Yesterday I saw a LinkedIn group discussion started by John Hale about the top books on social media. After clicking on a couple of links, I found the original post from Jurgen Appelo on the Mellow Billow Blog titled “Top 100 Best Social Media Books, Ever.” To rank the books, he used a number of criteria including the number of Google hits (GH); number of Amazon ratings (NA); average Amazon rating (AA); number of GoodReads ratings (NG); average GoodReads rating (AG); and release date (RD). In essence, his criteria depends on consumer behavior rather than any independent assessment about the content of each text and its value to a specific audience. For me, the methodology is okay if you are looking for the most popular social media books, rather than the “best” social media texts. Also, some of the books he considers social media texts I would have trouble putting in that category.

In any event, here’s the link to Appelo’s post: http://tinyurl.com/qhuutv. His top ten include:

1. Twitter Power: How to Dominate Your Market One Tweet at a Time
2. Groundswell: Winning in a World Transformed by Social Technologies
3. World Wide Rave: Creating Triggers that Get Millions of People to Spread Your Ideas and Share Your Stories
4. Tribes: We Need You to Lead Us
5. Here Comes Everybody: The Power of Organizing Without Organizations
6. The Brand Bubble: The Looming Crisis in Brand Value and How to Avoid It
7. The New Rules of Marketing and PR
8. What Would Google Do?
9. Wikinomics: How Mass Collaboration Changes Everything
10. Personality Not Included

For a list of a few of my favorite social media texts, go to my earlier post titled “Social Media is a Cocktail Party” at http://tinyurl.com/knrgq9.

Post by Dan Dunlop, The Healthcare Marketer

I do research for a living. A lot of it tends to centre on the Web 2.0. And the Chairman of my research group wrote Wikinomics. So I spend quite a bit of time out looking for new companies and business models, with a particularly keen eye for things that are “opening up”. But to be honest, there are quite a few situations where it becomes obvious that being open isn’t always a great thing.

For example, one easy technique for locating new “lighthouse case study” ideas is searching through various contests that are floating around out there. Two of the more well-publicized ones recently are the TechCrunch 50, and the Mashable Open Web Awards. The first provides a nice list of start-ups to consider, and the various stories swirling around them point to many more. Great resource. I also had high hopes for the Mashable Open Web awards as a pointer towards great case studies. But thus far have been mostly disappointed.

The reason is that I suspect the system is being gamed, and I don’t know what to make of many of the results I’ve seen. For example, I was really interested in “Twitter user of the year”, particularly since there are many, many interesting Twitter users out there. I watched the updating list for a few hours last week. @ivetesangelo proved quite popular. In fact, my rough count indicated @ivetesangelo was getting about 60% of the votes. @sookiebontemps and @tommcfly were also quite popular. I greatly suspect that the system was being gamed. I scanned through a variety of other lists, saw voting patterns that defied all logic (at least in relation to what the contest intended), and moved on.

In some ways it’s not really fair to compare the two directly – but since both are seeking to identify the “best” in a relatively similar space, I think the difference between the two experiences is important. By applying some structure, expertise, and filtering, TechCrunch provides a lot of value to me; by being almost entirely open, the Mashable Web Awards are left open to gaming, and various different interpretations of what’s going on. I have a hunch of some expert panel had narrowed down a list of the best things going on out there (perhaps guided by voter input) and let people work from there, the output would be more interesting – and useful.

I see this kind of thing pop up a lot. In general, I find open to be good – to a point. But there’s a reason things like hierarchies emerged out of self-organizing systems.

Today, I came across article from a friend
“There but for the grace of good”

The message to the world from his action:

1) Integrate the person in related network

2) Find out more and support the speciality of a person

3) Sut Up Email, Twitter, Announcements Web Sites to help to communicate – all the tool are free on internet:

Tools on Internet to help to integrate homeless people:

• http://homelessness.change.org
• www.gmail.com
  Communication
• www.twitter.com
  Real Time News from Network
• http://www.gumtree.com
  …or other local announcement site
• http://www.realitycharity.com/person-to-person-fundraising.php
  Person to Person charity

Gary Hayes, autor del excelente blog Personalized Media, ha desarrollado un contador de Social Media, Mobiles y Gaming.  Entre las cosas mas geniales del contador, es el hecho de que Gary lo ha hecho “portable”, es decir, que es un widget que puedes incrustar en tu blog e incluso descargar a tu escritorio para tener un screenshot del momento en que lo “tomas”. Solo vean que genial esta:

Nota: La aplicacion es un un flash que pueden ver funcionando en el blog de Gary. Nos estamos mudando de plataforma, asi que mientras tanto, solo puedo pegar un screenshot de la aplicacion

Gary escribe que el contador esta basado en estadisticas que multiples sitios han publicado hasta final de septiembre 2009.  La cantidad de sitios es impresionante, y denota la habilidad y practica que cualquier persona seriamente interesada en social media y new marketing debe tener.  Copia aca del blog de Gary:

• 20 hours of video uploaded every minute onto YouTube (source YouTube blog Aug 09)
• Facebook 600k new members per day, and photos, videos per month, 700mill & 4 mill respectively (source Inside Facebook Feb 09)
• Twitter 18 million new users per year & 4 million tweets sent daily (source TechCrunch Apr 09)
• iPolicy UK – SMS messaging has a bright future (Aug 09)
• 900 000 blogs posts put up every day (source Technorati State of the Blogosphere 2008)
• YouTube daily, 96 million videos watched, $1mill bandwidth costs (source Comscore Jul 06 !)
• UPDATE: YouTube 1Billion watched per day SMH (2009)- counter updated!
• Second Life 250k virtual goods made daily, text messages 1250 per second (source Linden Lab release Sep 09)
• Money – $5.5 billion on virtual goods (casual & game worlds) even Facebooks gifts make $70 million annually (source Viximo Aug 09)
• Flickr has 73 million visitors a month who upload 700 million photos (source Yahoo Mar 09)
• Mobile social network subscribers – 92.5 million at the end of 2008, by end of 2013 rising to between 641.6-873.1 million or 132 mill annually (source Informa PDF)
• SMS – Over 2.3 trillion messages will be sent across major markets worldwide in 2008 (source Everysingleoneofus sms statistics)

I cannot say nothing least that a big THANK YOU to Gary for this greatest effort and such a great tool!

Fuente: Gary’s Social Media Count

cheers,

A notícia foi publicada na TI Inside (http://www.tiinside.com.br/News.aspx?ID=155299) e provavelmente em diversos outros meios de comunicação.

A lista completa inclui nove outras tecnologias (incluídas a “TI Verde” e a “virtualização”) mas gostaria de compartilhar um item específico que chamou minha atenção.

Segundo o Gartner, a Computação Social (“software sociais e de redes de compartilhamento“) é uma tecnologia quente para 2010 em “conseqüência da mudança na postura dos trabalhadores” porque “os funcionários não querem mais ter que realizar em ambientes diferentes seus próprios produtos e trabalho, e o acesso a informações externas“.

Os funcionários não querem mais trabalhar de um determinado jeito, que podemos chamar de “jeito atual”? Suponho então que conheçam um novo modo revolucionário de trabalho que está funcionando extremamente bem fora da empresa – nas igrejas, nas associações, nas ONGs, nas universidades.

Qual é, afinal, esse modo de trabalho? Cá entre nós, meramente utilizar o MSN / Skype e ter uma rede de contatos no Orkut / Facebook / MySpace / LinkedIn / Plaxo não é uma forma revolucionária de trabalho.

Estou me auto-atribuindo a tarefa de encontrar e entender essas práticas revolucionárias para poder afirmar claramente aos executivos do mercado o caminho para a mudança.

Aceito voluntários para esse trabalho de pesquisa e discussão franca.

Opiniões sobre o futuro do modo de vida do homem em um mundo plano e acelerado.

Overseeing a hub of global technology exchange, yet2.com now enjoys fascinating insight into broad buying trends across the technology marketplace – the aggregated ’shopping list’.

Every day yet2.com is presented with information about market demand and supply regarding a broad range of technologies. Thus daily, our Boston, London and Tokyo offices receive 5–6 data points of serious buyers’ interests in specific technologies. Our definition of “serious” buyers is senior technologists from Global 1000 companies with approved budgets and active projects to pursue specific technology opportunities. We abstract this information into an internal High-Interest Areas database, collecting the most sought-after technologies in yet2.com space.

Periodically we analyze these data points into a broad mapping of market interest, trends and specific technology areas in which yet2.com sees high market interest from these serious buyers.

This is one of the most interest and valuable reports yet2 completes, and is my favorite activity.    It’s an evergreen process, because new data keeps rolling in and every few months we aggregate and publish it.  Here is the latest overview.

1) Life Sciences

Wound Care Liquid bandages, antimicrobials, coagulants, super absorbents, including binders and silicone foams Implants Super elastic shape memory alloys, catheter delivered Surgical devices – extending minimally-invasive to new procedures such as endoscopic disc clearing Implantable biodegradable polymers, including for extended release drug delivery Actives Actives delivery (taste masking, new formulations of delivery, anti-itch, analgesics)

2) Electronics

LEDs for lighting High reflectance surfaces and fittings Next gen Applications IP in high energy efficiency RFID Cost down Tags active Continuous printing Geo positioning Chips and algorithms to enable copyright protecting and digital rights management. Location specific content serving

3) Filtration

Waste Streams, Antibiotic residues detection, Cost-effective field-based testing, Air purification

4) Energy

Renewable Wind Turbine Generators, next generation blade technologies, shock absorption, Alternative substrates Solar/ paper and alternative substrates, printed electronics, near term incremental and long term step changes, Software and technologies for variable and distrbuted supply, dynamics and demand management, Emissions control, Biofuels i. Non-agricultural non-ethanol based Fermentation i. Biomass separation, In situ product removal, Algae and fungi based, Gasification i. Introducing furnace technologies, Replacing hot air with pure oxygen, Steam and pulverized carbonaceous materials iv. Clean gasification including reducing pollutants and sequestration and geologic storage of captured carbon

5) Printing and Authentication

Electrophotography-based high speed digital printing Aqueous-based pigments, anti statics, printing on rough substrates

6) Food Products

Healthy Fats, Barrier (cost effective lower-foot print flexible) Absorbents/Natural AntiMicrobials, DHAs, EPAs, Omega-3s Cost effective production Organoleptics, Food Packaging, Bioassaying and food safety testing

7) Consumer Products

Hair/Skin Anti-frizz/UV/color protection Free radicals control Scents/ Freshening Gene shuffling and receptor bio assays Antimicrobial and other secondary benefits Non wovens /wipes Imparting secondary benefits: elastic, antiviral, antimicrobial, controlled release

Natural Cleaning / Anti-Microbials

a) Enviro-friendly surface cleaners b) Nanosilver- based c) Microorganisms d) Enzymes and Bioflavonoids e) Encapsulation and controlled release f) Preservatives

9) Materials

Conductive i. Electrically conductive substances that can be used in a ‘printing’ process; ii. Conductive inks and ESD coatings Use in polymer melt additivation b) Self heating c) Enviromaterials biobased, sustainable and completely biodegradable plastics for use in injection molding, paper coating, cast film and sheet, blown film, thermoforming

10) Encapsulation

Controlled release, slow release, higher loading ii. Agricultural, pharma, cosmetic and food applications

11) Agriculture

Hydroponics, Reduction of water intensity of crop production b) Fertilisers, Controlled release, Enable reduction in overdosing

Reler Wikinomics foi uma agradável surpresa por dois motivos: 1) O livro continua atual, mesmo com a maior parte dos exemplos agora já terem se tornado superpotências virtuais (o que enaltece mais um pouco a visão moderna e visionária dos autores); 2) Senti como se agora entendesse bem mais do que acontece em relação ao mundo virtual, provavelmente porque esse é o mundo que agora ando respirando, mesmo que ainda com pulmões de um recém-nascido. É impressionante como um livro desse nicho pode ter 4 anos e ainda manter a pose. Há algum tempo fiz o mesmo com outro livro do assunto e o achei extremamente ultrapassado e prosaico (estou fazendo um esforço danado pra lembrar qual era, mas a única lembrança que me vem é que o dono do sebo me deu pouco por ele, mesmo na troca…), o que evidencia que gente que tem algo a dizer não se rende ao tempo. Os ensinamentos e exemplos ali valem ouro para quem está querendo entender um pouco mais desse insano mundo que é a internet. Obrigatório.

Agora a questão do substituto. Não sei se vou aguentar ler Marley e Eu (eu vi o filme antes, e achei muito bom, mas agora que tenho meu próprio cão não sei se aguento ver de novo  não… acho que vou chorar em bicas) porque, pra ser sincero, estava bem chato no começo. Talvez fosse porque eu não estava realmente interessado, sei lá. As outras opções são Adestramento Inteligente, do Dr. Pet (minha cadelinha é linda, inteligente, astuta e um amor, mas adora morder o braço da gente, o que muitas vezes é extremamente irritante), uma releitura que talvez seja importante, agora que a Lilou está com 6 meses, ou Violetas na Janela, outro que ando enrolando muito e que, apesar de gostar muito de romances espíritas, admito que precisa, desculpe o trocadilho infame, estar no espirito pra segurar a onda. Talvez não seja a hora de nenhum desses, mas também não sei o que vai ser.

Ainda sem iPod, estou sofrendo no trânsito. Impressionante como faz falta um aparelhinho daqueles. Justo no mês em que adquiri Psicoacústica, do Ira! e estava adorando o novo do Arnaldo Antunes (que fez o disco mais pop e acessível da sua carreira emulando, inacreditavelmente, Jovem Guarda!) o que me deixa mais chateado ainda. Vamos ver se semana que vem resolvo isso pois tá difícil de passar o tempo sem música.

Anteontem fiquei de molho porque sofri um pequeno acidente: consegui tropeçar numa escada do Terminal de Ônibus e torci os dois pés. O resultado disso são dois tornozelos que parecem polainas feitas de carne. O lado positivo é que não quebrei nenhum dos dois, apesar da insana dor que o acidente me causou (sério, nunca tive tanta dor assim na vida, e olha que eu tenho cálculo renal crônico…), coisa que nunca mais quero sentir. Não sou adepto da correria diária, tanto que evito qualquer desespero por causa de trabalho, principalmente porque, segundo meu amigo Alan, “sou o mais próximo de um Peter Sellers que um brasileiro jamais vai chegar”, mas a segunda-feira foi estressante e complicada, portanto  não tive muito tempo para colocar a cabeça em ordem. Como sou desastrado por natureza o resultado foi dor excruciante por pressa pra chegar no trabalho, o que realmente não valeu a pena. Tudo isso pra dizer que fiquei em casa com os pés pra cima e acabei assistindo O Pentelho, o que me fez lembrar do texto da semana passada, em que eu falava de expectativa. Cable Guy foi o Corpo Fechado de Jim Carrey, que vinha numa suscessão incrível de filmes de comédia física, o que decepcionou muita gente em se tratando do filme dirigido por Ben Stiller (que se mostrou um ótimo profissional e conseguiu ser o primeiro a mostrar que Carrey não é apenas um careteiro extrordinário, mas também um careteiro extraordinário que sabe atuar). Com um roteiro simples, mas mais voltado para o drama, é um filme moderno, humano e fatídico e que, em alguns momentos, até nos deixa apreensivos com as tomadas escuras e bem emolduradas. Ainda no filme, Jack Black e Owen Wilson em início de carreira de gente grande, mas o filme é inteiro de Carrey, que mostra grandes caretas, mas também um lado artístico que ninguém ainda conhecia. Matthew Broderick até tenta, mas Chip Douglas é o centro do filme, não tem jeito. Aliás, a tridimensionalidade do personagem impressiona pela modernidade e pelo feedback crítico em relação a mídia. Foi um enorme fracasso, mas garanto que foi por ele que alguns diretores olharam para o antigo Ace Ventura com outros olhos. Um grande filme. Para poucos, mas ainda assim, grande.

Também vi Inimigos Públicos e, apesar de ser grande fã de Michael Mann, não sou fã do estilo extra-mega-blaster-cool que ele adotou em Miami Vice. E ele faz o mesmo, de uma maneira mais contida, nesse Public Enemies, para contar a história de John Dillinger. Os personagens são vazios demais em contraste com a vida que Mann exala na direção. Chega a ser triste que um esmero tão grande com posicionamento de câmeras, sombras, tomadas perfeitas, sejam negligenciados por um texto sem graça e preguiçoso. E olha que sou fãzão do Depp, hein? E o Bale? Pensei que ele fosse um dos atores principais. Que nada. Seu papel, apesar de importante, é redundante e sem direcionamento. O filme tem uma forma linda para pouco conteúdo, infelizmente. Saudades de Colateral.

Pô, me bateu uma vontade gigante de rever The Wall, o que me deixa automaticamente com vontade de rever Tommy, que me deixa doido pra rever The Commitments, o que me deixa puto por saber que ainda não tem em DVD. Que porcaria de mundo é esse em que uma distribuidora se dá ao prazer de privar ouvidos e olhos astutos de uma pérola musical desse porte? Vergonha, pura vergonha.

Nota mental: Se passar perto de um Free Shop, procurar a tal pasta de amendoim que americano tanto gosta. Será que o troço é tão bom assim?

The only interesting bits about the event in Munich were the keynote speaches and a couple of nice contacts, like meeting up with Professor Scheer again.

Don Tapscott, August-Wilhelm Scheer and Florian Krueger

It is a shame that the once largest IT show in the south of Germany has been denoted to a gathering of likeminded IT Guru’s. We need to do something about it. Innovation has been mentioned in numerous posts and speeches of mine as being the key to success or even survival in Central Europe. Like it or not, besides Biotech (aka the Nano-Guys) IT will remain the main driver behind any meaningful change project in the years to come.
An IT fair therefore should have the governments highest attention and support. Instead, the Bavarian Head-of-State decides to fight about coalition non-issues to foster the power of the local party in Berlin. Well…

Enough complaining, the real take-away from this fair was positive, there are many smart people around and good ideas that have been discussed. Don has certainly given the people a lot to think about and input -such as his- is crucially important to the German Leadership. Everybody knows that Flickr is more successful than Kodak’s EasyShare, but has everyone embraced the idea and made it a part of his reinvention / change programme? What does it mean that communities and “Curators of Content” are so much more important than the pure providers of information?
Has every company / organisation thought and I mean really thought about the desires, dreams and fears of their clients? How they can be managed in the best, philantrophic way and how they can then ultimately be so well tied to the organisation that loyalty exceeds temptation…

What I also liked a lot was to see how innovative some of the perceivedly conservative companies such as Giesecke & Devrient are. They are humming happily behind all these megatrends, which are about to come such as 4th generation networks and developing the tools for success, without the larger audience even knowing that they exist, or what it exactly is they are doing. I have to admit, I was impressed by some of their thinking.

And finally it was great to meet the folks from BITKOM and especially Thomas Mosch, who does a stellar job in Berlin for the entire industry.

So, at the end of the day the overall impression is really positive, but there’s still a long way to go for Europe, before we can relax and enjoy our achievements. Let’s Go!

l'ami Brice Auckenthaler, co-organisateur et fondateur de expertsconsulting, désormais Créargie

Nous avions déjà couvert il y a près de 2 ans un atelier du club E2 qui était dédié aux réseaux sociaux. J’en étais partir ravi et … avec quelques amis en prime car je suis resté en contact avec tous les intervenants.  Cette fois-ci le thème en était “de quoi sera fait demain” et j’ai eu la chance de participer afin de démontrer l’expérience de l’utilisation des médias sociaux par Orange Business Services.

Philippe Le Fessant dans une explication passionnée des QR codes japonais

Alors de quoi demain sera-t-il fait ? S’il est difficile de répondre à la question, il y a une chose qui est certaine : les technologies de rebond depuis les médias traditionnels vers l’Internet (TV, papier etc.) ont de l’avenir. C’est du moins la constatation faite par les intervenants et notamment M. Philippe Le Fessant dans une présentation fort intéressante, et qui plus est l’oeuvre d’un amoureux du Japon et des cultures orientales, capable de décrypter les jeux de mots en Japonais. Chapeau bas !

Je vous livre donc comme à mon habitude le compte-rendu de cette réunion avec les notes prises en séance, de quoi rendre jaloux ceux qui n’auraient pas eu le courage de se déplacer tôt ce matin.

Club E2 : de quoi sera fait demain ?

Introduction

par Jean François Hautot et Brice Auckenthaler, patrons du cabinet nouvellement créé CREARGIE (http://www.creargie.fr)

• Fusion entre Créargie et Expertsconsulting
• 3 pôles : 1° prospective 2° stratégie 3° marque 4° innovation (pas seulement r&d) 5° performance (reegineering de produits)
• Repérer, ranger, en parler autour de nous : chaque consultant est responsable d’un observatoire (thématique, sur divers sujets touchant à l’innovation)
• Vous aider à montrer à vos collègues que ce n’est pas dangereux d’innover

Panorama illustré des tendances de demain

• Google n’arrête pas d’innover. Avec Wave va probablement révolutionner non pas un monde, mais plusieurs mondes. C’est la combinaison du mail, de Facebook, Twitter et du SMS. Sur invitation seulement. C’est un peu déconcertant, c’est comme si le mail avait été ré-inventé. Certains participants ont testé, mais l’intérêt va au-delà du grand public notamment dans le cadre de la gestion de projet.
• Vodafone lance 360 en Angleterre, une sorte de plateforme qui rassemble en un seul endroit sur Internet toutes les données de l’utilisateur. Equivalent de Ma Sphère de SFR mais en plus massif. Actuellement, uniquement 6 téléphones sont compatibles. Couvre également les autres opérateurs en se basant sur l’usage et sur les couches supérieures de service.
  • Ma marque est un écosystème : il y a donc peut être des maillons pour renforcer la relation avec des publics qui ne sont pas forcément les interlocuteurs traditionnels
  • Mezzo di Pasta : chaîne de restauration qui a un réseau facebook et une application iPhone. Il va falloir créer du lien
  • Peugeot : initiative Mu. Au lieu de vendre uniquement des services autour de la voiture ils ont élargi aux autres moyens de transport. On gagne des points et il y a des partenaires avec des services pour les week ends etc. Mu pour se mouvoir. En marché test sur quelques villes françaises et probablement au-delà de la France dans le futur. Dépasser le marché immédiat et aller au-delà. Organisé en tant que club versus service.
  • Playmaker : une sorte de Nike+ dédié au football.
  • La porosité des marchés a atteint les marques. La frontière des marques et des entreprises est poreuse è impératif de s’ouvrir au monde extérieur
  • L’hyperlivre : Jacques Attali le sens des choses. Ouvrage parsemé de flashcodes, qui renvoient vers des prolongements du livre. On est dans un monde de paradoxes : le consommateur est de plus en plus sollicité et il faut donc que tout soit très simple et en même temps il est demandeur de plus de profondeur. Attali a voulu que des mises à jour soient produites au fur et à mesure. Tendance de l’hybridation, combiner des choses qui avant étaient opposées et les mettre ensemble. La question qui se pose est de savoir si le site Internet va se mettre à jour de façon synchrone avec le livre. Surcouf : vend l’inverse d’un site réel sur Internet et veut mettre
  • Fabriquer à la demande en flux tendu : myfab.com est un site de fabrication à la demande. Une fois que le produit est construit et a généré assez d’intérêt on est informé sur son état de fabrication, sa livraison etc. C’est une logique d’abonnement versus une logique de vente. Le commerçant propose une fabrication à date et les prix varient.
  • NTT Docomo : malgré la crise depuis 20 ans, le Japon est extrêmement innovant. Ils viennent de lancer pas exclusivement à l’usage des jeunes, un détecteur de bons plans ; on se voit proposer un avatar, il faut être équipé d’un mobile et on vous propose toute une palette de services à la demande. 200+ fournisseurs sont dans le système. Ce n’est pas très cher et pas exclusivement destiné aux jeunes.
  • Peugeot : Avec la crise, plein d’initiatives voient le jour, avec un petit véhicule urbain avec un véritable 4 places, mais à mi chemin entre un scooter et une voiture. Renault va lancer une initiative similaire avec un produit appelé Zoe. Le volant n’est pas un volant, se conduit comme un scooter.
  • Japon :
    • le recyclage chic. Recyclage dans le Shinkansen avec une sorte de mise en scène pas vue en Europe. Le vert n’est pas que les trucs qu’on cache. Il y a de la mise en scène autour.
    • QR codes se généralisent.
      • 2 autres exemples. Chez Muji, le QR code devient carrément un argument pour associer des promotions.
      • QR code designé par Murakami pour une marque de luxe (Vuitton) http://www.itechnews.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/louis-vuitton-and-takashi-murakami-stylized-qr-code.jpg

Di git ! Video, la télévision devient interactive, Philippe Le Fressant, directeur associé chez Jap’Presse

• Codes 2D : 1/3 du trafic des sites de marque vient des rebonds (beaucoup plus de mobiles au Japon)
• Info choc de la semaine : -20% sur le marché de la pub en France (en 93, -3% dans la crise). Aucune baisse de 20% n’est conjoncturelle.
• Sony annonce pour 2010 des écrans 3D relief sans lunettes
• Télévision sur mobile : En France on se pose la question sur les normes. La particularité de la télé sur mobile au Japon ce sont les liens contextuels pour acheter le CD ou télécharger des épisodes manqués. Le modèle est gratuit, ce sont les mêmes programmes que l’on trouve sur la TV de salon. Les business modèles asiatiques sont peu convaincants et donc ceci explique le faible développement en Europe.
• Sans contact sur mobile : existe au Japon depuis 2004. 1/3 du parc est équipé. En France, pas début avant 2010 pour les premiers terminaux. Nouveauté en Mars par Sony qui a sorti les premiers TV avec des puces NFC. On passe le mobile devant la TV et on surfe sur le site ou effectuer un paiement. On peut acheter du contenu en passant son mobile sur sa télécommande. La fin de la télévision ? Dans sa forme actuelle, avec ses rendez vous et dans sa forme actuelle. Délinéarisation de la télévision. La publicité sur Internet est archaïque, en bandeaux et en affichage. Au Japon, ils vendent du rendez vous. Un site de vidéos qui ont lancé des jeux de minuit. A minuit un popup s’ouvre et tout le monde joue. A minuit 15, autre popup et on annonce les gagnants. 40-50% de participation. Si on ne change pas les modes de publicité actuels, on continuera à faire -20% par an en Europe.
• 20 millions de personnes au Japon qui utilisent leur télécommande comme un guide, ce qui donne aussi des infos sur ce qu’ils regardent.
• Reconnaissance d’image vidéo : reconnaissance optique de 2^ème génération. Premières présentations en France en même temps qu’au Japon. Les Mangas au Japon sont aussi pour les adultes. Pendant le générique, shooting possible. Marche sur tous types d’écrans.
• Au Japon c’est le package des produits qui fonctionne beaucoup. C’est dommage de ne pas faire un rebond aujourd’hui
• Site : http://justdigit.com

Ce matin, réunion à l’échangeur, organisée par experts consulting et e-laser, rue des archives. Voici ma présentation :

Organizations are recognizing the need to expand into the social media space to better understand their customers. Stories like those of Jet Blue, Whole Foods and Dell are becoming more widespread as these firms show concrete, quantifiable measures of success. With the ease of access to product and brand communities (corporate and 3^rd party) companies now want a set of operating guidelines. How do you actually manage the interaction? And, what rules must guide the conversations and behaviours displayed by employees on such message boards?

Stemming from other posts and discussions about this very issue, I put forth the following list of simple guiding principles that I think can provide a starting point for organizations entering this sphere of communication.

Although, there is no one single, policy structure that can fit all situations and organizations, the one thing I do take a strong stance on, is the need to keep the rule simple to understand and relatable, which is the reason I chose to use the rule of the road as my reference point.

Most Importantly, Don’t drink and Drive…well that’s just good advice

My point in putting up this list is to mainly drive discussion around the subject of, what constitutes ‘good’ social policy? Hopefully this provides a springboard from which to launch this much needed debate.

We had a fantastic event.  This was our 10th – in 10 years.  122 guests came from 3 continents.

We had many leaders in Innovation and Technology together, from IBM, to P&G, to DSM to SAP – and listening to their vision of the future was fascinating.

There were also 16 small companies with a wealth of new technology.  Two examples; Vincent Ribas came from Madrid to present his way to measure blood pressure (and other things) with light.  Yagi-san came from Tokyo to present his new encapsulating technology.  Lots of fascinating discussion.

When doing technology deals – it’s all about people.  Which is a key reason we have been hosting our own event for 10 years now….

I’ll send out a more detailed description of the event, but I did want to share a few pictures:

Tom Reeves, VP of IP and Licensing at IBM, is about to start his presentation.  IBM filed 4,500 patents last year.

Jason Lye (Newell Rubbermaid), Thomas Jacobs (Material ConneXion), Chip Murray (DuPont), Ben duPont (yet2), Nob Tamagawa (yet2)

Yagi-san (Ellie), Rob Kirschbaum DSM , Takeda-san (KISCO)

Rob Kirschbaum (DSM), Bob Hirsch (DuPont – ret.), George Polson (Arch Chemicals)

Scott Schmidt (Arkema), Christopher Savage (Georgia Power), David Groh (Amway)

Craig Tomanelli (Bayer Healthcare), Alex House (FTT), Emma Hughes (yet2 Europe), Steve Fusco (AT&T)

Phil Stern (yet2), Rob Shaddock (Tyco)

Jeff Weedman (P&G), Joe Fox (Ashland), Bob Hirsch (DuPont – ret.), Tim Bernstein (yet2)

Dan Abramowicz (Crown), Jason Lye (Newell Rubbermaid), Tom Ales (Kimberly Clark),  Cheryl Perkins (Kimberly-Clark ret.)

Andy Martin (WLGore), John Lynn (Discovery Alliance ), Kenneth Klimpel (Colgate Palmolive)

Marcel Lubben (DSM), Luc Vanmaele (Agfa)

Tim O’Gorman (Shell), Caryn Oryniak (Church&Dwight)

Rob Kirschbaum’s lobster – anyone that knows my partners – Tim and Phil – knows how cheap they are.  The fact that these huge lobsters slipped through our accounting process is a mystery to me – but they sure were good.

PS  I’m an amateur photographer and I find this site a great resource:  www.strobist.com

]]> http://ffbsccn.wordpress.com/2009/09/23/the-netflix-prize-is-brilliant-%e2%80%93-but-is-it-fair/ Wed, 23 Sep 2009 15:04:00 +0000 Randy Mayeux http://ffbsccn.wordpress.com/2009/09/23/the-netflix-prize-is-brilliant-%e2%80%93-but-is-it-fair/

The tech observers will be weighing in on the Netflix wikinomics prize given to the best idea to improve their “recommendaiton software.”  (See my earlier post, “Everybody” Knows More than “Anybody” — Netflix Awards a Prize in the Era of Wikinomics).  Slate’s technology writer, Farhad Manjoo, thinks the whole concept was brilliant.  He wrote, in  The Netflix Prize Was Brilliant: Google and Microsoft should steal the idea, that Netflix could have never hired as many innovators as actually worked on the project (they all had other jobs); they would have never worked this diligently on the assignment without the potential of the prize money; and, if it had simply been an open source project Netlfix would not own the winning software outright.  But here was the line that got my attention: As Netflix CEO Reed Hastings admitted to the New York Times, “You look at the cumulative hours and you’re getting Ph.D.s for a dollar an hour.”

I think, as I said in my earlier post, that for such a massive innovation project this wisdom of crowds/wikinomics approach is perfect, it subtly reminds us of another development in our current economic climate.  Though this is a really good way to innovate, is this another example of increasing productivity with lower wages?  Admittedly, all of those who worked so diligently to win the prize did so “voluntarily,” with the hope of the prize as their motivation.  It would have cost Netflix far more than the one million dollars they spent to obtain this outcome if they had hired all of these innovators.  Getting more work for less money out of people seems to be the dominant direction in this increase productivity at lower cost era.

It turned out great for the winners.  Another team came in 20 minutes late, and won nothing.  The winning team had seven members.  The team that was 20 minutes late had 30 members.  And many others worked many, many hours and also did not win the prize.  Netflix got an exceptionally good return for its investment.

Is this good, or bad?  It is certainly good for Netflix.  And good for customers of Netflix.  Is it good for the worker?

News Item – Netflix awards $1 Million Prize for innovation from outside the company

The contest was to help with the most basic of promises of Netflix:  “If you like this movie, we’ll help you find the next movie you will like – even though you had no idea you would like it.”  From the NY Times article: The payoff for Netflix? “Accurately predicting the movies Netflix members will love is a key component of our service,” explained Neil Hunt, chief product officer. The prize went to a seven-person winning team of statisticians, machine-learning experts and computer engineers from the United States, Austria, Canada and Israel, called BellKor’s Pragmatic Chaos.

Two of the Winning Team Members Robert Bell & Chris Volinsky

This story about Netflix demonstrates the truth behind two best-selling business books.   The basic premise of the two books, The Wisdom of Crowds, and Wikinomics: How Mass Collaboration Changes Everything, is simple.  Everybody knows more than anybody.  And when you add the amazing ability of technology for people to collaborate with what they know and what they learn, separately and together, the result and payoff can be beyond amazing.

Here are a few quotes to remind you of the authors contentions.

The Wisdom of Crowds

From The Wisdom of Crowds:
Corporate strategy is all about collecting information from many different sources, evaluating the probabilities of potential outcomes, and making decisions in the face of an uncertain future.  These are tasks for which decision makers are tailor-made.  Yet companies have remained, for the most part, indifferent to this source of potentially excellent information, and have been surprisingly unwilling to improve their decision making by tapping into the collective wisdom of their employees.
The smartest groups are made up of people with diverse perspectives who are able to stay independent of each other.  Independence doesn’t imply rationality or impartiality, though.  You can be biased and irrational, but as long as you’re independent, you won’t make the group any dumber.
The solutions to cooperation and coordination problems are real in the sense that they work.  They are not imposed from above, but emerge from the crowd.
The decisions that democracies make may not demonstrate the wisdom of the crowd.  The decision to make them democratically does.

From Wikinomics:
“No company today, no matter how large or how global, can innovate fast enough or big enough by itself…  Wikinomics reveals the next historic step – the art and science of mass collaboration where companies open up to the world.  It is an important book.”  (A. G. Laffey).
In the past, collaboration was mostly small scale…  Never before, however, have individuals had the power or opportunity to link up in loose networks of peers to produce goods and services in a very tangible and ongoing way.
Whether designing an airplane, assembling a motorcycle, of analyzing the human genome, the ability to integrate the talents of dispersed individuals and organizations is becoming the defining competency for managers and firms.
In-house innovation alone will not be enough to survive in a fast-changing and intensely competitive economy.  The days when companies divided the national pie in a wading pool or well-mannered rivalry are long gone.  Today’s global firms sink or swim in an ocean roiling with cutthroat competition.  And plummeting collaboration costs enable them to reach outside their boundaries for talent.
The new age of mass collaboration will no doubt seem complex and uncertain, and it’s true that collaboration and openness are more art than science.  Capabilities to develop new kinds of relationships, sense important developments, add value, and turn nascent networked knowledge into compelling value are becoming the bread and butter of wealth creation and success.  Is your mind wired for Wikinomics?

Wikinomics: Mass Collaboration Changes Everything

The Netflix story shows us that from the earlier book, The Wisdom of Crowds, companies have now moved from innovation within/by their own employees to innovation from the “outside masses.”  Technology makes it happen.  And the idea of the contest enables a company to “hire” an army of innovators with the promise of a big financial award.  And, I suspect that the losers of the contest may very well find their efforts pay off in other ways in other endeavors.

The age of Wikinomics, based on the Wisdom of Crowds, has surely arrived.

———

My synopsis of both books, The Wisdom of Crowds and Wikinomics, with audio+ handout, are available at our companion web site, 15minutebusinessbooks.

Companies are now recognizing the importance of Mass Collaboration, both internally and externally. They are now aware of the power of working together, along with the convenience of doing it even without the presence of those working on the project. And one of the tools that is now being acknowledged by these companies is Wikipedia. Wikipedia, for most of us, is our ever-reliable source of information that we usually use to answer our queries and for some, to back up their research. Most Academicians, though, discouraged the use of it because other readers, who may not be really credible, have the ability to edit it. This is where we take Wikipedia.

Wikipedia users are aware of its features that allow you to edit, input and save its content. People do this to add new ideas on already existing articles that can be found on Wikipedia sites. What most people probably aren’t very much aware of is its feature that actually allows you to create your own Wikipedia site. This is the side of Wikipedia that companies should focus their attention on. Companies can save themselves from those toxic meetings, heavy papers for memos and other reports, and the likes by creating their own Wikipedia Sites. They can just easily setup a page, tell their employees about it, so that employees may, then, start using them.

Let’s take a very simple example. The manager wants to gather suggestions from his people for their upcoming team building. Instead of doing it on a traditional way, through meetings, or suggestion box that consumes paper and most people actually ignore, they can use the Wikipedia. If employees want to share their idea, they can just go to the site that was setup, edit the page, and put on their idea, then save it. Other people will automatically be able to see this. By the end of the day, they will be able to collect actual and detailed ideas without the very hassle way of doing it.

It’s really kind of simple and very easy once companies have tried and explored further on its uses. If you think your own company is ready for this technology, here are some, again, simple tips that you may already know, which you can also apply in using Wikipedia.

Set your Objectives

What are your goals for using Wikipedia? Why are you going to use Wikipedia instead of other medium? Is it for gathering information from your employees like the previous example? Is it to work on a project? Whatever your objectives are, just make sure that you have a direction for setting up a site and that you will be truly maximizing its uses and other features. The objective or what you aim to accomplish by the end of the day should be reflected on your site, or should be the main feel of the exchange of conversations and statements going on. This will automatically give those other people who may stumble upon it what your site is about. Stating the objective explicitly may also help. Also, try to think if on the current situation, the Wikipedia is what you really need. If you think that you can do away with traditional media, and it’s easier and more convenient; then, stick to it. Having the latest technology today, doesn’t necessarily mean completely abandoning the old school ways.

Format the content of your page

Formatting your Wiki doesn’t only pertain to the designs, although making it more appealing to its reader is also a plus when having a Wiki site. You may choose on the different templates available, or for some instances tweak on its codes and other designs to make it more personalize. Most importantly when formatting your page, organize the contents. Make your Wikipedia accessible to the readers by making sure it contains everything that they need, and helping them not to get confused on the content. You can put in headings to introduce one section of your page, or links that are related and also important for your site.

Moderate the content

Set a standard among your employees or those who will be using the page on the limits of what they should put in. You can tell them to what extent they can disclose on a certain project you are working on, or tell them what words or languages they are not allowed to use when posting comments or other suggestions. Do remind them that your Wikipedia, by the end of the day, will be publicized and will be for everyone’s consumption.

Have someone to moderate and maintain it

This is very helpful in backing up the tip stated above. Assign someone from your group to monitor the progress of your site. Assign this person to update, organize once in a while the content, since there will be more added to it, and look out for information you may not want to see in your site. This person will make sure that your Wikipedia is still safe and clean for the general public to view.

Lastly,

Share your Wikipedia to the World!

Put links on your other sites that will direct them to your Wikipedia, or put links on the Wiki page itself that will also link back to your page. Do not be afraid to publicize the content of your Wikipedia as long as you follow the previous tips. After all, Wikipedia is a public site; it would defeat the main purpose of  Wikipedia if you will just keep it among yourselves.

Do you have other tips to share?

I’m kinda new in this whole blogging, social networking thing and I’m still learning it all. I was also new with the term “wikinomics” and find it quite fascinating. The word wikinomics comes from the Hawaiians’ ‘wiki wiki’, which means ‘fast’, and the word ‘economics’.

In 2006, the Canadian business executive Don Tapscott and consultant Anthony D. Williams wrote a book called Wikinomics. How Mass Collaboration Changes Everything. The book describes the affect and influence of the internet on the strategy and innovation of companies. That’s what wikinomics is about. Not all great ideas, tips and advices come from within company walls. Anyone with an internet connection could contribute something useful. Consumers become ‘prosumers’: People contribute at creating products because of the modern communication technology; they are producers.

Tapscott and Williams say that companies should go with this developments by creating ‘ideagoras’ (ideas platforms) to be able to innovate at a high level. An that’s really what is happening online right now. Companies as Dell, Starbucks, Apple, all created public blogs where people share all sorts of stuff: opinions, ideas, tips etc.

As I said before, all you need to have to participate is an internet connection. That means a lot of different types of people share their thoughts and ideas: students, teachers, clients, competitors, partners, suppliers, etc. What happens is that there’s a lot less competition as well between businesses, which is good, especially during the crisis, because that also means less corruption and power abuse.

I like this way of doing business. The idea of sharing and trusting, creating… I think that’s very efficient and effective.

The concept of a ‘wiki’  (everyone can start a wiki, it is not only used for business)  

Una delle più interessanti trasformazioni socioeconomiche in corso è l’Open content, ossia il ripensamento del diritto d’autore concernente sia le opere d’arte sia le opere dell’ingegno economicamente utili, come ad esempio i brevetti.

Sono già stati introdotti tipi innovativi di licenze, come quelle Open Source e quelle Creative Commons, che consentono di copiare e modificare liberamente le opere, pur riconoscendo all’autore originario sia la titolarità morale sia il compenso economico.

Si tratta di licenze più sofisticate del semplice copyright oggi in vigore, che attenuano il potere dell’editore e lasciano più gradi di libertà all’autore nel definire le forme di riutilizzabilità della propria opera. Per esempio: ci sono forme di licenze Creative Commons tali da consentire che un libro sia riutilizzabile per produrne un altro (di cui esso diventerebbe dunque una parte); altre forme, invece, lo vietano.

Il movimento Open content è nato da quello Open source, sviluppatosi a partire dagli anni ‘80 e concernente il mondo del software (del quale ha innovato la filiera produttiva). E’ un piccolo grande orgoglio della comunità informatica, l’avere dato la stura a una riflessione e un trasformazione così profonda come l’open content.

Tuttavia, come ho avuto già modo di dire altrove, intorno a open source circolano un paio di fanfaluche.

Una è che le licenze d’uso open source implichino o invochino la gratuità del software. In realtà quasi nessuna delle licenze Open presuppone o prescrive la gratuità dell’opera: a indurre in alcuni questa miscredenza è l’ambiguità dell’aggettivo “free”, che in inglese può significare libero ma anche gratis.

L’altra fanfaluca è che open source sia una manifestazione di intelligenza collettiva, ossia di emergenza dal basso di competenze un tempo solo appannaggio delle organizzazioni strutturate.

Secondo questa visione, il software open source dimostrerebbe che nugoli di umani senza alcun coordinamento possono auto-organizzarsi per produrre manufatti di grande complessità, come Linux o OpenOffice. Nessuno dirige o coordina i lavori.

Questa credenza è alimentata da autori (giuristi, economisti, giornalisti, politici) che non conoscono le sottigliezze del processo di produzione del software e dunque non lo comprendono.

E’ vero, infatti, che alla fabbricazione del software open source partecipano tantissimi programmatori free-lance, ma è falso che essi operino senza coordinamento top-down.

In realtà, i prodotti open source di più grande diffusione, successo commerciale e complessità (come Linux, OpenOffice, Apache Server o certi ERP) sono stati progettati e realizzati da organizzazioni aziendali ordinarie (come Sun, Red Hat, IBM, OpenBravo, Compiere, ecc ecc).

Esse si sono avvalse, è vero, in parte di programmatori sparsi per il mondo e spesso non remunerati se non con l’apposizione dei loro nomi tra i credits, ma costoro sono stati e sono orchestrati da esperti di sviluppo del software e industrializzazione di prodotto.

Anche i progetti open source non controllati da aziende, prevedono tutti un Project leader che coordina gli indirizzi, stabilisce le priorità e così via.

Insomma, la partecipazione è spesso volontaria e spontanea. Ma l’0rganizzazione del lavoro è di tipo top-down. I lavoratori dell’open source, quando non sono veri e propri dipendenti di aziende del ramo, assomigliano ai terzisti che lavorano in outsourcing per le imprese manifatturiere: quando Zara o Tods ordinano delle lavorazioni a terzi, prescrivono dei precisi capitolati d’opera, anziché aspettare che ai loro cancelli si presentino prodotti o semilavorati prodotti per “spontaneamente” e per ”auto-organizzazione”.

Andate su openoffice.org o su sourceforge.net, e vi troverete le regole comportamentali e collaborative per contribuire a progetti open source, nonché l’elenco dei task che possono essere svolti da qualunque volontario.

Chi ha promulgato quelle regole? Chi mantiene quella lista di task, preoccupandosi delle relative priorità e dei mutui collegamenti, senza i quali nessun software emergerebbe?

Non l’Intelligenza Collettiva di un Organismo Auto-organizzato, ma delle persone concrete, spesso con tanto di stipendio e company car. (A volte, questo stipendio è provvisto da aziende o enti pubblici ignari che i loro dipendenti fungono, per una buona parte del proprio tempo, anche lavorativo, da project leader per progetti open source).

Nicholas Carr

Supongo que el ensayo de Nicholas Carr no deja a nadie ileso, sea que use Internet para informarse, distraerse, comunicarse y/o trabajar. Yo, fui reconociendo los síntomas y los signos señalados por Carr con una cierta alarma y desde luego con la esperanza de que sus temores agoreros, fuesen refutados por alguna mente tan brillante como la suya. He leído mucho sobre el tema y buena parte, en este mundo hiperinformado, no era más que la repetición de lo mismo y esos fuegos artificiales de poca luz que acompañan a cualquier noticia que se dé y más si ésta es controversial, pero que son mucho más ruido que nueces.

Rescataré, sin embargo dos fuentes: un artículo en El País Internet cambia la forma de leer… ¿y de pensar? que desde el título abordaba lo que ya es una afirmación sin vuelta: leemos de manera distinta y lo que es una duda inquietante: si eso cambia nuestra manera de pensar ¿es malo?. Buena parte de las respuestas la dan pensadores del  London University College y como es de esperar no hay respuestas rotundas. Sin embargo creo que el balance se acerca mucho más a no temerle al cambio que a imaginar que Internet nos volverá a todos zombies intelectuales (o por lo menos, eso es lo que mi cerebro quiere creer). En cualquier caso los que lo experimentarán en forma completa serán los nativos digitales (es decir aquellos que ya nacieron rodeados de tecnología digital), que, según Don Tapscott, autor, entre otros ensayos de Grown Up Digital: The Rise of the Net Generation y de Wikinomics: How Mass Collaboration Changes Everything, constituyen la generación de los actores, iniciadores, lectores, escritores, espectadores, organizadores, escrutadores y colaboradores” y dice también que estos son más aptos para trabajar en común “más perspicaces, rápidos y más abiertos a la diversidad”, y que los que utilizan videojuegos disciernen mas cosas y tienen competencias espaciales desarrolladas que el son muy útiles a los arquitectos, los ingenieros y los cirujanos”.

¿Cómo le puede ir mal a la humanidad con personas así que además han nacido conociendo el daño que los humanos más civilizados le hemos causado al planeta en que vivimos? Y que además estarán perfectamente enterados de todo lo que Internet tiene de distracción y de ocio mal dirigido y mal digerido. Porque hay otro ocio buscado, encontrado y extraordinariamente útil al espíritu y sin duda a la mente.

La otra fuente es donde la polémica desatada por el ensayo de Carr ha alcanzado sus más altos niveles: Edge, una revista de Internet perteneciente a la Edge Foundation Inc. cuyo mandato es “promover el análisis y el debate de temas intelectuales, filosóficos, artísticos y literarios de manera a ponerlos al servicio del desarrollo intelectual y social de la sociedad, y reúne lo que la propia organización llama algunas de las mentes mas interesantes del mundo”. Es una manera modesta de llamarlas “algunas de las mentes más brillantes del mundo”.

Al final de este texto he puesto, traducidos, los principales pensamientos de los sabios que opinaron en Edge sobre este tema.  Pero si leen inglés, vayan a la fuente directa. Será un poco más largo, pero mil veces más seguro. Cada pensador que cito tiene en su nombre un enlace a su biografía en Edge. Vale la pena ir al enlace antes de leer lo que dice, para descubrir la mezcla de conocimientos, hobbies y frecuentemente éxito en el mundo de los negocios, de estos iluminados.

De lo leído, me  parece importante poner la situación expuesta por Carr dentro del contexto de la historia. La revolución de la información y con ella los cambios trascendentales en la cultura de la humanidad empezó cuando los fenicios inventaron el alfabeto. Y siguió con los escribas de las distintas civilizaciones hasta que llegó Gutemberg y se imprimió la primera Biblia. Vino después una mayor selección de libros, pero era aún literatura solo para un grupo reducido: los alfabetizados. Después se amplía la oferta porque más gente aprende a leer y a los libros sagrados se agrega lentamente una literatura más al alcance del lector, que aún pertenecía a una minoría. La explosión que produce cada vez más libros en distintas formas, de distintos temas, con distinto precio va aparejada ya no solo con la alfabetización sino con la sed de conocimientos del ser humano que encuentra en el libro educación y distracción. Y que está dispuesto a pagar por ambas. El espacio más cotidiano, ligero e informativo lo ocupan revistas y periódicos. La radio, pero sobre todo la televisión, llega como gran competidora del tiempo que se ocupaba en la lectura y, además, deja al humano pasivo delante de una pantalla hasta que llega, finalmente, la oferta infinita y la interacción con Internet. En cada transición los agoreros expresaron su miedo por lo que la nueva tecnología iba a destruir. Y si bien acertaron en lo inmediato, nunca imaginaron las enormes consecuencias colaterales y desde luego positivas, que traería cada adelanto.

La Imprenta de Gutemberg

Por ejemplo, con el advenimiento de la imprenta se temía por el futuro de los escribas, amanuenses o copistas que por siglos habían tenido la importante tarea de transmitir la cultura escrita —o la tradición— en una sociedad predominantemente analfabeta. Un monje llamado Johannes Trithemius y conocido como Johann von Heidenberg, que fue el fundador de la sociedad secreta Sodalitas Celtica (Cofradía Céltica) dedicada al estudio de las lenguas, las matemáticas, la astrología y la magia de los números, escribió en 1492, medio siglo después del invento de Gutemberg,  un tratado sobre la superioridad del trabajo de los amanuenses sobre el de la máquina. Pero al monje se le creó un problema, quería que el libro alcanzase una amplia audiencia así que tuvo que escoger que fuese impreso porque sus aliados escribas no hubieran hecho suficiente número de copias a tiempo, con lo que con los hechos destruía la teoría de su libro en el momento mismo de imprimirlo.

Por otro lado, Gutemberg nunca pudo imaginar cómo ayudaría su invento al protestantismo (es decir que la diseminación de las ideas protestantes fue facilitada por la invención de la imprenta, lo que hizo posible difundir una amplia literatura apologética, bíblica y religiosa y fomentó la edición de nuevas traducciones de la Biblia en lenguas vernáculas). De la misma manera, los múltiples cambios sociales catalizados por Internet son imprevisibles.

Otro ejemplo: los fabricantes de teléfonos celulares, no imaginaban que los mensajes de texto se convertirían en una característica tan importante del producto.

Cada una de las eras incorporó nueva gente, cada vez más, al uso de los nuevos medios. Y la oferta fue variando (es decir cayendo) en calidad y de profundidad (medida en términos de alta cultura) para satisfacer lo que pedían cada vez más personas (no hay mas que ver lo que se ofrece en la televisión hoy en día). Pero la cultura no fue nunca un asunto de masas. Ni las sinfónicas tocan en los estadios, ni los clásicos se reparten en fascículos como oferta de los periódicos, ni los museos de arte necesitan policías para poner orden en la entrada. Siempre ha sido una minoría la que tenía acceso a la cultura. Sea porque los niveles de alfabetización eran bajos, sea porque el costo de acceder a esa cultura de élite ha sido siempre alto. “La guerra y la paz” será leída por una minoría en un libro tradicional o en forma electrónica y algunos la encontrarán sublime y la leerán más de una vez, para lo cual deberán separar el tiempo que toma leer una obra de gran envergadura. Porque no es cierto que mal acostumbrado el cerebro a leer en pequeñas rebanadas la información, se vea impedido de leer algo de mas envergadura. No es, de hecho, el número de páginas. Lo prueba el hecho de que los libros de Harry Potter, best sellers por definición, tienen muchas páginas. Ni tampoco es una cuestión de tiempo: el tiempo (o por lo menos el tiempo libre), lo maneja cada persona y dispone de él de la manara que quiere.

La discusión sobre los grandes autores, que como verán más abajo, ha causado gran polémica en la que han participado varios de los sabios que nombro más arriba, así como otros en un Foro Your brain online de la Enciclopedia Británica

Los dejo con la traducción de lo que han dicho en Edge, los sabios modernos.

—————————————————————

W. Daniel Hillis y Kevin Kelly

W.DANIEL HILLIS

Afirma que si bien algo nos está volviendo estúpidos no es Google: más bien Google sería un chaleco salvavidas que nos permite quedarnos en la superficie de un torrente (de información, claro está) que crece sin parar. Y el desborde de información no es consecuencia de los avances de la tecnología de las comunicaciones ni del poder de los medios, ni lo genera nuestra reciente debilidad por mordisquear la información. Estas son tendencias y no la causa. Solo síntomas del predicamento en el que nos hallamos. Nuestra insaciable demanda de información es la que lo produce. Nos quejamos de la sobrecarga pero tomamos un servicio de banda mas ancha, un teléfono que nos permita recibir e-mails, tarifa plana para nuestras líneas y cable premium. En medio de la inundación abrimos todos los grifos (caños / canillas). La tecnología ha roto nuestro aislamiento y no solamente el mundo se ha complicado sino que más de él se ha vuelto relevante. Tenemos además más necesidad de información porque cada vez hay más decisiones en nuestras manos (o decisiones por las que tendremos que votar) que antes las tomaba otro por nosotros. Por ejemplo el rey. Nuestro entorno ha crecido de tal manera que ahora pertenecemos a la aldea global (término de por sí ya muy viejo pues lo acuñó McLuhan en 1962) con mentes diseñadas para manejarse en un trozo de sabana con un grupo íntimo de amigos. Forzados a tener más información sacrificamos la profundidad. Descremamos, compendiamos, nos saltamos la letra menuda y frecuentemente se nos escapan puntos importantes.

Hillis asume que encontraremos una manera de salir de esta situción, probablemente a través de nuevas tecnologías o edificando nuevas sociedades más afines con las limitaciones.

KEVIN KELLY

K. Kelly, simplifica mucho la cosa (Por cierto le debo a su blog, The Technium, la estupenda foto de la máquina de escribir de mi post anterior —una Malling-Hansen Writing Ball— que usó Nietzsche y que puede verse aquí en funcionamiento).

En primer lugar dice que Carr admite ser un pesimista crónico y que ha hecho tan buen trabajo citando a pesimistas crónicos antiguos que estaban equivocados, que es difícil tomárselo en serio. Se pregunta después si fue el uso de la máquina lo que cambió el estilo de la prosa Nietzsche o si simplemente fue que estaba muy enfermo y muriéndose y el océano de textos cortos de la web se debe a que somos incapaces de prestarle atención a los artículos largos o si se trata de que antes era poco lucrativo producir en pequeñas cantidades  ahora no. Y al recordar que Carr describe al inicio de su texto la manera tan inteligente como usa Google si no será más bien que cuando nos salimos de Google nos volvemos mas tontos y mas bien al usar Google mejoramos nuestra inteligencia.

Ante la duda decide que prefiere perder los, digamos, 20 puntos que pierde su IQ (cociente intelectual)  a cambio de los 40 que gana al utilizarlo.

Larry Sanger y George Dyson

LARRY SANGER

También va al grano. Acepta que la tendencia a picotear información es cierta y nos está llevando a lo que llama con gran humor una indigestión epistémica(1) y que es cierto que deberíamos leer más libros incluyendo a los clásicos. Pero piensa que Carr se equivoca al presentar el problema como uno tecno-social colectivo, fuera de nuestro control por el que hay que culpar a los programadores y que debe ser tratado por los psicólogos sociales más que por los filósofos y los humanistas.

Sanger cree que hay un solo culpable de esta situación: uno mismo. Si algunos de nosotros no podemos leer un libro completo no es por culpa de Google ni por la vasta información en Internet. Afirmarlo sería aceptar una cierta dosis de determinismo que, a fin de cuentas negaría aquello que nos hace más humanos y que casi indiscutiblemente nos otorga nuestra dignidad: nuestra habilidad para pensar sobre las cosas de punta a cabo, con intensidad y de manera que pueda llevarnos a cambiar nuestras mentes en forma profunda.

Es ridículo quejarse de algo que cada cual maneja o puede manejar y un signo de falta de la voluntad o de indisciplina pero no de ser víctima de nada o nadie.

GEORGE DYSON

Al principio se pone dramático al preguntarse si el precio a pagar por máquinas que piensan no será el de personas que no piensen y saca un ejemplo de J. B. S. Haldane que, en 1928 dijo: “Los antepasados de las ostras y las lapas tenían cabeza. Las serpientes perdieron sus miembros y los avestruces y los pingüinos, su vuelo. El hombre podría de igual forma perder su inteligencia.”  Pero corrige y dice que sin duda perderemos algunos de nuestras atesoradas formas de pensar, pero las reemplazaremos por algo nuevo. Porque si bien la generación actual no ha tenido inmunidad infantil contra la estupidez asentada en la red, las siguientes si la tendrán. Y declara que le preocupa más que la gente crezca sin saber atar un nudo bolina (nudo marino) y afilar un cuchillo de caza o reconstruir un carburador que la gente que no lee libros (¿habrá que ganarse el sustento cazando y pescando?).

Termina diciendo que el iPod y el MP3 causaron la declinación del album y el ascenso de la lista de canciones. Pero que más gente está escuchando más música. Y que eso es muy bueno.

Jaron Lanier y Douglas Rushkoff

JARON LANIER

Lo que nos está haciendo estúpidos es pretender o fingir que el cambio tecnológico es un proceso autónomo que continuará en la dirección que escoja independientemente de nosotros.

Es cierto que alguna tecnología en particular puede convertirnos en estúpidos. Casinos, dive bars, los tabloides sobre famosos, el crack… Y ciertamente hay tecnologías digitales que no extraen los mejores aspectos de la naturaleza humana. Los comentarios anónimos, por ejemplo. Lo que hace peor a la tecnología es el concepto de que solo hay un eje para escoger que va de pro a anti. Los diseñadores de experiencias digitales debe alegrarse de que alguien formule una crítica bien articulada, porque es un paso crucial en hacer mejores cosas digitales.

DOUGLAS RUSHKOFF

Afirma que en 1995 sostuvo que miramos a los niños instruidos en el uso de la red de manera equivocada, y que éramos como peces lamentando que los chicos hayan evolucionado, les hayan salido piernas y caminen en la tierra y que en ese proceso hayan perdido la capacidad de respirar bajo el agua, mientras que ahora es menos optimista particularmente porque aún ignoramos los sesgos de los medios cuando nos movemos de un sistema al otro. No es tanto una cuestión de qué es bueno y qué es malo sino de cuan conscientes estamos del poder de cada medio y cuan conscientemente nos movemos entre el uno y el otro.

El problema de Internet, dice, es que nos empuja a cortar en tajadas delgadas la información o pasar rozando sobre ella en vez de ahondar más profundamente y reflexionar. Es como una lectura de The New Yorker que nos da  suficiente información para proporcionarlos los trocitos de ella que necesitamos para discutir un tema en un cóctel: la web proporciona grandes dosis de eso.

La fortaleza de la web está, sin embargo en proporcionar sus textos en un contexto más coloquial y abierto a la colaboración. Mientras que el libro está más sesgado hacia la persona (con mucho tiempo disponible) sentada en su estudio y leyendo casi siempre en solitario, la red abre la posibilidad de explorar de manera compartida. Como esta por ejemplo.

Por lo tanto la clave, según Rushkoff, está en entender los sesgos de cada medio (como diría McLuhan). No debemos ver nuestro movimiento entre un medio dominante y otro menos dominante como un beneficio o una pérdida sino como un cambio de panorama que puede ser explotado positivamente si tomamos el tiempo y la energía para examinar las características y oportunidades del nuevo terreno.

Nicholas Carr y Clay Shirky

Una escaramuza importante, en torno al ensayo, se produjo entre Nicholas Carr y Clay Shirky un personaje de primer orden en el mundo intelectual conectado con Internet, del que hemos hablado antes y del que hablaremos más en este blog. Shirky, un optimista que ha medido la participación activa, solidaria y gratuita de la gente en proyectos como Wikipedia, responde al escepticismo de Carr con argumentos que Carr rebatirá y Shirky volverá a contestar. El debate se llevó a cabo en un Forum de la Enciclopedia Británica (Your Brain Online: Forum) que se desarrolló en torno al artículo de Carr.

A pesar de presentar muchos argumentos, la posición de Shirky se centra en que lo que se está jugando es el concepto de cultura y se monta sobre el ejemplo de Carr sobre “La guerra y la paz” en su ensayo (1) para decir que realmente que la gente no lea “La guerra y la paz” no es culpa de la red, es simplemente demasiado largo y no tan interesante. Que el público ha decidido que la sagrada obra de Tolstoy no merece el tiempo que toma leerlo. Y que el proceso empezó mucho antes de Internet, porque lo que desplazó muchísimo la lectura de libros fue la televisión. Pero que ahora, la gente ha vuelto a leer (y coincide con Shirky en que la gente lee más que en los 70 y 80 cuando reinaba la TV) pero que el retorno no ha sido hacia los iconos literarios del pasado. Y concluye el pensamiento diciendo que el problema, como lo ve Carr es que ya no solamente la gente no lee “La guerra y la paz”, sino que ha dejado de hacer una genuflexión frente a la idea de leer “La guerra y la paz”. Finalmente lo tilda de ludista y de querer volver el reloj atrás.

En su respuesta Shirky reitera que su problema no es con el tiempo que quita la red sino que nuestros cerebros está posiblemente siendo recableados de una manera distinta a la del pensamiento “concentrado, linear, relajado, reflexivo y profundo” que él ve como central en la identidad humana y en la cultura. Lo acusa de filisteísmo y de imaginar que seremos capaces recuperar nuestra capacidad de concentración con lo que además de querer volver atrás el reloj, él también se convierte en un practicante de la tecno-utopía. Esto lo negará posteriormente Shirky diciendo que lo que ayudaba enormemente al poder de concentración, era que el entorno estaba prácticamente vacío,  situación imposible de recrear. Y que quizás un medio que expande tan radicalmente la posibilidad de compartir información terminará siendo malo para la humanidad… pero que será la primera vez desde la invención del alfabeto fenicio.

——————————–

(1)epistémico, ca.

1. adj. Perteneciente o relativo a la episteme.

episteme.

1. f. En la filosofía platónica, el saber construido metodológicamente en oposición a las opiniones individuales.

2. f. Conocimiento exacto.

3. f. Conjunto de conocimientos que condicionan las formas de entender e interpretar el mundo en determinadas épocas.

Real Academia Española © Todos los derechos reservados

(2) “Ya no puedo volver a leer La guerra y la paz —admitió—. He perdido la capacidad de hacerlo. Me resulta difícil absorber incluso un blog de más de tres o cuatro párrafos. Lo leo por encima.” (en declaración de Friedman, patólogo de la facultad de la Escuela de Medicina de la Universidad de Michigan)

(3) philistinism (filisteísmo)

materialismo, preocupación por las cosas materiales; creer que el confort físico es el de más alto valor, deseo por la riqueza y los bienes materiales con poco interés en los asuntos morales o espirituales. Una persona a la que guía el materialismo y usualmente desdeña los valores intelectuales o artísiticos; alguien no informado en un área determinada del conocimiento

Si desea suscribirse gratuitamente a Mercaderes Asociados pulse el botón

think you want to try using wikis in your group or company but don’t know where to begin? here are some tips that will help you get started

1. Remember that wiki is a culture shift – from having to convene personally to using emails to having instant messaging, it was never easy to convince everyone to use them. Until now some people prefer to talk face to face rather than online. What you need to keep in mind is that with the right explanation and a little coercion you’ll get to have them change ways. Tell them: what wiki is all about and its importance, how do to use it and what the should do as users — responsibility to add content. Aside from the new social media aspect, you are also now responsible to keep them active, to speak their minds and to contribute. Wikis won’t work without its contributors so remember to embibe in their hearts and minds the importance of adding content
2. So start easy – start with an easy task rather than shocking them with a very big wiki project (making them end up hating it since they were caught off guard). A group discussion would be a good first step asking them to edit and add content slowly but surely they’ll get the hang of using it making it easier for everyone
3. Seed the wiki – there’s always something daunting with a blank page. You’re free to do anything but a lot of room for mistakes. Give your wiki a good foundation and your users a little bit ease in posting by put some content and structure to follow.
4. Capture feedback – add a page specially for giving out feedbacks and new ideas. This would be helpful in having a record of what has transpired during the whole process
5. Praise or reward – it gives them to boost to continue what their doing and the inspiration to do more. it makes the contributors feel valued and their post recognized.

sounds hard?? i don’t think so just always remember that wikis are a collaborative work — everyone has a voice that they should use. Each of us can contribute so let’s make use of it the more the merrier!

I enjoy listening to people postulate what will be the next big thing. These conversations make me feel like I’m in that scene from The Graduate where Mr. McGuire tells Benjamin Braddock he has just one word to say to him: “plastics.”

So what’s the word of today that’s got a great future?

Social media comes to mind (yeah, I know, that’s two words). But it’s really one of many trends that have broad implications for business and communications.

Here are three more to pay attention to:

Real-time web

This is so new there’s no agreement on a proper definition. It concerns the creation, search and conveyance of information in real time to enable instant interaction. Twitter is an example of the real-time web; which similar to instant messaging transmits back and forth almost asynchronously, only with Twitter the stream is made public.

Real-time web impacts the search industry. All major search engines employ indexing and there’s some lag time till information gets recorded and ranked. Meanwhile, Twitter offers real-time search. Analytics firms are venturing into the real-time realm to deliver instantaneous monitoring and metrics.

Crowdsourcing

A type of distributed collaboration that calls upon the collective wisdom of crowds. A company takes something that’s normally performed in-house, or by a third-party provider, and instead asks the public to do it.

Problems are announced in the form of an open call. Participants often create online communities, or crowds, to work on potential solutions. What’s interesting  is that those who successfully offer input need not be experts — they just need an idea that works. Non-technical individuals can solve computer engineering problems and an absolute amateur may have the best concept for your next product innovation.

Crowdsourcing can be cost efficient: Fees may or may not be paid for services rendered — prizes and recognition could be the only compensation — and even if they are, they’re usually well below the expense required to do the same thing in-house. Businesses also benefit by receiving ideas from many sources rather than from just within the organization. Jeff Howe is credited with coining the term for a 2006 article in Wired.

Latent semantic indexing

I wrote a post about latent semantic indexing in early August. The techy terminology relates to how search engines index and subsequently rank web pages.

LSI is important to understand for search engine optimization purposes.

Keywords are currently king with SEO, but they may need to share the throne with LSI, which is a way of scanning a page that takes into account both keywords and related terms.  For example, a web page about lighting fixtures might also logically include the words lamp, chandelier, dimmer, fluorescent and bulb.

The idea is for the search engine to take a holistic view of content and analyze it in a way that reflects real human thought rather than simply zero in how many times a particular keyword appears. One aim of LSI is to reduce faulty results that occur when searches are conducted for words with multiple meanings.

While search engine companies keep their special sauce (algorithms) close to the vest, word is that Microsoft’s Bing heavily relies on LSI.

For those who create web content, the takeaway here is that besides prominently featuring pertinent keywords, a web page must also include alternative and related terminology. Beyond creative writing skills a thesaurus comes in handy here.

- Deni Kasrel

What do YOU think of these fast growing trends that we need to pay attention to? What’s missing? Comments welcome.

Related posts:

Improve SEO Content Strategy By Thinking Beyond Keywords

This will be a elaboration from my previous post about how BestBuy is effectively expanding their online identity through Andrew McAfee’s SLATES (Search, Link, Authoring, Tags, Extensions and Signals), and Wkinomics business model (Peering, Being Open, Sharing and Acting Global). It will highlight the core web 2.0 patterns that was highlighted in O’Reilly Radar Report titled Web 2.0 Principles and Best Practices and reference by Dion Hinchcliffe’s introduction.

Here are the 8 Core Patterns for web 2.0

• Harnessing Collective Intelligence: Sometimes described as the core pattern of Web 2.0, this describes architectures of participation that embraces the effective use of network effects and feedback loops to create systems that get better the more that people use them
• Data is the Next “Intel Inside”: A phrase that captures the fact that information has become as important, or more important, than software, which has become relentlessly commoditized.
• Innovation in Assembly: The Web has become a massive source of small pieces of data and services, loosely joined, increasing the recombinant possibilities and unintended uses of systems and information.
• Rich User Experiences: The Web page has evolved to become far more than HTML markup and now embodies full software experiences that enable interaction and immersion in innovative new ways.
• Software Above the Level of a Single Device: Software like the horizontally federated blogosphere (hundreds of blog platforms and aggregators) or the vertically integrated iTunes (server farm + online store + iTunes client + iPods) are changing our software landscape.
• Perpetual Beta: Software releases are disappearing and continuous change is becoming the norm.
• Leveraging the Long Tail: The mass servicing of micromarkets cost effectively via the Web is one of the primary “killer business models” made possible by the Internet in its present form.
• Lightweight Software/Business Models and Cost Effective Scalability: Everything from Amazon’s S3, to RSS, to Ruby on Rails are changing the economics of online software development fundamentally, providing new players powerful new weapons against established players and even entire industries.

Here is how I think that BestBuy has followed these core patterns

• Harnessing Collective Intelligence: This can be seen by the use of corporate wikis, that managers and staff use to spread information about latest products, updates made to the stores, solutions to possible problems and error made through product descriptions. As it is an opened platform for all who work there, it is able to grow into a very reliable source of information. BestBuy is using ideaX project is very similar to the one created by a group of QUT students called DearQUT. IdeaX is a way that people submit suggestions to improve BestBuy and other vote on ideas they like and agree with.
• Data is the Next “Intel Inside”: Same with the first core pattern, the implementation of a forum for customers to be a part of buildings a keystone to not only offering the physical device but additional support to all those who use the forum. Information is also broadcasted through their various social networking account on twitter and facebook. This can also been see on the homepage where registered users are able to review products that they have purchased. This provides a great service to other looking at purchasing that product and adds value to the overall experience.
• Innovation in Assembly: BestBuy uses their BestBuy Connect page as their main collaboration of all their social networking services, and through RSS users are able to follow any new updates.
• Rich User Experiences: The BestBuy homepage provides a rich experience for new and existing customers, with an easy to navigate site, customer reviews and extensive product search. With the online store it has provided a clean interface to those who visit the site.
• Software Above the Level of a Single Device: Best buy has implemented a mobile version of the website to make it easier for people viewing the site on a mobile device like a smartphone, or internet enabled device.
• Perpetual Beta: The use of corporate wiki’s, customer forums and social networking services, it can be said that the transition between old strategies for content distribution and information sharing will be  phased out. And new services like this will be constantly revolving and growing.
• Leveraging the Long Tail: What BestBuy is able to do with the customer reviews is that they are able to offer a complete buying experience. Where if you were not sure on whether you want to purchase this item, you have the option at reading both user reviews and reviews from cnet.com, offering an end to end solution to purchasing items.
  
• Lightweight Software/Business Models and Cost Effective Scalability: Are using technologies like RSS and various Web 2.0 services to leap beyond their competitors. As many of these servers are run run by BestBuy it has little effect on the infrastructure costs for advertising and promotions that would normally be associated with it.

~matt