Category: Uncategorized

Facebook is worth $10 billion. At least, that’s what it’s worth if you believe today’s news reports about the site’s $200 million investment from a Russian firm.

But here’s the catch: the $200 million is real. The $10 billion is not.

It’s simply hypothetical.

It’s what Russian-based Digital Sky Technologies believes the social networking site could be worth, assuming that Facebook can cash in on its millions of users. But it’s all just theory. Two years ago, when Microsoft invested $240 million in Facebook, the site was valued at 15 billion hypothetical dollars.

So how did a site that’s watched its core metrics — users and page views — soar over the last two years become $5 billion less valuable?

I could give you a theory ^1.. But it’d be just that: a hypothetical.

Hypotheticals are the reason why Cubs fans get excited every Spring, why “Dewey Defeats Truman” didn’t look that absurd, why “The Godfather III” seemed like a good idea. Sometimes, you want things to be true. Sometimes, you need things to be true. Sometimes, you’re willing to deny all logic to make it so.

Hypothetically, nothing is impossible. Hypothetically, all men are created equal. Hypothetically, the American Dream lives on.

Dreams are great. Action is even better. But if there’s anything I learned in a high school science classroom, it’s that proof trumps all.

Facebook — the site — is the real deal. Millions of people are using it to connect and share and live, and that’s undeniable.

But any dollar amount attached to the site is more than just hypothetical.

It’s hype.

1.) That theory: Facebook’s real value is in that it has access to data about millions of people. Facebook knows if you like the Goo Goo Dolls or horror films; you’ve posted it right there in your profile. Hypothetically, Facebook could convince users that it should be able to take that data and sell it to advertisers — say, concert venues that might be hosting your favorite band, or movie studios. In turn, those advertisers would provide microtarged ads to Facebook users, and the site would be worth beyond its $10 billion valuation. But they tried that in 2007, and users balked, partially because Facebook wasn’t even doing a very good job of delivering these microtargeted ads. I think a Facebook that’s — and this is key — non-intrusively gathering data for advertisers would be worth $15 billion. A Facebook that can’t do that — by which I mean to say, the Facebook you use today — is worth considerably less. Of course, they could always make actual dollars by doing as Google did in 2004 and putting out an IPO. >back to article

H/T to nobihaya for the photo of Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg introducing Facebook in Japan last year.

So I’m applying for a job this morning through a company’s online submission site, when I come across this unusual “yes/no” question:

Can you perform the duties of this job?

At first, I think it’s a trick question. Maybe it’s a Freudian statement of sort: the id says yes, but the super ego says no. Or maybe it’s just a lonely Proustian questionnaire.

And then I look at the next line: “If no, please state the reason.” And it occurs to me: they’re not asking for existential analysis. They actually want to know if you’re capable of doing the job that you’ve just spent the last 20 minutes applying for.

Which makes me wonder: has anyone — after a third of an hour and seven pages of tedious résumé reentry — ever looked at that question and realized, “Oh, hell, I’m not qualified for this job at all”?

So I’m sitting at a bar in D.C. on Thursday. The Lakers-Nuggets game is on half the TVs. The Canes-Pens game is on almost all of the rest, except for one lone screen in the far corner, which is showing the Orioles game ^1.. The basketball game goes to commercial, and suddenly, the booth next to ours breaks out into song. There is no karaoke machine nearby, and they’re not singing along to the music playing in the bar.

And just when I’m about to give up, I look up at the TV hanging over their booth. A taxi driver wearing massively oversized glasses is singing on screen.

It’s at that moment that I realize the booth next to ours is singing along to a Heineken commercial, even though the TV is muted.

Sure, Budweiser might’ve blown a few million on ads during the Super Bowl, and Miller might’ve generated some buzz with their one second ad, but it’s Heineken — in, of all things, a PSA for designated driving — that has the best new beer ad of 2009 ^2..

When an ad campaign can vault a song from 1990 ^3. into the iTunes top ten — hell, when bar patrons are compelled to sing along to a television on mute — then it’s doing something right.

I’m just not sure what that something is yet.

1.) A trick question: The Washington Nationals are playing a game that’s broadcast on television. A sports bar in Washington, D.C., has over 50 televisions. What is the likelihood that a single television at the bar will be showing the game? (Actual answer on Thursday night: zero). >return to article

2.) Dos Equis’ “The Most Interesting Man in the World” ad — which also broke out this year, thanks to a few quotable lines — actually launched in 2007. >return to article

3.) It’s been a big month for Biz Markie. He’s also gotten involved in former Democratic National Committee chairman Terry McAuliffe’s Virginia gubernatorial campaign. >return to article

For some background about the ad, click here.

I never did learn how to work the phone line. I must’ve said the number a thousand times — five seven three, eight eight two, eight two, six two — but I never did figure out how to work it.

Sometimes, the phone rang. Sometimes, it just flashed red digits. Sometimes, it didn’t do anything at all.

So in four years as a DJ at KCOU 88.1 FM — the Mizzou college radio station — I can’t say that I ever took a call on the air. But I’ll take solace in other discoveries. I learned exactly why Townes Van Zandt is the best songwriter you’ve never heard of. I discovered the ways of the blues legends — Memphis Slim and Big Bill Broonzy and Lightning Hopkins come to mind — and nodded along to the Piedmont rhythms of Cephas & Wiggins. And I found out that if your band had a name as weird as The Butthole Surfers’, you’d probably get airtime on college radio.

Last Monday, I hosted my very last show on KCOU. For posterity, I’ve embedded the final hours below. If you’ve got two hours to waste with me, The Black Keys, The National, and Big Smith, then by all means, enjoy.

And if you’re over at KCOU right now reading this, I’d stop and look over at the phone line. It might be ringing, and you might not even know it.

The photo, of KCOU’s Pershing studios, by me.

You might not have noticed — maybe because it didn’t come across your Facebook news feed — but MySpace is dying. They’re losing activity by half a percent a week, which is a remarkable rate of atrophy.

And it’s not too hard to figure out why they’re losing users. For one, their interface isn’t easy to use or modify. For another, users don’t trust the site, partially because MySpace became synonymous with online stalkers. And then there’s a third reason, one that Warren Buffett spelled out at the Berkshire Hathaway meeting last month when talking about another dying industry:

“Newspapers were the ultimate businesses in every city with pricing power. They were essential with advertisers and customers. They’ve lost their essential nature.”

Even the one demographic that really needed MySpace — the music industry — has moved on. A site like Virb has a simpler design and more upside. (Proof? Check out the MySpace page of one of my new favorite artists, Joe Purdy, and then see his Virb page.)

What’s remarkable is how fast MySpace has fallen apart. A year ago, they were second in social networking, behind only Facebook. This year, they’re a year away from extinction.

Which got my thinking about something that I’m titling “Things That Were Once Unavoidable, But If They Disappeared Today, I Probably Wouldn’t Even Notice That They’re Gone.”

The list, so far:

Sideline reporters
Blockbuster
Ronco infomercials
Male pattern baldness
Local phone calls
Collect phone calls
Organ music at sporting events
Speed bumps
The Windows operating system
The U.S. Postal Service
Kmart
Mapquest
Yahoo!’s search engine
Wrist watches
Amtrak
Boxing
VHS
The AOL “You’ve got mail” voice
Jenna Elfman

What’d I miss?

H/T to bimurch for the photo.

I don’t listen to many podcasts, but the one that does make my iPod is from The Moth, which hosts regular “story slams” around the country. Basically, interesting people get up on stage and tell interesting stories. And then The Moth goes and turns their stories into podcasts.

I was listening to one of their podcasts today. It’s by a man named Ed Gavagan, who designs furniture for a living. But he tells a story — and I’ve embedded it below — that defies anything you’ve ever seen hashtagged with #FML.

It’s an amazing story. Take 15 minutes out of your day and listen to it.

I’ve just installed Apture on this blog, which means that many of the links on danoshinsky.com are going to appear differently. So if you see a little rectangle next to a link, it means that you won’t be redirected to another page. Instead, a little pop up window will appear that allows you to view whatever it is I’m trying to reference — more than likely, it’s probably a Bill Raftery YouTube video or a Flickr link — without leaving the page.

Thanks,
The Management

Tonight, in the process of cleaning out my basement, I found a stack of notebooks from previous semesters. In one notebook, I stumbled across an essay I’d written to no one in particular, in which I argue that the standards for defining the modern literary canon have changed. Mostly, it’s an essay about why my mother hates “Moby Dick,” and I don’t really feel like reprinting the entire thing here, if only because you don’t need to be my mother to understand why “Moby Dick” sucks.

But I do want to reprint something from the essay that seems especially relevant:

It has been my experience that the average American mind simply runs through a checklist before approaching any media item. When considering the potential “greatness” of a book or blog or TV show, the mind starts ticking through the items.

No sex? No violence? No danger?

No interest!

What’s weird is, three months after I wrote that essay, “Flavor of Love” went on the air. I don’t think America has looked back since.

I was having a conversation with a friend last night that, for reasons I do not entirely understand, devolved into an explanation of osmosis. This tends to happen to me. I’m sitting around, discussing Icelandic hedge funds and John Wall and Mario Kart, and suddenly I’m talking about sophomore year biology. It’s worth noting: I was not good at sophomore year biology ^1..

So I struggled to explain how and why things move from cell to cell, because explaining the functions of multicellular organizations isn’t necessarily within my area of expertise. Then I tried a different tack: I used the lowest common denominator.

“Osmosis is basically Bluetooth technology,” I told my friend. This seemed to please both of us tremendously, especially since I didn’t have to continue talking about cells, and he didn’t have to pretend to listen. And the concept behind my explanation wasn’t that far off. Osmosis is a way of transporting molecules between cells. Bluetooth is a way of transporting data between wireless devices. Once you get past the big words that define osmosis — semipermeable membrane, solvents, etc — you’re left with the realization that Bluetooth also allows the movement of things from from cell (phone) to cell.

But now, I’m struck by a simple question: Where do we cross the line between explanation and oversimplification?

Or: If we’re in the business of oversimplifying things, does anyone actually benefit?

Or, maybe: if the only possible analogy in a situation is tech-related, have we do we become too reliant on technology?

1. This was partially due to a small group of freshman girls in my class who were, semi-affectionately, referred to as “The Fannos,” but that’s a story for another time. >back to article

H/T on the photo at top via this site.