Helpful collection of DNS related material.
I just stumbled across http://www.dnsstuff.com, which is a handy site that gives you access to a bunch of functionality from one page:
- Any DNS record
- Reverse DNS lookup
- DNS timing
- Whois
- Ping
- Tracert
- Spam database lookup (150+ DBs searched)
- etc
Nifty.
The following three items turned up in sequence in my aggregator this morning.
While it’s starting to shape up as another A-List/Power law debate, I think something else more interesting is going on that Dina is highlighting. There are new cultural norms taking shape here influenced, as always, by key characteristics of the technology. At the same time, as Finkelstein points out, these norms are also shaped by predictable aspects of human nature.
It can be a struggle to tune into the nuances of this debate. You can choose to listen to a small set of voices all saying the same thing. You can choose to seek out diversity in sources and perspectives at the expense of having to develop your own synthesis. Most importantly, you can choose to do so mindlessly or mindfully.
1. Revenge Of The A-List(er/ers).
Feel the floor, I mean being flat on the floor, while a very few have the floor. [Seth Finkelstein’s Infothought]
With this key graf.
What I am saying is that bloggerdom is as gatekeeper-constricted as other Big Media. It’s a gatekeeper of audience, not a gatekeeper of production, but this makes no different in the final result. To be charitable, people keep responding to that observation by saying anyone can pitch a story to the editors, I mean the gatekeepers, and that they are unmoved by insularity and clubbiness. Which, by the way, is exactly what Big Media claims too, and I think is about as true (note the implication there – people can think conections count for more than they in truth do, but denying they mean anything at all seems over-idealistic)]
Scoble is responding to Finkelstein’s earlier post. Or more precisely, he’s using his take on Finkelstein’s post to make his own point. But the nice thing about blogs and linking is that we can easily go look for ourselves.
2. Finkelstein notes that he isn’t in the A list.
Seth Finkelstein says that the A-list isn’t linking to him. Or something. Seth, you miss the point. How did I get to the supposed “A list?” By linking to everyone and by reading more than 1000 blogs. Seriously. Why does that matter? The more you link and the more you read, the more likely people are to link to you and talk about you. Here’s a question for you Seth: have you ever linked to an A lister? Here you do and you get linked to by two of us.
Here’s my top blogger tip: if you want people to link to you link to them first! A link is a gift. Everytime I get a link it tickles my soul. Plus, it shows up in my referer log so I notice you did it. How do you think I found out about your blog?
I have a saying. Everyone gets one link for free. But you gotta earn the “n” link. So, the stakes go up next time. Next time you’ll have to be interesting. Sorry, but that’s sorta how it works. (Yeah, my boss ignores me when I go in to ask for a raise too and mubles something about how my coworkers are writing more code and doing more cool stuff to help customers).
Oh, and look at my experimental aggregator blog. What percentage of those posts are from the “A list?” See, you don’t need to be an “A lister” to get noticed.
I’ve only been blogging for about three years. It doesn’t take long to get onto the A list if you wanna be there (here’s a hint, it isn’t as interesting as you might think). Just write something that other bloggers find interesting. Don’t know what that is? Well, then visit Technorati and read some more blogs.
Oh, one rule that an “A lister” taught me very early on: don’t beg for links. There’s nothing more uninteresting than that. [Scobleizer: Microsoft Geek Blogger]
And Dina finds an interesting perspective on community that is worth considering.
Another way of looking at community …. Why the Amish would like Blogs.
“The Amish way of life is actually a means to prevent interaction with outsiders. Oddly this is precisely why they are such supporters of community……………………..
The problem with the Amish method of community or the beauty of it depending on how you see it, is that there is not really any growth. The only way you get more Amish to have kids. That limits the growth to a pretty slow number. The same is true of Separatist or Elitist communities. If you aren’t trying to actively convert users, or working on ways to have communities interact you aren’t likely to grow your communities.” [Brandon Wirtz’s Digital Mix]
[Conversations with Dina]
This is a nice collection of tips and strategies for designing large scale training events.
The Problems With Training (and What to Do About It). As the author asserts, “Mirroring the 7th grade classroom and the freshman college 101 lecture hall will serve only to copy their mediocrity.” Too true. But what to do about it? This essay contains a number of good suggestions, ranging from the ever popular 99-second talks to the importance of food, round tables, and varied activities. When I plan a conference (and I will plan a conference some time over the next couple of years) it is my intention to employ a number of these tactics to draw on some of the lessons on learning that we all know but never seem to apply for ourselves. Like, for example, having the conference participants themselves design the conference online before the actual event. Whoever heard of such a thing? Via elearningpost. By Scott Berkun with Vanessa Longacre, UIWeb, February, 2004 [Refer][Research][Reflect] [OLDaily]
Lots of people have been pointing to this or sending me links to go look. What I found most intriguing is its implicit decision to approach knowledge management from the perspective of personal knowledge management. It simply takes as a given that the primary object of knowledge management is to assist knowledge workers in organizing and applying their own personal stores of knowledge. I happen to think this is a good thing as does Dave Pollard. Here’s a recent post Dave did on Personal Content Management: An Exploration, for example that speaks to this idea nicely. My post on knowledge work improvement – black box, white box, and deliverables is an entry point to some of my thinking on this point of view.
James Fallows writes in the New York Times:
A current race for a solution goes by the deceptively blah name of “knowledge management,” or K.M. It is an effort to bring Google-like clarity to the swamp of data on each person’s machine or network, and it is based on the underappreciated tension between a computer’s capacity and a person’s. Modern computers “scale” well, as the technologists say – that is, the amount of information they can receive, display and store goes up almost without limit. Human beings don’t scale. They have finite amounts of time, attention and, even when they’re younger than the doddering baby boomers, short-term memory. The more e-mail, Web links and attached files lodged in their computer systems, the harder it can be for people to find what they really want.
If anything, the challenge of helping people find their own information is harder than what Google has done. Search engines let you explore sites you haven’t seen before. Knowledge management systems should let you easily retrieve that Web page, that phone number, that interesting memo you saw last month and meant to do something with.
The current creative struggle is important because, when it yields a victor, it will leave everyone less frustrated about using a computer. What makes the struggle intriguing is that it involves two great axes of competition. On the business level, it is another installment of that ancient tale, Microsoft vs. the World. On the conceptual level, it raises basic questions about what knowledge is.
The underlying intellectual question about knowledge management is whether people actually think of knowledge as a big heap of laundry just out of the dryer, or as neatly folded pajamas, shirts and so on, all placed in the proper drawers. The “big heap” theory lies behind some of the programs: we don’t care where or how things are stored; we just want to find certain pairs of socks – or P.D.F. files – exactly when we need them. The “folded PJ’s” theory guides a variety of programs that let you mark information as it shows up – for instance, tagging an article you know you want to refer to later, when shopping for a new car. Brains work both ways, and the ideal K.M. software will, too.
Google’s success suggests that there is a huge potential for solving a problem that people didn’t realize they had until the right solution appeared.
Going to need this.
Small Pieces Loosely Joined for kids.
David Weinberger is one of the most cogent and original thinkers about the meaning of the Net and the impact it has, and can have, on our lives and our society. As one of the authors of The Cluetrain Manifesto, he helped define the impact of the web on how we conduct our business – personal and professional.
In his follow up solo offering, Small Pieces Loosely Joined, he attempts to present a unified theory of the web. It’s a terrific read and a book I have recommended to many friends and co-workers.
Today, while reading through my blog list, John Porcaro pointed out that there is a kid’s edition of Small Pieces. Weinberger originally created this version for his son (11) and it’s a wonderful explanation of the dynamics, the wonder, and the potential dangers of the web.
If there’s a child in your life in the 11-13 year old range (like my son Jason who’s 12), please show them this wonderful work. It can be read online or downloaded in MS Word format for printing. It will change the way they look at the Net and help them to appreciate the potential it has to change our world.
Nice overview of Etienne Wenger’s work on Communities of Practice.
Since I presented on Communities of Practice the other day, this article about Etienne Wenger’s work obviously hit the spot too. Creating online communities shouldn’t just happen…it should be a strategic imperative and a planned process.
[Serious Instructional Technology]
This is the sort of unanticipated problem with reading blogs creates. I have too much interesting reading in the queue as it is. Brad may have gotten some free time, but he’s going to cost me some of mine.
Notes: More Free Time Tomorrow.
Raj Arunachalam has cancelled his appointment with me tomorrow: he’s flying to George Mason to interview James Buchanan and Gordon Tullock.
I have owned seven copies of Buchanan and Tullock’s (1962) The Calculus of Consent: Logical Foundations of Constitutional Democracy in my life. I keep loaning my copy out to graduate students: “You haven’t read this? You must read this!” They keep liking it so much they don’t return it. So I go and buy another one.
This is a nice process for running AARs together with a case study of AARs in action. AARs are a simple and powerful technique for discovering and communicating lessons learned. They work especially well in project-based environments. If they aren’t already in your bag of tricks, they should be
After Action Review Toolkit. Allison Hewlitt has posted a draft After Action Review Toolkit, which provides a practical step-by-step process for running these reviews. To quote: The AAR is a simple process used by a team to capture the lessons learned from past successes… [Column Two]
Altered Carbon
Morgan, Richard
This was getting lots of buzz in different places that I trust. I picked it up and browsed it in the book store and put it back several times before I finally decided I was going to read it. Glad I did.
What makes good science fiction work, and the reason I continue to make it such a major component of my fiction reading, is to make plausible hypotheses about a technology innovation and then be relentless in pursuing that “what if” wherever your understanding of behavior and society leads. Morgan does exactly that. If technology could give you a real-time backup brain that essentially lets you cheat death (but not pain), where does that take you? To some frequently nasty but compelling places.