Is the group better or worst off than the individual? That was the prevalent question in today's session. We examined the common notion that the group exhibits retarded behaviour, and also the alternative perspective that James Surowiecki asserts - that the group is smarter than even its smartest individual, under the right circumstances. The circumstances are as follows:
Diversity
The group must be composed of people with differring backgrounds, thus they bring different perspective and angles at resolving particular issues.
Decentralised
Everyone in the group must carry the same weight. If someone is more important than the other, then this would tilt the bias.
Collective Verdict
It is not enough to have many different opinions. One needs a method or system to aggregate all these opinions.
Independant
Each individual within the group must not be influenced by the other. Short selling was mentioned and one name immediately came to mind - George Soros. One of the theories on the causes of the East Asian Economic Crisis in '97 was that George Soros brought about the collapse of the thai baht. He saw that the administration was floating the currency and it was grossly inflated. So he bought a lot of thai baht, and others, seeing that the investment guru made a big move, followed suit. This caused the thai baht to sky rocket and at its peak, Soros decided to sell his entire lot. When this happened, many of the other big players followed suit and this caused the thai baht to crash, and led to the crashing of the economies in the surrounding regions. Of course, this is but a theory, and the actual collapse was due to a confluence of various factors and events. But this definitely illustrates how non-independant thinking could result in bad outcomes.
The reason for the success of Web 2.0 is the acceptance of the above notion and thus creating tools or services that allows the group to come up with better solutions. A very simple concept that is successfully implemented in Google.
Mobile Commerce Infrastructure
After the discussion on crowds, we moved on to the infrastructure of mobile or m-commerce. I believe most of us have a lot of differring views to voice out but there was no opportunity to do so and we moved from topic to topic really fast. Perhaps we could slow down the transition between topics so we have more time to 'interrupt' Prof Gilbert. =P We talked about a variety of possible m-commerce applications, and here are some of them:
Movie Booking
Currently, the moviehouses allow bookings via WAP or phone, but require you to pay immediately via debit/credit card. They also charge $1 more. I can clearly understand why this is so. Firstly, why only allow payment via credit card instead of allowing consumers to just tab it to their phone bill? Probably the mobile subscription operators were taking a huge cut of it, and the moviehouses like Shaw and Golden Village were not willing to share their revenue. And why the extra buck for advanced booking? Why do they discourage such online bookings? Shouldn't they be happy that they are getting a confirmed customer? No, in fact, they are possibly reducing they're revenue. Let me paint a scenario. I would like the catch the movie Babel. If I were to book it by WAP, it would probably mean I am not at the cinema, and am either at home or elsewhere. I place my booking, go to the theatre, enjoy the film, and go home. After all, I am guaranteed a seat at the cinema. However, since it caused more to book, I decide to head down to the cinema and buy my tickets at the booth. Now, there is the possibility that I am unable to get a ticket for Babel, and Blood Diamond is showing at the same time, and since I have already made the effort of going to the cinema, I might as well just catch Blood Diamond. But I really want to watch Babel, so I come back another day to view it. So instead of watching 1 movie, I end up watching 2, doubling their revenue. This is why moviehouses prefer the traditional way of purchasing movie tickets.
Carpark Tracking
Great idea! I've never thought of it but this just shows the endless possibilities for m-commerce applications. An important thing to note is that in implementing this application, we make use of existing infrastructure so the startup cost of this model is very low. All the information we require can be gathered by existing means. Keeping startup cost really low is an important issue to me as the lower the startup cost the lighter your fall will be should you fail. I do this this carpark idea will take off as I believe one will save money from using this service. I've experienced similar scenarios where I end up driving around to various carparks for half an hour just to find a lot. Paying a small nominal fee for such a service would save me a lot of money, that is, the fuel cost, the maintenance of the vehicle (wear and tear), depreciation due to usage etc.
After discussing a few applications of m-commerce, we were given our assignment, which is the solve the language problem in Jurong Bird Park for tourist via the implementation of a mobile network. We briefly examined the infrastructure of the former and current mobile networks and how the different components interact with each other.
Definitely yet another eye opening session. A lot of new ideas this week and fodder for loads of discussion! A pity time is a constraint and we couldn't delve deeper in some of the great ideas and perspectives mentioned in class. May next week's session be a better one!
Saturday, January 27, 2007
Monday, January 22, 2007
starhub and the mystery that is the internet
Week 2 already and it seems the class is still shrinking! Anyway, this week we discussed the case study of StarHub. Being a confluence of the various media services, they have achieved a much stronger presence in our country than what was previously thought possible for an upstart in a playing field ruled by a monopoly.
Previously, SingTel had the edge as its services encompasses fixed lines and mobile services. It had a high exposure rate as there is a telephone line in every household in this nation. This makes their services readily available and accessible to the whole population. However, after the strategic acquisition of Singapore Cable Vision, StarHub gained the upperhand. Besides gaining a direct line (the cable service) with nearly every household in the country, this pipeline they have to each household possess greater capabilities compared to it's archaic copper wire counterpart. Also, them packaging all their services together in a bundle was a very smart move that SingTel has only just picked up. By doing so, they can increase their market share. For example, AhSeng might have been a SingTel mobile user, and got his internet access from Pacific Internet. He decides to get cable TV, and StarHub offers a package which bundles cable TV, cable internet access, and a mobile subscriber line. He signs up as the overall savings is hard to miss. StarHub has now gained an additional consumer, at SingTel and Pacific Internet's expense. Of course, there are exceptions and not everyone is willing to switch due to the 'legacy' effect. I am still a SingTel Mobile subscriber, although I do have cable TV at home.
We also discussed about the internet - its origins and how it works. The architecture of the internet is a surprisingly simple concept that turns out to be very hardy and versatile. It is 'robust'. TCP/IP technology is the basis for the internet. It routes packets around the internet rather smartly, so if any one of these 'pathways' go down, it automatically travels down alternative 'pathways'. This gives us a resilient medium that allows the exchange of information and communication across large distances almost immediately. With the onset of the internet came E-mail and Usenet (news groups). Before E-mail, the main forms of communication are the telegraph, telephone and snail mail. E-mail is a form of communication that is loosely coupled; that is, it does not require the other party to be present to 'receive' one's message. In a telephone call, for example, the other party must be beside a phone if not he will not be able to receive the message one wants to verbally convey to him. If he is not there, he will not receive your call and therefore not hear your message. Whereas in e-mail, his mailbox will always be there, and he can check it anytime he wishes. This is particularly useful when the information in question requires transmission but need not be immediate. I can't comment much on Usenet, as I've never used or subscribed to any of those alt.binaries before, but I guess it was a good way to bring people with common interests together to discuss relevant topics. It's similar to the message forums or bulletin boards present all over the internet these days.
We were also introduced to standards and the IEEE. This is definitely very important as the presence of a standard would clearly illustrate the boundaries and capabilities that a developer has when designing a new product. We also looked into, albeit, briefly the differences between the different standards, such as the 3 standards for wireless technology, and IPv4 and IPv6. IPv4 allows greater flexibility when rerouting, whereas IPv6 offers greater speeds. A tradeoff as usual, but as technology develops, the next version of IP would probably encompass the best of both worlds, such as what 802.11g is doing for wireless local area network now.
Lastly, we touched a little on HTML. I did some freelance web design work for various companies back in '98-'01 during my secondary school days (I charged below the prevailing market rate due to my inherent age back then, but it doesn't mean I provided a below average service =P ) , so this was nothing new to me, but it was definitely a good refresher as I've not touched HTML in years! Looks like it might be useful if I dig out my old portfolio and look through the code again and hopefully all that lost knowledge slowly trickles back into my head. JavaScript, DHTML, CSS, SSI... Flash! Am looking forward to next week's Intro to Flash. It would be another good refresher, if not slightly nostalgic.
Previously, SingTel had the edge as its services encompasses fixed lines and mobile services. It had a high exposure rate as there is a telephone line in every household in this nation. This makes their services readily available and accessible to the whole population. However, after the strategic acquisition of Singapore Cable Vision, StarHub gained the upperhand. Besides gaining a direct line (the cable service) with nearly every household in the country, this pipeline they have to each household possess greater capabilities compared to it's archaic copper wire counterpart. Also, them packaging all their services together in a bundle was a very smart move that SingTel has only just picked up. By doing so, they can increase their market share. For example, AhSeng might have been a SingTel mobile user, and got his internet access from Pacific Internet. He decides to get cable TV, and StarHub offers a package which bundles cable TV, cable internet access, and a mobile subscriber line. He signs up as the overall savings is hard to miss. StarHub has now gained an additional consumer, at SingTel and Pacific Internet's expense. Of course, there are exceptions and not everyone is willing to switch due to the 'legacy' effect. I am still a SingTel Mobile subscriber, although I do have cable TV at home.
We also discussed about the internet - its origins and how it works. The architecture of the internet is a surprisingly simple concept that turns out to be very hardy and versatile. It is 'robust'. TCP/IP technology is the basis for the internet. It routes packets around the internet rather smartly, so if any one of these 'pathways' go down, it automatically travels down alternative 'pathways'. This gives us a resilient medium that allows the exchange of information and communication across large distances almost immediately. With the onset of the internet came E-mail and Usenet (news groups). Before E-mail, the main forms of communication are the telegraph, telephone and snail mail. E-mail is a form of communication that is loosely coupled; that is, it does not require the other party to be present to 'receive' one's message. In a telephone call, for example, the other party must be beside a phone if not he will not be able to receive the message one wants to verbally convey to him. If he is not there, he will not receive your call and therefore not hear your message. Whereas in e-mail, his mailbox will always be there, and he can check it anytime he wishes. This is particularly useful when the information in question requires transmission but need not be immediate. I can't comment much on Usenet, as I've never used or subscribed to any of those alt.binaries before, but I guess it was a good way to bring people with common interests together to discuss relevant topics. It's similar to the message forums or bulletin boards present all over the internet these days.
We were also introduced to standards and the IEEE. This is definitely very important as the presence of a standard would clearly illustrate the boundaries and capabilities that a developer has when designing a new product. We also looked into, albeit, briefly the differences between the different standards, such as the 3 standards for wireless technology, and IPv4 and IPv6. IPv4 allows greater flexibility when rerouting, whereas IPv6 offers greater speeds. A tradeoff as usual, but as technology develops, the next version of IP would probably encompass the best of both worlds, such as what 802.11g is doing for wireless local area network now.
Lastly, we touched a little on HTML. I did some freelance web design work for various companies back in '98-'01 during my secondary school days (I charged below the prevailing market rate due to my inherent age back then, but it doesn't mean I provided a below average service =P ) , so this was nothing new to me, but it was definitely a good refresher as I've not touched HTML in years! Looks like it might be useful if I dig out my old portfolio and look through the code again and hopefully all that lost knowledge slowly trickles back into my head. JavaScript, DHTML, CSS, SSI... Flash! Am looking forward to next week's Intro to Flash. It would be another good refresher, if not slightly nostalgic.
Friday, January 12, 2007
the maiden session
We had our first session this morning at SR4. Albeit the many latecomers, the session was still beyond my expectations. Perhaps I'm too used to the rigidity of science classes that I have forgotten the joy of interactive discussions. That aside, today we talked about disruptive technologies.
Disruptive technologies refer to those that are new, seemingly impractical, but often have a great impact on the consumer population. These technologies are able to displace the existing technologies, which is why they are 'disruptive'. Large corporations are designed to work with existing sustaining technologies; that is, those that can be incrementally improved and is established. This is why they experience a problem when faced with the onset of new and possibly cost-saving disruptive technology, as they have a 'legacy system' in place and thus are unable to swiftly adopt such new technologies. It is quite common for a large company to dismiss the feasibility of the above mentioned disruptive technologies.
Prior to this discussion, I've always known that such disruptive technologies have a great effect on the structure of the industry, but I never knew the full extent of it. It has gotten me to think about such changes in alternative perspectives and was an eye opener on the implications of the discussed technologies. Perhaps these same ideas can be applied to various other relevant innovations. In the near future, I hope I'd get the opportunity to come up with a disruptive technology. Maybe it'll be my big break.
Looks like this is an interesting module after all. (:
Disruptive technologies refer to those that are new, seemingly impractical, but often have a great impact on the consumer population. These technologies are able to displace the existing technologies, which is why they are 'disruptive'. Large corporations are designed to work with existing sustaining technologies; that is, those that can be incrementally improved and is established. This is why they experience a problem when faced with the onset of new and possibly cost-saving disruptive technology, as they have a 'legacy system' in place and thus are unable to swiftly adopt such new technologies. It is quite common for a large company to dismiss the feasibility of the above mentioned disruptive technologies.
Prior to this discussion, I've always known that such disruptive technologies have a great effect on the structure of the industry, but I never knew the full extent of it. It has gotten me to think about such changes in alternative perspectives and was an eye opener on the implications of the discussed technologies. Perhaps these same ideas can be applied to various other relevant innovations. In the near future, I hope I'd get the opportunity to come up with a disruptive technology. Maybe it'll be my big break.
Looks like this is an interesting module after all. (:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)