Just wanted to post a quick note regarding Long Tailer (“Tailor”?) Chris Anderson’s appearance inside Second Life. Wagner James Au (aka Hamlet Au, formerly aka Hamlet Linden) sent me an email alerting me to the virtual event which he was arranging and so I took some time to drop in. Those of you who recall some rather old posts on my 3D Long Tail forms (“ecoToroids” – reLink 1, reLink 2) will understand my interest.

The event was okay. I’ll confess to wanting something more technical, but at least it got me out of the current grind for a bit. Anyway, I saved the raw chat log (Link) for those of you who might be interested. I don’t recall seeing any talking genitalia shouting out, so it’s probably safe for work. Enjoy.

I very recently started reading my first Ayn Rand novel, The Fountainhead. People have said that I remind them of something having to do with Rand, so I’m thinking I should read one or two of her books. Although just started, I happen to be far enough along to find the recent architectural critique of Libeskind’s Denver Museum of Art extension to be especially interesting and worth mentioning here (along with including this Link). There are times when I find product design and architecture to be especially alike, so this piece in The New York Times intrigued me; even more so after finding something on the PBS site comparing Libeskind with another architect, David Childs (Link). I think I’ll make some time to watch the associated video on the PBS Frontline site. I could use a break right now.

Lastly, I wanted to call out the photograph above. What’s nice about trying to give proper credit is that I go looking for the originators of the images I post here, and in this case it led me to the Bitter Bredt Fotografie site (Link). Nice stuff on their site and well worth a visit.

{*Minor update… forgot to add these when I posted this: there’s more coverage on Arcspace – Link – and I also happened across an article on Constructor Magazine about this and 3D modeling – Link}

{Image Copyright © Bitter Bredt}

I just received another email from Paul Hemp (you might recall him from an earlier post of mine – reLink) that included a link to his latest article over on the Harvard Business Review titled “Are You Ready for E-tailing 2.0?” (Link – good while supplies last). Those who’ve been active inside virtual worlds the last year or so won’t really be hearing anything new, but importantly people who read Hemp’s article are probably not active and still new to the whole idea of conducting business inside online 3D spaces. The question is: will they see the big picture? I’m not sure they will, even with the Harvard Business Review effectively telling them this is the future of online retail. Considering that the opportunity to get in and learn the ropes before the competition only comes once, I’m a little amazed we’re not seeing quite a bit more activity already. It’s certainly not cost prohibitive.

Truth be told, I suspect most marketers see this as only advertising and want to know what the returns are going to be in the context of that perception. It doesn’t seem as if anyone wants to invest in learning. Personally, I believe they need to put these early efforts under the R&D umbrella and expect losses… just like conducting early tests and research in any new technology. Because if they don’t, they may find themselves regretting missing the opportunity. And in my opinion, there won’t be many as big after this.

Via the good IBM folks at the eightbar blog comes word (Link) of Reebok’s virtual store inside Second Life. Considering my inability to get into SL due to other commitments, it’s no surprise some of these aren’t pinging on my radar til after they’re old news (though this might be new news). Regardless of whether it’s old or new, I thought it worth pointing out. The store is typically minimalist; similar to the Adidas store about which I previously blogged (reLink). I do, however, like the shoe modification kiosk. I’ve not played NBA 2k6 so I don’t know anything about the UI that lets users select and modify their Nike kicks (see previous mention of that – reLink) but I doubt it’s any better. If it is, someone post some screenshots. I’d like to see.

The big news yesterday (besides North Korea detonating a nuke) was the deal between Google and YouTube. And of course because Mark Cuban has been relatively vocal on the subject of YouTube and continues to be vocal, I stopped by his blog to read his latest on the deal (Link) and skim the reader comments. And while reading a comment something struck me: the anti-corporate “free everything” crowd is going to volutarily go to work for the very corporations they claim to despise. Many of them, because they’re not especially savvy, are going to get used. My comment on Cuban’s blog explains how:

—

“Google will share revenue derived from the content with the uploader, any copyright owners, and Google of course.”

No. They’re not going to pay the uploader anything. The uploader (and possible content thief) is going to be the engine that drives more corporate profit. This is just a variation on the idea that music companies can still make money off of p2p downloads. Attention has value. And it all ties back to ad revenue.

YouTube is going to use the DMCA and let rights holders issue their notices. Only before that happens we might see the integrated advertising. And the revenue stream might give the rights holders pause. Here’s a scenario:
Continue reading →