The Zeitgeist

I am glad to see that Doc Searls was interested enough in my recent blog entry to revisit an old topic of Internet access and corporate control. At the end of his commentary he wonders if with all the depressing news he’s insane to be be optimistic. I don’t think so, at least in the long term; if anyone can articulate how and why there’s reason to believe that the Internet will survive as a cradle of free discourse, and innovation into the future it’s Doc.

I would like to be optimistic, but I am very pessimistic for the short term because media and telecom companies are so stubbornly stupid – they don’t understand that by strangling the net, they’re killing that goose and her ability to lay golden eggs. Not satisifed with outrageous profits for what in 90% of the world would be unacceptablely poor levels of “broadband” performance and criminally actionable levels of service, they now seek to extract more money from consumers at every possible inflection point of network activity. Of course, if they succeed in their machinations, they’ll make the Internet an unusable morass of toll booths, filters, and walled gardens with the net result being that people will just stop using it. There <em>are</em> other things to do in the world you know (remember, just like you did before you knew there even was an Internet?), and then all those nice profits will just disappear. *poof*. BUH-bye.

Such a deconstruction of the ‘net will take several years, but it’s a strong possibility unless we all send a strong economic reminder and, perhaps more importantly, an unqualified shaming to <b>all</b> the parties to remind them who works for whom. Note to Verizon, SBC/AT&T and other wanna-be digital hegemons, when you’re in business the customer is always “<em>something</em>.” Think hard… this is a “business 101″ idea. That “something” starts with “R” ends with “T” and has one vowel…

Perhpas Doc & the other Cluetrain authors could send a few copies to Ivan Siedenberg, Ed Whitacre and the others to give them a few thinking points.

On a more optimistic note, and also apropos of Doc & Co., If the markets of the 1990s were conversations, then the conversations that we currenly have on the Internet (I mean blogs not email) are in fact the markets of the early 2000’s. They are the community squares, the rooftops from which new ideas are shouted and broadcast to all who are interested enough to bend an ear. They are the breeding groud for the ideas that people turn into the actions of new network applicatons and services. The meme I think we have to propagate is that the Internet may be a network, but that it’s the at the edge of the network where individuals with ideas are the <strong>endopoints-as-beginning</strong> that are creating the new innovations. The innovations the people are paying for. The innovations that the telecoms themselves could be a part of, but are instead attempting to smother in their cadles.

If the telcos had any clue they’d be giving the bandwidth away and partnering with every promising startup they could find. At Citibank, the former chairman John Reed spent a large portion of the company’s budget on technology development. He called it the “let a thousand flowers bloom” strategy. They developed stuff in-house in the ’80s and into the ’90s, and when the Internet boom started they looked to every startup they could find in order to find new ways to deliver value to their customers. Did they do down blind alleys? yeah. So what.. life, and innovation in particular, is like that. They have been for over 30 years on of the most technologically innovative financial firms on the planet. There’s a lesson there…

There are other possible outcomes to the “Not On My Pipes” strataegy, some are even less favourable to the telcos: …never underestimate the creative power of Geeks. If the telcos want an arms race, they’re going to run head first into the buzzsaw of Geek creativity.

The telcos better be very careful… the world is changing. The may be unleashing a tide of opposition that they neither turn, nor outrun. I am surprised that the boards of SBC/AT&T and Verzon didn’t at the very least chastize their respective chairmen for such short-sightedness. …the right action would have been dismissal on the spot.

One of the things that makes this (IT) business so interesting its how mutli-disciplinary it truly is. Before doing my own startups, I have been a VP, a Sr. VP and a Managing Director at major banks and brokerages; I’ve also been systems programmer for a major university, and a consultant for Digital Equipment Corp, and other firms. All along the way I’ve had to become a mini-domain expert on each and every project I’ve worked on. CS (Computer Sceience) types are like that.. it’s just part of the job. In the last 20 years the “thousand flowers” that have bloomed in this profession are all sorts of speacialized hybrids: radio-engineer/programmers, lawyer/programmers, artist/programmers, embedded-system-engineer/programmers, doctor/programmers, and on and on and on.

We’re are an intersting inflection point in the history of the (online/connected) world, for all of the working life of 99% of the population, since the dawn of the modern age (lets say, for fun, since the 1880s) there has been a difference between “what you do” and “who you are”. For programmers like me and for artists whose work becomes something we do even when we’re not “working” this is nothing new. During the renaissance people were known for the totality of what they did (think “da Vinci”)… there was no “work-self” versus a “non-work” or “home-self.”

More and more, as people escape the traditional work roles (and as coporations demand loyalty but give none in return) we’re seeing the emergence of people on a mission. They want to apply themselves not for some great corporate parent who will give them a gold watch at the end of their careers, but rather to make their own mark by doing something that can change the world. And they’re not afraid to to create new technologies, nor are they afraid work and play well with other like minded souls to make it happen.

The power of computing technologies is best expressed as a strict creative meritocracy. The best code wins (well, except for Microsoft…again that’s a whole ‘nuther topic). The coolest new application or idea will (almost) never be derivative, rather it will be something new and unexpected out of left field, created by people who do what they do for the sheer joy of creation. It’s not just what they do, it’s who they are. And, the things they are creating have the ability to capture the imaginations of people because people never thought that the new thing could either a) exist or b) make something they wanted to do so easy/fun/rewarding that it changes the landscape in an instant. Some examples? Flickr, Skype, RSS Feeds, and Del.icio.us for starters. When’s the last time a telco did anything like that?

There some very talented people out there working not only on the next generation applications — and doing so withouth the advise or consent (ha!) of the telcos — but working on the next generation of infrastructure as well: Software Defined Radios, long-haul 802.11 networks and even terahertz radios and laser-based broadband are on the horizon. Most of these technologies will be out of reach of the telcos and several cannot be regulated (under the current communications act) by the FCC.; micro/metro and global scale networks that cannot be controlled, let alone turned off.   They’re going to be the ultimate in Open Source.

World of Ends.. World of EndPoints, World of Beginnings. If the telcos want to start a war, they can. It’ll be rough at first, but in time, Doc’s right, there’s going to be a lot of good happening. No wall stands forever. No dictatorship lasts forever. The telcos need to decide where they stand. The public is fast losing patience; and the geeks are refusing to wait.