June 2005 Archives

In the extended entry I explore one of the major issues facing businesses today: the conflict between cost efficiencies and productivity. It's a longish article, so I've placed it behind the cut, but would appreciate your comments and your own perspective on the matter.

Thanks to all those who made an attempt at answering my question on the difference between online and offline shoppers - some interesting responses. For what it's worth, I think there is a distinct difference between the online and offline shopper, but that this difference is also altering over time. As shoppers have access to a wide range of product search resources, 'offline' or store shopping is becoming less about product search and more about the social and tactile experience of interacting with the goods as well as the sales experience. Marketers *sort of* understand this, and are tailoring the physical infrastructure of shopping centres to cater for pleasant shopping experiences. But somewhat remarkably in my opinion, marketers do miss that offline shopping is still changing even beyond the dimension of shopping experiences. And not just in terms of speed of transactions and quality of customer service.

Offline shopping is becoming rather polar. Customers either want service, or they really *don't* want service. It's not that customers are unclear about whether they want to purchase, it's that they are absolutely clear about why they are shopping. They either have a purchase in their minds, or they are shopping predominantly as a form of therapy, and simply wish to interact with the goods. Customers have reached a position where if shopping is entirely experience oriented and not goal oriented, then they find sales assistants a *disincentive* to enter a store. As they grow in sophistication, customers' respect for, and tolerance of sales assistants is actually reducing.

So essentially the changes I see are a marked separation of goal oriented shoppers and experience oriented shoppers. Shoppers who have a specific purchasing goal in mind are time conscious and want service immediately, and at the lowest possible price. Shoppers who are experience-oriented find sales assistants irritating and officious. And I think the internet and online shopping is actually contributing to this polarisation process.

This clearly needs more research, but it's interesting to watch the trend develop.

Here's a controversial perspective.

Is the experience of an online shopper in fact no different from an offline shopper in terms of scanning and product evaluation experience? Is the vast majority of the marketers' sphere of influence in the offline channel restricted to environmental factors, the 'pleasure' of the shopping experience and the emotional status of the shopper?

Discuss.

I'm alive, I'm perfectly healthy and I'm not actually that stressed. I'm just otherwise preoccupied. Your normal blogging will continue when technical difficulties have been resolved!

With thanks to Engrish.com, I think I have found a new logo for my blog.

Happy winter solstice to everyone! Don't forget to look out your window tonight - the moon is very low-hanging at the moment, so it appears larger than normal. Check out the NASA site on the (Northern Hemisphere) summer moon for details!

I will probably be developing a post either later tonight or tomorrow on the role of academics in response to a discussion I've been having with Mark Bahnisch. but I have learned not to promise a delivery time. Just stay tuned!

This would have been posted sooner but my blog is having an attack of internal server errors. I'm figuring it's just internet pixies being naughty. In any case, I *do* have links for the day so I'm forging ahead anyway.

First and foremost, MIT are conducting a blogging survey which should produce some interesting results. I recommend all bloggers participate and stay tuned for the results.

Next for the truly wonderful idea of teleporting or transporting oneself over the internet, check out the story on the research of one Professor Todd Mowry at Carnegie Mellon Uni. What a fabulous idea. Not hyper-useful, but probably several million out of 10 for style.

Then there's anatomical proof that men's brains are different from women. And as far-fetched as it sounds, there is a theory on the table that physical differences in brains could actually account for why men don't understand women. Although having said that, I have to say I haven't had too many troubles with men not understanding me. Perhaps I just am lucky enough to get along with all sorts of people? I certainly hope so! :-)

For a rather entertaining jaunt through the annals of independent minds, check out Wikipedia's List of people widely considered eccentric. Note that these people are considered eccentric, but I'm sure many will regard some representatives on this list as barking mad, or even exceedingly dangerous. It's one of the few occasions where Adolf Hitler and Michael Jackson should be spoken in the same sentence. I'm just rather surprised at a few obvious omissions....For the writers category, for instance, I'd add Emily Dickinson, (who, after the Civil War in the US, only ever wore white, and rarely accepted visitors), and Kurt Vonnegut (who had a shifty looking character lurking around in the background of a television interview about his fictional works.... and that character was later revealed to be his fictional science-fiction author anti-hero, Kilgore Trout.... doing my honours thesis on representations of reality in the fiction of Vonnegut was like drowning in reason).

For the sci-fi fans out there, check out the Star Wars doco from the makers of the wonderful spoof, Troops! This isn't as funny as the fabulous Troops - isn't meant to be - but is still, as Slashdot says, worth a viewing.

In tech-business news, Google is weighing in on electronic cash payment systems race in direct competition with PayPal, and my money is on Google. No actually, I only wish my money was in Google. Particularly considering the stock price of Google over the past 10 months.

And finally, returning to the subject of the first post, the Electronic Frontier Foundation has released a Legal Guide for bloggers. Bloggers and commenters on others' blogs, please take note. And even though this is a US guide, the important thing for Aussies to note is that when it comes to copyright and defamation law, it's a hell of a lot easier to sue in Australia than it is over there in the US. The more jobs my sister-in-law gets, the better! :-)

Yes okay, I haven't posted all weekend but I really needed the sleep. And I've been catching up on reading and housework. Sue me.

But the good news is that I've developed a veritable goldmine of commentary and links for tomorrow. In the meantime, I'll just say thanks to Kevin and Claire for drinks on Friday, Tracey and Lachlan for the housewarming on Saturday, and Shan and Cam for a film(Mr & Mrs Smith - lovely bit of silly fluff), coffee and a giggle over the newspaper on a rainy Sunday afternoon. And Troffie, for providing the reading material I consumed at various intervals during the course of the weekend, usually over a hot cup of tea. Overall a fabulous, and relaxing weekend. And really needed.

Yes I am busy. I will get back to things. Tomorrow. For sure.

And speaking of Neverland.... on the one occasion where it's a good thing to get out for a duck, the extraordinarily lucky Michael Jackson has managed to score it, found not guilty on all charges.

Perhaps he should get a beak surgically attached to the place where his nose was now?

I just caught up with the film, Finding Neverland, on DVD. Am I the only person on the planet to have seen the film knowing the horrendous story of the Llewellyn-Davies family? Am I the only one who was aware of the impact the stories of J M Barrie among others, including Kenneth Graham and Lewis Carroll, on the children who were in their care, and been repulsed, rather than awed by the experience?

Dear God, this was a period of exploitation, provocativeness and almost unbelieveable blindness to the horrific social illnesses that clearly afflicted some of these authors. Without suggesting that these men were paedophiles - there is no proof of this - there is clearly proof of the psychological damage caused to the children who were attached to these perverse men.

I'm more traumatised than awestruck by this film. If ever there was a more chilling tale of grooming for paedophilia, I haven't found one.

... I'm sure everyone who is even remotely interested in Windschuttle-bashing/advocacy has already read his latest offering in The New Criterion on The Journalism of Warfare, but I thought I'd poke Mark Bahnisch among others to discuss further.

I know I've been less than exciting in my recent posts, but I'm hoping to make up for it with probably one of the best weeks of news in IT on record. It's been a fascinating week, and one which has not had half the publicity it deserves. So I'm hoping to do my part to correct that.

First and foremost, to one of Bob Cringely's finest posts, about how Apple and Intel are merging. Now it's no secret that I have been a fan of Bob's for a long time. Not least because he gave me one of the best interviews I got for the 1999 ABC Radio National series, In the Pipeline. (He was an absolute darling and I'll love him forever for it.) And I also loved his book, Accidental Empires: How the boys of Silicon Valley made millions, battled foreign competition and still can't get a date. But this article on the announcement of Apple taking on Intel chipsets has it all. He's ripped back the window dressing from the announcement and reminded us of all the inconsistencies of this relationship. Bravo, Bob.

On a slightly lighter note, there's the news that male geeks are now apparently more desirable among women. (How that impacts on female geeks I'm not entirely sure.)

In local news, the appointment of Solomon Trujillo as the new Telstra chief is either proof that the Telstra Board only like people with slightly surreal names (Ziggy Switkowski to Solomon Trujillo????), or that they really don't know where the company is going. Trujillo's political associations have ranged from left wing to right wing, and I think The Australian probably do well to describe him as a 'visionary'. Essentially he's more strategic than tactical. What that means for Telstra is anyone's guess. I suspect it doesn't mean much in the way of actual action. Ziggy was certainly more active than Solomon appears. (I think I hear a biblical tale coming on....)

In blogging news, blog ads are continuing to grow in profile and as a marketing channel to exploit. Given DoubleClick's review of a decade of online advertising (released in February), and given the news from Blackfriars that the web and PR will collectively capture US$100 billion in advertising spending during 2005, the likelihood is that blog advertising isn't going away anytime soon. Indeed, it's likely to make a lot of bloggers very happy, because the marketers are getting smarter and only offering advertisements that interest blog readers. And bloggers can actually get paid by advertisers. It's a hell of a lot better than being blog-spammed all the time, anyway. (And for what it's worth, I will NOT be offering advertisements on my blog.)

In legal news, Larry Lessig has released a map of where Creative Commons has penetrated throughout the world. For those who have not come across the idea of Creative Commons, it's a variation on Copyright law, where the author can voluntarily reserve some but not all rights to a work. This permits much more collaborative content production, and so is an interesting development in intellectual property in the digital age.

There's going to be a new patch release to Windows next week, so all of you out there with limited downloads on your broadband accounts should beware of your limits for the month. And speaking of broadband, the adoption of residential broadband is growing at an enormous rate in Australia. Bigpond just announced that they now have over 800,000 residential customers.

I'm nowhere near finished with news for the week, but I'm aware this post is already too long. So stay tuned for more blogging goodness over the next day or two.....

All positions for lunch and even after work drinks are now gone for next week. Even the weekend is now fully booked. Thanks to all those who contacted me! Anyone who still wants to catch up, please let me know what your movements are the following week (beginning the 20th).

If people were wanting to catch up with me for lunch to discuss research/business proposals/ideas/employment etc then NOW IS YOUR CHANCE!

Next week my diary is virtually free. And given my diary over the last two weeks that's a miracle.

So Mark, Hamish, Paul, Robyn, Tracey, Renee, Pradeep, Mike, and basically anyone else who has ever said that maybe they'd like to catch up for lunch, and can get in to the top end of Brisbane at around 12:30pm-ish on a business day, please contact me asap either by email, by sms, or by making a comment to this post, with details on how best to contact you.

There is some sense of urgency in this query, as I'm not sure if I'm even going to be living in Brisbane by the middle of August. Then again, I could be here for the next five years. I don't know. The point is that you need to get in now, while you can. Tomorrow may be too late.

So carpe diem! Or at least carpe cena occursus!
For those who are too lazy to find a Latin to English translator, it very roughly translates to 'seize a lunch meeting'

Some big decisions going on at the moment. Will announce more when I know more, but suffice to say I'm excited by some very interesting opportunities and hoping I'm going to make the right choices and back a winner, whichever decision I make.

Partied Friday, recovered Saturday, partied Sunday.
'nuff said?

Tonight's Ideas Festival event, a public lecture from Jared Diamond, author of the recent book on collapsing societies went off without a hitch, and the audience were thoroughly engaged. Jared is a marvellous speaker, and his stories of the rise and fall of cultures the world over challenge notions of consumerism, political protectionist theories, and the role of the first world in protecting the interests of the third world. Conversations carried on long after the event, and we hope to have a space for some of these conversations via the Ideas Festival site some time tomorrow. Come join the debate!

So Deep Throat is finally revealed. And he wasn't so very far removed from the Cigarette Smoking Man and his cronies depicted in the X-Files series, after all.

But who was this elusive Mark Felt? And how did he avoid detection all these years? Wikipedia, of course, has an extensive biography of Felt, now updated to include his confirmed role as Deep Throat whilst #2 at the Federal Bureau of Investigation. And when it comes to it, he's been reported as the leading candidate for Deep Throat for many years. But it was really J Edgar Hoover who probably provided the best reason for Felt's anonymity all these years. A charismatic and decidedly public face of the Bureau, Hoover was frequently challenged in his controlling position, aware of the desire in Nixon to sack him, and possibly even advocating Felt's role in the downfall of an American president. When L Patrick Gray took over as Head of the FBI in 1972, and Felt assumed the role of Associate Director, it was carte blanche for Felt to direct the attention of a couple of journalists from the Washington Post to the activities of a corrupt government. It's fascinating even to hear what Nixon has to say about Felt's ambition in the original Smoking Gun Tapes recording just after Hoover's death in 1972.

But Felt himself was not so very far from corrupt. Investigating radical bombing attempts in the mid-1970s, Felt approved the action of FBI agents breaking in to homes and collecting evidence without a warrant. When this issue went to court, Felt managed to get away with a US$5000 fine, when the maximum charge for this action was 10 years imprisonment. Jack Limpert at the Washingtonian Magazine said in August 1974, that the "one that got away" was Mark Felt, and that every lead he had to Deep Throat led to Mark Felt. But Felt had categorically denied association. Indeed, he is directly quoted as saying, "I can tell you that it was not I and it is not I". So not only was he a conspiracist, he was a liar.

I'm not actually trying to bring Felt down. I think what he did was necessary and fabulous. But I question whether he did it because it was moral. Instead, I will go so far as to suggest that Felt exposed Nixon because it suited his ambition, and the objectives of his former employer, J Edgar Hoover. I do not believe he made a choice based on the good of the people, but rather the good of the Bureau, and in order to sustain control. I'm also trying to point out that it is often those we most suspect, and we most argue with, who will be most "at fault". The only trouble is that these people have the capacity to lie through their teeth, and do so with equanimity. So comfortable and skilled are they with the art of lying, that not even a polygraph test could pick them.

So what do we learn from this? That an outright and distinct denial from a government official is worth nothing? That someone who may have exposed corruption somewhere may also be guilty of their own brand of corrupt behaviour? How then, are we expected to place trust in the judicial system, when officials can comfortably perjure themselves and pervert the course of justice? And what kind of a victory for democracy is it, when we laud the actions of a proven liar?