MasterSearch

AddThis

Showing posts with label Silicon-Valley. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Silicon-Valley. Show all posts

August 09, 2019

#Dopamine #Fasting Is The Hot New #SiliconValley Trend



Dopamine Fasting - The Hot Silicon Valley Trend

Dr. Cameron Sepah | 7 Aug 2019


In the age of the "attention economy", many of us are highly overstimulated at best and addicted at worst, and we don't even know how bad our behavior is. As I wrote about, Americans spend a whopping 11 hours a day engaging with media of some kind! It's unclear what the long-term implications of this overstimulation are on our brains, but in my experience working with executive clients in my private practice, I've observed that this interferes with our ability to focus/sustain attention, regulate our emotions in healthy/non-avoidant way, and enjoy simple/mundane tasks that seem boring by comparison. So what's the treatment?

What is Dopamine?


Dopamine is the neurotransmitter in our brains that's responsible for motivation and reward. Dopaminergic drugs (e.g. stimulants such as Adderall, cocaine, & methamphetamine) act on dopamine receptors like a key opening a lock, and over time, downregulate these receptors and makes us less sensitive to dopamine. This requires using more and more of the drug to get the same effects, thus starting the cycle of addiction. But even behaviors such as gaming or gambling can become problematic through the motivation and rewards of near misses and wins.
No alt text provided for this image
This is not to demonize dopamine; it's an important brain chemical, and people who are low in it (whether naturally or by taking antipsychotic medications) can be lethargic, emotionally flat, and anhedonic (taking little interest of pleasure in things). And properly-prescribed dopaminergic medications can help people with ADHD & Parkinson's improve their ability to focus and regulate their behavior. Rather, the point is to give our brains a chance to go through a purposeful withdrawal from dopamine overstimulation that lets our brains return to balance and homeostasis.

What is Dopamine Fasting & Why Do It?

No alt text provided for this image Just as intermittent fasting has become all the rage in Silicon Valley and beyond, I am popularizing "dopamine fasting" as the antidote to our overstimulated age. Dopamine fasting has precedent from psychiatric practice. As a clinical professor of psychiatry, my residents often prescribe stimulant medications like Adderall or Ritalin to patients with ADHD. Patients are sometimes advised to take "drug holidays" by taking it for the 5 days it helps them work/study, and take 2 days off on the weekend when it's less important, in order to avoid building a tolerance to the drug, where the effects fade and you increasingly need a higher dose. 

Regardless of whether we are stimulating our dopamine receptors exogenously (from outside the body by taking a stimulant drug) or endogenously (from inside the body, by engaging in a stimulating behavior), the same principle applies. A benefit of dopamine fasting is that it helps retain the pleasure of the behavior instead of getting tired of it. More importantly, you are training yourself to have more control and flexibility over whether or not you engage in a behavior (e.g. choosing not to procrastinate when it's important).

What to Dopamine Fast From?

No alt text provided for this imageIn my clinical experience, I find the behaviors that are most problematic/prone to addiction are:
  • Pleasure eating
  • Internet/gaming
  • Gambling/shopping
  • Porn/Masturbation
  • Thrill/novelty seeking
  • Recreational drugs 

This list is neither inclusive nor exclusive. I've seen versions of "dopamine fasting" that say absolutely no digital devices, but I find this to be missing the point. For example, browsing compulsively through various articles on your phone can definitely be addictive, while reading a single book on a Kindle Paperwhite device (which has no options for distraction) is probably fine. To decide what to fast from, simply regard whether it's highly pleasurable or problematic for you, and thus you may need a break from.

The Schedule

No alt text provided for this imageA suggested schedule for dopamine fasting is as follows:
  • 1-4 hours at the end of the day (depending on work & family demands)
  • 1 weekend day (spent it outside on a Saturday or Sunday)
  • 1 weekend per quarter (go on a local trip)
  • 1 week per year (go on vacation!) 
Again, these are guidelines, not strict rules. If it's easier to start by dopamine fasting for 1 hour a day (vs. 4 hours a day), then go for it, and then try to ramp up to what you're willing to do and sustain long-term (e.g. 2 hours/day). Perfect is the enemy of good. So like Nike: just do it. Let's now tackle each of the six major vices in turn:

---


July 18, 2011

Google: The Beginning - WSJ.com


  • The Wall Street Journal
THE SATURDAY ESSAY
JULY 16, 2011
The Beginning
An insider recounts the early days: the bizarre job interview, April Fools' pranks that enraged users, roller hockey, platters of sushi—and the uneasy leap to the mainstream.
By DOUGLAS EDWARDS
In an excerpt from his new book, "I'm Feeling Lucky: The Confessions of Google Employee Number 59," in this Saturday's Review, Douglas Edwards recounts tales from the early days of Google, including bluffing his way through a job interview with Sergey Brin, sweating-out Google's first-ever April Fools' Day prank, and what it was like working at a start-up that had a chef and two massage therapists on call-but no marketing department.
Getty Images/Michael Grecco; Google Type: Vault 49
Co-founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin in 2002.

In November 1999, Douglas Edwards became fledgling Google's first "brand manager," making him employee No. 59. In this excerpt from his new book, "I'm Feeling Lucky," Mr. Edwards gives an inside view of the company's early days, starting with his job interview with co-founder Sergey Brin, then 26 years old.

Cindy McCaffrey, director of public relations, brought me back to the conference room to wait for Sergey. I wasn't nervous. Sergey was about the age of my favorite T-shirt (I was 41) and a Russian by birth. I had lived in Russia. I spoke some Russian. I had Russian friends.
I felt unusually confident that the interview would go well. Perhaps I would become his mentor and we would toast each other's health with fine Siberian vodka. Sergey showed up wearing roller-hockey gear: gym shorts, a T-shirt and in-line skates. He had obviously been playing hard. I had known better than to wear a tie, but he took office casual to a new level.

Sergey pored over my résumé and began peppering me with questions. "What promotion did you do that was most effective?" "What metrics did you use to measure it?" "What types of viral marketing did you do?"

"How much do you think a company our size should spend on marketing?" Sergey asked me. Based on his earlier questions, it was easy to guess what he wanted to hear from me. "I don't think at this stage you should spend much at all," I said. "You can do a lot with viral marketing and small budgets."

He nodded his agreement, then asked about my six months in Siberia, casually switching to Russian to see how much I had picked up. Finally, he leaned forward and fired his best shot, what he came to call "the hard question."

"I'm going to give you five minutes," he told me. "When I come back, I want you to explain to me something complicated that I don't already know." He then rolled out of the room toward the snack area. I looked at Cindy. "He's very curious about everything," she told me. "You can talk about a hobby, something technical, whatever you want. Just make sure it's something you really understand well."

I reached for a piece of scrap paper as my mind raced. What complicated thing did I know well enough to describe to Sergey? I decided to go with the general theory of marketing, which was fresh in my mind, because I'd only learned it recently.

One of my dirty little secrets was a complete lack of academic preparation for the business world. Fortunately, my boss at the San Jose Mercury News, where I was working as a brand manager, had a Harvard MBA and a desire to drive some business theory into my thick skull. She had given me a bunch of her old textbooks, along with strong hints that I should spend time reading them. I began regurgitating everything that I could remember onto the paper in front of me: The five P's (or was it six?), the four M's, barriers to entry, differentiation on quality or price.

More
How Google Got Going
Speakeasy: Google Employee No. 59 on Why He Left
A Holiday Card From Google

By the time Sergey came back, I had enough to talk for 10 minutes and was confident I could fill any holes with the three Bs (Buckets of Baffling Bulls—). I went to the whiteboard and began drawing circles and squares and lots of arrows. I was nervous, but not very. Sergey bounced on a ball and asked questions that required me to make up things on the spot.

"What's more important: product differentiation or promotion?"

"How does the strategy change if the price is zero?"

He seemed to be paying attention, and I began enjoying myself. We were developing a special rapport! Clearly, he wanted to hear what I had to say and valued my opinions. Later I found out that Sergey did this with everyone he interviewed. An hour wasted with an unqualified candidate wasn't a total loss if Sergey gained insight into something he didn't already know.

The light was fading by the time I finished, and Sergey invited me to join the staff for dinner, which was being brought into a small kitchen across from the conference room. A crowd of hungry engineers bounced from plate to plate with chopsticks picking at a large selection of sushi.

"We just hired a chef, so this is a temporary set-up," Sergey told me. "And we've got a couple of massage therapists coming in as well."

A warning light flashed in my head at that. This was the guy who didn't think there should be a marketing budget, and he had hired a chef and two massage therapists? But then I saw the platters of fatty tuna and shrimp and salmon and yellowtail. I grabbed some chopsticks and began loading my plate. Concerns about a business plan and revenue streams and organizational structure faded away.


Larry Page and Sergey Brin in their first office -- a garage -- in Menlo Park, Calif., in January 1999 One of Mr. Brin's early marketing ideas was to inoculate Chechen refugees against cholera.


May 26, 2011

Social Media Companies' Ridiculous Valuations


Can you say bubble?


Infographic: What the Largest Social Media Companies Are Worth

By Derek Thompson, The Atlantic
In 2010, LinkedIn made about $200 million in sales. In 2011, its stock price suggests a market cap of $9 billion. Trading at 45 times its revenue makes LinkedIn the highest price-revenue ratio of any stock in the world, said Espen Robak, president of the firm Pluris Valuation Advisors.

The rest of the social media brat pack is on the cusp of going public. Zynga's IPO could be weeks away. Facebook is expecting a $100 billion valuation by IPO in 2012. What kind of wild valuation multiples could we see from the next batch of upstarts? The cool chart below* answers that question. The upshot: Of the companies earning revenue, Twitter has the highest current revenue-valuation ratio.

GLG-TECHBUBBLE_Infographic.png

http://cdn.theatlantic.com/static/mt/assets/what-were-reading/GLG-TECHBUBBLE_Infographic.png

* To answer the question posed by the chart (Is there a tech bubble?) the best answer is: This chart doesn't have the answer. Investors are willing to pay the prices they're paying for private and public stock either because they believe they can get their money out before the market realizes there is a bubble (a risky strategy) or because they really think that these companies will grow quickly and eventually settle at mundane multiples, like Google and Microsoft. Graph courtesy of Gplus.
This article available online at:


_______________________________________
Check it out on The MasterTech Blog

May 18, 2011

In Silicon Valley, Buying Companies for Their Engineers - NYTimes.com


Acquisition: For Buyers of Web Start-Ups, Quest to Corral Young Talent
May 17, 2011



SAN FRANCISCO — Sam Lessin sold his Web start-up to Facebook for millions last year, and Facebook promptly shut it down. All Facebook wanted was Mr. Lessin.
That is what it has come to in bubbly Silicon Valley. Companies like Facebook, Google and Zynga are so hungry for the best talent that they are buying start-ups to get their founders and engineers — and then jettisoning their products.
Some technology blogs call it being “acqhired.” The companies doing the buying say it is a talent acquisition, and it typically comes with a price per head.
“Engineers are worth half a million to one million,” said Vaughan Smith, Facebook’s director of corporate development, who has helped negotiate many of the 20 or so talent acquisitions made by Facebook in the last four years. The money — in the form of stock — is often distributed among the start-up’s founders, employees and investors. The acquired employees also get a rich salary and often more stock options, which makes this a good time for entrepreneurial engineers.
Mr. Lessin, who is 27, happily traded his dream of becoming the next Internet superstar for a prominent job with Facebook. “The impact here is astronomical,” said Mr. Lessin, whose start-up was called Drop.io. “It’s awesome.”
But the deals may not be so good for everyone. Some Silicon Valley veterans fear that companies are overpaying for talent and that some of the acquired employees will defect as soon as they can, perhaps because they will get restless in a corporate environment. And venture capitalists, who hope for windfalls in the tens or hundreds of millions if not more, will only grudgingly settle for less.
“It is not what we are aiming for as investors,” said Dave McClure, founder of 500 Startups, a venture fund. “We are trying to build large, lasting businesses.”
Still, Mr. McClure and other investors said a talent acquisition that offers a modest payoff is better than no deal at all if a start-up sputters. And while a sale for a few million will not make or break their funds, it could amount to a tidy sum for an engineer just out of college, they said.
“Who are we to tell a young entrepreneur that they can’t have their first million?” said Paul Graham, a partner at Y Combinator, a well-known incubator that has invested in hundreds of start-ups.

May 13, 2011

Facebook Loses Much Face In Secret Smear On Google

Facebook Loses Much Face In Secret Smear On Google
Facebook secretly hired a PR firm to plant negative stories about Google, says Dan Lyons in a jaw dropping story at the Daily Beast.
For the past few days, a mystery has been unfolding in Silicon Valley. Somebody, it seems, hired Burson-Marsteller, a top public-relations firm, to pitch anti-Google stories to newspapers, urging them to investigate claims that Google was invading people’s privacy. Burson even offered to help an influential blogger write a Google-bashing op-ed, which it promised it could place in outlets like The Washington Post, Politico, and The Huffington Post.
The plot backfired when the blogger turned down Burson’s offer and posted the emails that Burson had sent him. It got worse when USA Today broke a story accusing Burson of spreading a “whisper campaign” about Google “on behalf of an unnamed client.”
Not good.
The source emails are here.
I’ve been patient with Facebook over the years as they’ve had their privacy stumbles. They’re forging new ground, and it’s not an exaggeration to say they’re changing the world’s notions on what privacy is. Give them time. They’ll figure it out eventually.
But secretly paying a PR firm to pitch bloggers on stories going after Google, even offering to help write those stories and then get them published elsewhere, is not just offensive, dishonest and cowardly. It’s also really, really dumb. I have no idea how the Facebook PR team thought that they’d avoid being caught doing this.
First, it lets the tech world know that Facebook is scared enough of what Google’s up to to pull a stunt like this. Facebook isn’t supposed to be scared, ever, about anything. Supreme confidence in their destiny is the the way they should be acting.
Second, it shows a willingness by Facebook to engage in cowardly behavior in battle. It’s hard to trust them on other things when we know they’ll engage in these types of campaigns.
And third, some of these criticisms of Google are probably valid, but it doesn’t matter any more. The story from now on will only be about how Facebook went about trying to secretly smear Google, and got caught.
The truth is Google is probably engaging in some somewhat borderline behavior by scraping Facebook content, and are almost certainly violating Facebook’s terms and conditions. But many people argue, me included, that the key data, the social graph, really should belong to the users, not Facebook. And regardless, users probably don’t mind that this is happening at all. It’s just Facebook trying to protect something that it considers to be its property.
Next time Facebook should take a page from Google’s playbook when they want to trash a competitor. Catch them in the act and then go toe to toe with them, slugging it out in person. Right or wrong, no one called Google a coward when they duped Bing earlier this year.
You’ve lost much face today, Facebook.
Update: Sleazy PR Firm Throws Scummy Facebook Under The Sordid Bus

May 08, 2011

The ‘Facebook Class': Apps & Fortune Makers

The Class That Built Apps, and Fortunes

May 7, 2011

NYTimes.com




STANFORD, Calif.
ALL right, class, here’s your homework assignment: Devise an app. Get people to use it. Repeat.
That was the task for some Stanford students in the fall of 2007, in what became known here as the “Facebook Class.”
No one expected what happened next.
The students ended up getting millions of users for free apps that they designed to run on Facebook. And, as advertising rolled in, some of those students started making far more money than their professors.
Almost overnight, the Facebook Class fired up the careers and fortunes of more than two dozen students and teachers here. It also helped to pioneer a new model of entrepreneurship that has upturned the tech establishment: the lean start-up.
“Everything was happening so fast,” recalls Joachim De Lombaert, now 23. His team’s app netted $3,000 a day and morphed into a company that later sold for a six-figure sum.
“I almost didn’t realize what it all meant,” he says.
Neither did many of his classmates. Back then, Facebook apps were a novelty. The iPhone had just arrived, and the first Android phone was a year off.
But by teaching students to build no-frills apps, distribute them quickly and worry about perfecting them later, the Facebook Class stumbled upon what has become standard operating procedure for a new generation of entrepreneurs and investors in Silicon Valley and beyond. For many, the long trek from idea to product to company has turned into a sprint.
Start-ups once required a lot of money, time and people. But over the past decade, free, open-source software and “cloud” services have brought costs down, while ad networks help bring in revenue quickly.
The app phenomenon has accentuated the trend and helped unleash what some call a new wave of technology innovation — and what others call a bubble.
Early on, the Facebook Class became a microcosm of Silicon Valley. Working in teams of three, the 75 students created apps that collectively had 16 million users in just 10 weeks. Many of those apps were sort of silly: Mr. De Lombaert’s, for example, allowed users to send “hotness” points to Facebook friends. Yet during the term, the apps, free for users, generated roughly $1 million in advertising revenue.

April 14, 2011

Dot-Com Veterans reemerge



Scarred by the Dot-Com Bust, Reinvented for Social Media

Thomas WeiselNoah Berger/Bloomberg NewsBeen there: Thomas Weisel scouted technology start-ups in the 1990s and is doing so again.
SAN FRANCISCO — Thomas Weisel doesn't have much personal experience with social media. He has never opened a Facebook or Twitter account, and he has resisted buying an iPhone.
But Mr. Weisel knows a lot about overheated markets. His firm, Thomas Weisel Partners Group, was a dominant force in taking technology companies public during the dot-com boom and was hobbled when that bubble burst in 2000.
Today, Mr. Weisel, 70, is assessing the industry landscape from his corner office at the Stifel Financial Corporation, the brokerage firm that bought his struggling company in April 2010. Although the current frenzy raises concerns, he says he thinks it is unfair to compare Internet stocks during the late 1990s to social media companies now.
"In a sentence, the big difference is these companies, in many cases, are enormously profitable out of the gate," he said.
Mr. Weisel, who as co-chairman of Stifel's board is still out hustling banking business, is among the many heavyweights from the dot-com days who are reinventing themselves in the era of social media.
Mary Meeker, the research analyst who was called the Queen of the Internet, recently joined theventure capital giant Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers. Frank Quattrone, the Wall Street investment banker who helped take Amazon.com public in 1997, now has his own boutique advisory group working with technology start-ups and stalwarts, including National Semiconductor on its recent deal with Texas Instruments. Sandy Robertson, previously a founder of Robertson Stephens, a technology banking firm, joined Francisco Partners, a private equity shop that focuses on technology.
Lise Buyer, a former Credit Suisse First Boston analyst who currently advises companies on potential public offerings at her firm, Class V Group, jokes that she is "running into everyone" she knew from the go-go period of the late 1990s.
"Social media is a new frontier," Mr. Robertson said.These veterans offer a unique perspective, having survived the previous technology craze and now playing a role in the current one.
Mr. Weisel, a Rochester, Minn., native who was once a competitive speed skater, rose to fame during the technology boom. In the early 1990s, he ran Montgomery Securities, one of the boutique banks known as the Four Horsemen that dominated technology underwriting during the decade. During his tenure, Mr. Weisel took Yahoo public and helped orchestrate StrataCom's sale to Cisco for $4.7 billion, at the time the largest technology acquisition that year.
But like many at the time, Mr. Weisel was swept up in the frenzy. In an interview in January 2000, he declared the tech boom was "the Super Bowl of all Super Bowls." Just a couple months later, the bubble burst — a crushing blow to his firm.After NationsBank bought Montgomery in 1997, he struck out on his own, starting Thomas Weisel Partners. He quickly landed a number of big assignments, including advising Yahoo on its acquisition of GeoCities.
In the aftermath, Mr. Weisel tried to diversify his firm away from technology, which accounted for more than 80 percent of revenue. He expanded into health care and consumer products. To raise capital, he took Thomas Weisel public in 2006.
But the firm never really recovered from the dot-com bust, and in 2010, it was sold to Stifel Financial.
His experience over the last decade has influenced his view. While he remains bullish on technology broadly, he says social media stocks are far from a slam dunk.
"They have great potential, but they have to continue to produce," Mr. Weisel said.
After years of managing, Mr. Weisel is happy to play the role of sage counsel. He regularly meets with technology entrepreneurs and executives, to help Stifel Financial land deals.
The notable difference this time is the underlying business models of many companies, he says. Technology costs are minimal, which allows social networking sites to be profitable almost immediately. During the dot-com boom, companies burned through cash and took years to turn a profit — if they did at all.
"For the most part, these are real companies with real revenue and are generating real cash flow," he said.
Even so, Mr. Weisel says it is critical for companies like Groupon, which is said to be valued at roughly $25 billion, to maintain their leadership position.
"First-mover advantage is key," Mr. Weisel said. "If they don't continue to produce, someone next door will come in and build a better mouse trap."
He points to MySpace as a cautionary tale. In 2006, it was the top social networking site, with users topping 50 million that year, according to the research firm comScore. But it has steadily ceded ground since then to Facebook, which claims 150.7 million users today versus 37.7 million for MySpace. Its current owner, the News Corporation, recently put MySpace on the auction block.
Mr. Weisel is also watching valuations. Companies like Facebook, which is worth an estimated $50 billion, may not be able to justify such numbers unless their strategies evolve and they find new sources of profit.
"Right now, these business models are typically brand new and not fully vetted," Mr. Weisel said. "They have to figure how to continue to monetize the traffic they are getting or valuations will fall off."

The Barons of Two Booms

Other major Wall Street players from the dot-com bubble have reinvented themselves.
Sandy Robertson
Sandy Robertson
THEN: A founder of the boutique bank Robertson Stephens, he proclaimed in 1999 that tech companies were the most expensive stocks ever.
NOW: While he wonders if sites like Facebook are the modern equivalent of the defunct citizens' band radio, Mr. Robertson, an executive at the private equity firm Francisco Partners and a director at the software company Salesforce.com, sees great potential.
Mary Meeker
Mary Meeker
THEN: As an analyst for the investment bank Morgan Stanley, Ms. Meeker was referred to as the Queen of the Internet for her bullish investment calls on technology companies like Amazon.com and eBay.
NOW: Ms. Meeker left her perch at Morgan Stanley in late 2010 to join Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers, the venture capital firm based in San Francisco. An investor in the start-ups Groupon and Zynga, the firm recently introduced a $250 million social media fund.
Henry Blodget
Henry Blodget
THEN: Once a high-flying technology analyst at Merrill Lynch whose stock recommendations often moved the market, Mr. Blodget was accused by regulators of issuing positive ratings on stocks in public while deriding them in private e-mails. As part of a settlement, he was barred from the securities industry.
NOW: Mr. Blodget is currently the editor and chief executive of The Business Insider, a gossipy news site that covers Wall Street. He has more than 28,000 followers on Twitter.


Sent from a wireless device.

April 02, 2011

Google founder hopes to prove he's ready to be CEO

Google founder hopes to prove he's ready to be CEO
AP via Yahoo! News

By MICHAEL LIEDTKE, AP Technology Writer – Fri Apr 1, 4:48 pm ET

SAN FRANCISCO – Google co-founder Larry Page is known for his vision, passion and intelligence.

Yet there is a fair amount of concern that Page's other known traits — his aloofness, rebellious streak and affinity for pursuing wacky ideas — might lead the company astray. Page takes over as CEO on Monday as fast-rising rivals and tougher regulators threaten Google's growth.

Investors used to Google Inc.'s consistency in exceeding financial targets worry that new leadership will bring more emphasis on long-term projects that take years to pay off. And many people still aren't sure he has enough management skills to steer the Internet's most powerful company.

Page already has learned that smarts alone won't make him a great leader. Although Page impressed Google's early investors with his ingenuity, they still insisted that he step down in 2001 as Google's first CEO. He turned over the job to Eric Schmidt, a veteran executive who began working in Silicon Valley in the early 1980s while Page was still in grammar school.

Page's admirers say that at 38, he is more mature and less apt to be chronically late to meetings or tune out of conversations that don't stimulate his intellect — habits that he fell into during his first stint as CEO.

'There are parts of being CEO that don't fit Larry's personality,' said Craig Silverstein, the first employee that Page and Google's other founder, Sergey Brin, hired when they started the company in 1998. 'You wear a lot of different hats when you're CEO. Some of them are very interesting to Larry and some of them, presumably, are less interesting.'

True to his taciturn form, Page hasn't said much publicly since Google made its stunning announcement in January that he will replace Schmidt as CEO. Google said Page wasn't available for an interview.

Page, though, has left little doubt about his top priority: to dissolve the bureaucracy and complacency that accompanied the company's rapid transformation into a 21st-century empire. Google is expected to end the year with more than 30,000 employees and $35 billion in annual revenue.

In Page's mind, the 13-year-old company needs to return to thinking and acting like a feisty startup. Rising Internet stars such as Facebook, Twitter and Groupon, all less than 8 years old, are developing products that could challenge Google and make its dominance of Internet search less lucrative.

Page has drawn comparisons to two high-tech geniuses who are even more accomplished: Microsoft Corp. co-founder Bill Gates and Apple Inc. co-founder Steve Jobs. Like those two pioneers in personal technology, Page invented and cultivated a product that changed the world.

But Page has yet to match them in this respect: as CEOs, Gates and Jobs brought out the best in the companies that they created, delighting stockholders as their investments soared.

Page doesn't fit the CEO mold, even by the standards of Silicon Valley's free-wheeling culture. He dropped out of graduate school at Stanford to start Google and doesn't have a business degree.

Science and technology, though, seems to be in his DNA even though he grew up in Michigan, where automobiles rule.

His late father, Carl, was a computer scientist and pioneer in artificial intelligence, and his mother taught computer programming. Page began working on personal computers when he was just 6 years old in 1979, when home computers were a rarity. The geeky impulses carried into his adulthood, leading him to once build an inkjet printer out of Legos.

Page relishes challenging the status quo and encourages his employees to do so, too. Those who know Page suspect he picked up the anti-establishment mindset as a boy who attended Montessori schools, which discourage structured curricula and encourage independent activities.

Page has wanted to control his own destiny — and legacy — since reading a biography of the inventor Nikola Tesla before he was even in high school. Tesla wasn't rewarded or widely recognized for his breakthroughs in X-ray, wireless communications and electricity. Page didn't want that to happen to him as an entrepreneur.

For that reason, Page embraced the chance to be Google's CEO when the company started in a rented garage not far from the company's current headquarters in Mountain View, Calif. It also helps explain why he and Brin created a separate class of stock with greater voting power so they and Schmidt could remain in charge after the company went public in 2004. Page's stake in Google has made him one of the world's wealthiest people with an estimated fortune of $20 billion.

Although the contours of his personality and background are known quantities, Page remains an enigmatic figure on Wall Street.

To some, he remains best known for uncompromising idealism, reflected in his embrace of his company's 'Don't Be Evil' motto and his pledge to never cater to investors' desire for ever-rising quarterly earnings at the expense of long-term investments.

Page already raised concerns by pushing Google into renewable energy and robotic cars. Those who know him say he has discussed even more far-flung projects behind closed doors.

'Sometimes his ideas are just way out there and you're kind of like, 'Wow, that came out of left field,'' said Ethan Anderson, a former Google product manager who now runs Redbeacon, a startup that operates a search engine for finding neighborhood businesses.

Uncertainty about whether Page will be as interested as Schmidt in appeasing Wall Street has contributed to a 6 percent drop in Google's stock price since the CEO change was announced Jan. 20. The technology-driven Nasdaq index has added 3 percent during that time.

BGC Financial analyst Colin Gillis doesn't believe it's a coincidence that Google revealed it would hire more than 6,200 employees this year — a 25 percent boost, and the most in its history — less than a week after it announced Page's comeback as CEO.

'Don't be surprised if Google's spending goes up, even it means its earnings per share might go down,' Gillis said.

Page's supporters believe Google's current market value of about $190 billion will climb even higher under his leadership. That would mirror what happened after Jobs finally got his chance to run Apple in 1997 after a decade in exile. Since then, Apple has brought out the iconic iPod, iPhone and iPad devices and created more than $300 billion in shareholder wealth.

But the returns of company founders haven't always been triumphant. Consider Yahoo Inc. co-founder Jerry Yang's second stint as CEO from June 2007 to January 2009. Yahoo's stock fell 56 percent during that period, larger than the 41 percent drop for Nasdaq. Unlike the rest of the Nasdaq, Yahoo shares aren't close to rebounding to their June 2007 levels.

Hoping to smooth the transition to a new CEO, Google is keeping Schmidt, 55, in a prominent role as executive chairman and chief liaison with lawmakers and regulators around the world. That's an important job as Google faces growing scrutiny over its ambitions to use its dominance in search to enter new markets. Brin, 37, intends to focus on long-term projects, leaving Page to manage Google's daily operations.

'I am quite convinced that this change will result in faster decision-making, better success for the business and ultimately greater value for the shareholders,' Schmidt told The Associated Press after Google announced its shake-up in January.

In the past, the three made key decisions by committee, though Schmidt was the one responsible as CEO. Schmidt guided Google through an uninterrupted stretch of prosperity that has topped the performances of other technology trailblazers, including Apple and Microsoft, at similar stages of their corporate lives.

Page is better prepared to be CEO after a decade as Schmidt's apprentice, said Douglas Merrill, who worked with both executives before leaving Google in 2008 as vice president of engineering.

'Larry has grown over time,' Merrill said. 'He has learned how to make projects work. He has learned how to make sure things happen on time and in a predictable fashion. Larry is a sort of a learning machine.'

___

AP Technology Writer Rachel Metz in San Francisco contributed to this report.

Google founder hopes to prove he's ready to be CEO - Yahoo! News

March 09, 2011

Lunch with the FT: Sean Parker

Lunch with the FT: Sean Parker

By John Gapper
Published: March 4 2011 18:41 | Last updated: March 4 2011 18:41
Sean Parker is late. He was due at Gramercy Tavern at 1pm and at 1.15pm his assistant calls to say he is on his way. By 1.25pm, there is still no sign of him and I sit wondering if he is going to arrive. He has cancelled lunch once already, complaining of a knee injury and he has a reputation in Silicon Valley for being unreliable and flaky.
Illustration of Sean Parker
Parker is indulged because he has been a driving force in several pioneering internet companies, including Napster and Facebook (although he was ejected as president of Facebook for alleged bad behaviour) and has others up his sleeve. He is portrayed in The Social Network, the Facebook film, as a gifted but amoral playboy who charms his way to the side of Mark Zuckerberg, Facebook’s founder, and brutally ejects a rival.
The devil has the best line in the Aaron Sorkin-scripted film. When Parker, played by Justin Timberlake, meets Zuckerberg at a New York restaurant, he floats across the room, orders food for everyone, spins enticing tales and leaves with the come-on aphorism: “A million dollars isn’t cool. You know what’s cool? A billion dollars.” In real life, Parker’s Facebook stake is now worth $2bn.
So it is hard, waiting for him at a “very private banquette” (as Parker’s office has specified on the booking) at the Danny Meyer restaurant in lower Manhattan, to disentangle fact from fiction. Parker is having trouble with it himself since some parts of the script, for which Sorkin won an Oscar this week, ring true. He is indeed a bon viveur who wears designer suits and at the age of 31 has just spent $20m on a carriage house in nearby Greenwich Village.

At 1.30pm, the real-life figure turns up, shaking my hand apologetically. True to form, he is dressed immaculately in a dark suit, grey and white checked shirt and a black tie secured with a silver tie-pin. He says he has flown to New York from San Francisco for our lunch because he felt guilty about cancelling last time, and is staying at a hotel – the heating in his house is being repaired.
“The lateness thing is part of my branding almost but, in this case, I’d planned on getting here on time,” he says. “I had to go by the house to pick up some things. I was trying to find a belt to come over here and it’s like a nightmare. I’m crawling through this ET-like maze of plastic sheeting.” He waves his arms around to portray the scene and gives a wide-eyed, high-pitched laugh, somewhere between a giggle and a whinny.
Those who know Parker say he is kinder and more sensitive than the Sorkin portrayal. Indeed, the man now perched on the banquette before me is friendly and solicitous and is working to offset his new reputation as, as he puts it, “an asshole”. Yet he is also more like a Sorkin character than anyone I’ve ever met – if not the anti-hero of The Social Network.
He is pale-faced and intense, with a mop of reddish-brown hair and a beard, and talks as fast and rhetorically as a West Wing wonk. An auto-didact who did not attend university, he will happily extemporise about any topic from Italian wine to network engineering, and has the self-confidence-cum-arrogance of the Silicon Valley elite. I mention his knee and he gives a long, precise explanation of his cartilage problem, with hand gestures. “The meniscus is this piece of cartilage. It’s like there’s a bone here and a bone here and they fit together. Ordinarily bones have a ball and groove, that’s the typical joint structure. The knee is different. It’s flat bone to flat bone and this thing in the middle is the meniscus.” His own meniscus, “instead of being shaped like a [ring] doughnut, is shaped like a Boston eclair.”
The anatomical details done, we turn to the menu. Parker says Gramercy Tavern is his favourite restaurant but, as a night owl who often does not rise before noon, he tends to have dinner. “I don’t think of it as a lunch place so I have no idea if it’s going to be any good,” he says, before diverting into an explanation of the importance of table placement in gaining a third Michelin star (Gramercy Tavern has one star).
“Have you had the smoked trout?” he asks. “I’m not normally one for smoked fish but this is not like any smoked fish you’ve ever tasted. It’s amazing. Even if you’re not into fish, we could get one and you could just taste it. It’s really, really good. It’s like the best thing on the menu.” He pauses. “I might have hyped it now so if you don’t like it, you’ll blame me. It’s awful.” He laughs uproariously.
We both order the trout with cipollini purée and pickled onions. After quizzing the waitress about the snapper, Parker takes the rack and belly of lamb but decides not to have the belly (“I’m not super-hungry”), while I opt for sea bass with Swiss chard, capers, pine nuts and sweet onion sauce. We both have water and also order an Arnold Palmer (a mixture of lemonade and iced tea).
While we wait for our food, he describes the house he has bought, which he has rented for the past year. It was built in 1820 to serve a nearby mansion. “I can only imagine what the mansions of Fifth Avenue must have been like. I’m living where they kept the horses,” he says. His former landlord, the Italian drinks heir Enrico Cinzano, owned it for 20 years and had distinctive taste.
Parker has kept the entrance hall, which Cinzano lined with the sides of an old New York subway train, complete with taped subway noises. “I love the subway cars,” he enthuses. “Enrico said to me [Parker adopts a slightly menacing Italian accent], ‘Sean, you know, at some point I’m going to have to take back the subway cars.’ ” Long rhetorical pause. “‘But Sean, I’ll find you new subway cars.”
I have been laughing along with Parker’s stories since he turned up, feeling as enjoyably caught in his wake as the characters in The Social Network. So it seems a good time to mention the film. When I do, Parker turns serious for the first time. “Mmmm,” he says ruminatively, pointing at my tape recorder on the table. “That thing’s on, right?”
He thinks for a while. “There is no simple answer to what I think. It is a long conversation and you can easily take one quote out of context and frame it in one way or the other, so I have to trust you.” I nod, wondering what his definition of “a long conversation” might be, given the length and detail into which he has gone about his knee, his house and the trout.
He warms up with an anecdote. “Sony screened the film for me and a couple of friends, which was nice of them, given that they knew I’d hate it. My friends were up in arms at the end. They were screaming and one of them got drunk and started yelling at the woman from Sony, ‘He’s going to sue you! He’s going to sue you!’ and I’m like, ‘Shut the f**k up! Be quiet please. Let’s be dignified here.’ ” He imitates his frantic efforts to keep the peace.
While he is talking, the trout arrives. “It’s like a whole other ball game. It’s not even like fish, it’s like butter,” he says. I taste the trout as he watches me intensely. The taste is dense and creamy. “It’s amazing, isn’t it? You like it?” I agree that it is delicious and he makes a two-fisted punch of delight. “Yes!” he cries. “I’ve done something right today.”
Parker asks if I would like a glass of wine and the waitress suggests a pairing of Cantalupo Il Mimo, an Italian rosé made with the Nebbiolo grape. The news sends Parker off at a tangent. “The Nebbiolo grape is the most underrated grape,” he enthuses. “The Barolos and Barbarescos, all the great Italian wines, are based on the Nebbiolo grape. It is versatile. You get these really spicy minerally wines, you get earthy tones and leather and then you get these fruity wines.”
He returns to his reflections about the film. “I’m watching it and thinking this is really interesting. This character is definitely not me. It is a plot device created by Aaron Sorkin to tell the story that Aaron Sorkin wants to tell. At the same time I’m looking at David Fincher’s work [the film’s director] and saying this is brilliant and this guy has an obsessive devotion to accuracy.”
Parker and Sorkin clearly did not get on. “My interactions with Sorkin were agonisingly weird. He is by far the weirdest person I have ever met. I had dinner with him and a few hours before I got an e-mail from his assistant saying, ‘Sean, this does not need to be a long conversation. Aaron is only going to use it to win your trust.’ ” He laughs loudly. “I went, ‘What? What is this guy thinking?’ ”
The dinner turned out to be “like the most phony, stilted conversation ... It was as if he had scripted our conversation and when I deviated from the script, he came back to it.” I am laughing too much to eat as Parker builds up to his story’s punchline. “He was also twitching through the entire meal. Like uncontrollably twitching. Shaking in fact ... I don’t think he won my trust.”
The film did make him famous, I point out. Surely that has its uses? Parker contests that. “If you Google me, every five minutes someone will talk about me and they will say, ‘That guy is a jerk’, or ‘He’s an asshole’ and then strangely every once in a while someone will say, ‘That guy’s so awesome’. I’m, like, Uuuggh. I was perfectly capable of doing what I wanted in my life without this.”
The main course arrives and Parker, who is allergic to nuts and must carry an EpiPen, asks our waitress about the hazelnuts that were supposed to come with his lamb – he is allergic to nuts. It turns out that, although he had forgotten to mention it before, she has told the kitchen not to put them in. He is obviously, as he said, a regular.
Since he disputes his portrayal in the film, I ask him about what drives him and how he defines his job. “Solving specific problems is what drives me. I am not interested in having a career. I never have been,” he says. “This in no way resembles a career. I think a career is something your father brings home in a briefcase every night, looking kind of tired.”
It is an arresting image and I ask him if he is thinking of his own father, who was until recently chief scientist of the US National Ocean Service. “Yes, I think that’s accurate,” he says soberly. “He wanted to be entrepreneurial but he had a family and he didn’t feel able to take the risk of putting everything aside. He actually told me, ‘If you are going to take risks, take them early before you have a family.’ ”
Parker took those words to heart, building on his early hobby as a hacker in Virginia, to link up with other teenagers who had become fascinated by the potential of the internet. These included Shawn Fanning, the founder of Napster. Parker decided not to apply for college (a decision that “seemed totally insane” to his mother) and to develop Napster instead.
In one long breath, he describes what happened in the following 18 months: “Founded the company, launched the product, moved to California, got on my hands and knees and installed all the servers for six weeks, got introduced to my first business people and hired them and fired them, and was sued by the record labels and suddenly I’m on MTV and now we’re sponsoring raves and going to crazy parties, and then bigger and bigger and bigger. And then the company’s dead and I’m in a beach house in North Carolina getting the call, ‘Sean it doesn’t look good. I don’t think you’ll have a job when you get back.’ And then it’s over. And one day Fanning and I woke up from this dream. It felt like we’d lived through an entire lifetime of experiences.”
We have talked for nearly two hours. I excuse myself for a break and when I return to the table Parker is talking on his BlackBerry. As he ends the call, he looks agitated and upset. Page Six, the gossip column of the tabloid New York Post, has a story that he undertipped a nightclub doorman by giving him only five dollars. “This is insane,” he mutters, “If I did it, it was an accident.”
We skip pudding. I have coffee while he takes an English breakfast tea and discusses the meteoric change in his fortunes. “You have got to be willing to be poor [as an entrepreneur],” he says. “There was a time when I was living out of a single suitcase. I had a rule that I wouldn’t stay on one person’s couch for more than two weeks because I didn’t want to become a bother.”
So is a billion dollars cool? He ponders the question carefully. “No, it’s not,” he says. “It’s not cool. I think being a wealthy member of the establishment is the antithesis of cool. Being a countercultural revolutionary is cool. So to the extent that you’ve made a billion dollars, you’ve probably become uncool.” He laughs at his retort to Aaron Sorkin.
It is nearly 3.45pm and his BlackBerry is flashing alarmingly as his assistants guide him towards his next appointment, at Spotify, an online music service in which he has invested. Still muttering about Page Six, he retrieves our coats and carefully tips the attendant. Outside, a driver awaits with a Cadillac Escalade. Parker offers me a ride but I do not want to delay him. He is late.
John Gapper is the FT’s chief business commentator
..................................................
Gramercy Tavern
42 East 20th Street, New York
Bottle sparkling water $7.00
Arnold Palmer $4.00
Trout x2 $28.00
Sea bass $22.00
Rack of lamb $26.00
Glass Cantalupo
il Mimo x2 $18.00
Glass still water $3.00
Coffee $4.00
English breakfast tea $5.00
Total (including tax) $127.39
..................................................
Sean Parker’s ups and downs
As a teenage computer hacker in the Washington, DC, suburbs a decade and a half ago, Sean Parker had acceptable technology skills but none of the out-and-out wizardry of a Bill Gates or a Steve Jobs, writes Joseph Menn.
If one trait distinguished him, it was that he didn’t have the same tunnel vision as many of his peers. He thought the capabilities and flaws of computers and the internet were most interesting when they overlapped with the outside world.
He also had a precocious ability to spin business plans out of the ether. Napster, the song-sharing service, was fully Shawn Fanning’s creation and he would become its public face but Parker sprung to a natural role as business adviser and strategist, much as he would later with Facebook.
He was convincing enough, and the dotcom boom was so powerful, that even venture capitalists who might have concluded that Napster’s massive, directed file-sharing was illegal still wanted to put money in.
Napster itself was doomed in short order, though a record industry lawsuit first brought it headlines and millions more users. A lucrative settlement with the record industry – Parker’s secret goal from the start – foundered not because of his hubris but that of the hired professionals by then in charge of the start-up.
Parker himself was undone, at Napster and personally, by the wording in his e-mails to Fanning that were uncovered in the litigation. In one, he wrote that users “are exchanging pirated music”.
“I was incredibly depressed,” he said, after he took the hint and resigned in 2000. In 2001 he founded Plaxo, a system for keeping electronic address books up to date. Plaxo got top-tier venture funding amid a miserable climate but it again pushed the boundaries, nagging users with spam.
In Silicon Valley Parker is famed not only for his partying but for his difficulty finding operational roles inside companies. Venture investors forced him out at Plaxo and later stripped him of his post as Facebook president in 2005 after a drug arrest that didn’t result in charges.
He is now finding and managing investments for venture capital firm Founders Fund and playing a major part at Spotify, helping the music service try for licensing terms to play digitised songs from the big US record labels. If he clinches a deal, he will have come full circle and buried the Napster ghost.
Joseph Menn is an FT technology correspondent and author of ‘All the Rave: the Rise and Fall of Shawn Fanning’s Napster’


http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/8383ab06-45e3-11e0-acd8-00144feab49a.html?ftcamp=rss#axzz1G3wLvsId
_______________________________________
Check it out on The MasterTech Blog

Subscribe to The MasterTech's Feeds

Add This