Who we are is what we follow

Robert Scoble says the secret to Twitter success is who you follow.

And I agree with him (though I only follow a fairly carefully selected ~170 people on twitter at the moment, that is growing every week.

But this post is not about that meaning of “follow”, rather I have a theory that is a bit broader, related to a past post of mine about Time & Attention.

This afternoon as I left my apartment and picked up my mail on my way out the door, I had a new issue of the New Yorker magazine waiting for me, as I took it out to take with me I had the thought “now I’m three weeks behind on my New Yorker reading” in short in the unit of time “unread New Yorker magazines” my count went up one to three (or four if you count an issue I “only” haven’t yet read the fiction story. I have been a New Yorker subscriber since college, reading almost every issue cover to cover, skipping only the event listings and for the most part the poems. And yes, that’s a lot of words and a fairly significant amount of time I’ve invested into appreciating the magazine.

Which got me to thinking - there is a group of fellow subscribers and readers of the magazine with whom the unit of measure “how many weeks worth of the New Yorker you haven’t yet read” would be a common bond. A bond of a unit of measure which in turn, is a bond that reflects something important about us - namely one shared aspect of what we pay attention to, what we follow.

At the moment March Madness is in full swing here in the US, a few days ago my friends were buzzing about setting up their “brackets” today my friends at times are complaining about their partner’s obsessions with the games (or about the wins and losses of the teams they selected). In contrast, however, I have paid almost no attention at all to March Madness, I don’t know who is winning or losing, who made it in, who was favored, or what has been happening in the first series of games. Here is a place where I am not following what a large number of my friends are following - either directly or indirectly as a result of their partners (I use partners to be gender neutral here).

But I am deeply aware of the political calendar, in the past few months I’ve been paying active and close attention to each primary election, and likewise a fairly large portion of my circle of friends has been doing the same - some of us working directly for a campaign, some following actively via Huffington Post, some via DailyKos, some like myself via Andrew Sullivan and some by more mainstream news sources. All of us also using various social mediums - twitter, facebook, email, our own blogs and podcasts, to help raise awareness and share stories and bits of news or speculation which we find compelling. In short with the US presidential election there is a strong and common thing many of my friends and I are following. And yes, some of us at least are long time political junkies, we did much the same things the past few election cycles.

For many people in the US and more broadly in the “Western” world this past weekend was Easter and one set of my friends and family was paying attention to that, preparing for the Holy Week celebrations, buying hams for Easter Sunday dinner, painting eggs and hiding them for their children etc.

For another set of my family and friends last week was Purim, a Jewish holiday and occasion for fun and drinking and the baking of Hamentashen.

I’m not religious so I was caught a bit unaware this year by Easter and by Purim. Made aware of Easter in fact by the signs in my neighborhood butchers shop that they would be open on Easter Sunday. Shopping at a local Safeway (large supermarket chain) I also noticed that Safeway had set up as they do each year a section of kosher for Passover products and across the way had their Easter candies and products. So naturally I assumed that Passover was also soon to happen.

In a call last week to my business partner, who is also Jewish but more practicing than I am, he informed me however that Passover this year is not until April due to the once every seven years additional month which is added to the Jewish Calendar to keep the lunar calendar generally in sync with the seasons so major holidays don’t fall in the wrong seasons.

I suspect, however, that someone at Safeway had some fairly simple set of rules for the buyers - when you start putting out the Easter products also start stocking Kosher for Passover items.

Via Twitter, though also via my friends blogs, Facebook statuses, personal emails and other communications I am noting even more acutely what (and at times specifically who) they are following, what Holidays they are celebrating, what conferences they are preparing for, speaking at, planning, what albums they are waiting to be released, what performances musical or otherwise they are attending or at times what they have just bought tickets to in advance. In short I can see the many ways in which what we are paying attention to overlaps and as interestingly more and more I can see some of the multitude of ways in which it does not overlap.

And via tools such as Facebook, Upcoming.org, and yes, Twitter, I can choose to start to follow, start to pay attention to some of the same things as my friends and I can signal out to them what I am following.

My shared stories on Google Reader, I suspect, paint a different picture of me than many people might assume. Via Google Reader for the past year I have, perhaps, mostly been signaling my political views - sharing a lot of stories from Andrew Sullivan, sprinkled with an occasional tech story. I do not, however, share everything that I am paying attention to, for instance, I don’t always share every story about advertising which I am reading and following - those instead I star for my own future reference, those I might share in a more manual fashion with my business partner or some trusted advisors.

At present I am a part of, following and paying attention to many different yet sometimes overlapping worlds. Professionally I am entering into the advertising world, so I am spending more and more time and attention following that world - and I need to find more and richer sources, subscribe to more print magazines and blogs, attend even more industry related events. I continue to be interested in the wider world of the Internet and “Web 2.0″ and that too is a professional as well as personal interest, so I am aware of many of the upcoming conferences, read and subscribe to many related blogs, and frequently attend events. I’m also quite interested in the future of music and more broadly in the future of media and to that end I follow and participate in some industry discussions, attend events, read blogs, etc.

I’m also a science fiction fan of select TV shows, occasional movies but mostly of novels. So I’m also paying some attention to when various authors I like have books published, I attend a small set of science fiction conventions each year, and I am a fan of a few select TV shows (mostly Doctor Who and Torchwood). I am not, however, as tied into this world as many of my friends, friends who subscribe to monthly magazines (which in many cases they also publish and write for), friends who attend not the one or two conferences I attend but far more, friends who aren’t just fans of but are professionally engaged in the world of science fiction and fantasy.

And I could go on, I’m a foodie so I pay some attention to the weekly farmer’s markets, to restaurant openings and closings, to special events related to food, but I don’t follow it as closely as I might like. I missed, for example, that a major restaurant I had been told about a few months ago was finally opening this month in NYC, had I been paying closer attention I would have timed a trip to NYC in time to get to be there for the “friends and family” previews (my sister’s boyfriend is writing a cookbook with the chef so I’m fairly sure had I known to ask I could have gotten in, along with the “VIPs” for as one food blog called it the hottest ticket in town). Now I’ll have to try for a reservation along with everyone else each time I’m in NYC or might be.

My point with this post is to suggest that what and who we follow shapes us, it helps to define us in a very deep and powerful manner. Whether it is the calendar of events of our religion, or the publishing schedule of our favorite magazine, the rhythms of our lives are set by what we follow.

And in turn when our rhythm is in sync with that of another person the chance of our also being friends goes up. 

I would prefer, strongly prefer, to date a woman (and if you are reading this via a feed etc, I’m a man and yes, I’m single at the moment) with whom I had many overlapping rhythms. Though as well I would hope that we were not entirely in sync, that she would follow and pay attention to some things which would be new for me, and likewise that I might follow and introduce her to new events and sources. For that, I think, would be ideal - ongoing new discovery and mutual sharing of passions and interests. Over time we likely would overlap more and more - would schedule ourselves to do things together - but hopefully as well we would constantly be discovering the new as well - new people to suggest new ideas to us, new sources of information, even entire new fields of study.

Notes on Transit - transitcamp without being there

This weekend in Palo Alto TransitCamp Bay Area will take place. I was not able to attend (in not small part because via public transit it takes me 2+ hours if I catch all the right trains and buses to get from my house to Palo Alto) but as my contribution here are some observations and thoughts I have about Transit.

First some personal background. I grew up in Oak Park IL, moved to Chicago where I lived for another 13+ years, two years ago I moved to the Bay Area. In 2004, I sold my car and have not replaced it, when I sold it (a 2000 model I had bought in Dec 1999 as a new car, that car had only ~13k miles on it). So for about the past 8+ years I have primarily relied on public transit, not on a personal car for the majority of my transportation. With the occasional taxi ride (often to/from an airport - more on that as well, and yes, to a degree taxi policies and licensing should be considered as part of overall transit).

Here are a couple of observations followed by a few suggestions. Primarily I will focus on issues specific to the Bay Area, but I’ll note some additional elements based on my experiences in other cities both in the US and around the world.

• Current transit is, mostly, focused on the needs of “commuters”
• In the Bay Area we, simultaneously have too much and too little transit (I’ll explain)
• There are many options for how to pay (as an individual) for transit - in the Bay Area we have nearly all of them (far too many)
• When thinking about transit private (individual) and private (corporate) should be part of the discussion, as well as all of the factors that influence those choices (tolls, parking availability & pricing, zoning requirements especially around the construction of new parking, metered vs free vs permit parking, zoning rules around mixed use vs. sole use vs. “strip malls” vs. sidewalk frontage or set backs etc)
• Tourists have different needs than residents, not all residents have the same needs, and those needs vary by time of day, day of week, month, the weather and the age & health of the individuals.
• The groups who have the most political influence are rarely those who have the most vital needs for public transit, though the aspects of public transit which do impact those with political influence tend to be those which get the greatest funding.

Here in the Bay Area by my count there are at least the following varieties of transit which should be discussed.

1. Private Cars
   • an unusual aspect being the commuter lanes & toll policies which combine to create an unique system in places of the bay area for ride sharing by strangers (essentially “hitching” but with a more fixed pattern)
   • toll policies preference travel in certain directions
   • parking and zoning regulations dictate certain patterns in SF while zoning & building patterns dictate others in the rest of the Bay Area
   • motorcycles and scooters
   • special cases of rental cars
   • special cases of tourist cars (”go cars” guided tours of San Francisco for example)
2. Shared Cars (City Carshare, ZipCars) and Commuter vans
3. Taxis (and to a lesser extent limousines)
4. Amtrak
5. multiple ferry services
6. CalTrain
7. BART
8. Muni - buses, cable cars, and light rail
9. A large number of public bus services - most one per town around the Bay Area, a few like AC Transit crossing multiple towns, and a couple which cross towns (TransBay)
10. Private bus services
    • Corporations (Google, Microsoft, Yahoo and a few others) have formal bus services for employees
    • Certain buildings & neighborhoods in San Francisco (and some buildings in other cities) have bus services, typically for residents or workers in those buildings usually between the buildings and main transit centers (Caltrain station being a main point)
    • Local universities have services for students between residences and campus locations and between multiple campus locations throughout the area (U. C. Berkeley in Berkeley, UCSF and many other schools throughout SF
    • Tourist specific buses (some of which do offer “on/off” services. There are some public tourist buses as well (in the Presidio, in Golden Gate Park)
11. Public handicaped special bus services
12. Greyhound
13. Bikes
14. Walking
15. Select light rail in other towns than San Francisco
16. Major airports (Oakland, San Francisco and San Jose)
    • these also have internal transporation and special buses connecting the airports and trains
    • for some reason no airport in the Bay Area has trains that run directly to the terminals
17. Private airports (and to a lesser degree helicopter pads)
18. Private boats & boat dock

That is a lot of transit options - many of which any one person rarely experiences and uses. Like much of the state of CA the private car, usually driven without passengers is a very commonly used form of transit. For that matter there are many people who never use any of the other services - especially public buses

Payment methods and models:

1. Pay on entry - most buses, MUNI in SF, Ferrys
2. Pay on exit - CalTrain - exact amount varies by start and end point (and varies considerably from a low of <$2 and a high of many multiples of that
3. Prepaid - MUNI (monthly passes), most Tolls w/automated pass, to a degree BART since you have to have a card with value added to it already (new “TransitLink” will have aspects of this
4. Payment via special unit - bus coupons in San Francisco, parking cards in SF

Some questions I have:

1. What is the GOAL of Public Transit? (Not or at least not solely I’d argue to “get workers to work”)
2. How should transit be funded (currently few if any transit services are fully funded by the riders in the case of public services)? Private services (buses etc) are parts of the cost of some other business (office building, large company etc)
3. How can the many specific focuses and political complications of have dozens of public transit agencies be minimized to better serve the needs of the entire Bay Area?
4. How can Public Transit in particular emphasize the public service aspects of transit, not just serve the needs of one sector of the public (businesses whose commuters have to get to/from work during “regular” business hours).
5. In particular, in my view, public transit should have many 24hr options, be sure to have 24hr access to hospitals in particular, should avoid creating isolated sections with no inexpensive transit options for much of the day, and transit should build into their business models flexibility to accommodate changing circumstances (planes which are delayed at airports for example)

Some specific suggestions

1. In San Francisco (and across the Bay Area more broadly) the last trains, especially across the Bay, should run for 1 hour AFTER bars & nightclubs close (and if on weekends this means running 24hrs - so be it). This both serves a very strong and real public interest (keeping people off the streets when/if drunk) and it as importantly would encourage more people to stay in the city after work for entertainment and/or head into the city on the weekends - without clogging roads with cars and without requiring preplanning in the morning (i.e. choosing to drive instead of taking the train). Combined with bike parking at many stations (already done) and with local bus/transit services so people could avoid driving from train stations home (perhaps also with friendly parking policies that encourage overnight parking without serious penalty)
2. Trains (and buses) which leave from Bay Area airports should run until also an hour or so AFTER the last plane lands - if this means running very very late, again so be it. Ideally the trains would be in communication with the airlines and be sure to wait until all bags were off and arriving passengers were directed from the baggage claim to the buses to trains (and were made aware that trains would be waiting for them). This might be slightly costly (but heck, I’d imagine airlines might kick in some dollars in fact) but would dramatically improve impressions of the public transit services for visitors and locals alike. A related point, ideally public transit should run TO the airports in time to clear security for the FIRST planes of the day (and yes, this might in the case of SF to OAK traffic suggest running nearly 24hrs - see a trend in my suggestions…)
3. Monthly (and Weekly) passes should be available WIDELY. From ALL machines and from all hotels - at a minimum as a starting point. My local Safeway almost without fail SELLS OUT of Monthly MUNI passes - that is completely unacceptable - each pass is simply a piece of paper - 1000’s more of them should be printed each month - NO store should EVER sell out of them. Chicago solves this by NOT selling a monthly pass - instead Chicago sells a pass good for 30 days from first use - but with the variety of ways transit s paid for in the Bay Area that might not work (can’t easily visually show the pass where that mode is needed such as on buses)
4. Fine amounts for not having a pass/ticket in modes of transit where one is required at all times (most of the bay area services) should be SPELLED OUT AND POSTED.
5. Unlike many cities, the bay area does NOT have a single, universal taxi number - and taxi rates are extremely high - which discourages many people from using or thinking about using a taxi. At a minimum there should be ONE number (perhaps per area code) for taxis which would work with ALL taxis. Outside of SF taxis can be nearly impossible to find at times (Palo Alto in particular I’ve had problems at times)
6. ZipCar and City Carshare are good for many people - but serve people who need one-way transportation or need open ended transportation relatively poorly (I most often need a car on days, such as this weekend, when there is an event or events happening down the peninsula which I would want to attend - and which I couldn’t easily predict when I might return from the events - both because I don’t know travel times and traffic well and because I not infrequently will stay late at event and/or want to go out with folks from an event - to get dinner for example). This is a very hard problem for car share services - but for me at least, and I’m sure I’m not the only person, $60/day though perhaps actually a good deal is a very big hurdle to overcome to think about spending to go to an event. (For that matter the $10-12 round trip to take Caltrain down to Palo Alto is pretty painful as well)

Much of the transit system fails because of serious gaps in the transit experience between commuters (many of whom have their passes paid for by their companies or significantly discounted) and the use and costs born by everyone else. I buy a monthly MUNI pass in San Francisco ($45) which is a good deal - and it makes it trivially simple for me to get on/off buses, trains or even the cable cars if I’m traveling within San Francisco - however I can’t, for example, use that pass to get to an airport (why the San Francisco airport at least for purposes of transit isn’t “in” San Francisco still befuddles me).

Yes, the trip planner is useful (though why there isn’t a mobile and iPhone interface for it I don’t know) and NextBus is also helpful, but even so there is also too little flexibility in too much of the transit patterns in the city - travel in the commute times is uncomfortable (very packed - suggesting that even more trains/buses could be run then) but at least trains and buses arrive fairly frequently - but if you wait just a bit everything slows to halt. And if you want to travel on, say a Sunday, good luck - your options shrink to almost none (no Caltrain back to San Francisco after 9:30 or so on a Sunday night for example).

Plus the payment complexities and the inability to pay on the train in most cases (you can’t even pay the gate agent at MUNI or BART but must fight with the often broken/flaky machines) also makes transit a frustrating experience. From CalTrain’s giving change only in dollar coins (and not taking payment on the trains) to MUNI’s insistence on using two different machines at times to get change (for dollar coins and for quarters).

So those are some suggestions and questions and observations I have about transit. I with I could have made it to the TransitCamp this weekend - but as I noted, it would have been costly for me in terms of time (and money).

Some thoughts on Obama’s possible running mates

This is, of course, still all quite speculative, as I write this Obama has a lot of momentum having won all the primaries this weekend, but the final result of the Democratic Primary is still quite up in the air. I am, however, an Obama supporter and I want to put a few thoughts out into the “blogosphere”.

First, I do not think an Obama/Clinton ticket would be a good or healthy ticket. (and nor do I like a Clinton/Obama though I’d be marginally okay with that if necessary but as I noted, I want Obama to win it all).

Nor do I like some of the names usually mentioned - Al Gore, Howard Dean, or John Edwards. Edwards has said he doesn’t want the VP nomination. I also don’t like the idea I’ve seen tossed out in some places for Colin Powell. A few others I don’t like - Wesley Clark, Richardson, or for that matter any of the other candidates for President this time around (all of whom besides the big three turned in pretty poor showings in debates and on the campaign trails).

My primary criteria for a VP is I want a VP who will, in 8 years time make a great president. I want the Democrats to pay attention to the long term - I want another candidate of the same generation of Obama (possibly even someone younger than him) who after 8 years at the VP would make for a fantastic President.

So two names I have heard suggested both seem like very viable and positive suggestions - the female governors of Kansas and Arizona. Both have proven an ability to win in states where Democrats are not typically successful. Governor Kathleen Sebelius of Kansas is 59, Governor Janet Napolitano of AZ is 50. Both are highly skilled politicians from states which could this year be in play for the Democrats.

While for the past few weeks I have been marginally in favor of Governor Sebelius as the VP, on further reflection this evening I now think Governor Napolitano would be a truly fantastic choice for VP by Obama.

Here are my reasons:

- She, like McCain is from Arizona, which makes AZ definitely in play against McCain in the national campaign.

- She has a lot of experience, is strong on a lot of important issues (immigration for one having led a major state where immigration and border issues are important)

- and at age 50 she would be 58 after two terms in the White House and would make for a great presidential candidate at that point!

- plus she will be term limited in 2010

Either would be a historic candidate, neither are however as well known nationally as Hillary Clinton - but as well neither would come with Clinton’s negatives - and both would be strongly in keeping with Obama’s message and movement for change.

And I think either (though slightly more likely for Governor Napolitano) would mean we would go from our first African American President to our first Woman President!

If you haven’t yet voted be sure to vote in your upcoming primary. If you can afford it, consider donating to Obama’s campaign.

Vote Today if you can - my vote is for Obama

I am not a Democrat. Nor am I a Republican. I have been a registered Independent since I moved to CA, while I was in Illinois I didn’t have to registered as a member of either party and I did not, though living in Chicago meant that generally the Democratic primary was the most important so I tended to vote in that (since few if any Republicans even ran for many positions from Chicago).

But this year I have a clear choice - I have been and am strongly supporting Barack Obama for President. Not only because he taught law at the University of Chicago (where I attended The College) and lives in my old neighborhood of Hyde Park, though both are positive factors in my support. My primary reason for supporting Obama is that I agree with his positions (more so than any other candidate of either party) and even more I respect how he goes about governance - what he focuses on, how he listens to and respects alternative positions and viewpoints, including those of members of the other party - yet at the same time how he has now many times over shown an ability to run a very efficient and masterful organization and shows planning and foresight for the long term.

For example, in both the Illinois Senate and at the US Senate Barack Obama has championed, sponsored and gotten passed a number of ethics reforms many of which share a common trait of focusing on transparency and accountability. He has pledged even more such steps when he is elected. Here I think is an example of simple, very hard to argue against steps which will go a long way to major reform of the government - and which take full advantage of our modern, digital age.

He also has shown a willingness to not shirk from his views or positions even when they might not go over well with a given audience he is addressing - notably he championed merit pay for teachers even while addressing a large teachers union (not known for supporting that position - which is one that I also strongly share). He has also frequently addressed gay and lesbian rights - again even when not addressing “friendly” audiences. I’m straight, but countless of my friends are not - and even were that not the case I deeply respect his giving gay rights a prominent place in his campaign and speeches (and unlike certain presidents he has not shown any unwillingness to even say the word “gay”).

On foreign policy I also strongly support his positions and approach. I was not anti-war - though I respect those who were - I do think there are times when we should act militarily, though to be blunt I think the time probably was during the first Gulf War or later on when there was an uprising in Iraq which we had initially supported but then did not follow through with that support. At that time we had a large (and real) coalition and a much clearer reason for acting (invading and taking over a neighboring state is a very clear and immediate cause for military action - much more so than the we now know fictitious reasons for the current conflict).

Obama’s position before the war was and is a very smart one - he was opposed to “dumb wars” - not the knee jerk, sometimes head-in-the-sand “all wars” but he recognized that Iraq was a dumb war. He has since followed up on that position and insight with opposition to further dumb bills - all while also being very active in veteran’s rights (he serves on some relevent committees in the Senate).

In short I think that Barack Obama is the best candidate for President I have had the chance to vote for in my lifetime. This will be my 5th presidential election (I’m 33) - and though like all previous elections in my lifetime a Bush or a Clinton (or both) are involved, I hope that is only the case for a few more weeks during the Primaries.

If you are not in a state voting today, I encourage you to contact and reach out to all your friends who are in states which vote today - and if your state has not yet voted making sure you are registered to vote and when the time comes vote. While I hope, like myself, you will be voting for Barack Obama, even more I hope you will vote and participate. This year we are seeing record participation levels in every primary - and overall I think this more than almost anything else is a positive sign for the country.

So please go Vote. Use the League of Women Voter’s SmartVoter site to locate your polling place and view a full sample ballot.

and

Yes. We. Can!

Update - check out the comments on this Talking Point Memo post for another great Obama related post

Economics, live video, and The World Economic Forum at Davos

I am deeply interested in Economics, for many years now I have been researching and thinking about a Networked Theory of Economics, a goal of mine for 2008 is to write and publish my book on that topic (ideally selling it as well so it reaches a wide audience).

So at this time I am very interested in what is happening this week in Davos, Switzerland. This year, in a fairly radical move towards openness, The World Economic Forum has a YouTube channel where they are posting many videos from the press events as well as interviews with attendees and leaders at Davos. Davos has also given a number of leading bloggers full access (though some sessions are off the record, quite a few portions of the conference are on the record). Robert Scoble is wandering through Davos with his cameraphone, frequently streaming live to the web via Qik. Jeff Jarvis and Michael Arrington among others are also in attendance and posting about their experiences as they happen.

As I wrote this, Robert streamed live, I jumped into the live chat. Yup, we live in science fictional times.

I am up late here in San Francisco, as I go to sleep soon, the 2300+ participants at Davos will go on about their day, when I wake up they will likely be almost about to eat dinner and heading to parties (apparently tomorrow Google is having a big party). And I know that because minutes ago I watched live video from and of my friends at the forum, streamed live across the Internet. Of course that same video started by Robert observing the President of Israel recording two videos for YouTube, which are also now likely live on the web as I write this.

Truly this is amazing stuff. When I was growing up, in the 80’s and 90’s CNN and cable news was just getting started, though my family didn’t even own a TV, the impact of live news around the clock was just starting to have an impact on the globe. But the rest of the world was still fairly far away, phone calls cost money - especially overseas calls, and data rates were measured in baud (and computers showed mostly only text and very simple graphics - though that changed rapidly as I was in high school in the late 80’s and early 90’s.

Now Robert’s cell phone on which he was recording and streaming live video has more computational power, I’m fairly sure, than the computers I used throughout high school and even into college. He almost certainly has multiple GB’s of storage and very rapid data connections to the web (3G I assume), a screen on his phone that is far denser than the screens we used then - and a camera that records at resolutions unheard of back then - heck nearly unheard of not all that many years ago.

And though Robert notes that not that many bloggers are at Davos this year, the impact of YouTube and bloggers is to help crack open in a fairly major way a gathering that had for years been shrouded mostly in secrecy into a far more open event. Still with a lot of secrecy and I’m sure a lot of security - but also impressively interested in engaging with the world.

In watching the video which I have embedded above, I was also struck by how interesting the group of co-chairs of the forum are - world leaders past and (near)present along side business leaders from across the globe - leaders who were not just white, anglo saxon males - but leaders of large and yes powerful companies from across the globe.

All speaking, at least in this press conference in English, and all seemingly comfortable with their roles, with each other, and for the most part with the press (though the press were for the most part mostly interested in talking to Tony Blair). Personally I was most interested in everyone else on the panel except Tony Blair and Henry Kissinger. I am encouraged by the engagement of the leaders of some of the largest companies in the world in the issues which face us as a globe.

My views on Economics, in the most simple form, is that all economics can be modeled as a network over time. What this means is that value is not fixed, not inherent but deeply and tightly embedded in the economic networks we create and participate within. I have to do more and deeper research and modeling, but in general I would thus be deeply opposed to protectionist steps - and also deeply suspicious of attempts to economically isolate countries (or other entities).

At MeshForum we talk about many types of networks and especially about interdisciplinary approaches to networks. The World Economic Forum at Davos is a prime example of the power of social networks - and the vital importance, even for the very “important and/or famous” of face-to-face interactions, of shared meals and joint experiences. But the spectacle of and around Davos also highlights that there is much more going on, there are other factors - new media old and new, political networks both within countries and globally such as the UN, economic networks both within corporations and between corporations, and newer, creative networks such as the Project(red) campaign which connects individual customers, brands, an NGO of the UN, and millions of HIV patients thoughout the world. $57 million dollars is, perhaps, a drop in the bucket compared to the cost of AIDS to Africa and the world, or to the revenues of the corporate sponsors of the project, but it is also enough to have had a very real and dramatic impact on tens of thousands of our fellow humans who were suffering and now have some measure of hope.

As I live and work here in the US, in this very expensive and deeply futuristic place called Silicon Valley, even here in San Francisco which has at least a small measure of history and culture as well, it is well worth remembering how large and diverse and complex our planet is.

And to recall how small are the links which connect us all. My friends are now there at Davos hanging out, meeting, and sharing meals with some of the people who quite literally lead this world - the leaders of large corporations, the organizers of major efforts to save lives (as well as, less fortunately some of the leaders whose decisions cost lives), and the leaders of many governments (or past leaders).

They say that we, all humans, are connected by just a few steps, but also at far too many times it seems that even in our own countries, within our own cities we exist and live in different worlds. In 2008, however, I see many signs that our common links, our common, global interests are starting to be made clearer and that technology is, in part, helping more people reach out to each other - and to engage and perhaps see the “other” as also human, also worthy of respect and engagement with - even and perhaps particularly when we do not entirely agree.

Being a bit political - this is the land of the free right?

Okay I have to get this off my chest. I am not normally overly political on my blog, I am deeply passionate about politics - but as a centrist, independent, neither of the major US parties really represent me so my options often have been the lesser of two evils (and on national campaigns the first few times I voted I went with a third party).

But I am also proud to be a US citizen, even today.

The news of late has been full of stories about how the President of Iran who will be in the US visiting the UN is not going to be “allowed” to visit Ground Zero. Full of stories and outraged folks saying that he should be prevented from visiting there, that he should not be allowed there etc.

I can see the logic (if barely) to the extent that he might have asked to go down into the pit, onto the actual worksite of Ground Zero (i.e. not to the public spaces and viewing/memorial spaces around it) but isn’t the US supposed to be a free country? Aren’t we supposed to be a land where our citizens, and our visitors and guests here, are allowed to go where they want on public spaces, to have free speech in those spaces, and have a right of free assembly etc?

I think the reaction is a worrying sign, a sign that we as a country (and our politicians) are increasingly scared of actual freedom, actual liberty, actual discourse and engagement with those with whom we disagree.

I am Jewish by ethnicity if not by active religious practice, I find the President of Iran’s comments in the past and support of Holocust deniers to be reprehensive. But, and this is a very big but, I think we are ill served by not engaging with him, by not letting him see our country while he is here, not bear personal witness to the site of Ground Zero.

In many other areas of politics and economics (which is more the frequent topic of my blog) I see a similar trend, an avoidance of those who might disagree with us, a refusal to allow for freedom of movement, an increasingly restrictiveness across many sectors. Here in the US it is now incredibly difficult for many non-US citizens to visit the US, whether as tourists, students, or workers (legally). Visa take more and more time to get and are seemingly revoked at a whim.

As a conference organizer I have to give a lot of consideration to issues of visas if I were to invite non-US citizens to speak at my conference. I also have to think a lot about what might happen if non-US citizens have problems getting into the country to attend my event. It is clear to me that this is having a major impact on people’s decisions about studying in the US and about their choices of where to work and what events to attend. In turn the fewer and fewer non-US citizens who are engaged at US events, teaching and attending at US universities, and working (or investing) in US companies the less engaged with the rest of the world we as a country will be.

In the next few months as we seek funding for my current company we will be grappling with some of these issues of engagement with the world. Our company will be providing advertising to publishers of online applications - in turn on average today most of these publishers see 60% or more of their traffic and users from outside of the US. To work with them and there users in turn we will need to be actively engaged outside of the borders of the US.

It will be a challenge - and one which is ill-served by the current political trends here in the US. By political here I am not solely talking about our public officials and politicians, I mean the tenor of the public discourse, the easy assumption that a visitor on our shores can and should be denied access to public spaces - that we should shy away from engaging with and discourse with those with whom we disagree - that not talking, not engaging, actively avoiding is apparently a wise strategy by current popular opinion.

Okay, got that off my chest.

On community building - what matters is why

Today in Silicon Valley there was an unconference on Online Community. I was traveling to NYC today so was unable to attend but I weighed in on the active discussion on upcoming about the fact that they charged for participation in this unconference (and though not high by the standards of major tech/business event, nearly $20o seemed like a lot to many of the commenters who felt that unconferences should, by their very nature, always be “free”.

Also today my friend Edward Vielmetti blogging from Ann Arbor Michigan wrote about discussions he had recently about starting and keeping a group going.

I think, however, there are some basic issues that hold true for online communities as well as hybrid online/offline groups (and for entirely “offline” groups). Basic issues that are so basic they often go undiscussed or thought about.

First - what is reason for the group?

Second - are the patterns of the group aligned with the purpose of the group. By patterns I mean the online tools being used, the timing of offline events & meetings, even how people are invited to join and participate in the group

Third - if the group is intended to persist (not all groups are, many have designed into them a planned end - think an entering class of students, or a campaign for a specific election) is the group’s patterns aligned with persistence? For example, does the group depend almost solely on one person (so that person ceasing to be active, for whatever reason, could define the end of the group as well)

Groups come in a variety of types. The purpose of these groups - and the meaning/import given to the group by members (and by non-members if they are aware of it) differs widely. Yet all to often people ignore these differences and assume that somehow all “groups” are akin to each other - that they all have the same broad structures & patterns and thus for many might all be manageable via the same set of infrastructure and technology.

A few types of groups

A group to accomplish a specific non-individual task. Team competitions are often a clear example of this - i.e. a group of people have to enter together and compete together and the group is thus often defined via this shared, joint activity. Frequently when an individual is no longer able to contribute towards the group tasks in the same way they first find other means of participating and then later have to stop their group activity (though a small handful might remain involved via coaching.  In these types of groups (and many companies fall into this type as well) what is crucial is an individual’s role in accomplishing the group task - and more fundamentally what that group task is and what has to happen to achieve it.

A group which exists to define trust. This is a bit harder to give examples of if you are not an active member in one or more of these types of groups, but there are many groups which exist not to accomplish a specific task together, but which are created around some common bond (often a shared experience and/or connection to an individual or organization) and which exist in large part to create and validate trust amongst the members. This trust enabling the individual members to engage with each other in an advantageous way - usually, though not exclusively for financial gain. I am personally a member of a number of these types of groups - they have usually been by far and way the most “productive” groups I belong to. Furthermore they are the “groups” which have historically built up lasting and strong friendships - as well as business partnerships.

With this second type of group I am primarily considering trust between group members. These groups serve a vital and powerful role of filters, once you are “in” the other members hold you (and each other) with some regard and are usually willing to extend deeper and more significant trust within the group than they would with a non-group member with whom they had the same degree of contact. A small example, in such groups it is by no means uncommon for group members to offer each other a place to stay - even to members they may have never previously met in person.

Groups which exist to define identity external to the group. There are countless examples of these types of groups - actively created by their members (honors societies, graduates of a given school, alumni of a given corporation) or created by other (races, speakers with a given accent, people meeting some physical criteria such as height or hair color). It may just be personal, but though I qualify for some of these groups - and have observed many others, I tend to find groups which exist primarily for external validation to be of minimal personal interest or utility. Many of these groups do also have significant intra-group activities (IEEE, Mensa, various alumni groups etc) and people do find value from these interactions with other members. But fundementally the purpose of many of these groups is to serve as shorthand, to validate and often rank someone within some external criteria (when they are formally defined - though it is easy to argue also with some such as race as well).

“Groups” such as religious organizations (churches, monasteries,  religious orders) may cross a couple of these definitions. For their members they often exist for a specific purpose - a church for example might exist to fulfill religious requirements. That same church may also serve as high trust group for members (certainy church members often help each other out). And finally a public definition of a religious order or group might serve in part to place someone externally. Religious attire - from a cross around someone neck, to the vestments of an Orthodox Hassidic Jew, to a Hajjib, all serve to define their wearer in at least two important ways. Externally to the group (as a clear “other”) and internally as a “fellow traveler”.

There is much more to explore here in this post I have touched on many topics each worthy of much longer bits of writing. Please leave comments if I have missed critical types of groups, if you disagree with my points (or even if you agree) and I welcome examples, counterexamples, and further discussion. At somepoint this summer I will be organizing one or more one day MeshWalks and I welcome futher discussion on types, roles, and definitions of groups.

Travels and June conferences

Later this week I will be attending the Future of Online Advertising conference in NYC. I fly to NYC Tuesday night (taking JetBlue so I anticipate fewer problems than with my recent United travels). I am looking forward to this conference as a chance for me to learn deeply about the current state of the online (and especially mobile) advertising worlds. In the next few months NELA Partners will be turning on and opening up to other publishers our advertising network. This week will be a chance for me to learn as well as to network with others in the industry.

I will be staying in the New York area for a few days after FoOA working as well as connecting with friends and family in the NYC area.

Then I have a few days here in the Bay Area, a weekend birthday brunch to organize and host, and then in the following week I will be actively participating at Supernova 2007 here in San Francisco. My hope is to organize a talk/session for the open space day on June 19th, and to be an active participant throughout the week.

Following Supernova I have a few weeks of work, probably mostly here in San Francisco, though I’ll likely also be spending some time in Palo Alto.

In mid-July I plan on returning to Chicago for a non-work conference, Think Galactic, a science fiction convention put on by a bunch of my friends in a political science fiction reading group I was part of when I lived in Chicago (though not as active as I might have liked as I often had conflicts on the nights they met). A bit left of my political leanings perhaps (though I’m pretty difficult to place on a left/right spectrum and in general think that politics is far more complex than just left vs. right). And yes, I’m a capitalist which is not a label many of the organizers would accept for themselves. But still, it will be a weekend of intelligent conversations with very smart people.

I may also return to Chicago for BlogHer at the end of July. Still trying to decide, I’d like to go, but two trips to Chicago in one month… (though given that I have so many friends and family in Chicago I’ll probably go).

Then in August I will probably be going up to Seattle for Gnomedex. For which I probably should register very soon if I want to go.

Somewhere in July or early August, scheduled around these travels, as well as other related events here in San Francisco and in Silicon Valley, I hope to hold the next MeshWalk. This time in Palo Alto along Sand Hill Road. Still working out the details (and the sponsors) but the basic plan is to work with a number of VC firms and companies to have a conference that is in motion, with lots of places to stop during the day. Stops ranging from small startups, to places of historical note, to VC firms. We may start with a “traditional” breakfast, likely will have lunch somewhere notable, and will end with a party. I hope to have the basic details set within the next week or two.

If you are interested in attending the MeshWalk, hosting it and/or sponsoring it please leave a comment or contact me directly.

And that takes me through August. I do not think I’ll be going to Burning Man this year, too much else going on, though I may go to something over Labor Day weekend (probably not the WorldCon this year either however - Japan is a long way to travel). Already I have plans for a week+ trip back to Oaxaca in the fall, along with likely many trips to NYC.

In and amidst all of this travel and conferences, my primary focus for the Summer will be the continued growth of NELA (and likely the launch of a few related projects).  In a few weeks after we complete some major bug fixes and feature enhancements we should be opening up NELA to many more beta users.

Stop complaining about capitalism and make it your bitch

Sometimes the strangest searches lead to this blog.

I did not write the quote in the subject, but a few years ago I linked to the still highly relevant article “Queer Eye for the Green Guy” which coined this phrase.

Reminded of it tonight, I still agree with the comments I’ve read elsewhere online which suggest this could make a great bumper sticker (or t-shirt, though as the article suggests, perhaps one you wear underneath a more formal shirt).

I am a capitalist. But I am also, in many respects, a “bright” and to an extent a “green”. I am not, however, all that left leaning politically - yes on many social issues, but I’m probably too anti-union, pro-free trade, pro-global integration (though many of my personal policy suggestions would probably not sit all that well with many on the “right” either. I usually call myself a “radical centrist” - and no, that’s not a contradiction.

In my personal life I am relatively “good” from an ecological footprint. I do not own a car, my use of electricity and gas for heating is minimal (though I likely live in too many sq. ft. for a single person by many ecological measures). On the otherhand, I do a fair amount of bi-coastal travel with misc. other trips to parts of the US - about one trip a month, which probably is a bit worse for the environment than if I owned a car and did not fly (but it may be pretty close - I do generally fly dense flights on fairly modern planes which helps a little bit).

I buy a lot of organic and local products, though I do buy some furniture and clothing new, much of what I own is secondhand (though I do own a lot of books). I have recycled my old computers (with an organization in Chicago which refurbishes them for reuse whenever possible) but I do now own many computers.

And though I love vegetables, I’m certainly an omnivore though living in the bay area I can much of the time adhere to a diet that Slow Food would likely approve of (heck, here in San Francisco even many of the taquerias serve organic meats from Niman Ranch, along with it seems most of the independent burger joints!). Whenever possible I shop at local farmer’s markets.

But by all means I encourage you, even if to the left, right, up or down of me politically to “stop complaining about capitalism and make it your bitch” - sell. Add value. Make, gasp, a profit. Reinvest it. Do it again. Expand into other regions of the world. Show others how they too could make money AND be green AND be improving the lot of many.

Profit is not a scary thing - it is, fundamentally an opportunity at a point in time. i.e.  to make a profit, you have invested energy and resources and be allocated by others more than what you invested at that point in time - i.e. something you have done gave a number of others value and now you have an opportunity to pass that along, perhaps to repeat it (when possible) perhaps to explore other options (and perhaps to do both).

Value is embedded in networks. At a point in time when we have “made a profit” what that means is that by the way we were tracking value, what we invested was less than what we have generated.

But you have to always look at this cautiously. Often traditional accounting does not track lots of factors - for example if most people working on something are not being paid - then they are surviving (feeding, sheltering clothing themselves) based on resources they obtain somewhere else (other jobs, savings, gifts from friends or family). Yes, technically an organization might create value from their efforts during this time and transform that to a “profit” in some manner (from retail sales to services) but unless everyone involved will always be willing to get their personal resources in other ways then the system as a whole would show that that specific entity is not “really” showing a profit.

However it is indeed very possible to generate a profit which does, in fact, include the costs of the people involved in that process.

From an ecological standpoint here is where things can get really interesting.

Some businesses are built on top of something seemingly scarce (physical resources for example - a mining company). They usually try to determine what the cost of getting their good(s) are at a point in time - and likewise what the price of that good is which they can obtain. i.e. the oft cited “it costs $40 to extract a barrel of oil from a given field so until the price of oil is higher than that…” However arriving at these costs (and the prices) is actually very complex (and at various time horizons hard to measure.

- i.e. long term costs such as environmental cleanups, long term commitments to employees such as pensions & health care, replacement costs/present value of equipment, political costs such as fees, taxes etc which can and will change as political parties change in the relevant countries etc.

And whether a “profit” is being shown at point in time relies on how you account for things - but fundamentally what it is also showing is that lots of other parties (people, governments, corporations etc) may (or may not) be willing to part with resources for the resource being exploited (say Gold or Oil).

But a company who does that should look at what role they play in these systems. I, for one, am very encouraged by the shift from “Oil Companies” to “Energy Companies” it allows, at least for the consideration, of other ways to meet demands for energy - with Oil being just one (albeit a major one) option. (Though it should also be noted that many of these companies also generate vast amount of resources from non-energy uses of Oil - plastics & lubricants for example being just two major ones.

An activist of any sort - “bright”, “green”, social etc should think about how they might look at the systems around them and at how alternatives which are aligned philosophically with their beliefs might serve valued roles in those systems - while likely also helping reinvent and reshape those systems.

i.e. the “slow food” movement has helped in a very real way drive the larger organic movement which in turn has repercussions  in many areas. Changing demand for pesticides and fertalizers, greater realization of the costs of shipment (even resulting in firms such as Walmart looking to source more produce locally), and in a very real way a reshaping of how food is perceived (i.e. “organic and natural” might be better than “bright and shiny” when it comes to apples). Reinforced in this specific case by usually also great taste (and a greater variety of them).

I am not disheartened when I see people making money selling “organic” - when I see what had been small businesses grow to be big ones, or when I see huge businesses (Walmart, Safeway etc) selling organic products and looking at sourcing them locally. I’m encouraged - yes, they may also save money by doing so - and perhaps be able to sell goods at higher prices while also lowering their costs (i.e. make profits).

But aren’t we also benefiting?

Anyway these are complicated topics - but go, make Capitalism your Bitch and explore them!

The bogs of war

A phrase that I thought of this afternoon. I think it is a general phrase - not specific to any war past or present - but something truthful about the nature of wars.

Okay, going to keep this short - remember the phrase - feel free to use it - though credit if you do is, of course, welcome.