We have comments on Social Edge, though we don't see them used that much outside of our weekly discussions. This holds true even when we have content that is a bit more, for lack of a better word, provocative. Recently we published an X-Interview with former U.S. President Jimmy Carter. We haven't had a single comment on the site to this post. You have to be a logged in member to be able to post a comment, but still, I was surprised to see that there wasn't a single comment responding to what the former president had to say.

The same video is posted to YouTube, where comments are a different story. At this time, there have been 38 comments on YouTube. The comments have not, however, been a shining example of considered cognitive discourse, and have instead veered off into insipid insults and argumentative posturing. With all the knuckle dragging you would think the video was a prolonged insult to neanderthals. Alas, I don't know that any of the comments related to the content of the video at all, instead merely focusing on supporting or debasing the subject of the video, Mr. Carter.

Oh, how I would have loved to read a discussion concerning the eradication of guinea worm and other diseases! If it devolved into a political discussion with an intelligent back and forth on the pros and cons of habeus corpus restrictions, that wouldn't have been terribly disappointing either. Instead, people have used the comments to call President Cater an "ass," a "son-of-a-bitch," a "fool", a "senile old bastard" - you get the picture. We're not reaching Lincoln-Douglas level of debate on this one.

I have to admit, while reading the comments I was tempted to delete most if not all of them and close down further comments on the video. YouTube allows you to set your comment options thusly:



Ultimately, what people want to say is up to them. Sometimes, however, what goes unsaid is far more interesting than what is shouted, screamed, hollered or typed.

I love books. Yep, I may live my life online, but when I log off, I retreat into the two dimensional world of dusty pages, alliterative phrases and the occasional dangling participle.

You would think that I would be the ideal target audience for a product  like Amazon's Kindle, that brings old dead tree media into the 1st century. Yet for some reason, I just can't make the leap. I understand that an electronic version of a book is a lot more useful than an actual book, I do. I get the fact that if I run across a character who was mentioned earlier, I can search and find that initial reference and see if they were left handed than as they appear to be now. I can click a link in a science book that takes me to a picture of the Horsehead Nebula:


This is all well and good. And the fact that your internet service on the device is free? Wicked. I thought I liked free shipping. I think I would love free internet service - accessible anywhere Sprint is available - all the more. (There are drawbacks to the internet connectivity, but I won't be picky on this point for now. The fact that it is there and free is probably the most revolutionary aspect of the product.)

$9.99 for new releases? Very cool too. And newspapers. Granted, no LA Times, but that will come I'm sure.

The electronic ink technology looks very nice as well. It doesn't appear to have an option for color, which is something of a letdown when it comes to magazines and blogs, but fine for most reading.

So what's the hangup? Why can't I get behind an electronic book device?

Sure, the limited internet capabilities are free and the books are cheap - but that initial $400 price? Steep. I would need to buy a lot of books before I made up the difference. More importantly though is the DRM (Digital Rights Management) issue. A number of eBook readers have come and gone - who says this one is going to stick around? Can you back up the books to a computer and read them there? Really, what I would prefer would be to read books on my iPhone and store them alongside my music and movies in iTunes. Then I wouldn't have to lug around another device - which is why I bought an iPhone in the first place. If I have to lug something around in addition to that, how about a regular book? Saves on batteries.

But still, there's something else. Technology needs to be more organic. Which is a cheap way of saying that there's just something missing.
 I want to be wowed by an eBook reader, I really do. I love the idea of being able to cart around a slew of books but not enough to carry around a $400 device to do so.

Technology should break down barriers between you and the information you are interacting with and/or the barriers between you and other people. A great example of where this works is customer reviews on Amazon. Visual voicemail on the iPhone gets you to the messages you want to hear faster than previous methods of voicemail. Kiva does a great job of breaking down barriers between lenders and entrepreneurs, enabling them to connect directly.

Your technology solutions should do the same. If your project management software is getting in the way of getting work done, ditch it. Maybe for your team a paper calendar tacked up on the wall is more feasible. Are you looking at implementing a CRM (Customer Relations Management) system? Before shelling out the bucks, make sure that all those bells and whistles are really going to be beneficial. Chances are, they're not. Especially in small organizations. Keep it simple, keep it useful.

Perhaps the biggest reason why I'm not excited by the Kindle eBook reader can be summed up by another one of Amazon's offerings, a subsidiary called MobiPocket. If they wanted to sell me books and not book readers, the eBooks that they sell here would be priced the same as the ones for the Kindle.

Until Amazon, Sony and others who have tread down the eBook path stop treating the books and my money as being disposable, they can keep the reader and I'll keep the cash and by dog eared copy of Cat's Cradle.

(Notice that the book version shows other formats prominently, including the Kindle format, but the Kindle page link to the book version is virtually hidden.)

Go on, you know you want one.

I cant help but think of the old cartoons, probably Bugs Bunny... 'One for you, two for me, one for you, three for me.'

I'm anxious to see one, and especially interested in getting a look at the UI. I'll let you know what it's like if I manage to get my hands on one. Or you could get one and see for yourself. Go on, it matches that new sweater Aunt Bertha just sent you.

Or if you are so inclined, you could give money to the cause via Facebook or the One Laptop Per Child site.

"All hail the mighty gPhone, even if it doesn't actually exist. Turns out, the gPhone is a mobile development platform with an OS called Android, middleware, "key" applications and a forthcoming SDK. Funny, I thought the press had pretty much decided that the gPhone was going to be the first phone to bake you cookies. Which would have made these kids happy:



"It would give me anything I want." At first, these kids were cute. Then, really annoying and cloying. Then, they simply became a representation of all that we've been told that an unannounced bit of technology would be. And just like the kids' visions of a phone that helps animals feel better and makes peanut butter sandwiches, the journalists' pronouncements on what the gPhone would be turned out to be nothing more than wishes.

Of course, what we really need from a cell phone are the two things that Google, Palm, Apple and other mobile software makers can't give us. Speed and coverage. Which is why Apple's iPhone is the first phone that doesn't make me want to slam it against a counter more often than I use it to talk to people. When coverage or speed from AT&T's network is pathetic, I flip over to the iPod functionality and enjoy some music or a movie. It downloads mail when I have coverage and I read them when I don't. It doesn't really matter how slick Android is, nor the apps that come with it, the network is still going to be as fast as a tricycle on a highway.

Interesting that they'll have an SDK out 3-4 months ahead of Apple's SDK, while phones built on the platform won't start showing up until next June at the earliest. Will the folks that make jailbreak apps for the iPhone convert their stuff over to work on phones that don't exist? Or will they be converting their stuff over to work "properly" via Apple's SDK in February? My bet is on the latter, since they and their customers will be able to use the fruit of their labors immediately.

Still, I'm looking forward to seeing what apps Google makes available and how they deal with the limitations of low bandwidth. Will they have a suite of mobile office apps? How well will they function? And the true test that won't come until late next year - how does the work people do on the phone convert over to their desks? We'll get a glimpse on November 12th - same day as the One Laptop Per Child Give One Get One program starts.

By the way, I've heard rumors that here on the Edge, we're going to be releasing the sePhone. It'll solve all of the world's social and economic inequities through the delivery of vibrations that cause the whole world to sing Earth, Wind & Fire's Let's Groove:



And everybody gets their own horn section! Because as we all know, that is the key to lasting happiness. We're still working out the kinks though. Right now, the vibration causes people to sing instrumentals. We'll keep working on it. Just don't hold your breath.