Brandon Donnelly

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.

Subscribe

Tag: twitter

  • 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.

  • Twitter just censored my tweet about this Eiffel Tower replica

    This morning, I came across an FT article talking about how mainland Chinese people are right now flocking to Macau to receive western mRNA vaccines. Apparently the Special Administrative Region has a single hospital offering the western varietals to “tourists”, and lots of people now want them and presumably think they are more efficacious than the Chinese alternatives. This is not surprising.

    So what actually stood out to me was the photo that FT chose for the article. It’s of the half-scale Eiffel Tower replica that was built as part of a $2.5 billion casino resort in Macau known as The Parisian Macao (pictured above). There’s even a faux Louvre-like building behind it and a “Jardin” in front of it so you can get that axial view of the tower. Welcome to Paris!

    Of course, this is not the sort of thing that excites me in the least. I understand why it is done and that there is clearly a market for it, but I don’t get it. It feels totally empty. Have we really run out of new ideas? So I decided to tweet something out to this effect and, in it, I included the fun fact that Macau is a former Portuguese colony and currently a Special Administrative Region of China, just like Hong Kong.

    But it turns out that you can’t say this on Twitter. I don’t know why, but my tweet was immediately filtered out of my feed — twice. Instead what you can say is “Macau is a SAR of a country that starts with C and ends with A.” Apparently, this is acceptable Twitter language. Hmm. This has never happened to me before.

    Thankfully, I have my own domain (which you are now reading from) where things are much freer. And collectively, we have things like the Ethereum Name Service, which is trying to create an even more censorship-resistant version of the internet. So today I decided that it was time to cancel my Twitter Blue account and put some more money into ENS tokens. This feels more like the future.

  • Twitter > Instagram

    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.

    Here is a typically funny explanation from Matt Levine introducing what just happened:

    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…

  • 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.

  • What should Airbnb launch this year?

    At the beginning of this year, Brian Chesky, who is cofounder and CEO of Airbnb, took to Twitter to ask about what products, features, and/or services the company should launch this year. The thread is filled with all sorts of interesting ideas and suggestions, as well as many responses from Brian confirming the things that Airbnb is already working on, and so here it is:

    If you’re not a Twitter person or don’t feel like going through the entire thread, you can also check out this highlight summary from Skift. They went through and curated the ones that they liked. Some of the common suggestions included tools for co-living and remote working, tools for families and larger groups (like being able to cluster bookings in a particular area), and tools that help you meet locals and other guests.

    There were also a number of suggestions around a full blown travel advisory business, as well as property management services that could help small landlords service and maintain their places. This one seems pretty compelling to me because if your goal is to get as many places/hosts as possible, you probably want to make it as easy and frictionless as possible.

    It also helps to solve the operating scale problem that is inherent with most short-term rentals. If you’ve got one property, it can be costly to manage. But if you’re Airbnb and you have lots of listings in a particular submarket, then you have some economies of scale. Then again, they’re in about 100,000 cities. So maybe that’s a lot to manage. And maybe it’s too hotel-like for a company that is facing regulatory headwinds.

    Do you have any thoughts on what Airbnb should launch this year?

  • Bangkok has a lot of messy wires

    Actor Russell Crowe tweeted this out back in October while he was in Bangkok filming a movie:

    It’s a photo of the city’s notoriously messy communication wires. As I understand it, many or most of these wires aren’t even active. The telecom industry just has a very ad hoc approach to running new ones and there’s also nobody responsible for removing any of the old ones.

    In response to this tweet, the Prime Minster of Thailand, Prayut Chan-o-cha, has called for these utilities to be tidied up and put underground. No more mess! Who knows if it’ll actually happen, but it’s kind of cool to see what can be done with a single tweet.

    I wish I could say that my tweets were also capable of inspiring such swift urban action.

  • NFTs and real estate

    I have started using my NFT collection as a rotating face on my Apple Watch. The one you see below is a Cool Bean, but I have many others in the gallery. Lately, I have been gravitating towards NFTs on the Solana blockchain because of how fast and cheap it is to transact. Though I am still much longer with ETH.

    This is all pretty geeky stuff, but it reminded me just how early we are when it comes to web3. NFT art has exploded over the last year, but the broader ecosystem is still getting built out. We are all going to want mediums in which to display and experience this new form of art. And as soon as that happens, I suspect they won’t be thought of as “just JPEGs” anymore.

    (One of the nicest digital art displays that I have seen is the MONO X7. It’s currently available for pre-order but I haven’t yet pulled the trigger.)

    On a related note, I follow a human on Twitter who goes by 6529, because that is the Cryptopunk number that she/he owns. 6529 is incredibly bullish on crypto and NFTs, and tends to write long and insightful threads about it. One of the most recent ones is about real estate and I think that many of you will find it a worthwhile read.

    What I particularly like about it is that it reminds us that so much of what we consider to be normal and the status quo is actually just a construct that people before us created. Usually it’s not perfect and there are many inherent flaws, but it’s the best that could be done at the time. That or it just worked.

    And because it’s the way it’s been “always done”, it just recedes into the background and most of us don’t give it much thought. Of course, so much of entrepreneurship is about questioning the status quo and doing things differently. Why this way? Could it be better? And it’s precisely during these moments of change where lots of value is created.

  • An imperfect laneway worth replicating

    We stumbled on Bar Volo last night on our evening walk (pictured above). It’s on St. Nicholas Street, which I guess is technically a street. But it feels and acts more like a laneway. I was naturally pretty excited by this discovery and so I tweeted this out. I was then called out for glorifying this laneway because: 1) this is only one small storefront, 2) the rest of the laneway is kind of pooey, and 3) there are other, better, examples of complete laneways in the city such as throughout Toronto’s Yorkville neighborhood. Okay.

    What got me excited is that this is a recent development — there’s a residential building above this welcoming bottle shop — that managed to successfully create fine-grained urbanism and activate a laneway frontage that could have very easily gone underutilized. Now imagine if every new development with some sort of laneway frontage did things as meaningful as this. Piece by piece, we would be building another layer to our city. (I like to think that we’re contributing to this vision with our laneway towns at Junction House. They are, by the way, 100% sold out. Go laneway living.)

    It’s easy to get excited by the bigger urban moves. A new tall building or a Ferris wheel on the waterfront, perhaps. But sometimes the answer is as simple as a small brewery, a narrow and imperfect laneway, and a roll up garage door.

  • It’s okay to put buildings close together

    This morning I came across this beautiful photo by @callicles of the 11th in Paris. After admiring it for a few moments, I then immediately tweeted it out with the above caption: “It’s okay to put buildings close together.” Because here’s the thing about this photo: It represents one of the great paradoxes of city building. When most people look at this photo, I suspect that they will find it beautiful. They will like the mid-rise architecture and they will like the quaint European-scaled streets. But despite its fairly universal appeal, very few cities are able to build this way today. It’s often not allowed. So instead what people do is travel to Europe in the summer, sit in cafes, admire the architecture and urban design, and then lament the fact that we don’t build cities like we used to.

    What is it that makes this intersection so inviting? Well, the buildings are tight up against each other. I’m guessing that the right-of-ways (ROWs) in this picture are maybe 6-9 m wide. There are no building setbacks or stepbacks to speak of, save and except for the penthouse floors which taper back slightly. And so all of the spaces in these buildings would likely have some sort of direct facing condition with their opposing neighbors (but partially mitigated by the fact that these aren’t all glass buildings). The ratio of ROW to building height is, I’m guessing, something like 1:4, which, at the end of the day, is a large part of the reason why these streets feel so intimate and inviting. The buildings frame the streets and public realm.

    What I just described breaks many of the guidelines that I suspect many of you in the industry are accustomed to following. In our world, the streets should be wider to allow for adequate fire and service vehicle access. The buildings should stepback to allow light to reach the sidewalks, to mitigate impacts on any surrounding single-family homes, and to provision for sky views. Here in Toronto, the midrise guidelines also stipulate that buildings should have a ROW to building height ratio that is closer to 1:1. Though to be fair this guidance is often rightly broken. But the truth remains, we generally don’t build like this anymore. Why is that?

    It’s not because we can’t do it. We certainly could. We are, for whatever reasons, choosing not to. Is it because we’re bad at understanding what we actually like and what makes for great cities? Is it because what we end up liking is a bit counterintuitive? My unproven and untested theory is that it is at least partially the result of an approach to planning that is defensive — instead of offensive — in nature. We plan around and bow completely to existing contexts. We plan to mitigate impacts. We plan to satisfy some very individualistic concerns about how cities and neighborhoods should be built. For better or for worse, we plan to piss off the least amount of people. Politics also play an outsized role.

    What is far less common to think about is how to plan offensively. The fact of the matter is that the Paris we all love today pissed off a lot of people when it was being constructed. The approach was top-down and hugely disruptive. It ignored and completely erased much of the city’s previous urban context. Artists at the time, and probably many others, despised the new regularity of Paris’ street wall buildings. They longed for the old hodgepodge of medieval blocks and the visual variety that they created. But today, it’s hard not to think of this offensive move as anything but visionary. Of course, there are also countless examples of top-down offenses turning out terribly bad for cities.

    Perhaps the right approach, then, is to simply start being more deliberate about introducing elements of planning offense. My friend David Wex of Urban Capital likes to remind me that Montreal is a city with grandeur and that Toronto, for the most part, is a city without it. So as I have argued before, over here, I think it’s time we rethink our approach. Instead of just worrying about things like shadow impacts and angular planes (defensive), we should also be asking ourselves offensive questions. How refreshing would it be to sit down in a project meeting and have someone ask: “Okay, but does this design contribute to the overall grandeur and beauty of our city?”

    And maybe once we take this new perspective, we’ll come to the conclusion that sometimes it’s okay to put buildings close together.

  • Returning to an office-centric culture

    Earlier this week, Amazon announced that it plans to return to an “office-centric culture” as its baseline. Its rationale was that being in an office allows the company to better “invent, collaborate, and learn together.” All of this was laid out in an announcement that was distributed to its teams globally. On the other end of the spectrum, Twitter continues to double down on working from home. The company, which is currently hiring, is even trying to target talent that may be disgruntled by the fact that their current company is planning for them to return to the office. Two very different approaches. So which one is right?

    This is, of course, a great debate right now and the right answer probably depends on a myriad of different factors, some of which are likely specific to the company. Dror Poleg has been trying to think through this problem with something he calls the talent equation (because it’s all about talent). It works like this: level of in-person interaction x overall size of talent pool = innovation and financial success. The basis behind this equation is pretty simple. In-person interaction is great for business. This much we know. But you also need the right talent interacting. Allowing remote work is one way of expanding the size of your talent pool. But again, you do this at the expense of in-person interaction.

    In-person interaction is what makes cities the great organisms that they are. And I believe firmly in this side of the equation over the long-term. Even right now I find that when I go into the office, my call and Zoom volumes go down dramatically and I have more time to think, collaborate, and do, you know, actual work. This is because many interactions don’t require a Zoom meeting when you’re in the office. You stop by someone’s desk. You ask a thing (usually pretty quickly). And then you go off and action that thing. But I also acknowledge that for some companies, access to the right talent — and lots of it — may be a real challenge, particularly in smaller cities.

    Like Amazon, I am a supporter of office-centric work cultures. But I do think that Poleg’s talent equation is a useful way to think about this debate right now.

    Photo by Shridhar Gupta on Unsplash