tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-46890045837524862002024-03-05T10:09:27.249-08:00WorksheetWhat I do day to dayBud Gibsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10890564471631569204noreply@blogger.comBlogger61125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4689004583752486200.post-72982271810747754482014-05-19T18:05:00.001-07:002014-05-19T18:05:29.288-07:00Testing a tag manager tagI'm writing this post to see if <a class="g-profile" href="https://plus.google.com/104725678129478369928" target="_blank">+Justin Cutroni</a>'s <a href="http://cutroni.com/blog/2013/10/07/auto-event-tracking-with-google-tag-manager/" target="_blank">article</a> really works. It should record a click event every time someone clicks on his google+ page or his article.Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14054501145562192554noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4689004583752486200.post-2637377167033088612014-04-11T11:15:00.000-07:002014-04-11T11:15:15.647-07:00Should you pay for a MOOC-based certification in R?My simple response is no. Instead, you should use the portfolio you create as part of your learning to aggressively market yourself to people who care about the kinds of things you can do for them. That's where you will get the payoff, and it's the only proof that really matters.<br />
<br />
This said, I have occasionally paid for certifications. Why don't MOOCs teaching R, even very good ones, pass the test?<br />
<br />
<ul>
<li><b>Paying does not entitle you to premium support or any support really</b>. At most, it seems you pay just to guarantee that it's really you taking the course although, to be fair, this verification may itself have some incidental value. For instance one study group of students taking Coursera's <a href="https://www.coursera.org/specialization/jhudatascience/1" target="_blank">Data Science Specialization</a> use whether you are a paying, identity-verified course participant, as one criterion for joining them. If that's important to you, then paying might be worth it.</li>
<li><b>Employers don't really value certification unless the field is well understood and the certification tests can be used to differentiate ability in the market place</b>. Learning R is of some value, but it's really being able to structure problems and derive useful answers that is the real value. MOOCs don't teach that, and MOOC certifications don't demonstrate you can do that.</li>
<li><b>The quality of MOOCs is uneven</b>. For instance, even the excellent MITx MOOC I'm currently auditing, <a href="https://www.edx.org/course/mitx/mitx-15-071x-analytics-edge-1416" target="_blank">The Analytics Edge</a>, has some glaring mistakes in one of the problem sets. If you've taken enough courses on quantitative analysis, you know that mistakes are bound to happen. The problem is that you have no real recourse other than complaining on the forums. Why pay for that?</li>
</ul>
<div>
So, in short, I say don't pay because it doesn't get me anything. When might I pay? If I could pay $300 or $400 and get real support, I'd consider it for certain topics. I might (and have) paid several thousand dollars for learning experiences that then give me access to verifiable earning opportunities. I've also paid up to $1000 for subscriptions to services that provide real analytic value.</div>
<br />
<br />
<br />Bud Gibsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10890564471631569204noreply@blogger.com81tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4689004583752486200.post-29639170090971764632014-04-09T06:13:00.001-07:002014-04-09T06:13:59.532-07:00Pursuing Data Science in the Cloud (is it really just about R?)I'm currently enrolled in two MOOCs for learning data science. They are:<br />
<ul>
<li><a href="https://www.edx.org/course/mitx/mitx-15-071x-analytics-edge-1416" target="_blank">The Analytics Edge</a>, from MITx (hosted on edX).</li>
<li><a href="https://www.coursera.org/specialization/jhudatascience/1" target="_blank">The Data Science Specialization</a>, from Johns Hopkins (hosted on coursera).</li>
</ul>
<div>
Let me reveal my biases. First, I vastly prefer The Analytics Edge, the MITx offering, but I don't dislike the Johns Hopkins Data Science Specialization. The Analytics Edge is very intellectually engaging while the Johns Hopkins specialization focuses on building your professional portfolio so that you can advance your career. In particular, the Johns Hopkins specialization injects an element of social networking through <a href="http://git-scm.com/" target="_blank">git</a> and <a href="https://github.com/" target="_blank">git hub</a> that is just totally lacking in The Analytics Edge.<br />
<br />
You need both, so I'm taking both.</div>
<div>
<br />
Second, both offerings essentially use the statistical programming language <a href="http://www.r-project.org/" target="_blank">R</a> as their centerpiece. I have used this language extensively in the past. In the few years since I last took it up, the associated tools have taken a nice leap. In particular, there is now <a href="https://www.rstudio.com/" target="_blank">RStudio</a>, a much friendlier editing and interactive debugging environment as well as the two courses I mentioned. You can now see a real practice-based community developing around the language, smoothing the rough edges it was born with as an academic brain child.<br />
<br />
Now for the kicker, data science cannot just be about programming or understanding analytical paradigms for solving problems. I'm taking these two courses to determine the current zeitgeist. But, I think the real value in data science comes from understanding the problem to be addressed in its natural context and going from there. In other words, the critical element is in initially figuring out the problem. That critical step is absent from both courses. I think there is an opportunity there.</div>
Bud Gibsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10890564471631569204noreply@blogger.com13tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4689004583752486200.post-68433014692326155402013-05-15T15:56:00.000-07:002013-05-15T15:56:19.329-07:00Big changes to Google+, Have they broken Google+ blog commentingAt 6:55 PM, May 15, 2013, Google+ blog commenting seems broken.Bud Gibsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10890564471631569204noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4689004583752486200.post-49651771626687803732013-03-17T18:04:00.001-07:002013-03-17T18:04:14.250-07:00Feedly<a href="http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2013/03/a-second-spring-of-cleaning.html">The announced July 1st shutdown of Google Reader</a> this past Wednesday sent me into a bit of a tizzy. Google Reader is a very convenient way to track web site updates. I've been using RSS, the underlying technology for Google Reader, since it was introduced in the late 1990s.<br />
<br />
RSS originally stood for Really Simple Syndication. The idea behind RSS is to make a web site's content available for aggregation by any program capable of reading RSS. Obviously, sites may not want to syndicated full articles but only article extracts or headlines. You find all three.<br />
<br />
RSS is an incredibly efficient way of tracking the content of multiple web sites, and Google had really invested a lot over the years improving its infrastructure to make its own tracking of RSS as efficient as possible. Google Reader was a nice side-effect of that effort.<br />
<br />
But, the truth of the matter is that Reader's interface had become neglected over the past couple of years. Google had even resorted to ripping features out of Reader in favor of Google Plus, their flagship social network.<br />
<br />
Google Plus doesn't really hack it for tracking website updates.<br />
<br />
So, the past couple of days I've been evaluating non-Google alternatives to Reader. The one I like so far is <a href="http://www.feedly.com/home">Feedly</a>. It uses Google's feed infrastructure, something that will have to change before Google shuts it down.<br />
<br />
Here's a list of the feedly positives:<br />
<br />
<ul>
<li>Very fast loading.</li>
<li>A compact, attractive display of headlines. It just hammers every other alternative with this feature alone.</li>
<li>Great iOS apps that really facilitate skimming headlines and quickly accessing content. It's a joy to use on iOS.</li>
<li>Well implemented sharing in the web interface, with a bit of an exception for Google Plus.</li>
</ul>
<div>
Here are some areas where feedly needs work:</div>
<div>
<ul>
<li>Sharing to Google Plus from iOS. Feedly defaults to the web interface. To be fair, <a href="https://developers.google.com/+/api/">Google has only recently opened up the API for doing this directly</a> without having to go through the web.</li>
<li>Sharing to Google Plus is also slightly flaky from Feedly's web interface. The text box for inputting your commentary has a tendency to flicker out.</li>
</ul>
<div>
Things any of these feed readers will have to do to attract me long term:</div>
</div>
<div>
<ul>
<li>Convince me they have a business model. For instance, how does Feedly make money? Unclear.</li>
<li>Provide me a way to leave by exporting my feeds.</li>
</ul>
</div>
Bud Gibsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10890564471631569204noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4689004583752486200.post-83824969157495301662013-02-25T07:35:00.003-08:002013-02-25T07:37:11.180-08:00Why not a web book vs. a chromebookThis post is inspired by <a class="g-profile" href="http://plus.google.com/104013835962992611989" target="_blank">+John Hardy</a>'s rant today concerning <a href="https://plus.google.com/104013835962992611989/posts/4tL2EUoci5P">something called asm.js</a> as well as what I will only describe as long term recall of <a class="g-profile" href="http://plus.google.com/107606703558161507946" target="_blank">+Tim Bray</a>'s <a href="http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/201x/2011/06/14/Native-vs-Web">native vs. web</a> article of a couple of years ago.<br />
<br />
My key point is this: Google's Chromebook experiment has it right on how people spend their time on light weight laptops but wrong on what to do about it. In short, as assumed by the Chromebook team, people on light weight laptops do spend the vast majority of their time interacting with and publishing "web" content.<br />
<br />
However, is the solution to just push everything into the browser? I'll note that much like with my mobile devices, I opt for native web clients on my macbook air when they're available. They're faster, and I have more control over each service.<br />
<br />
I think the Chromebook would be more interesting if it more clearly recognized this fact. Perhaps <a href="http://golang.org/">Go</a> could become the default <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Native_Client">native client</a> language.Bud Gibsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10890564471631569204noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4689004583752486200.post-50686119892006865352013-02-22T07:47:00.000-08:002013-02-22T07:47:05.262-08:00The pixelated cloudI know <a class="g-profile" href="http://plus.google.com/116651741222993143554" target="_blank">+Sundar Pichai</a> said that Google's new chromebook is named Pixel because we'll never have to consider pixels again once we start using it to access the cloud, but I thought it would be useful to consider what it would mean to add Pixel-like machines to the cloud.<br />
<br />
First off, I think Google is dreaming here, but it's an intentional act of dreaming as indicated in <a href="http://dawn.com/2013/02/22/google-challenges-apple-with-high-end-laptop/">this article</a> shared by <a class="g-profile" href="http://plus.google.com/102366211018261594737" target="_blank">+Tracy L. Crawford</a>. What currently boils down to a $1200–1500 high-end web browser is not a mass market machine. Instead, it's meant to evoke in the minds of people who can do something about it the kind of scenario where the Pixel makes sense. In a nutshell, I think that scenario is as follows:<br />
<br />
<ul>
<li>Most of your processing power lives elsewhere. Google engineers using the Pixel are compiling on linux workstations back at the office. They're accessing Gmail and internal Google+ hosted by Google.</li>
<li>You're not hampered by legacy software compatibility needs, in particular the need for seamless Microsoft Office compatibility. It's amazing how embedded office is in the infrastructure of even new phenomena like eBooks or electronic publishing. Microsoft Word is effectively still the standard of exchange for a large part of the content production industry.</li>
</ul>
<div>
Who do I think this most closely fits right now? Students, traditional small businesses not heavily into content production, web-only content creators, and cloud software developers are a few groups who spring to mind.</div>
Bud Gibsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10890564471631569204noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4689004583752486200.post-53493407028120549252013-02-09T10:25:00.001-08:002013-02-09T10:25:16.093-08:00Is it twitter?Earlier today, I had an interesting conversation on <a class="g-profile" href="http://plus.google.com/115106448444522478339" target="_blank">+AJ Kohn</a>'s Google+ update about <a href="https://plus.google.com/115106448444522478339/posts/Wd6gwZ3RrUz">how businesses are cooling on Facebook</a>. The key observation: <a href="http://facebook.com/">Facebook</a> makes it less likely users will see your updates <i><b>UNLESS</b></i> they heavily engage with you. Otherwise, you have to pay, <i><b>per post</b></i>, to guarantee reaching your fan base. For a large brand, this can come into thousands of dollars <b><i>per post</i></b>.<br />
<br />
Not hard to see why businesses might be disgusted with Facebook.<br />
<br />
More interestingly, AJ, <a class="g-profile" href="http://plus.google.com/114246814151335572510" target="_blank">+David Iwanow</a>, and others seem to feel the real ascendant social network is <a href="http://twitter.com/">Twitter</a> while <a class="g-profile" href="http://plus.google.com/116024884086268367178" target="_blank">+Jesse Wojdylo</a> and I are more of the opinion that the winner lately is the hashtag (# plus a word or group of words with no spaces between, for instance <a href="https://plus.google.com/s/%23facebook">#facebook</a>). Although hashtag functionality originated on Twitter, it is now built into a number of social networks (<a href="http://plus.google.com/">Google+</a>, <a href="http://pinterest.com/">Pinterest</a>, etc.) and allows you to easily indicate that your update pertains to a topic that many others may also be discussing. If you click on the hashtag, you are typically taken to a list of other people's posts containing that tag, often updated in real time.<br />
<br />
So, it makes sense that advertisers have lit on hashtags as a way to generate buzz about their brands wherever the particular person may prefer to contribute. For example, <a href="http://chrgd.com/2013/02/twitter-wasnt-mentioned-in-50-of-super-bowl-ads-after-all-hashtags-were/">during the super bowl there were 26 online calls to action that utilized hashtag calls to action and only three that mentioned Twitter</a>.<br />
<br />
AJ's counter is that people think Twitter when they think hashtag. After all, the hashtag originated on Twitter. He's running a survey to test this assumption. To me, the fact that AJ is even running a survey basically cedes the argument that it's about the hashtag first and any use on Twitter second.<br />
<br />
Brands are understandably trying to reach users first on the networks they use.Bud Gibsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10890564471631569204noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4689004583752486200.post-28634982412134804902013-02-08T06:12:00.002-08:002013-02-08T06:12:41.845-08:00hashtags in the streamSomething like 75% of super bowl ads this year had online calls to action. What that means is that they invited viewers to go online and do something like try out a web site or talk about the brand in a social network like twitter, google+, or facebook.<br />
<br />
It took a couple of days for people to catch on that there was a subtlety in these calls to action. The specific social space was very infrequently mentioned. Instead, viewers were given a hashtag, that's a # sign followed by a word or group of words without any spaces between. Most social networks provide a search functionality so that when you click on a hashtag, you get all the posts to which people have applied the tag. Often, these searches work in real time.<br />
<br />
A few thoughts on the hashtag strategy:<br />
<br />
<ul>
<li>It's network agnostic. Google+, twitter, instagram, and others support it. That way, you're not dictating to your fans where to go. They can go where they normally go.</li>
<li>It's potentially very prone to spam. To be part of the stream, all you have to do is write the hashtag in your post. As a result:</li>
<ul>
<li>I'd expect social networks to start providing authority filters based on the poster's overall reputation.</li>
<li>I'd expect marketers to start differentiating between social networks based on the quality of their signals.</li>
</ul>
<li>There's real opportunity here for aggregators. Many of those currently already exist with high monthly subscription prices.</li>
<li>Aggregators and proprietors of social networks have fundamentally different sets of interests. Strangely, users' interests may be more aligned with those of aggregators since, in many cases, users contribute to social networks in order to be heard. This goes against what you might hear from privacy advocates.</li>
</ul>
Bud Gibsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10890564471631569204noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4689004583752486200.post-25444938455600861032013-02-05T09:01:00.000-08:002013-02-05T09:01:44.057-08:00Search, Social, and you: The question of reach<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjCiKWB3z2OaNlCkl78n-0KGZToksCnPKNok-RhC0RhJ_XvKKyANlcDb3ZkfhDfwwS7sTkN4JS0HInL9W24temX-xdXZOsMfguL8jV4OJv-Sk76AIH8vrlIqG0guAsPGCizTv8IihCPbqM/s1600/Search-Social-You.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjCiKWB3z2OaNlCkl78n-0KGZToksCnPKNok-RhC0RhJ_XvKKyANlcDb3ZkfhDfwwS7sTkN4JS0HInL9W24temX-xdXZOsMfguL8jV4OJv-Sk76AIH8vrlIqG0guAsPGCizTv8IihCPbqM/s1600/Search-Social-You.jpg" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
I'm in a bit of a reading frenzy these as I research my own book on search marketing. In all this reading, one book that has really caught my attention is <a class="g-profile" href="http://plus.google.com/117583125622876230870" target="_blank">+Rob Garner</a>'s <a class="g-profile" href="http://plus.google.com/113064321072428370008" target="_blank">+Search and Social</a>. It's all about the mechanics of discovery on the world wide web.<br />
<br />
I want to devote this post to thinking about reach. Think of reach as meaning how many people you can reach using a particular medium on the web.<br />
<br />
<br />
<div>
As illustrated in the diagram, search has the greatest reach. It will hit people who are not connected to you in any way whether that be knowing you personally or through your extended social network. Search will also represent you in a way tailored to the person searching. This feature makes it a very arms-length method of engaging your potential customers. You have to do it on their terms and you are presented as one in an array of options.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Your extended social network has the second greatest reach. These are people who know people who know you. Again, you're likely to be presented in a more arms-length off-hand way, but there is also more likely to be an element of personal recommendation or opinion. People know the people involved and have some opinion as to their worthiness. Further, the consideration set is likely to be smaller.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Finally, there is the set of people directly connected to you. This is the smallest set of the three, but it is also the most engaged, either positively or negatively. People connected directly to you are going to broadcast out into the other layers, impacting their effectiveness in garnering you new visitors.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Often web marketing efforts, such as pay per click advertising or twitter hashtag campaigns are directed at gaining you visitors and giving them direct experience with you. Just be aware that that can be a double-edged sword.</div>
Bud Gibsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10890564471631569204noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4689004583752486200.post-13096008985783350812013-01-29T11:19:00.000-08:002013-01-29T11:19:01.355-08:00Social Media CoverageDeep into researching my book on search marketing, I'm reading a number of interesting books and articles on the convergence of search and social. Perhaps the most developed of these is <a class="g-profile" href="http://plus.google.com/117583125622876230870" target="_blank">+Rob Garner</a>'s <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Search-Social-Definitive-Real-Time-ebook/dp/B009UCNJIE/ref=tmm_kin_title_0?ie=UTF8&qid=1359486126&sr=1-1">Search and Social: The Definitive Real-Time Guide to Content Marketing</a>. It's a fascinating read, and I suggest checking it out.<br />
<br />
Rob's thesis is that search and social need to be thought of as a unit in modern day marketing efforts. By social, he means the electronic linkages that connect us more and more in our everyday lives. Penetration rates for social media so defined may be as high as 92% for the US adult population.<br />
<br />
My own view is this: While the vast majority of us may be on social media, what percentage of our lives does it cover? When might social media connections be relevant?<br />
<br />
<ul>
<li>The first question is significant. If you're on social media but not that plugged in, then it's not having a large, direct impact on you. </li>
<li>Further, if you're not consistently contributing to social media, then the picture of you gained from social media is not going to be too accurate.</li>
<li>Second, social media connections might be relevant in only a fairly narrow band of activities, at least as they relate to friend networks. Do you want to know everything about your friends' tastes? Do you want them knowing yours?</li>
<li>I suspect friend networks come most into play when seeking out social engagement. They come less into play in areas where you may want a more authoritative, experience-based opinion.</li>
</ul>
Bud Gibsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10890564471631569204noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4689004583752486200.post-68304882770729284432013-01-16T05:56:00.002-08:002013-01-16T05:56:44.375-08:00Why torture your followers with two google+ profilesI created a second google+ profile for teaching a little over a year ago. At the time, I was motivated by the following:<br />
<br />
<ul>
<li>I needed an easy way to follow and interact with students in my courses.</li>
<li>I didn't want to forcibly mix two streams of content, one student oriented, the other not at all.</li>
<li>I find it hard to easily categorize people into circles. Better to let them choose the stream they want to associate with. Making everything public lets people make informed decisions about engaging with you. They can see it before they make the plunge to circle you.</li>
<li>It's much easier to just switch into a completely different persona for particular tasks.</li>
</ul>
<div>
Recently, I created a third profile (I actually have a few, but this is the third I actually intend to use) and plan to merge it with the teaching profile so that I'll get back to two. "Why create a third?", you might ask. Well, there are a few reasons:</div>
<div>
<ul>
<li>The teaching profile attracted quite a few followers (several thousand). People seemed to want that kind of content.</li>
<li>The strategy behind the teaching profile was haphazard. I only attempted to connect with students but put no time into thinking about what the appropriate external connections would be.</li>
<li>I was influenced by <a class="g-profile" href="http://plus.google.com/112374836634096795698" target="_blank">+Guy Kawasaki</a>'s dictum to use Google+ as the blogging platform for a book I'm getting to work on (by the way, <a href="http://apethebook.com/">his book on publishing</a> is very worth the $10 price on Amazon or other electronic outlet).</li>
<li>Therefore, it made sense to create a profile focused on moving my teaching and book writing efforts forward (they're joined at the hip).</li>
</ul>
<div>
<a class="g-profile" href="http://plus.google.com/113808875758581497084" target="_blank">+Joseph C. Miller</a>, <a class="g-profile" href="http://plus.google.com/101968685409431735765" target="_blank">+Shawn Drape</a>, <a class="g-profile" href="http://plus.google.com/110352049954858592591" target="_blank">+Thomas Morffew</a>, <a class="g-profile" href="http://plus.google.com/105037104815911535953" target="_blank">+Ade Oshineye</a>, this post is for you.</div>
</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Finally, I still find my original profile quite useful. I'm not abandoning it. I'm just creating a new focused line.</div>
Bud Gibsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10890564471631569204noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4689004583752486200.post-90657407560722456142013-01-11T08:05:00.001-08:002013-01-11T08:05:18.917-08:00Simplifying is often the best strategyI'm going to go a self-publishing route as I start this book authorship journey. That gives me something to sell. From there, I can go on to seeking a more established publisher. I've been pretty good at drumming up interest in our courses and events.<br />
<br />
So, I think the trick might be to get together five good lessons in search marketing that help get people started and get them pointed at some tools.Bud Gibsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10890564471631569204noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4689004583752486200.post-30883504719950233542013-01-09T08:17:00.001-08:002013-01-09T08:17:23.973-08:00Lessons in Search MarketingSo I think the title of the book I'm launching on should be "Lessons in Search Marketing". It's simpler. I can use a subtitle to indicate the non-profit angle.Bud Gibsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10890564471631569204noreply@blogger.com15tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4689004583752486200.post-57090616623534081072013-01-08T09:32:00.000-08:002013-01-08T09:45:41.572-08:00Using Google+ Communities for classroom discussion<a class="g-profile" href="http://plus.google.com/105037104815911535953" target="_blank">+Ade Oshineye</a> was kind enough to say that he was interested in my feedback on Google+ Communities. I'm going to be using them this term for classroom discussion. Here's a couple of links to seed the conversation:<br />
<ul>
<li><a href="https://plus.google.com/u/0/communities/109364339092773296579">My soon to be launched student community</a>. Expect action there starting tomorrow.</li>
<li><a href="https://plus.google.com/u/0/communities/107227825802974578216">Lightbox</a>, a pretty great community focused on photography.</li>
</ul>
<div>
A few quick observations:</div>
<div>
<ul>
<li>What makes Lightbox so great is that the community reinforces high quality content creation. Some of that is based on a voting pool which encourages people to submit and critique photos. To submit, you have to critique. If your submission doesn't garner 10 save votes before 10 delete votes, it gets deleted. If, however, you get the 10 save votes, then you're promoted to another category in the discussion where saved photos go.</li>
<li>Google does not provide automatic vote tabulation. You have to read down through the comments and use labels like #save1, #save2, #delete2, etc. based on your count of what's gone before.</li>
<li>Google does not provide any sort of way of tracking member activity to reinforce the norm that you have to critique to submit. That's really on the honor system. Personally, I think the larger issue of tracking member activity needs to be addressed even if it never quite gets down to this level of particularity. <a class="g-profile" href="http://plus.google.com/112336147904981294875" target="_blank">+Gerwin Sturm</a>'s <a href="http://www.allmyplus.com/">All My Plus</a> is a good step in this direction.</li>
<li>With just a little bit of work, Lightbox could be a full-fledged publication based on user-generated content. The workflow is submit content, have it voted on, push voted up content to the rest of the world via the appropriate community category. It would be good if one could just publish that category as its own stream.</li>
</ul>
</div>
Bud Gibsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10890564471631569204noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4689004583752486200.post-51354399665015189352013-01-08T08:52:00.002-08:002013-01-08T09:46:02.861-08:00Reviving WorksheetI'm reviving my Worksheet blog. The real question in my mind has been where it fits. I've been blogging off and on since 2004. My main observation is that blogging is ephemeral. It's not quite as short term as a Google+ post, but it's also not as long term as a religious work (e.g., Bible) or even a text book. I think it's really six months to a year. After that, all bets are off as to the actual relevance of the posts to the person who wrote them.<br />
<br />
There's a few ways to view blogs:<br />
<ul>
<li>An instant, but light weight, publishing platform which can be used for just about anything.</li>
<li>A personal diary.</li>
<li>A professional diary.</li>
</ul>
<div>
It's in this latter sense that I created worksheet, and it's where I'll mainly stick.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
I've decided to try to write a textbook based on the search marketing curriculum I've developed. It will likely start as highly focused lessons and case studies.</div>
Bud Gibsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10890564471631569204noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4689004583752486200.post-92190956045020713902011-03-13T09:17:00.001-07:002011-03-13T09:17:19.535-07:00Tablets<p>I have the original iPad but did not feel the compelling need to jump to the iPad 2. It's been months since I used my iPad, not because it's not good, but because it just doesn't suit any of my current use cases. Let's review those:</p>
<ul>
<li>Internet hosting: A server with pair networks</li>
<li>Heavy computing: A Mac Pro workstation, with an NEC wide gamut display, and external RAID by macgurus.</li>
<li>On-the-go computing: A macbook air 11 inch.</li>
<li>e-reading: A kindle wifi only</li>
<li>Mobile on-the-go: Droid x</li>
</ul>
<p>Basically, the iPad would fit the macbook air's current spot. The problem is that the iPad has no keyboard for easy editing, and my attempts to marry it with a bluetooth keyboard ultimately just resulted in a hosed keyboard, no easy way to carry the two together.</p>
<p>I think the dream many report would be to marry the bottom 3 devices in a tablet. In my mind, it's an open question as to whether that can happen or is even desirable. The wifi kindle is cheap and light, easy for extended reading. Mobile phone prices and data plans are clearly headed toward commodification (though carriers are fighting tooth and nail). The replacement cycles are different.</p>
<p>By marrying e-readers, phones, and on-the-go computing, you make yourself ripe for getting held hostage with higher prices to follow. Just witness Apple's recent decision to force vendors to pay a 30% fee for all in-app purchases, some of which are mandated.</p>Bud Gibsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10890564471631569204noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4689004583752486200.post-57427395934425743272011-02-05T04:40:00.001-08:002011-02-05T04:40:50.811-08:00Posting to blogger from my Droid x<div><p>This works reasonably well. I'd like to set my location as something other than an exact address. I'd also like a list of labels I've already used. What happened to all of these instant features google talks about constantly?</p>
</div>Bud Gibsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10890564471631569204noreply@blogger.com0Community Engine Llc, 2435 Newbury Court, Ann Arbor, MI, United States42.251865 -83.766339tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4689004583752486200.post-8879425511596709562011-01-28T09:41:00.001-08:002011-01-28T09:41:05.121-08:00Software Development Priorities<p>So, I occasionally write software to do useful things for students and analyze interactions in the classroom. One reason we're using Google Buzz these days is that it has excellent API support.</p>
<p>As an only sometimes software developer, I have to think about where it makes sense for me to spend my efforts. Here are my criteria:</p>
<ul>
<li>Is it likely to be developed by someone else who will have more time to maintain it?</li>
<li>Does it require a lot of infrastructure to pull off?</li>
<li>Should it really be part of the platform but the platform provider just hasn't realized it yet?</li>
<li>How much time am I wasting on mindless repetitive tasks to achieve what I want?</li>
<li>How substantially would it help students improve their performance?</li>
<li>If I devoted a personal man week could I make substantial progress?</li>
</ul>
<p>The answer to the first three questions has to be "no", or really close to "no". the answer to the last three has to be "pretty substantial" or "yes".</p>Bud Gibsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10890564471631569204noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4689004583752486200.post-38511036107475198052011-01-20T06:49:00.001-08:002011-01-20T06:49:57.974-08:00Getting people to contribute information<p>My giant complaint about twitter is that it's mainly <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phatic">phatic</a>. All of this talk of retweets, etc. is noise making. <a href="http://twitter.com/#!/search/%23la2m">It gets me to look</a>. It tells me who considers who important. Those are things to know, but they get me only so far.</p>
<p>I use social media a lot in my classroom teaching. I'm looking for people to contribute information which we then craft into knowledge. Some of that is phatic. Mostly though, it needs to be about substantive things students can do to effect tangible results.</p>
<p>Substance and results matter. If you can't produce those, your social connections won't matter.</p>Bud Gibsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10890564471631569204noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4689004583752486200.post-19763318552708952792011-01-15T19:44:00.001-08:002011-01-15T19:44:27.529-08:00My new cloud computer<p>I have <a href="http://www.apple.com/macbookair/">the 11" macbook air</a>. It came Friday. It's expensive. It's something I said I would never get. I like it a lot.</p>
<p>Why'd I get it?</p>
<ul>
<li>I need a light computer to carry around.</li>
<li>Its solid state drives are nearly indestructible</li>
<li>It offers a lot of ways to connect to cloud services, not just a web browser</li>
<li>It maintains the apple/unix compatibility I've been accustomed to for the last decade</li>
</ul>
<p>We'll see how it plays out.</p>Bud Gibsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10890564471631569204noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4689004583752486200.post-28102386363749058942011-01-09T09:03:00.001-08:002011-01-09T09:03:49.944-08:00Quick Review of Reeder for the Mac<p>Short version: it's fantastic. If you're on a Mac, get it now! Reeder for the Mac is <a href="http://madeatgloria.com/brewery">available here</a>. It offers an unparalleled Google Reader experience. It's what feed reading was meant to be. My only complaint is that it does not allow tagging posts, a critical part of my workflow. I use shared tags to organize my reader output for different constituencies.</p>Bud Gibsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10890564471631569204noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4689004583752486200.post-5736903617157934972011-01-09T07:50:00.001-08:002011-01-09T07:50:42.480-08:00Devices and platforms<p>I would like devices that plugged into platforms and just worked.</p>
<p>All of the talk of <a href="http://www.roughtype.com/">software as a service or infrastructure as a utility</a> is just hogwash unless I can do that. The truth of the matter is that, at many levels, software is not sufficiently standardized to be offered as a service. Further, infrastructure is optimized as a stack around a presumed application model. <a href="http://gigaom.com/mobile/how-app-stores-can-compete-with-android-market/">There is currently a war going on around what will be the application model of choice that extends all the way down to devices</a>.</p>
<p>You cannot just plug devices into networks anymore. This is a step backward.</p>Bud Gibsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10890564471631569204noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4689004583752486200.post-54222280549128946482011-01-02T09:55:00.001-08:002011-01-02T09:55:34.598-08:00My own personal cut at the Monty Hall problem<p>Yesterday, I bookmarked <a href="http://blog.moertel.com/articles/2011/01/01/the-bayesian-meets-monty-hall">a Bayesian solution to the Monty Hall problem</a>. The main drawback to that solution is that it requires you to go through some rather complex mechanics and recastings to get how it works. I think there's a simpler, plainly intuitive solution to be had.</p>
<p>But first, in a nutshell, the Monty Hall problem is this:</p>
<ul>
<li>You're given a chance to choose one out of three doors, behind one of which is a prize.</li>
<li>After you make your choice, Monty reveals that one of the two doors you did not choose is incorrect.</li>
<li>Monty gives you the option of sticking with your original choice or switching to the remaining unknown door that you did not originally choose.</li>
</ul>
<p>The key intuition to getting the correct solution is this:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Your original choice was one out of three. Therefore, you had a two out of three chance of getting it wrong. Nothing that happens later changes this fact. Your original choice of door continues to have a two out of three chance of having been incorrect throughout the duration of the problem.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Now, when Monty tells you one of the doors you did not choose is incorrect, the door you originally chose still has a two out of three chance of having been incorrect. Given that there is now only one other door remaining, it must have a two out of three chance of being correct. You should switch when Monty gives you the chance.</p>
<p>I must confess that this is not how I would have originally tried to solve the problem. Like most people, I originally assumed that I was going from a one out of three to a one out of two equiprobable decision problem, meaning that both remaining doors had an equal chance of being correct. In other words, there was no reason to switch. The better intuition is to think that Monty has effectively combined the two doors I did not choose into one.</p>
<p>Recasting the problem into the following equivalent form makes this clear:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>You may stick with the single door you originally chose or take both of the remaining two doors you did not.</p>
</blockquote>Bud Gibsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10890564471631569204noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4689004583752486200.post-5786985829061771772010-12-24T09:46:00.001-08:002010-12-24T09:46:44.537-08:00Google Buzz and Canonical Representations<p>So, <a href="http://www.salmon-protocol.org/">salmon</a> sounds interesting, but one has to ask himself why, particularly if it requires waiting.</p>
<p>I want a Google Buzz that can do the following:</p>
<ul>
<li>Allow me to disseminate digital artifacts to people who choose to receive them.</li>
<li>Allow me and others to interact around those artifacts and any others that may appear in our streams.</li>
<li>Allow the interaction around an artifact to be represented back to the point of origin of the artifact. For instance, Buzz interaction around a blogger blog post should be able to be shown back on that post.</li>
<li>Allow interaction at the point of origin of the artifact itself to be shown in the Buzz stream for that artifact. For instance, comments on a picasa picture should show up in the buzz posts about that picture.</li>
<li>Allows all of the functionality just described to be implemented immediately on Google properties.</li>
<li>Eventually allows all of this to work with other platforms, including self-hosted.</li>
<li>Drops this nonsensical happy talk about the semantics of activity streams.</li>
</ul>
<p>Currently buzz does 1 and 2. There is no going back to the point of origin or "canonical representation" to harken back to the title of this post. I want it all today; no more "it will be great some day."</p>Bud Gibsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10890564471631569204noreply@blogger.com0