I love Business Insider, but articles like this should probably be taken with a grain of salt.

The chart that Business Insider used, which came from the Quantcast traffic-measuring firm, seemed pretty conclusive: it showed that Upworthy reached more than 80 million unique visitors in the month of November, and then its reach dropped dramatically — to the point where it reached less than 60 million in the first part of January, for a decline of about 40 percent.


This seemed like a fairly obvious sign that Facebook’s algorithm change — which the social network has suggestedwas designed to favor“high quality” news sources over those that traffic in gimmicky viral content — was penalizing Upworthy. But a broader view of the Quantcast data shows that things aren’t nearly as bad for the site as that first graph showed.

If you segment the Upworthy traffic measured by Quantcast by week instead of by month, you can see that the siteoften gets huge spikesof visitors — a result of a post that does particularly well on Facebook or some other platform — and that these inevitably subside, as they do with any publisher. Upworthy had several in November that pushed weekly uniques above the 35 million mark.

More specifically, articles about a site’s traffic getting crushed.

We see it all the time, from social media to SEO.  


(via Photo Of Sochi From Space)

Innovation is never a linear process, but it looks like we’re hitting a dead end here.

Maybe Google’s onto something by buying Nest.  Maybe the smartwatch thing is the next step in integrating things like Xfinity Home or whatever it is that lets you check on any faucets you’ve left on.

Who knows, but for now, it looks like it’s all about phablets and other goofy names for devices that already exist, but seem to be getting bigger with each new release.

"creativereason said: Ironic for comments re: automation to come from one of the leaders at a company that keeps buying robotic and AI companies?"

I wasn’t really thinking of that too much when Creative Reason made the above quote on a post I made yesterday.

Of course, in a timely fashion, Google Acquired DeepMind for $650 or so recently.

DeepMind is the latest in a long line of artificial intelligence acquisitions from Google that recently included the learning thermostat and smart fire alarm company Nest, described by Google’s Eric Schmidt as “an important bet” which will lead to products that are “infinitely more intelligent”.

“DeepMind was generally interested in reinforcement learning, and in deep learning, which is very useful in mining so called ‘big data’, something Google has a lot of and is interested in processing,” said Murray Shanahan a professor of Cognitive Robotics at Imperial College London.

I am, of course, still on the side that automation is a good thing for consumers and businesses alike.  There are a lot of jobs people don’t want to do.

There are also a lot of jobs that we can’t even conceive of yet.  Who would have thought that there would be the job of radio host in the year 1700?

In 1990, how many people had any idea that SEO could be a job?  I’m guessing not too many since the internet wasn’t exactly “a thing” just yet.

Still though, it’s ironic that Schmidt sees automation costing jobs and being a major issue as we move along, right as his company acquires another company that will allow it to automate tasks.

Not a good look

Not a good look

(Source: wilwheaton, via creativereason)


Interesting comments.  I’ve got a question, but here’s the quote I think is interesting:

He said given the constant development of new technology, more and more middle class workers would lose their jobs.

Speaking at a meeting at the World Economic Forum at Davos, he added that it was not clear if workers would have the right skills to be re-hired.

Mr Schmidt compared the situation to the industrial revolution.

He called for more industry-wide innovation.

"It’s a race between computers and people - and people need to win," he said.

How do you define winners here?

Automation is scary, especially with regards to manufacturing, but I’m not sure it’s a bad thing.

Cheaper products, lower labor costs, increased innovation… that sounds like a lot of good for the majority of people.


(Source: fastcompany)


By Phil Noto

Gotta be honest.  My Galaxy S3, that I was such a fan of… it’s quirky and unreliable now.

I’ve learned my lesson and will go back to iOS as soon as I can.




Yesterday a Walmart spokesman criticized the petition I’ve been circulating that asks Walmart (and McDonalds) to pay their employees at least $15 an hour.

Walmart’s spokesman told the Huffington Post that my petition fails to mention that Walmart is a major job creator and that it promotes…

I guess the accompanying inflation caused by giving everyone in a non-skilled job a 48% raise won’t ruin the intended benefit of this? Price of goods will go up because companies will lose money otherwise. Or fire everyone. Or replace workers with robots.

People in skilled positions it those that are highly educated will want a raise to keep up with inflation (and to make sure they stay ahead of folks with no skills or education).

I understand the sentiment. But reality has to be considered. Fast food jobs were intended for high school and college workforce. Walmart workers are not skilled or educated. Life isn’t always fair.

Brutally true.

I definitely feel for people in a tough position, but these aren’t jobs that justify $15 per hour.  

Say goodbye to those $1 burgers if this ever happens.