@T: ALWAYS THE TWAIN

Well I’ve spent the last few days wrapping up London to-do’s before I fly to the US. I met with Martin Bloom who’s involved with the Innovation Warehouse, completed some paperwork and bought items that I need for the US which aren’t available there.

I have to admit that I’m really looking forward to this next phase in my career. The mentors and investors I’ll have access to in the US are more suitable for the corporate objectives of my venture. It wasn’t a straightforward decision to  physically leave  the UK in search of mentors, investors and talent; I spent time investigating the startup ecosystem and gauging my chances of success if I stayed put.

However, maybe the mark of an entrepreneur is to go and seek out  smarter opportunities rather than accept any stagnant status quo.

US technology companies must surely be global leaders for good reasons and I’m lucky enough to be about to be educated by some of  the people who have created these companies.

Mamma Mia and I decided to hang out in the Saatchi gallery on Saturday and these are some of the works we admired:

The painting that looks like aluminum foil scrunched up is a very clever way of showing what perspective, contours and line illuminations can do and it stands out from the usual “let’s paint some glasses and their reflections” so I think this is one of  my favorite contemporary paintings. The Cher-Che Guevara screenprint by Scott King has notes of Andy Warhol so, whilst it’s striking, is not an entirely innovative form of art and therefore not as good as William Daniel’s tin foil alludes.

After the Saatchi gallery I made my way to a friend’s 30th birthday party where we “signed in” by creating a portrait of  ourselves with colored paper, pens, gluestick, glitter symbols and other paraphernalia we loved @school:

Naturally, I took my inspiration from Sigrid Holmwood’s fluorescent egg tempera pieces that were exhibiting at the Saatchi gallery. No prizes for guessing which portrait was mine!

Yups, the one with rose-tinted eyes (ok there was no blush only hot fluorescent pink paper), the blue mouth (an ironic statement because I rarely swear and write with asterisks when dealing with expletives like s***) and the bouncy curls (actually my hair is Oriental black and…..straight).

Ah and I’d like to make an observation about my generation and manners. On my way to the party I dropped by  Chinatown to pick up some food for the party (delicious heavy noodles, chili sauce, Tom Yum peanuts, a bottle  of Sake and more). I was also laden down with my bag of birthday presents and other  items so ……,on the bus, I was more than happy to find an empty seat.

Now there were several people the same age as me who were not over-flowing with bags (in fact they had none) and they were sitting close to the doors (the seats typically allocated to those less able to stand). A super-glamorous elderly lady of about 60 boarded the bus. Not a single one of those people the same age as me stood up to offer her a seat (!) — despite it being obvious by the way she grasped the railings that she was unsteady on her feet in a moving vehicle.

Of course I stood up and let her have my seat. Then I lugged my bags over to a corner and did the best I could with balancing those and standing upright in a moving vehicle — LOL.

This was A-OK. Afterwards, as she got off the bus, she made a special effort to come over to thank me which was really cool and I hope I’m that glamorous and soignée in decades to come…….

So it was a GR8 Saturday!

This September I’m going to the US to progress my startup. Originally I had hoped to stay in the UK, collaborate with others interested and involved with the semantic and context space and to attract UK investors but when I did a deeper SWOT analysis (strength, weaknesses, opportunities and threats) of the UK ecosystem — from business support to audience adoption potential to investor financing — I finally accepted that the chances of TWAIN IT being nurtured and becoming a success in the US are higher.

Without going into too much detail about the trials, tribulations and challenges facing UK startups, the contrast between US and UK’s approaches to cutting edge technology and entrepreneurs may be best illustrated by these articles:

• http://www.mobileindustryreview.com/2010/03/the_us_startup_visa_a_boon_for_dismayed_frustrated_british_entrepreneurs.html

• http://www.freddestin.com/blog/2010/03/a-cry-for-europe.html

• http://news.cnet.com/8301-30685_3-20010832-264.html

• http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10152929

• http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/rorycellanjones/2010/07/uk_tech_is_anyone_listening.html

• http://paidcontent.co.uk/article/419-atlas-venture-reorg-moves-european-investing-to-boston/

• http://blogs.ft.com/techblog/2010/01/atlas-ventures-pulls-back-from-london/

When one of the larger VCs like Atlas Ventures decides to move its European operations to………BOSTON — as a reflection of how tough it is for  European VCs to raise money from Institutional Limited Partners to back them — then it’s obvious that the UK ecosystem for financing isn’t making the progress out of infancy to adulthood in quite the same way as the US did.

Unfortunately, the situation is what it is. As entrepreneurs we can choose to  go with this flow or we can go find another flow more conducive to getting us where we need to be.

So the universal truth about startup life is that it’s often chaotic and if the founder(s) aren’t dynamic, adaptable and super-skilled (or at least have access to talented people who can compensate for their skills gaps) then the chaos consumes the startup and sinks it……….:*(.

Vision, passion and chutzpah are advantages but even more of a plus is when the founder(s) have strong execution skills to back up those qualities in a coherent way.

In today’s post, I’d like to share how resource and talent constraints need not necessarily result in disasters. Quite often what happens when entrepreneurs get a semi-good idea is that they throw cash at designers and developers to design them a snazzy website and, in the process, they unfortunately forget that this should be tethered with business model and revenue objectives as well as a UI that’s comprehensible and easy to use.

It would actually be better for those founders not to waste capital in this way but to focus on the product, its user base and its business model.

One Semantic play in particular (alas for them no more because they burned through US$20+ million of cash but didn’t understand their core user proposition and couldn’t deliver on system’s improvements) was a cursory lesson in……….

SMART = SIMPLE SOLUTIONS NOT SPIN.

Superficially, their UI was “rich” with lots of content and a multitude of features. However since their semantic algorithms were unable to provide CONTEXT that content was actually static and compounded the non-performance of the platform. Compare this with Google with its single search bar or the way iPad works and it becomes obvious that navigating the clever complex algorithms don’t need to be on the consumer’s consciousness.

One Touch. One Click. One Icon / Info Bar is about what most people can handle and it’s how they prefer to handle info and technology.

Unfortunately, another universal truth is that once a platform has been coded it’s more expensive to go back and start again and it would seriously disrupt the service for users.

This incoherent approach to strategic implementation also arises because technical founders are rarely versed in business knowhow whilst business founders rarely have the tech knowhow and when they do partner up, they invariably find themselves communicating at cross purposes. At later stages of the startup this is what causes “management and strategic differences” that can contribute to the company being less successful than if the principals involved are on similar and complementary planes of perspectives.

Add excessive “spin” to the mix and the primary objectives (SOLVE USERS’ NEEDS, MAKE A PRODUCT THAT’S STRAIGHTFORWARD AND COMPANY-USER SYMBIOSIS IN MONETIZATION) get lost in the wash which means no one wins and leaps of tech advancement are not realized.

So amidst the chaos of startup life, what’s a sensible approach?

Well………….wherever possible………….SCHEMATIZE THE USER FLOWS BEFORE THE SYSTEM IS CODED.

For exampple, here’s what happens when we cross Michael Porter’s 4P principles of business modeling with the tech knowhow of wireframing a simple, clean UI:

This focuses management to remember the audience they’re servicing as well as what value utility those users are receiving from the platform (that some of them may be prepared to pay for).

Eagle-eyed readers will instantaneously recognize that this 8-pod molecule is the same structure I deploy on  @T’s homepage :

It is also the basis of my data consciousness model:

What does this show? Well, in problem-solving when we can visualize a structure and its components that can help us unlock the problem we have to apply some creative adaptability. The components can seem unrelated, random and even confusing. Yet by anchoring it around a central core and then attaching each of the 8 pods into a sequence (a DNA) it becomes part of a coherent whole. The same is as true in business models as in UI design.

In this way, instead of “wrestling the octopus” we have a clear understanding of what our central goal is: (data) consciousness whilst keeping in sight its constituents.

An experienced developer I recently met made the observation that I’m able to “see the Big Picture and also loop the details back in an agile way, which is rare. It’s a good quality to have in product development.” By comparison to him and many others, I’m a novice so I take his comments as a compliment.

Administration is a key skill I’ve been thinking about in recent days because a contact sent me their business plan to sanity check prior to their fundraising exercise. Their documents just reminded me how much paperwork goes into creating a startup — behind the scenes, the elevator pitches and the slick UIs. There’s the written business case, the tech documentation for the build, all the financials, all the legal filings for trademarks and patents (as applicable), all the contracts of employment plus service licensing agreements plus shareholder agreements and user agreements, all the marketing and press literature and another stack of paper dedicated to everyday operational communiques.

It’s not quite as extensive as one of the “deal bibles” that used to be delivered to my office  — one M&A took up 15 boxes of literature and one colleague went into an entire vault of information during the firesale of Enron’s assets and we were deciding which assets were worth buying on the cheap — but even a startup has a lot of admin to contend with.

Now I always love to check out other people’s business plans for 3 reasons:

(1.) I can often help them re-engineer it to increase the likelihood of attracting appropriate investors;

(2.) It’s always informative to experience how others approach their business models; and

(3.) Taking yourself out of your own area of focus and expertise is always healthy for intellectual development; it provides reference points for me to access later in any multi-disiplinary cross-pollinations I may do in problem-solving.

Anyway, the administration aspect also makes me think about………ACCOUNTING and how inappropriate assumptions during the modeling process can put the strategy off course whilst on-the-spot assumptions can shortcut a startup towards success. The best thing a startup can do is to proxy model themselves against either a direct competitor or a company providing broadly similar services — rather than carve out a cashflow model and balance sheet from scratch.

Recently I heard several UK startups claim that, “The numbers don’t matter, we can just make them up. That’s what everyone else does. The investors don’t care, they’re just taking a punt on the team.”

Hmmn………and this may be one of the reasons the startup sector in the UK is less developed than in the US where they do, at least, try to crunch some numbers about potential market size from credible industry sources (IDC, McKinsey, Gartner, Datamonitor et al).

Just as another observation: the startups which have typically failed have been the ones which “made up the numbers” (whether that’s in # of users, how long they engage with the site per visit, how sticky they are after X months etc.) to try and persuade investors to keep pumping money into them.

Sooner rather than later it becomes obvious that these “made up numbers” are unsustainable and actually ERODE the value of the investment.

Anyway, in the interests of avoiding such pitfalls I’m using a number of financial modeling tools to sanity-check my own projections (the example below is a dummy version — the real version is available only under NDA):

It’s also not the case that someone with an MBA, ACCA or chartered status always produces a spot-on financial model. Again this may arise from lack of access to assumptions data and this deficiency then feeds into the model as a whole. It’s something to be aware of — if not avoided as much as possible.

As for the imagination, innovation, ingenuity, leadership and execution traits needed in a startup founder, those are probably more of a natural state than administration skills.

Yet it’s probably the attention to detail during admin (e.g. checking through invoices and ensuring its compliance with the original financial plan) which makes the startup a success and how much of a success, long-term.

Recently, I’ve been in touch with former colleagues based in NYC and I’d like to share this curiosity with readers. These colleagues are listed on LinkedIn and yet unless you knew them personally or had worked with them, you’d simply never know the extent or context of their experiences and the types of companies and transactions they’ve been involved with.

They work in Private Equity and Venture Capital and at the most will list the fact they have MBAs from Harvard, Columbia, INSEAD or some other Top 10 business school on their LinkedIn profiles. This “under the radar” approach is not surprising for the simple reason that it’s a way to avoid getting tarnished by the public flak over the crisis. These guys did NOT create the toxic mortgage CDOs, they’re the ones applying their knowhow in the clean up. Thank goodness it’s this team because, personal bias aside, they’re the best in the business.

Now, recently in the UK, there’s been some discussion about trying to make the PE and VC sectors more transparent — particularly for pre-seed stage companies, to empower them to navigate the whole complex investment and financing landscape. I proposed that the leading VC firms engage in a public debate using some of the most advanced mapping tools to strand their arguments (for and against) measures that they could consider and implement to support grassroots startups.

One VC made the observation: “Yes, but you’ve worked in VC. You know we don’t debate publicly.”

Yes, I know. VCs also don’t complete their LinkedIn profiles the way the marketers do. VCs, by and large, aren’t sell-side unless it’s an exit and they don’t have much interest in appearing high on any SEO list unlike marketers.

Importantly, discretion matters and there are also a whole raft of SEC / FSA rules governing disclosure that the VC and PE community observes which contrasts with what happens in the marketing, press and startup sectors.

Anyway, I’m looking forward to catching up with my former team once I’m in NYC again. Also heading up to MIT to see where they are with the whole “timestamping versus clustering” work and across to Silicon Valley-San Fran to catch up with some contacts before I head for San D. where I’ve been invited to go horse trekking. I wonder what that’s going to be like after riding a camel in the Sahara — lol.

A new chapter opens and it’s………..a welcome change. A BRAVE NEW WORLD.

Barry Robson very recently wrote on a group thread: “@Twain: You are not only the great integrator, you are a true “Renaissance Man”.

This is an amazing compliment and I’m really humbled because Barry’s background is that he’s CEO of the Dirac Foundation, St Mary’s Hospital Imperial College London; a Council Member of IBM’s Deep Computing Institute and Strategic Advisor at IBM’s TJ Watson Research Center; previously Professorial Lecturer at Mount Sinai Medical Center and also lectured at Stanford University Medical School. His full bio is here: http://www.research.ibm.com/people/r/robson/ and he’s been involved with genuinely ground-breaking projects.

For non-scientists, the Dirac Foundation continues the work of Paul Dirac who was awarded the Nobel Prize for Physics in 1933 (when he was only 31!!!) alongside Erwin Schrödinger, the genius behind the infamous “Schrödinger’s Cat” paradox. Dirac is credited with originating equations that describe the behavior of fermions and the potential existence of…..anti-matter.

It’s even more amazing because this discussion group comprises, arguably, some of the smartest AI and Natural Language Programming (NLP) computer scientists in the world; people who graduated with PhDs and Professorships decades before I was even a twinkle in my parents’ eyes and who’ve been dedicated to developing intelligent systems for over 3 decades more than me. I’m an unknowing novice by comparison to these super, super-clever people who share and spark knowhow in very contextual and relevant ways; and whom I admire, respect and aspire to emulate along my knowhow adventures and evolution.

So what caused Barry’s compliment? Well……….I “twained” three seemingly mutually exclusive approaches to code coherency and interoperability:

(1.) Cultural and perceptual calibration a priori to processing;

(2.) NLP statement structuring for verification of lexicon anomalies; and

(3.) Quantum Mechanics notation.

Here’s how the thread took shape; part of my contribution’s at the top:

I also threw in a solution to resolve Hamiltonian issues (these arose from Einstein’s original Quantum theories and are specifically about time-time capture, btw). It simply made sense in my mind to reconfigure subjunctive tenses from Latinate languages and to re-imagine it as computational code that would fit into double integrations for context mapping as well as differentials for transitional time-position capture.

Originally, when Barry introduced QM code and Hermitian operators into our discussion on “Can we compute the answer to any question?” following a video by Stephen Wolfram of Wolfram Alpha that indicated we would be able to, I have to admit that it was relatively new to me (or to crack a physicist’s joke…….it was µ relativity, ha ha). Anyway, Barry wrote:

For practical purposes that basically means that in standard i-complex QM you rotate the square root of minus one to the hyperbolic number (square root of plus one), and write your relators (verbs prepositions etc. ) as Hermitian operators.

Now  for anyone without a maths / astrophysics degree all of this would read like gobbledy-gook with the exception of the words “For practical purposes that basically means” and “verbs prepositions etc.”. For someone like me I home in on “i-complex” and become interested because I’ve had a long held belief in trying to fuse matrix maths with DNA paths and linguistics to try and arrive at genuine semantics.

Naturally, when faced with something I know less than I should about, I like to ask questions so that I can construct frames of reference for myself and also sanity-check the theories and process themselves for comprehension and coherency. My grandmother did say I was a “curious child and asked so many questions!” — LOL.

My questions stemmed along lines of construct and substitution for ensuring code consistency and coherency and Barry was kind enough to explain and provide examples of what he means by QM, Hermitian operators and twister notation. Here’s his explanation:

Using QM notation such as <subject| verb | object> as analogous to <A operator |B> in QM, operators can be products of operators, so adverbs that qualify them belong between the “|” symbols. Adjectives are actually quite subtle. They could be regarded as Hermitian operators that are completely symmetric as in <grass| green | grass>, but that is unwieldy and I tend to think of them in orthodata to metadata as in <grass:=green| or arguably <green_things:=grass|. QM often ignores the “:=” bit. What they mean is <momentum:=2.3 mass-velocity units | position:= 3 Angstroms>

Time, subjunctive etc belong as verb qualifying operators, unless like in Japanese you want a time tense adjective. Time suggests considering the CPT operations of physics, which I am trying, rather than simpy add a new mindless dimension to the thesaurus. Subjunctive seems to me to have a probabilistic-conditional aspect about it, though one can appeal to the twistor forms (see below) as in <|| wish that | <I| am | correct> >.

The article could be held to have adjectival force, but ultimately belongs I think in between the “|” with the verbs as a matter of categorical relationship. It is more natural to write

<some cats| are | black> = <cats| may be| black> (existential qualification for the general case)

<cats| are |mammals> (universal qualification for the general case)

<Aristotle| is |a man> (universal qualification for the incidence case)

<The philosopher| is |a man> (universal qualification for the incidence case)

<A philosopher| is |a man> (existential qualification for the incidence case)

After about 10 seconds I grasped this notation convention, so I proposed these transformations:

A-ha, thanks, Barry. So it seems to me that even optimally QM and its Hermitian operators (at the moment) work along an equivalent functional way to how logic questions work in IQ tests of the type:

• All cats have tails. Some cats are black. Chester has a black tail.

Can we tell what color Chester is? Or whether Chester is a cat or in fact a dog?

There are 2 Hermitian operator applications of particular interest.

(1.) When you write “I tend to think of them in orthodata to metadata as in <grass:=green| or arguably <green_things:=grass|”, would it be possible to adjust it to these scenarios?

• <green_things:=naive|

In English there is a phrase “green about the gills” which indicates someone fresh and naive.

• <green_things:=new|

Universally, the color green is associated with growth and new shoots.

• <green_things:=prosperous|

In Chinese, the homophone for the word for color green is the word for prosperity and happiness.

• <green_things:=fresh|

In Italian, the word verde for green also has connotations with verdura (vegetables which are fresh).

(2.) You also wrote, “Subjunctive seems to me to have a probabilistic-conditional aspect about it, though one can appeal to the twistor forms (see below) as in <|| wish that | <I| am | correct> >.”

The subjunctive tense is deployed in French, Italian and Spanish when expressing:

* events which are uncertain/doubtful to happen;

* emotions (hopes, fears, etc.);

* opinions rather than facts (subjectivity involved); and

* beliefs.

Time-wise, these are then sub-categorized into future subjunctive, present subjunctive, imperfect subjunctive, past perfect subjunctive and present perfect subjunctive. 

So…..could the “twistor” notation look something like this:

<|would || wish that | <I| am | correct> >

<|might || wish that | <I| am | correct> >

<|did || wish that | <I| am | correct> >

<|had || wish that | <I| am | correct> >

<have had || wish that | <I| am | correct> >

OR could it look something of the form:

<|time || wish that | <I| am | correct> >

I thought about this a little more, in amongst putting together an ecosystem initiative for UK startups (more in another post), and had one of my “Twain Synergy Epiphany” moments (TSE which will henceforth become some kind of energy or force unit like Joules or Newtons and be pronounced as “T-see”, LOL). It started to distill, crystallize and map in my mind how QM could work with NL and perception capture a priori, so that’s what I shared and that’s what caused Barry Robson to write:

“@Twain: You are not only the great integrator, you are a true “Renaissance Man”.

Readers should be aware that one of my personal heroes is Leonardo da Vinci and never am I more grateful that it’s the likes of him rather than Barbie that my parents taught me to appreciate. For sure, without their grounding and early orientation on the world’s most extraordinary talents, I would now not have reference frames or the intelligence to interact with these super, super-clever people whom I admire and respect.

So now having been suitably impressed and inspired by Barry Robson I’m going to apply to IBM’s SmartCamp competition:

* http://www-05.ibm.com/ie/smarterplanet/smartcamp/index.html

Hopefully, my friend David Price of debategraph.org is reading this post and will also apply since debategraph definitely would contribute to a Smarter Planet as IBM envisions, :*).

Additionally, readers should watch out for IBM testing their Watson machine on ‘Jeopardy’ soon. It was originally announced back in April 2009 and has been scheduled to happen soon (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/20/magazine/20Computer-t.html):

Here’s the format of my new business card. On the front is the TWAIN IT brand logo.

On the back is this:

I decided on this design and format since readers may recall that the aim is for TWAIN IT to become completely integrated into the circuitry and DNA of the Web OS of the future (ETA: 2020).

Eagle-eyed readers might have noticed the globule of DNA inside the white tadpole of the Yin Yang symbol. This is a reminder that we’re informed by our heritages. Yet the carte blanche eye in the rainbow tadpole above this (which completes the Yin Yang) also means that our future is full of bright color and possibilities: a kaleidoscope of opportunities to become Enlightened.

To date, all of the branding has been generated from my wee brain, :*). Some friends were concerned before that I may be a cyborg since I can be reasonably technical but my creativity definitely confirms I’m a…….HUMAN — lol.

So I’ve had my iPad for almost a fortnight — although it’s only been operational for about a week (more later) — and needless to say……….I LOVE IT (or as those keen to abuse the English language with text-speak would say “I heart it”)!!! In this blog post I’ll share some videos on iPad Apps that I like and will be installing.

Now readers may remember that when I was in Paris last autumn I happened to buy three sets of ballet pumps, which were to be worn once this summer arrived. It’s taken the schizophrenic British weather some time to let the sun out to play with all the Icelandic ash clouds and typical hazy indecision, but at the weekend the summer did arrive whilst I was at eBay-Paypal’s offices to do Launch48 (essentially we got 48 hours to take a Web/mobile idea and turn it into a prototype). As well as the vitamin D helping me to be mentally alert for the workshops, the sunshine also gave me the opportunity to wear a bright, flowery summer dress and become TWAIN IS A WALKING ADVERT FOR APPLE:

I have the same ballet pumps in red and black, by the way — LOL.

Meanwhile, my iPad took a week to become operational mostly because activating my microSIM for 3G took a few days and another few days passed to get delivery of screen protectors etc. — the delays due to the end-May bank holidays. I waited for the screen protectors because a smudged, dirty or scratched screen can definitely be mitigated against, :*).

Soon my iPad will also be adorned with one of the following cool covers (readers can comment and let me know which one they prefer):

I suspect the beer one might get a few votes for its fun factor, :*).

Now, in case any readers are interested, the most expensive case I’ve happened across is this red leather one from a Hong Kong based company and it costs US$108.99 (plus another US$12.99 for standard international shipping) which compares with Apple’s own brand one which is made from rubber and costs US$39:

No doubt there will be even more extravagant and expensive luxury iPad accessories as time passes and we can already see this with the bling-bling Swarvoski Hello Kitty cover which is being sold for……US$450!!!

Meanwhile, as much as “I heart Hello Kitty” (lol), I can think of smarter ways to spend that US$450 such as on business-relevant iPad Apps:

(1.) AUTODESK SKETCHBOOK PRO

(2.) IANNOTATE PDF

(3.) iMOCKUPS

(4.) APPLE IWORKS

(5.) EVERNOTE

For a list of 90 general applications which are useful / fun, TechRadar produced one of the best articles on this:

TWAIN SHOULD GET IPAD COMMISSION!

One of my best friends, R, sent me a really funny email from NYC after I spoke with her about the iPad. She believes that Apple should pay me commission for successfully converting her into a buyer of their product. In fact, the machine’s been in the US a wee while before the UK and she hadn’t bought it because Apple’s marketing campaign hadn’t really shown its UTILITY, only its coolness so people are saying, “Yeah and so what?! Why buy this when we can get a notebook / touchscreen phone / etc.” Yet a few tailored specifics from me about how she could use it to design handicrafts on the go (bags, jewelry, etc.), present to people on the move without lugging her Macbook around as well as make free wi-fi calls with the Truphone app and she went to Apple store immediately after our call and placed a reservation on a machine!

A SCINTILLATION ABOUT PERSONALIZED RECOMMENDATION SYSTEMS

This also got me thinking about existing recommendation tools on the likes of Amazon, netflix, Facebook et al. The assumption is that just because we click “Like” for something, all our friends will be curious about a product / service and like it too (‘Birds of a feather flock together’ type of psychology). However, I don’t believe in these existing systems; that is I don’t believe they accurately reflect each of our intelligence and are actually turning us into drones directed by the dumb algorithms rather than remaining intelligent discerners who instruct the machines.

After all I appreciate that other people, including my friends, have completely diverse and differentiated tastes and mindsets from me. They’re not homogenous clones of me and I’m not a homogenous clone of them (and it would be seriously dull, boring and silly if we were homogenous drones, :*)). What they like does not automatically translate into what I like or vice versa. The key to smart recommendation is less about like assimilations and more about differentiation context.

So, for example, I’m aware of all the other products my friend’s already purchased and I can also gauge the intent of gizmos she’s in need of / interested in exploring. I can also contextualize this with her tech tastes (simple, powerful, seamless processing with clean line designs) as well as specific personal growth projects she’s working on (handicraft creativity), so when I recommend the iPad to her it is about an emotional understanding of her personal utility and tastes rather than what some technical specification that an autistic algorithm and 5-star rating generates.

See? If I am thinking about stuff like this, I’m definitely thinking about how TWAIN IT can become smarter and better than whatever algorithms are in Google, Facebook, Twitter et al with their rudimentary like/dislike, follow/sheeple, ramp-up/ramp-down approach to online analytics that actually abjugates the wonderful complexities of human intelligence, ability to communicate discerning / ambiguous tastes and make decisions from options which are not necessarily linearly derived but laterally contextualized.

So……..onwards with TWAIN IT!

Well, I suppose if I had a voice and a story like Susan “SuBo” Boyle, the Global Brain knol would have hit ten thousand views within 24 hours rather than two years — LOL. That will teach me about whether I should go for mass common denominator material or high-end, abstract niche topics like artificial intelligence consciousness — double LOL, :*).

In any case, even though the viewership is completely dwarfed by SuBo’s 300 million YouTube views for an obscure collaboration network comprised mostly of MDs, academics and techies a ten thousand view count is a fairly good result.

Anyway, this knol remains a philosophical grounding to the applications I’m developing themselves. Today I’m having lunch with the guy who led development of Yahoo! Maps and Yahoo! Answers. We’re going to swap notes on data objects and microformats and how inefficient existing ranking systems are which then affect the order in which search items appear on lists etc. etc. etc.

Am I loyal to Google or to Yahoo? Neither. I’m loyal to improving data efficiency, context and clarity on the Web.