The Dilemna of Online Identity

Posted on by
1

The vexatious issue of online identity becomes steadily more and more intractable with the staggering growth in the number of Internet and mobile users and the proliferation of web-based communities and online applications. But the problem of online identity goes well beyond simply finding a ubiquitous login profile for all your favourite websites. 

Technology now controls and mediates the permeable boundary between communities and a growing number of services.  Dealing with the technology around online identity involves addressing important issues such as verifiability, security and reputation. In difficult economic times the expression of our online identity holds considerable value, because it may affect our ability to find a job or win a contract. Centralising the protection and management of online identity then seems like a logical step towards solving some of these issues, but it also brings with it some philosophical problems.

If you entrust your personal data to a single organisation how can you be sure that it is secure? Is it better to have a multiple identities and logins? If your favourite social networking site went bust tomorrow you may lose some data but at least all your other identities remain intact. Could access to personal data be abused if it was located in a centralised repository? Would it mean more or less spam and invasion of personal privacy? What happens to your data in perpetuity? The reality is that we are already struggling with these issues. If you own a telephone, get a welfare benefit or operate a motor vehicle – your personal information already resides on numerous databases around the place. Almost certainly some of that information is incorrect and you don’t even know it. Recently I had to make two personal visits to my bank to make a simple address change happen!

Last week’s launch of the new .TEL domain was a positive step towards allowing Internet users to regain control over their online data. The launch of .TEL received little coverage in New Zealand,  despite the tremendous opportunity it represents. The new domain was set up by Telnic, a respected global domain registry. Each .TEL domain comes with it’s own free website that the owner can configure to display contact information. Here’s how the ideegeo .TEL site looks for example. You can also add active links such as phone numbers, email addresses, related websites, blogs and personal social network pages.

Over time .TEL will grow to become the equivalent of  the world’s virtual White Pages and no doubt a myriad of application offerings will spring from within it. It seems like the perfect way for small businesses to get listed on the web without the expense of developing and managing a full blown website. The domain owner has full control over the page content and level of access by other users (public or private). If there is any change of address or other contact details it is a simple matter to update the site. The .TEL sites are protected by high level encryption to keep spammers and cyber-criminals away.

The .TEL launch included a funny video that alludes to some light hearted social benefits from becoming a .TEL owner. We’ve been promoting the clip on our iWantMyName domain management site this week. Enjoy.

Rural Towns Left to Wither

Posted on by
Reply

I had occasion to head home to the provinces for a family visit last weekend. What always strikes me is the character of the little towns along the way. Some of them have been dying off for years, only kept alive of late by the fact that the surrounding rural economy has been booming. But with commodity prices plunging, the underlying support from dairy (and oil) is falling away.

If city dwellers are feeling the pinch now, spare a thought for the rural towns. For some, almost nothing has changed since the 1950s. Their central business districts generally comprise a petrol station, convenience store and a public bar. Now with falling trade even some of the pubs and petrol stations have passed on. Weeds creep insidiously through gaping holes in ramshackle corrugated iron fences that surround overflowing car wrecking yards and the odd farm machinery repair workshop. It’s not rustic or charming, it’s decay; and it’s a testament to how decades of questionable government economic policy has left such towns unimproved.

The one beacon of hope amongst this desolation is the local school. Tidy, manicured grounds surround the elderly buildings, replete in yet another coat of standard issue Ministry paint. The school is the last remaining focus point for the community. But even the school is at risk as roll numbers dwindle and the same Ministry casts its bureaucratic ruler over the books. Not even community pride in the school can prevent the young people from leaving town as soon as they are able – there is nothing to hold them.

Some of the troubles faced by rural towns are simply geographical. No amount of government intervention can compensate for poor soil, challenging climate or remoteness. For those towns that do not have viticulture or glaciers or fishing quota, the future looks rather bleak. On a broader front, the withering of our small towns is related to the fact that New Zealand in general continues to lag behind in GDP per capita. There is simply not enough cash to go around, largely because we have underinvested in innovation as a nation. Our small provincial towns are a metaphor for the wider economy.

I mentioned that education is a beacon of hope, there was also another glimmer of light on the horizon last week. McKinsey run an annual exercise involving mapping global innovation. Auckland was the only New Zealand city that was polled, but it showed up in the top left corner of the data as a “hot spring” of innovation. In other words we are registering more technology patents each year, but only in a small number of areas. Now, it turns out that bubbling hot springs generally host a thriving microcosm of life. On that basis investing in science and technology innovation as a means to generate economic wealth seems like a good idea. So why is the government heading in the opposite direction?

Is There Any Money In Social Media?

Posted on by
3

Last week I engaged in a blog discussion regarding how Twitter will monetise its service offering. It got me thinking about social media in general and about whether or not such products can ultimately generate value for their investors. I probably caused some mild offence by suggesting that social media sites need to think beyond the Google ads model as a revenue driver. Shouldn’t delivering value to the user be the prime motivation for site owners?

I find it quite bizarre that so many site owners are obsessed with driving traffic to their sites in order to squeeze out a few more cents of revenue, on the basis that a tiny percentage of users will click on some ugly random ad words placed strategically around the site. Oddly, nobody seems to question this model. At this point I should probably point out that I don’t own the ads you may have seen at the top of this page sometimes. In fact if I had my way I would gladly pay to keep them off site because of the devaluing effect they have on my own brand.

So notwithstanding the irony that paying to remove ads has now become a valid revenue model in itself, I reckon there are a lot more creative ways to make a social media site pay. The most obvious option is the multi-tiered subscription based approach whereby users can receive a basic level of service for free and choose to pay for additional services. Dating sites are probably the most popular example of this approach and my friends over at Smallworlds are taking this track too. The second approach is to sell something for which there is a demonstrable need and do it in a stylish way that carves out a niche. That’s what we are doing with iWantMyName. But how can sites like Twitter earn cash when they don’t appear to have anything tangible to sell apart from access to their network?

Twitter has so much cash to burn that there is no urgency to find a revenue model – yet. Building trust and growing the user community is far more important than spamming users with site ads at present. There have been quite a few ideas floating around about how Twitter will monetise but many of them are red herrings. I believe Twitter does have a plan and the key lies in the fact that the interface is so clean and simple at present. By offering only limited functionality now it creates a fertile ground to add revenue generating value drivers downstream.

I think contextual search will play a big role in the approach that Twitter ultimately adopts and other site developers should watch and learn as this evolution occurs. Twitter is ripe to move into an enterprise setting too, but it cannot do this until there is much better search functionality. Microblogging may not replace email entirely in the future, but it certainly will put a big dent in it. How long will it be before you can add images and document attachments directly to your Tweets?

What I love most of all about micro-blogging services is that I have complete control over who I subscribe to. That is a feature people will pay for and that is the one problem that regular email software can never properly address. On that basis alone I think micro-blogging services will eventually win as opposed to stepwise adaptation by the encumbent technologies.

Local Tech Rejected for Auckland Transport Solution

Posted on by
4

Infotech are reporting that a French firm has been identified as “preferred provider” for an integrated smart card solution across the Auckland region. If NZX listed local company Infratil misses out, it underlines the continuing struggle faced by local technology firms to secure major publicly funded contracts.

The Auckland Regional Transport Authority (ARTA) has been assessing tender responses for a much needed smartcard solution that would provide considerable relief for beleagured commuters in the City of Sails. But ARTA appears to have already flagged Thales as the most likely candidate in the project, which is reportedly valued at up to $100 million. At a time when everyone is concerned about preserving jobs, you would think that local contractors would receive favourable consideration. But – as in the past – local component is not a criteria for assessing public spending.

The stakes are high for the companies concerned. Wellington is considering extending to a region-wide solution and Christchurch is looking for a system that is compatible with whatever technology Auckland settles upon. The New Zealand implementations will also be excellent business case studies to support future export sales.

So perhaps the local technology is inferior? Not so. Last year Infratil, in a joint venture with ANZ bank, developed and launched the Snapper smartcard on its bus network across the Wellington region. Apart from some minor teething problems at the outset, the product has proven a success amongst Wellington’s commuters and usage continues to grow. The swipe cards can be recharged periodically and also used for small purchases at convenience store outlets.

Perhaps the chief criticism of Infratil’s solution involves concerns about monopolistic practices, because only Infratil buses currently have the Snapper technology installed. However that argument seems like a moot point given that ARTA have complete control over the scope of the solution for Auckland. Infratil will also draw upon the experience of it’s Australian project partner, infrastructure giant EDI Downer. So there is little doubt about the vendor’s ability to stay the course. Having eliminated the usual arguments – what is it that stops NZ public agencies from supporting local businesses? Outdated attitudes towards procurement of local technology should be confined to history.

Jobs Summit Lacked Innovation

Posted on by
8

Predictably the sketchy proposals emerging from last week’s “Jobs Summit” ranged from mildly interesting to the completely ridiculous and I’m left wondering how many will actually come to pass. But the ideas fest, hosted at Manukau City, was not actually about generating sensible approaches to the economic crisis, it was about putting on a display of unity and generating some positive buzz. Ironically, the business leaders at the conference will likely preside over hundreds of layoffs themselves in the coming months.

I like that John Key is an ideas man and is prepared to entertain novel concepts. But his sidekick Bill English made it very clear going into the summit that the state of the nation’s finances would not allow for a great deal of additional expenditure. By lowering expectations ahead of the summit he allowed the government to wiggle out of addressing any meaningful economic reform. His comments may even foreshadow some backpeddling on big ticket sacred cows like tax cuts, broadband and superannuation.

I guess my real concern is that the Jobs Summit hoopla has eclipsed the fact that economic realities have shifted so much that we really need to make a quantum leap in how we approach investing in our future as a nation. I’m not convinced that the summit properly addressed these issues. Borrowing cash to dig cable trenches and build a cycleway will simply not cut the mustard in my opinion.

Since it was elected, the government has astutely avoided making any comments about the need to invest in research, science and technology innovation. In fact the only promise they have made in this area is to kill off the R&D tax credit. They still don’t get it. The only businesses that are growing right now are precisely those that have invested in technology research and development. For example colostrum manufacturer New Image have exploded onto the Asian market. Even the horrendous balls-up in China by dairy commodity behemoth Fonterra has failed to suppress the demand for this high end, added value product.

Saving jobs in the breakfast cereal factories and assembly lines of South Auckland is important. But even more important is creating more high tech companies and developing our largely under-educated workforce. The lack of aspiration we currently demonstrate as a nation is reflected more and more in the ugly twin cultures of ethnic gangs and idiot boyracers that are furtively permeating our society and populating our streets with a generation of social rejects. What we really needed was an all encompassing social, economic and technological Innovation Summit.

Power to the Tweeple

Posted on by
Reply

Last week’s “blackout” protest was a lesson in how readily Internet technology can be used to disintermediate traditional sources of information and motivate a community to action. It also showed how quickly informed debate can be subsumed by a vocal minority making clever use of the very same technology.

Recently I suggested that Twitter might one day seed a political revolution. Now Twitter users in New Zealand have put that theory to test by calling for others to black out all their online profiles (and blogs) in order to raise awareness of a protest against amendments to the Copyright Act. The section 92A amendment was originally proposed to counter illegal downloads of copyrighted material and supposedly places the onus on ISPs to disconnect offenders upon accusation.

I say “supposedly” because I have yet to locate a complete rendition of the new legislation. In fact an examination of numerous “prominent” blog sites that are supporting the protest fails to reveal any links to the complete text of the amended Act. So we are taking it completely on trust regarding their interpretation of the wording of the amendment. But there was an even more disturbing aspect to the manner in which this protest was conducted.

Spreading the word about the protest through viral means such as blogs, Twitter and Facebook has turned out to be hugely successful, with global media and some prominent individuals picking up on the event. But my heart sank when I read a tweet from an over enthusiastic supporter who suggested that Twitter users should “unfollow” anyone who didn’t conform to the blackout mandate. I wonder if anyone noticed the irony?

S92A is certainly an unjust and poorly drafted piece of legislation that both impacts on personal freedoms and has facist bully-boy overtones. Yet calls for the black-listing of non-protestors shows the same level of crass indifference as demonstrated by the politicians who drafted the amendment in the first place. Join our cause or suffer the consequences? So it was with some sense of relief that I discovered that at least one popular blog site has set up a forum to allow both sides in this argument to express some viewpoints. Some informed debate, including a discussion about the experience of other countries in such matters, would be refreshing at this point. Isn’t that how intellectual communities find consensus and move forward together in an open society?

Driven to Digital Distraction

Posted on by
4

There was an interesting book published recently about the relationship between modern lifestyles and shortening attention span. I’ve been saying (and observing) for some time that over-exposure to online games and other digital technology reduces attention span and the ability to engage in reflective thought. I’ve noticed it in myself and more worryingly observed it in my kids. But can we do anything about it?

In an interview with author and researcher Maggie Jackson, Wired magazine explores the possibility that our multi-tasking lifestyles have led to an institutionalised culture of distraction that damages the ability to concentrate and think creatively. Jackson reveals that there is sound research into how brain physiology behaves in response to multiple stimuli and activity overload. Humans are evolving to the new environment, but perhaps not in a good way, she suggests.

So what happens when today’s kids, who are growing up immersed in technology from a very early age, are called upon in the future to demonstrate complex deductive thought over extended periods at exam time or in a stressful work environment? Writing, planning, conversing and being artistically creative do not deliver the same instantaneous level of gratification that scoring points in an online battle quest does, for example. Will the next generation be damaged by early over-exposure to digital technology?

In many respects, digital technology has made the world smaller and more navigable. On the other hand, rewiring our behaviour can have an isolating effect. We are constantly looking for the next hit of endorphin that comes from a new email, a fresh Tweet or another enemy to slay in our favourite virtual world. But sometimes that buzz comes at a price to our real world relationships and creative power.

The Digital Innovation Terminator

Posted on by
2

With the squashing of the R&D tax credit, the biffing of BIF and the annihilation of the Digital Development Council one could be forgiven for thinking the incoming government is auditioning for a role in the forthcoming Terminator movie. Of even more concern is a blatant lack of understanding about where the Internet is taking us, as witnessed by their trashing of the Digital Forum.

Don’t they get that distributed problem-solving by communities and networks is the way forward now? When the Minister states that the government will now consult individually with the parties concerned, what he really means is that he will open the door to the best corporate lobbyists around town. Joe public, small business and the creative sector won’t get a look see. The Digital Forum wasn’t perfect, but at least it gave voice to a wide range of users and producers of digital innovation and creative content.

The axing of the government shared network represents yet another another milestone in the government’s ideological war being waged on every last programme or initiative that had Labour’s brand on it. This leads one to the disturbing conclusion that the KAREN research network might be the next target on the chopping block. Established as a Crown entity, the network was supposed to turn a profit whilst delivering high bandwidth capability to the already under-funded research agencies and universities. But poor demand modelling and underinvestment in marketing new services left the network underutilised.

Given the already woeful levels of research, science and technology investment by government, it would be a disaster to let KAREN go. In fact the government should be fully funding its owner REANNZ as a matter of course, as part of a wider commitment to building up RS&T capability. The potential in terms of research and science outcomes from a properly wired and (socially) networked science and technology community has yet to be fully tapped.

Can Web 2.0 Save the World?

Posted on by
3

Last year Umair Haque, a Harvard University technology commentator, vented his annoyance about the fact that the new wave of Web 2.0 start-ups being funded out of Silicon Valley mostly contribute very little towards solving the world’s really big problems. I’m inclined to agree. So are New Zealand’s online ventures providing anything of real social value?

I’m not saying that simply selling stuff and making a profit is not an admirable goal in itself, because it is. Such activities generate taxes and contribute to the fabric of society in a variety of ways. But it would be great to see some more initiatives that have purely social or environmental goals, but with a sustainable business model. So I drew to Haque’s attention a New Zealand venture called Celsias.com. This is a community site that aims to “solve global warming one project at a time”. The site so far has no fewer than 126 global projects listed in which organisations or individuals commit to changing the environment for the better. Celsias also aggregates recent articles on green issues and has a discussion zone where users can initiate conversations on topics of their choosing.

Celsias looks great and makes a tangible contribution to society and probably doesn’t get the attention it fully deserves. Every workplace should have an account on their site. As Ben Milsom CEO of Nexx points out in this well considered blog article, for the most part we haven’t really progressed from simply being online consumers. After all, the sites with the most traffic in NZ are actually Web 1.0, simply replicating real life activities online such as banking and selling consumer goods. As Ferrit discovered, there is not a lot of upside left in this business model. We need more innovative online services that actually solve real problems.

Very few of the most highly trafficked websites offer true interactivity or provide an opportunity to be creative. As a nation, we are possibly not as digitally savvy as we might like to believe. However Ponoko is one site that simply shines because of the way it pools and leverages talent. Ponoko won’t save the world but it does allow its community of users an unusual creative outlet, one that has garnered global interest. It also facilitates collaboration and provides lots of advice and guidance on designing and selling. It is good to see new online business models emerging. Recently launched TribeHQ also takes a fresh approach to online knowledge sharing and, by acknowledging network effects and cluster theory, looks set to redefine white collar recruitment.

But ventures like Nexx, Celsias, Ponoko and TribeHQ can change the world, if for no other reason than that they remind us that the economic order is changing. Unfortunately there is a great deal of inertia out there. The battles with bureaucracy encountered by Nexx and other “social lending” platforms are instructive. The gatekeepers haven’t yet realised that we are in the midst of an economic, technological and social revolution. If a platform like Kiva can be allowed to facilitate micro-financing to clients in developing nations, why can’t we have a peer-to-peer lending platform in New Zealand? If we can get a project like Nexx underway perhaps it would expedite some much needed capital flowing into the technology sector too!

Got any other online ventures that have social, creative or environmental objectives? Let us know.

Will the “Jobs Summit” Deliver?

Posted on by
1

Almost everybody with half a clue accepts that another round of economic reform is required to address the challenges ahead. But the National government’s “100 days of (in)action” will soon look like an opportunity lost unless John Key can execute rapidly on some good ideas following next month’s “job summit”.

In case you hadn’t noticed, the perfect storm is gathering. Melting commodity prices, a tidal wave of leveraged debt plus cooling consumer spending has all but evaporated economic growth. The rainy day has arrived. The good news is that previous governments have been fiscally responsible by putting some of their pocket money in the piggy bank. The bad news is that they gave up on attempting to diversify the economy away from logs and animal protein, despite all the advice to do so.

Whatever happens, the prime ministerial “jobs summit” planned for next month will not be a panacea. However it is better than doing nothing, which is what the government appears to have been doing since the election in early November last year. A quick flick through government Minister’s press releases reveals that almost no new ideas or economic strategies have been announced since the election. What are they waiting for? Management theory suggests that business turnarounds succeed best when there are early wins and momentum for change is built up rapidly. Economic turnarounds are surely subject to the same laws of physics. So far the signs are not very promising

The “jobs summit” needs to be rebranded more broadly as a societal forum because it is not just about jobs or even money any more. It’s about dealing with a paradigmatic shift in how business, government and society operate within economies. If the government don’t understand this, we have a real problem. That’s why it troubles me that the forum has been proposed by a former investment banker and will be chaired by a stock exchange CEO. Aren’t these just the kind of people who got us into this mess in the first place?