Reason Why I Stopped Pirating is Being Destroyed By Those Trying to Stop It

I know, I know – it’s been more than a year since I last posted. I apologize to my readers for that – all two of you (hi mom and dad!). Now, back to my post: I hate the MPAA, and almost everyone else incapable or unwilling to embrace technology to create a good experience for customers.

Netflix is the best thing to happen to the first world since…the GUI. I’d say sliced bread, but that’s cliche and hard to beat. Can you imagine trying to spread peanut butter on a whole loaf of bread? But I digress. My beef with the MPAA arises at their lack of acceptance that more and more people are streaming movies – and easy access beats out free content. I am more than happy paying for movies online for a reasonable price if it means I’m guaranteed a good quality movie and no risk of a virus (or a a 72 minute limit – I’m looking at you MegaVideo). Starz recently ended negotiations on renewing their content distribution with Netflix. Netflix is one of the largest digital distributers of movies and tv shows, why Starz would do this is beyond me. In the press release from Starz, they state,

“this decision is a result of our strategy to protect the premium nature of our brand by preserving the appropriate pricing and packaging of our exclusive and highly valuable content.”

First of all, Netflix is a distribution channel. I wouldn’t have seen half the movies coming from Starz that I have had it not been for Netflix, nor would I have had any interest at going out of my way to find it. “But what about Blockbuster?” Hah, that’s cute. DVDs are going to become the VHS’ of the 21st Century. Think about Netflix’s recent rate increase for those subscribed to the DVD and streaming service – they’re incentivizing people to stream because they recognize that the user demand for streaming is growing – and will continue to grow, whereas the demand for a physical DVD is decreasing, and will continue to do so. Second, even if Starz were to offer movies digitally through their own site and/or app, it doesn’t have the distribution power that Netflix does (Xbox, Roku, etc etc), and I’d venture to say that most users aren’t going to pay for a subscription to a trillion services (xbox, Netflix, Hulu, MLB.tv, NFL Network, etc etc) once all content is available online – and we ditch the tv. So what’s the harm in offering new movies to Netflix earlier? If anything, it’ll keep more people from watching the movie illegally if there’s easy access to it.

The true competitor to Netflix isn’t Hulu, or vice versa. The true competitor is pirated digital copies (both streaming and torrents). The primary need that services such as Netflix and Hulu fill is that they offer what users want easily and safely (as in, the risk of getting a virus is minimal to none). And until there’s a service that’s both free and convenient, people (lots of them) are going to pay for movies and shows. This concept would have been unfathomable just 10 years ago in the age of Napster, but if there’s one thing that these services have proven, it’s that unless the MPAA and studios embrace the times, the internet is going to leave them in the dust.

And before you start telling me that college students aren’t going to pay for a bunch of services and they’ll still continue downloading illegally. You might be right for the next few years – but there are ways to incentivize students to pay for content (student discounts? targeting the parents that pay for students? etc etc). But honestly, who cares if college students don’t pay for content? With the exorbitant cost of education ever-rising, they’re not paying for much other than their tuition and books. Almost everyone I knew in college a few years ago watched movies illegally, but almost all of these people now have a Netflix or Hulu (or both) account. Some of them will also get their shows or movies off of iTunes. They have effectively gone from piraters in college, to young professionals paying for content. And guess what MPAA? Watching movies legally through a service like Netflix or Hulu is far easier than searching for torrents or streams.

Make Your Users Fall in Love

Just kidding, you can’t make them do anything – but you can create a product they love and obsess over. When this happens, your users have effectively fallen in love with your product (now, if only relationships were so simple).

While it goes without saying, the first step in getting users to fall in love with your product, is to create something that solves a need for them (whether this is B2B or B2C, the same advice holds for both). Users won’t use a product that adds to the mountain of products they are already using, nor will they use something that further complicates their life. Unless your product adds value to them, they’re not going to use it – sorry. Technology is meant to simplify our lives (though it doesn’t always seem that way). If there’s an existing solution for a need you want to solve, find a way to solve it better (create a cheaper product, better product, etc). If there is no solution, then figure out a way to create one your users will want to use.

There’s no magic solution to figuring this out. I’m a disciple of the Lean Startup philosophy. That is, I take a very user-centric approach. You won’t know what users want if you’re just going to sit in front of your computer. Get up, and get away from your computer screen – go outside and talk to users (literally, and figuratively). There are a couple of ways to do this:

Conduct User Tests
Also known as usability testing, this is an incredibly useful way of figuring out if your product is intuitive. Remember how I said users don’t want to use products that will further complicate their lives? Well, they also don’t want to use products that aren’t intuitive. People barely have time for their significant other, let alone have time to figure out how to use your product. The flow of your product should be completely intuitive – don’t create some crazy interface to be “different.” Your users aren’t going to care how “different” the interface and user experience is if they don’t even know where to begin. To figure out if your product is intuitive, have real people play around with it – make sure your “actionable” item is easy to access. If the purpose of your product is for users to submit questions to their social graph, then the flow between launching the app, to submitting a question should be simple and easy to find – question submission is your “actionable” item.

Watch users actually use your product and have them give feedback. Usertesting.com is a useful resource, or you can invite users to your office (real, or coffee shop, either one works), and have them go through the flow of your product. Paper prototyping is useful if you’re in the early stages of development and are looking to create an intuitive interface and/or user experience but also make changes. Paper prototyping essentially requires paper mockups of your product (you can either freehand it, or, and this is much more efficient, use a product where you can create mockups quickly – like Balsamiq, which is fabulous and completely INTUITIVE to use).

Conduct User Research Studies
User Research Studies are done to figure out where your market is. Startups often have the problem of having a product that they target to everyone. To gain user retention, it’s important to have die-hard passionate users. These are your earlyvangelists. Forget your average, mainstream, late-adopting user – at least, in the beginning. Don’t even think about tailoring your product towards them, because they’re risk averse and are unlikely to use a product they haven’t heard about (people that scream and cry about Facebook privacy fall in this category as well – btdubs, privacy is dead, quit crying about Facebook intruding on it *glaring at Congress*). Create your product for your most passionate user-base. If your product is an app that finds the best dessert dishes in your local area – go find dessert fiends and foodies and talk to them about their experience in finding the best desserts, see what they use, and figure out of they’re your target demographic. If they’re not, then create a hypothesis and prove/disprove that hypothesis. Let’s say, hypothetically, I’ve proved, after having talked to dessert fiends and foodies that they are not my ideal demographic for such an app (it could happen?). I’m not going to waste my time trying to convince them that my app is for them, nor am I going to try to tailor my app towards them if finding the best desserts is at the core of my product. I’ll create a new hypothesis – for example, my app is something children between the ages of once-they-learn-to-speak to 10 years old are likely to love (“Mommy, I cleaned my room, can we get a scoop of salted caramel from Bi-Rite?”). Next, I’ll go out and find children that fall under this demographic and their parents and talk to them to prove or disprove my theory.

Don’t Be “Whipped” By Your Users
There’s also the problem of listening to users too much. Don’t fall into this trap. Often times, users will say one thing, but will do another. They may say they want a feature that lets them share every page on your site, but won’t ever user it. Don’t blindly listen to everything your users say. Listen to their problems, then create a solution accordingly. A good way to avoid being “whipped” by your users is through the use of metrics. Use a third-party analytics tool, or create a quick one in-house that keeps track of all metrics worth keeping track of. If users say they want X feature, but your team isn’t convinced developing it is the best use of time, create a simplified version of it (bugs are okay, your product is more important than having a couple of inconsequential bugs – best example of this: first generation iPhone was simple and filled with bugs…there wasn’t even copy/paste! But its users loved the product). Are your users actually using that feature? No? Get rid of it. Yes? Conduct user studies to see how you could improve on it so as to maximize its full potential. If there’s a feature you’ve had since day 1, but you don’t have a significant number of people using it, I don’t care how attached you are to it, it needs to go. It’ll add to the clutter, and clutter contributes to a messy user experience and/or interface.

Team A and Team B
Actually called Split Testing, or A/B Testing. I just like using cutesy names. I think it makes my blog cute. Kidding, seriously. But Split A/B Testing is incredibly powerful. Scientists use it all the time, at least, a variation of it. When they run experiments, they’ll have a control group, and a variable group. Likewise, doing A/B tests can impact the end design and user experience of a product. If you’ve decided to implement a feature, but aren’t sure it’s something users care for or which variation of the feature to implement, split your users into two groups. Show one variation to one group, and another to the second group. Keep track of the metrics. Which one are users actually using or using more? Or don’t even show the feature to one group. Do they care that they don’t have it? Let your data guide you.

I would write more, but I have a tendency to write too much. There isn’t a magic formula. You may do all of these things, but still have a product users don’t love. There are a number of factors that go into getting your users to fall in love with you – it just so happens that for many companies and product teams, there just happens to be a correlation between doing all of this and gaining users. More importantly, they’re better equipped at not just gaining users, but achieving user retention. User retention just so happens to be the biggest indicator that will tell you that your users have fallen in love – with you, or rather, your product (or you, if you’re Steve Jobs).

Most importantly, create a product with your users in mind. Second most important: follow the data. Following metrics is key – it tells you if users walk the talk. Basically, to use a real-life analogy: If a guy were to tell me a bunch of sweet crap  nothings, but doesn’t show it, it means absolutely nothing to me other than, they like telling me what they think I want to hear. If there are two important lessons to learn early, they’re as follows:

1. Always keep your users in mind when defining a product (profits will come with users. No users = no profits)
2. Actions speak louder than words (i.e., pay attention to your user data and see if what they’re saying matches up with what they’re doing).

World Cup 2010 Analysis

REALLY wish I were in South Africa for this.

I did one of these last World Cup on my Facebook profile. I know I primarily talk about technology on my blog, but, I’ve been waiting FOUR years for this. So here’s my analysis for each of the groups for the World Cup (only the GREATEST sporting event EVER).

Group A:
South Africa. Mexico. Uruguay. France. I would love to see South Africa advance, and although they’re the hosts with home advantage, they’re in a group with Mexico and France. Arguably two of the toughest teams with some of the richest futbol history. France barely squeaked into this World Cup with a controversial win against Ireland in the European playoffs (Irish supporting Tweeters were pissed that day! Let’s just say, Henry had a lot of haters, haha). France and Mexico are definitely advancing, with France leading the group (I mean, come on, they have Henry).

Eye candy alert: Rafa Marquez playing for Mexico. Seriously ladies (and fella’s?), go handle a Google image search.

Group B:
Argentina. South Korea. Nigeria. Greece. Okay, so, if you know me, you know I’ve supported Brasil since I was 8. So obviously I hate Argentina. Look, I’m a Barça fan, I love Messi, but, Argentina, you must die – in the first round. Tell me why this is the bandwagon team for World Cup 2010? Anyways, unfortunately, Argentina is good. Like, really really good. And Messi is amazing. I’m talking Fifa’s Player of the Year amazing. Luckily for all of us Seleção supporters, there’s one thing that’ll keep Messi from performing the way he does when playing for Barça: Maradona. He fails as a coach. Enough about Argentina. Greece- despite being Eurocup Champions of 2004, they failed at Eurocup 2008. They are not advancing. This brings us to South Korea and Nigeria. South Korea has had strong showings in the last decade or so and are arguably their regions strongest team. However, I feel that Nigeria has the potential to be the underdogs and surprise us. Argentina is obviously advancing, but so is either South Korea or Nigeria. Since I can only choose one of those, I’m going to go with Nigeria. Argentina will clearly lead this group. No question about it.

Group C:
England. Algeria. USA (USA! USA! USA!). Slovenia. Okay, so talking about Slovenia is just going to be a waste of space. On to teams that actually have the potential to advance. England for sure (though, I really really really REALLY want to see us kick some British ass on Saturday – see! I’m a patriot!). I do feel that Algeria is an underdog waiting to surprise the world. Many of their players are exported to some of the strongest European teams. I mean, Zidane (yes, THE Zidane. The legend), is Algerian, though he played for France last World Cup (and although some of you may think of him as the head-butter, those of us that love soccer/futbol know he’s ranked with the likes of Ronaldo – no, not douchenozzle CR7 Ronaldo every other girl goes crazy over, but, THE Ronaldo…the Brazilian legend Ronaldo…and Zidane could possibly even be ranked amongst the likes of…dare I say it?…Pele – yea, that’s right, I said it). The two teams to advance: England (I mean, with Rooney on their team, it’d be pretty sad – but I’d be happy – if they didnt), and USA. Despite what the world thinks about the United States, we’ve improved significantly over the last, many, years – and we’ve got a fairly strong team right now. I think we’ve got a legit shot at showing the world what we’ve got! Here’s to hoping for an epic upset, the likes of USA vs. Mexico in World Cup 2002. PS: Is Donovan still playing? Geez, retire already. England will lead this group.

I'll definitely have to go to Brazil for the next World Cup.

Group D:
Germany. Ghana. Australia. Serbia. Germany is the CLEAR favorite in this group. I mean, with a force like Ballack, how could they not be? No really, Ballack is a force. I’m convinced he channels Darth Vadar’s energy. Have you SEEN him play? Him, along with most of the German team, play so dirty. At least they did in the EuroCup. Germany also has a history of having a fairly strong showing at the World Cup. So talking about them anymore might get boring because we all know they’re going to advance. Talking about Serbia will be a waste of time, so let’s just end that here. Between Ghana and Australia, I’m going to go with Ghana advancing. But only because they had a strong showing at the last World Cup, and also because I’m mad I have to go to Australia during the World Cup instead of South Africa. I also don’t know a whole lot about the Australian National Team. So teams to advance in this group: Germany and Ghana with Germany unquestionably leading this group.

Eye candy alert: If you’re into super macho, manly-man, testosterone-fuelled, don’t-believe-in-showers, shank-a-guy-for-glancing-at-you, get-into-bar-fights, type of guys, check out Michael Ballack. Not my cup of tea, but hey, you like what you like.

Group E:
Japan. Denmark. Netherlands. Cameroon. I really don’t know a lot about the teams in this group. I do, however, know that Eto’o plays for Cameroon, and he’s freaking amazing (not Messi amazing, but amazing nevertheless). Between the other three teams, I really don’t know a lot about Japan. I also don’t recall Denmark in Eurocup ’08. Teams to advance: Netherlands and Cameroon. Could be the Netherlands that lead, but, I’m going to go with Cameroon because they have Eto’o.

Group F:
Italy. Slovakia. New Zealand. Paraguay. God, it’s so obvious which team is the strongest. Italy (let’s hope there’s no more shit-talking resulting in head butts this World Cup – here’s to looking at you, Materazzi). Hmm, I don’t know much about New Zealand, and with teams like Italy and Paraguay, I really don’t see how Slovakia can slide through. Teams to advance: Italy and Paraguay with Italy obviously leading.

Group G:
Brazil (YAYYY!!!). North Korea. Portugal. Ivory Coast. Obviously, Brazil is the strongest in this group. They are also, perhaps the strongest in the entire World Cup. No words could do this team justice on the level of epicness they portray. Even if you’re an Argentina supporter (read: bandwagoner), you can’t deny, when Brazil plays, it’s like watching ballet on the soccer field. The Ivory Coast (or, Côte d’Ivoire), is definitely a team to look out for. Though they’re underdogs, they always put up a tough fight – at least based on past, recent performances. Unfortunately, with Portugal (in addition to Brazil) in this group (read: with douchecanoe Ronaldo…I mean, he IS a good player), I don’t see how the Ivory Coast can advance. And also, inquiring minds want to know, how the f*ck did North Korea even qualify for the World Cup??!!!!????!!?! No, seriously, WTF?! Though, I would love to see them advance, but only to see them play South Korea (now there’s a game that would need extra security). Teams to advance: Brazil (in other news, when looking up at the sky on a sunny day, you will notice that it is blue), and Portugal. No, you know what? I’m going to pick a less obvious choice: Ivory Coast. Brazil and Ivory Coast will advance. Side note: this is too obvious, but, Brasil is obviously going to lead this group.

PS: Isn’t Drogba playing for the Ivory Coast?

Group H:
Spain. Chile. Switzerland. Honduras. I supported Spain from the beginning during the EuroCup (despite people doubting/laughing at my support since Spain hadn’t won a Eurocup in 40 years prior to the last Eurocup). They’re EuroCup Champions, so they’re my favorite for this group (and likely everyone else’s). Spain’s roster also reads like a freaking who’s who of European soccer (Iniesta, Puyol, Pique, Casillas, Xavi, Ramos, Fabregas, Villa, Torres, jesus am I missing anyone? – this team will be unstoppable). Hmm, let’s see, Chile is arguably the third strongest team coming out of Latin America. I have no idea how Honduras even qualified, so let’s just move on. Switzerland played like shit at the EuroCup. Teams to advance: Spain (obvi.), and Chile, with Spain leading this group

Eye candy alert: David Villa and Cesç Fabregas are hot. No joke. And if you know nothing about soccer/don’t care for it, aside from the awesomeness that is this sport, you should watch/follow the World Cup for these two.

Sorry Tiger, it’s the Year of the Location-based Services

2010 will be the year that location-based social networking services become mainstream. Bold statement? Hardly. With the rise in popularity of Foursquare, Gowalla, and other similar sites, we’re going to start seeing a shift in users from early adopters, to more mainstream adopters. I’ve been using Foursquare obsessively for a couple of months now, and it’s become increasingly hard to hold down mayorships. I didn’t think it would be a service that I could get addicted to – but every time I’m ousted as mayor, a piece of me dies a little. I don’t think it’s how many points I can rack up in a week, so much as it’s a combination of unlocking badges, and being mayor of various locations that keep me engaged with the app. It could also be that more of my friends use Foursquare than Gowalla, MyTown, Loopt, or BrightKite, thus giving me little incentive to use the other services. Despite Yelp having the edge in number of users, I really don’t think they’ll “oust” Foursquare as “mayor” of location-based services. I use Yelp to find new places to eat, thus, I have no reservations about adding random people I don’t know as I may find their reviews useful. With that said, I’m also unlikely to use Yelp’s check-in because, aside from the fact that there are no exciting game-mechanics to it, I really don’t want people on Yelp to know where I’m checking in. The type of people I’m connected to on Yelp, are very different from that on Foursquare.

With location-based services, monetization will be huge. I previously blogged about hyper-local targeted advertising, otherwise known as location-based advertising. Imagine the possibilities with location-based advertising within location-based services. If someone checks in to a location tagged as nightclub at 11pm on a Friday night, they can receive an advertisement right when they check in, on late-night pizza. This way, when they’re stumbling out of the nightclub with their friends at 2am trying to figure out where to satisfy their munchies, the idea of late night pizza is already in their head (or maybe they receive a push notification around 1:30am letting them know of a pizza place open late).

2010 will be the year location-based services become huge. More mobile phone users are getting smartphones, and the smartphone market penetration keeps increasing – though location-based apps are doable on normal phones, the user-experience is a lot better on a smartphone. On another note, it would be interesting to study how many of those with smartphones don’t have data plans, and why they don’t have them (or why they bothered to get a smartphone if they weren’t getting a data plan). So, while it is the Chinese Year of the Tiger, it’s definitely the tech year of the location-based services, whether or not that’s Foursquare, or Gowalla, or some other service, has yet to be seen.

Live Blogging Evan William’s Keynote

10:16am: And done! The keynote for the Online News Association Conference is over. I’m off to the next session!

10:13am: Question from the web – If Twitter allows for tweets to be cached for 14 days, and developers cache it forever, who’s liable?

Evan Williams – “I think I need my lawyer here” He mentioned how phone companies are subpoened everyday, and they turn data over. It’s not an area he’s very knowledgeable about, as mentioned by him.

10:10am: Apparently, Twitter got its name from the word “twitch,” since that’s sort of the feeling you feel when your phone vibrates; so the team looked it up in the dictionary and twitter was right under there. Twitter is something that birds do, hence all the birds around the site. “Tweet” was actually a word which users made up, and they thought it was brilliant, so they went with it. As Williams says, it was brilliant, and much better than “status updates.” Oh snap Facebook!

9:58am: The Beauty of the internet today, as told by Williams, is that you can do things on the cheap. A problem many people make is that you partner with someone because you think you need a partner. Don’t just partner for the sake of partnering. Be smart about who you work with. He says this from personal experience.

9:56am: @ev’s piece of advice for people wanting to start their own companies – If you listen to external voices too much, nothing great comes out of it. Ask yourself, “Do I like what I’m doing? Do I see this happening in the real world?”

Susan Mernit asked, “What advice do you have to this audience on how to start something, what paths to take that’s not a traditional 9 to 5?” and he answered with the following: “The first thing that comes to mind is to start small.” An error that people make is that people try to create things that have to have a bunch of functions. Create something you want to see in the world rather than doing a lot of analysis, or listening to what your MBA friend said has a market in the world (amen brotha).

If you listen to external voices too much, nothing great comes out of it. Ask yourself, “Do I like what I’m doing? Do I see this happening in the real world?”

What advice do you have to this audience on how to start something, what paths to take that’s not a traditional 9 to 5? “The first thing that comes to mind is to start small.” An error that people make is that people try to create things that have to have a bunch of functions. Create something you want to see in the world rather than doing a lot of analysis, or listening to what your MBA friend said has a market in the world (amen brotha).

9:48am: (sorry, the internet is currently very slow right now in here) Susan Mernit is now asking about his experience with starting Twitter. Apparently, it used to be part of his other company called Odeo, which has to do with podcasts. Williams gave this piece of advice: Go with your gut, don’t do what the outside world is trying to tell you. He felt something with Twitter that they didn’t feel with Odeo. And that made all the difference. *Note to self, book rec. from Williams* The Dip by Seth Godwin. Here’s an analogy as reiterated by Evan Williams, from that book: sometimes you can’t tell if you’re in a dip or a cul de sac. If you’re in a cul de sac you need to stop right now, and if you’re in a dip, you should keep going. Sometimes it’s hard to tell.

9:38am: Susan Mernit asked if Evan Williams regrets selling Blogger to Google. He said he does not regret it as his experience at Google was very valuable.

9:34am: Apparently Twitter has 80 employees. He got a laugh from the crowd when he said he wasn’t making more money than journalists, and Twitter needs to fix that. (Reminds me of an NPR podcast I was listening to the other day where someone stated that investing in Twitter where its valuation is around $1B, yet, there is no revenue, is irresponsible and reminiscent of the late 90′s dot com bust – may be an unfair comparison).

9:33am: “I’m not announcing any features” <–Evan Williams response when pushed by Susan Mernit.

9:25am:  Evan Williams is explaining how they want to give journalists better and better tools to be able to sift through and capture the more relevant tweets (take THAT spammers!). A new feature called Lists, which is in testing right now, will allow you to categorize the people you follow. This allows for you to control information flow. For example, instead of searching for a hashtag if you’re at a conference, you can create a list and see tweets live streaming. Apparently, lists was a fairly early idea for Twitter.

9:18am: Susan Mernit (@susanmernit) is interviewing Evan Williams (@ev) onstage.

9:15am: Evan Williams is being introduced on stage.

Right now I’m sitting at a table waiting anxiously for cofounder and CEO of Twitter, Evan Williams, to come on stage for the Online News Association’s 2009 conference. He’s giving the keynote speech this morning.

The Gloriousness of Geo-Location

Too bad the Whos didn't have geo-location or Twitter. Horton could have easily found them through displayed longitude and latitude on tweets while looking for their dust speck in the field of clovers. Just sayin'.

Yes, I know “gloriousness” isn’t a real word, but that doesn’t detract away from the wonders of geo-location (and not just because it makes for the ultimate stalker-tool). Sure, you can, through Loopt, BrightKite, and similar applications, find your friends and people near you with similar interests. And with Twitter’s integration of geo-location into their API’s, developers can utilize it for a number of possibilities. But there’s one particular possibility which makes geo-location so great: hyper-local targeted advertising. Think about it.

If users are all of a sudden enabling geo-location on their tweets, posts, etc., it would make it that much easier to do targeted advertising. Small businesses contribute greatly to the economy, and often cater to niche markets that larger businesses and corporations are often unable to do. Currently, if a small business or local business were to advertise on the web on, say, unique ice cream flavors, and they just happened to be located in San Francisco, but someone in Los Angeles tweets/blogs/searches for unique ice cream flavors, that advertisement could very well show up. The problem with this is that it really doesn’t benefit the advertiser (or even the person receiving the advertisement). With geo-location, small businesses can ensure that they target users who are most likely to frequent their establishment (i.e., users that are in close proximity to them). Allowing for hyper-local advertising allows for businesses to maximize their success at reaching their target audience.

Hyper-local advertising also increases the interaction advertisers can have with users. Let’s say a user loves telecommuting and often finds themselves working out of coffee shops. With geo-location, a coffee shop could advertise free coffee with the purchase of a scone for an hour to everyone that’s currently in that coffee shop, and people in the surrounding area. The user that loves telecommuting would likely pay more attention to more deals (or in this case, a steal – if it’s a pecan scone!) that are advertised, and possibly frequent that particular coffee shop more often.

As geo-location becomes increasingly popular in the social networking realm, not only could advertisers utilize it to more effectively advertise to their target audience, but it would allow for a more personalized user experience through location. Geo-location could be used for location-based social networking, geo-tagging pictures and videos, and location-based searches, among other infinite possibilities. The effect of all of this is the increased information about particular locations for locals, by locals. Advertisers would be able to more effectively reach these people, and these users would be able to more effectively sift through information that’s more relevant to them.

Four Screen Convergence

The first cellular device was a huge clunky piece of electronic seemingly from the Paleolithic Era. It made calls, and received them. As time went on, technology innovated and created smaller cellular devices that could also send texts in addition to making and receiving phone calls. Soon after, someone came up with the brilliant idea to converge the mobile device, with the camera. This was the first instance of two screen technologies converging. But people wanted more. There was a demand for the ability to push email to mobile devices, and soon enough, cell phones were being created that allowed one to not only email, but surf the web, and even play games. This is where we are today. For many, their mobile devices are essentially a secondary laptop, where they’re able to view and receive presentations, play Super Monkey Ball, find directions from their current location using GPS or triangulation, and of course, browse the web. But it doesn’t stop there. Although we are currently able to view videos off sites such as YouTube, we’re still unable to view actual, live content on the vast majority of mobile devices. The technology is there, it’s just expensive, and consequently, not widely used. Additionally, while you can view live content now, you unfortunately need high speed internet connection when streaming live content. And this is where mobile technology will likely trend in the next 5 to 10 years, if not sooner.

We’re likely to see a convergence of an additional screen into the already convergent three screen technology we’re seeing with mobile devices now: the television. Soon enough, our cell phones will act as a secondary television in addition to a secondary laptop, camera, and phone. In all likelihood, we’d still probably need TiVO, but if we’re at, say, a wedding, but we really want to catch the intense Barça game against Manchester United, rather than relying on a live score feed, we could pop in headphones and watch away, in real time! Or, for you baseball fans out there, the Giants are playing the Dodgers, the Red Sox are playing the Yankees–would you rather go shopping with your significant other as they try on a million pairs of the exact same shirt when the game is going on or risk their monstrous wrath? Shopping would probably be more bearable if you could catch your game in real time, from wherever you are. Although you could do that right now, you’d need high speed internet, and unfortunately, the reality is that you’re not guaranteed high speed internet on your mobile device at all times.

Soon enough, as companies in the streaming live content for mobile devices space innovate, and as the demand for live television on mobile devices grow, we’ll likely see the convergence of this additional “screen” on our mobile device. I, for one, certainly can’t wait. I can watch that new episode of Lost, Fringe, or Dollhouse right when it airs (okay, fine, Gossip Girls). Take THAT spoiler meanies!

An Archaic Revenue Model

Archaic, kind of like ad-based revenue models.

Handed down from generation to generation, revenue based on advertising has been around since the dawn of the newspaper (possibly even before? I don’t know my advertising history). Unfortunately, little has changed in terms of media revenue models. Sure, there’s subscription based revenue models, but that’s hardly viable in the age of free, instant information (take note, New York Times). One would think VC’s would be more cautious investing in companies based on a primarily advertising-based revenue model especially since it’s not a recession-proof revenue model. It’s okay if that’s one component of a company’s revenue model, but not the only component.

However, while there is a façade of cautious investing, investors have on rose colored glasses when it comes to internet companies with popular appeal, but zero ability to be cash positive or zero ability to create a sound revenue model. This is especially true when it comes to Facebook–a startup created by a Harvard dropout which incidentally has become one of the most visited sites on the web. Whether or not Facebook’s value is inflated is an argument that could be made into a thesis–arguments going in either direction. However, the fact remains that Facebook has valuable market data on its users, yet, has been unable to effectively utilize it. What is the point of sitting on top of valuable market data if it doesn’t profit from it? On the other hand, should their revenue model consist partly of selling private user information to a third party, or giving third parties access to personal user data, this could undermine user’s trust in Facebook and result in a decline of users sharing their personal information with the social networking site, which would consequently deflate Facebook’s value.

Not only has Facebook burned through their revenue, but they’ve burned through their VC funding. Although Facebook is looking to create more personalized targeted advertisements (a venture which, if successful, would prove Facebook critics wrong, and could potentially be a threat to Google), it has yet to capitalize on the personal information its users entrust in the site. In fact, it’s current method of targeted advertising is fairly unsophisticated. I often receive targeted advertising in Swedish, or it’s based off of the information I put in the “Personal Information” part of my profile. For some reason I also receive a lot of shopping related advertisements. I have no idea why as I hate shopping. Overall, Facebook is a social networking site surrounded by hype, but lacking in substance. And by substance, I mean, benefiting from its vast database of personal user information.

Which brings me to my next point, although Facebook is lacking in the ability to be cash positive, it’s not nearly as hype-inflated as startups based on Facebook applications. For starters, why base the foundation of your startup on another statup (which, to reiterate, has yet to create a sound revenue model). An advertising based revenue model is hardly sound, especially considering that model is a copy of the model used by traditional media (and look at the state of traditional media now). A startup based on creating Facebook applications is a lot of hype, with little substance. Sure, they have access to select personal user information, which allows them to use this information as a marketing tool–possibly even utilizing this information to sell to third parties, but as far as monetizing on the product and service they’ve created, most Facebook applications have hardly been able to add any tangible value. Should Facebook start some sort of monetization off personal user data, Facebook applications can kiss their chance at monetizing goodbye. Creating a startup based off of Facebook applications is hardly innovative, and surrounded in overrated hype. Creating a viable revenue model that’s not based on advertising, with a foundation not based on another startup, now THAT is innovation.

Personal Legend

I recently read The Alchemist for the first time after a friend said I reminded him of the main protagonist. It’s an incredibly inspiring book (and now, one of my favorites) and I recommend it to everyone who has not read it yet. After stumbling across a series of failures and downs, I’m glad I came across this book now as it puts everything in perspective.

Everyone has a personal legend, that is, a goal that one must journey through life to attain. This is what keeps us going, and what gives our lives meaning. Upon fulfilling the personal legend, we can either embark on fulfilling a new personal legend, or become content with the one we have fulfilled. Unfortunately, too many people either forget about their personal legend, or, in their desire to attain their personal legend, they forget about the journey one must embark on. It’s easy to desire something, whether that’s fortune, fame, love, etc., but much harder to actually work towards it. We are constantly surrounded by people in the former group, those that have forgotten their personal legends. As children, or even as college students, we have hopes, dreams, and ambitions. We have not yet become jaded and cynical–that comes about sometime in our 20′s when we enter the work force. Too many of us become corporate drones, living each day as the next with minor variables. Ultimately, at the end of the day, we have achieved virtually nothing–sure, maybe we completed analyzing data for an assignment, or we managed a few accounts, maybe a prospective client just signed a deal. This, however, does not add significant meaning to our lives, it merely adds security.

We think having money, or security, adds meaning, but it’s simply an allusion our minds portray to keep us from realizing our failure in achieving our personal legend. Slowly, but surely, we become cynical and jaded becoming content with our systematic way of life. And then there are the super-dreamers. These people dream about fulfilling their personal legend, but that’s all they do. They are often much less content with life than the former group. They want the reward without the hard work.

My personal legend lies in my desire to change the world. This doesn’t necessarily mean to cure cancer, eradicate the world of poverty, bring about world peace. Simply put, I want to facilitate people’s passions, including my own. I can’t expect anyone to do the journey for me. I may meet people along the way that help me out, direct me back on the path of my journey when I’m about to stray, even if they do this unintentionally, but ultimately, it is up to me to work hard to fulfill my personal legend. The failures in life aren’t really failures; they are roadblocks requiring us to take a detour. Those of us that stay focused must realize this and find another way to fulfill our personal legend rather than giving up and going back. I realized this as I was finishing the book. My failures aren’t failures unless I don’t learn from them and adapt. They are only truly failures if I give up.

Each person’s journey is different, and each person’s journey takes a different amount of time to complete. Even if you never fulfill your personal legend, just by journeying towards it, your life has fifty times more meaning in it than those that have forgotten their personal legend, or those that desire to attain it without working hard themselves to reach it.

I <3 Nancy Pelosi

Nancy Pelosi at a Commonwealth Club of California Speaker Event in San Francisco

My sister interns for the Commonwealth Club of California, and one of the perks she receives from interning is being able to go to speaker events they put on, for free! Considering the economy and the fact that she’s working, well, for free, she jumps at the chance to go to a speaker event, and I jump at the chance to tag along. On Wednesday, April 15th, the Commonwealth Club brought none other than Ms. Speaker-of-the-House herself, Nancy Pelosi. She had a book signing at the end, and since it’s about women in power, I decided to buy a copy for her to sign; it’s called, Know Your Power: A Message to America’s Daughters. There are many reasons why I absolutely admire her, but I won’t go into all of them (mainly because it’s 1 AM, and for some reason, I’m writing this as opposed to being asleep in my bed). When I interned for the Democratic National Committee, on the application to apply for the internship, it asked who our favorite politician was, and why. So of course I put Nancy Pelosi. Reasons being: She’s completely awesome, first Female Speaker of the House, she’s completely awesome, closest a woman has gotten to the Presidency in this country, she’s completely awesome, she’s living proof that women don’t need to give up family to pursue a career or vice versa, she’s completely awesome, she signed my copy of her book, and did I mention, she’s completely awesome? Well, okay, I didn’t put down “she’s completely awesome” on the application, obviously…I’d like to think I can articulate my words better than that.

At the event, she spoke about a number of topics (of course the Economy was mentioned), but what stood out to me was what she said regarding health care reform. According to Pelosi, we may soon be seeing health care reform sometime this year. I’m sure I’m not the first to say it, nor will I be the last, but, I’d just like to say, it’s about damn time. I’m not a fan of my $40 copay. My favorite answer to a question was her answer to a question someone asked regarding the difference between working as Speaker of the House under President Bush and his administration, versus under President Obama and his administration. While under Bush, she mentioned that Bush would often remind her of the chain of command, “One, two, three…see that? That’s the chain of command”…One being Bush himself, two being Cheney, and three being herself. On working under President Obama, she sighed (a good sigh, obviously), and said, “With President Obama, he has a great intellect. Having a great intellect saves a lot of time.” I couldn’t agree more.