Technology Translations

Told You So - No Data Is Secure On The Internet

2011-12-26T13:25:00.000-08:00

This article from Bloomberg BusinessWeek, and especially the accompanying graphic, details the sad facts: 282.8 million records exposed or stolen in 2011.

Best Buy Gets A Lump Of Coal In Its Stocking

2011-12-22T08:07:00.000-08:00

You would think that retailers would know by now that lots of orders may come in online (it is the 21st century, isn't it?). But not Best Buy, which also commits the customer-unfriendly error of explaining it using "PR Speak": something happened - it wasn't our fault. Santa knows, Best Buy, and you're on the naughty list. SF Chronicle

I Think I'll Post Some Personal Data On The Internet - NOT

2011-12-19T08:29:00.000-08:00

I know I've ranted about this before, but how can people -- the media, the highly paid gurus, the techies, the bureaucrats -- continue to be so stupid? Banks protect data exchange with a separate gated network (SWIFT) and nobody cracks it. Medical data should be protected in the same way. NY Times

You Bought 1.0?

2011-12-12T10:48:00.000-08:00

The Kindle Fire is yet another example of the "customer beta" mentality among tech companies. The push is to have the latest and greatest out NOW (a trend no entirely due to greed, since blame can be assigned to media pundits and people who line up at 2AM to get bragging rights, among others), and so they push it out the door. NY Times

I learned this the hard way with the foremost practitioner, Microsoft, and their late, unlamented Vista. But there are plenty of other guilty parties out there, and one would have thought that Amazon was smarter. But Xmas was coming, and so good luck 1.0 buyers.

Whoops - There Go The Brakes

2011-11-01T14:22:00.000-07:00

So now hackers can attack your car. Terrorism has a new tool. And don't piss off any geeks or you're in big trouble. Bloomberg Business Week

Lost In The Computer?

2011-11-01T11:11:00.000-07:00

How, in the 21st century, with everything computerized, can a firm "lose" hundreds of millions of dollars? And how is it that the auditors can't find it? I would love to do a case study on this one. Even if there was fraud, the story says they "found" about 200 million when they started looking - how hard should it have been to "find" the money deposited in a financial institution? Sure hope my banks have better "books and records." NY Times

Too Big To Fail?

2011-10-29T19:40:00.000-07:00

Microsoft's latest update for 2007 Office Suite Service Pack 3 is 433M. What could possibly be in it that is worth downloading that much, and why the hell can't Microsoft break it into understandable chunks so one could pick and choose? But, no, like Apple, with Microsoft, it's our way or the highway, and as much of a black box as Apple's OS.

Toilet Tech

2011-10-13T09:31:00.000-07:00

I saw something like this in Toyko's Akihabara tech marketplace a decade ago, so it has taken a while for the US to "rush" to the forefront in Toilet Tech. NY Times

Oops - 2!

2011-10-06T09:18:00.000-07:00

Through what is called a "series of mishaps" (stupidity as well as the unthinking use of private data which is all too common) data on Stanford Hospital patients ended up on a tutoring site on the Internet. NY Times

When will IT and business/nonprofit folks realize that data needs to be protected throughout your chain of suppliers? Just because you can easily send/give data on thousands/millions of people doesn't mean you have abrogated your responsibilities.

Oops!

2011-10-05T15:14:00.000-07:00

An app on an iPhone snapped a pic of the thief and sent it to the owner, who forwarded it to the police. This is one instance of Big Brother that I approve. NY Daily News

Banks To Small Business: Hacked? Tough...

2011-09-25T10:33:00.000-07:00

This is yet another example of how insecure online transactions and institutions are, and another example of the all too usual complete lack of corporate social responsibility. The numbers on hacking thefts from small and medium businesses are depressing, as is the behavior of the banks.

Hire a security consultant to do a security audit of your systems and the systems you attach to, because your partners, suppliers, and customers are a threat to you through their computers and Internet connections. And think about insurance to protect you from banks as well as from hackers.

Bloomberg BusinessWeek

Target Miscalculates Web Hits

2011-09-14T11:15:00.001-07:00

You'd think by now, after so many well-publicized server outages due to higher than anticipated visits, that big companies like Target would have capacity expansion plans. Obviously they didn't. NY Times

Honest, I Really Wrote This Post

2011-09-11T09:24:00.000-07:00

The very clever software created by Narrative Science doesn't prove that computers will replace people. It does prove that certain categories of writing, such as sports journalism, is full of simple narrative expected and beloved of many. Which, after all, is the basis of much literature (and TV and movies and epic poetry) - we expect and like formulas. What is really fascinating is that it took so long for it to be instantiated in software. NY Times

Don't Say That Digital Stuff Never Dies

2011-09-06T12:37:00.000-07:00

If your Internet presence depends on others, then you need to "trust, but verify." Otherwise, as this NY Times article shows, Google can declare you dead.

Much Technology Is Not Neutral

2011-08-10T09:27:00.000-07:00

There are, of course, those technologies that can only be afforded by the well off. And, as this SF Chronicle article notes, technology is useful not just for law abiding citizens, but also for criminals and worse (terrorists carry cell phones and use social media).

Knowledge Wants To Be Free, But With Freedom Comes Responsibility

2011-08-09T13:03:00.000-07:00

Yes, perhaps the so-called Western style of verified knowledge is sometimes onerous. But the article in the NY Times is careful to cite an example where no verification appears to be needed -- the children's game dabba kali -- but doesn't seem to understand that anyone could post such an article which was completely false, or made up, or scurrilous, or racist. And if we let that standard be established, then we no longer have "knowledge," but simply spoutings. Look at so many blogs if you doubt that is what we would get.

The Internet Will Make Everything Insecure

2011-08-05T10:40:00.000-07:00

Seems crooks are better at understanding the value of technology than most. And attacking small/medium businesses, where the folks are more likely to not have a good understanding of technological security (which is OK, since they need to run a business, not be techies), is very clever. After all, stealing a billion a hundred or thousand dollars at a time from millions of people adds up. Hackers Take $1 Billion a Year as Banks Blame Their Clients, SF Chronicle

We Value And Protect Your Data - NOT

2011-07-23T12:13:00.000-07:00

in 2007 an intern in the Ohio Office of Budget & Management, asked to safeguard a hard drive with sensitive information, left it in his car and it was stolen, exposing Social Security numbers for 859,852 people in Ohio.
Great Moments In Intern Hostory, Marnie Hanel, Bloomberg BusinessWeek,18-24Jul2011

The Government Finally Gets It

2011-07-20T11:14:00.000-07:00

Consolidation of data centers has been the reality in corporations for at least the last 15 years. It provides many benefits other than lowered costs, such as less power use, less real estate costs, and many fewer unnecessary applications and software packages.

Too bad it took a budget Armageddon to get the government to do it, but good for taxpayers and, who knows, maybe we'll even get better service from the government.

NY Times

Picking Google's Lock

2011-07-10T11:15:00.000-07:00

Seems "virtual" service companies have figured out how to game Google search algorithms and overwhelm real local businesses, as described by The Haggler in this NY Times article.

Real free-market economists would, of course, trumpet this as "creative destruction." But a lot of these companies do shoddy work, and there is no accountability. Now that is just "efficient," in free-market speak, since providing value has become inefficient.

Too bad that technology makes this possible.

The Internet Will Change Everything?

2011-06-14T09:42:00.001-07:00

Yes, we can buy stuff online, and bank online, and pay bills online, and connect the Internet to our mobile phones. And store personal identifying information online for thieves to vacuum up. We have gone from making it somewhat difficult for thieves to get our information to giving it away on Internet street corners.

If companies like Citibank, with legions of security staffers and a regulatory fiduciary responsibility, can't protect you, no one can. Of course, that assumes that those companies understand the risk or care about it, instead of simply wanting to capture more customers and fees in the cheapest possible way.

There will be the usual "we care about our customers and their data" letters, and then more breaches.

Why Software Fails

2011-06-10T13:08:00.000-07:00

This fascinating article by Paul De Palma concisely summarizes why there are so many software fails, so much money and time wasted, and why I am nervous about having software running my car or doing medical diagnostics.

So many experts believe that technology innovation, especially based on software, is the engine of the New Economy. But the software risk models didn't stop the Subprime Mess. And that's assuming the models were any damn good in the first place.

I Have Seen The Future, And It Doesn't Work

2011-05-22T11:53:00.000-07:00

The usual suspects have waxed eloquent about the "contingent" worker: the Internet will make it possible for all of us to become outsourcers, selling our skills globally, living where we like and easy.

Well, sorry about that. The Mechanical Turk is a site that provides "microtasks," which, of course, pay microbucks. Panagiotis G. Ipeirotis, an associate professor at NYU's Stern School of Business, found that many of the contingent workers at Mechanical Turk are based in India and make $2-3/hour. Even in India that's not a living wage.

Now Mechanical Turk isn't to blame for its pitiful wages, but it points up a ruthless economic law: if everyone competes for work, the lowest bidder wins. Technology isn't going to bring the New Millennium, where we all work for ourselves, it is simply going to recreate "nature, red in tooth and claw."

Not What But How Division

2011-04-20T10:29:00.000-07:00

As this NY Times video shows, technology ideas poorly implemented equals pain and, in this case, perhaps crashes of a non-computer kind.

iPads Take Flight

2011-04-01T08:50:00.000-07:00

This is a very interesting use of technology to simplify processes and paper, as long as pilots don't watch a movie when they should be flying the plane ;-)

Big Brother Knows Where You Are

2011-03-26T11:52:00.000-07:00

One thing I learned during my days as a mad scientist: whatever the technology, whatever its good or bad effects, it would be used. Example: cell phone companies recording your location whether there is any business or moral reason to or not.

It’s Tracking Your Every Move and You May Not Even Know, Noam Cohen, NY Times, 26Mar2011

Oh Joy - Powerpoint On Your Mobile

2011-03-24T11:57:00.000-07:00

The insidious Powerpoint invades the last safe domain.

Failure To Communicate

2011-02-28T15:33:00.001-08:00

Technology projects have a depressing failure rate, as do undertakings in areas which have been made more complex at least partly through technology, such as medicine, law, teaching, and, especially, financial services.

As Atul Gawande points out in his fascinating "The Checklist Manifesto," this is due to both a lack of study of failure as well as an obsession with the heroic ideal: "The truly great are daring. They improvise. They do not have protocols and checklists."

And yet, all these complex professions are actually team efforts, and study shows that the hero model creates dysfunctional teams which make dumb mistakes by skipping steps and not allowing team communication. Worse "We don't study routine failures... We don't look for the patterns of our recurrent mistakes or devise and refine potential solutions for them."

And even if there are some efforts to study failure or to enhance teamwork, there are no organizations with the power to make the solutions required, expect in the case of the airlines.

Under The Menorah

2010-12-13T16:01:00.001-08:00

During the holidays one's thought turn, of course, to the Next Big Thing, that ultimate shiny gadget that will transform your life and make you look cool instead of simply geeky.

For me, that would be a pad running Windows (sorry Apple) that is also a phone, so I can have an e-reader, my Windows apps, and my phone in one device (hey, who said "convergence" was just a myth?).

No rush, but I'm waiting. Yours sincerely, wasting away...

See How Clever I Am?

2010-11-20T15:36:00.000-08:00

RANT NOTIFICATION: Reading this may cause crankiness.

So the Website geeks are finding all kinds of "innovative" ways to insert ads. Popup boxes that come in "behind" the page so when you close it, like a pile of steaming poop, there it is. "Veils" that cover the page and that you must close before you can see it. "Floaters" that race across the screen and interfere with reading.

So where are the innovative anti-geeks with methods for blocking this stuff?

Death Gets It

2010-08-19T10:56:00.000-07:00

Death said “Let’s be friends” on Facebook.

I said “WTF?”

Death said “That whole scythe scene is so yesterday.”

I checked Death’s profile: 4,234,837,401 friends.

I said “Show off.”

Death said “Come on, this is the Next Big Thing and you can be in on it first.”

I checked Death’s profile for music: that dude had them all.

I checked Death’s profile for movies: all again.

But Death’s profile said “Likes vanilla ice cream,” and I knew that Death was really not that cool.

I said “Later, dude.”

Death said “Definitely later, man.”

Then Death posted an iPhone app in the Apple Store.

Technology Will Save Us, Again

2010-08-10T11:45:00.000-07:00

John Seely Brown, the tech guru, says in a recent BusinessWeek (www.businessweek.com/managing/content/aug2010/ca2010084_450584.htm) that many people are picking "passion" over a paycheck, and that this trend will become a "sustainable engine of economic growth" through cloud computing and social networking. Pardon me for not sharing his enthusiasm (or that of so many other consultants and media darlings) for technology as an enabler.

Cloud computing, according to Seely, gives access to "the most powerful technology resources" (although I'm not sure I understand how it could give access to an electron microscope - one of his examples - since someone has to place the specimen physically). So how many of these "passion-based" businesses need that, or can't get the computing they need from a laptop or desktop PC? OK, maybe Gmail ;-)

As for social networking -- the panacea of the 21st century -- helping connect entrepreneurs to many more partners than ever before. How many partners does a small business need, and why should they trust anyone they link up with over a social network? Even people you link up with through face-face networking can be incompetent, aggravating, and untrustworthy. What makes people you find on a social network better?

It's not "what" (technology), but "how" (you knowledge, skills, attitude) that matter.

As for 80% of people not liking their jobs, when did people ever like their jobs, before technology or after?

Do You Want More With That?

2010-08-08T10:33:00.000-07:00

Randall Stross, the technology columnist and business prof, has an interesting article in the NY Times that, while about the Kindle vs. the iPad, is really about the age-old debate between the advocates of specialization and of generalization. This debate crops up in many fields and forums, such as evolution (humans are "best" because they are generalists), economics (task/worker specialization is the reason Western businesses are "best"), and. of course, in technology.

Phones have gone from single-purpose devices to generalized tools. Computers, interestingly, were designed as multi-purpose devices, made so by their software, but expanded by a variety of special-purpose hardware, such as video and audio chips.

This is a debate which will never be resolved. I am in the generalist camp: since the earliest days of computing I have wanted a phone, PDA, and computer in one device. Others prefer a variety of specialized devices, although I must point out that means many batteries to keep charged and much pocket/backpack space, among other inconveniences.

I look forward to the continuing arguments, and keep hoping for my ideal device.

Amazon Don't Know Nothing

2010-07-22T08:04:00.000-07:00

Amazon is a clever site, with their "people who bought this also bought this" recommendations, user reviews, previews of books, and lots of other technological wizardry.

But they sometimes are not very clever with the very same technology.

They sent me a "you might be interested in these based on what you bought" marketing message which contained some items I had already bought, even though they have a record of all my purchases.

And most annoyingly, they let me buy 2 books that I had already bought within a month without popping up a "you already bought these" suggestion, or some easy to click on "my recent purchases" list, or "all my purchases" in account statement format.

Is This The End Of Rico?

2010-07-20T16:42:00.000-07:00

Amazon just announced that it sold more Kindle books the last 3 months than "real" books.

Of course, the lower price of the eBooks may have had something to do with that, but still. Amazon is everyone's bookstore, whether you like that or not, "You've Got Mail" lovers. As Amazon goes, so goes the nation?

Should be photos soon of people on beach chairs reading their Kindles.

The Post-Literate Society?

2010-06-20T08:55:00.000-07:00

David Carr is on a crusade to bring us back to the gospel of the printed word on paper (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/06/20/INL91DU44K.DTL&type=printable). What he doesn't realize is that he is simply repeating the endless cycle of reaction (one of the ancient Greek philosophers lamented the written word as it prevented students from learning properly by memorizing). Technology doesn't change people's minds; they still work in the same way. What changes is culture, our learned and shared likes and attitudes.

And Carr's elitist attitude is also typical of past reactionaries: "deep reading" of dense books is good, email and phone calls and Facebook are bad. In Victorian England, those who didn't do Latin and Greek were uneducated clods.

If people don't read, it isn't because of technological distractions. And it doesn't mean that we are all becoming mindless yahoos. Technology doesn't kill minds, culture does.

Measuring The Value of Technology Companies

2010-05-27T08:55:00.000-07:00

This article in the NY Times (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/27/technology/27apple.html?th&emc=th) says that Apple is now more "valuable" than Microsoft. Of course, the measure of "value" is stock price, which once again demonstrates the sad state of our values.

Technology can help people, business, and society, or harm them. The "value" is in its social, not its economic, impact (which includes the economic impact as one variable). On the one hand, perhaps Apple may have had greater social impact, with its clever consumer technology. On the other, Microsoft transformed the nature of business, and regardless of how many trinkets Apples sells, the vast majority of what people do today, whether for good or bad social effect, is done on Microsoft software.

iPad Early Adopters

2010-04-12T10:47:00.000-07:00

Rob Walker in the NY Times (www.nytimes.com/2010/04/11/magazine/11FOB-consumed-t.html?pagewanted=print) points out that early adopters often have all the pain, while later adopters often get all the gain.

And Tony Kontzer, in his KnowIt All blog, sifts through the Twitterverse (http://blogs.cioinsight.com/knowitall/content001/culture/ipad_in_the_twitterverse.html) and provides evidence of the silliness of early adopters:

Tweeter scottsimpson posted: "People think I'm using my iPad to surf the internet. It's not even on. I'm just staring at myself. Killer app." Ironically, this seems to be the iPad's main appeal initially--as a shiny toy to show off and validate oneself.

Good TV, If You Can Get It

2010-04-04T12:23:00.000-07:00

So Hulu and its ilk are supposed to let you cut the cable and do away with the alluring flat-screen TV or simply hook it directly to the Internet.

Well, good luck. In both Vista and Win 7 I suffer from unceasing problems accessing Hulu and even Youtube, not matter which browser I use (Explorer, Firefox, Chrome).

It is especially consistent with Youtube - I cannot get any video to run longer than a couple of minutes, and sometimes not even that. So don't send me links to amusing, shocking, or stupid videos.

With Hulu, sometimes it will work, and I can watch an entire episode (and the ads). Some of the time, the video stops and starts, starts and stops, driving me mad as I hope against hope that it will stream smoothly. Even more of the time, and especially after an ad, Explorer and Firefox will crash.

I'm keeping my cable, thank you very much.

Another Trip To Hell

2010-01-08T12:57:00.000-08:00

Technology projects fail, mostly not because of the technology.

See this for a hilarious, and sad, commentary on one type of technology project, which is true of them all.

http://theoatmeal.com/comics/design_hell

Cyborg Evolution

2010-01-08T10:36:00.000-08:00

Young guy in Finland lost part of a finger and created a prosthetic with a USB drive:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=acVc6H7wYbA

Be interesting to see where this goes. It takes dependence on technology to new heights.

What This Country Needs Is More Nerds

2009-12-21T14:55:00.001-08:00

At least that's what the NY Times says: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/21/technology/21nerds.html?th&emc=th

Most countries now view "innovation" (whatever that is) in science and technology as crucial to their economic future, if not to world domination. And the US was once great at making nerds, although it has been declining for years.

But there is a cloud looming over this happy picture: outsourcing, including temporary, part-time, and contingent workers, has become a US addiction. So what makes the "experts" quoted in the Times article think there will be jobs in the US for all these newly-minted nerds? Perhaps for Chinerds (China), Braznerds (Brazil), Rednerds (Russia), or some yet-to-be-discovered Shangri-La of low cost high tech nerds. But hardly in the US.

Windows 7 Is Only So-So

2009-12-12T12:04:00.000-08:00

Yes the upgrade works smoothly, and it boots somewhat faster. But it is still full of bloat-induced glitches:

Internet Explorer spawns processes that grow immense and stay alive even after the app is closed, blocking launch of Office apps in Windows Explorer and causing IE to freeze up.

Even with IE killed, Explorer still won't consistently launch Office apps, and even the very nice freeware xPlorer2 Lite won't always launch Office apps.

Internet connections act strangely regardless of browser. IE, of course, is almost unsuable, and even Firefox wasn't much better, so I downloaded Chrome, which is slick, but still has problems connecting and running videos.

Bring back XP Professional - the best Windows ever.

Sent From My Old Technology

2009-10-28T17:20:00.000-07:00

There's a subtle status thing with email from mobile devices: it comes with a tag line "Sent from my (insert whiz bang device name here)." That's like someone walking in your door and saying "I got here in my (insert fancy expensive car name here)." Or like wearing your designer clothes with the label on the outside (oh, wait, they already do that).

Why should the recipient care what device an email comes from? But the tag line shows how with it the sender is, and the status comes not only from the device, but from the "always connected" impression.

I suggest that everyone alter their email signature to say something like "Sent from my TRASH-80," "Sent from my 1984 IBM PC," "Sent from my Apple Lisa," etc.

Harvesting Privacy

2009-09-03T11:12:00.001-07:00

Email address harvesting programs are proliferating and getting ever more aggressive and intrusive. Many are adopting malware practices, grabbing addresses without you knowing it. Then they send emails to everyone.

Sadly, even some legitimate sites are doing this, including LinkedIn and Facebook applications.

We need a law. I know, I know, bad idea but what other protection do we have? To paraphrase Churchill - except for all the other forms that have been tried.

Update: YES - NO?

2009-08-29T08:52:00.000-07:00

A wonderful article by Gail Collins, OpEd columnist for the NY Times, and a very funny person.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/29/opinion/29collins.html?th&emc=th

Google (YouTube) Still Doesn't Get It

2009-07-30T12:53:00.000-07:00

Now I can understand why a site with millions of users would want to be cautious about customer support, but YouTube is as paranoid as the Bush administration.

They have a Catch-22 rule that you can't post anything longer than 10 minutes, but there are many university sites that post hour-long lectures, recently consolidated under YouTube EDU. So try and find out how you can create a "channel" under YouTube EDU. Their Help(less) claims that if you can't find what you need, you will be directed to a form that lets you contact (mythical) Customer Service. Well, good luck finding that form.

Seems to me that this company full of brilliant technologists has forgotten that all that wonderful technology is used by real people, who sometimes need help not from FAQs or the user community (who are quite generous but not "official").

Hello, anyone there?

Eyes On The Future

2009-03-18T11:09:00.000-07:00

I just read an article in BusinessWeek (http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/09_12/b4124044178284.htm?chan=magazine+channel_new+ideas+for+growth).

It discusses the new "Singularity U," based on ideas of scientist and futurist Ray Kurzweil. Created by Google, NASA, and XPrize creator Peter H. Diamandis, it will bring in senior executives to help them grasp the implications of fast-changing technology, and how it can kill your business and create new ones.

Everywhere I see this emphasis on the "new idea," the "new technology." Consultants, academics, the media, and executives are all watching the horizon.

Meantime, this obesssion with "what might be" can cause them to miss "what is" or "what should be."

Yes, new technologies will come. But reacting to new things simply requires a plan, not an obession.

Big Brother

2009-03-18T10:59:00.000-07:00

I just read an article in the latest BusinessWeek (http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/09_12/b4124046224092.htm?chan=magazine+channel_new+ideas+for+talent).

It talks about gathering and analyzing data about employees. This isn't the usual "time and motion" study stuff that has been around since Frederick Taylor. This is about discovering, supposedly objectively, which employees are "contributing" and which are "dead wood."

It isn't enough that globalization, abetted by technology that lets work be sent to the lowest bidder, has turned employees into tissues. Now companies want something akin to the sci-fi "Minority Report," where people were arrested for crimes they were going to commit. The numbers will be crunched and, based on the "metrics," the contributors will be rewarded (this time - you're only as good as what you're doing for me now) and the rest will be disposed of. The numbers will get so good that companies will hire only people "proven" to be contributors, and no one else.

It isn't enough that the number crunchers got us into the subprime mess because people surrendered their judgement to computers. Now we let computers do our thinking, and if they're so good at it, why do we need people anyway?

Thanks, Technology

2009-01-31T08:20:00.000-08:00

There used to be a lot of argument whether IT affected productivity; in general, the answer is yes.

But as we are finding out yet again, there are no unmixed technological blessings.

IT has played a significant role in bringing down the US and the world economy.

The stock market crash of 1987 was in part brought about by automated exchanges and programmed trading.

The Internet bubble of 1998-2000 was brought about by fascination with shiny technology without any economic substance.

And, of course, there is the subprime mess of 2007-200?, brought to you by quants, computers, business obsession with "innovation," and a vast wave of greed.

Gosh, thanks technology.

Google Doesn't Get It

2009-01-13T10:25:00.001-08:00

I have just discovered that Google, alas, is the typical technology-centered company. Despite their vaunted reputation and motto, their Video service is a literal "idiot box:" automated scans of videos and, when the computer rejects it, there is no human being to take issue with (I know because I called Google and, when connected to a human finally, was told there is "no one in Google Video.").

Think they ate a bit too much of their own dog food.

Frankenstein 2.0

2008-12-24T08:29:00.000-08:00

In Mary Shelley's novel, misuse of technology produces a monster which destroys its creator.

The same thing has just happened with the subprime mortgage debacle, as it did earlier in the financial meltdowns covered by Michael Lewis in his "Panic: The Story of Modern Financial Insanity."

Electronic trading automated stock exchanges, computer programs automated stock trading, sophisticated algorithms allowed investment specialists to believe they had conquered risk, databases allowed mortgages to be offered like a going out of business sale, and the creation of derivatives beyond the understanding of anyone.

Is it any surprise that the monsters of technology destroyed their creators? The sad thing is that they also destroyed so many innocent bystanders.

Price Performance Curve?

2008-11-09T10:53:00.000-08:00

In the 9Nov NY Times Book Review an article about "FACTORY GIRLS: From Village to City in a Changing China, By Leslie T. Chang" caught my eye.

Seems Coach manufactures at least some of its bags in China. Now automation, technology, and global outsourcing (made possible by technology) were supposed to bring efficiency to the "market" and therefore lower prices. So how can a bag made by the lowest-cost provider in China be sold as a luxury item in the US?

Please note that I'm not singling out Coach; they just happened to be mentioned in the review. I'm sure other so-called "luxury" goods are also made in China.

Vista Sucks

2008-09-19T07:47:00.000-07:00

I know, there's nothing new or even interesting about this subject, but it's my blog and I can rant if I want to.

Vista is so bad that Microsoft is running ads showing that people who don't know it is Vista like it (especially because there is a legion of Microserfs keeping it from barfing on their shoes during the "hidden camera" routine) - because, of course, if they knew it was Vista they'd hate it, like me.

After I got the laptop with Vista installed, the fun began. IE7, the "integrated" browser, slowed down gradually until it was unusable. Thanks, Mozilla, for Firefox, which even works fine on Vista.

After "SP1" gave me the "new, improved Vista," Windows update stopped working and my Internet connectivity became flaky - I need to power up and then restart to make a connection, and if Powersave mode comes on, restart again because the connection dropped (so sorry). And IE7 started working again, for a while, and now the only way it works if if I Run As Administrator (go figure).

But I'm ready - I bought a copy of Windows XP Professional, and soon I'm going to Orkin Vista.

I Hate Hyperlinks

2008-07-09T18:23:00.000-07:00

I suppose Doug Engelbart or Ted Nelson or Vannevar Bush, the "fathers" (grandfather, father, uncle?) of hyperlinks thought they were a good idea. To me they are yet another example of a technology that seems, to tech types, to be "wicked cool," but is in reality a pain in the ass.

When I see an interesting article, and it isn't available in PDF, I create a Word file from it. Every hyperlink gets copied, and then I have to eliminate them by hand (thanks again for nothing, Microsoft). At least some companies, like Business Week, use parenthetical hyperlinks to stock symbols, which are easier to dump.

And worst of all, where there are hyperlinks, they are usually to generic terms ("PC," "cancer," "yes," "no").

Either there needs to be a way in HTML (XML, whatever), to turn hyperlinks off, or Word needs to be upgraded to find and eliminate hyperlinks, or both.

Anyone out there interested in creating a nice utility, maybe make some money?

Fad Rider

2008-06-15T11:12:00.000-07:00

(Thanks to my wife Stephanie for this one)

All those cold-eyed technocrats out there doing deep analysis of trends and The Next Big Thing when in fact they're just riding fads. Sometimes, of course, fads can have a core of real value, like PCs and Green IT, for example. But sometimes they can just be fads.

I can't really point the finger, since I've had a very successful career as a fad rider. I bought an IBM PC in 1982 and never looked back.

But I've managed to maintain a bit of perspective by understanding the tendency to misunderstand the effect of technologies, even among those who should know better.

"In predicting the effect of technology changes, the two most common mistakes are to overestimate the short-term changes and to underestimate the long-term changes." Jakob Nielsen, Upside, Feb 2000

"A new century is at hand, and a fast-spreading technology promises to change society forever. It will let people live and work wherever they please, create dynamic new communities linked by electronics, improve the lot of the poor, and reinvent government..." Anon. late-19th century author speaking about the telephone

The Internet was the subject of irrational exuberance to the point where otherwise reasonable people lost their sense of proportion, predicting the end of business as we know it and expressing contempt for those who “just don’t get it.” Strong Words. Tasty, Too. BusinessWeek e.biz, 1Oct2001

Every Damn Cliche

2008-02-16T08:59:00.000-08:00

There are innumerable Internet sites bemoaning and laughing at the endless cliches in every movie genre.

Human imagination may be limited, but the other reason is that people feel comfort with what they know.

When the hard-charging new CEO comes riding in on a white horse to save the failing company, his pearl-handled revolvers shoot cliches, the same "sure-fire" solutions used a million times before: reorganize, rethink, reemphasize, innovate.

Even in technology, when the specialists inevitably come up with a "solution" (the use of that term is a subject for another posting, with its connotation of mathematical certainty) that invokes the latest gee-whiz widget/platform/architecture, that is simply a cliche: to them, the best "solution" is the newest "solution."

Bet you thought I was going to come up with something new here...

Upgrading Means Downgrading

2007-12-18T10:35:00.000-08:00

I owe my wife credit for this one: Our ISP was "upgrading" its servers, which meant we lost the ability to send outgoing emails, and she noted how "upgrading often means downgrading."

Technology has grown so complex that "upgrading" both personal and corporate devices often leads to unexpected problems and outages. Even installing a new piece of software can end up destroying your PC/server. And upgrades from vendors, including especially operating system upgrades, to "provide new and improved features," often act instead like malware.

Vendors who issue upgrades without planning for additional technical support are demonstrating contempt for their customers. This is as true in the corporate world (I have over 27 years experience there) as on your home PC/Mac.

I'm tired of being a beta site for things that should have been tested, and of waiting days for an email response from tech support, or hours on hold.

Time to hold vendors accountable.

Expertise and the Internet

2007-07-25T13:03:00.000-07:00

In a 25Jul NY Times article by Adam Cohen, about the YouTube presidential debate, he mentions a book by Andrew Keen (I'm not going to include the title so the book doesn't get another link):

Andrew Keen laments that by pushing amateurs of all kinds to the fore — including, presumably, amateur debate questioners — the Internet “is undermining truth, souring civic discourse, and belittling expertise, experience and talent.”

Why does that sound so defensive?

These are the same "experts" that research has shown are wrong 90% of the time in their area of "expertise." These are the same "experts" who get paid a lot of money for that (faulty) "expertise." These are the same "experts," in other words, who have a lot to lose if "amateurs" take the stage.

There are a few places where this might hold. I wouldn't ask an amateur for diagnosis of a medical condition, although there again research has shown that even the "experts" don't come to the same conclusion. I wouldn't ask an amateur to build a complex structure.

However, in so many other areas, the "experts" haven't proven their worth: financial advice, economic forecasts, politics, political analysis, intelligence, technology directions, etc.

I am not saying the amateurs have proved their worth. But the Internet has created an far-reaching market for "expertise." So, since in the US many believe in capitalism, why not let the "invisible hand" determine who the "experts" are who have valuable "expertise," rather than dismissing the "amateurs" and foisting card-carrying "experts" on us?

Your Printout Is Ready, Sir or Madam

2007-07-18T08:58:00.000-07:00

Windows was built with many unspoken assumptions. One that is especially irritating: every person has a printer attached to their PC, or at least at their desk. And so, when you print, the printer queue in the control panel clears out. But most office workers have to walk to get their printouts. And since there is nothing to indicate that you sent something to the printer, everyone forgets.

This may seem like a minor annoyance, but it is a symptom of a big problem with technology - the people who design and build it don't have to use it.

Hope all you real people appreciate my striking a blow against the uncaring technocrats.

Because I Said So

2007-06-25T12:16:00.000-07:00

Magazines and newspapers write articles with quotes from "the usual suspects," the same people who present at conferences so often I begin to wonder whether human cloning is already a reality.

These pundits and industry luminaries are featured in pithy soundbites the essence of which is "technology has changed everything because I just said so."

Just one example (honestly not meant to single out someone unfairly): in the 2Jul2007 Businessweek article, "Children of the Web," the co-founder of Ning, Marc Andreesen, is quoted: "A whole new generation grows up used to new technologies, and they're just different."

Well, gee.

Think about that for a moment (as I wish the author of the article had). Every new generation is different; technology has nothing to do with it, unless you believe in Technolgical Determinism (don't ask).

For example, the Romantics of the 19th century were a youth movement all across Europe, opposed to aristocratic, social, and political norms (sound familiar?). They didn't have blogs, or social networking software, but they knew one another, dressed alike, and lived in the same Bohemian (the term was coined then) way. They created new forms of art, music, and literature (sound familar?). They also helped stimulate the nationalist movements of the day, as a number of modern European nations came into being.

OK, just because I said this doesn't make it true. But it does make sense.

Deja Vu All Over Again

2007-06-11T12:21:00.000-07:00

No offence meant to Mike Vizard, whose 11Jun opinion in Baseline (http://www.baselinemag.com/article2/0,1540,2140578,00.asp?kc=CIOMINEPNL061107) was subtitled: "New development tools are putting business users in charge..." That could well have been ripped from the headlines when I started in IT, in the early 1980s, when "fourth generation languages" were going to change application development as we know it forever, putting users in charge.

Users still aren't in charge for a simple reason: despite the fact that they are (and always have been) impatient and dissatisfied with IT's productivity and understanding of the business, they are still functional business people, not programmers.

Yes, there are "power users" who sling code, write macros, and have the neatest and latest gadgets. But they are the tail of the curve, always have been, always will. Those under the bell, the 95%, are doing their jobs and don't want to add another one, especially since they are working more hours and enjoying it less as companies have become leaner and meaner.

For IT there is good news and bad news: users don't want to program.

Rappin Web 2.0

2007-04-27T18:56:00.000-07:00

Now don’t you know
Web 2.0 is the way to go
You gotta go fast
Or you become the past
Whatever IT you got
Forget it dude, it ain’t hot
Like Web 2.0
It’s better than blow
You’ll get high on Web 2.0
Be a media star
Your career will go far
Only do it now the gurus say
Gotta get it done or you’re yesterday
Don’t think about it any more
Cause you don’t wanna be an IT bore
Beside they must know more than you
They paid so much and you’re just screwed
So do it now, Web 2.0
That’s it, so long, gotta go
I hear it call, Web 2.0.

Speed Kills

2007-02-15T10:27:00.000-08:00

We often assume "if some is good, more is better." Like most assumptions, this has no basis in the real world. And yet the gurus and the IT folks and the business folks keep pushing for the "real-time enterprise." Get me all that data and get it for me now!

But information is only the first step towards utility and business value. Data must be processed into information, information into knowledge (through analysis), and knowledge into wisdom (through exercising judgement). Information without analysis and judgement is often useless: "knowing" is not the same as "knowing how" or "knowing what."

Information will not cure [problems], yet many people treat all problems as if lack of information was the primary obstacle. Technopoly: The Surrender of Culture to Technology, Neil Postman (Vintage Books, 1993)
It is not enough to exchange information. The information has no value unless it is understood and properly integrated... and allows [businesses] to work better. Toshifumi Suzuki, Chairman, Severn-Eleven Japan, "The Right Mind-Set for Managing IT, M. Benasou and Michael Earl, HBR, Sep-Oct1998

Businesses often can't find the time or resources to turn data into information, much less knowledge or wisdom.

And despite the fact that so much data is in corporate computers, managers spedn a lot of time looking for data, often without any benefit.

Even when companies, or people, are able to turn data into information, it doesn't always aid decision-making.

Even worse, the ability of computers to spew out information has begun to overwhelm some business people, leading to "Information Fatigue Syndrome."

So stop and think, and not just for a moment, before saying you want it all and you want it now.

Information Overload - Myth and Reality

2007-02-07T09:54:00.000-08:00

Is the computer responsible for information overload?

Forty years after the invention of the [printing] press, there were printing machines in 110 cities in six different countries; 50 years after, more than eight million books had been printed, almost all of them filled with information that had previously not been available to the average person.

In America, there are 260,000 billboards; 11,520 newspapers; 11,556 periodicals; 27,000 video outlets for renting tapes; 362 million TV sets; and over 400 million radios. There are 40,000 new book titles published every year (300,000 world-wide) and every day in America 41 million photographs are taken, and just for the record, over 60 billion pieces of advertising junk mail come into our mail boxes every year.

Informing Ourselves To Death, Neil Postman, 1990, http://world.std.com/~jimf/informing.html

Is there really information overload?

Simply because businesses can gather huge varieties and quantities of information doesn’t mean that it all has value to the business. Yet many people treat all problems as if a lack of information was the primary obstacle.
Technopoly: The Surrender of Culture to Technology, Neil Postman (Vintage Books, 1993)

There is plenty of information.

The report, How Much Information? 2003, from UC- Berkeley's School of Information Management and Systems, estimates that in 2002 people stored about five exabytes of new information on paper, film, optical or magnetic media, a number that doubled in the past three years. An exabyte is a billion gigabytes.

A weekday edition of The New York Times contains more information than the average person was likely to come across in a lifetime in 17th century England.
Information Anxiety, R.S. Wurman (Bantam, 1990) see also Information Anxiety2, R. S. Wurman, David Sume, Loring Leifer (Que, 2000)

So people spend their time gathering information and, sometimes, analyzing it, often without asking “what information do I need?,” and in many cases without knowing if it is aiding decisionmaking or providing value to the business.

Recent studies indicate that information workers spend as much as a quarter of their time just finding and gathering job-related information.
Coping With Infoglut, Tommy Peterson, Computerworld, 23Jun2003

Two multi-company studies confirmed that even though companies gather quite a lot of customer data, few summarize or synthesize it into a coherent picture of the customer.
Data to Knowledge to Results, T.H. Davenport, et.al., California Management Review, Winter 2001

And even if you were sure there was value in the huge volumes of information, people have problems thinking about it and finding the time to work with it.

People say they like to have options but are overwhelmed by the necessity of choosing from a vast and growing number of alternatives.
The Paradox of Choice: Why More Is Less, Barry Schwartz (Ecco, 2004)

A growing body of research evidence that indicates multitasking actually erodes, rather than enhances, productivity.
Why More Is Less, Megan Santosus, CIO, 15Sep2003

The fog of information can drive out knowledge. Daniel J. Boorstin

Worst of all, some businesses are moving to create the “real-time” enterprise, where data is collected and disseminated instantly. Although some IT journalists, analysts, and consultants feel this is the wave of the future, it may simply lead to less ability to make decisions and more Information Fatigue Syndrome.

Gartner asked 540 companies in the United States and Europe in 2002 how current data needs to be for analysis, just 11% said data should be updated instantaneously and continuously.
Intelligence Or Info Overload?, InformationWeek, 10Nov2003

Note that no matter how fast you get “bits” it takes longer to move “atoms.” For example, knowing that a 7-11 is running out of Pepsi doesn’t let you get it restocked at the same speed because the physical items have to be procured and moved.

So, what do you do?

Increase the signal-to-noise ratio:

'Signal' refers to useful information conveyed by some communications medium, and `noise' to anything else on that medium. Hence a low ratio implies that it is not worth paying attention to the medium in question.
http://mm.iit.uni-miskolc.hu/Data/texts/hackers_jargon/signal-to-noiseratio.HTML

The term is often applied to Usenet newsgroups [where] it is quite common to have more noise (inappropriate postings which contribute nothing) than signal (relevant, useful or interesting postings). The signal gets lost in the noise when it becomes too much effort to try to find interesting articles among all the crud.
http://wombat.doc.ic.ac.uk/foldoc/foldoc.cgi?signal-to-noise+ratio

When there is noise in the communication channel, filter it out. This requires you to distinguish between noise and the meaningful signal.

The challenge is… knowing what the right type of information is, what metrics to measure and what the right workflow is.
Tobin Gilman, PeopleSoft BusinessWeek Special Advertising Section, 10May2004

Examine what you are doing (business processes) in detail.
Make sure it is something you should be doing.
Redesign and/or optimize those processes you should be doing.
Find out what information is needed to make those processes work, including when you need it and how much you need.

Vilfredo Pareto (1848-1923), an Italian economist, observed in 1906 that 20% of the Italian people owned 80% of their country’s accumulated wealth. Pareto’s Principle states that a small number of causes is responsible for a large percentage of the effect, in a ratio of about 20:80. The Pareto Principle, Matthew Linderman, 17Feb2004,
http://www.37signals.com/svn/archives/000552.php

Gather only that information and use tools to do any analysis.

Typing Class

2007-01-11T08:49:00.000-08:00

I went to high school a long time ago, in another galaxy far away, when the typewriter was still the height of communication technology. I had to take a typing class one year, but when I arrived in the business world I found that "keyboarding" was not for business professionals.

Then the PC came along and turned business professionals back into typists. But not the classic 10-finger typists , the way I was taught. However, many technology magazine reviewers seem to think we are still in the Typewriter Age. They talk of keyboards as if they were still typewriters: too small, virtual is bad, etc. (see, for example, David Pogue's review of the Apple i-Phone in the 11Jan issue of the NY times). All they have to do is look around them at the "thumb people" (as the Japanese call them), typing madly away on Blackberries and cell phones with tiny or virtual keyboards. The Typewriter Age is over, the Thumb Age is here.

PowerPointitis

2006-12-20T18:05:00.000-08:00

Want to know why most blog entries are short (including this one)? Because most bloggers have been trained by PowerPoint.

In a culture like ours, long accustomed to splitting and dividing all things as a means of control, it is sometimes a bit of a shock to be reminded that, in operational and practical fact, the medium is the message. The 'message' of any medium or technology is the change of scale or pace or pattern that it introduces into human affairs. Understanding Media, Marshall McLuhan (Gingko Press, 2003)

But short doesn’t mean informative.

…many of Lowe's funding decisions were based on superficial factors such as a presenter's persistence or PowerPoint expertise. "The quality of the presentation drove whether the project was accepted or not. So someone could do a great job presenting an awful project and it would get approved," says Stone (Lowe’s CIO). How Lowe’s Grows, Cindy Waxer, CIO 1Dec2005
PowerPoint templates (ready-made designs) usually weaken verbal and spatial reasoning, and almost always corrupt statistical analysis. The Cognitive Style of PowerPoint, Edward Tufte, http://www.edwardtufte.com/tufte/powerpoint

PowerPoint has become so pervasive that it is a cultural artifact, rather than technology. It affects the way we think about information, about persuasion, about argument, about problem solving. It becomes an apparently rational instrument that we insert between us and the issue.

Sarah Wyndham, a defense-industry consultant living in Alexandria, Virginia, recently began to feel that her two daughters weren’t listening when she asked them to clean their bedrooms and do their chores. So, one morning, she sat down at her computer, opened Microsoft’s PowerPoint program, and typed:

FAMILY MATTERS
An approach for positive change to the
Wyndham family team

Instead of pleading for domestic harmony, Sarah Wyndham was pitching for it. Soon she had eighteen pages of large type, supplemented by a color photograph of a generic happy family riding bicycles, and, on the final page, a drawing of a key—the key to success. The briefing was given only once, last fall. The experience was so upsetting to her children that the threat of a second showing was enough to make one of the Wyndham girls burst into tears.
Absolute PowerPoint: Can a software package edit our thoughts?, Ian Parker, The New Yorker, 28May2001

Bits and Atoms

2006-11-03T12:51:00.000-08:00

The Internet has transformed business, right? Not if your business is moving atoms rather than bits.

"It turns out that Nicholas Negroponte was right, at least about one thing. The world is made up of bits and atoms. If you're selling bits, the Internet represents the greatest single transformation your business will ever see. If you're selling atoms, the Internet is only a catalog and an order form. It's really hard to ship atoms down fiber-optic lines." Richard L. Brandt, Three-Wheeled Business Plans, Upside, Jul2000

Consider Netflix. It transformed the video rental business right? Well, Netflix is one of the 10 largest users of old-fashioned USPS first-class mail in the US, moving atoms back and forth. And I bet Amazon is one of the biggest customers of UPS.

Who is trembling about the Internet? The media: newspapers, magazines, music, movies. All purveyors of bits desperately trying to hold onto their atom-based business.

The Bon Ami Test

2006-09-20T09:41:00.000-07:00

Bon Ami is a household cleanser that has been sold for over 120 years. It does the job it was designed for, even in kitchens and bathrooms far different from those in the late 19th century when it first came on the market.

What does this have to do with technology? Well, it is related to the mania for "new, improved technology" that is the only thing that can possibly handle the demands of modern businesses. Third generation languages, components, object oriented languages, client-server, Web services, SOA, etc. Every day companies drop everything and are reborn converts to the new improved technology simply because they are sure, without even asking in many cases, or without really trying hard to see if what they already have will serve.

So I (modestly) propose the "Bon Ami Test:" a checklist that will let IT groups quickly determine if they have existing technology to meet business requirements.

The list would include such things as availability of technical resources, which is, of course, a key factor in the continued use of "legacy" technology. One unexpected benefit of outsourcing is that the hungry outsourcing companies may well be happy to keep on supporting legacy systems because their profit margins are better since it doesn't require retraining and/or hiring additional people with the new skills.

Choosing Technology - Rules of Thumb

2006-08-18T13:31:00.000-07:00

Gordon’s Technology Rules of Thumb

· Less Technology Is Better. Why? Because technology is complex, expensive, and difficult to manage, and gets worse as you have more of it.

· Easy Technology Is Better.

If the technology has a long learning curve, is technically complex to install and maintain, and is difficult to use, you will impede the process rather than enhance it.

On the other hand, easy to use doesn’t mean it will do what you want or that you will understand how to use it. (see Getting Started below).

· A complex process does not demand a complex tool. Building a house, for example, is a complex process, but most of it can be accomplished with hand tools: shovel, hammer, screw driver, etc.

· Buy, Don’t Build

Not every technology choice has enough strategic impact, compared with its …cost, to deserve the investment of creating a custom solution. What’s in the Kool-Aid, Peter Coffee, eWeek, 19Jan2004

Competitive advantage is rarely based on technology; get to market as quickly as you can.

Also, don’t make the mistake of thinking that your processes or business are unique and therefore require a custom solution. In the vast majority of cases, this is simply not true.

· Rent, Don’t Buy

This keeps your options open. There are many providers that offer access to software on a “rental” basis, including vendors of major business applications (see below).

· Pilot the technology

If you have the luxury of time and money.

· Have an "exit strategy"

In case the technology doesn't work or better technology comes along.

· Try to avoid “social influence”

“…studies have shown that ‘social influence’ – institutional history, corporate leadership, peer pressure – has a major effect on how people decide whether a technology is valuable or not.” Goodbye, J.F.K.-Columbus, by James Surowiecki, The New Yorker, 8Oct2001

“…it seems that fad, fashion, and faith drive most decisions about [technology].” Rethinking the Mobile Workplace, Thomas Davenport, Optimize, Aug2005

· There is no such thing as a “technology decision” - all decisions are business decisions, are influenced by culture, and affect business processes and organization.

I can change a system, but I don’t know if I can change people’s minds and culture.
Ralph Szygenda, Group VP & CIO, General Motors Corp., Political Skills Required, InformationWeek, 21Apr2003

"Usually people begin a ...project by focusing on the technology needs. But the key is people and process." Shir Nir, managing partner, Knowledge Transformation Partners KM: The Right Way, Simone Kaplan, CIO, 15Jul2002

A decade ago, Wanda Orlikowski, a professor of information technologies and organisation studies at MIT, published a study… Her main finding: “When an organisation deploys a new technology with an intent to make substantial changes in business processes, people’s technological frames and the organisation’s work practices will likely require substantial change.” Erik Brynjolfsson, a management professor at the MIT Sloan School of Management, along with two other researchers, analysed the IT investments of 400 large firms and found that those companies that had adopted organisational changes along with the new technology tended to be more productive. A touch of concrete: Even the best software won’t work without organisational changes, The Economist, 12Apr2001

· New technology isn’t automatically better or better suited. Companies seeking technology solutions often don’t bother to consider what they already have, or technology that isn’t the latest and greatest.

An emphasis on new technology frequently prompts companies to purchase a leading-edge product because it's the most functional. But there's a trade-off: Implementing the most advanced technology is usually more complicated than alternatives that may have already been tested in the marketplace for years. What's more, the newer options can be more expensive to implement. In many cases, legacy technology is capable of meeting current business needs and can be adapted to meet future requirements. Because the technology has been used in real business settings, it's likely to have been thoroughly tested, increasing the odds that it will provide the advertised results. The fact is, the best technology solution is the one that most closely matches the underlying business need, and often that need can be effectively met by older, less glamorous technology. Intercompany Integration: Newer Technology Isn’t Always Better, By Ken Vollmer, InternetWeek 12Nov2001

…what these CIOs [say] is that they seek the best ways to align the technologies they already have in place with their companies' business goals. The New Normalcy, By Eric Chabrow, InformationWeek, 14Jun2004

Choosing Technology - Risk

2006-08-18T13:29:00.000-07:00

Choosing technology is an exercise in decision making under pressure with insufficient information, something every business person needs to understand and practice since this is the case with most business decisions.

You should use a standardized process to make any decision: life, business, technology. That will increase the probability you will make the right decision.

The first thing you need to know is your attitude towards risk, a strategic decision which influences a company's position on the Gordon Technology Adoption Spectrum:

· Bleeding Edge - Very high risk; first to use it.

· Leading Edge - High risk; a few others have used it.

· Trailing Edge - Calculated risk; there has been a conference on the technology, at least one known vendor has entered the market, someone else in your industry is using it.

· Late Adopter - Low risk; there has been an article in BusinessWeek about the technology.

· Wait & See - Very low risk; adopt it a year after articles stop appearing in IT journals.

· Stand Pat - Risk averse; whatever we are using now is fine.

Of course, this can actually be a risky attitude since new technology can destroy your business - "The Innovator's Dilemma: When New Technologies Cause Great Firms to Fail," Clayton Christensen (Harvard U. Press, 1997).

If you are Bleeding Edge, then you don’t need a standardized process because you don’t care about anything except the technology.

If you are Stand Pat, you don’t need a process because you’re not buying anything.

For all the other risk attitudes, you need some kind of standardized process; the farther down the spectrum, the more formal the process. The process is similar to due diligence for any investment.

Only Blog, They Say 2

2006-07-21T09:48:00.000-07:00

The Pew Internet & American Life Project is a treasure trove of fascinating statistics. Their study, “Bloggers: A Portrait of the Internet’s New Storytellers,” release 19Jul, shows that, once again, the Internet is an extension of offline life, and not necessarily a revolution.

52 percent of the bloggers said they did it to express themselves creatively and 50 percent said it was to document and share personal experiences, and in any case viewed it as a hobby shared, at best, with a few people.

Anyone who reads a lot of history will recognize this profile: people keeping journals and diaries to record their experiences and share them with a few people. Blogs are simply an electronic version of an American pastime.

Start The Revolution Wihout Me

2006-07-10T13:59:00.000-07:00

Warning: This is a reaction to an indirect source. An article in the 8Jul NY Times, by Dan Mitchell, talks about the blog of Chris Anderson, editor of Wired magazine.

'...markets are "increasingly shifting away from a focus on a relatively small number of 'hits' at the head of the demand curve and toward a huge number of niches in the tail" (longtail.com). Moving the economy, and the culture, "from mass markets to million of niches," he writes, amounts to nothing less than a reordering of society.'

So once again, the Internet will change everything. Makes a good headline, and, not incidentally, plugs Mr. Anderson's new book.

But, in fact, all those niches existed before the Internet, which simply made them easier to satisfy. It didn't create them. And it didn't change the structure of the market, except perhaps to allow entry of a few giants once the revenue stream gets big enough. And none of that "reorders society."

Same with eBay, except in the opposite direction: it merged many niches into one huge market.

There have always been niche needs and niche sellers. It is true that some niches were too inefficient to serve, but not all that many. A bit of research would have uncovered people who own Edsels and need parts, or people who own Pez dispensers with Disney motifs, or very tall people who can't find clothes in department stores, or people who can only wear cotton, or people who can't eat wheat, etc, etc. etc.

Only Blog, They Say

2006-07-05T08:28:00.000-07:00

The cure for the common cold, for cancer, for poverty, for global warming.

How to win friends and influence people.

Sweeter breath, whiter teeth.

If a blog falls in the forest, does anyone hear?

Clever use of carefully selected anecdotal success stories, the three people out of a million who somehow managed to get a few other people to view their rantings.

How many blogs are there on Blogger, say, and how many of those have been viewed by anyone, and how many of those have comments, and how many of those have connected with an audience?

And Blogger indulges in ruthless Darwinian selection: if you don’t update your blog they delete you, but if you update your blog and no reads it, they leave you crying in the wilderness.

We think to defeat history, which has shown that the mass of people lead lives of quiet desperation, die, and are forgotten when everyone who knew them also dies.

Innovation

2006-06-23T14:09:00.000-07:00

Innovation is the new consultant bandwagon.

What was once central to corporations – price, quality, and much of the… analytical work associated with knowledge – is fast being shipped off to lower-paid, highly trained Chinese and Indians… Increasingly, the new core competence is creativity… It’s about creativity, imagination, and, above all, innovation. Get Creative!: How to build innovative companies, Bruce Nussbaum, BusinessWeek, 1Aug2005

It has become extremely important for companies to be perceived as innovative, however defined.

For example, from the CSAA 2005 Annual Report: For many years it [innovation] was something that, frankly, CSAA wasn’t so comfortable with. While we could always be counted on for stability, too often we valued caution more than progress – and innovation was something others did. Today we know better. Paula F. Downey, President

For example, from an ad in the 29May2006 BusinessWeek: Less than a year ago, Ford Motor Company rededicated itself to American innovation. And by delivering truly innovative products… we’re doing just that. Bill Ford, Chairman and CEO

Innovation, like so many other consultant bandwagons, is something they all talk about but no one defines, because, of course, when they sell you “innovation methodologies,” or “creative thinking,” they can claim that whatever results is innovation.

So let’s first define innovation, and then talk a bit about one kind of innovation that doesn’t require consultants or methodologies.

What is “Innovation?”

The dictionary says, “A new idea, method, or device.”

It doesn’t always mean a new or changed product; it can also mean a new or changed service,

Services now account for around three-quarters of value and employment in the advanced economies, and innovation is increasingly central to the performance of these services in public and private sectors. Service Innovation: Organizational responses to technological opportunities and market imperatives, Joe Tidd and F.M. Hull (Imperial College Press, 2003)

or a new or changed process (method), including whole new types of businesses.

For example, the Toyota production system led to performance advantages of around two to one over other car makers in terms of quality and productivity. Managing Innovation: Integrating Technical, Market and Organizational Change, J. Tidd, J. Bessant and K. Pavitt (Wiley, 2005)

It doesn’t always mean something new; it can also mean changing something that already exists.

For example, in the 1970s Xerox lost about half its market share in copiers to a new generation of smaller machines, which were innovative in the application of existing copier technology. Managing Innovation

It isn’t always something created by the person, group, or company; it can be something bought or introduced from outside.

Much process innovation is about configuring and adapting what has been developed elsewhere and applying it – for example… adopting world class manufacturing (and increasingly service) practice. Managing Innovation

It doesn’t always mean adding something; it can also mean taking something away.

…[airlines] have been slipping another row or two of seats into coach by exploiting stronger, lighter materials developed by seat manufacturers that allow for slimmer seatbacks. The thinner seats theoretically could be used to give passengers more legroom but, in practice, the airlines have been keeping the amount of space between rows the same, to accommodate additional rows. One Day, That Economy Ticket May Buy You a Place to Stand, By Christopher Elliott, NY Times 25Apr2006

It isn’t always successful; most innovations fail, in nature, in society, and in business.

As our understanding of the history of technology increases, it becomes clear that a new device merely opens a door; it does not compel one to enter. The acceptance or rejection of an invention, or the extent to which its implications are realized if it is accepted, depends quite as much upon the condition of a society, and upon the imagination of its leaders, as upon the nature of the technological item itself. Medieval Technology & Social Change, Lynn White, Jr. (Oxford, 1962)

It isn’t always the “best” or even “better,” and in some cases, it may even make things worse.

Microcomputers couldn’t do what mainframes did, but they were vastly cheaper to buy and to operate. PCs couldn’t do what mainframes or minicomputers did, but they were vastly cheaper to buy and to operate.

It may not be useful until other innovations are available, a systemic innovation as opposed to an autonomous innovation.

…some innovations are fundamentally systemic – that is, their benefits can be realized only in conjunction with related, complementary innovations. To profit from instant photography, Polaroid needed to develop both new film technology and new camera technology. Similarly, lean manufacturing is a systemic innovation because it requires interrelated changes in product design, supplier management, information technology, and so on. When Is Virtual Virtuous?, Henry W. Chesbrough and David J. Teece, Harvard Business Review, Aug2002, pg. 3

It isn’t always radical, leading to a degree of change that many companies, or even whole industries, cannot adopt or adjust to; instead, it can be incremental, leading to a degree of change that may be more easily adopted, within a company or across an industry.

Most organizations are good at incremental innovation and exploitation as they build and develop existing knowledge and capabilities. They are less successful at creating the conditions for radical innovation. Innovation In Organizations From A Complex Adaptive Systems Perspective, Ysanne Carlisle and Elizabeth McMillan, paper presented at Complexity, Science and Society Conference Sep2005, University of Liverpool

It isn’t always the work of an isolated genius, or “two guys in a garage;” it can also be the result of “small world” networks, or of deliberate, structured efforts by groups or companies to “manage” innovation.

…tracing the history of key innovations in art, science, and politics in ancient Western and Eastern worlds [shows only two who] fit the loner model, a finding supported by historians and cultural sociologists who have shown in great detail that the creativity of many key figures… all abided by the same pattern of being embedded in a network of artists or scientists who shared ideas and acted as both critics and fans for each other… Collaboration and Creativity: The Small World Problem, Brian Uzzi and Jarrett Spiro, Am J Sociology 111, no. 2 (Sep2005), pg. 448

In fact, even if it starts as the work of one person, an entrepreneur, the development, spread, and adoption of innovation is a process embedded in a social and cultural context, a process that can foster and encourage, or hinder, innovation and its spread and adoption.

Innovations can grow wild, springing up weed-like despite unfavorable circumstances, but they can also be cultivated, blossoming in greater abundance under favorable conditions. When a Thousand Flowers Bloom: Structural, Collective, and Social Conditions for Innovation in Organization, Rosabeth Moss Kanter, Research in Organizational Behavior, 10 (1988)

New Media?

2006-05-24T08:07:00.000-07:00

The consultants, journalists, venture capitalists, and companies are excited about yet another "new business model that will forever change the media industry." Charging by the page, by the look, by the chapter, etc., is the new paradigm.

Well, I have news for you: this is very old news. In the mid-19th century, the novels of Charles Dickens, among many others, were sold by subscription, or by the piece. Even earlier than that, writers, or simply those with opinions, published essays and broadsides and sold 1 or a few pages.

What changed in the 20th century was technology that drove the price of books way down, and made magazines easy to produce and affordable. So writers and those with opinions could pump out cheap books rather than sell their material by the piece.

Perhaps if some people knew more history we wouldn't get so excited so often about so many "new paradigms."

Simplifying Complexity

2006-03-09T08:13:00.000-08:00

People add computers to the mix now without asking whether it makes business sense, yet I am sure IT managers are aware that most people use only a small part of what they have. Computers have complicated people's daily business lives beyond the value they have added to the process. In addition, they have created an overworked support structure which can't keep up with demands for help.

I think we should stand back from our fascination with this technology and remember that we are business people; it is our job to add value to our companies by applying business analysis to the needs of our clients and introducing technology where appropriate. Ask someone whether they want to prepare a presentation in an hour or so, or if they would rather fiddle with fonts and animation and color until tomorrow. Ask someone if they could get along with a book of photos of the inventory, which would take a few days to create, or if they want to create a whole new inventory system and then have programmers support it forever.

We should stop looking for the next "killer technology/application" and start helping people use what they have more effectively. We should apply our analytic skills to helping people reengineer their business processes. We should pressure vendors to integrate their products better so that we can simplify our lives and those of our clients. We should plug our ears with wax and stop listening to the siren's song, leading us to smash up on the complexities of technology, applications, and networks. Otherwise, when the next series of "where's the beef?" articles about the payback from technology appears, our companies may be the bad examples.

Paperbacks

2006-03-09T08:02:00.000-08:00

Paperbacks have contributed to and benefited from the information explosion. Now detailed information on everything from astrology to astrophysics is available at prices that almost anyone can afford. Some of the knowledge would make the keepers of the great library at Alexandria envious. On the other hand, some of it should turn its producers red with shame. But as long as the curiosity bug continues to bite people, paperbacks on any subject will find a ready market, which is a good thing. Knowledge is the enemy of oppression. In this age when specialists make our decisions for us there is a great need for access to information. Computers are touted as the solution to the alienation of the average person from knowledge. But computers require experts and institutional structures. Paperbacks only require a writer, a publisher and a reader; the eternal triangle of knowledge.

The Easy Computing Mirage

2006-02-24T09:38:00.000-08:00

Almost since the first computer was installed in a corporate office, business people using the computer have had more needs than can be satisfied by their IT budgets and staff. Vendors saw this market early, and offered products that could be used outside the IT-controlled "glass house." Power users hunted for ways to get their business problems solved without asking IT.

The minicomputer, the Information Center, the PC, client/server computing, the Internet, and now Web services, have each been touted as the computing solution that would free business people from the tyranny of IT. But each solution has proved to be a mirage, desirable but forever out of reach. The complexity of computing -- hardware, operating systems, applications, databases, networks -- has proven too much for even IT professionals to combine and use, as demonstrated by the Standish Group's Chaos survey and Microsoft's constant security embarrassments.

Nor has greater computing power led to creation of easier software. On the contrary, paraphrasing Parkinson, software has expanded to fill the available memory, disk, and processing power, resulting in a computing environment that has grown exponentially more complex, harder to use and to manage.

Technology has made certain things easier, but only those things that can be reduced to simple processes, such as cell phones and other electronics. But even these consumer devices have been attacked by feature bloat. So "smart" dishwashers fail with distressing regularity, requiring a house call by a technician to "reboot" the dishwasher's software, and elaborate cell phones are used simply to make calls or download ring tones.

There is an inherent complexity in the creation of software, and it can't be overcome by breaking the software into small pieces like Legos. Worse, when elements of a system are made by different suppliers, as in Web services, a situation develops like that described by Butler W. Lampson, a researcher at Xerox PARC: "A distributed system is a system in which I can't get my work done because a computer has failed that I've never even heard of."

One reason for this complexity is that none of the languages and tools designed by technicians and used by developers offer a complete solution to any software problem or task. A software patchwork results, pleasing to neither developer or user.

Another reason is the perception that change has become the norm in business: every day you must react to new events and do new things. This perception has made business seem increasingly complex, and has raised the expectations for the technology used to respond to change: it will be able to handle things known, as well as changes foreseen and unseen. It has also led everyone to believe that only more technology and the newest technology will provide help for all the change.

But has business really become more complex, and is more and complex technology the solution? Business still plans, makes, markets, and sells. Technology supports these processes, but it is only a tool, and no one should use a jackhammer to pound a nail. Business people should go back to first principles: what really is the problem and what is the simplest tool I can use to help me solve the problem? IT professionals, if they want to be an integral part of the business, need to support this search for simpler solutions. It is time for IT professionals and business people to give up grasping for the mirage and start thinking about how to simplify complexity.

The Internet Is Everyone's Attic

2006-02-24T09:34:00.000-08:00

If you grew up in a place like LA there are no basements or attics so clothing doesn't get preserved, as the textile curator at LA County Museum told me once. But still, many of you will know what I mean.

Warm and dry and a bit musty, a perfect place to spend a rainy afternoon rummaging among the trash and treasures. There will be much more of the former than of the latter, but most people don't mind; that's why garage sales and eBay are so popular.

Things you forgot, things you never knew you had or needed, old memories, some fond and others not, people, some forgotten and some not.

Things from former owners - other people's lives - and other generations - your living history.

National Geographic, Life magazine, Time, Harper's, Atlantic Monthly, moldering encyclopedias: science and news and culture.

Letters and diaries, intimate glimpses into minds, ideals, hopes, loves, triumphs and tragedies.

Will you come down from there a better person, or with new ideas, or with things you really need, or with a resolution to contact old friends/lovers? Or will you simply come back down to the real world after passing a pleasant few hours away from your life?