Long-term accidents

Twentieth-century beliefs about who could produce and consume public messages, about who could coordinate group action and how, and about the inherent and fundamental link between intrinsic motivations and privation actions, all turned out to be nothing more than long-term accidents. Those accidents are now being undone by new opportunities, created by us, for one another, using abilities afforded to us by new tools. The driving force…is the ability of loosely coordinated groups with a shared culture to perform tasks more effectively than individuals, more effectively than markets using price signals, and more effectively than governments using managerial direction.
— Clay Shirky, Cognitive Surplus, Chapter 4 (last page)
A frieze of horses and rhinos near the Chauvet cave’s Megaloceros Gallery, where artists may have gathered to make charcoal for drawing. Chauvet contains the earliest known paintings, from at least thirty-two thousand years ago.

A frieze of horses and rhinos near the Chauvet cave’s Megaloceros Gallery, where artists may have gathered to make charcoal for drawing. Chauvet contains the earliest known paintings, from at least thirty-two thousand years ago.

What emerged with that revelation was an image of Paleolithic artists transmitting their techniques from generation to generation for twenty-five millennia with almost no innovation or revolt. A profound conservatism in art, Curtis notes, is one of the hallmarks of a “classical civilization.” For the conventions of cave painting to have endured four times as long as recorded history, the culture it served, he concludes, must have been “deeply satisfying”—and stable to a degree it is hard for modern humans to imagine.

From First Impressions: What does the world’s oldest art say about us?
By Judith Thurman, June 23, 2008, New Yorker 

Contrast the mind-blowing concept of 1,000 generations of cultural continuity with Sir Ken Robinson’s statement at TED in 2007,

If you think of it, children starting school this year will be retiring in 2065. Nobody has a clue, despite all the expertise that’s been on parade over the last 4 days, what the world will look like in 5 years time…

Sir Ken Robinson: Do Schools Kill Creativity? [At around 2:20]
http://youtu.be/iG9CE55wbtY

It's just so much easier

To get an idea off the ground…over this last decade the barrier to entry has been lowered quite a bit, to where if you have something new you want to explore it really is a couple thousand dollars to get something off the ground and launch it.
— From This Week in Tech episode 228, a conversation between Digg founder Kevin Rose [quote starts around 22:00]

Host Leo Laporte and <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Scoble" title="wikipedia">Robert Scoble</a> talk with Rose about how much easier it is to get stuff done now. 

Kevin Rose: If you wanted to start a company back in 2000 it was a lot more difficult than it is today. You’d actually have to go out and buy dedicated servers, and there was no Amazon S3. There was no EC2. To get an idea off the ground today (or even just a few years ago) over this last decade the barrier to entry has been lowered quite a bit, to where if you have something new you want to explore it really is a couple thousand dollars to get something off the ground and launch it. 

Leo Laporte: That’s a really good point, that’s completely changed everything hasn’t it?

Kevin Rose: Absolutely, especially the way that we scale websites. It was really difficult back in the day. And the fact that you can go and just launch new server instances in milliseconds depending on what the load is of your current site, based on EC2 — it’s just so much easier than it was even just a few years ago. 

Robert Scoble: what I was putting up on screen right here was a Twitter room, or Twitter list, of a bunch of people who are covering the Iranian protests. This was pretty difficult to do even a year ago. And now we can see 346 people, all who are covering the Iranian protests, most of whom are actually in Iran. It’s pretty amazing that we can connect to each other this way.

 

Teams with healthy idea life cycles are easy to spot

Teams with healthy idea life cycles are easy to spot: ideas flow
between people easily and in large volumes. Conversations are
vibrant with questions and suggestions; prototypes and demos
happen regularly; and people commit to finding and fighting for
good ideas. Often, this is fun—people are happy to learn from
failures, debates, and bizarre ideas. Teams that innovate are great
places for ideas to live; like happy pets, they’re treated well, get
lots of attention, and are shared among people who care deeply
about them.

The life of ideas is the responsibility of whoever is in charge.
— From Scott Berkun’s The Myths of Innovation, page 103. Sharing with my new friend Jacob Wang.

The 21st century data challenge

This is the 21st century data challenge:
Not transactions.
Not data warehouses and business intelligence.
Not database backed web sites
Not even MySQL backed web services…
[The challenge is] real time cloud-based intelligence delivered to mobile applications with algorithmic intelligence
— Tim O'Reilly, Keynote from 2010 MySQL conference, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WqLB99dA48k

A few thoughts about mobile

I was just asked a question about how we should be thinking about “mobile”. The question came with some assertions that made me think the person was thinking about mobile mostly as a content consumption device. This was my very very very quick answer.

[I’ll need to flesh these out later to get the quotes right.]

  • Most of the world will experience the Internet through a mobile device (via H. Rheingold, Smart Mobs, in 2002!!!)
  • Moore’s law and its cousins are pushing these devices towards INSANE amounts of speed/power/low cost. (Even if you think Moore’s law is plateauing)
  • “real time cloud-based intelligence delivered to mobile applications with algorithmic intelligence” is the 21st century data challenge, Tim O'Reilly, from keynote at 2010 MySQL conference
  • Think about the mobile device not as a content consumption device but as a sensor rich platform that knows where it is, temperature, altitude, tilt/rotate/yaw, high rez picture/video. See Cory Doctrow “would you rather be the barcode or the scanner” essay from Make magazine and elsewhere
  • “The odds that an event of historical [or scientific] significance will be witnessed by an individual with a high-rez camera on internet connected mobile device have gone from zero to almost certainty…” paraphrase Clay Shirky, Cognitive Surplus (I think)
  • Brand (or Institution)-to-consumer interactions matter less than consumer-to-consumer interactions, and these kinds of interactions are becoming ubiquitously mobile.

    Failure

    Quick release cycles and quick failure

    Notes to self:

    The Value of Failure (?)
    I’m never quite satisfied when I participate in discussions about the value of failure. I’m not sure why, but I think we’re missing something here. Not sure what it is. “Yeah, yeah, yeah. Fail quickly. You’ve got to fail to learn.” What does that really mean in practical terms?

    Failure and quick release cycles
    I think these people (in the video, above) are approaching quick/early failure in a very (literally) constructive way. They walk out onto a field with an airplane made out of foam core, toothpicks, and packing tape; they fly it and crash it and adjust it five or six times; and they leave the field with a much better plane than what they started with.

    Notice:
    a) Their plane is built to be hackable. It’s made out of foam core. At 4:00 the pilot says "maybe we should try getting rid of this forward sweep" of the wings and he gets out his knife and he cuts off the front of the wings and tapes them to the back. Earlier in the video he decides he needs a bigger vertical stabilizer on the back so he cuts a rough square of foam core, tapes it to the side of the old stabilizer, and pinches the leading edge to make it more aerodynamic. Then he launches it to see how it worked. 

    Says the pilot/engineer/hacker (at about 5:45): 

    “So, we came out and it was too tail heavy. so two crashes later we figured that out. Then we put a bigger battery on it. And then we figured out there wasn’t enough vertical stabilizer, and we fixed that. Then there was too much ‘magic carpet’ going on–too much flex–so we put some tape on it and fixed that. Then cut the front of the wing off and put it on the back of the wing, which got rid of the wing rock. Now, with model #1, we got probably five airplanes worth of test flights.

    b) This brings to mind Stuart Brand’s book “How Buildings Learn: What Happens After They’re Built” which (among other things) describes the benefits of building things in a way that makes them easier to improve and modify over time.

    c) Another thought: the people in the model airplane video are able to fail/improve quickly because their platform supports rapid releases and quick fixes. (Does my web publishing platform, writ large, allow/support this? Not really.) If their plane were “better” - -  if it were made out of fancier materials and looked more polished - - i’m guessing it would be a lot harder to modify and hack.

    d) Years ago I saw an article somewhere about designing high performance sailboats. The author said that phenomenal things could be done in the design phase with computer modeling, but that the models were never perfect. For $100k you could design a cutting edge boat with advanced hydrodynamic modeling, or for about the same amount of money you could skip all the hydrodynamic predictions and just build the actual boat and see how it sailed (which, after all, is the ultimate point of the exercise) - - if it wasn’t particularly fast (usually the case) you could sell the boat for cost and try again. 

    Faster, NASA, Faster, a 2009 NY Times Op-Ed by former astronaut and Google program manager Edward Lu, encourages NASA to adopt a space vehicle strategy that emphasizes smaller but more frequent launches- - as many as one a week, for reasons similar to those used by the model airplane enthusiasts in the video.

    The Russian Soyuz rocket demonstrates the value of frequent launching. Variants of this rocket have flown more than 1,700 times, averaging more than 30 launchings a year. As a result, the Soyuz is among the most reliable of all existing rockets. In fact, I flew into space aboard a Soyuz rocket in 2003 when NASA space shuttles had been grounded after the Columbia disaster.

    To meet its new goals for human spaceflight, NASA must be able to be creative and take risks, or else it will be unable to adapt to new technology and changing political realities. Grand plans stretching over decades will become irrelevant and eventually collapse.

     

    (Lu’s NY Times op-ed is also useful for .gov employees trying to understand how to operate with greater agility in a highly bureaucratic environment.)

    I’m also remembering a conversation I had with the CEO of a New Media/Technology design agency: he said that the big trick isn’t failing, that’s all too easy to do. The trick is building the skills you need to learn from those mistakes, and to recognize breakthroughs and progress when and where they do occur (which is usually when and where you’re not looking).

    Another good reference on the “failure” question is We Tried To Warn You, Part 2: Failure is a matter of timing by Peter Jones in Boxes and Arrows, 2008. 

    There’s also a Harvard Business Review article I’m looking for about how top performing businesses are better at exposing, discussing, and sharing lessons-learned from past failures than the also ran’s are.

    My paper Good Projects Gone Bad, an Introduction to Process Maturity from the American Association of Museums conference in 2008 might be helpful too. 

    And a search on Nina Simon’s Museum 2.0 blog for articles relating to “failure” yields some gems.

     

    A bit of a forward rush

    Every once in a while I get correspondence from someone chiding me for the way I write — in particular the informality. I received one the other day complaining about sentences that begin with “but” or “and”. There is, however, a reason I write this way. You see, the things I write about are very important; they affect lives and the destiny of nations. But despite that, economics can all too easily become dry and boring; it’s just the nature of the subject. And I have to find, every time I write, a way to get past that problem. One thing that helps, I’ve found, is to give the writing a bit of a forward rush, with a kind of sprung or syncopated rhythm, which often involves sentences that are deliberately off center.

    More broadly, the inherent stuffiness of the subject demands, almost as compensation, as conversational a tone as I can manage.
    Paul Krugman, But, And, Why - New York Times, October 22, 2011

    I Love this short piece and the turn of phrase “a bit of a forward rush” from Paul Krugman’s blog about why he uses elastic and informal language in his writing. I get flack for this too, as well as for using exclamation points and smiley faces in my emails.

    Standard business language is unnecessarily tedious. If I’m using a smiley face or an exclamation point in my correspondence it’s probably because I’m genuinely excited to be talking with you about whatever it is we’re talking about. 

    Reference also If you’re happy and you know it, must I know it too? from Sunday’s NY Times (October 21, 2011), which quotes a bunch of cranky people who don’t like smiley faces very much.

    Publish first, then curate

    This post by Tim O’Reilly initially caught my eye for two reasons,

    Tim is using Google+ as a micro blogging platform, somewhere in between Twitter and his O’Reilly Radar blog.

    In the post he riffs on YouTube as an economy

    Whoever it was who said that the internet model turns traditional media on its head, from curate then publish to publish first, then curate, surely got it right

    There’s a new advertising business model here too. With hundreds of millions of views, these bands are now media companies. It seems to me that the potential of YouTube to be a game changer in the media marketplace, a powerful new channel and business model for artists is still not widely understood. I bet there are as many people making a living on YouTube as in the iTunes app store, yet there’s far less buzz about it.

    I hadn’t heard that phrase about the change from “curate then publish” to “publish first, then curate” before, but it’s powerful.

    (I find myself thinking specifically about the presentation by SchoolTube that Darren Milligan facilitated a few weeks ago—there seems to be a huge demand for B-roll, stock footage of everything and anything that can be re-used by students and teachers. During the SchoolTube presentation we discussed the nuances between our reflexive approach to content creation (curation) with a B-roll approach. One statement by SchoolTube president Carl Arizpe stands out in my mind, (paraphrase) “We have students and teachers clamoring for B-roll footage of the Washington Monument. They can’t find anything that’s rights-free or licensed for re-use.”)

    How Web Video Powers Global Innovation

    Chris Anderson: How web video powers global innovation, recorded July 2010.

    There are a few ideas in this talk by TED founder Chris Anderson (not Wired Magazine editor Chris Anderson) that are, as the conference says, worth spreading.

    1) The concept of Crowd Accelerated Innovation (at 5:50)

    [QUOTE] And there are just three things you need for this [crowd accelerated innovation] thing to kick into gear. You can think of them as three dials on a giant wheel. You turn up the dials, the wheel starts to turn. And the first thing you need is … a crowd, a group of people who share a common interest. The bigger the crowd, the more potential innovators there are. That’s important, but actually most people in the crowd occupy these other roles. They’re creating the ecosystem from which innovation emerges. The second thing you need is light. You need clear, open visibility of what the best people in that crowd are capable of, because that is how you will learn how you will be empowered to participate. And third, you need desire. You know, innovation’s hard work. It’s based on hundreds of hours of research, of practice. Absent desire, not going to happen.

    2) Openness (6:55)

    This is how TED survives and thrives by GIVING EVERYTHING AWAY:

    [QUOTE] So, at TED, we’ve become a little obsessed with this idea of openness. In fact, my colleague, June Cohen, has taken to calling it “radical openness,” because it works for us each time. We opened up our talks to the world, and suddenly there are millions of people out there helping spread our speakers’ ideas, and thereby making it easier for us to recruit and motivate the next generation of speakers. By opening up our translation program, thousands of heroic volunteers – some of them watching online right now, and thank you! – have translated our talks into more than 70 languages, thereby tripling our viewership in non-English-speaking countries. By giving away our TEDx brand, we suddenly have a thousand-plus live experiments in the art of spreading ideas. And these organizers, they’re seeing each other, they’re learning from each other. We are learning from them. We’re getting great talks back from them. The wheel is turning.

    3) “Jove” (10:32) a video scientific journal to increase speed/efficiency of knowledge transfer between scientist

    This need/idea was entirely new to me and it knocked me off my feet:

    [QUOTE] Jove [http://www.jove.com/About.php?sectionid=1] is a website that was founded to encourage scientists to publish their peer-reviewed research on video. There’s a problem with a traditional scientific paper. It can take months for a scientist in another lab to figure out how to replicate the experiments that are described in print. Here’s one such frustrated scientist, Moshe Pritsker, the founder of Jove. He told me that the world is wasting billions of dollars on this. But look at this video. I mean, look: if you can show instead of just describing, that problem goes away. So it’s not far-fetched to say that, at some point, online video is going to dramatically accelerate scientific advance.

    4) Global, mobile, video-driven education (15:01)

    If you’re like me you’ll suffer, grinding your teeth through a bit of hyperbole at 15:01 - - but be patient, it’s a setup. You’ll be wowed by the Pakistan and Kenya example that follow:

    [QUOTE] Here’s a group of kids in a village in Pakistan near where I grew up. Within five years, each of these kids is going to have access to a cellphone capable of full-on web video and capable of uploading video to the web. I mean, is it crazy to think that this girl, in the back, at the right, in 15 years, might be sharing the idea that keeps the world beautiful for your grandchildren? It’s not crazy; it’s actually happening right now.

    I want to introduce you to a good friend of TED who just happens to live in Africa’s biggest shantytown.

    (Video) Christopher Makau: Hi. My name is Christopher Makau. I’m one of the organizers of TEDx Kibera. There are so many good things which are happening right here in Kibera. There’s a self-help group. They turned a trash place into a garden. The same spot, it was a crime spot where people were being robbed. They used the same trash to form green manure. The same trash site is feeding more than 30 families. We have our own film school. They are using Flip cameras to record, edit, and reporting to their own channel, Kibera TV. Because of a scarcity of land, we are using the sacks to grow vegetables, and also [we’re] able to save on the cost of living. Change happens when we see things in a different way. Today, I see Kibera in a different way. My message to TEDGlobal and the entire world is: Kibera is a hotbed of innovation and ideas.

     

    I think TED has been walking the talk with crowd accelerated innovation for years now and I’ve been fascinated watching its website evolve towards a sharing and collaboration platform even though its core product is video that you consume. I intend to steal the design patterns for embedding, favoriting, sharing, downloading, transcripts (including crowd created transcripts and translations), and rating for the Smithsonian Commons. These features didn’t appear overnight though, they seem to have accrued gradually over time.