I Just Delivered Cookies to Watertown, MA Police Department from 2,500 Miles Away

I’m biased. I see technology as an amazing force in empowering people and creating connections. TaskRabbit helped me deliver a ‘thank you’ gift to the Watertown, Massachusetts police department from 2,500 miles away here in San Francisco. We’ve used TaskRabbit before for furniture assembly, help at a kid’s birthday party and other local tasks, but never considered how I could use the platform for distributed labor in other cities. Hmmm…. 🙂

 

Note, if you want to do same, here’s my task page for you to copy.

VC Firms Don’t Back You, VC Partners Do

Have you ever tried to hug a company? It’s kinda tough. They don’t have arms. And total Ken doll down below. That is to say, COMPANIES ARE NOT PEOPLE. So it always surprises me when founders say “I raised money from [VC firm name]” and not “I raised money from [person] at [VC firm name].”

“Semantics” you might say and “bullshit” I’d definitely reply. By genericizing the relationship between you and your investors, you’re losing the opportunity to build a sense of personal responsibility and obligation between your sponsor and yourself. This is especially relevant within large partnerships and when a traditional venture capitalist is investing in your seed round. 
In fact I’d go so far as to say at the seed round you’re definitely NOT taking money from a firm but a person, because you need that one person to make an important set of implied commitments: to work with you hands-on despite the relative small size of their investment compared to overall fund; to help you build a narrative towards your A Round so that their firm will participate, perhaps even lead. The opposite is true – if there’s not a named investment professional on your deal who you can trust will be your advocate, don’t take that money.
So founders, when recounting your investors – on your website, in conversation and especially with the investors themselves – don’t say you took money from a firm, you took it from a person.

How I Became An Overnight Success (Spoiler: Took 10,000+ Overnights)

A little over two months since I left my gig at YouTube. Head down working on my new thing, details soon, but noticed something rewarding as I’ve been pitching it to people. Often they ask “how long have you been working on this?” and I get to say “oh, about 39 years.” Wha????

What I mean is that my next project really comes from trying to go ‘all in’ – what can I do that’s the sum total of everything I’ve done up to this point. The experiences I’ve had, the people I’ve met, the successes, the failures, the fears. All of it. 
Talking with a young founder the other day and he said, “you’re Internet famous but I don’t really know why.” I took this to mean that there’s no single accomplishment I’m tied to – I didn’t found a billion dollar company – so why the heck would people know my name. My hope would be because I’ve tried to contribute in lots of small ways to lots of people or communities. Some totally silly. Some meaningful. But it’s probably also because I’ve been fortunate enough to be part of amazing teams at Second Life, Google and YouTube. When I get mentioned in the tech press it’s usually for that stuff. No one ever covered my struggles – the 2006 promotion cycle where I got denied or fall 2008 when the YouTube monetization product team was moved out of my org because Google management didn’t think I could handle the additional responsibility. But these are all part of me – and part of what I’m doing next.
Anyway, the point isn’t to talk about myself but rather to say, life is a cumulative game, where one experience leads to the next. Keep pushing yourself. Don’t settle for a ‘meh’ job. Be willing to jump up on the table and say “we can do better.” Because the only thing I know for sure is that the best way to become an overnight success is realize it takes thousands of overnights.

Why Video Discovery Startups All Fail

Sad to see Cory Booker’s startup Waywire pivoting to “Pinterest for video” after starting with much bigger ambitions. Prediction: they’ll struggle because video discovery just isn’t a venture scale business.

My previous role leading product at YouTube put me in position to see a lot of video startups. Additionally, most large developers hit our radar at some point via their API usage. Many of the video curation/discovery startups were based on two hypotheses:


1. There’s an explosion in web video content (and it’s not all on YouTube)
2. It’s difficult on YouTube to find and manage the content you want to watch

These are both absolutely true yet it doesn’t matter – video discovery startups are flawed products and even worse businesses. Why? Because they don’t fit into a consumer’s mental model. They’re fine products – several are very well-designed – and I’m sure many user studies provide answers like “oh yes, I totally need this,” but in reality there’s no habit being formed. Here’s why:

Verticalized content needs context not just collections. Many of these startup founders would provide the example of a particular interest and describe how an enthusiast would want to come to their site to see [fishing, cooking, fitness, travel, etc] videos.  But just a collection of embedded thematic videos isn’t enough – the real fan wants content, community, editorial. They already get their videos as part of the sites they visit today – along with text and images. A bunch of three minute videos with varying quality, metadata and sources isn’t enough value, not when some blogger is already picking the best of these and adding content around them.

Horizontal content needs to solve search not just browse or curation. At YouTube we thought of a user’s video discovery needs as occurring across a spectrum of intent. On one side you have “high intent” which means someone searching for a very particular individual video. On the other side you had low intent – this is why millions of searches a day start with something very generic such as “funny videos.” In between the two would be more thematic queries such as “Lady Gaga” or “Louis CK standup.” Today even though YouTube isn’t an A+ in fulfilling needs across this entire spectrum it’s largely good enough to be the only dedicated video site consumers turn to for short form content. By and large they don’t want to sort their video destinations by intent (I go here to search for news video, here to browse for recipe videos, etc) because that’s unecessary mental load. Furthermore, and anyone who has ever gone down the YouTube rabbit hole can attest, a single user session is likely to include multiple points on the discovery spectrum. You start perhaps by searching for a video on how to fix a flat tire but before you know it, watching clips from High School Musical.

Social video is not a standalone product, just a signal. For a while many companies were simply pulling the video shared by your Facebook friends and people you follow on Twitter to create social collections of content. These failed as standalone products because (a) social graph != interest graph and (b) removing the context and conversation took social videos and made them non-social. Fail.

It’s hard to make money on other people’s video when you can’t monetize it directly. Finally, even those people who’ve been able to get a bit of traffic find it hard to create a business. Video sites have a great business model – the ad follows the content so when you watch a YouTube video offsite, you’re still allowing the content owner to get paid. When you’re simply embedding content your monetization is really limited. You can’t put another ad in the player. From a YouTube terms of service standpoint they’re perfectly happy to let you ad support your site so long as the ads don’t target the video content AND if you removed the video, the page would still have enough content to be interesting to the consumer (that’s the reasonable man test).

Some believe that native ad models are the solution – that content owners and advertisers will pay to promote their content. YouTube does this via sponsored videos and indeed it does work but requires a scale of both users and operations that these startups can likely not reach.

So what would I do? Probably create a great mobile app and a .99 per month subscription service to deliver a handful of curated YouTube videos to you each day. Highly thematic and where context is less important – hockey fights, vegan recipes, kid-friendly videos. It would be a niche business but one I think you could scale by getting folks to subscribe to multiple channels. But don’t take venture capital. Just build it.


[For a smart response to this post, please read this post from ShowYou CEO Mark Hall]
[Update: Some additional thoughts from the CEO of Telly, a social video site]

Google Fiber: Just One More Search Per Session

Just got back from spending a day IN THE FUTURE! Ok, Kansas City where we met with local startups, big companies, Kauffman Foundation leaders and other folks thinking deeply about Google Fiber. As you can see from our speed test screenshot it’s for real.

Since Google Fiber is just rolling out, it’s not like there’s a whole bunch of specialized web products built around having 1GB speed. But when you play with it, the gap between you and Internet totally disappears. The computer is responsive in a manner that I’ve never experienced before. You can play multiple 4k YouTube videos without buffering. You download 1GB files during a tv commercial break. You just get more done.

And that’s the point. People ask me what’s Google’s metagame with Fiber. My guess is the following: Use Fiber to reset consumer expectations of what a connected home should feel like. Continue to drive down the cost of deployment and sign up customers for a very sticky (high LTV) service by being first to market. If existing ISPs follow – or even beat Google in some many markets – Google still wins. Why? Because as I found out personally, when the Internet is this fast you do one more search per session, watch one more video per session, send one more email per session. A connected population benefits Google. Period.

[Big thanks to Jeff & Regan of Silicon Prairie News for curating the trip. Their Big Omaha event is coming up May 8-10 and looks great.]

Optimizely Raises $28 Million via "Try Before You Buy"

A while back I wrote about the “Try Before You Buy” trend in hiring – finding ways to work with people more deeply than an interview process would allow. My friends at Optimizely recently raised $28m and one selection criteria they used for investors caught my eye: 

they auditioned VCs in an unusual way, by holding “mock board meetings” with potential investors

Perfect. Congrats Pete & Dan (and Stanford classmates Peter Fenton & Doug Pepper who are among their funders).

Be More Generous? There’s An App For That Too.

I just delivered a dozen cannoli and pound of cookies to my local firehouse, Station 15 here in San Francisco. And I didn’t even have to get up out of my comfy chair.

On Friday I was sitting at Peet’s in SOMA when a few policemen in uniform stopped by on break. Seeing them made me wonder how I could digitally gift coffee to police, fire and other first responders who serve on behalf of the city. Folks on Twitter suggested a few different ideas including my friend Ashley Brown who is VP of Operations at Get It Now – Postmates, a just-in-time delivery service. Ash recommended that I just use their service to send coffee to someone I wanted to thank. Their CEO/founder Bastian Lehmann even agreed to waive the delivery fee for this charitable endeavor. Operation Thank You was on!

This afternoon a Postmater named Jorge followed my instructions to pick, purchase and deliver the goodies to Station 15. He even snapped a picture

So many of the use cases we think about are based on satisfying ourselves – bring me this right now! It’s equally fun though to start conceiving about how Postmates, Taskrabbit, and other of these new mobile apps can be used to brighten someone else’s day instead of just our own. Seems like an opportunity for one (or all) of these products to build these use cases. Like a day of service, where taskrabbit helps coordinate rabbits to clean up local parks. Or Postmates does a Day of Thanks where all deliveries to firestations are free of charge. Apps that can be used to get can also be used to give.

Early Employees: Joel Jewitt & Palm

I was a huge Palm Pilot/Treo fan. In my latest LinkedIn post, early Palm employee Joel Jewitt shares stories of their success and failure to become Apple. 

Q: Palm had the first mainstream smartphone, the first mobile app platform and even was developing a mainstream tablet/netbook before other PC companies. Why didn’t you guys turn into Apple?
A: The ipod/itunes service phenomenon was the seed for every other mobile product Apple has developed. Or put another way: we should’ve been the ones who built a great music player and service

“Well, that’s the future”

Jurassic Park oral history in Entertainment Weekly. When you see the future, you know it.

KATHLEEN KENNEDY Producer I remember getting the phone call where Dennis said, “I think I have something you and Steven should take a look at.” We saw this wire-frame model of a dinosaur running across the screen, and it caused five
 or six of us to literally leap to our feet ­because it was so extraordinary and ­significantly beyond anything we had seen in motion control up to that point.
SPIELBERG The last time my jaw dropped like that was when George Lucas showed me the shot of the Imperial cruiser [in Star Wars]. I showed it to [stop-motion effects legend] Ray Harryhausen. He was absolutely enthralled and very ­positive about the paradigm changing. He looked at the test and said, “Well, that’s the future.”

Quantified Self or Better to Quantify Someone Else: Can We Improve Ourselves By Mimicking Others?

The quantified self movement has produced any number of digital wearables allowing us to track our runs, our steps, our calories, and even our sleep. Then using our own motivation or target goals, we’re supposed to change our behavior towards improvement. Easy, right?

However, I wonder if we’re focusing on the wrong idea. Instead of tracking us as individuals, what if we used this technology to mimic someone who is already doing it right? Train like an athlete, eat like a nutritionist.

Imagine “following” someone and be made aware of their actions. Drink water when they drink water. Snack when they snack. Or follow the work pattern of the most productive person you know – how often do they check email? How often are they on Twitter? Should I follow the technology usage patters of MG or would my head explode?

Instead of measuring yourself and improving against some depersonalized target, would it be interesting to pattern our behaviors to someone else – in realtime, not just a training model – and as a community, live like someone else. Would that increase chances of improvement because we’re part of a real collective?

The next gains in quantified self might not be hardware and sensors but sociology and community….