We are starting to see some revelatory musings on how search is going to develop going forward. This series is well worth reading for anyone who is interested in how the web is going to develop.

Thanks to Kaila i’ve been considering the future of search in 2010 or more to the point the future of search itself.

It didn’t take me long to realise that search is going to replaced by receive. How annoying is that to all those businesses involved in SEO

But seriously if we are still searching in 2010 i will be surprised because by then the web should be evolving into a living and breathing system. This system will not be a library which we dip into hoping that we will find what we are looking for but will be part of us.

Simply put we will become the system.

We won’t need to search anymore as we will be the filter through which information, that we both want and may be interested in, will flow.

Search is an external process: Receive is an internal process.

Relevance technologies will be key to this evolution as will as filtering systems. Receive will be an intelligent learning system. I’m looking forward to this.

Which is the best receive engine?…..that will be the question.

I’ve been following the Murdoch bid for Dow Jones courtesy of Jason and it’s actually more interesting than it looks on paper.

What is the future for print? Murdoch seems to be thinking that at some point the major papers will shut down. I agree with this though the time frame in uncertain.

This article confirms that the squeeze is on(thanks Jason!) noting that the San Francisco Chronicle is taking a major bath and should be shut down. Much of this is driven by falling advertising revenue but i think there is something else at work here.

People are generally using the internet for news and general media information. Who wants the hassle of buying a paper of which you may only read 20% of the content.

Murdoch senses something more economic. The costs of running a print media are enormous and the savings he could make by putting the Wall Street Journal online could be hefty. No distribution or printing costs. Imagine all the trees that could be saved

But think out further. Why do we read a newspaper? to get news, find out stuff, see what’s on etc.

Do we read it for editorial? Not anymore. Who cares what some editor thinks when there’s a million blogs all talking about the same thing. The blogosphere may be a holy mess but over time it will sort itself out into various structures and frameworks. Over at VortexDNA we have MyBlogDNA which will be rolling out soon where you can match your blog to others who share your DNA.

We are all editors now!

But imagine if you had the ability to create your own “paper” drawing from the net stories that you were interested in and were relevant to you. So order your subjects and away you go.

But you still want to hold something to read. Ok just print it off at home. With the printer technology we have now and no doubt coming soon, home printers will be able to handle a myriad of tasks. Have your own paper delivered and printed at home.

Now that will save a lot of money and energy too. No more wasted papers, sections of papers or rubbish i don’t want to read about.

Relevant advertising can come with it or without it.

Could this extend to magazines as well? Glossy Vogues printed out at home? Maybe that is a stretch too far but who knows?

What is for sure is that Murdoch seems to be ahead of the game here as he was with MySpace. I wonder how far ahead he has really thought.

Thoughts anyone?

I’ve been following the spread of microfinance for a while and have been getting involved with Kiva which has been a great experience. I have also noted the rise of social lending businesses such as Zopa, Prosper and even Facebook. Jason has written a good piece on the rise of new forms of financing.

What interest me further is whether all finance can move to a P2P platform and seriously eat into the major lending markets currently controlled by the commercial banks.

I think it could do. This crosses the web with money and complimentary currencies.

Remember that anyone can create “money” if they really want, it just can’t be in the form of bank notes issued by the Reserve Bank. Commercial banks create bank loans by a simple bookkeeping entry. Only 2% of the money supply in NZ is in the form of notes and coin so banks don’t actually hold any money other than a bit of cash.

My point is that P2P finance could take off in a very big way once we get the hang of it. My guess is that the firms currently involved don’t realise how big this could be.

Expect the central banks to cast their beady eyes over these operations once they get a roll on. For now it’s just some web bizness but this feels like 1694 all over again.

Following on from my previous piece I have just viewed a couple of interesting videos projecting how the web may develop in the future courtesy of Richard MacManus.

Whilst there is a certain amount of PR spin and product placement going on here they are both worth a look at if you have a spare 15 minutes. As i noted previously it is reminiscent of the 1920s and the media battle that took place from there on. Same stuff, different technology?

You can catch them here

I wrote this article for a business paper here in NZ about 3 years ago. I don’t think alot has changed really though the issue of Food Miles and Carbon Pricing has reared its head. Pricing the ecosystem is an emotive subject but i believe we must recognise its value in monetary terms in order to enable true economic comparisons to be made.

We know in our hearts that we need to consume less and make better. We don’t do it because we are time constrained as we slave away in our jobs to pay off huge mortgages, large rents and all the bills we have incurred in our consumption binge. If we really knew the true cost of our goods and services we may change our behaviour with increased speed.

And yet see the seething anger when petrol prices go up……we may be in position to control and destroy the planet but it may well do that to us first. Anyway this may or may not resonate. See what you think:

March 2004.

‘Greens take us back to the Dark Ages’ screams the Business Round Table. ‘Business doesn’t care about anything apart from money’ whines the Green Party. Sound familiar? This is generally what passes for debate between the official representatives of the economy and the environment. It is reminiscent of a long running stand off between a teenager and parent. Will the environment and business ever resolve their disagreements live together in sustainable harmony?
To answer this question we need to explore how the economy and the environment interact. The word economics is derived from the Greek ‘Oikonomos’ meaning household steward or home economist in modern diction. In ancient times, the household was the central functioning unit of any economy and most economic activity took place within that framework. Now the household is a place where we live and sleep but rarely do we produce anything that is identified as part of the economy, reflected by GDP. Business is now the place where most economic activity takes place and it is now the steward of the environment.
Our technological capabilities have also moved on giving us DVD recorders, microwaves, mobile phones and other similar gadgets but they are still all built from materials taken from the same source as thousands of years ago. As, John Muir, the founder of the modern ecology movement, said “When we try to pick out anything by itself, we find it hitched to everything in the universe”. In simple terms, the economy is simply a subset of the environment, and economics a framework for understanding our transactions with the environment. They are one and the same, not distinct and separate entities as often portrayed in the media.
We have become expert in transforming natures’ goods into new products to satisfy our ever increasing desire for material consumption. At the same time, the waste products from manufacturing, some 90% of actual inputs, are becoming harder to absorb and process. Whilst nature provides obvious goods in the form of wood, minerals and fossil fuels, little attention is paid to the crucial services it provides in acting as a both a source and a sink for economic activity. These services include waste processing, climate regulation, water supply and regulation, soil formation, nutrient cycling, food production, erosion control, pollination and even recreation and cultural values.
The value of these services has been largely ignored by the mainstream economics profession rather like the value of unpaid labour in the economy. A mother who goes out to work and hires a nanny to look after her children suddenly finds out the monetary value of her work in the household. Previously no value was attributed to looking after children but as soon as someone is employed formally then the value is recognized. Of course anyone who has children knows too well the value of unpaid labour in the home.

Whist ecosystem services have always had value they have never been recognized in monetary terms and therefore incorporated into the economic framework. In 1997, a study, led by Robert Costanza at the University of Maryland, attempted to value global ecosystem services. The findings estimated very conservatively the value of ecosystem services to be in the region of 2-3 times global GNP. In 2000, a study into the external costs of UK agriculture by Jules Pretty at the University of Essex, showed a value of ₤2.3bln, based on actual financial costs incurred. This equated to ₤208 per hectare of arable and permanent pasture. Again this was a conservative estimate of all agriculture related externalities.
What these and other studies have shown is that there is a real and attributable value to these services previously taken for granted. If any business has any doubt about the relevance of these costs, they should have another look at their insurance bill. Munich Re, one of the world’s largest re-insurance companies, puts the annual global costs of climate change at US$300bln by 2050. Even the Pentagon, a normally conservative institution, is recognizing the potential security issues of serious environmental changes. One thing Greens need to recognize from their side is that without security, law and order, the issue of environmental damage is likely to be an irrelevance.
Actually incorporating external costs at the company level has proved difficult. However Trucost Plc, a London based but Christchurch born company has designed an external cost calculator and an environmental rating system, which incorporates the externalized costs of any organization into their actual accounts. Initially there was strong resistance from some in the environmental movement, concerned about placing a value on nature. However, now there is an understanding that if you don’t value something then it will be treated as if it has no value. It is an unashamedly anthropocentric view to place a monetary value on nature but one which in the long run will lead to a more sustainable economy. Mainstream economics needs to acknowledge the importance of externalities and not spend so much time pouring over inflation statistics. Economics is fundamental to how society organizes itself and surprisingly can be fun and understood by anyone, as demonstrated by Diane Coyle in her recent book, “Sex, Drugs and Economics”, which succinctly analyses everyday activities in simple language.

Whilst the economics profession needs to wake up, the environmentalists must also acknowledge that expecting society to make a wholesale change of consumption habits without strong financial incentives is naïve. The only way to make them change their current ‘unsustainable’ consumption patterns is for goods and services to properly reflect the externalized costs that make them unsustainable in the first place. The true sustainable business is one which internalizes all its costs, instead of passing them to the taxpayer to pick up at some future date. Therefore, in order to create a sustainable economy, we must recognize the value of the environment in real terms. Then maybe business and the greens can redirect their energies to work out smarter and cheaper ways of living well and enjoying life.