Play My Cards Right

Popularity: 28% [?]

Share This

If you want one let me know. I personally do not use Joost very frequently. The content is currently far from compelling, and while I do kind of enjoy the interface of the client, and the video does indeed work really well, I find the “channel” model of video distribution to be completely unnecessary in the connected world.

Update: All invites are gone.  Sorry to those who didn’t get them.  Enjoy!

Popularity: 37% [?]

Share This

Sometimes my iTunes looks like this:

Popularity: 31% [?]

Share This

As the wave of video on the net slowly overtakes traditional broadcast as the medium of choice for watching things, a lot of people are trying to get in the game.

One of the chief arguments aggregators and commentators have made regarding the current video revolution is that there is simply so much of it, we must have some kind of mediator who is capable of sorting out “the good stuff”. So we have places like Network2, who accept video feeds based on the notion of “shows” and some relatively vague criteria of “quality.” What these folks fail to realize is that the mediator is dead. Channels are dead. They are hanging on to old paradigms without even realizing it. Update: Coincidentally, this is what is killing Joost, which I’ll get around to reviewing at some point- I’ve been beta testing it for about a month.

The social networks of today- and by social networks I mean social websites, the blogosphere and ad hoc networks of friends and neighbors who create communities on the net- provide mediation through hyperlinking, message boards, email threads and the like. Viral distribution is all that is needed to get a video into the hands of those who want it, and aggregation through a few mediators at the top of a site is completely unnecessary. Will some things be overlooked? Absolutely. I would love to see 54 Hours be more popular than it is. But then that raises the question of whether or not we are truly participating in a way that we could actually see our videos find increased mindshare. By not jumping into YouTube more fully and relying on the podcasting/vlogging methods, are we avoiding opportunities?

Pardon the digression. My point here is that the assumption that filters need to be provided is as dead as the television broadcasting paradigm. With limited bandwidth (both broadcast and temporal), television could only afford what it deemed most acceptable to the most number of people. Contrast that to today’s world of near limitless bandwidth and the ability to time-shift programming to suit your schedule. Why revisit that world by placing boundaries to content that people should be free to discover for themselves? We will create the filters we need through our networks of connected people. By participating in different networks we will witness and redistribute other content. Any new boundary based on these new freedoms is- whether intentionally or not- aimed at limiting access.

Popularity: 46% [?]

Share This

So Jason Calacanis, Dave Winer and Peter Rojas have been “jokingly” talking up producing a limited run, luxury mp3 player. I think the original inspiration was right on, and some of the features they’re talking about are great:

• RSS based wi-fi file transfers
• Podcast recording
• NO DRM

However, I think instead of making the perfect mp3 player, they’re in danger of making the Dave Winer podcast player- a branded, commercial supported, podcast friendly monster that forgets that (most) people like podcasts in addition to their music, not the other way around. These three (possibly two- I don’t get the feeling Peter is all into podcatching) are forgetting that it has to be a great music player before it’s a great podcast player. Peter brought up a good point about mass storage mode players, though I personally have no problems with iTunes syncing- I sync 3 ipods between four computers and have never lost a track, I simply learned the use and limitations of the device, then built a workflow around them.

Overall, I think they’re on the right track but if this thing ever came to pass you’d be surprised how few people are really interested in Winerstein’s Monster. To sum it up, perhaps designing should be best left to designers, lest we arrive at:

Popularity: 23% [?]

Share This

Since my initial post regarding Podcamp, a lively conversation has erupted both here and over at the Something to Be Desired blog as spurred on by Podcamp Pittsburgh organizer Justin Kownacki.

I don’t have the attention span to cover everything point by point but reading over it all and thinking about it has lead me to reconsider some of what I’ve said, or at least look at it in another way.

First off, I want to be clear that I do not in any way believe that sponsorship of podcasts or an event like podcamp is a bad thing.  My previous post would most certainly lead one to believe that I do, but I will say that courting sponsors and working with them will inevitably lead to questions regarding your motives in what you produce- whatever you produce.

With that said, we can discuss how new media producers are supposed to earn money from what they do.  Making money is difficult enough, and doing so with a freely distributed good is nearly impossible.  It is the fundamental problem of digital distribution.  Currently advertising certainly seems like the best means to this particular end.  No one would argue with the kinds of numbers Google is doing.  As long as we are able to maintain an editorial line between advertisers and content, then we are safe.

Now, there will be those who cross that line, as there are in every medium.  This is expected and inevitable.  However, the difference is that we are working in an age where reputation is everything, and as Calacanis has pointed out, the community of media consumers will not put up with content that is bought and paid for by moneyed interests when it gets in the face of the openness and “truth” of the blogosphere.  Authenticity is king, after all.

Which leads me to my final point in this long and winding road:

Sponsorship is a necessity, but it must not frame the discussion. 

Podcamp would not work without its incredibly gracious, incredibly giving sponsors. Most conferences have sponsors and the attendees still have to pay!  I am so thankful for that.  But despite the “unconferenceyness” of it all, I really feel that having sponsors leading discussions, shilling their products and then disclaiming those shills is really disingenuous of those participants.  I think Network2 is a great idea, and I thought Chris was a really nice guy, I have purchased clothing from SpreadShirt, but when you open a panel called “The Future of Video” with a five minute pitch about the company you work for, I’m calling bullshit.  Even if that company has no business model, yet.
We are treading a very fine line, for sure.  Podcamp needs sponsors.  We all need to eat.  We all want to represent our stuff- I was there to talk about 54 hours as much as I was to network and learn.  Part of what is great about all of this is that people get to talk about what they love and we all get to hear about it.  I just don’t want to watch something with so much potential be subverted so quickly without at least calling attention to that subversion.

Popularity: 32% [?]

Share This

Before I begin, I will preface this by saying that I am not good at interacting with people. One-to-One communication is lost on me as I can not bring myself to actually approach people. Thank god for smokers as they’ll talk to anyone- even the people standing by themselves outside waiting for the whole thing to be over. Now when it is one-to-many, me and an audience, I’m fine. My public speaking skills can use some work but for the most part, I can hold my own. The point is I could have gotten a lot more out of this had I been willing to actually communicate with the people there I was so excited to be in contact with.

With that said, things I’ve learned:

• Mac users really do think they’re superior to PC users, and don’t hesitate to pound that into the ground when given the opportunity. Thankfully I have a mac.
• Everyone is concerned with making money, but there is very little concern about content.
• There is a movement afoot that is trying to shoehorn podcasting, videoblogging and other new media into a format that is palatable to traditional forms of media consumption. This movement is in place partly due to short-sightedness of participants, and partly by the corporate interests that are already consuming far too much mindshare at events like podcamp.
• There is a huge amount of bias against YouTube. I heard “America’s Funniest Home Videos” repeatedly over the weekend. What these folks don’t get is that that’s where the audience actually is with web video, and while we’re bitching about finding an audience and getting sponsored, YouTube users are building communities around their homemade content- and lot of which is actually quite compelling.
• Corporate sponsorship frames the conversation at these events. From Network2 to Scion, they were everywhere and they all wanted a piece. The smell of money is now in the air, and everyone is grabbing for it. Of course I am partially to blame, as it was an “unconference“- I should have done more to shift the overall discussion.
• The economics of podcasting is really uncertain, but I can tell you this: There are not enough viewers or advertisers in the world to get everybody paid, and that is the way it should be. The people who rise to the top are going to be the ones who work really really hard, build communities, and define themselves for the space. Not by simply transferring old paradigms onto new contexts. There is big money in TV because for a long time it was the only venue for video and there was a limited number of channels, a limited amount of time. With no limit on bandwidth or time, the potential for ad revenue will drop as media becomes a-dime-a-dozen.
  
• Alive in Baghdad was one of the few people actually discussing the potential of new media as a disruptive force. Most people were trying to build “channels” and worry about whether pre-roll or post-roll ads were better. Brian is an inspiring individual and this work needs to be seen by everyone.

With all that said, I did meet some really nice people and most of my depression stemmed from my own inability to deal with situations like this. I learned a lot- particularly from the technical sessions on Saturday. Alex Lindsey must have an amazing amount of energy, and he was willing to put up with all kinds of crap to help people out and do what he could. The Tikibar folks too were very gracious and had a few questions for the 54 hour presentation.
I sat in on a session of GeekRiot with Shawn Smith. Don’t know if he’s going to post it or not as some of it was non-optimal. We were just starting to get to a good place when the session ended.

I am going to try to go to the Philly podcamp to rep with BK and Wrestling Team. Hopefully we’ll be a little better prepared to discuss the art of the medium, the potential of it, and the actual future of online audio and video outside of where the money is going to take it.

Taggin’: podcamp, podcamppittsburgh, podcamppittsburgh2006

Popularity: 25% [?]

Share This

NYT Link Here

I am trying to find the specifics of this agreement between Universal and Microsoft, which includes a royalty to Universal on every Zune player sold.  They are basically trying to recover royalties they would have received had the AHRA applied to hard drive based music players.  Does this mean I can listen to any music on Universal-owned labels, regardless of how I acquired it?

Popularity: 25% [?]

Share This

The eventual closing of the MSN Music store sheds light on one of the biggest potential problems facing the DRM-ing of digitally distributed music:

When the store closes, when the publisher dies or when it is no longer economically feasible to continue support for these DRM schemes, all of the people who bought and paid for that music (or rather the rights to listen to that music) are going to be up the creek without a paddle. Some future MS operating system will no longer support the files, they won’t be able to copy them to the devices they want or they may even be rendered unplayable.

Historically, the solution to this would be what people have been doing with out-of-print computer games for years- building communities, emulators and the like around the joy of using this old tech. Unfortunately for us, when it comes to unlocking your old MSN Music files, or your old Protected AAC, you will be breaking the law.

What then are your options? Of course people will likely break the encryption anyway, as they already have. But the fact remains that unless the laws are changed they will not be able to legally access music that they paid for due to nothing less than the inevitability of progress.

Popularity: 15% [?]

Share This

OEM’s don’t want grandma opening up their new computer on christmas morning with a broken OS.

Popularity: 15% [?]

Share This