Way to steal, people. It really makes you seem more professional and legitimate.
[You can find my comment on their post here…but they’ll probably delete it soon]
————
Update: I got an email, and a comment below, from Pete at Mashable, and then a comment on the Mashable post itself from Paul, assuring me that they did not plagarize my ideas, and that my email probably didn’t even get to Paul (the author’s) inbox, as he doesn’t have a Mashable account yet (he’s new, apparently).
Despite how odd it is to have the same idea come up within two days of each other, of such a polarizing and obscure nature, I’m going to take Peter and Paul (hahah… ok, sorry) at their word, in the spirit of a friendly (and hopefully beneficial) future for both of us, and consider this a giant coincidence, with the issue resolved / closed.
posted on January 13th, 2008 at 1:15 pm by Kyle - Comments
[This is my first substantial post in a long time, so just as a warning: it’s going to be long, full of things no-one will like, and probably very very angry. It’s like I have a stockpile of feelings.]
Paradise? Am I talking about Heaven, The Afterlife, The Halls of Valhalla? No. I’m talking about the blogosphere of tech-news reporting.
The Golden Age of Grotesque
Even as little as a year ago, the portion of the blogging world that discussed/”reported” news on the tech world was very diverse and original. You could go to any number of the most popular blogs and find long opinion / editorial pieces, and little gems of news that wouldn’t be on the others. In a word: they were the opposite of mainstream media (”MSM”).
This was a good time.
The Dope Show
But then, something happened. Blogs like TechCrunch, GigaOm, ReadWriteWeb, Mashable, Gizmodo, etc. began to cover the same things: the most popular internet applications and their progress (Facebook, Google, etc.) and then alot of shiny AJAX bullshit that shouldn’t even exist. And not just individually, but they would rehash the same subjects over and over again (on the same blog), even when it was seen the same amount of times on their friends/competitors.
The Tech Blogosphere
mOBSCENE
The last few months this is what the world of tech blogging looks like:
Facebook
Google
“Google Killers”
“Digg Killers”
Microsoft Sucks
Twitter
“Twitter Killers”
VC Investments
[stupid things that serve no purpose but get funding anyways]
And repeat. It’s like you put a newspaper in the washing machine every night, and read it in the morning. The same news, just jumbled around a little bit.
(S)aint[s]
There are a few diamonds in the rough at the moment, the few originals that do what they feel like, even if it’s not politically correct or even always based on hard facts. Which makes it interesting.
Valleywag
Uncov
Scoble
Valleywag is like a tabloid for Silicon Valley, without all the aliens and pregnancies. Uncov is probably my favorite thing ever, because he/they bash all of the things about “Web 2.0″ and the industry that I absolutely hate (read: stupid crap), and he has a basis in reality that most bloggers don’t: real knowledge, coming from an engineering background. Scoble (”Scobleizer”) is not always interesting, but when he is… man he is. Oh, and people love to hate him, and I like to see the backlash from even just simple statements.
Oh yeah, MSM!
Cake and Sodomy
What sparked this? Aside from being tired of reading the same things on 140,000 different blogs about the same stupid things that don’t matter (or do, but have been rehashed to death), it’s simple: these blogs will only cover your startup/application/company/whatever if you meet at least one of three requirements.
You’re Famous
You Have VC/Angel Investors
You’ve Created a Mashup
I know I’m not the only one who’s noticed this, and yet I haven’t seen anyone else gripe about it. Hello, people? Yeah the Internet called, it wants to give your soul back, you spineless tool.
Mechanical Animals
The reason I bring this up is that I’ve recently launched my first web service/application, mySHOUToutLOUD. We spent some money on Facebook advertising, which turned out to be pretty worthless, but I also thought I might get some coverage from the blogs that (you would think) care, so I sent this email:
We thought you’d be interested to hear about the v1.0 Launch of our service, mySHOUToutLOUD, as of January 1st, 2008. As a new consumer complaints vehicle, we hope to have success in letting individual consumers have a voice in the public eye, in order to help their problems / concerns be resolved with any product or company.
We have attached the press release for this (PDF), but you can view other details at the press site: http://press.myshoutoutloud.com
Hopefully you find this informative, and give our new service a try.
Here’s to a brighter future for the consumer public!
–
The mySHOUToutLOUD Team
“real consumer complaints, for real people”
The press release that was attached can be found here. What happened? Nothing. No reply emails. No signups from the people who check this stuff out.
I got a great reply email from a few people over at Wired and San Jose Mercury News. Does that feel good? Knowing that MSM is more professional and has more basic courtesy than all of you couch slobs that make money from doing nothing?
Oh, Hello! I didn’t see you there, Michael Arrington!
User Friendly
So, in closing, here’s my suggestion to you wannabe-journalists who cover only what Arrington thinks is interesting:
Get your thumbs out of your asses, lose some weight, and find your spine. You wonder why MSM doesn’t see you as a threat, and even CSE didn’t give you “credentials” (albeit diminished) until this year? Probably because of things like this.
—-
P.S. Mahalo sucks.
P.S.S. All song titles courtesy of Marilyn Manson.
posted on January 11th, 2008 at 6:53 am by Kyle - Comments
I love reading articles about the mindset and habits of geeks/nerd/IT-people, but only when they’re right. In this case, I’ve found two worth reading (one is a short recap of the other):
Mozillarecentlyreleased an early version of a new project called “Prism”… not at catchy or anthropomorphic as their other projects… What does it do? It’s quite elementary, my dear Watson: it brings the internet home.
Explain, Please…
Until now, using the internet has been restricted to two methods: through a browser, or in a desktop-based widget. The futurists of technology love to say that the browser is the new OS, but here’s a newsflash: you can’t run the browser by itself. It does, and always will, need some sort of operating system to run on top of. Period.
Keep it up, Mozilla, and you’ll rule the world…
But with the release of Prism, desktop and web integration come one step closer… web applications that run and appear as if they are desktop applications.
Why Is This Important?
This is huge, not only because it’s ‘cool’, but also because of a certain technological wonder: threading. As Uncov loves to point out, the main problem with using a web browser to run applications (ignoring the obvious programming limitations) is process threading. For the uninitiated, the basic concept is that a computer processor allots memory/time/resources to every program… but if you’re trying to do things that step outside the bounds (say, edit video from within a browser), your video editing lags because it has to go through the browser before it gets to the processor. Long story short, if everything’s locked in a browser (especially if you’ve noticed Firefox’s memory leaks), you get screwed in the end because of memory issues.
Right, But…
You still don’t see it? How about this example…
[example]
Gideon Wanker (”Giddy” for short) users Gmail for all email, Google Calendar for his scheduling, Google Documents for his word processing, and Google Reader for news. Why? Because he likes that he can access all of this from anywhere with an internet connection, and avoid data storage/transfer problems. But the problem is that he has to keep a tab open for all of these if he wants to multitask, which probably creates noticeable lag time after a while.
And then Giddy installs Prism, which allows web applications to run independently. Suddenly each one of his favorite tools become separate entities, each running a different instance… response times are faster, it’s more akin to the “desktop environment” everyone is used to, and most importantly he can now Alt+Tab between the different windows!
[/example]
…Ok, that last one was a joke.
Yeah, this doesn’t really apply here.
The End Game
Do you see where this leaves the “future of the Internet”? Despite how much I hate the idea of doing stupid things like editing video through some web service, or other such nonsense… it gives the ability for people to actually create products that might have some impact because they can be used in the manner intended.
This is the point where you go “ahhh! I see!” and tell your buddies about how you realize that the OS will never go away, and that a “Web OS” is even more pointless… but you like the idea of using web applications in a desktop environment.
posted on October 26th, 2007 at 9:04 am by Kyle - Comments
If you’re a company that wants to have a successful web application/service, you need three things:
good programmers
scalable server architecture
a vision
While the legitimacy of point number 1 is in question, that’s not what I’m getting at. Many companies, regardless of their grand (or not so grand) visions, and potential programming power, forget that your web application/service doesn’t mean anything if no-one can get to it, it’s slow, or it breaks.
Maybe you should recruit for intelligence…
MySpace
MySpace is a perfect example of failing to prepare for the future. First, it’s written in ColdFusion. Second, it’s coded on a very low level. Third, it’s not built to be easily scalable. Have you seen the URL’s (”?fuseaction.item=123455&action=etc.etc.”)? Why do you think the site is so slow, even after it’s received alot of money and attention? Because the core code has not been rewritten and was not built with the future in mind (there’s a link to this statement somewhere on TechCrunch or R/WW, but I can’t find it at the moment).
Sweetness
You know, with all of the money that some of these web applications/services get, you’d think they would do something right. Facebook managed to, MySpace didn’t; Jaiku (and Twitter) did, Pownce hasn’t… the list goes on and on.
GUI: coding in blocks and segments, and using things like header/footer files so that you can easily implement a graphical redesign
Codebase: creating your own function/code library that you re-use across the entire project, with clear and definitive names. Even if you replace 3 lines of code in each page with one function… that increases usability. Imagine that for much larger implementations.
Database: optimize database queries to the full extent possible. Enough said.
AJAX: do not use AJAX when your server-side language will do. An oveuse of it slows down your site, and may even break it. Ever seen Pownce?
Hardware: scalable. Many startups spend alot of money creating their own server clusters, which is fine… if you can afford to continue that in the future. The wrong thing to do is buy a couple of servers, set them up, and ignore them. I personally host with MediaTemple on their “gridserver” plan… even though I get frustrated with the lack of control sometimes, it’s very easy to scale since you just have to tell them to throw more “grid units” at your account… which does not cost $1000 each time you need one.
Wow, impressive. Want to go draw with crayons now? My Future
I’ll find out in the coming months if my theories, which are supported by many others, are correct, and I implemented them properly… but the one thing I do know is that many many don’t.
This is why many web startups fail, or just break in half when they get any number of users. Stupidity is not an excuse.
posted on October 24th, 2007 at 9:59 am by Kyle - Comments
People seem to think that “we” (the tech industry / Silicon Valley) are in another bubble. And, while I tend to agree (think about how places like Gaia or Mint have been funded with immense amounts of money), I also disagree at the same time.
Hello, Mr. Bubble.
What?
Much like Prince, people are partying like it’s 1999. But in this case, the party involves alot of coding and being nerds, while also getting alot of money from Venture Capitalists and private Angel Investors. Some good things are being produced, there’s no doubt about that (consider all the big names you’ve heard in the print media recently). There also happens to be a crapton of crap.
The Problem
The problem is that there is way too much of a “me too” attitude, and not enough originality. I’m not sure I can even name all of the Twitter/Jaiku/Pownce competitors… there has to be at least 10 of them. And then there’s a social network launched by everyone and their grandma about every 8.5 minutes…. that’s a great idea, I know I want to be part of 1500 different social networks, especially the ones that have no meaning or value! In addition to that, there’s all the YouTube, Google (search), etc. competitors.
Why does everyone insist on copying everyone else? I’m not exactly sure, but it probably has something to do with the fact that VC’s are willing to throw money at anyone with a business plan written on a napkin that involves the phrases “social network”, “the next [name current big site] of [name industry]”, and “Web 2.0″.
IR Ur Sowshul Netwerkz Vizyouleyzayshunz!
The Crap
Ok, so people aren’t being original. Not a real big deal, because if they are copying a “big” idea, then at least it’s worth something, an is potentially useful. But what about the people who build utter, total, encapsulating crap? Yeah, there’s alot of it (read more about my feelings on “mainstream Web 2.0″). Let’s review some of the worst ideas, and their problems, shall we?
Ning
Concept: A social network of social networks. Create a social network from their product for your own specific needs/interests.
Funded: Yes.
Problem: Really? Do I have to explain this? There’s something called MySpace. And Facebook. And a handful of others that captivate people’s interests (Goodreads, for example). Is there a market for another social network? No, because there is no-one left to use it. So why build a social network around a white label distribution of a social network? I have no idea.
SecondLife
Concept: Virtual reality as conceived in all SciFi movies and books.
Funded: Not sure, but they do have an actual income.
Problem: This is actually one of my less hated. It’s actually a really good concept. I tried it once, and it was very slow and annoying… maybe it was the connection. Anyways, if the whole world hadn’t degenerated into porn, online sex fantasies, extortion, and other virtual “crimes” it might be useful. But they failed to police it in the beginning, and now it’s too late.
Mint
Concept: Online banking, investment, and money management / tracking
Funded: Yes.
Problem: Hmm… where to start. How about the fact that you give them your bank data. Is that not a problem? What’s the thought process? “Oh yeah, some random internet startup is definitely secure enough and trustworthy for my personal bank data” … way to go, Sherlock. On top of that, things like this already exist. It’s called “Quicken” or “QuickBooks”… and if you want an internet version, surprise! They have internet versions of that software! And it’s secure! And widely used!
[all the Digg Clones]
Concept: Social news, exactly like Digg does it.
Funded: Sometimes.
Problem: Digg works because of the user base. There’s only so many people who are fanatic enough about news to obsess over it, and they only spread so thin. Congratulations on creating a failing business model, which happens to be based on someone else’s idea.
Kindersay
Concept: Teaching your young children.
Funded: Yes.
Problem: …yeah, this is easy. It’s called “Kindergarten”. The Internet is good for older people (like, maybe, 3rd grade) to do research and learn on… but when you barely know what a computer is, why should you be learning from some generic white woman about generic topics? Can’t your parents teach you? Oh that’s right, they’re too busy playing SecondLife to care about you.
And that’s just off the top of my head, from what’s been talked about recently. There’s about 1.3 x 10^24e other terrible terrible ideas out there that are funded, and being lauded as “revolutionary” and “ground breaking” by people like TechCrunch (while it is helpful for the current startup / industry news, Arrington is a pompous self-involved ass).
Anyways
I got a little sidetracked. Sorry. Anyways, to pick up the thread of discussion here, we are in a bubble. Everyone (in the industry) knows it. The difference is that this time people actually have monetization models. Companies aren’t spending millions of dollars on sock puppet TV ads… in fact, very little money is being spent on advertising other than word-of-mouth. And, despite all the clones and terrible ideas that will fail, there are many web applications that are (and will be) crossing over to “mainstream” [again, see here].
RAWR!
The fact that the bubble is recognized is indicative of the difference from last time. Yes, money is being thrown all over the place. But there will not be a huge economic crash (at least related to the “Web 2.0 revolution, baby”). Why? There’s one major, all-encompassing reason:
99.9% of these companies do not have publicly traded stock. They don’t have intentions of IPO’s.
You’d think that people would have realized this by now. I have, and I’m not even old enough to drink at a bar.
posted on October 20th, 2007 at 7:51 am by Kyle - Comments
