Daily insights for city builders, delivered every morning at 6 AM ET. I’m Brandon Donnelly — a Toronto-based real estate developer and founder of Globizen. I’ve been writing here since 2013.
He recorded videos from open cameras located in cities around the world (the one in the embedded tweet above is from Temple Bar in Dublin)
He scraped all Instagram photos tagged with the same general location
And then he used AI software to help compare the Instagram photos against behind-the-scenes footage of the photos actually being taken
I don’t have a problem with people posing and making numerous attempts to capture the right photo. You should see me before every meal and when I go to the gym. I think the creepy part is that many, or perhaps most, probably don’t realize just how ubiquitous video surveillance is within our cities. But the reality is that there are cameras everywhere.
I guess I’ll never be able to run for Prime Minister.
If I had to pick only one social network to use, it would be Twitter. I, of course, also enjoy Instagram because I like taking photos. But if I had to pick one, it would be Twitter.
I just find that Instagram is more about passive consumption (like watching TV), whereas on Twitter I’ve found a way to actively engage in productive discussions around the topics that interest me — everything from real estate and architecture to NFTs and photography.
The crypto community is also very centered around Twitter. I haven’t looked at the numbers, but I would think that NFT activity has been, or at least should be, a boon for the company. That said, Twitter has never really been a great business and public company.
But maybe that changes now that Elon Musk has become its largest shareholder with a 9.2% stake in the company (currently valued at a few billion). The stock jumped over 27% today. Or maybe it doesn’t change at all and this is just a fun side hustle for Elon.
Look this all makes complete sense, obvious, intuitive, simple sense. If you are the richest person in the world, and annoying, and you constantly play a computer game, and you get a lot of enjoyment and a sense of identity from that game and are maybe a little addicted, then at some point you might have some suggestions for improvements in the game. So you might leave comments and email the company that makes the game saying “hey you should try my ideas.” And the company might ignore you (or respond politely but not move fast enough for your liking). It might occur to you: “Look, I am the richest person in the world; how much could this game company possibly cost? I should just buy it and change the game however I want.” Even if your complaints are quite minor, why shouldn’t you get to play exactly the game you want? Even if you have no complaints, why not own the game you love, just to make sure it continues to be exactly what you want? The game is Twitter, the richest person in the world is Elon Musk…
Here’s a cogent argument by Dror Poleg about how urban economics can be used to explain the evolution of Web3, and also why it’s all a bit of a ponzi scheme, but that when it works, it works.
His argument revolves around ownership and participation. If you own real estate in a city, you could say that you are both a part owner of said city and a participant. You participate by virtue of living and/or doing other things there, but beyond that you also have a vested interest in the city doing well. Because if the city continues to do well and grow, there should be more demand for real estate, including yours, and that likely means your wealth will increase over time.
This same force could be said to apply when existing property owners oppose new development. It restricts supply and increases the value of people’s existing “ownership” in a city. It’s kind of like being a company and not issuing new shares so as to not dilute your existing shareholders.
This connection between ownership and participation is similarly a hallmark of Web3. In the world of crypto, users buy tokens (some fungible and some non-fungible) and those tokens provide access and rights to various things.
For example, owning tokens might allow you to vote on key decisions affecting the overall organization. And if the organization does well and continues to grow, all token holders should, in theory at least, see their wealth increase. More people will want those same tokens. Ownership and participation.
Web2 companies, on the other hand, do not typically offer this automatic connection between ownership and participation. That is, of course, unless you’re a shareholder. If you’re just a regular user of a platform like Instagram (which I am), but you don’t own any shares in Meta (I do not), then you’re only a participant.
If you happen to be a widely followed influencer then you can certainly benefit indirectly from the platform, but you do not benefit from any sort of direct ownership in the organization. Pretty much everything accrues to the house.
In fact, you also don’t own your followers, from which you derive your indirect benefit. Not to pick on Meta, but if Meta decided that your content was suddenly inappropriate for the platform, perhaps too salacious, then it could choose to close you down and your indirect benefits.
This, of course, is one of the great promises of crypto and Web3. If you’re a part owner and you have some say in the way things are being run, you can maybe avoid this kind of outcome. And if things really aren’t working out, one should have the flexibility to take their followers and be extra salacious somewhere else.
We shall see if this is ultimately how Web3 plays out, but the connection between ownership and participation is an interesting one and, if things do end up working out as planned, maybe it can be harnessed to improve our cities. Because we know the problems: inequality, housing supply and affordability, and many others. The system is clearly far from perfect.
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.
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.
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.
Whenever you see a best-of-anything ranking, you should probably ask yourself what the hell “best” even means. In this case, Resonance Consultancy is ranking the world’s cities based on six alliterative categories: place, people, programming, product, prosperity, and promotion.
Some of these metrics are qualitative, but many are, in fact, quantitative. Number of COVID-19 infections in 2020; number of direct destinations served by the city’s airports; number of foreign-born residents; number of top-rated restaurants (TripAdvisor); most Instagram check-ins, and so on.
The result is this list of the world’s best cities:
London
New York
Paris
Moscow
Tokyo
Dubai
Singapore
Barcelona
Los Angeles
Madrid
Rome
Chicago
Toronto
San Francisco
Abu Dhabi
I arbitrarily chose the top 15 cities in order to make sure that Toronto was included in this ranking. If you’d like to download a full copy of the 2021 World’s Best Cities report, you can do that over here. I recommend you check out their performance criteria.
Toronto, for example, performs very well when it comes to “people.” That’s fairly consistent across most of these rankings. But it didn’t fare so well when it comes to “place.” That category includes things like the average number of sunny days and the number of high quality sights & landmarks.
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?
In 1956, Donald Horton and Richard Wohl coined the term parasocial interaction to describe the psychological relationship that people were starting to have with TV personalities. Though radio had already started this phenomenon, the television brought with it an entirely new dimension. People started to really feel as if they knew that person on TV. They had become a friend.
But as Christopher Mims points out in this recent article about loneliness during the coronavirus pandemic, the problem with parasocial interaction is that it’s entirely one-sided. It also isn’t real: “Sitting around the house watching television, parasocializing with our favorite news anchors or sitcom characters, didn’t confer the same benefits as socializing with real people.”
The internet has further enhanced the way we parasocialize. Similar to how TV built on radio, the internet has built on TV. Instead of just scripted television shows, we now have Instagram Stories, TikTok videos, inappropriate Snaps, and many other methods of communication, some of which are maybe a little less scripted.
Of course, we also see our real friends online and those people we know, but never actually spend time with, maintaining only a loose “relationship” via the occasional emoji reaction. Mims argues that this has created a new kind of “mental equivalence.” It has become harder for our minds to distinguish between our real friends and our parasocial friends.
Recently, we have all become familiar with terms like “flatten the curve” and “social distancing.” But what is clear as we all start isolating ourselves at home — whether mostly or entirely — is this: it sucks. Even with all of the tech and social media that we now have available to us, we cannot replace what it’s like to give someone a hung, look them in the eyes, and have a meaningful conversation.
That said, the Italians seem to have really mastered this whole self-isolation thing with their balcony orchestras and internet videos like this one here:
The New Yorker recently published a “daily shout” on Instagram called, How You Know You’ve Made It, by City. It is essentially a series on city stereotypes, and it’s pretty funny. Sorry Cleveland. If you can’t see the embed below, click here.
