Showing posts with label Social. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Social. Show all posts

Building A Better Version Of Capitalism Is A Massive Startup Opportunity

GNN - Why, on a philosophical level, has #Facebook been so staggeringly successful? A startup that swelled into a multi billion dollar revenue generating business in a relatively short span of years, one which continues to attract billions of users every month?

According to writer and philosopher Alain de Botton the company’s success can be explained by the fact it tapped into a genuine human need that was being overlooked and underserved by the rest of the business community: the desire to have better relationships.

Whether Facebook is actually serving that need well is a whole other question, but the appetite it taps into is undeniable. And de Botton argues that other core human needs continue to be drastically underserved by the modern business community — providing a fertile opportunity for startups to fashion and forge businesses that are successful exactly because they serve the goal of increasing our wellbeing.

He was making the comments in a talk on the virtues of modern business last week, at London’s Midtown Big Ideas Exchange — beginning with the premise that we need a better, more virtuous version of capitalism. Not that capitalism itself is broken, with de Botton professing himself a capitalist with caveats, but that the current version is misguided and misdirected — with businesses all too often created to fix problems that are, as he put it, “nonsense” or “bullshit”. Rather than addressing areas of genuine human psychological need.

No one in a developed economy can argue that selling bullshit is going to increase the sum total of human happiness. Not even in a mercenary sense — because, as de Botton pointed out, after a certain income threshold, rising wealth is not a psychological accelerator to happiness.

“How are we going to go about creating a better version of business — a better version of capitalism?” he began, dubbing this “one of the most pressing issues of our time” given its contribution to social unrest and human unhappiness. “Capitalism has taken a real bashing over the last few years, is in deep trouble as a concept, assailed from all sides. Where we’re aiming to get to is a good version of business, a good better version of capitalism.

“We’ve got to try and make headway because if we don’t make headway the mob will. We live in a world that’s dominated by social media. By instantaneous, mob, collective reactions to things and unless businesses, and people involved in business understand a little bit more about what they’re doing, and what they should be doing, and what they should be defending, and what they should be changing the system will be in trouble.”

(Entrepreneur Nick Hanauer expressed similar sentiments about the need to address capitalism’s rising inequalities in a recent article for Politico, called The Pitchforks Are Coming… For Us Plutocrats.)

“Many economists have noted in the past few years ever since Richard Layard’s landmark studies on happiness, we have recognized that increases in happiness do not directly follow from increases in national income. That a country can get ever richer and people are not happier. The magic figure is $36,000, above $36,000 increases in income do not translate very easily into any increases in happiness,” he added.

de Botton went on to define human need as the core things that are elemental to our psychological wellbeing. And which are absolutely distinct from “vain desires” — aka passing fancies or things we wish for “in an idle way”. Things which we are all too often induced to wish for by the snake oil of the advertising industry.
“More of the economy needs to further up Maslow’s pyramid.

Hence the misdirection of much of modern capitalism — since it’s pouring its energies into coming up with ever more clever ways to sell us things we don’t need, rather than applying intellect to figure out what we really need and selling us that instead.
“I think it is an absolutely fundamental basic philosophical distinction — that distinction between needs and desires. So needs are the things you really need, and desires are the things you think you need but in fact you don’t really, you only wish for them in an idle way,” said de Botton.

He referred to the ancient Greek philosopher Epicurus, saying his recipe for human happiness amounted to an individual being able to gain three core things: community/friendship, the chance to be independent, and the chance to think continuously about an inner life in order to reduce personal anxiety.

“Those who oppose business, those who say businesses corrupt, they latch onto something absolutely key. They will say that businesses are not satisfying our real needs, they are merely exciting us to vain desires. We don’t really need to go gambling, we don’t really need to go bowling, we don’t really need to eat greasy, unhealthy food, but we can be excited to do so with certain inducements and therefore business is evil; business it not virtuous because it is not properly satisfying people’s needs,” he said.

“And because this is undoubtedly true that some organizations are satisfying vain needs and not real needs, this has cast a cloud over all business and it’s slightly muddled the perception of everyone working within capitalism.”

But — crucially — it does not have to be this way, argued de Botton. And Facebook’s success in building a business that at least started out trying to address a real human need shows the huge untapped potential for startups that opt to “run a virtuous business” by seeking to fix genuine human problems.

What then is the recipe for following in Facebook’s footsteps and building a business along de Botton’s more virtuous, capitalist lines?

“You just have to start with human need. What is it that really makes people happy?” he said, adding that an area of particular interest for him is relationships. “How we relate to others. The single greatest contributor to people’s wellbeing is what sort of relationships are they in. And we are hopeless at relationships.”

He cited statistics that half of marriages fail, and that not only that but of the half of couples that stay together 40 per cent have thought of leaving their partner more than one in the previous month. “We need to think about this area. It should be a major area of the economy. It should be a bigger area of the economy than running shoes,” argued de Botton.

“Think of Maslow’s famous pyramid of needs, at the bottom you’ve got material needs, as you climb up towards self actualization, meaning, friendship, connection etc. I would simply say that more of the economy needs to further up Maslow’s pyramid. I think that’s happening anyway — the fact that Facebook’s now one of the most important companies in the world. I don’t think it’s doing it that well, but it’s further up the tree than an oil company. It’s further up the pyramid of needs.

“And I think this is going to be the direction as neuroscience makes advances, as we enter into a more psychological century, and as we realize that we’re still only at the beginning of capitalism. It looks like we’ve got everything. It looks like Apple’s invented every gadget but there’s so much that still needs to be done, the economy still has so much to grow for.”

One area de Botton singled out as ripe for far more better businesses to be created is matching human talents to jobs. A mismatch in our skills and careers is the cause of much modern misery, he argued, saying far more innovation is needed here.

“Most of us are still trapped in the cage that was chosen for us by our 17-year-old selves and we can’t get out of it because we are still at the dawn of really trying to understand how to match people with jobs which properly fit their talents,” he said. “One resource we waste inordinate amounts of all the time is human talent. We are still not matching talent properly.”

Talking generally about opportunities that entrepreneurs can capitalize on within a more virtuous model of capitalism, de Botton suggested even something as basic as making a list of things that make you unhappy could offer the germ of a business idea.

“There is a back to basics view that suggests that capitalism is sort of running out of steam because we’ve got everything that we need… I think that’s completely wrong. The world economy will only, as it were, have done its job when everything is perfect. So long as you walk down the road and one paving stone is slightly misaligned, so long as you’re look at a building and one tile is a little bit out of place, so long as there’s something you want and no one is quite selling it to you, so long as there’s an area of your life that’s a little bit unhappy and someone is not selling you a service to fix it the economy is not large enough, there is still unemployment that has no proper basis.

“In other words there is a lot of need out there that is not yet being satisfied. I think we should and can have full employment if we focus on allocating our resources properly.”

Unemployment is a consequence of “the wrong perception of what should be commercialized”, he argued, adding: “We haven’t begun to scratch the surface of human unhappiness. Every bit of human unhappiness is a business waiting to be born. Some people say what business should I do, what business should I go into? And I always say are you unhappy about anything in your life? Make a list of everything you’re unhappy about — from the moment you wake up to the moment you go to sleep, in an average day.  Everything you write down is a business.

“There are so many needs which we haven’t yet learned to satisfy and a full economy will be one which properly delivers happiness across so many areas. At the moment we are just scratching the surface. We have managed to satisfy people’s basic material needs… but we’re unhappy, we’re squabbling, we’re looking for meaning. These are all businesses waiting to be born. Waiting for the ingenuity of entrepreneurs to harness human unhappiness and connect it up to profit.

“It’s only been done in a relatively narrow range of human activities. Running shoes, got lots of those. Pizzas, got lots of those. One of the largest businesses in the world should be psychotherapy. Given the contribution that psychotherapy can make it should be worth a hundred times more than BMW,” he added.
Until Facebook came along we didn’t know how lonely we were.

And while de Botton conceded it may be “on the whole a little bit harder to make money from genuine needs than vain desires”, he argued the potential rewards are worth the extra effort — given the contribution more virtuous businesses can make to those who build them and the people the businesses serve. And given the risks associated with doing nothing to fix the model of capitalism we have now.
“Until Facebook came along we didn’t know how lonely we were. Or how much we wanted to connect with other people. We didn’t even know it was a need, we didn’t know it was a business. That need to send people messages all the time about more or less nothing — we didn’t know that was a need. That’s what businesses do, they latch on to our needs and there is an enormous area of opportunity waiting to be discovered.”

In the talk de Botton also discussed philosopher and economist Adam Smith’s idea of the need to incentivize the very wealthy — the richest entrepreneurs who have already amassed their fortunes — to make more socially beneficial contributions. The problem, he argued, boils down to society using the shorthand of wealth to “keep score” on individual worth, which encourages the super rich to amass more wealth instead of looking for ways to use that wealth to help society at large.

“We don’t honor people who do the right thing enough… The incentive structure is not there. There’s occasional reward but there is no reliable system of reward pegged to doing good in the world. And that’s why more people don’t do good. Because it’s literally irrational,” argued de Botton. “We need to understand human vanity. We need to understand the mechanisms by which love, respect, honor can be aligned with socially beneficial goals. It absolutely isn’t at the moment.”

“We’ve got a very dangerous value system which rewards things it shouldn’t be rewarding,” he added. “But the useful thing is the rich don’t want money they want love. Therefore a good society takes that and does very interesting things with it.”

FEATURED IMAGE: CHRISTOPHER ADAMS/FLICKR UNDER A CC BY 2.0 LICENSE

Twitter’s Senior Vice President Of Engineering, Chris Fry, Has Stepped Down

Christopher Fry, Twitter’s Senior Vice President of Engineering (read: the man responsible for fighting off the fail whale), has stepped down from his position. The news comes by way of documents filed with the SEC.
Alex Roetter — a founding member of Google’s AdSense team and Twitter’s current VP of Engineering — will be stepping up to Fry’s role. If you’re curious how much such a position pays, by the way, the documents spill the beans: Roetter’s pay is being bumped up from an undisclosed amount to $250k a year.

Fry will remain with the company in an advisory position.

Fry, in his move to an advisory role, is well regarded both inside and outside the company. There is a general feeling, we hear, that these exec moves to advisory roles are being made for those who Twitter feels have done a particularly good job for the company.

Still, there is a shift underway when it comes to product development at Twitter, much of which has to do with the pace of releases in that area. Roetter comes from Twitter’s ad products department, which has been on fire since 2010 when Twitter first launched them. Compare that to the substantially more subdued — if not glacial — pace with which Twitter has been iterating on the platform, and you can start to put a bit of shape on this move. So, expect faster product-development cycles from Twitter.

Twitter User Growth Will Come From Asia-Pacific – Region Accounting For 40% Of Users By 2018

Figures out this morning from eMarketer estimate Twitter’s growth to continue in the double-digits through 2018, with the Asia-Pacific region playing a large part in that growth trend. Today, Twitter users in Asia-Pacific already outnumber those in North America and Western Europe, accounting for 32.8% of all Twitter users, compared with just 23.7% in North America, the report says. By 2018, the Asia-Pacific region will account for over a 40% share of Twitter’s user base, while the North American region drops to just 19%.

Also notable is that eMarketer’s report doesn’t include China in its estimates, because the network is currently blocked there, even though many users still access it by way of virtual private networks. If that situation changes, the report notes somewhat obviously, the growth in the Asia-Pacific region would be “significantly higher.”
Instead, the forecast estimates that Indonesia and India will end up impacting Twitter’s user base growth most heavily going forward, with both countries experiencing increases of over 50% in 2014 – the former with 61.7% user growth and the latter with 56.9% growth. More importantly, perhaps, is that while large growth numbers tend to indicate a relatively small installed base, that’s not the case with these two countries – India and Indonesia will become the third and fourth-largest regional Twitter user bases this year, at 18.1 million and 15.3 million users, respectively.

That means this year they will both also surpass the U.K. for the first time, in terms of user numbers.
Meanwhile, in Twitter’s home base in the U.S., the market is more mature, with growth tapering off into the single digits in 2015 and beyond. It will, however, remain the largest country in terms of user accounts throughout the forecasting period. In addition, the U.S. user base is today where most of Twitter’s revenue comes from – in fact, the U.S. accounted for nearly three-quarters of Twitter’s total ad dollars last year.

But this (fairly bullish) report indicates that Twitter still has room to grow its ad business outside the U.S. where the service takes hold in these expanding, emerging markets.

In 2018, eMarketer says it estimates that Twitter will growth 10.7% to reach close to 400 million users worldwide.
One big caveat: this estimate and the forecast itself relies on different data sources than Twitter’s own reported figures (255 million monthly actives, currently) because eMarketer uses instead some 90-plus data sources including Twitter press releases, survey and traffic data from other research firms and regulatory agencies, historical trends, internet and mobile adoption trends, country-specific demographic and socioeconomic factors in its analysis.

From this collection of roughly 400 data points, the firm leans heavily on consumer survey data to eliminate business accounts, multiple accounts for individual users and other sources for double-counting to reach its numbers. This is also eMarketer’s first-ever forecast of Twitter users worldwide, so the company still needs to prove that its estimates on this particular subject do well.

Facebook Is Replacing Its “Hide All” Button With “Unfollow”

http://www.sarkarworld.tk/2013/12/facebook-is-replacing-its-hide-all.html
Here's a new tweak to how Facebook users can filter their News Feeds: The company says it's rolling out a button that allows you to “unfollow” other users.

To be clear, it sounds like the functionality is pretty much identical to what users could already accomplish by hitting the “Hide All” button. For those of you who haven't tried it, Hide All is a way to remain Facebook friends with someone while hiding their updates from your News Feed - say if they usually post content that you find annoying or boring, but you don't want to offend them by completely severing your Facebook connection.

What is changing is the specific wording. Thanks to services like Twitter and Instagram, users have presumably become more familiar with the concept of unfollowing, and it seems that the language of following and unfollowing is becoming a bigger part of Facebook.

Next to the “Like” button in profiles, Facebook will also show users whether they're following someone (this will show up on on individual user profiles and on company Pages). The mechanics of following, which allows you to follower a user's public updates (assuming they've opted in) without becoming their friend, will remain the same, but this may encourage more users to take advantage of this option to influence the kind of updates that show up in their feed.

“The goal of this change is to help people curate their News Feed and see more of the content that they care about,” a Facebook spokesperson said.(sarkarworld)(techcrunch)(GNN)

A Like Is Not Enough: Facebook Tests Star Ratings Displayed On Pages

Facebook is apparently testing displaying star ratings, out of a possible five in total, on Pages on the desktop version of its site, according to a reliable tip received by TechCrunch this morning.

Screenshots and live testing show that Facebook has turned on the star rating display for at least a small subsection of users, providing information to network users that goes beyond the somewhat sentiment-deprived basic Like.

Using a star system for place and page ratings isn’t entirely new; Facebook has been collecting star ratings from users on the desktop and via local search for quite a while now, and also seeking star ratings on content and apps via Timeline.

What is new is making this information explicitly displayed on the social network itself, in a prominent place on a business or place Page.

This shift, if it moves from the testing phase to general adoption, has a couple major implications for Facebook users.

First, for general members, it provides an increased degree of sentiment information surrounding places and content that goes well beyond the simple off/on attribute of the Like.

The Like is actually fraught with ambiguity users employ it variously to express sympathy, solidarity, endorsement, a sign of interest or even in some cases a feeling of dislike.

The number of Likes something has indicates how present it is in public consciousness, but not necessarily how people generally feel about it.

Comments provide some sense of sentiment around a Page, but the five-star system threads the needle between ease-of-use, information and digestibility, compared to both the Like and text comments.

And as Facebook moves to become a platform geared towards providing public information, as well as real-time interactivity around media like TV, offering more granularity around how its users feel about people, places and things makes a lot of sense.

For businesses, it’s not clear yet whether displaying this rating will be optional or mandatory, but if Facebook is making a play to compete with the Yelps, Foursquares and Angie’s Lists of the world when it comes to local discovery and service recommendations, it would make sense that they are required by default.

That could mean a considerable shift in how businesses use FB, with more emphasis placed on customer service versus just maintaining a presence on the network. Likes are easy, after all, but getting users to fill up that star bar will require a lot more effort and interaction.

We’ve reached out to Facebook to learn more about this feature, the extent of the test and whether a wider rollout is planned, and we’ll update when we receive more information.

Update: A Facebook spokesperson provided the following confirmation and info from the company:

We’re extending star ratings on Facebook from mobile to desktop to make it easier for people to discover great businesses around them.

This is beneficial for both businesses and consumers. Star ratings encourage more people to rate a business, making it eligible to appear in News Feed and help others discover a business they didn’t know about previously. For businesses themselves, this also leads to greater brand awareness.

As you may recall, star ratings launched in early 2012 with the introduction of Nearby on mobile. Now we’re bringing the visibility of star ratings to a more prominent spot at the top of Pages’ timeline on desktop and to the preview in News Feed.

Thanks to FB user Om Agarwal for the tip.

Facebook Like Button, Viewed 22B Times A Day On 7.5M Websites, Gets A Redesign

Facebook has today updated the design of its Like button for the first time since inception. An image of the new design can be seen below.

Websites currently using the like button will be automatically upgraded.

According to the company, Like buttons appear on over 7.5 million websites and are seen 22 billion times each day.

The new design has a Facebook blue background and ditches the “thumbs up” for a simple F with the word “like”. F Like. Flike.

The company is also pairing like and share buttons together in a single embed, hoping that websites will opt to use both.

What’s the difference, you ask? Well, the share button allows for a comment to be added before sharing, while the like button simply auto-posts to your feed.

You can take a look at the brand new Like button below. Let us know if you flike it.