The AOL, Weblogs Inc., and Creative Weblogging Spat

If you like various parties naming people thieves, losers, and potential libelers, then you might want to check out these links.

AOL-Weblogs Inc. – here
Creative Weblogging – here
SiliconBeat – here
Other – here, here

Note Weblogs Inc. recently got together with AOL.

When I saw this stuff going around this weekend, I am glad I did not eat the eggs I purchased. I probably would have lost it …

Disclosure: I am a former Creative Weblogging author (The CIO Weblog). I am a hired gun of 21Publish, and 21Publish co-founder Stefan Wiskemann is also an investor in Creative Weblogging.

Confused (Much Ado About Nothing)

This weekend I tried buying some eggs from a convenience store/pharmacy (like a CVS or Walgreens). It was a probably a first for me for buying eggs outside of a grocery store.

Some of the egg cartons were labelled "04 11 04" and the others were labelled "10 12 10".

I could not parse what this meant. It neither looked like an international date (e.g., day month year) nor a domestic date (e.g., month day year).

I figured I was just confused and so I went to ask the cashier.

Steve: I having a hard time determining the date of freshness on these eggs. Any ideas?

Cashier: Date?

Steve: Yeah. The side of this box has a stamp here, but it doesn’t look like a date stamp at all to me. I also looked inside to see if there was a stamp on the eggs … but nothing …

Cashier: Date? What kind of date would be on eggs? (blank look)

Steve: Hmmm. (squinting a bit while sizing up the cashier and deciding what to do ; long pause) …

In the end I got the "10 12 10" eggs. My rationale was that they would probably be healthier for my family than eggs from November 4, 2004. All said, we didn’t have eggs this weekend, and they are still sitting in our refrigerator.

Reasons Why Toilet Paper Is Better Than Private Company Stock

In no particular order:

  • You can’t get toilet paper as income, but you can get private company stock as income and get taxed by the IRS at 34%.
  • You can pay less than a 35% premium for extra soft toilet paper, but calculating the preferred stock premium over common requires a PhD and ten venture capitalists to weigh in.
  • You can wash off toilet paper, but if you hold common stock you can get washed out.
  • You can get scented toilet paper, but the sniff test on common stock is harder.
  • Toilet paper is liquid and you can sell it on eBay, but you can’t find accredited investors to purchase your private company stock there, and you’d probably be the laughing stock of the world if you tried.

More on the predictability of toilet paper, from the Seinfeld episode where George Castanza is relating the discussion he had on a date:

George: We discussed toilet paper.

Jerry: Toilet paper?

George: Yeah, I told her how toilet paper hasn’t changed in my lifetime, and probably wouldn’t change in the next fifty thousand years and she was fascinated, fascinated!

Jerry: What are you talking about?

Elaine: Yeah.

Jerry: Toilet paper’s changed.

Elaine: Yeah.

Jerry: It’s softer.

Elaine: Softer.

Jerry: More sheets per roll

Elaine: Sheets.

Jerry: Comes in a wide variety of colors.

Elaine: Colors.

George: Ok, ok, fine! It’s changed, it’s not really the point. Anyway, I’m thinking of making a big move.

Finally Getting Used To Tech.Memeorandum

Having followed tech.memeorandum casually for a couple of months, I’m getting a little more used to its user interface. The politics thread is here, and the technology one is here (the latter being the only one I’ve traveled).

The one problem that I have had with the user interface for memeorandum is that I don’t generally consider myself to be a news junkie or maven that combs through copius amounts of internet information.

But I am finding that the tool can be useful to help me find information clusters on current topics. It is helping me to locate other information sources more passively and to determine whether my current list of information sources may be lacking in any way. New sites might benefit by having this type of interface.

What has been difficult for me to assess, however, is how high quality is the main thread of information that travels through tech.memeorandum? Just because there is a lot of dialogue around topics picked up by tech.memeorandum does not mean I will have much  interest in any of the main threads. Would be interesting if the main thread could be more customizable or trainable. Alternatively, if the main thread had coverage reputation like a mainstream media publication, then I would commit more eyeball time to the site.

Pondering Executive Severance Clauses And Search Times

J. Rextor has an interesting annecdotal comment at his b-school blog at BusinessWeek, where he is using his blog to recount the experience of searching for a new executive position within a firm. The comment is:

… I did receive an email back from one of [executive recruiters] that stated it takes
approximately 3.2 years for most executives to find an upwardly mobile
executive position in another company.

I have not really had much appreciation for the personal value and legitimacy of executive severance clauses until the past few years where I have seen a number of friends have to find new jobs at senior levels. If one is faced with the situation of having to leave a situation of a good fit with a prior firm, it can be hard to get the balance right again when looking for a new job. At higher-levels, awesome positions can be scarce to come by, and severance compensation can be viewed as consideration for longer job search times for like-level positions. That said, and while I’m no compensation expert, 3.2 years does seem pretty high to me. I’d have to sample some other executive recruiters for feedback, but I’m pretty certain that their cycle time must be shorter than this for placement of executives (guessing 12 months?).

Forget The Cluetrain, Return To Seminal Works Of Information Theory Of The 40s

Posts by Umair Haque, Fred Wilson, and Jeff Nolan are all talking about the looming attention crisis (see here & here) related to information overload and the blogosphere. Wilson captures Umair’s words:

Herbert Simon said it in 1971, which is that "What does an abundance of information create?" A scarcity of attention basically, right?

It’s funny that blogging is starting to replace email conversations (based on ROI), yet we are still in overload. I, for one, peaked out at reading between 50 and 100 feeds, and I needed to start to drop some and add others as my work balance shifted.

For those may not know, blogging was heavily influenced the seminal blogging work, "The Cluetrain Manifesto". The takeaway saying from that work has been "markets are conversations".

But I think with the doubling of the blogosphere hand over fist (with no end in sight on the graphical charts) we are starting to see some limits as to what people can process.

That is why I think we will see a return to works that preceded the Cluetrain by 50-60 some years in the 1940s. These are the seminal works of Claude Shannon on information theory, and much of his work was written in plain English without having to be decorated with tons of mathematics. We may find inspiration in solving some of our new problems from the information theory and related fields.

Some key items from the field of information theory:

  • The essence of information can only be reduced so far before the content is distorted. This concept became known as the entropy bound. Entropy can be thought of as an energy-level contained within a message.
  • Smart guys like Huffman (at Stanford when he did his master’s thesis if I recall correctly) developed algorithms for organizing information so that it could be reduced using probabilities. More frequently occuring information or data patterns (i.e., higher probability items) would be encoded using short patterns (likely shorter than their original length). Less frequently occuring data patterns would be encoded using longer patterns, perhaps even longer than their original length. The net effect of structuring things in total around a probability-oriented tree was to increase efficiency of information transfer (e.g., compress information sent over a modem).
  • A channel (such as a data pipe into the home, or perhaps likened to that of a blog reader’s maximum ability to process information) had to have as much capacity as the entropy.
  • No message could be compressed beyond the entropy bound or it would be distorted (i.e., data lost).
  • But a new field grew out of this area, called rate distortion theory. Rate distortion theory enabled people to compress (and hence, process) information even better. The side effects were that one needed to control where distortion occurred. For example, much of the music contained on an iPod is not an exact reproduction of the bits and bytes on an original compact disk. At risk of trivializing the process of getting that information onto an iPod, data and information has been thrown out or trimmed from the song. That said, the audio folks try to use knowledge of the ear, hearing, music reproduction, etc. to shape the noise and distortion into an area where people don’t care (e.g., in some audio processing systems, perhaps where the average person can’t hear imperfections, such as above 15kHz frequency where certain cymbal overtones occur).

The blogosphere faces similar challenges in terms of capacity limitations, means for improving efficiency, and information distortion.

Feedreaders can speed the process of reading blogs. I’m guessing my efficiency in reading news went up 50%+ after shifting to a feedreader.

At some point though, I ran out of channel bandwidth using this method. What to do then?

Well as folks like Andrew have pointed out (as does Jeff Nolan in his post), people do a lot of linking to the same posts. Good case for unsubscribing to A-list blogs because you get the same information everywhere. But I suppose that the unsubscribing method for reducing information may create some distortion. One is not getting info straight from the horse’s mouth so to speak.

Other methods, such as using web services to aggregate tags (as recently contracted by Nivi) are also a way to reduce information. But I suppose that this method could create distortion in that one is seeking information that tends to be the same as what you’ve always sought out in the past.

Another area of interest is around blog communities (as I mentioned before here in the context of BusinessWeek’s b-school community developed by 21Publish), and how the dialogue surrounding these types of structures seems different to me.

I do not know the answer to the general question of how to reduce information overload most effectively (I have resorted to dropping feeds and adding new ones). But I will say that I suspect the blogosphere (and the web in general) does not pay enough attention to holes and gaps in information (e.g., can we create maps of worlds readers are missing). We also tend not to pay enough attention to distortions created by circular linking, information reduction, reinforcing lists, etc. Perhaps not mainstream concerns in the blogosphere, but I know that these types of pitfalls have to be avoided in business in general. Why should use of the blogosphere be any different?

Technorati Tags: , , , ,

Update (11/1/05): Bill Burnham has a post on Feed Overload Syndrome.