Facebook Knows (and keeps, and reviews, and analyzes) all:

Fascinating article in a recent posting at The Rumpus.net capturing an interview among an unnamed Facebook employee and Phil Wong of Rumpus.net. The whole article takes place in a bar near the Facebook campus over a couple of beers...and seemingly shares some good insight on how the monolith that is Facebook actually operates.

What is most interesting about this article is the insight that it provides to the inner workings of Facebook, its operations, internal workings and morale. Clearly this is only one employee's perspective, but the discussion seems to be open and forthcoming. In fact, here are a couple of the nuggets that stand out to me:

1) Facebook keeps everything: It probably shouldn't be a surprise when you think about it, but basically every post, picture, comment, or change you make is kept by Facebook forever. While you may delete things, they don't...

2) Facebook employees can see everything: Again, should't be a surprise, but employees of Facebook have the ability to emulate your account and see everything as you do. This apparently used to be done with a "master password (keyword: Chuck Norris)"...but today is done through some portal tool (as well as, access to the back-end of the database). Of course, there are lots of good reasons to do this including researching issues, account hijacking, etc.

3) Facebook does seem to take some aspects of privacy seriously: While Facebook's CEO may seem to argue that everything you or I post should be made public, they do seem to have some internal procedures regarding why and how employees access an individual users account. In fact, while the interviewee admits to looking at accounts that she shouldn't have, she did make clear that if you get caught and can't explain why you are looking, you get fired. All-in-all, that is a good thing.

4) Facebook does seem to be more careful in launching new functionality: Given their history of missteps, this is a bit surprising, but of course, I am only sensitive to the screw-ups...not the things that work fine (e.g. location of a specific button). Lessen learned, I guess.

5) Facebook seems to value most getting things done: Admittedly, this comment is a bit self-serving (and if word-for-word, the interviewee may be a bit tipsy), but it is still good to know that getting stuff done is what counts in the Facebook world. Too many companies seem to forget that.

As for the veracity of the article, I will let you decide. Judging by the comments surrounding the article, a lot of folks question whether or not the article is real or a compilation by Mr. Wong based on rumor, theory, and postulation. Personally, I can't say one way or the other, but my gut is that there is a lot more truth than fiction in this article. None the less, you should decide for yourself here...

The Rumpus.net: Conversations About the Internet #5: Anonymous Facebook Employee

Seven Reasons Why Google Should Stay in China

 vs. 

There has been a lot of discussion recently regarding Google and its future strategies in China. The genesis for this debate was the recent admission by Google that its systems were recently hacked in an attempt to gain access to the gmail accounts of certain Chinese human rights activists and the possible theft of intellectual property. In response, Google has stated that they will no longer censor their Google.cn website. For those that are unaware, Google.cn is the local Chinese-language site of Google and is generally regarded as the second most popular search site in China behind Baidu.

While I appreciate the moral debate associated with Google's actions, I disagree with their decision to possibly leave China or change their policies regarding search censorship. I do not make this decision lightly, and I certainly understand why many will disagree, but I also firmly believe that Google's decision is short-sighted (at best) and possibly counter-productive (at worst).  

I have outlined below the seven reasons (in no particular order) why I believe that Google should stay in China below. As always, I appreciate my readers opinions and comments.


Seven Reasons Why Google should stay in China

# 1: "Don't Be Evil" is Not A Business Model (aka Your Shareholders Have Expectations Too): Last I checked, Google was a publicly traded, for-profit, shareholder owned corporation. While Google makes great products, and is generally beloved by its users, and has become an inconic brand, Google's purpose in life is to make money for its shareholders...not spread goodness and cheer around the world. Leaving what will soon be the world's largest Internet-user market because of a new-found sense of morality is not a reason for such a radical shift to business strategy. If I was a share holder, I would be asking big questions as to why such a well-known policy matter (search censorship in China) suddenly over road a major international business plan.

#2: Google Knew the Rules When They First Went to China: Nothing has changed since Google first entered China in 2006. For a world-wide phenomenon, I find it hard to believe that Google thought that the Chinese would treat them differently.  And if they did, that is perhaps the most naive thing I have ever heard.

For that matter Google, please stop couching the implementation of bad security policies and practices in your China operations as the excuse that is "driving" you out of China. Allowing penetration of your systems is a failure of security. The fact that they were under attack should not have been a surprise. Seriously, did you think that the Chinese wouldn't try to spy on you and penetrate your systems? At least 20 other companies were also attacked as part of the same effort. 

In case you were wondering, if you Google "China spying on us" you get 1,870,000 hits.

# 3: Some Open Internet in China is Better than None: If Google wants to do some good in the world, providing even a partially censored Internet in China is a very good thing. The fact that the Internet in China is heavily fire walled and restricted is no surprise to anyone. The fact that China market-leader Baidu willingly restricts Internet search to remove terms such as Falun Gong is equally not surprising. That being said, the Internet is a big place and there are still millions of web pages that remain accessible to the average Chinese citizen only via Google. Even censored, Google.cn still provides a great service to the average citizens in China...and that fact alone says Google.cn should stay in operation. 

(Note: For more information on how the Internet in China is censored, check out this Wikipedia page.)

# 4: Google, You Made Your Point Already (In Fact, Maybe Too Much of One) The press around Google leaving China has certainly been global, but now it is time to ratchet it back. While the Western World gets the moral issues associated with this topic, further embarrassing the Chinese leadership on this topic is counter-productive. In fact, the implications of continuing to push the way you have may be more damaging in the long run to a broad swath of companies and industries that want to operate in China.

Now is the time to back off a little bit and come to a resolution that makes sense for both parties. In fact, you might even be able to get some agreement with the government that allows for you to maintain your Do-No-Evil position with the Chinese Government's interests.

#5: You Don't Get to Score if You Don't Play in the Game: Pardon the bad metaphor, but simply put, if Google is not in China, then Google doesn't get to discuss Chinese censorship and policies. We all know that Google is a very influential player in the Internet (in addition to search, advertising, etc.), but that influence is based on participation and market share. One thing that is very true about operating in China is that public officials are sensitive to world opinion and the "face" that China portrays to its neighbors, friends, enemies, and competitors. 

Why cede the position of influence from the largest Internet market in the world? Sure, if Google leaves they will be applauded for their moral position by various members of the blogosphere, but they will also instantly become a non-player regarding Internet policy matters in this part of the world.  Doubt me? How influential is Yahoo on this matter? Not a whole lot given that they left China years ago.

# 6: Where Does it End?: Let's be honest...every nation on Earth has its own interest, policies, and approaches to the Internet and accessibility. While nations like North Korea, Sudan, Iran, and Saudi Arabia are particularly restrictive, even here in the US, our government has acted to restrict Internet access, content, etc. If Google leaves China for a difference in moral opinion, why should it stay in so many other nations? In fact, if I am a country that has a restrictive Internet policy, I now know how to push Google around. Simply require them to restrict a few search items and then dare them to complain. What kind of items? Could be anything? And if Google doesn't like it, they can leave.

# 7: Search is Not, and Never Has Been, A Moral Issue: Google, stop wrapping the issue of search into terms usually associated with conflicts between Good vs. Evil. Search is a tool, only as good as the algorithm that supports it and the results that it provides. We all live most our lives quite well without using search to make our decisions. I don't need Google to know right from wrong, much less to know that it is wrong to steal. Associating the Chinese Government's restrictions on search at the same level as the challenges of living under an autocratic regime is ludicrous. 


And besides, what is the difference between not making a search result available (as in China) vs. only making a result available on page 300 of the search results? What's the difference among having a company pay for a search result to appear high on a list vs. never showing it at all? For that matter, who decides what exactly is click-fraud? Or even how does the Google search algorithm work and how does it prioritize results? I know there is a lot of grey in these questions, but there is no such thing as search purity and philosophically, I doubt the Chinese see much of a difference.

In China, we call manipulating search results to be censorship. In the US, we call it advertising. The fact it is, both are manipulations of a given set of data to serve a specific purpose.  Search, of all things, is not an either / or issue, so why are we trying to make search to be such a thing?  

Full Disclosure Statement: This blog was originally written on Google Docs and has been posted using a Google-owned Blogging tool that contains Google-supplied Ads.

How to Explain Twitter to others

As a regular user of Twitter, I am often asked to explain two things.  The first, is "what" is Twitter.  The second, "why" do you use Twitter.  Ehow users have done a good job explaining the second issue (why), but I wanted to put my own two cents in an effort to explain "what" Twitter is.  If you are a current user of Twitter, you probably don't need this information, but if you are not a Twitter user, a new Twitter user, or are just curious about Twitter, hopefully, this information can help you explain Twitter to your parents and friends

1) Twitter is the future of communication:  This is the most common explanation you read in the press.  Usually the explanation starts with something like Twitter is better than sliced bread and then continues with how it will solve world hunger.  Needless to say, most explanations create more confusion than Twitter itself...so I am not sure how good an answer they are.

That being said, I do believe that Twitter will play a *part* in the future of communication, collaboration, and messaging (instant messaging, email, etc.).  At its heart, Twitter does two things very well.  # 1...it accelerates communication: Because it is based on the fastest medium available, Twitter does a great job sharing immediate information with your "followers."  Sure, you could do email, etc. too...but IM is still the fastest way to communicate.  # 2...Twitter allows you to share (and redirect) information with a large population easily and quickly.  Not only is this sharing done with your followers, but by using the Hash (#) model in the Trending Topics and Search sections, you can literally share information with the entire base.

Here is another good explanation at Biznik. http://bit.ly/XCxPy  And by @Statsgirl. http://twurl.nl/fx0wdo

2) Twitter is a Food Court: This is actually one that I like to use. Basically, the theory is that everyone you are following and everyone of your followers have some common interest(s).  Like in a food court (common interest = hungry?), a Twitter user walks around and "finds" things of interest.  Those things of interest are then processed (e.g. bought) and those that are not, are ignored.  When you are "hungry" the next time, you go back to Twitter and see what is available. Admittedly, you have to stretch the metaphor a bit, but hopefully you get the basic idea.

3) Twitter is a Cocktail Party.  This is another example I like. Basically, like in a Cocktail Party, everyone is talking at the same time.  Like in party, you get the opportunity to listen to interesting conversations, meet new people, share information, etc. Everything...except no drinks, I guess. :) Anyway, replace conversation with tweets and you've got it.  For a better explanation, check out this link off of TwiTip. http://twurl.nl/muqtim

4) Twitter is the Pulse of the Day: The most fascinating thing about Twitter is how easily top trends / topics can bubble to the surface...almost completely on their own.  As mentioned above, the Search, Trending Topics, and # model allow for any topic of mutual interest to be shared globally almost instantly.  Sure, you can get a sense of key topics via CNN or MSNBC, but Twitter is one of the best to let you find a topic of global interest so simply.

5) Twitter solves business problems: No one is quite sure how Twitter itself is going to make money, but there is no doubt certain businesses are doing it already.  Two of the best are Dell and Comcast. Dell (@Dell) has made Twitter a key vehicle to highlight deals and drive traffic to their website. Comcast (@Comcastcares) uses Twitter to find and solve customer issues.  There is no doubt that Twitter can help solve customer problems and / or make money...though every business has to find their own approach. Of course, there are also plenty of "get rich quick" ideas...but I basically ignore those.

6) Twitter is a cool way to do Closed-user-Group (CUG) texting:  It is a pretty simple way to use Twitter, but there are a lot of groups that use Twitter as a simple way to have geographically unlimited Instant Messaging platforms.  While there are other choices available in the market (e.g. AIM, Google), Twitter is a great tool to give *everyone* a mechanism to do group IMs with few limits in time, place, or interest.

Hopefully, this help you with explaning Twitter.  Let me know if you have any other examples or ideas for this continually-changing medium.

The Craziest Way To Boost Your Mobile Internet Service

I have to admit it made me laugh to see how well 3G Broadband signals were boosted with the simple "addition" to his wireless modem. But, desperate times call for desperate measures, and it seems like this guy may have solved a desperate problem.

Of course, it does beg the question about what happens if your 3G mobile broadband needs are outside of the kitchen...but at least it is an option. Heck, it can't be any worse than what iPhone users currently experience in some cities. Only question is if the colander comes in Apple-white.

Enjoy...

Learnings in Twitter Advertising: Sponsored Tweets

This is part one of a series exploring the use of Twitter as an advertising medium. In particular, I will focus on how individual Twitterers can become part of the advertising movement. Comments, ideas, suggestions, or corrections are all welcome.

SPONSORED TWEETS: GREAT SITE AS LONG AS YOU HAVE LOTS OF FOLLOWERS

The Basics:
1) Requires that your account be at least 60 days old, have a minimum of 100 followers, and at least 100 Twitter updates.
2) Every post will include some type of notification that it is sponsored. Everything from "#Sponsored" to "#ad" can appear. This is a requirement of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC).
3) $50 minimum balance before you can withdraw money. About average for this kind of thing.
4) Uses a combination of different metrics from Klout, Twittergrader.com, etc. to measure the "quality" of your Twitter account.

The Pros:
1) It works. In short, yes, you will get paid for tweeting someone else's ads. Given the level of effort that entails, this is almost free money.
2) Account settings are simple to establish and update...including keywords and category.
3) Website does a nice job sharing stats (e.g. clicks) which gives you a good sense of how successful your tweets are.
4) Full control over price per tweet. Sponsored Tweets does recommend a price per tweet (roughly correlated to $1 / 1000 followers you have), but in reality, you can set any number you want. Of course, Advertisers still have to accept your price.
5) You almost always write the actual tweet. The advertiser always provides instructions (e.g. links, words, requirements), but you can put the actual tweet in your own words. This is a great advantage if you are trying to ensure the sponsored Tweets are consistent with your other tweets. Of course, you still only have 140 characters to work with.

The Cons:
1) No option to opt-into adds because Advertisers only solicit you directly. It sometimes feels like you are waiting for one of the cool kids to pick you for kick-ball.
2) Related to #1, it can be a long time between paid tweets. Best to keep in mind, that this is free money...not instant money.
3) Advertisers seem to favor accounts with very large followings. Twitter accounts with small followings may get few opportunities.
4) Very difficult (if not impossible) to become a celebrity or recommended account by Sponsored Tweets. You can try, but don't expect it.
5) Sponsored Tweets doubles your per-tweet price for Advertisers. Said another way, whatever price you set the advertiser will pays 2x.

The Verdict:
Join Sponsored Tweets. It may take you a while to grow your account to $50, but given the level of effort, opportunity to present your account effectively, and the results, Sponsored Tweets is worth your time. As noted though, you need to really grow your followers to make money.

To sign-up, you can click HERE or on the Sponsored Tweets panel at the bottom of this blog.

Five Changes That Apple Must Make to the iPad in Order for it to Succeed

January 27: Blog has been updated to account for the latest announcement from Apple regarding the iPad name and a photo of the device.
--------------

Well, it is official. On January 27th, Apple is set to announce their latest creation...which, assuming everyone has been correct, will be their new tablet PC the "iPad." In true Apple fashion, the combination of their carefully placed media management techniques and the love of all things Apple has brought the hysteria around this upcoming product launch to near hysteria. Of course, no one knows anything about the product itself, but the fact that Apple is about to launch a brand new product line has certainly gotten everyone excited.

So...will the iPad succeed? Will a new device by Apple that singly-handedly opens up an entirely new category of products and solutions that consumers the world-over enjoy?  Or will it be like the recent launch of Google's Nexus One? A good product, but certainly not iconic and with only limited appeal (more on what is good, bad, and indifferent on the Nexus One here). A device that could, should, and might be a winner, but the combination of hubris and mistakes in execution hurt its appeal? I am not talking Apple Newton here...more...well...Nexus One.

Well, without seeing the iPad, it is impossible for me to know for sure. I did postulate on its launch a few weeks ago, but regardless, I do believe the iPad could be a winner if the following five things are done.

1) Focus on the secondary computer market: Rumor has it that the iPad will be priced at around $1000 when it is first launched. While Macbooks have become the choice de jure device for techies everywhere, the fact is, they get away with this price because they are capable of being your primary computer. In my mind, the iPad will never be your main computer, but instead, has the possibility of being a fantastic second device. A device that you use for all sorts of reasons including watching videos, updating Facebook, Twitter, etc. and web browsing. In other words, take the lessens that made netbooks so popular and make the experience better.

2) Price the iPad under $500: It is virtually guaranteed that the iPad will cost around $1000. Frankly, that is way to high to make this product a must-have by a large enough percentage of the market to make a difference. Sure, it will sell...perhaps even a million (probably not)...but in a market where world-wide annual sales are more than 65 million the iPad will be a drop in the bucket. But it doesn't have to be that way. Price this device at $500 and I guarantee millions will be sold.

3) Embed the iPad with 4G wireless date: The iPad is rumored to include 3G services from one of the major wireless carriers, but that is not enough. 3G works pretty well, and has good coverage, but it is simply not capable enough to supply the download speeds of the multi-media / video capabilities that would differentiate a tablet in the market. Equally important, to take advantage of the 3G service, you will have to sign-up for an annual contract at ~ $60 / month. So, in addition to the $1000 device costs, you will be looking at another ~$700 per year just to use it! So where does 4G make a difference? Well, first it solves the bandwidth problem by supplying download speeds 3 - 5 times higher and second, the pricing model for 4G is significantly different (at least from Clearwire)...generally offering per-day and no contract options.

4) Run the iPhone OS: Admittedly this is a bit of techno-babble, but the fact is, the iPhone is incredibly easy to operate. So easy in fact, that millions of relatively non-technical individuals use it every day. A Mac OS? Well, not so easy. I am not saying it is impossible to use, but for people used to window-based PCs, the difference is significant. If the iPad used the iPhone OS a lot of those hassles would disappear and the potential market for the iSlate would significantly grow.

5) Include a keyboard: Admittedly this sounds counter-intuitive, but first of all, why can't a tablet be a tablet with a keyboard? After all, the biggest complaint about a tablet is its form-factor and associated user experience. Sure, it is awesome to watch a video, but type an email? Write a document? Or this blog? Not so easy. The iPad could solve a lot of these issues if it simply included in the package a keyboard. Sure, most people wouldn't use it for a lot of what the iPad is to be good (video), but when it came to writing-intensive activities a keyboard is the difference. And for a cost of $10 it seems worth it. Heck, including it would likely be hailed as another example of Jobs and his brilliance!

Let me know what you think of this list and any other ideas I missed. Of course, the list above includes some very "non-Apple" things....so the probability of them happening is very small. That being said, some of the technorati also have their own misgivings and recommendations, so perhaps my ideas are not so crazy after all.

Want a Nexus One? Shouldn't be a problem...but caveat emptor.

Fast Company just published some great data from Flurry (Mobile Analytics) that significantly questions that success of Google's Nexus One launch. While admittedly, it has only been one week since Google's self-proclaimed "super-phone" came to the market, there is no doubt that it has been a very hard week for Google. The combination of questionable go-to-market strategies (more here), terrible customer experience, and a so-so device (more here) has resulted in a very small success rate in selling this device to the market.

I know that Google is new to the mobile business, but I have to think that many of these problems have been self-inflicted. As I have noted many times, the Googleplex is full of very, very smart people, but the fact is, the mobile phone business is not measured by smart people...but by basic block-and-tackle execution and relentless focus on customer service.  Whether the folks at Google forgot those facts, didn't listen to others, or simply thought that their model for bringing products to market was superior is irrelevant (though not necessarily surprising), the facts speak for themselves. The launch of the Nexus One has been a disaster, and it may be getting worse. And more critically, if Google doesn't get these issues under control ASAP, not only will they likely submarine their whole hardware strategy for the future, but potentially damage their brand in a way that has far more significant implications for the future.

Is that too harsh? If you think so, let me know below: