Tuesday, February 02, 2010

Farewell Blogger

Blogger announced tonight via email the end of their support of FTP. I started this blog way back in August 2006 and have been happily FTP'ing to this domain a fairly constant stream of drivel ever since. From 26th March I won't be able to do this any more.

Now, Blogger are offering me free hosting on a custom domain. I suppose I could redirect to that but, and here's the rub, I have so much content, particularly images, that are hosted on my domain already with full paths in the posts that I fear an attempt at migration could be, erm, long, laborious and perhaps ultimately unsuccessful. Maybe I'll see if their migration tool helps with this, maybe not.

This is a bit disappointing really. Although there is much not to admire about this blog, I was happy enough with it not to tinker too much and I had chunks of custom stuff ( like the random header images ) and category support. So, I'd stayed loyal to Blogger despite beseechings suggesting I do otherwise.

Now Blogger have forced me to do what I should have done a while back and migrate the whole thing to WordPress. This won't be entirely pain free (although I've done one Blogger to WordPress migration and it went pretty well ) but it's not something I have much time to do right now. I'm hoping all my absolute paths to pre-hosted content will work well for me. So, for a while, I guess there will be a bog-standard WordPress theme here soon until I get some time to tinker.

I'm sure the good people of Blogger won't cry to lose me and I appear to be in a bit of a minority so perhaps it makes some sense that they can't be bothered with me any more. I should thank them really, I think the WordPress version will ultimately be better.

I may have a go at punting another of my Blogger blogs across to a custom domain just to see what happens...

Labels:

2 comments

Sunday, January 31, 2010

iPad : Function From Design Desire

I've been watching all the iPad chat with only a passing interest. I've only recently got an iMac (which I love) but I don't have an iPod/iPhone or any other Apple kit. I can, however, see why people like them so much.

I'm not going to add much to the glut of ongoing iPad debate other than to make one observation.

When I first watched the iPad videos I found it hard to see how/when I would use it. I've got a lovely wee Linux Eee PC which does everything I need on the move (and quite a few things the iPad doesn't). The obvious occurred to me that most of the Apple techno-bling never has won the battle on function. Certainly, I've avoided the iPhone up to now because there were key things it didn't do. And yet, massive popularity and the must have tag results.

So, when you consider the iPad, you can argue all day long about what it does and doesn't do but that doesn't matter. What Apple seem always to be able to pull off is to make people want their technology. I want an iPad and I have no need for it and I'm not really sure what I'd use it for.

There is undoubtedly something a bit primal at the heart of this. Whether it is a basic need to 'keep up' or to reinforce self-worth through possessions the desire alone is enough.

All Apple do is create the desire through glorious design and have a platform open enough for the useful killer app type stuff to come along later. If you create enough desire, enough people are interest in building the apps on the device. It's all a little back to front, normally you shell out on high price tech because what it will do for you right away. Seems to me that people will buy the iPad just because they want it and knowing that they will find a use for it later.

Contrast with the desirable tech of my youth. When you were deciding whether or not you wanted a BBC Micro, Commodore 64 or a ZX Spectrum, you didn't care all the much how it looked or what it could do, you were primarily interested in the software/games that ran on it.

There have been tablets before but they have never taken off because they weren't sexy enough so not enough were sold so there wasn't enough app investment to make them any kind of game changer. The iPad will sell plenty for being sexy alone and the rest will just happen.

Labels:

0 comments

Saturday, January 23, 2010

Why do we like Social Networking?


I watched Kevin McCloud's excellent two-part documentary of his stay in the Mumbai slum of Dharavi last week. I'm a huge fan of Mumbai but this opened my eyes even further to parts fo the city I hadn't seen. Kevin was at his honest and frank best and reflected the balance of the good and bad of Dharavi very well.

Clearly, in many ways, life in Dharavi can be seen as a squalid mess and Kevin didn't shirk from any of this. But one aspect that was also covered was the inherent happiness of the people, fuelled by the closeness and extent of the community around them. Although Kevin quite rightly pointed out that community isn't enough when you living in an open sewer, it was clear that was something there to be learnt in relation to the way we live, our city design and the architecture of dwellings.

Yesterday I did a presentation on Social Media at a technology workshop in town. As the excellent discussion progressed, my thoughts turned back to Kevin's experiences in Dharavi.

So, the question is, what makes social networking so popular? Obviously, the most popular things are those which satisfy a fundamental need. If we draw a contrasting parallel between our modern life and the close community of Dharavi, we see what we miss, at a fundamentally human level, is the day to day interactions with the humans around us. We sit in houses, flats, cars, offices, largely cut off. When we are in public we are still secluded, hiding in the fog our of business, glumness, frustration.

What social networking gives us is a way to feel connected, to feel part of something, to feel we are close to people. Perhaps even to belong. The day to day, minute to minute, face to face interactions of the people of Dharavi are replaced my tweets, pokes and 'I likes'.

So, could it be that the popularity of social networking is, at least in part, a product of a failure of urban planning and modern life that has has us feeling lonely and disconnected?

As Kevin also concludes, in the documentary, you wouldn't swap the comforts of modern life to have a community spirit like Dharavi, but there is clearly something we can draw on to improve the way we live.

Labels:

2 comments

Tuesday, December 15, 2009

Updated Social Media Map


While preparing a presentation on Social Media last night, I thought I should update my Social Media Map to see what, if anything, had changed from the original version from the start of the year.

Surprisingly, it hasn't changed all that much. There are a few additions but nothing that has dropped off. I don't use blip.fm all that much these days and Foursquare has only just arrived. I think TwitterFeed also got the bullet for being unreliable so I've recently switched to FeedBurner.

Notable absences are any connections to LinkedIn, which I don't feel is right for me and Posterous which I like the look of but don't feel the need for.

I should maybe add some info on Twitter clients but it's already looking a bit cluttered. Mostly I use Echofon in Firefox, PockeTwit on the phone and occasionally TweetDeck.

Labels:

0 comments

Friday, December 04, 2009

Hoarding Versus Storage - A Conundrum


I've always been a hoarder. Obviously, I refer to this particular prediliction as collector but, the fact remains, chucking stuff out is not in my make up. Aside for the ubiquitous big box of wires, I still have the postcard collection of my youth, all my coins, books I've read and won't read again, books I've never read and, crucially, all my music.

I started buying vinyl at the end of the 70's and did so constantly until I started buying CD's around 1991. I have hundreds of albums and just as many, probably more, CD's. My vinyl has been lugged with me between houses/cities and very rarely leaves the increasingly battered storage boxes. I still have a turntable (2 in fact) but they're far from a state that I can easily set them up. So, the vinyl provides a rather perfect embodiment of a literal dead weight.


but ain't it lovely?

A couple of years ago, I put myself through the modern day hell of ripping all my CD's. It took the best of part of 2 weeks but I got there. So, I now have a lovely wee NAS sitting under the TV and allows me to stream everything I own from anywhere in the house ( and two other copies on external drives, I'm doing down all that again ).

So, let's recap:
  1. I have many, many boxes of vinyl I never play.
  2. I have many, many boxes of CD's I never (physically) play in the house.
  3. 100% of the time in the car, I play ripped music on an MP3 player.
  4. 90% of the time in the house I listen to Spotify rather than my own ripped music.
None of this was an issue when all these boxes were just strenuously lugged up into the attic. But, since a man passing himself off as a builder came and took all my money, that is now where I sleep. The vinyl and CD's are now spread about between the house and the garage.

And here is the conundrum. Do I keep them? Why do I need them?

The answer for the vinyl is fairly easy. I'm keeping it for HUGELY sentimental reasons. I tried ripping it with a USB turntable and got far too bored. So, for the moment, the vinyl is going nowhere.

But the CD's? I could bin them, not that attached but, of course, the crucial thing is that, they would cost a lot to replace and the insurance company won't go for "there was £x000 of music on that NAS that blew up until a hail of cat pee". So, binning the CD's would be little previous.

So, I've decided I'm going to keep the CD's and throw out the boxes ( an idea I knicked from @stuartamdouglas ). I've ordered some CD wallets and transfer will start when they arrive. I may even do the same with DVD's.

If you're looking for lots of CD boxes, I'm yer man.

I suspect there will be some I'll be too squeamish to bin. We'll see. It'll be interesting.

It does open up a lot of thoughts on the nature of ownership of digital media. Clearly, the MP3 world has led to a move away from the need for a physical thing to have. And, with more and more cloud based music storage solutions appearing, it won't be long before you don't really ever have a file either. You'll just buy the right to be able to listen to something stored in the cloud (or more likely you'll just 'own' a pointer to the file in the cloud, which is what Amazon should do if they'd bother to read my blog). This is already true with Spotify which is why I'm listening to music on Spotify now as I type. Truth is, I'd pay for Spotify, which is why they probably should make me pay before they go bust!

Labels: ,

2 comments

Wednesday, August 12, 2009

If You Build It...


They might come? The world of Internet traffic generation has changed a lot since the days when I were thin. Used to be that you were worried about SEO, meta-tags blah-di-blah-di-page-rank-bobbinstm and, while much of this is still relevant to some degree, there are many more fun ways than the painful wait for your site to appear on page 10 of Google.

Yesterday, I 'launched' The Photo Project, a charity photo book web site. I won't go on about it here (check the site to find out more) but suffice to say, in the old order of web traffic generation, I wouldn't fare very well against all the other photography related site searches that go on. And yet, on the very first day, there was a creditable 421 hits from 181 unique users.

Contrast this with my previous web dabblings. When I first put the LazyWebTools page refresher live it took a while to pick up search traffic and it wasn't until that it got a few forums mentions that it took off. Several years on it still maintains a very loyal following in the 100's of hits a day region.

Another website I did fared less well. I thought CheckMyRequest was the sort of daft thing that would be picked up virally eventually. It never did and I never really tried much (daft as it was).

The simple fact is that in one day, ThePhotoProject outshone all the traffic to CheckMyRequest gets in months. (ignoring the fact the CheckMyRequest is inane and ThePhotoProject has slightly more substance).

How? Twitter.

ThePhotoProject has a Twitter account (@thephotoproject) so I tweet that the site is live. I then retweet this from my account to my ~300 followers and hope to get retweeted from there. If you get lucky (or know some lovely people*) you can get retweeted by people with very big networks and the word can spread very quickly. Even with a relatively small number of retweets there were a decent number of hits, harking back to previous blathering on scale-free networks...

This is in no way a great surprise to anyone. There are many great proponents of this art and it is one that will become increasingly important the more we rely on the "NOW!" and don't want the six week wait and painful SEO struggle.

The challenge now will be to maintain the same level of interest. The re-tweet game is ideal for an initial splurge but any more than that and it becomes inane spamming and has a negative effect.

So, I'd better keep it interesting...

* a big thankyou to those lovely people, @the_emecks, @Sheamus, @applemacbookpro, @AmyVernon, @davefitch, @jerryjamesstone, @ash_matadeen, @gamebittk @chrisnixon @alpower for the retweetage...

Labels:

0 comments

Wednesday, August 05, 2009

A Quiet Night On Twitter


An interesting night was had on Twitter last night.

@canongatebooks and @davesimps0n organised a "world's first" Twitter based interview with former band members of The Fall to promote Dave's book The Fallen. It started slowly but got into something of a swing. The idea was to use the hashtag #TheFallen to control the ebb and flow of questions. Great idea and should have been fairly simple. Unfortunately, it was somewhat let down by Twitter (and probably more specifically Twitter Search) as many of the tagged Tweets seemed not to appear (although I did see all of mine in the search).

I did discover, however, that you should take Hex Enduction Hour to a desert island as the vinyl was very thick and would therefore make a good paddle.

It's a shame when something new like this is let down by some pretty basic failings. I hope people aren't put off from trying this kind of thing again. Praise goes to Dave and Canongate Books for having go.

One other aspect that this attempt showed was that it is difficult for people to maintain focus on including the hashtag with the ebb and flow of replies and retweets. I suspect there is a feature in there somewhere for a Twitter client to allow the user to 'lock' themselves into a conversation and automatically add the necessary hashtag. This would help keep all the conversation visible. At the very least, when replying to a tweet that contains a hashtag automatically adding the tag in the reply would help a lot.

Interestingly, during the interview another mini-Twitter event broke out with @csteinle tweeting live from a siege incident in Edinburgh using hashtag #DalrySiege.

So, there I was, watching an interview with The Fall and a live siege from a couple of miles away. All on the same platform. Shows how diverse a vehicle Twitter can be. But evidence suggests it still needs to work a little better.

Labels:

0 comments

Tuesday, August 04, 2009

HTC Touch HD - A Slight Annoyance


Ok, so you're all gonna say, "should have got an iPhone". Maybe so, but I couldn't be arsed changing provider and, for the most part, my HTC Touch HD is a very capable phone.

It does everything I need. I'm used to Windows Mobile so the messaging, emailing is good, web browsing is really nice and the camera is great. OK, so I can't download a spirit level app, but hey, you can't have everything.

I have one fairly major gripe about it though. It relates to the way the TouchFLOTM 3D has been integrated with Windows Mobile.

My desk at work suffers from some pretty poor signal. It's not a huge issue but it drops out on occasion. The HTC Touch HD TouchFLO interface has a rather nice SMS overlay over the standard Windows Mobile messaging. You can flick through the messages on the touch screen with a pleasing animation.

So, a message arrives and appears in the TouchFLO interface. You click reply, compose send. You return to the TouchFLO interface. Job done. Nay not so. The problem is, if your signal has dropped out and the message doesn't get sent you are in trouble.

Why? Well, Windows Mobile knows it hasn't sent the message. It even pops up a very informative "Text message cannot be sent" modal dialogue. Unfortunately, this is under the TouchFLO interface so you don't see it. It gets worse. Because the error is a modal dialogue, it is waiting for you to click OK and therefore you don't get notified of the arrival of any more messages until you click through the TouchFLO interface and clear the dialogue.

This is some pretty dumbass design.

So, I've had a few instances of "did you get my text?". "No, oh hang on..."

I'm aware of it now so it doesn't catch me out as often but in the heat of battle I still click send and forget to check.

If you have an HTC Touch HD, beware...

Labels:

3 comments

Thursday, June 11, 2009

More Content Vicar?


Thirst for content can, from time to time, expose a lot of bland nonsense. There are sites/content authors that mistake lists of obvious blurb for content. We all know who they are, I don't need to name and shame (the list would be too long). A large part of the reason for this is the democracy of access. Many sites make it very easy for people to become content authors, which is a good thing. Except when the content purports to solve an issue but instead, to quote Mr. Cleese, is 'Specialist subject - the bleeding obvious'.

They look like they might be trying to help you do something but instead barely scrape the surface of the issue. You go looking for help with something and you end up trawling through pages and pages of the same banal crap and platitudes.


Photo credit: me from morguefile.com
Image added with new Crop and Post on MorgueFile.

It seems that, rather having any genuine insight into a problem or issue, many people settle for skipping over the top of a problem by regurgitating self-evident tripe.* It doesn't help that there appears to be an army of uber-idiots who go about commenting on these lists/articles saying "hey - that's great". Stop it. You're just encouraging them.

As an over-the-top example of what I mean (and to stop ManicMorff of accusing me of too many 'serious' blog posts), here's my Web 2.0 style, 'look at me I'm a content provider'...

Top Ten Tips for Learning to Drive
  1. Buy a car, you'll need this. Recommend getting one with four wheels.
  2. Petrol is important, try to get a good price, look online for cheap garages near you.
  3. Sitting nearer the windscreen may help you see more of what is going on but it will make pushing the pedals harder so don't do it.
  4. If you see the Google StreetView car follow it to make sure you get snapped but don't crash or you'll end up on the @gsightseeing website. Alternatively crash into the StreetView car as part of your holistic marketing plan.
  5. Make sure you find the biting point of the clutch before pulling away. There is no way I can communicate what this means to you through text but I'm going to tell you anyway.
  6. If you're going to hit a pedestrian, try not to hit a pedestrian.**
  7. Get a driving instructor who has the same first language as you. Translation adds to thinking time which will make it difficult when also using your iPhone.
  8. Don't drive with a sheep or any other livestock in the back seat.
  9. Nothing the A-Team ever did to a van is appropriate to most road going cars.
  10. And finally... the smell of lavender is calming, try to drive by fields of lavender on your route.
( I love this, "Perhaps the first necessary thing to do when trying to learn to drive stick [shift] is to simply sit in your car." & "Remember to use the right gear!" Genius.)

I promise you, you could publish Viz Top Tips as a set of serious articles and some Muppet*** in the US would say "wow, that's great, you have a unique way of looking at the world".

So, in an attempt to drive more pointless traffic to my blog...

Top 10 tips for getting more Web Traffic
  1. Submit your site to search engines.
  2. etc...
You get my point...

I've nothing against people having their day in the sun and having some articles on the web****. The big issue that it all gets in the way of genuinely useful content when searching for answers. A lot of these big content sites have, not surprisingly, high page ranks so you invariably you get them first and have to trawl through the nonsense before you finally alight on something useful. With the amount of content being generated each day, it won't be long before the shit will drown the fan with no hope of a re-emergence. Unless we all learn to go straight to page 2 of the search results. Top tip, position 11 will soon be king!

* "Self Evident Tripe" is a great name for a band.
** © Vic and Bob
*** you MUST watch this... it's still great.
**** although a post on not using the Internet in relation to self-worth is looming

Labels:

1 comments

Stumbling Through Twitter


StumbleUpon has, for many years now, been my way of finding new, interesting stuff on the Web. The stats today show that I have 'Stumbled' over 25000 times. It solved the problem of getting stuff you might like 'pushed' to you and removed the need to go looking for anything specific.

StumbleUpon always said that the more you rated the more accurate the match of pages you were given would be to what you liked. I've never been entirely convinced of this, it seems that pages you get are very much within category, I've seen no signs of refinement.

Over recent months, I've noticed my source of new, interesting stuff has shifted from StumbleUpon to Twitter. A great number of people of Twitter share an even larger number of links.

The key difference with this way of getting new content is that, rather than the StumbleUpon category approach, people you follow can offer up pretty much anything. So, rather than getting 'pages you might like' you get 'pages that people like you like'. If you get the right followers, there can be a group of people who see the world like you offering you content. Therefore you can get off-category stuff that you still find interesting, simply because they think like you think.

This means that, once you refine who you are following accordingly, the quality of links you get via Twitter is higher than those delivered by StumbleUpon because they have already been filtered as 'interesting' by someone who you have decided know their eggs from their sulphurous smell.

A good example of this is @Sheamus, I started following him recently and he provides a good flow of stuff that I find interesting. There is a demographic match (of some sort) that makes this work. On the flip side, you will follow people that offer up stuff you don't like. But that is easy solved.

The other aspect of content pushing that Twitter does well is when content providers themselves have a Twitter account and feed their new articles out. If you're like me, you tend not to visit a large number of sites routinely, so it is very easy to miss lots of good stuff. Take a site like Smashing Magazine. They provide a large amount of quality design stuff which I'd miss if it was left to me to look. But, through their Twitter account @smashingmag, I get pushed their new stuff as and when it is published.

The only issue with this Twitter fed push content is keeping up with the volume. If you don't look right away, there is a chance that a lot of good stuff could drift away up the timeline.

So here's a service/feature idea for free. Have some way of storing links in Tweets for later use/viewing. Could be a service ( TwitLinkbank? ) or, perhaps better, a feature of a plug in like TwitterFox, it could store links in Tweets from a set of users in a Bookmarks folder so you can check them out easily later.

Labels:

1 comments

Wednesday, May 13, 2009

Twitter and the #fixreplies Issues


There has been a lot of Twitter-chat today about the change that was introduced by Twitter that stopped people seeing '@' replies from people who they weren't following.

There was a lot of moaning and groaning throughout the day and later news suggested that this was perhaps a scalability/performance issue.

Now, I spend a lot of my time dealing with exactly these issues so, thought I would burble a bit about it. Because I think I can understand the issue.

I can't be sure of Twitter storage and indexing structure so this is largely conjecture, but hopefully it gets close to explaining the issue.

For you to 'see' a tweet it has to be retrieved into your stream ( by whatever means, web, API, etc ). So, there is a big lookup. Tweets by your followers, tweets that mention you etc.

To find ALL the tweets that mention you, the search has to look in ALL streams. It would appear that there isn't any kind of indexing that can cope with this. The signs have been there for a while, particularly in the lag people were seeing in appearing in searches.

I have a very strong feeling that the weight of searching for @replies across all streams for everyone was just getting a bit too much. And the comments that "serious technical reasons why that setting had to go or be entirely rebuilt" are entirely expected because the amount of work that needs to get done to support this grows exponentially with growth of users numbers.

It will need an entirely new approach to indexing (and perhaps storage) to pull this off. Something much more akin to the Google model and map/reduce is likely, who knows.

Anyway, I feel their pain, tuning is such painful progress because it is running very hard to stay still, when all you want to do is add new features. Maybe they'll just turn it back on and get more cooling fans...

Labels:

0 comments

Tuesday, May 05, 2009

So You Want To Start A Company


So you want to start a company. Good for you. No, seriously, it will be good for you. Although there will inevitably be times when it will feel exactly the opposite. At the very beginning, the immediate problems are obvious "I need product, I need customers, I need an office, I need MONEY" and for the most part these are the things you do need and should doubtless set about tackling first. The difficulty is, that during these vital early stages, the pursuit of the necessary sometimes obscures the view of the less immediately so, leaving you exposed to accidents that doubtless lie in wait.

There is no magic formula, no panacea, nothing you can read or listen to that will give you all the answers. If there was, everyone would do it, would have done it, and the world of business would be a seething mass of overblown self-congratulation and champagne. But it isn't, it's a tough place where many, if not most, people fail, at least once. What follows is not exhaustive (and hopefully not exhausting) collection of topics that you might want to think about when getting on with the important day-to-day stuff, form filling, paying bills, picking your Porsche.

The most important thing to remember, there really is no need to fear, starting a company is good for you. You'll either succeed and go on to great success or you'll fail and will learn more than you can possibly imagine along the way.

You
Before we go any further, lets talk about the most important person in your business, you. You need to understand some basic facts about yourself: who you are; what your strengths and weaknesses are; how you react to pressure, people. The more you know about yourself, the better decisions you can make about yourself with respect to your business. At almost every stage of the development of your business, self-delusion will always be your potential worst enemy. And the stark truth of this is that at some point in life of your company, you may no longer fit the bill. Sure, you started it, you probably still own most of it, but that doesn't mean that you can grow at the same speed as it. What you did in years 1 and 2 might be next to useless in years 3 and 4. Knowing when and if you have to get out of the way is perhaps the single most important decision you will have to make. Maybe you are a business genius, you will take it to the end and exit in a flourish of glory. If so, fantastic. But as you walk along that golden path, always keep one eye on your own performance and ask yourself the hard questions, "Is the business doing the best it could with me in charge?", "Could someone else do this better?". Self-aware, not self-delusional. You have to decide what you are trying to achieve, the success for the business or personal glory? Remember, success for the business is your reward. Glory don't buy you jack.

Be careful with your ego too. Maybe you get some investment; have some money to play with. This shouldn't be seen as an opportunity to show off, offer jobs to your mates and lavish yourself with unnecessary flim-flam. The glory comes later, for now the money is about survival and progress.

Your Attitude
Tied in with your newly honed self-awareness, is your attitude and how it impacts your business. We are all very different. Some are gung-ho, some are over cautious, indecisive etc etc. Therefore, it's very easy to let emotion sneak into decision making and therefore it's very important to try and treat everything you do in a similar, rigorous manner to avoid your attitude getting in the way of doing the right thing.

Be positively negative. Expect the best but plan for the worst. Test any and all assumptions, test everything. Avoid sentences that start 'but surely' and look very closely at the implications on any that do. Don't get carried away, project for success/growth but have a set of "What if" plans that look at the how the world will look if it all goes a little wrong.

The other thing to be very wary of is fear. Fear is the one thing that will cloud your judgment above all other emotions. The times when you are likely to be most scared are the times when you need the clearest head. With fear comes weakness and indecision and whatever situation you are in, unless you manage the fear properly, people will recognise and exploit it. You're short on cash, you really need the sale. You can't let it show. No one will buy from a company if they seem on the edge. Walk tall, always.

Communication
All businesses are people businesses. It doesn't matter if you sit on your own in a locked room shipping widgets to Wisconsin, the degree to which your business will succeed will be in no small way be related to each and every interaction with the people in and around the business. So, you may now say "but I'm not very good with people does that mean I will be hindered in my progress?" There's no way to sugar coat this, yes it does. It doesn't mean you are bound to failure either. You see, depending on the situation, being a heartless cynic may be of more use to you than the warm, approachable side of your nature. The truth is, the most successful can usually do both and many more styles besides. You could make the accusation that it's all a bit of an act to match the situation and you wouldn't be far off. But before you get too near the Yellow Pages and the phone number for acting classes, at the very heart of all the questions of style and approach is one simple thing, communication. If you can communicate, however you get your message across, you're probably off to a good start. Unfortunately, this has to cover all types of communication be it verbal, written or, in some cases, non-verbal. In the course of the business you will meet people, talk to them, some you'll know, some you'll meet cold. You'll be on the phone, writing emails, business plans, endless other documents and all with the need to precisely communicate their meaning and leave the right impression.

The truth is, there's probably not that much you can do about any of this now. It's probably a little late to become a new person, to change how you communicate drastically. The vital thing is that you first understand the important role that your interaction with people has to play in the success of your business, even if that does mean employing someone to do your talking and writing for you.

Founding Fathers
OK, you've had an idea, it's a real winner, you just need to get it off the ground. But you can't do it alone. What do you do? You know people don't you? Some of them are really good friends, and they can do stuff, they'll help you out. In fact, you could just bung them some equity and they'll work for nothing, it's not like giving them equity will cost you anything and it's not as if you can afford to pay them now anyway. That's a great idea. Right?

Well, frankly, no, it isn't. There is an extremely good chance that, as your business grows, your friend will end up being as much use as something that steals a big chunk of your equity for no return. And, worse than that, the inevitable time will come when, for the sake of the business, you have to replace them. Then it gets really messy. There's a fight, lawyers are involved, you lose a good friend and most likely don't get any or all of your equity back. The very equity that you need to re-finance the business at a crucial time, so you dilute yourself, your business ends up getting owned by an accountant and they eventually remove you too for employing your friend in the first place.

Maybe that's all a little exaggerated but hopefully it makes the point. A seemingly sensible and harmless decision in the early days of the business can come back to haunt you.

All this is not to say that getting friends to help you is a bad thing but doing it on the right basis is vitally important. Making no long term promises is often wise and there are many other ways to handle the issue of reward, use share options not shares or accrue time worked for payment later. Of course, your friends may be exactly what your business needs now and in the future, in which case, they will probably understand the most appropriate basis for engaging with your company.

You only get one chance to found the company, pick the right people and always remember, friends now can easily become burdens later.

Family
You may not immediately see your family as a major consideration in your business. But life in a start-up company isn't like any other job and therefore the need for the understanding and support of your family is very important. A unsupportive family, whilst not making the business fail, will be a difficult distraction at a vital time.

Recruitment
You may stay on your own forever but very likely you'll be recruiting staff as your business grows. It cannot be over emphasised how important getting this right is, especially in the earliest stages of development. The simple fact is that most problems you will ever have with staff can be eliminated at the recruitment stage; if you get it right.

Get an agency or, more importantly, an agent. Don't worry too much about which company you use but only use one and decide which one using two criteria. How personal a service you can get from an individual you trust and how cheap you can make them. As a start-up, you don't necessarily look like a big prospect to a recruitment agency so you have to sell potential to them. One person today, could be ten tomorrow and a hundred next year. Whether you actually do it or not, almost make it look like there is a competition for your business at the early stage. Try to get the rate down and, when they have offered you their best deal possible, pick the agency you want to use and tell them you will only use them if they reduce their rate in return for exclusivity.

Understand what you are like as an employer, how you like people to be and make sure that you recruit for the culture you want to create. There is no point going for choir boys if you like to go skateboarding at lunch time. These are people you will spend a lot of time with and they need to want to work for your success. The more they understand and empathise with you, the more they will contribute to your success. In a similar vein, the work of retaining people successfully in your company starts before you have employed them. Even if you can get square pegs into round holes, they are more likely to fall out.

Networking
When starting a new company, most people often get networking wrong. There is nothing worse than a room full of small company MD's all desperately trying to sell to each other when none of them came to buy anything. Used well, networking is massively useful but there is only one thing to remember about networking; you reap what you sow. Going into it only hoping to receive will ultimately prove fruitless. Take some time to help people, even if there is no immediate obvious benefit to you, and eventually it will start to bring dividends. It is a much longer game, but certainly one worth playing and worth playing well which means remembering that what you get out of it is in proportion to what you put in.

Advisers
You will encounter many people along the way that want to give you advice. If you raise some money or start to get successful, this number will increase ten-fold. Most of this advice will be good but knowing who you can trust is the most important consideration, especially when the advice starts to conflict.

The first thing to look for is signs that those giving advice actually understand what your business is all about. Sentences that start "I remember when I" had better be in context to the discussion or you should start to be wary. There is an immense amount to be gained from war stories, examples and the sage words of people who have been there before, but you have to be sure that they are applying their thoughts to your situation and not just enjoying the sound of their own voice. Certainly, in the areas such as business strategy, the tendency for such advisers to steer you down their well trodden route is very strong. This doesn't mean that it is necessarily the best path for your business and you should be careful not to allow strategy to be guided into someone else's comfort zone, simply because they have misunderstood your business. In many ways, advisers who listen more than the speak are often best.

This can often be a problem if you raise venture capital. When you get the money it will usually come with a loss of some control and this often comes in the form of people introduced to you, appointed by, your investors. There is every chance that these are good people, after all why would anyone investing in you give you a bad person? But there is always a chance that there is an element of cronyism at work; the old boys network kicks in and you are offered a trusted pair of hands, known to the investors, friend of the investors, someone due a favour by the investors. At this stage you've just toiled for months, years to get the money so you are probably quite easily convinced of their fit to your company. But be strong and be wary. Be prepared to push back if this person isn't a good fit for you, however strong their CV appears to be. Always remember, this is about making a success of your business in the future, not about whatever success they may have had in the past.

Flexibility
There is always a fine line with flexibility. If people see you alter your vision too much, they'll accuse you of not having a clear strategy and accuse you of weakness and indecision. If you stick firmly to your beliefs, you will more than likely be perceived as too rigid, perhaps even delusional and you will be similarly criticised. In short, there is no right answer but you must be prepared to adjust strategy to maximise the chances of success of the company. Your original idea might be great, but on first contact with the market it doesn't go down to well, then get ready to flex. After all, you are trying to make a success of your business rather than be recognised as a insightful, yet flawed, visionary.

Equity
At the end of every company rainbow lies the pot of gold you get from selling the company, the magical exit. In the beginning you have 100% but, as people will never tire of telling you, 100% of nothing is nothing. It's all about achieving balance; trying to keep enough so that there is the reward you are after at the end, but using enough that you can make a success of the company and get to the gold.

This is not an easy balance to strike and it is sometimes that circumstances can take control of far more than you, but there are some basic considerations to always keep in mind.
You should only use equity to get things you absolutely need. This may seem obvious but, as we've already discussed, the temptation to give too much away in the beginning can be quite strong, especially when you are looking around for help. But with your equity being the only free thing you have to use to make progress, you need to preserve it when necessary but release it in the right amounts and the right time. Above all, don't be greedy. Jealously clinging to your equity in the thought that you are maximising your eventual payout can ultimately be self-defeating. Remember, 100% of... well you get the point.

There are two main uses for your equity: to get people or to get money. You will, at some stage, need some talent around you and, when cash is perhaps tight, equity can be a good way of drawing someone in. This is where you have to bring in some good judgment. You need to assess the potential impact the individual will have on your business but also what impact the levels of equity your are offering will have on them. There is no point bringing them in with a small percentage only to lose them later when they realise they are slogging their guts out simply to make you a millionaire and them a couple of weeks in the Maldives. On the flip side, giving away too much to someone who has not enough positive impact will cripple your ability to correct the situation later. It's a complex, yet fundamental simple balance of rewards, yours and theirs. Equity is a key tool for attraction and retention of the people you will need. But 'need' is the key word. Some skills, people are rare and special, some are more of a commodity. Only use equity for the special ones, anyone that you can replace relatively easily doesn't need to get any.

If you never have to raise any funds then well done you. For the rest of us mortals, the game, and it is a game, of equity financing is no fun to play and the rules are, at best, vague. There is one thing you can be sure about, a company on the up will do an awful lot better than one on the way back down again. Leave it too late through over-optimism or greed and you easily find yourself losing the lot just to keep going. Get it right, keep your valuation looking good and you might just get the cash boost to send you into the stratosphere for the loss of very little.

Equity can also be a major distraction. Remember one key phrase and repeat any time the topic comes up; "You have to bake the cake before you can cut it up". People who are more interested in what their upside is going to be instead of getting on with some hard work should be given a long, cold stare. Obviously, you will have to distribute equity as shares or options, but make a reasoned and balanced decision and put the whole thing to bed as quick as you can. Don't let it fester, don't leave it ambiguous and NEVER make any promises or offers that you can't substantiate.

Money
It may be self-evident that running out of money is a very bad idea for the health of your business but it isn't necessarily as straightforward to stop it happening. Especially in the early days, keeping a close eye on whatever funds you may have is clearly a very good idea. So, get the easy bits right. Be in control of your finances. Know what is going on, get a good relationship with your bank and makes sure you get all the information you need in a timely manner. There is absolutely no excuse for not knowing what is going on in your bank account; where you stand with creditors, debtors.

Always think about cash preservation. That isn't subtle code for spend nothing, employ cheaper people, it's just about getting value for every penny you use. Make sure you don't skimp on the basics. Get good, stable infrastructure. Trying to do key things on the cheap will always come back to haunt you.

A really easy way to eat up all your early stage money is to employ too many expensive people too quickly. At the very beginning, only employ the people you absolutely need to progress. Sure, your business plan may say that by next year the revenue stream and growth with be such that you will need these people. But your business plan isn't history or fact, it's a guess. So, expensive recruitment to prepare you for what might happen very often leads to a premature shortening of your cash horizon when the business plan doesn't pan out the way you had hoped. Don't fool yourself into thinking that you really need all these chiefs now. If they are really keen on the opportunity, they'll wait until it becomes fiscally sensible. And if they won't, question their judgement or motivation.

That extends to how you make you and your company appear externally. Simple things like literature, business cards, websites are your opportunity to make one man in a shed look like a good sized company. Sure, you maybe don't sell through a website, it may not be your main marketing focus, but you can use it to market defensively, to look credible, professional and BIGGER when people are seeking you out. None of this need be expensive, just realise it is important and invest the right amount in projecting the image of the company you want to become, long before you get there.

Labels:

0 comments

Thursday, April 30, 2009

Picking a Company or Product Name


So, you have an idea for a business or product. How do you come up with a name? Here's a few tips.

1. Pick a word you like and look it up in a foreign language.

There are many online dictionaries for this. Look for something memorable, that has an obvious hook and no obvious pronunciation problems. Start with the basic principles you are after, get a thesaurus involved and get translating.

2. Try accessing the pantheon.

Have a look at www.godchecker.com, search for words that you like and find the name of some obscure God that matches the characteristic that you want. By way of example, Dubiaku, "The only mortal to outwit Death" ( although clearly that's a terrible name ).

3. Check the name.

For UK company names, always check Companies House ( or your local equivalent) . Names may be available but they may be dissolved and could have died because of debt reasons etc. Probably best to avoid those.

4. Check the domain.

Always check for the domains as soon as you have an idea, do a quick DNS lookup to see if it is registered, I always use a whois lookup (like www.dnsstuff.com). Don't check with a hosting company, that can lead to the domain getting squatted. No point having a cool name if you can't get the domain. As soon as you decide on a name, register at least the .com and .co.uk (or local equivalent) RIGHT AWAY!

5. Go mad.

The name doesn't have to make sense. In many ways memorable is better than appropriate e.g. Google, Orange. Although it doesn't always work ( Boo, Monday etc ). Crazy names can make for strong branding possibilities but you have to make sure that your target market can cope with that. It has to be said, the number of nonsense names available drops every day. Try to make sure the name is pronouncable.

6. Watch for double meanings.

Albatross could be a great name, a bird that stays flying for a long time, but it also hangs round your neck! :-) Also, make sure the name doesn't mean anything rude or inappropriate in any foreign language. Tomorrow the world! But not if your product name means 'jobby' in Korea.

Labels:

1 comments

Tuesday, April 28, 2009

Caution : Optimism ahead


It's good to be optimistic. And I love people with great drive and belief. But there is, unfortunately, a limit on how far a wave of optimism can take you up the beach before sucking you back into the shark-infested depths.

My problem, as has often been pointed out, is that I see reasons why things might be difficult far brighter than why they might work. That's not to say I can't be optimistic, positive even, but I tend not to get carried into shore by the wave alone. I prefer a Mulberry.

I've seen a number of situations where optimism has got the better of people.

It's tricky, but there is a balance. Yes, of course, be optimistic, believe. But plan on the basis that things won't go quite as well as you'd hoped. It is catastrophically easy to move forward on the basis of assumed success. I've been playing chess like that for years. Attack, attack, oops*. This is not, I stress not, negative. "What ifs" are a great exercise to go through. If you need to have multiple plans, then do that. Don't have a single plan that goes a bit Arnhem at the end if you don't get your way. Planning for worst cases is not negative or any admission of presumed defeat. It just makes sense. At no point during the war (or since) did anyone accuse Churchill of negativity despite extensive plans being drawn up on what would be done in the event of a German invasion. It's just common sense/realism/preparedness. Not negativity.

Those who cry "negativity" are generally objecting to their bubble of Walter Mitty-esque optimism being burst. Hands off ears. Listen. There will be a way.

There is always a way.

This post has been brought to you by Wikipedia and World War Two.

* - those interested in miltary history may also like to read the story of the Battle of Midway, a more finely balanced positive versus negative strategy you won't see... a great lesson in the role of luck too. I'll try not to mention Apollo 8 again.

Labels: ,

0 comments

Thursday, April 23, 2009

How to Write Better PowerPoint Presentations

Everyone moans about it, but you can't get away from it. People use PowerPoint a lot. And, for the most part, the issue isn't with the tool itself. It is far more to do with how people use it. I've been suffering this for too many years now, so this is a small attempt to make my life better my hopefully sitting through a few less dismal presentation attempts.

Don’t get too carried away. This isn’t the panacea you seek. This post isn't called "How to Write Good PowerPoint Presentations" deliberately. I can't make them good. Only you can.

It won’t ensure you have good content and it won’t make you a good presenter, but it will get you started on the right road and it will definitely stop you inflicting ‘death by bullet point’ pain on your next audience. And it might help you make them listen.

OK, first some basics, paradoxically, in bullet-point form.

• Less is more
• Only ever use 1 transition type, although no transitions at all is probably still better
• NEVER (and I can't stress this enough) use sound effects
• Clipart sucks, don’t use it
• If you are nervous and have to read, read off paper NOT the slides
• Base your presentation on how long you have got, not how much you think you have to say
• Good coverage of the important stuff is better than bad coverage of everything
• PowerPoint can do lots of things, just because you’ve found some of them out, doesn’t mean you have to use them all.
• Always allow questions during the presentation, don’t shut people off by doing the “ask me at the end” routine. If you're not good enough to cope with interruptions then, well, you know...

Listening Not Reading
Why are you doing a presentation? Whatever it is for, you are probably trying to communicate something. You want your audience to learn something, remember something; go away educated, opinion changed. To do this you need to engage them, they need to be listening to you. What you don’t want them to do is read. Your slides are not there for them to read while you idly burble to the side, clicking in time with the nods. If the audience is reading ahead of you then they’re not listening to you. Too many words on your slides gives too much opportunity to read. Less text, more listening. The slides are a backdrop, an aid to what you are saying.

In particular, try not to hand out your slides before you present. Your audience will read very far ahead and be further disengaged when you speak.

Strong Images
I’ve already said that clipart is bad. But use of good quality images is strongly encouraged. This is not as difficult as it may seem. There are many great resources of FREE high quality imagery online. All you need to do is to think conceptually and translate what you are trying to say into a suitable image. Many images are keyworded on concepts, so you just need to search for ‘strong’, ‘weak’, ‘fast’. It’s easy because the photographer will already have dome the concept -> image mapping for you.

High quality imaging does two key things. It makes the presentation engaging and visually interesting. It also transfers some of the feeling of quality across to what you are saying. This is the flip-side of sad old clip-art making you look cheap and unimaginative. Maybe you are, but you maybe want to hide that.

For free stock images have a look at: www.morguefile.com, www.sxc.hu.

One word of warning, these images can be quite large when downloaded so don’t go embedding them full size into the presentation thinking that just because they are resized on the screen they are small on disk. Get good with resizing but don’t go crazy and ruin the quality by over compressing. Resize to around 300-400 pixels wide. That’s plenty. Don’t email 10Mb files to people and blame me afterward.

The same applies to screenshots. Don't Alt-Print Scrn and then Ctrl-V into Powerpoint. They are raw bitmaps, they are HUGE. People who do that are muppets. You hear me? Muppets. Stop it. Now. If you can't "Save As..." JPG then ask your kids. They like The Muppets too.

Humour
Humour is a good thing, but only if you can carry it off, you want the audience to be laughing with you, not at you. Before you think about using humour, ask a close friend or confidante a simple question "Am I funny? No, seriously, am I?" (beware of "Funny how? Funny like a clown?" responses). You need to be sure of the answer. Lots of people think they are funny and they are simply just painful. Self-awareness if a powerful aide.

Template
Use a template that constrains the available space, this will stop you adding too many words without you noticing. This can be acheived by having a thick bold header or wide left margin. Make the design clean and unfussy. You don't need the date in the footer. Most people you are presenting to know what day it is. Don't put your name on every slide, you'd like to think people might know who you are.

Two Versions
If you want to be doing this right you should probably think about two versions of the presentation. One to present with and one to print out for your audience. Don't constrain the display version of your presentation using that the excuse you have to print it out too. If you get the 5 stage process right, your print version is simply the intermediate phase before you fluff. So, there isn't any additional work with providing two alternate versions of the same presentation.

Scott’s Simple Five Stage Process

Plan -> Frame -> Splurge -> Bullet -> Fluff

1 Plan
What are you trying to achieve? Before you begin, ask yourself this simple question “what am I trying to achieve from this presentation?” or complete the sentence “at this end of the presentation I would like to the audience to…”

2 Frame
Write a heading for each slide you want to have. Make it flow. Have a beginning, middle and end. You are telling a story.

You should know roughly how long you have. So decide on the time you have per slide. You need to factor in time for discussion/questions as you go.

Very quickly, create a slide for each of your table of contents, putting the heading at the top of each.

3 Splurge
On each slide, type in everything you might want to say in association with that slide. Just type it in as you might say it, although if you keep the prose good at this stage it will be useful.

4 Bullet
Go through the presentation, copy your text into the notes section and summarise each slide content as a set of bullets. (You could type the original text straight into the notes section if you prefer).

5 Fluff
Now you have to make a final pass through the presentation removing all the bullets and replacing them with something more interesting.

How, you may ask, do you do that?

Let's look at the structure of a standard presentation. Each slide is a topic or section of information. Bullets, usually, breakdown this topic into smaller sections defining the sequence of information. The sequence/flow of the information is the important thing - not how it is presented.

Here are a couple of alternative strategies:

Visual Bullets
Just because we are aiming to avoid bullets, it doesn't mean that we can't use the basic concept and make it look differently. Let's take a slide that would normally have 7 bullets. This can be alternatively arranged to look like this:

And you can bring this to life by making each block appear/slide-in/whatever.

Hexagons are just one way to do this, take yourself back to school and work out other nice patterns. Get a dictionary and look up the word 'tessellate'.

Multiple Slides
For some unknown reason people tend to cram lots of stuff onto one slide rather than use more slides. This is perhaps related to saving paper on the printed version. But if we're going to have two versions, this limitation is pointless. So, imagine our same 7 bullets in a topic. Why not an intro slide with the topic on it and then a slide each for each bullet? Each slide could have a striking image and very few words on it. OK, so a 10 slide presentation with 5 bullets per slide becomes a 50 slide presentation, but so what? Do you get charged by the slide? No. This doesn't change the overall length ot the speed at which you present, it just gives you a better, more engaging, layout.

Warning
If you get good at this process you could find yourself in demand. People will turn up with many a dog's dinner and ask you to "Do your thing". You might like this at first. But ultimately it will become a pain. Just give people one of your existing presentations and tell them to copy it. Getting good at Powerpoint is one thing, spending all your time doing it is a cross no one should have to bear.

Conclusion
I could go on. But there is surely only so much someone will read on a subject as dull as Powerpoint. And yet, I bet right now, all over the world 10's of thousands are standing up in front of several tired people with bullets/clip-art, with "introduction -> problem -> solution -> conclusion -> thank you" drivel. It can be so much more than that.

Imagine yourself strutting in front of this wowing people as you move from one jaw-dropping slide to the next screaming "Are you not entertained?" like Russell Crowe in Gladiator. No? Well, how about people just stay awake or to the end? That'll do.

Labels:

1 comments

Wednesday, April 08, 2009

Floccinaucinihilipilification


Who knew I'd find a valid(ish) reason to use that word. Hopefully I've not stretched it too far.*

For a good few years now I've been giving most of photography away online for free. I now have well over 300K downloads from two sites alone. People often say to me "you should charge for those, if you got £1 a time..." etc. And my answer is always the same. They're not 'worth' anything.

Which is a poor answer. They are 'worth' something, just not money. I dabbled in selling images on stock sites and you find that it is a whole different (and challenging) world. To even qualify for sale images have to be of a very high standard and, to get noticed at all, you need to upload a ferocious amount. Filed under "too much effort - not enough time".

So, floccinaucinihilipilification: according to the Oxford English Dictionary "the action or habit of estimating as worthless".

There are countless free resources on the web. Some aim to monetize at some point in the future, but most are simply provided entirely free with no intentions of future wealth.

No obvious value can be put on these. But, to some extent, they fuel a large part of the life of the Internet. Look at it the other way, what if they didn't exist? What would happen if no one gave away their photos/services/information for free.

As as example, check out these three searches. These show where my photos have been used on three large content websites:
This is just a small glimpse. Free stuff permeates the entire Internet in this way.

What would these writers have done without access to free content? Would they have bought images? I get many emails of thanks for providing good quality free photos. Many people say that their work would be difficult/impossible without such resources. Whether it is freelance writers/designers, charities etc they all need free resources to function.

Another example is the LazyWebTools page refresher, something I built for myself to keep up with football scores. I put it online for free and am amazed at how much it is used. Before long it was driving insurance sales, being used in a Florida newsroom and used extensively by the Washington DC fire department (to name but a few, we'll ignore the hip-hop gang DoS attacks).

So, can we estimate the value of these 'worthless' resources? Do we have to? Can we assume that these free resources will always exist and therefore considering their worth is pointless?

I have a feeling that people will always be happy to exist in the underworld below the paid resources. Whatever the individual motivation, the free internet will always exist and therefore questions about its value are moot. But it's worth should not be underestimated. I'm sure you could pay an analyst some money to work out the value to the various industries. I doubt they ever do much for free.

In case you're wondering why I give away stuff for free. I've maybe got a better answer (although it may not make sense to everyone). Soon to appear on a T-Shirt:

"Will work for cheapies"

* look out for next week's post on antidisestablishmentarianism

Labels: ,

2 comments

Tuesday, February 17, 2009

Personal Google Brand Measures


Let's get one thing clear from the start. I am not a Greek English Lexicon. Although, judging from my web logs and analytics, many accidentally think I am.

The fact that I share a name (at least in search index terms) with a book, led me to consider how much people searching for you online matters and how much you need to protect your search position against 'contamination' from other sources.

Obviously, this hinges massively on your name. I'm afraid Mr. Bradley Pitt of East Cheam has had it. But for those of us with a sufficiently obscure name to have a chance, can we dominate our own search space?

So, the goal is, can you secure the whole first page of Google hits for a search on your name? And, what should this be called? @clarocada has suggested "Google Self Engineered TopTenMysation". I currently have 8 of the 10. The other two go to a far more eminent, but perhaps less SEO aware, Professor in the US ( a big hello to you sir ). It helps that my book and photos are splattered widely all over the place.

I lose out big-style to many other Liddell's when you ignore Christian names. I may have been able to take Eric in a fight (especially on a Sunday), but I think I might lose out to Chuck. I do still scrape onto the first page though.

Obviously, if you have a name similar to a more famous person, there must be some benefit in out-SEO'ing them, however difficult that may be.

Try it. How well are you doing? Do you own your own personal Google brand? John Smith need not apply.

Apologies to all those arriving her looking for some help with their Greek.

Labels:

3 comments

Monday, February 02, 2009

Finding Google's Backwaters


There are so many ways to get to the good stuff on the Internet. Lists, StumbleUpon, optimised search returns etc but there is a truly enormous long-tail of weird/wonderful/dross.

I thought it might be amusing to see some of this randomly, ignoring any notion of popularity or context. Sure, I could just surf about, but I had a feeling that I would always subliminally guide my own hand. So, here's the method I came up with:

I used a random word generator and took the first 3 words it offered me.

They were: concocted, measlier and peruke. ( I resisted the temptation to find out what peruke meant - I confess I didn't know )

I then created an 'as it happens' Google Alert for each of these words. I didn't want to just search for the words as they would be ordered by Google's view of importance. And waited...

The spidery nature of Google inevitably returned a distinct 'latest news' feel to the results. Anyway, here's some of what I received by email:

concocted
Cellist disease a hoax, British doctor confesses
( FAIL - I heard this on the radio during the week )

The Myth of Israel's Strategic Genius
( interesting viewpoint)

Okay, a 'He-Man' movie? C'mon, really?

( never really liked He-Man )

( and lots more )

measlier
http://measlier.net/
( really? FAIL )

The only other things I got were dictionary definitions of 'measlier'. FAIL.

peruke
A random foreign blog

EDIT: A late peruke just in!

No great surprise, turns out a peruke is an old-school wig. Can't imagine it turns up that often.

So, as experiments go, this one was largely unsuccessful. I think it might still work, so maybe I'll have another go.

Labels:

1 comments

Sunday, February 01, 2009

Luckily It's All About The Art


When it comes to reward for effort, writing a book has to feature at the very lowest reaches of the league table. Months of effort and toil on The Beatle Man and I get 46p for every copy sold on Amazon (or other sites). I'm not complaining, such is the way...

Recently, I was playing about with the Amazon Affiliate widgets (as is my wont, I like a widget) and I set up the links (on here and elsewhere) to allow people to buy the book via my site. Some kind person did and I got 50p for it.

So, 2 minutes of effort to put a link in a blog produces more reward than months of writing. Obviously, it's not about the money, as Stu and I have been discussing a lot of late, it's much more about the cheapies. So, I'll keep writing, and maybe add some more links!

Labels: ,

0 comments

Wednesday, January 28, 2009

My Social Media Map


Following on from my earlier thoughts on a Web Ripple, things have moved on quite a bit and it has now got a bit more complex than a mere linear ripple. So I drew this picture. This is not all the possibilities; this is what I am actively doing now. I have a ping.fm account and if I actively used that then this could get a lot more intricate.





What does your map look like?

Labels:

0 comments

Monday, January 26, 2009

CoolIris


I had neglected my photo site for a while so, as it had started to pick up quite a few Stumbles, I thought I should freshen it up a bit. Cue orgy of tinkering e.g. I got rid of the horrible banner and replaced it with another horrible banner.

One thing I had been wanting to try for a while was to load the photos into CoolIris (formerly PicLens) for display. This was remarkably easy and the result is quite pleasing on the eye (although a few people have said that the display quality is a little reduce from the existing FlashRelief galleries).

It was made easier by the fact that the FlashRelief galleries were already setup with XML feed files so that conversion to Media RSS format was pretty quick (if anyone wants a quick way to how to convert FlashRelief XML files to Media RSS files give me a shout). There is also a publisher tool to make this process easy.

What was particularly nice is that I created a separate RSS feed for each of the galleries and then chained them together (with next, previous tags) to create one seamless stream.

Another one of the cool things you can do once it is all setup is drop the gallery in anywhere. Check it out on the photo site.

All in all, a really nice piece of kit.

Labels: ,

0 comments

Sunday, December 14, 2008

How to Display Your Twitter Location using Google Maps on a Website or Blog


Further to my previous post about displaying your location details using the TwitterVision API, here's how to extend that to display your Twitter location on a Google Map.

You'll need to get a Google Map API key first by going here. The steps from there are pretty similar to the non-map version.

1. Add the code for your API key into the <head> of your page.

2. Add a div to your page where you want the location info to go, make it's id your Twitter screen name like:
<div id="scottmliddell" style="width:200px;height:200px"></div>
You can size this to be the size of map you'd like.

2. You need a simple bit of code to extract the information and set up your map location:
function loc(locObj)
{
var longitude = locObj.location.longitude;
var latitude = locObj.location.latitude;
if (GBrowserIsCompatible()) {
var map = new GMap2(document.getElementById(locObj.screen_name));
map.setCenter(new GLatLng(latitude, longitude), 13);
}
}

You can download this as a file here.

3. At the bottom of the HTML page you want to add the location to, add:
<script language="javascript" src="/gloc.js" type="text/javascript"></script>
<script
src="http://twittervision.com/user/current_status/scottmliddell.json?callback=loc">
</script>

Obviously replace my Twitter screen name with yours.

You can see this implemented here.

Labels:

0 comments

How to Display Your Twitter Location on a Website or Blog


In preparation for next year's Sucata Run to Split, I was pottering about with some updates to the Team GI blog. The plan was to be able to display our current location on the blog using or Twitter location (which we could set with BrightKite or an iPhone). Anyway, it is very simple to do using the TwitterVision API. Here's how I did it...
1. Add a div to your page where you want the location info to go, make it's id your Twitter screen name like:
<div id="scottmliddell"></div>

2. You need a simple bit of code to extract the information and format it:


function loc(locObj)
{
var loc="";
loc += "Longitude: " + locObj.location.longitude + "<br>";
loc += "Latitude: " + locObj.location.latitude + "<br>";
loc += locObj.profile_location + "<br>";
document.getElementById(locObj.screen_name).innerHTML = loc;
}


You can download this as a file here.
3. At the bottom of the HTML page you want to add the location to, add:


<script language="javascript" src="/loc.js" type="text/javascript"></script>
<script
src="http://twittervision.com/user/current_status/scottmliddell.json?callback=loc">
</script>


Obviously replace my Twitter screen name with yours.
It will look like this:

Where am I?

Loading...


There is much more info you can grab out of the API - this is just a very simple version. I'll leave styles and formatting to you.

Labels:

0 comments

Wednesday, December 03, 2008

Scale Free Networks and Social Networking


A while back, I blogged an article I had written on Enterprise System Adoption and Scale Free Networks. I was reminded of it recently in relation to my experiences with Twitter and, in particular, @ruskin147's blog post on the impact of @stephenfry's Twitter reaction to the new Blackberry Storm.

It's not an new observation, but networks like Twitter clearly show the basic structures of classic Scale Free Network. There are clearly many 'hub' people on Twitter, such as Stephen Fry, who have many, many more followers and therefore impose a far greater influence on the rest of the network. As I wrote with regard to Enterprise System Adoption, these hub influencers govern the thoughts of the network at large.

The nature of Twitter makes this phenomenon even more prevalent and this is further reinforced by services like the Twitter Grader, with its notion of the Twitter Elite, and @mrtweet with its direct implication of those who can influence. Both act to significantly reinforce the size and influence of the hubs in the network.

This amplified influence may not be sitting comfortably with Stephen Fry, but it is obvious that many people are seeing the power of being a strong hub with these new social networking scale free networks and using this to great advantage. I'm afraid Stephen can't avoid it, with over 20,000 followers, he is now a significant hub in the scale-free network. It's science.

Labels:

0 comments

Monday, November 10, 2008

LazyWebSpammers


A while ago, I remember getting a vague sense of misplaced pride when my popular but largely uninteresting website LazyWebTools was blocked by WebSense in work. It felt like it had arrived, been recognised by the world.

But now some bandits are trying to grab traffic by spamming it on their dodgy sites. Now, I know how much traffic the site gets and there isn't really that much to steal, but still they try. Do this search and you'll see the crappy sites that are spamming with my site. Don't visit them. Swines.

But if you do the search, you will see the lovely people at McAfee report that: "We tested this site and didn't find any significant problems". So, that's nice.

Labels:

1 comments

Saturday, November 08, 2008

The 'Web Ripple'


I've spent some idle time recently tinkering with various Web 2.0 sites like Facebook, Twitter etc. As my reader may have noticed, my Facebook status is now driven from Twitter and it all ends up here on this blog.

In addion, if I make a prediction on HubDub, it becomes a Tweet and goes to Facebook, Twitter and this blog. So, I'm going to call that a "Web Ripple" (dunno if this exists as a web thing yet), one action on one site that flows into many others. Similarly, if I update my location on BrightKite, it ends up in the same 3 places.

Therefore, my record ripple is 4. Can anyone beat 4?

Labels:

1 comments

Friday, November 07, 2008

So, let's have a button that does that...


As my reader will be aware, whether at home or on the move, I almost always listen to music using random/shuffle mode. I have oft to referred to this herein as the 'randomiser'. It's just a natural extension of the mix-tape : that changes each time you put it on. But this has some drawbacks.

I'm going to ignore discussions of how actually un-random this usually is and rather concentrate on new features that I would like the makers of media and MP3 players to add.

Ooh-Ooh Play The Next Track Of That Album

It goes like this. The randomiser plays "I Want the One I Can't Have" by The Smiths and you know the next track is "What She Said" and you really want to hear that but you know the randomiser is about to play a dull B.52's album track off Mesopotamia. So, let's have a button that does that...

Nice, Just Play All That Album Now
But just "What She Said" isn't enough, you have the taste now and you know it goes "That Joke Isn't Funny Any More" following by "How Soon Is Now". What you really want now is just to play the rest of the album. So, let's have a button that does that...

Oh Yes, Stick With Them
Maybe you're just in the mood for The Smiths now. Would be good to say "stick with this artist" and play random tracks by them. So, let's have a button that does that...

Thumbs Up
On the basis that there is no true randomness in any of this then I'd like to be able to tune the selection based on weighted choices. Now, I really could go to town on this algorithm. But maybe that would be giving away some really nice IP for something I'll never build. Anwyay, this button is fairly obvious, you're enjoying this track now and perhaps tied to mood, location, time of day it could build up a picture of what you like to listen to when and where. But in its simplest form, it would mean "Play more of them". So, let's have a button that does that...

Thumbs Down
As above, but opposite. So, let's have a button that does that...

Never, ever play that song again
One of the major drawbaks of a random trawl through your entire collection is you will inevitably and frequently alight on tracks that are guff album filler. These should be stricken from the record by being able to say never play that again. So, let's have a button that does that...

Right then, I'll give you until next Christmas. Go!

I'm not expecting for much, my last attempt to subliminally influence the direction of technology via an unread blog didn't really work that well.

Labels:

2 comments

Tuesday, October 14, 2008

Oooh Stretchy!


Doesn't look that much different but the blog templates they are a changing. This is the first incarnation of a new blog template now with a stretchy 3-column liquid layout and integrated Twitter-y stuff. (Thanks to Martin Taylor).

Ultimately, I plan to move this to http://www.scottliddell.com/ but that could be a bit tedious.

Keep an eye out, there will be more changes herein on the way...

Labels:

0 comments

Wednesday, October 01, 2008

Wordle


Just had a quick play with Wordle. It is strangely soothing. The Wordle for this blog is below, click on it to see it bigger...


Labels:

1 comments

Wednesday, March 26, 2008

Free Porn - The Aftermath


Well that didn't take long. It took about 18 hours between my last blog post titled 'Free Porn' and my first hit from someone searching for something similar. I imagine it was because they had something specific ( "7/24" matched the time of the post ) in their search that allowed them to get to my blog so quickly. But even so, that's still pretty quick. Can you imagine how disappointed they were when all they got was a picture of me looking like a saddo magician and two peppers kissing?

Watch out next week for my blog post called "Best Book In The World - Buy It Now".

Labels: ,

1 comments

Tuesday, March 25, 2008

Free Porn


There is so little to report it is a little embarrassing to even consider a blog post but I feel I owe my reader some output.

So, you'll have to put up with a crappy clip show of a post (and a really spammy title, just as an experiment).

Book Stuff
Bit of a distribution delay; apparently the text on the title page was too near the edge. So much for buying a copy, seeing it was fine and approving it. I could scream 'racket' but I won't. I'll believe that this was a safe precaution to avoid issues at the distribution printer. But having to get another pointless proof? Well...

I've dipped my toe into some Google Ads in advance of distribution. Quite good fun, quite enlightening. I'll do more when things are ready to rock on Amazon.

Set up a Facebook page for the book. Go now, become a fan! I've got a design for a Facebook Ad ready to go too.

I've also integrated a PayPal cart into The Beatle Man website for buying signed copies. Two sales so far, thanks guys! **

Photo Stuff
A lovely weekend on Islay didn't yield too many photo ops due to some dodgy old weather, but was quite pleased with what I did get. You should all go to Islay, its fab. Many thanks to A&M.



click to download full size

I finally got round to trying my new black backcloth too. It went quite well for a first time. Here's a new portrait for you all to hurl abuse at (if you haven't already on Facebook).



For old times sake, I shot some veg.



The new lens is a real peach. But the f2.8 one would have been better for:
Had a rather fun (but challenging) shooting the dress rehearsal of a stage musical at the Kings in Edinburgh. Was very different and great fun roaming round an empty theatre. Discovered that auto-ISO would be a very useful feature in low light. Excuse no. 1 for a new body. Thanks to Scott for letting me have a go.
Puzzles
Not long now until season two of Bimbogami is nearly there. Most of the puzzles are in the can and MorFF is busily coding the new improved site. We'll be going for a full synchronised launch so the teams can have a good battle. Should be fun.
** Late breaking news, that's 3 signed copies now! One is off to the US...

Labels: , ,

2 comments

Wednesday, September 05, 2007

Murmurs of Earth


At the risk of attracting "most boring post since that last crap space one" comments, I'd like to take a few moments to pay tribute to arguably the best space missions ever, Voyager.

Launched an unbelievable 30 years ago, both Voyager 1 and Voyager 2 are still going strong, still returning data to earth despite the former being the farthest man made object from earth. Designed to last 5 years, most of their instruments still function with only minimal degradation.

There is no point it recounting the incredible list of achievements of these spacecraft other than to encourage the reader to investigate further and marvel and the ingenuity and robustness of technology that we would consider archaic now. A 4-bit processor and an 8-track tape form the core of the processing power and storage. Go figure.

As a technology person, it is a salutory lesson that you can produce powerful, robust product without having to use the latest and greatest of fancy tools and technology. Concentrate on getting it right and you can do deliver results with anything.

So, well done NASA and JPL. Staggering stuff. Just hope that you continue to get funded to keep the Voyager missions running until 2020. Shouldn't abandon them to the cosmos yet.

Labels: ,

2 comments

Sunday, August 12, 2007

The Hidden Millions of the E-Commerce Economy


I've calculated that if I live to somewhere near 1000 I might make £1M from my E-Commerce 'empire'. I have played with a number of 'revenue' streams over the years, never seriously, but mainly just to find out about how they work. This has lead to me having large numbers of tiny amounts of money strewn throughout the Internet.

Let's do a quick audit of my current unclaimed balances:


Photography

Shutterstock$19.90**
Dreamstime$68.00
iStockPhoto$47.22
StockXpert$36.00
Fotolia£62.98
CanStockPhoto$6.35
FeaturePics$14.30
LuckyOliver

$3.00

BigStockPhoto

$9.00



Web Ads
Google Adsense$14.36
AdBrite$42.63


Misc

CafePress$4.00
Helium$1.14


and probably others I have forgetten about.

All in all, you can see that this doesn't amoun to all that much. My point it not to reveal my pathetic attempts at at exploiting the miracle of the Internet. It is this.

How many other people are like me and have small amounts of money hidden away, unaccessible in various sites across the net. In standard, 'long tail' fashion I bet it is quite a lot. There is likely to be millions of dollars locked up in the e-commerce economy that will probably ever gets accessed. A typical minimum payout on these type of sites is around $100. As you can see, it will be a long time coming before I ever see the money I have accumulated on these sites.

I wonder to what extent these funds are significant? Could be that the mysteriously keep the whole thing runnig or, more likely, they are just a quirk of mediocrity.

** - after 1 payout

Labels:

2 comments

Sunday, July 01, 2007

Just nosey...


As my reader will know, I have a website LazyWebTools that hosts a number of small tools, the most used of which is a simple and free Automatic Page Refresher. I check out the website hits every now and then and, for the most part, it is gamers and the like.

For a while now, one web address has always stood out among these and today I noticed that it is by far the greatest user of the tool. The hit comes from:

"Government of the District of Columbia, Washington, District of Columbia, United States"

There have been maybe 20-30 hits from there today (a Sunday) alone. I'm just nosey. What is part of the US Government using it for? And why so many hits, are there a lot of users? I'd love to know. Just being nosey.

Addendum 19/07/2006: I'm pleased to say that the refresher is being used by the good people of the Washington DC Fire Department to monitor incoming alerts. A very noble purpose.

Labels:

0 comments

Monday, May 21, 2007

Searching for inspiration


A while back now I got tired of hitting F5 all the time so decided to build a simple internet Automatic Page Refresher. It worked a treat. I stuck it on my website and it got used so much that I got attacked a lot and had to shut it down. That was when I moved it to LazyWebTools. It still get used a lot mainly, I think, by people refreshing Gaia (whatever that is) but I've also sold the occassional offline copy for people like TV newsrooms and insurance brokers. It still rattles along with lots of hits every day, but I'm bored with it now, so I don't keep trying the promotion thing, so it makes, last time I looked, about $0.03 a day!

Its been updated a bit over time, I had to change the minimum refresh time to stop it being used for DoS attacks and I added the Automatic Page Cycler, which is far superior, but gets used less.

I'd like to think there wasn't a simpler way of refreshing internet pages automatically for free, its not like its hard.

Since then, I've been a bit out of inspiration for more tools. I built a really simple Times Tables Tutor to teach kids multiplication tables, which works really well, but hasn't taken off. Inspired by a TC idea I built CheckMyRequest, but it didn't fly liked I'd hoped, daft as it is. It should be popular, we all get asked to do daft things every day, its perfect sorting people out in a humourous way.

So, I need to think of a new tool, if you have any ideas, let me know.

Website of the Day:
Given the subject of the post it has to be the mediocrity of LazyWebTools, roll up, roll up, get your automatic page refresher here.*

Track of the day:
Well, you can all see what I've been listening to thanks to my new last.fm gadgets, but it seems to timeout the tracks quite quickly. The randomiser was mostly awful tonight, but I'll go for 'All we ever wanted' by Bauhaus.

* Did you see what I did there?

Labels:

1 comments

Thursday, May 03, 2007

The Last of the True Disbelievers


As I type some music is arriving in my house. It is the rather splendid 1985 mini-album by
The Brilliant Corners, Growing Up Absurd. Not available on CD, I got it from EBay on vinyl and, being far too lazy to do it myself, Stuart* borrowed my USB turntable and he has MP3'd it for me and is currently uploading it to my server behind the TV.

In the age we live in, this is perhaps not happening in every living room in the land**, but isn't exactly remarkable. Its not like we built the bits ourselves. We bought it from t'Internet.

Thing is, this still has an element of wonder to it. Sure, I'm a technology kinda guy, I understand it, its not magic, but if you'd asked me when I was 12, playing vinyl on the all-in-one Waltham Music Centre (with built-in digital clock no less) if this kind of thing would ever be likely, I might have been a bit amazed.

I think I was lucky in that I caught the very end of the innocent times, I can track the rise of true technology with my passing years.
  • Black and white TV, 3 channels
  • Colour TV, with a remote! (with one BIG button)
  • Channel 4/Teletext
  • VHS
  • and so on...

And then, of course, the mighty ZX81. If you want trace back the rise of my own personal Skynet, it starts at Christmas 1981.

10 PRINT "SCOTT"
20 GOTO 10

Wow.

Wow? Wow is the word. What makes you go wow? The point, which I am sluggishly and with no small amount of wine involved getting to, is that much of the wow has gone out of the world because a the glass ceiling of wow has been broken. Kids today just see the next thing to come along as evolution not revolution. You don't get "Wow" you get "well, duh!". The baseline has moved so much that the asymptote of wonder has been reached. We will never stop progressing, never stop seeing new things, but we are now so close the to top of the wonder-curve that nothing will be remarkable ever again.

If you tell a kid of today that you said "the graphics are amazing" when talking about Sabrewulf on the Spectrum or that the speech used in Impossible Mission in the C64 was "astounding", you simply get laughed at. But at the time, they brought with them a "wow", an amount of disbelief from which comes wonder.

I'm happy to have been one of the last of the true disbelievers***. I'm as happy as I am equally miffed that I bet there is a lot of really cool stuff that will happen after I'm dead that I'll never see and that frankly, when it arrives, no one will be all that surprised about.

Website of the Day:
All hail the real
wow!

Track of the Day:
Well, it has to be the newly arrived Mary by The Brilliant Corners which is on "growing Up Absurd" available on a server under my TV.

* - the notable freelance writer and sci-fi critic, come on Wikipedia, get the finger out
** - some people have lives, apparently, dim-witted loons
*** - credit must go to the mighty Ciaran and song "Last of the True Believers" by That Petrol Emotion

Labels:

2 comments

Saturday, April 28, 2007

Vista - Finally some good news


Finally some good news about Vista. After the disappointment of not being able to USB Stream by HandyCam in the Vista laptop. I picked myself up, got a Firewire/iLink cable and had a go with that.

I have to say, it couldn't have been much more impressive. Plugged-it in, turned it on, detected the drivers and a very smart wizard took over.

I had a few choices of what to use to do the importing so I tried the new to Vista Import Video Wizard. I chose the options I wanted, starting with the simple burn all the tape to DVD and output as AVI.

Popped in a blank DVD and away it went. A couple of hours or so (I should have timed it) I had a DVD and a 12GB AVI. I was quite pleased with this but it wasn't until I played the DVD that I got the best surprise.

The DVD was automatically produced with a title screen and scene selection which worked really well. The quality was great too.

I'm doing a new tape now as I type which, if nothing else, shows that the Core Duo processor is doing something right.

Labels:

0 comments

Friday, April 20, 2007

How to create a playlist of all your music in Windows Media Player 11


By special request for Tony C, here's how to create a playlist containing all your music in Windows Media Player 11.
  1. Obviously, first get all your music added to library.
  2. Then, select the 'Songs' view of your library. Click on any song* in the list and start it playing.
  3. Then click on 'Now Playing'
  4. Everything should now appear in the 'Now Playing' list
  5. Then from the 'File' menu choose 'Save Now Playing List As...' and save as your 'Everything' playlist.

In other advice:

  1. If you're going to break your arm, try not to break you arm.

* - don't play any rubbish

Labels:

8 comments

Thursday, April 19, 2007

Don't buy Vista...


If you want to be able to connect to a wireless network. I've had my new Vista laptop for a bit now and yet, here I am, on my old trusty XP laptop. Why? Because my the Vista laptop won't connect to the Internet any more, its just says "Local Only" and lets me enjoy the information superhighway that is my router. That's all.

Its just not ready yet. I have a new router. Maybe that will fix it, maybe I'll never get back on the Internet for a while.

In addition, I got the new laptop as my old one struggled with digital video. I want to get all my mini-DV as DVD. Guess what? From the Sony website for my camera:

"For models with USB streaming, this function is not supported in Windows Vista"

Joy untold.

In summary, my advice is, don't buy Vista. Nice features are all very nice, but its utterly pointless if you can't do the basics.

Lets see how long until SP1 appears...

Labels:

0 comments

Thursday, March 29, 2007

Mr. Vista


OK so here I am on Vista.
Some first impressions:
  • Eh, like, its Windows
  • Windows Media Center is very pretty (but I imagine I can't be bothered with it)
  • It found my NAS drive very easily
  • What's the deal with wireless networking?

My immediate gripes relates to the wireless networking. I boot up, setup, configure WEP keys, bang, connected. Download updates, reboot, boom, not connected. Only local access to the router, can't see the Internet. An amount of faffing about and I get back on the Internet eventually (but I don't know why it started working). From a quick search (on the old laptop) I discover that this seems to be a fairly wel known issue. Hurrumph.

Then: Two laptops side by side on the same desk. One says "Signal strength: Excellent", the other says "Signal strength: Poor". The Vista machine obviously has blocked ears. I'm hoping that when I upgrade to my new router things will improve. If I don't post for a while you'll know that its not gone well.

Oh and that task switcher thing is largeless pointless.

So, all in all, not too excited yet. More as it happens, but I might have to post from work.

Labels:

0 comments

Thursday, March 08, 2007

Dear Amazon...here's my prior art


This post has a dual purpose. To ask Amazon to make a change to their website by implementing my idea and then to discuss whether or not me posting it here constitutes prior art when I take them to task for stealing my idea.

First, the idea.

Dear Amazon:
Please stop the purchase of gifts from polluting my recommendations. Just because I buy my daughter an Elefun game doesn't mean I want you to suggest more. Find me good music instead. There is no point recommending this to me, the TV decides what she wants. Ditto for all the other gifts I've bought. Here's how you do it. Allow my to enter a list of people that I might buy gifts for. I'd also like to enter their birthday and whether or not I'm likely to but them a Christmas present.
Then, when I buy a gift, I will tell you who it is for and you won't use that in my recommendations. Instead, you'll email me a month before their birthday/Xmas and tell me what I should buy them. In fact, maybe I should have a tickbox which says "Just send them something to the value of £x just in case I forget".
OK, that's it, pretty simple. Get on with it guys, thanks. *

Prior Art
Having this unremarkable idea and deciding to blog about it made me think if a blog post could ever be used as prior art in a patent discussion. Of course, Amazon will always be a good point of reference to discuss this because of their famous 1-click ordering patent.
Obviously, the problem with a blog is that I can change the post date and make it look like I invented 1-click ordering on the day Tim Berners-Lee was born. So you have to think you start on pretty shaky ground. But I suspect there will be some underlying OS date that can act as proof, however difficult to get at that be. I dunno, maybe the bowels of Blogger would provide the clue, I doubt the dates on my webserver would help that much.
Perhaps there needs to be a service for recording your ideas easily (in a Blogger) style but where the date is provable. Oh jeez, there goes another idea I can't prove the date of.

Website of the day:
Well, given that I am currently languishing at the top of the top ten, I'm going to have to go for my latest bit of INternet fun, NewsBiscuit.

Track of the day:
It is a singular pleasure when great songs you haven't heard for ages suddenly spring into life with the help of the randomiser, I nearly leapt out my chair to dance in the Student Union bar when Cruisers Creek came on. "There's a party going on down around here..."






* If you already do something like this then I'm not a chump, you've just not made it very obvious

Labels:

1 comments

Friday, March 02, 2007

Domain Name : Use it or lose it


Something is really beginning to annoy me. Been investigating the next in my list of pointless web projects and, as ever, you spend a large amount of time hunting for a suitable domain.
In a large number of cases they are often being used. That's fine. In a similarly large number of cases, they are registered, parked, not in use and likely to never be in use ever. They're not even for sale.

I don't mind if people grab a domain for something they are working on, its a sensible thing to do. But I think that in a lot of cases, nothing is ever going to happen. If they can't even be bothered to put up a 5 minute "coming soon" page (however ghastly that might be) you begin to think that is just a huge waste of good names that I could have to build dumbass sites on.

Perhaps a rethink of the domain registration strategy is necessary? I'd go for a use it or lose it policy. Not too draconian, maybe 6 months to add at least 1 page that represents content or it automatically goes back to being available.

And as for these people that register domains as a result of searches or other registrations, I'll get to you next. You know who you are. And would the idiots who registered scottliddell.com please realise that it will never make money, you've just embarrassed yourself.

Labels:

2 comments

Thursday, March 01, 2007

www.yada...eh...thingy what was that?


During a brief, but ultimately successful, shave this morning, I had the radio on as usual. Listening to XFM as I sometimes do, you get the horror of radio ads.
I heard one today for the FSA and specifically Money Made Clear. It was an expensive ad, known names doing the voice-overs, that comedian bloke that often gets naked on TV and Kevin Whateley. They paid a lot for it.
When it came to the end, they clearly want you to go the website to find out more. In the not so distant past, this would have meant the ad trotting out the usual hamfisted "double-u, double-u, double-u, dot, blah-di-blah, forward slash banana-pants*". But this ad didn't do this, they just said search for "Money made clear".
Now, this is maybe to save ad time (and therefore money) but I suspect advertisers may have discovered that no one ever remembers the URL from such a spiel.
Trouble is, its a little open to exploitation. The poor sods at the FSA spend a fortune on radio ads to get search terms into all our heads and all you have to do is beat them at SEO for "Money made clear" and collect the hits. Isn't that right you clever people at two unnamed building societies (try it, you'll see what I mean!). Not to mention the cheapo loan company that appears to have paid for a sponsored link for that search term.

Does suggest that more work is required to integrate traditional ad media with the web.

* copyright, my daughter

Labels:

0 comments

Wednesday, February 28, 2007

Technology and Social Responsbility


Yesterday saw the change in penalty in the UK for driving while on a mobile phone.
This will doubtless cause a surge in the sales of various handsfree kits, bluetooth headsets etc.
Cue collective hand-rubbing of technology providers.

It struck me that there is a far better solution to this. If every mobile manufacturer used the same connector then car manufacturers could start to have built-in hands free without having to worry about what phone their customers might have. Obviously, some high-end cars already have Bluetooth etc, but for the cost of a simple connector and a microphone, every new car could be built with the capability of providing safe, hands-free driving. The world would be a safer place, etc etc.

Of course, if you start down that road, then you might as well start to campaign for speed limiting of cars too. That might stop a good few accidents too, but just like mobile phone connector convergence, won't happen for a long time, if ever.

Labels:

2 comments

Friday, February 23, 2007

CSS Tinkering


Inspired by the ongoing CSS travails of ManicMorFF, I decided to try a little CSS tinkering with the blog template tonight. Not everyone's idea of a quiet Froday night in, I grant you, but I find it all strangely relaxing. But only if it works, if it doesn't work I become an incandescent ball of rage and bile.* Obviously, you would have a good argument with regards to the fruitlessness of this tinkering (especially when I have some other things I should be getting on with), but hey, some people have long baths or watch TV, I do this. Thing is, its good just how to learn things for the sake of learning them, you never know when it might come in handy. Although, you're right, I could pick something slightly more likey to come up in the normal course of a life.

So, what do we have for these efforts? Well, we have DropCaps that can be used to start each post and the little pull quote thing you can see above. Quite neat if that's what floats your boat. These things and much more can be found at this excellent CSS techniques list.

Next week, I will have a go at writing Chuckie Egg entirely in client-side Javascript. Well, if I don't, who else will?

Website of the day:
Animals swearing, does it get any better than that? Thanks to WDG for sending it over.

Track of the day:
Can I just say , the so-called Shuffle mode of Windows Media Player is ABSOLUTELY RUBBISH. I now have 9200+ tracks to choose from and it just picked the same song twice within the space of 3 songs. That's pants. Anyway, I did enjoy One More Robot by The Flaming Lips tonight. With a special mention to Topaz by the B'52's, aaah, 1990.


* I'm not really that bad but what is the point of pull quotes if you can't allow tabloid sensationalism to creep in?

Labels:

2 comments

Sunday, February 11, 2007

Miniature Music


It wasn't one of the most exciting things I have ever done, but I have just about finished ripping all my CDs onto hard drive. Something close to 40GB of the stuff. It took a long time but it has been worth it for a whole number of reasons.

Firstly, and unexpectedly, it has allowed me to rediscover hitherto undiscovered gems hidden in the collection. Sticking the whole lot on shuffle is even more fun that it ever was.

Secondly, I have freed up a LOT of space in the living room. Two cupboards are going and will be replaced by a small, metal box the size of a small, metal box. And the attic will have gained a few large boxes of CDs. Next, I need to get one of these and I'll be flying (until such time it'll be me and Sennheisers at the laptop).

It does make you think though. If you can reduce that much furniture to a small box. You can surely reduce an entire record shop to a kiosk or whole in the wall. No doubt someone, somewhere is already thinking about this. You can get an album at 192kbps easily into 128MB and a 128MB USB pen drive costs about hee-haw these days. So, why not pitch up at a machine, stick in your pen drive, stick in your debit card and walk off with any album you want? Its not as if this is some space age fantasy from the Jetsons, its all very possible now. Which makes you think there must be a strong commercial imperative not to do it. Obviously, you could argue that this is just a slightly less elegant solution to what can be acheived by downloading and that is, in many ways, true. And companies clearly want the cross-sell/window shopping aspect of retail space. But why not the best of both and have a 'download kiosk' in the shop itself?

Obviously, you can't ignore the tactile pleasure of buying a thing. Not that CD's have ever got anywhere near buying vinyl.

This also leads on to another digital media concern. I have 40GB of music on my hard-drive. If my hard-drive went phut, I would be annoyed but I could retrieve it all again from the attic (or my backup). But what if I have 40GB of downloads that all go south and I haven't backed up? I may have missed something but this is something that I don't think the ever-increasing downloads industry has addressed. Perhaps one way round this (other than telling people to back-up more) would be to have a download service that remembers what you have bought so that you have the right to download it again for nothing. Does that exist? If it doesn't it should. Obviously, it wildly open to abuse so that's probably why it doesn't exist.

One day I'll start one of these posts with a little more of a coherent point. Maybe not.

Labels:

5 comments

Monday, February 05, 2007

Ants Are Not Pants - Success in a Process Free World


Have you ever sat and watched ants at work? Its fascinating. Drop a small pile of sugar. Word soon gets round. Then they all appear, forming nice ordered lines, one in , one out, until all the sugar is gone. But that's an easy task.
They can build enormous colonies, complex air-conditioned structures. They feed massive nurseries, fill larders, defend themselves against constant onslaught from things with long tongues. Hugely successful, collaborative, co-operative environments made up of thousands of individuals with a clear and common purpose.
What is more remarkable is that all this is achieved with none of the things that we would need to get even close to achieving something as varied or complex.
They have no language to speak of, a little dance, the odd chemical trail but nothing too funky. All this processed with brain the size of this full-stop .



"Darren sets out on his quest for CMM Level 5"


What's worse, they have no written processes, no Mission Statement, no quality manuals, documentation, reviewers, signatories, counter-signatories and, unbelievably, no single form has ever been found filled in anywhere near any insect colony in the animal world.
How can this be possible? A complex task achieved with no brain, a minimum of communication and no processes at all? Surely there has to be a mistake. After all, are we all not told that even the simplest task needs process/control/methodology?

Put simply, you don't need a process if you know what you are doing.

Processes exist for two main reasons:
  1. Most people are at best average and don't know what they are doing.
  2. A large subset of jobs only exist because of the existence of processes.
The real working world, the structure that we exist and operate in is, in fact, a myth created by the mediocre. A grind set at the IQ of lowest common dumbinator, at the pace of the rate determining step. And the framework that keeps all this operating is a set of pointless, sub-optimal processes. They don't make things better, they just make sure it doesn't get any worse.

Imagine your organisation with everyone who exists to process and everyone who doesn't know what they are doing removed. Its lean, mean and focused. Not to mention efficient, successful, driven, high-morale. Need I go on? Its not like you are believing me are you?
But think of it. Everyone is good. Everyone knows what they are doing to contribute to the common goal. Everything just works. Remember, ants aren't pants, so why are we?

"What you are describing will lead to anarchy!" I hear you say.
"Not necessarily" I retort, tongue not entirely in cheek.
"OK, maybe only in very small companies then" you weakly concede.
"Yes, I say, absolutely, but what if you broke down the work of large organisations into small company-like structures, 'talent cells' I'm going to call them, then you could extend the model infinitely." I say, extending an already ridiculous notion into the way beyond.
"You're either a genius or an idiot, I've not decided yet, but I think you might be an idiot" you say, before walking off with your clipboard.

Clearly, you can't write nothing down, you can't stop all communication. I'm only using the extreme view to make a more considered point. In fact, this is all an elaborate, exaggerated prelude to one simple message. If you are only going to have one process, or one process you are going to get right. Make it recruitment.

If you assume that everyone you recruit fits the 'Ant' model then you can design a leaner, more efficient structure. All you have to do is to make sure that you get the right people and it will work. Don't recruit on the basis of getting people who will cope with a little guidance, control, process, review, audit, reins, safety helmet. Recruit people who will push the envelope beyond what you currently do now. Look at your structure now and spot where there is waste and inefficiency.

Lets go back to the ants. Are we to assume that ALL the ants, every single one in the myriad horde, gets it right? I doubt it. There must be some ants that don't quite get it on occasion. I bet the workers, soldiers whoever spot this and rip them a new one.

I could go on. No really, I could. But a blog isn't a place to publish the entire treatise, if you want to hear me go on at longer length about process-light environments then drop me a line.

I will conclude this meanderings with one sad truth. This model could never work. Why? Because there aren't enough ants to go round.

Website of the Day:
This one is for Stuart, because he was asking. It also helps cultivate my 'crashingly dull' theme, eh MorFF?

Track of the Day:

From the opening chord of their debut album, Suede always sounded a bit special. So, tonight Matthew, I've going for 'So Young', which I was when it came out.

Labels:

3 comments

Saturday, February 03, 2007

All Around The World


Signed up for Google Analytics recently, you get quite a lot of cool stuff for free. And, for the record, I don't subscribe to the "Google are the next Microsoft, taking over the world, yada, yada" thing. The do some very useful stuff.
Anyway, in Analytics you get a really sweet GeoMap that gives you an idea where your traffic comes from. This the map from this site on 3rd February 2007.


Click to enlarge


I was quite startled by the coverage of the globe (but come on Africa, put some effort in!). Its a little spooky to see how many people from how many places drop by for a nanosecond before they find something more interesting.
( Obviously, I have to give a big 'shout out' to what appears to be an emerging fan club in Mexico, Ola! )

Its worth nothing that most of these hits are photography related and many come from the Flash Relief site. Since I've been listed on there, hits have jumped quite a bit. As yet, I've not managed to attract many people on the basis of what I ramble about!

As an aside, something in my GMail inbox has been driving some very odd ad links this week including a link to Sunshine Colonics. This is a generally unremarkable site, but I have to take my hat off to whoever named the company, if they meant it like I hope they did, it genius
.

Labels:

0 comments

Saturday, January 27, 2007

Death by Popularity - The Web Hosting Conundrum


There is a bit of a conundrum with the Internet. The more popular a site is, the more likely it is to fall over. This is especially true when you get a sudden spike of popularity.
I can remember on September 11th, hitting the news sites to be met with a spectacular array of error numbers but mainly telling me "server too busy", at the very point the world really needed the Internet, it killed it in the process. The only way I could find out anything on the Internet was too seek out a less popular news site and try there. I eventually got some news from the then fairly new, Ananova. Truth was, the only real way to get any news that day was to phone someone who could see the infinite power and bandwidth of a TV.
( This sort of thing happened again recently after the sad death of Steve Irwin. )
Things haven't changed much over the intervening years. A number of times I have seen the BBC website choose to feature a new site or service, only to temporarily kill it in doing so. You can imagine the chat in the offices of the site:
"Hurrah, we're featured on the BBC website..."
"Only, no one can see what our site does...coz its now dead."

The basic rule is, if a high performance/high hit rate site features a site of less power and bandwidth, there is a good chance it will kill it with the flood of hits. The site will only gain the visitors that remember to go back and try later, which is far less than they would hope for from such exposure.

I saw this again this week, when my favourite photo site MorgueFile suddenly got a massive peak in traffic because of an article on Digg (well done to Michael and the gang for keeping it just about alive).

This is clearly something that the next generation of hosting has to address. There is no point in having a service that is almost guaranteed to fail at the point of maximum demand. Neither does it make sense, economic or otherwise, for sites to plan for the peaks and have a server farm sitting and waiting on the off chance. The ability to turn up the power and bandwidth virtually instantaneously (on-demand or automatically) will be a killer feature of hosting. This has already started to emerge, particularly in a lot of the hosting that BT is starting to offer (although with an ironic quirk of fate, when I went looking for a link to see what hosting they are providing now, their site was down!).

If you are unable to read post its most likely because it has just become massively popular :-)

Labels:

1 comments

Thursday, January 25, 2007

When new technology gets old


Technology moves very fast these days (Cybil Fawlty, specialised subject 'the bleeding obvious').
Not so many years ago, well, 26 years actually, I had a ZX81 and it was the pinnacle of home computing. And, believe me, it was fab. Thing is, it has no particular legacy now, only a museum like curiosity that was once kept for a difference engine or Colossus.
The technologies that I want to take about are those that leave a more permanent echo. Two candidates are mobile phones and laser eye surgery. No one knows what 20, 30 years of mobile phone use can do to you. Similarly with 20 year old laser'd eyes. "It'll be fine" they say. Supposedly the same people that used to sell asbestos to builders. I'm not a scaremonger, I love technology, advocate it and use it widely (although you can stick your laser eye surgery where the sun don't shine). I'm merely using these examples to illustrate the fact that we tend to get so caught up in the new and the now that we rarely look at the long term impact.
One of the potentially most interesting forms of this is the internet itself. We are creating content now that could still be around in 20, 30, 50, 100 years time. My grandchildren might read this very blog post and think "what an old twat" and click on the link to a now neurally implanted version of Wikipedia to find out just exactly how little power a ZX81 had. When my daughter is older, her teenage friends might track me down on the Internet and tease her at school because "her Dad is such a dull square and there's no way to you were on a billboard in Las Vegas".
The thing is, new technology today isn't all disposable future museum pieces, it has the ability (and perhaps role) to persist, to form part of a personal, cultural historical record.
We can already go to the WayBack Machine to see how gloriously crap the original BBC website was. Who knows where this post, along with the rest of the internet content, will end up in the future. Will there only ever be one transitory internet, with sites living and dying with us? Or will we devise a mechanism to maintain an on-going record (the WayBack Machine being a laudable but limited early attempt) so that this will post and many millions more like it will remain beyond my/our lifetime as a record of this time?

Website of the day:
Well, how apropos (was it deliberate?), have a look at this. People are already seeing that the passage of time has a place in applications of today.

Track of the day:
I was taken with Panther Dash by The Go Team! tonight. You can never have too many harmonicas.
( all together now grandkids of the future, "Granddad that is soooo 2004...")

Labels:

0 comments

Wednesday, January 24, 2007

Snap!


My reader(sic) may notice that I have added Snap to my site and blog (if you have no idea what this is, hover over an external link and you'll see). I suppose there are many arguments with regard to its usefulness but for now the novelty of it is tipping towards the 'quite cool' end of the scale.
I have to say it is a really good implementation, a doddle to integrate and it seems to render the page previews very quickly. Obviously, with my penchant for the funky client-side implementation, I'm always going to be a fan.
Does make me think that it could change the surfing dynamic a little if it takes off, people could perhaps see a lot less spurious hits with low wait time.
I first saw it being used on JP Rangaswami's excellent blog Confused of Calcutta which I would encourage you to read.

Labels:

0 comments

Monday, January 15, 2007

Convergence, Information, Learning and Semantics


Hope the subject line didn't put you off, couldn't think of anything suitably pithy to summarise what I wanted to write about.

Lets get the background out of the way. We have the Internet crammed with great information repositories (and even more rubbish ones), we have high-speed, high availability broadband/wi-fi, we have convergent mobile devices, we have advanced search capabilities, we have more access to more immediate information and knowledge than we ever thought we would have 10 years ago.

But still it all leaves me a little frustrated because getting what you need, finding out what you need to know still requires an amount of skill or luck.



Searching, the old-school way


By way of example, I did some work recently relating to a patent application (not my own I hasten to add). I was doing research, looking at the market, for opportunities, prior art, that kind of thing. I found quite a lot and hopefully it proved useful to those receiving the information (I think it did ). But the basic problem is that I was able to find things that they (and it seems the patent office) couldn't.

So, here is my contention, this wonderful information age we live in will never actually be real until such time as the skill involved in finding things out is obsolete.

A few years ago, I wrote an article for a training magazine that discussed the nature of information in this way and used, as its popularist hook, the idea of using technology to cheat at Who Wants to Be a Millionaire. If you remember, the people who tried to cheat used coughing and all manner of stupidity to win £1 Million pounds. I discovered that if you typed the text of the question unedited into Google, for almost all, the answer was somewhere in the summary text in the top hits. This was pretty impressive. If you could harness speech recognition, search technology, a screen reader and some bluetooth you weren't far from cheating your way to the £1M. But as a day to day solution it was, at best, flakey.

This lead me to think of two things, semantics and the nature of information itself.

I have no doubt, at some point in the future, that the nature and value of information will change. It will be intrinsically simple to find out any fact, that the value in remembering anything will diminish greatly. This has massive implications for education. What we will have to teach children and assess them on will have to change entirely. Remembering that the Battle of Hastings was in 1066 will have no more importance than the time of the next bus (although I'm sure many would argue that that is as its should and may already be).

Even now, with my laptop permanently on at my side, there is no nagging question I can't get the answer to, and when devices are up to it, that will be true 24X7 wherever I am (although I do OK now with searching on my PDA). And as the way of living becomes prevalent and USABLE to everyone, the nature of knowledge will surely change.

(BTW, as an aside, a really good addition to the armchair knowledge hunter's armoury is the Wikipedia gadget for the Google desktop sidebar, it works really well and none of that messy web page browsing required.)

The one remaining hurdle to be accomplished in all of this is semantics. Information retrieval by text based searching, however powerful, is limited. And crucially, it requires the skills of the user to select the correct search terms. The next generation must surely be based on a semantic engine but although the ideas of the Semantic Web have been around for a while now, it has still to make its way out into the world and there is the Metacrap lobby that doubt if it ever will.

The problem with any Internet search is that you go looking for a definitive answer and you often end up with a 'well, it depends which site/person you believe' feeling. One thing that the addition of semantics will provide is to be able to measure the weight of an opinion i.e. the relative numbers of answer a) versus those saying answer b). I was given an example of this very problem today with the question "Who was the 5th Beatle?", it seems to depend on who you ask. But if you could measure the numbers of each answer? If I can return to the beginning, this would be akin to an Internet version of 'Ask the audience?' in Who Wants to Be A Millionaire. Currently, you have to do that measuring yourself, no one does, its tedious. Understanding the context and content of a set of semantic search results would make this possible.

I firmly believe a semantic knowledge representation on the web will happen, but perhaps not in the form currently proposed, and if there is anyone out there looking enviously at Larry and Sergey they should perhaps start thinking about a semantic view of the web and knowledge storage and retrieval as the next thing to try and take over the world.

The benefits would be huge. A single device. You asked it a question, verbally. It accesses the web with a semantic search and talks back the most likely answer, anytime, anywhere.

Obviously, the steps to achieving this are non-trivial but the raw material is there, we already have a gloriously populated Internet. But we have to solve two key problems, how to create a usable semantic index from that which already exists and, crucially, to know you can trust what you find.

The element of trust is one that is also still to be addressed. There is an implicit trust based on the users on interpretation of the site they are on. We read the BBC we believe it, we read Wikipedia, we believe it (even though it is user written) but if we are on 'Big Al's List of Stuff', we may seek corroboration. But there is no formal/technical mechanism for trust, maybe there doesn't need to be, but if we are to use this new form of knowledge retrieval as an agent for change in education, then it might be a good idea to know we are being told the correct information. The simple fact is that I could easily build a 'Capitals of the World' website that says the Capital of Peru is LiddellTown and, with good SEO, I could make it the de facto answer for people searching all over the world.

Which might be a good laugh, if nothing else.

So, there we have it, it seems that progress only creates a deeper thirst for more progress. I imagine it has always been so. Next week, I'll be banging on about the need to develop and market a replicator and a holodeck.

Labels:

2 comments

Tuesday, January 02, 2007

Stumble - You Know You Want To


As someone would have said if he were still alive, the Internet is big. Very big. (he may have even said it while he was alive, he was like that). I would add that, if you're not careful, it can be pointlessly big. Lets face it, the way most of us use the Internet is a bit like the Monopoly view of London, round and round the same set of places, rarely drifting off the beaten path.
It might be something like:
  • BBC/CNN/geographically significant source for news to see what's going on in the world
  • The Onion/The Register/you know the type of thing for offbeat laughs
  • Amazon/Play/your favourite retail therapy location to see what you fancy wasting money on
  • IMDB/Wikipedia/info site to answers questions and then pretend you knew all along
  • Your favourite forum(s) to share some wisdom with like-minded people
  • Places you end up as a result of ad-hoc searches, bookmark and then forget about
  • Sites sent to you for the 14th time by email that you eventually decide to click (generally yet another video of someone falling off/on/through something)
  • Oh hang on, I've not been to the BBC site for a while
  • You know what I mean, I'll not labour the point
Essentially, its a loop, round and round. I'd hazard a guess that we all work on a basic subset of a maximum of a dozen sites. On our Monopoly board, we get to see even less of London.

And this presents a problem. There is an awful lot of good stuff out there that we don't get to see (Obviously, there is an order of magnitude more rubbish stuff too).


This changed for me the day I discovered the StumbleUpon toolbar. (Note: this isn't a new thing, I'm not claiming a discovery, this is more on an homage type thing). But I felt inspired to write as today I was nursing my sick daughter, who had fallen asleep on my left arm, leaving me with only the ability to click on the mouse button on the laptop (typing was tricky). This is, just one of the many occasions, where Stumbling comes into its own.

The Internet remains, for the most part, a pull medium. You have to go look. There is no schedule, index or order of service. This is often good, it gives immense freedom with a 24/7, on-demand vibe. Trouble is, when you don't really know what to demand, you can easily get lost in the Internet Loop (which is only made worse by this multi-tab Firefox thing).

It reminds me of an old Jerry Sadowitz joke (probably the only clean one) about a guy who goes into a bookshop and asks for a book on making Persian rugs, he is told they don't have any so he replies "OK, what else do you have?".

In short, this is what StumbleUpon does. You can walk into the Internet and say "OK, what else do you have?". And, the joy of it is, its very simple.

Install the toolbar, tell it what you like, click 'Stumble' and away you go. Find a page you like, click "I like it", if its pants, click "Not for me". Over time, you'll get more and more of the kind of things you are after with the added benefit that everything you liked is stored on your page which can then act like a mobile favourites page.

Its hugely liberating, massively useful and is as near as you can currently get to making the Internet a push medium. You get to places that would otherwise have passed you by. No more will you look at your computer and think, "all that Internet out there and I've no idea where to go".

Just imagine what life would have been like if you hadn't seen something like this, a random Stumble during the writing of this post.

As an aside, and as previously trailed, Stumble is great for parents of young children. When the TV is monopolised by the toddler generation, StumbleUpon creates a 'channel' away from the TV that can stop the adult mind turning to mush after the 15th consecutive viewing of High School Musical.

Its already a big thing and I predict it'll get bigger. Get Stumbling, you won't look back.

Labels:

1 comments

Saturday, October 07, 2006

Spread a Lot of Happiness


Wrote this article a while back, it was published in Computer Headline magazine, thought it was worth a repost here.

Enterprise System Adoption and Scale Free Networks

It is now well established that the return on investment from an enterprise deployment is in no small way linked to the level of end-user adoption of the system itself. Change is never easy, and many implementations have been stalled because users did not adopt the new technology and processes necessary to make them work. New and increasingly complex applications promise great returns with their richness of function and interface. Unfortunately this can also leave the end users perceiving that, compared to the existing legacy systems, the new systems have more screens, more data to enter and generally make their job harder than it was before. This inevitably leads to resistance on the part of the users.

The traditional approaches to combating this resistance involve communications programmes that precede and ultimately integrate with the end-user training programme. A lot of money is often spent on conferences, user forums, newsletters and the like to ensure that the user understands and accepts the need for change and hopefully the benefits that the new system will provide. Do these approaches work? The desired ROI requires much more than the occasional convert or, at best, widespread apathy. If companies are going to achieve the excitement and support that they want from their end users, it is clear that some new thinking is required.

Now for the science. Recent scientific discoveries have shown that various complex systems have an underlying structure that is controlled by shared organising principles. These so-called Scale-Free Networks are made up of an uneven distribution of connections. Nodes of these networks do not have a random a pattern of connections; instead, some nodes act as hubs with many connections. It is the way that these hubs work that dramatically change the way such networks operate.

This research has shown that Scale-Free networks can be found in a variety of common situations. For example, the mechanics of the spread of a disease and the development of the Internet itself have been shown to obey the laws of Scale-Free networks. Further research has shown that similar rules apply to social networks and communities. It is clear that the end-user population of an enterprise system is a similar sort of social network and perhaps by understanding its characteristics, we can best influence the adoption of the system.

The keys to a Scale-Free network are the hubs. In the case of an epidemic, these would be the carriers - the few people who come into contact with many, many more, spreading the disease as they go. In relation to the Internet, the hubs are the search engines e.g. Google. We can easily see how the treatment of such hubs can have a dramatic effect on the whole network. Cure the disease carrier and the epidemic dies; bring down Google and much of the Internet becomes inaccessible.

In the case of end-user adoption in a large user community, the hubs are the key influencers in the organisation. These are the people that, by the natural force of their will or character, set the agenda for those around them. In any large group of people, there are always significant numbers waiting to find out what their opinion should be on a subject - and that opinion is, in many cases, set by a colleague or peer. These people are the hubs, the carriers and the ‘disease’ they can carry is opinion. The crucial point is that until this opinion is set, it is not yet determined if it will have a positive or negative effect on the network as a whole.

The science of Scale-Free Networks clearly shows that these individuals, the hubs, hold the key to the rapid diffusion of opinion or information. If they are detractors, then overall adoption will significantly decrease, if they are advocates then the reverse is true.

If you believe in the theory then this sets an intriguing and difficult organisational challenge. Traditional communication in an enterprise will usually follow a top-down, hierarchical flow manager to subordinate down the chain. Alternatively it could be a “tell one, tell all” strategy of mass communication. The theory says that neither of these will have the same positive effect as identifying those few individuals in the organisation to whom everyone else listens. These are not usually the managers, who can easily be eyed with suspicion, but the influencers.

The corollary of this is, of course, that most of the money you are spending on the communicating with everyone is being wasted on the majority who will only ever be influenced by the diffusion of opinion from the hub minority. Look around your office today and you probably know who they are, focus your attention on them; win them round, show them why the new system is of benefit to all and the rest will follow. They have to – it is science after all.

Further Reading: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scale-free_network

Labels:

3 comments

Saturday, August 26, 2006

A momentous moment


Looks like my new blog started on a good day, a few clicks on the Ads on http://www.checkmyrequest.com made an astounding $7.53. This , in itself, is not that momentous, but it has finally taken me over the magical $100 barrier, which means I'll actually have made some money from my web site ads for the first time ever.
Its not a method of income I could ever recommend, but that will cover the hosting costs for the first time ever with some money to spare.

Labels:

6 comments