What I learned

So, last post was about me hitting back at all the personal insults and the inbalance of the blogosphere. As Len Edgerly said in my comments last night we like our junk food more than we like our broccoli, even if the broccoli is better for us.

Dave Winer this morning sent me a clear message: admit you made a mistake and move on.

Danny Sullivan continues the conversation.

First, to Dave Winer. Of COURSE I made a mistake. Anytime you open yourself up to personal attacks the kinds of which have been made on me the past few days that’s explicit evidence that I made a mistake in some kind of judgment. Even I get that. Especially punctuated when you get really smart people like Danny or you to attack.

But Dave’s right. Time to make an accounting of the mistakes and things I have learned.

The reason I’ve been quiet is to figure out what my mistakes were, and to glean some personal learning about it.

Here’s the mistakes I can see I made. I’m sure there’s at least 20 others, most of which have been pointed out in excruciating detail on the blogs I linked to on Monday:

1. Hooking my thesis to a technology that doesn’t have an obvious tie to search. TechMeme.
2. Hooking my thesis to a company that doesn’t yet have a good track record: Mahalo.
3. Attacking SEOs needlessly, which caused all sorts of people, including Danny Sullivan to get their hairs up in a fighting stance.
4. Doing too simplistic an analysis of how Google actually works.
5. Misjudging Google’s speed today. It took literally minutes for it to show up on searches.
6. Misjudging TechMeme’s ability to point at a short post and at video. Turns out if you get enough conversation going it probably will link to a one-word post. Gotta try that someday! :-)
7. Jumping into a battlefront (SEO’s vs. Google) without really understanding how that warfront will go.
8. Not making it clear that I was making some BIG assumptions. Like that Google won’t adopt and that Facebook will open up enough to make it possible to build a new kind of search engine in public on top.
9. Using the form of video, which makes it a lot harder for some people to consume. But, then, I’m doing R&D and am going to continue to use new technologies like Kyte to see what’s good and bad about them.
10. Hooking my thesis to a guy, Jason Calacanis, founder of Mahalo, who has been pushing his stuff so hard lately that lots of people have turned him off. Or worse.

That’s a lot of mistakes for a 20-minute video on a Sunday morning.

But, as Tom Rolander, one of the guys who has made an even bigger mistake in his life and lived to see another day, says “every story has to have 10% fruit juice to be believed.”

So, what’s the fruit juice in my story?

1. Google is getting noisier and isn’t improving as fast as we’d like it. So, anyone who has an idea of how search is going to improve will get listened to. I think this is why Powerset and Spock got so much hype.
2. A lot of people have discovered social networks and services in the past six months. Twitter, Pownce, Facebook, Plaxo, not to mention Upcoming, Yelp, Flickr, Del.icio.us, Digg, etc. And we’re just starting to learn about how those are potentially going to change our life and the services we expect. So, anyone who can see a new pattern in how these will be used will get paid attention to.
3. Anything with a halfway interesting story about how an upstart like Facebook will beat Google will get listened to if for no other reason than to argue about it.
4. There’s a LOT of personal animosity against “a-listers” and anytime an a-lister gives everyone a chance to get that animosity out of their system it will be used.
5. Kyte.tv, the technology I used, is a lightening rod of its own. People either hated it or loved it. Many of you came by the chat room over the last three days and told us that. If you use a new technology to tell an interesting story that’ll increase the chances you’ll get listened to.
6. RSS has such a strong place now in how many of us consume information that when you mess with that reading behavior you’ll increase your chance of getting noticed.

So, to wrap this up. Did I learn my lessons? Are there others that I should have learned that I didn’t pay enough attention to?

Comments

  1. Offtopic – wouldn’t it be great if the WordPress devs implemented a tag you can use to temporarily disable smilies (so 8 ) will properly appear for listing things, etc)?

  2. Offtopic – wouldn’t it be great if the WordPress devs implemented a tag you can use to temporarily disable smilies (so 8 ) will properly appear for listing things, etc)?

  3. There is nothing wrong with making a mistake.

    There is something wrong with making a mistake twice.

  4. There is nothing wrong with making a mistake.

    There is something wrong with making a mistake twice.

  5. Don’t back down! That people are far too beholden to Google is not your fault. Neither is the fact that questioning Goog’s hegemony is seemingly “off-limits”. If you made a mistake, fine, but at-least wait out your four year time frame before saying so, otherwise your retraction might be the biggest mistake. And, furthermore, don’t let others vitriol determine what you will or won’t talk about.

  6. Don’t back down! That people are far too beholden to Google is not your fault. Neither is the fact that questioning Goog’s hegemony is seemingly “off-limits”. If you made a mistake, fine, but at-least wait out your four year time frame before saying so, otherwise your retraction might be the biggest mistake. And, furthermore, don’t let others vitriol determine what you will or won’t talk about.

  7. Seth: I’m not backing down from my main thesis: which is that social graph based search is going to upset the Google cart. Thanks for pointing that out. Did I list that on my list of mistakes? No! :-)

  8. Seth: I’m not backing down from my main thesis: which is that social graph based search is going to upset the Google cart. Thanks for pointing that out. Did I list that on my list of mistakes? No! :-)

  9. Did you really make that many mistakes? You threw out an opinion of how you saw things. Some people like them and some people didn’t. Some people took apart your opinion with facts of their own.

    The most heat you took was from those in the SEO industry who rely on Google for a majority of their income. Social networks aren’t as easy to optimize for as Google is, right? Sacred territory you strode upon there.

    The conversation is what’s important. The conversation continues. You were a success with that.

    Yet, I still think you should do more writing. ;-)

  10. Did you really make that many mistakes? You threw out an opinion of how you saw things. Some people like them and some people didn’t. Some people took apart your opinion with facts of their own.

    The most heat you took was from those in the SEO industry who rely on Google for a majority of their income. Social networks aren’t as easy to optimize for as Google is, right? Sacred territory you strode upon there.

    The conversation is what’s important. The conversation continues. You were a success with that.

    Yet, I still think you should do more writing. ;-)

  11. Robert,

    I’m a little confused with all the recent “converstation” I hear on this blog about Kyte.tv. I think yesterday’s post about what was happening on ScobleShow was the first I heard in a long time.
    Does Kyte and PodTech have a relationship? It seems I hear nothing but advertising about how great Kyte is but very little about what ScobleShow is doing. Shouldn’t you be trying to drive revenue to PodTech instead of to Kyte?
    I’m trying to figure out how a company like PodTech whose biggest/most popular face is doing an incredible amount of promotion for a different product.
    An example is join my channel on Kyte, post a vidoe on my Kyte channel, and btw if you have check out this video on ScobleShow.
    It seems I know more about what is on Kyte and what is being discussed on Kyte then what is happening w/ PodTech. Care to explain?

  12. Robert,

    I’m a little confused with all the recent “converstation” I hear on this blog about Kyte.tv. I think yesterday’s post about what was happening on ScobleShow was the first I heard in a long time.
    Does Kyte and PodTech have a relationship? It seems I hear nothing but advertising about how great Kyte is but very little about what ScobleShow is doing. Shouldn’t you be trying to drive revenue to PodTech instead of to Kyte?
    I’m trying to figure out how a company like PodTech whose biggest/most popular face is doing an incredible amount of promotion for a different product.
    An example is join my channel on Kyte, post a vidoe on my Kyte channel, and btw if you have check out this video on ScobleShow.
    It seems I know more about what is on Kyte and what is being discussed on Kyte then what is happening w/ PodTech. Care to explain?

  13. Nice Robert. Nice to read something hefty from you rather than get a video link.

    Kind of ironic advice coming from Winer isn’t it?

  14. Nice Robert. Nice to read something hefty from you rather than get a video link.

    Kind of ironic advice coming from Winer isn’t it?

  15. 9) Using the form of video, which makes it a lot harder for some people to consume. But, then, I’m doing R&D and am going to continue to use new technologies like Kyte to see what’s good and bad about them.

    Supplementing the videos with a readily available transcript might be a simple way to nip this one. I imagine there are others like me who like to keep up from the workplace, but who, for one reason or another, can’t/won’t/shouldn’t watch them from the office.

  16. 9) Using the form of video, which makes it a lot harder for some people to consume. But, then, I’m doing R&D and am going to continue to use new technologies like Kyte to see what’s good and bad about them.

    Supplementing the videos with a readily available transcript might be a simple way to nip this one. I imagine there are others like me who like to keep up from the workplace, but who, for one reason or another, can’t/won’t/shouldn’t watch them from the office.

  17. “Anytime you open yourself up to personal attacks the kinds of which have been made on me the past few days that’s explicit evidence that I made a mistake in some kind of judgment.”

    No, it’s not. Opening yourself up to personal attacks — being open — isn’t a mistake. Not having your facts straight is.

  18. “Anytime you open yourself up to personal attacks the kinds of which have been made on me the past few days that’s explicit evidence that I made a mistake in some kind of judgment.”

    No, it’s not. Opening yourself up to personal attacks — being open — isn’t a mistake. Not having your facts straight is.

  19. Accepting the mistakes. This is what makes you different from some other A-Listers who clings on to their thesis. Kudos Robert.

  20. “every story has to have 10% fruit juice to be believed.”

    That your post was met with such vehement statements of disbelief might indicate a level of fruit juice somewhat under 10%.

  21. “every story has to have 10% fruit juice to be believed.”

    That your post was met with such vehement statements of disbelief might indicate a level of fruit juice somewhat under 10%.

  22. “Google is getting noisier and isn’t improving as fast as we’d like it.”

    I think this is also wrong, Robert. I can’t think of a single time in the last year when I’ve searched for something on Google and the answer I needed hasn’t been on the first page. And I, like most people, almost never venture beyond that first page.

  23. “Google is getting noisier and isn’t improving as fast as we’d like it.”

    I think this is also wrong, Robert. I can’t think of a single time in the last year when I’ve searched for something on Google and the answer I needed hasn’t been on the first page. And I, like most people, almost never venture beyond that first page.

  24. Robert:

    Albert Einstein said:

    “Anyone who has never made a mistake has never tried anything new.”

    So don’t be shy about putting out new theories. Frankly, most of the world couldn’t give a crap about Dave Winer and Danny Sullivan. Most of the people who went after you are nobodies. Wired magazine’s content gets worse and worse so who cares about them as well. In the valley, we tend to get wrapped up in our echo chamber. Most of the world couldn’t care less about any of this.

    Here’s my advice for what its worth:

    -In the future bounce theories off other people to get their take. If they agree then make it a collaborative effort. Just think if you could have pulled guys like Dave Winer and Danny Sullivan into the mix and they agreed with you on this. Think of how powerful it would have been for the three of you to present the theory together. At least the Valley would be paying attention.

    -Forget Calacanis. People are sick of him. Anytime you introduce him into the picture its going to automatically piss off a lot of people who will come after you for just that one thing. I think you need to distance yourself from Jason.

    -Make sure you have your facts and stats straight – valleywag sucks but they legitimately took you down on this point.

    -People are not as excited about techmeme and Facebook as you think they are.

    -RSS isn’t that cool. Its only been adopted by 5% of Internet users. RSS may never cross the chasm. Its time for technologist to realize that.

    -On an off topic note, I think your star is much brighter than Podtech. Podtech is working against you at this point in your career. I hope you are thinking about your options here.

    For what its worth, keep up the good work and good attitude. People still respect you for having an opinion and no one will care about all this in a week.

  25. Hmmmmmmmm… I think Dave Winer has, perhaps, confused “ideas/opinions” with “facts”. All you did was put forward your ideas/opinions on the future of search. Since when did people deserved to be kicked for sharing their ideas (good or bad)?

    As for the SEO “controversy”. I don’t think you said anything controversial. You made the point that SEO paid links are a problem for Google; and that Google could potentially be disrupted by a search technology where paid links don’t influence search results. Surely no-one disagrees with that?

    Now, do I share your view that Google will lose it’s position as the No. 1 search engine in four years? No, I don’t. However, let’s be clear – the Internet moves fast enough that, given the right competition, it could

  26. Robert:

    Albert Einstein said:

    “Anyone who has never made a mistake has never tried anything new.”

    So don’t be shy about putting out new theories. Frankly, most of the world couldn’t give a crap about Dave Winer and Danny Sullivan. Most of the people who went after you are nobodies. Wired magazine’s content gets worse and worse so who cares about them as well. In the valley, we tend to get wrapped up in our echo chamber. Most of the world couldn’t care less about any of this.

    Here’s my advice for what its worth:

    -In the future bounce theories off other people to get their take. If they agree then make it a collaborative effort. Just think if you could have pulled guys like Dave Winer and Danny Sullivan into the mix and they agreed with you on this. Think of how powerful it would have been for the three of you to present the theory together. At least the Valley would be paying attention.

    -Forget Calacanis. People are sick of him. Anytime you introduce him into the picture its going to automatically piss off a lot of people who will come after you for just that one thing. I think you need to distance yourself from Jason.

    -Make sure you have your facts and stats straight – valleywag sucks but they legitimately took you down on this point.

    -People are not as excited about techmeme and Facebook as you think they are.

    -RSS isn’t that cool. Its only been adopted by 5% of Internet users. RSS may never cross the chasm. Its time for technologist to realize that.

    -On an off topic note, I think your star is much brighter than Podtech. Podtech is working against you at this point in your career. I hope you are thinking about your options here.

    For what its worth, keep up the good work and good attitude. People still respect you for having an opinion and no one will care about all this in a week.

  27. Hmmmmmmmm… I think Dave Winer has, perhaps, confused “ideas/opinions” with “facts”. All you did was put forward your ideas/opinions on the future of search. Since when did people deserved to be kicked for sharing their ideas (good or bad)?

    As for the SEO “controversy”. I don’t think you said anything controversial. You made the point that SEO paid links are a problem for Google; and that Google could potentially be disrupted by a search technology where paid links don’t influence search results. Surely no-one disagrees with that?

    Now, do I share your view that Google will lose it’s position as the No. 1 search engine in four years? No, I don’t. However, let’s be clear – the Internet moves fast enough that, given the right competition, it could

  28. I think one of the most revealing aspects of this whole blowup was the level of personal animosity from Wired. Very sad. Also sad is Dave Winer not calling out Wired for the personal nature of the story he linked to. Dave you were part of the mob here, complete fucking hypocrisy.

  29. I think one of the most revealing aspects of this whole blowup was the level of personal animosity from Wired. Very sad. Also sad is Dave Winer not calling out Wired for the personal nature of the story he linked to. Dave you were part of the mob here, complete fucking hypocrisy.

  30. I think one of the most revealing aspects of this whole blowup was the level of personal animosity from Wired. Very sad. Also sad is Dave Winer not calling out Wired for the personal nature of the story he linked to. Dave you were part of the mob here, complete fucking hypocrisy.

  31. I agree with Ian Betteridge (#18) that “Google is getting noisier and isn’t improving as fast as we’d like it.” is not necessarily true. I don’t see that much crud in Google search results. Less today than a couple of years ago, actually.

    I’d echo the suggestions about transcripts being useful for video (and, actually, audio) content. Think not just of the people who are deaf, but the people with short attention spans who want to skip the slow bits.

  32. I agree with Ian Betteridge (#18) that “Google is getting noisier and isn’t improving as fast as we’d like it.” is not necessarily true. I don’t see that much crud in Google search results. Less today than a couple of years ago, actually.

    I’d echo the suggestions about transcripts being useful for video (and, actually, audio) content. Think not just of the people who are deaf, but the people with short attention spans who want to skip the slow bits.

  33. When you put out a controversial theory and DON’T get attacked for it, that’s when you should be upset.

    As it is, you’ve just proven how relevant you are to the conversation. Time to rejoice, really.

  34. When you put out a controversial theory and DON’T get attacked for it, that’s when you should be upset.

    As it is, you’ve just proven how relevant you are to the conversation. Time to rejoice, really.

  35. Robert,

    I watched your videos and, honestly, I don’t think you made any of the mistakes you outlined above. Yes, you did all those things, but I don’t see them as mistakes. As an a-list blogger, whatever you say is going to be scrutinized, dissected, and and attacked. But really, isn’t that one of the signs of a good writer? People who read you should never be left without an opinion. Your writing should polarize people and encourage them to act passionately. Apathy is the writers worst enemy.

    I didn’t agree with everything you said in the videos. But I think a lot of the beating you’re taking has nothing to do with WHAT you said but rather the fact that you addressed a very polarizing subject: the search war.

    I think I’ll just wait for Valley Wag to figure it all out. They’ll probably have an article explaining what you REALLY did wrong by nightfall. :-)

  36. Robert,

    I watched your videos and, honestly, I don’t think you made any of the mistakes you outlined above. Yes, you did all those things, but I don’t see them as mistakes. As an a-list blogger, whatever you say is going to be scrutinized, dissected, and and attacked. But really, isn’t that one of the signs of a good writer? People who read you should never be left without an opinion. Your writing should polarize people and encourage them to act passionately. Apathy is the writers worst enemy.

    I didn’t agree with everything you said in the videos. But I think a lot of the beating you’re taking has nothing to do with WHAT you said but rather the fact that you addressed a very polarizing subject: the search war.

    I think I’ll just wait for Valley Wag to figure it all out. They’ll probably have an article explaining what you REALLY did wrong by nightfall. :-)

  37. Robert,

    I watched your videos and, honestly, I don’t think you made any of the mistakes you outlined above. Yes, you did all those things, but I don’t see them as mistakes. As an a-list blogger, whatever you say is going to be scrutinized, dissected, and and attacked. But really, isn’t that one of the signs of a good writer? People who read you should never be left without an opinion. Your writing should polarize people and encourage them to act passionately. Apathy is the writers worst enemy.

    I didn’t agree with everything you said in the videos. But I think a lot of the beating you’re taking has nothing to do with WHAT you said but rather the fact that you addressed a very polarizing subject: the search war.

    I think I’ll just wait for Valley Wag to figure it all out. They’ll probably have an article explaining what you REALLY did wrong by nightfall. :-)

  38. Robert,

    I am not going to comment on the “future of search” – plenty of others are taking care of that… However, I believe that there is a significant portion of your userbase that are happy with your decision to use communication technologies like kyte. Your channel had over 600 simultaneous viewers and chatters for more than 12 hours, thousands of chat messages, non-stop conversations for the last 3 days; so many that we put in a hot patch to disable the “new chat” audio alerts by default. Your channel has been embedded on dozens of websites, connecting all readers to one “Scoble network”. Furthermore, you and your readers/viewers have given us superb feedback on what we need to focus on improving in our product (as mentioned several times, we are working on an updated design with improved usability).

    In response to the kyte vs PodTech questions, kyte is a communication platform and not an online video player. I think you’ve already done an excellent job of showing that comparing kyte.tv to PodTech is apples to oranges: http://scobleizer.com/2007/08/20/kytetv-vs-podtechnet

    BTW, Nokia announced today the 3G version of the N95 for the U.S.. I am having the pleasure to use such a device and it is a whole new experience to use online services with connection speeds >1Mbps.

    Daniel
    http://www.kyte.tv

  39. Robert,

    I am not going to comment on the “future of search” – plenty of others are taking care of that… However, I believe that there is a significant portion of your userbase that are happy with your decision to use communication technologies like kyte. Your channel had over 600 simultaneous viewers and chatters for more than 12 hours, thousands of chat messages, non-stop conversations for the last 3 days; so many that we put in a hot patch to disable the “new chat” audio alerts by default. Your channel has been embedded on dozens of websites, connecting all readers to one “Scoble network”. Furthermore, you and your readers/viewers have given us superb feedback on what we need to focus on improving in our product (as mentioned several times, we are working on an updated design with improved usability).

    In response to the kyte vs PodTech questions, kyte is a communication platform and not an online video player. I think you’ve already done an excellent job of showing that comparing kyte.tv to PodTech is apples to oranges: http://scobleizer.com/2007/08/20/kytetv-vs-podtechnet

    BTW, Nokia announced today the 3G version of the N95 for the U.S.. I am having the pleasure to use such a device and it is a whole new experience to use online services with connection speeds >1Mbps.

    Daniel
    http://www.kyte.tv

  40. Robert -

    I’ve been a long time reader of your site, so I’ve seen the transitions in your focus over the years. (Please note that these are strictly my impressions of how your focus changed, so you may not agree)

    When I first came upon you, you were fighting your fight to break down the walls and humanize the Redmond giant. You tried to show a company that was working hard to make progress, but recognizing that the corporate structures in place was getting in the way. Then you first moved over to podtech, and (re-)discovered how much of the world existed that wasn’t microsoft-centric. Over the past couple months, your focus has seemingly shifted over to “social” and “wow” products. Twitter, Facebook, Apple, Pownce, et all. Mobile products, photowalking and social networking events and applications which add value to “real” life.

    Unfortunately for me (and I doubt I’m alone), the place you had your biggest contribution was in finding products/companies/concepts which added value to my “work” life – things which made it easier for me to do my job – or to provide hints on where the next trend was heading. That’s where I found value. That, and you welcomed those that challenged your viewpoints and started conversations – often times I learned as much reading the comments as I did reading the original posts, some times more.

    Nowadays? Not so much.

    The social networking stuff is all well and good. But most of the social networks you link to are blocked at work because they distract people from *working*. And when I get home, I don’t want to spend all my time attached to my computer building my social networks and finding more stuff to read – my rss feeds give me enough noise to distract me over the course of the day. I don’t need more noise. On the contrary – I need less.

    The Apple fanboy stuff – fine. But does it add value to my day? Not really. There’s not a Apple store within 100 miles, nor is there a demand for experience using their products. Yeah, I have an Ipod, but I’m not in awe of it – it’s a tool which does a job acceptably.

    As for the extraneous conversations – you seem to still be as engaging in the comment areas of the posts I read, but there seems to be much more of an edge to them. Kind of a “if we don’t believe, we must be against you” vibe. Now, I’ll admit, I don’t read the comments as much because what you’ve been covering doesn’t interest me as much, so it may just be a matter of perception.

    As for why the uproar? First of all, you set yourself up for failure by stating on your post “The only reason you’ll watch these two videos is because you trust me to add value to your lives.” Seems to me that you’re saying that if I don’t watch these and believe them, I’m going to miss somethimg.

    But the biggest issue is it was comparing apples to oranges. How can a social tool help me do my job better? Short answer – it can’t. If anything, it’ll distract me with other noise, and make it harder for me to find what I need. But I can go to Google, do a simple search and within a page or so, I’ve found my answer. Thirty seconds or less and I’m moving on – that adds value to my day.

    How would these tools you’ve been covering lately help me do a day to day job? Well, if they’re blocked, they won’t. Or if they’re like Twitter, they’ll add more noise and I’ll find myself ignoring those that twitter and I’ve found that some that used to post quality concepts to blogs on a semi-regular are now twittering useless items, and I’ve even stopped visiting them because they’ve been twittering more often then blogging, and the value they used to add to my day is now almost nil because I have to filter out the noise.

    Don’t take this the wrong way, but do you want to add value to my life again? Show me ways to utilize all these social networks and tools without getting swallowed up by the extraneous noise. Show me how they add value to my “work” life without distracting me from what I’m supposed to do – work.

    But please keep going. Yes, you may not cover as much of what I find of value, but from time to time, there’s a nugget which keeps me checking in. And you may be providing value to others. Plus, you can’t succeed or fail, unless you try. Right?

  41. Robert -

    I’ve been a long time reader of your site, so I’ve seen the transitions in your focus over the years. (Please note that these are strictly my impressions of how your focus changed, so you may not agree)

    When I first came upon you, you were fighting your fight to break down the walls and humanize the Redmond giant. You tried to show a company that was working hard to make progress, but recognizing that the corporate structures in place was getting in the way. Then you first moved over to podtech, and (re-)discovered how much of the world existed that wasn’t microsoft-centric. Over the past couple months, your focus has seemingly shifted over to “social” and “wow” products. Twitter, Facebook, Apple, Pownce, et all. Mobile products, photowalking and social networking events and applications which add value to “real” life.

    Unfortunately for me (and I doubt I’m alone), the place you had your biggest contribution was in finding products/companies/concepts which added value to my “work” life – things which made it easier for me to do my job – or to provide hints on where the next trend was heading. That’s where I found value. That, and you welcomed those that challenged your viewpoints and started conversations – often times I learned as much reading the comments as I did reading the original posts, some times more.

    Nowadays? Not so much.

    The social networking stuff is all well and good. But most of the social networks you link to are blocked at work because they distract people from *working*. And when I get home, I don’t want to spend all my time attached to my computer building my social networks and finding more stuff to read – my rss feeds give me enough noise to distract me over the course of the day. I don’t need more noise. On the contrary – I need less.

    The Apple fanboy stuff – fine. But does it add value to my day? Not really. There’s not a Apple store within 100 miles, nor is there a demand for experience using their products. Yeah, I have an Ipod, but I’m not in awe of it – it’s a tool which does a job acceptably.

    As for the extraneous conversations – you seem to still be as engaging in the comment areas of the posts I read, but there seems to be much more of an edge to them. Kind of a “if we don’t believe, we must be against you” vibe. Now, I’ll admit, I don’t read the comments as much because what you’ve been covering doesn’t interest me as much, so it may just be a matter of perception.

    As for why the uproar? First of all, you set yourself up for failure by stating on your post “The only reason you’ll watch these two videos is because you trust me to add value to your lives.” Seems to me that you’re saying that if I don’t watch these and believe them, I’m going to miss somethimg.

    But the biggest issue is it was comparing apples to oranges. How can a social tool help me do my job better? Short answer – it can’t. If anything, it’ll distract me with other noise, and make it harder for me to find what I need. But I can go to Google, do a simple search and within a page or so, I’ve found my answer. Thirty seconds or less and I’m moving on – that adds value to my day.

    How would these tools you’ve been covering lately help me do a day to day job? Well, if they’re blocked, they won’t. Or if they’re like Twitter, they’ll add more noise and I’ll find myself ignoring those that twitter and I’ve found that some that used to post quality concepts to blogs on a semi-regular are now twittering useless items, and I’ve even stopped visiting them because they’ve been twittering more often then blogging, and the value they used to add to my day is now almost nil because I have to filter out the noise.

    Don’t take this the wrong way, but do you want to add value to my life again? Show me ways to utilize all these social networks and tools without getting swallowed up by the extraneous noise. Show me how they add value to my “work” life without distracting me from what I’m supposed to do – work.

    But please keep going. Yes, you may not cover as much of what I find of value, but from time to time, there’s a nugget which keeps me checking in. And you may be providing value to others. Plus, you can’t succeed or fail, unless you try. Right?

  42. Robert -

    I’ve been a long time reader of your site, so I’ve seen the transitions in your focus over the years. (Please note that these are strictly my impressions of how your focus changed, so you may not agree)

    When I first came upon you, you were fighting your fight to break down the walls and humanize the Redmond giant. You tried to show a company that was working hard to make progress, but recognizing that the corporate structures in place was getting in the way. Then you first moved over to podtech, and (re-)discovered how much of the world existed that wasn’t microsoft-centric. Over the past couple months, your focus has seemingly shifted over to “social” and “wow” products. Twitter, Facebook, Apple, Pownce, et all. Mobile products, photowalking and social networking events and applications which add value to “real” life.

    Unfortunately for me (and I doubt I’m alone), the place you had your biggest contribution was in finding products/companies/concepts which added value to my “work” life – things which made it easier for me to do my job – or to provide hints on where the next trend was heading. That’s where I found value. That, and you welcomed those that challenged your viewpoints and started conversations – often times I learned as much reading the comments as I did reading the original posts, some times more.

    Nowadays? Not so much.

    The social networking stuff is all well and good. But most of the social networks you link to are blocked at work because they distract people from *working*. And when I get home, I don’t want to spend all my time attached to my computer building my social networks and finding more stuff to read – my rss feeds give me enough noise to distract me over the course of the day. I don’t need more noise. On the contrary – I need less.

    The Apple fanboy stuff – fine. But does it add value to my day? Not really. There’s not a Apple store within 100 miles, nor is there a demand for experience using their products. Yeah, I have an Ipod, but I’m not in awe of it – it’s a tool which does a job acceptably.

    As for the extraneous conversations – you seem to still be as engaging in the comment areas of the posts I read, but there seems to be much more of an edge to them. Kind of a “if we don’t believe, we must be against you” vibe. Now, I’ll admit, I don’t read the comments as much because what you’ve been covering doesn’t interest me as much, so it may just be a matter of perception.

    As for why the uproar? First of all, you set yourself up for failure by stating on your post “The only reason you’ll watch these two videos is because you trust me to add value to your lives.” Seems to me that you’re saying that if I don’t watch these and believe them, I’m going to miss somethimg.

    But the biggest issue is it was comparing apples to oranges. How can a social tool help me do my job better? Short answer – it can’t. If anything, it’ll distract me with other noise, and make it harder for me to find what I need. But I can go to Google, do a simple search and within a page or so, I’ve found my answer. Thirty seconds or less and I’m moving on – that adds value to my day.

    How would these tools you’ve been covering lately help me do a day to day job? Well, if they’re blocked, they won’t. Or if they’re like Twitter, they’ll add more noise and I’ll find myself ignoring those that twitter and I’ve found that some that used to post quality concepts to blogs on a semi-regular are now twittering useless items, and I’ve even stopped visiting them because they’ve been twittering more often then blogging, and the value they used to add to my day is now almost nil because I have to filter out the noise.

    Don’t take this the wrong way, but do you want to add value to my life again? Show me ways to utilize all these social networks and tools without getting swallowed up by the extraneous noise. Show me how they add value to my “work” life without distracting me from what I’m supposed to do – work.

    But please keep going. Yes, you may not cover as much of what I find of value, but from time to time, there’s a nugget which keeps me checking in. And you may be providing value to others. Plus, you can’t succeed or fail, unless you try. Right?

  43. Robert, I really love reading your blog everyday. And I enjoyed your speculation on TechMeme etc vs SEO. And I think people are being too harsh in their criticism against you, just because it is you. I guess that is what you have to live with for building such a big reputation.
    I respect you even more after this post, admitting mistakes and being human and practicing what you preach in your book about responding to making mistakes in the blogosphere. Like many others, I am not sure if you made any mistake in just speculating, but you know better. Look forward to more stuff from you. Cheers

  44. Robert, I really love reading your blog everyday. And I enjoyed your speculation on TechMeme etc vs SEO. And I think people are being too harsh in their criticism against you, just because it is you. I guess that is what you have to live with for building such a big reputation.
    I respect you even more after this post, admitting mistakes and being human and practicing what you preach in your book about responding to making mistakes in the blogosphere. Like many others, I am not sure if you made any mistake in just speculating, but you know better. Look forward to more stuff from you. Cheers

  45. Robert, I really love reading your blog everyday. And I enjoyed your speculation on TechMeme etc vs SEO. And I think people are being too harsh in their criticism against you, just because it is you. I guess that is what you have to live with for building such a big reputation.
    I respect you even more after this post, admitting mistakes and being human and practicing what you preach in your book about responding to making mistakes in the blogosphere. Like many others, I am not sure if you made any mistake in just speculating, but you know better. Look forward to more stuff from you. Cheers

  46. I guess the way I see it is this. I like to read your blog because it hardly ever fails to be interesting and thought provoking. Does that mean I always think you are 100% right? Of course not, but I’ll still keep reading every day.

    I can’t remember the last time I read Wired News btw.

    Keep up the good work.

    John S.

  47. I guess the way I see it is this. I like to read your blog because it hardly ever fails to be interesting and thought provoking. Does that mean I always think you are 100% right? Of course not, but I’ll still keep reading every day.

    I can’t remember the last time I read Wired News btw.

    Keep up the good work.

    John S.

  48. I guess the way I see it is this. I like to read your blog because it hardly ever fails to be interesting and thought provoking. Does that mean I always think you are 100% right? Of course not, but I’ll still keep reading every day.

    I can’t remember the last time I read Wired News btw.

    Keep up the good work.

    John S.

  49. Robert, you said it best with juicy fruit 1 — that people perceive Google as noisier. Whether it is or isn’t, no one can say definitively. We don’t have commonly accepted metrics for relevancy. And I know people will say oh, it’s not as good as it used to be — but people often forget that they demand more of a search engine over time, looking for things today they wouldn’t have tried in the past. The bar keeps getting raised.

    In terms of the outcry, my juicy fruits were two in total: your misunderstanding and slandering of SEO and your way-too-much enthusiasm that a major search engine like Google will just get wiped out by sprinkling Facebook social goodness into the search mix.

    My previous post covered some of the past attempts here and mainly warns that it’s not new that social can be helpful, but it’s not likely to be a revolution, nor is Google likely enough to be stupid enough to let social pass it by. I’m not angered by your suggestions. It’s just that it’s not new, unique, and you worked up to it by not providing enough history or background to state your facts. And that you spend like two minutes on it after I had to watch 36.

    On the SEO front, I’ve just had enough of people equating SEO with spam. It is not, and you pushed that idea again. Google doesn’t consider SEO spam, OK? I’ll quote Google:

    “SEO is an abbreviation for “search engine optimizer.” Many SEOs provide useful services for website owners, from writing copy to giving advice on site architecture and helping to find relevant directories to which a site can be submitted.”

    http://www.google.com/support/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=35291

    There are shady SEO tactics and shady SEO firms, just as there are shady PR firms, shady doctors, shady lawyers, shady plumbers and so on. But Google actively engages with SEOs (as do the other search engines) because they can indeed help content that should be found better in search engines get found better, not through trickery but understanding that search engines see content almost like a unique browser. Indeed, what you called a “warfront” isn’t with SEOs and Google. It’s with spammers and Google. SEO is not the same as spam, and that’s how it came out in your video.

    Flip it around. If you’d said we needed blog resistant search engines because bloggers pollute the results with relatively poor, badly written content, you’d have bloggers in general upset at you. Same to for any industry that gets stereotyped.

  50. Robert, you said it best with juicy fruit 1 — that people perceive Google as noisier. Whether it is or isn’t, no one can say definitively. We don’t have commonly accepted metrics for relevancy. And I know people will say oh, it’s not as good as it used to be — but people often forget that they demand more of a search engine over time, looking for things today they wouldn’t have tried in the past. The bar keeps getting raised.

    In terms of the outcry, my juicy fruits were two in total: your misunderstanding and slandering of SEO and your way-too-much enthusiasm that a major search engine like Google will just get wiped out by sprinkling Facebook social goodness into the search mix.

    My previous post covered some of the past attempts here and mainly warns that it’s not new that social can be helpful, but it’s not likely to be a revolution, nor is Google likely enough to be stupid enough to let social pass it by. I’m not angered by your suggestions. It’s just that it’s not new, unique, and you worked up to it by not providing enough history or background to state your facts. And that you spend like two minutes on it after I had to watch 36.

    On the SEO front, I’ve just had enough of people equating SEO with spam. It is not, and you pushed that idea again. Google doesn’t consider SEO spam, OK? I’ll quote Google:

    “SEO is an abbreviation for “search engine optimizer.” Many SEOs provide useful services for website owners, from writing copy to giving advice on site architecture and helping to find relevant directories to which a site can be submitted.”

    http://www.google.com/support/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=35291

    There are shady SEO tactics and shady SEO firms, just as there are shady PR firms, shady doctors, shady lawyers, shady plumbers and so on. But Google actively engages with SEOs (as do the other search engines) because they can indeed help content that should be found better in search engines get found better, not through trickery but understanding that search engines see content almost like a unique browser. Indeed, what you called a “warfront” isn’t with SEOs and Google. It’s with spammers and Google. SEO is not the same as spam, and that’s how it came out in your video.

    Flip it around. If you’d said we needed blog resistant search engines because bloggers pollute the results with relatively poor, badly written content, you’d have bloggers in general upset at you. Same to for any industry that gets stereotyped.

  51. Robert, you said it best with juicy fruit 1 — that people perceive Google as noisier. Whether it is or isn’t, no one can say definitively. We don’t have commonly accepted metrics for relevancy. And I know people will say oh, it’s not as good as it used to be — but people often forget that they demand more of a search engine over time, looking for things today they wouldn’t have tried in the past. The bar keeps getting raised.

    In terms of the outcry, my juicy fruits were two in total: your misunderstanding and slandering of SEO and your way-too-much enthusiasm that a major search engine like Google will just get wiped out by sprinkling Facebook social goodness into the search mix.

    My previous post covered some of the past attempts here and mainly warns that it’s not new that social can be helpful, but it’s not likely to be a revolution, nor is Google likely enough to be stupid enough to let social pass it by. I’m not angered by your suggestions. It’s just that it’s not new, unique, and you worked up to it by not providing enough history or background to state your facts. And that you spend like two minutes on it after I had to watch 36.

    On the SEO front, I’ve just had enough of people equating SEO with spam. It is not, and you pushed that idea again. Google doesn’t consider SEO spam, OK? I’ll quote Google:

    “SEO is an abbreviation for “search engine optimizer.” Many SEOs provide useful services for website owners, from writing copy to giving advice on site architecture and helping to find relevant directories to which a site can be submitted.”

    http://www.google.com/support/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=35291

    There are shady SEO tactics and shady SEO firms, just as there are shady PR firms, shady doctors, shady lawyers, shady plumbers and so on. But Google actively engages with SEOs (as do the other search engines) because they can indeed help content that should be found better in search engines get found better, not through trickery but understanding that search engines see content almost like a unique browser. Indeed, what you called a “warfront” isn’t with SEOs and Google. It’s with spammers and Google. SEO is not the same as spam, and that’s how it came out in your video.

    Flip it around. If you’d said we needed blog resistant search engines because bloggers pollute the results with relatively poor, badly written content, you’d have bloggers in general upset at you. Same to for any industry that gets stereotyped.

  52. Daniel: for the record, I love Kyte.tv. For everyone else: I’m not paid or compensated by Kyte.tv. For Valleywag: I just signed a contract with PodTech for Q1, 2008, so am not going anywhere. Nice guessing, though!

  53. Daniel: for the record, I love Kyte.tv. For everyone else: I’m not paid or compensated by Kyte.tv. For Valleywag: I just signed a contract with PodTech for Q1, 2008, so am not going anywhere. Nice guessing, though!

  54. Daniel: for the record, I love Kyte.tv. For everyone else: I’m not paid or compensated by Kyte.tv. For Valleywag: I just signed a contract with PodTech for Q1, 2008, so am not going anywhere. Nice guessing, though!

  55. Fuck WIRED.
    Savvy readers stopped paying attention to them around 2002, and had stopped buying the dead tree form around 1998.
    Who are they to talk about relevance ?

    Sullivan is right on something though, that 2 minutes of substance in a 38 minute video is likely to annoy any busy person who has something to do with his/her life.
    Even on a slow sunday.

    R&D is one thing, testing the nerves of the web crowd is something different.

    Kyte.tv, even if flakey for some of us, wouldn’t be nearly as annoying had you taken care of that important detail.

    I swear I made a huge honest effort to follow through the entire presentation with an open mind.

    All in all, glad to see you taking it all positively.
    The Tom Rolander interview was just great, your HP garage visit was awesome, and many other great works of great journalistic value you have produced won’t dissappear just because of this misstep.

    Now the web crowd would be doing some good by acknowledging the good things as much as they’re ready to punish you.

    I’m sure Sullivan would have gladly talked to you before posting that presentation, that would have been the journalistic approach, instead of attempting to reinvent the wheel sculpting on Calacanis rolling stone technology.

    4 minute clips, no guinea pig treatment, research and counsel with the techies.. and you’re golden.

    Best regards and great success,

    vruz

  56. Fuck WIRED.
    Savvy readers stopped paying attention to them around 2002, and had stopped buying the dead tree form around 1998.
    Who are they to talk about relevance ?

    Sullivan is right on something though, that 2 minutes of substance in a 38 minute video is likely to annoy any busy person who has something to do with his/her life.
    Even on a slow sunday.

    R&D is one thing, testing the nerves of the web crowd is something different.

    Kyte.tv, even if flakey for some of us, wouldn’t be nearly as annoying had you taken care of that important detail.

    I swear I made a huge honest effort to follow through the entire presentation with an open mind.

    All in all, glad to see you taking it all positively.
    The Tom Rolander interview was just great, your HP garage visit was awesome, and many other great works of great journalistic value you have produced won’t dissappear just because of this misstep.

    Now the web crowd would be doing some good by acknowledging the good things as much as they’re ready to punish you.

    I’m sure Sullivan would have gladly talked to you before posting that presentation, that would have been the journalistic approach, instead of attempting to reinvent the wheel sculpting on Calacanis rolling stone technology.

    4 minute clips, no guinea pig treatment, research and counsel with the techies.. and you’re golden.

    Best regards and great success,

    vruz

  57. Fuck WIRED.
    Savvy readers stopped paying attention to them around 2002, and had stopped buying the dead tree form around 1998.
    Who are they to talk about relevance ?

    Sullivan is right on something though, that 2 minutes of substance in a 38 minute video is likely to annoy any busy person who has something to do with his/her life.
    Even on a slow sunday.

    R&D is one thing, testing the nerves of the web crowd is something different.

    Kyte.tv, even if flakey for some of us, wouldn’t be nearly as annoying had you taken care of that important detail.

    I swear I made a huge honest effort to follow through the entire presentation with an open mind.

    All in all, glad to see you taking it all positively.
    The Tom Rolander interview was just great, your HP garage visit was awesome, and many other great works of great journalistic value you have produced won’t dissappear just because of this misstep.

    Now the web crowd would be doing some good by acknowledging the good things as much as they’re ready to punish you.

    I’m sure Sullivan would have gladly talked to you before posting that presentation, that would have been the journalistic approach, instead of attempting to reinvent the wheel sculpting on Calacanis rolling stone technology.

    4 minute clips, no guinea pig treatment, research and counsel with the techies.. and you’re golden.

    Best regards and great success,

    vruz

  58. Its physically impossible to be wrong about predictions. Ask any economist. I think the only learning is to ignore personal attacks, or emotionally charged ‘rebuttals’.

  59. Its physically impossible to be wrong about predictions. Ask any economist. I think the only learning is to ignore personal attacks, or emotionally charged ‘rebuttals’.

  60. Its physically impossible to be wrong about predictions. Ask any economist. I think the only learning is to ignore personal attacks, or emotionally charged ‘rebuttals’.

  61. Right or wrong, look at the great discussion caused by the video. As to your detractors (and I have been one periodically), opinions are easy, everyone’s got one. It’s hard maintaining leadership, and you do that. My hat’s off to you.

    Everyone that goes to far in their shots may need to look in the mirror and wonder what their motivations are. I find people treat others in a certain way because that’s how they feel about themselves. $.02 Rock on, Robert.

  62. Right or wrong, look at the great discussion caused by the video. As to your detractors (and I have been one periodically), opinions are easy, everyone’s got one. It’s hard maintaining leadership, and you do that. My hat’s off to you.

    Everyone that goes to far in their shots may need to look in the mirror and wonder what their motivations are. I find people treat others in a certain way because that’s how they feel about themselves. $.02 Rock on, Robert.

  63. Right or wrong, look at the great discussion caused by the video. As to your detractors (and I have been one periodically), opinions are easy, everyone’s got one. It’s hard maintaining leadership, and you do that. My hat’s off to you.

    Everyone that goes to far in their shots may need to look in the mirror and wonder what their motivations are. I find people treat others in a certain way because that’s how they feel about themselves. $.02 Rock on, Robert.

  64. C’mon, Roberto. Nobody cares about Calacanis or Mahalo, We’re here for one thing only: where’s your next job going to be? If it’s not Facebook or Kyle.tv, tells us where? (And not some Q1 ’08 nonsense either. :-)

  65. C’mon, Roberto. Nobody cares about Calacanis or Mahalo, We’re here for one thing only: where’s your next job going to be? If it’s not Facebook or Kyle.tv, tells us where? (And not some Q1 ’08 nonsense either. :-)

  66. C’mon, Roberto. Nobody cares about Calacanis or Mahalo, We’re here for one thing only: where’s your next job going to be? If it’s not Facebook or Kyle.tv, tells us where? (And not some Q1 ’08 nonsense either. :-)

  67. Yeah, there were some mistakes, but regardless this is probably my favorite post of yours ever…most of the key points are right on target. And besides, at least you: a) found something that you were passionate about and spoke up about it, and b) put your cajones on the line with something that was almost guaranteed to cause a firestorm.

  68. Yeah, there were some mistakes, but regardless this is probably my favorite post of yours ever…most of the key points are right on target. And besides, at least you: a) found something that you were passionate about and spoke up about it, and b) put your cajones on the line with something that was almost guaranteed to cause a firestorm.

  69. Yeah, there were some mistakes, but regardless this is probably my favorite post of yours ever…most of the key points are right on target. And besides, at least you: a) found something that you were passionate about and spoke up about it, and b) put your cajones on the line with something that was almost guaranteed to cause a firestorm.

  70. Anona: I’m at PodTech and not looking for a new job. If and when I ever am in need of different employment, my readers will know I’m looking, believe me.

  71. @Danny Sullivan

    Maybe this is just a sensitive topic for you. In his video, I thought Robert was clearly talking about SEO specifically in the context of SEO paid links. Do you agree that SEO paid links degrade the search experience for people that use Google? In other words, do you agree that SEO paid links are a “bad thing”?

    Too many SEOs equivocate on this issue; and that is a big part of the reason why the whole field of SEO has a bad name in some quarters. I hope you can be clear for us.

  72. @Danny Sullivan

    Maybe this is just a sensitive topic for you. In his video, I thought Robert was clearly talking about SEO specifically in the context of SEO paid links. Do you agree that SEO paid links degrade the search experience for people that use Google? In other words, do you agree that SEO paid links are a “bad thing”?

    Too many SEOs equivocate on this issue; and that is a big part of the reason why the whole field of SEO has a bad name in some quarters. I hope you can be clear for us.

  73. @Danny Sullivan

    Maybe this is just a sensitive topic for you. In his video, I thought Robert was clearly talking about SEO specifically in the context of SEO paid links. Do you agree that SEO paid links degrade the search experience for people that use Google? In other words, do you agree that SEO paid links are a “bad thing”?

    Too many SEOs equivocate on this issue; and that is a big part of the reason why the whole field of SEO has a bad name in some quarters. I hope you can be clear for us.

  74. I just wanted to tell you I totally support the fact that you took a position and still hold to your main premise: that social graph based search is going to upset the Google cart.

    The topic itself, the fact that google, and facebook were subjects in the videos and the fact that it was YOU is why the story was so galvanizing. Lot’s of smart people (Danny, Dave, and thousands more) were paying you attention. Attention currency sometimes comes at a price.

    I think part of the reason that this firestorm spread so fast is that people were watching YOU and then chatting via the Kyte.tv player that got embedded everywhere. I use it for my channels of distributing video/slideshows, etc. as well. I think that it is the first time that they have embedded it at techcrunch

    I had a blast participating in the chat sessions for hours over the course of the first day. What some people might not be aware of is that you had well over 600 people continually on the kyte channel watching video and chatting. That was really crazy.

    It is nice to see the chat at a level that is easier to follow since it has slowed down.

    Finally; admitting where you are wrong takes balls. Lot’s of people can never do that.

    Cheers! Keep Creating!
    Rodney Rumford
    http://www.facereviews.com

  75. I just wanted to tell you I totally support the fact that you took a position and still hold to your main premise: that social graph based search is going to upset the Google cart.

    The topic itself, the fact that google, and facebook were subjects in the videos and the fact that it was YOU is why the story was so galvanizing. Lot’s of smart people (Danny, Dave, and thousands more) were paying you attention. Attention currency sometimes comes at a price.

    I think part of the reason that this firestorm spread so fast is that people were watching YOU and then chatting via the Kyte.tv player that got embedded everywhere. I use it for my channels of distributing video/slideshows, etc. as well. I think that it is the first time that they have embedded it at techcrunch

    I had a blast participating in the chat sessions for hours over the course of the first day. What some people might not be aware of is that you had well over 600 people continually on the kyte channel watching video and chatting. That was really crazy.

    It is nice to see the chat at a level that is easier to follow since it has slowed down.

    Finally; admitting where you are wrong takes balls. Lot’s of people can never do that.

    Cheers! Keep Creating!
    Rodney Rumford
    http://www.facereviews.com

  76. I just wanted to tell you I totally support the fact that you took a position and still hold to your main premise: that social graph based search is going to upset the Google cart.

    The topic itself, the fact that google, and facebook were subjects in the videos and the fact that it was YOU is why the story was so galvanizing. Lot’s of smart people (Danny, Dave, and thousands more) were paying you attention. Attention currency sometimes comes at a price.

    I think part of the reason that this firestorm spread so fast is that people were watching YOU and then chatting via the Kyte.tv player that got embedded everywhere. I use it for my channels of distributing video/slideshows, etc. as well. I think that it is the first time that they have embedded it at techcrunch

    I had a blast participating in the chat sessions for hours over the course of the first day. What some people might not be aware of is that you had well over 600 people continually on the kyte channel watching video and chatting. That was really crazy.

    It is nice to see the chat at a level that is easier to follow since it has slowed down.

    Finally; admitting where you are wrong takes balls. Lot’s of people can never do that.

    Cheers! Keep Creating!
    Rodney Rumford
    http://www.facereviews.com

  77. I call it the “Scoble God Curve”, Scoble starts off at the bottom of the curve, slowly going up the slope of ‘I am humble’, then to ‘I know all’ up up up to ‘My posts are more important than Gods’ until he gets a bit too excited and posts something with far to much excitement and no real content. Then crash. The curve drops back to normal. Then slowly start building up again :-)

    It is a kind of saw tooth, shark tooth, wave shape. Slowly up the slope, peak, then crash. I like it when he’s up near the God status. The comments come flooding in. The trolls start their engines. Big media start taking an interest…

    haha…

    Like it?

    BTW SEO is important. How can I get the word out about my amazing, FREE, OPEN SOURCE, flash charts ( http://teethgrinder.co.uk/open-flash-chart/ ) without SEO? :-) :-P

    SEO helps tell people the my charts are GPL and LGPL so can be included in commercial web sites – no problem! :-D

    I wish I had an iPhone. We don’t even have a land line at home, no internet :-( No mobile phone signal… hahaha welcome to the UK

    monk.e.boy

  78. I call it the “Scoble God Curve”, Scoble starts off at the bottom of the curve, slowly going up the slope of ‘I am humble’, then to ‘I know all’ up up up to ‘My posts are more important than Gods’ until he gets a bit too excited and posts something with far to much excitement and no real content. Then crash. The curve drops back to normal. Then slowly start building up again :-)

    It is a kind of saw tooth, shark tooth, wave shape. Slowly up the slope, peak, then crash. I like it when he’s up near the God status. The comments come flooding in. The trolls start their engines. Big media start taking an interest…

    haha…

    Like it?

    BTW SEO is important. How can I get the word out about my amazing, FREE, OPEN SOURCE, flash charts ( http://teethgrinder.co.uk/open-flash-chart/ ) without SEO? :-) :-P

    SEO helps tell people the my charts are GPL and LGPL so can be included in commercial web sites – no problem! :-D

    I wish I had an iPhone. We don’t even have a land line at home, no internet :-( No mobile phone signal… hahaha welcome to the UK

    monk.e.boy

  79. I call it the “Scoble God Curve”, Scoble starts off at the bottom of the curve, slowly going up the slope of ‘I am humble’, then to ‘I know all’ up up up to ‘My posts are more important than Gods’ until he gets a bit too excited and posts something with far to much excitement and no real content. Then crash. The curve drops back to normal. Then slowly start building up again :-)

    It is a kind of saw tooth, shark tooth, wave shape. Slowly up the slope, peak, then crash. I like it when he’s up near the God status. The comments come flooding in. The trolls start their engines. Big media start taking an interest…

    haha…

    Like it?

    BTW SEO is important. How can I get the word out about my amazing, FREE, OPEN SOURCE, flash charts ( http://teethgrinder.co.uk/open-flash-chart/ ) without SEO? :-) :-P

    SEO helps tell people the my charts are GPL and LGPL so can be included in commercial web sites – no problem! :-D

    I wish I had an iPhone. We don’t even have a land line at home, no internet :-( No mobile phone signal… hahaha welcome to the UK

    monk.e.boy

  80. Robert,

    I think what you did with your videos was trying to put in words what you felt intuitively in the Web zeitgeist. You learn by experience and you try to share those intuitions with us. I think you ruffled some cartesian feathers when you tried to support you theory but it does not matter. You contributed to making all of us think more about how social media & social search could impact our ecosystem. People will build on these ideas and improve them.

  81. Robert,

    I think what you did with your videos was trying to put in words what you felt intuitively in the Web zeitgeist. You learn by experience and you try to share those intuitions with us. I think you ruffled some cartesian feathers when you tried to support you theory but it does not matter. You contributed to making all of us think more about how social media & social search could impact our ecosystem. People will build on these ideas and improve them.

  82. Robert,

    I think what you did with your videos was trying to put in words what you felt intuitively in the Web zeitgeist. You learn by experience and you try to share those intuitions with us. I think you ruffled some cartesian feathers when you tried to support you theory but it does not matter. You contributed to making all of us think more about how social media & social search could impact our ecosystem. People will build on these ideas and improve them.

  83. Monkey Boy, no internet? No mobile signal? In the UK?? You must live in a stone cottage on a tiny islet in a far-flung corner of the Outer Hebrides…

  84. Monkey Boy, no internet? No mobile signal? In the UK?? You must live in a stone cottage on a tiny islet in a far-flung corner of the Outer Hebrides…

  85. Monkey Boy, no internet? No mobile signal? In the UK?? You must live in a stone cottage on a tiny islet in a far-flung corner of the Outer Hebrides…

  86. @32 “For Valleywag: I just signed a contract with PodTech for Q1, 2008, so am not going anywhere. Nice guessing, though!”

    It appears you are no fan of Valleywag, but is it really worth committing career suicide to prove them wrong? You can do better than PodTech.

  87. @32 “For Valleywag: I just signed a contract with PodTech for Q1, 2008, so am not going anywhere. Nice guessing, though!”

    It appears you are no fan of Valleywag, but is it really worth committing career suicide to prove them wrong? You can do better than PodTech.

  88. @32 “For Valleywag: I just signed a contract with PodTech for Q1, 2008, so am not going anywhere. Nice guessing, though!”

    It appears you are no fan of Valleywag, but is it really worth committing career suicide to prove them wrong? You can do better than PodTech.

  89. you know as I read through this blog the following thoughts ran through my head
    1- the NYT has a corrections page, but it doesn’t really get much notice.
    2- I recently read an article about a guy turning soft after he had a kid. Are you turning soft before having another?
    3- a lawyer once taught me the greatest lesson of all: never apologize! ….the others will do it for you. (<- literally)

  90. you know as I read through this blog the following thoughts ran through my head
    1- the NYT has a corrections page, but it doesn’t really get much notice.
    2- I recently read an article about a guy turning soft after he had a kid. Are you turning soft before having another?
    3- a lawyer once taught me the greatest lesson of all: never apologize! ….the others will do it for you. (<- literally)

  91. you know as I read through this blog the following thoughts ran through my head
    1- the NYT has a corrections page, but it doesn’t really get much notice.
    2- I recently read an article about a guy turning soft after he had a kid. Are you turning soft before having another?
    3- a lawyer once taught me the greatest lesson of all: never apologize! ….the others will do it for you. (<- literally)

  92. “I just signed a contract with PodTech for Q1, 2008″

    That’s not really that long. Why only Q1? Why not an exclusive contract through 2009?

  93. “I just signed a contract with PodTech for Q1, 2008″

    That’s not really that long. Why only Q1? Why not an exclusive contract through 2009?

  94. “I just signed a contract with PodTech for Q1, 2008″

    That’s not really that long. Why only Q1? Why not an exclusive contract through 2009?

  95. Dan: do you really know what you’re going to want to be doing in 2009? Do you sign exclusive employment contracts that long into the future? I might if I were Barry Bonds and had millions of dollars on the table, but that isn’t the case.

    Silicon Valley moves way too fast to take such a long-term approach with your career.

    Byron: I’m glad I’m not associated with you in business.

  96. Dan: do you really know what you’re going to want to be doing in 2009? Do you sign exclusive employment contracts that long into the future? I might if I were Barry Bonds and had millions of dollars on the table, but that isn’t the case.

    Silicon Valley moves way too fast to take such a long-term approach with your career.

    Byron: I’m glad I’m not associated with you in business.

  97. Dan: do you really know what you’re going to want to be doing in 2009? Do you sign exclusive employment contracts that long into the future? I might if I were Barry Bonds and had millions of dollars on the table, but that isn’t the case.

    Silicon Valley moves way too fast to take such a long-term approach with your career.

    Byron: I’m glad I’m not associated with you in business.

  98. Robert – maybe I’ve missed the post, but why did you choose Kyte.tv over other offerings? The reason I ask isn’t to criticize but out of curiosity. I’m wondering if I missed something special about Kyte.tv (?)

  99. Robert – maybe I’ve missed the post, but why did you choose Kyte.tv over other offerings? The reason I ask isn’t to criticize but out of curiosity. I’m wondering if I missed something special about Kyte.tv (?)

  100. Robert – maybe I’ve missed the post, but why did you choose Kyte.tv over other offerings? The reason I ask isn’t to criticize but out of curiosity. I’m wondering if I missed something special about Kyte.tv (?)

  101. TDavid:

    1) Speed to produce. It’s the fastest to produce video technology out there. Far faster than YouTube or anything else I’ve used.
    2) Chat. The chat lets you upload video, audio, text.
    3) Distribution. It’s on Facebook and Nokia mobile phones and lets me upload video and audio from my Nokia phone.

  102. TDavid:

    1) Speed to produce. It’s the fastest to produce video technology out there. Far faster than YouTube or anything else I’ve used.
    2) Chat. The chat lets you upload video, audio, text.
    3) Distribution. It’s on Facebook and Nokia mobile phones and lets me upload video and audio from my Nokia phone.

  103. TDavid:

    1) Speed to produce. It’s the fastest to produce video technology out there. Far faster than YouTube or anything else I’ve used.
    2) Chat. The chat lets you upload video, audio, text.
    3) Distribution. It’s on Facebook and Nokia mobile phones and lets me upload video and audio from my Nokia phone.

  104. hi robert,

    i think search engines are going to evolve into answer, facts and recommendation engines. I talk a little about it here:
    http://www.michaelhoover.org/mike/2007/08/delicious-is-th.html

    You’ll still have pure search, of course…but that functionality will be commoditized over time(first steps are nutch and the internet archive tools). Once you have a vast majority of the webs url’s in a database, you can apply a ranking algorithm in context: pagerank, peoplerank, authority, raw inbound link count, etc. It’s not easy, but it’s also not impossible.

  105. hi robert,

    i think search engines are going to evolve into answer, facts and recommendation engines. I talk a little about it here:
    http://www.michaelhoover.org/mike/2007/08/delicious-is-th.html

    You’ll still have pure search, of course…but that functionality will be commoditized over time(first steps are nutch and the internet archive tools). Once you have a vast majority of the webs url’s in a database, you can apply a ranking algorithm in context: pagerank, peoplerank, authority, raw inbound link count, etc. It’s not easy, but it’s also not impossible.

  106. hi robert,

    i think search engines are going to evolve into answer, facts and recommendation engines. I talk a little about it here:
    http://www.michaelhoover.org/mike/2007/08/delicious-is-th.html

    You’ll still have pure search, of course…but that functionality will be commoditized over time(first steps are nutch and the internet archive tools). Once you have a vast majority of the webs url’s in a database, you can apply a ranking algorithm in context: pagerank, peoplerank, authority, raw inbound link count, etc. It’s not easy, but it’s also not impossible.

  107. The psychologists and brain scientists are on your side. My view is that we have only just touched on the potential and power of social networks and as they evolve (assuming that the control freaks don’t have too much sway) the commons ‘recommendation, evaluate and publish’ capability will be cut a swathe in the need for search.

  108. The psychologists and brain scientists are on your side. My view is that we have only just touched on the potential and power of social networks and as they evolve (assuming that the control freaks don’t have too much sway) the commons ‘recommendation, evaluate and publish’ capability will be cut a swathe in the need for search.

  109. The psychologists and brain scientists are on your side. My view is that we have only just touched on the potential and power of social networks and as they evolve (assuming that the control freaks don’t have too much sway) the commons ‘recommendation, evaluate and publish’ capability will be cut a swathe in the need for search.

  110. “Dan: do you really know what you’re going to want to be doing in 2009?”

    Yes.

    “Do you sign exclusive employment contracts that long into the future?”

    Yes. A lot of people do: it’s called enlisting.

    2009 is barely more than 15 months away; I would have expected you to at least sign to be there for the next year, if not the entirety of 2008.

  111. “Dan: do you really know what you’re going to want to be doing in 2009?”

    Yes.

    “Do you sign exclusive employment contracts that long into the future?”

    Yes. A lot of people do: it’s called enlisting.

    2009 is barely more than 15 months away; I would have expected you to at least sign to be there for the next year, if not the entirety of 2008.

  112. “Dan: do you really know what you’re going to want to be doing in 2009?”

    Yes.

    “Do you sign exclusive employment contracts that long into the future?”

    Yes. A lot of people do: it’s called enlisting.

    2009 is barely more than 15 months away; I would have expected you to at least sign to be there for the next year, if not the entirety of 2008.

  113. @52 “Byron: I’m glad I’m not associated with you in business”

    Well,I’m not sure what you are tyring to say there. I was simply tyring to say that I think you would be much better off disassociating yourself, careerwise, with Podtech.

  114. @52 “Byron: I’m glad I’m not associated with you in business”

    Well,I’m not sure what you are tyring to say there. I was simply tyring to say that I think you would be much better off disassociating yourself, careerwise, with Podtech.

  115. @52 “Byron: I’m glad I’m not associated with you in business”

    Well,I’m not sure what you are tyring to say there. I was simply tyring to say that I think you would be much better off disassociating yourself, careerwise, with Podtech.

  116. I want to briefly explain my belief on the future of search.

    I believe we must granulate and organize content in viewable trees. And we will need better tree and multi-dim spreadsheet software to do such, which I’m working on. Algorithms will assist us, if not do a bulk of the work. But the data will be open, so anybody can sort it, not just private algorithms. Also I posted a video about tagging and search on youtube at davidnode

    Peacz

  117. I want to briefly explain my belief on the future of search.

    I believe we must granulate and organize content in viewable trees. And we will need better tree and multi-dim spreadsheet software to do such, which I’m working on. Algorithms will assist us, if not do a bulk of the work. But the data will be open, so anybody can sort it, not just private algorithms. Also I posted a video about tagging and search on youtube at davidnode

    Peacz

  118. I want to briefly explain my belief on the future of search.

    I believe we must granulate and organize content in viewable trees. And we will need better tree and multi-dim spreadsheet software to do such, which I’m working on. Algorithms will assist us, if not do a bulk of the work. But the data will be open, so anybody can sort it, not just private algorithms. Also I posted a video about tagging and search on youtube at davidnode

    Peacz

  119. I watched your video where you showed that Mahalo is better than Google at searching for “HDTV” and I thought I’d try it with my current research interest, “composting toilets”. Well, Mahalo has nothing at all about “composting toilets” and google has plenty, with no SEO problems. I think “HDTV” is a bit of a special case — it’s a topic that tech bloggers write a lot about and that SEOs fight over. But “composting toilets” is at the other extreme — nothing at all from the tech bloggers and no SEOs are messing with it.

  120. I watched your video where you showed that Mahalo is better than Google at searching for “HDTV” and I thought I’d try it with my current research interest, “composting toilets”. Well, Mahalo has nothing at all about “composting toilets” and google has plenty, with no SEO problems. I think “HDTV” is a bit of a special case — it’s a topic that tech bloggers write a lot about and that SEOs fight over. But “composting toilets” is at the other extreme — nothing at all from the tech bloggers and no SEOs are messing with it.

  121. I watched your video where you showed that Mahalo is better than Google at searching for “HDTV” and I thought I’d try it with my current research interest, “composting toilets”. Well, Mahalo has nothing at all about “composting toilets” and google has plenty, with no SEO problems. I think “HDTV” is a bit of a special case — it’s a topic that tech bloggers write a lot about and that SEOs fight over. But “composting toilets” is at the other extreme — nothing at all from the tech bloggers and no SEOs are messing with it.

  122. In the world of surgery, there is a saying that if you do not have any complications it means you haven’t operated enough

    It’s all publicity and as long as you are willing to share so we can all learn from eah other’s mistakes, don’t sweat it

  123. In the world of surgery, there is a saying that if you do not have any complications it means you haven’t operated enough

    It’s all publicity and as long as you are willing to share so we can all learn from eah other’s mistakes, don’t sweat it

  124. In the world of surgery, there is a saying that if you do not have any complications it means you haven’t operated enough

    It’s all publicity and as long as you are willing to share so we can all learn from eah other’s mistakes, don’t sweat it

  125. “7. Jumping into a battlefront (SEO’s vs. Google) without really understanding how that warfront will go.”

    Seriously?
    C’mon Robert, there is no war between SEO’s and Google. By putting the statement in those words, you are still implying that ALL seo’s are evil.

    It comes across like a snide attack on SEO’s, only four points after:
    “3. Attacking SEOs needlessly…”

    You might want to clarify that.

  126. “7. Jumping into a battlefront (SEO’s vs. Google) without really understanding how that warfront will go.”

    Seriously?
    C’mon Robert, there is no war between SEO’s and Google. By putting the statement in those words, you are still implying that ALL seo’s are evil.

    It comes across like a snide attack on SEO’s, only four points after:
    “3. Attacking SEOs needlessly…”

    You might want to clarify that.

  127. “7. Jumping into a battlefront (SEO’s vs. Google) without really understanding how that warfront will go.”

    Seriously?
    C’mon Robert, there is no war between SEO’s and Google. By putting the statement in those words, you are still implying that ALL seo’s are evil.

    It comes across like a snide attack on SEO’s, only four points after:
    “3. Attacking SEOs needlessly…”

    You might want to clarify that.

  128. [...] this week, Robert Scoble unfortunately countered the second and posted a video which he soon admitted contained several inaccuracies and was ill-advised.  A part of the video carried on a bit of [...]

  129. I’ll preparing a presentation for Facebook Camp Montreal on how Facebook could compete/hit at Google. And MSN could steal huge search share now they’ve got a deal to serve Facebook’s text ads. Interested in the video/transscript, Mr. Scoble?

  130. I’ll preparing a presentation for Facebook Camp Montreal on how Facebook could compete/hit at Google. And MSN could steal huge search share now they’ve got a deal to serve Facebook’s text ads. Interested in the video/transscript, Mr. Scoble?

  131. I’ll preparing a presentation for Facebook Camp Montreal on how Facebook could compete/hit at Google. And MSN could steal huge search share now they’ve got a deal to serve Facebook’s text ads. Interested in the video/transscript, Mr. Scoble?