The story of Google that matters for most people is how it affects their daily lives (searching, web browsing, mobile phones, mapping/navigation, email, calendaring, YouTube, news, etc.) but I appreciate that Levy’s book focuses on the personalities and processes driving the evolution of what is arguably one of the most transformative corporate and technological entities of our time.

It can be easy to forget that behind some of the game-changing products and services produced by the company, there were real people thinking through issues of privacy, dealing with cross-cultural considerations and navigating interpersonal dynamics all while trying to make a living and find a sustainable business model.  They had/have desks, meetings, slide shows to give, families to care for, water-cooler conversations to have, and Levy does a great job capturing and re-telling those stories from the days of “two guys in a garage” all the way through the present days of life as an international corporation.  This is not always done with the most critical eye – those with concerns about Google’s operations or policies may be put off by the extent to which this book is an homage – but on the whole I think Levy is fair in calling out the moments when individual Google employees or the company as a whole screws up, and placing those in the context of Google’s good intentions.

A few themes in what Levy’s book revealed about “the Google way”:

1. “Ready, fire, aim” – Google does the bold, innovative or creative thing first, then (for better or worse) readjusts, re-calibrates, rethinks it later
2. When it comes to figuring out “what works,” studying data and using a scientific approach is more important than intuition or speculation.  Despite their many successes with this strategy, Google experienced failures when a data set wasn’t complete, e.g. when it doesn’t include the preferences, fears, doubts and hopes that are trapped in people’s heads or hearts.
3. Especially in its startup years, Google tried to only hire “A” people; engineers, researchers and thinkers who were either the best in a field of study (or headed that direction), who were driven by the excitement of discovery instead of money, and who could internalize the big picture goals of a project and then go make it a reality.  In their hiring they screened for intelligence, applicable knowledge, experience and adaptability, and as a result, they operate more like a research university than a traditional corporation.  Bureaucracy, office politics and administrative overhead seemingly emerged only with reluctant concessions to what was absolutely necessary to function at a larger scale.
4. If you want innovation in your organization, it’s important to create an environment where challenging accepted ways of doing things is not only permissible, but normal at all levels of authority and leadership.
5. It’s good to introduce questions of morality into the day-to-day operations of your organization.  At the same time, the more people you have, the harder it is to maintain integrity around living out a given set of moral values.

Google’s history is particularly of interest to me in that the company was started within a year or so of the company I co-founded, Summersault.  We were in a dorm room instead of a garage, and our goal was making great websites, not letting others search them more effectively.  There are not just a few differences between Summersault and Google today – billions and billions of dollars more in annual revenue, tens of thousands more employees, a private jet here, a self-driving car there, etc. – but I don’t think its too conceited to say that we started our company in the same spirit Google did, trying to help people make the most of the web…they just did it on a much bigger scale.

I was recruited by Google several years ago, to be a part of the team that keeps the company’s software application infrastructure up and running.  I really enjoyed my conversations with their staff about what it would mean to work there, and it was exciting to think about being a part of something so technically interesting and so global in scope.  In the end I knew that my passion and focus remained with what I’d started here in Richmond and so I declined to continue in the interview process, but In The Plex only reinforces what a great adventure that alternate path through life could have been.

It seems safe to say that most people underestimate the significance of what Google is and does.  Steven Levy’s book is a great read, and a great insight into how this one company has transformed the Internet age.

There are a lot of different strategies out there and each person has to find what works best for them.  Here are a few queries that might help you think about how well your strategy is working for you:

1. Are you able to work through your e-mail inbox in a reasonable amount of time every day, respond to or delegate time-sensitive questions/comments, convert messages into to-do items, or otherwise file them away on the first pass through?
2. Do you make good use of e-mail filters available in your mail reading program to highlight/tag/sort messages in ways that make you more productive?
3. Are there mailing lists or other regular notifications that you could unsubscribe from or have re-routed, to minimize the e-mail that you just delete or file on a regular basis?
4. Do you have a system for filing email that allows you to quickly and intuitively retrieve messages (sent and received) that you need to review without a lot of searching or jumping around to different folders?
5. Are you purging or archiving old messages in a way that makes sense for your role and your use of email?
6. Are your auto-”check for new mail” settings calibrated to (or turned off for) being productive? (i.e. Do you really need to know about a new message the instant it comes in, or would it be okay to review new messages once an hour?  A few times per day?!?)

If you’re not employing any particular email management strategy, may I recommend the “Inbox Zero” series of articles from 43 Folders?  There’s a great video of a presentation about this approach to get you started.

What other tips or strategies do you use to keep email useful to you as a tool, instead of getting overwhelmed by it?

Culture

Ghost in the Wires by Kevin Mitnick
Finally, Mitnick gets to tell his side of the story when it comes to his adventures in computer cracking and social engineering.  Though his writing style isn’t particularly compelling and his personal meditations on the interpersonal aspects of his adventures are a bit awkward, the details of how he pulled off some pretty technologically impressive (albeit illegal and sometimes destructive) hacks – and how law enforcement responded – make for compelling reading on their own.  As someone who spent a fair number of hours in my childhood trying to deconstruct how the phone system and the emerging world of BBSes and Internet nodes worked, Mitnick’s book is a great visit to the past and a reminder that humans continue to be the weakest link in all computer security.

What We Leave Behind by Derrick Jensen and Aric McBay
Partly a book about how our society views waste of all kinds from all sources, from our individual person to our households to our cities, and what we do with waste based on those views.  Partly a book about the ethical, intellectual and spiritual challenges that come with seeing a truth about how the world works, and then deciding what to do with/about that truth.  As with other Jensen books I’ve read, the experience of following his train of thought is at once uncomfortable and enlightening, and always takes me to new places in my own consideration of “the meaning of life,” even when I disagree with some of the thinking that got me there.

The End of Growth by Richard Heinberg (partial)
Chock full of data and economic analysis that refutes conventional wisdom about the state of the world economy.  Heinberg basically says (as he has in other books and settings) that in the face of rising energy and food prices, debt levels, and disastrous choices about our relationship with the surrounding environment, growth as we’ve known it can’t continue (not “it shouldn’t” but “it’s not physically possible”).  Especially as I work on economic issues here in my own town, his discussions around the point that there are no new jobs, just jobs moved around from one place to another, were particularly poignant.  But Heinberg as always does a good job of painting a picture of a version of humanity that can see “progress” without depending on “growth.”

Novels

Daemon by Daniel Suarez
One of the best high-tech thriller novels I’ve read.  A mix of Neal Stephenson, Stephen King and Tom Clancy.  A cautionary tale about the power we give to the organizations and corporations (and individuals) who manage our electronic identities, and some imaginative examples of possible abuse.  And like the best tech thrillers, the technology references are realistic and accurate, paying respect to the hackers and hobbyists who can spot a fabricated plot device or an oversimplified explanation of how hacking an unsecured Wifi signal works a mile away.  Don’t let your housemates read it if they’re skeptical of your home automation efforts (you’ll see why), but I couldn’t put it down.

The Associate by John Grisham
A lawyer gets into an interesting and sometimes dangerous situation involving powerful corporations and other people he’s not quite sure he can trust, and requires creative legal maneuvering and the confronting of his personal demons to get out of it alive.  Yes, it’s the plot line of most every other Grisham novel, and yes, it was once again an entertaining read.

Water for Elephants by Sara Gruen
Such a good novel! Well-written, exciting, immersive, touching, real.  I had recently forgotten what it felt like to read a book where you start to care deeply about the characters and what happens to them, and where even when the situations or places or time period feel far away, the human dynamics and choices that are described bring insight and understanding about what it means to be alive.  Haven’t seen the movie, don’t know if I want to replace the rich imagery in my head with the Hollywood version.

The Apostle by Brad Thor (partial)
Political intrigue.  War and terrorists.  Secret operatives and daring missions.  Blah blah blah.  Maybe I didn’t give this enough of a chance and Mr. Thor seems to have found a winning formula for bestsellers, but I found it shallow, plastic-y and unreadable, even for vacation reading, and finally gave up after a few hundred pages.

Business & Politics

Campaign Boot Camp by Christine Pelosi
Politics the Wellstone Way by Wellstone Action! and edited by Bill Lofy
Two hands-on, how-to books for those who want to be engaged in the political process, especially candidates.  While in many cases I was pleased to see that I’ve often been doing “the right things” in my own first venture into running for elected office, it was helpful to have these two contributions to the conversations I’m having with my volunteers and supporters.  The Pelosi book was perhaps more basic conceptual information while the Wellstone book was more of a practical guide to getting certain campaign things done, with examples and templates to help.

First Break All the Rules by Marcus Buckingham and Curt Coffman
Extensively researched and well written reflections on what “great managers” do differently from all other kinds of managers.  I took a lot of notes on this one, and am working my way through implementing the valuable advice I found for my own company, but it would be a useful read for anyone in a position of leading a team.

The Carrot Principle by Adrian Gostick and Chester Elton
A quick read on how to reward and engage members of a team.  Not ground-breaking, but well researched and full of good ideas.  Complements some other works by the same authors that I hope to check out soon.

It’s Okay to Be The Boss by Bruce Tulgan
Tulgan calls out what I think is a real problem – leaders who don’t actually lead – but then proceeds to write what I found to be a fairly surface-level look at when and why it happens and what to do about it.  He seemed intent on appearing to be in opposition to most kinds of conventional management wisdom (or even some of the more modern refinement of said wisdom, see above), but in the end just ends up presenting the same kinds of advice in slightly different ways and, I’m sorry to say, with much less attention to the power dynamics and humanity of management-employee relationships.  Not recommended.

What have you been reading this summer?

The Center City Development Corporation has asked that $300,000 of the $5 million in funds available through Richmond’s Certified Technology Park account be used to support renewed operations of the organization and its Uptown Innovation Center facility.  The Palladium-Item covered the request today in a news article and related editorial, the latter of which painted the request as just another ask for taxpayer funded handouts to support private business efforts and essentially encourages a “no” vote by the Redevelopment Commission, the entity that approves the funding request.

It’s important to note here that the $5 million in the CTP account has been sitting around for close to eight years, and that the City is coming up on its third renewal of its CTP designation without any significant use of those funds.  Those I’ve talked to about it have expressed some concern that if the State of Indiana, which administers the CTP program, sees this under-usage of those funds, there could be an understandable attempt to move them back under state control.  So an argument can be made for spending at least some of the funds sooner rather than later to demonstrate that we’re a town with a plan.

I should also note that I’ve been a part of some conversations about how to use these funds, and I have even put my own proposals on the table for what might make a good partial use of them (that’s a blog post for another time).  I started and have managed a high-tech business in Richmond since 1997, and we’ve created a number of technology jobs here, so I definitely have something to say about what might further encourage tech businesses to locate/grow in this city.  I’ve shared some of those thoughts in this space, e.g. Growing a Geek Culture in Richmond.

Is allocating $300K to Center City the best and highest use of the funds?

Maybe, maybe not.  I haven’t seen the details of the request.  I know that Beth Fields and Jason Whitney, co-Executive Directors of the organization, and board chair Rhett Baumgartner are three people who are deeply, personally invested in the health and well-being of this community, and that they wouldn’t attach their names to this request if they didn’t believe it to be a viable, impactful way to use the money.

The money can’t be used for just anything, as the CTP program requires that it go to support “the attraction and growth of high-technology business in Indiana and promote technology transfer opportunities.”   Questions in the paper about the necessity of proposed fund usage will surely be answered by the detailed organizational budget already submitted to the Redevelopment Commission.

As already noted, in the absence of other formal requests to allocate the funds to a given project, this is a relatively small slice of that pie that could be used to move something forward with long-term implications.  We say as a community that we want new and exciting opportunities to be taken on that spark growth and encourage further investment in the community.  We have to embrace the fact that these efforts require non-trivial investment and risk to get going, and the CTP designation was created for just that purpose – investing in new and exciting things that will lead to job creation and community building.

As a small business owner eagerly trying to find qualified technology workers to add to our staff, and as someone who has invested heavily in the success of the downtown business district, it’s encouraging to think of a renewed, well-funded Center City organization focused on exactly those things.  There’s a pool of money that’s been made available for just this purpose and that might go away if unused, and now someone is saying they’re willing to put it to good use.

As a community, we (as represented by the Redevelopment Commission) should ask good questions of the proposal and probe the details, but we should be very careful about saying “no” to people who are investing in moving the community forward.

Updated at 2:53 PM to include link to Pal-Item editorial, now available online.

The movie was incredibly well made.  Aaron Sorkin’s writing was as good as the best days of The West Wing, each member of the cast seemed to just nail their role, the editing was some of the best I’ve seen, and so on.

Perhaps most enjoyably, this is a mainstream movie that is at least in part about the culture and goings-on in the modern world of Internet entrepreneurship, I believe the first of its kind. It fully embraces the geekiness that was and is a part of building a web application like Facebook: in the first 30 minutes, the Apache webserver software project is mentioned at least twice, there are dramatic lines about needing more Linux webservers running MySQL, there are punchlines that involve the emacs text editor, and scenes of glorious code writing marathons – wow.

The Social Network also takes on the complex and sometimes dirty aspects of Internet start-ups, business partnerships that go sour, the role of lust, greed, insecurity and power struggles in creating beautiful things, and the general messiness of human relationships in a post-industrial world.  Some of this is probably over-dramatized; if you believe the narrative it presents, success in the world of the Internet means being ready to screw over your friends and then lawyering up to defend against their lawsuits, treating women as decorative sex objects to invite to website launch parties, and deferring basic care of one’s body in order to write software all night long.  My experiences as a web developer in the Midwest have been much less sensational…but then again, I’m not a billionaire, so maybe I’m doin` it wrong.

The movie doesn’t purport to be factually accurate, but there’s enough real history in there that it will likely become the popular understanding of how Facebook actually came to be; it might be close enough.  If you use Facebook, or if you’re interested in some of the crazy stuff that happens to take a start-up business like Facebook to what it is now, I think The Social Network is a great film to check out.

If you’ve seen it, tell me what you thought!

Unfortunately, most of the responses (and the ones favored by the Obama administration) are focused on paying insanely large amounts of money to private contractors to create and deploy complex technological solutions in hopes of addressing the threat.

What advocates of this approach fail to appreciate is that (A) most of the actual threat comes from uneducated human operators of the technology in question, and (B) deploying homogeneous, technologically complex solutions often makes us more vulnerable, not less.

Once you get past the flashy headlines and attention-grabbing introductory stories in these articles, meant to scare us into believing how real the threat is (basically, bloodthirsty hacker terrorists are trying to kill us all), each of them seems to come back to one of two recurring themes behind these threats.   Either a human being messed something up, or a piece of technology wasn’t secure enough and is now being exploited.

For the first case, it’s usually things like “so and so unknowingly downloaded a virus onto their USB flash drive and then plugged into a secure government network – things exploded!” or “an e-mail user clicked on a phishing scam link and had their password stolen.”  For the second case, it’s usually “Windows machines are insecure, and so they get taken over and absorbed into botnets, which can then wreak havoc through denial of service attacks” or “a security hole is found in a product made by a brand that everyone was supposed to trust, and so it’s running EVERYWHERE and OMG we’re all going to die.”

But in throwing hundreds of millions of dollars at cyberwarfare defense we will most likely see only minimal resources devoted to end-user education and training to defend against social engineering, poor personal security practices, and the related actual vulnerabilities.  The funding will also not include programs to hold hardware and software vendors more accountable for selling more secure products and services to end users.  Instead, it will go toward funding secret surveillance and the further shifting control of the Internet into military hands.

With this approach, in the end we’ll be back to where we are right now.  End-users will continue the insecure personal practices that lead to security breaches, and the continued homogenization of hardware and software will amplify the potential impact of every security hole discovered.   This is not helpful.

We´re having a great time. More soon.

Summersault contacted them earlier this year about their network paging services as a part of our hosting infrastructure, and we certainly thought we’d found a service that was technically well done and reasonably priced.  After we signed up for the $50/month service and started using their system “for real,” we found that it lacked several key features that we needed (including some common sense security precautions), and that their user interface left much to be desired.  To be fair, they did offer us a free demo that we tried out a bit, but the way we were integrating their service with our systems meant that these issues didn’t come out in full until we actually started on the integration.

When we asked them if they could address some of our concerns, they basically said that we would have to pay for any work they might do to change their system.  This wasn’t surprising in and of itself, although some service providers are kind enough to say “hey, that’s a good feature idea, maybe we’ll add that in a future release.”  Not Interpage.

When we finally decided that the system was not going to meet our needs because of those concerns, we contacted Interpage to cancel our service, less than 2 months after we’d signed up.  You would think we’d announced that we were going to burn down their office building.  We got terse replies and no attempt to see if there was a way to keep us happy, just instructions on what paperwork we needed to send over. Okay, fine.

Until they kept billing us.  When I called to note what I assumed were erroneous charges, they said that they needed to bill us for the full length service period after the cancellation date (and they used the date we submitted the paperwork, instead of the date we first contacted them saying we didn’t need their service any more).  I explained how frustrating that was given that we’d never actually had any significant use of their system, but allowed them to bill our credit card for what they said was a final charge, just so we could be done with it.

And then another charge came in for the following month.  And then another charge for the month after that.  Two full months after we’d requested that they cancel our service, they were still billing us.  When I contacted them, they came up with some rationalization that their terms of service allowed for it, even though they’d told me that they were done billing us.

When I explained to Interpage that this seemed quite unethical and certainly not very customer-service-oriented, there was no backing down.  When I said that we might consider disputing the charges with our credit card provider, he literally said “You won’t win.”  The guy was challenging us to a fight.

We did dispute the charge, and during that process, Interpage started charging us fees and interest for the provisional credit that the credit card provider had given us – my understanding is that this runs up against the whole point of having a dispute process with your credit card.  Interpage was then somehow able to convince the credit card provider that we’d agreed to be charged well after our service had ended (I’m still trying to figure that out), and so the provisional credit was reversed.

So, Interpage got what they wanted, they were able to bill all of the fees that they thought they deserved according to their fine print, case closed, right?

Nope, they’ve now turned the $36 in penalties over to a collections agency.

I’ll spare you the remaining details, but it’s absolutely amazing to me that an business could have the gall to be so mediocre in its services provided, so insensitive in its relationship with a customer, and then so brazen in its thirst to “win” any kind of financial dispute.  Is this really the kind of company you want to do business with?

Some customer service lessons:

1. Just because you have fine print that says you’re allowed to take your customers to the proverbial cleaners doesn’t mean that you can treat them like dirt at the first sign of conflict.
2. You should at least pretend to care about making your customers happy for a few minutes before throwing down the gauntlet for a legal fight.
3. If a customer gives you feedback on ways your service can be improved, consider listening to that feedback for a few minutes before ignoring it.

Interpage Network Services, Inc. must have all of the income and customers that it ever wants, and it must not worry too much about what those customers think of it, because it certainly failed on all of the above counts in our experience.

If you’re considering doing business with Interpage for paging, fax, or other services, you’ll want to check and double-check that you aren’t setting yourself up for a billing nightmare.

1. Capitalism vs. The Environment: A small business perspective on doing well AND doing good. This coming Thursday September 24th at 4 PM at Indiana University East in Whitewater Hall Room 132 the Community Room, free and open to the public, no registration required.  I’ll be talking about our experiences at Summersault as we’ve tried to do the “right thing” when it comes to the environment and nurturing sustainable lifestyles, and examine whether it’s even possible to pursue a for-profit technology venture and not be in a harmful relationship with the land and life around us.
2. Get Techie, Get Social! A workshop to help non-technical people learn more about technical topics, especially social media like Facebook and Twitter.  Monday September 28th from 9:30 AM to 11:30 AM at Morrisson-Reeves Library, free and open to the public, no registration required.  If you’re at all intimidated by some of those “newfangled Internet trends” or the Internet in general, I hope you’ll bring your questions and frustrations so we can work them out together.  There’s a PDF flyer for the event.
3. TCP/IP topics in Introduction to Computers and Computing.  I’ll be speaking at this IU East class on Monday October 12th about things like DNS/Bind, network topologies and routing, e-mail technologies, and web technologies.  This particular class isn’t open to the public, but if you have folks interested in discussing these topics in technical detail, let me know and I’d love to speak with your group.
4. Communicating Through Technology. Friday October 23rd at 9 AM at a conference for women hosted by the Wayne County Foundation.  I’ll be speaking along with co-worker Jane Holman about social media and general technology topics.  You can view the conference brochure in PDF, and registration is required.

I hope you can join me for one of these events!

It’s something that I think about a lot (especially when we’re trying to hire someone), but I didn’t have a ready answer – partly because there is no simple answer, but partly because I hadn’t really ever taken the time to write one down.  Below is a list of ideas and comments, in no particular order, that came out when I put the question to the wider Summersault staff.  I hope that you’ll contribute your own thoughts and suggestions, and I’ll pass the list back to the Chamber and anyone else I can find who might be in a position to work on some of these things.

1. If there were more resources and locations in town that catered to the “do it yourself” computer builder/hacker, we might see an increase in people building up their own skill sets.  Opening a Freegeek location here would be a great start.
2. We need more social venues and public spaces that aren’t “the bar scene.”  Coffee shops with free wireless access and decor/atmosphere appealing to the 20s/30s crowd are usually ideal.
3. Technology toys are a luxury, and consumption of them is probably not going to flourish in Richmond right now, especially in a depressed economy.  But, there are a small population of people with dollars to spend on high tech stuff.
4. Some of the existing computer hardware businesses in town are geared toward fixing broken computers, instead of getting people excited about what’s possible with technology, or catering to “gadget lust.”   If a computer business could provide an experience more like what you get when you walk into an Apple Store (technology is fun/cool/interesting, not hard/frustrating), they might serve as a better gathering place or hub for local geeks.
5. Perhaps obviously, more technology-oriented businesses in town will yield a larger number of people, conversations, potential hires, skill-sets, etc.   Having more diverse businesses here in general adds to the appeal of Richmond, and allows geeks to find what they want locally without leaving for Dayton, Cincinnati, Indianapolis.
6. There’s a strong crossover for geeks with bike culture and people generally interested in alternative transportation.  Other hobbies that have a “do it yourself” quality to them are generally found thriving within geek culture, so promoting those (especially cycling) could help.
7. We need more opportunities for conversation and networking among geeks and people interested in technology.  Whether it’s classes or seminars or informal meals, tech people need low-pressure ways to gather. We noted that environment at events hosted by the “Young Adult Professionals” is generally not friendly to introverted geek types.
8. Younger children need to be encouraged to share and learn about any interest they might have in technology, and given opportunities to really explore it.
9. Local higher education institutions need to do a better job of incorporating the “Linux culture” into their programs.  A number of local technology businesses (including Summersault) have trouble finding qualified candidates for our technical positions because the local educational offerings are geared toward an entirely different paradigm.
10. Richmond sometimes needs more “presentable” spokespeople for different parts of its geek culture.  Sometimes the awkwardness and relaxed attire and unique personal hygiene standards that come with being a geek are not conducive to effective public relations and messaging.
11. Richmond needs to generally be more open to a culture of subcultures – it’s okay for people to  have hobbies, interested, specializations that don’t fit into some single notion of the “mainstream” way of life here.  We should support and encourage that, not alienate it.
12. The creative arts are a huge part of encouraging a strong geek culture – when there are artistic endeavors like theater, music-making, film-making, etc. going on in a community, geeks have more opportunities to thrive.

When I asked our group a more direct question about specific actions that an entity like the Chamber of Commerce could take to support geek culture here, we came up with a few ideas:

1. Fund a grant for expanding the existing Hardware Cooperative into a Freegeek location.
2. Provide sponsorship for events and gatherings geared toward geeks, but let some geeks organize it.
3. Work toward having reliable wireless internet access across the city
4. Include the geek demographic as a target in the marketing that you do for your organization and the city as a whole.

That was the result of our initial brainstorm.  What do you think it means to grow a geek culture in Richmond (or in your own community)?