By: johnbattelle

johnbattelle — Mon, 08 Oct 2012 18:17:00 +0000

Someone call Claude Shannon.

By: Buck

Buck — Mon, 08 Oct 2012 17:28:00 +0000

Cows are information? I thought it was antelope that were information? But does the data from the cow inform the rancher? So now the rancher has useful information FROM the data? Thus, the data precedes the information.

By: Nathan Schor

Nathan Schor — Fri, 05 Oct 2012 17:46:00 +0000

First, well-done, all in all, but especially ‘If it’s valuable to know, new data will flow.’ It’s a wonderful expression that deserves highlighting and re-circulating.
Your way of distinguishing information from data makes immediate sense: ‘When we discover some set of information might be valuable, we turn that information into data.’ It also generates a corollary – “the most interesting bits of information”, are worth more.
But we also need to consider the accuracy resulting from the transfer. On the Big Data end of the information spectrum ‘interest’ (hence, value) is extracted algorithmically, a process perpetually plagued with improving its woefully wasteful results.
On the other data terminus, however, is Small (personal) Data, which deserves attention because it efficiently targets the most accurate information source – the individuals themselves. And within that domain is a specific subset that is (in exactly the way you use the term) clearly ‘interesting’ if measured by keen demand from merchants, and thus valuable. I’m referring to purchasing intent data, and more specifically to the comprehensive quartet – what, which (brands), when and where – that defines a buyer’s aspiration to acquire. Monetizing that data is a challenge I’m in the midst of thinking about, so this is a timely post which inspired this longer than usual comment.
Of course, a ‘database of intentions’ is a topic you’ve given considerable attention to in the past, identifying the term in your book ‘Search’ and how it fueled Google’s revenue stream. Although that is common knowledge now, it was an insight few had recognized during the time the book exposed it.
So I imagine you would appreciate how much more valuable such ‘intent’ information if it were controlled by the individuals who originally created, deservedly owned, and thus rightfully profited from it? The added value ( and there is a remarkable amount of it) coming from merchants eager to put such useful data to work in closing sales (since it is inarguably magnitudes more efficient than broadcasting).
My own efforts are inspired by the recently growing recognition of the Vendor Relationship (VRM) initiative, which advocates a consumer-centric and demand-driven commerce, also appropriately referred to as ‘intentcasting’ to distinguish it from the broadcasting prevalent today. As this market space is both immense and imminent, readers may be interested that succinct overviews of the Personal Data/ VRM market from different perspectives are located (original sources) at Personal Data: The Emergence of a New Asset Class , an informative one-page executive summary from the respected World Economic Forum. Also the main VRM site is at http://www.cyber.law.harvard.edu/projectvrm; or the just published and aptly titled book, The Intention Economy: When Customers Take Charge, by the founder of the movement, Doc Searls; or his recent WSJ piece, The Customer as a God – WSJ.
Nathan Schor nathans@netmeals.net

By: Nathan Schor

Nathan Schor — Thu, 04 Oct 2012 18:43:00 +0000

OK – that did not happen yesterday so I’ll try again in another reply.

By: johnbattelle

johnbattelle — Thu, 04 Oct 2012 17:50:00 +0000

not sure what’s going on, that comment did post…

By: Nathan Schor

Nathan Schor — Thu, 04 Oct 2012 17:44:00 +0000

Testing comments – previous one did not remain posted.
Nathan Schor nathans@netmeals.net

Comments on: Data Wildcatters on the Wild Swiss Range

By: johnbattelle

By: Buck

By: Nathan Schor

By: Nathan Schor

By: johnbattelle

By: Nathan Schor