I watched A Conversation On The Future Of Music.
Guests were Chris DeWolfe (myspace) and Edgar Bronfman (from Warner Music). Instead of the future of music industry, they spent lots of time for future strategies for both companies. They both said all the money from the business need to go to artists, users and music companies, and that’s what their companies want.
Chris said Myspace is different from iTunes or Rhapsody because Myspace’s streaming service is a great market than others, and having the online music community is very special, 2.0!!!
Edgar said Apple is doing a remarkable job, but the online music market between itunes and myspace is not even competitive. He siad if audiences care about the community or want to share with their friends, the choice will be myspace, not itunes. Itunes is “Sexy device” music stores.
20% of revenues for Warner music is from digital sources (I think it is still very low percentages), and it was only 5-6 percents a few years ago.
Also watched Launch Pad Fourth Edition :Web Meets World.
Mok Oh from EveryScape, Inc plans by 2010, his company like to build on-line views of every single cities in the world. It looks like the google street view system, but it actually lets you go to see INSIDE of a restaurant or a store, even how the interior of the restaurant looks like. They launched a beta version of a few U.S. cities, but the company plans to have the online views of everywhere in the world by next a couple years. Privacy? Hmm.. I don’t know.
Here is how Austin looks like! AMAZING!
http://www.everyscape.com/austin-tx.us.aspx
Monday, December 1, 2008
Web 2.0 Summit: Media and technology behind it
Picking from the Web 2.0 Summit videos was a difficult task, but only because I thought everything was very interesting. These people are helping lead the way in how we communicate on the web and building the technology that will be used to do it.
The Media Business: New Approaches
With that thought in mind, the first video I watched was the panel discussion between Joel Hyatt of Current TV and Evan Williams of Twitter that was moderated by Ken Auletta of The New Yorker. They were figures I was familiar with being that I'm a Twitterholic and I had been looking at Current as a way to get some video news pieces I planned to work on in the future.
Anywho, the panelists provide some background on their respective companies and models they were working on to create a profitable business, which is when my favorite word came in: monetize. (FYI: note my sarcasm). Williams discussed how Twitter was considering charging commercial enterprises to tweet as a way to generate revenue. He described it as an alternative model to the ad-revenue system that has been the only real model used in old media. So with the proposed Twitter model, instead of having advertising placed among your tweets, you follow the tweets of a company voluntarily.
One issue we discussed in class was what criteria would be followed to designate a Twitter account as a commercial one. Would newspaper or network news accounts be considered commercial accounts that require payment? Once Twitter explores this business model some more, perhaps we will learn how they plan to implement it and differentiate commercial and non-commercial accounts.
Auletta referred to Twitter's plan as innovation seeking the business model versus the business model seeking innovation since business are already tweeting. I think that's a very apt description that old media finds a very scary because the possibility of failure is fairly possible versus the tried and true old ad model.
One thing is for sure, though. Twitter is becoming a mainstream player in the world of interactive web communication and the disbursement of news. While Williams contends Twitter is not on the level of Facebook or Myspace, I think they are on the verge of getting there. The adoption of Twitter by some news media outlets is proof of that. Current is one example.
Hyatt discussed their collaboration with Twitter on the presidential debates this year, which was called Hack the Debate. The digital cable news channel and Twitter joined forces on Election Day again - along with Digg - to provide viewer responses and user-generated content. Hyatt touted the fact that 40% of the content on Current is user generated and it was a way to "unleash the creativity of young people." However, he also said they were experimenting with new ways to generate revenue as well, which includes their user-generated ads.
Here's my issue with Current. In order to submit pods, which are the mini-news stories that Current airs, you have to submit release forms for legal purposes. So basically, anyone who appears in your video has to sign a release in order for it to appear on Current TV. Also, if you film on private property, you have to get a location release for that too. Speaking from experience, because I had to do this with my Choose or Lose gig, it's a giant pain in the behind because it is not something the typical journalist has to do. I understand why Current and other media corporations do it. They have to protect themselves legally, obviously. However, I don't know of ANY news stations or journalists in general that have to do this.
I love Current. They have great content. However, if they want to keep that "news network" mentality, the releases have got to go. It's one thing that hinders it from growing, I believe. Granted I couldn't get paid by posting my video on YouTube (Current pays content creators $ if their stuff makes it on air), but I don't have to get a release for the protester that was just beaten at some rally.
Paul Otellini
So enough of my rant on monetizing and release forms. The next video I watched was a talk with Paul Otellini of Intel. I had never heard of the guy, but I'm glad I know about him now.
He discussed the need for professional networking and the need for a customized web experience, which he said was close to fruition. The big point he was trying to drive home was the advances in chip technology Intel has been able to create and how they would help propel Web 2.0 to new heights. I particularly enjoyed how they used camera-like gadget to translate Chinese characters to English (in this case, the name of a restaurant) and provide a variety of links and videos to items related to the restaurant.
Otellini claims this is the future of interactivity, but when I saw this demonstration, I couldn't help but think of an iPhone app that Cindy said I should download (I did) called SnapTell. The app has image recognition technology for CDs, DVDs and book covers. When it figures out what book, CD or DVD it is, the app provides link to the Wikipedia page, amazon page and any other web pages it finds relevant.
I think the technology that Otellini described is there, but making it even more powerful and accessible from compact devices is oh so close to coming.
Bringing the two together
Each video discussed very different, but very related topics involving Web. 2.0. Some assessments:
The Media Business: New Approaches
With that thought in mind, the first video I watched was the panel discussion between Joel Hyatt of Current TV and Evan Williams of Twitter that was moderated by Ken Auletta of The New Yorker. They were figures I was familiar with being that I'm a Twitterholic and I had been looking at Current as a way to get some video news pieces I planned to work on in the future.
Anywho, the panelists provide some background on their respective companies and models they were working on to create a profitable business, which is when my favorite word came in: monetize. (FYI: note my sarcasm). Williams discussed how Twitter was considering charging commercial enterprises to tweet as a way to generate revenue. He described it as an alternative model to the ad-revenue system that has been the only real model used in old media. So with the proposed Twitter model, instead of having advertising placed among your tweets, you follow the tweets of a company voluntarily.
One issue we discussed in class was what criteria would be followed to designate a Twitter account as a commercial one. Would newspaper or network news accounts be considered commercial accounts that require payment? Once Twitter explores this business model some more, perhaps we will learn how they plan to implement it and differentiate commercial and non-commercial accounts.
Auletta referred to Twitter's plan as innovation seeking the business model versus the business model seeking innovation since business are already tweeting. I think that's a very apt description that old media finds a very scary because the possibility of failure is fairly possible versus the tried and true old ad model.
One thing is for sure, though. Twitter is becoming a mainstream player in the world of interactive web communication and the disbursement of news. While Williams contends Twitter is not on the level of Facebook or Myspace, I think they are on the verge of getting there. The adoption of Twitter by some news media outlets is proof of that. Current is one example.
Hyatt discussed their collaboration with Twitter on the presidential debates this year, which was called Hack the Debate. The digital cable news channel and Twitter joined forces on Election Day again - along with Digg - to provide viewer responses and user-generated content. Hyatt touted the fact that 40% of the content on Current is user generated and it was a way to "unleash the creativity of young people." However, he also said they were experimenting with new ways to generate revenue as well, which includes their user-generated ads.
Here's my issue with Current. In order to submit pods, which are the mini-news stories that Current airs, you have to submit release forms for legal purposes. So basically, anyone who appears in your video has to sign a release in order for it to appear on Current TV. Also, if you film on private property, you have to get a location release for that too. Speaking from experience, because I had to do this with my Choose or Lose gig, it's a giant pain in the behind because it is not something the typical journalist has to do. I understand why Current and other media corporations do it. They have to protect themselves legally, obviously. However, I don't know of ANY news stations or journalists in general that have to do this.
I love Current. They have great content. However, if they want to keep that "news network" mentality, the releases have got to go. It's one thing that hinders it from growing, I believe. Granted I couldn't get paid by posting my video on YouTube (Current pays content creators $ if their stuff makes it on air), but I don't have to get a release for the protester that was just beaten at some rally.
Paul Otellini
So enough of my rant on monetizing and release forms. The next video I watched was a talk with Paul Otellini of Intel. I had never heard of the guy, but I'm glad I know about him now.
He discussed the need for professional networking and the need for a customized web experience, which he said was close to fruition. The big point he was trying to drive home was the advances in chip technology Intel has been able to create and how they would help propel Web 2.0 to new heights. I particularly enjoyed how they used camera-like gadget to translate Chinese characters to English (in this case, the name of a restaurant) and provide a variety of links and videos to items related to the restaurant.
Otellini claims this is the future of interactivity, but when I saw this demonstration, I couldn't help but think of an iPhone app that Cindy said I should download (I did) called SnapTell. The app has image recognition technology for CDs, DVDs and book covers. When it figures out what book, CD or DVD it is, the app provides link to the Wikipedia page, amazon page and any other web pages it finds relevant.
I think the technology that Otellini described is there, but making it even more powerful and accessible from compact devices is oh so close to coming.
Bringing the two together
Each video discussed very different, but very related topics involving Web. 2.0. Some assessments:
- In order for news media to survive, it must evolve by adapting to new technology.
- However, news media must first learn about the technology, which is where the real problem lies. When someone from Intel is talking about the processors that are continuously getting smaller and faster, someone needs to break down the information for those that don't understand it. I think reality has begun to sink in for those news organizations that haven't jumped onto technology bandwagon. Simplifying the information may help get these media organization over the fear of the new.
- The tech community should continue seize this opportunity. Granted there will always be some entities resistant to change, but that's why they will die out and innovators won't. They might fail at one thing (Twitter could with their proposed revenue model), but eventually find a formula for success.
Facebook and Politics 2.0
The Web and Politics Panel
The 2008 Presidential election is like the election of 1960 in that a new medium has become the dominant medium in which we communicated through during the election. In the sixties it was television. Today it's the web. In this pannel Arianna Huffington of the Huffington Post, Mayor of San Fransisco Gavin Newsom, and Joe Trippi of Trippi and associates dicuss politics shortly after the presidential elecition with moderator John Heilemann of New York Magazine. This panel is one of the longer ones. It is actually 51 minutes long, but the information is relevant so it is worth watching. The web has not only changed the way elections are run, but it will change how politics are run in the future. With the web, citizens can interact with their government easily. While television demanded fake, the web demands authenticities. With the web we find out who the politicians really are. It is something that politicians aren't really used to. The panelist argue that this authenticity is healthy for society. Another big thing they talked about are the ways that Barack Obama mobilized people through the web using BarackObama.com, Facebook, Myspace, twitter, and of course Youtube. And also how he raised money through emails asking for small donations. He took advantage of the benefits of the interactivity of the web to raise money and change the nation.
Facebook
Of course I have to choose the Mark Zuckerburg panel, because as you all know how much I love Facebook. At first Mark talked about monetizing, but he's said that he's pretty much fine financially. Facebook is growing rapidly, especially this year. This month they've grown to 125 million users and its no surprize because even my grandma is on Facebook these days. Mark talked about the future of Facebook, which right now is "Facebook connect." This will allow you to use your Facebook profile information on other websites. It is in the works right now. Mark also mentioned the elections and how the candidates took advantage of the applications platform. The causes application has helped people to create virtual movements. Mark dicussed this and other topics reguarding the election.
The 2008 Presidential election is like the election of 1960 in that a new medium has become the dominant medium in which we communicated through during the election. In the sixties it was television. Today it's the web. In this pannel Arianna Huffington of the Huffington Post, Mayor of San Fransisco Gavin Newsom, and Joe Trippi of Trippi and associates dicuss politics shortly after the presidential elecition with moderator John Heilemann of New York Magazine. This panel is one of the longer ones. It is actually 51 minutes long, but the information is relevant so it is worth watching. The web has not only changed the way elections are run, but it will change how politics are run in the future. With the web, citizens can interact with their government easily. While television demanded fake, the web demands authenticities. With the web we find out who the politicians really are. It is something that politicians aren't really used to. The panelist argue that this authenticity is healthy for society. Another big thing they talked about are the ways that Barack Obama mobilized people through the web using BarackObama.com, Facebook, Myspace, twitter, and of course Youtube. And also how he raised money through emails asking for small donations. He took advantage of the benefits of the interactivity of the web to raise money and change the nation.
Of course I have to choose the Mark Zuckerburg panel, because as you all know how much I love Facebook. At first Mark talked about monetizing, but he's said that he's pretty much fine financially. Facebook is growing rapidly, especially this year. This month they've grown to 125 million users and its no surprize because even my grandma is on Facebook these days. Mark talked about the future of Facebook, which right now is "Facebook connect." This will allow you to use your Facebook profile information on other websites. It is in the works right now. Mark also mentioned the elections and how the candidates took advantage of the applications platform. The causes application has helped people to create virtual movements. Mark dicussed this and other topics reguarding the election.
Web 2.0 Summit
The first panel I watched was The Future of Health, featuring Carol McCall of Humana Inc., Joanna Mountain of 23andMe and Daniel Kraft of Stanford Medical School. In it, they each discussed the current trends in medicine - a "long tail" of personalized, niche-oriented medical assistance online. Daniel mentioned that more people use the internet to get health information than from their actual physician, citing that one out of three web searches are related to peoples' personal health. He said that sites like WebMD and other health-related websites help personalize wellness activities, making it simple to troubleshoot most symptoms. For example, he talked about a site where users can check their blood pressure online, without going into a clinic. I have no idea how that would work, nor could I find it online...
Meanwhile, Carol focused on the importance of retaining physicians to translate important health information, such as genetic code or specific diseases that the layperson could not understand...definitely understandable, but maybe a small plug for health insurance too (Humana perhaps??). However, one interesting trend that Daniel mentioned was a virtual reality surgery program that clinic teams use to actually simulate an operation, able to add hypothetical malfunctions aimed to relieve stress when they physically go through with the procedure. Another trend that Joanna sees, that 23andme uses, is the idea of transparency. She discussed the importance of allowing the user to realize that not everyone knows exactly what works and what doesn't in the medical field and that all experts may necessarily agree on evaluating research results or how they make decisions.
The second panel I watched was Cloud Computing: The Future Web, featuring CTOs Padmasree Warrior of Cisco Systems, Inc. and Shane Robison of HP. They initially discussed the idea of a federal CTO and exactly what would go into that job, assuming Obama actually chooses one, and then they talked about cloud computing. Mainly, the panelists agreed that cloud computing is the next evolution of computing and technology and that it can be used in more ways than we can even realize at this point. Currently in its early stages, they likened cloud computing to how the Internet was initially formed: many different "clouds," both large and small, operating in and of themselves. However, Padmasree's prediction is that the "tipping point" (when cloud computing will really take off) will occur once private and hosted clouds move to what she calls the "Intercloud," a cloud which connects all other clouds - much like how the Internet works today. However, this will require much standardization and collaboration among companies in many, many headaches and years to come.
Padmasree mentioned two main benefits that large companies can currently see from cloud computing: (1) flexibility and (2) the speed of developing applications. These two results of working in the cloud will spur innovation like we've never seen. As it is, she mentioned the nature of work is changing into a much more collaborative environment - a place where "we don't go to work anymore, we just work." As cloud computing evolves, we will see much more of this cloud networking, like Cisco's innovation, Telepresence which combines video and social networking. Now called visual networking, Padmasree says we're just at the tip of that.
Shane discussed in more detail what we do with the innovations in cloud computing, such as how we think about those business decisions and what it means to the customer/business/technology relationship. He discussed the importance of using cloud services to navigate the information and how to make use of it, as opposed to simply ways of getting data. For example, by using a program called Brain information can be used to predict prices of commodities or the outcome of future events.
While the topics of these two panels were very dissimilar, they overlapped on several levels. It seems like the way health is advancing online is definitely toward a very personal and focused environment, and the nature of cloud computing absolutely parallels that. While I don't see people going to the "online physician" for a checkup, the Internet provides a level of accountability that is required for people to feel taken care of. For example, instead of going to one checkup a year, patients can receive daily "checkups" via the web. Of course, replacing physical checkups with innovations like Telepresence, would be crazy. However, using video and web-based technologies to provide a more interactive experience than simply looking up information on WebMD or Wikipedia is absolutely where the medical field should begin. Doctors could really use cloud computing to collaborate with other doctors, or even share information more fully and efficiently toward new techniques or specific diseases.
Sheth and Robbins
I chose to watch the presentations of Beerud Sheth of Webaroo, Inc. and Jesse Robbins of O’Reilly Radar.
Beerud Sheth spoke about the immense opportunity of SMS (text messaging) technology in his home country of India. He stated that there were 3.5 billion SMS users, as compared to 1.4 million Internet users in the world, which he states is the most widely adopted technology. In his home country of India, the disparity is even larger. There are 30 million Internet users, compared to 300 million SMS subscribers. With the use of mobile handsets being much more used then other communication technologies in other countries, he stated that there is a huge market for these users. The parallel of innovation on the technology pyramid as he states, has rich content cell phones such as the iPhone and T-Mobile G1 at the top of the pyramid, with the much broader base of the pyramid including normal brick and flip mobile handsets. Sheth decided to open GupShup, which is chitchat in Hindi, in which any mobile SMS user can create a group and invite friends to the group via their cell phone. It is one to many broadcasting, micro blogging, and user generated text messages all built into this service. He states that it is Twitter for India. His service has generated 12 million users, with 500 million messages a month in India. Instead of using the web in India, most people use the cell phone , in which he states is the lowest common denominator medium. He basically states that there is another web beyond the Web, and the Web 2.0 developers should start developing content for other devices, not just the Internet.
Jesse Robbins spoke about how Web 2.0 is transforming humanitarian aid. He basically stated that those who are inexperienced in technology are excited, and those who are experienced are scared. For example, people saying Twitter can help emergency systems are saying it can work, and the emergency professionals are weary of this new technology. The four steps to disaster innovation are 1.) disaster, 2.) ad hoc innovation, 3.) championship, and 4.) take what was learned from disaster and distribute it broadly.
He decided to go to the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina and help work for World Shelters building makeshift homes for displaced refugees. The challenge came with the I-90 bridge being destroyed and Red Cross not knowing that Google Maps was real time, thus creating the impression that the bridge was still intact. Mikel Maron came in and became the champion by using Open Street Map, which Robbins stated was the Wikipedia of maps online and fixing this. He created better maps for humanitarian aid and also for everyone. He concludes his presentation stating that non-profit organizations need help from Web 2.0 companies in order to help out many kinds of disasters that we face. In order to do this they must serve those that serve others, and make a difference through better technology.
The two speakers were very different in that they talked about completely different things. While Sheth spoke of social media for SMS, Robbins talked about how Web 2.0 could help for the better good of society. I did not intend for this to happen, but anyway, I thought both presenters were very effective in their message. I thought Sheth’s message was more important because EVERYONE uses text messaging. While many people do not have computers with broadband access, mostly everyone has a cell phone with text messaging capabilities. I believe this is a business model that Web 2.0 innovators can use here in the states to their advantage.
Beerud Sheth spoke about the immense opportunity of SMS (text messaging) technology in his home country of India. He stated that there were 3.5 billion SMS users, as compared to 1.4 million Internet users in the world, which he states is the most widely adopted technology. In his home country of India, the disparity is even larger. There are 30 million Internet users, compared to 300 million SMS subscribers. With the use of mobile handsets being much more used then other communication technologies in other countries, he stated that there is a huge market for these users. The parallel of innovation on the technology pyramid as he states, has rich content cell phones such as the iPhone and T-Mobile G1 at the top of the pyramid, with the much broader base of the pyramid including normal brick and flip mobile handsets. Sheth decided to open GupShup, which is chitchat in Hindi, in which any mobile SMS user can create a group and invite friends to the group via their cell phone. It is one to many broadcasting, micro blogging, and user generated text messages all built into this service. He states that it is Twitter for India. His service has generated 12 million users, with 500 million messages a month in India. Instead of using the web in India, most people use the cell phone , in which he states is the lowest common denominator medium. He basically states that there is another web beyond the Web, and the Web 2.0 developers should start developing content for other devices, not just the Internet.
Jesse Robbins spoke about how Web 2.0 is transforming humanitarian aid. He basically stated that those who are inexperienced in technology are excited, and those who are experienced are scared. For example, people saying Twitter can help emergency systems are saying it can work, and the emergency professionals are weary of this new technology. The four steps to disaster innovation are 1.) disaster, 2.) ad hoc innovation, 3.) championship, and 4.) take what was learned from disaster and distribute it broadly.
He decided to go to the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina and help work for World Shelters building makeshift homes for displaced refugees. The challenge came with the I-90 bridge being destroyed and Red Cross not knowing that Google Maps was real time, thus creating the impression that the bridge was still intact. Mikel Maron came in and became the champion by using Open Street Map, which Robbins stated was the Wikipedia of maps online and fixing this. He created better maps for humanitarian aid and also for everyone. He concludes his presentation stating that non-profit organizations need help from Web 2.0 companies in order to help out many kinds of disasters that we face. In order to do this they must serve those that serve others, and make a difference through better technology.
The two speakers were very different in that they talked about completely different things. While Sheth spoke of social media for SMS, Robbins talked about how Web 2.0 could help for the better good of society. I did not intend for this to happen, but anyway, I thought both presenters were very effective in their message. I thought Sheth’s message was more important because EVERYONE uses text messaging. While many people do not have computers with broadband access, mostly everyone has a cell phone with text messaging capabilities. I believe this is a business model that Web 2.0 innovators can use here in the states to their advantage.
Sunday, November 30, 2008
Web 2.0 Summit
The two videos I watched were Isaac Mao (Social Brain Foundation) and Rebecca MacKinnon (Global Voices). The Isaac Mao video discussed social networking such as blogging and chat rooms. Mao talked about "micro behavior" in these blogs. This can be seen in various social networking sites such as Twitter where information is being shared, but in concise 'blogs' if you will. You can read about various micro-blogging tools here.
Mao also discussed censorship primarily with regard to the great firewall in China. He discussed journalism 2.0 with regard to professional and grass roots media and the importance of having the truth accessible. Obviously with censorship the users are not getting the entire truth and are not able to get all the information that is out there.
The other video I watched was Rebecca MacKinnon (Global Voices). MacKinnon also discussed blogging with regard to what kind of information people were linking to in their blogs. She said that bloggers in the US did not link to blogs from other countries as much nor did they discuss issues in other countries as much. She also discussed censorship and how it is not only in China where the internet is censored. She talked about how companies are stuck in the middle between users and the government. She discussed one case in China where journalist Shi Tao was sentenced for 10 years in jail for speaking out and it was Yahoo who gave the government his email records. She then mentioned the issue of companies needing to "uphold their user's interests" and still operate as well. She discussed a website that is seeking solutions and that has a multi-stakeholder initiative: Global Network Initiative.
Mao also discussed censorship primarily with regard to the great firewall in China. He discussed journalism 2.0 with regard to professional and grass roots media and the importance of having the truth accessible. Obviously with censorship the users are not getting the entire truth and are not able to get all the information that is out there.
The other video I watched was Rebecca MacKinnon (Global Voices). MacKinnon also discussed blogging with regard to what kind of information people were linking to in their blogs. She said that bloggers in the US did not link to blogs from other countries as much nor did they discuss issues in other countries as much. She also discussed censorship and how it is not only in China where the internet is censored. She talked about how companies are stuck in the middle between users and the government. She discussed one case in China where journalist Shi Tao was sentenced for 10 years in jail for speaking out and it was Yahoo who gave the government his email records. She then mentioned the issue of companies needing to "uphold their user's interests" and still operate as well. She discussed a website that is seeking solutions and that has a multi-stakeholder initiative: Global Network Initiative.
Web 2.0
I had to watch the web video with Tony Hsieh (zappos) because I love shoes! I can't believe a woman would spend $62,000 on shoes, where does she put them all? The fact that they focus on customer service is important because it brings in repeat customers. Everyone wants to buy from a company that is on their side. I think that the idea is brilliant because it's not some big fancy marketing idea, it is simply providing the best customer service possible. The surprise upgrades are an amazing idea, they will sometimes surprise you and upgrade your shipping and you could get your shoes the next day. I think that it is an excellent marketing technique because it lets your customer know that you really care about them. Their number one priority is company culture and it is good that they recognize that if their employees are happy then their company will be more productive. You can check them out at www.zappos.com.
I also watched the video with Michael Pollan. He made some really good points about food and what interested me most about his discussion was his link between the health care system and food. We are a society of fast food and I am just as guilty as the next. We spend more time eating out and we forget that for the most part fast food is harmful to our bodies. Large quantities of sugar and fats can be traced to all kinds of diseases. We ingest in enormous quantities the two calories that are the most unhealthy. If we make simple lifestyle changes we can decrease our trips to the hospital and thus, in my opinion, make health care more affordable. I'm not an expert but I do know that every plan does not cover everything. He cited that 60% of Americans are overweight and that is a huge portion of our society. In order to remedy our health care crisis we need to start by making informed eating decisions.
Click To Play
I also watched the video with Michael Pollan. He made some really good points about food and what interested me most about his discussion was his link between the health care system and food. We are a society of fast food and I am just as guilty as the next. We spend more time eating out and we forget that for the most part fast food is harmful to our bodies. Large quantities of sugar and fats can be traced to all kinds of diseases. We ingest in enormous quantities the two calories that are the most unhealthy. If we make simple lifestyle changes we can decrease our trips to the hospital and thus, in my opinion, make health care more affordable. I'm not an expert but I do know that every plan does not cover everything. He cited that 60% of Americans are overweight and that is a huge portion of our society. In order to remedy our health care crisis we need to start by making informed eating decisions.
Websummit
I watched Bob Sutor of IBM and Keven Rose of Digg. It was interesting to watch these videos back to back. Sutor was dry, had a slideshow prepared, talked slowly -- to be blunt he was boring. Rose, on the other hand, talked fast, had a flow of ideas but didn't have a set presentation. In fact, Rose says in the beginning that he was set to talk about something completely different. I liked his presentation better because he didn't seem to be as stuffy as Sutor. Sutor seemed to be more "old school" business than Rose.
Sutor says we are at an inflection point and big things have to happen in the IT industry. He also says there has to be a partnership between IT and different industries like government. He says that by the year 2011 there will be more than 1 trillion connected devices and 2 billion people will be on the Web. He discusses traffic problems, power problems, and how IT can help with these issues. He talks about a program IBM is working on in Stockholm where they are working together to reduce traffic. So far, traffic has been reduced by 40%. He says there are five things that need to happen. The first is big bets. The second is an open political administration -- much like the one that will go into office on Jan. 20. The third is new collaborators in business, the fourth is open source being the key to privacy and security and the fifth is higher standards.
I enjoyed the Rose video more. He talked about starting a start-up during a difficult time. He said he had a first mover advantage because, at the time he started Digg, services like techcrunch weren't up yet. He thinks that over the next 12-18 months there won't be any investing in start ups. He said we're heading into a valley area where it'll be good to start something new. He gave some pointers on doing this and keeping it cost effective. When Rose started Digg, he kept his day job. Instead of hiring someone from the US to help him, he outsourced using Elance and got someone from Canada to help him. He also served as his own PR. A couple of interesting things he mentioned: his servers are rented at $99 a month and he said to start a podcast and have it put on Itunes because you'll get 20,000-30,000 people listening to you when you're on the "new" page.
Sutor says we are at an inflection point and big things have to happen in the IT industry. He also says there has to be a partnership between IT and different industries like government. He says that by the year 2011 there will be more than 1 trillion connected devices and 2 billion people will be on the Web. He discusses traffic problems, power problems, and how IT can help with these issues. He talks about a program IBM is working on in Stockholm where they are working together to reduce traffic. So far, traffic has been reduced by 40%. He says there are five things that need to happen. The first is big bets. The second is an open political administration -- much like the one that will go into office on Jan. 20. The third is new collaborators in business, the fourth is open source being the key to privacy and security and the fifth is higher standards.
I enjoyed the Rose video more. He talked about starting a start-up during a difficult time. He said he had a first mover advantage because, at the time he started Digg, services like techcrunch weren't up yet. He thinks that over the next 12-18 months there won't be any investing in start ups. He said we're heading into a valley area where it'll be good to start something new. He gave some pointers on doing this and keeping it cost effective. When Rose started Digg, he kept his day job. Instead of hiring someone from the US to help him, he outsourced using Elance and got someone from Canada to help him. He also served as his own PR. A couple of interesting things he mentioned: his servers are rented at $99 a month and he said to start a podcast and have it put on Itunes because you'll get 20,000-30,000 people listening to you when you're on the "new" page.
Eh.
Thanksgiving Break Post
Sorry this is late... family just left this morning.
Our three bedroom rental house got the beating of its life this week with a three legged arthritic 60 lb golden retriever, twin 6 month olds, a two year old and four sets of adults.
So. I watched this.
And I loved it.
John Heilemann moderated a panel on "The Web and Politics" composed of Arianna Huffington(here,too), Gavin Newsom and Joe Trippi.
Heilemann made the statement that the 2008 Presidential election is like the 1960 election when a new medium became a dominant medium.
He asked the panelists to state if it was true or false and discuss.
Trippi- True. Sited Howard Dean. Said that the new tools, Facebook, Youtube, etc., helped to push the web as a dominate medium in this election. Also sited the fact that more users have broadband this election and Obama was able to utilize the power of free video. He made the point that the value of Obama’s free video exposure (in terms of number of views) was as much or higher than McCain’s entire budget.
He said these tools made the change from the 2004 to the 2008 election. Just like Kennedy made the first televised presidency, then Obama may make the first web presidency.
Gavin- He wants to know what the web presence will be like in the office. “What does it mean?” How will it work in changing public policy in terms of fundamentally shifting the construct of so many issues in the country?
Huffington- Agree. “Lets put it very bluntly, were it not for the Internet, Barrack Obama would not be the president.” She raised his sophisticated way of organizing and fundraising and contrasted McCain’s old ideas vs. Obama’s new ideas.
Her comment,“The internet has killed Carl Rove politics,” gained great applause.
She talked about the pundits in the blogosphere having an obsessive compulsive need to fact check and keep stories alive way after the mainstream media has “moved on to the next shiny object” (credit to Jon Stewart).
“Remember Sarah Palin?... I call it the Trojan Moose of the Republican Party,” zinged Huffington.
She referred to the online obsessive campaign to prove Palin’s statement about being against the “Bridge to Nowhere” wrong.
She concluded with this great quote. “In 2004, trust me, they would have gone on repeating it because the echo chamber would not have been so powerful. And the same thing happened with all the fear mongering around Bill Ayers, around Obama being a strange socialist terrorist, somehow it was not believable because the truth kept on intruding into people’s rooms in such a way that it was not possible for that completely delusional fear mongering to prevail. So that for me is the greatest success of the ’08 race.”
The panel continued to talk about if there was a right and left balance among the blogosphere. They contended that the blogosphere might be more about finding the truth than about towing a party line and made the distinction between how new media are approaching this differently than traditional media.
Up to this point Gavin didn't contribute too much until he began singing the praises of Facebook and lamenting the power of Youtube.
Trippi chimed in on this and sited George Allens' slip up with the
"macca" comment.
They also discussed the manipulative and "gotcha"
tactics of citizen journalists and how there is no
more "off the record" events.
Huffington spoke about Obama's fundraising comment
about "guns and religion" and how if the
Huffingtonpost had suppressed the story they would
have been no better than Fox News.
Trippi- "You're going to be who you are, and that
is healthy".
On the whole, this was a great panel. I found it
very positive in the way the panel kept things
pretty non-partisan. I appreciated Trippi's
insight and expertise as someone on the political
side and how his comments were bounced off
Huffington as someone on the web side. Gavin,
besides touting his great number of Facebook
friends, didn't have too much to contribute to
either side.
Although, his initial question of "what does it
mean?" in regards to transitioning and using
Obama's web talents from the candidacy to the
presidency does raise a few questions.
Especially in light of Obama's removal from direct
web communications.
Wish I could have seen it live.
I also watched this one.
"The Future of Music" with Chris DeWolfe, Edgar Bronfman, moderated by John Battelle.
The panel discussed how MySpace Music has been wt/out a CEO for a while and Battelle forced a squirm out of DeWolfe as he discussed some rumors.
Bronfman discussed his take on iTunes and "who is making money" there.
Then DeWolfe spoke to the difference between MySpace Music and iTunes.
Basically he said they wanted to "put together a service that paid the music companies, paid the artists, gave the users a great experience, made it so they didn't have to go out and steal the music and made sure that everyone got paid."
They talked about the difference between MySpace Music and Rhapsody, and how MySpace Music has more ads than anyone (this disclosed by DeWolfe!).
He said the main difference between Rhapsody and MySpace Music is the community factor.
DeWolfe described as such, "It's a bit like going to a bookstore and not knowing what to look for in a bookstore verses then going to your friend's house and him giving you a book to read"
Battelle then attempted to usher the panelists into an Apple-bash.
Bronfman didn't bite. Perhaps due to fear of getting on Jobs'(if you don't check any links at all, please goto this one!)bad side.
His honest opinion-
Bronfman- "Look, Apple's done a phenomenal job."
Batelle- "Besides that stuff!"
Bronfman- "No but it's true. It's really true... What is remarkable and why you have to give them so much credit is nobody else has managed to pull it off... the iPod was introduced, i think, in 03, here we are five years later and there isn't a single competitive device in the market place. there's a reason for that- they're incredible good at what they do."
Battelle might be on the MySpace Music payroll or perhaps had been dissed by Jobs' at some point- either way, this guy did not attempt to hide his feelings. Overall, Battelle pushed an anti-Apple agenda and gushed (unwarranted)praise on MySpace Music.
DeWolfe and Bronfman both had some interesting things to say as insiders, but not much was really said about the "Future of Music".
I sat in on a similar panel at SXSW and also found that they had little to really say about the future. I feel that this subject is changing too much to actually come up with any real projections.
And of course you can't talk about the "Future of Music" sans Radiohead's grand experiment, of which Battelle gushed and Bronfman and DeWolfe salivated over.
-Chris
Web 2.0 Summit
The two videos I watched were Tony Hsieh of Zappos.com and Beerud Sheth of Webaroo. The topic Hsieh chose to discuss was importance of building your brand. He began at Zappos.com in 1999 and focused on customer service and the customer experience from the beginning. According to Hsieh, "If you get the culture right and make sure everyone understands the vision of where your company is going, most of the other stuff -customer service, company culture, falls into place." Culture is so important to their business model because Hsieh feels that a company's brand and culture are two sides to the same coin. They have a stringent interview process to make sure employees fit into the company culture and have passed on talented people because they are not a good fit. Hsieh's main goal is to not be known as an online shoes store, but rather the a company that consistently delivers good customer service and experience. He strives to create the "wow" experience by offering things such as two-way free shipping and surprise upgrades. Unlike some companies, Hsieh knows repeat customers are the best customers and makes a point to take care of them. The Web has made companies more transparent and therefore customers can see through those who project one image yet operate in another. In conclusion, if you focus on what is important such as your company culture and don't stray from it, the profits and sales will follow.
The second video, with Beerud Sheth, focused on the disparity between Internet users and mobile device users in India in order to showcase "another web within the web." Worldwide, there is around 1.5 billion Internet users and about 3.5 billion sms or text users. In India, this disparity is even greater with around 30 million Internet users and about 300 million sms users. The subscriber growth is rapidly increasing, mostly in small towns and rural areas, but the capabilities of the technology used by this group is very limited. Companies seeking to grow the consumer base in these areas are not concerned with new apps and cooler capabilities but yet how can we lower the price and make it more available to a wider audience? Because of this, Sheth highlighted on GupShop which is the Twitter of India. GupShup allows a publisher to form a group and invite friends and other subscribers. GupShup can be used entirely by mobile device, which is the lowest common denominator. It offers free group messaging and currently has around 12 million subscribers. Basically, it's what we think of the Internet currently but it's compressed into mobile devices for greater access.....like another web beyond the web.
The second video, with Beerud Sheth, focused on the disparity between Internet users and mobile device users in India in order to showcase "another web within the web." Worldwide, there is around 1.5 billion Internet users and about 3.5 billion sms or text users. In India, this disparity is even greater with around 30 million Internet users and about 300 million sms users. The subscriber growth is rapidly increasing, mostly in small towns and rural areas, but the capabilities of the technology used by this group is very limited. Companies seeking to grow the consumer base in these areas are not concerned with new apps and cooler capabilities but yet how can we lower the price and make it more available to a wider audience? Because of this, Sheth highlighted on GupShop which is the Twitter of India. GupShup allows a publisher to form a group and invite friends and other subscribers. GupShup can be used entirely by mobile device, which is the lowest common denominator. It offers free group messaging and currently has around 12 million subscribers. Basically, it's what we think of the Internet currently but it's compressed into mobile devices for greater access.....like another web beyond the web.
Wednesday, November 26, 2008
giving 2.0 Thanks
The two video's I watched are Jack Klues from ViviKi, and Mark Zuckerberg from Facebook.
Jack Klues from VivaKi sits atop two of the most powerful media services networks in the world—Starcom MediaVest Group (SMG) and ZenithOptimedia. He is also a member of Publicis Groupe Directoire, the elite governing body that guides his organization’s parent company, Publicis Groupe S.A..
The Interview in general appeared (on the surface) seemed dry and contrived. The major goal for his company ViviKi's new model delivers powerful digital capabilities to the group and its clients that are accelerated for the new media landscape. He claimed that the in building an online branding is creating a the balance between brand building and customer acquisition. And to build a brand online he said it is much like the traditional model of brand building - you simply have to know who you customer is and what they want.
On the other hand - The Interview seemed much more vibrant and alive. In general Zuckerberg claimed that in the past year and in the current economic crisis the Facebook agenda was not necessarily worrying about the economics but to engage and grow their new users. And one of his biggest obstacles was to get user to over come the Internet Safety issues and have people share personal information online.
In both interviews, both gentlemen, seems to be aware of how to build a brand online. But each use different platforms. ViviKi builds large corporate brands while Facebook use Individuals to build brands.
Jack Klues from VivaKi sits atop two of the most powerful media services networks in the world—Starcom MediaVest Group (SMG) and ZenithOptimedia. He is also a member of Publicis Groupe Directoire, the elite governing body that guides his organization’s parent company, Publicis Groupe S.A..
The Interview in general appeared (on the surface) seemed dry and contrived. The major goal for his company ViviKi's new model delivers powerful digital capabilities to the group and its clients that are accelerated for the new media landscape. He claimed that the in building an online branding is creating a the balance between brand building and customer acquisition. And to build a brand online he said it is much like the traditional model of brand building - you simply have to know who you customer is and what they want.
On the other hand - The Interview seemed much more vibrant and alive. In general Zuckerberg claimed that in the past year and in the current economic crisis the Facebook agenda was not necessarily worrying about the economics but to engage and grow their new users. And one of his biggest obstacles was to get user to over come the Internet Safety issues and have people share personal information online.
In both interviews, both gentlemen, seems to be aware of how to build a brand online. But each use different platforms. ViviKi builds large corporate brands while Facebook use Individuals to build brands.
Web 2.0
The Summit
I took a look at the Track Me and the Michael Pollan clips from the Web 2.0 Summit.
The Track Me clip was hosted by Brady Forrest from O'Reilly Media, Inc. and included panelists from Google, Sense Networks, Skyhook Wireless, and MicroEnergy Credits . The panel discussed applications dealing with tracking, or the ability for apps within mobile devices to follow each other around. Using technology within iPhones and Blackberry's along with satellite and other wireless networks to provide location information. Google is looking to provide a platform for other developers to build applications that can bhring all the location technologies together under one umbrella. Skyhook has sent out teams around the world to locate an map access points around the globe to maintain a Wi-Fi system to integrate location based apps.
The Michael Pollan interview was an interesting look at the connection between agriculture and the health and energy crisis going on in this country and others. The interveiw was conducted by John Batelle of Federated Media Publishing. Pollan is the author of 'In Defense of Food: An Eater's Manifesto.' It related to the huge amounts of fossil fuel it takes to grow and maintain the food supply for the country. He states we can lower carbon output simply by changing the countries diet. the more a food source is processed the more money it makes. However, the more a food is processed the less healthy it becomes in nutrients and the more fossil fuels are consumed to continue the processing of the food supply.
Web 2.0 Summit
I chose to talk about the presentations by Bob Sutor of IBM and Jesse Robbins of O'Reilly Radar. Both speeches were similar in the fact that they both addressed the need for utilizing new technology for the betterment and advancement of mankind. Sutor used examples ranging from such things as traffic system improvements to meat packing tags for fresher meat. Robbins concentrated on the area of disaster relief along with using new technology for search and rescue campaigns.
Sutor's presentation was interesting as he feels that we are at an inflection point in the IT industry were partnerships between private and public organizations must happen to be successful. He acknowledges that we have the processing power and connectivity, along with extreme advancements expected in the next few years, but the proper utilization of our growing technologies is key for advancement. Sutor uses the examples of inefficient electrical grids being used in major cities that allow large amounts of energy to be wasted along with inefficient supply chains for consumer goods companies that waste much more than they should. He goes on to emphasize that big projects and "big bets" are required in our world to make things more efficient which will in turn allow us to advance. These "big bets" need the private/public partnerships to work though. These projects need to have privacy and security concerns addressed early and should not be an afterthought of the project when creating and utilizing these new technologies.
Jesse Robbins spoke on how web 2.0 tools are transforming humanitarian aid. Mr. Robbins was actually part of the Katrina relief effort and saw first hand the ineffective use of technology. He drew up a list of four things that lead to disaster tech innovation, they are:
1. Disaster (the event itself)
2. Ad-Hoc Adaptation (people take tools at hand to survive and recover from disaster)
3. Champion (champion needs to emerge after disaster to improve it iteratively)
4. Iterative Improvement
His example on the matter is when he was helping in the Katrina effort (disaster) and they were using handheld GPS units and Google maps (ad-hoc adaptation) because many of the street signs had been blown down. The google maps were not current though and the American Red Cross was under the impression that they were so people were told to cross bridges that were destroyed and time was lost. A champion had to emerge to give advancement and that was a geo hacker named Mikel Maron who teamed with Google, Yahoo, and the UN and aid agencies to update the maps for humanitarian organizations. With his collaboration came a new champion and improvement in the form of internet SAR organization that helps analyze aerial and satellite imagery for search and rescue efforts. If a disaster comes and there is no champion, there is no iterative improvement.
The two presentations were similar in the fact that both addressed the need for improvements in technology and the use of private and public organizations in implementing the new advances. They must work together to achieve progress and efficiency. Whether the progress be made in traffic systems or search and rescue campaigns, both stressed the need of companies working with public organizations to advance themselves and mankind in general.
Kevin Versus Kevin: High Bit Order
Kevin Kelly (K. Kelly) Wired
Kevin Rose (K. Rose) Digg
Well I would like to share my brilliant knowledge of the Web with you as I compare and contrast the Web 2.0 presentations of Kevin Kelly of Wired and Kevin Rose of Digg, but it is my ignorance that will once again shine. I can speak a little Spanish and maybe a little more Greek; I know these guys were using my native tongue, but I think in a new dialect known as "Webian." The first difficulty I encountered was that I didn't and I don't know what "High Bit Order" really is. If I knew better exactly what Web 2.0 is then I might have a better chance of figuring out what Web 3.0 or 10.0 might look like in the next iteration.
Back to Kevin versus Kevin. I will start with K. Kelly... In this presentation the discussion was about the history of the past 6,527 days since the inception of the Web and a prediction of what the next 6,500 days will bring -WOW-!!! I truly enjoyed Kevin's ability to take complex issues and make them simple.
So here goes - The first step of the Web as we know it was the simple connection of the computers on the Internet, step two was the sharing of documents and use of applications to make document sharing richer in content, step three is linking data and now we are at the beginning step four which is sharing data to the extent that computers can make intelligent and intuitive connections, deductions and decisions based on the minutia of that data. How can this knowledge help predict Web 3.0 and beyond? One of the initial pointers to the future is in the cloud, and what the cloud is and how the cloud works. With the abilities of sharing data, the cloud becomes one big OS or one huge machine that is made up of billions of smaller processors working in unison and as such, its computing power of this connected system allows for the smallest of details of one person's particular life to be shared, stored and used to enhance not only that life but the lives of all others connected to the Web.
The social, financial, political and personal implications are staggering. That is K. Kelly's take on High Bit Order, K. Rose tells us that timing is everything if we want to profit from this exponentially growing online world in the cloud.
K. Rose's presentation discussed the benefits of starting up during tough financial times, because competition is slim during those periods. Some of the challenges for such a start up would include funding, staffing, equipping and promoting your business on a shoe-string and K. Rose used his start-up of Digg as an example of how frugal budgeting and creative strategies can help you create similar results as he had with Digg.
So, K. Kelly tells us what to expect concerning High Bit Order and K. Rose suggests a strategy to profit from it.
As a side note, I looked at another High Bit Order presentation from Beerud Sheth to hopefully shed some light on the subject for me and he talked about SMS mobile Web and the Web beyond the Web and how http content is being blown out of the water by sms content. Yeah... I'm lost!
Kevin Rose (K. Rose) Digg
Well I would like to share my brilliant knowledge of the Web with you as I compare and contrast the Web 2.0 presentations of Kevin Kelly of Wired and Kevin Rose of Digg, but it is my ignorance that will once again shine. I can speak a little Spanish and maybe a little more Greek; I know these guys were using my native tongue, but I think in a new dialect known as "Webian." The first difficulty I encountered was that I didn't and I don't know what "High Bit Order" really is. If I knew better exactly what Web 2.0 is then I might have a better chance of figuring out what Web 3.0 or 10.0 might look like in the next iteration.
Back to Kevin versus Kevin. I will start with K. Kelly... In this presentation the discussion was about the history of the past 6,527 days since the inception of the Web and a prediction of what the next 6,500 days will bring -WOW-!!! I truly enjoyed Kevin's ability to take complex issues and make them simple.
So here goes - The first step of the Web as we know it was the simple connection of the computers on the Internet, step two was the sharing of documents and use of applications to make document sharing richer in content, step three is linking data and now we are at the beginning step four which is sharing data to the extent that computers can make intelligent and intuitive connections, deductions and decisions based on the minutia of that data. How can this knowledge help predict Web 3.0 and beyond? One of the initial pointers to the future is in the cloud, and what the cloud is and how the cloud works. With the abilities of sharing data, the cloud becomes one big OS or one huge machine that is made up of billions of smaller processors working in unison and as such, its computing power of this connected system allows for the smallest of details of one person's particular life to be shared, stored and used to enhance not only that life but the lives of all others connected to the Web.
The social, financial, political and personal implications are staggering. That is K. Kelly's take on High Bit Order, K. Rose tells us that timing is everything if we want to profit from this exponentially growing online world in the cloud.
K. Rose's presentation discussed the benefits of starting up during tough financial times, because competition is slim during those periods. Some of the challenges for such a start up would include funding, staffing, equipping and promoting your business on a shoe-string and K. Rose used his start-up of Digg as an example of how frugal budgeting and creative strategies can help you create similar results as he had with Digg.
So, K. Kelly tells us what to expect concerning High Bit Order and K. Rose suggests a strategy to profit from it.
As a side note, I looked at another High Bit Order presentation from Beerud Sheth to hopefully shed some light on the subject for me and he talked about SMS mobile Web and the Web beyond the Web and how http content is being blown out of the water by sms content. Yeah... I'm lost!
Tuesday, November 25, 2008
I watched two of the panel videos from the 2008 Web 2.0 summit. The first was a discussion about the future of music, and the second covered tracking methods created for use with mobile devices. The theme I found present in both discussions was the business to business partnership model currently being used to provide services to customers. Businesses that were once thought to be unrelated or competitive in the past are forming partnerships to promote products and services because more and more businesses are creating specialized products and require others to market them to turn a profit.
A conversation on the future of music
Participants
John Battelle, Federated Media Publishing, moderator
Chris DeWolfe, MySpace
Edgar Bronfman Jr., Warner Music Group
This panel focused on the future of music and new media technologies. DeWolfe and Bronfman discussed the recent partnership of Warner Music Group and MySpace, which allows MySpace to carry more titles that users can access, as well as sell music. Users benefit because they become the “curators” of their personalized play-lists. MySpace benefits by providing a service other social networks do not, and Warner benefits by selling music and promoting its artists.
Bronfman also discussed his view that iTunes and MySpace are not competitors. He says the attraction of MySpace revolves around a networked community, whereas the Apple Store simply allows for the purchase of products. The community makes all the difference!
Track Me
Participants
Brady Forrest, O'Reilly Media, Inc., moderator
Greg Skibiski, Sense Networks
Ted Morgan, Skyhook Wireless
April Allderdice, MicroEnergy Credits
Rich Miner, Google
Participants on this panel talked about how apps are becoming more prevalent in mobile devices, and how the lure of many new technologies revolves around the ability of those devices to provide information on user-location. Wi-fi and satellite tracking have become highly-demanded features in mobile devices. And, the need for consumers to buy “smart phones” is no longer necessary, as long as carriers provide access to the services for which consumers’ devices have the capacity to run. iPhone was sited as one example where the user market has been seriously restricted because Apple decided to limit availability of the product to only one service provider.
A conversation on the future of music
Participants
John Battelle, Federated Media Publishing, moderator
Chris DeWolfe, MySpace
Edgar Bronfman Jr., Warner Music Group
This panel focused on the future of music and new media technologies. DeWolfe and Bronfman discussed the recent partnership of Warner Music Group and MySpace, which allows MySpace to carry more titles that users can access, as well as sell music. Users benefit because they become the “curators” of their personalized play-lists. MySpace benefits by providing a service other social networks do not, and Warner benefits by selling music and promoting its artists.
Bronfman also discussed his view that iTunes and MySpace are not competitors. He says the attraction of MySpace revolves around a networked community, whereas the Apple Store simply allows for the purchase of products. The community makes all the difference!
Track Me
Participants
Brady Forrest, O'Reilly Media, Inc., moderator
Greg Skibiski, Sense Networks
Ted Morgan, Skyhook Wireless
April Allderdice, MicroEnergy Credits
Rich Miner, Google
Participants on this panel talked about how apps are becoming more prevalent in mobile devices, and how the lure of many new technologies revolves around the ability of those devices to provide information on user-location. Wi-fi and satellite tracking have become highly-demanded features in mobile devices. And, the need for consumers to buy “smart phones” is no longer necessary, as long as carriers provide access to the services for which consumers’ devices have the capacity to run. iPhone was sited as one example where the user market has been seriously restricted because Apple decided to limit availability of the product to only one service provider.
Eat Sunshine
The two panels I watched from the Web 2.0 summit were The Future of Health and Micheal Pollan the author of " In defense of Food: An Eaters Manifesto" and the "Omnivores Dilemma".
In the first panel there were three panelists. Th first was Daniel Kraft from Stanford Medical School, one was Joanna Mountain from 23 and Me, genetic testing and the third was Carroll Mccall from Humana Inc. The main themes that I noticed in this panel were customization, prevention and being proactive when it comes to our health care. 23 and me is a genetic testing company where individuals can go and get a profile of their genetics which can enable them to understand if they are likely to get a certain disease based on their specific genetic traits. Joanna Mountain also said that there is a lack of desire from people to care about genetics or want to understand it, however when it is personalized and customized to patients they have found that patients are much more willing to learn a few new concepts about genetics when it relates to their own personal data. Even though currently genetic testing can only tell you about .1% of your genetic traits, it is growing rapidly and the price of the testing has dropped drastically, so it is more affordable. Daniel Kraft from Stanford Medical school, said he really liked what companies like 23 and Me were doing with genetic testing but wondered what a patient would need from him(or a physician) if they had their genetic profile. Carroll Mccall from Humana inc said that the need for physicians would be to show the patient how the genetic testing is relevant to them, the physician can make recommendations to the patient based on their individual genetic testing results. Carroll Mccall also discussed the healthcare side of the issue discussing how we need to make a change on how we view healthcare, it should be more of a relationship of receiving good care from the healthcare provider that looking at the return on investment. She also said that the an issue with insurance is that it is not customized per person, the insurance looks at everyone the same and insurance needs to shift to more customizable coverage for each individual. Daniel Kraft from Stanford medical school also discussed extending the physician and patient relationship to an online forum similar to Facebook, where the patient could chat with the physician or send them messages to extend the physician patient dialogue. Forums like Web MD are doing a great job of this currently.
In Micheal Pollan's forum he talked bout how food is key and in order to solve big issues that we are worried about today such as energy independence, healthcare cost and climate change we need to look at our food system first. Most of the main issues with healthcare can be traced back to the american diet. Pollan recommends a new way to raising and eating food called "eating sunshine". He says that every single calorie is a product of photosynthesis and we should all live by that motto. We need our animals on a farm not in feed lots and we need to re-localize our food systems as much as possible. The government has a disconnect in signing farm bills that allow large amounts of high fructose corn syrup and hydrogenated soy oil to be produced, yet they are worried about the obesity crisis but clearly they are helping it along. Cheap food=Expensive healthcare. Pollan says we need to realign our agriculture policies along with our environmental and healthcare policies. In Pollan's opinion the web can empower consumers to make informed choices in two ways. The first is a device that will make the food system more transparent, not only will the device tell you the nutritional breakdown of the food, but it will tell you where it came from and how it was transported . The second way the web empowers consumers is though online local communities of people sharing information on where to to find food locally instead of going to the supermarket.
What these two panels have in common is that they both agree that the web is instrumental in progressing both issues of food and health forward. They also agree that that there is a definite link between our food and our healthcare crisis.
The differences between these two panels are that the first on health tends to focus more on customizing healthcare for the individual whereas the second, on food, looks at revamping the way we get food and the type of food we eat completely ,and not as much on customization.
Sunday, November 23, 2008
Web 2.0 Summit
I looked at Kevin Rose's arguments about starting a start-up in a bad economy. I wanted to see how this wunderkind operates and what he had to say about the topic. I also looked at The web and politics because I am fascinated by the way the web is altering communication, especially in terms of political and social action. An even larger umbrella term for what is happening is the democratization of information.
The Kevin Rose presentation was much shorter than the political presentation, but was none-the-less informative about how start-ups form and the kinds of resources that are available for people interested in doing so.
Rose described how Digg did not launch during the real web 2.0 explosion and how that helped them in terms of not having much competition for the first 6-8 months. He called it the first mover advantage. Rose talked about the funding for consumer Internet start-ups will be drying up a bit, at least in the short-term. This is actually an opportunity to gain that first-mover advantage. Its much more difficult to launch a new company when that particular sector of the market is being flooded with new companies.
Rose did not quit his day job when he founded Digg. He outsourced his web programming to Europe and ended up paying 1/3rd of what he would have had to pay someone from the U.S. Its interesting to see this kind of effect of globalization. Even high-tech related fields can be outsourced as opposed to the traditional notion of manufacturing being the primary beneficiary of outsourcing. Rose also rented servers for $99 a month, the cheapest route and did not suffer any problems or setbacks. I think that he is certainly on to something here. It may be more difficult to get funding, but if you can attain it success will be much more likely due to the lack of competition.
There was not a lot of overlap in terms of subject matter between the two presentations. However, DIGG is firmly part of Web 2.0 now and is part of the New Media that is transforming the nature of politics itself. Because DIGG aggregates is can have an article from the Huffington Post or the Drudge Report. DIGG can enhance the reach of these blogs, which can in turn have the kinds of influences we have seen in the recent presidential campaign.
John Heilermann of New York magazine moderated a panel which included Arianna Huffington of the Huffington Post, Gavin Newsom mayor of San Francisco, and Joe Trippi a political consultant. Heilermann compared the 2008 election to the 1960 election because they shared something in common. What they shared in common was the maturation of a medium that altered the political landscape irrevocably. In 1960 of course the debates between JFK and Nixon were the first to be televised, and in 2008 the web really reached a level of maturity in terms of its influence on the political world.
Trippi agreed and said that in 2003-2004 the web hadn't quite reached its zenith in terms of influence. There was no youtube and facebook hadn't opened up to everyone. Since then broadband users increased and a whole new slew of tools emerged. 14.5 million hours of official Obama video was watch on youtube. That's exposure that Obama didn't have to pay for like he would have in a broadcast model. He also didn't have to interrupt programming. People that had a serious interest could go watch videos at their leisure.
Newsom described the web as "fundamentally shifting the construct of what we believe is possible in this country." I could not agree with Newsom more.
Huffington of course agreed as well, stating that Barack Obama would not be president or even have been a Democratic nominee if it weren't for the web. She argued that the net killed Karl Rove politics. People had access to the truth through the blogosphere and youtube and were less susceptible to the kind of fear mongering that defeated John Kerry in 2004.
Huffington also brought up an interesting but somewhat unrelated point about how many quote unquote left wing issues are now mainstream. Issues such as: global warming, health care, and ending the war in Iraq. Huffington said that "the truth does not always lie in the middle." She called Obama the new center and talked about how she envisions the Huffington Post as new journalism, not right vs. left, but what is true. Trippi agreed that the msm focuses he said she said journalism, but the blogosphere and related tools allow the individual to decide on their own. He poingnantly altered James Carville's "its the economy stupid" by stating "its the network stupid." I think that Trippi nailed it on the head with that quote. He also astutely pointed out that youtube demands authenticity.
Newsom described that politicians are behind the curve in terms of social media and the web. They realize how it alters and improves fundraising, but not much beyond that. He talks about facebook and how it has changed the audiences that show up.
This panel really excited me. I am a firm believer that the web has irrevocably altered and will continue to alter the structure of politics in the world. It has empowered individuals like nothing we have ever seen in the history of mankind. It is an exciting time to be alive.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)