Do I Want Evernote?

I often tell people I am waiting for Google Brain to come to the market. I want all my objects RFID-tagged so I can find them; I want to be able to scan the ISBN of every book I read and make it full-text searchable and tagged so I can go back and find that great point that was made... uh... somewhere while I was reading on the T on Tuesday; and well, I'd just like the real world to be as helpful and responsive as my digital life is.

One of only two products I have ever heard of coming close to this is Evernote. The other is some project by a guy at Microsoft, and since Google Brain does not yet exist, I can't seem to track the info down. But the last time I looked at Evernote, I wasn't sure it was what I was looking for (well, okay, nothing that exists is really what I am looking for). I think it was, in part, because I had yet to discover how comfortable I was relying on GPS to tell me the nearest Dunkin Donuts or letting Google Maps be my lazy addressbook. I was reminded of Evernote's existence again recently by Salon, but the review didn't really inspire technolust. I mean, woo hoo, pictures of wine lables, so?

And then, today, I needed Evernote. At work, I realized I needed to call in a perscription refill, but did not have the Rx number is on the label at my home. If only I had taken a snap of this with Evernote when I first got the perscription, I'd be all set now. Serendipidously, Marc Hustvedt posted a review of the new version of Evernote today, stamping it "up to snuff."

Of course, my specific example raises the obvious concern with any service of this nature - privacy. After all, what's more personal than a medication? It did give me pause, but I have generally surrendered willingly into the All Your Data Are Belong to Google world, as long as I see some ROI.

Emergence and Adpoption

I've been contemplating Ray's comment on Twitter emergence - the idea that we are defining how to use it as we use it. Take Facebook, which began as a digital analog to the classic frat boy's "menu" and has now become a strong targeted advertising platform beyond the reach of Google, after looping around the cul-de-sac of becoming "the new Desktop" (so far, it turns out most Facebook apps are pretty silly). Twitter has gone through an even more impressive growth, evolving- from "What Are You Doing?" in 140 characters or less to a marketing tool, conference and event live microblogging, friendsourcing, even getting out of jail.

Now, this is great if mavens truly are super early adopters who ultimately reflect the needs of the greater group. And that model works for goods that have a long design, manufacture and feedback process and consumers who do not expect a high level of customization. But what happens if early adopters create a usage model that isn't useful for anyone else, essentially creating a ghetto of Twitterati and a majority public who find the tool useless?

The reason I have been thinking about emergence and adoption through this lens lately is due to a recent finding that, although Hungarians are increasingly net-savvy, there are very few Hungarian bloggers. Is this because Hungarians are still behind in terms of web tool adoption, because they are so far ahead they have already outgrown blogging, or is it because blog culture developed without them and has gelled in a form that isn't relevant to Hungarians?

Why should we care about Hungarian bloggers? you ask. Well, because they are in a unique position of having been held back from the steady progress of technology experiences in the US and Western Europe, then rapidly dropped into it. Until recently, due to various economic and logistical reasons, internet in the home was very very uncommon so the hungarian web still partied like it was 1999. I could just as easily have looked at web users in India calling email obsolete, I just happen to be more familiar with the Magyars. I know that when the Iron Curtain came down they stayed far behind in fashion for almost a decade, but jumped ahead of Americans in terms of mobile phone and PDA adoption.

So, which is it with blogging? To find out, I tracked a common word ("megyek" which means "I am going" so ought to be used frequently in tweets) on Twitter, then checked out these folks' profiles to see who they are following and being followed by. And guess what? The Hungarians love the Twitter. It makes sense - they don't need to tweet in english or use an english-based GUI to do so, they can do it all from their handhelds, which they are already highly comfortable with. Blogging isn't merely passe, it's just not that useful to a hungarian.

So, what does that mean for us? I think the lesson is that it's important to push beyond early adopters while a new tool or technology is in its adolescence. This gives the average user some structure to start from, but room to still influence what it will become as it matures, ensuring it isn't just a cool, shiny toy.

College may be Expensive, but it's Still Valuable

On this week's edition of Radio Boston, the topic was the (un)affordability of college. Many good points were raised, but one guest said a few things that really raised my hackles (unfortunately, I came in in the middle and didn't catch who it was).

First, he practically called a college degree irrelevant, citing the fact that so many Fortune 500 CEOs either never graduated from or never even attended college or university. This is such a misleading use of statistics. Sure, these exceptional men had the ambition and vision and intelligence to make tremendous successes of themselves without the aid of formal eductaion. However, this does not apply to most of us. Most people who do not attend or graduate from college earn about $30,000 a year, while Bachelors holders average around $50,000. And though a remarkably high percentage of these high-powered businessmen did not attain a college degree, a remarkably low percentage of those without a college education ever reach anywhere close to such heights of success.

Someone piped up about what a shame it was that trade school education was in decline, and I think this is another case entirely and often does hold more value than a liberal arts or university degree.

The second statement he made that I think is a lie, doing a disservice to a lot of young people, is that it doesn't matter if you attend a "name brand" school, that's just marketing hype. As the adage goes, it's not where you go, but what you do when you get there. Well, sort of. I think this is important to keep in mind in terms of gracefully accepting what you can't change, but it's only true to a point. Again, exceptional people will excell no matter what, but elite colleges provide students with so much more than academics. Alumni networks alone can make a world of difference, not to mention all the enhanced extracurricular activities a fat endowment can provide.

This may come out sounding like a fairly elitist post, but it really isn't. I realize that the economy is only getting worse and only a very small portion of the population (many, thanks to the advanatage of a family name and an elite prep school training) are fortunate enough to be able to attend the top schools. I think being realistic is important. However, I think it's also important to continue to push people to get as much of the best education they can. Both these statements come from a kernel of truth and the desire to soften a sometimes harsh reality. But it seemed to me that, in this context, these statments (especially taken together) are mutating into some sort of common wisdom that higher education is no longer important. That is outright false and harmful.

My Twitter Resistance.. and why it may be at an end

Ever since attending the Boston KM Forum's event KM 2.0: Real of Hype? I've been thinking quite a bit about my resistance to certain new technologies, specifically Twitter. Most of the attendees whose background was more in modern, applied KM than old-school theoretical praised Twitter over and over. But it still wasn't enough to convince me.

First, I don't have a critical mass of friends on Twitter. I think I have one. Meanwhile, most of my friends and acquaintances are on Facebook, so I can use that (for now) as my passive "keeping in touch" mechanism.

Second, I'm not sure who I would opt to follow and I think it would be a not-so-small blow to my ego that there's no real reason for anyone to follow me professionally. Clearly, I am already intellectually aware of this information, but the tangible evidence is just not something I want to sign up for at this point.

But then I read this great post - Claim Your Brand Name Or Suffer (linked via KM Forum attendee Doug Cornelius' blog) - and it has given me plenty of motivation. After all, I've already ceded the top billion or so Google search results for my name to Middle East expert Amy Hawthorne. Why let her have my Twitter presence (*gasp* maybe she already does!)?

And I'm sure after about a week, I'll wonder why I ever thought Twitter wouldn't be useful. After all, I only jumped ship from Yahoo to GMail because I got in during the first few waves and secured my good name. Now, I have relegated Yahoo to my "spam account" and curse its clunkiness and non-Googleness every time I log in to clean it up.