Google Wave integrations for the Enterprise

Interesting blog straight from the Enterprise 2.0 Conference taking place this week in San Francisco. Wish i was there :-/

Integrations by SAP, Thoughtworks, and Novell. Boy, and knowing there are still people who don’t believe Wave is going to happen big time.

Watch till the end, where there is an BPEL export of the business process that was collaboraively edited on the Gravity canvas in a cross-company wave. Piece of cake !

More details here on the Enterprise 2.0 Blog.

Btw: thx to my good friend Roger, i got an invite for Wave. You can find me there at: p.vanderauwera@googlewave.com (don’t use as an email address 😉

Failure is NOT an option (you don’t know until you try)

A couple of weeks ago, i was attending the Web 2.0 Summit. Actually, it is the Web² Summit (read as Web Squared).

If you want to stay up-to-date a little bit, a must read is the Web Squared Whitepaper. You can read it online here or download it here.

web2009_websquared-cover

One morning, i was taking the elevator to have breakfast. In front of me in the elevator was somebody i never met, but he had a conference badge. So i started a chat. By the time we got to the ground floor, i understood i was chatting with Don Dodge, Director Business Development Emerging Business Team at Microsoft. UPDATE: just learned via Don’s blog that he has left Microsoft

6a00d8341bf9da53ef00e550076d788834-150wi

I identified myself as part of SWIFT’s Innovation Team, we got connected, and Don invited me to join him for breakfast.

We chatted about innovation cultures and where we were coming from. About our deep DNA of FNAO (Failure is not an Option), and how people in such culture usually feel reluctant to come up with idea of dare to take risks.

Don told me i gave him inspiration for a new blog post on The Next Big Thing.

Never thought he would do this, but hey ! Today i received from Don a mail with a link to his post. I have copied it here below in it’s entirety. Don’t hesitate to comment on this blog on on Don’s blog.

BTW: i have invited Don to be part of our Innotribe @ Sibos 2010 in Amsterdam in Oct 2010 :-). Hope he accepts.

PS-1: I am not an “Exec”. I am just part of SWIFT’s Innovation Team.

PS-2: “Make a mistake and you are fired” is of course a metaphor to indicate that an FNAO culture does not promote taking risks and being innovative. Sometime to the contrary. But that metaphor does not change anything to the important message Don has for big and small companies trying to innovate.

+++ start Quote from Don’s Blog

Failure is NOT an option – Why this can be a bad strategy

An exec at a large European financial company recently told me his former CEO believed “Failure is not an option”. Great, I thought. This means they will do whatever it takes to succeed, try five or ten different approaches until it works, get the whole company focused on the goal, etc. No, he told me. What it means is “Make a mistake and you are fired.” Wow! Another example of the difference between startups and big companies. I have worked most of my career in startups where you are always pushing the envelope, taking big risks, where there are no obvious answers, and you just keep trying until you find the combination that works.

Poker ChessStartups play poker, big companies play chess – This “failure is not an option” discussion reminded me of the huge differences between startups and big companies. Success is not easy in either case, but the approaches are radically different. Using a game analogy, startups are more like poker players. They take big risks, they bluff, they make quick decisions, change direction constantly, and they keep their competitors off balance. Poker is an aggressive game where if you play your cards right you win big, and win fast. If you lose a hand you can come back and double your money in the next hand. There is no time to wallow over a loss. You did your best. Move on and your luck will be better next time. Chess is a different game. Both require incredible skill and talent. A great poker player is rarely a good chess player.

Big companies think long term. Like chess players they think four or five moves (years) ahead. They protect their assets, play defensively, think strategically, and carefully consider the options before making a move. Big companies have a lot to lose, while small companies don’t. Big companies leverage their assets (conservatively) and flex their muscles where they can. They go for incremental improvements in position. Big company CEOs, like chess players, work a long term strategy. Each short term move plays a part in a longer term strategy that is not visible to the casual observer. In fact, their strategy is often kept secret, and they take care to make sure their short term moves don’t reveal their long term plan. Strategy is a competitive advantage.

There is another interesting topic on how to make the transition from startup to successful big company, but we will save that for another day.

Fail Fast – If you are going to fail, do it fast and move on to the next thing.More in depth thoughts here. The only thing better than a “Yes” is a quick “NO”. When you are raising money, selling a customer, or trying to get a deal done, it is the long drawn out process that never ends that will kill you. It is the same thing with startups. Being successful is always the goal, but if it is going to fail…Fail fast.

Bill Warner, founder of Avid Technologies, Wildfire Communications, etc, said recently “Some of you guys are so smart you turn what should have been a one year failure into a five year death march.” Entrepreneurs are resourceful, smart, and have that indomitable spirit that doesn’t allow them to quit. This can be good and bad. Sometimes it is better to “fold” and move on to the next game.

Hold ‘em or Fold ‘em? – “You got to know when to hold em, know when to fold em, know when to walk away, know when to run.” Kenny Rogers. The toughest decision any entrepreneur makes is giving up on a company. It just isn’t in their DNA to do it. In fact, they rarely decide to do it, it is the investors who finally make the call. How do they decide? It is really about passion and commitment – from the founders, investors, employees, and customers. If the passion is lost in any two of the four groups…it is probably time to “fold” and move on.

Fine line between success and failure – There are no easy and obvious answers. If it were easy everyone would have already done it. Timing and luck play a big part in success…bigger than most people will admit. There are four key elements to success in any business; great people, great idea, great timing, and luck. If you don’t have any two of the four…you are probably going to fail. I have seen startups with great people and a great idea that were too early (timing), or had bad luck on things they couldn’t control. They failed. The same idea tried five years later succeeded. Timing matters. The market needs to be ready to adopt your ideas. The answer is never obvious. You don’t know for sure until you try.

+++ End quote

Energy from Passionate Creatives

Fantastic blog by Hutch Carpenter about The Passionate Creatives. His blog is always quality. Always new content. Feeling deeply the pulse of the Enterprise 2.0 wave.

0990783

A lot in Hutch’s blog post reminded me about the book – The Cultural Creatives – How 50 million people are changing the world. By Paul H. Ray & Cherry Ruth Anderson.

418MH0BC23L._SL500_AA240_

In his recent blog entry, Hutch talks about “Passionate Creatives”.

Especially about passionate creatives at the edges.

Passionate creatives are everywhere among us, but they are not evenly distributed. They tend to gather on the edges where unmet needs intersect with unexploited capabilities.  Edges are fertile seedbeds for innovation.

Or also

Companies are best-served by allowing employees who are attracted to these changes to pursue innovative ways to address them. Why?

They get energy

They get an experimenter’s mentality. They get a happier workforce. Let employees exercise some form of self-organization to accomplish this.

The alternative may be incumbent staffers who have fallen into routines, or

have reason to protect

the status quo

This does not help companies address rising levels of volatility. Free the passionate creatives!

Makes me think of Red Monkey story by Jef Staes. I use it a lot. In every presentation about innovation. It’s where my audience does NOT loose me on my trip to the future.

Book_Wordcloud

Let me make another connection here. Just like Hutch, i would like to refer to  A Labor Day Manifesto for a New World by John Hagel.

John Hagel founded the Deloitte Center for Edge Innovation. And is having a fantastic blog The Big Shift. I had the honor of meeting John Hagel in person during the last Web 2.0 Summit. We had a brief chat on his possible participation to next years Innotribe @ Sibos 2010 in Amsterdam.

Have a look at the whole Labor Day Manifesto, and more specifically at the last paragraph:

Stop and think about the last truly great person who left your organization. First think about what made that employee great. We bet you name such characteristics as action-oriented, driven, passionate, fun, and genuine.

Now think about where that worker went. Chances are, to a position with a perceived promise of putting his or her talents to better use—moving into a role with greater challenges and opportunities to learn and make a difference. It wasn’t about money.

What a great test for each organization !

And there is also the interesting innovation blog from Stefan Lindegaard. In his 5 oct post Job Opening- Senior Innovation Manager he describes how difficult it is to find a senior innovation job:

I am sad to say this is just not the time to seek such a job. I see this in the networks I facilitate where many innovation leaders have lost their jobs in the past year. I have been in touch with several of them discussing their options and trying to help them move on. Actually, last year some of them got a new job pretty fast, but this is not happening now. It takes longer – if at all.

Just to give you an idea of how bad the job situation looks like: There are less than 20 companies on Monster.com in the U.S looking for senior innovation managers and offering interesting challenges.

Somewhere in the middle there is a great advice for people wanting to work with innovation:

So my advice to all the people working with innovation right now is this: If you really want to work with innovation, then

your current job

is most likely the best chance to do this.

My dream scenario is that – in these times of crisis, with efficiency programs cutting out the best when focusing solely on efficiency and allowing managers to settle old bills with team members that took the risk to innovate – that the group of passionate creatives on the edges of every company will stand-up, claim their space, and fight to destruct the cynicism that reigns in some many companies.

The root cause for this unbearable cynicism are usually power-games between silos. These power games are putting a major barrier to success to any CEO shouting “change” at the top, as the change – or desire thereto – does not permeate into the lower echelons of the organization, and therefore remains nothing more than

a big illusion

This is the difference between old and new game.

In the new game, we don’t shoot at Red Monkeys, we don’t fire the guys who have the courage to take risk. On the contrary,

we protect them,

expose care, and

channel the energy

for the better of the company

I met a couple of those passionate creatives recently:

what an energy !

If only we could turn the negative cynicism energy into a positive creative energy.

Who feels energized by this ? Let’s join forces. Let me know who you and where you are.

Google and Finance 2.0

Umair Haque has written an Open Letter to Google titled “Can Google take on Wall Street – and Win ?”

It starts with: “Dear Google,…”

and goes on with:

Every day, you handle more searches than the NYSE handles trades — and that difference, I’m guessing, is about to hit an order of magnitude more. Every day, you connect people, businesses, and communities in deeper and tighter ways than besuited beancounters do. From my tiny perspective, it seems that you just might be in the best position of any organization in the world to take on Finance 2.0.

Umair’s open letter is nothing more (or less) than

asking Google to implement

his Finance 2.0 Manifesto

written some months ago, and commented in this blog here. I strongly recommend to read the Manifesto.

And he continues:

What would a Googlier

finance industry resemble?

What would a more Googly set of capital markets look like? That’s the $12 trillion dollar question. After all, markets are just search engines — remember?

You still think you’re in the media business. You’re not. In the 21st century, everyone’s in the same business: the awesomeness business. It doesn’t matter what you make, as long as it offers maximum awesomeness. And right now, better finance would be pretty awesome.

Yesterday, you used to change the world. If you think a bit harder, a bit smarter, a bit more disruptively — you still can. If you don’t — well, the biggest catfish in a parched, dried up pond sure ain’t the smartest catfish.

And he gives some “leading” examples:

Tracked, ValueCruncher, StockTwits, and many more are the leading edge of a revolution — a revolution in what finance has been for the last several centuries, and what it must become in the 21st.

Something i don’t like in Umair’s post is the polarizing tone as if all in financials services is bad, and Google is “doing good” and Google being positioned as the solution to cure world hunger. Although i have already promoted many times on his blog that

polarization fosters innovation

Also, the “leading” examples offered above are putting Google in its traditional role of information manager, searcher of information.

I believe we could also look at Google as a utility. They have some great tools that could be applied in a big way to financial services. What if for example a neutral party would host a federated Google Wave as a SaaS solution for the financial market ? Running on a secure messaging platform like SWIFT ? Next generation person to person communication ? Or apply the same technology to do Collateral Margin calls for example ? Where every new call is a new Call “wave”. Think about it.

There is of course a lot i like in this article, especially the implicit push for extreme – even “impossible” innovation. Last week, i was attending the 11th European Conference on Creativity and Innovation. One of the keynotes came from Mark Raison, titled “The Power of Impossible”

Look at this presentation. Internalize it. And then let’s play-back Umair’s open letter with The Power of the Impossible in mind.

What would happen then ?

PS: Mark Raison is on my target speaker list for Innotribe @ Sibos 2010.

70,000 Feet

Via Nova Spivacks Twitter account: “See this video of flight in U2 to 70,000 feet. I went to nearly 90,000 in 1999. This gives a good feel for it. http://bit.ly/14WdGJ

Space flights will be quite ordinary in 2025. That’s a little more than 15 years from now. I may still live then.

For our think tank long term future.

Stunning Human Face animation

http://www.ted.com At TEDxUSC, computer graphics trailblazer Paul Debevec explains the scene-stealing technology behind Digital Emily, a digitally constructed human face so realistic it stands up to multiple takes.

Wikipedia for Data

My colleague Mariela popped into my office the other day: “Peter, when we talk cloud computing we should highlight something fundamental: it’s about making DATA more accessible/interoperable, more than making applications interoperable”.

In essence, she saw that Cloud computing is in essence about

OPEN DATA

Mariela is right on.

This is btw one of the big beliefs as well of Russell Daniels from HP, who was a speaker at our Innotribe @ Sibos. Short video interview with Russ below right after the cloud panel discussion:

Over the last couple of days, i found some more evidence on several blogs.

image

There are positive ways to proceed. Google, for example, a leader in cloud computing, has recently launched a specific project — The Data Liberation Front — explicitly including as a key facet the goal of making sure that users can quickly and easily export data from Google products. This ambitious and extremely important effort should be a model for the rest of the cloud computing industry.

See also Wolfram Alpha API to be released later today and the actual release page

image

And also the release of the WolframAlpha iPhone app:

image

My friend Peter Hinssen installed the iPhone app and tweeted yesterday this is the COOLEST thing he has ever seen.

Lots of writers have compared Alpha to Google, but I think that’s a mistake. it’s a data source, not a search engine, and that’s a significant difference. What matters with a data source is the ability to ask a question, get an answer back, and use it as easily as possible. An API minimizes the impedance mismatch: you can do computing directly with Alpha’s curated data.

But there’s another comparison that’s even more relevant: Twitter. What has made Twitter success isn’t so much the web application that lives at twitter.com. What has made Twitter valuable is the huge ecosystem that has grown up around that application: alternate clients for all sorts of platforms, web sites for searching, slicing, dicing, and remixing. Those have all been enabled by a simple and well-thought-out API for dealing with Twitter programmatically. The web isn’t about web pages; it’s about interactions between data sources.

Some other newcomers on the scene:

 image

Good Data raises $2.5M for business intelligence by Andreessen Horowitz, the firm run by Netscape billionaire Mark Andreessen. Btw the same firm is one of the candidates for acquiring Skype, but the Skype founders don’t seem to like it very much. Have a look at the great video on Gooddata’s homepage.

image

There is Factual.

image

Factual wants to be the center of the web’s open data. Not a minor detail: Elbaz, who co-founded Applied Semantics and sold it to Google, has self-funded the company. Well-known technology commentator and investor Esther Dyson recently joined Factual’s advisory board. Also Nova Spivack blogged about Factual here. Nova Spivack and Ester Dyson are two of the smartest people when it comes to semantic web and new technologies

250px-Nova_spivack 200px-Esther_Dyson-20050316

And Techcrunch Erik Schonfeld had a blog as well last week. With a link to a great video:

This is like Wikipedia but then for structured data ! It not about mashing-up user interfaces anymore. The next web is about being able to source good data sources and mash them up.

Imagine if we would start using this for all sort of financial services.

Semantic data/web will definitely be a topic for Innotribe @ Sibos 2010 in Amsterdam. Book already the dates in your calendars: 25-29 Oct 2010.

New Money and Payments

The last couple of days there have been several blogs reporting on new types of money and payments.

First there was the great interview of Steve Boyd with Jamais Cascio.

Some highlights of the highlights:

You have to get a critical mass of people to agree in a new fantasy.

Groups with shared purposes could in fact have new currencies.

The unbanked are the source of many innovations in the world, right now.

Governments start to care when economies arise.

The question of anonymous money and the roll of cell phones in future money.

Then there were 2 news items on micropayments to news publishers:

The first one related to a New platform for micropayments to news publishers

image

The key comment in the Spingwise article being that:

…for bitcents to work, it will need to attract enough publishers who produce content that readers are willing to pay for. Meanwhile, other ventures—like the soon-to-be-launched Journalism Online—are also working to create a new economic model for the news industry. Keep a close eye on this space—change is in the air, and business opportunities won’t be far behind.

Especially if the big boys want a piece of the cake. Here comes Google again.

googlecheckout

I found this one via my Twine subsription, and Nova Spivak was the first one posting it.

Again, some highlights only:

Google is developing a micropayment platform that will be “available to both Google and non-Google properties within the next year,” according to a document the company submitted to the Newspaper Association of America. The system, an extension of Google Checkout, would be a new and unexpected option for the news industry as it considers how to charge for content online.

While currently in the early planning stages, micropayments will be a payment vehicle available to both Google and non-Google properties within the next year. The idea is to allow viable payments of a penny to several dollars by aggregating purchases across merchants and over time. Google will mitigate the risk of non-payment by assigning credit limits based on past purchasing behavior and having credit card instruments on file for those with higher credit limits and using our proprietary risk engines to track abuse or fraud. Merchant integration will be extremely simple. [grey bold emphasis Google]

In a brief paragraph entitled “business model,” Google suggests that it would share revenue in a similar fashion to the iTunes App Store and its own Android Market, both of which take a 30% cut of revenue.

I downloaded the document and besides what’s covered in the blog post, it contains some other interesting facts about Google Checkout:

Key statistics:
• Tens of millions of registered Checkout users
• Several hundred thousand registered merchants, high number of sellers selling digital
goods
• $ Billions of orders processed

Planned Roadmap:
• Simplified Merchant Integration – Dramatically increase the speed by which merchants
integrate with Google Checkout. Target early 2010
• Guest Checkout – Allow users to buy goods with Checkout-enabled merchants without
creating an account. Target Q4 2009
• Stored Value – Gift cards and maintaining a balance for buyers on Google Checkout.
Planned for future
• Micropayments – Aggregation of small payments by buyers for purchasing digital
content. Planned for future

The PDF also mentions some really interesting thinking on what i would call “convenience” in a multi-vendor marketplace environment:

Easy Subscription Sign-up and Management for Users Plus Content
Packaging and Multiple Payment Forms for Publishers
o Single sign-on capability so users can use one login for access to premium content and a central place to manage subscriptions and payments.
o We envision the typical scenario to be where a user pays a monthly fee for access to a wide-ranging package of premium content. One example of a "package" might be full access to the WSJ; another "package" might include the top 10 business publications. Google believes that there is real power and benefit to publishers in providing these sorts of broad, multi-publication access passes.
o For multi-publication packages, publishers will receive a revenue disbursement that is proportional to the usage of their content in the package.
o While providing an option for micropayments will be important, we do not believe it will be the norm for accessing content. Example 1: A user has access to the "basic" premium content package. She hears about the latest Sarah Palin article in Vanity Fair, which  is not part of her package. She can make a one-off payment of $0.10 to read that article, which will show up on her bill as part of the monthly payment.

Just think: replace publishers by financial services providers, and micropayments by regular monthly payments. Sounds like a marketplace for financial services. With a single-sign on for the marketplace syndicated/federated to the underlying providers of services. But i am deviating, this post is about new money and payment systems.

Last but not least there is the iPhone Payment App by Twitter creator Jack Dorsey:

3aug09_squareccr

Here are the dongles again ! And i thought that the whole idea of smartcards, USB-Tokens, and other physical tokens were gone, as they do in my opinion no sense in a mobile world. Wrong again, Peter ! (Don’t worry, i am stubborn 😉

The innovation is in a small, plastic card reader that fits in to the headphone jack of an iPhone (or iPod Touch) and transfers the credit card’s swipe data to the app. After the employee enters the amount to charge, the customer confirms by scrawling their signature with their finger and then either one enters the customer’s email address to send the receipt to. The payment is processed by Square for a small percentage plus a fixed fee; the funds are transferred directly to the store’s bank account, cutting both time and complexity on the processing side. The customer’s receipt includes a map showing the location of the transaction which is handy for those who record, sort and file such things.

Jack Dorsey (please DO read the man’s Wikipedia bio), the man who all but built Twitter in a matter of two weeks, has been working on a half-secret start-up project since around May. His new venture — dubbed, funnily enough, Squirrel — is based around the concept of using the iPhone as… yep, a portable, personal cash register; essentially the exact device which Square has created

Two links if you want to know more. Here and Here.

Big changes coming in this area. Have you seen any bank involved in these innovations ?

Re-Inventing Wall Street: Finance 2.0

When Umair Hague posts something on his blog, i always take some extra quality time to read.

110-umair-haque

Umair Haque is Director of the Havas Media Lab, a new kind of strategic advisor that helps investors, entrepreneurs, and firms experiment with, craft, and drive radical management, business model, and strategic innovation.

Always sharp, and always in for a good controversy and/or polarizing opinion. I am a strong believer in polarization being a big driver for Innovation.

Have a look at his latest blog post titled “Reinventing Wall Street from the Bottom Up

Some super-quotes:

Welcome to the new trickle-down economics. Here’s how it works:

  1. Banks massively misallocate capital.
  2. The government uses money reserved for public goods — education, transportation, healthcare — to bail out banks instead.
  3. The bailout should trickle down, as lending to businesses and consumers alike sparks economic activity.
  4. No effort to settle bad debt is made; little reform of corporate governance, industry structure, or competition is necessary — because banks are too big to fail.
  5. Little oversight of steps 2, 3, or 4 are necessary, because markets are perfect resource allocators, and market actors are rational.

Result? In trade terms, a shock worse than the Great Depression, as Paul Krugman has noted.

In employment terms, a lost generation.

In monetary terms, a flight from the dollar.

In microeconomic terms, the stagnation of America’s industrial base.

If it weren’t for Apple, Google, and a handful of old-school companies pursuing dramatic reinvention, like Wal-Mart, we would be in a Great Depression.

In macroeconomic terms, value is transferred from you, me, and our grandchildren to Wall St — permanently.

And also:

The greatest transfer of wealth in history is taking place. It is already roughly worth a year’s output of the entire United States, or about 5% of the entire world’s output.

Or…

It’s is faith-based economics — and it’s Barack Obama’s biggest mistake. (Consider for a moment that 20+ per cent of hedge funds misrepresent info.) For years, George Bush hunted for phantom WMDs, while terrorist networks flourished under his nose. Now Barack Obama is hunting for a phantom prosperity, while the greatest robbery in the world is happening right under his nose.

In the same blog post, he is referring to his Finance 2.0 Manifesto, published back in April 2009, where he makes 9 recommendations for a better financial system. I have cut & pasted the whole lot, not because i am lazy, but because the context is worthwhile reading as well (orange/red highlighting by myself)

Edge funds. An edge fund is the opposite of a hedge fund. Where hedge funds are opaque, edge funds are transparent. Where hedge funds are closed, edge funds are open. Where hedge funds are run for near-term gains, edge funds are in it for the long run. Where hedge funds create artificial book value, edge funds create value that accrues to real people and society. Where hedge funds focus on long and short transactions, edge funds focus on relationships. Think Marketocracy on steroids.

Macro and microcurrencies. A currency tied to national interests determined by a political elite? That’s so 20th century 16th century. A better financial system needs better currencies. Finance 2,0 will be built on microcurrencies and macrocurrencies: currencies which operate hyperlocally and transnationally. Why? Because people shouldn’t have to bear collective responsibility for bankers looting or regulators cahooting. In the 21st century, the quiet tyranny of economic collective responsibility is intellectually bankrupt: it is fundamentally unjust, deeply inefficient, and vastly value-destructive.

Social banks. Despite what marketers tell you, banks do not exist to maximize profits. They exist to maximize the safety of deposits. We’ve been taken for a very expensive ride. Next-generation banks will be structured as social enterprises — because the incentives to safeguard deposits and reinvest profits for the common good perfectly converge to a dominant strategy for long-run value creation.

Fair markets. Markets are free like a shark is a fish. Anyone can play — but only at the risk of being manipulated, looted, and defrauded by the deepest-pocketed. The anonymous arms-length transactions orthodox economics lionizes are, in practice, just a hyperefficient mechanism for front-running, predatory trading, and bid rigging. Next-generation markets aren’t just free: they’re fair. They are markets where information about reputation, reliability, and relationship thickness are hardwired into the DNA.

Stakeholder communities. Institutional investors are so 20th century. Centralizing control over our biggest corporations in the hands of a bunch of old dudes asleep at the wheel was as good an idea as the spork: interesting in theory, useless in practice. Tomorrow’s radical innovators are already updating corporate governance for the 21st century, by letting communities of stakeholders shape managerial decision-making. Think mega-Etsy.

Whisper bullhorns. Why is trading such a great business? Because traders have access to info that you don’t. Why can’t everyone get in on the whisper circuit that powers prop desk profits? Because no radical innovator has taken on the challenge yet of amplifying the secretive whisper circuit into a blaring bullhorn. But imagine if the rumours that drive share prices up and down on trading desks were Twitterfied. The result would be a financial revolution: the market power Big Trading enjoys would vaporize faster than you can say "insider info."

Googlizing financial instruments. What business is Wall Street really in? The business of hoarding information: to seek a so-called informational edge. Of course, markets don’t work if everybody’s hiding info — they only work when people are revealing it. Google can help me find a tennis racquet, Match can help me find a date, and Last.fm can help me find some tracks to rip — but who can help me find a better place to put my cash that effortlessly? No one. And that’s a massive reason why we’re stuck with a 1.0 financial economy.

Anti-ratings. Your credit is rated mercilessly. But does anyone rate lenders — not to mention brokers, banks, and investors? Today’s crisis would have been far less severe if consumers had access to knowledge about who was a trustworthy lender — and who was going to sell them the financial equivalent of a roadside bomb. Credit ratings alone cannot create more efficient financial markets — doing so requires better information about both buyers and sellers of every kind of financial product.

Open source modeling. Every bank built the same models. Every bank built the same flawed models. Every bank built the same flawed models on similarly erroneous assumptions. How dumb is that? Incredibly. Unleashing the power of open source to vaporize this black hole of incompetence is going to be a tremendously powerful path to innovation. The peer review, voluntary contribution, and always-on negotiation at the heart of the open source model create powerful incentives for quality — which is exactly what the hare-brained quants at banks lacked.

Finance 1.0 cannot power growth 2.0. Yesterday’s finance cannot power tomorrow’s prosperity. Bailouts, taxes, nationalization, regulation are what your discussions this week are focused on. These can limit the depth and intensity of the crash. But what they cannot do is build a radically more efficient, productive, and effective financial system.

See also my previous post about Peter Thiel and the Singularity, where he said that credit only works in a growth society.

That requires a better kind of finance altogether — one designed not merely to make the worst among us richer, but

to make us all authentically, meaningfully wealthier.

That’s why finance 2.0 is the future.

This is the sort or personal and corporate values we want to discuss as underpinning for our Long Term Future. Hence the need for the Think Tank we are building from Flanders to gather like minded authentic people who do care about our next generations.

Augmented Reality is Real Now

The big news this week is that Layar’s iPhone App is approved and available.

From now on we call it the “Reality Browser”

image

See also sub-line “Available for Android”. I clicked on the Android Marketplace and this is what i got.

image

Also have a look at the 162 Layers that are already available. Yes, you got it right: 162 Layers available already.