Really enjoyed the film "V for Vendetta", made by the Matrix's Wachovski brothers.
Natalie Portman and John Hurt are great in a complex and grim futuristic drama that's very original but a bit like mixing Phantom of the Opera with 1984.I found the anarchistic moral of the story and veiled references to current politics as nazi-like very questionable. Yet the film and story are presented in such a provocative and stylistic way that I was intrigued throughout the film.
How would you like it if, after you turned 21, the federal government cut you a check for $10,000, every year, for the rest of your life? Murray's idea is Provocative.
Over at O'Reilly's blog there is an excellent discussion about the nature of biz in a Web 2.0 world (why does the term Web 2.0 BOTHER so many people? Get over it!)
Doc Searls seems to suggest that old style biz is selfish where new style is generous, sharing resources in a virtually unrestricted way. One poster suggests, I think wrongly, that generosity comes after affluence. Based on my experiences I'm often surprised that when I share ideas openly and honestly I build trust with people and that trust leads to opportunity *for everybody in the equation*. Sure there is a *chance* that somebody will nab your idea, implement it better than you can, and do great thing. But that is:
1) OK because ideas, even great ideas, are not a key component of change. The key is a fully implemented great idea and is a much taller order.
2) unlikely, because they are probably working on a new angle or different idea or implementation anyway. At MashupCamp I was pleased and surprised how few people were even interested in doing some of the things I thought would make "great mashups" in the travel space. Why? Because they were busy with THEIR vision of the next big thing. Cool, and the best part is that the collective intelligence in such a group, or in the internt community at large, leads to a sort of *collective* expanion of horizons and creation *even better* stuff than without the open exchanges. I'd note that MSN's traditional failure to understand and harness this power may be their biggest impediment to moving ahead successfully in the new Web world.
What one should seek in the new "generous" internet are relationships and mechanisms (e.g. blogs, websites, wikis, wifi, free computers, etc, etc) that foster bigger and better ideas which in turn will foster bigger and better improvements to the global web, still a very immature system.
Here's the screen shot of the Google sponsored links that are placed OUTSIDE of the "sponsored links" areas! Call me a naive and stupid S.O.B. but I really thought that Google was the kind of company that stuck to the high road on such matters. IMPORTANT NOTE – the "flights" link goes to EXPEDIA flights rather than an objective, non commercial site.
Again I should say I don't mind the ads, but why have they shouted so loudly and so often that they would NOT compromise organic listings with ads? Well? Huh?
The moral of the story is that Google's in it for the money more than the user experience.
That's OK, just stop telling me that you are NOT.
Jan Egeland of Norway is the key person for the UN’s humanitarian affairs. He noted last year that Tsunami areas got plenty of international aid (almost 100% of that needed to rebuild) while Pakistan earthquake victims languished (I think it was 25% of the needed relief).
In Africa starvation now stalks millions. Egeland was recently quoted suggesting urgent need could rise to 15 million, momstly in Somalia, and correctly noted that if, for example, Scandinavia faced hunger on this scale the world would be scandalised:
“It would be evident if, say, all of Scandinavia faced collective starvation, the world would really respond. “If all of northern Iraq was facing massive starvation, I think the world would really respond. If Kosovo and Bosnia again faced starvation, I think the world would massively respond.”
Some suggest foolishly that starvation is a natural limit on population, yet it’s clear that over long periods development leads to LOWER birth rates. Thus funding development in third world can *theoretically* lead to a positive feedback, creating less suffering in the long term.
Political impediments caused by instability and despotic leaders and persistent ignorance about basic health issues stand in the way of optimal distribution of aid. Yet there are always better ways and collectively we should be able to find them.
I think many who oppose higher levels of aid to Africa would support much higher levels of international aid if there were better mechanisms to make sure the funding was working and demonstrate the benefits to the skeptics.
As the cost of the Iraq war approaches $400,000,000,000 I’m reminded that 20% of that number, or $80 billion, was cited a few years back as the cost to eliminate world hunger. Where are all those conservative economists when you need them for this cost/benefit analysis?
Google's claims about keeping organic listings separate from advertising are ringing increasingly hollow. I actually think they have every right to do exactly what they appear to be doing now – mixing ads and organic listings – they just should not mislead people about this, claiming that they don't do it!
Here's a search for "dallas to SFO". The results page sports not one but TWO entire ad blocks in the white, formerly "organic listings only" section. On my 15" laptop screen about 65% of the results page shows advertising.
Amr at Yahoo pointed out recently that Google could have trouble keeping up earnings since the advertising was now very well optimized. But how about just adding a LOT more ads?
| Web | Results 1 – 10 of about 3,290,000 for dallas to sfo. (0.14 seconds) |
| Sponsored Links | |||
| Cheaper Than A Taxi Major Airports. Tour Specials. Business Charters. 415-505-4634. http://www.cheaper-than-a-taxi.comFlight To Dallas SuperSearch Across Multiple Sites And Find Low Fares To Dallas http://www.travelzoo.comFlight To Dallas Search Flights Now & Save Big With CheapTickets®, It's Simple! http://www.CheapTickets.com Flight To Dallas Dallas Flights Texas – Low Fares Cheap Dallas Flights Flight To Dallas |
|||
| More Sponsored Links » |
Sponsored Links
Dallas Flights
http://www.Delta.com The Official Delta Site has special deals and everyday low fares!
Flight To Dallas
http://www.ORBITZ.com Find Special Low Fares on ORBITZ. Book Flights, Hotels, Cars & More!
 |
| Product search results for dallas to sfo | |
 |
Dallas Cowboys Visor – $12.95 – Sports Fan Outlet Dallas Cowboys Logo Cap – $15.95 – Sports Fan Outlet Motels Hotels Restaurants and Bars by Hornbeck, James S … – $80.00 – Bibliophile Bookbase |
It's brilliant for Google to offer free internet to any metro area, and maybe even rurally though that gets more complex logistically. Google doesn't need ISP fees, they to keep up market share and ad clicks. Even a linked logo to Google will probably create enough ad clicks to justify the cost here and certainly if you include brand awareness it's worth the money for them.
A drop in Google's bucket of cash to consolidate the position as search leader.
Where the HECK are Yahoo and MSN when all these cool initiatives spring up?
Henry Blodget poses some provocative search questions and gets a thoughtful answer from Walt Mossberg, who has switched from Google to Ask as his primary search tool.
This is significant as I recall that it was people like Mossberg, with a huge audience, who reported early and favorably on Google, creating the favorable buzz that launched them from obscurity to search stardom in just a few years (also less well known people like me and the thousands of other web savvy folks who helped with the positive Buzz about Google back in the ancient internet times c1998).
I don't think internet habits die all that hard which is why I have Google puts AND admire Google's brilliance at the same time. Online fortunes, literally and figuratively, can change overnight. Note that over a decade we saw Alta Vista, then Yahoo, and now Google as the 800 pound gorilla of search. The new game has Yahoo and Google equal in actual relevance (though not in perceived relevance) with Ask and MSN catching up soon.
All use different approaches and eventually there will probably be a "breakout application" that will do a much better job. As Jeremy Zawodny has noted people won't switch because you are a "little better". The next search giant may need to be "great". It might remain Google but it could also become, for example, IBM who arguably has the best but too-slow-for-prime-time search routine called "WebFountain".
John Battelle's excellent interview with MSN search engineer Gary Flake reminded me of a long talk I had with Andy Edmonds in New Orleans PubCon last year. Andy is a former Mozilla geek now working at MSN to determine search relevancy. Andy is VERY sharp and reminds me of guys like Jeremy at Yahoo who can see far beyond the narrow corporate interests into the heart of what's up with the evolving internet. (though they rightfully are sometimes protective of those corporate interests).
Also, at MIX06 I was impressed with how hard the LIVE search team was working and felt that they are getting the resources and respect needed to make big changes at MS in search.
Back in June of 2005, Andy was very optimistic and obviously sincere in his assumption that relevancy at MSN would equal Google's sooner than most were thinking It's not happened yet but the Flake interview suggests that Microsoft's use of artificial intelligence in their algorithm is improving fast. If as Gary suggests MS has a superior configuration (using a 64 bit architecture) that will allow deeper analysis things MS search could get very good very fast.
I won't hold my breath, noting when talking to guys at Google and Yahoo they tend to dismiss MS search as "hopeless". Part of this is their ego talking but mostly it's an assumption that Microsoft no longer is doing bleeding edge research needed for a breakout in search quality. People at MSN like Gary and Andy challenge that assumption.
Read that title again because there is a HUGE difference that's getting lost online.
I hate to bash the neat new tech feed feature of John Battelle's Federated Media because I think John is one of the most sincere fellows out there and really wants to bring quality AND commercial viability to the blogosphere. I'm for both those things.
Also, I like the collection which appears "good". But this is not the *best* collection of posts because it only reflects those in the Federated stable – a very, very small fraction of intelligent commentary.
I'd be a hypocrite to blame Battelle for compromising online quality in favor of business. HOWEVER when does this cross the line? If Battelle had restricted all quoted people in his excellent book "The Search" to those with whom he did business it would not even have made it out of the publisher's office and even John would agree he'd be horrible to show such bias in a printed book.
Yet online we've all started to expect the worst commercialism and then be relieved – or even inspired – if a company simply pushes out quality and announces that it favors people with whom it has a commercial connection.
One's attention only spans a tiny fraction of total content. As Federated, TechCrunch, and all of us choose to read and post more about our internet home boys than those with whom we have no association then how narrow and commercial is this all going to get?
Isn't blogging supposed to destabilize rather than enforce this narrowing focus of our limited attention?
Joe Duck 