If you’re like me, you probably were right in the middle of all the madness during the dot.bomb days. It was difficult as an entrepreneur back then to sit still while companies were getting mega funding for completely trivial ideas (anyone need some dog food delivered?).

Of course, it only served me the better. Post.bomb, I managed to walk away without injury and could demand higher rates simply because I actually knew what the heck I was doing. I still would have taken the millions, mind you.

Lately, it feels like redemption is near. 9 years ago, I knew about 1/2 of what I needed to know and 1/4 of the people I needed to know. Today, I get what was missing then. Web 2.0 - I like the concept for many reasons. Perhaps my favorite, however, is it’s also the next generation of me.

I smiled when I saw this yesterday (thanks Charlie):

“The focus on “eyeballs” sounds like 1990’s bubble investing, but the difference is that bubble investors valued eyeballs no matter how expensively they were acquired (since capital was free). We are looking for organic growth–the kind that’s easy even bubble-scarred for VC’s to mentally extrapolate into a large capital-efficient business.”

Source: Who Has Time For This?, “Consumer Investing (2)”

I smiled because I’m hopeful that it means this time, the right things will see the light of day.

If Web 2.0 was all about the technology, the world would be run by geeks.

Digital Identity is a topic that seems to be cropping up more and more these days. Of course, for me, it’s almost like a game of Where’s Waldo - until you know you’re looking for him, you can’t see it. Readers of this site have long known I’ve raised many issues with the first round of social networking sites (SNS 1.0). I’ve been sitting idly for some time now thinking about how the next generation (SNS 2.0) will try and approach those problems.

I’m almost done sitting still ;) We’ll be announcing our project sooner than later and it will hopefully solve many of these problems with one clean and simple solution. But before we get ahead of ourselves, I thought this post that Charlie O’Donnell made a couple of months ago (which I only discovered by accident today) really hits the frustration on the head:

If you open up the API, you can let people develop stuff on top of the LinkedIn backend. So, the Sportsvite folks can choose not to show your professional resume, but instead throw on a rating on how hard you can throw. Currently, aside from the attempts at FOAF, I haven’t seen anyone open up their system and attempt to be the profile engine for everyone, but I think LinkedIn has the best shot. I don’t think you can just do this with a closed, LinkedIn.com offering. You need NYSSA to choose you as their front end provider and Fordham and whoever else wants a “Powered by LinkedIn” database. Until then, LinkedIn is just going to be Y.A.F.P. and we’re still going to have to log on and put our stuff into these clunky pseudo address books.

This is going to be BIG!, “Too Many ^$%#ing Profiles”

Now, I’ll just say that I don’t think LinkedIn is going to do it just yet. There’s too many parameters that are potentially out of whack with trying to let too many external entities tie onto the backs of LinkedIn’s system. For example, LinkedIn doesn’t want anyone re-kindling old high school flames inside their network (can it happen, yes. is it frowned upon, yep).

Again this goes back to the database. It’s been optimized for one type of thing. We benefit because that gives us a wonderful ability to search and find new things that are relevant. The sacrifice, of course, is that you have to pigeon hole who you are in each of these places.

One of the trackbacks on that post sums it up nicely:

Overall, this is a big problem I have with a lot of the PIM service sites. LinkedIn (contacts), Trumba (events), Gmail (email) - each of these is really good at what it does, but they all prevent me from being able to synch up this same information and take it with me. Because of that, I end up either a) using competing services that are not as feature rich, but allow me to use my data more efficiently (yahoo has an online calendar that can synch with my palm), or b) forgoing either web or palm access to the information.

Source: What’s Next?, ” You can’t take it with you”

It’s a trade-off, I know. For the next 2 months, it will have to do ;)

I meant to post this sooner, but Pete mentioned it again so I figured I should make the placeholder now.

Ross Mayfield has an interesting little entry up titled “Cheaper to Host than Attend”. Basically, he’s talking about the effects social media are having on the way that events are conceived, coordinated and executed.

Ross asks us to think about it - believe me I have been. Right now, the trade show industry is seeing a very strange series of effects chomping down their utility. How do I know? Comdex is dead! OK that’s only anecdotal. What I can tell you is that the meetings we’ve had with people that are in the event business all are the same, they’re looking for new ways to get people in and they recognize, but don’t know how to harness, the increasing role and impact of technology and social media on their business.

Don’t like that answer? Then consider things like BloggerCon, Gnomedex, local user groups and associations. There is tremendous growth in this arena and it’s more than just 5 or ten people, we’re seeing hundreds and even thousands aggregate in new and interesting ways. Do you think somehow those groups will STOP getting together?

The future of events looks quite different from my chair. How’s it look from yours?

The first-run experience
http://37signals.com/svn/archives2/the_firstrun_experience.php?8#comments

Developing a technology product is really a tedious and risky business when all is said and done. It seems that with the advent of this Web 2.0 era, the pressure is even greater that if you don’t do it yesterday, it’s already done by someone else.

This is a pressure we’ve been experiencing to say the least - especially considering we’re building things I’ve had floating in my head for something like 2 years. To that end, we’ve been working as effectively as possible. I’ve managed much larger teams previously, but this time it’s a little different - it’s fun and exciting all the time. Every day’s got a new gem (no pun intended).

I’ll be introducing the team formally later, but Demetrius Nunes, on of my secret weapons, sent me a link to a blog entry he wrote. It was really nice to see and hear how much someone working with me/us felt:

For instance, I am working in a Rails project right now where the whole team, including the client himself, is made of those kinds of people. I know it’s unusual to work with a client with deep technical knowledge, but I got lucky this time. He chose Rails over more established options such as ColdFusion (which he personally masters) and this alpha-geek attitude reflects on other areas of his personality as well, such as having flexible work hours, using web-based collaboration tools and even doing podcasts.

I was truly delighted to hear from him such motivating phrases as “If we build anything that might be useful to other people, let’s give it back to the community” or “Sure, I’d be glad if you blogged about the project” or simply “I completely trust your judgment on that”.

Yes, my client encourages me to blog and to do open-source development. I wonder what my odds would be of having the same thing if I was working on a .NET “enterprise” project for a big company. Don’t laugh please. :-)

Source: “The technology filter”, Y.o.m.b.a.r.

Are you inspiring your team? Are they inspiring you? It makes all the difference.

Most people who read here, or don’t read here lately, know that I’ve been busy putting together a whiz-bang team and pursuing my pursuit of a life as a professional comic (ok I’m not being honest there).

In reality, I’ve been finally shaving down all the rough edges and realizing just how large the opportunity before us is. It’s quite exciting and we’re now in the process of getting ready to annouce we exist :) How exciting, I know.

What I can say is we’re building a Web 2.0 application. I didn’t make up the term, I don’t know if I like it, but I know that when you see it, it will instantly be recognized as such. Fortunately for me, I’ve been quickly removing myself from the development side and focusing on the opportunity alone. Granted, it works wonder that I know geek speak, can write my own code, design databases and all that stuff, but in reality it’s just too nice having capable, excited developers as my partners in crime now.

I came across this link on the Business Opportunities Weblog and thought it was pretty dang succinct:

10 Steps to a Successful Web 2.0 Company

1. Solve the smallest possible problem…
2. Get a responsive and chatty audience using the product.
3. Launch. Now. Tomorrow. Every day.
4. Distribute. Distribute. Distribute.
5. Don’t hold users against their will.
6. Be mindnumbingly simple.
7. Get people hooked on free.
8. Don’t waste any money on marketing.
9. Don’t overfund.
10. No one sucks.

And so let’ see how we’re doing:

1. Check.
2. Still Pending.
3. Working on it - believe you me.
4. How do we do that exactly?
5. Would never consider it.
6. Roger.
7. We love free stuff too.
8. !Marketing
9. Printing our own money doesn’t count, does it?
10. Amen.

So I’ve installed this blasted Google Talk application mostly because I am interested in comparing it to Skype really. The interface is ok I guess and it’s nice getting GMail pop-up alerts (except I don’t really use GMail right now).

In any event, you can’t tell if the thing works without someone logged in. It’s too early for anyone to be online via my normal IM so I’m checking here.

If you’re on Talk, hit me up madmonk AT gmail DOT com.

I came across this article yesterday and wanted to post it sooner but life gets in the way.

It seems that a company named Melodeo, hmm sounds much like Odeo (which is the new company it seems), is introducing an application that makes it possible to subscribe and download Podcasts directly on your phone.

Intersting, but impractical. I’ve got a Nokia 7610. It takes 1MP pictures. Trying to send one of those pictures up and out into the ether is painstakingly slow. Would it seem “easier” to download a 20MB podcast? Not just yet, in my book.

However, one thing that does make me curious is whether or not content should/would be downsampled to make the downloads more manageable. It seems that compressing the MP3s that we’re using down to something painfully low, it might just work out considering the player.

Any thoughts? Anyone preparing low-end versions of their podcasts?

For some time now I’ve been slowly telling people about the underlying value of conferences and workshops. In having that conversation, I’ll often relate to people my 80-20 Rule. It goes something like this:

Conferences are:
80% people (the networking)
20% presentations (the actual content)

It’s hard for anyone to really argue with this, though they sometimes want to tweak the numbers. The folks that have a vested interest in the content are willing to pump up the value of the presentations. The people that are shy also tend to align with this thinking. The extroverts don’t even go to the sessions!

Generalizations aside, meeting people face to face is not just desirable, it’s necessary for most things that are going to really stick (IMHO). Fortunately, I’m not alone in this thinking. I came across this link from Dave Taylor (via Business Opportunities Weblog):

The Critical Business Value of Attending Conferences

I definitely recommend you give it a read.