Category Archives: Uncategorized

i got walloped with the cluestick the other day by npr’s story on the ‘boy band’ 2gether:

“Another boy band? Hardly. 2gether is sort of a Spinal Tap for the turn of the century. The group was “created” as a parody of such boy bands as N’Sync. A mockumentary called, 2gether, aired on MTV earlier this year and a strange thing happened. The parody band generated 300 fan Webster; the soundtrack hit the charts; and Britney Spears asked the parodists to open for her last tour. It gets weirder. The musicians have started to take themselves seriously.”

why the cluestick? first, because i had no idea that this thing was going on. absofreakinlutely no idea. this can mean only one thing. i’m old. i’m the man. i don’t have kids, but i’m sure my dogs are thinking, “jeez, this guy is out of it.”

secondly, this whole story plays perfectly into the hands of douglas rushkoff’s characterization of the range of response to the act of coercive marketing in his book, coercion:

“Currently there are three levels of response to coercion, which can exist simultaneously in our culture. Some of us are readily fooled by the simplest of manipulative techniques. These people, who I call “Traditionalists,” are the sort of folks who are emotionally moved by politicians’ speeches, dedicated to their local sports teams, and ready to believe that government agencies would prevent us from being duped by misleading advertisements.

The next group – who marketers like to call “sophisticated” audiences – feels they understand how the media hope to manipulate them. These “Cool Kids” respond to coercive techniques that acknowledge their ironic detachment. Their television remote controls and video game controllers have changed their relationship to the television tube. They like to deconstruct every image that is piped into their homes. But they fall for the wink wink, nudge nudge plea of the modern advertiser or salesperson who appeals to their media-savvy wit. As long as the coercer admits with a sideways glance that he’s coercing, the Cool Kid is likely to take the bait. He is being rewarded for his ironic attitude.

The last group has graduated from the culture of cool and is just plain fed up with everything that has a trace of manipulation. The “New Simpletons” want straightforward, no-nonsense explanations for what they’re supposed to buy or do.”

if you want a perfect illustration of a prepubescent sophisticated audience, listen to the story.

ever wondered about service oriented architectures? well, ibm has the article for you [although they lose points for throwing around numbers sandwiched by two letters]:

“The concept of Web services is the beginning of a new service-oriented architecture in building better software applications. The change from an object-oriented system to a service-oriented one is an evolutionary idea that sublimated from the global Internet and Web system. To understand how to build Web Services into your computing architecture, you need to carefully understand the role they play. This article details the software engineering concepts behind the Web Services architecture, how it has evolved, how it is structured, and how it can be brought into your existing computing infrastructure”

there’s even a nod to the importance of semantics interface and services compatibility:

“The semantics of services — what they do and what data elements they manipulate mean — is the key issue. Business value results from B2B collaborations that do the right thing. If they do something else, the damage may be dramatic. How, then, do we trust that a service does the right thing before it is used? And how do we make that determination at Internet speeds?

In small-scale OO systems, interface compatibility usually implies semantic compatibility. That is, an object that implements the right set of messages with the right types of arguments probably does “the right thing.” This is true, in part, because small-scale systems tend to be built by a small team of programmers with shared understanding of how the system operates and, in part, because small systems offer little opportunity for ambiguity. However, in large-scale OO systems, the semantics provided by a given class cannot be reliably deduced from the message interface alone. Clearly, in an Internet populated with many thousands of services offered by thousands of different companies with very different agendas, compliance with some specified message set will not be sufficient to deduce the semantics of the service.”

semantics? edd dumbill has another great piece that articulates one perspective.

it’s pretty simple, and the economist hits the nail on the head:

“For many of Napster’s users, the main benefits of its file-swapping
service are that it provides music conveniently and for free. Some
people will be prepared to pay for the convenience and for good
quality downloads, provided the price is right. That means the
main challenge facing Bertelsmann and Napster is to produce a
paid-for service which people would rather use than free sites
which could copy Napster. Some of these other file-swapping
services will be harder to police. Services such as Gnutella and
FreeNet allow the swapping of music files between personal
computers but without the use of a central service, like Napster’s.
This makes it much more difficult for courts and regulators to act
against them. By teaming up with Napster, Bertelsmann has
accepted the inevitable: Internet distribution of music is here to
stay and likely to grow enormously. But the deal does not mark the
end of the music industry’s piracy problem. Music companies now
have to show they have more to offer customers than free
web-based services.”

even the new york times likes the deal.

i’m all for the “legitimization” of napster:

“For a moment there, as Napster’s usage went through the roof while the music industry spread insane propaganda about the impending collapse of all professional music making, one could imagine that the collective will of thirty million people looking for free Britney Spears songs constituted some sort of
grass-roots uprising against The Man. As the BMG deal reverberates through the industry, though, it will become apparent that those Napster users were really just agitating for better prices. In unleashing these economic effects, Napster has almost single-handedly dragged the music industry into the Internet age. Now the industry is repaying the favor by dragging Napster into the mainstream of the music business.”

but i’m betting that they had better be careful how they price the subscription scheme, since apparently napster users haven’t been “agitating for better prices” – they’ve tasted the fruit called free and decided they like it:

“PC Data’s latest survey of the buying habits of some 120,000 US home-based Net surfers shows that Napster users soon cut the number of albums they buy, once they get proficient at downloading songs from the MP3 sharing service.

The company measures sales through online stores. It found that “new Napster users are just as likely to purchase music at cdnow.com after initially downloading Napster software. However, 90 days after downloading Napster software, consumers’ online music purchases plummet”.”

looks like pcdata is talking to the same kids as npr

crap. isn’t this one of the signs of the apocalypse?

“The news couldn’t be more shocking if the Catholic church suddenly announced it was embracing contraception: Apple is moving to a two-button mouse.

Sharp-eyed beta testers of Apple’s new operating system, Mac OS X, have noticed that the pre-release software supports mice featuring more than one button.”

i’m betting that tommorrow i walk outside only to run into four pasty-looking guys on horses.

coincidence – or not. mere days after proclamations of the “new semantic music web” we find that a record label signs deal with napster:

“The two companies are developing a new subscription service to let Net users swap songs copyrighted by the recording giant. Members of the proposed service would be able to search and download songs–legally–from Bertelsmann’s entire catalog of artists, including Santana, the Dave Matthews Band, Christina Aguilera and Whitney Houston.

Bertelsmann said it will drop its lawsuit against San Mateo, Calif.-based Napster once the service successfully launches. For now, the company will offer a loan to Napster to create the subscription service.”

great. it seems as if someone has found yet another way to track the unsuspecting online:

“[It] involves sending and receiving homing bits to a user’s PC from multiple locations and then studying them to “triangulate” its geographic location. Quova, based in Redwood City, Calif., is a leader in this approach. It has scattered computers in about 20 cities around the world that are now constantly bouncing bits off of Internet addresses. The computers study both the route those signals take–which servers and where–and how long it takes them to reach their destination. Quova says it can provide a Web surfer’s city in one-fiftieth of a second with 90% accuracy.”

anonymous proxy services are looking more attractive everyday.