Monthly Archives: September 2013

(Trying To) Face Down The Evil At TechCrunch Disrupt

I’ll be on stage in just a couple of hours at TechCrunch Disrupt in San Francisco. I’m interviewing a lot of people over the next three days, including CEOs, entrepreneurs, VCs and politicians. See here for my interview schedule, here for the full schedule.

This conference is a little different for me than the dozens of ones that have come before. Why?

Last night Paul Graham asked me if I still love startups. I think what he was asking was if the chemical full on in love affair that I had with startups in the early days of TechCrunch is still going strong, or has morphed into something else over time, as all great loves mellow and evolve.

What involuntarily came out of my mouth had little to do with the question. And I’m pretty sure it’s a theme, bubbling under the surface, that is going to take up a big part of my brain space at Disrupt:

“I’m scared of our government and I’m disgusted by what little Silicon Valley has done to fight it.”

Just today I’m reading yet a new NSA document that laughingly refers to us (the people) as “zombies.”

Who knew in 1984…that this would be big brother [picture of Steve Jobs with iPhone}…and the zombies would be paying customers [pictures of people with phones, tablets]?”

We’ve been dehumanized. At best our government considers us meaningless sheep to be herded/slaughtered at will. At worst they consider us all terrorists or potential terrorists, needed to be watched at all times.

I’ve watched the months of debate. Debates where the government sucks up every bit of information on everyone it can, then argues that as long as it isn’t looking at that data the Fourth Amendment is intact.

But then argues that since they got the data legally, they can certainly look at it, too.

It’s a vicious cycle. Collecting mass data isn’t a violation of the Fourth Amendment. Then once they have it, looking at it doesn’t require a warrant.

As I’ve written before, I don’t believe this is a system to fight terrorism. I believe it is terrorism, against the American people and everyone else in the world.

I’ve brought this up in every one of my preparation meetings with the people I’ll be interviewing.

There has been some pushback. Some people don’t want to talk because lawyers. Others say this isn’t their fight and they can’t effectively lead their organizations from behind bars.

Others say they are willing to speak their mind.

In all cases I will ask the questions. We are inundated with denials and narrowly tailored “transparency reports”, but no company has stepped forward to tell us exactly what is really going on, and why the government seems so optimistic about being able to get user data from companies in real time or near real time, without any judicial oversight.

I’ll ask the CEOs if they feel any responsibility to protect their users against clearly unconstitutional (and just plain icky) government data grabs. I’ll ask them what they are willing to do, if they do feel responsible, to protect those users.

I’ll also ask the VCs and others about this, too.

For example, Right off the bat this morning I am going to ask Ron Conway, who has pushed for gun control via his Sandy Hook Promise for nearly a year now, hasn’t said a word about Silicon Valley’s role in the wholesale destruction of our human rights by the United States government.

He could do so much by leading an effort at real transparency, and a real pushback against the government. But he hasn’t lifted a finger. I want to know why.

He knows this question is coming, we discussed it last night.

And we’ll go from there. At the end of the conference I’ll write again and see what kind of answers we got from our leaders. Because I think we can handle the truth. I think we deserve the truth.

One thing I won’t do is ask the easy “gotcha” questions that I know can’t realistically be answered and that will only serve to make people look stupid. I’m not trying to just stir up the crowd at the expense of the speakers. But there are plenty of constructive and forward looking questions, including personal philosophy questions, that I think can be asked constructively. And secretly I think many of these people are just itching for the chance to say what they really think.

Amazon And Free Stuff

I’m reading Amir Efrati and Jessica Lessin’s article about Amazon toying with the idea of giving a free smartphone to people.

Of course there’s a real issue here with the cost of the device: “Offering a phone for free would be a daunting proposition. Amazon would have to find a way to make up for the cost of manufacturing — on average, $200 per smartphone.”

In 2010 I had a good source saying that Amazon was trying to figure out how to give a free Kindle to its Amazon Prime members – the best and most loyal Amazon customers who pay a yearly fee for free shipping and (now) premium digital content.

They had the same problem then – they’d do it, said my source, “Just as soon as they can work out how to do it without losing money.”

I’m not sure they’ll ever figure it out. Hardware costs and software development isn’t cheap. And if the product sucks because the hardware is dated or the software is iffy, then people won’t really want it. The kind of customer who’ll live with a sub par free product probably isn’t who they’re targeting.

Still, it’s a tantalizing idea, and one that clearly keeps coming up at Amazon HQ.

That’s One Fugly Logo, Yahoo

yahoologo

We forget that Google’s logo is really bad because we’ve been looking at it for so long that we don’t notice any more. But I’m pretty sure that even 10 years from now I’ll still look at Yahoo’s new logo think “That’s one godawful fugly logo right there.”

It’s a serious case of “A camel is a horse designed by committee.”

It looks like a logo that somebody would have created with clipart fonts from those CDs back in the early nineties. It lacks any personality, it’s boring, it’s banal. It’s a great big bag of fail. It sucks, badly.

I never thought a logo could be so singularly uninspiring.

On the upside, it’s definitely got people talking.

Update: It actually doesn’t look nearly as bad on the Yahoo website, although at best I give it a “meh.”

yahoologo2

My TechCrunch Disrupt Interview Schedule

Next week is TechCrunch Disrupt in San Francisco. The event is essentially sold out, and there’s good reason – this is probably the best lineup of speakers they’ve had to date.

I’m preparing for some fascinating conversations. The schedule is still fluid but as of today here’s who I’ll be talking to on stage. They’re in the order that I’m talking to them:

    San Francisco Mayor Ed Lee
    Ron Conway, David Lee and Brian Pokorny from SV Angel
    Doug Leone from Sequoia Capital and Sanjit Biswas from Meraki
    Reid Hoffman and David Sze from Greylock Partners
    Marc Benioff/Salesforce
    John Doerr/Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers
    Vinod Khosla/Khosla Ventures
    Marissa Mayer/Yahoo
    Mark Zuckerberg/Facebook

I’ve interviewed almost all of these people before and I’m sure they’ll have fascinating things to say. I expect Benioff to be the most likely to say something outrageous.

Mayer will get at least a little razzing about the Vogue Magazine thing – Personally I think she should do the interview in the same pose as the picture. Probably won’t happen, though.

Wrapping the conference up with a talk with Zuckerberg will definitely be a win. Hopefully it’ll be as newsworthy and interesting as our talk a year ago.

  • Privacy