A chicken in every pot: And broadband in every garage. My travels apparently interfered with me seeing this item during the past couple of days:
House Democrats today proposed an “innovation agenda” that includes as one of its platforms affordable broadband access in every home within five years.
While I rarely blog on these political issues, I do have a suggestion that I believe could help beef up this agenda. I think it could be enhanced if it included a provision for handing out iPod Nanos to every citizen.
1999 2.0: A “thrown over the fire wall” free feature from tomorrow’s WSJ examines the resurgence in domain name “real-estate” plays. It includes this amusing(?) sidebar:
Not all Web-address purchases these days are driven by an effort to earn money from ads. In July, the owner of dog.com bought fish.com for $1 million. The dog-bites-fish story was driven by the buyer’s plans to expand an online pet-supplies business.
Pets United LLC, parent of Dog.com, acquired Fish.com from Dan Farmer, a technology executive, through domain broker Afternic Inc. Alex Tabibi, chief executive of Pets United, wanted to expand his firm’s list of pet-related domains, which include Horse.com and Bird.com. The site will sell fish food, fish tanks and accessories.
Mr. Farmer, chief technical officer and founder of computer security firm Elemental Security Inc., bought Fish.com in the early 1990s and used it for a personal Web site and email. He said in an email that he has probably had thousands of offers for the domain over the years. “I glibly decided that if anyone offered me a million dollars that I’d sell,” he said. He said he used the after-tax proceeds to pay off the mortgage on his San Francisco condominium and “gave a bunch to charity.”
Explaining the inexplicable: Matt McAlister (who, by the way, I think has a really cool title: “Sr. Product Manager, RSS & Social Media, Yahoo!) made a presentation to magazine-types yesterday during which he explained some Web 2.0 ideas to non-technical people. He’s uploaded the Power Point of his presentation here and says talking in terms of “mashups” worked.
That’s a coincidence, because yesterday, I also made a presentation to some magazine-types during which I also tried to explain some Web 2.0 ideas to non-technical people. (During my presentation, I even credited Matt McAlister at one point when I showed a deli.cio.us hack he created — and I borrowed.) Like Matt, I constantly struggle with how to make simple something that I know an audience has a pre-conceived (mis-perceived, often negative) notion about. And in the case of blogs and other participatory/social/amateur media, the notions can be all over the board.
While my Power Point style is, well, not of the bullet point school, here are the “slides” (ppt, 2.1 mb) that went along with my presentation yesterday. It was my attempt to help folks “connect the dots” (the device I used) about what all of this is about. My part lasted about 10-15 minutes and was designed help the business types I was talking with relate social media with the buzzwords they normally use: content, community and commerce.
In looking now at the Power Point, I must warn, “you had to be there.” And, frankly, even if you were there, it may not have made that much sense. But I do think it did help connect some dots for several people in the audience who needed some dots connected.
By the way, I’d like to give a shout-out to blogger friend Josh Hallet who recently posted an MP3 of one of his presentations on blogging and social media concepts. I like his approach and called him about it — we ended up talking a long time about what works and doesn’t when trying to simplify some concepts that are, actually, quite simple, but people want to believe they are not.
My new edge status: The zen master of spelling & puns at Hammock Publishing says I’m so edgy that now I’m doing endorsement deals. By the way, I am very honored to be described as edgy. Also, in the past 24 hours, I was also honored to be described publicly as “cheeky” and “glib.” I took all of those descriptions in the positive way they were intended. (Also, I chose not to look up their definitions.)
“Edgy” is the new “Mojo”: “Yahoo has developed a certain weird geek chic,” Denton said. “Their philosophy is just edgy enough.”
P.S. When both Yahoo! and Rex Hammock are described as “edgy” in the same 24-hour period, the term has definitely lost some of its edge. Or has it lost its mojo?