Traffic court: excellent entertainment

April 29, 2009

This morning I was in traffic court in Redwood City, CA contesting a $333 fine for failing to stop at a stop sign…on my bike….turning right…at the back of the Spectrum ride pelaton! I’m happy to take some punishment for being so unfit that I was hanging off the back of the 50+ rider group…but $333!

Anyway, I figured an hour spent in traffic court at 8am to reduce the fine would be worth it. Now I know why Court TV does so well – the place rocks for the entertainment value! I watched as hapless motorist pleaded their case with the most outrageous excuses, to the applause and laughter of the assembled guiltless(!).

One lady was so convincing that not only was she not even in the car when given the ticket, but that she can’t drive, doesn’t own a car and was not even in the country at the time that the judge just dismissed the case to stop the laughter and get the court under control.

If you have a ticket I thoroughly recommend you go to court just to give yourself a bit of laughter at the start of the day!


Gin, TV, Social Surplus and 4-year olds

April 28, 2009

As anyone who reads this blog knows, I have a fascination with the state of the newspaper industry and its impending demise…it serves me well as a proxy for ‘old media’ in general. Its not the printing press, the TV screen, the glossy magazine cover or the stream of mindless manufactured hit records that I take issue with but rather the seemingly intractable belief that we, the consumer, are happy doing just that; consuming.

In Clay Shirky’s recent speech at Web 2.0 (posted here) he talks about cognitive surplus as an asset that is manifesting itself today in the way we now choose not only to consume, but also to produce and share; with the latter two beyond the control of media. Its mind boggling to me that executives at old media still don’t understand that people are no longer happy being spoon fed their entertainment, news, what to buy, etc. they want to be empowered to make choices, interact, join the conversation. Is it any surprise how quicly Twitter has become a key faciltator of social commentary….they simply managed to put a tool into peoiple’s hands that made it really easy. Old media seemingly go out of their way to make it hard for us to contribute, share and become a part of the conversation, and because of that they will be the dinosaurs of the 21st century.

As Clay points out, 4-year olds don’t understand why the TV set does’nt have a mouse and a keyboard so they can ask Dora a question as the movie is playing, and when they find out they quickly find something else to do. Its a phenomenon I observe in myself – I used to be happy watching some mindless TV show – but no more. Now I feel that when I am sitting watching TV I am wasting time – using up cognitive surplus that could be channeled to some useful purpose, or at the very least into something that gives me more self-satisfaction. So what is wrong with playing video games, editing Wikipedia articles or simply answering questions via Aarvark? I least I am producing and sharing, much less selfish than simply consuming! We need to learn from our 4-year olds, as how they respond today is only a glimmer of what we can expect in the future. Twitter and their ilk forbode the future of how we will consume, produce and share every aspect of our lives – adapt or die!


Prescriptive social software & WOM

April 28, 2009

Alice Marwick’s piece on the emergence of prescriptive social software solutions – Brightkite, Loopt, Foursquare, Whrrl, etc. – made me think about how all these products are about mimicking ‘real life’. Take Foursquare – in a nutshell all it really does is provide a mechanism for rewarding us based on places we go to anyway and thus helping us find folks to hang with – replacing the way we used to do things…go there and call up a buddy who lives nearby to see if he/she wants to join you.

The idea of prescriptiive social software as applied to online word of moth marketing and advocacy is really interesting. In ‘real life’ we advocate things as the opportunity arises – in a conversation, when asked our opinion, etc. – but rarely do we go out of our way to advocate something unless the mechanism to do so is put right in front of our noses at the moment we are most likely to be inclined to advocate – at the checkout, when registering the product, etc. Social software allows us to express ourselves with more immediacy – I dont have to save my thoughts for later for example, I can just post them on Twitter as they occur. But there is no real mechanism for organizing all these random thoughts, observations, recommendations, etc. into relevant buckets that can then be digested by our social network when they are in the right zone, and there is no real mechanism ,eyt, for provoding context.

So, does it mean that we will see the emergence of more and more prescriptive social software solutions, each addressing some specific activity we do in real life – exercising, shopping, travelling, raising our kids, etc to solve the context problem? Most start-ups are focusing on simply facilitating social connections- the real basics, but I believe we will have tools that help us organize our social interactions in the same way we organize our own lives.


Tyler Hamilton sours cycling…again.

April 21, 2009

Bob Roll wrote a heartfelt piece on Versus following the news that Tyler Hamilton had (again) failed a doping test:

Tyler Hamilton has once again run afoul of the anti-doping authorities of cycling.  I don’t think I need to explain the first time Tyler Hamilton was found positive. This second infraction makes his denials of his first infraction hollow and even more egregious.  For 5 years Tyler Hamilton has subjected us to a litany of denials that ruined the credibility of the whole sport and not just one athlete.  This second infraction is even more troubling because Tyler admitted that he knew before what he was taking as against the rules. Any person with a brain would understand the scrutiny they would be subjected to at their second and last chance to race clean. For Tyler Hamilton to possess the egotistical conceit that would allow him to continue cheating with drugs while our sport struggles with this monstrosity might be finally the first person to merit a lifetime ban from cycling.
Depression is a serious illness. There are hundreds of anti-depressants available to the millions of people that courageously suffer with this disease.  For Tyler Hamilton to reject the diligence and hard work of the mental health profession who could most certainly work out a therapy that would allow Tyler to minimize the side effects of the one anti-depressant he sites (Celaxa) is inexcusable. Tyler chose to disregard the medical advice of his own doctor and listened to rumors from completely unqualified people as a solution to what can be a very real mental illness.   For Tyler simultaneously to take a massive dump on two industries by reaching for the simple solution is abysmal.

The substance that Tyler Hamilton tested positive is called DHEA. DHEA is a listed ingredient in the over the counter medicine Tyler decided to take for his depression. It is a precursor to the steroid testosterone. It could be argued that the trace elements found in Tyler’s urine have no athletic benefit.  This may be true in a clinical sense but in the real world cycling is reeling from years of doping fraud and more importantly Tyler himself has stated he knew beyond a shadow of a doubt that DHEA is a banned substance and chose to take it anyway. The sanctions required to prevent this behavior in the future must be swift and merciless.  It is Tyler’s turn to have mercy on his fans and supporters.
I will be the first person to admit lionizing this man because of his truly amazing performance in the 2003 Tour de France.  With grace and courage Tyler Hamilton doggedly pursued his dreams with a broken collarbone without ever surrendering and eventually winning a spectacular stage and finishing 4th overall.  How shocking now to realize that the emptiness of his dreams extend to my own enjoyment of the sport and being to realize gainful employment form it. That is a bitter pill to swallow. Please pardon the pun.  I would rather know that the sport is clean and that the riders that race clean may never win then have the illusion of grandeur and the glamour of evil perpetrated by Tyler Hamilton. If this latest episode does not want to make you vomit and spontaneously regurgitate all of the lies that we’ve been forced to swallow you do not love cycling and there’s plenty of hypocritical sports that do not do anything to combat doping.  Please feel free to follow anyone of those which include but is not limited to: football, baseball, basketball, tennis, soccer, formula one etc…etc…etc…

Tyler can now feel free to hand in all his prizes and hopefully he can eventually look into the eyes of riders like Blake Caldwell and Viatcheslav Ekimov, both of whom he stole titles from, and sincerely apologize.  When Tyler was a kid and developing his competitive instincts as skier he was taught to apologize to the ski racers he had beaten.  Is Tyler a self fulfilling prophecy of doom?

Bike racing is an extremely tough sport – riders train for 5+ hours a day, rain or shine, for 9 months a year, and then race at a frenetic pace across some of the harshest roads race directors can throw at them. Its no surprise that pros constantly look for ways to improve their performance. But we hold those riders up as role models, even heroes, that our kids can look up to and idolize – much like most professional sports. In this day and age professional athlete’s need to be whiter than white and Tyler Hamilton has let down his sport and his fans twice now – which is reprehensible IMHO. Tyler Hamilton has been a huge cycling star and reaped the financial and other rewards that that comes with. He has let us all down and should be punished accordingly – life-time ban?



Should we trust the ‘cloud’?

April 16, 2009

As we move more and more of our vital personal and, increasingly, company information into the cloud……Gmail, Google Docs, Wikis, Flickr, Mint, Facebook, this blog…..we are increasingly placing our trust in the various vendors to ensure its safety, integrity and accessibility. In the past three days I have ‘lost’ two documents on Google Docs. And unlike my hard drive, where I can run an undelete program, switch to Time Machine or query the corporate server, there is absolutely nothing I can do about it……..ignoring the fact that I know I didn’t delete them – they just disappeared!

Do I have any recourse to Google for the loss – yeah, good luck with that! Even assuming I could get hold of someone in the Googleplex willing to help me out, their T&C’s are quite clear;

8.5 You agree that you are solely responsible for (and that Google has no responsibility to you or to any third party for) any Content that you create, transmit or display while using the Services and for the consequences of your actions (including any loss or damage which Google may suffer) by doing so.

Placing trust in the cloud exposes businesses to huge risks that could impact the ability of the business to function and, I am sure, is barely on the insurance industry’s radar. There’s opportunity in them thar hills though – cloud services backup and recovery – and so the cycle continues.