Knights Of Glory Claims To Be The First Arabic MMO To Launch On The iPhone View Staff Page Follow me on twitter Have a Tip, Pitch or Guest Column? Tell us.X Latest on TechCrunch TV Latest in Gadgets Also on AOL Tech About Subscribe

0 comments


While world of Massively Multiplayer Online (MMO) games has ballooned in the last few years, the content available to people who’d rather not play a character from Western-inspired troops beating the crap out of some vague Eastern enemy has been somewhat limited. Culture is important, right? Which is why ‘Knights of Glory‘ – a sort of ‘Arabian Knights’ inspired MMO where warring Sultans of old wage war against each other with their medieval-era armies – has been gathering pace as the only fully Arabic browser-based MMO. Think in terms of a sort of World of Warcraft for the Arab-speaking world. Today sees the release the iPhone version of Knights of Glory, after its approval on Apple’s App Store, and the company claims this is the first Arabic MMO on the App Store.

“We didn’t believe in the potential of MMO games on mobile phones until we found many of our players asking for a mobile version” says Radwan Kasmiya, chief producer for Falafel Games, which produces Knights of Glory. He points out that while the content and production is in the Middle East, the game development is actually done in Hangzhou, China. Yes folks, welcome to globalisation.

The story-driven RPG allows the player to take the role of a leader during an historically accurate era when Arabic kingdoms fought against each other. The game is very social, with players all over the Middle East socializing, competing and collaborating. Last year Knights of Glory won the Readers’ Award for the Best Arabic Browser Game for 2012 by ArabMMO, a news portal for MMOs in the Middle East.

Falafel Games was founded in 2008 by Radwan Kasmiya and Vince Ghossoub, with a mission to produce games from an Arab’s perspective in light of the dominance of Western narratives in the gaming industry. The company is venture backed by the MBC Group and Middle East Venture Partners.

Knights of Glory will be released as a paid app but you can sign up to try out the game for free in an ‘early bird’ promotion by going here filling in your details and redeeming a code to dowload the game form the App store.

Check out the video below for instructions on how to sign up and a bit of a review. It’s in Arabic.


Source : feedproxy[dot]google[dot]com
Read More

Bringing Down The Mexican Mafia: How Hackers Stopped A $93 Million Fraud View Contributor Page Have a Tip, Pitch or Guest Column? Tell us.X Latest on TechCrunch TV Latest in Gadgets Also on AOL Tech About Subscribe

0 comments


Mexican-mafia

Editor’s note: Maria Rocio Paniagua currently works at Flit, a PR firm that helps products, projects and events launch in Mexico. Follow her on Twitter @lachinous.

“When the geeks go marching in, good stuff can happen, but if everyone joins in, real change can take place.” That’s what the hackers and team behind Codeando México, a civil innovation platform where government and organizations publish projects, thought when they launched the #app115 challenge, an app competition that aimed to prove that great code can be very inexpensive if motivated by the right reasons.

What motivated them? A couple of weeks ago, the Mexican House of Representatives announced that they were planning to pay $9.3 million to have an app developed. The app would work on mobile devices and would monitor what went on in the sessions: bills, context, statements and media analysis. According to one of Mexico’s most widely read newspapers, they had hired a company called Pulso Legislativo (a company that allegedly has questionable relations with current and former legislators from the party in power) and had agreed to 32 monthly payments of about $290,000.

The cost caused outrage, because it appeared to be another case of fund misuse by the government. The team from Codeando México wrote a blog post breaking down the figure: “It is more money than what the three most active VCs funds invested in Mexican startups in 2011 and 2012. It is buying a taco for 11,500,000 mexicans, it is paying the annual scholarship support for 306,667 students or broadband access for a year for 17,500 families. It is what a team of developers would charge you to develop Angry Birds 77 times…you get the point by now.”

According to Oscar Mendoza, the analysis director of Pulso Legislativo, the company didn’t develop a native app; instead they were offering a private service through a web app that provided reports from and analysis of Congressional sessions — information that the legislators already had. Mendoza said they had distributed 550 access keys; however, a head count quickly showed that many legislators had no knowledge of the contract or app.

“Together we can go beyond angry tweeting, towards fixing the world on a Saturday night over some tequilas.”

A journalist named Arturo Aguilar launched a petition on Change.org, which almost immediately received more than 1,900 signatures. As a result, the House ended up suspending the contract. Still, people from Pulso Legislativo said they’d continue providing their service until someone from the legal department of the House announces the official cancellation of the contract.

The Challenge

The guys from Codeando México teamed up with Intangible – a project started by Fede Casas and Jorge Soto that helps entrepreneurs develop their businesses, polish their code, and grow in their market space for up to six months – to walk the talk. They launched the #app115 challenge that invited hackers to take action: “Create an awesome, simple and useful open source Congress app for the Mexican citizens, make some money out of it and show how technology can bridge the gap between citizens and their representatives,” Codeando México wrote in its post. “Together we can go beyond angry tweeting, towards fixing the world on a Saturday night over some tequilas.”

Winners would receive an iPad mini and a symbolic prize amount of $9,300. How did they come up with that figure? “We wanted to make it 10,000 times cheaper,” says Casas.

Soto contacted Yeshua Sanyasi, one of the parliament assistants from a smaller party, to try to get what they were doing noticed by the Congress. They succeeded and set April 4 as the date for app proposals — just 10 days after they had launched the competition. In all, 173 individuals registered to participate, and five apps were presented. Some were built by teams, but most were developed by guys working by themselves.

Hacking on the steps of Congress.

Hacking on the steps of Congress.

The Trip To Congress

I was invited by one of the organizers to watch the presentations and met the participants at the Intangible offices. They were nervous — some of them wore suits, which is very unlike their usual attire — and they were discussing what they thought the event was going to be like. When we arrived at Congress, we went through security and waited an additional 15 minutes while they prepared the room. The hackers used this time to check their apps, take pictures and give interviews.

As soon as we entered the main room, we were greeted by a lawyer and a couple of legislators, one of whom quickly added that this project had been “well received by the Congress” and that they should expect “good representation.” Fifteen minutes before the presentation was to begin, the room was still empty, except for participants, curious onlookers  and supporters. Five minutes before, there was around 25 legislators, aids and onlookers. The grandson of the syndicate leader that was very publicly thrown in jail a couple a weeks ago arrived to loudly say hello to everyone and talk about the apps that were live.

We started half an hour late with an audience of around 50 legislators and aids. They introduced the presidium, which was made up of representatives from the party that organized the event and people from the Science and Tech Secretariat. Rodolfo Wilhemy, founder of Codeando México, gave a short speech. He had told me earlier that he wanted to ask for formal support for the hacker community, demanding the creation of a fund and a pipeline of contracts for similar projects. “It will be a white glove slap,” he said. Intangible’s Soto then said a few words, thanking the presidium for the opportunity and finally introduced the participants.

App Presentations 

Most teams used the site Curul 501 to obtain the Congressional information with which to populate their apps — partly because the site was at the top of the suggested links in the challenge, and partly because the web page from the Congress is horrible. Of the five apps presented, two were developed for iOS (Diputados and Congreso) and the rest for Android (Mi Congreso, Senado de la República and Actividad en San Lázaro). Each participant had five minutes to pitch their demos. Four of the apps were already in the respective app stores, so the audience could download them and follow the demos.

The presidium.

The presidium.

There was time for questions after each presentation, which is when things got even more interesting. A few of the Congressional representatives had a hard time containing their frustration about the Diputados app, particularly when the group showcased Karma, the app’s ranking feature. It works like this: every bill introduced gives a representative 10 points; every attendance awards three points; and every absence subtracts 20 points. One of the representatives in the audience took the mic and said he thought it was “unfair to be graded.” Another one jumped at this, adding that he had been missing that particular morning  because “he was looking at roads.”

It’s clear that this app’s feature was disruptive, having been called unfair and criticized so much. Representatives do have other obligations aside from being in sessions, but there has never been a truly open ranking system where Mexicans can see what their representatives are up to.

Diputados, developed by a workshop from Queretaro and presented by Arturo Jamaicas, was chosen as the winner; Mi Congreso (an app entirely developed by Eduardo Blancas by a 20-year-old hacker on his free time from school) was the runner-up. On the spot, the organizing team got Juan Pablo Adame, the Congressional representative in charge of the digital agenda, to agree to this project.

While the $93 million-dollar deal was dismantled, Codeando México still has a long road ahead. Remember, Pulso Legislativo plans to keep taking advantage of the bureaucratic process until its contract is canceled — probably in the hopes that the public forgets and lets it go. And although Codeando México managed to hold this competition, there is no official pipeline for the government to pursue further contacts like this one to help engage independent hackers and workshops. If they manage to create that in the next few months, they’ll truly be taking down the Mexican mafia in the best possible way.


Source : feedproxy[dot]google[dot]com
Read More

Backed Or Whacked: Get Together With The Band View Staff Page Follow me on Twitter Have a Tip, Pitch or Guest Column? Tell us.X Latest on TechCrunch TV Latest in Gadgets Also on AOL Tech About Subscribe

0 comments


Editor’s note: Ross Rubin is principal analyst at Reticle Research and blogs at Techspressive. Each column will look at crowdfunded products that have either met or missed their funding goals. Follow him on Twitter @rossrubin.

Last week, Backed or Whacked look at a trio of wristbands that can hold a buck, make a bun and prevent a burn all without any assistance from a successful mobile app platform. But as a host of digital fitness products has shown, the usually limited interfaces of fashion accessories can be boosted by pairing them with smartphones.

BW-embraceWhacked: Embrace+. The Embrace+ could be described as a smartwatch for people who would rather rave all night than know what time it is. The transparent band, to be available in three shapes, has embedded LEDs that illuminate in different colors depending on the kind of notification being received.

With 13 different services and alerts intended to be supported out of the gate, there’s a good chance that those with an active social (networking) life will find their wrists becoming a rainbow of a light show throughout the day. And if the unlimited colors aren’t enough for you, the band also offers options for the number and duration of blinks, light brightness and speed interval and whether to include a subtle vibration.

The Embrace+ campaign attracted interest, with nearly 1,500 backers ponying up nearly $84,000, but that represented less than half of its ambitious $220,000 goal. Almost immediately after it ended, the team vowed a relaunch at a new web address, but so far clicking it turns up a generic web-hosting admin page.

BW-weloxxWhacked: WeLoxx. Those who have pursued the quantified self only to discover there is too much of their self to quantify for their liking have access to a whole battle of the bands to help them with calorie expenditure. These include offerings from Jawbone and Nike with more on the way from Fitbit and Samsung. But at CES, much attention was lauded on a connected utensil called the HAPIfork that keeps track of how often you shovel food into your mouth, coaching you to eat more slowly.

That’s the basic idea of the WeLoxx, which moves the sensor from the fork to the wrist and thus enables it to work with spoons, chopsticks or your grubby bare hands. The project, originating in Bern, Switzerland, proposed two different models for the WeLoxx — a more watch-like design, the WeLoxx 300, and band-like design, the WeLoxx 900. Both featured an array of traffic lights to signal how fast you’re eating. For the near term, though, we won’t be loxxing, as the campaign collected only $584 from six backers en route to missing its $80,000 goal.

BW-linkmeWhacked: LinkMe. The LinkMe is a paradox. On one hand, or perhaps wrist, notification bands are supposed to be unobtrusive. The Embrace+’s light show may even be pushing it, but at least only you know how to decode its glowing rainbow.

In contrast, the LineMe wraps an LED billboard around that hand-joining joint. The advantage is that the band can display specific messages instead of just notification lights, possibly saving you more trips back to the 5″ LTE-packing behemoth weighing down your pocket. On the other hand, it could enable anyone close enough to your resting arm to read the digital sweet nothing intended just for snookums. The creators, New Yorkers Matt and Colin, would counter that you can set up a system of abstract characters to get back to the Embrace+ level of abstraction.

The LinkMe would last about two weeks on a charge and, like the Nike FuelBand, the LinkMe can default to a time readout when nothing private is being broadcasted to it. One month in, the campaign has raised only about $13,000 of its $100,000 goal.


Source : feedproxy[dot]google[dot]com
Read More

Bitcoin Miners Are Racking Up $150,000 A Day In Power Consumption Alone View Staff Page Follow me on twitter Have a Tip, Pitch or Guest Column? Tell us.X Latest on TechCrunch TV Latest in Gadgets Also on AOL Tech About Subscribe

0 comments


There’s a gold rush going on these days, or a Bitcoin rush, at least. Driven by the recent swings in the value of a Bitcoin, more and more people are learning about and becoming interested in the currency. While they could just buy Bitcoins at the current market rate, others are looking to try their luck at mining Bitcoins. And like prospectors who traveled west during the Gold Rush of the 19th century, many Bitcoin miners will find that they spend more on chasing the Bitcoin dream than they’ll ever hope to win back.

As explained here, Bitcoins are “mined” by unlocking blocks of data that “produce a particular pattern when the Bitcoin ‘hash’ algorithm is applied to the data.” It seems simple enough, but the cost of Bitcoin mining is greater than one might expect. The more Bitcoins are mined, the more difficult it becomes to find the next block. Unless the miner is using the latest specially-designed mining rigs, the computers used often sport high-end graphics cards (since the GPUs are more efficient than CPUs for mining application). And running those computers requires a lot of power.

Blockchain.info, which tracks Bitcoin-related data, estimates that miners are using 1,005.59 megawatt hours of electrical consumption each day in their pursuit of new blocks of Bitcoins. That ends up costing about $150,000 in power costs each day to mine the currency. [Hat tip to Bloomberg for reporting on the data.]

That may sound like a lot, but miners on average are making money. According to Blockchain, miners are generating $470,000 in Bitcoin-related revenue per day. In fact, due to the recent interest in the virtual currency and its popularity, operating margins for Bitcoin miners are close to record highs.

While it might be easy to look at those numbers and think it’s NBD to just like, extract value out of thin air, Bitcoin mining isn’t as lucrative as it seems. Regular users hoping to use their regular computers to mine shouldn’t expect to just start making money by setting aside a few compute cycles to dig up Bitcoins. That’s generally reserved for special mining computers that do nothing BUT mine for Bitcoins using custom encryption processors.

As Biggs points out in his article, “While you could simply set a machine aside and have it run the algorithms endlessly, the energy cost and equipment deprecation will eventually cost more than the actual Bitcoins are worth.” That’s been confirmed by my colleague Matt Burns, who wrote in our internal message board that “after mining for a few days, the energy required to run my computer at full tilt was far greater than the Bitcoins I mined.”

Even if you do choose to pool your resources to mine, it’s a fairly complicated process, even for tech-savvy users. Check out the aforementioned article by Biggs for how he connected his home PCs into a Bitcoin-mining pool.

The alternative is to just buy specialty hardware designed to do nothing but mine for Bitcoins. Like any other investment, the return isn’t assured, and likely will be based on how Bitcoin market takes shape as time goes on. But right now, as with most gold rushes throughout history, it’s those who are supplying the miners that are finding the real riches.


Company: bitcoin
Website: bitcoin.org
Launch Date: 2009

Bitcoin is a digital currency created in 2009 by Satoshi Nakamoto. The name refers both to the open source software he designed to make use of the currency and to the peer-to-peer network formed by running that software. Unlike some other digital currencies, Bitcoin avoids central authorities and issuers. Bitcoin uses a distributed database spread across nodes of a peer-to-peer network to journal transactions, and uses digital signatures and proof-of-work to provide basic security functions, such as ensuring that bitcoins...

→ Learn more

Bitcoin is a digital currency created in 2009 by Satoshi Nakamoto. The name refers both to the open source software he designed to make use of the currency and to the peer-to-peer network formed by running that software. Unlike some other digital currencies, Bitcoin avoids central authorities and issuers. Bitcoin uses a distributed database spread across nodes of a peer-to-peer network to journal transactions, and uses digital signatures and proof-of-work to provide basic security functions, such as ensuring that bitcoins...


Source : feedproxy[dot]google[dot]com
Read More

What Games Are: The Shady Side Of Games View Staff Page Have a Tip, Pitch or Guest Column? Tell us.X Latest on TechCrunch TV Latest in Gadgets Also on AOL Tech About Subscribe

0 comments


Editor’s note: Tadhg Kelly is a veteran game designer, creator of leading game design blog What Games Are and creative director of Jawfish Games. You can follow him on Twitter here.

There’s a reason why games and organized crime have often gone hand in hand. The thrill of the win, of achieving – often with money attached – has long proved a lure that society felt the need to control, like a drug. Games of chance, Poker, horse racing, sports betting and many others brought quixotic pleasures to many and bankruptcy (or worse) to some. There was always money to be made in the shadows for those happy to work in them.

That shady aspect still exists in the games industry today. While there are some highly ethical game makers out there who conduct their business in a manner befitting their ideals, there are also plenty who dupe and deceive to profit from an audience. Some are merely morally gray, maintaining that since games are a tough market and the cost of user acquisition is high, they have to be scrappy. Even if they don’t personally like it, it’s just how life is.

But beyond that typical red-ocean thinking, you can always rely on some developer or publisher to eventually take things too far. Like water flowing into every nook and cranny of a given platform, some will use their powers for good while others will figure out how to use a game as a form of arbitrage to extract as much value as possible. And you may say “well that’s business”, which it sometimes is. Yet shady actions can have far wider impact across the industry than is generally realized.

Take, for example, the practice of selling virtual goods in children’s games. Free-to-play games are very popular across all segments of the market, but the ability to sell items from within a game has the potential to deceive. While the notion of permitting players to financially participate as much as they want to is neat, many don’t fully realize what that means. Parents in particular are often unaware that their children know their iTunes passwords until big bills caused by their little angels buying $1000 worth of virtual game goods surface. And good luck getting a refund.

Because of course there are shady game makers out there who think it’s okay to put a $99 item in a game aimed at nine year olds. Of course they have an entirely self-reinforcing rationale for why this is permissible. Of course they use words like “choice” and “parental responsibility” to justify their actions. And yet they come across as weasels. In fact they ARE weasels. When this sort of nonsense goes on long enough, outsiders start to step in.

Government agencies like the UK’s Office of Fair Trading are starting to take a strong interest in free-to-play games. The OFT is an official consumer advocate group whose judgements can be far-reaching, and their recommendations often form the basis of legislation designed to clean up particularly egregious industries. This may serve as a wake-up call for the industry to self-regulate before regulation comes a-calling, or it may just be the tip of the iceberg. If, for example, the United States’ Department of Justice decides to do likewise, who knows how far that could go.

The problem for most of us who make games is that shady tactics tend to poison the well. The difference between the ideal of Facebook games (play together) and the practice (notify and spam repeatedly) is why social games stalled, for example. What could have been the most amazing platform change in gaming in a generation instead became a haven for sleazy lowball tactics designed to make a quick buck or an exit sale. Facebook’s early (and continuing) mistake lay in not taking an active-enough hand in managing their platform, preferring to let evolution sort it out.

The sale of crappy gamification “solutions” is another example. Through the work of writers like Sebastian Deterding, gamification has developed into a very interesting idea (with a variety of caveats, which I have written about before). Yet, regardless of where you stand on it, gamification has started to invert in large part because of the revelation that it mostly doesn’t work. There are many shady companies out there offering solutions that are little more than packs of GIFs and experience point tables, and of course that sours companies on trying gamification more than once.

It’s for reasons like these that I tend to strongly support Apple’s firm stance in governing the App Store. To some writers (like my Twitter buddy Keith Andrew at Pocketgamer), Apple’s control is only about maintaining profits and an iron-like grip on its customers, but I think there’s more to it than that. Apple takes an active hand in surfacing interesting apps because that’s important for the life of its platform, for the perception among users that iOS is where you go to find all the good stuff. The good stuff often needs a helping hand in the face of legions of developers hawking identical software with large advertising budgets.

Apple also bans or forbids certain apps on the basis of not wanting to dilute that conversation. Apps are not permitted to look like app stores, for example, or to use push notifications to advertise. Apps are not permitted to use incentivized installs. Apps are not permitted to deceive, in other words, or at the very least this is strong discouraged. And Apple seems as though it’s about to crack down on a number of apps that have been treading softly in these areas without directly violating them.

Apple seemed to realize early that shadiness would be problem that had to be curtailed or else the platform itself would be under threat. The risk to iOS of allowing it to be gamed or balkanized – as Facebook had – may not have been plainly apparent at the time, but in retrospect very much so. This is why the AppGratis-es of this world are heavily monitored. AppGratis appears to be just a typical example of needing to reign in wayward practices that would otherwise lead to bad places. Strong rules and enforcement is why iOS remains a vital development platform, and the one that users trust most. But of course, there are side effects.

Chief among them is censorship. As a medium, gaming is trying to come out of its teenage years and stop being regarded as mere entertainment. Some game makers want to feel that they stand shoulder to shoulder with writers, moviemakers and musicians in being regarded as artists, but regulation gets in the way.

In the old days it used to much worse. If you wanted to make games on a non-PC platform, such as a console, you had to factor in the risk that the platform might say no. The platform’s owners might not have even allowed you to have a dev kit to try unless your proposed game fit with their content strategy and guidelines.

These days platforms rarely exercise that kind of power and game making has become much more democratic, but there’s still a ways to go. Games like Sweatshop are banned according to content guidelines that would be considered unthinkable in book or music markets. The burgeoning zinester movement (artists who create games and related interactive art to explore a variety of issues) feels unwelcome and unlikely to become an Editor’s Choice because their work is not exactly PG13.

Unfortunately, like the Mob, shady game makers always be with us. There will always be someone who regards platforms like iOS as an opportunity to scavenge. There will always be someone who looks for the breaks, the wedges and the opportunity to behave like sharks. And they will always have a mealy mouthed rationale to justify their actions. None of us wants more censorship, or for games to be regulated to death. Most of us want the medium to thrive and grow and become as fully expressive. So as an industry it behoves us to establish codes of practice and police ourselves. Otherwise someone else will eventually do it for us.


Source : feedproxy[dot]google[dot]com
Read More

Warby Parker Opens Retail Store In NYC, With Boston Up Next, Beats Google & Amazon To The Offline Punch View Staff Page Follow me on twitter Have a Tip, Pitch or Guest Column? Tell us.X Latest on TechCrunch TV Latest in Gadgets Also on AOL Tech About Subscribe

0 comments


Hip online eyewear startup Warby Parker has, over the last two years, been partnering with boutiques to open “stores-within-stores,” or small Warby Parker showrooms, where customers could try on their eyeglasses in 3-D. These showrooms popped up in L.A., Nashville, San Francisco and many others. Today Warby Parker officially announced its first, flagship retail store in SoHo in New York City.

As e-commerce has matured, some of its younger companies have begun to turn to more traditional forms of advertising. One Kings Lane, Gilt Groupe, Beachmint, Fab and Wayfair are just a few of the boutique online brands to launch ad campaigns on TV in the last six months in an effort to drive viewers to mobile apps and sites.

Now, if Warby Parker is any indication, e-commerce companies may continue to expand their businesses by moving offline and building their own brick-and-mortar retail outlets. Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos has expressed interest before, while 9to5Google reports that Google is looking to open retail stores in time for the holidays. Warby Parker doesn’t quite have that kind of market cap, but clearly it wants to go head-to-head with the biggest offline retailers.

tumblr_inline_ml5drgQ2sc1qz4rgp

Interestingly, Warby Parker was founded in part because (at the time) less than 1 percent of eyewear was sold online, so the startup hoped to take on the bigs like Luxottica — which owns the seemingly ubiquitous LensCrafters, Ray-Ban, Sunglass Hut and Oakley, among others — by creating a strong, fashion-conscious brand and selling online at a lower price and better margins. It worked, and the startup made a name for itself, and started to catch the attention of consumers and investors.

Warby closed a $41.5 million investment at the end of February, led in part by J. Crew CEO Millard S. Drexler (who was formerly CEO of Gap and currently has an awesome name) and American Express, along with a host of VCs. With heavy backing from the retail world, and a growing number of showrooms, the company is now experimenting more aggressively with its offline push. But it’s trying to transfer the same academic aesthetic/brand offline while keeping a little bit of the tech.

Its new flagship store in NYC is designed to look like a classic, old library — the New York Public Library, really — with brass library lamps, rolling ladders and musty books. The whole deal. In a way, it feels a little pretentious, but it’s also awesome and makes sense given the product; you use your glasses to read, nerd — sometimes even things besides the Internet.

And in fact, it’s almost the opposite. Rather than keep its eyewear behind glass, the startup’s new store leaves its glasses out in the open to be taken for a test drive. The store also includes an in-house optometrist for on-hand, $50 eye exams offered seven days a week. Non-prescription glasses will be sold for take-away, and customers can choose to receive products by mail or to pick them up at the store.

tumblr_inline_ml5dqw7p7j1qz4rgp

That might seem like superfluous information for those not living in the five boroughs, but it appears that the startup is already taking its brick-and-mortar retail strategy beyond NYC. As Boston Business Journal recently reported, Warby has listed a job posting for a “store leader” in Beantown, seeking someone with “sales management experience with a customer-focused, operationally excellent retailer … to build a team of exceptional team members.” And they’re also hiring an in-store optician. You don’t have to live at 221B Baker Street to put those pieces together, amirite?

But the other key to Warby Parker’s new offline strategy, as Om describes in his coverage today, is that the company wants to bring more tech into the offline world by wiring its stores to collect data. Using Wi-Fi, sensors, etc., it wants to get a better understanding of how people shop, what the trends are both in terms of in-store flow and customer design and product preferences, for example. The more they can bring smart data collection methods offline, the more business intelligence they can glean — especially when, as Om points out, it’s combined with insight from online shopping data.

It may be too early to say that the eyewear startup is at the tip of an online-to-offline retail wave about to sweep through e-commerce — not really sure I see that happening yet — but it is also far from being counterintuitive. Create a strong, hip brand online, generate brand recognition and revenue, get a foothold on the market, and then move offline. It seems like a familiar playbook, even if it isn’t.

[Photo credits: Collin Hughes]


Company: Warby Parker
Website: warbyparker.com
Launch Date: 2010
Funding: $50.3M

Warby Parker was founded with a rebellious spirit and a lofty objective: to create boutique-quality, classically crafted eyewear at a revolutionary price point.

→ Learn more

Warby Parker was founded with a rebellious spirit and a lofty objective: to create boutique-quality, classically crafted eyewear at a revolutionary price point.


Source : feedproxy[dot]google[dot]com
Read More

Gillmor Gang: Speculation, Music, Death View Columnist Page Follow me on Twitter Have a Tip, Pitch or Guest Column? Tell us.X Latest on TechCrunch TV Latest in Gadgets Also on AOL Tech About Subscribe

0 comments


The Gillmor Gang — Kevin Marks, John Taschek, Keith Teare, and Steve Gillmor — spared no expense to bring you the finest in up-to-date tech commentary. In other words, we tore into Twitter Music, ignored Facebook Home, dissected the internals of AirPlay, and cashed our Bitcoin checks.

Our attention is a zero sum game, and whether it’s West Wing or Twitter pointers into the musicsphere, how we make our streaming choices will determine who the big winners are. What we’re really waiting for is the tipping point when the streamer artists crossover and recapture the idea that the creators are the real coin of the realm.

@stevegillmor, @kteare, @kevinmarks, @jtaschek

Produced and directed by Tina Chase Gillmor @tinagillmor


Steve Gillmor is a technology commentator, editor, and producer in the enterprise technology space. He is Head of Technical Media Strategy at salesforce.com and a TechCrunch contributing editor. Gillmor previously worked with leading musical artists including Paul Butterfield, David Sanborn, and members of The Band after an early career as a record producer and filmmaker with Columbia Records’ Firesign Theatre. As personal computers emerged in video and music production tools, Gillmor started contributing to various publications, most notably Byte Magazine,...

→ Learn more

Keith Teare is the CEO and founder of just.me Inc and a Founder at the Palo Alto incubator, Archimedes Labs. Teare has a track record as a serial entrepreneur with big ideas and has achieved significant returns for investors. History (a) The EasyNet Group: Founded in 1994 as one of the first ISP’s in Europe, Teare was CTO and co-founder. It went public on the AIM exchange in London in 1996 and was trading at a valuation of more than $1...

→ Learn more
Person: Kevin Marks
Companies: Salesforce, BT, Google, Technorati

Kevin Marks is a software engineer. Kevin served as an evangelist for OpenSocial and as a software engineer at Google. In June 2009 he announced his resignation. From September 2003 to January 2007 he was Principal Engineer at Technorati responsible for the spiders that make sense of the web and track millions of blogs daily. He has been inventing and innovating for over 17 years in emerging technologies where people, media and computers meet. Before joining Technorati,...

→ Learn more
Person: John Taschek
Companies:

John Taschek is vice president of strategy at salesforce.com. He is responsible for corporate product strategy, corporate intelligence and market influence. Taschek came to company in 2003, bringing over 20 years of technology evaluation experience. Taschek currently is also the editorial director for CloudBlog - an independent blog run as an adjunct to salesforce.com’s web properties. He occasionally is on Steve Gillmor’s The Gillmor Gang enterprise web video-cast. Previously, Taschek ran the testing labs at eWEEK (formerly PC Week) magazine....

→ Learn more

Steve Gillmor is a technology commentator, editor, and producer in the enterprise technology space. He is Head of Technical Media Strategy at salesforce.com and a TechCrunch contributing editor. Gillmor previously worked with leading musical artists including Paul Butterfield, David Sanborn, and members of The Band after an early career as a record producer and filmmaker with Columbia Records’ Firesign Theatre. As personal computers emerged in video and music production tools, Gillmor started contributing to various publications, most notably Byte Magazine,...

Keith Teare is the CEO and founder of just.me Inc and a Founder at the Palo Alto incubator, Archimedes Labs. Teare has a track record as a serial entrepreneur with big ideas and has achieved significant returns for investors. History (a) The EasyNet Group: Founded in 1994 as one of the first ISP’s in Europe, Teare was CTO and co-founder. It went public on the AIM exchange in London in 1996 and was trading at a valuation of more than $1...

Kevin Marks is a software engineer. Kevin served as an evangelist for OpenSocial and as a software engineer at Google. In June 2009 he announced his resignation. From September 2003 to January 2007 he was Principal Engineer at Technorati responsible for the spiders that make sense of the web and track millions of blogs daily. He has been inventing and innovating for over 17 years in emerging technologies where people, media and computers meet. Before joining Technorati,...

John Taschek is vice president of strategy at salesforce.com. He is responsible for corporate product strategy, corporate intelligence and market influence. Taschek came to company in 2003, bringing over 20 years of technology evaluation experience. Taschek currently is also the editorial director for CloudBlog - an independent blog run as an adjunct to salesforce.com’s web properties. He occasionally is on Steve Gillmor’s The Gillmor Gang enterprise web video-cast. Previously, Taschek ran the testing labs at eWEEK (formerly PC Week) magazine....


Source : feedproxy[dot]google[dot]com
Read More

Through The Looking Glass: Hiring Sales People View Contributor Page Have a Tip, Pitch or Guest Column? Tell us.X Latest on TechCrunch TV Latest in Gadgets Also on AOL Tech About Subscribe

0 comments


Editor’s note: Ben Horowitz is co-founder and partner of Andreessen Horowitz. He was co-founder and CEO of Opsware (formerly Loudcloud), which was acquired by HP, and ran several product divisions at Netscape. He serves on the board of companies such as Capriza, Foursquare, Jawbone, Lytro, Magnet, NationBuilder, Okta, Rap Genius, SnapLogic and Tidemark. Follow him on his blog and on Twitter @bhorowitz.

“He’s a big bad wolf in your neighborhood
Not bad meaning bad, but bad meaning good”
—Run DMC, Peter Piper

Perhaps the most common mistake that I see a technical founder make when building her sales organization is that she applies strategies to the sales-hiring process that work when building the engineering team. This may sound shocking, but sales people are different from engineers, and treating them like engineers does not work well at all.

It starts with the hiring process. If you attempt to hire sales people using the same assumptions that worked with engineering, then here are some of the things that will go wrong.

The Interview

A good engineering interview will include some set of difficult problems to solve. It might even require that the candidate write a short program. In addition, it will test the candidate’s knowledge of the tools she uses in great depth. A small portion of the interview may address personality traits, but smart managers will tolerate a very wide variety of personalities to find the best engineers.

A good sales interview is the opposite. You can quiz them on hard sales problems all day long, but only a horrible sales rep won’t be able to bluff her way through the most intricate quiz on how to sell a complex account. On the other hand, great sales people tend to have very specific personality traits. Specifically, they must be courageous, competitive and hungry. They also need enough intelligence to get the job done. That’s the magic formula. Hire engineers with that profile and you’ll fail. Hire sales people who are really smart problem solvers, but lack courage, hunger and competitiveness, and your company will go out of business.

Dick Harrison, CEO of Parametric Technologies, home of perhaps the greatest enterprise sales force ever built, interviewed Mark Cranney, the greatest sales manager I have ever met, as follows:

Dick: I’ll bet you got into a lot of fights when you were a youth didn’t you?

Mark: Well yes, Dick, I did get into a few.

Dick: Well, how’d you do?

Mark: Well, I was about 35-1.

Dick: Tell me about the 1.

Mark tells him the story, which Dick enjoys immensely.

Dick: Do you think you could kick my ass?

Mark pauses and asks himself: “Is Dick questioning my courage or my intelligence?” Then replies: “Could or would?”

Dick hires Mark on the spot.

Ask an engineer that same set of questions and at best she’d be confused, and at worst she’d be horrified. By asking Mark those questions, Dick quickly found out:

  • Whether Mark had the courage to stay in the box and not get flustered;
  • That Mark came from a rough environment and was plenty hungry;
  • That Mark was super competitive, but smart enough to calculate his answer.

Hiring sales people is different.

The Background

When screening engineers from other companies, its smart to value engineers from great companies more than those from mediocre companies. All things being equal, always interview the Google engineer over the Quest Software engineer. Why? Because, as an engineer, you have to be way better to get a job at Google than at Quest. In addition, Google’s engineering environment and techniques are state-of-the-art, so engineers who come from there will be well trained in an environment with high standards.

anybody with a pulse can sell a massively winning product

In contrast, anybody with a pulse can sell a massively winning product like Google Ads or VMware hypervisors, but people who consistently sold Lanier copiers against Xerox were elite. In fact, it might be a good sign that a sales rep was successful at a bad company. To succeed at selling a losing product, you must develop seriously superior sales techniques. In addition, you have to be massively competitive and incredibly hungry to survive in that environment.

The Cost of Making a Mistake

Great engineering organizations strive never to make hiring mistakes, because hiring mistakes can be very costly. Not only do you lose the productivity that you might have gained from the hire, but you might well incur severe technical debt. To make matters worse, even when an engineering manager recognizes she’s made a mistake, she’s often slow to correct it, leading to more debt and delay. In addition, building an engineering organization too quickly will cause all kinds of communication issues, which makes slow hiring in engineering a really smart thing to do.

On the other hand, you often can’t afford to build out your sales force too slowly, especially if you have significant competition. Sales people, when compared to engineers, work in relative isolation, so there’s productivity loss, but relatively little long-term debt or fast growth issues. Sales managers generally don’t have issues with firing poor performers, so sales people go fast. I have a friend who was fond of saying, “We have two kinds of sales people: rich and new.”

The Conclusion

Applying engineer-oriented hiring techniques to fill out a sales organization is like eating poison ivy to get more green vegetables. You will get the opposite of what you want.


Ben Horowitz is a co-founder and general partner of the venture capital fund, Andreessen Horowitz. Horowitz was a co-founder and CEO of Opsware (formerly Loudcloud), which was acquired by HP in 2007, and Horowitz was appointed vice president and general manager of Business Technology Optimization for Software at HP. Earlier, he was vice president and general manager of America Online’s E-commerce Platform division, where he oversaw development of the company’s flagship Shop@AOL service. Previously, Horowitz ran several product divisions at Netscape...

→ Learn more

Ben Horowitz is a co-founder and general partner of the venture capital fund, Andreessen Horowitz. Horowitz was a co-founder and CEO of Opsware (formerly Loudcloud), which was acquired by HP in 2007, and Horowitz was appointed vice president and general manager of Business Technology Optimization for Software at HP. Earlier, he was vice president and general manager of America Online’s E-commerce Platform division, where he oversaw development of the company’s flagship Shop@AOL service. Previously, Horowitz ran several product divisions at Netscape...


Source : feedproxy[dot]google[dot]com
Read More

Disrupt NY 2013 Hailo, SideCar, And The New York Taxi And Limousine Commission To Discuss The Future Of Transportation At Disrupt NY 2013 View Staff Page Follow me on twitter Have a Tip, Pitch or Guest Column? Tell us.X Latest on TechCrunch TV Latest in Gadgets Also on AOL Tech About Subscribe

0 comments


In the coming weeks, the New York Taxi and Limousine Commission is expected to enter into its first trial of taxi e-hail apps. That’ll allow startups like Hailo that help users find nearby cabs through their mobile phones, without having to hail them from the street. At the same time, competition is coming from services like SideCar, which enables passengers to find rides from community drivers.

All these changes will have a significant impact not just on consumers — who will soon have more choices than ever — but on the entire urban transportation industry. There’s the question of how regulators view the safety of mobile, on-demand transportation services, particularly those which provide rides from drivers without commercial licenses. There’s also the difficult balance between regulation and innovation, particularly as the taxi industry seeks to compete with the convenience provided by technology startups like Uber?

At Disrupt NY 2013, I’ll be talking about some of the companies involved in this transition, as well as the local regulatory agency which oversees them, to discuss how these apps will reshape the way we think about getting around cities like New York.

I’ll be joined by NY TLC Deputy Commissioner Ashwini Chhabra, who will present the side of the regulators in this debate. Over the last year, he’s been working with local taxi companies, tech startups, and technology providers, to make supporting e-hail applications a reality in the city.

We’ll also have Jay Bregman, CEO of taxi e-hail startup Hailo. Already operating a wildly popular service in the U.K., Hailo will be one of the first apps to take advantage of the TLC’s new e-hail rules. Prior to founding Hailo, Bregman was the founder and CTO of eCourier.co.uk, a company which used GPS for an intelligent dispatch system.

And rounding out our panel will be Sunil Paul, CEO of ride-sharing startup SideCar. After a successful run in San Francisco, SideCar is aggressively expanding into other markets, including Brooklyn, N.Y. Prior to founding SideCar, this tech veteran had co-founded companies like FreeLoader and anti-spam leader Brightmail, and has also been an investor in a number of cleanweb technologies and startups.


28274v10-max-250x250Jay Bregman
Founder & CEO, Hailo

Jay Bregman is the Founder / CEO of Hailo – a network that matches passengers and licensed taxi drivers using a tool which helps to make cabbies’ days more sociable – and profitable. Hailo has raised $50M in investment from an all-star cast of investors including Union Square Ventures, Accel Partners, Wellington Partners, Atomico Ventures, Richard Branson and KDDI. Together they’ve funded Facebook, Foursquare, Twitter and Tumblr, founded Skype, and brought loads of other fanatistic companies to life all over the world.

Previously Jay founded eCourier.co.uk which was voted London’s most inspirational business by the Evening Standard in 2007. He holds a B.A. from Dartmouth College and an MSc from the London School of Economics. Jay was named on the Times’ 100 People to Watch in 2012.

He now lives in New York City managing Hailo’s North American expansion.


51449v3-max-250x250Sunil Paul
CEO, Side.Cr

Sunil Paul is co-founder and CEO of rideshare community SideCar. SideCar has operations in San Francisco, Seattle, Philadelphia, Austin, Los Angeles, Boston, Chicago and Brooklyn, NY. Sunil coined the term “cleanweb” to describe the aggressive application of social, mobile, and Internet media to accelerate cleantech deployment and restructure sectors as diverse as hotels, automobiles, agriculture and food, clothing, buildings, lighting and renewable finance. SideCar is a realization of Sunil’s cleanweb vision.


Source : feedproxy[dot]google[dot]com
Read More

Beyond The Bitcoin Bubble View Columnist Page Follow me on Twitter Have a Tip, Pitch or Guest Column? Tell us.X Latest on TechCrunch TV Latest in Gadgets Also on AOL Tech About Subscribe

0 comments


A few months ago, while visiting a hacker friend’s magnificent new San Francisco loft, he gestured to a little alcove stuffed with server racks and said: “And over there are the Bitcoin mines.” I smiled and nodded, thinking, Oh, right, Bitcoin. Is that still a thing?

Andy, if you’re reading this, I apologize. Is it ever, and how. Over the last few weeks the hype around everyone’s favorite distributed cryptographic currency has gone insane. It’s a Ponzi scheme; no, it’s the first instance of the third era of currency; no, it will spiral up and down forever; no, it’s the new venture-capital frontier; no, it’s an existential threat to the modern state.

No, possibly, conceivably, maybe, and no. But: I realized this week that Bitcoin actually is a really big deal — in a way that’s been almost entirely obscured by all the hype.

A rare voice of reason this month came from Felix Salmon, who wrote (in a post marred by some remarkable ignorance; for instance, Facebook Credits ceased to be a $1 billion market when Facebook discontinued them almost a year ago):

A peer-to-peer payments system, allowing anybody on the internet to pay anybody else on the internet without having to sign up with some financial-services behemoth first, could revolutionize global commerce … Bitcoin isn’t the future. But it has helped to light the way ahead.

I mostly concur. Of course, I would, since I concluded exactly the same thing two years ago, when Bitcoin was at its previous hype peak. I went on then to speculate that its real future might be as a national currency in a nation like Zimbabwe previously scarred by hyperinflation.

…And I don’t know what I was thinking. Bitcoin’s true long-term value was staring me in the face, and I missed it. It wasn’t until I read this superb Nyaruka post on the subject that it hit me.

Almost everyone else writing about Bitcoin is doing so from the perspective of a First World citizen living in a nation with thriving electronic payment networks and a strong, easily traded currency. But that’s not the context where it really matters. Where Bitcoin matters, where it’s important, is the developing world.

Ever tried to exchange Colombian pesos in Guatemala, or Tanzanian shillings in Zambia? I have, and believe me, it’s a Kafkaesque nightmare. Now imagine living in the developing world and trying to sell goods or services internationally. Talk about a pain point. Until Bitcoin. To quote that Nyaruka post:

Someone in Rwanda that builds a compelling service can instantly start taking payments from the rest of the world, without asking for permission, without filling out any paperwork and with the same fee structure as the biggest retailers … So Bitcoin is exciting to me not so much because it is a new currency, but because it has the potential to be a globally recognized, yet completely decentralized, form of digital payment.

Of course unofficial distributed international payment networks are as old as the hills. Our own John Biggs points out that Bitcoin is in essence much like a modern day hawala network; but it is to hawala as PayPal is to money orders sent by Pony Express. No ID required, no setup costs, no nothing: just send and receive. Bitcoin is no threat to the modern nation-state…but it is conceivably an existential threat to PayPal.

However, it’s not without its flaws. For one thing, Bitcoin’s “block chain” — the record that verifies all transactions — could conceivably be forked, as happened due to a versioning bug back in March. That wasn’t a significant problem, but now that Bitcoin’s collective value has briefly hit 10 figures (although it might be back down to eight figures by tomorrow…) you have to wonder if someone might try a brute-force attack on it. “If a user controls the majority of computational power in the mining network, they can manipulate this to their advantage by creating two diverging chains,” to quote a Cornell writeup.

In other words, if a true computing megapower (say, Amazon, Apple, Google, or one of a handful of national governments) really wanted to break Bitcoin, they could. In fact I’ve seen speculation that anyone willing to splash out a few million dollars on custom hardware would probably be able to hijack the block chain.

Furthermore, it’s not really all that anonymous, which is a highly desirable feature in a digital currency; and worst of all, if the last few weeks have proved anything at all about Bitcoin, it’s that it’s ridiculously volatile… which is exactly what you don’t want in a payments mechanism.

So I believe it’s Bitcoin’s successors — whether that be Ripple/OpenCoin, or the anonymous Bitcoin bolt-on ZeroCoin, or something else still being dreamed up — that will truly change the world. But not the First World. We don’t much need Bitcoin and its descendants, at least not yet. In the developing world, though, crippled by weak currencies and byzantine payment infrastructures, a simple, seamless, frictionless, reliable international peer-to-peer payments system could be a huge, huge deal. But not until the volatility diminishes…which is to say, not until the hype here fades away. Here’s hoping that’s soon.


Source : feedproxy[dot]google[dot]com
Read More