Hello!
The comments on this profile are unclaimed and thus are unverified.
Do they belong to you? Claim these comments.
Daniel
Is this you? Claim Profile »
10 ヶ月 ago
in Should You Pitch Social Media? on Jacob Morgan on Social Media, Technology, Marketing, and Life
When you have a hammer, all you see is nails. I agree that many things ought not be pitched, because people just don't have the 'eyes' for it yet.
My own philosophy is to create such a buzz with people in one circle that you draw the "what's going on over there" response which then brings in the people who are open to anything and everything because they do not know what they are about to experience, they just know something is going on. They tend to take those experiences as "the law" when a pitch is "the pressure I will resist." People want to discover things on their own, so arrange the discovery.
My own philosophy is to create such a buzz with people in one circle that you draw the "what's going on over there" response which then brings in the people who are open to anything and everything because they do not know what they are about to experience, they just know something is going on. They tend to take those experiences as "the law" when a pitch is "the pressure I will resist." People want to discover things on their own, so arrange the discovery.
10 ヶ月 ago
in Will be Blogging With Blog World Expo! on Jacob Morgan on Social Media, Technology, Marketing, and Life
Congratulations Jacob!
10 ヶ月 ago
in How efficient is synchronous communication? on Wikinomics
I agree with Brennan on when-to-IM, and Naumi on how-to-maximize, but I think the key is consciousness. I have problems with people who think it is social hour all the time, not valuing their time or mine. The real question is, how does on meekly convey the gravity of needing your own time to think by yourself, and focus. As this technology becomes more normal over the next 20 years, I believe we will be conscious of how this dynamic plays out. A level of etiquette will need to begin, otherwise we're always going to be doing poor work or being distracted. I find myself picking work partners based on their IM etiquette. How's that for a sudden realization on a Monday afternoon.
11 ヶ月 ago
in Bajofondo, Making Your Own Genre on Jacob Morgan on Social Media, Technology, Marketing, and Life
These guys definitely do not suck. //d
11 ヶ月 ago
in Cuil, The New Search Engine Launches, But is it Cool? on Jacob Morgan on Social Media, Technology, Marketing, and Life
Plus when you have to tell people how to pronounce your name and spell it, you are asking for punishment.
11 ヶ月 ago
in Cuil, The New Search Engine Launches, But is it Cool? on Jacob Morgan on Social Media, Technology, Marketing, and Life
Cuil seems like the nerdy statistician who thinks he knows how to play a sport because he has analyzed it a lot. At least right now. The real world experience Google has shows it is far superior. It is one thing to index web content in massive amounts, and another thing to do it right.
11 ヶ月 ago
in Randy Pausch has Died, My Tribute on Jacob Morgan on Social Media, Technology, Marketing, and Life
I just watched the Time Management lecture and that man is awesome. I am deeply glad that he now functions inside humanity without limits to his physical capabilities.
11 ヶ月 ago
in Where is Technology Headed? The Many Questions to Ask on Jacob Morgan on Social Media, Technology, Marketing, and Life
In my humble opinion, technology has exposed some things about humans which we are about to realize in one large "oh," globally. Right now we are very checked-out as a human organism. We are peasants as Lennon would say, to the extent that we are not volitional in a conscious way. Right now even if we do have freedom of will, we do not use it, and technology is drawing our attention to this. Also, the super-abundance of options is calling attention to our lack of desire for options, as you showed us in one post. You raise a good point on the difference between observation and participation. I think this is the key to the difference in paradigm. Right now we are dating someone really, really bad for us. It is a spirituality, and we are not really aware of it. Only some of us see this. Others rule out spirit. That is interesting because spirit is all about desire and choices, it is about will. So they will-not say that will exists. That requires a quote from the band Rush. "If you choose not to decide you still have made a choice." They wrote songs about your blog post. Like 'New World Man' and 'Digital Man' and 'The Weapon.' I find them to sing like blue-prints for a purposeful world where technology serves an awakened race of masters, rather than an unconscious slave race.
Right now, we are participating in non-participation. We are observing what we ought to participate in, consciously. That is to say we are unconscious and going about like we know what we are doing. Children do this when they play "doctor" or "house." The idea is that imagination takes precedence over reality and it is called play. This is good, but not when one becomes responsible for tasks of consequence. So right now we are the cosmic adult-still-living-at-home from a universal perspective. And to make matters worse, we are not even observing this lack of participation because we are at play in a time for work. We are instead participating in non-observation. From that position observing non-participation. Just look at a teenager supposed to be involved in the dinner table conversation, or considering the words of their parent while they have a text messaging device within reach. It looks like there is stuff being done, but is there? Is it the right stuff? Is it of the quality of thing which satisfies the criteria of progress? Maybe in an instant gratification world, but not in a world with other people in it. Especially when those other people are mothers.
So we ARE participating in non-participation and ARE observing non-observation. This is at least honest, and now it is stated positively. Now that our heads are spinning, we decide to create brand names and "put on shirts and sell each other [products]" to quote and censor Alice In Chains. But a curious thing happens to us when we do this. I call it the "just fix it" factor. It is the dynamic which happens when someone wants to play a multi-player-only game and cannot connect to the server, or wants to perhaps install a new printer and has no cable for it: frustration and desperation. People start writing blog posts about USB cables and about data loss. (hehe) These two situations of pain varieties are vital and cause self-consciousness. What was previously unconscious non-participation becomes conscious non-participation, or observation of a no-effect situation. This is very possibly why we each get a smack when we enter the world. It focuses our attention on the smack, which in itself causes us to cry, but hey, now we are crying. Before we were having a womb-thought, and now we are having a pissed off non-womb thought. At this point people will often grasp at something to numb the pain of being in a dysfunctional scenario. But instant gratification is its own problem in a reality tuned to perseverance.
This is getting long, but you have asked a question I think about constantly, as a technology designer and futurist. I guess it is ok this post is long considering it is a contemplation of our existence.
What is the solution? Where is technology going? Well, now we need to quote Mos Def. He said of Hip-hop, "people talk about Hip-hop like it's some big-foot in the forest. WE ARE hip-hop. So next time you ask yourself what is hip-hop doing, ask yourself what am I doing?" That is paraphrased. It also applies to technology. Technology is the period of time where politicians lost power because between them and the people is now a non-partisan, non-human, x-factor. This means that if TV were removed, or walkie-talkies, the people-system dies. Period. This would be very interesting to observe and participate in, but instead of that, I am working on systems based on spiritual material which cannot go offline, and point out to us that WE are technologies. WE are artificial intelligence, in one way of describing us. We are ideas. Who is having us as a thought being is an interesting question but people usually get on medication instead of asking that, or they surround themselves with people who make medication, or they go on a train of thought away from medication which ends up become their medication. All this is a defense against actually participating. It's like when someone tries waking you up and you are ALL ABOUT continuing to sleep. I am like that. I even fall back asleep sometimes and dream of being awake and getting dressed and all the particulars of starting a productive day. Not so much any more, but I used to.
So I laid out the situation we are in of non-participation and non-observation, but obviously I am commenting on a blog post of someone observing something and participating in something, and I myself and observing and participating, so what does that do? Well, it means that someone with the capability to create new systems, and someone who obviously calls attention to new things are talking, and that means that there is the potential for change. What change? Well, what does change change relative to? Non-change. Without non-change there is not change, otherwise that change is in itself non-change. So what does not change? A hah! Now we are getting somewhere. Once we put out toys away, we will discover that the solution to human technology suicide is right here in our play pen. We just refuse to put down the white coats and titles and really start some cosmic work. We see ourselves as something we are not, and everything we think from that point on is not a thought. It is a memory of a race we never were so it is a delusion. I am intentionally not giving what I actually think originated us, or what mire we transpired from. What good does it do to argue over how you came to the argument? Is the next moment in your conversation being experienced or is it being delayed?
Let's pull in one outside topic to set this against in contrast. What sets gas prices? Do we even know? We think we know. Do we? Who knows? Is it speculation? Is it OPEC? Is that truly the deciding factor? Ultimately we still pay whatever it costs because we need to get home. So it continues and presumably, until the solution comes, but what is that? And to whoever the profits are going to right now, that is actually a problem. It is an end of a gravy train. My point is that life is anchored, right now, to an undefined constant we cannot touch or hope to influence unless we do something really drastic, all together, but we can't do that because we also cannot eat together or stay on one train of thought without something buzzing or flashing or speaking directions in a digitized voice. Our thoughts are not thoughts, they are traffic accidents where we still survive most of the time and eventually accomplish enough to keep eating but very soon not even that. I venture that this is occurring because of influences we are not paying attention to. Other people venture other reasons, but either way we are all looking for a reason all the time. We base our next thought on 'something' and the idea is for that 'something' to be 'something' which is participating in reality which is more or less observing reality at the same time. Right now though, the basis for tomorrow's thought is the fear we have today, and that has been true for thousands and thousands of years.
As I continually say to people, we are womb-beings. We are in momma. We are not awake or alive from a perspective of the universe, and for that reason we cannot see the cause and effect of what is really happening, we instead play with out toys. So what I believe is going to happen is that in the blink of an eye, a true, real, quantifiable Universal is going to fall into the playground like a bombshell. I believe I know what that Universal is, but I am waiting for the pain aspect to peak so that the desire aspect also peaks and the market suddenly exists for a real life. A conscious platform for conscious beings. It will know you before you login and not by invasive means. It will understand you, generally, to the point where it will never inundate you with options or cause technology to get out of control. Because think about it, if the tool supply became so fast that an urgent task became impossible, does the term 'tool' apply any more? No! Only a fool in his madness would continue that behavior. So as an organism which has the option of intentionality, technology will serve as a smack on the butt for us and we will realize we were in the womb, and suddenly, we will be responsible, living-outside-the-parent's-house beings. This will all be very fun, and play will pail in comparison.
I am working on a good respond to your excellent email!
Right now, we are participating in non-participation. We are observing what we ought to participate in, consciously. That is to say we are unconscious and going about like we know what we are doing. Children do this when they play "doctor" or "house." The idea is that imagination takes precedence over reality and it is called play. This is good, but not when one becomes responsible for tasks of consequence. So right now we are the cosmic adult-still-living-at-home from a universal perspective. And to make matters worse, we are not even observing this lack of participation because we are at play in a time for work. We are instead participating in non-observation. From that position observing non-participation. Just look at a teenager supposed to be involved in the dinner table conversation, or considering the words of their parent while they have a text messaging device within reach. It looks like there is stuff being done, but is there? Is it the right stuff? Is it of the quality of thing which satisfies the criteria of progress? Maybe in an instant gratification world, but not in a world with other people in it. Especially when those other people are mothers.
So we ARE participating in non-participation and ARE observing non-observation. This is at least honest, and now it is stated positively. Now that our heads are spinning, we decide to create brand names and "put on shirts and sell each other [products]" to quote and censor Alice In Chains. But a curious thing happens to us when we do this. I call it the "just fix it" factor. It is the dynamic which happens when someone wants to play a multi-player-only game and cannot connect to the server, or wants to perhaps install a new printer and has no cable for it: frustration and desperation. People start writing blog posts about USB cables and about data loss. (hehe) These two situations of pain varieties are vital and cause self-consciousness. What was previously unconscious non-participation becomes conscious non-participation, or observation of a no-effect situation. This is very possibly why we each get a smack when we enter the world. It focuses our attention on the smack, which in itself causes us to cry, but hey, now we are crying. Before we were having a womb-thought, and now we are having a pissed off non-womb thought. At this point people will often grasp at something to numb the pain of being in a dysfunctional scenario. But instant gratification is its own problem in a reality tuned to perseverance.
This is getting long, but you have asked a question I think about constantly, as a technology designer and futurist. I guess it is ok this post is long considering it is a contemplation of our existence.
What is the solution? Where is technology going? Well, now we need to quote Mos Def. He said of Hip-hop, "people talk about Hip-hop like it's some big-foot in the forest. WE ARE hip-hop. So next time you ask yourself what is hip-hop doing, ask yourself what am I doing?" That is paraphrased. It also applies to technology. Technology is the period of time where politicians lost power because between them and the people is now a non-partisan, non-human, x-factor. This means that if TV were removed, or walkie-talkies, the people-system dies. Period. This would be very interesting to observe and participate in, but instead of that, I am working on systems based on spiritual material which cannot go offline, and point out to us that WE are technologies. WE are artificial intelligence, in one way of describing us. We are ideas. Who is having us as a thought being is an interesting question but people usually get on medication instead of asking that, or they surround themselves with people who make medication, or they go on a train of thought away from medication which ends up become their medication. All this is a defense against actually participating. It's like when someone tries waking you up and you are ALL ABOUT continuing to sleep. I am like that. I even fall back asleep sometimes and dream of being awake and getting dressed and all the particulars of starting a productive day. Not so much any more, but I used to.
So I laid out the situation we are in of non-participation and non-observation, but obviously I am commenting on a blog post of someone observing something and participating in something, and I myself and observing and participating, so what does that do? Well, it means that someone with the capability to create new systems, and someone who obviously calls attention to new things are talking, and that means that there is the potential for change. What change? Well, what does change change relative to? Non-change. Without non-change there is not change, otherwise that change is in itself non-change. So what does not change? A hah! Now we are getting somewhere. Once we put out toys away, we will discover that the solution to human technology suicide is right here in our play pen. We just refuse to put down the white coats and titles and really start some cosmic work. We see ourselves as something we are not, and everything we think from that point on is not a thought. It is a memory of a race we never were so it is a delusion. I am intentionally not giving what I actually think originated us, or what mire we transpired from. What good does it do to argue over how you came to the argument? Is the next moment in your conversation being experienced or is it being delayed?
Let's pull in one outside topic to set this against in contrast. What sets gas prices? Do we even know? We think we know. Do we? Who knows? Is it speculation? Is it OPEC? Is that truly the deciding factor? Ultimately we still pay whatever it costs because we need to get home. So it continues and presumably, until the solution comes, but what is that? And to whoever the profits are going to right now, that is actually a problem. It is an end of a gravy train. My point is that life is anchored, right now, to an undefined constant we cannot touch or hope to influence unless we do something really drastic, all together, but we can't do that because we also cannot eat together or stay on one train of thought without something buzzing or flashing or speaking directions in a digitized voice. Our thoughts are not thoughts, they are traffic accidents where we still survive most of the time and eventually accomplish enough to keep eating but very soon not even that. I venture that this is occurring because of influences we are not paying attention to. Other people venture other reasons, but either way we are all looking for a reason all the time. We base our next thought on 'something' and the idea is for that 'something' to be 'something' which is participating in reality which is more or less observing reality at the same time. Right now though, the basis for tomorrow's thought is the fear we have today, and that has been true for thousands and thousands of years.
As I continually say to people, we are womb-beings. We are in momma. We are not awake or alive from a perspective of the universe, and for that reason we cannot see the cause and effect of what is really happening, we instead play with out toys. So what I believe is going to happen is that in the blink of an eye, a true, real, quantifiable Universal is going to fall into the playground like a bombshell. I believe I know what that Universal is, but I am waiting for the pain aspect to peak so that the desire aspect also peaks and the market suddenly exists for a real life. A conscious platform for conscious beings. It will know you before you login and not by invasive means. It will understand you, generally, to the point where it will never inundate you with options or cause technology to get out of control. Because think about it, if the tool supply became so fast that an urgent task became impossible, does the term 'tool' apply any more? No! Only a fool in his madness would continue that behavior. So as an organism which has the option of intentionality, technology will serve as a smack on the butt for us and we will realize we were in the womb, and suddenly, we will be responsible, living-outside-the-parent's-house beings. This will all be very fun, and play will pail in comparison.
I am working on a good respond to your excellent email!
11 ヶ月 ago
in Pics from Real Estate Bar Camp 2008 on Jacob Morgan on Social Media, Technology, Marketing, and Life
You are a networking mad man!
11 ヶ月 ago
in SF Startup Drinks Pics on Jacob Morgan on Social Media, Technology, Marketing, and Life
You're a PC User?!?! :)
11 ヶ月 ago
in How Do You Define “Beta?” Is Your Company in Beta? on Jacob Morgan on Social Media, Technology, Marketing, and Life
I definitely agree 'beta' is being overused, or used to cover mass ass.
11 ヶ月 ago
in Do Some Things Seem Backwards to You? on Jacob Morgan on Social Media, Technology, Marketing, and Life
Hey Jacob - I have been finishing going through a massive strategy pass and finishing going through manuscripts, sorry for not getting back to you. I don't know if you'll really be interested if you think truth is only in the eye of the beholder. In one way it is, but in another way it is not. We could have crossed eyes, and I believe we do, so does that make it true or what it true already? Truth is truth. Either I am with it, or I am not. My perspective is not so normative that I condition truth to be how truth is.
The surface is the deepest. If we do not embrace the connections under the surface then we do not truly see the surface for what it is. This is to say that the outer world is not really outer, but a view of the inner as an allegory. This is not pantheism or anything. Just saying that the human organism is one thing, and the outer world is like our interface which reveals things about us. Like when we go to the ocean, we understand the ocean because we have emotions and the ocean is a pretty damn good metaphor for our emotions which are deep, sometimes rough, sometimes calm, always moving, etc... So I just put out the idea that there is more to life than the beholder's limitations. Or I could go so far as to say that truth is only as visible as your limits.
The surface is the deepest. If we do not embrace the connections under the surface then we do not truly see the surface for what it is. This is to say that the outer world is not really outer, but a view of the inner as an allegory. This is not pantheism or anything. Just saying that the human organism is one thing, and the outer world is like our interface which reveals things about us. Like when we go to the ocean, we understand the ocean because we have emotions and the ocean is a pretty damn good metaphor for our emotions which are deep, sometimes rough, sometimes calm, always moving, etc... So I just put out the idea that there is more to life than the beholder's limitations. Or I could go so far as to say that truth is only as visible as your limits.
11 ヶ月 ago
in Do Some Things Seem Backwards to You? on Jacob Morgan on Social Media, Technology, Marketing, and Life
Barfield would say you're working off Dashboard knowledge. What seems like it isn't related is related, but not on the Dashboard. The term comes from being conscious of the present situation inside a combustion chamber in the engine, or being conscious of the precise reality inside the Transmission, or looking at the instruments.
There is an intricate network of conscious connections inside humans. This is something that explains most of what seems backward. It is not backward at all. If it seems backward, then the focal point of the observer is fixed on an irrelevant reference point which is not meaningful in greater scheme of things, or even in microcosm.
But then people say, well, you're being too serious, "you know what I mean" one is ugly one is attractive. Says who? Are the two individuals physical only or is there more to them. And if so, is their physical appearance a pitance set against the content of their talent or character? And if you know what humanity is truly made of, would not it make perfect sense that abundance of choice is an innovation in Quixotism? The issue is point of view. Taking another of your examples - death before recognition of talent - of course. Up until now, the human organism has been in a fight for its life. It is rejecting one life type and defending another. It is trying to purge what is called Zoe life, and clutching Bio life. Consciousness is being rejected, Biological appearance reality is being upheld. The question is which are you primarily? Until we are primarily Zoe and the pendullum swings over to consciousness in the overall organism, death will always come before talent recognition. That is, due to the in-depth conscious mathematics involved, not the dashboard knowledge.
There is an intricate network of conscious connections inside humans. This is something that explains most of what seems backward. It is not backward at all. If it seems backward, then the focal point of the observer is fixed on an irrelevant reference point which is not meaningful in greater scheme of things, or even in microcosm.
But then people say, well, you're being too serious, "you know what I mean" one is ugly one is attractive. Says who? Are the two individuals physical only or is there more to them. And if so, is their physical appearance a pitance set against the content of their talent or character? And if you know what humanity is truly made of, would not it make perfect sense that abundance of choice is an innovation in Quixotism? The issue is point of view. Taking another of your examples - death before recognition of talent - of course. Up until now, the human organism has been in a fight for its life. It is rejecting one life type and defending another. It is trying to purge what is called Zoe life, and clutching Bio life. Consciousness is being rejected, Biological appearance reality is being upheld. The question is which are you primarily? Until we are primarily Zoe and the pendullum swings over to consciousness in the overall organism, death will always come before talent recognition. That is, due to the in-depth conscious mathematics involved, not the dashboard knowledge.
11 ヶ月 ago
in The Monty Hall Problem, Do You Know the Answer? on Jacob Morgan on Social Media, Technology, Marketing, and Life
Yet another good video Jacob.
11 ヶ月 ago
in Is Too Much Choice a Bad Thing? on Jacob Morgan on Social Media, Technology, Marketing, and Life
Are you interested in marketing systems and methods which attack core issues in the makeup of human beings? It seems like you are. I have some things cooking but I am no marketing person and I don't plan to become one. If this is the sort of thing you like, you might want to help.
11 ヶ月 ago
in Is Too Much Choice a Bad Thing? on Jacob Morgan on Social Media, Technology, Marketing, and Life
That was awesome, and very encouraging for my system design work. The platform gives you the opportunity to add a wider scope of choices, but it starts you out with a basic set determined by the essential make up of your consciousness. This guy is way cool, and right. And yes, my system also facilitates redistribution of wealth to the 3rd world. Yay! //d
11 ヶ月 ago
in Is Too Much Choice a Bad Thing? on Jacob Morgan on Social Media, Technology, Marketing, and Life
Watching video - One of my best systems is a choice-platform. It uses amazing criteria to weed out what you would likely never choose. Will comment after watching.
11 ヶ月 ago
in Scarcity, Good or Bad? on Jacob Morgan on Social Media, Technology, Marketing, and Life
Well, the premise seems to be that the product is not a natural sale and that lack or abundance is a variable to be massaged. That is zero-sum economics, and encourages frivolous products so long as they can be sold, by some formula or campaign, not by the quality or value of the item itself. I don't think you mean that though.
11 ヶ月 ago
in Facebook Applications are Getting Out of Control on Jacob Morgan on Social Media, Technology, Marketing, and Life
This is great news! You mean people are being encouraged to expect mature applications by being fed teenie bopper classics in spades? What a great time to be a provider of refined human web applications!
11 ヶ月 ago
in Just When You Thought It Was Safe to Get an Iphone on Jacob Morgan on Social Media, Technology, Marketing, and Life
The real value of the iPhone is the SDK and software development capabilities which can easily be overtaken by another manufacturer.
11 ヶ月 ago
in The 3 Types of Twitter Followers on Jacob Morgan on Social Media, Technology, Marketing, and Life
As we see micro-blogging pop up, I think we are really getting a sense of the nature of humanity itself. There is a lot of revealing information about human beings themselves in this post that transcends Twitter.
12 ヶ月 ago
in The Trends of the Most Popular Social Networking Sites on Jacob Morgan on Social Media, Technology, Marketing, and Life
Twitter I am told holds the most value in being able to "sense" the reaction of a product put to market. So based on the Twitter traffic regarding the word "iPhone" for instance, Apple can gauge its releases and emphasis. I don't know if the human organism as one whole will appreciate this over time. And as soon as they realize the main value it is geared toward, the natural response will be to say "thanks Twitter for the great idea," and move on to open source means, protecting themselves. I mean think about it -- My brother and his ex-girlfriend exchanged lists of what they were looking for in a person -- lists, in like date two, and then they proceeded to have a natural relationship? No. Any time you reverse engineer the perception of authenticity and true understanding of a person or persons, you are cheating those people out of someone who actually feels the same as they do. The only powerful model for Twitter, without charging posters (which would fail) demands a consumerist, information predator view. Maybe I am being overly cautious, but I believe that LinkedIn and Twitter are diametrically opposed. LinkedIn forces one to create a *profile* themselves just to see the full profile of another, beyond what is public. And they emphasize authentic relationship (though people like to have 22,000 contacts and pretend that is humanly possible to maintain in real sincere interactions and opportunity sharing). Twitter is all about the anonymous world where the club itself makes money. The record label makes money, but you don't really know if the artist is like you. I hope I am not splitting hairs here, but I think the divide comes in the area of authentic human contact. Twitter is great for me to know what is going on with people I care about, but the instant my conduit to another piece of this human organism becomes a food source for another person, without overt and declared, even necessary disclosure and real value to the community, and I do not mean price breaks on products I do not want, then they do not deserve conscious attention.
It is cool to discuss such things, and I think the reason why I enjoy your blog is an example of the above rant. You are human, and not pitching me something underhandedly. I think marketing is a through-the-front-door industry. //d
It is cool to discuss such things, and I think the reason why I enjoy your blog is an example of the above rant. You are human, and not pitching me something underhandedly. I think marketing is a through-the-front-door industry. //d
12 ヶ月 ago
in The Trends of the Most Popular Social Networking Sites on Jacob Morgan on Social Media, Technology, Marketing, and Life
Thanks for bringing my attention to compete.com!
Twitter was mostly a proof of concept. They cannot hang with centralized traffic, and will go the way of jabber. I hope they get a piece of the idea they birthed once it goes de-centralized:
http://rss.slashdot.org/~r/Slashdot/slashdot/~3...
Also, with Google "forced" to give up all the YouTube.com logs to the legal system, per the legal posturing of Viacom, they will likely feel a sting of user caution in the future. They too were a proof of concept technology. Now everyone and their relative has a similar video tool. Just goes to show, originality is rare (which is what makes it originality).
Facebook has a lot of stigma in the "underground" for being a CIA data gathering source. Not that no other web network is not. At least myspace has that "made in a garage" feel about it to protect it from paranoid people making up legends.
The strongest one you looked at was LinkedIn I believe. Where YouTube and Myspace and Twitter are really proof of concept technologies, LinkedIn actually plays into a constant in the universe: longevity. People on LinkedIn will value LinkedIn in the future because of how long someone has been on it, and how many long-time users are in a person's network. It seems to be a return to a desire for tangible, referenceable history where the other tools are still very shallow, by nature.
Good stuff. Glad I subscribed to your RSS feed with Vienna. //d
(Since I view this weblog as valuable retrospectively when we're in web 7.0 or whatever, once the web is so natural to us it is not versioned off, I have a correction: 4th sentence of paragraph #1 has word omitted, I believe it is "what")
Twitter was mostly a proof of concept. They cannot hang with centralized traffic, and will go the way of jabber. I hope they get a piece of the idea they birthed once it goes de-centralized:
http://rss.slashdot.org/~r/Slashdot/slashdot/~3...
Also, with Google "forced" to give up all the YouTube.com logs to the legal system, per the legal posturing of Viacom, they will likely feel a sting of user caution in the future. They too were a proof of concept technology. Now everyone and their relative has a similar video tool. Just goes to show, originality is rare (which is what makes it originality).
Facebook has a lot of stigma in the "underground" for being a CIA data gathering source. Not that no other web network is not. At least myspace has that "made in a garage" feel about it to protect it from paranoid people making up legends.
The strongest one you looked at was LinkedIn I believe. Where YouTube and Myspace and Twitter are really proof of concept technologies, LinkedIn actually plays into a constant in the universe: longevity. People on LinkedIn will value LinkedIn in the future because of how long someone has been on it, and how many long-time users are in a person's network. It seems to be a return to a desire for tangible, referenceable history where the other tools are still very shallow, by nature.
Good stuff. Glad I subscribed to your RSS feed with Vienna. //d
(Since I view this weblog as valuable retrospectively when we're in web 7.0 or whatever, once the web is so natural to us it is not versioned off, I have a correction: 4th sentence of paragraph #1 has word omitted, I believe it is "what")
1 年 ago
in Yougotbeer.com, Buy Someone a Beer Online, and They can Drink it Offline! on Jacob Morgan on Social Media, Technology, Marketing, and Life
This is a great concept. The Open Source community of programmers always jokes and says 'send me a beer' for appreciation of a system they wrote. Now people can!
