Tag: facebook

• Be your own bitch

  I just joined Warpcast. You can find my profile, here.

  At first glance, Warpcast is going to look a lot like X. But instead of tweets, you cast. There are also various topic channels, similar to how Reddit works. But the most important difference is that Warpcast is a client for the Farcaster protocol, which is a social network built on Ethereum. This means that it is a decentralized social network.

  You won’t see of any this if you decide to sign up. All of the esoteric crypto things are hidden in the background. But it’s there. And it ultimately means that, as a user, you get to own your online identity and whatever content and following you create. Meaning, you can take it with you if you decide you no longer want to use Warpcast and instead want to access the network through another client.

  It also means that software developers now have a real incentive to build things on top of the protocol, because unlike with a centralized service like X, they can be confident that they won’t get the rug pulled out from underneath them. And herein lies the feature that will ultimately lead to an enormous amount of new ideas and innovation.

  In real estate terms, you can think of developing on top of a centralized service like building within a theme park owned by a single company. The theme park might want you to build on their land, right now, but if at some point it no longer suits their business needs, they can always change the game on you.

  On the other hand, building in a city on land you own outright is a lot like developing on top of a decentralized service. Sure, you need roads and municipal infrastructure to service your land (think of these like the above protocol), but you generally don’t need to worry that the city might wake up one day and remove all of this important infrastructure. It’s a given. And that’s a fundamental difference, even if the buildings might look the same in the end.

  Venture capitalist Fred Wilson once explained it in this way, “don’t be a Google bitch, don’t be a Facebook bitch, and don’t be a Twitter bitch. Be your own bitch.” What he meant by this is that if you build on someone else’s land, then you’re opening yourself up to being their bitch. What you want to be is your own bitch. And similar to how our cities work, this is the potential of decentralized services.

  As I write this post, I currently have 6 followers on Warpcast. If you’d like to be number 7, you can follow me here.

  2024.05.22

• Twitter just launched NFT profile pictures

  I was reading this morning about how Meta is working on features that will allow users to display their NFTs on their social media profiles, and to possibly even buy and sell them from within Facebook and/or Instagram. I thought this was kind of newsworthy and so, after the reading the article, I opened up Twitter to share the story. This is then what popped up:

  

  It is an invitation to use an NFT as my profile picture. Now, I am already doing this (it’s a CryptoBabyPunk), except that it would take someone a bit of work to determine if I truly owned the NFT or if I was just posing as a proud CryptoBabyPunk owner for the purposes of trying to increase my internet stature.

  So what this new feature is intended to be is a way to easily demonstrate proof of ownership. Once you connect your crypto wallet and select your NFT, your profile picture changes to a “special hexagonal shape.” This is the marker. Though you have to be a paying Twitter customer to do it (currently a few dollars a month).

  Some or many of you may be wondering why this is even worth talking about. Maybe you like your circular Twitter profile picture just the way it is. But these moves and announcements by large companies are both a vote of confidence for the crypto space and greater “utility” for NFTs.

  The value that somebody might derive from an NFT is wide ranging. In some cases it might just be something to look at (which is generally how art works). And in some cases the NFT might grant access to exclusive events or provide other perks, some real and some alleged. It’s all very much evolving as we speak. But in every case, you really need to be able to differentiate real from fake. What Twitter just did is a step in that direction.

  Broadly speaking, the more infrastructure that gets built out around NFTs, the more value they will have. I think bringing NFT collections to our social media profiles is, for example, a perfectly obvious extension. Here are my photos. Here are my videos. Here’s the stuff I’m tagged in. And here’s my beautiful and wonderful NFT art collection.

  You can bet that the NFTs will become just as curated and carefully managed as the rest of the profile.

  2022.01.20

• Dwelling in peace

  

  

  

  These “aesthetic monsters” are part of a new NFT collection that I recently bought into. They’re called Angomon (supposedly “ango” translates from Japanese into “dwelling in peace”). And they can be purchased on the Magic Eden NFT marketplace. At the time of writing this post, the floor price is about 1.15 SOL.

  The ultimate plan is for these characters to live in some sort of 3D world that will be called the Angoverse (which is an obvious play on metaverse). The team is also planning to provide NFT holders with the original 3D files for these Angomon so that owners can 3D print their own real-world figurines. Longer term, the hope is that there will be official Angomon collectible figurines available for purchase.

  All of these things are of course future plans. They could happen or they could not. These NFTs could have tremendous value or they could not. I just thought these monsters looked cool and fashionable, and so I bought a few. Right now the plan is to frame them and display them all at Parkview Mountain House.

  But it is also interesting to note how go-to-market strategies are changing in this new world of crypto and web3. Fred Wilson recently wrote about this over on his blog. In web2 (think the Facebook/Instagram era), most consumer applications started out with a tool. The network came after.

  Chris Dixon called this strategy, “come for the tool, stay for the network.” In the case of Instagram, the tool was initially photo filters. People used it to apply those filters that made every photo look brown and hipster-like. But eventually network effects took over and that became more important. There are were lots of people using it.

  In web3, everything now seems to start with some kind of asset or token. People buy in and then become invested in the project, which is interesting because they then begin to market out of self-interest. This post is not about that and is more about sharing something that I think is cool.

  Fred Wilson has proposed a new slogan for this. It is: “come for the assets, stay for the experience.” So these Angomon are now assets of mine. If the experience does eventually come, I guess I’ll stick around. Hello web3.

  2021.11.24

• Meatspace vs. metaverse — what is the best way to flex?

  

  With every passing year, the Matrix feels less and less like science fiction. With the continued rise of the metaverse — Zuckerberg is betting all of Facebook on it — we are increasingly living our lives between two worlds: one is offline and one is online. What this will ultimately mean (for us and for our cities) is of course up for debate. But what is clear is that the traditional trappings of real life have quickly made their way online into the metaverse. Arthur Hayes recently penned this fantastic article about the future of the world (it’s the metaverse) and the role of art (including NFT art). In it, he makes the argument that to “flex” is integral to the human experience. Here’s what he means by that:

  As social beings, the sole purpose of many activities and purchases is to publicly display how much energy you can waste. The nightclub economy is extremely a propos to this concept. Individuals walk into a dark room, listen to loud music (art), dance (a waste of energy akin to a mating call), and pay exorbitant amounts of money to drink liquid. Everyone gets dressed up real nice in articles of clothing that serve no useful purpose other than to demonstrate that the wearer spent a lot of money to display their social status to the rest of the clubbers present.

  People go to clubs to flex. In the words of the late Clayton Christensen, that is the “job” to be done.

  Why this matters is that many of us are now doing the same kind of things online. Buying a CryptoPunk (an OG NFT) for a large sum of money and posting it as your social media profile pic is a flex. Is this rational or irrational behaviour? Whatever your answer, it is akin to paying several hundred dollars for a t-shirt from some cool streetwear brand. The real job to be done is not that you desperately need a t-shirt to cover your upper torso. It is the signalling that goes along with owning something scarce and valuable. One of the things that is so special about NFT-permissioned stuff is that there’s now a simple way to prove and enforce all of these things: ownership, scarcity, and so on.

  What’s equally fascinating to me is how offline and online will end up interacting with each other. (Arthur refers to our offline world as the meatspace. I don’t know if he coined the term, but I’m going to rolling with it for the purposes of this post.) If people end up preferring to flex online instead of offline (and I’m sure many already do), what does that do to our meatspace(s)? And what does it do to our cities and how we build? I have no doubt that these questions are coming.

  Photo by Richard Horvath on Unsplash

  2021.08.21

• Finding an audience (on Facebook)

  Social media can be both fun and useful. Over the weekend, we were exploring a few different design options for an address sign at Mackay Laneway House and so I posted this image on Twitter and storied it on Instagram. I got a bunch of responses, as well as some great suggestions. And we ultimately ended up making a small change to the design. That process was both fun and useful. The final design is now out for pricing and production.

  

  But as we all know, there is also a dark side to social media. The algorithms that power social media have been optimized to amplify whatever drives the most engagement. Oftentimes that means whatever gets people the most enraged. In this recent NY Times article, Stuart A. Thompson and Charlie Warzel make a compelling argument that Facebook has actually been coaxing many Americans into taking more extreme views on the platform — it made them more popular.

  And we’re not talking about extreme views on home address signs.

  2021.01.18

• Shoppable AR

  I don’t think Snapchat is on a lot of people’s radars these days. (Though it did recently become worth more than Twitter.) But every time I hear about what they’re building I can’t help but think, “Wow, that’s really cleaver and creative. I see a longer-term vision at work here. And if it all works out, this could be something very special.”

  This past week it was announced that the company is going long on something they call shoppable AR (augmented reality). Already, more than 170 million of its users engage with its AR features on a daily basis. Shoppable AR is an extension of that and will allow people to do things like try on clothes, similar to the way people currently apply selfie filters. Obviously this could be a boon to online shopping.

  They’re also continuing to develop something called “Scan,” which allows people to scan a logo or barcode and trigger a specific AR experience related to a product they may be thinking about buying. It doesn’t take much to think about how some of this functionality could be applied to specific industries, such as real estate.

  But will all of this fuel growth for the company? Or will Facebook simply steal the idea if or when it catches on?

  2020.06.21

• Market power in tech

  Benedict Evan’s latest post on Microsoft, IBM, and anti-trust is excellent. In it he argues (reminds us) that market power during one generation of tech, doesn’t necessarily guarantee market power in the next. And that anti-trust intervention isn’t actually responsible for Microsoft missing out on, among other things, mobile. The rules of engagement simply changed. The PC is now a smartphone accessory.

  Here is an excerpt:

  The tech industry loves to talk about ‘moats’ around a business – some mechanic of the product or market that forms a fundamental structural barrier to competition, so that just having a better product isn‘t enough to break in. But there are several ways that a moat can stop working. Sometimes the King orders you to fill in the moat and knock down the walls. This is the deus ex machina of state intervention – of anti-trust investigations and trials. But sometimes the river changes course, or the harbour silts up, or someone opens a new pass over the mountains, or the trade routes move, and the castle is still there and still impregnable but slowly stops being important. This is what happened to IBM and Microsoft. The competition isn’t another mainframe company or another PC operating system – it’s something that solves the same underlying user needs in very different ways, or creates new ones that matter more. The web didn’t bridge Microsoft’s moat – it went around, and made it irrelevant. Of course, this isn’t limited to tech – railway and ocean liner companies didn’t make the jump into airlines either. But those companies had a run of a century – IBM and Microsoft each only got 20 years.

  For the full post, click here.

  2020.01.03

• TikTok’s revenue is apparently over $7 billion

  Last week, audio clips from an internal Q&A session at Facebook were leaked and published by the Verge. These meetings have historically always been private. In what I think was the right move, the company then decided to publicly livestream a subsequent Q&A session — you know, to show that they had nothing to hide.

  The media tended to focus on Mark Zuckerberg’s comments about the threat of Facebook being broken up by regulators. #BreakUpBigTech. Lots of people are also attempting to glean what this leak might signal about the company’s current corporate culture. But there are lots of other interesting soundbites.

  Here’s an excerpt from Zuckerberg about the Chinese social media app, TikTok:

  So yeah. I mean, TikTok is doing well. One of the things that’s especially notable about TikTok is, for a while, the internet landscape was kind of a bunch of internet companies that were primarily American companies. And then there was this parallel universe of Chinese companies that pretty much only were offering their services in China. And we had Tencent who was trying to spread some of their services into Southeast Asia. Alibaba has spread a bunch of their payment services to Southeast Asia. Broadly, in terms of global expansion, that had been pretty limited, and TikTok, which is built by this company Beijing ByteDance, is really the first consumer internet product built by one of the Chinese tech giants that is doing quite well around the world. It’s starting to do well in the US, especially with young folks. It’s growing really quickly in India. I think it’s past Instagram now in India in terms of scale. So yeah, it’s a very interesting phenomenon.

  TikTok now has over 1.4 billion installs outside of China according to TechCrunch. And in the first half of this year, it supposedly booked more than $7 billion in revenue (though most of it came from China). The company is also saying that it posted its first profit in June of this year.

  All of this is, indeed, “a very interesting phenomenon.”

  But it’s even more interesting because this is probably the first consumer-facing Chinese internet product with massive global adoption. And it has Facebook paying attention. They’re now the ones who have to play copycat — their version of TikTok is called Lasso. Of course, it’s not nearly as popular.

  2019.10.07

• The Information Age: Tech & the S&P 500

  The below chart from this morning’s Wall Street Journal is perhaps a good example of our ongoing transformation from an industrial economy to an information economy. Just four stocks — namely Microsoft, Apple, Amazon, and Facebook — have accounted for 19% of the S&P 500’s total return this year. All of them are “tech.”

  

  And this is not new to 2019. Similar contributions were made by tech last year and in 2018. I have been used to hearing about the 4 horsemen of tech. But apparently there’s even now something called the “FAANG stocks,” which refers to Facebook, Amazon, Apple, Netflix, and Google (Alphabet).

  This shift is, of course, one of the reasons why every city is trying to establish a strong tech ecosystem. I saw that first-hand in Lisbon this past week. And frankly I think the city has many of the same characteristics that made Berlin a great place for tech. It’s affordable. It’s filled with young and smart people. And it’s a fun place to be.

  There’s a reason that Lisbon now hosts the annual Web Summit, which is generally considered to be the largest tech conference in the world. (The North American offshoot, called Collision, relocated to Toronto this year in order to be in a more global city.)

  Portugal only has a population of about 10 million people. There are some 3 million people in the metropolitan area of Lisbon. But that doesn’t really matter because most startups today are immediately targeting a global customer base.

  I learned more about Portugal and Spain’s colonial pasts on this trip and I found it fascinating. In many ways, it was the start of globalization. But that was the Age of Discovery. Those centuries are over and done with. Our century is the Information Age. The above chart is part of that story.

  2019.07.21

• Libra expected to launch within Indian WhatsApp

  

  I was at a wedding last night (congrats, again, Kate + Rob) and a group of us started talking about Facebook, or, more specifically, how most of us have stopped using it all together. I deleted my account last year, but ended up having to create a ghost account with no friends just so that I could run social ads. But other than that, I don’t go on. This, of course, is a problem for Facebook. Here are some stats on its declining user base.

  This trend line could be one of the motivating factors behind Libra (Facebook’s new blockchain-based currency). Payment infrastructure, if successful, should be a lot stickier than social infrastructure. But being the classic underachiever that he is, Zuckerberg’s ambitions run even deeper than this. Max Read published a fantastic article on Libra in New York Magazine last week. Here is an excerpt:

  As far as I know, there’s only one other entity out there developing a blockchain-based digital currency for a billion-plus-member economy: China. The People’s Bank of China has been amassing blockchain and digital-currency patents as it develops its own cryptocurrency — loosely pegged to a basket of other currencies, just like Libra — which could help it more efficiently monitor and control capital flows. (So much for the decentralized, anarchist dream of cryptocurrency.) Facebook doesn’t want to compete with Mastercard, or even with Goldman Sachs. It wants to be the currency platform Mastercard operates on. Facebook’s payment product is a whole new currency because its long-term competition isn’t PayPal or Visa or even WeChat, but the renminbi, the euro, the yen, and the dollar.

  Libra is expected to be first available to Indian WhatsApp users. The goal is to gain a foothold in the $689 billion global remittance economy, of which $80 billion flowed to India last year (2018). In the short-term, this probably won’t make any or much money for the company. But it should get people using and bought in to Libra in the medium-term.

  If you’re looking for more on Libra, including what checks and balances can expected to be in place regarding your privacy and personal information, have a listen to this podcast:

  Photo by Nitin Mendekar on Unsplash

  2019.06.23