Ajax Girl

AT&T bought Centennial Communications Corp for $944 million today in order improve AT&T’s coverage in the Midwest, Southeast, and Puerto Rico.

The purchase will add 1.1 million customers to AT&T’s 74.9 million base. The move follows Verizon’s purchase of Alltel last week.

Source: TechCrunch
Original Article: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Techcrunch/~3/4xszrWc5b8w/

Now that the election is over there is going to be no shortage of punditry looking to pinpoint exactly what moments in the last 18 months contributed to Barack Obama’s victory over John McCain. No one is better equipped for this analysis than Auditude, the video fingerprinting company that was recently employed to power part of MySpace’s video platform.
Using a database chronicling millions of hours of video content, Auditude can identify the original source of video clips scattered across the web, even if they’re only a few seconds long. And with that, the company can figure out which speeches, gaffes, and ads actually mattered to The People.

For its initial analysis of the election, Auditude has mapped out the popularity of each moment in this year’s three presidential debates. Crawling across sites like YouTube, Veoh, MySpace, and Yahoo, the site isolated several thousand videos depicting portions of each debate, and then laid them out in a timeline to determine which moments were the most viewed.

Unsurprisingly, the majority of popular clips involved McCain gaffes and moments when Obama said something that was especially poignant. This bias can be attributed to Obama’s much stronger web presence, and a generally liberal bias on sites like Digg where videos tend to go ‘viral’ and garner millions of hits. That said, there’s still plenty of useful data to be found (for example, note that the infamous “that one” statement only had around half as many hits as McCain’s “Zero?” reaction in the third debate).

Below are charts for each debate, along with links to the highlighted clips:

Clips:
Eisenhower ‘Goof’
You Were Wrong

Clips:
That One

Clips:
Zero?

Crunch Network: CrunchGear drool over the sexiest new gadgets and hardware.

Source: TechCrunch
Original Article: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Techcrunch/~3/BF453lYn6OY/

One thing we are finally going to learn in this down market is whether social investing can hold its own against the pros. There are many Websites devoted to social investing—Cake Financial, SocialPicks, StockMantra—each with their own twist. Add to the list Piqqem, a site run by Crowd Technologies that just recently came out of stealth. (Crowd Technologies is also the company behind StockMoose, which it launched as a quick experiment to test some of its technologies). The company raised about $1 million in June, 2007 from some serious angel investors, including Mike Markkula (the first investor in Apple), Mike McCue (founder of TellMe), Brad Handler, Stefan Roever and John Levinson.

Piqqem collects votes from its users on where they think a stock’s price is headed. For any given stock on Piqqem, before you can see what the crowd thinks you have to give your own prediction. You can do this with a simple rating system (two arrows down, one arrow down, a neutral circle, one arrow up, or two arrows up) or by actually plotting a specific price in the future on a stock chart. Piqqem collects all of these predictions and tells you what its members are collectively thinking about each particular stock.

CEO Jett Winter explains:

In general, we differ from the other sites in that we are a true wisdom of crowds sourcing application. That is, everyone gets one vote and they can vote as much as they want. We then aggregate and report the results. We don’t try to find the best single stock picker (like virtually everyone else) as that really isn’t wisdom of crowds anymore. Further, there is no weighting based on your ability to invest.

Rather than take the advice of any particular pro, Piqqem pulls together everyone’s opinion and generates a collective opinion. You can see this on the site, which offers lists for the top rated stocks, the most active stocks, the ones where sentiment is rising, and the ones here it is falling.

If nothing else, Piqqem is certainly a good place to get ideas for stocks to invest in. But does it really have any chance of ever beating the market? Like any social investing site, its picks are only as good as the people who contribute to it. But beyond that, there is fatal flaw to this approach.

When it comes to stocks, the best prediction market out there is the stock market itself. It is the biggest prediction market out there, with millions of people predicting the future price of stocks every time they buy or sell shares. All of those predictions are aggregated together in the form of the price. To think that a few thousand, or even a few hundred thousand, people on Piqqem can do better is naive. And in fact, if you look at the prediction lines on Piqqem they already closely hue the actual stock price.

Winter counters that Piqqem willwork because it takes money out of the equation:

The votes today, in the market, are also weighted based on money. If you have a lot of money you can move the market and set the price. In our view, the crowd as a whole has more “information” than any one entity in the market and over time the information the crowd knows will become evident to the people with the money. As the people with the money figure out this information they will move the market in the future—but hopefully we’ve predicted it before they move it!

Sorry, I don’t buy that. The votes should be weighted by money. If someone is willing to put down a million dollars on the shares of Apple going up, that should count more than someone who just puts $100 down (or worse, is just clicking on a Website). Money not only makes the predictions of a market better, it also makes it harder to game the system because there is more to lose if you turn out to be wrong.

Secondly, even assuming Piqqem is perfect and it does produce better stock picks than any one individual could, investors will quickly discover and then it will become a reflection of the market. Piqqem does not exist in an information vacuum.

Nevertheless, it’s still a fun site. Here are some screen shots:

Crunch Network: CrunchBoard because it’s time for you to find a new Job2.0

Source: TechCrunch
Original Article: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Techcrunch/~3/2VWXnj1s2_c/

Only three days after the close of one of the most historic elections in US history and the selection of Barack Obama as President, will.i.am has created a followup to his smash hit viral video Yes We Can. The new song, called It’s a New Day, made its debut on iTunes last night (you can download it here), and will be shown on this afternoon’s episode of The Oprah Winfrey Show.

Yes We Can (which we embedded below) features a collection of celebrities and musicians embellishing and singling alongside one of Barack Obama’s most memorable speeches, and as been viewed as many as 50 million times across countless online video sites. The new song is more traditional, celebrating Obama’s victory with references to past heroes of the United States and the civil rights movement. We’ll post the video as soon as it is available.

Crunch Network: CrunchGear drool over the sexiest new gadgets and hardware.

Source: TechCrunch
Original Article: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Techcrunch/~3/2BOMeMtwnXU/

Smule has done it again. The company behind the ingenious lighter app that took the iPhone by storm a few months ago has launched Ocarina, a networked musical instrument that allows you to listen to songs being played around the world in real time. The app costs 99 cents, and you can grab it here.

As an instrument Ocarina has been perfectly executed, and is much more suitable for the iPhone’s screen size than the virtual keyboards and guitars that litter the App Store. To play, you blow into the iPhone’s microphone while fingering notes using the 4 ‘holes’ on the ocarina. Smule says that the microphone can detect subtle variations in air flow, explaining that “unlike other iPhone audio apps, the sound is not pre-compiled but is generated by the notes, gestures and nuance of the individual performer”.

And for the vast majority of the population that has no idea how to play an ocarina, the app has another awesome feature: you can listen in on the songs being played on any iPhone worldwide. After selecting the ‘globe’ view, the app presents you with a 3D world littered with a number of little dots presumably representing every active Ocarina. The app will automatically start playing one of these, highlighted by a series of green blobs rising from Earth, each of which corresponds to a note. If you don’t like what you’re listening to, you can hit the ‘next’ button to start playing a new song (you’ll probably be using this button often, as many of the people playing are awful).

This is how an iPhone app should be done. As we pointed out in September, too few developers are leveraging the platform’s network effect to differentiate themselves, instead choosing to develop standalone apps that can be easily cloned. By being first to market with this app, Smule has safeguarded itself against the competition: even if another ocarina app comes along that is network compatible, Smule’s application will likely have the largest user base and will be very difficult to catch up with. And if Smule is smart, it’ll keep making these virtual instruments, allowing it to share the same network to create a worldwide orchestra that would be nearly impossible to replicate (and it sounds like it will - the company has developed an audio platform called ChucK that will likely be applied to other instruments).

For another app that is trying to tap into the iPhone’s network effect, check out Chess With Friends, which we covered yesterday.

Crunch Network: MobileCrunch Mobile Gadgets and Applications, Delivered Daily.

Source: TechCrunch
Original Article: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Techcrunch/~3/Pd9eKhvywOc/

In the platform wars between Facebook on the one side and MySpace, Google, and the whole OpenSocial crew on the other, the side that makes it easier for application developers to make the most money will win. Advertising in social networks has always been problematic, and with an advertising recession upon us those already-low ad rates are going to get lower, not higher. The other way to make money on these platforms is to try to charge for apps themselves or sell things through the apps. But to do that developers first need a payment and billing system to tap into.

Less than an hour ago, MySpace COO Amit Kapur revealed at the Web 2.0 Summit that MySpace is working on its own payments and virtual gift products that MySpace developers will be able to add to their own apps.

Facebook has its own virtual gifts, but has not yet opened that to developers. (Although there is a gift economy inside Facebook powered by other companies). And Facebook has been rumored to be working on a payments system since forever.

iPhone’s App Store has proven that, at least on mobile phones, people are willing to pay for apps. Bringing that model to social networks could work if the quality of the apps goes up and the number goes down. One problem with Facebook and MySpace apps is that there are too many of them. there are no barriers to entry. Charging for apps, or trying to sell add-on services through them, would force the startups and developers creating them to build something that people are actually willing to pay for.

And it is not just the developers who are in a sudden rush to figure out how they are going to make money. Facebook and MySpace are also under more pressure to ramp up revenues these days.

The challenge to switching over to such a model from the current free-for-all is that the value of many of these apps is directly correlated with how many people use them. (More specifically, with how many of your friends use them). The minute someone charges for an app, the adoption rate goes way down. So some aspect of most of these apps will likely always be free. But the ability to charge for extras or for a more fully-featured experience might actually result in better apps being produced.

In any case, the race is on to provide alternative revenue streams besides ads to app developers. Will MySpace beat Facebook to the payments party?

(Photo by Paul Falardeau).

Crunch Network: CrunchBase the free database of technology companies, people, and investors

Source: TechCrunch
Original Article: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Techcrunch/~3/mw-Z1-7J15I/

Slide founder Max Levchin just kicked off a panel called “The Platform Advantage” at the Web 2.0 Summit. Participants include Google’s Vic Gundotra, Microsoft’s David Treadwell, MySpace’s Amit Kapur and Facebook’s Elliot Schrage.

The panel began with a general debate on exactly what a platform is, and how each of the companies play in the space. Kapur says a platform has to create an ecosystem that includes a core base of users, tools to build applications, and an advertising network to monetize the platform. Kapur also let’s something slip - saying that MySpace will soon release a payments platform and a virtual goods platform.

Schrage says the Facebook platform is a place for users to interact, and for developers to take advantage of that social utility.

Treadwell, from Microsoft, is talking about open standards and advanced tools that let developers easily create applications. He highlights the iPhone platform as a great example.

Levchin says that everyone is talking about openness, but in reality every one of the platforms represented on stage are closed to some degree.

Gundotra says you have to disambiguate the term. Schrage focuses on the results - that developers can get far more traffic and engagement on Facebook than they can on their independent web applications.

Kapur says the most important thing is to build developer trust by having clear rules and guidelines - a clear slap at Facebook and their constantly evolving policies that tend to anger developers. Levchin (who runs one of the companies that has been in the middle of the Facebook politics) agrees, and notes that Microsoft’s Windows platform has done a good job over the years with consistency and backwards compatibility.

Schrage weighs in on Facebook’s behalf and distinguishes between technical and policy issues. He says on policy its important to be transparent and tell developers what’s coming. He says Facebook has sometimes failed to communicate changes to their platform and it’s something they’re still working on. He says over 400,000 developers have signed up to Facebook Platform, and they’ve had to scramble to scale. He also highlights the importance of community, and creating opportunities for developers to work with each other.

Gundotra (Google) says Facebook and MySpace aren’t true platforms but are extensible applications, similar to Office in the Windows world. He says the web is the important platform that we are all developing for. Open Social, Gundotra says, is an attempt to focus on the web as the platform.

Schrage says open standards are great, but they take too long to emerge. Experimentation with proprietary formats in the meantime is the right thing to do, he says.

Levchin brings up the next topic, asking how the platforms react to developers that start to make too much money by competing with them (again a slap at Facebook). Kapur says MySpace won’t break developer trust by competing with them.

Gundotra says it’s a recipe for disaster to have a single company control the platform. Innovation slows to a release every five years (referring to Windows). Using the open web allows fast innovation, and no one controls the platform.

Gundotra says “It’s Windows v. the web. And the web has won.”

Crunch Network: CrunchBoard because it’s time for you to find a new Job2.0

Source: TechCrunch
Original Article: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Techcrunch/~3/9NKnjxfniug/

For those of you who use FriendFeed and are looking for even more information bombardment in your lives, you can now receive every update via instant message. FriendFeed now supports notifications and posting for Google Talk and Jabber. So if it is not enough for you to visit the site 12 times a day, or keep updated via a desktop client, or get your feed in your e-mail, you can now turn on the information spigot even more.

FriendFeed ultimately is a communication platform, so adding IM was inevitable. But please kill me now. Just the thought of getting a ping every 30 seconds when anyone I follow on FriendFeed decides to Twitter, blog, add a photo to Flickr, share something on Google Reader, or any of the dozens of other actions across the Web FriendFeed monitors is overwhelming. I need less noise in my life, not more noise.

Luckily, the IM features has some settings that allow you to control what sorts of messages you want to receive through that channel. For instance, you can set it so that you only get IMed when someone comments on one of your posts. I’m sure this will become a very popular feature. (FriendFeed also recently started adding maps into the feed whenever geo-data is available, which is very cool but you need to go to the site to see that).

Crunch Network: MobileCrunch Mobile Gadgets and Applications, Delivered Daily.

Source: TechCrunch
Original Article: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Techcrunch/~3/dwr-97fyTIw/

New York Magazine’s John Heilemann is leading a panel at the Web 2.0 Summit in San Francisco this morning on “The Web and Politics.” Joining him is San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsome, Arianna Huffington and Joe Trippi.

The session jumped right off with Heilemann saying the Internet played a disruptive role in the 2008 election in the same way television played a disruptive role in the 1960 election of John F. Kennedy to president. Neither medium was new in the respective elections, but both “came of age” and swung the election towards the winning candidate. Kennedy, in particular, used television ads extensively in his campaign to reach the American voters directly, and embraced simple things like makeup:

The televised debate between John F. Kennedy and Richard M. Nixon was probably the most decisive event for the election of 1960. The growth of TV as a new medium, and declined use of radio marked a significant change in how campaigns are ran today. For the TV appearence, Nixon refused to wear make-up and therefore appeared unshaven, tired and sweaty under the lights. Kennedy, however, did wear the make-up and so appeared cooler and more composed than Nixon. Kennedy, before the debate, returned tan and attractive from vacation. Not only did Kennedy appear to be better groomed, and handsome, his suit was navy popping off the grey back drop. Nixon’s suit was grey, blending in to the curtain behind him. With these factors combined, Among TV viewers agreed, Kennedy won the debate. Richard Nixon’s deep, strong, radio appealing voice won over all radio listeners, they agreed Nixon won the debate. Nixon entered the race ahead of Kennedy. Television as a new medium changed presidential elections from this point on, marking the election of 1960 significant. Radio voice failed to prevail over now “candidate centered” television campaigns.

Huffington says flat out that if it wasn’t for the Internet, Obama would not be president. Trippi notes that Obama’s YouTube spots gathered an aggregate of 14.5 million viewing hours. The Internet was used by candidate previously, he said, noting the Howard Dean campaign, but Obama really leveraged it fully with online video, blogging, social networking and fundraising.

The panelists also note how mainstream media tends to fail in politics, simply reporting on what each candidate says without saying who’s right or wrong. The blogosphere, they say (particularly Trippi and Huffington), tends to call out factual inaccuracies better than mainstream media.

Howard Dean showed that the Internet could be used to raise lots of money online, say the panelists. But Newsome says social networking is significantly more powerful and allows for the creation of much more meaningful connections between the candidate and voters. “I’m addicted to Facebook,” he said.

Newsome also notes that “every single thing a candidate says, and how he says it,” is available online for people to review and judge. And he questions whether candidates today are more authentic or less authentic now that they have to be “on” all the time.

Crunch Network: MobileCrunch Mobile Gadgets and Applications, Delivered Daily.

Source: TechCrunch
Original Article: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Techcrunch/~3/tnFJk8rE6_w/

A lot of musician interviews wind up with a pulling-teeth vibe where you can sense the artist would rather just let the music do the talking. “Dion Pays Homage To Guitar-Rock Giants,” an audio interview with the singer-songwriter on NPR, is the opposite of that. You can sense he can’t wait to tell stories about his music and his peers.

You might think you don’t give a shit what Dion has to say, but take a listen. You’ll be fascinated. In fact, it’s a great example of promotion through education. Instead of just some old fogey plugging his latest record, he really gives ya something. He bring his guitar along and weaves in bits of songs, anecdotes about the greats he came up with, musical lessons, etc.

He covers “Summertime Blues” and explains how he loves the sense of humor displayed in the third verse. He talks about the song “Ruby Ruby” which led to the greatest compliment of his life: Little Richard’s mother telling him he’s got soul. He mentions how Johnny Cash’s “I Walk the Line” changes keys six times. He tells the story of writing “Born to Cry” as a 16-year old after he walked past a synagogue and heard the cantor singing. And he breezes through all of that in just a few minutes.

It’s a great lesson for anyone who’s trying to promote something. If you just show up to plug something, it’s easy to tune out. But if you give your audience a story they want to hear and/or teach them something interesting, they’ll eagerly pay attention.

Source: Signal vs. Noise
Original Article: http://www.37signals.com/svn/posts/1378-dion-shows-how-to-give-good-interview