0 Google and the Soft Monopoly Posted: 7/08/2009

Google is taking over the world, or at least the Internet. We've suspected this for a while, so it really shouldn't come as a shock. Yet unlike previous companies which have tried to do this, such as Googles nemesis Microsoft, we don't seem too concerned about it. Quite to the contrary, we tend to welcome Googles juggernaut rampage to conquer every segment of functionality on the Net.

Take Googles announcement today that it will be releasing a free operating system based on its Chrome Internet browser some time in 2010. This is from a company which already has established itself as the dominant player in searches, email, maps, video, advertising, and is considered a strong contender in fields such as group collaboration, phone services, and even mobile computing. This is the same Google which is sponsoring a race to the Moon and regularly invests millions of dollars a year in a broad spectrum of startups. The same Google which recently introduced the concept of Google Wave, which may have the ability to revolutionize communications in a way Twitter can only dream about. Google isn't just a 500 pound gorilla on the Internet, it is THE 500 pound gorilla. Now, had any other company with this kind of omnipresence announced its intention to expand into yet another market, there would be panic and fleeing of the populace to the hills. Instead, the overwhelming consensus seems to be one of eager anticipation, bordering on celebration. So why does Google get treated so differently?

My guess, for what it's worth, is that Google has mastered the art of the Soft Monopoly. A Soft Monopoly is everywhere because people genuinely want it everywhere. It's helpful, useful, and generous, and doesn't go throwing its weight around to get what it wants. Instead, it convinces everyone else that they want what it wants because what Google wants makes things better for everyone. With only a few exceptions, everything Google has tackled has made the Internet a better place for everyone, which wins you a lot of friends. With such populist support, how could a Soft Monopoly do anything but expand? Whereas Microsoft and Apple have consistently tried to dictate what their customers could and could not do, Google has taken the opposite path. Their logic, I suspect is that the more seamlessly and effortlessly Google can fit itself into the experience its customers dictate, the more positively Google will be viewed. For Google this means offering a lot of high quality services for free. In doing so they become a ubiquitous part of the fabric of the Net, so when you need a professional solution, the answer comes naturally.

So should we be surprised Google is creating a free open source operating system? No, it's a natural behavior for a Soft Monopoly like Google. By leaping into another market with a free disruptive product, Google expands their potential to be helpful in all sorts of new ways. For a Soft Monopoly, helpfulness is directly related to future profit, so Google is right on its game plan. Right now Google seems content to constrain its monopoly to the realm of bits and bytes. So until your Google Groceries get delivered to your Google Apartment door by a Google Grocerybot, I think the world is safe for the time being.

Continue Reading

0 Upcoming Posts Posted: 7/02/2009

I've come to two realizations over the past week. One: I love writing articles, and two: I have more things to write about than time currently allows. So therefore, I'm going to just jot down a bunch of the topics for posts I plan to write and release soon.

• Tools for open source invention of real world things
• Community vs. Content on the Hypergrid
• How to capitalize on the lack of content in the open Metaverse
• Modular systems for third world empowerment and infrastructure
• How computer vision will revolutionize machinima
• Can radio be crowd sourced?
• Funding the Metaverse explosion
• Bringing the talent from SL to the open Metaverse
• Rapid game design prototyping system
• The Encyclopedia of Stuff
• Mapping material flows and artificial metabolisms
• Citizen journalism through social multimedia mash up tools
• Planning infrastructure through modular evolution
• Hybrids in the skies
• Air deployable emergency aid systems
• Meshing social media and consulting
• Can flash mob tactics be applied to the freelance job market?

For now that's all of the ones I can think keep track of that I need to write about. Looks like I need to get cracking!

Continue Reading

0 A Virtual World like Polka-dot Flypaper Posted: 6/30/2009

Recently, the popular Second Life blogger Hamlet Au made a post raising a point of contention against Chris Abraham's remarks unfavorably highlighting the differences between SL and Twitter.  The specific point Hamlet took issue with went roughly as follows. Twitter is not like Second Life in and of the fact that it is "cheap, light, and open."  In essence Chris is pointing out several truths regarding the major differences between Twitter and Second Life.  It is true that Twitter is cheap, its free.  It's also true that twitter is light on system resources in comparison to SL, one is a text-based app, the other is a dynamic real time 3D environment.  Additionally it is also true that in relative terms Twitter is far more open than SL.  The potency of Twitters' API has been on prominent display throughout the #Iranelection crisis.  SL has a long way to go before it can boast such a promiscuous architecture.   

In response, Hamlet listed off a series of advantages SL has over Twitter.  To his mind SL has the advantages of being "unique, sticky, and profitable."  Unique in the fact that there is no real direct competitors to SL, aside from the Opensim grids.  Sticky in how much time users spend using the different services.  For this Hamlet points to statistics showing the huge lead in minutes per month spent on-platform SL enjoys over Twitter.  The last point, profitability is almost a gimme, in and of the fact that Twitter is completely funded by venture capital whereas Linden Labs makes a tidy profit off leasing land to residents.  

For the full post, you can read it here.  Honestly I'm not going to take sides on this one because while I view the argument as rather immature and the comparisons a bit sketchy, the truth is that both of them are right on all points.  What both of them are doing amounts to two blind men feeling up different sides of a elephant.  In this case lets call that elephant The Killer Social Platform.  In order to be effective and pervasive, this platform would have to be open, light, cheap, and unique.  In order to be sustainable, it would have to be sticky and profitable.  In more whimsical terms, the Killer Social Platform has got to be like polka-dot flypaper.  It has to be cheap and pervasive enough that its everywhere you want it to be, and compelling and unique enough to keep users hooked once they've tried it.  

Maybe the solution isn't text based like Twitter, or 3D like SL. Maybe it resides in the middle.  Perhaps the solution is a open, hostable 2D virtual world that utilizes ubiquitous lightweight technology like Flash.  It might be isometric like Metaplace, but my hunch is that a side scrolling style world would spread far faster, as its far easier to create content from a side view.  To be fair to Metaplace, they do a excellent job simplifying the task of bringing content reliably into a isometric world, something I applaud.  Flash is lightweight enough and ubiquitous enough that it could be embedded practically anywhere, and website embedding could allow non-users a window into the world prior to actually signing up to participate.  This is one of Twitters' strong points, as anyone can follow a conversation without signing up, effectively selling the receptive to the platforms' utility.  With persistent hosted environments comes the opportunity for profit, whether through hosting fees as SL does or through advertising. 

Additional profit can come from the sale of additional functionality, or the capacity to handle that functionality. Ownable persistent virtual property has definite inherent stickiness to it, especially when coupled with strong traditional social networking services such as groups, events, and content sharing.   The visual, location based aspect of SL coupled with its ability to allow the user to participate simultaneously in larger discussions is a large contributing factor to its stickiness.   In regards to openness, that is genuinely a structural business decision that must be made early in a product's development.  

The degree of that openness is debatable, as some will lean towards a completely open virtual framework for anyone to host, while others will inevitably prefer the hosted API route of Twitter.  Either way, the current trends point toward openness as a key element to widespread adoption.  Now we're left with uniqueness.  The fact of the matter is that a system that can pull all of the other elements off, and do it well, will be unique.  Sure, there may be competition, everyone believes they can invent a better wheel. Competition need not be viewed as a bad thing though. Historically competition has always been a excellent motivator for innovation.  

I'll give the topic a rest for now, mostly due to the fact I am beginning to lose my train of thought in a haze of sleep deprivation.  I'll probably come back and describe this platform some more in the future, gotta tease this string out to see what unravels.

Continue Reading

0 Sketchbook Dump Highlight Post Posted: 6/29/2009

If you follow me on Deviantart, you'll know that I recently did a two part marathon sketchbook dump that ended with nearly twenty new pictures being uploaded.  From this I learned two things. One, I need a dedicated flatbed scanner, because taking snapshots of each sketch just doesn't cut it when it comes to quality.  Two, I have a weird obsession with drawing heads.  Maybe this has to do with the fact I'm insecure about my ability to effectively draw faces, so in response I just draw a lot of them.  Instead of spamming you with all the pictures, I'll give you a sampling of my personal favorites from the batch.  To see all of them, feel free to check out my deviant page.

A fun little cartoon beastie I did while 

experimenting with combinations of art styles.

This was an attempt to merge art nouveau and 

hispanic chibi (if that's even a style)

Not everything was cute, however.  These

are a couple of pen sketch concepts of some

generic cyberpunk/horror characters.

One of my absolute favorites from 

the set was also the last I uploaded.  

I think I have a thing for biomech vehicles.

Whether I'm any good at drawing them 

is a completely different matter.

Hope you take a look at the full dump, and please feel free to let me know what you think!  This artist loves feedback.

Continue Reading

0 Joomla for the Metaverse Posted: 6/29/2009

I recently posted this question on Twitter and Plurk: if Opensim is the Apache of the Metaverse, then what will be the Joomla of the Metaverse?  Clearly I need to work on my grammar when tweeting/plurking, but I was being serious.  This isn't a idle or rhetorical question, its something which has to be answered if Metaverse solutions like Opensim are ever going to truly become the next incarnation of the Web.  

While it is true that the Web grew through its infancy without much in the way of content management software, it has become a essential ingredient to its continued growth.  Even in its early years, the growth of the web was spurred by programs and services like Geocities and Dreamweaver. These served to sufficiently lower the bar of entry into the world of web design to allow those with little or no technical knowledge quickly create a web presence.  This created a primordial sea of amateur designers and content from which the committed and skilled graduated to create bigger and better things.  

Right now the Metaverse scene is currently in the AOL stage, with a few centralized services offering walled garden experiences wherein they hold the monopoly on content and users.  A few pioneers (OSGrid, ReactionGrid, Openlife) cling to the fringes, boldly attempting to create more open alternatives.  However on their own they cannot compete on the scales of content and user population that the walled gardens offer.  This is why the developments in cross grid transportation in Opensim are so widely hailed, because in many ways they are the equivalent to the most powerful element of the Web: the hyperlink.  Once a critical mass of grids become connected and standards arise for commerce and content sharing, this new web of grids will begin to eclipse the walled garden providers.  But this critical mass must exist.

This is where the question of content management becomes so crucial.  Without tools and services to lower the barrier of entry, the growth of the open Metaverse will be stunted.    The open Metaverse will need its Geocities, its Dreamweaver, and its Joomla.  The barrier of entry must be lowered, which means making the deployment and management of entire grids simple, pain-free, and dirt cheap.  When the barrier of entry is lowered, it will open the gates to a stampede of amateur Metaverse creators seeking their slice of the pie.  Now to be clear, most of these amateurs will not create great virtual environments.  Just like the web now, most of the content will be mediocre. 

A Metaverse Geocities will probably offer free hosting for simple one-sim grids, with a simple template-based creation tools.  Revenue will most likely be provided in much the same way Geocities provided it, embedded ads for free accounts, or a monthly cost for those who chose to upgrade.  An astute observer will note some similarities between this and grid services currently provided, sans the advertising.  One of the primary differences will again be in the linking, as users of such a service will occupy a grid of their own, populated only with their own sims and any hypergrid sims that they should choose to link to.  

A Metaverse Dreamweaver will most likely provide a world creation tool set based heavily off of the tool sets currently used by MMOG developers to layout large environments.  When augmented with a marketplace function (much like a pan-grid XStreetSL perhaps), it will facilitate a drag-and-drop style of world creation.  Much in the same way Dreamweaver simplified complex web functionality into a WYSIWYG interface, its Metaverse cousin must do as well.  Commonly occurring complex scripted objects would be abstracted into click-and-place entities.  Any fine tuning of these worlds would most likely be performed in-world, the Metaverse equivalent to hand-rolling HTML and Javascript. 

Finally, a Metaverse Joomla would abstract and simplify the maintenance of large, complex grids in much the same way Joomla simplifies and abstracts the maintenance of large complex websites:  by providing high-level editorial, publishing, and management tools.  In the case of the Metaverse variant, this would entail on-the-fly creation of template based sims, the ability to monitor real-time activity, permissions based administrative controls, and the ability to extend the grid to include third-party functionality and themes.

I cannot begin to stress how important these services will be to the growth of a open Metaverse. I've listed these three comparisons in this order for a reason.  It is most likely the order in which they must occur.  Right now the major battles of cross-grid content transfer loom just over the the horizon, as the first transfer mechanics are just now being created.   While that battle rages, a Metaverse Geocities can be introducing the world at large to the idea of being a virtual world maker.  Inevitably some compromise will be reached, and a Metaverse Dreamweaver would capitalize from whatever content marketplace system emerges.  As these worlds grow and mature, and the need for simple dynamic management of large scale grids emerges, a Metaverse Joomla can fill the need.

So the question remains: if Opensim is the Apache of the Metaverse, what will be its Joomla?

Continue Reading