Slashdot Mirror
Amazon CTO Rips Blogging Authors a New One
theodp writes "Following what was characterized as rude treatment of invited guests in a confrontation at Amazon HQ, Amazon CTO Werner Vogels turned to his personal blog to give author Shel Israel a public scolding for suggesting Amazon doesn't 'get' blogging (Amazon's blogging innovations include 'faux' personal blogs and patent-pending plogs). Vogels went on to voice concerns on Israel's blog that blogging could be too distracting for Amazon employees - think the self-proclaimed guy-with-guts challenged CEO Jeff Bezos about the distractions of his space exploration efforts?"
they also said that about cars, computers, video games, television, space flight, electric cars. all those are still around, and probably will be for as long as we are. I doubt blogging is going anywhere.
Classic slashdot. A ridiculously biased summary, and the last point is completely irrelevant to the subject.
Hell yeah! CTO doesnt 'get' blogging!
I wish more people were as blunt and forthcoming as Mr.Vogels.
What the hell is this about again?
More drama than a spanish soap opera. The only sad part is this lacks the good looking women and I can understand what they are saying...
This story reminds me of a saying, something about arguing on the internet being like running in the special olympics... I can't quite remember how it ends though.
This summary reads like the Chewbacca Defense.
Wow, am I the ONLY one here who can't make head or tail of what the text in that post says ? It's really confusing. Who did what to who and what happened then and where to who after what was done ? Mind clearing things up a bit ?
they also said that about cars, computers, video games, television, space flight, electric cars. all those are still around, and probably will be for as long as we are.
Of course, they also said that about the cravatte, off-white nylon shirts with huge collars, pet rocks, steam cars and listening to live plays via the telephone. And they were right.
That said, no, I don't think blogging is a fad either; it's too useful for that.
Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
Explaining jokes on the internet is like competing in the special olympics...only retards do it.
That said... it seems to be this is a classic case of mass-induced elitism. I don't think the Amazon guy was off in his line of questioning. What's good for Microsoft or Sun might not be for Amazon or eBay, yet Scoble and his friend come across as the quitenssential "it" boys, giggling and stomping their little feet because the hick across the table doesn't know what the small fork is for - as if his life depended on it.
I suppose if you live in that "blogosphere" long enough it must look to you like everyone is blogging and, more importantly, that everyone should be doing it. I don't think that's the case. I've found many corporate attempts at blogging to be underwhelming and downright stupid - if you don't "get it" then just don't do it at all. I doubt many millions of Amazon customers are going to decide one day that they won't spend a dime online anymore because Amazon doesn't have a blog.
The blogorati need to come out into the light and look around once in a while.
> Shaky camera work and giggling do not make a business case in most organizations.
Whereas shaky camera work and jiggling is a sure path to riches...
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
It would seem that if the Amazon guy doesn't want to kowtow to Mr. Israel (and why would he), the blogger guy is likely to wage some sort of blogger-jihad against Amazon.
Is that likely to cause them any trouble? Amazon seems to be quite good at what they do.
I have a feeling that this is a case where he can tell Israel to kiss his ass.
http://www.thebricktestament.com/the_law/when_to_
I'm not sure if I'm referring to the meeting in the story or the post on Slashdot, either...
That is all.
Next headline:News at 11...
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
I read all the trackbacks and comments linked and basically it reads like a polite version of a forum flamewar. You can actually almost see that behind their carefully creafted words they really at heart want to write something like "OMG ur teh gay!". If this is what 2 "blogging poster boys" and the CTO of one of the most high profile online retailers do with their blogs then I think Amazon and anyone else would do well to stay as far clear of them as they can.
I have discovered a truly remarkable sig which this post is too small to contain.
One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
From one click purchasing to one dick blogging, is there anything Amazon doesn't have patents on?
And really love some good flamewar action. So I saw "rips a new one" and was geared up for one hell of a great story.
Boy, was I wrong. I need to update my definition for that phrase.
Drama drama drama blog drama drama Amazon drama blog smug smug drama blog Amazon smung drama blah.
Why is this news we give a flying leap about?
Having been in business (finance) for 15 years, I have been in a similar position to the CTO on occasion. The world is full of armchair quarterbacks, who are able to scratch a living in journalism and from writing books. Some of these people have real insights, some are just cobbling together platitudes on fashionable subjects. By and large, I tend to discount people who sell opinions on any subject, if they have never tried to make a living out of the implications of that opinion.
My feeling is that this CTO is in the position that well-meaning people are happily giving him advice all the time about what Amazon should be doing. He has limited resources in terms of time and money, so he needs a well-primed bullshit filter to make sure that he's not wasting his time. The first thing you do when talking to a consultant is to establish their bona fides, and to test them on the basis for their recommendations. You can start to believe their general statements, when you can see that their conclusions are based on real research and not thought experiments.
When someone is using the phrase "you just don't get (whatever subject)" I counter that it's up to them to convince me. There were lots of people putting crazy valuations on internet stocks in the late 90s. When you asked them how they justified the valuations, they would come up with over-optimistic projections about the amount of money that could be made from the net. Often they would assume that one company's revenues would be greater than the entire spending on that product category. Eventually the conversation would get to a stage where it was clear that they had no data to support their hypotheses, and they would wheel out the phrase "you just don't get it".
They could just as easily have said "oh ye of little faith". That's appropriate in a religious setting, but not where my clients' money is concerned. It's also my experience that people who have faith in irrational things tend to view any aggressive questioning as rude. I remember one of my analysts getting very upset when it was pointed out to her that her opinion on a particular company was at odds with her own facts - her only defence was to scream at me for being rude. Often if people have no real counter-arguments, they react to bad news and criticism by criticising the way it was delivered.
is your friend
<br
Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face