Comments on: Evening Beer Notes http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/doc/2009/04/17/evening-beer-notes/ Same old blog, brand new place Tue, 24 Nov 2009 23:51:40 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Nevada DUI Attorney http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/doc/2009/04/17/evening-beer-notes/comment-page-1/#comment-158711 Nevada DUI Attorney Sun, 19 Apr 2009 04:52:09 +0000 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/doc/?p=1369#comment-158711 Couple of things I came across recently. I was "shared" a video about the latest updates on youtube, and the talks with the big corporations that they are having. The actual users of youtube are outraged [ ok outraged is over the top, they are more intrigued, outraged would be a mass exodus from youtube ] why? because youtube has systematically ousted the little guy in favor of the corporate bigwig videos. And, they are putting forth these videos as "most popular". When in fact most advertisers receive a very cold and poor welcome, and if they are rated, are rated out of existence quickly. So the users that made youtube what it is today are out of the dialogue as to the future of the entity that they had a direct impact on. Someone in response to these "did you hear" videos, said radio was the same way. At first, radio was done by ma and pa radio holder and then the corporate big wigs came in and took it over. In the end, there's nothing really any one can complain about. Social media, was of course started by the real users of the web, but corporate greed has seen the light and are flexing their Emuscles to oust these silly peons and defining the market ... to put it biblically "in their own image". However, I think they will find, as your commenter alluded to, the internet is a vacuous space and there is lots of room to wiggle in. If these corporations seek to take over the kickball and remake the rules, everyone can simply leave their playground and go elsewhere at the touch of a button. Youtube may have been the only kid on the block, but now they are just the "big" kid on the block, there are plenty of other kids to go play with. The same is for a lot of social media. It's all now properly categorized and waiting for new users. The Obama talks concerning censoring the internet is scaring me though, 4th amendment violations aren't even being brought up. Couple of things I came across recently. I was “shared” a video about the latest updates on youtube, and the talks with the big corporations that they are having. The actual users of youtube are outraged [ ok outraged is over the top, they are more intrigued, outraged would be a mass exodus from youtube ] why? because youtube has systematically ousted the little guy in favor of the corporate bigwig videos. And, they are putting forth these videos as “most popular”. When in fact most advertisers receive a very cold and poor welcome, and if they are rated, are rated out of existence quickly.

So the users that made youtube what it is today are out of the dialogue as to the future of the entity that they had a direct impact on.

Someone in response to these “did you hear” videos, said radio was the same way. At first, radio was done by ma and pa radio holder and then the corporate big wigs came in and took it over.

In the end, there’s nothing really any one can complain about. Social media, was of course started by the real users of the web, but corporate greed has seen the light and are flexing their Emuscles to oust these silly peons and defining the market … to put it biblically “in their own image”.

However, I think they will find, as your commenter alluded to, the internet is a vacuous space and there is lots of room to wiggle in. If these corporations seek to take over the kickball and remake the rules, everyone can simply leave their playground and go elsewhere at the touch of a button.

Youtube may have been the only kid on the block, but now they are just the “big” kid on the block, there are plenty of other kids to go play with. The same is for a lot of social media. It’s all now properly categorized and waiting for new users.

The Obama talks concerning censoring the internet is scaring me though, 4th amendment violations aren’t even being brought up.

]]> By: Brian Solis http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/doc/2009/04/17/evening-beer-notes/comment-page-1/#comment-158555 Brian Solis Sat, 18 Apr 2009 17:59:09 +0000 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/doc/?p=1369#comment-158555 Doc, you are completely correct. I lost a sentence that actually explained your take on VRM and will add that back in asap. The spirit of the Conversation Prism and the Conversation Index is intended to motivate brands, and the people who represent them, to first discover, document, and then breathe in the meaningful dialogue and the insights they reveal in order to improve their relationship programs, services, communications, marketing, training, infrastructure, and products overall. Doc, you are completely correct. I lost a sentence that actually explained your take on VRM and will add that back in asap. The spirit of the Conversation Prism and the Conversation Index is intended to motivate brands, and the people who represent them, to first discover, document, and then breathe in the meaningful dialogue and the insights they reveal in order to improve their relationship programs, services, communications, marketing, training, infrastructure, and products overall.

]]> By: Doc Searls http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/doc/2009/04/17/evening-beer-notes/comment-page-1/#comment-158334 Doc Searls Sat, 18 Apr 2009 02:56:19 +0000 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/doc/?p=1369#comment-158334 Sorry, John. Use any of my photographs any way you wish. There is a Creative Commons license there for guidance. I wish I could get into my Flickr account to do more, but alas, Yahoo won't let me. Which will be the subject of my next post. Sorry, John.

Use any of my photographs any way you wish. There is a Creative Commons license there for guidance.

I wish I could get into my Flickr account to do more, but alas, Yahoo won’t let me. Which will be the subject of my next post.

]]> By: john- owassa history http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/doc/2009/04/17/evening-beer-notes/comment-page-1/#comment-158284 john- owassa history Fri, 17 Apr 2009 23:22:38 +0000 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/doc/?p=1369#comment-158284 Sir, Not sure if you received my previous request in late February. Would be interested in hearing from you regarding one of your photographs. Regards, John Sir,
Not sure if you received my previous request in late February. Would be interested in hearing from you regarding one of your photographs.
Regards, John

]]> By: Crosbie Fitch http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/doc/2009/04/17/evening-beer-notes/comment-page-1/#comment-158273 Crosbie Fitch Fri, 17 Apr 2009 22:34:14 +0000 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/doc/?p=1369#comment-158273 My pleasure, Doc. My pleasure, Doc.

]]> By: Doc Searls http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/doc/2009/04/17/evening-beer-notes/comment-page-1/#comment-158153 Doc Searls Fri, 17 Apr 2009 13:37:20 +0000 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/doc/?p=1369#comment-158153 I like 'volition to pay,' and the deal you outline. It's a good example of an assertion that one could make as a first party. And I like both EmanciPay and FreeMart. Alas the latter domain naime in both .com and .org form are owned by Koreans already. But EmanciPay .org and .com were both available when I checked, so I just bought them. I'm liking it more every minute too. Well done, Crosbie. I like ‘volition to pay,’ and the deal you outline. It’s a good example of an assertion that one could make as a first party.

And I like both EmanciPay and FreeMart. Alas the latter domain naime in both .com and .org form are owned by Koreans already.

But EmanciPay .org and .com were both available when I checked, so I just bought them.

I’m liking it more every minute too. Well done, Crosbie.

]]> By: Crosbie Fitch http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/doc/2009/04/17/evening-beer-notes/comment-page-1/#comment-158100 Crosbie Fitch Fri, 17 Apr 2009 09:38:37 +0000 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/doc/?p=1369#comment-158100 You could combine the 'volition to pay' with 'the unencumbered delivery of the work' in exchange. In other words the proposition is "I'll take the initiative in paying you to publish your work, but only if you've taken the initiative in restoring the public's liberty to your work". Copyright unethically contrives the ability to exchange copies for money. It has no place in the exchange of work for money. Thus how about a name that also indicates the emancipation of the public? Perhaps EmanciPay? or PayAndShare? or Pay2Share? PayFair? FreeMart? You could combine the ‘volition to pay’ with ‘the unencumbered delivery of the work’ in exchange. In other words the proposition is “I’ll take the initiative in paying you to publish your work, but only if you’ve taken the initiative in restoring the public’s liberty to your work”.

Copyright unethically contrives the ability to exchange copies for money. It has no place in the exchange of work for money.

Thus how about a name that also indicates the emancipation of the public? Perhaps EmanciPay? or PayAndShare? or Pay2Share? PayFair? FreeMart?

]]> By: Digital Stuffing » The Mainstreaming of Twitter http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/doc/2009/04/17/evening-beer-notes/comment-page-1/#comment-158083 Digital Stuffing » The Mainstreaming of Twitter Fri, 17 Apr 2009 08:25:35 +0000 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/doc/?p=1369#comment-158083 [...] building on new, or old just plain co-opting and taking all the digital stuff for themselves. Via Doc Searls, I see a piece that describes what is happening in some places where brands, companies and [...] [...] building on new, or old just plain co-opting and taking all the digital stuff for themselves. Via Doc Searls, I see a piece that describes what is happening in some places where brands, companies and [...]

]]>