2007 – Page 5 – Eugene Eric Kim

She’s Geeky, October 22-23

Published September 21, 2007 by Eugene Eric Kim

The tireless and talented Kaliya Hamlin is organizing a new gathering: She’s Geeky, coming October 22-23, 2007 at the Computer History Museum in Mountain View: (MLA)

The She’s Geeky (un)conference will provide an agenda-free and friendly environment for women who not only care about building technology that is useful for people, but who also want to encourage more women to get involved. (MLB)

It is designed to provide women who self-identify as geeky and who are engaged in various technology-focused disciplines with a gathering space in which they can exchange skills and discuss ideas and form community across and within disciplines. (MLC)

Blue Oxen Associates just signed on as a sponsor. But, I’m not allowed to register. Why? Registrations are for women only. Am I okay with that? Absolutely. (MLD)

Intimacy Gradients are critical for effective collaboration. I spend a lot of time teaching groups how to be more open; no one needs a lesson on how to be more closed. But there are times when being closed has value. (MLE)

I’ve expressed my admiration for BlogHer many times. Their conference has been open to both women and men from the beginning, and I think it’s worked in their favor. But their ad network is for women bloggers only. Is that a bad thing? (MLF)

Similarly, whatever gets blogged or recorded on the Wiki at She’s Geeky will be open to all. It’s just that only women will be allowed to attend. (MLG)

Women are a huge minority in technology. Regardless of why that is, there are many good reasons why women in technology should collaborate more with each other. Sometimes, the best way to kick start that is to create a safe space. That’s what She’s Geeky is all about. (MLH)

Speaking of women in technology, Lloyd Budd recently blogged about Leslie Hawthorn, another person whose praises I’ve sung on many occasions. Leslie is a classic Yellow Thread, someone who deserves much celebration. (MLI)

Quick Thoughts on BarCampBlock

Published August 22, 2007 by Eugene Eric Kim

I emerged from my summer hermitdom to attend parts of BarCampBlock this past weekend. My favorite part of Bar Camp was actually something I missed because I overslept on Saturday morning: the unveiling of the original Bar Camp attendee list (photo by Chris Heuer): (MJC)

(MJD)

This is such a wonderful picture on so many levels. Seeing it brought back vivid memories of the first Bar Camp: the sense of excitement about what a few passionate folks had created in a ridiculously short amount of time, the forging of new friendships and the strengthening of old ones. This little touch created a strong sense of continuity between the first camp, this third year anniversary celebration, and everything in-between. It also demonstrated the subtle difference between holding space well and simply holding space. Masters of this art understand the importance of the artifact, of Leave A Trail. (MJE)

I didn’t get to stay as long as I would have liked, but here are some quick thoughts on what I did see: (MJF)

The organizers (Chris Messina, Tara Hunt, Ross Mayfield, Liz Henry, and Tantek Celik) and volunteers did an incredible job of making everything run smoothly. The hardest part of a collaborative event isn’t the process; it’s logistics. In this particular case, the organizers had to deal with a sudden spike in registrations — 900 to be exact — with no clue as to the actual number who would show up (564 on Saturday, 260 on Sunday) and a location literally spread out over 11 locations within a few square blocks. When I saw various organizers on Saturday morning, I noted with surprise how calm everything was, and everyone just looked at me and laughed. There’s a ton amount of behind-the-scenes hard work and stress required to make any event run smoothly. Kudos to all who contributed. (MJG)
There were a ton of first-timers there. I saw several people I knew, and many more I didn’t. I like to see about 25 percent yield of repeat attendees at events like these, and this came close to that. I think that’s outstanding. The danger of events like these is that they become cliques. That wasn’t the case with this Bar Camp. In some ways, I think the oversaturation of networking events in the Bay Area — including many Bar Camp spin-offs — as well as the spirit of Bar Camp prevented this from happening. (MJH)
I heard a few folks comment on the lack of depth in the sessions, and I experienced some of this myself firsthand. This is common at open, collaborative events, but most folks misunderstand what this means. Open Space-ish events are particularly conducive to building Shared Language among disparate folks. Deeper learning and collaboration often occur as a result, but it doesn’t necessarily happen at the event itself. You can facilitate this deeper learning at events by making them more intentional — Internet Identity Workshop is a great example of this — but Bar Camps are more meta than that. (MJI)
I loved the Continuous Learning, not just from the Bar Camps that the organizers had played an active role in, but from the wider Bar Camp community. The demo party, for example, was an idea borrowed from Bar Camp Toronto, and while the execution needed tweaking, I loved the spirit of experimentation. (MJN)

More good thoughts from Liz, Ross, and Tara. (MJJ)

Little Dodger Fan Fishing

Published August 21, 2007 by Eugene Eric Kim

My nephew, Elliott, is a Cincinnati boy, but he’s clearly a Southern Californian at heart. According to my sister, he immediately gravitated towards the Dodgers hat among his collection of caps. (MJ9)

(MJA)

This picture brought a tear of joy to my eye. It will also bring a dent to my wallet, as I stock up on Dodger paraphernalia for when I see him in the fall. (MJB)

Generalist or Specialist?

Published August 20, 2007 by Eugene Eric Kim

Dave Gray shared one of his latest visualizations, which differentiates between specialists and generalists: (MIT)

(MIU)

I like the aesthetic of the diagram (which is how I feel about most of Dave’s work), but when I first looked at it, I couldn’t help but think that it was off somehow. After pondering, I realized my problem had less to do with the diagram than it did with how how he frames his conclusions: (MIV)

“Generalists are best when DEFINING the problem or goal. (MIW)
“Specialists are best used when SOLVING the problem or EXECUTING THE PLAN. (MIX)

The distinction between a specialist and a generalist isn’t the ability to state versus solve a problem. The distinction has to do with the kind of problems they are good at addressing. Generalists are good at defining general or, more accurately, system problems, which, by definition, cannot be solved by a single person. But a generalist isn’t necessarily good at defining specialized problems. (MIY)

The diagram itself is very good. I like the dimensionality of it, which jives with our traditional notions of horizontal versus vertical thinking (or breadth versus depth of knowledge). I also like the network depiction of the generalists’ plane, which emphasizes the systems view. (MIZ)

However, there are some important nuances missing. First, because of the colors in the horizontal plane as well as the top-down view, the horizontal plane seems to hold greater importance than the vertical plane. That’s misleading. A true systems thinker views a problem from all three dimensions, not just one plane. I think adding some color to the vertical lines would help alleviate this. (MJ0)

Second, while I like the fact that the vertical plane depicts mostly linear problems, I think these planes should show some network characteristics. This would also help emphasize the three dimensionality of the entire space, and the need for generalists and specialists to collaborate. (MJ1)

Finally, while I have plenty of nitpicks, I wouldn’t have thought deeply about these nuances in the first place if the diagram hadn’t helped clarify my thinking. It’s yet another demonstration of the power of Visual Thinking and of Dave’s skill at facilitating it. (MJ2)

MySQL, Open Source, and Trust

Published August 10, 2007 by Eugene Eric Kim

When Jonathan Cheyer wasn’t working with me and Brad Neuberg on HyperScope, he was scrapping away at his day job as Solid Information Technology‘s Open Source community manager. Despite having to deflect my endless teasing about revoking his hacker membership card for becoming a “marketing guy,” he’s been an excellent source of stories and insights about the nature of Open Source communities and collaboration. (I’m less concerned about his hacker cred than I am about him being a die-hard Celtics fan. Sad, very sad.) (MII)

Jonathan recently blogged about some controversy surrounding MySQL AB‘s decision not to distribute source tarballs of its Enterprise Edition. Why is this seemingly minor move such a big deal? He explains: (MIJ)

It’s about the importance of being earnest in what you do. Being an open source company is about a lot more than just slapping a GPL license on your software and handing it out. It’s about building a relationship with the community that is using, playing, testing, and improving your software. As anyone who is married knows well, this can only be done through ongoing, continual trust and transparency between the two parties. Trust is built by being dependable, and by telling the other person things that sound honest and real. Trust is improved by transparency, which is opening yourself to the other person. Adding an artificial means of inconvenience to the community in obtaining bits does nothing to help customers and only reduces transparency as seen by the community. (MIK)

I’m amazed at how often good companies with a strong understanding of Open Source forget this. I think it’s indicative of the ongoing tensions that businesses must balance, and it speaks even more favorably of companies that manage to consistently uphold their Open Source values even in the face of these difficult tensions. (MIL)

I don’t have any first-hand insights into MySQL as an Open Source project. I do know that it’s been a model in the community for doing commercial Open Source for a long time, and I know a bunch of great folks who are involved in that community, Jonathan included. Jonathan sums it up best when he writes: (MIM)

MySQL AB has been working with the open source community for a long time and a lot of good things have been accomplished as a result of that. There is much to applaud. Along the way, there have been occasional mistakes, and this is one of those times. MySQL risks alienating a community that has been very supportive of them by a misguided move in in their quest to “get more customers”. Make money, make as much as you can, but while you do, don’t forget the lesson of being earnest in your endeavors and staying true to your community. (MIN)