Archive for the ‘Wired’Category

iFixit – welcome to the era of DIY repairs

I would put iFixit right up there with Fancy Hands (see prior post) as a platform for showing off the possibilities of crowd-sourcing. It demonstrates what people can do when the Web creates a frictionless environment for cooperation: namely, prices drop, costs trend towards zero, and the resulting burst of activity creates an entirely new horizon. Simply awesome.

You’re probably familiar with iFixit. We link to their teardowns and home fixing guides all the time on CrunchGear; they mostly focus on Apple, and their light and informative tone is a welcome addition to such a dry topic as hardware disassembly. Well, they’ve decided that merely providing help for Apple users isn’t enough, and are today launching a “global repair community” with the aim being user-level repairs of any device.

Such a project is well-timed; the relationship between user and manufacturer is becoming more one-sided. It doesn’t trouble you that the devices we use every day are so poorly documented, or constructed in such obscure ways, that one has to be an Apple-qualified technician or Dell customer service person to fix a simple problem? I’ve actually had a long post gestating on this very topic, and now iFixit has gone and eaten my lunch.

Read the rest of this entry»

Related articles by Zemanta

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Fancy Hands

Recently I exchanged e-mails with Ted Roden, principal of Fancy HandsI read about the company on Read/Write/Web and was drawn to the idea right away. Fancy Hands basically acts as a virtual valet and more; carrying out instructions, making things happen, remembering things, following up, etc. Don’t ask who, or where things happen. Just ask for it to be done, and it is. This is exactly what I liked about the vendors at this year’s ABA Tech Show, most of whom were all about practicality (and it couldn’t come at a better time).  

Besides, Fancy Hands is a terrific example of crowdsourcing – an idea that, for one reason for another, never caught on but should have. Why? Because it was really this article in the June 2006 edition of Wired that got me interested in Web 2.0 back in 2006. This was quite a feat considering that the dot.com boondoggle had cost me everything I had, as well as my credibility. But the idea of having thousands of anonymous but earnest participants cooperate in making things happen was too interesting to pass up. What’s more, the Internet seemed like the perfect medium for its rise.

Of course crowdsourcing never did become a force to be reconned with in the new, new, new economy, and today it remains the proud domain of handy-crafters and artisans from around the world (Etsy anyone)? But I still think that Fancy Hands represents the next step in the development of the Internet – from the force “out there” to the network that makes things happen “here.” I like that.

Posted via email from practice (redux)

Wired on the iPad

Hey iPad haters. Suck it.

Posted via email from practice (redux)

This year’s models

A simple illustration of what trends will hit this year. Pay attention!

ABA TechShow 2009 – Short and SaaSy

Were the ABA Damnit!

We're the ABA Damnit! We own you!

This was my 10th year at ABA Technology Show in Chicago. This year was particularly cool.  Here’s why:

Meeting The Heavies: To me, seeing people like Dennis Kennedy, Tom Mighelle, Bob Ambrogi, Jim Calloway, Kevin O’Keefe, Brett Burney, Andy Atkins, Jay Foonberg (!) and the rest of my pretend blog friends … I mean pretend LinkedIn friends … is like reconnecting with long lost relatives. Exciting and a little intimidating. But all of them were really great and down to earth. Except that Kennedy. Such a prima donna. I kid, I kid.

Meeting Canadians: Who can forget meeting the Great Librarian of Upper Canada! Beat that. Then there was Phil of the Future (my name for him), Steve Matthews (nice guy), Brett Burney (I think he’s Canadian), Dominic Jaar (vive la Quebec libre!), the boys from Clio (or as I called them, the Booth Babes), and a host of other talent from the Great White North. It was great to meet you all: now go back where the ice doesn’t melt until July.

Technology Becoming Accepted: This year for the first time in memory I noticed a preponderance of grey hairs and the careful gait of partners scoping out potential buys for their offices.  This was not the brash, flash-in-the-pan TechShow of the late-90′s in which the Internet was decried as a fad.

SaaS, Saas, and more Saas: Software as a service was all over the place, and by next year it will be pervasive. This year I was knocked out by the number and variety of kick-ass SaaS providers at the show including Clio, RocketMatter, and VLO Tech. Clio was my hands-down favorite for a number of reasons – I intend to use it in my own practice. Whatever your cup of tea, the idea of throwing away the IT department in favor of the Cloud is gaining traction fast.

Less is … Less: One lamentable fact about this  year’s show – there was less of it than I’ve seen in a long time. Another casualty of the economy I’d say, but we shouldn’t overlook the fact that many legal technology vendors have been slaves to profit instead of boosters for innovation and the slow economy is making it painfully apparent what a royal screw job they’ve been giving lawyers all these years. Many players couldn’t make it ? Good riddance to bad company.

Other than that however, it was a great experience as always and one that I heartily recommend to one and all. If you haven’t been to TechShow, go there. If you have, come back. A splendid time is guaranteed for all.

For more coverage see my SmallLaw Column in TechnoLawyer.

Check out Twitter coverage of TechShow.

As always, I’d love your thoughts. E-mail me at mhedayat[at]mha-law.com or tweet me @practichacker.

ttyl :-)

07

04 2009

Is Google's goose cooked?

Excerpted from the March 1, 2009 piece What An Antitrust Case Against Google Might Look Like posted on TechCrunch by Eric Clemons, professor of Operations and Information Management at the Wharton School

The mainstream press, such as The New York Times, has noticed that even Google itself is starting to worry about the possibility that the Department of Justice may seek regulation, possibly even the break-up of Google. How can this be? How can a firm seen as a triumph of creative capitalism and a virtuous contributor to the economy (“Don’t be evil!”) possibly be suspected of anything? Is this regulatory oversight gone mad? Not exactly.

Below I summarize what I do know about Google’s behavior and what I believe the Department of Justice is likely to perceive and likely to need to demonstrate if it seeks to act against Google. In a later post I will expand, including what I believe but cannot yet demonstrate. It’s important to remember that I am not an attorney, just a computer science faculty member at a major business school, with some litigation experience, and that I have had no conversations with Google or with the Department of Justice about these issues, but I believe that what follows provides some insight into thinking at the Department of Justice. [read the rest of the post]

Coincidentally (or not) the same kind of story appears in the January 2009 issue of Wired Magazine [see The Plot to Kill Google].