Is there a link between turning people away from a B&B and the Apple iPad?

Now that's a daft question.

Of course there isn't.

Or is there.

Privacy, rights and permission are in the focus at the moment:

there's the gay couple being turned away from a home-run Bed & Breakfast

There's the US preacher who was stopped from speaking (and arrested) because he was "anti-gay".

Then there's apple's drive to open up a new market - and control it.

Reading this about the iPad (Cory Doctorow on BoingBoing), I recognised a lot to agree with. I also read this about the iPad (Stephen Fry in Time magazine) and was taken by the quest for engineering purity. And this is worth a read too.

There's two worlds colliding: freedom & control.

Both Doctorow & Fry talk about both ideas.

Doctorow wants freedom to tinker/understand, control over what his devices can do (and what content he can use them for.

Fry wants freedom from glitch-laden hardware & software, allowing him to control how he interacts with content.

Those who run a B&B from their home want the right to say who they welcome into their home. Others want the right to stay in any place that makes itself available as a B&B.

A guy who passionately believes something wants to respond with his views (non-violently) when people ask, others want to be able to silence people who disagree with them. Whether he's right or wrong in your view - the fact he was locked up for answer people's questions and expressing his opinion - without violence. Hmm...

Clearly, there's a ton of detail being missed here, and I'm not coming down on one side of the other, but I think there's a link.

The iPad is beautiful (I'm told). It's functionally amazing and heralds another shift in how we interact with content.

But that it's locked down - which means there's limitations on what can be done on the platform. It's controlled. Not that is an entirely bad thing. Infact, it may help prevent our children who are fast becoming users of these tools & technology.

But this is one to watch. Particularly given that Apple have announced a new form of advertising on their mobile devices - and "ads will have access to location, accelerometer, and a lot of other stuff."

I ain't preachin' fear, but do you think we should have our eyes open and be aware of what's going on around us?

Will you share your life with these people?

Many people social networking is a fad.

Plenty others say that's nonsense and it's the future.

I'm becoming more aware of the need to be an active part of a community. I'm thinking that this is where it's at.

Whatever the community - a family, a student flat, your colleagues, the guys in the pub you see every night, the parents you spend more than a passing second with - these connections enrich our lives, or at the very least give us something to talk about!

Back to this technology stuff. Whatever happens in the months and years ahead, we're unlikely to end up back in the dark ages of having to phone a bank - never mind go into it - to find out how much is in our account. But that's not really social.

As the network effects start to infiltrate how we consume content (has anyone else found that following the twitter feed relating to a TV show or live event while watching said show/event) the experience becomes richer, albeit a little nosier. Sure, we've still got to learn how to filter and how to find space to reflect and form our own conclusions, but there's something in the connectedness that can add such depth.

Finance is typically something we don't talk about much. Well, we probably do, but it's generally in abstract.

What happens when some of the walls come down and we can feel comfortable sharing our financial experiences with our (genuine) friends?

I work for a Financial Services company (please don't unsubscribe now...).

What does it mean for our organisation to embrace this change - how can we lead it?

I'd love your thoughts!

None of the above

On the radio the other day, I heard a selection of Vox Pop clips including one where a man said:

"I want an extra box on the ballot paper for the election - a box for 'none of the above'. I don't want any of them".

While an indictment of many political animals in the UK, it got me thinking about who I would vote for.

Then I read Ian Pearson's ideas about re-designing democracy. Read it here.

His central idea:

At an election, why not allow people to vote for the party of their choice and also for the local candidate of their choice. So you tick two boxes, not much extra effort.

It's not a million miles from the current Scottish Election system where you get to vote for a candidate tied to a party and then to vote for a party.

I'd like to see this trialled on a local election and see what happens. See if more people turn out. Sure, some people might not get it first time out - but is that any different from just now?

Have a read and see what you think.

Do you have an Open ID?

You probably do and don't know it. If you have any account with Google, Microsoft or Yahoo (and a fair few other services) then you do.

Then why not follow this blog by joining the Friend Connect box on the right hand side.

It'll let me know you care ;-)

Not sure what an Open ID is? Here you go: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Openid

Get real

One of the reasons I enjoy, participate & spend time with social networks is that I believe in transparency.

Do you?

I love sleek design and intellegent ways of putting content together that make it accurate & accessible. Not "dumbing down" - at least not at the expense of the truth.

"Nothing but a lot of talk and a badge" as Robert de Niro said as Al Capone in Brian de Palma's (truly excellent) The Untouchables. Now in that case, de Niro?Capone was wrong - but I guess we all like to put a bit of polish on so something appears better than it is.

I struggle with that. Do you?

I reckon (from experience of my own life) that honesty - and in particular integrity will always beat cheating. It might seem that shortcuts get people there faster, quicker, cheaper - but at what cost. I'm not saying they're always wrong, and certainly not saying they're not worthwhile. But we've all seen what happens to Biff Tannen in Back to the Future...

But will our journey of life mean as much if we spend too much time looking over our shoulders for what *might* catch us out? And as we live more online, our networks will either back us up, or knock us down.

Will my Facebook friends complain if I'm posting irrellevant content - or just plain lies? I'd hope so.

Will my Twitter followers decrease if I start spouting on about how great I am (cue sarcasm in the comments)? If I have any kind of listenership, then yes.

I love that the networks we're connected through are part of our digital identity. And they're becoming an increasingly important part too.

I dunno, but there's something in me that wants to connect with people (and organisations) that act with integrity. That probably means local organisations for now, but as the world becomes more digitally connected, that shift will happen to enable global connections of a more meaningful scale.

We can laugh together. This is funny.

We can cry together. This is awful.

We can take action together. Do this now.

What's your take?

More than one currency

When catching up with some podcasts a couple of weeks ago, Mitch Joel spoke with Tara Hunt on Six Pixels of Separation (podcast) spoke about there being more currencies than Money (capital). She mentioned Information (learning), Relationships (social).

It's about making friends, finding your place and sense of significance in the world. Money used to deliver this.

• Autonomy (make your own decision),
• Confidence (love it for the challenge),
• Sociality (feeling of belonging),
• Set points (always happy/cynical/grumpy etc).

You can adjust the first three to impact your sense of happiness.

It's an interesting, thought-provoking and at least partially accurate observation. I wonder if we can invest in all four of these currencies?

Have a listen to the conversation here and see what you think.

What about faith. How does it impact (or underpin) these things?

I almost called you old...

I've had a couple of conversations recently on the topic of communication and generation differences.

I've done a couple of audio conversations (not *quite* interviews) for a work thing - the first on GenY and another on Online Collaboration. I love this stuff, and am keen to learn (and share!) as much as I can.

On Father's Day (ie a little under a week ago) I spent some time with Mum & Dad and we ended up talking about online networks and Dad (who is far from a luddite) said that these things don't really interest him as he's always just kept himself to himself. Okay, but what about when you are looking for some help to do something on your Triumph motorbike, or an issue with your mobile phone - there will be online communities or networks that will be perfect to help you with that.

Interestingly, since they moved house last year, Dad has been great at getting to know his neighbours, helping cut trees & build fences. Something that a younger generation might not do. Mum has started playing with Facebook a bit. Seems to be enjoying it and can't quite see the point (yet), but not giving up on it yet. Mum & Dad are either late Baby Boomers or Generation Jones, I'm (just) a part of GenY. Positively, neither were saying "it's wrong, rubbish and shouldn't be allowed"!

I think the ability to interact with people is one I'm relearning through a number of ways - but it's all about dialogue, not monologue.

In a meeting at work the other day we were reflecting on an event we'd put on with one of the corporate directors. We'd arranged an interview as well as questions from the floor. The interview had some business topics and some personal ones. We felt it was right that people get to know this director as a person, not just a Boss. One of the questions was "brown sauce of tomato sauce". When we were talking about it, a Baby Boomer said she felt there were too many personal questions, not enough work-related. I agreed to a point, but then the comment was made "and as for that question about the sauce...". That was it, for me. I felt the need to explain that actually people want to know that these guys are human as well. We put them on a pedestal and say "listen to my edicts", but actually they are people, with real lives, making real decisions, right?

I had to stop myself saying "my generation doesn't care about hierarchy or how important someone should be - we care about who they are (at least I do!) and what drives them". I almost said "I guess we're just from a different era". I'm glad I did. Mostly.

So, the whole experience has made me think a little more that I need to be inclusive - that communication I come up with, or help develop has to meet the needs of a diverse audience. While I don't want to water things down until they are meaningless, neither do I want to prefer one generation over another, just 'cos one of them is so stuck in it's ways that it'll never change (;-P - that's a pale attempt at irony, incase you missed it!).

Anyway, what do you think? Have you had any similar experiences or experienced something that connected with you & colleagues of a different generation? Leave a comment and share your story!

Media is changing (in case you hadn't noticed).

I was struck recently with surprise at the number of empty video rental shops. Gone. While that is hard for those who have lost their jobs, and for the ripple impact on local economies - there's a number of factors.

Loads of things like family gaming (Wii), Postal DVD rental and of course, online video.

This talk by Clay Shirky, recorded at New York in May 2009, explores the shift from silo'd media, to connected, global, social and media. It's well worth the 17 minutes to watch.

I particularly liked that this wasn't mass-hysteria, but based on what is going on in our day. I guess we have to decide how we respond to that. We are moving from a mature model media (where we've had a pretty clear idea of how it worked) to the early-ish days of a new model. It's not going to be the same, which means that it might not be comfortable for people to deal with the change.

At the end of the day, people working in Communications have a choice to make - resist until you are extict, or get on board and shape the future!

(h/t Garr Reynolds)

Why am I surprised?

So here's a funny thing. okay, so not funny, just an observation.

I've been mucking about with online social *stuff* for a number of years, after Jenny & I spent time in New Zealand and wanted to keep in touch with home. But it's really only been about 18 months since something clicked in my brain and I really got interested in what's going on.

On a personal level, I love the interaction, sharing life with people and being able to formulate an idea in words & pictures. From anywhere. But only if you want it.

Why do I enjoy sharing my life - it's not the most interesting, but it's what I've got and hopefully being alive online is helpful for others too. It seems that being connected online (thru a social network, reading friend's blogs, following people's flickr streams or coonsuming their tweets) fosters a greater level a understanding between us. At least for me it does.

Why? Because I understand a little more about the way you see the world.

This has been in my head this afternoon as I found myself in a (real world) meeting when someone I don't know other than thru LinkedIn asked how my daughter was. Then, later, @CRayDancer referred to her as babyB.

I was a little taken aback. Why? I track the traffic on my blog (thanks Google Analytics), my flickr photostream, my mobile pictures, my twitter links etc etc. I think it was the crossover to the real world (that I don't get a lot of as I don't get the privilege of live *real world* conversations with them very often. (by the way, it's one world, just different expressions of it!)

Anyway, it felt good to know that people understood some of my back-story before we spoke.

If anything it means I don't have to repeat myself!!

And what about you - do you get much cross-over between the different expressions of life?

Please share your views here!

conversation

I recently started a blog at work (as part of a test of some "enterprise 2.0" solutions).

Here's what I wrote today...

During an early morning conversation at work with McColleague last week (by early morning, I mean before 8am), we got talking about her experiences the previous day.

She'd been at a youth project in a less-illustrious part of Edinburgh helping some young people do some mock interviews and found the experience a little frustrating.  It seems that when asked questions like "tell me about a time when you worked as part of a team", a fair few of these young people only had short answers - like "when I played football".

It was like they had lost the art of conversation. These young people didn't know how to share their story in a way that would demonstrate who they are and what makes them different.  I could go on a rant about upbringing and the importance of family and community in shaping our young people, but I won't.

In a culture that loves headlines, short, sharp updates, sound-bites, extracts, summaries, text messaging and, yes, twitter, I find it interesting.  I'm aware that I don't hold a conversation with *that* many people everyday.  I probably only talk with three or four people for more than 30 seconds, the rest of the time it's a passing comment, sharing a joke, asking for help.  It can be difficult to have a real conversation when we are all under pressure to deliver results and juggle umpteen tasks.  It's those real conversations where experiences are shared and each party knows they have learned something new (about themselves, about someone else?).

I think we can lose the art of conversation when we don't have (or make) time to understand our experiences and the information that we are surrounded by.  Can we listen if we struggle to interpret and filter what we are hearing.  Can we speak if we don't really know what we are talking about?! (case in point, some Football Pundits and politicians).

Not for one minute do I think we're all to be experts in rhyming meter or hold great oratorical discussions when we want to ask how our colleagues got on trying that new recipe out last night.  I

So, what does that have to do with work?  Well, if we are in a bite-sized, on-demand culture where we have more information around us than ever, how do we organise the apparent chaos/how do we make sense of all the *stuff* we are bombarded with so we can have coherent thoughts that we can share with people?  I think the value of being able to tag/rate/comment and generally socialise information (or *content* as it might be described) has become apparent.

In our organisation we have loads of information, loads of talented people and a lot of intellectual capital tied up in our heads.  We can use social tools to make this kind of information searchable, trackable and ultimately more decipherable.  It won't make us all more intellegent, but may help us get better at filtering the froth that we don't need.  I can find more relevant content on del.ic.ous or digg or evern twitter when I search tags, than if I just sent a few words out into the googlesphere.  Okay, maybe Google will give me better ranked results than ever, but it's the social aspect that can lead us to the put our trust in the content - removing some of our need to filter everything.

Maybe.

What do you think?