reaDIYmates are fun wi-fi objects that you can build easily. They move and play sounds depending on what's happening in your digital life. Choose from a variety of existing designs, use our templates or create your own object.  Then decide what you want them to do through a simple web interface. Link them to your digital life (Gmail, Facebook, Twitter, Foursquare, RSS feeds, SoundCloud, If This Then That, and more to come) or control them remotely in real time from your iPhone. You don't need any creative or technical skills to build and use your reaDIYmate, but if you want to go further, we made it super easy for you to change designs, write applications, or add inputs and outputs. They're Arduino compatible and you can plug 50+ solderless electronic bricks.

Deutsch LA’s new Invention Strategy team has put together a nice report summarizing key observational trends from 2012′s SXSWi. The report was based on two strategic lenses:

1) Start-ups represent emerging bets at the intersection of technology and culture

2) Clusters of start-ups help to identify what’s broken in current industries and where there’s opportunity for disruption.

I think viewing start-ups from this perspective is a clever approach at “predicting” future consumer needs and how brands can provide solutions. Good job to the Invention Strategy team; I’m excited to see what they come up with next.

Ja, ein neuer Blog. Ein Blog, nicht über persönliche Befindlichkeiten und Gedanken, nicht über gesellschaftliche Entwicklungen oder politische Ereignisse, sondern ein Blog über die Internet-Technologie, eine Technologie, die neben unserer physikalischen Welt eine zweite, von den Gesetzen der Schwerkraft weitgehend befreite, digitale Welt hat entstehen lassen. In dieser neuen digitalen Internet-Welt gewinnen die Dinge unserer alltäglichen Erfahrungswelt eine neue, eine zweite Existenz, die mit diesen Dingen wie Schatten, schwerelos und anderen physikalischen Gesetzen gehorchend, verwoben sind. Losgelöst und eigentümlich eigenständig können diese Schatten unserer eigenen physikalischen Existenz, unserer Ideen und Gedanken in Worten, Bildern oder Videos, annähernd mit Lichtgeschwindigkeit um die Welt geschickt, in Interaktion mit den digitalen Schatten Anderer, von Freunden oder Kollegen treten. Es eröffnen sich zuvor nie dagewesene Potenziale für neue zwischenmenschliche Kommunikationsformen, gesellschaftliche Partizipation und profitable wirtschaftliche Aktivitäten. Und das alles, dank einer Technologie, der Internet-Technologie.

"This is an incredibly naive article on renewable energy. Ms Eilperin makes the ridiculous assumption that nat gas will be the panacea to all our energy problems.  Anyone familiar with the electric utility industry, knows that their pricing is slanted to their favor."

Trifft es ziemlich gut, den !Green Backlash muss es dennoch zwingend geben bevor es wieder besser werden kann

Was mir an seiner These latürnich schwer zupass kommt, ist die Tatsache, dass sie mich in meiner Überzeugung unterstützt, dass wir, wenn wir ein "demokratisches" Netz haben wollen, in dem die Produktionswerkzeuge in den Händen möglichst vieler liegen, wir nicht anders können, als die Technologie so einfach wie möglich zu gestalten. Und umgekehrt sollten wir bei denen die komplexe Technologien fordern und fördern, vorsichtig sein, ob sie nicht einen Zentralismus im Netz befördern oder gar aktiv zentralistische Ziele verfolgen.

his is the home for everything about amateur Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs). Use the tabs and drop-down menus above to navigate the site.

This community also created ArduPilot, the world's first universal autopilot (planes, copters of all sorts, ground rovers, boats). The ArduPilotMega autopilot hardware runs a variety of powerful free Arduino-based UAV software systems, including:
* ArduPlane, a pro-level UAV system for planes of all types.
* ArduCopter, a fully-autonomous multicopter and heli UAV system.

Tatsächlich änderte sich dann in den Klassenzimmern aber gar nicht viel. Bis heute blieb es im Prinzip bei dem System, das sich Ende des 19. Jahrhunderts zusammen mit der industriell-bürokratischen Organisation herausgebildet hatte: Der Lehrer ist das Medium. Die Schule hat das Wissensmonopol. Wer nicht mitkommt, ist selber schuld.

Smart Meter erlauben die Analyse des eigenen Stromverbrauchs.
Der Haken an den erhältlichen Lösungen? Eine detaillierte Analyse ist in der Regel nur möglich, wenn die Daten zuvor auf den zentralen Server des Anbieters übertragen werden.
Dabei möchte man diese Daten gar nicht aus der Hand geben, denn sie erlauben einen detaillierten Einblick in die Lebensgewohnheiten eines Haushalts:

Wann stehen die Bewohner auf?
Wann gehen sie zu Bett?
Wie oft und wie lange sind sie in Urlaub?
Welche Elektrogeräte gibt es im Haushalt: Spülmaschine/Waschmaschine/Gefrierschrank?
Wie oft werden diese benutzt?
Wie oft wird gekocht?
Wie oft wird die Toilette nachts aufgesucht?

All of these tools are windows into something much deeper -  us and our desire to communicate. I would bet a lot that we are much closer to the beginning than the end of a period of great change.  The Industrial Revolution took about one hundred and fifty years and we're only about fifty years into the current revolution.

 

From my vantage point I don't see the younger generation as being more adroit simply because they grew up in a new world.  They were surrounded by different tools and defaulted to them making them their own, but these tools will change.  The term digital native is popular, but I don't see the process of change as abrupt with people on one side or the other of a divide -- a rich continuum of tools has been emerging.  Some will replace old modes of communications entirely and some will serve niche groups differently.  And there are surprises when very old tools prove to be much more robust than imagined.

 

The foundation for social organization transformation is culture and leadership. Process and technology initiatives are certainly important and play a vital role; but without a change in organizational behavior it will prove meaningless. Change starts from the top and it’s the leaders that are responsible for facilitating this change.

Let me give you an example. One of the Directors I work with, bought an iPad 2, which he takes to all meetings we have, which he loves and uses a lot. However, I take a notebook running Windows 7 Starter. Why? Well it’s my need. I would love to take a tablet, but none exist that allow me to do all the things I want to (at the moment that is). While he looks at the odd app, browses the web on his iPad, and that’s about it, I have to plug my machine into projection screens, I have to run presentations, I have to modify those presentations, I have to go through technical prototypes and even
demonstrate applications, proof of concepts and much more, all from that little notebook. And that notebook is holding real databases on it, real development environments.

Es wird noch viel, viel schlimmer werden, als es bisher ist. Zumindest, wenn gesamtgesellschaftlich kein Bewusstsein dafür entwickelt wird. Schon heute ist die Vollüberwachung durch BKA, BND, Verfassungsschutz oder gar den eigenen Arbeitgeber nurmehr einen Knopfdruck weit entfernt. Legal, illegal, wen interessiert das im Fall der Fälle wirklich? Das Morgen ist, wenn wir nichts unternehmen, weit schlimmer noch, als Orwell sich das in seinen kühnsten Träumen ausmalen konnte.

The term “pearls before swine” comes from the Sermon on the Mount, a famous speech given by Christ to his disciplines. It means that people should not waste pleasant or good things on people who will not appreciate them.

In the time of Christ, pigs were regarded as unclean animals in the Jewish faith, so in a sense, the term refers to giving great things to beings which are not worthy. The fact that pearls would be essentially useless to pigs has also been pointed out, as the term illustrates that it is rather foolish to give things to people who cannot or will not use them. Pigs are unlikely to realize the value of pearls when they see them, so tossing pearls to swine would really just be a waste.

Many people use the term to talk about someone who doesn’t appreciate the value of an item or another person, as in some people also use this term in a resentful sense, suggesting that they offered or gave someone something superb, and ended up being snubbed.

Many people who attempt to enact social change find themselves frustrated by the pearls before swine phenomenon, struggling to understand why people reject their proposals and ideas when they hold so much promise.

The Promise of Social Technology

Technology is advancing faster than people and businesses can keep up. The tidal wave of advancement create new dynamics unforeseen and unknowable. Who would have thought just six years ago that a young kid from Harvard would create a global phenomena called Facebook? Who would have thought that people would engage in “distributed global conversations” representing 140 characters at the rate of millions per second. Who would have thought that businesses would need to try to control these conversations by instituting “social policies” to curb risk? The fact is and still remains that no one thought about these dynamics because the very nature of massive human interaction was not on anyone’s radar.

Now the adoption of these technologies permeates everything and touches everyone, at least those paying attention. The word “permeates” means to spread or flow throughout; pervade. When something spreads throughout it surrounds all things and begins to capture everyone’s attention. When something begins to capture the attention of the human network the draw pulls people’s emotions, intellect, spirit and the reactions create discourse and opinions that further the discourse.

Appreciation of Innovation or Wasteful Use of It?

The human reaction to disruptive innovation falls into two categories of use, useless and useful. There is a simple, important principle at the core of disruptive innovation fueled by people’s use of something innovative and free: people innovate faster than companies and entire industries change. Because of this, most organizations are not ready to respond to the influence of people’s increased expectation for improvement. The disruption is fueled by transparent communications filled with “pearls of wisdom” that show people’s expectations. The challenge for organizations then becomes one of listening and responding in real-time with innovation that exceeds people’s expectations.

Useful application of social technology by organizations is the “key” to unlocking needed innovation expected by the customer (people), internal and external. Useless application of social technology, and its related dynamics, by organizations is the age-old reaction of stinking thinking from the neck up. In this case the swine is represented by those that “fear” innovation that comes from “pearls of wisdom” offered freely by the “markets of conversations”.

People and organizations fear innovation because they try to frame it and use it with old knowledge. Thus they use social media or view it as useless. Useless means having or being of no use and not able to give service or aid. Sounds a lot like “pearls before swine”.

You wouldn’t think that policymakers need to be reminded that technological progress raises living standards and creates new (and better) employment opportunities. Alas, some comments President Obama made in a speech last week seemed to link technology to job losses. “There are some structural issues with our economy where a lot of businesses have learned to become much more efficient with a lot fewer workers,” he said. “You see it when you go to a bank and you use an ATM, you don’t go to a bank teller, or you go to the airport and you’re using a kiosk instead of checking in at the gate.”

In an essay in today’s Wall Street Journal, one of my Mercatus Center colleagues Russ Roberts, a professor of economics at George Mason University, brilliantly deconstructs this logic and points out why technology doesn’t destroy jobs:

Somehow, new jobs get created to replace the old ones. Despite losing millions of jobs to technology and to trade, even in a recession we have more total jobs than we did when the steel and auto and telephone and food industries had a lot more workers and a lot fewer machines.

Why do new jobs get created? When it gets cheaper to make food and clothing, there are more resources and people available to create new products that didn’t exist before. Fifty years ago, the computer industry was tiny. It was able to expand because we no longer had to have so many workers connecting telephone calls. So many job descriptions exist today that didn’t even exist 15 or 20 years ago. That’s only possible when technology makes workers more productive.

Read the whole thing. Great stuff.

Our idea of technology appears to have supplanted the reality of technology, at least in the minds of our officials. Technology is not an invisible force; it is not still air waiting to be blown hither or thither. No, technology is the work of people, and insofar as technology “values” anything, it reflects the values of its creators and users. Technology is born with intent. We ignore that intent at our peril.

McKinsey führt ja in regelmäßigen Abständen Befragungen durch, die den Stand der Web 2.0-Adaption durch die Unternehmenswelt beleuchten. Mit Hilfe dieses Features kann man darüberhinaus die Entwicklung einiger Themen beobachten. Und wenn man zuerst auf “Internal purposes: Technologies and tools companies are using internally” und dann auf “Training” klickt, erscheint diese Aufstellung mit den Spitzenreitern: Video sharing (48%), Wikis (32%) und Podcasts (32%)

list of the Most Important Info-Tech Policy Books of 2010.

What should be on your technology watch list? Forrester provides its annual list of 15 technology trends to watch.

I hope what you get from reading What Technology Wants is a useful framework for understanding what technology means in our lives -- a way to anchor your own self in the face of ceaseless accelerating technological change.

I welcome general responses, positive or negative, about the content of this book. For specific issues, like errors, typos, etc. I've started another thread. Also I've initiated a few other threads on related facets of this book. Once singed in, you are welcome to start other threads about aspects of this book if you are so inclined.

Douglas Coupland is a writer and artist based in Vancouver. For the canadian newspaper Globe and Mail, he wrote The ‘radical pessimist’s guide to the next 10 years’ a dystopian view on the near future. One of the the underlying ideas behind the guide could be translated as the observation that evolution continues, whether we like it or not. Our next nature might be as wild, unpredictable and out of control as ‘old nature’ once was.

Living with Complexity
Norman, Donald A
MIT Press, October 2010
280 pages
Amazon
If only today’s technology were simpler! It’s the universal lament, but it’s wrong. We don’t want simplicity. Simple tools are not up to the task. The world is complex; our tools need to match that complexity.

Simplicity turns out to be more complex than we thought. In this provocative and informative book, Don Norman writes that the complexity of our technology must mirror the complexity and richness of our lives. It’s not complexity that’s the problem, it’s bad design. Bad design complicates things unnecessarily and confuses us. Good design can tame complexity.

Norman gives us a crash course in the virtues of complexity. But even such simple things as salt and pepper shakers, doors, and light switches become complicated when we have to deal with many of them, each somewhat different. Managing complexity, says Norman, is a partnership. Designers have to produce things that tame complexity. But we too have to do our part: we have to take the time to learn the structure and practice the skills. This is how we mastered reading and writing, driving a car, and playing sports, and this is how we can master our complex tools.

Complexity is good. Simplicity is misleading. The good life is complex, rich, and rewarding—but only if it is understandable, sensible, and meaningful.

Read first chapter

Donald Norman
Business Week has named Don Norman as one of the world’s most influential designers. He has been both a professor and an executive: he was Vice President of Advanced Technology at Apple; his company, the Nielsen Norman Group, helps companies produce human-centered products and services; he has been on the faculty at Harvard, the University of California, San Diego, Northwestern University, and KAIST, in South Korea. He is the author of many books, including The Design of Everyday Things, The Invisible Computer (MIT Press, 1998), Emotional Design, and The Design of Future Things.

Talk about hitting the nail right on the head. This was was delivered with a sledgehammer.

If those high profile bloggers think the open web is about spreading personal data across the web, then something went completely wrong in the past. My understanding of the open web always included these principles:
open standardsinteroperabilitytransparencydata sharing Annotated link http://www.diigo.com/bookmark/http%3A%2F%2Fnotsorelevant.com%2F2010-05-09%2Fthe-open-web-is-dead%2F%3Futm_source%3Dfeedburner%26utm_medium%3Dfeed%26utm_campaign%3DFeed%253A%2Bnotsorelevant%2B%2528Not%2BSo%2BRelevant%2529

Who is the most influential person on the internet? That argument could go on for years. Bill Gates and Steve Jobs certainly get people to buy things. Larry Page and Sergey Brin are the men behind the omnipresent Google. Moot, the founder of 4chan, topped TIME’s Most Influential Person poll. It could easily be argued that one guy with a pencil has the strange power to make things happen without a company, without a title, and without even asking. Randall Munroe has influence he never asked for. His creation xkcd is “A webcomic of romance, sarcasm, math, and language.” The accompanying blog, which Munroe calls a “blag”, is where he posts everything outside of the thrice-weekly comic. Yeah, he’s published a book, too, but it’s the comic that makes things happen.

All too often the newest, brightest and shiniest technology (let’s call it BSTechnology – bright shiny technology) grabs the attention of someone with purchasing power within the organization. Immediately all problems that person is facing seem to be solvable if only that new BSTech was in place. This is a myth.  Annotated link http://www.diigo.com/bookmark/http%3A%2F%2Fcfour.fishbowlsolutions.com%2F2010%2F04%2F26%2Fthree-common-mistakes-in-pursuit-of-enterprise-2-0-the-next-generation-workplace

“In How to Start a Startup I advised startups never to let anyone fly under them, meaning never to let any other company offer a cheaper, easier solution. Another way to fly low is to give users more power. Let users do what they want. If you don’t and a competitor does, you’re in trouble.”

Google's new social media service Google Buzz will show up in your Gmail account this week. Here's how to customize and use Buzz--or opt out of its inbox-cluttering updates completely.

This is why I say that the iPad is a cynical thing: Apple can’t – or won’t – conceive of a future for personal computing that is both elegant and open, usable and free.

despite modest IT spending, virtualization and cloud computing continue to attract keen interest from executive management ... Perhaps the most significant change is in the demand for social technologies, which is leading to the adoption of new technologies such as cloud computing.

these modest little boxes are marvels -- inspiring evidence of the inexorable march of powerful, open computing technology to everyman and everywhere.

We have produced a democracy of netbooks. And the geek in me can't wait to see what happens next.

I think I'll wait for Google Wave to actually come out of its Alpha 'Preview' release status before I drop the hammer on it. You haven't even seen a feature complete version of the product yet! Its pretty ambitious don't you think? I swear that soon you bloggers will want real unicorns delivered with every new app (no matter how many alpha/beta graphics are stamped on it) before you're satisfied.

“It is harder and harder for me to spot an IT sector in which Google does not offer products and services,” Mathias Schindler pondered in the forum, “Can you think of any IT sector where there is no Google product (yet)?” Competition has a tough time, unless they happen to get bought up by Google, not only because of Google’s cross-integration power, but also because it would take mindblowing budget to reproduce Google’s cloud server farm. Google after all arguably owns the world’s biggest super computer, one with an AI that becomes better and better with more data. But the giant is growing taller by the second, and I’m curious if there will be a couple of instances where we’ll see him stumble over his own feet in 2010.

Strange times: The Great Recession and Great Inflection are making our companies ultralean, innovative and productive. But with credit still constricted, we’re like a superfit track star with a weak heart. We’ve got to get credit pumping to our industrial muscles again.

While Web innovation is unpredictable, some clear trends are becoming apparent. Expect the following 10 themes to define the Web next year:

ich warte und warte und warte

Utility computing is Web 2.0’s version of rocket fuel. ‘You don’t generate your own electricity,’ Bezos says. ‘Why generate your own computing?

A corporate technology infrastructure is not so much a system to control what is permissible as it is an infrastructure that needs to be co-created with end users. Apple (sort of) gets this with the App Store. Google understands this with Android and Wave. Open source software has developed largely because people are seen as participants in software creation rather than as end users.

a long article by Sam Anderson on “Twitter, Adderall, lifehacking, mindful jogging, power browsing, Obama’s BlackBerry, and the benefits of overstimulation.”

“Free-associative wandering is essential to the creative process; one moment of judicious unmindfulness can inspire thousands of hours of mindfulness.”

“Focus is a paradox—it has distraction built into it. The two are symbiotic; they’re the systole and diastole of consciousness. Attention comes from the Latin “to stretch out” or “reach toward,” distraction from “to pull apart.” We need both. In their extreme forms, focus and attention may even circle back around and bleed into one other.”

“IdeasProject brings together these important big thinkers to contemplate the big ideas that matter most to the future of communications, joining them up through video clips, links, articles, podcasts and dynamic maps to push the boundaries of Web navigation and the thought process itself.”

One last thing to consider about persuasive design is the ethics of the tactics you use, and the agendas which your persuasion promotes. Use your super-powers only for good. There can be a fine line between making things convenient and making things constrictive, or between educating the user with knowledge and manipulating them with propaganda. In our efforts to create a brighter greener future, we have to remember the means are as important as the ends, because by the definition of sustainable design, better means are the ends we seek.

the quality about some software that inspires love in their users, is totally devoid in enterprise software.

“The best you can ever say about enterprise software is when it doesn’t get in the way of the business. At it’s worst, enterprise software creates more work than it automates.”

He argues that argues that there are exactly four reasons that internal corporate systems are so unloved and unlovable

“They serve their corporate overlords, not their users.”
“They only do gray-suited, stolidly conservative things.”
“They have captive audiences.”
“They lack ‘give-a-shitness’ .” Nygard identifies this as the most important characteristic: the love a developer has for her software and its application, and thus the time she spends making it sing.

What must happen for the learning and development field to rethink its role and function?
A CLO or learning leaders forum is an important starting point. The leaders of a field must begin the process of conceiving a compelling vision for the future of organizational learning. In the process of forming this vision, however, leaders have an important obligation to mirror democratic and open principles. Distributed networks of innovation, comprised of the entire learning and development community, are crucial to advancing the discussion.

Many questions remain: What is the role of training, development and talent in achieving organizational strategies? How does information abundance influence the achievement of these objectives? How do organizations learn to function in distributed environment? How can organizations achieve strategies when fully distributed? How can expertise be developed through informal, in-process methods? How can a full spectrum of learning and development experiences

Exploring the difference between the raw service of Amazon EC2 to the high level web centered Google App Engine, the highlights are:

* Insight into the pay-as-you go aspect with no commits
* Analysis of cost with regards to peak and elasticity in face of unknown demand
* Cost of data transfers versus processing time
* Seamless migration of user to cloud processing
* Limits and problems with I/O on shared hardware

Cloud computing is less of a technological change and more of an environmental change in the IT economy which has led to the Cloud.

illustrates the real pains of tech execs and how emerging trends *should* be used as cures. Of course many remedies can also be toxins. So, it'll be interesting to see whether 2009 meets your expectations or serves to aggravate your aggravations.

A different "definition" emerged with each vendor pitch -- indeed, we came to see that the definition sometimes varied on the basis of a given usage scenario. Many people found this frustrating, and I suspect they were not, and are not, atypical in this regard.

The Titanic Error. It's not the parts of the iceberg that you can see that you should be worried about. Successful collaboration is about many intangible things (leadership, trust) and yet people focus on what they can see - i.e. the tool.

a review in the current issue of American Scientist of Jonathan Zittrain’s The Future of the Internet - and How to Stop It

No one knows for sure what the education world will look like in the future. But if the path we are on continues, ten years from now we are likely to have a completely different discussion about the impact computers have on schooling and on learning. The only way to get to that point, however, is by not repeating the mistakes from the past. Pitting computer-based learning directly against teachers or continuing to cram it into schools will not work. Producers of computer-based learning software must introduce it disruptively, by letting it compete against non-consumption initially. And software makers must customize the software for different learning types while other entrepreneurs find new channels to reach students. If all this happens, those who have extolled the benefits of computer-based learning might finally be able to see its promise materialize.

The Accenture report argues that, in the long run, companies will have to adapt to their employees' technology preferences. After all, over half of the respondents in this study (52%) said that a company's use of technology was a major factor when they select an employer (though the current economic climate might turn this into a luxury for many employees).

Predictably, we can expect the open source paradigm to gain in strength and to be increasingly adopted by the traditional software industry, and that there will be some convergence between the two sides of the industry. But in the next 10 or 15 years there will surely be unanticipated technological discontinuities, comparable with the launch of the IBM System/360 in the 1960s, the personal computer in the late 1970s, and the open source movement in the 1990s.

how to provide for a culture and focus on innovation during a down market ... innovators toiled away, coming up with the next amazing devices, concepts, software, ideas and infrastructure that later boggles the mind. We've barely scratched the surface in terms of what comes next

Tech is everywhere. It's seven years since the last recession. Technology has become markedly more pervasive in that time -- it's the air we breathe and the water we swim in. Cell phone penetration in the U.S. has tripled in that time; eCommerce has increased by 85%. While it may have been "nice to have" (and therefore eminently cut-able) back in 2002, tech now sits at the center of companys' operations. IT has become Business Technology. If you don't believe me, start unplugging wires at your company and see how long you can develop, manufacture, deliver, sell, and service your products

via Headshift - read this in a few quiet minutes

What is a Hype Cycle?
What are the 5 phases of a Hype Cycle?
What is the Priority Matrix?
What was the most influential Hype Cycle?

Summary

There is a tension at the heart of our efforts to collaborate. This tension and its possible resolution is best captured by the following questions.

* Should we be putting people first, before technology, in our efforts to collaborate?
* Does collaboration benefit from a more formal process?
* Can collaboration be encouraged in a replicable and systematic manner (as much as anything concerning people can be repeatable and systematic)?
* Does the lack of a formal process for optimising collaboration hold back productivity and performance?

This article attempts to answer these questions and shine new light on what constitutes successful collaboration.

It’s notoriously difficult to get this right as in my experience it all depends on whether or not a strong player will emerge to really get a successful product to market and therefore speed up the whole adoption cycle. Gartner do list the companies that they think are players in each of the new technology areas, but what I believe is making this harder to predict these days is the tendency for a major IT vendor to buy the start-ups at an earlier stage.

Simon shares a few publications which have had a significant impact in his way of thinking about technology

Studies of corporate performance reveal a growing link between certain kinds of technology investments and intensifying competitiveness.
by Andrew McAfee and Erik Brynjolfsson

I’m being “old school,” but I’m of the philosophy that it’s to one’s advantage to understand something about how hardware, software, and databases operate. The more you know, the more opportunities you can bring to light. How much is enough in

Predicting the future is hard, as we see when Donald Duck tours the Museum of Modern Marvels. The museum is full of wonderfully ridiculous inventions from the future such as the pneumatic pencil sharpener ...

Technology can be a driver of innovation, but technology is no end game in and of itself. Rather, thinking about technology’s impact on the world, of how we’ll work, live, play and exist, is a way to ensure that developments are meaningful and longer

Gartner defines a disruptive technology as one that causes major change in ‘the accepted way of doing things’, including business models, processes, revenue streams, industry dynamics and consumer behaviour.

hmmm, eher nein

As a consultant you need to love technology, you need to be following and evaluating the trends that are out there, and be able to comment on them (intelligently) in relation to any one of your assignments.

on how technology and organizations interact over time