Chronicle of Technology, Culture and Stupidity

24 Sep 09

Am I Cool Enough for Tumblr?

I’m in a bit of a blog transition right now, with Oddly Together’s future hanging in uncertainty. A man has got to live and feed his family, so I have to make Chronicle of Technology, Culture and Stupidity and my subbranded site at Betanews the greater priorities. The latter site pays, the other doesn’t, but it could someday. So could Oddly Together.

When I launched Oddly Together a few months ago, I had closed down Chronicle of Technology, Culture and Stupidity. My plan was to do technology blogging at Betanews and cultural, societal and storytelling blogging here. But the other blog, at joewilcox.com, had been around for a long time (that was good for search traffic and incoming links) and based on comments my readers there didn’t follow me to Betanews. So joewilcox.com is back and sucking away some of the blog topics I might otherwise do here. Additionally, I’ve converted that site to microblogging, even though WordPress as configured is nowhere as suitable as Tumblr.

Are you following any of this? I’m lost trying to explain it. Other changes: I ditched a Mac running Snow Leopard for Sony VAIO running Windows 7. Everyone knows the cool kids use Macs, or so I assume that means Tumblrs. My birthday passed, and I turned another decade—now making me 20 or more years older than most Tumblrs. But what I originally planned for Oddly Together otherwise fits well with the Tumblr community.

The Tumblr team is improving features all the time, and perhaps a little Posterous competition helps there. As much as I like Tumblr as a publishing platforms, limitations bug me:

  • Content management is bearish at best
  • Other than adapting something like Disqus, there is no real commenting
  • Social networking features, while good, pale behind services like TypePad

I love that there are new Tumblr themes everyday, and someday, when I’ve got time, I may do my own. When it comes to CSS, I’m in need of some Dummies books. But I can code HTML. Hell, I supported my family in 1995 and 1996 coding HTML Websites (back in the day before WYSIWYG editors). Other aspects of the publishing platform just click. It suits me. I’d pay, absolutely I would, if David Karp and crew offered some premium features. Sign me up, baby.

I’ve considered other services. I have successfully exported all posts (except this one) from Tumblr to WordPress XML. The export opens up plenty of possibilities, such as TypePad.com and WordPress.com—or even Posterous. Themes suck at all three sites. TypePad themes are boring, and custom themes aren’t allowed at WordPress.com; that’s a benefit exclusive to third-party hosted WordPress. Posterous just added some themes, f-f-f-f-five of them, and all measure hurl on the yuck meter. I could preserve link structure at Posterous or WordPress.com by pointing the Oddly Together domain there. TypePad has far better features—most everything I’d want—but last century’s infrastructure. Publishing isn’t really dynamic, .html would break all my links and theme customization is convoluted.

So the question remains: Is Tumblr the place where I belong, where Oddly Together can fit in? Or am I just not cool enough for this crowd and need to retire to the old folks’ blog? Tumblr is a community as much as a blogging service. Is it the community for which this blogger and blog can find a place?

blogging Tumblr cool tumblog microblogging internet

22 Jul 09

Damn, I must read Chris Anderson’s book Free: The Past and Future of a Radical Price. Based on the above WNYC video and Q&A—”The Gift Economist“—in the July 19, 2009 the New York Times Magazine, I must disagree with Chris’ concept of free as applied to digital products. Free and the Internet go oddly together, and not necessarily well together. Chris may be right, but for other reasons than he presents here.

In the video above, Chris asserts that on the Internet “free really can be free.” Nobody has to pay. He presents his view, which does allow for combo free and paid models, by way of marketing and economic history and theory. My problem: Contrary to popular belief, economics doesn’t derive from human culture or society, but the natural world—where nothing is really free.

Air doesn’t cost you anything. It’s free; natural processes over billions of years paid for the atmosphere we freely take for granted. But the process of breathing isn’t free. It requires the proper functioning of interdependent biological systems and input of energy, provided by ingested food. Some food freely grows, but the majority must be cultivated, which price is paid for in many clearly identifiable ways I shouldn’t need explain; they’re obvious.

Then there is biology. Regardless of culture, society or civilization—past or present—human beings instinctively assign value to everything. Survival of species demands choices for which there is the greatest value derived for the invested energy. That’s biology, not society, as primary influencer. Mother Nature invented proverb: “Waste not, want not.”

Value is Everything
Modern economic theory is too hung up on prices, when value is more important. Often pricing is independent of value, as should be apparent from the housing market collapse. An artificial debt-driven bubble drove up home prices, which didn’t make the real estate more valuable.

A $5 million dollar condo in Manhattan might be valuable for location, not because a housing bubble drove up the price by $2 million. Now, housing prices are free falling in most US markets and will continue to until perceived value—mostly measured by people’s willingness and ability to buy—achieves equilibrium with mortgage costs.

Value is everything. For a teen the value assessment might be: Is it worth cleaning my room so my parents won’t yell at me or will I get more from chatting with my friends online? There is an associated value assigned to the action, but not an associated price. People make these kind of value decisions for most nearly every action the take, or decide not to.

In the late 1990s, I paid Netscape $30 bucks for its Web browser, even though Internet Explorer was free. Why? Because I got more value from paying than getting something for free. I’ve paid for the online version of the Wall Street Journal since 1996. Much of the same information is available elsewhere for free. But I derive value from the Journal’s authority, presentation, story searchability and cheaper cost (about half) the print edition. The point: People will pay for anything for which there is perceived or actual value. Free is an acceptable price when there is perceived or actual value.

The Value of Free
Where Chris might have a point—and I’ll need to read his book to find it: Human beings instinctively are natural communicators, and they expect communications—the exchange of information—to be free. Anthropologically, people have a need to create, share their creations and reciprocate the process to others.

I believe that people everywhere have a natural aversion to paying for information or entertainment.  Just because communications and social sharing are highly valuable doesn’t mean people willingly pay for them. The idea that value has a price, whether fixed or fluid because of supply-and-demand logistics, is a construct of economic theory.

From that perspective, copyrights and patents are unnatural constructs. They restrict the natural creating, sharing and communications processes that are essential to human intelligence and its further development.

Google gives away for free information/content that people highly value. Internet free isn’t about price but making things free that people highly value but instinctively don’t want to pay for.

Damn, maybe I should write a book. If you’re a publisher, or book agent, please ping. I’m ready.


Chris Anderson Free Internet Long Tail WWW Web Wired World Wide Web society culture sociology anthropology