  Now, they find themselves with a slew (if you can call 500 million people that) of users and a desire to monetize.  It then makes sense for it to move up the scale and become more of a content company.  Thus, you see lots of Like buttons all over the place, a payment platform, and an ad platform to make this as effective as possible

The problem is with privacy.  Users were led to Facebook thinking it was on the Communication side of the fence.  However, it’s ambition is to be more in the middle because that is where it can both spread quickly and make money.  The privacy rules of a Communication web application and Facebook now are longer in agreement .  You can’t ask people to “Friend” and communicate with work people, parents, and close personal acquaintances and then also ask them to make that information public as if it is Content.  That there is a fundamental problem.

1. There are two women in the film
2. These women have names
3. These women talk to each other about something other than a man

Some of my favorite films of all time don’t satisfy this rule – such as Big Lebowski and The Dark Knight.   This week John August, a screenwriter of major films (Big Fish, Charlie and the Chocolate Factory), is saying that now that he knows about this rule, he’s going to try to bring it to every one of his subsequent films.  He says in his blog post:

Looking back through my movies, I’m struck by how rarely the female characters actually do talk to each other. In Big Fish, it’s only a brief moment with Sandra and Josephine. In Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, it’s a throwaway moment between Violet and Veruca. Titan A.E. fails the test unless you know that the alien Stith is technically female.

In each of these cases, I had to spend a few minutes just to come up with these (admittedly slight) examples.

Also, I find it fascinating that the Reverse Bechdel Test is almost meaningless. Pretty much every movie made includes two named male characters talking about something other than a woman.

Here’s the original comic strip that invented the rule:

And if you want to see how many films apply, check out this video:

Interesting….

Last week i saw the movie Crank 2: High Voltage. This movie is totally insane.   To illustrate how out there the film is, i’d like to repost comedian Aziz Ansari’s tweets he had while watching the movie where he reports on what’s actually happening on screen:

A dog just bit a cops duck off!

“FULL BODY TOURETTES!”

Chev is having sex on a horse racing track!!!!!  (this scene lasted 10x longer than I thought it could!)

Horse race sex scene is easily one of the most dumb/ridiculous things ever in a film. Can’t believe it. Crank 1 is dead to me.

Surely everyone has mentioned this, but Chev Chelios just killed an Asian dude and said “Chicken… and Broccoli.” Speechless.

RT @scottaukerman Here’s a lesson, kids: Tattooing your entire face will get you exactly ONE movie role.

RT @jwoliner The last “blooper” consisted of showing how an extra had shit himself. Going out with class!

Basically, I don’t want to give the impression that its cool to text or Twitter in a theatre, BUT if there is a movie with a character named PoonDong… I think its a unique situation and we were respectful in how we did

That’s right.  All of these things happened and more. For instance, there’s a Godzilla scene where Jason Statham becomes a 60 foot giant and fights in an electricity farm – for no major reason.  You have Amy Smart, the guy who played “Pedro” from Napolian Dynamite, David Carradine, Corey Haim, Jason Statham, and Ron Jeremy.   The horserace scene was so ridiculous that i had to buy the song that was playing during it out of respect. I could go on and on about how absurd this movie is, but i think you should do yourself a favor and get some beers and actually watch it for yourself.

But, my week doesn’t stop there.  I also saw the movie Splice on Sunday.  That took insanity to a whole other level.

I thought there was going to be a small alien-like thing that was just going to take out the lab and make for cool scenes similar to the movie Alien and Aliens.  However, what i was NOT prepared for was the little mutant to grow up to be like a human, have a tail with a stinger, go live with the doctors in their farm, start drawing pictures, have mutant sex with the Adrian Brody, get a pet kitten, grow wings, morph into a man, get buried alive, and then rape the mom.  THAT was unexpected and totally insane.  If you are looking for a humongous WFT, go check out this movie.

Ok, go about your business. Just had to report on that. Nothing more to see here.  Move along

Some facts about this snake:

• One bite from a snake this large contains enough venom to kill over 40 full grown men
• The head alone is larger than the hand of a normal sized man.
• A bite from those fangs would equal being penetrated by two  1/4 inch screwdrivers.
• A snake this size could easily swallow a 2 year-old child.
• A snake this size has an approximately 5 and 1/2 foot accurate striking distance. (The distance for an average size Rattlesnake is about 2 feet)
• Judging by the size of the snake, it is estimated to weigh over 170 pounds. How much do you weigh?

The 10 Golden Principles of Successful Web Apps from Carsonified on Vimeo.

1. Speed.  Fred sees speed more than a feature. Speed is the most important feature and he argues that this is more important with mainstream users an early-adopters who are more forgiving.  Everyday users have no tolerance for slugish apps.  I heard the same thing from Google when they presented at Techstars.  They measure everything and if it’s slow, they fix it.  Fred mentioned pingom as something they use to measure every portfolio company.
2. Instant Utility.  If a user has to spend too long to configure the service – it won’t catch on.  YouTube is a great example of how it won by providing instant feedback rather than delaying the gratification.
3. Voice.  Consumer software is media today.  Consumers approach in the same way the approach magazines, tv shows, etc.. Software has to have a personality and if it has no attitude, then it won’t catch on.
4. Simplicity.  Just one main feature at launch.  Fred points to Delicious as a perfect example of this.  Make the app super simple and then go from there.  There are lots of good posts on how to focus on this.
5. Programmability.   Make your app accessible from other developers.  This means read+write API’s and if’s not “write” it’s not an API and might as well be RSS.   Allow other developers to add energy, data and richness.  In Fred’s mind this is absolutely essential and he’s hesitant to invest in anything that isn’t programmable.
6. Personalizable.  You want make your app infused with your user’s energy.
7. REST URLs.  Make your app easy to navigate – give everything a URL. This also makes is discoverable from Google.
8. Discoverable.  There are millions of web pages and web applications.   This point means SEO but it also means that your app itself should be self-promoting.  This means social media and branding.
9. Clean.  This is UI requirement.  You need to be able to come to the page and be able to immediately determine what to do and what’s going on.   It has to be inviting and simple.
10. Playful.  An app should be fun to use and it’s use should encourage future use.  Weigh Watchers is a good example as it establishes points and goals and getting the points and acheiving goals is something that should be embedded in each application

There one more interesting point he spits out at the end about the name and brand of a company.  He talks about how important it is to him that the company purchases the actual name of the company.  For example, Foursquare was playfoursquare.com and they insisted that they change.  He also insisted that del.icio.us become delicious.com.

The 10 principles are interesting to think about and a good checklist for any startup to have.  I’ve definitely been guilty of ignoring some of these in my past work.   Interesting stuff

Whoa. You can guess what his response was. Of course we want to see pictures. Hotrod replied,

These are the 205 tickets. Hmmm…I’d need to see pics before deciding. I usually take cash.

to which the guy replied

i understand they’re good tix, but like i said, we’re HUGE fans

And then sent these photos

It is AMAZING what people will do for tickets these days

The video, called “Write the Future,” premieres on TV in 32 countries during the UEFA Champions League final on Saturday, but was posted early by Nike on NikeFootball.com. The ad features Cristiano Ronaldo, Didier Drogba, Wayne Rooney, Landon Donovan, Thiago Silva and Ronaldinho (even though he didn’t make Brazil’s World Cup roster), plus cameos by Roger Federer, Kobe Bryant and Homer Simpson.

Alejandro González Iñárritu directed the Nike short and cast his “Amores perros” star Gael García Bernal as Ronaldo. Incredible work overall by the swoosh.

In case that video didn’t get you excited, here’s another short little commercial:

Only 21 days till kick off!

Our goal was to identify which colleges, compared student-for-student, have turned out the most undergraduates destined for high-tech greatness. While our results included many prestigious names, the rankings produced surprises as well. At the top of the list is a spot nearly 3,000 miles away from Silicon Valley.

That right baby! These results don’t surprise me. Making my way through the tech entrepreneurial world, I’ve encountered lots of Dartmouth alums as both entrepreneurs and VC’s. Dartmouth also has a long history in pioneering technology. Some key notes:

• In 1956, a Dartmouth math professor coined the phrase “artificial intelligence” and “AI” (link)
• In the 60′s, The Dartmouth Time-Sharing System, was the first large-scale time-sharing system to be implemented successfully – setting the stage for the large server farms we see today at large companies such as Google.
• 1964, Dartmouth created the BASIC programming language which became a extremely popular language in the 70′s and 80′s.  In 1975, Bill Gates and Paul Allen developed a version of BASIC as their initial plan for Microsoft and today’s MS Visual Basic is still a derivative of that initial creation.
• Since 1991, computers have been mandatory for all students and in 1988 had campus-wide email working (before AOL!)
• In 1999, Wired magazine named Dartmouth the #1 most wired College in the country and in 2001, it became the first school in the country to be completely wireless (link)

It’s clear the Dartmouth is doing something right.  It’s nice to get the recognition.

Goldfeder’s plan was pretty intricate. First, he spent 15 hours using a digital camera, a make-shift green screen and a 30-day free trial of Pinnacle Studio software to edit himself into Back to the Future as Marty during a scene opposite Doc Brown. He then spent a few minutes talking to Doc, as himself, about whether or not he should propose, cleverly working Doc’s real responses from the movie into their conversation.  That would have been enough for most people.

But then Corey continued. He then convinced his girlfriend that there was a Michael J. Fox retrospective taking place at a theater downtown where they were screening Back to the Future. In cahoots with the theater, they put up signage out front making it look like the event and screening were indeed real, and Goldfeder snagged about 20 friends to show up as audience members. He then showed up with his gal, the lights went down, Back to the Future began as planned, and then when they got to the selected scene Marty McFly was instantly replaced by Corey Goldfeder, who, after a little chit chat with Doc, turned it over to himself to do the actual proposal. And of course she said yes.

The video is private right now for some reason, but you can watch part of it on Fox News (fast forward to 1:35):

This is incredible.  Not only for the amount of time but for the subject matter too.  Back To The Future is one of the all time classics.  It’s great.  I would love to somehow incorporate it into my wedding.  Here’s a pic of the couple:

I’ve heard quite often over the past year how Apple is crazy to go down the same path again.  However, i read a good summary today by Mark Sigal on O’Reilly’s blog about why this isn’t the case.  His five main points are:

1. Retail Distribution: During the PC Wars, everything came down to distribution and presence on limited retail shelf space. To be successful, you had to be on the shelves of retailers like ComputerLand, CompUSA, Circuit City, Office Depot and MicroAge. Given the wide variety of hardware OEMs making Wintel-based PCs, both shelf-space for Macs and the technical know-how to sell them were severely limited, making a differentiation story like Apple’s a hard sell. Today, Apple Stores drive a superior environment for consumers to experience hardware hands-on and get educated about the full breadth of Apple products. An aside, this is a consumer touch point that Google absolutely lacks.
2. Pricing overhang: A primary reason for Apple’s crushing defeat by Microsoft was Apple’s misguided notion that it could charge grossly higher dollars for Mac products than Windows-based PC offerings. Contrast this with the present, where Apple is consistent in their assertion and awareness that it cannot and will not leave pricing overhang (i.e. a sufficient pricing gap between its products and the competition). This avoids the past dynamic where consumers saw picking Apple products as an either/or decision, in terms of price vs premier experience. iPod, iPhone, iPod Touch and iPad all have followed this course.
3. Developer ecosystem: It is a truism that in platform plays he who wins the hearts and minds of developers, wins the war. In the PC era, Apple forgot this, bungling badly by launching and abandoning technology initiatives, co-opting and competing with their developers and routinely missed promised milestones. By contrast, Microsoft provided clear delineation points for developers, integrated core technologies across all products, and made sure developer tools readily supported these core initiatives. No less, Microsoft excelled at ensuring that the ecosystem made money. Lesson learned, Apple is moving on to the 4.0 stage of its mobile platform, has consistently hit promised milestones, has done yeomen’s work on evangelizing key technologies within the platform (and third-party developer creations – “There’s an app for that”), and developed multiple ways for developers to monetize their products. No less, they have offered 100 percent distribution to 85 million iPhones, iPod Touches and iPads, and one-click monetization via same. Nested in every one of these devices is a giant vending machine that is bottomless and never closes. By contrast, Google has taught consumers to expect free, the Android Market is hobbled by poor discovery and clunky, inconsistent monetization workflows. Most damning, despite touted high-volume third-party applications, there are (seemingly) no breakout third-party developer successes, despite Android being around two-thirds as long as the iPhone platform.
4. Consumer technology adoption: During the PC era, large enterprises essentially dictated the industry winners by virtue of standardizing on a given vendor or type of solution. This created a winner-takes-all dynamic, inasmuch as consumers would ultimately buy the same solutions that had been blessed by large enterprises. By virtue of its conservative nature (remember the motto, “No ever got fired for buying IBM”?), staid Microsoft always felt like a safer choice than crazy Apple. And besides, accounting could solicit bids from multiple hardware vendors, which they liked. By contrast, today’s breakthrough adoption begins in the consumer realm and filters back to enterprises, not the other way around.
5. Microsoft-like resilience: I remember too well the Microsoft mantra “Embrace-Extend-Extinguish,” which basically meant that any segment worth owning Microsoft would ultimately dominate by the 3.0 version of its competing product.  They were ruthless in squeezing the lifeblood out of competitors through any means necessary. But, give Microsoft full props for manifesting an unyielding resilience to keep working its product offering and market assault until victory was at hand. Considering Apple’s rise from the ashes to re-create a very profitable Mac business — the dominance it has created with iPod and iTunes; the powerhouse iPhone and iPhone platform and the ambitious, and already well-regarded iPad — does anyone wonder about Apple’s resilience? By contrast, Google remains almost completely dependent upon search and advertising, despite launching so many new product offerings and seriously pursuing M&A over the past several years. Arguably, Google’s famously loosely coupled structure leads to a lot of seeds being planted, but so too, it seems to a less than laser-like focus on seeing those seeds to cultivation and full harvest. It begs the question, “Can a tiger change its stripes?”

I carry around both an iPhone and a Droid so I’m witness the battle every day when i pull both out and decide which to make a call or text on.   They are both good phones.  The Android phones get refreshed every month when a new manufacturer comes out with the latest, whereas i have to wait a year for each new iPhone.  That said, the iPhone is better and because of points 1-5 above, i suspect Apple will clean house for at least a few more years.

CBS-owned (NYSE: CBS) social music discovery and radio service Last.fm announced on Tuesday that it is discontinuing the on-demand song streaming service on its website, which had been available for the past two years in the U.S., U.K. and Germany, and will no longer host music videos.

What, Last.fm didn’t like paying tons of cash to have people play music for free? That’s amazing! Of course they cancelled this. They were offering free services which grew traffic but not monetizing those users at all. Not surprisingly someone asked why their offered the freebies. The release continued to read:

The company also said a number of new digital music services will now support “scrobbling” of tracks to users’ Last.fm charts. They include Spotify, The Hype Machine, MOG, We7 and Vevo.

This is the only reason i know of that people use Last.fm. People want to know what their most popular track is and it’s interesting to see what are the most played tracks. Where does this lead? It leads to last.fm being the Neilsons or Comscore or Billboard of the future. This site will tell us what’s popular and by who. In my mind, this is the future they have.  I wonder if CBS is regretting paying $280 million in cash for them.

Working within a company so long, it’s easy to see how your blood and bone can become part of the product and ultimately make something truly unique.  Giving a company your all, walking into the fire is both painful and pretty romantic.   The poet, David Whyte talks about this proverb, saying:

Work is the very fire where we are baked to perfection, and like the master of the fire itself, we add the essential ingredient and fulfillment when we walk into the flames ourselves and fuel the transformation of ordinary, everyday forms into the exquisite and the rare.

It’s an interesting analogy because in you can see that the potter, in disappearing into the kiln, he created something he loved and something truly special, but he also dies.  In doing his work he ceases to be a person that the rest of the world can interact with and relate to.

Such is the life of working on a startup

(thanks to Jerry Colonna for writing about this first)

We Are The World (download here)

Some notes on the song:

• Michael Jackson pretty much wrote the entire song himself.  Sure, Lionel was there but it’s mostly MJ’s work.
• All the musician came from the American Music Awards.  All came in limousines except Bruce Springsteen who drove a pickup truck and parked it outside and paid for meter parking
• There was a big sign listed above the studio with the words, “Leave your ego at the door.”
• Prince bailed at the last minute because the organizer called him a creep (guess he didn’t see the sign)

ANyway, a good song to go back to and check out

Scott says….

If you want an average successful life, it doesn’t take much planning. Just stay out of trouble, go to school, and apply for jobs you might like. But if you want something extraordinary, you have two paths:

1. Become the best at one specific thing.
2. Become very good (top 25%) at two or more things.

The first strategy is difficult to the point of near impossibility. Few people will ever play in the NBA or make a platinum album. I don’t recommend anyone even try.

The second strategy is fairly easy. Everyone has at least a few areas in which they could be in the top 25% with some effort. In my case, I can draw better than most people, but I’m hardly an artist. And I’m not any funnier than the average standup comedian who never makes it big, but I’m funnier than most people. The magic is that few people can draw well and write jokes. It’s the combination of the two that makes what I do so rare. And when you add in my business background, suddenly I had a topic that few cartoonists could hope to understand without living it.

…Get a degree in business on top of your engineering degree, law degree, medical degree, science degree, or whatever. Suddenly you’re in charge, or maybe you’re starting your own company using your combined knowledge.

Capitalism rewards things that are both rare and valuable. You make yourself rare by combining two or more “pretty goods” until no one else has your mix…

It sounds like generic advice, but you’d be hard pressed to find any successful person who didn’t have about three skills in the top 25%.

There’s a good article in Slate about how the TV show The Wire is becoming a common item for professors to assign to college students.  Some schools have a whole course dedicated to it.  As many of you know, i’m a huge fan of the show and can understand why profs would use it.

One of the professors teaching a course on the show is the sociologist William Julius Wilson—his class, at Harvard, will be offered this fall.  He says,

Although The Wire is fiction, not a documentary, its depiction of [the] systemic urban inequality that constrains the lives of the urban poor is more poignant and compelling [than] that of any published study, including my own

That’s how badass the show is.  Anyone who hasn’t checked it out, should get into it.

Disney Brass: Katzenberg, Roy Disney and Michael Eisner

In 1984 Disney’s animation studio was filled with old-timers and young eager newcomers such as Brad Bird, Jon Lasseter, and Tim Burton.  The old timers lacked the passion and the youngsters lacked the experience.  For years they were at an impasse and it resulted in really lame, tired movies.  Disney recognized this and hired Michael Eisner, Frank Wells and Jefferey Katzenberg.   The new brass didn’t immediately recognize the importance of animation, nor really understand it.  They did know that change was needed and went about the standard “weed, feed and seed” strategy that I’ve seen in my startup experience.  This is a technique of getting rid of the old/bad talent (weed), bringing in new hires (seed) and empowering those who have great ideas (feed).  It almost always works.

What makes the film interesting is that even though this is a documentary, the footage is all in the time period. There are no talking heads in 2009 telling us how it is.  It’s only interviews from the 80′s with all its hair, sytles and the culture.

The animation workers had to endure quite a bit from 1980 to 1988 when they produced their first hit in decades, The Little Mermaid.  Bringing in outside song writers for Mermaid proved to be a stroke of genius.  From that film they gained confidence and experience and then scored another massive hit with Aladin.  After Aladin, they immediately started working on Beauty and The Beast this time with some swagger.  When Beauty premiered at the NY Film Festival in draft form,  it received a standing ovation and went on to be one of the rare animated films to be nominated for a Best Picture Oscar.   After Beauty and The Beast, egos were looming large.  Eisner was jealous of Katzenberg for promoting himself as the head of the Animation studio and the animators all were getting agents, high salaries, and big heads.  Despite that, you could tell that they knew they had something special and they were able to rally together once more to score another major hit with Lion King – which shattered all major box office records at the time.  After the release of the Lion King, Frank Wells died, Katzenberg quit, and the animators fell under their own egotistical weight.

Lion King went out to be the largest grossing animated film of all time

I saw the film with the director/producer who worked at Disney during this entire period.  In his Q&A afterwards commented that everyone knew they were doing something special, but in the end you can’t keep a winning team together for too long – talented people just become too expensive.  In any industry or endeavor, you can’t keep a winning team together forever.  Think of the Red Sox, Shaq & Kobe, Microsoft, etc.

This is a fun film to watch.  It captures an amazing run of films we all know and love, and the turmoil, passion and business antics that went into making Disney a phenomenon.

The movie was writen by Robert Harris who is a former BBC TV reporter and political columnist.  He actively supported Tony Blair until the Iraq War, which Harris felt was a mistake. When Blair resigned in ’07, Harris quit his job to write the novel The Ghost. So, the similarities between Blair and Adam Lang, Cherie Blair and Ruth Lang, Hatherton and Halliburton, etc. are definitely intentional.

I also love it because it’s a classic film noir.  The rarely make films this way anymore because people want action instead of suspense, love instead of skepticism, optimism instead of curruption and happy endings instead of killing the good guy.  Well, I like warm fuzzies and Jennifer Aniston as much as the next guy, but what a i LOVE is a good old kick-ass Noir.  Let me explain:

• The whole movie is dark and rainy.  I was freezing in the theater and i couldn’t tell if i was actually cold or if it was just the film’s atmosphere.  That atmosphere — a rain-swept Martha’s Vineyard in winter — has an ominous, gray chill, and the main interior looks just as cold.  Interesting note: the movie was filmed in Germany and all the views of the ocean were done with green screen. Classic noir.
• Corruption rules.  No matter how hard the Ghost tries to find out the truth and do the right thing, he’s in over his head – just like his predecesor was and it’s likely to get him killed.  Everyone is cheating on everyone else either sexually or professionally.  Who can you trust?  If you’re familiar with Polanski’s other classic, Chinatown, you’ll know that the answer is nobody.  Classic noir.
• Mysteries and Clues.  There are dead bodies and they point to clues which point back to the dead body which point to something. What? We don’t know.  The story is great and you can actually try to figure it out, which is amazingly novel these days.  In the latest Sherlock Holmes, did you ever for a minute follow the mystery that was trying to be solved?  I didn’t.  That’s why that movie sucks and this movie is awesome.
• Women are deadly and the last ones standing.  There’s a reason the phrase “femme fatale” was given to the noir genre. Oops, did that give anything away?  Sorry about that.
• Everyone dies. Well not everyone, but this film has no problem killing people you like. And it doesn’t kill them in a cheesy way like a gun shootout but in an old school way – with one giant event.  Classic noir.

Polanski did an amazing job.  There is obviously a big parallel between Polaski and the character Lang as both are exiles sought by a court.    Apparently the Swiss arrested him while they were filming this and he finished the film while in prison.  I haven’t seen the documentary about him that came out last year but i do know that he’s got a way of making really good movies.

If you look at the three constituents of ad sales: publishers (the web site), readers, and the advertisers. The CPM is beneficial only to the advertiser. With CPM, publishers optimize their site for page views. This results in chopping stories into 3 pages, making photo galleries, lack of ajax, or other gimicks that result in more page views at the expense of user enjoyment. Typically when sites begin to focus on monetizing, they get worse for the reader, not better.

The Deck is an ad network. They represent both publishers (Twitteriffic, Daring Fireball, etc.) and advertisers (Rackspace, Gowalla, KickApps, etc.). They subjectively vet both of them.  The also have the following rules:

1. They will only represent websites of a certain type. In this case it’s sites focused on design or technology
2. They will only place ads of products they like or endorse
3. They then will place only one ad per page of one size and of one format. They charge the advertiser a monthly rate and sign yearly contracts wht the publishers.
4. Their ads have up to 80 characters and one image

Does it work? Definitely. They are way oversubscribed for both advertisers and publishers. Even though advertisers get less impressions, they are more effective. Thus, 7 out of 10 advertisers return month after month. Publishers have more attractive, less cluttered sites and no longer have to worry about chasing pages. Sure they want an audience and the bigger the better but whether it’s 3 page views per user or 10, it doesn’t matter

The author of Daring Fireball has a story of when he was using Google Ads instead of Deck. For a while his most successful, in revenue terms, article was one where he compared a certain design to a man’s toupee. What he found was all the Google Ads next to his article had to do with men’s hairpieces.  He also found that men’s hairpiece keywords are very highly priced and he earned 7x the amount of money on that page than other pages. This was troubling for him because he then started thinking about what words are valuable to Google when writing articles rather than what he readers want. His revenue (and interests) were properly aligned with advertisers nor readers.

Deck is an interesting example of someone innovating around ad networks. I find it fascinating as i really don’t like the CPM either. But, does it scale to other, non design/technology sectors? Maybe. I think it requires the readers to be intelligent and (somewhat)affluent. So i could see Travel or Cars having a similar ad network. But it gets harder after that.

I’m now seeing that this has over 1.5 million views so maybe i’m late to the party. Oh well, still worth a post:

This year they’ve hit gold again with this ad. Look at the ad, now back at the blog, now back at the ad…:

What do you think? Any other ads that you like better?

A truly absurd moment when the best short Oscar was being accepted. Here’s what happened. The director and the producer of the film are in a huge fight. When the winner was announced, the director of the film ran down from his seat while his mom blocked the producer with her cane. The director started thanking people when the producer finally made it to the stage. She then proceeded to talk over him for the rest of the time allotted while we, the viewer at home, just stared and wondered, What the hell is going on?!. Watch the speech below and here’s a link to the story.

Sandra Bullock was a GINORMOUS upset. She was the last person i thought would win. Seriously, the last. I wanted Carey Mulligan, thought Meryl would win, but could have understood if Gabby or Helen had taken it. But Sandra?? No way. She totally made up for it with one of the best Oscar speeches i’ve heard. It was thoughtful, coherent, funny and to the point. Good work

Of course, i was wrong about Avatar and i feel good for Kathryn “Point Break” Bigelow (and Lizard) but i do feel that there is a James Cameron backlash going on. It’s too bad because it was the better film. I don’t care that much because he’ll buy everyone that doesn’t like him eventually.

Oh well, i can’t wait for next year when Tron cleans up.

My sister is a smart lovable gal.  Sometimes she is wrong and she hates it when people point this out to her.   She responded to my recent Oscar predictions post with some interesting comments.  She said,

I won’t remember Avatar in ten years. Hell, I can barely remember it now; I had to go re-read a review to remind myself of what the actual plot was. I left Avatar thinking “Wow, you know, that looked really cool.” But Best Picture? Really? No.

and

I should note now that my brother compares the Oscar race between Avatar and Hurt Locker to the Star Wars vs. Rocky Oscar race for Best Picture, and where he comes down on the side of Star Wars on that one, I’m firmly in the Rocky camp.

Interesting comments.  But totally wrong. As an older brother, it is my duty to explain why.  Here we go:

Liz, first off I can see why you’d think this way.  You said you got sick from the 3D for Avatar and in your review you can’t even remember what the plot of Avatar was.  Well if you were so sick and you don’t know what the movie was about, you probably shouldn’t pick it for Best Picture.  But just realize that you’re in the minority and the rest of the country is quite aware of what occurred on the screen and loved it.  Maybe you should to rewatch in non-3D

Now about Rocky vs. Star Wars.  Have you seen the first Rocky lately?  The dialogue is atrocious. Rocky’s relationship with Adrian is one of the worst written and acted relationship in cinema.  It’s severely dated.

Star Wars is a different story altogether.  If you don’t think Star Wars was a seminal film in cinema history, you’re retarded.

Star Wars references are so deeply embedded in popular culture that you don’t even realize it.  You can’t even watch CNN now without them trying to copy many of the technological ideas that were first shown in a movie over 30 years old now (election hologram anyone?)  Everyday references to the main characters and themes of Star Wars are casually made. Darth Vader has become an iconic villain.  Phrases like “evil empire” and “may the force be with you” have become part of the popular lexicon in EVERY industry and culture.  Do you even remember what Apollo Creed’s nickname was?

Rocky is a good movie, but Star Wars was a good movie that changed cinema forever.  Almost all (or the majority) of science fiction films have been influenced by Star Wars and it basically created the modern-day blockbuster genre.  How many Rocky parodies are there?  Could you imagine a Spaceballs or Fanboys of Rocky?  No, the only thing keeping the Rocky films alive are Sly Stone’s attempt to remake the original time and time again.

I could go on and on about how Star Wars impacted both society and film but i think you get my point.  It was a major game-changer. This is why i compare it to Avatar.  While i don’t think Avatar will have the impact of Star Wars, i do believe it represents a large step-function in how films will be made going forward.  Major dramatic films are being made in 3D.  Future films will be made, realistically, without actors.  Think about that.  Major realistic, dramatic films without actors.  That’s what Avatar has introduced.

Let me just say that in 2007, NASA launched a space shuttle carrying a pair of Rocky’s shorts into space to celebrate the 30th anniversary of the film.  Wait, no, that’s a lie.  They didn’t.   What they DID do is launch the space shuttle with the original lightsaber on board.  It was the lightsaber that was used by Luke Skywalker. After spending two weeks in orbit, they brought the lightsaber back to Earth on November 7.  And you think this film, Star Wars, where they are doing event like this and making more references to over 30 years after the film was released shouldn’t win a “Best Picture” Oscar.  Really Liz?  Really?

The Oscars are coming this weekend. I’ve done a pretty good job this year of seeing most of the nominated movies.  So, without further blabbing, here’s my predictions for who will take the Oscar home and who I think should.

Best Picture

This is the most interesting race because we have two very different front-runners.  The Hurt Locker is a great story with an extremely authentic look at human nature and war.  Avatar is a technological marvel but is also has a thin plot.  It’s also interesting because this is the first year with the crazy new voting structure.  There are 10 films nominated.  The voters rank the ten in order of preference. If one film has over 50% of #1 votes, it wins.  If not, then the film with the least #1 votes is elinimated and those votes are redistributed and the process begins again.  This means a film that doesn’t originally have the most #1 votes could end up winning.  Whatever, i don’t really care that much.  Here’s what i think:

The Hurt Locker is a great film.  Maybe my favorite war movie ever. It’s raw and gutsy.  Avatar is also a great movie.  It has a generic story but the look and feel of the film was spectacular.  When i left the theater, I had a “holy crap, that was really something” feeling that rarely happens after a movie.  Ten years from now, i’ll remember my Avatar viewing but probably not my Hurt Locker experience.  Thus, i’m voting for Avatar. Which will win?  Star Wars, a similarly seminal film, lost out to Rocky in 1977.  But Lord of The Rings won in 2003.   I don’t think LOTR wins if it’s only one film.  I think in general, the Academy doesn’t like voting for big blockbusters but i have a hunch Avatar wins here.  I want:  Avatar / Should Win: Avatar

Best Actress

All i can say is that Carey Mulligan was the best performance this year.  Hands down. That girl will be a star.  Sure, Meryl Streep was good in a Julia Childs movie but that movie wasn’t good.  If Sandra Bullock wins, i’ll throw up on my TV.  She was good but she was playing Sandra Bullock with a southern accent. Puh-lease.   Give it to Carrey.  I didn’t see Precious but i heard that gal was great.  So caveat this pick.   That said, i know that the Academy has a love affair with Meryl Streep and loves her.  They also hate giving it to first-timers.  I want: Carey Mulligan / Should Win: Meryl Streep

Best Actor

I’ll tell you right now that Jeff Bridges wins here.  Everyone loves him.  He’s awesome.  He’s The Dude. This is a total lock.  I’m still pissed that the guy from Notorious was nominated.  This guy not only acted like Biggie Smalls but was able to rap like him.  He’s the most nuanced rapper in history and this guy got it down. We gave an Oscar to Jamie Fox for Ray Charles and Reese for June Carter, we should give one to this guy.   Of the nominees who were actually nominated, i like Jeremy Renner the best. His performance was amazing. He owned that movie.  The George Clooney and Morgan Freeman nominations are a total joke.  I like both those guys but those are the best acting performances of the year? Really? I don’t think so.  So, I want: Jeremy Renner / Should Win: Jeff Bridges

Best Director

This is so similar to Best Picture.  I love The Hurt Locker and i give her extra props because she directed Point Break (check out this for a great spoof) but you have to give it to James Cameron.  It was always believed we’d get to a point where human actors were necessary.  A world where you’re only limited by your imagination.  George Lucas wanted that with Jar Jar Binks.  Nobody had been able to do it.  Now we have. James accomplished it – all it took was perseverance and half a billion dollars.   BUT, everyone hates James Cameron. People think he’s a dick.  I see the Academy not wanting him on the podium. Especially after his “I’m the king of the world” speech last time.  I see an upset and Kathryn winning.  I want: James Cameron / Should Win: Kathryn Bigelow

Best Supporting Actor

This one is even easier than Best Actor.  Christoph Waltz wins hands down.  He rocked that movie so hard, it wasn’t even funny.  His personality was so cunning and creepy.  You could see him toying with the other actors.  A little gesture here, an inflection here.  He put on an acting seminar.  Everyone else just pulled up a chair and starting taking notes.  I want: Christoph Waltz / Should Win: Christoph Waltz

Best Supporting Actress

I have no idea who wins this. I hear the Precious gal was great.  Of the other 4, i like Vera Farmiga the best.  She was great in The Departed and was great here too.  Maggie was ok, but not award-winning.  Anna was good but more annoying than inspiring.  Penelope Cruz was in a horrible movie.  So it’s between Mo’nique and Vera.  I’ll wager that Mo’nique gets it because it seems to be more of a moving role.  I want: Vera Farmiga / Should Win: Mo’nique

Best Animated Film

Up is the best animated film but my favorite is Fantastic Mr. Fox.  It is one of my favorite films of the entire year.  Wes Anderson goodness.  I’ve seen the film twice and would be happy to see it another 20 times.  Loved it. I want: Fantastic Mr. Fox / Should Win: Up

Original Screenplay

The Hurt Locker takes this one.  The Coen brothers wrote a seriously awesome screenplay in Serious Man but it wasn’t that fun and the Academy hates not fun movies that aren’t about the Holocaust.  I don’t think anyone really took Inglorious Basterds seriously and people will feel bad voting for Avatar over Hurt Locker and want to throw the film at least one Oscar.  I want: Hurt Locker / Should Win: Hurt Locker

Adapted Screenplay

Everyone loves Jason Reitman.  He’s cool, he’s on a roll, his movies are good and his part of the Hollywood family.  People see Up In The Air and they think it’s a movie of our times.  It’s not, but they’ll give him the Oscar anyway.  I personally prefer An Education. That movie was creepy, joyful, and inspiring all at the same time. Nicky Hornby rocked that one.  He’s also been a on a roll with About a Boy and High Fidelity.  I want: An Education & Nick Hornby / Should Win: Jason Reitman

John Hughes wrote and directed some of my favorite childhood movies.  Movies like Ferris Bueller’s Day Off, Planes, Trains and Automobiles, The Breakfast Club, Pretty In Pink, Uncle Buck and more.  I was pretty sad to hear about his death last year.   There is a good article in Vanity Fair this month with quotes from actors from his movies including Matthew Broderick, Anthony Michael Hall, and Molly Ringwald.  Some good excerpts:

Ringwald: I remember the first thing that I saw of him—I didn’t know what he looked like; I didn’t know anything—were his tennis shoes. He was really into sneakers. It was not what I really thought of as a film director. His hair was spiky. He looked kind of relatable to me.

Hall: The word “dweebie”? Gotta credit Judd Nelson for that. I was on the Breakfast Clubset when he ad-libbed that. I think Judd’s responsible for that being part of our vernacular: him yelling, “You’re a neo-maxi-zoom-dweebie!” I remember John laughing.

Broderick: It was extremely pleasing to make John laugh. He had a quiet, very real, uncontrollable laugh: an eyes-closed, head-half-down, bent-over-quiet thing.

Hall: There’s a scene in The Breakfast Club between the principal and the janitor, Paul Gleason and John Kapelos, where one asks, “Who’d you want to be when you grow up?” and the other says, “John Lennon.” I think that was really John to some extent. He was such a Beatles fan.

Hall: When I was doing Weird Science, I got a call from my agent on a Wednesday, saying, “Stanley Kubrick is interested in you for a role in his Vietnam drama that he’s doing, Full Metal Jacket.” Got a call back on a Friday saying, “Well, now he wants you for the lead, as Private Joker. He’s gonna call you tomorrow.”  All I can compare this to is waiting for Oz to call. The stories preceded him: his privacy, living in London, sort of extricating himself from Hollywood, all that shit. I was shaking in my boots. The phone rings. Stanley Kubrick gets on and says, “I want you to know: I just screened Sixteen Candles three times … and you’re my favorite actor since I saw Jack in Easy Rider!” I’m like, “Whaaa? Am I fucking hearing this?”

The long and short of it was, it was such a drawn-out, wild process of negotiating with Kubrick, via his attorneys, that it had a real effect on my family. [Hall ultimately withdrew from the negotiations.] But my point in telling this story is, had I not had this collaboration with this great guy, I never would have gotten that call from Kubrick. I received the greatest compliment of my life, and I owe that to John Hughes.

First there’s a new Puma phone that was announced this week at MWC (the largest mobile conference in the world) and instead of trying to compete with iPhone/Android and trying to do everything it’s just a cool phone, with some cool “fun” features (pedometer, compass, audio player with turntable) and a solar panel on the back so you don’t run out of juice.  Pretty sweet.

Second, there is some more solar powered stuff:

These are lamps on a highway that are wind powered. As far as practical renewable energy concepts go, these wind-powered highway lights are pretty elegant.  I don’t see why we don’t get these on EVERY highway.

Finally, there’s just some bike new from LA:

Los Angeles is known for its freeways, and those guys are impossible to ride a bike on. That’s where a proposal from a cycling activism organization called the L.A Bike Working Group comes in. The group recently proposed a “Backbone Bikeway Network”–a system of bikeways that is comparable to a freeway for cyclists.  I don’t see this happening any time soon, but it would be really great if it did

The movie has a good script, but the real story is the job played by British actress Carey Mulligan who plays the 16-year old girl.  Watching the movie with the Kesners, we all couldn’t help but comment how she reminds us of Audrey Hepburn.  There’s no one else that came to mind.  The movie could have been sad or creepy but because of Carey’s lightness and joy of character, it is instead it is a romance.  In 1998, I remember watching the movie Playing By Heart which has a few small roles for a little-known actress named Angelina Jolie.  I remember and seeing her absolutely kill every scene. I knew i was watching someone who was going to be a star.  Although two completely different actresses, I felt the same way about An Education and Carey.

Check it out – it’s a good movie.

The iPad is super-duper slick.  I can see some great use-cases for it, such as:

• If i was pitching a presentation to someone at a restaurant, in an elevator, or anywhere – the iPad would be a much better way to present the presentation than a laptop.  I could see it becoming a must-have for entrepreneurs
• If i had kids and a family room with lots of people, having a family iPad that people use publicly would be great. Anyone in the family could us it in front of the TV or as the home iTunes download system for movies and TV shows that syncs with their AppleTV
• Games. This could be one of the most sick gaming machines. It has the graphics, accelerometer, and connection needed to really be badass. I could see someone making a truly unique iPad gaming experience.

All these great ideas and reviews make me love the iPad but i’m not going to get one.  I’m not feeling it yet (not because of the video joke and jokes) and here’s why

• i have an iPhone and i have a Macbook. I’m not feeling a huge need to have an iPad. If i did, i would want to replace my MacBook and i don’t think the iPad is powerful enough to be a replacement yet. I want all my songs on it (need more than 64 GB) and i want to run a browser and email at the same time. Until those happen, my laptop is vastly superior.
• The A4 chip seems like a bad idea.  No way Apple is going to consistently be better than Intel or AMD at making low power chips.  Maybe they can now and early billions from it, but it can’t be a long-term solution
• No camera bums me out.  I’m not sure but i think I’m going to want to take pics with the iPad. Maybe not but i like video skyping and i like taking random pics.  Give me a camera

If you know, you know that i feel that i’ve seen the future. I know what i want and where i want Apple to take me.  It’s this:

• I want an iPhone device that has huge storage, enough for music (b/c i don’t see cloud music solution for another 5 years), and a fast enough processor that i can put all my files on it and use Google Docs and Dropbox for shared files
• A portable keyboard and docked monitor so i can plug my phone into them and use it as a desktop computer when i’m at home or at work.
• Over time, the files get saved more and more in the cloud and my phone become a portable processor, harddrive and network card.  That’s all

I saw with the iPad a keyboard doc and saw this future is coming.  It’s coming but slowly.  i can’t wait

Last week I read his article Nil By Mouth where he describes how it feels to not be able to eat following his throat surgery. He offers some great observations from religious to the social.  It’s an amazing essay and a must read for anyone who eats to appreciate what truly results from a meal. Hint: it’s not the food.  One passage:

One day in the hospital my brother-in-law Johnny Hammel and his wife Eunice came to visit. They are two of my favorite people. They’re Jehovah’s Witnesses, and know I’m not. I mention that because they interpreted my story in terms of their faith. I described my fantasies about root beer. I could smell it, taste it, feel it. I desired it. I said I’d remembered so clearly that day with my father for the first time in 60 years.

“You never thought about it before?” Johnny asked.

“Not once.”

“Could be, when the Lord took away your drinking, he gave you back that memory.”

Whether my higher power was the Lord or Cormac McCarthy, those were the words I needed to hear. And from that time I began to replace what I had lost with what I remembered. If I think I want an orange soda right now, it is after all only a desire. People have those all the time. For that matter, when I had the chance, when was the last time I held one of those tall Nehi glass bottles? I doubt I ever had one from a can.

In this latest essay Making Out Is Its Own Reward, Ebert provides a trip back in time to a period where America’s youth was held by all parts of society to the “3 foot rule” where when you’re with a girl/guy 3 of your 4 feet had to be on the floor. He discusses the impact it had on a poor professor who was a touch more liberal, what it meant for him and his life as a teenager in the 50′s, and how that relates to kids today.

The blog from Ebert is a treasure. Some article are solely focused on movies but regardless to topic the writing is fantastic. You get the sense that he’s willing to write about anything with honesty and care. I hope it continues as can’t wait to see what he writes next

I was listening today to an NPR podcast with George Lucas (download). He has a new book out where he discusses the 300 most influential and impressive blockbuster movies to him. For each film, he does some significant research into the casting, the shooting schedule, the budget, and the result. He adjusts for inflation so you can see the true impact older films had. Some interesting tidbits:

• The average ticket price in 1910 was $6 and the average ticket price today is $6. I find that amazing.
• The music licensing for Lucas’ first film American Graffiti cost him 70k because he was instructed to keep his costs under 10% of his 700k budget. He licensed 2 albums worth of rock. People told him that he was insane to do that. Every other film prior to that had be scored. Nobody had thrown music on top of film. First, it’s amazing that this is the film that changed that. Second, a year later the studio was trying to license all the music for an album to be released and it cost them $1 million. In one year, the industry changed that much. Wow
• Jurrasic Park was the one movie that really changed the digital landscape.  Prior to that everything looked like an effect. After JP he knew you could make anything
• Star Wars was revolutionary to Lucas in that you could make a 2 foot green person seem lifelike. That was the first time there had been an imaginary life-like character in film. Really changed the game. 2001 was the biggest movie at the time and was seen as the best, most creative sci-fi film ever. However, Lucas saw it as a set of still shots and wanted to introduce energy into special effects shot. He wanted to be able to pan the camera through space and not just have one shot.
• 3D is new and Lucas looked at using it for Episode I but the techology wasn’t there.
• He and Spielberg used to trade equity points in their films.  Lucas always thought Spielberg’s films were better than his and Spielberg thought the opposite so each trades a few points of equity in each of their films before they were released.  For example, Close Encounters of the 3rd Kind came out when Star Wars came out and Lucas preferred Close Encounters and Spielberg thought Star Wars would crush it.  Guess Steven knew better

For those of you who don’t know what that is, it’s a little clip you were around. The clip (called a “Tracker”) contains a motion sensor like the ones found in the Nintendo Wii. The Tracker senses my motion in three dimensions and converts this into useful information about my daily activities. The Tracker measures the intensity and duration of my physical activities, calories burned, steps taken, distance traveled, how long it took me to fall asleep, the number of times I woke up throughout the night and how long I was actually asleep vs just lying in bed.

It’s pretty awesome stats and all i have to do is wear this little clip. Also, the clip uploads the data to my Mac without attaching it. All in all, it’s pretty sweet.

One thing i’ve noticed is how nice the web interface is. Entering in foods, water, and stuff is a breeze. Anyway, it’s my first day with this thing. We’ll see how it works. Stay tuned.

Televisions. The TV’s were amazing. In the years past, it had all been about getting bigger and bigger and bigger. This year was different. This year the TV’s got better in different ways. Sure they got bigger. There’s a pic below of a 152″ plasma. It was ridiculous. But the also got thinner, they got 3D, they got wireless – both the video cable and the power cable, and they got Skype. I was a little disappointed that there wasn’t more web on the TV but i guess that time hasn’t come yet.

eReaders. This show was all about the eReader. Last year there were thousands of Netbooks. Now the netbooks are all gone and the eReader has replaced them. The Skiff was the nicest although one of them has the ability to switch from an eReader to an LCD screen with a push of the button. I attribute this all to Android. There’s another reader that’s a full powered Android device with broswing, email and other stuff.

There were also a ton of iPhone accessories there – speakers, cases, grips, remotes, you name it. All in all it was a great show in my opinion – one of the best in years. Anyone else get a different impression?

There’s a good article in the NY Times about Vengence films.  It describes how the genre as existing, writing,

The formula’s popularity stems from the permission it gives viewers to experience the rush violence provides without feeling guilty about it. The plot gives the hero the same permission when a wife or daughter or brother or girlfriend (in Jodie Foster’s case a boyfriend) is abducted, injured or killed….

Once the atrocity has occurred, the hero acquires an unquestioned justification for whatever he or she then does; and as the hero’s proxy, the audience enjoys the same justification for vicariously participating in murder, mayhem and mutilation. In fact, the audience is really the main character in many of these films.

Personally, I really like these films.  I remember watching “Payback” with Mel Gibson and loving the gritty, matter-of-fact way he dispensed with the people who screwed him out of 80 grand.  The author of the article lists these 10 as his favorite:

• “Death Wish,” “Get Carter,” “A History of Violence,” “The Limey,” “Mad Max,” “Out for Justice,” “Point Blank,” “Straw Dogs,” “Taken,” “Valdez is Coming.”

I haven’t seen some of those.  My tops are:

• The Limey
• Payback
• History of Violence
• Braveheart
• Kill Bill
• Man on Fire
• Out for Justice
• Die Hard

What about you?

2009 was a fun year.  I traveled to 42 cities, 4 countries and logged over 100k miles.  I also found time to stay at home and do stuff.  Looking back on the year, some things really stand out.  For instance:

• Up’s tear-jerking silent vignette. With each new film, Pixar finds some way to top itself. The marvelous innovation inUp was the wordless sequence near the beginning, set to Michael Giacchino’s wistful score, depicting Carl and Ellie’s entire life together — including the sad fact that they can’t have children. Who else would dare to try that? And who but Pixar could pull it off so gracefully?
• I Like This Song.  I started a little experiment in May of placing a good song i like every day to the blog ilikethissong.com.  At first it was easy because there were so many songs i was bursting to share.  But as the year wore on, i got more selective and paid more attention to what i was putting up.  The real treat, however, has been the followers of ILTS who have sent me new music and tunes.
• The Android OS. I went to the largest mobile phone conference in the world last February and saw thousands of phones that were running Windows Mobile OS that was vastly inferior to the iPhone. I came away from there thinking that the iPhone was going to crush everyone for the next 10 years.  Luckily Google’s OS has grown up and is the real deal.  This is the year when the race for the future of mobile actually started
• Brett Favre.  Say what you want about him, but for me he has transformed the Vikings from a team that drove me crazy to watch to a team to be proud of every week.  He was inspiring and regardless of how early we go out in the playoffs (i’m thinking first round) i’ll always remember this season because of him.
• Zach Galifinakis and The Hangover.  Zach G. had slipeed under my radar until The Hangover which was this summer’s must-see movie.  I thought he made the film and i was even more delighted to see that his webepisodes of Between Two Ferns prove him a true comedic talent
• Death of Old Media.  Magazines crumbled.  Newspapers folded.  Online usage soared.  People who were in the print business ran scared.  Some tried to adjust their print properties.  Others just wove a white flag.  It become evident this year that online is where the users are and if you’re not moving your media business there, you’re either going to downsize or disappear.  This was of personal interest to me as i spent lots of 2009 looking at the advertising piece of this at Buzz and looking at the opportunities this new world creates with Tobes.
• In-N-Out burger.  I ate so much In-N-Out in 2009 that this could very well be the year of the Double-Double.  Thanks to JT, Pedro and JStreet for coming with me time after time after time.
• eReaders / Kindle.  The Kindle came on strong this year and The Nook is looking like a solid competitor.  While neither may be long solutions with their closed formats, they have gained serious attention and sales.  I also read my first books on electronically this year and i can easily picture a future when books are primarily sold without paper.
• Obama.  He came out of nowhere.  We were about to elect someone into the Presidency (Hilary) which would have had two families (Clinton’s and Bush’s) control the office for over 24 years.  THis was not the America i was down with and i was just about to write off the political system for good when Obama came along.  Sure, you can complain about different things he’s done in office thus far but he’s engaged me and he’s made me pay attention. I respect his reasoning.  That word, “hope,” is a strange one and it was a big part of 2009 for me due to him.
• Avatar, Star Trek and Sci-Fi. This year was an incredible year for sci-fi. I thought Star Trek was awesome, the little indie flick District 9 was refreshing and extremely well done, and of course James Cameron’s epic, Avatar – the film that needed new technology just to complete it – rocked the end of the year. These films showed that sci-fi is alive and kicking and isn’t some little repetitive genre reserved for geeks and nerds.
• A Personal Stream of Information From Friends.  Before 2009, my RSS feed dominated my web browsing experience.  Twitter and Facebook worked their tail off in ’09 to change the web landscape.  Their impact has been incredible.  The personal stream of information is how many people are now receiving their news and media.  What this means is that the web (and possibly life) won’t ever be the same.  I can’t wait to see where it leads
• D Wood.  Last and most importantly it’s D. Say what you will about LA but it brought me to Diane and more than anything it will be a year remembered as the year i met her.  That one little meeting has changed everything.

Happy 2009 everyone. It’s been a fantastic year and I wish you all the best in 2010.

I saw the new James Cameron film Avatar this weekend and loved it.  Loved it. Once again, JC totally delievered.  The movie is quite a spectacle.  It’s not so much the chracters, but the story and the visuals that make this film.  Even if you’re not a sci-fi fan, you need to check this out to see how $250 million bucks should be spent. Or as Ebert says in his review:

“Avatar” is not simply a sensational entertainment, although it is that. It’s a technical breakthrough. It has a flat-out Green and anti-war message. It is predestined to launch a cult. It contains such visual detailing that it would reward repeating viewings. It invents a new language, Na’vi, as “Lord of the Rings” did, although mercifully I doubt this one can be spoken by humans, even teenage humans. It creates new movie stars. It is an Event, one of those films you feel you must see to keep up with the conversation.

If you haven’t seen the movie, the rest of this post isn’t for you.  If you have, here are some thoughts:

I found the plot to be a mishmash of movies i’ve already seen:

• So much of the story seem extremely similar to the Kevin Costner film Dances With Wolves.  Not a bad movie to rip off considering it took home 7 Oscars.  But seriously, check this out: a guy from a modern culture sent to live with the natives. He falls in love with the native ordered to teach him their ways and in the process begins to prefer their “primitive” ways to his.  He then switches sides in an epic battle for the natives’ survival.   Of course, Avatar does this battle is a much cooler way and the natives are 12 foot blue people.  But still, it’s much of the same
• When the machines are stampeding through the forrest and the natives are with bows and arrows and rocks trying to stop them, i couldn’t help but think of the Ewoks scene in Star Wars where the cute and awesome rebels put the kibosh down to destroy the shield.

The look of the film was incredible.  Really amazing.

• The colors and lighting in this film are a sight to see in the theater and in 3D which is the best 3D experience i’ve ever had.  None of the dimming that typically occurs happens here.
• I was worried about the Uncanny Valley effect.  This effect states that when a robot or CG person is made more and more humanlike in its appearance and motion, the emotional response from a human being to the robot will become increasingly positive and empathic, until a point is reached (the valley) beyond which the response quickly becomes horrible (or a strong repulsion) which is what happened to me with most movies like this (remember Jar Jar or Polar Express).  However, the fact that Cameron was able to make the Na’vi human-like with CG opens the door for truly imaginative films to emerge.  This has NEVER happened before.
• The last time i saw CG so clear and real was when i saw the Lord Of The Ring films, so i wasn’t surprised to see that Peter Jackson’s New Zealand shop, WETA, was the shop responsible.  Those guys are just getting better and better

If you know James Cameron, you’ll recognize some of the pieces of his past films showing up here.  Some things that stood out for me

• I remember how obsessed Cameron was with the Harrier jets in “True Lies” and how he made Arnold hang from it for a major sequence.  So I wasn’t surprised when the main plane in this film was a smaller, sleeker Harrier.
• If you read Wired you’ll know that JC loves going underwater.  He’s built and patented his own submarines so he can go deeper than anyone has ever gone.  Also, you’ll remember Titanic has a big chunk dedicated to the team going through the wreckage. Thus, it was no surprise to see that the land of Pandora looks very much like an underwater environment.  There are Jellyfish floating, sea-like creatures flying in the air, and tropical coral as vegetation.
• Breathing is a big theme in the movie.  Similar to how the final scenes of “The Abyss” involve the main character running out of liquid air, this film ends in with Sully fighting to breathe.
• Am I the only one who remembers the big human-like machines in (Cameron-directed) Aliens that Sigourney Weaver used at the very end where the machines mimic your movements but with more power? (see this pic to remember what i’m talking about) Well those things are back in this movie and while they are a bit more nimble, they are exact ripoffs from Aliens.

Anyway, just some thoughts.  What did you think?

- In general the iPhone kicks its ass in usability.  Typing on the droid sucks so much that i find myself not wanting to send texts.  This is especially true in the car. I can text and drive fine with the iPhone but the Droid will cause a crash.

- Having your phone be an iPod is a huge benefit.  This is such a major differentiator for me as i listen to a ton of music and listen to podcast every day while driving.  The media players on the droid are a joke.

- Google Voice is awesome and i really wish it was on the iPhone.  Being able to sync calls and text messages with the web is really useful.  There are other GV competitors but they don’t compare for me

- The voice reception and quality on the Droid is heads and shoulders above ATT.  I can actually get calls at work and inside my home.   I’ve never been an ATT hater but the Droid is making me a Verizon lover.

In general, i think the Droid is pretty great and definitely a competitor to the iPhone but the slickness/enjoyment of the interface and iTunes will keep me on it – at least for the near future.

I think of our present situation as somewhat analogous to the mass migration from the country to the city that started several centuries ago in Europe: the bustle and stimulation and diversity of urban life made it harder to enjoy the slower, organic pleasures of rural living. Still those pleasures didn’t disappear. People continue to cherish them in mass numbers to this day.

I believe this wholeheartedly. Urban life totally disrupted the traditional calm of country life. Today there are plenty who prefer the hustle of the city and many others who prefer to keep it calm in the country. I fully appreciate both. However, i have no patience for people who bash city life (ask my sister about how i attacked her when she started ripping NYC).  Large city culture is unique and can be exhilarating, stimulating and inspiring. But it’s existence doesn’t preclude living in the country – just like the internet and technology doesn’t have to render reading and concentrating in large doses obsolete. Don’t fear the change, just recognize it for what it is: another option for your attention.

Fred

Those of you who aren’t familiar with Playdar, let me explain what it is. Playdar is a “Music Content Resolver.” Think a radar for music to play (play+radar = playdar). Now, i’m sure i probably just lost about 50% of my readers there. Those of you who are left, let me explain more in very general terms. Playdar allows a web page or a music service to take a song and then provide a source for that song. If the song is on your local computer it will play that file. If it is on your wife’s computer, it will play from there if it is connected. If it’s no where you specify, it will then look to the internet for the mp3 file. Basically, it will allow you to find any mp3 for any track.

As the co-founder of the music service Qloud I completely understand, respect, and fear the complexity around licensing music. And, any music service that charges users by play (Lala, Launch, etc.) is a challenging consumer experience. Something like Playdar, which allows the user to pay for content he/she doesn’t own and listen from a local (aka legal) location for the rest, could dramatically change the economic model for music services and allow more to experiment.

Even subscription services, which pay the music labels per play would benefit from something like this as many users play the same songs over and over. It might come to a point where once a user plays a track over 70 times the service just gives them the mp3 to download to caps the license fee for that track.

My hope is that many more legal options emerge around Playdar.   The new music services of Spotify and MOG are just Rhapsody with more features and a better interface.  It’s great to see some more innovation. Can’t wait to see what’s ahead

For this reason (and possibly others) wikipedia contributors are on the decline. Does this mean it will not be the dominant site it is today in the future? I wouldn’t surprised. I could see sites like Mahalo picking up the slack. What do you think?

You will see an advertising strategy from us in the very near future.  And i think that it will be…um…fascinating and completely non-traditional and people will love it…. The genuis of Google when Google first rolled out ads was that the ads were also the kinds of things that people were looking for.  So we want to do something that is organic and in the flow of the way people already use twitter and not here are the tweets and here are the ads.  So it’ll be very organic.  It’ll be very cool and people will love it when they see it.

This is exactly the right strategy.  I know from experience as does anyone who’s every tried to sell traffic to ad agencies that the banners are not working. The click-throughs and engagements are low.  The IAB unit needs some help and the best way to help is to generate ads organically within the content.  What Twitter’s strategy is, i’m not sure but i did see this video today where Steven Fry suggested that tweeters can sell access to their accounts.  That would be interesting.

Here’s Twitter COO below. The ad discussion is at 17 minute mark

Related articles by Zemanta

• Twitter COO Costolo: Advertising Coming To Twitter Soon (centernetworks.com)
• Twitter COO: We’ll Have An Advertising Business Soon. And You’re Going To Love It. (techcrunch.com)
• Twitter ads are coming soon – will you love them? (thenextweb.com)

Just was reading about Google Maps, specifically their turn-by-turn, and its impact on the maps market.

As many people know, there are 2 main players in the map market: Tele Atlas and NavTeq.  Google licensed both of them for Google Maps for years.  While they licensed, they also sent cars all around the nation gathering their own data.  These two guys, Tele Atlas and NavTeq, were the only game in town.  TomTom, the leading portable GPS device maker, wanted to control their own destiny and agreed to buy Tele Atlas for US$2.7 billion. And Nokia, worried that they would lose access to the coveted map agreed to buy NavTeq for a cool $8.1 billion.

All was good until Google dropped a bomb.  About six weeks ago, they went independent and didn’t rely on either for their map data.  And then about a month ago they announced their own turn-by-turn navigation would be available in the Android OS.  Now anybody from BMW to GM to Samsung can provide turn-by-turn by simply using Google’s OS.

The big losers here are RIM and iPhone.  They either have to not allow that access or pay a large royalty.  And Windows Mobile and Symbian are in an even more difficult situation as paying to embed this data could be more than the license fee they get from handset manufacturers.  This all assumes, of course, that users really demand this feature. If they do, Google’s really in the catbird seat.

People will complain that this is incredibly anti-competitive.  That Google is using it’s money making machine to unfairly compete in the map market.  Well, the story is even worse than that.  To get carriers to use Android, Google offers a cut on the search revenue that the phones produce.  So not only is Android free but it’s actually paying providers to use it.  Some people are calling it “less than free.”  Google will go beyond cell phones with this strategy.  Any netbook manufacturer (Dell, Sony, etc.) will get a cut of search revenue by building on Android or Chrome instead of Windows or Linux.  It’s tough to compete with “less than free.”

It makes you think of the world of complements.  Chris Dixon discusses Google and how its complement are the web browser and the OS.  The best thing you can do as a company is drive your complements to become commodities.  Well there’s no better way than driving their prices to be below zero.  Kudos Google,  I’m impressed.

The first and main reason i didn’t like the book is this: Chuck writes about what he’s interested in. His past books were about Rock N Roll, Reality TV, Billy Joel, Dixie Chicks and other things. They had an interesting take on items i liked and were very familiar with. These essays expanded my thinking on these topics. For example, i had never realized that the Dixie Chicks were that similar to 80′s Van Halen, nor had i thought about how Billy Joels was a unique kind of cool different than almost all other rock stars (on a coolness range from white to black, he’s an orange). Also, past essays celebrated both the subjects and the concepts. The current essays are about philosophical views on the world. He asks questions and makes statements about society such as,

• Why we like or hate people who fail
• Why we interact with popular advertising in the manner we do
• Why Chuck hates laugh tracks in TV shows and america’s approach to humor
• Why NFL Football is great
• Why watching people (voyeurism) is exciting: (because there’s a possibility for anything to happen)

These are the topics of this book and they are just nowhere close to as interesting as his previous topics. His book of interviews, IV, had a great interview with Val Kilmer. Nothing here touches that.

Reason number 2 for not liking this book is that there are lots of quotes in the book. For some reason my Kindle never shows who says these quotes. That makes them WAY less interesting and just frustrating. Don’t read this book on a kindle.

My third reason is that I didn’t like the prose. I think i know why this is. I’ve tracked down Kloserman on podcasts and now seen him speak twice. I know what he sounds like in person. So much so that i now hear his voice talking when i read his text. Do you know when you notice someone is saying the word “like” too much and all of the sudden you find yourself pay attention to them actually say the work “like” over and over instead of whatever it is they are trying to say? Well, this happens with me and Chuck. He uses the words “idiom’ and italicizes his word “must” and i can hear his emphasis. It bothers me. Maybe i’ve just read too much of his stuff.

Finally, the last essay in the book is about his dislike of technology and I completely disagree with his opinion regarding the Internet. He has a part in the book where he criticizes anyone who publicly praises the internet because he argues they only like it because it now makes them relevant. He says,”the only people who insist the internet is wonderful are those who need it to give the life meaning.” I can’t begin to say how wrong that stance is.

At the end, Klosterman comes off as a guy who is just bitter that the world is changing. He reminds me of people who refuse to watch television, won’t own cell phones and only listen to music on vinyl. Grow up.

A Batman spoof:

A Point Break spoof. I love how Aziz does Keanu by just shouting. Click on the image to go to the video page:

A video describing all the ambiguous endings of movies. If you were unsure how they ended, now you know:

This is a company, Local Motors, i just found out about (from Toni) that crowd-sources the designs of cars and then builds them in a micro-production environment.  This is the next car their are building (below).  It looks totally sweet.  They build each car one by one and costs roughly $50k per car.  But they are (1) totally unique; (2) quite fast; (3) environmentally sound – 30 mpg on clean desiel; (4) and kick ass!

I’d love to have one of these.  To me, cars are getting more and more similar.  As a kid, i used to be able to identify the make of a car by their headlights in the dark.  Now i can’t even identify them in the daylight. A Nissan looks like a Toyota which looks like a Ford.

I love the thought of crowdsourcing and micro-producing for cars.  We’re already doing with t-shirts (threadless), shoes (nikeID), and airplanes (Epic planes)

Balsalmiq.  This is sick wireframing software.  It’s so easy and intuitive, it can allow anyone to make fairly decent wires.  It’s also a great way to get ideas across to other people.   Doing a full-screen demo of wires always seems to impress people.

YuuGuu.  If you want to share your screen to another person to either do a demo or just display a problem, this is the best way to do it. We’ve tried a bunch of different types (such as Vyew) and this is by far the best.

Dropbox.  We’re not the only one who loves this.   In fact, on the Balsalmiq blog they wrote, “If you don’t use DropBox, I will shake my head at you in disapproval.”  Dropbox is a network file times 1000.  It’s incredible.  We put lots of files into Dropbox as a way to share.   In fact, i’m about to start using it as a way to share all my files across my computers and my girlfriend’s.  A great way to just do backup to another machine.

Skype.  This remains the best way to do voice-to-voice communication.  It’s also a damn good IM client.  Haven’t experimented with the screen sharing yet.

Jing.  For debugging, there is nothing better than Jing.  If you don’t know Jing, here’s the use case it solves: (1) click a button, select an area of your screen, capture a video of that area for as long as you want, click to stop and here’s a URL of that video hosted on the Jing site.  Easy as pie and incredibly useful.

TripIt.  If you travel at all, this is a must have. When you make an airline or travel reservation, all you do is forward your email confirmation to tripit and they keep track of all the details.  Once you’re at the airport all you need is their iPhone app (or mobile site) to easily grab confirmation codes

Google Apps / Docs / Tasks.   Using corporate email through Google Apps is very easy to do and eliminates lots of effort of setting up Exchange or anything else – it’s both simpler and better.  Through that we get Google Docs which has always been a tremendous way to collaborate on documents with others.  For instance, i have a doc that i use that Nader (in San Francisco) can edit each day in real-time as i work on it.  I also use tasks as a great way to keep track of what i need to do.  I love that i can add tasks from the iPhone (great tasks interface) and then see them back on machine so i can knock ‘em out.

Any other items that you use that you’d recommend?  What are your favorite work tools?

Just finished reading the book In-N-Out Burger by Stacy Perlman about the creation of the iconic burger joint. The book has some great stories about the original founders. The husband/wife team Ester and Harry Snyder worked tirelessly and with lots of integrity to create a burger joint focused on “doing one thing an doing it better than anyone else”

The book begins when they founded the company in 1950 and the depiction of that time in LA was really interesting to learn about. The automobile was just coming on the scene and fast food restaurants were just starting. LA was a hotbed for them. In-N-Out, McDonald’s, Carls Jr, Taco Bell an others all started around the same time in the LA area. Los Angeles at that time was the Silicon Valley of fast food in the 50′s  There was a hype and boom around it and it was making many food entrepreneurs millionaires.

From the beginning In-N-Out wanted to be a place that was family owned and run. Harry and Ester continually turned away offers to sell, expand quickly or even change the scope of the business. Whether it was stubbornness or not, staying small and focused was Harry’s belief and it helped shape a truly unique restaurant that has – relative to other burger joints – healthier, better tasting burgers and a friendlier and cleaner environment all at a low price.

The book is also very much a out the Synder family – the dad, mom, 2 brothers, and granddaughter. Over 60 years of operation each one of these family members eventually ran the entire company. Harry was the main entrepreneur who built the core. When he died, he gave it to his youngest son who was equally talented and capable and built it up to be most like what it is today.  When he died, the oldest son stepped in.  He struggled with drug use and 6 years after taking over died from drug complications. After that, Harry’s wife, Ester, at age 82 took over again until her granddaughter was able to assume control.

The beginning is a great tale of growth and success, the middle is an interesting story of politics and growing pains, and the end is sort of tragic as the youngest Snyder (Lyndsi) is far from the dynamic inspiration of Harry nor nearly as competent.

I happy to have read the book and learn about In-N-Out’s secret sauce. If Harry, Ester or his son rich were still running the show I would bend I’ve backwards to eat there. But knowing that the company is now in somewhat incompetent and undeserving hands makes me believe that it’s only a matter of time before they chain tries to overexpand, maximize profits and become more of the same rather that a unique place with a special culture. Sure hope that doesn’t happen too soon

Some interesting facts:

• In the 1950′s car hops were all the craze. In 1949 Harry built a two-way speaker system that allowed people to order their burger on the way in and pick it up on their way out in a fast, streamlined process.  While Wendy’s claimed to have invented the drive-thru in 1973, In-N-Out used it right off the bat for over 20 years prior to that
• The entire chain lived by Harry’s quote: “Keep it simple, do one thing and do it the best you can”
• Harry felt he had to own the entire process on how to make beef patties and deliver to stores on daily basis.  What you won’t see in an In-N-Out are: freezers, infrared lights. or microwaves
• There’s a secret menu: the term, “animal style” came from the 60′s when the surfing community ordered the burgers with special sause.  The other customers who wanted the sause started calling it “animal style” as they viewed the surfers as animals.  Protein style. Lots think it came with the atlkins craze. But it came in the 70′s when the founder (harry) started eating burgers without the bun to try to lose weight.
• Harry always paid his employees way over minimum wage.  In 1950, min wage was 60 cents and he started everyone at $1
• Harry and Ester didn’t want to expand to more stores but their employees wanted more shifts.  Harry finally agreed to expand if he could staff an entire store with current employees and pay for it all in cash
• Every store opened is completely paid for – there is no debt
• LA is the birth place of fast-food and burgers.  Right by Baldwin Park in San Bernardino Valley, McDonalds opened it’s first store in 1948.  Similarly, Carl’s Jr started in 1945 and Fatburger in 1952 in LA
• Ray Kroc, who is credited for building the McDonald’s empire actually approached 4 other chains before the McDonald’s founders decided to sell exclusive franchise rights to him.   In-N-Out was one of the 4.  Harry declined almost immediately.  At that time, many people were getting quite rich by starting fast food chains and franchising them.  Harry felt lots of pressure to do the same.  You can imagine how every one in your industry is doing something one way and you feel like doing the completely opposite.  While he could have definitely made more money franchising, he has created a cult and beloved brand by doing the opposite.

Related articles by Zemanta

• NPR Tackles In-N-Out Burger (franklinavenue.blogspot.com)
• Interview with Stacy Perman (NPR)
• 10 secret menu items at fast food restaurants (cnn.com)

I was bummed however, to read of the new Barnes & Noble Nook not because it’s bad but because of what it represents.

The hardware of the Nook is better: It has expandable storage slot, it has wifi and it has a touch screen instead of a keyboard which means it’s more flexible for future functionality.

I now have library concerns. The Nook can take not only B&N’s eBooks but also Google’s and PDF’s.  While i’m not one to compare book counts, i am worried about my eBook library.  When i buy a book i want to own it forever.  I don’t want it attached to the device i have at that time.  Think of how bad it would be if the music you had was tied to your iPod.  Every time you got a new iPod, you could only put new music on it.   Granted, it’s not a great analogy because you listen to music over and over and you typically read a book only once.  But i think you see my point.

Vinyl vs. Books.  What i think could happen with me is that my book purchasing starts to look like how many music lovers purchase vinyl.  These people consume music digitally, through mp3′s, but for bands they really love they like to have the physical product – thus they purchase the vinyl record.  I could see myself doing this with books.  I read them all digitally and for authors/books that i really like, i’ll actually pay a premium and buy the physical copy.  Ideally i would like to have a format (like mp3) where i could save every book in and keep them all on a harddrive.

The Nook has sharing capabilities.  With the Nook you can send a book to a friend for 14 days.  This is nice but not a big deal for me.  What i want is the ability to share sections of the book to the web.  I want to post passages to my blog and i want to send to Facebook and twitter sentences that i enjoy.  I don’t see anyone allowing this and it’s troubling.  I want to be able to do much more with digital books then i could with the actual book. That’s why the mp3 is so much more powerful than the CD and that’s why the eBook could be much better than the book

Anyone else had similar concerns with their kindle?

In the Oct. Wired magazine they had a small blurb about things we’ll say to our grandkids.  Some of the good ones were:

• Back in my day, we only needed 140 characters
• There used to be so much snow up here, you could strap a board to your feet and slide all the way down
• TV contests gave cash to whoever could store the most data in their head
• Well, the screens were bigger, but they only showed the movies at certain times of day
• You used to keep the files on your computer, and you had to go back to the same computer to access them!

I thought it was an interesting topic.  Some more i thought of:

• Even though they were bigger, our cell phones were only for making calls
• It seems strange, but new artists didn’t pay us to listen to their music.  In fact, we had to buy the music from them
• When i was a kid, when we looked at cars we used to think “the bigger the better”
• People used to think that being tan was cool
• When kids were born, first of all they didn’t grab a clone for storage but also they had no way of not only knowing what hair color or muscle mass they kid would have and some patents didn’t even know if they were having a boy or a girl
• We had these things called “TV channels” and we had to order all the channels or none of them.  We only had a few hundred of them and you couldn’t search for anything on your TV.
• We used to go to watch the football/baseball game in person. I know it’s crazy but they used to have huge stadiums to watch the game with your own eyes.

What can you think of?

A girl is continously haunted by noises and strange occurances.  Her boyfriend, Micah, buys a camera and becomes obsessed with it.  Like any guy, he wants to get all of the strangeness on film.  The genius of the movie is that he places this camera on a tripod and films them sleeping to see what happens in the middle of the night.  And things happen.  When you see stuff occur, you see it happen through a static camera while their eyes are closed.  You feel for them and are legitamitely scared.  As Ebert says, “for extended periods here, nothing at all is happening, and believe me, you won’t be bored.”

If you like being on the edge of your seat, go check it out

Related articles by Zemanta

• Paranormal Activity Trailer – Holy Crap (themovieblog.com)
• Paranormal Activity Tries to Ride Social Media Buzz to Wide Release (mashable.com)
• Help Paranormal Activity Get A Wide Release (themovieblog.com)

That quote made me thing of the activities around launching a company.  You never know what’s going to hit you but you know that you’ll be able to solve it when it comes.  It makes me think of one of my favorite quotes:

Afoot and light-hearted I take to the open road,
Healthy, free, the world before me,
The long brown path before me leading wherever I choose.

Henceforth I ask not good-fortune, I myself am good-fortune,
Henceforth I whimper no more, postpone no more, need nothing,
Done with indoor complaints, libraries, querulous criticisms,
Strong and content I travel the open road

- Walt Whitman

I have found that you must be both excited and confident and if you are, it’s very fulfilling.  Just some words to think about over the weekend

As he says: “The challenge is in designing structures and transparency that will attract the good guys while burying or repelling those that seek the new technology (because they can’t find anywhere else to go). In other words, you either need to move the top left to the top right (not easy, but possible*), or educate the bottom left of the grid in how to contribute to the culture (really difficult indeed). The best new media (like blogs and possibly twitter) open doors to people who didn’t used to have a voice. The worst ones (like blogs and possibly twitter) merely create new venues for scams and senseless yelling.”

People like to bemoan new technologies but it’s just lazy to criticize the entire sector.  Some innovations move you ahead (upper right) and some introduce new problems (lower right)

Related articles by Zemanta

• The tacky techie conundrum (vator.tv)

In the book there’s a good passage about the music business and radio.  In the late 1930′s, radio was emerging as a popular entertainment format but also one that made a mess of the old ways of paying musicians.  At the time most radio broadcasts were live, and the musicians and composers were paid for a single performance but to musicians and composers payment for a single radio performance alone did not seem fair when that one performance was being received by millions of listeners.  To them, if those millions were packed into one concert hall, the musicians share of the receipts would have been huge.

Broadcasters argued that it was impossible to pay licensing fees based on how many listeners tuned in b/c no one knew what that number was.  But ASCAP, which had a near-monopoly on the most popular artists, made the rules and insisted on royalties of 3 to 5 percent of a station’s gross advertising revenues in exchange for the right to play music – and it threatened to raise the rate in 1940 when the contract expired. Whoa.

Understandably, radio stations were pissed and took matters into their own hands and cut live performances entirely.  Recording technology was improving and more and more stations began playing these new things called “records” instead.  Music labels responded by selling records stamped with “NOT LICENSED FOR RADIO BROADCAST” but in 1940 the Supreme Court decided that radio stations could play any record they had purchased.

So ASCAP convinced its most prominent members (including Bing Crosby) to stop making recordings.   Let me repeat that, ASCAP convinced artists to stop making music because of how it was being distributed.  Amazing.

With a shrinking pool of music to play and a crappy deal on the table by ASCAP, the broadcasters struck out and formed their own royalty agency called Broadcast Music Incorporated (BMI) which had much better terms.  At first it was a magnet for regional musicians such as R&B or Country artists who were usually neglected by New York-based ASCAP.  Because these musicians wanted exposure more than money they agreed to let radio stations play their music for free – and thus business model for charging radio stations to pay a fortune for music collapsed. ASCAP never regained the right to get large royalties.

The irony is large is amazing.  Worried about a bad business model, ASCAP’s bad terms practically drove free music into the radio stations.  A free inferior version of music (radio) turned out to be a great marketer for the paid version.

Similarly today, free music on the web is driving more and more people to concerts. Music consumption continues to rise but record labels are collapsing.   You’d think today’s issues are unique but you only have to look back 80 years to see what we continue to repeat history.

This is why i love stories about people who were told they were wrong and they persevered and proved their naysayers wrong. Three stories stick out in my head:

Steve Jobs got forced out of Apple because he had a crazy idea that hardware can be beautiful. Years later he came back to prove that he was right 20 years before.  Now he’s dominating the music industry, the largest shareholder of the largest media company (Disney) and revolutionizing the mobile technology industry

In-N-Out Burger was a fast-food joint just like all the others in the 50′s. Ray Kroc wanted to buy it and franchise it. That was the thing to do.  McDonald’s was doing it, so was Taco Bell and Wendy’s and everyone else. But Harry Synder (the founder) of In-N-Out told Ray to pound salt.  He had a different idea. Instead of “lower costs and increase sales” it was “do one thing and do it as well as you can.” That one thing was the In-N-Out burger.  He never sold. The Synder family has purchased every In-N-Out with cash.  He wanted to know every meat distributor by his first name. That’s why the #1 requested meal backstage at the Oscars is In-N-Out and why there’s over an hour wait at a place where burgers are $2.

John Lasseter lost his job at Disney back in ‘86. He was fired by an old line animator who said there was no future in computer animation. Lasseter slept under his desk, and a decade later delivered Pixar’s first hit, “Toy Story”.  After story he and Pixar have gone for 10 for 10.  Nothing is a sure thing in media.  And John is 10 for 10.

All of these guys did it their way and the world is a better place because of it. We can only hope that we have the conviction and passion and talent of them in our own lives.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Disney/Pixar’s John Lasseter Talks ‘Rapunzel’ Casting, ‘Toy Story 3′ Plot, ‘Cars 2′, ‘Winnie the Pooh’ and More! (cinematical.com)
• “‘Toy Story 3′ backstory revealed by Pixar’s John Lasseter” (gointothestory.com)

I had no idea why Google would buy a company, reCaptcha, that does captchas. For those of you who don’t know, captchas are the little squiggly text that people enter to prove they are human. The word “captcha” actually stands for: Completely Automated Public Turing test to tell Computers and Humans Apart

With these things are all over the internet, why would Google buy this specific company? I found out a few reasons. First, they are the original gangsters – it turns out the guy who invented captchas is the founder of reCaptcha. Second, they way they do the captcha words is quite innovative. Check this out: reCAPTCHA takes scans from newsclippings, articles and old books that can’t be read by machines (because they are scans) then feeds them to humans in a captcha one at a time with other words that it knows. The user then enters both words. The word that reCAPTCHA knows is tested – if correct, it now learns an additional word to use on other challenges. This is how they build up their database of words from scans.

Google has for the past 6 years been scanning books like crazy. They have millions of books scanned. What they don’t have is text of those books available to be searched. The thought is that if you use captchas to surface all the words of those books one at a time, this will enable a massive crowdsourcing project to build a database of literature. Very interesting experiment. I never really hear of such clever business development deals. I love it.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Google Captures reCAPTCHA (sitepoint.com)
• Google acquires ReCaptcha as book-scanning aid (news.cnet.com)
• Google signs deal to print 2m books on Espresso machines (guardian.co.uk)

While at Dartmouth, Theodor was editor of Dartmouth’s comedy magazine called The Jacko. That is  until he got caught drinking on Easter eve and got kicked out.  By his fraternity (Caste and Gauntlet) he was voted least likely to succeed and he graduated with a 2.4 in 1925.  Given all that he managed to go out and sell  more than 222 million books (66 titles).  That’s pretty amazing

Here are some good quotes:

My alphabet starts with this letter called yuzz. It’s the letter I use to spell yuzz-a-matuzz. You’ll be sort of surprised what there is to be found once you go beyond ‘Z’ and start poking around

Nonesense wakes up the brain cells. And it helps develop a sense of humor, which is awfully important in this day and age. Humor has a tremendous place in this sordid world. It’s more than just a matter of laughing. If you can see things out of whack, then you can see how things can be in whack

If you sat 50 years with your worms and your wishes, you’d grow a long beard before you catch fishes

I’d like to get beyond Z soon. It sounds like a good place to be.

There’s an interesting article in the NY Times called Taking Back The Knife: Girls Gone Gory in which it talks about the recent increasing in horror movies being made and the strange findings of recent box office receipts showing that women have an even bigger appetite for horror films than men.

This surprised me although i have seen it first hand; last weekend both Diane and Althea put Halloween 2 tops on their “want to see” list.  Some of the reasons that the NY Times said were:

• Women can identify more with horror films as their are other women as the main characters. Diablo Cody (writer of “Juno”) said, “When I watched movies like ‘The Goonies’ and ‘E.T.,’ it was boys having adventures. When I watched ‘Nightmare on Elm Street,’ it was Nancy beating” up Freddy. “It was that simple.”
• Women enjoy pure adrenaline rushes. As Cody says, “Some of us just like that stuff. We like suspense, we like to be scared, we like to have visceral reaction in the theater. Maybe I’m starved for adrenaline, but for me watching a horror movie is very pleasurable. So making one was kind of a dream.”

Diane, the resident expert here, claims it’s because horror films are much more emotional than other genres.  Most movies are event driven or just visually pleasing which caters more to the male.  Horror movies, on the other hand, are all about messing with your emotions – which is much more powerful to the woman than the male (in theory).

Whatever the reason is, i was surprised to hear this gender preference.  Any one else have any ideas?

Related articles by Zemanta

• Megan Fox: Zac Efron is a Delicious Strawberry Cupcake (shoppingblog.com)
• Active Horror Franchises (popsyndicate.com)
• Kate Beckinsale Wears Black Before Her Whiteout (popsugar.com)

It makes me reflect on my time here in LA.  As some of you know, i’m moving to Denver in the next few weeks.  I’m out of here. While i’m excited about moving closer to the mountains and friends, i’m sad to leave LA.  The past 17 months have been an interesting time. Some thoughts on LA:

• The people are not as bad a place as people think.  Sure, there are some shitty people – and most of them work in “the industry” but if you avoid the industry and industry parties, then you really don’t run into these people that often.
• Side note: it’s interesting moving from one town where “the industry” was the government to LA where it is the film business.  As i see it, these are the two largest growth business the US will have in the next 30 years (except maybe health care) or if not the largest grown maybe the largest export
• LA is very entrepreneurial. However, the people i met here are quite different than the entrepreneurs from Silicon Valley.  Up there, a startup is typically an academic thought-based exploration.  Down here in LA, it’s much more about the hustle.  When i think about the two types of startups, i’ve found that  LA is more focused on making money and less on the ideas and philosophy behind the deals.
• Nature, nature, nature.  It’s all around LA.  People talk about Colorado’s proximity to mountains and nature – well it’s right here too.  You’ve got beach, mountains, desert – all within 2 hours.  And it’s beautiful.  If you can see past the smog, you’ll see some amazingly beautiful scenery. I wish i had spent more time exploring
• The beach is underrated.  There are lots of parts of LA.  You’ve got the Valley, Hollywood, West Hollywood, and Beverly Hills.  But what all of those don’t have is great weather year round and the beach.  The beach brings a calm to people’s attitude and a coolness to the air.  Both make a big difference day in and day out.
• Related to the above post: Beach Cruisers. I’ve always loved biking but it wasn’t till i moved to the beach that i discovered the cruiser.  This has 3 key characteristics: (1) a big comfy seat, (2) a basket for carrying stuff, (3) handlebars angled up so you can sit straight up and not hunched over.  All of these dramatically change the bike riding experience so it can be done recreationally and comfortably .  I love my cruiser
• Food: I love the Tacos.  Cactus Tacos, Dos Burritos, Loteria or all the others.  My taco standards have been raised forever.   I also love In-N-Out and ate there almost twice a month the entire time, as noted by JT and Jstreet and Nader.
• Movie theaters. As i’ve written before, LA does movie theaters the right way.  This means that they are big comfy seats and that you can pick your seat before you arrive so you can get there 5 min before showtime and have a nice center seat.  Or you can see that there are no good seats and wait for another show.  Game changer
• Dartmouth surely represents.  No matter what i wanted to do in LA, i found that there was a Dartmouth alum and friend who had figured it out and could take me along.  I was so fortunate to have soccer teammates, pong partners, business thinkers, rock band drummers, talent agents, concert goers and providers, and lots entrepreneurs all over the place.  They made LA an easily place to join and a hard place to leave.  I see lots of vacations back in my future.
• The Garfields.  Todd and Julie were one of my highlights of LA.  I’m very fortunate to have roped them into many meals and movies.

Of all of these, i think i’ll miss the beach and the people around the beaches the most.  Waking up to salt water in the air and a cool breeze is amazing.

Thank you LA, i’ll miss you.

• TV and traditional ad spending for Nike is down 80% over the past 4 years where as digital spend is up 200%.  They want to go where the consumers are and more and more that is online
• Nike Marketing Director Simon Pestridge says: “We don’t do advertising any more. We just do cool stuff. It sounds a bit wanky, but that’s just the way it is. Advertising is all about achieving awareness, and we no longer need awareness. We need to become part of people’s lives and digital allows us to do that.”
• For brands there’s a fundamental need to engage consumers rather than bombard them with ads
• Another good point in the article is that the days of interrupt-driven advertising is over.  The article claims, “Pestridge insists there will always be a place for traditional advertising, he acknowledges that the days of ‘interruptive marketing’ are over. ‘Now it’s all about deciding what you want to say and how you’re going to say it.’” In my opinion, sites that integrate a sponsors message into the content, whether paid or facilitated, is much more effective
• They spend more time making content that they put on the web than making taglines.  Content like Ronaldinho ‘Touch of Gold’ viral video has over 30 million views (see below)

I think this shows that the content is the ad now.  Advertisers increasingly don’t want to interrupt the user. They don’t want to just inform – they want the user to engage with them.  This is the where the future is.   It’s not in banners, but rather in, as Nike says, “cool stuff.”

sometime soon.  What i really want is an AppleTV – and i don’t mean the box that attaches to the TV.  I want an actual TV created by Apple that’s an LCD or Plasma that runs OSX.

The levels of convergence would be ridiculous.  You could use it as a Time Machine device to back up all your machines in your house.  It could have a built in cable modem and airport so it could broadcast wireless everywhere.  You’re basically converging Time Machine, Airport Express, the AppleTV box and adding a device that has a screen and processing power. The different models will vary by harddrive size.

The experience would be sick.  The TV would, of course, have an App Store so people could make living room applications.  This could be anything from a Party Playlist to Pictionary, or Charades.  The remote could be an iPod or an iPhone.

Apple tried to integrate iTunes into Motorola phones (such as the Rockr) and found it to be such a horrible experience that they just built the entire stack and worked with a service provider (AT&T) for the iPhone.  They’ve been doing the same with television.  They have the AppleTV which is an add-on and can never get into the experience.

There are so many possibilities.  Come on Steve Jobs.  Make it happen

Some facts: iLike has 50 million registered users.  That’s a huge number.  They are definitely one of the most popular applications on Facebook and one of the best applications anywhere for concerts. They have built some things that are quite hard to build such as:

• A mp3 download store (link)
• A music activity feed crawling millions of artists and millions of users
• A ticketing system integrated with Ticketmaster
• A self-serve advertising system

They have raised $16 million bucks and claim to be profitable.  Both Facebook and Amazon were interested in the deal.   If both of these are true why would they sell for $20 million? Selling for $20 means that the investors get their money back and then then $4 million gets spread around to shareholders.  Basically nobody makes any money that they are happy about.

To compare, Facebook just bought FriendFeed for $20 million and they have 1 million monthly uniques.  iLike has at least 3x that on the web and 50x total and they are growing.

Also, I can’t imagine why a dynamic, fast moving company would want to go work at MySpace instead of Facebook or Amazon.

• MySpace vs. Facebook. One is doing a fantastic job of innovating and developing new innovative software (FB).  The other is bleeding users, bleeding cash (MySpace Music) and restructuring.  iLike has also actively been courting Facebook for the past 3 years. They’ve thrown Facebook / iLike parties and done everything possible to try to get a FB acquisition.  Going with MySpace is strange
• MySpace vs. Amazon. One (Amazon) is in iLike’s backyard in Seattle and the other is down in LA.  One is making good inroads into providing a viable music store to iTunes.  The other (MySpace) started as a primary space for music but is now controlled by the labels and is getting worse and worse as they try to cut costs.

Both of those don’t make sense so then you have to conclude that they are just doing this for the money.  But if (a) they are profitable and (b) it’s only $20 million on $16m raised then that doesn’t make sense either.

My conclusion from all this non-sense:

• iLike was not profitable and were running out of money.  They needed to either raise more money or sell.
• Fatigue.  Working in the digital music industry and having success at it is exhausting.   Your main content source (music) brings with it tons of headaches.  The labels are working against you every step of the way
• Facebook had no interest in getting into the music business.  I think they see content area as something for partners and although iLike probably asked them repeatedly, they backed away from the deal.  There is no better content company that is more integrated into Facebook than iLike.  If FB didn’t want them, they’re not going to get anyone.
• MySpace paid more than $20 million.  They won’t disclose the terms but my guess is that there is some kicker in there that made the deal very attractive to the shareholders.  Too bad we don’t know what it is.

At least one or more of these have to be true.  What are your thoughts?

1. In the film, the main character is a guy who writes greeting cards. While this is his job, he’s actually an architect. When i heard this, the movie immediately became less original and unique

   to me. Being an architect is such a cliche now. Ever since Something About Mary it’s been used in every romantic-comedy around. I understand why. If you’re a woman, an architect embodies all the qualities you’d want in your man’s job: it’s creative, it’s independent, it’s the perfect mix between corporate and entrepreneur.

2. You must quit your job to be happy. Such a load of crap. In modern movies there are really only four types of themes: (1) “Believe in yourself and you can do anything.” (2) “We are all alike underneath.” (3) “Love conquers all” (4) “Good people win.”  Almost all movies are one or more of these themes.  I was sort of bummed that this movie became a #1 (Believe in yourself) movie when he quit his job.  It just made the whole thing more cliche to me.  Hollywood loves this message and it’s all over the place – almost every tv show and movie is saying this.  I was hoping for more realism
3. In real life, everyone knows the situation where there’s a couple where both people really like each other. They get along great and things seem fine. However, one person likes the other person way more. The other person is into the relationship, but not enough. They break up and people wonder why. This happens all the time. However, it never happens in movies. The only other movie i know of where this happens is Woody Allen‘s Annie Hall. I also think that just because this movie tackles this situation is why so many people see it as novel or unique.
4. It’s amazing how good the guy from 3rd Rock From The Sun looks (Joseph Gordon-Levitt).  He was so nerdy in that show and he’s really pretty cool in this movie. I liked him a lot as an actor – even though i thought his character was a sap.  I also didn’t even recognize him as the doctor in GI Joe.

All in all, i really liked the movie and thought it was fresh and fun.  I also like the music in it.  It’s worth checking out

Related articles by Zemanta

• (500) Days of Summer – In Theaters Now! (justjared.buzznet.com)
• (500) Days of Summer (cbc.ca)

In the panel you had 7 actual authors of popular comic books and in the seats were about 1000 fans of the books. Questions stemmed from upcoming plot lines to questions about why certain characters behaved the way they did

On thing that occured to me during the Q & A session is that i’ve never experienced the written word in this way.  When i read something, either a book or an article, it’s always complete.  Never is it time-based.  Here’s a form where a user reads something and then has to wait a week or a month to continue reading.

Now I’m used to the anticipation and serial nature with TV shows but i realized that i have never experienced it with anything else.  That’s why i was so surprised to hear Radiohead’s announcement yesterday that they will no longer release albums but rather EP’s and singles.  This is cool. The album does seem like an antiquated concept now.

Imagine how cool it would be if a band released an album serially.  A new song each week for 10 weeks.  If this happened, I would look forward to hearing the 2009 Radiohead collection every week.  The anticipation would be half of the enjoyment.  This just shows that there is lots of innovation left in the industry.  Just because there are Walmart stores set up to sell albums doesn’t mean that’s the way it has to happen.

Imagine a world where Thom York says, “The single next week will blow your mind, while the single the week after that is one of the best love songs i’ve ever written.”  I’d mark those dates and download.  It’d be an event and it’d be a lot better than having to find out from friends when new albums drop

Wathching TV shows like Chuck and films like Twilight which have almost no emotional maturity, i really respect how he took teenagers seriously. Rarely today do films show teenagers as individuals having real hopes, ambitions, problems and behavior. He did – in fact, in invented the movie that did.

“Kids are smart enough to know that most teenage movies are just exploiting them,” he said on the set of “The Breakfast Club.” “They’ll respond to a film about teenagers as people. [My] movies are about the beauty of just growing up. I think teenage girls are especially ready for this kind of movie, after being grossed out by all the sex and violence in most teenage movies. People forget that when you’re 16, you’re probably more serious than you’ll ever be again. You think seriously about the big questions.”

Kevin Smith once saying, “Basically everything I do is just a raunchy John Hughes movie.”

He was a stud and the world will miss him

Related articles by Zemanta

• ‘Brat Pack’ Teen Comedy Film Director Dies (news.sky.com)
• John Hughes – a career in clips (guardian.co.uk)
• John Hughes, Director of Classic ’80s Films, Dies (abcnews.go.com)
• Actors Remember John Hughes: Broderick, Culkin, Ringwald & More (huffingtonpost.com)

As the media industry consolidates and more and more people are simply linking to news – you might start to wonder where all the news is going to come from. There’s a great quote that was passed along to me by Jordan that goes:

what no one seems to understand is that “news” doesn’t just magically appear on twitter/the web/etc. Most of it is scraped off these “old dead media” sources. I’m constantly amazed by the childlike mindset of the digerati to this process. It’s like kids thinking that food comes from the grocery store. Kill off the farmers and the journalists and see how much magic food and news just “finds you” for your consumption

Lots of stuff is derivative on the web and it makes you wonder if the world is going to just become one big echo chamber. Or will journalists do more stuff on their own?

Personally, i don’t think the analogy holds. Food must be grown but news doesn’t have to be paid for by journalists at major media companies.

• Not every newspaper needs to write a report on the ballgame. ESPN will cover that for us.
• We don’t need to pay reporters to go to town hall meetings and report back, people are doing that for free.
• We don’t need local papers writing opinions on what’s happening across the globe. A handful of paid opinion pieces plus organic perspectives (blogs / twitter / etc.) are enough for me.

What the world needs is not to cut off the supply of news but to radically change the way it’s published and the economics behind it. Most news is still being produced and most of it is being delivered at very low cost or free. If it’s more expensive than that, it has to go.

This item has wolves on it which makes it intrinsically sweet and worth 5 stars by itself, but once I tried it on, that’s when the magic happened. After checking to ensure that the shirt would properly cover my girth, I walked from my trailer to Wal-mart with the shirt on and was immediately approached by women. The women knew from the wolves on my shirt that I, like a wolf, am a mysterious loner who knows how to ‘howl at the moon’ from time to time (if you catch my drift!). The women that approached me wanted to know if I would be their boyfriend and/or give them money for something they called mehth. I told them no, because they didn’t have enough teeth, and frankly a man with a wolf-shirt shouldn’t settle for the first thing that comes to him.

I arrived at Wal-mart, mounted my courtesy-scooter (walking is such a drag!) sitting side saddle so that my wolves would show. While I was browsing tube socks, I could hear aroused asthmatic breathing behind me. I turned around to see a slightly sweaty dream in sweatpants and flip-flops standing there. She told me she liked the wolves on my shirt, I told her I wanted to howl at her moon. She offered me a swig from her mountain dew, and I drove my scooter, with her shuffling along side out the door and into the rest of our lives. Thank you wolf shirt.

Pros: Fits my girthy frame, has wolves on it, attracts women
Cons: Only 3 wolves (could probably use a few more on the ‘guns’), cannot see wolves when sitting with arms crossed, wolves would have been better if they glowed in the dark.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Three Wolf Moon Shirt (neatorama.com)
• Moon Wolf Tee Shirt # 1 On Amazon (stacyknows.blogspot.com)
• The Incredible Amazon Three-Wolf Moon T-Shirt (blippitt.com)

Why no Android phones?  I love Android as a concept but every time i hear about a new manufacturer releasing new handsets they are always on Windows Mobile.  I went to Mobile World Congress this year and saw a ton of new phones from Samsung, Acer, Sony/Ericsson, LG and others.  Every single one of them was using Windows Mobile.  For an OS that seems inferior to Android and dramatically inferior to the iPhone, why is it getting so much traction?  Why do device manufacturers keep choosing it.  Please tell me?

If they keep choosing it, it means there will be more and more phones that are essentially useless to me in my handset selection and this is a bad bad thing.

I was skeptical but i just watched this video (below) of Flynn’s summer league play and he looks fan-fricking-tastic.  I’m very excited to see what he can do with KLove, Big Al and rest of the squad.

Also, i want to touch on the fact that Mad Dog Madsen was traded to the Clippers.  While not the best player in the league i think he’s done a great job of communicating with the public.  His blog is good read and he’s clearly a very smart dude (from Stanford). He’s missing Minnesota and I’ll miss him too.

Check this out:

“It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat.”

Now – onward and upward….

You could view William as a type of artist for he approaches a Flow-like state when he’s diffusing – all time stands still and like a surgeon he achieves the utmost clarity and focus.   He understands bombs inside and out and does it day after day after day until he could do it in his sleep.  He also tries to understand the bombers. He loves his job and could be the best in the military at it.

This movie is exciting – not because of the action scenes but because of the people – the characters.  There aren’t any big speeches but rather you can see each person examining their soul as the war takes it toll.  I felt as if i was truly watching someone feel the war.  The direction of this movie was top notch.  There weren’t lame quick cuts in the action scenes but rather the camera dwells on the situation at hand and allows the viewer to experience the situation just as the soldiers are.  It’s not action – it’s suspense.  It’s great and you can see why William James needs his drug.  It’s an approach to war i’ve never seen before

I thought that this was the first good film about the Iraq War that i’ve seen.  It shows how the troops are integrated in the streets and how tough it is for them to police in a city that doesn’t necessarily want them nor understands them.  I’ve talked to a few veterans and one of them has specifically mentioned the kids in the cities and how hard it is to look at someone and both want to help someone and also be afraid of them killing you.

This is a great film.  It’s on my list for nominations for Best Picture, Best Director (Kathryn Bigelow) and Best Actor (Jeremy Renner)

Related articles:

• The Hurt Locker: A Film That Mirrors The Point (takepart.com)
• New Trailer For ‘The Hurt Locker’ Is The Bomb (screenrant.com)
• Heart-Pounding First 8 Minutes Of The Hurt Locker (cinemablend.com)

The reason i believe is something I heard from Chris Connelly and that TV is the new indie movie. Shows like The Soprano’s, Band of Brothers, The Wire, and Mad Men – those are the best movies of the last decade.  Granted they didn’t come out on the big screen but this is where visionary directors are going to produce character-driven creative stories.   Cinema today is all about either (1) Big budget action movies or (2) formulaic stories in a specific genre whether it’s horror, comedy, romance, or thrillers.   It’s interesting to see that TV is picking up the slack that films are leaving.  This could also be why people are picking up TV DVD’s much more.   The production quality, the music and the cinematography is way better in these tv dramas than they ever were in 80′s and 90′s television – it’s no wonder that they can compete head on so well.

Personally, if i had to pick, i’d choose The Departed or No Country For Old Men as the best movies of the 00′s.  What do you think?  First, what is your top movie of the past decade?  And do you agree that TV is the new Indie film?

Regardless of what you may hear, YouTube costs are a fraction of any other company running similar operations. Most of Google’s bandwidth is free or near-free; its hardware is cost-optimized; and its data center costs are mostly committed or sunk. The top customers of our sourcing advisory service, whose prices are on average 20% better than the average market level, cannot deliver content as cheaply as Google’s massively scaled operation. Surprisingly enough, the ones that come closest are often thosethat leverage the scale of others through using cloud services.
But even if a fair accounting of its costs showed a loss, YouTube gives Google the ability to achieve needed improvements in lowering cost of other operations. Loud stories about YouTube’s losses can only help deter copyright lawsuits and demands from content owners. Skepticism is warranted — but be ready for surprise news of profitability in the future.

The article does explore the upside of allowing the market to believe the YouTube business is quick unprofitable.  With license-holders eager to renogotiate and reap larger profits, it’s better to all them to perceive that it’s much too expensive to host and deliver these files and thus license payments should be low.

But this is clearly wrong.  In yesterday’s earnings call, Google had this to say about YouTube:

“Monetized views” on YouTube have more than tripled over the last year, said SVP Jonathan Rosenberg. Executives would not say whether YouTube was profitable, although they did say it was on a trajectory to become a “very profitable business for us” in the “not too distant future,” giving a collective heart attack to analysts who have speculated about how much money the site is losing. In a follow-up call with analysts, CFO Patrick Pichette said that the company wanted to reaffirm that YouTube’s business model was credible. “There’s been so much press with all these documentations of massive costs and no business model,” he said.

Interesting to think about next time someone speaks up about how horrible the YouTube business is.

Related articles by Zemanta

• YouTube’s ‘financial folly’ overblown, report suggests (cbc.ca)
• Google accused of avoiding YouTube revenues (theregister.co.uk)
• Guessing game: How much money is YouTube losing? (thestar.com)
• How Much Money Is YouTube Losing? (abcnews.go.com)

• Here’s a page with all the music i’m listening to
• Here’s a page with all the websites i find that i like
• Here’s a page with all my photos from the past 5 years and beyond
• Here’s a page with all my workouts from each day
• Here’s a page that shows my activity around LA (stores and restaurants i go to)
• There’s more including videos (YouTube), payments (Mint), TV shows (Boxee), and books (GoodReads)

Fred wrote that he likes to keep this data because, “I am interested in this sector of implicit behavior data. I believe that publishing the things I do on the web will allow web services to get smarter about me and give me better experiences.” I keep track for different reasons.  I actually like to keep data about myself. I find it interesting and i use to remember events of my life.

But i see it going even further.  What i wrote was:

When i look at the web, i see people trying to capture experiences. They capture photos on flickr, videos on youtube, and notes with people on email. Their life is being tracked but not in a comprehensive way.

I could imagine a site – call it “Lifetracker.com” which tracks all the things you do. You plug in last.fm, gmail (or other email), google voice, flickr/picassa, twitter, credit card (mint), youtube and other web services. I then matches 3 things: the data, the contacts, and the time. It creates a timeline for you and marks who you’ve been interacting with and when. There’s an API so each new web service you start using you can plug into it.

There are several benefits: (1) as you mentioned, you can give this data to services for recommendations; (2) you can search your life. If google is web search, twitter is real-time search, this would be “me search”; (3) just like we don’t remember phone numbers anymore b/c we put them into our phone to retrieve any time we want, we can start throwing information into lifetracker such as meeting notes, audio recordings of phone calls, etc. so we don’t have to write stuff down and remember it. Use the cloud as a memory storage instead of your brain

I see this coming and it’s really exciting to think about it.

I do think it will happen.  What do you think?

Saw Bruno last night and here are some thoughts:

• The trailer was hilarious BUT gave away way too many scenes.  Watching the movie, I found that there was a setup and you already knew what was going to happen.  This was true for the camping trip and the military attempt. Similarly, he gave away too many jokes from the movie on the Today show too which i posted about yesterday.
  • Trailers giving away too much of a movie is a monstrous pet peeve of mine.  I hate that films do it. I understand that it helps get people into the theaters more but it really degrades the actual experience.   This is a whole other post for me.  But man does it tick me off.
• With Borat, they explained the camera because they were filming everything for the station back home, and you could tell when there was a hidden camera.  For Bruno, there was no explanation why the camera was following Bruno around for most of the time.  There are some scenes where you wonder how they are filming it – like the swingers party scene.   It made the movie feel less authentic and more fictional
• There are some great scenes that really show the insanity of America and of Hollywood.  Some parents should be totally ashamed of themselves for how they pimp out their kids.  Bruno is able to expose the absurdity of LA really well.
• The movie is lot like the movie Jackass except instead of doing anything just to be dumb, Bruno does gay things just to be dumb and films the reaction of other people.   There’s actually quite a lot of similarities between the two
• I found that the narrative of the movie was pretty contrived.  It was more a series of funny events strapped together than an actual story.  Sure it tried to be a story of Bruno’s attempt to become famous but that is not really an arc.
• This is the best marketed movie i’ve seen in a long time.  Everywhere i looked it was Bruno.  His appearance on Letterman and The Today show were great.  I really felt that this movie was an event which resulted in me marching out on opening night. I have to hand it to them – really great marketing.

So, i think as you can see, i felt the movie was hyped up abit too much for me and didn’t fully deliver.  I still think it was pretty damn funny.  I laughed a lot.  But, i think it’s more of a Borat sequel than another innovative step.  Personally i think Borat was better or at least more novel.  I’m going 7.5 out of 10

Related articles:

• Bruno: Sacha Baron Cohen interviewed on the Late Show with David Letterman (telegraph.co.uk)
• Bruno Tries To Get A Hug From Matt Lauer (socialitelife.celebuzz.com)
• Bruno Gets Up Close and Personal with Eminem (themovieblog.com)
• Woman sues Bruno actor over injuries (thestar.com)
• Bruno: Sacha Baron Cohen’s film gets 18 rating (telegraph.co.uk)
• Sacha Baron Cohen’s Bruno Fools Alabama National Guard (huffingtonpost.com)

I’m headed out to see Bruno tonight and i’m pretty excited as i’ve read some great reviews and saw that it’s at 71% at Rotten Tomatoes.  Ebert says:

Here is a film that is 82 minutes long and doesn’t contain 30 boring seconds.

that’s a pretty good endorsement – especially from someone who isn’t in to sophomoric comedies that much. I like Borat so i’m expecting great things. I actually think that people are much more outwardly homophobic than racist so i can imagine that Sacha Baron can have much more fun with peolple with Bruno than he did with Borat.

I got even more excited when i saw Bruno go on the Today show and talk about Isreal and Palastine and his war on carbs.  It is hilarious:

Related articles:

• A Beautiful Blend of Voice: Perpetuum Jazzile (converstations.com)

I last saw Marc in Paris

Over the past 8 years i’ve become friends with Marc Canter. I first met him while working at AOL as we needed new and fresh ideas there and boy did he have them.  We asked him again to come and help us out at Ruckus and he delivered again.

Marc lives in the San Francisco area – or at least he did. Marc has announced that he’s leaving heading to Ohio. You heard that right – OHIO. Why? Because he has big ideas and sometimes the best place to do them is not in the Bay Area. He’s also planning on tapping into some US resources that haven’t been utilized – unemployed people. His plan involves the unemployed force, a non=profit, private equity, grants, and lots of new ideas. You can read about it more here

I wish him the best of luck and hope to drop into OH soon to hear more about it.

I reread this morning Clay Shirky’s great SXSW piece about the media business and i wanted to share some of his thoughts here.  Let me go through the end of the article a bit.  He starts:

Elizabeth Eisenstein’s magisterial treatment of Gutenberg’s invention, The Printing Press as an Agent of Change, opens with a recounting of her research into the early history of the printing press. She was able to find many descriptions of life in the early 1400s, the era before movable type. Literacy was limited, the Catholic Church was the pan-European political force, Mass was in Latin, and the average book was the Bible. She was also able to find endless descriptions of life in the late 1500s, after Gutenberg’s invention had started to spread. Literacy was on the rise, as were books written in contemporary languages, Copernicus had published his epochal work on astronomy, and Martin Luther’s use of the press to reform the Church was upending both religious and political stability.

I want to draw the obvious parallel to today’s revolution in publishing and in technology. I belive that just having email and IM has increased the literacy in America (maybe the world).  Not 15 years ago no kids were daily expressing themselves in written words, now they do all the time.  In 1996, i would frequently get emails in ALL CAPS and poorly written.  Now it’s a must-have skill.  But let’s continue with the speech….

What Eisenstein focused on, though, was how many historians ignored the transition from one era to the other. To describe the world before or after the spread of print was child’s play; those dates were safely distanced from upheaval. But what was happening in 1500? The hard question Eisenstein’s book asks is “How did we get from the world before the printing press to the world after it? What was the revolution itself like?”

Chaotic, as it turns out. The Bible was translated into local languages; was this an educational boon or the work of the devil? Erotic novels appeared, prompting the same set of questions. Copies of Aristotle and Galen circulated widely, but direct encounter with the relevant texts revealed that the two sources clashed, tarnishing faith in the Ancients. As novelty spread, old institutions seemed exhausted while new ones seemed untrustworthy; as a result, people almost literally didn’t know what to think. If you can’t trust Aristotle, who can you trust?

I find this same thing is happening with columnist and journalism.  Poor articles just get overlooked or debunked in comments.  The threshhold for well researched facts is higher as the audience is double-checking you every step of the way.  What happened with Aristotle is happenign today with every sports, politcal, and news writer in the world.

During the wrenching transition to print, experiments were only revealed in retrospect to be turning points. Aldus Manutius, the Venetian printer and publisher, invented the smaller octavo volume along with italic type. What seemed like a minor change — take a book and shrink it — was in retrospect a key innovation in the democratization of the printed word. As books became cheaper, more portable, and therefore more desirable, they expanded the market for all publishers, heightening the value of literacy still further.

Sound familiar to anyone? Can you say BLOG or TWITTER – such a simple concept.  Take publishing an article on a web page and shrink it to a blog or 140 characters.  What seems like a minor change has some profound responses.

That is what real revolutions are like. The old stuff gets broken faster than the new stuff is put in its place. The importance of any given experiment isn’t apparent at the moment it appears; big changes stall, small changes spread. Even the revolutionaries can’t predict what will happen.

Old stuff is indeed getting broken. Newspapers are gone or going fast.  Magazines are next.  Paper is being replaced by netbooks, iPhones and Kindles.  These devices are embracing different technologies and shorter-form content.  This is the real revolution that’s happening in front our face.  That Time Magazine you have in your mailbox will be a story you tell your grandkids about, “hey kids, get this, i used to walk to the mailbox and pick up a ‘magazine’ that had stories in it written down, printed once a week and sent to me.” and they will look at you the same way i look at my grandparents when they talk about a world with radio programs only and no TV.   Our new world has more content, better content, that is more easily shared and discussed – and it’s a beautiful thing.

Related articles by Zemanta

• This Is Our Media Revolution. Who Will Be Our Manutius? What Our Octavo? (snarkmarket.com)
• Gutenberg was a blogger (trishussey.com)
• The printing press as an agent of change (randomthougts101.blogspot.com)

As everyone knows, Michael Jackson died last Friday from heart complications in LA.  While i wasn’t shocked by his death, I was amazed by the reaction both by people and the media.  Some of my thoughts:

1. First off, while it’s nice to see such happy thoughts and words coming out of the media and blogosphere, i can’t believe how everyone has sort of forgotten about the past 15 years of Michael Jackson. I mean, multiple child molestation charges with 13-year old boys.  Whatever the cause of the guilt, do you know anyone who would leave their 12 year old with him alone?
2. Some Good Articles: There is a great recount of all those stories listed here in Vantity Fair and Ebert has posted a great article that weighs both his greatness and his fragility in a good article here called “The Boy Who Never Gave Up“
3. Thinking about his legacy, he’s definitely one of the best performers of all time – his dancing and on-stage presence seems unparalleled.
4. While Elvis brought in Rock n’ Roll, i feel that Michael Jackson brought in pop music.  He came to define the 80′s style while adding more production value to music.  To me, he invented the genre “pop”
5. It’s interesting to see how people react once someone dies.  The immediately become forgiven and can easily take on legendary status.  While that’s ok, i wish more people who feel this way while the artist is alive.  Two months ago nobody was saying how influential MJ was. Then hie dies and everyone in the world starts blabbing off about how influential and transformative he was.  Was he awesome? Yes.  But why didn’t people post how awesome he was before? The same thing happened with Kurt Kobain, Johnny Cash, Elvis and others.  As Chuck Klosterman says (who is an expert on his subject having written Killing Yourself To Live), “You’ll hear nobody stating how influential Boy George is, but the minute he dies it’ll come out with how he was able to break down the gender barriers before anyone else”  And he’s right.  In death, people are no longer people, they become symbols.

This could possibly be the most delicious keyboard ever constructed.  As the Murdock family can vouch for, i’m a sucker for S’mores.  It’s probably a good thing this isn’t in my office or else i’d be getting fatter and way less productive as keys start disappearing.  Probably would last about 25 minutes.  I’d also probably rest it on my Macbook laptop so the chocolate would melt a little bit.  Yum

There’s an article i read today (thanks to Lizard) about how Twitter can you a better and happier person.  The reasons listed in the article are:

1. Transparency & Values: Twitter constantly reminds me of who I want to be, and what I want to stand for
2. Reframing Reality: Twitter encourages me to search for ways to view reality in a funnier and/or more positive way
3. Helping Others: Twitter makes me think about how to make a positive impact on other people’s lives
4. Gratitude: Twitter helps me notice and appreciate the little things in life

I find all of these true.  Sometimes i want to post a tweet about my life and i have to reflect about what i’m really doing and how it’s interesting to others.  It often makes me adjust what i’m actually doing – and if i don’t do that then it makes me realize how i’m actually living my life.  In that respect, it’s quite helpful.

There’s a good article in the USA Today about John Grisham.  It’s the 20th anniversary of Time To Kill, his first novel about a young 10-year old woman who got raped, her father who took revenge into his own hands, and the lawyer representing him.  It was an autobiographical story for Grisham and a great book.  However, writing a great book doesn’t necessarily mean it will fly off the shelves.  The article states:

When Grisham finished A Time to Kill in January 1987, it was a stack of legal pads. When typed, the manuscript was 900 pages.

The first chapters went out to a couple dozen publishers and agents. The rejections stacked up.

That April 15, after Grisham returned from his accountant frustrated, broke and about to borrow money to pay his taxes, agent Jay Garon called wanting to represent him.

Wynwood Press, a small company in New York, bought the manuscript a year later and printed 5,000 copies of A Time to Kill — at a length about a third shorter than the original manuscript — in June 1989. Grisham ordered 1,000 himself.  Wynwood didn’t have marketing muscle, so Grisham concocted his own book tour.

“I had this scheme where I would throw a party in my local library and the whole town would show up and I would sell a lot. I have pictures of kids climbing on stacks of A Time to Kill.” But when the party was over, he still owned most of the copies.

It’s an interesting story – especially since we think of him as being so successful.