Feedback Loops
Apr 25, 2008 Analogies, Technology, blogging
Thanks for visiting! If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to by RSS, or by Email. And if there's anything else I can do for you, feel free to drop me a line.
Image via WikipediaWe’ve all heard the high pitched squeal that results from feedback from speakers. And I’m pretty sure most of you would agree that it’s annoying. It’s not something you want to hear.
Feedback occurs when a microphone picks up it’s own sound from the speaker. The sound gets trapped in a loop (microphone picks it up from the speaker, amplifies it and sends it to the speaker, where it gets sent back to the microphone, etc), which causes that annoying whine that we all know (and most hate).
The thing is, with the power of Web 2.0, it’s very easy to get trapped in our own ‘feedback loop’. The web allows you to amplify your voice. With blogs, podcasting, Twitter and all the other Web 2.0 tools, you can speak and be heard.
But social media is a conversation. It’s not a one way broadcast. Yes, the tools help to amplify what you have to say, but if you’re just trying to build yourself up, it’s not going to work. You’ll just get annoying.
Companies which blog and only plug their products aren’t going to get much value from social media. Companies which blog and listen to what their customers say back will.
Same for individuals. You’re more likely to gain from social media if you’re listening to what others say, and feeding off each other, inspiring each other. If you’re just amplifying yourself over and over, you won’t gain value, and you won’t be adding value either. You’ll just be making noise.
How do you keep yourself from getting trap in a ‘feedback loop’?
Tags: feedback, listening, social media, twitter, web 2.0
Don’t get caught in the middle
Apr 23, 2008 Technology
Twitter’s been having problems over the last couple of days. It’s led Robert Scoble to declare that Twitter has given Friendfeed a major gift. The problems caused Daryl Tay to go off Twitter for a while. And lots of people have been asking questions about what’s going on.
For me, that’s the biggest issue. Yes, it’s not good that Twitter is broken. But the biggest problem is that it’s not obvious that it’s broken. If it’s broken and the site is down and there’s an error page, yes, it’s annoying, but at least people know what they are going to get. When they try to access Twitter, they know it’s down.
But that’s not what happened. The service was accessible. But it didn’t work how it was expected to. Because of that, people were left guessing about what’s going on. And people often don’t bother to take the time to guess.
If you’re going to go down, go down. But don’t leave people hanging. The middle ground is the worst place to be.
At least that’s my opinion. What do you think?
[?]Tags: expectation, middle ground, twitter
Connecting with others
Apr 22, 2008 Technology
So Skype has added unlimited land-line calls to Europe and Asia.
From a selfish standpoint, being in Singapore, this is great news. And hopefully it’s going to make it easier for you to reach me (my number’s on my sidebar if you want to talk to me - I’m always glad to have a conversation with my readers).
But there is a bigger point to all of this. There’s great value in surrounding yourself with the right people - people who inspire you and make you better. And developments like this make it easier to meet these sort of people.
No matter what you’re interested in, there are bound to be like minded people. There are lots of interesting, intelligent, inspiring, creative people out there.
And it’s now so easy to meet them. The barriers are being removed. Distance is no longer a barrier. To an extent, expertise isn’t a barrier anymore (if a 17 year old kid like me can have conversations with an award winning marketer like Mitch Joel, how much of a barrier can expertise be?).
How are you making the most of today’s technology to interact with inspiring people?
Photo: Meeting new people by Random Shennanigans
[?]Tags: barriers, community, connection, interactions, People, Skype
Does Twitter Spam Really Matter?
Apr 18, 2008 Technology
There’s been a lot of commotion over Twitter spam lately, with Mashable’s Adam Ostrow writing that Twitter Spam has spiralled out of control. Adam goes on to suggest that “the time has arrived for Twitter to require a CAPTCHA with every new follow you want to make”.
Personally, I never really liked CAPTCHAs because of the negative impact on usability. But that’s a post for another day, I guess (Wired’s Paul Adams asked the question of whether Captcha’s moment is passing, and you can see the discussion there if you’re interested.)
The question I want to ask here is the question in the post title. Does Twitter spam really matter? Yes, it’s slightly annoying getting the random email notifications of being followed. But other than the email notifications, I personally don’t see the big deal about Twitter spam.
Twitter, by its nature, is inherently permission based, isn’t it? You choose who to follow. So how does Twitter spam fit in? Users can just choose not to follow the spammers, and that’s done, isn’t it? And based on Andre Nantel’s study, users are more or less intelligent enough to choose who to follow.
When the user controls what messages he receives, can spam really be that big an issue? Can it even be considered spam in the first place?
The second question, I don’t have a fixed answer to. But for the first question, I don’t see how spam can be such a big isssue.
What do you think? Is there something I’m missing from all of this??
[?]Tags: captcha, permission, social media, spam, twitter
Your Yardstick
Apr 8, 2008 Personal Development, Technology
David Pogue wrote last week about how “blogger-bashers are terrible predictors of a product’s success or failure“.
The lesson he learned?
It’s the same lesson I learned when I reviewed the Flip “camcorder” a couple weeks ago: if you change the shape and concept of something enough, it ceases to be that thing. It becomes a new thing, or a descendant of that earlier thing. But it’s no longer the original thing, and you can’t judge it on the same yardstick.
I think it’s a very good viewpoint, and I think it can be applied to people as well.
When you’re doing your own thing, you’re probably going to be shot down. You’re going to be ‘bashed’ by people who judge you by the status quo - the old standards. But you shouldn’t let it get to you. Because they could very well be wrong.
Once you’re forging your own path and trying to break the status quo, all the old, accepted standards go out the window. And only you can accurately judge whether you’re succeeding.
It’s your own journey, and the only yardstick that truly matters is your own.
By what yardstick are you judging yourself?
Photo from Charlyn W via Flickr
Tags: criticism, judge, status quo, yardstick
Providing Personal, Customized Solutions
Mar 28, 2008 Companies, Marketing, Technology
CNet reports that Bug Labs have sold out until May. And it’s succeeding not just with “hobbyists and tinkerers”, but also with “corporations looking for less-expensive alternatives to custom devices”.
The beauty of Bug Labs, in my opinion, is this. It’s a tool that is inherently personal. It gives the user freedom to choose how they want to use it. By its very nature, it is customized, tailored to their own needs and wants.
When you provide a personal, customized solution - like Bug Labs has - you’re really likely to succeed.
It’s no longer about generic tools and services. It’s not about the mass anymore. It’s about the individual. It’s about being personal.
How can you make your product - or whatever you’re selling - more personal?
[?]Tags: , bug labs, customized, Personal
Irregular Blog Posts
Mar 27, 2008 Technology
Mitch Joel sparked an interesting discussion about whether blogs and podcasts should update regularly. There’s huge value in the comments there, so you should check it out.
I just thought I’d add my take here. I think the biggest hurdle is the adoption of RSS. When RSS gains mass adoption, it’ll change things.
And I personally don’t think content needs to be that regular. I’d rather updates come when the blogger/podcaster has better ideas.
Christopher S. Penn made a comparison with Seinfeld:
If Jerry Seinfeld’s show was on whenever he and the cast felt like it, how popular would it have become? Jerry Seinfeld’s show had great content, but part of what made it a success is that the audience knew when and where to find it, every week, same channel.
Personally, I disagree with him on this. The difference is that Seinfeld’s show (one of my favorites, by the way), was only available at that slot. You couldn’t get it after that. You can get blog content whenever you want it.
I think a better comparison would be with book authors - authors don’t write on a schedule, they write when they have ideas.
That’s my take. I think the nature of New Media should allow posts to be less regular. But without mass adoption of RSS, that change won’t come that soon.
Or maybe I’m missing something. What do you think?
[?]
