But what if a slice or sliver of people’s compensation was denominated for Kickstarter-esque discretionary financing? Why not make the organization a marketplace that creates the option to tap not “the wisdom of crowds” but the “excitement of employees” or the “perceptions of personnel”?
Genius. Read this article. Would you, as a boss, consider this model?
And… The link to the previous app made me realize that I’ve never given headline space to DaisyDisk. This despite loving the heck out of it and using it fairly frequently.
There are many apps that can analyze your disk and tell you what is taking up the most space. That said, none do it more elegantly than this. In fact, the darn thing looks so pretty you may not want to delete anything.
Seriously, if you ever have need for such a thing, it’s a no brainer.
A new app uses the power of your own positive thinking to create a placebo effect—which works even if you know it’s happening.
You start by setting a goal: say, more joy or love in your life. Then, you choose someone to give you the placebo (maybe a friend or family member), what you want it to be (a pill, say), and where you want to take it (maybe a forest where you go running with a friend). You then “take” the placebo whenever you want to, following a pre-set ritual built into the app.
The point is to replicate what’s important about the placebo effect, which isn’t the pill itself, but the experience.
Laser sintering is 3-D printing on steroids. The process is another form of additive manufacturing that shoots laser beams at metal powders to fuse particles together. As the powder bed is lowered, a new layer of particles is put on and then fused onto the emerging shape below it, slowly building up metal components and prototypes. The process, being employed by GE to make jet engine parts, produces little waste and allows for bespoke component designs on demand. See the video here.
City governments everywhere: get a grip. The sharing economy is not just the future, it is here — find a way to make it work or find yourself dealing with extensive new black markets!
(Note: the title of this article is misleading, as so far a judge simply applied existing laws to a case; no new laws have been made to “outlaw” Airbnb.)
For all the tranquility at the end of last week's World Technology/ICT Policy Forum (WTPF), E.B. White's words come to mind:
"there is nothing more likely to start disagreement among people or countries than an agreement." One also has to wonder though what a literary stylist like White would think of the linguistic gyrations demanded by the compromises reached at the WTPF in Geneva, and what they portend.
Past as Prologue
The management of the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) and a number of influential Member States made best efforts to recalibrate the dialogue at the WTPF towards mending political fences battered by the ITU's last major gathering back in December, and delegates of all stripes found a decent hearing for their concerns. But attempts by governments of Brazil and Russia to heighten the prominence of governments and the ITU itself in Internet governance still clashed with traditional defenders of the multistakeholder model. Where the clashes could not be resolved, we are left with gems such as this:
a formal recommendation dealing with the role for governments that "invites all stakeholders to work on these issues." Where, if anywhere, do you go from there?
Where to, ITU?
Uncertainty exists about how the next stages of the Internet governance debate will play out, but we at least know on what stages they will be played. Stakeholders in need of determining which venues to attend can choose among plenty of meetings and acronyms, IGF to CSTD to UNGA's 2C. The next opportunity for the ITU to consider the issue of Internet governance will be their own Council Working Group on the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) in June that take place alongside the ITU's larger Council meetings, where a broader discussion around the organization's budget may prove more important in determining priorities for the organization and how much resource it should spend in traditional areas of expertise, like satellite and spectrum allocations, and Internet policy.
In the coming months the ITU will also host a series of regional meetings in preparation for the World Telecommunications Development Conference (WTDC) from 31 March – 11 April 2014 in Sharm el‐Sheikh, Egypt. The ITU is colocating that meeting with its own ten year review of WSIS (called WSIS 10), as well as its annual WSIS Forum, in which it has traditionally served to review the WSIS action lines for itself and various other UN institutions.
Heralding what?
These meetings, and some of the new voices in them, imply that the ITU continues to position itself as a key forum for governments to come and make their views heard on Internet matters — a welcome if redundant function. So if the process of getting the agreement struck at the WTPF suggests anything, it is that stakeholders can agree to disagree. This will not mean a stalemate or halt a discussion, in this case, but rather an evolving debate about the role for government in Internet policymaking. The steady pace of ITU-sponsored engagements will provide further opportunities to agree, disagree, and in the end, hopefully create a set of shared understandings and brokered solutions that actually advance the debate to the benefit of people and countries around the world.
By Christopher Martin, Senior Manager, International Public Policy at Access Partnership
I like fashion. I don’t pretend to be a genius at it, but I have a definite style and I like to look good. But honestly, I’m really busy as a professional in DC and I rarely get the time to do regular shopping. I also am towards the beginning of my career and I don’t have a million dollar budget for my wardrobe!
When I heard about stitch fix — a service that boxes up 5 items that fit your “profile,” delivers them to your door, and you keep what you want and send back the rest — I was a little wary. I’d heard of Trunk Club (a related service for men) and I’d heard it was very expensive. But I filled out a 10-minute style profile – they ask you to rate different outfits, tell them types of clothing what you wear most often and for what occasions, and put in details about my sizes. The two best pieces of these profiles: questions about how much you usually spend on a given item (i.e. $50-100 for business dresses, “as cheap as possible” for tops), and a link to your fashion board on Pinterest! Ingenious.
Another view of the profile…
Then, you schedule a fix. You can sign up to get them once a month, or only when you want them. You add a note to your stylist letting them know if you want anything in particular this time around. In my case, I had just started a new job at a government agency and needed conservative neutrals. They did GREAT with that request! They charge $20 for a fix, so you lose that if you like NOTHING, but if you do keep anything, it is deducted from your cost as a credit. And trust me, you will want to keep something.
I have gotten quite a few fixes now (monthly, for a while), and I generally keep 2-3 of the 5 items each time – dresses, sweaters, earrings, etc. My stylists have done a great job picking items that I have a really hard time sending back: that are unique, versatile, would make me stand out just a little, and are a good value. They have sent me some dresses that are under my desired budget, even! Of course, occasionally there are items I am just not interested in, but that is okay. ;) At the end, you rate the clothes they sent you, put the items you don’t want in a pre-paid envelope and drop it in your nearest mailbox. So easy!
If you are interested in having someone pick out clothes for you every month or two, I HIGHLY recommend this. You will get interesting pieces of great quality from good designers that you might not have looked at on your own… but fit your style, because your stylist has a continuously improving profile on you.