Peter Chun

OpenID, a distributed single sign on solution that allows people to sign into different services with the same login credentials, gained significant momentum over the last year as Google, Microsoft, Yahoo and AOL all pledged their support for the initiative.

There are two ways companies/websites can participate in the OpenID framework - as “issuing parties” or as “relying parties.” Issuing parties make their user accounts OpenID compatible. Relying parties are websites that allow users to sign into their sites with credentials from Issuing parties. Of course, sites can also be both. In fact, if they aren’t both it can be confusing and isn’t a good user experience.

The problem, though, is that the Big Four Internet companies that I mentioned above have made big press announcements about their support for OpenID, but haven’t done enough to actually implement it. Microsoft has done absolutely nothing, even though Bill Gates announced their support over a year ago. Google has limited its support to Blogger, where it is both an Issuing and Relying party. Yahoo and AOL are Issuing parties only.

This isn’t just toe dipping in the OpenID pool to see how things go before jumping in. Putting my conspiracy theory hat on, it looks to me like these companies want all the positive press that comes from adopting this open standard, but none of the downside. By becoming Issuing parties, AOL and Yahoo hope to see their users logging in all over the Internet with those credentials. But they don’t accept IDs from anywhere else, so anyone that uses their services has to create new credentials with them. It’s all gain, no pain.

I spoke to Bill Washburn (the Executive Director of OpenID and only paid employee) and David Recordan (Vice Chair of OpenID) today about the hesitation of the big guys to fully implement OpenID. Both were careful not to criticize, noting that the support of these companies has been an important driver of OpenID awareness. But both also said that they would really like to see full implementation happen sooner rather than later.

Recordan says that at least 11,000 sites now take OpenID credentials for sign on (see image to right). Among them are some large services like 37Signals and LiveJournal. And the open source community has been great about building OpenID support into their software, Recordan says, so that others building on that software can launch Relying party services. Among the projects that support it are Drupal, Movable Type, Wordpress.org, Ruby on Rails and MediaWiki. But all of those services put together have nowhere near the user footprint of any of the Big Four.

I’ll say what the OpenID Foundation cannot, for political reasons - It’s time for these companies to do what’s right for the users and fully adopt OpenID as relying parties. That doesn’t fit in with their strategy of owning the identity of as many Internet users as possible, but it certainly fits in with the Internet’s very serious need for an open, distributed and secure single log in system (OpenID is all three).

If and when the Big Four become relying parties, the floodgates will truly open and there will be no looking back. And until they do that, I’m not buying that they really support what OpenID is trying to accomplish.

By the way, Chris Messina has done an excellent job of monitoring these and other companies that have promised OpenID support but are yet to implement it. Keep pressuring them, Chris.

Crunch Network: CrunchGear drool over the sexiest new gadgets and hardware.

Modu, an Israeli startup founded in 2007, is going to be adding $100 million to the $20 million in venture capital they’ve already raised, says Israeli newspaper The Globes. The company will create tiny modular phones that can be slipped into different device “jackets”— like an MP3 player, GPS, bigger cell phone, car stereo, or digital camera (see here for a demo video).

The round hasn’t closed yet, but clearly the details are leaking. The Globes isn’t naming the new investors but says that the company is being valued at $150 million pre-money, meaning they’re giving away a whopping 40% of the equity in this round. They must really need the money to get the product to market to take that kind of dilution.

Founder Dov Moran’s previous company, M-Systems, pioneered the concept of the USB flash drive and sold to SanDisk for $1.6 billion in 2006. See an interview with Moran here.

Crunch Network: CrunchGear drool over the sexiest new gadgets and hardware.

A new service called Quotably may be the best third party Twitter-related service so far. That’s because it reformats Twitter messages into threaded conversations, making it significantly easier to follow actual discussions that are occurring on Twitter.

Until now, it’s been hard to follow conversations, even if you are in the middle of them. Sometimes responses come back tagged with your user name (@username), but often they don’t. And if you are just observing the conversation it is nearly impossible to see all of the responses.

The service is easy enough to use - just tell it a Twitter ID and it will show you threaded conversations that involve that person. You can also view a RSS feed for any Twitter user by simply adding “.rss” to the end of the Quotably URL, such as quotably.com/techcrunch.rss.

I found this via HackerNews, my new favorite news site. In a comment, the creator, Ben Tucker of Green River, says it was just a weekend project.

I have one feature request - permanent Quotably URLs for each threaded conversation, allowing people to link directly to it.

Crunch Network: CrunchBoard because it’s time for you to find a new Job2.0

Consider this response that I just received (identifying information removed) from a venture capitalist I emailed to discuss a new investment:

Thank you for your message. I apologize in advance if I do not reply.

I admit it. My email response rates are lame. I have tried many different approaches and techniques, yet I fail. I read everything that comes in, and I swear I have the most sincere intentions of replying to all of you. But, alas, I suck.

I am spending more time than ever on the road these days. Working on private equity stuff, coaching startups, giving speeches, training for an Ironman this summer, and luckily, taking some vacation. The result has me logging in to Gmail much less frequently, which may, in fact, be a healthy development.

Thankfully, what used to be well over a thousand inbound messages a day is slowing now that I am an increasingly irrelevant unemployed vagabond and no longer holding any [XXXXXX] pursestrings. Hopefully, these trends will continue until my mom and dad are the only folks left sending me notes, and even then mostly to give me updates on the weather back in [XXXXXX].

If you are curious about what I am up to, or looking for clues as to where you can physically stalk me, try my Twitter stream at:
twitter.com/[XXXXXX]. If we are actually buddies, friend me on Facebook. Though, be warned I log in over there even less frequently than here. If you are just looking for some cheap laughs, check out my brother [XXXXXX] ’s YouTube videos: http://youtube.com/[XXXXXX].

In any event, I do look forward to being in touch with all of you. For now, thanks for your patience.

I remember the days before email. For those of you who don’t, you probably won’t understand how important the phone was as a communication device. If the phone rang, you answered it. Today, answering the phone when you are around other people is considered insulting.

The wonderful thing about email is that it’s asynchronous, meaning you don’t need to deal with it when it is first received. For me and many others, instant messaging is basically the same - I may respond to an IM instantly, or 24 hours later. The recipient generally understands that a response might be delayed, and doesn’t take offense. Facebook messages, Twitter and cell phone text messages all have similar benefits.

But the benefits of the new ways we communicate also mean there’s a lot more of it. The volume of communication requests for most people today are far, far beyond what they can handle. Few people today respond to every communication they receive. And an increasing number don’t even claim to be able to read every communication they receive, let alone respond.

I routinely declare email bankruptcy and simply delete my entire inbox. But even so, I currently have 2,433 unread emails in my inbox. Plus another 721 in my Facebook inbox. and about thirty skype message windows open with unanswered messages. It goes without saying, of course, that my cell phone voicemail box is also full (I like the fact that new messages can’t be left there, so I have little incentive to clear it out).

How do I deal with email now? I scan the from and subject fields for high payoff messages. People I know who don’t waste my time, or who I have a genuine friendship with. Or descriptive subject lines that help me understand that I should allot a minute or more of my life to opening it and reading it.

A journalist recently complained in a comment on another blog that he sent me multiple emails asking me for an interview, which went unanswered. But an email that he sent later suggesting some drama between AOL and Yahoo was instantly addressed. He was a little angry about that, which I understand. But what he doesn’t understand is that when I see an email asking for an interview, my brain says “this is not urgent, deal with it this evening,” whereas the possible breaking news has to be dealt with right away. Of course, when evening comes new fires have to be put out, which explains the 2,437 email messages in my inbox (it increased from two paragraphs ago in the time I took to write those words) that have to be responded to eventually.

The long term answer to all of this isn’t that people need to try harder to respond to communication requests. The long term answer is that someone needs to create a new technology that allows us to enjoy our life but not miss important messages. If I knew what that solution was, I’d quit this blog and go do it. Someone out there, though, has the beginning of an idea on how we can better manage our electronic communications. And he or she may someday turn that into a product and save us.

If you are the person with the idea to save us all, send me an email and tell me all about it. Actually, strike that. Drop by my house and tell me all about it. I don’t want your message to get lost in my inbox.

Crunch Network: MobileCrunch Mobile Gadgets and Applications, Delivered Daily.

Why is it the Brits have all the crazy-stupid ideas about how to screw up the music industry even more than it is already?

British musician Billy Bragg argues in the New York Times today that some portion of Bebo’s $850 million sale price should go to the musicians who uploaded their music to the site.

Note that Bragg neatly sidesteps the fact that music was uploaded to the site by artists (or their labels) themselves, with full knowledge that they would not receive payments of any kind (except free marketing, of course, and access to Bebo’s tens of millions of music loving users).

His argument is based on the notion that Bebo’s success was based on the availability of streaming music on the site: “The musicians who posted their work on Bebo.com are no different from investors in a start-up enterprise…Now that the business has reaped huge benefits, surely they deserve a dividend.”

Bragg also tries to take direct credit for Bebo’s success:

Mr. Birch has cited me as an influence in Bebo’s attitude toward artists. He got in touch two years ago after I took MySpace to task over its proprietary rights clause. I was concerned that the site was harvesting residual rights from original songs posted there by unsigned musicians. As a result of my complaints, MySpace changed its terms and conditions to state clearly that all rights to material appearing on the site remain with the originator.

A few weeks later, Mr. Birch came to see me at my home. He was hoping to expand his business by hosting music and wanted my advice on how to construct an artist-centered environment where musicians could post original songs without fear of losing control over their work. Following our talks, Mr. Birch told the press that he wanted Bebo to be a site that worked for artists and held their interests first and foremost.

Bragg does attempt to argue his case, primarily by (1) saying that social networks are as much to blame for declining music sales as the people who are downloading songs in violation of copyrights, and (2) saying that arguments that social networks are doing musicians a favor by marketing their music are “disingenuous.”

Both arguments have holes in them so large you could drive a BitTorrent stream through them.

Social networks have absolutely nothing to do with the decline in music sales. The fact that recorded music can be reproduced at a zero marginal cost is why music sales are declining. You can hate that or love that, but it’s simple economics that drives it.

And in fact the argument that social networks actually provide free marketing to artists is not disingenuous. In fact, it’s quite correct. Bragg notes that radio stations pay royalties for playing songs, even though they also obviously provide free marketing for artists.

His argument isn’t quite factually correct - In the U.S. royalties are paid by radio stations to song writers but not artists (it comes to about $450 million per year). In most of the rest of the world, though, artists are paid royalties. But a much more interesting analysis of the radio industry is the very strong desire for labels and musicians to pay them to play songs. Payola is now illegal, but the practice almost certainly continues. As recently as 2005, former New York State Attorney General Eliot Spitzer prosecuted payola-related crimes in his jurisdiction.

Recorded music is nothing but marketing material to drive awareness of an artist. Websites that bring that music to listeners are doing artists a favor. In fact, they’re doing them a favor that they should (and will) be paid for. Young artists and songwriters in particular benefit from these services - Until a few years ago they had almost no way to break into the mainstream without getting a label to promote them. Now those walls are being torn down, and Bragg has the audacity to complain about it.

I think the main reason Bragg wrote this article is jealousy over the massive success of someone he once met - Bebo cofounder Michael Birch. The paragraphs quoted above where he takes credit for their business model reveal his angst in that regard. Bragg had absolutely nothing to do with Bebo’s $850 million payday. And everything else he wrote in that article is dead wrong, too.

Crunch Network: MobileCrunch Mobile Gadgets and Applications, Delivered Daily.

New platforms like Adobe Air and Mozilla Prism are evolving that combine the benefits of Internet flow with the flexibility and power of desktop applications. They are part browser, part desktop app and are extremely efficient for certain types of applications.

Flash, Silverlight and Ajax get most web applications over the hump in terms of usability and are the technologies behind the fast transition of desktop applications to the web. But it’s not clear that they’ll ever kill off all desktop applications entirely. The bridge between them may very well be Air and/or Prism.

Matthew Gertner, who was a co-founder and CTO of startup AllPeers before it shut down earlier this year, is now working with Mozilla on their Prism project. I asked him to write a guest post discussing Prism and how it fits into the ecosystem v. Air as well as a number of emerging technologies for using web applications offline (Firefox 3, Google Gears).

Read Matthew’s blog, Just Browsing, here.

Thanks to innovations like Ajax and Flash video, web apps are quickly gaining ground on their desktop counterparts. With a few notable exceptions like Firefox and Skype, the big software hits of recent years have been websites such as Flickr, YouTube and Facebook. And yet web-based software cannot yet equal the high-quality user experience of the best native apps. This is the reason why Apple was forced to reverse its original decision to make Safari the official SDK for the iPhone. It also explains why online productivity suites like Google Docs are still struggling to compete with stalwarts like Microsoft Office. Web apps simply don’t provide the responsiveness, performance, whizzy graphics and access to local data that users crave, and they only work when you’re connected to the internet.

(more…)

Crunch Network: CrunchGear drool over the sexiest new gadgets and hardware.

Many college students (but few others) will recognize the Risk-like game known as Turf that pits thousands of students against each other in a weeks-long online wargame that is similar to the board game Risk, but uses the college campus as the map.

What started off as a for-fun experiment by Yale student Gabe Smedresman in January 2007 resulted in a game that went on for over a month and involved over 3,300 Yale students (more than 25% of the student body).

But now that original game of Turf has spawned two separate and funded startups to push the game as a business. Smedresman joined with Harvard students Andrew Fong, Matt O’Brien, and Hugo Van Vuuren to found Kirkland North, a Y Combinator backed startup (screen shot of their game is above). Meanwhile, a rival company has launched that was founded by some of the players of Smedresman’s original game, called GoCrossCampus.

A New York Times article today written by Brad Stone profiles GoCrossCampus and suggested the founders invented the game and said “The game, a riff on classic territorial-conquest board games like Risk, may be the next Internet phenomenon to emerge from the computers of college students.” There was no mention of Kirkland North or Smedresman’s original work in that article.

Kirland North contacted the NYT, they say, to set the record straight. Stone then wrote a new article on the NYT’s Bits blog with the additional information supplied by Kirkland North.

The Kirkland North guys are obviously irate over what they see as a blatant rip-off of their idea. In a phone conversation, Van Vuuren said that the GoCrossCampus guys are not engineers and had to outsource the development of the game, using Turf as a guide. The code base is inferior, he said, and of the 20 games that have been run on the GoCrossCampus platform, half have had technical failures (GoCrossCampus has not yet responded to my request for comment) (Update: see below). Van Vuuren says their platform is stable and has had no problems in the six games they’ve run since last year. A recent Stanford game, he says, had 2,500 players, with more than 1/3 of undergraduates playing.

And there is yet more drama - the original NYT’s article on GoCrossCampus had a prominent quote from Google product manager Jonathan Rochelle, who “views it as similar to software like Google Calendar and Google Docs — tools that enhance real-world collaboration,” and “Next month, Google will bring GoCrossCampus to its New York office, pitting sales departments against engineering groups over a map of the company’s Manhattan campus.”

But it turns out that Gabe Smedresman is actually a full time Google employee. The fact that Google is planning to run his rivals’ game at their New York office must not sit well with him at all.

Of course, Hasbro, the owners of the original Risk game, will have something to say about the real inventor of the game, so neither company may have much moral ground beneath their feet.

See also our coverage of Kdice, a simple synchronous multiplayer version of Risk.

Update: I spoke to a somewhat bewildered GoCrossCampus co-founder Brad Hargreaves (who’s currently on spring break). He says that the GoCrossCampus code base was developed completely separately from the original Turf game, and that they made repeated offers to Smedresman to join their founding team, which he declined. He also says that at the time they spoke to the New York Times, which was last month, they had no idea Smedresman intended to start his own rival startup. Hargreaves also disputes KirklandNorth’s assertion that the GoCrossCampus founders aren’t engineers - two of the founders are engineers, he says. Finally, Hargreaves says that their technical hiccups were all in the first two games that they ran; all subsequent games, he says, have run smoothly.

Crunch Network: MobileCrunch Mobile Gadgets and Applications, Delivered Daily.

New Sequoia-backed visual search engine SearchMe is just starting to send invitations to their private beta, which launched last week. The company says there are 30,000 people now on the waiting list. But if you want to get in now, just click here and enter your email. The first 1,000 people get in immediately.

Crunch Network: MobileCrunch Mobile Gadgets and Applications, Delivered Daily.

Two thing jumped out at me when I read a CNET interview with John Battelle of Federated Media this morning - his direct criticism of competitor Glam Media as a “flavor of the month,” and his suggestion that he may take equity stakes in his publishers.

Full disclosure - Federated Media is our ad selling partner. Sometimes we love them. Sometimes, not so much.

Glam Media: A Flavor Of The Month

The first thing that stuck out was his criticism of competitor Glam. CNET’s Stefanie Olsen asked Battelle “Vertical ad networks like Glam Media are really popular right now. Investors love them. Why do you think that is?” His response: “Because people don’t understand them and they hope things that they don’t understand will pan out.” He added “I just think they are the kind of flavor of the month, but you have to get down to where do you add value to the marketer and where do you add value to the publisher.” In a world filled with over-media-trained executives, its refreshing to see someone go after a competitor with such a direct statement.

My next question would have been to ask him how Federated Media is different from Glam. Federated Media sells advertising for tech sites; Glam sells ads for women-focused sites (although their biggest partner is MyYearbook). Other than the focus of the ad sales effort, the differences are not obvious to the casual observer.

The truth is the networks have significant strategic differences. Glam owns a few properties of its own, which helped in the early days as anchor properties. Federated Media does not own any major publishing sites.

Glam also guarantees revenues to partners. MyYearbook is rumored to receive a guaranteed CPM on page views, and many of the blogs get guaranteed monthly payments of $10,000 or more. Those guarantees resulted in a loss for Glam of $3.7 million last year on $21 million in revenue. But it also accelerated growth and allowed them to raise a massive round of financing.Federated Media, by contrast, doesn’t guarantee revenues but is profitable. They’ve raised just $7.4 million.

But Battelle also reportedly has Glam envy. He turned down a $100 million buyout offer, reportedly because he felt Federated Media should be worth at least as much as Glam ($400+ million).

Will Federated Media Buy Or Invest In Publishers?

The weak point of Federated Media’s model is that they don’t control their own publishers. If a better deal comes along, those publishers will bail - which is what happened last year when Digg left the network for a big, three year guaranteed revenue deal from Microsoft.

One way to solve that problem without guaranteeing revenue is to own publishers, or at least a stake in them in return for a contract they can’t get out of. When Olsen asked Battelle what he intended to do with the venture capital he’s in the process of raising, he said:

Word has it you’re looking to raise money and you’ve hired Savvian to vet offers. (CNET News.com story here.) Given that you’re already profitable and don’t need the cash, what do you plan to do with the money?
Battelle: Well, I can’t say specifically what we might do with any money that we might raise, should we do a fund-raising round. But I think there are an awful lot of opportunities in this emerging field and it’s just good to have access to capital to execute any reasonable ideas that we might have. It’s a very quickly changing market and it needs financing. I mean individual sites need financing and we want to be a good partner for all of our sites.

What do you mean individual sites need financing? You want to fund some of the sites you represent?
Battelle: I’m not saying that we’ll necessary do that. I’m saying that it might not be a bad idea to be ready, should that become something that those sites are looking to do. In a fast-evolving model, it pays to have a strong balance sheet.

So Federated Media says they want the option of investing in their publishers down the road. But certainly there will be strings attached. Here’s what I think he really means: They’ll either buy sites outright, or guarantee revenue, or guarantee revenue in exchange for equity. A publisher wouldn’t consider Federated Media an attractive investor versus venture capitalists simply because it would mean tying their revenue to them over the long term.

But at one point in the interview Battelle said a roll up wouldn’t work, because authors must be independent to be authentic (I’m interpreting, not quoting). So there’s some conflict in some of his statements. What are they really thinking? I have no idea. But revenue guarantees would be a nice place to start.

Crunch Network: MobileCrunch Mobile Gadgets and Applications, Delivered Daily.

Stealth startup Hyphen-8 has been beta testing their new mobile social network called Lime Juice in San Francisco since October. Using your phone to create or enhance real world interactions is a killer application, but no one has cracked the nut yet. The reason is that the network is useless until it achieves a critical mass of users who are online and using the application via their mobile phone. If no one else is online, there’s little point in you being online, either. And presence detection is another (technical) problem. Even if people have joined the network, how do you know when they are near you? But once it does happen, look out. You could be in a bar and see who’s single, who thinks you’re cute, who wants to talk to you, etc. (if they choose to share that information). Forget meeting via an online dating site and then organizing an awkward in person meeting that usually falls flat. Instead, you can do the online an real world thing simultaneously. We’ve kept an eye on the new startups launching in this space. Check out Mig33, ZYB, Mocospace, Aka-Aki, Nokia Sensor, Dodgeball, Mobiluck, MeetMoi and Imity, just to get warmed up. But none of them yet have critical mass (Mig33, however, is turning into a very large cheap VOIP provider on the side). LimeJuice now joins the group with a unique product. Users can actually join on the fly, via SMS. And the company is sponsoring party after party at bars and clubs in San Francisco to get users to try out the product with lots of others at the same time. The test results are encouraging - people are using it. A lot. How It Works The goal is to allow people in a bar or other social gathering to learn a little about the people around them, and flirt via the mobile network as a way to break the ice. The details are what makes LimeJuice interesting. It’s dead simple to join and use. First, users can register for the service via SMS. That means if just one person in a bar is a member or even knows about the service, they can tell others and quickly get a core group to join. When you create an account, you tell it something distinctive about yourself (tall blonde, red dress!) so that people searching will be able to quickly know who you are. When you go to another event later on, you simple update the description for the evening). Second, all of the key interaction (for now) happens via SMS. So every phone is ready to go. No need to download a java app or even go to a web page. Just send a text message to the service along with the identifier of the person you want to talk to (which you can get via search), and the message is sent to them. Third, even though people are using the service to send text messages back and forth, phone numbers are not exchanged. LimeJuice sits in the middle, and you can block someone easily. Beta Events LimeJuice has seen a good level of participation at the handful of events they’ve sponsored. An average of 40-50 people participate per event. They spend about 1.5 hours each using the service over the course of the evening and average ten text messages sent per person (some people send as many as 180 text messages). At one event, over 2,500 messages were sent to the service from participants. For now the company will continue to sponsor events in San Francisco, hopefully building up a core user base that will begin to spread out and get others to join. If/when they get a lot of people in San Francisco to use the service, they’ll then expand to other cities. The company, founded by Tobin Van Pelt and John Garrett, is based in San Francisco and has four employees. They’ve self funded to date with $100,000 and are currently pitching for a Series A round of funding.

Hyphen 8

Loading information about Hyphen 8…