Quarter-ThoughtsMay 17th, 2009 View Comments |
A smattering of recent quarter-thoughts (half of a half-thought) on the different incentives between a custodian and an owner, what “original” really means, the power of asking questions in public, if decentralized responses are really the best strategy, and how much attention we really pay to everything.
- Fred Wilson, Use the Public Channel For Better Customer Service, my comment:
Point #4 is the most interesting part; in essence, “defaulting to the public channel” would be a way to flip customer service from a one-to-one response channel (cost center) to a many-to-many interaction platform (profit center).
Private data sits stuffed inside a data center or company waiting for the owner to make sense of it, but public data is open for anyone to make sense from (and ultimately, profit from); the owner becomes a custodian, a massively different relationship.
- Why do underdogs fail to adapt and test “better” strategies if they can’t adopt the “best strategy”? Malcolm Gladwell, Annals of Innovation, How David Beats Goliath.
- Nothing is truly new;
#1: “The trick is realizing that the success and failure of everything is all in your head”
#2: “In the end, I live and die on the inside of my head.”
Culture reverberates around, similar ideas voiced in different ways; it’s the way it’s always been and always will be. Even the “original” is influenced by the past, consciously and unconsciously; the new is shaped by the boundaries, possibilities, conventions and taboos of the past.
But current copyright law simply doesn’t recognize what “original” work really is in today’s content-rich world; intellectual property law has failed to catch up with how culture has adapted to new technological realities. Whatever can be copied will be copied; instead of fighting to suppress copying and remixing, shouldn’t we focus on learning and promoting how to do it right?
- Ask a simple question like “How would you compare StockTwits and Covestor”, and in a flash, you get a long answer, StockTwits vs. Covestor. I love it when the Internet works the way it should.
- “Bill [Gates] stole my girls”; stories and motivation from Mark Cuban.
- How Jennifer Aniston hit on Malcolm Gladwell (or not); part of an epic conversation over email between Bill Simmons of EPSN and Gladwell. Dig in to Part 1, Part 2 and Part 3 for more about “inliers”, running the full-court press, using a roster efficiency by playing a different game, eliminating the NBA draft, and how the force of individual personalities can shape teams, leagues and strategies.
- David Brooks, Globalism goes Viral:
In these post-cold war days, we don’t face a single concentrated threat. We face a series of decentralized, transnational threats: jihadi terrorism, a global financial crisis, global warming, energy scarcity, nuclear proliferation and, as we’re reminded today, possible health pandemics like swine flu.
A network of diverse, decentralized actors might be the best foundation for dealing with decentralized events such as swine flu, given the advantages that credible, empowered local actors have to create faster, “test-and-learn”-based responses; but we’ve also seen the downside: massive hype, misinformation and a failure to understand the bigger picture (context) behind these global events, a massive misallocation of time, resources and energy.
The real question: which type of method for organization, centralized or decentralized, has more room to improve?
- Ed Cotton, People will give you 56 seconds:
The average time for a site visit in March of 2009 was 56 seconds. This puts tremendous demands on the efficiency of web design, meaning designers have to make sure people get what they need as quickly as possible. Perhaps this is why most websites look the same.
It also calls into question the depth that people want to go into to learn more. It’s not uncommon for clients and agencies to think about putting long form content and long copy into areas of their website, but with this research, one has to wonder if any of this material ever gets read or watched.
All of that may be true, but my guess is that the average is meaningless; instead, what’s the median? What’s the distribution of site visit times?
More interesting is the average of 111 domains visited per person; but again I’d like to understand the distribution of site visits over those 111 domains.
In fact, I’d be impressed if you read this far…
May 17th, 2009 at 14:43
Colbert vs Lessig on remixing.
Actually the remixed interview is better!
May 17th, 2009 at 14:43
Colbert vs Lessig on remixing.
Actually the <href=”http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QhmSjXmbbtQ”> remixed interview is better!
May 17th, 2009 at 14:43
Colbert vs Lessig on remixing.
Actually the remixed interview is better!
May 17th, 2009 at 15:14
As I've probably mentioned before, recommended: the movie / documentary RIP: A Remix Manifesto, the movie that spends a lot of time on Greg Gillis and Lessig…
(and it can also be downloaded and remixed…)
May 17th, 2009 at 15:14
As I've probably mentioned before, recommended: the movie / documentary RIP: A Remix Manifesto, the movie that spends a lot of time on Greg Gillis and Lessig…
(and it can also be downloaded and remixed…)
May 17th, 2009 at 15:14
As I've probably mentioned before, recommended: the movie / documentary RIP: A Remix Manifesto, the movie that spends a lot of time on Greg Gillis and Lessig…
(and it can also be downloaded and remixed…)
May 17th, 2009 at 15:24
On the difference between transformative copying and superseding an original work.
re: Whatever can be copied will be copied.
Surely you'd agree one cannot make identical copies of a major book or movie or song and sell them to the public unchanged.
That's the core of copyright. The rest is sorting out exemptions, like Fair Use etc.
May 17th, 2009 at 15:24
On the difference between transformative copying and superseding an original work.
re: Whatever can be copied will be copied.
Surely you'd agree one cannot make identical copies of a major book or movie or song and sell them to the public unchanged.
That's the core of copyright. The rest is sorting out exemptions, like Fair Use etc.
May 17th, 2009 at 15:24
On the difference between transformative copying and superseding an original work.
re: Whatever can be copied will be copied.
Surely you'd agree one cannot make identical copies of a major book or movie or song and sell them to the public unchanged.
That's the core of copyright. The rest is sorting out exemptions, like Fair Use etc.
May 18th, 2009 at 04:56
I wish all social Q&A works as well as as your example : )
Seriously though, I really think there is an opportunity here. One that focuses on people directing other people to the best relevant resources, conversations, communities etc. Right now, all these are done in an unstructured way which is already creating lots of value (at least in my case).
If there is a certain structure to it, I can imagine more value being created.
(Don't sure if this makes sense, just some ramblings).
May 18th, 2009 at 04:56
I wish all social Q&A works as well as as your example : )
Seriously though, I really think there is an opportunity here. One that focuses on people directing other people to the best relevant resources, conversations, communities etc. Right now, all these are done in an unstructured way which is already creating lots of value (at least in my case).
If there is a certain structure to it, I can imagine more value being created.
(Don't sure if this makes sense, just some ramblings).
May 18th, 2009 at 04:56
I wish all social Q&A works as well as as your example : )
Seriously though, I really think there is an opportunity here. One that focuses on people directing other people to the best relevant resources, conversations, communities etc. Right now, all these are done in an unstructured way which is already creating lots of value (at least in my case).
If there is a certain structure to it, I can imagine more value being created.
(Don't sure if this makes sense, just some ramblings).
May 18th, 2009 at 05:55
Making copies is one thing; selling copies is another.
Copyright law isn't a universal truth, it's merely a representation of cultural values at a point in time.
Do I know what copyright law should be (right now or in the future)? No, I don't understand the particulars of the debate well enough. But right now, if copies are going to be made, and it can't be stopped, then better to take advantage of it rather than let someone else exploit it.
For thought: http://www.ethanbauley.com/post/108941877/googl...
May 18th, 2009 at 05:55
Making copies is one thing; selling copies is another.
Copyright law isn't a universal truth, it's merely a representation of cultural values at a point in time.
Do I know what copyright law should be (right now or in the future)? No, I don't understand the particulars of the debate well enough. But right now, if copies are going to be made, and it can't be stopped, then better to take advantage of it rather than let someone else exploit it.
For thought: http://www.ethanbauley.com/post/108941877/googl...
May 18th, 2009 at 05:55
Making copies is one thing; selling copies is another.
Copyright law isn't a universal truth, it's merely a representation of cultural values at a point in time.
Do I know what copyright law should be (right now or in the future)? No, I don't understand the particulars of the debate well enough. But right now, if copies are going to be made, and it can't be stopped, then better to take advantage of it rather than let someone else exploit it.
For thought: http://www.ethanbauley.com/post/108941877/googl...
May 18th, 2009 at 05:59
Related: I honestly think this “chunk” was the most interesting part of Borthwick's recent essay: http://www.ethanbauley.com/post/109154974/the-c...
May 18th, 2009 at 05:59
Related: I honestly think this “chunk” was the most interesting part of Borthwick's recent essay: http://www.ethanbauley.com/post/109154974/the-c...
May 18th, 2009 at 05:59
Related: I honestly think this “chunk” was the most interesting part of Borthwick's recent essay: http://www.ethanbauley.com/post/109154974/the-c...
May 18th, 2009 at 06:13
I have this strange habit of not reading stuff that I know will be great, like the Borthwick essay you point to. There are already so much good stuff that I have yet to digest.
I am saving those for days where inspiration is sorely lacking.
May 18th, 2009 at 06:13
I have this strange habit of not reading stuff that I know will be great, like the Borthwick essay you point to. There are already so much good stuff that I have yet to digest.
I am saving those for days where inspiration is sorely lacking.
May 18th, 2009 at 06:13
I have this strange habit of not reading stuff that I know will be great, like the Borthwick essay you point to. There are already so much good stuff that I have yet to digest.
I am saving those for days where inspiration is sorely lacking.
May 18th, 2009 at 06:18
meaning, red the quick and easy to digest stuff first? if it's really easy it's probably not worth it
May 18th, 2009 at 06:18
meaning, red the quick and easy to digest stuff first? if it's really easy it's probably not worth it
May 18th, 2009 at 06:18
meaning, red the quick and easy to digest stuff first? if it's really easy it's probably not worth it
May 18th, 2009 at 06:22
Not really hard or easy but inspirational. Stuff like that comes once in a while (like your context post. I am still reading it every now and then) so it is more like saving them for later : )
May 18th, 2009 at 06:22
Not really hard or easy but inspirational. Stuff like that comes once in a while (like your context post. I am still reading it every now and then) so it is more like saving them for later : )
May 18th, 2009 at 06:22
Not really hard or easy but inspirational. Stuff like that comes once in a while (like your context post. I am still reading it every now and then) so it is more like saving them for later : )
May 18th, 2009 at 06:33
ah, that context post. I should go back and actually answer some of the questions from that one …
one I come back to a fair amount: http://www.gapingvoid.com/Moveable_Type/archive... or the PDF: http://www.changethis.com/6.HowToBeCreative
May 18th, 2009 at 06:33
ah, that context post. I should go back and actually answer some of the questions from that one …
one I come back to a fair amount: http://www.gapingvoid.com/Moveable_Type/archive... or the PDF: http://www.changethis.com/6.HowToBeCreative
May 18th, 2009 at 06:33
ah, that context post. I should go back and actually answer some of the questions from that one …
one I come back to a fair amount: http://www.gapingvoid.com/Moveable_Type/archive... or the PDF: http://www.changethis.com/6.HowToBeCreative
May 18th, 2009 at 15:55
It isn't only a question of copyright : there's a “right to privacy and right to publicity”
PDNPulse: Huge Settlement in Woody Allen-American Apparel Photo Case http://bit.ly/KZQ6Z
Here nothing was sold.
Needless to say it realli is quite complicated
May 18th, 2009 at 15:55
It isn't only a question of copyright : there's a “right to privacy and right to publicity”
PDNPulse: Huge Settlement in Woody Allen-American Apparel Photo Case http://bit.ly/KZQ6Z
Here nothing was sold.
Needless to say it realli is quite complicated
May 18th, 2009 at 15:55
It isn't only a question of copyright : there's a “right to privacy and right to publicity”
PDNPulse: Huge Settlement in Woody Allen-American Apparel Photo Case http://bit.ly/KZQ6Z
Here nothing was sold.
Needless to say it realli is quite complicated
May 18th, 2009 at 22:56
I mentioned this earlier, but the debate really isn't over copyright per se, but the vehicles available to get paid for (monetization) and get credit for (attribution) what we create.
Focusing on copyright without thinking about how we use it is pretty limiting.
May 18th, 2009 at 22:56
I mentioned this earlier, but the debate really isn't over copyright per se, but the vehicles available to get paid for (monetization) and get credit for (attribution) what we create.
Focusing on copyright without thinking about how we use it is pretty limiting.
May 18th, 2009 at 22:56
I mentioned this earlier, but the debate really isn't over copyright per se, but the vehicles available to get paid for (monetization) and get credit for (attribution) what we create.
Focusing on copyright without thinking about how we use it is pretty limiting.
May 18th, 2009 at 23:25
True.
Until recently you needed a tangible physical object in order to make a copy so getting a copyright license involved acquisition of the tangible product.
Now, in some cases, the user already has a copy (digital) and getting a license involves obtaining permission.
For the creator it's akin to the difference between selling cars and issuing drivers licenses, so yes I understand the problem.
However there's lots of sloppy expression in the 'debate' on all sides. It is always easier to work from specific examples
A teenager in Croatia who uses my image of footprints on a tropical beach on her blog does not bother me. The NY Times does.
May 18th, 2009 at 23:25
True.
Until recently you needed a tangible physical object in order to make a copy so getting a copyright license involved acquisition of the tangible product.
Now, in some cases, the user already has a copy (digital) and getting a license involves obtaining permission.
For the creator it's akin to the difference between selling cars and issuing drivers licenses, so yes I understand the problem.
However there's lots of sloppy expression in the 'debate' on all sides. It is always easier to work from specific examples
A teenager in Croatia who uses my image of footprints on a tropical beach on her blog does not bother me. The NY Times does.
May 18th, 2009 at 23:25
True.
Until recently you needed a tangible physical object in order to make a copy so getting a copyright license involved acquisition of the tangible product.
Now, in some cases, the user already has a copy (digital) and getting a license involves obtaining permission.
For the creator it's akin to the difference between selling cars and issuing drivers licenses, so yes I understand the problem.
However there's lots of sloppy expression in the 'debate' on all sides. It is always easier to work from specific examples
A teenager in Croatia who uses my image of footprints on a tropical beach on her blog does not bother me. The NY Times does.
May 20th, 2009 at 11:53
“vehicles available to get paid for (monetization) and get credit for (attribution) what we create”
and also vehicles for valuation to differentiate the good stuff from the junk.
May 20th, 2009 at 11:53
“vehicles available to get paid for (monetization) and get credit for (attribution) what we create”
and also vehicles for valuation to differentiate the good stuff from the junk.