Back to Pixel
“Cover for PixelsMil.com”
…lose my cool. #dailydrawing #illustration
Nice Sketch work
A weekly dose of Recommended Reading is the cure to your fiction affliction.A free magazine from Electric Literature, Recommended Reading features one story each week curated by top writers and editors like Jim Shepard, One Story, and Michael Cunningham.
With great facial hair, comes great responsibility. - by Glen O’Neill
The psychological profile of a compelling leader — think of tech pioneers like Jeff Bezos, Larry Ellison and Steven P. Jobs — is also that of the compulsive risk-taker, someone with a high degree of novelty-seeking behavior. In short, what we seek in leaders is often the same kind of personality type that is found in addicts, whether they are dependent on gambling, alcohol, sex or drugs.
So, when searching for your organization’s next leader, look for someone with an attenuated dopamine function: someone who is never satisfied with the status quo, someone who wants the feeling of success more than others — but likes it less.
David Linden, Addictive Personality? You Might be a Leader
Leaders get off on the dopamine that surges with the unpredictable: risk, exploration, indiscreet sex, and invention.
(Sounds like me, actually.)
I personally feel Facebook will remain for a long time to come.
Cringely heard a talk by Roger McNamee in which McNamee cites the now-conventional tech viewpoint: Facebook has won.
Again, I’m not saying he’s wrong, but what I took away from this speech was first an image of Microsoft as the Roman Colosseum being mined for marble after the barbarian invasion, and second a sense that while Facebook is certainly a huge social, cultural, and business phenomenon, I just don’t see it being around for very long.
Facebook is a huge success. You can’t argue with 750 million users and growing. And I don’t see Google+ making a big dent in that. What I see instead is more properly the fading of the entire social media category, the victim of an ever-shortening event horizon.
Each era of computing seems to run for about a decade of total dominance by a given platform. Mainframes (1960-1970), minicomputers (1970-1980), character-based PCs (1980-1990), graphical PCs (1990-2000), notebooks (2000-2010), smart phones and tablets (2010-2020?). We could look at this in different ways like how these devices are connected but I don’t think it would make a huge difference.
Now look at the dominant players in each succession – IBM (1960-1985), DEC (1965-1980), Microsoft (1987-2003), Google (2000-2010), Facebook (2007-?). That’s 25 years, 15 years, 15 years, 10 years, and how long will Facebook reign supreme? Not 15 years and I don’t think even 10. I give Facebook seven years or until 2014 to peak.
Does this feel wrong to you? Listen to your gut and I think you’ll agree with me even if we don’t exactly know why.
Roger may not care since he will have already made his Facebook fortune and then some. But I think this foreshortening is important because it makes Facebook the winner, yes, but the winner of what? Super-IPO of the decade? Yes. Dow-30 company of 2025? No.
My interest is in what follows Facebook, which I think must be its disintermediation by all of us reclaiming our personal data, possibly through our embracing the very HTML5 that Roger loves so much. The trend is clear from “the computer is the computer” through “the network is the computer” to what’s next, which I believe is “the data is the computer.”
You’ll notice I didn’t mention Apple. Black swan.
Facebook is the new AOL.
Cringley doesn’t get into my argument about the rise of social operating systems, but he points to Apple, where we just might see it first.