A world without wires
I'm rather excited about Our Social World, on 9 September. Looks like a fair few interesting people are speaking at the conference, including Hugh Mcleod and Julian Bond of Ecademy.
I intend to blog what I can at the conference, but first I have to take the plunge and get myself wireless. Step 1) Acquire a cheap laptop. Step 2) Wrestle with WiFi. The former is in hand. The latter could, I suspect, take a fair while. Good thing I know a few techies.
A question of identity
The human race is slipping towards the intangible. Consider the evolution of commerce.
Step 1: bartering. “That’s a nice pig, want to swap for this pile of grain?” A system so fundamental that we still see children use it even almost before they even learn the concept of ‘value’.
Step 2. precious metals. Shiny things that have value derived purely from their aesthetic appeal.
Step 3: coinage and paper money. Non-precious metals pretending to be precious. In essence these are now promissory items, made valuable by a universal acceptance of remuneration.
Step 4: virtual balances and transactions. A fairly logical step – if coins merely represent value, why bother with coins at all? Hence credit cards, cheques, direct debits etc.
Step 5: e-commerce. You don’t even see the goods. In some cases there’s not even anything to see! You buy your virtual goods with virtual money at a virtual shop.
As it is with commerce, so it is in other arenas too. Telephones, instant messaging, SMS etc are all taking us away from the tradition of face-to-face interaction. Today’s youth in particular have little problem slipping in and out of many personas, both online and offline. What’s notable, however, is that as we move in and out of these virtual personas, identity is still as important as ever. In the real world we establish this by the way we dress, the things we say, friends with whom we associate. In the virtual world we adopt other approaches.
Since this identity is still so important, it’s understandable that business wants to be part of it too. It’s the essence of segmentation and the Holy Grail for marketers - after all, almost all lifestyle preferences just distil down to different product choices (Armani, not Top Man... National Trust, not Club 18-30).
An excellent article on the excellent OK/Cancel webcomic/blog/whatever discusses the two flavours of metadata that businesses want to squeeze out of consumers:
Identifying data: post code, age, income – the facts and figures.
Identity data: tastes, interests, values – the things that make us the person we are.
It's this second point that holds all the juicy stuff – our motivations, our needs, what makes us tick – and we think we keep it a big secret. I’m afraid to say we’re lying to ourselves.
I look at my Friendster profile and see a full rundown of my favourite music, a description of my interests, lots of information the marketers would love. I look at my Final Fantasy XI character and consider how much time I’ve invested in her – buying the best equipment, adding witty search comments, earning a reputation as someone who’s helpful and polite.
Why do I do this? Because these are amongst my virtual identities and I want to put my personal stamp on them. If anything, I do this even more so virtually than offline. In a commercial environment, I still feel like a customer reference number rather than a person with an identity. In Final Fantasy and Friendster I am a person, however virtual – and, you know what? I want everyone to know! I expect the first company to afford me a genuine identity will command my loyalty for a long, long time.
Yes, we’ve become abstract beings, but look closely – you’ll see that this only makes us reinforce our identity more vigorously!
Sidenote:
This overlaps with another interesting point: attitudes to real-life law and authority in a virtual world. Downloading music from P2P networks is of course the classic example. It seems to me that most of the research into this is biased towards one camp or the other, but it is widely accepted that illegal P2P downloads substantially outstrip ‘legitimate’ sales.
By evaporating into our virtual selves, do we feel that ‘physical’ laws no longer apply? Maybe so. Maybe these laws are simply not appropriate or are very out-dated. Yesterday’s MGM v Grokster ruling has reinforced that ‘real-world’ law is very much in force, but the size of the backlash has been remarkable. Maybe it just goes to show that individuals are in the driving seat of this new virtual world and resent the strong-arm tactics of big business, struggling to apply real-world tactics and business models to a very different environment.
Party like it’s 1994
CNN must be having a very slow news day. I quote*:
The Internet transforms modern life!
In 1994, people had to call the bank to check their balances. Or inquire in person, or wait for a paper statement to arrive in the mail. Baseball box scores were found in the newspaper. Weather forecasts came over the phone from the weather bureau, or on TV. Back then, most Americans still had to lick a stamp to send mail.
Then along came the Internet, and an experimental browser called Mosaic, followed by an improved browser from Netscape. And if you had a computer, you discovered a new way to this cool, new thing called the World Wide Web.
The Internet? Is that thing still around**?
*I hereby claim 'fair use' of the above copyrighted material and do not of course condone any technology or system that could theoretically be used to disseminate copyrighted material, including but not limited to: P2P networks, the World Wide Web, VCRs, iPods, telephones, paper, semaphore, speech.
**(c)"kevin", user comment on boingboing.net. I hereby claim 'fair use' of the above copyrighted material and do not of course condone any technology or system that could theoretically be used to disseminate copyrighted material, including but not limited to: P2P networks, the World Wide Web, VCRs, iPods, telephones, paper, semaphore, speech. (That should get the RIAA off my back for now).
White-knuckle infotainment
So, you got bored of five channels? Repeats of Ground Force getting too much? I see you went and got cable... very nice. Have you watched CNN yet? Or, for all you sports fans, how about Gillette Soccer Saturday on Sky Sports? If so, you’ll know the format. Scrolling tickers (usually informing me that Cardiff City have conceded another goal), newsflashes, current highlights and tables, with a minimum of 2 anchormen flashing in and out of the main window. You want information? Hey, you got it!
[CB 2018: image lost to the mists of time, but you can guess…]
Well, guess what? A recent study shows that this doesn’t work. Apparently all the scrolling text and flashing updates distract the viewer from the real message, meaning their information retention actually drops 10%.
Hardly shocking, but this has been known in the web community since at least 1996 - and yet TV networks still try to ignore it. Why? I blame the well-known melding of broadcast information and entertainment. The web is about giving users information and letting them get on with it. Television is about keeping them watching, particularly up to the ad break.
Networks believe that the way to increase the viewing figures is to make information available in a fast-paced, exciting rollercoaster format. Comprehension and retention are now secondary to the white-knuckle thrill of heady information deluge. In short, it doesn’t really matter what you understand, so long as you have a damn good time trying!
I, for one, miss the days of the stuttering vidiprinter and Ceefax, and this is why I’ll do my best to shun the pseudo-information quagmire that TV broadcasting is slipping into
Decision-making, transparency, and culture
So, the worst-kept secret in politics is out: we’re going to the polls on 5 May.
Democracy, of course, isn’t about government by the people, it’s a chance for the public to decide who will govern on their behalf. (Actually, it reminds me of the Management By Exception concept from Prince2 – a Project Manager is given authority to manage within certain limits. If those limits are likely to be exceeded, the Project Board can intervene). As a result, democratic countries demand a high level of transparency in their electoral processes. We only need to look at recent events in Ukraine to see what happens when a democratic electorate believes that it is not being told the full story.
This isn’t the only election taking place though: within the next two weeks a new Pope will be elected. This election, however, happens in a very different way; a process shrouded in secrecy, dogma and habit. So, for the spiritual leader, an opaque election participated in only by an elite inner circle; for the political leader, a transparent poll involving every adult in the nation. So why do people accept such a huge difference between these election methods?
I can only see one reason, that being the level of trust placed in those leaders. Politicians are derided at every turn (often justly!) and every move is regarded with scepticism, but religious leaders command a powerful trust from all who follow them.
The lesson: keep your decision making utterly transparent unless you are able to inspire blind faith in your employees!
Physical space and sharing
My eye was caught by an interesting course CILIP are running, entitled “Innovative use of physical space for effective knowledge management”.
The old adage crops up again and again in KM: “The smokers are the best-informed people in the office”, which my information audit work thus far has confirmed. I wouldn’t recommend buying a pack of Benson & Hedges and claiming the costs as legitimate KM expenses, but it’s worthwhile looking at how the work environment affects how people interact and use their knowledge.
Our natural day-to-day habitats have a broad mix of physical environments. There are spaces for quiet solo contemplation. Spaces for group entertainment. Spaces for learning. Spaces for socialising.
Natural habitats have both spaces for full interaction and ‘dens’. However, we spend over a third of our waking lives in working environments that we generally have very little influence over. What is particularly notable is the homogeneity of these spaces – offices, building sites, schools etc are largely similar to one another, and tend not to offer much by way of ‘natural’ variety.
As a result, the working environment has to suffice for all the various tasks we are asked to perform; and the results aren’t always successful. Trying to interpret complex statistics is very difficult while your colleagues are chatting about last night’s episode of 24 – and, on the flipside, if you need to bounce an idea off a colleague who’s up on the third floor at the far end of a tortuous cubicle maze, you’d be forgiven for resorting to an email.
I can think of some obvious steps can that can be taken to overcome these barriers, but I’d be interested to hear of more sophisticated options:
Remove cubicle dividers
Encourage staff to sit in unfamiliar desks from time to time (something I'm trying to do myself)
Hold meetings outside the office, particularly when creativity is essential
Create a 'learning space' stocked with periodicals, interesting articles, comfortable chairs, artwork, even music - whatever's required to break the norm
Stop using the phone or email to contact someone who's in the building!
Provide a 'quiet room' where staff can lock themselves away when their work demands silent concentration.
I shan’t be attending the course unfortunately – space is already at a premium in our office and we’re not in the position to make any major changes. However, it’s an interesting topic with a number of extensions. I’m particularly interested in how the design of space will apply to the virtual world (particularly intranets etc) so I dare say I’ll have some more to say on the topic once I’ve found the time and space for some quiet contemplation.
Storytelling
Storytelling
FREDDY (referring to the papers)
But what is this?
HOLDAWAY
It's an amusing anecdote about a drug deal… The things you gotta remember are the details. It's the details that sell your story. Now this story takes place in this men's room. So you gotta know the details about this men's room. You gotta know they got a blower instead of a towel to dry your hands. You gotta know the stalls ain't got no doors. You gotta know whether they got liquid or powdered soap, whether they got hot water or not, 'cause if you do your job when you tell your story, everybody should believe it. And if you tell your story to somebody who's actually taken a piss in this men's room, and you get one detail they remember right, they'll swear by you.- the “commode story”, Reservoir Dogs
Storytelling has of course existed since language began, but only now is it being used as a deliberate tool for sharing knowledge in business. Business communications are, as we know, often dry, shrouded in impenetrable language (more on this in a future post), and generally devoid of human interest. Stories offer a different perspective to this didactic and mechanical communication.
A typical story (termed a springboard story by Steve Denning) is told from the point of view of an individual who is faced with a challenge analogous to that faced by the business. The method in which the protagonist overcomes this unusual challenge helps listeners to see what is involved in a large-scale transformation.
Stories aren’t particularly good for relaying complex information. Their true strength comes from their role of ‘catalysts for understanding’; dialogues rather than lectures, concerned with building relationships rather than instructing. It’s a good idea to practice these stories and refine them over time, building confidence and learning to adapt them slightly to your audience. Remember that stories rarely get interrupted!
Criticisms of storytelling
The anti-story is a powerful and destructive rumour or denial that contradicts your story – it only needs one person to say “I was there, and that’s not how it happened” to undermine all your efforts. One need only think of the thousands of urban myths circulating the internet to realise that the anti-story is very much a self-sustaining thing.
There is also a risk of being seen to be telling a fairytale - the so-called “Janet and John” story where everyone magnificently conforms to the corporate values and, surprise surprise, success results. Listeners will rightly react against this and create their own barriers and anti-stories of their own.
Personally, I’ll admit I’m still slightly sceptical of storytelling. Perhaps I’m hung up on the term itself, which is a little unscientific and unprofessional for my liking. I certainly prefer the term ‘narrative’ which also happily moves us away from the amateurish “I can do that” approach that sometimes pervades through certain KM areas. However, I do think there is some definite value in the concepts behind storytelling. Lecturing and top-down instruction often paints too black-and-white a picture, ignoring the important human frame of reference. Even a scientist cannot describe everything in structured terms: light, for instance, can be described as both an electromagnetic wave and a stream of particles. For these situations where the facts alone don’t get the whole message across, storytelling may well be able to bridge the human interest gap.
More about storytelling
RSS: the basics
Ok, enough head-in-the-clouds talk for now, let’s have some more specifics. Call it a temporary New Year’s Resolution.
In my next few posts, I’ll be giving a simple guide to some new technologies and ideas to hit the KM field recently. They won’t be news to some, but I hope they’ll be of interest to others.
What is RSS?
Stands for Really Simple Syndication or Rich Site Summary - it depends who you ask. Think of it as a distributable "What's New" for your site. You may have seen the orange XML button on various sites – this is the language that RSS is written in. (Why doesn’t it just say RSS? Don’t ask me…) Clicking on it will display an RSS feed.
Today’s web browsers don’t really understand RSS feeds yet so it will look pretty unintelligible - but by using an aggregator, you’ll be able to see all the new content on all of your subscribed RSS feeds. No need now to trawl round 50 sites to see what, if anything, has changed.
Obviously this is ideal for news sites and weblogs, which operate very much on the basis of individual articles. However, pretty much anything that can be broken down into discrete items can be syndicated via RSS: the "recent changes" page of a corporate website, revision histories of a book, latest releases on iTunes, even web comics.
How to start
Download or sign up to a news aggregator. They are almost all free.
Find some RSS feeds - some starters are given below. See if your favourite websites have the orange XML button, or a link saying ‘RSS version’ or ‘Syndicate this site’. You’ll know when you’ve found it because the page will display a lot of computer code, and the address in the browser will end in .xml.
Copy this address.
Paste it into your news aggregator and save your changes.
Hey presto! Whenever you sign in to your aggregator in future, it will tell you when this site has been updated and with what content.
RSS v Email newsletters
Of course we're always looking for the Next Big Thing and there seems to be a temptation to write off previous solutions as old hat. In this instance, the technorati are falling over themselves to denounce email newsletters and hail RSS as the new king of e-busness.
One can see why, to an extent. Email newsletters give the power to the company. Sign up for one and you are at the mercy of the editor: the content and the publication frequency are beyond your control. Email is seen as a very personal medium and many of us are beginning to regret losing control of our inboxes.
In contrast, RSS gives the power back to the user. If they want to find out about new products in your ‘Epsilon’ line, they can sign up to the RSS feed you’ve set up for that product. This will be automatically updated whenever you update your site and hence interested customers will automatically informed. You don’t need to send out a duplicate newsletter, or hope that interested parties will just stumble across your page. Nice eh?
I think it’s no exaggeration to say that RSS is the future, but it's far too early to write off email newsletters. The best ones are going from strength to strength and RSS still has a number of problems that are preventing it from reaching the mainstream.
Problems with RSS
RSS allows users to view content without advertising. Yes, you heard me right – this is a problem. Remember that the web is primarily funded by advertisers. 69% of users now use some kind of pop-up blocker – combine this with RSS’s content-only delivery and you have to wonder just how much longer advertisers will continue to hang around, and what the consequences will be for the web.
It’s also still rather technical and non-standard, meaning only a few users will have the IT literacy or the inclination to explore the possibilities. Usability will, of course, improve – after all, the web was very much like this in its infancy. For instance, the excellent new Firefox browser has a user-friendly RSS syndication feature built in as standard.
Related articles
- RSS described in plain English
- RSS tutorial for content publishers and webmasters
- Why RSS is not ready for prime time
News aggregators
- Newsgator
- Amphetadesk
- Bloglines
Some RSS feeds
- BBC
- Dilbert
- Boing Boing
- This page
- iTunes RSS feed generator
Also of interest
Customers taking control
"Call centres give poor service", says the BBC. Hardly a surprise. Could it be that people are realising that customers don't appreciate the increasing distance between them and the people with the knowledge? Are we learning yet that a headset, £5.50/hr and a CMS doesn't replace real expertise?
Customers want honesty and openness. With honesty and openness comes trust, probably the key determinant in any B2C relationship, particularly over the web (see the excellent Stanford Guidelines for Web Credibility for more).
So let's give them what they want!
I think it's time to loosen the reins a bit. Yes, give out your direct line number! Yes, let your staff blog about your products and services! Sure, maintaining the brand is important, but think of the brand value in letting the experts in your company talk directly to the world!
The first hurdle for many will probably be reworking the communications modus operandi. The 'rules of engagement' can be tricky for corporate bloggers and management alike. Most businesses use a communcations channel so tightly controlled that it could almost be called censorship. Opening this up is a brave step and will understandably unnerve some marketers and senior managers.
It's all about finding the right balance of control and supervision. Hold on too tight and you end up with an environment where employees feel patronised and scared to post lest they incur the wrath of management. Too little control, and you slip into the quagmire of unprofessionalism, gossip and even libel.
I think Sun's blogging policy has it about right. It doesn't insult the intelligence of employees, but it still establishes what can and can't be done in clear terms.
Let's hope businesses see past short-term jitters and begin opening up to these increasingly disenfranchised customers. Is talking to them really such a risk?
Two Google tips
One of the things I like most about KM and IA is the variety. Some days require you to put your head in the clouds and considery strategy, policy and other abstract concepts. Other days, you'll need to nosedive back through those clouds and get stuck in with some practical, 'here-and-now' solutions.
I'm currently putting the finishing touches to a workshop titled 'Practical Internet Searching'. As the name implies, I'm taking a pragmatic approach. Google seems to be a bit of a dirty word in the info management field these days (this could uncharitably be interpreted as motivated by either hubris or fear) but, although we can and should educate users about the vast array of tools at their disposal, most simply want to use their favourite tool more effectively.
I’m afraid I’m not able to publish the full course contents, but I’d like to share two nice features for your arsenal. Give them a whirl and let me know if you find them useful.
Numrange:
Example:
Best Picture Oscar 1950..1960
This searches for any number within the designated range. Particularly useful for dates, model numbers, or even prices.
The ~ (tilde) operator:
Example:
US ~foreign ~policy
This seems to be Google’s first step towards integrating synonym searching and maybe even taxonomy. I’ve no idea how the authority list is constructed or maintained, but my first impressions are that it successfully blends Google’s strong usability with a dash of the more sophisticated techniques that ‘our kind’ have long been wishing for.
An overlooked dimension?
I've always had a sneaking concern that sound has been a much overlooked topic in interaction design, so I was delighted to find Max Lord's excellent article Why Is That Thing Beeping? A Sound Design Primeron Boxes and Arrows.
In my experience, sounds either really help or really hinder a user experience; there doesn't seem to be much middle ground. Some examples of the former:
Sounds that tie in closely with product branding. Could you draw me Intel's logo? No? Could you hum me their jingle?
Catchy sounds used in entertainment (think Family Fortunes' famous 'eh-uh' wrong answer sound, or Countdown's time out jingle)
Extremely simple reinforcement sounds for important transactions (pedestrian crossings, ATM beeps).
But when sounds fail, they serve only to annoy:
The Windows startup chime
Websites that launch into unexpected and unwelcome music (the one guaranteed way to ensure your user leaves in under 5 seconds)
Most polyphonic ringtones.
The term 'information overload' usually refers primarily to the visual and cognitive burden information poses, but I suspect we run the risk of sonic information overload too without careful controls. I'll admit use my iPod as a way to wrest back control of one of my senses - perhaps a mild rebellion against the busy urban environment in which I live. I suppose it's the aural equivalent of pretending to read a newspaper on the Tube to avoid awkward eye contact.
I do find myself wondering just what future there is for sound design in interaction design, however. There's no doubt it's come a long way. Think back to the advent of the CD-Rom - every 'multimedia' project demanded a piano soundtrack, even if there was absolutely no benefit to the user experience (I have slightly bitter memories of being marked down heavily for omitting this in a University assignment). Luckily, this sort of use of sound now seems as dated as the 'information superhighway'.
The problem I have is that sound is still a medium that interrupts more than just the intended recipient. In a solo environment this isn't an issue, but in a quiet office it can be highly disruptive and embarrassing. I'm sure we've all wanted to throw ringing mobiles out of the window at times. Maybe the answer lies with use of other senses? I'm finding myself increasingly interested by the concept of haptic (touch-related) methods of interaction and response, which provide a similar alert without the need to disturb others. I'll freely admit it's not a field I know much about, so I'll endeavour to report back once I've explored it a little.
Watch this space... or should that be listen out for more?
Information auditing
The latest issue of Freepint has a nice little article on information auditing. I'm very much of the opinion that KM needs a firm IM foundation (a future post will take on the challenge of defining the clear waters between the two) so it makes sense to start with a systematic analysis of organisational information.
In very simplified form, an information audit looks at:
A) How the organisation uses information
B) How it should use information
C) How to bring A) closer to B)
One of the leading exponents of the information audit is Elizabeth Orna, who has just released an updated version of her excellent Practical Information Policies (ISBN 0566076934). I was fortunate to attend an Aslib course by Elizabeth a few months back. She's an intelligent speaker with a precise style greatly in contrast to some of the ponderous KM prose we're often exposed to.
The thing that strikes me as both the greatest strength and the greatest challenge of an information audit is the lack of standardised approach. For the first-time auditor (and, indeed, the second, where I currently find myself), this creates the unique challenge of "Where the hell do I start?"
What I've learned is that you should start in a way that suits your organisation and your own style of analysis. I initially became frustrated at the absence of a 'set in stone' approach, but I've learned to have faith in my skill as an information professional and trust that I will find a suitable approach. So far, so good. I'll let you know how it goes with my current audit.
Online learning at its most effective?
Recently, I've been enjoying playing the MMORPG (Massively Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Game) Final Fantasy XI. The premise is simple - progress through the story by defeating increasingly tough monsters and boosting your character's strength.
What has struck me today is that it provides a fascinating parallel KM universe. Bear with me...
After an initial period of alignment to learn rules and achieve basic competency, it soon becomes apparent that collaboration is preferable to going it alone. Thus, by level 10, most players abandon the solo approach and begin to form parties with others.
These parties have their own microcosmic team dynamics: leadership, concensus, teamworking. Agreed roles and responsibilities are essential: a White Mage heals other characters, a Warrior deals damage, etc. Parties must, of course, contain a good cross-section of skills and abilities - for instance a party of 6 Warriors simply won't work. There are some obvious parallels here with teamwork in the business environment and the benefits of, say, Belbin profiling.
The most notable product of this team work is a remarkable culture of altruism that persists throughout FFXI. The developers have intelligently avoided spoon-feeding players, meaning that interaction with others is vital to proceed in the game. Even our old friend the Community of Practice is represented via linkshells, virtual groups of like-minded friends. As with CoPs, the best provide a platform for social networking, healthy debate and learning for the good of all.
Players often give up valuable time to help others, either through the official mentoring scheme, helping newer adventurers to fight ("power-levelling"), or simply answering questions asked by those at the end of their tethers.
Why do they invest this time? (See also the old KM chestnut: "What's in it for me?") I'm convinced that the lack of competition between players is a major factor. Players cannot attack each other or hinder others' progress in any meaningful way*. In this utopian world, knowledge is not a means of preserving an advantage over others - it is, instead, a way to further the pursuit of goals.
Perhaps I'm wrong and FFXI is just an escapist world where politics, war and rivalry mean little. Perhaps it's just a place for people to go to act in ways they would never in real life. Still, it's worth considering how we can reduce the competitive element of knowledge sharing and attempt to foster the 'what's mine is yours' approach in the real world.
*As an aside, other MMORPGs that have allowed competition have, perhaps unsurprisingly, spawned online homicide, cons and muggings. Sometimes thefts have even deprived players of items that have value in the real world.
A self-indulgent treatise on semiotics and why "You Are Driving A Volvo" isn't shit
Primary reason for the lack of updates is that I was in London all last week on a course (OLAP cube analysis if you must know). As always on these occasions, I popped over to Tate Modern for an hour or so. It's become like visiting an old friend. Two new items of note: Eliasson's The Weather Project installation and Julian Opie's You Are Driving A Volvo. An unknown to me, but it transpires he's responsible for Blur's pop art-esque Best Of.. cover. Always quite liked that and some of his other works are pretty good too.
Cue a discussion on one of my messageboards - the old "Is this art?" debate. Me? I think that if you have to ask, it's definitely art. But how can I justify that for what is, after all, just a block of wood shaped and painted like a car?
On consideration, I think it appeals to me thanks to my interest in semiotics. Some definitions:
"The study of doctrine of signs, sometimes supposed to be a science of signs; the systematic investigation of the nature, properties, and kinds of sign, especially when undertaken in a self-conscious way."
"The theory of symbols and signs which explores how people glean meaning from words, sounds, and pictures. Sometimes used in researching names for various products and services. "
Clearly it's the symbol of a car that conjures up everything that we know about cars ("They go fast", "They use petrol", "I was sick in the back of a Toyota Corolla" etc). The inferred relationships are far more interesting than the car itself. Semiotics is one of those fascinating fields that seems to blend cognitive psychology, design and philosophy in one. I always appreciate ways of elevating the day-to-day mundanity of 'things' to a higher, more general level. I don't agree with Plato's theory of Forms (as I understand it, that each object we encounter is a flawed copy of a divine blueprint which only the enlightened can see) but I must admit I admire where he's coming from and the sheer audacity of his thoughts.
This all brings me round to the real issue: why I actually quite like my job. Semiotics is certainly a big feature of information architecture, along with a whole host of other fields (programming, graphic design, Human-Computer Interaction, research, psychology, information management) that run the gamut from the highly technical to the hand-wavingly vague. I can't think of many other jobs that have that sort of variety.
MSN’s mercy killing
Obviously you've already heard about MSN's decision to close its chatrooms. What a stupid and yet brilliant idea.
I don't even need to bother attacking the ridiculous logic behind the claim it will protect children. It won't. But I am utterly in awe of the business thinking behind it. In short, they not only get to drop a loss-making service that had no hope of ever generating revenue, but they also do this while maintaining a fantastic PR front. The Internet market has shifted substantially over the last five years: families are the target now - the techies have been connected for years. Now MSN have seized this market in a way other ISPs will struggle to catch up with.
Game, set and match. It's also got another interesting side in that it's the first example of a truly major Internet service moving to a fee-paying structure. This has been happening for small applications for years, but this takes it to a whole new level. The gift economy of the Internet is, sadly, dying. MSN have decided to make it a mercy killing.