More on visualisation and flight patterns and Generation M

A few weeks ago I wrote about visualisation, using flight patterns as an example. More recently I came across this. While the 9 snapshots of “a day in the life of US airspace” are by themselves interesting, what entranced me was the QuickTime movie. [For some reason I couldn’t load it into my VodPod; the error messages generated were ante-Web, a meaningless five digit error number, so I chose not to proceed.]

My thanks to Howard Rheingold’s Smart Mobs for bringing it to my attention.

As we see information continue to disaggregate and atomise, and as we see its velocity increase, we are going to need better and better visualisation tools and techniques. While there has been much progress in visualisation over the last decade or so (especially in the use of fractal representation, heatmaps, 3D, even simple video and animation), for some reason this has not made its way into business life.

Maybe that’s one more reason I remain Confused.

We’re still stuck in a world of PowerPoint presentations of scorecards and dashboards and RAG indicators, fed by Excel spreadsheets and simple databases, and with considerable manual intervention. Considerable use of derived data. Considerable throwing away of useful information. Considerable scope for sins of omission and commission when interpreting the derived data.

Now most large-scale organisations are under market and analyst pressure to report more accurately and more quickly, and everyone talks about real-time information. Real-time monitoring. Real-time reporting. Real-time events. We talk a good story, but when it comes to true decision support and management information, we go back to using dead-paradigm slow-moving hand-crafted tools.

Why? Maybe it’s because we want to.  Maybe it’s because we want the control it gives us, the ability to edit and spin the summaries we create. So we spend enormous amounts of time creating, reviewing, refining and negotiating the content of these carefully hand-crafted artefacts. And we manage to convince ourselves that what we see is real and accurate and transparent. And that the Emperor has Clothes.

All this is going to change. It is changing now. One of the key outcomes from the march of Moore, Metcalfe and Gilder is our transformation into an event-driven society. We have the ability to sense so much more in real time. We have the ability to take the sensed information and move it around so much more quickly. And in this digital age, we have the ability to connect different sources of information more effectively, both by use of semantic tools as well as by heuristic learning methods.

Generation M, with their mobility and their multimedia and their multitasking skills, have an innate ability to leapfrog us. They haven’t been infected by Office. They don’t think that way. They’re already used to non-hierarchical ways of looking at things, at tag clouds and cluster maps and fractal images. They’re already used to seeing lots of atomised fast-moving information and making sense of it. They’re used to better simulations, better virtual worlds, more decentralised ways of behaving, quicker decisions, less pigeonholing, faster networking. They’re different. And God bless them.

I’m not saying that boardrooms are going to turn into 21st century air traffic control units overnight. What I am saying is that we waste enormous amounts of time and effort using tools that aren’t fit for purpose, and then somehow we manage to convince ourselves that all is well.

Generation M won’t fall for that.

Musing about YouTube moments

Dominic Sayers, an old friend, erstwhile colleague and fellow cricket-lover, commented today on a post I’d written sometime earlier on “learning from the comments people leave on my blog“.  What he said was:

I thought you would enjoy this quote from a Cricinfo article today: “Kaif was cruising on 91 when Panesar stunned him with a Youtube moment”.

How soon before “a YouTube moment” joins the verb “to Google” in the dictionary?

As you would expect, I did two things. I googled “YouTube moment” and found it returned just under 18,000 hits. Then I went to YouTube, found this video and watched it. Looks like the Test series coming up will be interesting. Incidentally, I fail the Tebbit test spectacularly. I watch and support England every chance I get, have even had the good fortune to have been at two Ashes-clinching tests. But when they play India, things are different. it’s not Tebbit but Thatcher I land up following. TINA. India.

[The video is also on my VodPod in the sidebar in case you want to watch it later. I use VodPod to liberate the video link from the post].

On to the real point that Dom was making. YouTube moment as a neologism. Until Dom’s post, I never quite realised how useful the web is for tracking neologisms, one can almost associate a nascent phrase with a buzz factor and watch it grow. Or die.

And that set me thinking. YouTube moment. Whatever next? A FaceBook romance? A Flickr opportunity?

Floating in my bowl taking movies

Wish I was a Kellogg’s Corn Flake
Floating in my bowl, taking movies

Simon and Garfunkel, Punky’s Dilemma

Take a look at what Dr Curtis Ebbesmeyer does for a living. A retired oceanographer, he studies flotsam. I was reading about the flotilla of rubber ducks heading Britain’s way after they confounded earlier predictions and made it through the Garbage Patch. Apparently they’re due for landfall here any moment.

And it made me wonder. What if these ducks had had GPS? How much more information would we have gained?

We are heading towards a world where GPS-ed plastic ducks are part of the wisdom of crowds.

Prince-ly returns from the Because Effect

I’ve been fascinated by the Because Effect, ever since Doc Searls first discussed it with me, set against the backdrop of Doc’s Making a New World and Stewart Brand’s The Long Now. What is this Because Effect? Doc describes it better than I can, but if it helps you any, I use the following definition:

When something that was originally scarce starts becoming abundant, something strange happens. You find that you start making money because of that thing rather than with that thing. That’s the Because Effect.

Prince has often struck me as an incredibly talented artist as well as someone who really understands trends. So it was with some amusement that I read this story, where he is described as having done a deal with the Mail On Sunday to give his latest album away free before it hits the shops.

Now that’s avant-garde. Don’t just give a track or two away, give the whole thing away before you put it on sale. I know, I know, you’re going to say “he should have made it a free download” or something like that; or rather, the Mail On Sunday should have done a deal whereby anyone who signed up to their free online edition had the right to download it for free or something like that.

Whatever. The point is that Prince understands how he makes money, what’s scarce and what’s abundant about it. Digital downloads are abundant. Concert appearances are scarce. He makes money because of his CDs and not with them.

A word of caution. Some people are just not comfortable with abundance economics, so they try to create artificial scarcities as they go along. Second nature to them, I guess. So please don’t be surprised to find that someone dreams up a scheme whereby concert tickets start being offered as triple plays at grossly inflated prices, bundling together the concert with the CD and the T-shirt. [In this context, there’s a lot of noise about artists being offered “360-degree” contracts by media companies, this is a dangerous trend.]

You cannot bundle abundance with scarcity, it’s like trying to implement region coding of the air that you breathe. But then some people will try anything.

How times change

Yesterday, while watching Madonna at Wembley, the stadium was pin-cushioned with thousands of tiny points of light. This time around the light sources were mobile phone screens. Thirty years ago, when I started attending concerts in earnest, I saw the same pin-cushioning. In those days the light sources were cigarette ends. There wasn’t a cigarette end to be seen at Wembley yesterday.

How times change.  Or do they? As happened with cigarettes, mobile phones emit light at concerts, are habit-forming and appear to have the capacity to make people ill.