I love this tweet. Sounds like some grumpy old man using the twitter:
“You know what looks cute but sounds worse than fingernails on chalkboard? Baby red-tailed hawk. #beenscreechingallsummershutupalready”
I love this tweet. Sounds like some grumpy old man using the twitter:
“You know what looks cute but sounds worse than fingernails on chalkboard? Baby red-tailed hawk. #beenscreechingallsummershutupalready”
A few weeks ago I published a Q&A with Jane Friedman, long-time publisher of Writer’s Digest. Today she returns the favor, posting an interview with me on her Writer’s Digest blog. The topic is Building and Enthusiastic Fan Base as a Self-Publishing Author.
It’s no secret I and others have started to question whether Genachowski has what it takes to get things done in Washington. But at the same time, I’ve continued to hold out hope that Genachowski will reassess and reposition himself in time to leave behind a serious legacy of accomplishments.
The proposed September Open Meeting agenda shows that Genachowski may be preparing to do just that. In addition to an important but relatively uncontroversial E911 item, the agenda includes two items that promise to have significant impact, but will also likely generate at least some resistance from significant industry groups. The order selecting a database manager and finalizing rules for the use of the broadcast white spaces will make significant new spectrum available for broadband, will likely face a last minute push from broadcasters and the wireless microphone interests that have opposed it. The E-Rate order will make it easier for schools and libraries to purchase dark fiber rather than retail broadband service, and to purchase dark fiber through a competitive bidding process that would also allow government entities to offer dark fiber. This faces stiff opposition from AT&T and other telecom providers, who prefer that USF subsidize retail broadband access services provided by themselves.
These Orders, combined with the FCC quietly telling M2Z to give up hope of getting any spectrum for its proposed free-with-a-pay-tier broadband service, show a new willingness for Genachowski to do something he hasn’t done yet but desperately needed to do: say “no” to people who will squawk – loudly. As I noted in my previous moral exhortation piece, willingness to say “no” and take heat for it is the sine qua non of getting anything worthwhile done in Washington DC.
Continue reading
A lot of folks have reacted to Chris Anderson’s deliberately provocative piece in Wired: “The Web Is Dead, Long Live the Internet.” I have two chief reactions. One is a methodological one — Anderson gives no justification for reliance on percentage of total Internet traffic as being a measure of anything in particular from which we might draw conclusions. I am hardly the first to note, for example, that according to Anderson’s chart, DNS traffic ceased to matter by the mid-1990s, a conclusion dramatically contradicted by actual reality.
But my chief criticism is substantive. Anderson — perhaps unintentionally — does an excellent job recapitulating Karl Marx’s original Socialist critique of capitalism, i.e., that it will invariably reduce to a monopoly or cartel structure exacting monopoly rents (although he leaves off the part about it eventually collapsing under its own inefficiency, the workers seizing the means of production, yadda yadda yadda). But his conclusion is that such is human nature and we ought to just suck it up as long as we keep getting cool stuff. (Aps are the opiates of the technorati masses, apparently).
But there is a reason I am not a socialist (despite claims of some critics to the contrary) and instead brand myself as a member of the Congregation of the Progressive Capitalists. Anderson notes that “Monopolies are actually even more likely in highly networked markets like the online world. The dark side of network effects is that rich nodes get richer.” But he overlooks the ability of public policy to prevent that from happening. Anderson appears ignorant of the role of such things as the FCC’s Carterfone decision and subsequent rulemaking, or the role of the Computer Inquiries in creating the conditions for the growth and development of the Internet and the applications that ride on it, including the Web.
Accordingly, if we ignore the methodological problems and accept the underlying economic argument, the solution is not to develop ill-suited analogies based on the happenstance that we can somehow define “the Internet” as “post-adolescent” to somehow rationalize our loss of freedom. To the contrary, if we are really seeing the decline of the Web and the rise of the App, we have a policy choice to make. We can do nothing, and follow Anderson’s inevitable slide from the open world of the Web to the closed world of the Ap. Or we can do what we did to the wireline world 40 years ago in the FCC’s Carterfone and Computer proceedings and wedge the system open.
Put another way, we can still save the vibrant free market on the web through a little proactive regulation, rather than accept Anderson’s “inevitable” collapse.
I first met Jane Friedman sometime around June, 2001, when she called to tell me that my novel Acts of the Apostles had won the Writer’s Digest National Self-Published Book Award for that year (in the “genre” category: a juried competition with 324 entrants, ahem; I digress).
That call took place pretty early in Jane’s 12 year career at F+W Media (and pretty early in my self-publishing career, now that you mention it.) Her talent was obvious and she rose quickly. In 2008 she was named the publisher of Writer’s Digest, the No. 1 resource for working writers. In her varied roles at F+W, she was responsible for the management and growth of multiple book lines, annual directories, newsstand and subscriber-driven magazines, online education and services, e-commerce, print and online advertising, as well as national writing events and competitions.
Jane recently left WD to take a position as assistant professor at the University of Cincinnati, and she now teaches full-time in the e-media department of CCM. She’s a frequent speaker at writing and publishing events; her focus is on helping writers understand the transformation underway in the media and publishing industries, and how they can be successful and in control of their careers.
I recently asked Jane if she would like to be interviewed for Wetmachine and SelfPublishing Review. She said yes, and I sent her some questions; her answers appear below the fold (and will appear in SPR tomorrow). If you read my recent interview with Mark Coker of Smashwords, you’ll notice some overlap in my questions. I think it’s interesting to see where Jane agrees with Mark and where she differs. But all of her answers are thoughtful and some of them are quite intriguing.
Continue reading
According to a status update on the facebook page of a friend of mine (which means it must be true), this quote:
is attributed to Guy Steele (whom fellow Wetmachanic Howard Stearns once told me he wanted to be when he grew up) in the book Things a Computer Scientist Rarely Talks About by (“The Legend”) Donald Knuth, whose fondness for ligatures in TeX among other things, were oh-so-gently lampooned in the book to be mentioned in the next paragraph.
Of course such “difficult” questions are precisely the (ostensible) subject of the famous & brilliant novella Cheap Complex Devices, which you can read portions of right here on this very website, or better still, buy a copy! Any of y’all needing a nudge can start with this review, which gets to the heart of the matter quite nicely.
I occasionally suspect my colleagues in the Public Interest community lack a sense of humor — although perhaps it is simply that I am in a more relaxed frame of mind after my annual vacation from the 21st Century. I am neither surprised nor outraged at the recent news that members of the Information Technology Industry Council (ITIC) are picking up where the FCC “secret meetings” left off and trying to come up with a net neutrality consensus framework. To me, it seems rather sad and funny. My only surprise is that even in Washington, the notion of an industry trade association working with its members is anything unusual or significant. I mean, that’s what industry trade associations do after all.
The sad thing is that, given the utter genius the Obama Administration has shown for pissing off the Democratic base through constant waivering, there is every reason to believe that the FCC might be tempted to view what comes out of this “industry consensus process” as something it can embrace to its bosom. This would be a disaster not merely for Genachowski and what remains of his reputation, but for Congressional Democrats as well. If there is one unequivocal lesson that came out of the Goog-VZ debacle last week, it is that the Netroots care deeply about this issue. While I get that the DC establishment considers the Netroots something of an embarrassment (or, as Rahm Emmanuel famously opined, “bleeping retarded”), Congressional Democrats understand that unless the Netroots (a) keep giving money, and (b) turn out and vote, they are toast — as evidenced by Alan Grayson’s abrupt about face from his previous “let Congress handle it in our own sweet time” to “Congress and the FCC must step up now.”
More below . . . .
Continue reading
Immersive technology meets CRM, through the lens of social collaboration.
Well this was a fun week.
First, it turns out that the public — when actually confronted with the prospect of two giant companies dividing the internet between them — is less than thrilled with the prospect of watching the market work its magic. Bet Alan Grayson is sorry he sold out now.
If Mr. Grayson would like to show his support for real Net Neutrality, how about his co-sponsoring the Markey-Eshoo Bill? He (and all the other Dems who profess their undying love of Net Neutrality) could show they really mean it by actually co-sponsoring a bill with strong, enforceable, net neutrality conditions.
On the downside, the Senate stripped out $300 million from BTOP again. This time, it does not look like there can be an over-ride. Because when you are Democrats, if you have a stimulus program that’s actually working to create jobs and infrastructure for the future, the thing to do is gradually dismantle it to appease Republicans. _sigh_
Stay tuned . . .
Smashwords is a service for helping small and self-publishers format ebooks in diverse formats (for example: kindle, epub, PDF, Palm) and distribute them through diverse retail channels (for example Amazon, Apple, BN, Kobo, and Smashwords itself). A few weeks ago I sent Smashwords founder Mark Coker a note asking if I could interview him for Wetmachine & SelfPublishing Review. He said yes; I sent him some questions about the current & future state of book publishing, and he answered. His replies appear below the fold.
I found his answers interesting and direct, and I think you’ll enjoy reading what he had to say.
Continue reading