Year: 2009

  • Tea and multiplicity

    We sat in Infinitea, sipping green tea and munching fried momos. It was her first visit to Bangalore, and as my contribution to her introduction to the city, I had given her the experience of navigating the one ways of the city on a two wheeler. It was less than a month since we’d been first introduced to each other, and that turned out to be the subject of the conversation, at least the lion’s share of it. Of how technology had reached a point where one could perhaps land up in any city and have such conversations, because of the connections that pre-exist. No pre-exist for years or even months, but just a few days, thanks to the people we trust, who connect us. We perhaps have nothing in common culturally, but we can still relate to each other in terms of ideas and thought streams. Communication protocols are changing, and with that, relationships too. We discussed the subject of my post a fortnight back – evolution, and she told me the story of a guy who had a camera fitted into his glass eye!!

    She’s traveled a lot and shared anecdotes of places and experiences. Her stories reminded us of how destinations have become like trophies, simply to be collected as part of a journey which we no longer appreciate, much like the beautiful sights that nature has created. We compared notes on clicking images versus capturing it in the mind’s eye. I could totally relate to that as I remembered the Leh trip from earlier this year and told her of how I paused before I took the step into the plane that would take me back, knowing that it perhaps was the last time I’d see the place. After all, there are so many places to see, never mind the trophies, because there may be some I haven’t even heard of yet.

    I think that I might have come across as an absolute anti-capitalist, because at least twice I said that the only thing that stopped us from enjoying life fully was money, because it tends to become an end in itself, and we make the things it can buy, the things that hold value to us. If money wasn’t a constraint, I’d travel all over the world, write about the things I saw and be happy with the five odd people who read it. But it is, and so one has to save up, and choose from destinations, and hope one has made the right choice.

    We debated a bit on what I thought was a paradox of sorts. She said that many people felt lonely when they landed in an alien city (work,not vacation), and they yearned for a taste of their own culture. I said that, with increasing connectivity, we were all moving towards global citizenship, where the individual cultures had blurring boundaries, or rather, the differences seemed to be becoming less important. Typical example being how we were able to converse on a range of subjects without getting bored. (though we have only my word for it) And how with each passing generation, traditional customs were getting packaged to suit lifestyles…until they will become ‘user agnostic’. (much like the platform agnostic technologies) But yes, that is more futuristic than present, though I may have more in common with a London based Twitter user, than my next door neighbour, on several fronts.

    We spoke about the great divide that technology was creating, and how the human race has perhaps yet not identified that as one of our greatest challenges. A real time battle against time. Which made us realise that both of us were getting late for our (respective) next meetings.

    I drop her back at the hotel where she’s staying. We have to take a convoluted route, thanks to the one ways that dot Bangalore. Its funny because in terms of actual distance its really close by. I wonder if the roads are a good metaphor. We bid each other goodbye. Its easy to remain in touch, connected. After all, geographic distances don’t really matter. Sometimes its the divide in the immediate vicinity that is more difficult to bridge.

    until next time, a lot can happen over tea too 🙂

    PS: The day had two wonderful conversations, and as I start out to share the other, I realise I am trying to short change the next one and crunch the content. That’s unfair, so we will do a Part 2 soon 🙂

  • Spiga

    …is back, at a new location, and since the old version on Vittal Mallya Road was a favourite, we had to check out version 2 too. The new Spiga is on St.Marks Road, on the 4th Floor of the Halcyon Complex, that erm, funny white building right before you turn into Vittal Mallya Road. Two wheeler parking can be found a couple of buildings before this one, and for those with a couple of extra wheels, there’s valet parking.

    Spiga is a rooftop restaurant, semi-outdoor, with different sections. Some of the tables give a nice view of the cityscape. I’d describe the ambience as fine dining meets lounge. Dim lighting and candles with techno/house pulsing in the background. I personally preferred the coziness of  the home-converted-into-restaurant earlier version. This is cool too, in the white cushion mediterranean kind of way (which I think is the idea) and quite a neat place for a romantic dinner, but it lacks the character/uniqueness of the old place. Maybe that’ll happen over time, and the halcyon days will be back. 🙂

    We got in by around 7.30, and got a table without reserving in advance, but by 8, the place was quite crowded. They seem to have a well stocked bar, and the liquor menu is quite extensive, with what looked like a decent collection of mocktails, shooters, and aperitifs in addition to the usual alcohol options. I couldn’t spot a KF beer, my regular benchmark, though there were other brands.

    There are only two soup options – one veg (roasted pumpkin) and the other non-veg, at Rs.120. So, we had the Chunky Chicken and Veg soup, which would have been great if it had been a tad thicker and creamier. It was good though, with the promise of chunky chicken pieces met. It comes with garlic bread, and an additional portion of garlic bread is  complimentary. To be noted that there isn’t a by-two option, but the table was small enough, and the bowl big enough for us to create the option. 🙂

    In case you’re the salad kind, there are four kinds available – Caesar, Neo Classical Greek, Oriental and Pear & Walnut. All have veg and chicken options, and are priced at Rs.150-180 and Rs.180-210 respectively. And if you prefer starters, there are quite a few options there too, in veg (including a paneer dish), fish, prawn, lamb and from thai, mexican and mediterranean cuisines. Priced at Rs.100-180 for the veg, and Rs.200-250 for the non veg.

    Pasta options consist of alfredo and pesto, with veg and chicken options. (Rs.200/250) There’s also a fettuccine with bacon and prawns. (Rs.280). The main course has about half a dozen veg options, a little more in chicken, and a few interesting options in fish, prawn and lamb. There are a few Thai dishes in this mix too. D chose an Olive Fish, “Grilled fish, white wine mint sauce, olives, sprinkling of pine nuts, spinach rice, hasselback potatoes, with feta and onions. I chose a Mediterranean Chicken, “Seared chicken, red peppers, feta, mashed potato and pasta”. D’s fish dish was a bit on the bland side, with (strangely) a lemon flavor. She liked my chicken dish better. Unfortunately for her, I did too. I’d definitely recommend it. I want to try out the bacon wrapped fish sometime though.

    There are half a dozen dessert options, some of which you may not find anywhere else like the lemon ricotta pie, the ginger orange cheese cake, or the oreo cookie cheese cake. No, we didn’t have any, and yes, I find it difficult to face myself in the mirror, especially when I think of the rich chocolate fudge cake.

    The meal cost us just 0ver Rs.700. Loved the logo, and the black and siver business card. The service could’ve been better. We asked for water at room temperature, and got ice cold water, though they replaced it. We were asked if the main course could be served, while we were still having the soup, and in spite of asking them to wait, they served it almost immediately. Thankfully, we had just about finished the soup. Also, a word of caution. The main course portions are only just about sufficient, and if you’re going in hungry, a starter is recommended. Drop in for a pretty neat ambience, good food and yes, the desserts!!

    Spiga, No:9, St.Marks Road, ‘Halcyon Complex’, 4th Floor. Ph: 42110469/70

    Menu and Photos at Zomato

  • Brand Chats – Google & Godin

    Last week, Seth Godin’s company Squidoo launched “Brands in Public” (BIP from now), a  service which creates pages -‘public-facing dashboards’ that aggregate conversations about brands on Twitter, YouTube and blogs, in addition to news, videos, images etc. BIP will create the pages anyway, but for a fee, brands can develop this page. Brands then get control of the left column on the page, and can respond to the content, highlight certain content, run contests etc. (example) In Seth Godin’s own words, brands “can respond, lead and organize.”As Godin himself states, there are many monitoring tools online (found an excellent wiki by Ken Burbary) which can be used to ‘listen’ to the conversation, but this service allows brands to respond publicly.

    I saw a couple of posts which asked an interesting question – whether by creating pages ‘anyway’, Godin was brandjacking. Godin had clarified that if a brand requested him to take a page off, he would do so. And in a later update (to clear the air) he took off the 200 sample pages that had been put up. Bravo! Not that there was anything technically wrong with it – after all, like one of the articles states, Google does something similar- sell ads next to contextually relevant others- generated content (search, ad sense on sites), but the non-paid for brand pages just didn’t sound right.

    But it made me wonder again about the location of brand-consumer conversations. Before we get to that, another interesting news item in context, albeit a bit tangentially. Last week, Google launched Sidewiki, “which allows you to contribute helpful information next to any webpage. Google Sidewiki appears as a browser sidebar, where you can read and write entries along the side of the page.” The entries which are shown, are selected not by recency, but an algorithm that has among other things – the contributor’s previous entries and the feedback on the entry. Moreover the entry will also be used on sites with the same content. Users will have to be logged into Google for leaving comments and rating.

    As Jason Falls notes in his post about Sidewiki, this adds another layer for brands to keep in touch with, because users may not even have to search for information about the website (or the product/service sold there). If they have the toolbar downloaded, they can see the information as they browse the site. He also rightly remarks (IMO) that we should expect ads (even that of competitors) in the wiki soon. Meanwhile, like any good social product, there is no control that a brand can exert on this content, as it exists on Google’s servers. Jeremiah Owyang  also has a post on the same subject, which offers several great insights and advice. Apparently, the comments a user leaves will also be displayed on his Google profile. The web as one giant social network, he’s right, that’s what Google’s after. There is also the option of sharing it on Facebook/Twitter. It’d be interesting to see a Facebook version of this whenever it happens – a play with Facebook Connect, the website, and perhaps, Facebook fan pages. The Facebook newsfeed means that it can bring the conversation back to Facebook. That’s something Google can’t do..yet.

    Now, back to the location. Attempts are being made to aggregate these conversations, and in BIP’s case make it a conversation involving the brand itself. My problem was not with brandjacking, the conversations are happening anyway, and brands are free to create their own ways of aggregation and response, I was more concerned with two other things. One, the creation of a destination point , a ‘middle man’ whose only context connecting its users was the brand itself. Like a subject popping up while chatting over coffee vs a focus group – they both have their uses, but for me, the former is more social media, simply because of the difference in intent. To be fair, I’ve always thought aggregation was inevitable, but Chris Brogan wrote recently about ‘Feeling the Community‘, where he talks about how “we don’t join communities because we  happen to like a product or service. We gather around people who feel what we feel, and we share passion for things that bring us some sense of pleasure or joy, or even healing.” I can completely relate to that, it is the reason I’m not a fan of many things on FB, and was/am not an active member of the groups I’d joined. Now, I talk about all these things (whose group/fan page I am part of) on Twitter. I follow blogs and use these as conversation points there, on Twitter and offline, whenever I feel there is a context, and whenever I can identify with what’s being said on the subject.  What I’m trying to say is that the objects (brands) or even the platforms are not the important context, the people are. Even though the brand has an identity and a personality, different people associate to the same brand differently, and my conversations happen with people who I feel can relate to what I’m saying. Also, the aggregation may not really show the context in which a comment was made. (esp. Twitter). For that, the brand has to be present on Twitter. I’m not sure whether an aggregation point would have the same effect. Woods, trees, and mistakes.

    The second issue I have is whether such destination points would tend to become band-aid fixes for a larger problem. Would brands approach the issues with a short term tactical mindset – highlight the issues that they’re able to solve, gloss over the ones they can’t? In essence, see this a point where they can control the conversations? Shouldn’t the greater priority for organisations be changing their internal processes and structures to adapt to social media, than having a dashboard responding to comments? I’m just not very sure it can work in parallel.

    So, conversations on the brand website, on its side, and on some other site..actually everywhere. At some point, all data would have to become portable, and depending on context (and perhaps other parameters) I would choose the platform/service/location for interaction. For now, world wild web indeed. 🙂

    until next time, a website with a sidekick 😉

  • Life…streamers

    Sometime back, I read an extremely interesting post by Chris Messina – how we’re now hit by a plethora of data and information on the real time web, which our brains have not adapted to, and how, in order to process this, we’d require an augmentation of our existing abilities.

    The information overload has been happening for a little while now. Between reading blogs, writing them, microblogging, Facebook and all the shiny little tools that keep coming up, it’s a constant juggling act. I’ve been on Twitter for over a couple of years now. I can see a drastic change in the relationships there already, as compared to the banter of the initial days. New people, new thoughts, old people who’re changing with time, old thoughts recycled.  A simple @ tag connects lives. Meanwhile, its not just relationships and thoughts that change, but also behaviour – the need to share an experience, attention deficit, and so on. These would obviously vary with an individual’s usage of Twitter, facebook etc, but I’m sure there are more like me.

    While I’ve been dimly conscious of the vastness of the Twitterverse, I had a more tangible realisation only after i came across a tool (from an article shared by Shefaly). As I sat watching the pictures streaming across the screen on Twitcaps, I felt I was somehow connected to all of them across the world sharing images – from parties to churches to landscapes to death to raunchy stuff to coffee mugs and so many many other things. There are multiple images being shared every second, and I had an acute realisation of the magnitude of change happening, in terms of connectedness and sharing. The population of the world, the population of your own city, the number of people working in your office/living in the apartment complex- as the numbers come down, the people slowly change from a blurred intangibility to a focused person. But as we get more and more networked, the number of persons who become tangible are increasing, the arguments about their relative importance to self notwithstanding. As Chris says in the article, can human beings cope after a point?

    Sometime earlier this year, I remember writing a post about speciation – the evolution of the human species, and how replacement of body parts and advancement might finally end up in a being that may not match our current concept of human, or even living, like the Cybermen in Dr.Who. In that post, I had also mentioned Homo Evolutis, one of whose characteristics was networked intelligence.

    As the information deluge gathers momentum, there may be those who choose not to be part of it, who are comfortable not being part of this vast stream of consciousness, while there may be others who use their abilities and the augmentation to embrace this. These are obviously two extremes, and its quite possible that humans would figure out a middle path. But I already see this divide happening – some leaving it by choice, some left out by circumstances. The learning curve is becoming so steep that after a few years, it might be difficult or even impossible to catch up. And that’s how I begin to wonder whether we’re rapidly approaching the point when the species will diverge. Maybe not in my lifetime, but within a couple of generations?

    There’s another aspect of all this that I wondered about. With the increasing amount of information and the speed at which we’re forced to process it, will we have time to acquire more perspectives, or continuing that cycle, accumulate more baggage? Will that change the way we behave with people, and the way we live life? Will we become more objective? Or will we become more biased, relying on notions we don’t have time to change, and behaving accordingly?

    As I write this there is a stream of thoughts running in my head – of times, friends and relationships. Poignant moment as I realise the vast yet connected nature of the universe and its inhabitants. In the miniscule amount of my lifetime that I have spent on Twitter, I realise that people and relationships have changed, perhaps irrevocably. The lifestream will be an interesting read for me later, if I do manage it. Meanwhile life flows, faster, faster, until each second and beyond is accounted for, with streamers in between, so that we might remember…just..

    until next time, you’re here..now..reading post #700..thank you 🙂

  • From the corner of his eye

    Dean Koontz

    That Dean Koontz is an amazing writer of supernatural stories is a known fact. What makes this book special is the mix of several themes that work in superb harmony – a psychotic killer, quantum physics and faith. I’ve always wondered about parallel universes and in this book, the author has tried to put a structure to it through the theories of Thomas Vanadium and the abilities of Bartholomew, Angel and Mary.
    Koontz uses Enoch Cain’s obsessed journey to find Bartholomew as a background to highlight the connection between human beings’ lives, a sort of ‘Butterfly effect’ among people’s destinies. Each character is built perfectly with specific roles to play in this journey, and they all fall into place magnificently, like a jigsaw puzzle.
    There is an underlying theme of hope that runs through this book, and Koontz does a great job of balancing it with the pure evil that is Enoch Cain.
    The pace never slackens, and while I like all the author’s works (that I have read so far), this one just went beyond the regular gripping thriller category.