I'm in a taxi whizzing down Boulevard de Magenta, one of those wider than normal Parisian streets. There are cheap shops where you can buy mobile phones, bags and wedding dresses in the windows on both sides and you wonder what surprise will come around the next corner.
We pass a sign for a Bach concert at one of the music halls, somewhere around Place de Clichy. My driver hangs a right on Rue de Rocroy and the street gets narrower. Small shops, a coiffure Mixte, a few not so stellar looking 2 star hotels, a cafe brasserie and tabac on every corner, a nail salon and a few optique stores for glasses. In my rear view mirror, I see travel agent and pharmacy signs as we weave in and out of even more narrow alleys and roads.
The meter is escalating and I can't help but think of the sign that had prefix prices for certain districts of the city. He is miserable and not worth the fight despite his fabulous taste in classical music which he has blaring from some device in the front seat I can't see. Salt and pepper, a sharp nose, no smile. He refuses to smile in fact and he hates that I am paying by credit card.
It was the first Sunday of the month and the sky was hazy but the day was warm, a rarity on Paris visits. I originally had plans to get out of Paris for the day with a friend, take in some gardens and have a picnic in a park however after the plans fell through, I changed course and decided after a taxi towards a more remote spot on the Seine, I would begin to walk and keep walking until the sun set.
One of my favorite things to do is meander through Paris without a clear purpose and just see what shows up. I had started my morning in a funky part of the Marais, where art and graffiti were plastered across walls before jumping into the cab. As the desire to see more nature and less people increased, it was time to move towards the water. And so....I asked the driver to stop on the Seine where there were very few people.
A couple of hours go by and I'm swept with gratitude as I sat along the Seine on that warm afternoon. I received a message at 5 am that same morning from an acquaintance who had just finished a ten day meditation retreat and I couldn't help but wonder during those reflective hours if I could do something like that knowing how hard it is to shut my mind down. He had asked me how often I meditated and I began to reflect on what meditation meant to me.
A meditative state for me isn't necessarily a specific place and time I dedicate to silence and breath but more of a state of being, one which I find hard to do in Silicon Valley, yet can so easily be brought into the moment I leave.
With a SIM card in my phone that gives me the ability to text or call, I purposely put it away deep into the bottom of my purse. Instead of the rings, beeps and web page loading distracting me, I listen to the sounds of Paris amidst the haze of the sky.
Most shops are closed, yet locals and tourists alike buzz past me on roller blades and bikes while boats zip past them making their way under each bridge that crosses the Seine as far as my eye can see.
From there, I figured I would pop into the Pont Neuf metro stop on the 7 line and keep going until some visual or sound suggested I get off - I love days like that when you don't have to be anywhere else other than towards what moves you in a given moment.
Despite my miles of walking, it still felt like a blissfully lazy day. Paris has a way of making even the most unconscious present, for her sounds, textures, smells and historical colors have a way of weaving you into her storyboard, inviting you to share her glory with everyone you encounter after you leave her soil. While her spell is cast on you, you become conscious of all of 'her' grandeur, including the most intricate details. A family rides by on bikes, a bright yellow balloon fixated to the boy's handlebars, an elderly couple walks their Jack Russell, a blue-eyed blonde blades past me alone followed by a dark handsome 30 something year old with Caribbean features.
A gray haired man in his sixties with a professor-like beard sets up shop nearby and pulls out a mahogany hard bound leather book and while I can't make out the text, my guess is that he's reading some Eastern European dialect. My gut says he's Hungarian.
Yanks walk past me with day packs, a baggy t-shirt hangs loosely over the older man's overweight middle. A brunette with a fabulous brown leather sachet strolls by ever so pensively.
She stops and then...pauses. As she looks out over the river, she pulls out a notebook and writes something down. Then, she raises her face, glances over at me and gives me a smile before tucking her notebook in a side pocket and moving along on her journey to who knows where. I wonder where for quite awhile until that thought was interrupted by a falling chestnut which landed near my right leg. The fallen chestnut dangled off the lengthy stone stair I had been sitting up against for hours.
As I continue to watch a very eclectic world drift by, an out of breath man and his daughter get off their scooters and begin to walk them along the main path that runs along the river.
A Chinese couple and their children speed by on bikes, the nearly bald teenage son's hands are off the handlebars, as if a symbol of his new profound freedom half way across the world while on holiday with his obviously wealthy family. A well dressed Italian couple give me a warm smile as they walk up the stairs next to me; the man's face turns to curiosity as he sees me writing with such purpose and speed.
Of course I'm writing about you I wanted to say with the same curious look and warm smile he gave me, but instead I redirect my attention to the sounds of the scooters and motorbikes in the distance, the taxi cab horns and the oh so familiar sounds that rollerblade wheels make, especially when the bearings are loose. I spot my first graffiti -- Buble But glares back at me from across the river, plastered in red on the back of a metal book stall, one of the many set up along the Seine to entice tourists to buy.
Then, I see two lovers embrace and I can tell from their energy that they both chose to be here and that it wasn't one edging the other on for some redeemable lifetime romantic moment of sorts.
Romantic it was however and they brought me into their world for just a moment. Accents told me that he was European and she was an Aussie and I couldn't help but wonder if Paris was a meeting place to ignite these two lovers to the next level or if they had been together for years.
I decide to walk to Notre Dame since it is almost in my view. I have been to this remarkable church at least a dozen times and yet I always get a slight skip in my walk when I see her beauty emerge as I make my way around the corner and she stands sprawled before me. All the cafes that line up along the edge of her have become tourist haunts -- crepes and coffees are twice the price and it's more crowded than any of the surrounding streets. Yet, I'm called into sit down at one regardless.
I choose the one on the corner at the very end of the road, mainly because the man making the crepes is so obviously French, which isn't as common as you'd think in Paris anymore.
So many crepes from local stands are now crispy from being cooked for too long. While I typically go for a savory crepe (mushrooms, ham and onions is my favorite), I opted for an apple sauce and coconut crepe and the 40 something year old charming local who made it for me, nailed it - Yum!!
I left the cafe happily with my decaf cappuccino and my perfectly cooked crepe and proceeded to the bridge where I sat along its edge watching a street performer, three massage therapists taking clients on in small chairs in the middle of the street and a not so funny clown who was attempting to get kids to laugh by holding a bicycle upside down while circus music played in the background. Before I left this crowded part of Paris I know so well, I contributed to the lock bridge, which is always a favorite stop of mine....the romantic in me I guess.
Montreuil Market Heading to Montreuil Market was somewhat depressing after the peace and serenity of Paris' magical river, the same one that artists have painted to and been inspired by for centuries. I remember visiting the market over a decade ago and then again a decade before that and from my hazy recollection, it's changed significantly. I seem to remember more antiques, paintings and jewelry, knick knacks and appliances.
Now it appears to be more of an old fashioned flea market, the kind you might find in America's midwest where trucks come for the day and try to sell cheap clothes and shoes for the widest margin they can get. There were aisles with tires, oil, toothpaste, soap detergent, tea kettles and even Middle Eastern traditional shawls, but for the most part, it was a collection of clothes heaped in piles for those with enough patience to sift through for hours on end.
If you haven't been however, I suppose its worth stopping by for the mishmash experience. Hours are 7 am to 7:30 pm at night and the market is open two days a week on Sundays and Monday's. The official address is Avenue du Professeur André Lemierre 75020 Paris. Télephone: 01 48 85 93 30.
The best way to get there is on the Metro Line 9 and the stop is Porte de Montreuil. The market is a short walk up the main drag from the exit to the station.
I come across fun jewelry with semi precious stones that an adorable Peruvian is selling. He is standing across from La Boulangerie de Papa, a quaint cute blue salon that also has an outside creperie stand on the corner. It's a mere block away from the Greek eaterie I had so much fun in four or five years ago on a cold winter's night. Gyros by the dozen....Moroccans nearby calling me to eat at their restaurant, offering deals and sweet nothings I can't make sense of.
Onion soup or fish soup, egg, salad and beef, chicken or fish followed by chocolate mousse, ice cream, cheese or fruit for E12 to 17 a head all inclusive and every variation in between although they all sound like the same offer after awhile.
Restaurant after restaurant on Rue de la Huchette, one of the main drags, I find that there are too many offerings to choose one, something I often feel when I'm walking through the Latin Quarter. Then, Le Lac de L'ouest for Chinese, Thai and Vietnamese food across from the creperie but I'm not in the mood for Asian food, so I keep walking through her narrow streets.
A sweet creperie stands calls out to me with far too many sugar rich toppings to say yes to, such as chestnut, caramel, chocolate, strawberry, lemon, sugar, butter, honey, Nutella, apricot, banana and coconut, all ranging from 3.50 to around 8 euros.
Then a warm smile outside a restaurant on Rue de Huchette stops me in my tracks and so I indulge. Aperitifs start with Kir Cassis ou Peche, Kir Breton, martinis, tequila, cognac, Calvados, Cointreau, Grand Marnier and Rum. I have a small Kir Cassis although he tops up my glass before I can say no thanks to another. For E9.90, you can get Provencale or Cocagne or Complete or Bistrot or Basquaise or Kermaria AND a sweet crepe (various choices) with either cider, coke or apple juice.
Boulevard St. Germaine to Boulevard Des Italiens via Avenue de L'Opera Food stalls outside on the street on Boulevard St. Germaine sprawl in both directions. Viva Espana Bodaga grabs my attention with scrumptious looking Spanish food cooking away in large pots.
I sample some ham and then more Spanish food at Monceau Gardens.
I walk into Neo Cafe on 126 Boulevard St. Germaine to make sure my directions are in sync as I begin to realize I'm much further away from my hotel than I had thought.
Florian directs me in a deep dark and sexy voice, one that suggests there's a wink along with it even when there's not. Within a block or so from this quaint little cafe, I stumble upon another one called Tennessee Cafe, which isn't quite as quaint and it seems like it caters to yanks with its burgers and English menus. What is adjacent to Tennessee Cafe however grabs my eye.
There's a little passage called Passage de St. Andre, which is a narrow pedestrian cobblestone street that runs alongside the cafe. It looks historical and authentic in every way but it's hard to tell in Paris where everything is ten times older than even the oldest American city.
Cafes, bars and restaurants are strung along the left as you make your way down the cute pedestrian passage. I decide to have a drink at one of the cafes but need to move around a homeless person on his cell phone in the glass entryway to Thomas Travel to do so.
There's another homeless person along Boulevard Des Italiens who has a giant stuffed tan colored Snoopy sitting near him as he lay tucked up in his sleeping bag. I spot the elderly man perched up against a giant iron box on the same boulevard.
He had set up a fishing pole that dangled a cup from some fast food chain and while it slowly moved to the wind, he occasionally yelped into the dark streets. Then the giant life-sized chocolate lion in one of the windows along Boulevard St. Germaine and a giant pink elephant.
Then, a cafe calls my name. Here I stop and have a cappuccino while I watch people waltz by for the next hour or so.
In the spring, summer and fall, a great place to hang out is on the banks of Canal Saint-Martin. People lounge here, picnic here, play music here and hold hands. On Sundays, two streets running parallel to the canal, Quai de Valmy and Quai de Jemmapes, are reserved for pedestrians and cyclists.
The Canal Saint-Martin neighborhood is nestled between Gare du Nord and Republique in Northeastern Paris, in the 10th arrondissement. The main streets around the canal include Quai de Valmy, Quai de Jemmapes, Rue Beaurepaire and Rue Bichat and I'd recommend walking down all of them. It's a charming part of Paris not to be missed.
Other areas I love to wander through and try to each and every trip I make to Paris, include the Marais near St. Paul, Bastille and Luxembourg Gardens.
Be sure to check out our Paris section for great shopping tips, restaurant finds, and other reflective pieces like this one. There's also lodging & top hotels in France, and top hotels in Paris as well as general content on France. (travel to France).
Unless you look out the window.
When I did that on 4 November 2007, halfway between London and Denver, I saw this:
Best I could tell at the time, this was Greenland. That’s how I labeled it in this album on Flickr. For years after that, I kept looking at Greenland maps, trying to find where, exactly, these glaciers and mountains…
While I’m sure there are good maps of Greenland somewhere (Nuuk? Denmark?), Google, Bing and the rest are no help. Nor are the fat world atlases. Here’s an island the size of a continent, with lots of Fjords and islands and glaciers and mountains and stuff, many of which were surely named by the natives or visitors, and there ain’t much.
But:::: good news.
There, out my dirty and frosty window over the trailing edge of the wing, was the same long deep valley I had seen seven years before. Only now I was equipped to learn what was what, and where. My GPS and the plane’s map — there on a screen mounted in the back of the seat in front of me — agreed: we flying over the Cumberland Peninsula of Baffin Island, an Arctic landform almost twice the size of New Zealand, in Nunavut, Canada’s newest, most arctic and least populated territory.
The valley, I discovered on the ground, is called Akshayuk Pass. It connects the North and South Pangnirtung Fjords, bisecting the peninsula. Imagine a Yosemite Valley with a floor of glaciers draining into Arctic rivers, flanked for seventy miles by dozens of Half Domes and El Capitans — crossing the Arctic Circle, through an island where the last Ice Age still hasn’t ended.
On the west side of the pass is the Penny Ice Cap, a mini-Greenland inside the forbidding and spectacular Auyuittuq National Park. Wikipedia explains, “In Inuktitut (the language of Nunavut‘s aboriginal people, the Inuit), Auyuittuq (current spelling: ᐊᐅᔪᐃᑦᑐᖅ aujuittuq) means ‘the land that never melts.’” Nobody lives there. Hiking across it ranges from difficult to impossible. The only way to fully take it in is from the sky above, like I found myself doing right then. It was thrilling.
On the first flight over, I became fascinated by a mountain, just south of the Penny Ice Cap, that looked like an old tooth with fillings that had fallen out. It’s in the lower left side of this shot here from the 2007 trip:
Now that I could research the scenery, I found it was Mt. Asgard, named after the realm of Norse gods. From below it looks the part. (That link is to amazing photos by Artur Stanisz, shot from Turner Glacier, which Asgard overlooks in the shot above. Fun fact: one of the great James Bond ski chase stunts was shot here. See this video explaining it. Start at about 1:33.)
So now we have all these albums:
Which join these others on Flickr:
A digression on the subject of aviation…
A bit before I started shooting these scenes, a flight attendant asked me to shade my window, so others on the plane could sleep or watch their movies. Note that this was in the middle of a daytime flight, not a red-eye. When I told her I booked a window seat to look and shoot out the window, she was surprised but supportive. “That is pretty out there,” she said.
Later, when we were over Hudson Bay and the view was all clouds, I got up to visit the loo and count how many other windows had shades raised. There were very few: maybe eight, out of dozens of windows in the economy cabin of our Boeing 777. Everybody was watching a movie, eating, sleeping or otherwise paying no attention to the scenery outside.
No wonder a cynical term used by airline people to label passengers is “walking freight.” The romance and thrill of flying has given way to rolling passengers on and off, and filling them with bad food and failed movies.
Progress is how the miraculous becomes mundane. Many of our ancestors would have given limbs for the privilege of seeing what’s on the other side of our window shades in the sky. Glad all we need is to give up our cynicism about flying.
There are two common ways to build a thriving community.
The first is to begin with a huge audience and promote heavily to build a core, small, group.
The second is to begin with a very small, very passionate, audience. It helps to have both, but this is rare.
Most big organizations take the first option. They have big mailing lists with millions of members. There will usually be a few hundred die-hard members in the group to get the community started. Most customer service channels work well here.
Most amateurs rely on their existing relationships/passionate followings. They launch the community with their friends/relatives/existing connections and grow from there.
Both approaches can work fine (and often yield similar numbers). But it’s very hard to launch a community with neither a big audience or a strong, passionate, following.
Predicting The Conversion Rate Of Big Audiences Into Active Members
A common misconception is the conversion rates of big numbers.
Audiences of millions quickly become communities of hundreds. Using a few rules of thumb, we can estimate the conversion rates of big audiences.
The conversion rate is influenced by 3 factors; size of existing audience, strength of relationships/reputation with that audience, and existing competitors.
What % Of Your Total Combined Audience Will See Your Messages?
Most of the members in your audience can't be reached. First, we need to establish the real reach you have among your audience. Here's a few rules of thumb, it will vary by audience.
Multiply this figure by 0.25 to account for overlapping audiences (e.g. usually the people on your Facebook fans are those from your mailing lists etc...).
For example, imagine you have
Thus from the initial figure of 96000 you would be able to reach 2355 (9420 * 0.25).
That means just 2.5% of your total audience will even see the messages you send out (if you want to skip the maths, this isn't a bad rule of thumb to use).
But how many will actually respond or take action?
Whether they respond to your message depends both on the content of the message itself and the strength of relationships with this audience.
If the e-mail is good, assume 5% of the figure above will respond to your message. This varies based upon the quality of relationships you have with them, but 5% would be ok.
This gives you just 118 people (2355 * 0.05) to get the community started.
That's 0.12% of your original total combined audience
(again, not a bad figure to use if you want to skip the maths)
Will They Take Action? 3 Questions To Ask
Whether these 118 people will participate depends upon you, your company, and the community concept.
A passionate fanbase that loves you is clearly better than a customer list you’ve been sending discount offers to for years. Tim Ferriss is a great example of someone who can launch a thriving community in minutes.
If the audience loves the community manager, is passionate about their mission, and wants to associate themselves with the founder, they’re more likely to join and quickly participate. This varies by sector. B2C companies tend to do badly. Niche, focused, fields tend to do well.
1) Do they know and like you personally? Do you have a good reputation? I don’t have data here, but I’d guess 30% of strength is determined by your reputation.
2) Do they know and like your company and your company’s mission? I suspect this accounts for around 20% of whether people join and participate.
3) Does the community concept personify what they’re looking for? We have a detailed model for this. I’d estimate it accounts for around 50% of whether they join and participate.
Even if all these are really strong, only around 50% will become active members.
The rest are lost to a variety of factors you can't control (e.g. too busy).
This drops your figure of 118 to just 59.
Typically, the community manager isn’t well known (5/30), the organization is well known (15/20), and the concept varies – but let’s assumes 25/50.
This means 45% or 23 people will become regular active participants in the community initially. That's 0.02% of your initial reach.
The third factor is existing competitors. If there is an existing community in your sector, it’s far harder to persuade people to spend time in your community. Why join yours and not your existing competitor communities?
The crucial question isn’t whether you have competitors; it’s what % of the above figure participates in the competitor’s community. If it’s 1 in 20, that’s not a big concern. If it’s 1 in 2, that’s much more difficult to overcome. Your community has to be the only community of its kind.
Let’s assume 10% of the above audience participates in a competitor community. This leaves you with 21 active members.
How many People Do You Need To Start A Community?
Now you stumble across the big problem. Reaching critical mass usually requires at least 50 actively participating members. This sustains a high level of activity, lets members feel efficacy of impact, and is responsive enough to sustain activity.
For customer service channels, this will be easier. You can guide all members with a problem to the community to get answers. For others, it's a bigger challenge.
In this scenario (and this is the most common one) you simply don’t have the numbers to reach critical mass.
Of course, you could send out multiple messages to the audiences above to bring more people in, but the reach factors rapidly degrade by around 50% for each subsequent push.
To reach critical mass, you either need a bigger or more passionate audience.
The Core Challenge Is To Reach a >50 To Launch The Community
This is the core challenge that many organizations face when launching a community.
They simply don’t have a big enough or passionate enough audience to make a community succeed. There are all broad figures. I’ve tried to average most of the company’s that have approached us.
Our feedback is usually the same. Use the CHIP process (create content, host activities, interact with others directly, and participate in existing groups) to increase your audience size and your own reputation until the numbers are >50.
Community building begins long before you launch a platform.
It begins with building an audience that is willing to listen to you.
Everything else is easy if you have a big enough size or passionate enough members
|mkalus shared this story from jwz.|
Earlier estimates of the cost of a bike path, most likely attached to the sides of the approximately 2-mile western suspension span, placed the price at $400 million to $500 million. [...] Because attaching two paths would increase the weight of the suspension span, causing it to flatten slightly, the study suggested replacing the bridge decks with lighter materials, which could push the cost to $800 million to $1 billion.
Are you fucking kidding me? Can you imagine what a billion dollars of bike-infrastructure improvements in the city would look like?
Neither can I. But it wouldn't look like a single bike lane, hanging in the wind off a bridge.
Can you imagine what even ten million dollars of bike-infrastructure improvements in the city would look like?
Actually, I can: it would look like more than half of SFMTA's 2015 budget for bike infrastructure ($17.8M). Instead, we'll get a stack of design-fiction drawings from some parasitic consultancy. What the what?
Obviously improving bicycling infrastructure is a topic relevant to my interests, but this is a comically catastrophic use of public funds. Give me protected bike lanes on every major road in the city first, and you know what? I'll take the fucking train when I have to cross the bay.
We wrapped up the fifth Mozilla Festival.
There’s a lot of great things to share about the event, and here I’d just like to post the transcript from a quick talk I gave. It’s about the history of Mozfest and a light overview of the participation model.
Since 2010, participants come to the Mozilla Festival with an idea, no matter how humble or ambitious, and leave with a community.
Now in it’s fifth year, I’d like to share with you what Mozfest is teaching and learning. And how you can make the most of the weekend.
Five years ago, we had a crazy idea to do a festival in a public square in Barcelona. Among the hack buses and pickpockets, an educator named Jess and an engineer named Atul met and had an idea.
They wanted to make something to help teens remix websites and understand the underlying web technology. From their first user story at the festival, Jess and Atul evolved their hack into something called X-Ray Goggles. It included hackable curriculum and much of the methodology in what we now call Webmaker — a product which today reaching hundreds of thousands learners.
A year later the Mozilla Festival moved to London. In Ravensbourne College we found a modern learning institution w a true maker spirit. The partnership with Ravensbourne is incredible. We learn from the students, their staff, and in such a flexible, interactive space.
Our first year in Ravensbourne, journalists and open data experts were excited about how data-driven journalism could make storytelling more like the web.
Liliana from the Open Knowledge Foundation led a session called the Data Journalism Handbook. Her idea at Mozfest became an international collaboration. It involved dozens of journalism’s leading practitioners, from the BBC, Deutsche Welle, the Guardian, La Nacion, ProPublica, and many others. The handbook they started at Mozfest was published by O’Reilly and translated by community members into four languages.
Year after year, we’ve seen amazing collaborations formed and passions awakened.
Joe first came to Mozfest in 2011 when he was 16. His techie inclinations were transformed into a passion for teaching about the web. At Mozfest, Joe prototyped a card game to teach programming. And through community involvement, his card game evolved and became the ridiculously fun coding game, Erase All Kittens.
Here also he met his future employer, Decoded. And then founded his own company to to teach the web. This year Joe joins us as a Mozfest Super Facilitator, mentoring new facilitators on how to run interactive sessions.
For me as the Festival Director each year, the most exciting part of Mozfest is creating spaces for participants to learn and to lead.
And in that spirit, the festival is organized in a hugely decentralized way. From an initial 350 of us in Barcelona, we’re now nearly 5x the size.
I’d like to take a moment and acknowledge the people that make Mozfest happen.
If you are one of the 120 Mozfest volunteers and core team, I’d like to invite you to stand up and please remain standing. If you are one of 35 Space Wranglers who curate the Mozfest tracks, please stand. And if you’re one of the over 500 facilitators — nearly one in every three participants–please stand.
For everyone else: you may not be standing now. But by the end of the weekend, who can you teach? How can you take these ideas and inspirations home with you?
Will you stand with us?
Mozfest participants take the spirit of the festival home with them in many ways.
There are ways, small and large, to make the most of this weekend. Will you build the next tool to teach the web? Or write a world-class publication together with someone sitting next to you? Or be inspired to take what you learned and teach your community at home?
We invite you to make Mozfest yours.
You’ve arrived here with an idea. However modest or ambitious. And by Sunday evening, we’ll leave here as a stronger, better community.
Photo highlights and more #mozfest pics.
According to people familiar with the matter, Samsung is on the cusp of a major management shake-up. This news comes from the Wall Street Journal and stems from Samsung’s “brutal year” of witnessing a 60% drop in Q3 profits and declining smartphones shipments.
Last May was the first hint of a potential management shift as Samsung replaced Chang Dong-hoon as its head of the mobile design team with Lee Min-hyouk, known within Samsung HQ as “Midas” for improving the Galaxy lineup. Samsung declined to give a comment on the changes, but next up could see co-CEO and mobile head J.K. Shin step aside from his role to bring in B.K. Yoon, who currently handles Samsung’s home appliance and television business as its new mobile head.
Samsung launched the Galaxy S5 in April and is available in over 125 countries, including at the majority of carriers in Canada. The flagship smartphone reportedly outperformed the Galaxy S4 and shipped 10 million units in a record 25 days, but the WSJ states the desire for the GS5 has tapered off and Samsung has sold about 40% fewer smartphones, representing only 12 million units in the first 3 months of sales — the GS4 sold 16 million units for the time period.
Some say that Samsung’s GS5 lacked innovation and creative design. Samsung recently came out with a couple new smartphone designs that gained attention, specifically the metal-framed Samsung Galaxy Alpha and the Samsung Galaxy Note Edge with its curved display.
Here is Odell Beckham Jr. last night, making what might be the greatest catch in NFL history.
That video is beautiful, but there’s something that’s even more beautiful: Beckham Jr. before games, practicing exactly this type of catch.
This reveals the deeper truth behind his great catch: it was no accident. Watch how Beckham keeps one hand at his side, as if pinned by a defender; how he controls the nose of the ball with his index finger; how his eyes follow the ball into his palm. We normally think of this kind of catch as a feat of athleticism. This shows that it’s really a feat of preparation.
This is a very particular kind of preparation, systematically pre-creating the most difficult situations. You might call it High-Leverage Practice, because it shows how focusing relentlessly on pre-creating pressure conditions can set a performer apart from their peers.
It reminds me of a story about Steve Kerr, the former NBA guard who’s now coach of the Golden State Warriors. Early in his career, Kerr was having trouble coming in off the bench and performing his specialty, which was three-point shots. He tried to fix the problem by focusing on technique, shooting thousands of three-pointers in practice. It didn’t work.
Then one of his coaches, Chip Engelland, had an insight. The problem wasn’t the shooting. The problem was the pressure caused by Kerr’s coming into the game cold, without warming up. So Engelland and Kerr decided to try an experiment.
Here’s how it worked: Engelland and Kerr would sit on the bench together, chatting casually. Then, all of a sudden, without any warning, Engelland would yell NOW!, and Kerr would have to go shoot a single three-pointer, then return to the bench. Then a few more minutes would go by, with more casual chatting, then Engelland would suddenly yell “NOW!” an the process would repeat. For half and hour, they would do this, shooting only eight or ten times. And it worked. Kerr’s game performance vastly improved. Not because he was a better shooter, but because he and his coach had, like Beckham Jr., designed a smarter training space.
High-leverage practice shares a few common characteristics:
A recent article by People for Bikes details how street improvements made while introducing protected bike lanes have also greatly improved pedestrian safety in New York City. On streets where protected bike lanes were added, traffic injuries, the vast majority of which are suffered by people walking, fell by 12 to 52 percent. While these safety improvements are not necessarily unique to protected bike lanes, it is the risks faced by cyclists at intersections that prompted the redesigns of the streets.
This reduction in injuries is due to the reduction in the number of lanes of traffic making crossing distances shorter, the introduction of turning lanes making traffic more predictable, dedicated signal phases protecting cyclists & pedestrians from turning vehicles and reduced weaving of traffic around cars stopped for pedestrians.
Ironically, it is these safety improvements such as the protected signal turning phases that some drivers complain about. What they forget is that it crashes that are the cause of the worst delays. Traffic can be tied up for hours if a death or serious injury occurs.
These improvements are in addition to the reductions in sidewalk cycling which is not safe for cyclists or pedestrians.
Given all the benefits of protected bike lanes, it is time that communities speed up their building of all ages and abilities cycling networks.
I have another piece up at Ricochet: a review of Naomi Klein’s big book on climate change, This Changes Everything. It’s friendly but critical, looking at what the book’s themes of austerity, the local and extractivism mean for how we build politics against climate change. I’ve included it in full below…
Naomi Klein’s big book on climate change, This Changes Everything, is at once an extensive catalogue of climate change failures and a passionate defence of budding shoots of resistance. Much more than just an up-to-date account of where we are and how we got here, it is also a meditation on how to move forward — one that needs to be critically examined.
A litany of failures
Klein has a real knack for taking a tangle of scattered events and disparate characters and shaping them into a compelling narrative. The book flows easily, deftly weaving together threads of analysis and journalism. Although Klein begins the book in the maw of the lion, at a conference put on by the far-right Heartland Institute, which opposes climate change tooth and nail, her targets are not only the climate deniers.
She is at her best debunking the feel-good but unsuccessful attempts to deal with climate change from deep within the current system. From greenwashing billionaires such as Richard Branson to big green groups cutting deals with fossil fuel giants or geoengineering advocates ultimately looking for the Hail Mary response to unchecked emissions, Klein has no illusions about the dim potential for business as usual with a green twist. The juxtaposition, at one point in the book, of a sombre geoengineering conference and a raucous Audi corporate meeting separated by a wall is almost too perfect. “The reckless experiments the people in our room are attempting to rationalize are really about allowing the car people in the next room to keep their party going,” writes Klein.
These are some of the best parts of the book. Klein skewers the profound hypocrisy and blindness of false solutions that are still heavily implicated in the capitalist system, which she says is at the bottom of the inability to deal seriously with the climate crisis. But while bursting illusions is an important part of the battle, Klein also has very clear and particular ideas about how we should respond to climate change.
By examining three fault lines that run throughout Klein’s book, my hope is to add to debate on the most important question of all: strategy.
Abundance and austerity
One thread that runs through This Changes Everything is that of excess — and not just the well-known excess fossil fuels being burned and producing excess greenhouse gases, or even the excess confidence of those like Branson and the geoengineers, but a general excess of stuff that we are consuming. Klein blankly says that we need to reduce consumption.
The catch here is defining the “we” who are overconsuming. Klein makes no qualms about the fact that she belongs to the very top of the global distribution that has to “return to a lifestyle similar to the one we had in the 1970s.” The question is who else must do this.
Clearly the people of the Global South should not pay for any excesses that have contributed to climate change, as their participation in them has been, until very recently, minimal. The basic problem for the South is, in fact, severe underconsumption, whether from necessities like foodstuffs to basic technologies like indoor plumbing, simple time-saving innovations like washing machines, all the way to communications technology and advanced medicine. Klein acknowledges vast global inequalities and fully incorporates the unequal responsibility for climate change, as a climate debt to be repaid, into her analysis. At times, however, she comes too close to romanticizing a mythical simpler past and lumping further technological development in with a caricature of early Enlightenment science.
And it’s not just about the Global South. Incomes across much of the Global North have been stagnant for decades, notably in the United States, where the median household income after accounting for inflation has barely increased in 40 years, and consumption has actually flatlined for most. We may have iPhones, but many of us are still stuck in the 1970s.
Stagnation for many amid disproportionate growing incomes for the wealthy and rapidly rising carbon emissions raises the big question of economic growth one that is especially important as austerity has become the guiding economic program of many governments around the world in bad times and also good. To simply propose de-growth, as Klein sometimes does, may be too quick and even dangerous given the pervasiveness of austerity. Behind the growth/de-growth binary are fundamental questions about what is growing and for whom, and how is it measured.
An undue focus on shared austerity in the name of the climate has implications for political strategy. It’s true that people pull together in acute disasters as Klein describes, most notably in the returning theme of New York City after Superstorm Sandy. Yet broader, lasting organizing is much easier with some level of material comfort that gives people the time and security to participate in social movements. Such comfort, of course, should not and need not be bought at the expense of intense ecological harm. This is the lesson of the 1970s: radical demands that put our economic system into question, as Klein wants to do with her book, flourished in the US and Europe only after two decades of post-war prosperity for workers. And it was the intense austerity of those such as Reagan and Thatcher that helped shut these movements down.
Large-scale and local
Today’s distance from the Cold War has allowed for an immense breath of fresh air in Klein’s work: an unabashed return to the notion of planning. This is a welcome and important aspect of the book. Given the way climate change affects us all, and the best answers provided by elites who ostensibly believe in climate change ask us to trust in the same market solutions that have failed before, some form of democratic control over the economy sounds downright refreshing. Democracy is the answer to technocracy.
Getting down to the details, however, the picture Klein presents can be too simple. She argues for a very decentralized form of planning, where small-scale and local institutions are most important. Setting up another binary, she states that “real capitalists don’t plan.” But as the economic historian Karl Polanyi wrote in his 1944 opus, The Great Transformation, the free market was planned. It took a lot of conscious effort to create a market system that only appears to be spontaneous.
To add to the mix, capitalist firms hide within themselves a whole sphere of planning. The likes of GE or Walmart are enormous organizations that operate internally according to top-down plans — and they do this well. The problem is that the current end goal of all this planning is to realize the largest possible profit or maintain a high stock price. There is no reason, however, that these goals couldn’t be different and decided democratically. In Klein’s critique of corporatism and state bureaucracies, the bogeyman should be the technocracy that controls organizations for private ends rather than the size of the organizations.
In fact, we have a lot to learn from large organizations that take advantage of efficiencies internally according to plans: not least that they can provide more products and better wages and other conditions for the same inputs. We cannot retreat into the local and avoid the large. Klein gives the example of industries with large players such as auto or finance that were at the mercy of the state after the last financial crisis. These could have been socialized and transformed to serve democratic ends with their large scale kept intact. Their scale would have helped: think of the screaming needs for large-scale green infrastructure and large-scale investment in climate mitigation. The enormous obstacles to such a transformation were, as Klein often rightly says, political, not technical.
Yet it is possible for solutions at the local level to backfire, to decentralize back to the neoliberalism Klein wants to escape. Take the German energy transition that she uses as an example throughout This Changes Everything. Klein holds it up as a model of small, interconnected producers, some of them local power companies that have been taken over by municipal governments. These are the success stories.
At the same time, however, Germany’s greenhouse gas emissions have actually gone up in the past few years as a result of the push to shut down nuclear plants, which Klein acknowledges. But she is silent on another side of the transition. First, remember that Germany can pride itself on its modern, integrated energy transmission and distribution grid, which enables its alternative energy experiments, the outcome of large-scale planning. The transition has led to the creation of large numbers of small, private renewable energy producers who take advantage of this grid, and the state has guaranteed it will buy electricity from them at prices that cannot fall below very high thresholds. All producers, big and small, are buying equipment from large conglomerates who also participate in the benefits of subsidized high energy prices. German households, on the other hand, are left with soaring energy bills. This side of the famed transition starts to sound much more like another neoliberal experiment that relies on state support to redistribute resources in the wrong direction.
The neoliberal model like this one offers the familiar refrain of “disruption” advocated by the tech industry. In short, building new collective projects requires democratic control that happens on the local level, but the bigger picture needs to be kept in mind. In the long term, it may be easier to build a movement of citizens for more democratic control of larger-scale public works than try to “out-disrupt” the neoliberals who have mastered the terrain of dispersed, private solutions.
Polanyi is useful here again. He called land and labour “fictitious commodities” that had no place on markets, but noted that there were different ways they had been defended from the market. He pointed out that defence of land can quickly turn into reaction, a defence of conservative values that can ultimately lead to a defence of the market itself. The opposite of a large, high-carbon fossil fuel project is not necessarily a small-scale, local project; it can be a large, sustainable project in public hands.
Klein is absolutely right that we need more democracy and more planning, but each of these can take shape across a range of scales, with the local being one element that need not and should not supersede others.
Capitalism and extractivism
Finally, there is the big challenge posed in the subtitle of the book: capitalism versus the climate. In many ways, however, the main –ism at the heart of This Changes Everything is not capitalism. It is what Klein calls extractivism: a “dominance-based relationship with the earth, one of purely taking,” which is “the opposite of stewardship.”
On the one hand, the focus on extractivism is welcome. We don’t need more theories divining the next crisis of capitalism (whatever the cause) just around the corner; recall the old jab that the left has successfully predicted 20 of last 10 economic crises. Extractivism focuses attention on how technology has been used under capitalism and the long-term disconnect between the current model of energy-intensive capitalist growth and existing ecological boundaries.
This framing is part of an old conflict about the legacy of the Enlightenment. The problem is that Klein interprets the Industrial Revolution as the promise of liberation from nature, and thus a promise that has been broken by nature itself — nature putting us in our place. This differs from a more long-standing interpretation that sees the Industrial Revolution instead as the promise of liberation from toil and exploitation, a promise broken by capitalism.
Klein rightly articulates that our environment is outside our full control, but she underplays the extent to which we can shape it. We are not masters of the earth, nor are we mere stewards of a place beyond our remaking through reciprocal relationships.
At the end of the book, Klein recounts a visit to a salmon hatchery near the place she lived while writing the book. It turned out that the salmon she had seen on hikes were being aided by human intervention. “It’s a partnership of sorts between the fish, the forest, and the people who share this special piece of the world,” she writes. And that’s just it. We cannot return to a mythical nature any more than we can leave mass society. What we can do is change our relationships between each other as well as between ourselves and our environment.
Neither the economy nor nature are independent stand-alones. The economy is made and remade in our everyday social relationships: some of us work, while others decide what is worked on; some have access to any good under the sun, while others barely scrape by. Similarly, nature is never separate from our interactions with it. It is certainly possible to imagine a “swirling web of connections” that can exploit people and “expand infinitely,” as Klein lyrically describes capitalism, but that does not treat the natural world as its waste dump. Capitalism has outfoxed us before.
Human life, and life in general, is based on cycles of growth, raising again the question: growth of what? The growth of human creativity, for example, could be nearly boundless for all intents and purposes. The good news is that we are intentional creatures; that is, we have goals and find ways to reach them. The real puzzle is how to sustain social growth within ecological boundaries, not how to stop growth. Beyond a focus on the local, the austere and the extractive, there are question of ownership, planning and end goals. How do we turn the broken promises over the use and distribution of the fruits of human ingenuity into a common wealth?
A question of strategy
The major issue remains one of strategy. Klein understands this. She weaves a compelling story of strategic failures — from co-opting billionaires to co-opted big green — and provides very concrete ideas for the way forward. I’ve tried to complicate some of the dichotomies on which these ideas rely. A focus on austerity and the local can be co-opted into serving the neoliberal variety of capitalism already well entrenched today.
The Portland Coincidental Work Week is next week and we’ll be working on our plans for 2015. One of the things we want to include in our planning is Mitchell’s question about what does radical participation look like for Mozilla today?
Everyone who is interested in this question is welcome to join us next Thursday and Friday for the Participation work week. Please come with ideas you have about this question. Here is one idea I’m thinking about that feels like an important part of a radical participation plan.
I’ve worked at small software start-ups and I’ve worked at large volunteer-based organizations. There are many differences between the two. The speed that information reaches everyone is a major difference.
For example, I worked at a small start-up called Alphanumerica. There were a dozen of us all working together in the same small space. Here’s a picture of me in my corner (to give you an idea of how old this photo is it was taken on a digital camera that stored photos on a floppy disk.)
To make sure everyone knew about changes, you could get everyone’s attention and tell them. People could then go back to work and everyone would be on the same page. In this setting, moving fast and breaking things works.
Information doesn’t spread this quickly in a globally distributed group of tens of thousands of staff and volunteers. In this setting, if things are moving too fast then no one is on the same page and coordinating becomes very difficult.
Mozilla is not a small start-up where everyone is physically together in the same space. We need to move fast though, so how can we iterate and respond quickly and keep everyone on the same page?
Slow Down To Go Fast Later
It might seem odd, but there is truth to the idea that you can slow down now in order to go faster later. There is even research that backs this up. There’s a Harvard Business Review article on this topic worth reading—this paragraph covers the main take-aways:
In our study, higher-performing companies with strategic speed made alignment a priority. They became more open to ideas and discussion. They encouraged innovative thinking. And they allowed time to reflect and learn. By contrast, performance suffered at firms that moved fast all the time, focused too much on maximizing efficiency, stuck to tested methods, didn’t foster employee collaboration, and weren’t overly concerned about alignment
For Mozilla, would radical participation look like setting goals around alignment and open discussions? Would it be radical to look at other large volunteer-based organizations and see what they optimize for instead of using start-ups as a model?
I’m very interested to hear what people think about the value of slowing down at Mozilla as well as hearing other ideas about what radical participation looks like. Feel free to comment here, post your own blog and join us in Portland.
Some shots at the East Side Culture Crawl:
Outside 1000 Parker.
Inside 1000 Parker.
During the Crawl, 1000 Parker is like the Louvre – an overwhelming labyrinth of attractions. You are not going to see, or even find, everything.
Bicycles are everywhere, sometimes indivisible from the art.
Not to mention the useful stuff – like hand-crafted wooden bike boxes.
(That’s architect Matthew Soules in the background, talking to the artist, whose name, I regret, I did not note.)
As we debate the nature of change in Vancouver, we must confront those who wish to preserve “character” — an idea of past value that must not be changed.
Here’s an example, for me, of how this goes wrong. The Bowmac sign. Somehow, somewhere, someone has decided that this asinine reminder of a row of car dealerships on Broadway in Vancouver represents something that we should cherish, and that must be preserved. Except that it can be mostly covered over with signage from a US-based big-box retailer.
That “someone” is the City of Vancouver, whose Heritage Commission granted the sign heritage status in May of 1997.
Not all “character” should be preserved; times change, and the nature of the city must change along with it.
I was one of the councillors at the time who voted to preserve the sign, on the recommendation of many in the heritage community (and others) who thought this piece of Vancouver’s past worthy of keeping. The trade-off was the ‘Toys-R-Us’ scrim – easily removable – that allowed for the restoration of the ‘iconic’ sign of a Broadway past.
The combination BowMac and Toys “R” Us sign on West Broadway is both treasured and reviled by Vancouver residents. The sign’s current incarnation is a result of many compromises.
Owners of the Bowell McLean (BowMac) car dealership erected the 10-storey sign above their business in 1958. The orange sign was covered with hundreds of bulbs and neon lights. It was recognized as North America’s largest freestanding sign, and was visible from 18 miles away.
When Toys “R” Us purchased the BowMac property in the 1990s, they planned to demolish the sign. Heritage advocates protested that the BowMac sign was Vancouver’s largest, most visible, and most central neon sign.
The sign was designated a heritage landmark in 1997. It was retained, gently lit, and partially covered by a perforated metal sign with Toys “R” Us spelled in rainbow-coloured back-lit plastic letters.
A reminder of why I won't be missing Wikipedia.
AVONO: And this  could possibly constitute slander.
I wrote there that Christina Sommers is
A prominent right-wing supporter of
The Gamergate Conspiracy. I said
It there and on this page I here
Repeat those words and hurl defiance at
Your feet. And WTF?
AVONO: I would advise Markbernstein to immediately retract that statement.
That she is prominent is clear: she has
A wiki page, so she is notable.
That she’s right-wing may lack some nuance, but
You know, she is employed By AEI,
A famous think tank, right wing as they come.
Regarding her support of Gamergate,
I do agree the case is tenuous
And oft before I’ve urged she be removed
From Gamergate’s own page, but there my pleas
Have been rejected ’cause her photo shows
That some young woman somewhere does support
Some aspect of this sad and tawdry plot.
AVONO: Oh. I’m German: I thought “right-wing” meant “Fascist.” It must be a cultural thing. Never mind.
Meanwhile, some of the Gamergate folk have figured out who’s behind the nefarious Wikipedia account MarkBernstein, perhaps because it says so on my (former) Wikipedia home page, or perhaps by using the Google. Either way, my twitter feed and mailbox this morning will doubtless bring some special joys. As you see here, I haven’t been up to looking.
Randi Harper (@freebsdgirl) has been getting death threats.
A staggering number of men that I know and respect have spoken to me privately, apologizing because they didn’t know this was happening. I’ve related those conversations to other women, and they were shocked. They didn’t understand how men could not see these problems.
When I was a doctoral candidate in chemistry, about half of my fellow candidates were women. A little less than half – we weren’t there yet, but we were getting close.
When I was getting started in Hypertext research, about half of the top researchers were women. A little less than half – we weren’t there yet, but clearly many of the top people in the field were women. Two of the first three Hypertext program chairs were women, and program chair was the seat of power. Another of that crew has since been president of the ACM and has been knighted.
Throughout my career, my perception has been that about half my colleagues were women. A little less than 50%, perhaps, but we were still getting there. I don’t teach and I don’t spend time in universities, but naturally I do try to know the top grad students and best young scholars in my field, and it’s been clear throughout that more than half have been women.
It’s also clear that I’ve been fooled by a statistical illusion. Enrollments in physical sciences are roughly what they were, enrollments in medical school have remained roughly the same, but the proportion of women in computer science is way down. I’m not seeing this because I’m not seeing a sample: the average student doesn’t come to my attention. I’m only likely to notice the best – the ones who not only publish papers as students, but the ones who publish good papers as students, the ones who are already near the top of the field before they leave school.
And I had no idea of the venom that could be directed – not just by crazed zealots but by supposedly neutral and sensible Wikipedians – against women in computing generally, and specifically against one particular woman who may once have romanced a reporter. She’s an adult, she can have dinner with whomever she likes. But the Wikipedia pictures and headlines must name her and shame her (Allegations Against ___), and we must discuss at endless length, over and over, just what she might have done and whether anyone anywhere has said that it was wrong, because a campaign of GamerGate supporters is ever-vigilant for any way to condemn her and women like her, which is to say women in computing.
And then, an editor – a Wikimedia admin! – writes about this specific woman that:
I know other other allegations exist but will not state what those on WP are because that would be a BLP violation at the current time.
We need to be aware that there are other things the proGg side would like WP to say but we are nowhere close to having any sources
Holy McCarthy! In my view, no one can honorably assist an enterprise that condones this.
So, yes, GamerGate has been an eye opener.
In his, to my mind, fair defense of Uber, Mark Suster made a very important observation about the reality of business:
Let’s put this into perspective. As somebody who has to rub shoulders with big tech companies often I can tell you that there is much blood spilled in the competitive trenches of Apple, Twitter, Facebook, Google and so on. Changes to algorithms. Clamping down on app ecosystems. Changing how third-parties monetize. Kicking ecosystem partners in the nuts.
It’s a brutally competitive world out there because there are extreme amounts of money at stake. I’ve been on the sharp end of it and it doesn’t feel nice. And I pick myself back up, dust off and think to myself that I need to think through the realpolitik of power and money and competition and no matter how unpleasant it is – it’s a Hobbesian world out there. It ain’t pretty – but it’s all around us.
This is particularly relevant to Uber: the company is looking to raise another $1 billion at a valuation of over $30 billion, and, as I wrote when the company raised its last billion, they are likely worth far more than that. Still, though, skeptics about both the size of the potential market and the prospects of Uber in particular are widespread, so consider this post my stake in the ground1 for why Uber – and their market – is worthy of so many sharp elbows. I expect to link to it often!
There are three perspectives with which to examine the competitive dynamics of ride-sharing:
I will build up the model that I believe governs this market in this order; ultimately, though, they all interact extensively. In addition, for these models I am going to act as if there are only two players: Uber and Lyft. However, the same principles apply no matter how many competitors are in a given market.
Consider a single market: Riderville. Uber and Lyft are competing for two markets: drivers and riders.
There are a few immediate takeaways here:
It’s important to note that drivers in-and-of-themselves do not have network dynamics, nor do riders: Metcalfe’s Law, which states that the value of a network is proportional to the square of the number of connected users, does not apply. In other words, Uber having more drivers does not increase the value of Uber to other drivers, nor does Lyft having more riders increase the value of Lyft to other riders, at least not directly.
However, the driver and rider markets do interact, and it’s that interaction that creates a winner-take-all dynamic. Consider the case in which one of the two services – let’s say Uber – gains a majority share of riders (we’ll talk about how that might occur in the next section):
In this scenario Lyft by necessity moves in the opposite direction:
The end result of this cycle, repeated over months, looks something like this:
There are three additional points to make:
It doesn’t matter that drivers may work for both Uber and Lyft. If the majority of the ride requests are coming from Uber, they are going to be taking a significantly greater percentage of driver time, and every minute a driver spends on a rider job is a minute that driver is unavailable to the other service. Moreover, this monopolization of driver time accelerates as one platform becomes ever more popular with riders. Unless there is a massive supply of drivers, it is very difficult for the 2nd-place car service to ever get its liquidity to the same level as the market leader (much less the 3rd or 4th entrants in a market)
The unshaded portion of the “Riders” pool are people who regularly use both Uber and Lyft. The key takeaway is that that number is small: most people will only use one or the other, because ride-sharing services are relatively undifferentiated. This may seem counterintuitive, but in fact in markets where:
…Customers tend to build allegiance to a brand and persist with that brand unless they are given a good reason to change; it’s simply not worth the time and effort to constantly compare services at the moment of purchase3 (in fact, the entire consumer packaged goods industry is based on this principle).
In the case of Uber and Lyft, ride-sharing is (theoretically) habitual, both companies will ensure the prices are similar, and the primary means of differentiation is car liquidity, which works in the favor of the larger service. Over time it is reasonable to assume that the majority player will become dominant
I briefly mentioned price: clearly this is the easiest way to differentiate a service, particularly for a new entrant with relatively low liquidity (or the 2nd place player, for that matter). However, the larger service is heavily incentivized to at least price match. Moreover, given that the larger service is operating at greater scale, it almost certainly has more latitude to lower prices and keep them low for a longer period of time than the new entrant. Or, as is the case with ride-sharing, a company like Uber has as much investor cash as they need to compete at unsustainably low prices
In summary, these are the key takeaways when it comes to competition for a single-city:
There is a strong “rich get richer” dynamic as drivers follow riders which increases liquidity which attracts riders. This is the network effect that matters, and is in many ways similar to app ecosystem dynamics (developers follow users which which increases the number and quality of apps which attracts users)
It doesn’t matter if drivers work for both services, because what matters is availability, and availability will be increasingly monopolized by the dominant service
Riders do not have the time and patience to regularly compare services; most will choose one and stick with it unless the alternative is clearly superior. And, because of the prior two points, it is almost certainly the larger player that will offer superior service
It is absolutely true that all of the market dynamics I described in the previous section don’t have a direct impact on geographically disperse cities, which is another common objection to Uber’s potential. What good is a network effect between drivers and riders if it doesn’t travel?
There is, however, a relationship between geographically disperse cities, and it occurs in the rider market, which, as I noted in the previous section, is the market where the divergence between the dominant and secondary services takes root. Specifically:
Pre-existing services launch with an already established brand and significant mindshare among potential riders. Uber is an excellent example here: the company is constantly in the news, and their launch in a new city makes news, creating a pool of riders whose preference from the get-go is for Uber
Travelers, particularly frequent business travelers, are very high volume users of ride-sharing services. These travelers don’t leave their preferences at home – when they arrive at an airport they will almost always first try their preferred service, just as if they were at home, increasing demand for that service, which will increase supply, etc. In this way preference acts as a type of contagion that travels between cities with travelers as the host organism
Most important of all, though, is the first-mover effect. In any commodity-type market where it is difficult to change consumer preference there is a big advantage to being first. This means that when your competitor arrives, they are already in a minority position and working against all of the “rich get richer” effects I detailed above.
This explains Uber and Lyft’s crazy amounts of fundraising and aggressive roll-out schedules, even though such a strategy is incredibly expensive and results in a huge number of markets that are years away from profitability (Uber, for example, is in well over 100 cities but makes almost all its money from its top five). Starting out second is the surest route to finishing second, and, given the dynamics I’ve described above, that’s as good as finishing last.
What I’ve described up to this point explain what has happened between Uber and Lyft to-date. Still, while I’ve addressed many common objections to Uber’s valuation in particular, there remains the question of just how much this market is worth in aggregate. After all, as Aswath Damodaran, the NYU Stern professor of finance and valuations expert detailed, the taxi market is worth at most $100 billion which calls into question Uber’s rumored $30 billion valuation.
However, as Uber investor Bill Gurley and others have noted, Damodaran’s fundamental mistake in determining Uber’s valuation is to look at the world as it is, not as it might be.4 Moreover, this world that could be is intimately tied to the dynamics described above. I like to think of what might happen next as a series of potential tipping points (for this part of the discussion I am going to talk about Uber exclusively, as I believe they are – by far – the most likely company to reach these tipping points):
Tipping Point #1: Liquidity is consistently less than 5 minutes and surge pricing is rare – Once Uber becomes something you can count on both from a time and money perspective, rider behavior could begin to change in fundamental ways. Now, Uber is not just for a business meeting or a night out; instead, Uber becomes the default choice for all transportation. This would result in dramatically increased rider demand, resulting in complete Uber domination of driver availability. This would have several knock-on effects:
By all accounts Uber is already close to this level in San Francisco, and there are lots of anecdotes of people all but giving up cars.5 The effect of this change in rider behavior cannot be overstated, especially when it comes to Uber’s potential valuation: taxis have a tiny share of the world’s transportation market, which means to base the company’s valuation on the taxis is to miss the vast majority of Uber’s future market opportunity
Tipping Point #2: Uber transports not just people – Uber has already done all kinds of experiments with delivering things other than people, including Christmas trees, lunch, a courier service, even drugstore items. However, any real delivery service would need to have some sort of service-level agreement when it comes to things like speed and price. Both of those rely on driver liquidity, which is why an Uber logistics service is ultimately waiting for the taxi business to tip as described above.
However, once such a delivery service is launched, its effect would be far-reaching. First, driver utilization would increase even further, particularly when it comes to serving non centrally located areas. This would further accentuate Uber’s advantage vis-à-vis potential competitors: Uber service would be nearly instant, and drivers – again, even if they nominally work for multiple services – would be constantly utilized.
Moreover, there is a very good chance that Uber could come to dominate same-day e-commerce and errands like grocery shopping: most entrants in this space have had a top-down approach where they set up a retail operation and then figure out how to get it delivered; the problem, though, is that delivery is the bottleneck. Uber, meanwhile, is busy building up the most flexible and far-reaching delivery-system, making it far easier to move up the stack if they so choose. More likely, Uber will become the delivery network of choice for an ecosystem of same-day delivery retailers. Needless to say, that will be a lucrative position to be in, and it will only do good things for Uber’s liquidity.
The implications of this analysis cannot be underestimated: there is an absolutely massive worldwide market many times the size of the taxi market that has winner-take-all characteristics. Moreover, that winner is very unlikely to be challenged by a new entrant which will have far worse liquidity and an inferior cash position: Uber (presuming they are the winner) will simply lower prices and bleed the new entrant dry until they go out of business.
To put it another way, I think that today’s environment where multiple services, especially Lyft, are competing head-on with Uber is a transitional one. Currently that competition is resulting in low prices and suppressed driver wages, but I expect Uber to have significant pricing power in the long run and to be more generous with drivers than they are now, not for altruistic reasons, but for the sake of increasing liquidity and consistent pricing.
In short, Uber is fighting all out for an absolutely massive prize, and, as Suster noted, such fights are much more akin to Realpolitik. As Wikipedia defines it:
Realpolitik is politics or diplomacy based primarily on power and on practical and material factors and considerations, rather than explicit ideological notions or moral or ethical premises
It’s ethics – or, to be more precise, Uber’s alleged lack of them – that has been dominating the news most recently, and is what inspired Suster’s post. And, to be very clear, I can understand and share much of the outrage: in my Daily Update I have compared Uber to Wall Street and said that Emil Michael should be fired (both links members-only) for his comments suggesting Uber might investigate journalists – Sarah Lacy in particular – who disparage the company.6
However – and one of the reasons I’m writing this article – I am also very aware of just how much is at stake in this battle. Lyft has raised $332.5 million from some very influential investors, and I don’t for a minute believe that they don’t want to win just as badly as Uber does. It’s perfectly plausible, if not probable, that Lyft and its backers, overmatched in a head-on battle with Uber, are conducting a guerrilla campaign with the aim of inspiring so much disgust in riders that Uber’s liquidity advantages start to slip (and to be clear, such a campaign – if it exists – is only possible because Uber’s management speaks and acts poorly frequently).7
To be perfectly clear, I don’t know anything further about this situation – or other recent Uber PR fiascos, like this Verge piece about stealing Lyft drivers – beyond the size of the potential prize, as detailed here, and the reality of human beings and their incentives in the presence of such outsized rewards. In my experience the truth ends up being far more gray than the press – which really hates threats to journalists – has characterized this most recent episode.
In fact, in some ways I’m actually far more concerned about Uber’s perceived lack of ethics than most, because if I’m right, then Uber is well on its way to having monopoly power over not just taxi services but a core piece of worldwide infrastructure, and nothing about this crisis gives me confidence in the company’s ability to manage that gracefully.8 I get that Uber’s willingness to fight unjust laws is what got them to this point, but as James Allworth and I discussed on the most recent episode of Exponent, there is a deeper moral code that ought to govern Uber’s actions. Moreover, Uber needs rider goodwill to prevail in the many markets where it is facing significant regulatory resistance: it is local citizens who determine whether or not local laws and regulations will be changed to accommodate Uber, and Uber is making it very difficult to rationalize advocating for them, or, if my Twitter account is any indication, to even ride with them.
Ultimately, this blog generally seeks to analyze business, not render moral judgment or tell anyone what products or services they should or should not use. I myself am mixed: I plan on spending some time in the white part of that graph above, at a minimum. I hope, though, that you now appreciate exactly what is at stake and why so many elbows are being thrown.
Yesterday I followed Tracy Hern's advice and turned off the Flash plug-in in Chrome/Mac, and things are now running faster and in less memory.
Haven't had a clipboard failure since. Of course that's not yet proof that the problem is gone. But it's a good sign.
Choose Preferences from the Chrome menu.
At the bottom of the page, click on Show advanced settings.
Click on the Content settings button.
Scroll down to Plug-ins.
Choose Click to play from the set of radio buttons.
Click on the Done button.
Now, when you visit a web page with Flash movies, instead of seeing a preview, you'll see the image of a jigsaw puzzle piece. If you want to watch the movie, click the image.
Feels really good. I'm not a big fan of movies that start playing while I'm reading, so I like this way of working.
Why not ship Chrome with this setting by default.
iOS users are already accustomed to a world without Flash. Presumably many of us are also Mac users. It's a much more humane way to use the web, without videos starting up automatically while you're doing other stuff. It seems that the human being sitting in front of the computer should decide whether or not they want to watch a movie. I imagine advertisers wouldn't like this. Maybe if you like your users more there will be more of them to see the ads.
Heading into 2015, I’m quite excited about digging into one particular question:
“How can we deepen how people teach the web with Mozilla, so that their teaching experience with us is of higher quality, their learners learn more, and their community leadership is fostered?”
The good news is that I think we have nearly all the pieces. It’s about sequencing and packaging them, and then testing this offering with close partners and allies to ensure we’re serving real needs.
Below is a snapshot of our wiki page where we’re fleshing out this problem set.
For the time being, we’re using the placeholder name “Webmaker Club” to talk about the initiative. Really, it’s a focusing exercise to think about how to best address the above question about retention and quality of teaching and leadership.
Have a peek at the plan below! Would love to hear if this is something that would resonate in your community or local digital literacy program. And if you’re interested to test out a Webmaker Club–in any capacity–please get in touch. The more, the merrier!
This is a living document to think aloud about how Mozilla & friends are evolving our web literacy offering to address the following problems:
We believe the best way to design a solution is to build it in the open with lead users and partners based on their needs and interests. It should be tested with real mentors and learners and be agile.
There are also substantial pieces already made and tested with this model, so much of what we’ll do in 2015 is consolidate and iterate.
This document describes how we imagine that process working and what we’re learning along the way.
“Clubs” is a placeholder term. As this initiative develops, it may or may not have the trappings commonly associated with clubs. The term is just to help us hang our thoughts on a noun. It could die. Or it could be what we call it. Let’s just see.
Roughly, we anticipate that clubs have the following elements:
A collection of activities to learn about the web. It includes instructions for the mentors on how to facilitate the activities and materials for learners. There may be ways to recognize learning and participation in these activities.
Hypothesis: Our theory is that activities should be modular and remixable, so mentors can easily modify them for their needs. Yet they should also be simple to use so that mentors feel confident. We also think learners do best when they are making something together and have agency in their own learning.
Simple processes for connecting with other clubs & mentors. The goal is to celebrate what’s happening and to help people learn from one another. Could be things like a shared hashtag and a discussion forum.
Hypothesis: To be successful with this initiative, we need simple ways for people to share what they’re doing in their club and to reflect. This will help us respond to real mentors as well as help mentors help each other. Good social interactions encourage people to stay engaged longer.
A way for clubs to express their own local flavor, to be locally relevant and to innovate based on local needs. And whatever the local instance looks like, there should be something that unites it globally with other clubs. Things like design elements, webpages or physical gear could be ways to show local and global connections.
Hypothesis: There are ways to be local beyond simply “geography.” Clubs could adapt to audiences and spaces (e.g. adults in a library or young people in an afterschool program), by language (e.g. Bengali or English as Second Language), by partner network (e.g. ThinkBig or CoderDojo). We think clubs will be most successful when mentors & learners can make them their own. Yet there is some shared DNA that connects all clubs.
Clubs should cultivate and recognize local leaders. Clubs can be where local leaders test and innovate, as well as create spaces where they have independence and agency that roll up to a larger community. There may be resources and staff support to coach leaders on being more effective and distributed including professional development.
Hypothesis: We have a stance on leadership: it works in the open, it’s facilitative, and its about having your own agency as a leader and creating spaces for others to develop their agency as well. We think the same learning methods that work for teaching web literacy will be effective for teaching community leadership. Make it about learning with others, interest-based, and blended online and offline.
These local groups will be interwoven with other mentors networks, especially the Hive, as a larger community of practice spreading digital & web literacy. Hives can start clubs, clubs could become Hives. We see these offerings as deeply interrelated. There is also huge opportunities to continuing expanding this work with Mozilla networks like Reps and MDN.
Hypothesis: The Hive networks have been greatly successful in having local roots with global community. They are lab and classroom for web literacy. Webmaker Clubs can find a sweetspot in these ecosystems that brings something new (like particular stance on web literacy and community leadership) while leveraging and integrating what exists.
This is a group of collaborators with whom we’ll co-develop the club initiative. It is a mixture of larger learning networks and individuals who are dedicated to teaching the web. We have worked closely with them on a variety of projects already, including Hive, Maker Party and Mozfest.
Whatever we build, it will be shaped deeply by the needs and ideas of this group. They are our distributed leadership. They bring expertise and experience, and our offering should be in service to them.
To make testing more iterative and bring in club creators when it best suits their organizational needs and timing, we will have at least three test cohorts (ca. one each quarter).
Each cohort will test a set of content, as well as the supporting materials and design principles of the clubs. There will be time for needs gathering, onboarding, testing and reflection in each cohort. Participants can join any cohort in any role that appeals to them. They can also repeat roles or move into other roles depending on interests and needs.
Each cohorts will be a mixture of the following roles:
Just listen in on the process. Participate on the mailing list and calls. Reflect on the materials and process. Ideally, audit if you’re considering doing a local version later.
Create a test club or integrate the test programming into activities you’re already doing locally. Have 3-4 weeks when you can be engaging with your learners and participating in club calls. There will be multiple cohorts of testers, so if you can’t make one round, don’t worry there will be more. You can also do multiple tests, as we’ll add modules and improvements as we go.
If you’ve done local programming like this already or have tested a club as part of another cohort, you could mentor others who are testing. You can advise and coach the testers as well as provide additional insight and analysis on what’s working.
We will continue to write and test the club activities and instructions with the club creators. We are aiming for at least 3 modules, as well as examples & simple ways to remix these foundational modules for different audiences (e.g. libraries, afterschool programs, family at home, etc.)
Learners complete this module knowing the core of reading, writing and participating on the web.
Learners go deeper. They build on their learning in the first module.
Build from above resources as well.
Learners complete this module knowing how to teach in the open, to be facilitative leaders and to embed making & learning the web into their practice. Pick up best practices for how Mozilla and other communities teach and lead in the open.
Learners complete this knowing the affordances of mobile and how to use the Webmaker app to express themselves and learn more about the web.
Rough timeline. All subject to change based on needs of the cohorts and other realities. More detail here.
Deliverable: Be scoped.
—> Initial commitment and calendar of club creator cohorts (alpha, beta, release to market). Requirements gathering and assemble assets.
Deliverable: Be feature complete.
—> Rough versions of all features (content, tools and support) are ready. Test “Module 1: Web Literacy Basics” with first cohort. Experienced club creators observe & coach new ones.
Deliverable: Be content complete.
—> Do usability testing. Content is ready for localization. Test “Module 2: Teach and Lead in the Open” and expand testing of Module 1. Rough versions of all web properties are ready.
Deliverable: Be market ready.
—> Campaign. Web properties well marketed. Module remixes ready for testing in different contexts (e.g. library, at home). Module 3: Webmaker for Mobile also ready. Monitor and cultivate community leaders.
Deliverable: Be reflective and celebratory.
—> Recognition of local leaders at Mozfest. Ship physical packaging of clubs.
We are trying to do this with minimal dependencies on other teams or external factors. These skills and roles we anticipate needing.
Really keen to dive into this initiative. And would love your feedback and, if you’re interested, a chance to test and grow this offering with your local learners.
Email us at firstname.lastname@example.org or tweet #teachtheweb if you want to get involved!
I got this link from Andriy Drozdyuk, one of the developers working on LPSS. It describes a framework called Colussus developed by Tumblr to support the implementation of microservices. "These are small, specialized applications designed to efficiently encapsulate a single feature or component." They are coded using a toolkit called akka, designed to "raise the abstraction level and provide a better platform to build scalable, resilient and responsive applications." This feels a lot like Ruby on Rails did when it was first introduced, and while it had its quirks, Rails became an important and influential framework. Here are some other HTTP frameworks built using akka.[Link] [Comment]
Samsung hasn’t had the best year, but the company isn’t sitting around hoping things will get better on their own. The company has already confirmed plans to trim the fat from its smartphone portfolio next year, and there’s talk of executive restructuring (including a new head of mobile).
If you thought that was enough to fight back against the 49% drop in net profit Samsung announced in October, the company apparently also has plans to cut back on its ChatOn mobile messaging efforts.
Word comes via the Korea Times, which cites one Samsung official as saying the company will exit the mobile messaging market “from region-to-region.” This is supposedly part of the company’s plan to restructure unprofitable businesses and improve overall profitability.
From the sounds of things, Samsung plans a gradual shut down, but it’s not clear how many markets (if any) will get to keep ChatOn. Korea Times cites one Samsung official as saying, “From a business point of view, ChatOn isn’t a business that can show improvement in the future.”
However, the article also notes that ChatOn has popularity in some regions and cites another official as saying it’s highly unlikely Samsung “will immediately drop its mobile messaging business as the ChatOn service has received positive reviews in some markets.” Later, these officials say the service will be updated in some countries “before being pulled down completely.”
So while ChatOn is popular in some areas (it does have 100 million users worldwide), this sounds like the death knell for the servie, even if it won’t be a single flip of the switch.
Samsung has yet to confirm this report in an official capacity. Still, if there’s fat to be trimmed, redundant applications with user bases that are dwarfed by competing solutions are as good a place to start as any, right?
It might come as a shock when existing influencers and leaders within your topic's ecosystem don't join and support your noble community efforts.
It's easy to understand.
If you're an influencer, it's likely the existing ecosystem works well for you.
Every new entrant is perceived as a threat to your power (power is perceived as a zero sum game).
You don't want to change the status quo if you benefit from the status quo. You don't want to help support others that might reduce your power.
This is why many sectors are dominated by a tiny group of highly influential people who support one another to maintain the status quo. Outsiders are challenged and denounced. Outsiders usually need to break through without their support.
Of course, you can ignore the influencers and build your own audience from scratch. Once you become big enough, they'll help you in the hope you reciprocate.
Or you can engage the existing influencers in a piecemeal way. You can interview them, offer them guest posts, and offer them a chance to use the community for further publicity. They might link to you and given you token support. But they won't do this until your community is important enough to make it worth their time.
The better solution is to offer them real power in the community - perhaps more power than you. You have to stitch together a network from the existing key actors within the ecosystem for the community to succeed.
This means giving them a real role in how the community is run - not token efforts.
You have to approach them with an offer of more power, not less. At times they will do something that you disagree with - that's the nature of community building. You get the joy of building it, but not authoritarian control.
The first Indian ecosystem launches. It won’t be the last.
We’ve had this “Early 2008” Mac Pro since, well, early 2008. It’d been showing its age but I fixed that.
It’s the family mainframe, does homework and Plexus and BitTorrent (legal stuff only, you betcha) and drives the big high-end audio system through a Benchmark Media DAC1 USB, also it’s my 15-year-old’s gamebox, which means there’s a BootCamp Win7 partition in there.
I was encouraged by Bob Lee’s Six ways to breathe new life into an old Mac Pro, and Bob’s was even older than mine.
So I got a new SSD; Crucial might not be the cheapest but they make it ridiculously easy to pick the right part for your box. I bought the SSD and the required Icy Dock container through Newegg.Then I bought Carbon Copy Cloner, which is just a nice rsync GUI, but I’ll pay $45 any time to not worry about picking the wrong command-line switches.
Then it took about 15 minutes to open up the Mac Pro and slide in the SSD, a minute to format it, three hours to clone the old system disk onto the SSD, and 30 seconds to tell the Mac to boot the SSD. And having now just spent 45 minutes or so installing Yosemite, I’m listening to Shonen Knife on the “new” six-year-old system while I type this (the music’s using 2.35% of a single CPU on what is after all a dual quad-core 2.8GHz Xeon).
The inside of the Mac Pro is pure industrial-design poetry. I needed a little jewelers’ Phillips-head to screw the drive to its tray, that was it.
The computer’s now unsubtly faster. It’s a system that’s fun to use again. My children will love me more.
In response to a clarion call for diversity figures, many tech companies have released figures on the gender and ethnicity of their workforces. Facebook were first, quickly followed by Google and Yahoo. Several more giants of tech have followed.
Here, for quick reference, we gather and visualise all the released figures thus far.
Between work, home, your phone, and maybe a tablet, you likely have multiple devices signed into your Google account at the same time. This can sometimes make your account activity a little difficult to decipher. All those connections and all those IP addresses. It can be hard to figure out if there’s be unauthorized access or not. And what about when you access your account from a public machine and then can’t remember if you signed out?
Google now has an answer for the above situations. Called Devices and Activity dash, it’s geared towards IT managers and their staff but it works just fine for individuals, too. The dash gives users a list of all the devices that are currently signed into their account. It also lists those that have been active for the last 28 days. You’ll be able to see which devices connected and when they were last online. Pretty handy.
There’s also a new account checkup tool that will allow you to quickly run through all the security settings you currently have in place without having to dig around and find each one in account settings. It’ll verify your phone number for two-step authentication as well as your recovery email address. It will also show you a list of recent connections and sign-ins and a list of apps and devices with access.
I don't think they know how to listen to technology. They of course, being journalists, focus on the money. But there's a lot of open tech available for them to use. They don't look there.
It's like the blind men and the elephants, or Don's Amazing Puzzle (try it!). You see what you expect to see. Journalism is conservative. It wants things to stay the same. Tech is the opposite. It's invested only in upheaval. There's your conflict.
The story of the last 20 years has been the story of the collision of journalism and tech. I've been working on this for my entire 40-plus year career as a software developer and writer -- what happens to story-telling when the tools of publishing are available to everyone.
Journalism stood by while blogging took root. They covered it, but largely dismissed it. They ignored "RSS". They ignored everything, including the threat to their art. I warned them many times, here on scripting.com, that they would regret letting the tech industry own their distribution system. But that's what happened. Without any resistance whatsoever. Journalism let tech move in and take over.
Yet tech has been a lot more generous than I thought they (we) would be. Perhaps because they understand as little about journalism as journalism understands about tech. Or perhaps because they want journalism to be independent of tech. Hard to know.
How to rebuild
The Prime Minister went to the Arctic for nine days and never spoke of climate change.
The words didn’t cross his lips, as far as I know. Yet the consequences of climate change should have been apparent all around him, assuming he was interested.
What kind of worldview can reconcile such disinterest with such predicted danger*?
One, I assume, in which the consequences of climate change are not believed to be consequential. That is, whatever happens in the environment won’t be all that significant, not in the next decade, maybe not ever. And technology, policy and leadership can respond when the times are ready. Just not now.
Conservatives in Canada, Republicans in America, Coalitionists in Australia and soft denialists in power anywhere don’t have much to say about climate change. There have no real policy innovation, and no desire to develop any.
So the strategy is not to say anything at all, and keep the topic off the agenda.
That was the consequence of the Prime Minister’s Arctic trip: to not raise the topic, and hence lower the expectations on what serious people need to say about climate change.
Business has raised the bar to about the same level: serious people don’t have serious public concerns about climate change. That, presumably, is why it doesn’t get treated as a risk, fiscal or otherwise, when Canada’s industrialists make another big push to tap fossil fuels and get them to markets. It’s apparent in the news coverage, or absence of it, on the expansion of terminal capacity for thermal coal in this region. Concerns about coal dust, yes; train noise, yes. Climate change? Not so much. Or not at all.
For most of our senior leadership, whether in legislatures, executive offices or editorial pages, there are no consequences of climate change that have to be treated seriously enough at the moment to justify change – certainly not pricing the carbon we export for its consequences to the climate – that would disrupt the status quo or break the silence now.
Or, they must hope, ever.
* As recently as yesterday: “New Climate Normal” Poses Severe Risks to Development—World Bank Report
How did you hear about Narrative and how long have you been using your Clip?
I discovered the Narrative on Kickstarter. At first I found it too expensive, but after 18 months it was still on my wish-list, so … it looks like I had to bow my head. I’m using it about 4 months now.
How often do you use your Clip and in what settings?
I use it when I leave the house, but not during the usual things like walking the dog or doing the groceries. Of course I did in the first week, but that produced quite boring images.
Please explain your decision behind getting a Narrative Clip?
I want a bit more illustrations for my blog, without the alert and the distraction of making pictures myself, during my activities.
Describe what draws you to this kind of technology.
It all started when I read about ‘lomography’. There are ‘rules’, but the philosophy behind lomography is summarized in “Don’t Think, Just Shoot.” This motto is accompanied by The Ten Golden Rules which are supposed to encourage spontaneity and the taking of photographs anywhere, while minimizing considerations of formal technique.
I tried to do this with my normal small camera, but most of the time it felt quite awkward. It’s not always polite to shoot in certain situations or surroundings whenever you feel the need. Even in a quite public place like a train or so, I don’t want to make people feel viewed or being my object.
From that moment I searched for another way to practice this kind of photography. Not diligent, but it was at the back of my mind.
How do you wear/use the camera?
I created a sticker with black dots and curly lines to make the camera look less serious. In this way the eye of the camera isn’t easily visible any more. I suspect people think it’s a music device.
What’s the most surprising and/or interesting photo you’ve gotten so far?
One day I put the camera on a shelf in a corner of my room. My intention was to show some progress of the painting I was working on.
The next day I discovered the narrative captured me Skyping, on the moment I was told my father just died.
There is nothing spectacular visible, but I still can’t delete them.
Do you have any stories around how people react to the Clip?
To be honest … nobody ever asked me what it is.
What is best moment you’ve captured with the Narrative Clip and why?
Last month I captured a shelf with pots of paint in a large DIY-store. I hadn’t noticed in real, but on the picture I saw an advertisement stuck on the shelf; an invitation to enter a lottery with the number on your invoice.
I did. I forgot. And yesterday I heard I’d won something! A good part of the price of the Narrative. It’s earning itself back.
What’s a specific use case for your Narrative Clip that you’re looking forward to trying out?
I’m looking forward to my visit to Taipei where I’m one of the exhibitors of an art fair. And the second summit is a backpack trip for another 10 days through the rest of Taiwan.
Further I want to create a fast picture-movie called ‘The people I could have met this year’, with all the unknown passengers with funny, weird or curious faces shown for half a second.
And I try not to forget to put the narrative somewhere in the garden when I’m going to paint the house.
What’s a feature(s) you’d really like to see added to the Narrative service in the future?
A solution to get the pictures on my Samsung. I don’t want to bring my laptop with me to Taiwan.
You have 4 months to help me out!!!
Anything else you’d like to add or other Clip photos you’d like to share?
I’m thinking about swallowing it. Wait a couple of days.