Tumblelog by Soup.io
Newer posts are loading.
You are at the newest post.
Click here to check if anything new just came in.

February 20 2014

07:45

January 23 2014

16:06

Brad Frost – Creating Responsive Interfaces » UIE Brain Sparks

Atomic Design as a solution for creating responsive interfaces.

January 20 2014

19:24

Conversion Essentials — First Product Series #3 (FS037)

Online business culture seems to be in a bit of a conversion craze. Everyone wants to know how to convert casual web traffic into buyers and subscribers. And it makes tons of sense when you’re talking about loads of traffic and loads of money. But most of us aren’t. Many here at Fizzle are just trying to build and ship our first product. In this episode we cover the essentials of conversion so you can stop delaying the making of your thing, stop ingesting the stuff Amazon and Apple are thinking about (you’re not playing that game… yet, and it’s keeping you from important stuff) and start focusing on what matters about your website, your audience and your product. This is part 3 in our ongoing First Product Series (part 1, part 2) where we hear the first product stories of several successful business builders. (It’s still amazing to me to see how listening to these short interviews right next to each other puts ideas about making our own thing into perspective). Guests in this episode: Derek Halpern — Founder of SocialTriggers.com where he blogs about the intersection of psychology and marketing. Dan & Tom of Studio Neat — Founders of Studio Neat, purveyors of insanely successful Kickstarter campaigns, makers of delightful products like the Glif and the Cosmonaut. Danielle LaPorte — Hot n’ steamy writer at DanielleLaPorte.com and creator of the Desire Map, an holistic approach to life planning. Push Play: Conversion Essentials — First Product Series #3 (FS037) / Listen to Conversion Essentials — First Product Series #3 (FS037) A podcast for creative entrepreneurs and honest business builders... TO SUBSCRIBE: simply search for “The Fizzle Show” in your podcast app, or click here:iTunes Stitcher Instacast Podcast Feed URL It’s not about the conversion craze — it’s about making something useful (and loving it)Tweet This   or copy + Facebook Show Notes Want Conversions? Start with User-Friendly, Useful Landing Pages — “Everyone “knows” that if you want to convert visitors, you need short pages, split-tested button colors, and big, flashy graphics. Unfortunately, what everyone “knows” isn’t always correct.” The Mega-Details Behind the New Design of The Smart Passive Income Blog — Corbett and I helped Pat strategize and design his new site. In this post Pat tells the gritty details about how he had to change the design over time to improve conversion for his goals. What’s the BEST color for high conversions? — I include this because, ironically, Derek (a classic conversion guy and a good friend) through being super conversion oriented ends up saying the same thing as us. Essentials of Website Design for Business Builders — My essentials of design course in Fizzle is an excellent resource if you’re looking to design or redesign your site with these conversion essentials in mind. There’s workbooks and lessons and inside jokes and training and even a few live sessions with a big blogger as I redesign his site. Definitely worth a buck to check out. Visual Website Optimizer — A great A/B testing tool we’ve used ourselves. (This is what we used to nail down the current headline on the homepage). http://fizzle.co/sparkline/conversion-essentials-first-product-series-3-fs037

January 14 2014

05:09

BG 230: The Internet is Not Your Teacher » Buddhist Geeks

Podcast: Download Episode Description: This week’s episode comes from the recent Buddhist Geeks conference where Ethan Nichtern, a Buddhist teacher in the Shambhala tradition, speaks about ways in which the internet falls as a an aid in dharma. He uses the Tibetan teaching on co-emergence to frame the simultaneous benefits and harms of the internet, while also speaking about the limitations of a DIY (Do it Yourself) approach, especially when not being open to genuine human contact, with your community or with a teacher. And he argues that in order to go beyond a surface level dharma, which is mostly what he sees online, that one has to stay with things long enough to penetrate their true meaning. He suggests ways that we might do this and presents a very strong argument for not virtualizing Buddhist practice. Episode Links: Ethan Nichtern The Interdependence Project Transcript: Ethan Nichtern: So the title of my talk is ‘The Internet Is Not Your Teacher’ and there’s two iPads on the podium right now, which is kind of awesome. So, the first thing I’d like to say is obviously this entire gathering is a product of the internet and that’s great. On the way in here met six or seven people who I have previously only known through the Twitter, Facebook universe and I’m reading my notes off an iPad 2 so I can’t dislike the internet that much. In fact, I don’t dislike it at all. What I wanted to really say is that I think we’re at a very interesting time and a very empowering time in terms of the psychological and spiritual teachings moving further into our society through science, through community, through art, through politics. It’s also a really dangerous time. And my tradition which is a Vajrayana or Tantric tradition has this great framework for determining whether something is harmful or helpful which is called co-emergence which means when you want to figure out if something is destructive or empowering or enlightening or samsaric. It’s both. It’s always both and the internet is especially both. Like more both than anything has ever been. So let’s talk about the samsaric side as it relates to people wanting to study and practice genuine teachings of awakening. I think there are two aspects that are important here. The first is the cheapening of knowledge and wisdom. Where in the ancient world to even learn how to follow your breath was quite a journey over mountains or requesting teachings for a long period of time. And because it was quite a journey, you took the instructions that you received as important. And that’s not so from a respect standpoint of course it’d be great if we were all respectful of teachers, etc. But the main thing is how the process of learning happens and when you think what you’re receiving is important you tend to take more time to absorb and integrate it into your experience which is the whole point of how these teachings work. This isn’t ultimately a philosophy. As my teacher has been talking about recently the point of this is reworking how a human being experiences themselves not how they talk about themselves. Although if you change the way a human being experiences themselves I think the person should also be able to talk about themselves in a more engaging and interesting manner. True. But that’s secondary. So you can Wikipedia pretty much any Buddhist teachings you want. So I had this laughable experience where a lot of the Vajrayana teachings in the Shambhala tradition are said to be secret. There’s not a single Vajrayana teaching that I’ve ever received an empowerment for that you couldn’t Wikipedia right now. You could Wikipedia the surface of it, I mean, which is actually quite good. But if you’re doing seven other things at once and just want to find out what the word Mahamudra or Shikantaza means, and then have a conversation over Skype over what that means, or Twitter something about Mahamudra. Sorry tweet something about Mahamudra. It’s interesting. Let’s put it that way. Here’s the second thing which I think is even more co-emerging and didn’t really exist to the extent, in my understanding, in the ancient Asian cultures where these teachings came from. Our entire society, in the words of Generation X, has become very DIY. Do-it-yourself. The interesting thing about this term is that it started as an anti-consumerist phrase but it actually means you get to consume in the way you want. So there seems to be a strand of dharma, a huge strand of dharma, where we all want to become spiritual libertarians. We want to do the teachings in the way we do them. My teacher a lot of times says if you’re going to ask a teacher for advice you should actually do what they say. Chances are they’re going to tell you to do something you didn’t want to do in some small way. That’s what doing something good for you is, right? You have to do something that’s outside of the framework of your habitual apparatus, which means it doesn’t feel immediately good. So I always think of this conundrum of our DIY consumerist culture, especially in the United States of America which is possibly the most libertarian society on Earth today in terms of freedom is that we all really proclaim our individual freedoms. And the way we express this freedom is by doing whatever everyone else is doing. So we don’t really want to submit ourselves to a community, which is the sangha, or a teacher, which is the Buddha principle, that’s beyond our ability to control what feels good in the present moment. And this is one of the big dangers of the superficiality. And I don’t mean superficiality in a bad way. I mean in the surface way of internet dharma, of podcast dharma, and Wikipedia dharma. So here’s what I want to say, and there’s many different interpretations. We already heard from my friend Kenneth one model of enlightenment. There are many different interpretations of what the purpose of Buddhism is about. We heard from Kelly the purpose is to end suffering. In my tradition what we are increasingly saying is the purpose is to create a society that is awake, that encourages people to be awake. I don’t think anybody would say that it’s about attaining a certain state of meditative absorption or jhana or Samadhi, although those are fun and those can be a tool or a method to awakening. But I think a lot of people think it is about that. Yeah, I know it’s not really about meditation but if I actually could do that that’s what it’s about. The word enlightenment is really tricky. I find that people usually just define enlightenment as whatever I’m not experiencing now, and good luck trying to attain something that you have linguistically and psychologically defined for yourself as whatever I’m not experiencing now. I would like to propose that from my point of view Buddhism is about neither of those things. It’s not about enlightenment. I like to translate the term bodhi, awake, enlightened, as just sane. The whole purpose of all of these practices is to become a more sane and decent human being. And try to do whatever we can in a world that’s pretty quickly going away from sanity to spread sanity, to model behaviors to other people and communities to other people where they can feel sanity as well. If you want to become a sane and decent human being, this is my only point, that’s something you only learn from other human beings. Do you guys agree with that? I don’t know. I’m making a strong point. Now, you can learn that over Skype. Kenneth I think you work with students via Skype and so do I. That’s great. But you have to actually be taking the perspective that you are interested in other human beings. And so when we look at the dharma which is what everybody wants which is the truth, which is the teachings, which is the exalted understanding of how to end suffering, how to be compassionate, how to enjoy your life. That’s another way of saying these teachings are about. A lot of teachers now are just talking about happiness. When we look at that, the dharma has always been taught as interdependent with two other things. It actually doesn’t exist separately. There’s actually no such thing as internet dharma. The teachings of this tradition relate to the dharma as one of a triad. It’s actually just one aspect of three. The others are sangha, which nobody wants to remember is actually one of them. Why the sangha is one of them is because that’s how we receive the modeling of both decent and neurotic human behavior. That’s what it was invented for. The co-emergence of this is how you’re decent, this is how you’re compassionate, this is how you’re creative, and oh that’s how you’re a little insert your adjective here from your own sangha experience. And then there’s the Buddha, which is that we have to believe that somebody, you don’t have to believe they’re completely enlightened, and I like Kenneth’s model of being at the tipping point but not at the point of no room for improvement. But you have to believe that they know something in our DIY culture that maybe you don’t know yet or haven’t integrated fully into your experience. So this is kind of my conundrum because this year I was empowered as a senior teacher and lineage holder so I have to be a little bit more fire and brimstone. And I also have the experience of getting a lot of emails because the interdependence project has a podcast. I think it’s not quite as popular as the Buddhist Geeks podcast. But you know it’s all right. We’re less geeky. We’re the cool the kids. We’re less popular now. There’s been a switch. And then the next thing people say is, how do I study further? You know how do I find a teacher I’m in Wisconsin? How do I find the sangha? And it’s hard because we’re still at a phase where the interest is greatly outstripping I think the number of teachers who are actually saying I would like to work with people, the number of sangha that people can actually find. But the thing that we have to understand about this is what is the difference between surface dharma and depth dharma. I love surface dharma. I am a peddler of surface dharma. All of the social networking things. Social networking is great. The fact that we can do that is amazing. I mean you don’t actually have 3,000 friends. That might be…If you actually did, you’d probably go nuts, right? So there’s a little falsehood there but the fact that you can actually experience that you’re connected to 3,000 other people that’s wonderful. The fact that you can send messages to them, the fact that people can receive in their inbox little just ‘be compassionate today’. And then people say, oh yeah, I got that quote from Sharon Salzberg in my inbox and I remembered to be compassionate when I was in traffic. That’s great. But we should understand that it’s surface. And the thing that our DIY cheap commodified information culture has a tendency to do is make the surface all there is. Because when we dwell on the surface what starts happening is you start to be a scatter-brain. And in terms of attention, depth requires you to actually not be a scatter-brain. That’s almost the definition of depth. That you would actually be able to stay with something to penetrate it and to go deeper. So deep dharma is the three jewels which means teachers, like finding them, seeking them out, working with them, arguing with them, which is something since my tradition derives from Tibetan Buddhism that I think our DIY culture can bring to the table that was missing in Asia. Like you can actually debate your teacher. You should. What are you talking about Rinpoche? That would be good. I’m also a college professor so I know this. So there’s a lot of room for that. And then sangha, sangha is really the key to the societal aspect of these teachings. And I think if we’re going to actually have something to say to the world, and especially a world that’s in the midst of profound loss in the sense of community, which is really odd that a profound loss of a sense of community is happening the same time that social networking is taking off. It’s a really weird co-emergent time. We have to participate in human sangha. We have to actually go and encourage other people to say turn off your computer for a little while, you can turn it back on later, go find other people to meditate with. Go find other people to then hang out with. When the interdependence project started developing a real group was the moment that we started taking our practice, and this is just a very simple thing, after class we would say does anybody want to go and get dinner. That’s human connection. It’s not Second Life dinner you know. You have to eat actual dinner. There’s falafel out there people until the cyborgs take over, which my father is obsessed with Ray Kurzweil so maybe they will, we have to get dinner ourselves. And that’s the key deeply understanding these teachings and making human connections with other. So anyway I think that’s all in my ironic slightly hypocritical iPad 2 owning sense that I’d like to say. But thank you all for having me. It’s great to be amongst all the geeks. So thank you. http://www.buddhistgeeks.com/2011/09/bg-230-the-internet-is-not-your-teacher/

January 03 2014

15:17

Wait! Before you Turn Your Idea Into a Product... the 4 Part Podcast Series (FS035)

If you’re on this page you likely fall into one of two camps: 1. it’s time to make your first sellable thing, or 2. it’s time to start thinking about making your first sellable thing. 5 years ago most of us literally thought we could support ourselves with advertising revenue. In case you weren’t around for that: it didn’t work. So now we’re all coming around to what’s been central to business since the beginning of time: make something people want, make it good enough to be worth a few bucks, connect the people to that thing. In other words: make a product, a thing to sell. Will the first thing you create support yourself for the rest of your life? Maybe not. But everyone can make something worth at least a buck… … and once you break that seal — once you get your first sale from someone who isn’t a family member — the light bulb goes on, your eyes light up and you say, “oh shit, I get it! And I know what I’m going to do better next time.” We want you to be a product maker (even if you’re in a service industry) because it makes you better at your thing, brings you closer to your audience, and, frankly, because this tool making stuff is in your DNA. (Making useful stuff is much deeper in your blood than cubicles, smoke stacks, Excel reports and factory lines). For the next few episodes of the Fizzle Show (including this one) we’re going to get you thinking about building your first product. Whether you’re ready to build it now or not, getting your mind right about this stuff will profoundly impact the decisions you make about your business. In each episode we talk you through a common roadblock to creating your first thing. In this episode we tackle the idea questions: Where can I find an idea for my first product? What makes a good or bad idea for a product? What examples of other ideas that have worked in the past? But that’s not even the best part. In each episode we’re going to feature the “first product stories” of several successful friends of the show. These are people supporting themselves and their families doing stuff they care about, making things they’re proud of, things that have stood the test of time and continue to sell. These are people with hard-fought, well-earned insights about the process. Their tips here are priceless. (Which is funny, cuz, like, one of the episodes is about pricing and this goes against some of the advice you’ll hear there. See what I did there? now ur curious!) If you can’t tell, we’re really excited about these episodes and this idea. You’re more capable of doing this than you give yourself credit for. It’s no longer about traffic or exposure. You can create a profitable, small and trust-oriented businesses if you just come at it from the right direction. These episodes will help you do that. Please be our guest and enjoy this, the first episode in the Product Prodcrust Series about how to find find your idea. Push Play: Wait! Before you Turn Your Idea Into a Product… the 4 Part Podcast Series (FS035) / Listen to Wait! Before you Turn Your Idea Into a Product… the 4 Part Podcast Series (FS035) A podcast for creative entrepreneurs and honest business builders... TO SUBSCRIBE: simply search for “The Fizzle Show” in your podcast app, or click here:iTunes Stitcher Instacast Podcast Feed URL It’s no longer about the traffic or exposure. I’m heading towards small, trust-based and profitable.Tweet This   or copy + Facebook Guest Interviews in this Episode Anne Samoilov — Blogger and founder of Fearless Launching, a step by step course for launching your first anything. Matt Alexander — Founder of NeedLifestyle.com, a startup in mens fashion with all the right backers making all the right moves. Leo Babauta — Founder of ZenHabits.net, one of internet’s top 50 sites (according to TIME magazine!). A guy who drinks tea slowly and serves his audience matterfully. Josh Shipp — Founder of Youth Speaker University and an insanely popular youth speaker. (He does balloon animals. He toured with Bill Cosby. Literally). A Walk Through Making Your First Product in 7 Steps In case you missed it, episode 27 of the fizzle show is a killer walk-through making your first product in 7 steps. We’d be remiss not to mention it here. Listen to it here » Hello & Welcome to 2014 We’re so excited for 2014. I’m so ready to turn a new page. We’re so excited you’re here with us. I wanted to let you know that and say: we have plans for killer stuff this year (this podcast series is just the first of those plans). Can I ask you to take a chance on us? Join up free and we’ll include you in some access to things we’re doing this year. (also, then you’ll have my email so you can tell me which singer-songwriter we’re actually like. Listen to the intro of the show for context.) Join up here (it’s free) » Show Notes How to Have GREAT Ideas by James Altucher — “And this post is not just about coming up with ideas to get rich. It’s how I saved my life.” Drafts, the iOS app we use — “Drafts is where text starts on iOS. Quickly capture text and send it almost anywhere! The most flexible note taking app on iOS.” A Walk Through Making Your First Product in 7 Steps (FS027) — “You piece of crap. Nobody’s gonna buy this stupid thing. Who do you think you are? There are so many others smarter than you about this. What makes you think anyone will care?” Ultimate Dog Tease – YouTube — “Yea? What was in there!?” Live Your Legend – Live Local Meetups! Our friends Scott Dinsmore and the Live Your Legend community are organizing a series of meetups around the world on January 7th. The goal is to help you meet other inspiring, passionate world changers and entrepreneurs in your hometown. 146 cities are involved, and 1,263 people are signed up to attend. This is a highly recommended event. Start 2014 off by connecting with supportive people who can help push you to do work that matters. Join a Live Your Legend Local meetup here » http://fizzle.co/sparkline/finding-idea-product-prodcrust-1-fs035

December 28 2013

17:29

Nerdist Podcast: Jerry Stahl « Nerdist

@al Agreed. @super It’s the exact opposite of standing idly by and allowing yourself to be shit on by bullies. A blog post, or a video, or a tweet is a thing that someone makes and puts out into the world. A creation, if you will. To someone who makes things for a living, and makes things in order to feel happy, and makes things in order to make other people happy, and takes the act of making things and making them well very seriously, it’s baffling why someone would make a thing for the sole purpose of belittling someone. It’s exponentially impossible to fathom why someone would make that thing poorly, or with substandard materials (incorrect information, half-assed assumptions, poor grammar, etc). The response to want to make a thing to counteract and negate the negative thing comes as easily as breathing to a person who spends their life attempting to make good, positive things. The jury is still out on the effectiveness of responding to trolls, but the almost undeniable urge to respond, at least, is understandable, IMO. http://www.nerdist.com/2013/12/nerdist-podcast-jerry-stahl/

December 20 2013

14:30

Dan Klyn – Determining What Good Means with Performance Continuums Live! » UIE Brain Sparks

Dan Klyn: “Publishing Company” was accustomed to this. Paper and print and periodicals. What they were up against is digital. They had adopted digital a long, long time ago to make printing paper things more efficient, easier, better and that sort of thing. They did it in a timely fashion. They had no shortage of digital technology to make the paper happen. They didn’t embrace the medium of digital as a publishing medium and they needed to catch up. They felt like they were being forced, this is 2011, they’re being forced to transition to digital as a publishing medium. They hired a UX consulting company, a famous one from one of the coasts who we won’t name, to build them this bridge from print world, the print medium to the digital medium. Those people did a pretty OK job. They had a launch of this new digital version of what had been a print product. This print product had started being sort of, became a thing in the 1840s. They had a very long tradition of doing their business in print. They cut the ribbon on their new digital thing, and it was OK. It was OK. But what they’ve found out, there was a mix of people working on this thing and they had a blend of traditional publishing people and digital people. The digital people knew how to measure the use of the new thing. What they found was disquieting, to say the least. What they found was that when people first came to this new digital thing, this digital version of something they were accustomed to in print, they liked it pretty OK the first time. But the more that they used it, the less they liked it. The less engaged they got. That’s a big problem when your whole business model, at least the print version of the business model, is based on continuous repeated use. What they had on their hands was kind of like a turkey. At Thanksgiving, we all dream of eating that turkey. When we sit down after a year of being away from that turkey dinner, it’s great. But then, five, six days later, when you’re having your 16th turkey sandwich, you don’t like the turkey anymore. One of the people who worked at this company, we’ll call her Doris, was concerned about this pattern. She knew it was at odds with what the business needed to do to succeed. She was lying in bed at night with her husband, we will call him Rock, and she was sharing her concerns. Like, our company, this isn’t, we cut the cord, the people came, it was great, and now it’s not. It’s kind of a turkey. It’s not doing good. What Rock said to Doris was, “Have you guys tried information architecture as part of this making of this thing?” She said, “What is that?” The people who built them their bridge from print to digital were an end-to-end UX provider who started with visual pictures of what the new digital thing would look like. When they figured out a picture of it that everybody liked, or thought they liked, then that same company built it and launched it. So, laying in bed, worrying about this thing, her husband introduces this idea, the information architecture. Have you done that? Is that maybe what’s missing in your problem? He said he knew a guy and that happened to be me. We had this company, this new company called TUG, The Understanding Group. As I’m talking with my acquaintance’s wife, Doris, about what they need, she was becoming increasingly excited about this idea of what we were offering, which wasn’t a whole new big process, it was, let’s figure out what you should do. You have a thing, it performs OK, we know there are some problems. What is the plan for what you ought to do next? We’re not going to talk about what it’s going to look like and we’re not going to talk about how we’re going to build it. Let’s just build a road map. Let’s build a set of plans and that’s a great idea. As information architects, we’d like to invoke the metaphors and ideas of architecture. That picture of, wow, I could be working with the architect and we would have this great plan. We would figure out the plan before we do the things. That sounded pretty good to her and to us, as well. We engaged for a project to build them a road map for what they ought to do. What we learned was, there was a cast of thousands on the stakeholder team. We had been told that there were a lot of stakeholders and that it would be a pretty involved process. But there were 11 people who were deciders on this thing, and it wasn’t 11 Dorises. It was a weird mix of people from the old print part of the business, people who were new digital people who got brought in. Planning together the “we” of who is going to be planning was pretty complicated. It was this grand group with all these weird things that they were interested in. Our plan was, because they had said to us…There’s a HIPPO in here, there’s a couple of HIPPOs. Do you guys know HIPPO? This might be a Jared thing, right? Did you make up HIPPO? Highest paid person in the organization? I learned it from him, at least. In this group, there was the highest paid person in the organization, the second highest paid person in the organization, and then everybody else. They didn’t want the bosses to just make a decision. What they wanted was a planning process that was inclusive and that channeled the collective intention and will of this group in order to make that plan for what we should do. Our process for doing this was, well, we need to isolate them. We need to talk with them individually, figure out what each of them is about and what their priorities are and what they need. That’s Abby Covert and that’s me and some of our other team members. Then we’re sorting out the notes from all of these interviews. Our expectation is that we will be able to prioritize and figure out common threads and stack the paper and make the piles and we’ll figure out what the plan is. But that was a challenge. There were all these contradictions, seeming contradictions in what the people wanted. Some of the people wanted to focus on things like customer acquisition and if that was the problem. This problem of losing engagement and interest as you use it more. Well, maybe we attracted, we acquired the wrong customers. If we acquire more digitally savvy customers, maybe that population will be better for our business. Other folks are like, no, we need to service the customers that we have. As we work through these stakeholder interviews, all these seeming contradictions, we wanted to make a tidy little plan that everybody could agree on and have consensus around. But contradictions optimize what we’ve already built. They had built a ton of features. Should the plan be optimize what we have and make the features we have work better? Would that help our engagement problem? Or should we keep innovating? Is there something missing from what we offer now, and ought we focus on that in our plan? A huge one for them, based on the patterns that Jared talked with us about this morning, there’s this, wow, they had a really poor mobile experience, all this pinching and twisting. They didn’t have anything specifically for mobile. Should our road map, should our plan be about what we’re going to do for mobile now? Or should we just say screw it, we don’t have a mobile anything right now? Rather than stopping the gap against the basic expectation for mobile, let’s build something awesome for mobile that will be our future thing. Then a really big one sort of, how are we going to measure success with this? Are we going to try to talk about building engagement? Because we started to look at the analytics, and while there was some problems with engagement, there was maybe some evidence that conversion was pretty good or could continue to be one of the ways that they could focus. All these seeming contradictions. How do we sort this out? Because we have this perseverative interest in information architecture among our crew, we like to think in terms of architecture. If we were building a physical space to accommodate all of these contradictory needs and goals, we might end up with something like this. In order to even make something like this, you would have to be able to change the laws of physics and gravity and stuff. What are we going to do? What I usually do, so back to the storyline of this project, we had been engaged for a couple of weeks, they were expecting us to deliver them a roadmap for what, all the things that they should do, the plan. We had a meeting to show them the results of what we had learned that their intentions were in about a week or so. We had been expecting to be further along in that process and to have an orderly way to talk about what the plan is going to look like, and we had nothing. We just had all these contradictions and complexities. As I often do, rather than digging into the problem, I procrastinated and ran away from it. In addition to all of this weird consulting work that I do, I do research into the life and work of a guy named Richard Saul Wurman. Anybody here familiar with the TED conference? The guy who invented the TED conference is an architect and I’ve been studying his work at the point in the story in 2011 for about 4 years. Rather than dealing with this project problem, I turtled into my happy place of this kind of stuff, the work that Richard Saul Wurman is doing in architecture in the 1970s. La la la. [laughs] This is great. But what I found was, I had this gift of synchronicity or coincidence or whatever. In this book from 1972, which is the year of my birth, so 41 years ago, Richard Saul Wurman writes a book. It’s called, “The Nature of Recreation,” and it’s about Frederick Law Olmsted, the landscape architect. It’s about how do you design and plan parks and recreation? In the middle of this book is this concept that he introduced that he calls, “performance.” What is so peculiar to me at this time trying to avoid my work problem by perseverating on what this guy was doing with architecture is his description of how you can make the planning of parks and recreation in the built environment be good isn’t about bricks and mortar and sod, or…It’s not about any of those things. It’s about language. His contention in this book is that the reason just what’s possible for us to build starts with the language that we use to describe our intention of what we think is going to be good to build. What he observes is people know how to ask for a product of something that they’ve already seen, but they don’t have a language to describe what they actually want or need. They can say, “It’s kind of like Pinterest for dogs.” http://www.uie.com/brainsparks/2013/10/04/dan-klyn-determining-what-good-means-with-performance-continuums-live/

December 16 2013

15:22

DEF

Guest speaker: Terence McKennaListen Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser. Download                      Subscribe      MP3                            FreePCs – Right click, select option Macs – Ctrl-Click, select option PROGRAM NOTES: [NOTE: All quotations are by Terence McKenna.] “I’ve never met anyone with a deeper devotion to cannabis than myself.” “So what you have to do is just like every other thing, everything you’ve been told is wrong, and you have to take life by the handlebars and figure out what’s really going on, which doesn’t mean that you’re reckless.” “We’ve been polluted by Disney.” “We are living inside a 90% Nineteenth Century world view. And a culture cannot evolve any faster than its language evolves, because what cannot be said cannot be done. What cannot be said cannot be put in place.” “So in a way, one way of thinking about psychedelics is that they empower language. It’s a way to force the evolution of language. The way you stretch the envelope of culture is by creating language.” “It was very important, I think, to the Establishment to suppress that [hip phrases from the Hippie culture], because new words are the beginnings of new realities.” “What holds us together is what holds all sub-cultures together, which is an experience. In this case, the experience of being loaded, and, you know, it’s a very powerful and immediate kind of experience.” “It’s amazing that the world has evolved as far and as fast as it has, the human world, glued together by nothing more than small mouth noises.” “The whole history of the evolution of the Western mind is in a sense the birth of the Logos. The Logos is making its way towards self-expression, and it’s doing this by claiming dimension, after dimension of manifestation.” “The mind is not a form of intelligence. The mind is the theater in which intelligence is manifested. You don’t want to confuse the garage with the car. … Everything goes on within the confines of mind. It’s like the light that you switch on when you walk into a darkened room, and then everything else is the furniture within the room. Mind is simply the light which is shed over the landscape of appearances. … Mind is the inclusive category, I think.” “It’s very important to try and make some accommodation to the local language, because in a way, only the local language is appropriate to the place. … Somehow the local language is a part of the local reality.” “The one thing you learn taking psychedelics is that nothing is straightforward.” “Anybody who starts talking to you about the grandeur that was Rome, should be reminded: The grandeur of Rome was it was a bargain-basement on three floors masquerading as a military brothel. It was not a great civilization.” “I’m completely convinced that no one is in control, and that this is very good news.” “In a sense, the flying saucer is nothing more than a modern rebirth of the philosopher’s stone. The flying saucer is the universal panacea at the end of time. It’s the thing which cannot exist, but which does exist, and which if we could obtain it everything would be different.” http://www.matrixmasters.net/salon/?p=267

November 21 2011

23:28

Oddio Comic 33 - Marvel Two-in-One #99 - The Thing & Rom

In our Thanksgiving Week Oddio Comic, we find out Ben Grimm is scared of ghosts, but it doesn't stop him and Rom the Spaceknight from taking on the evil Dire Wraiths!
Older posts are this way If this message doesn't go away, click anywhere on the page to continue loading posts.
Could not load more posts
Maybe Soup is currently being updated? I'll try again automatically in a few seconds...
Just a second, loading more posts...
You've reached the end.

Don't be the product, buy the product!

Schweinderl