Bullets in the Laundry -- Should that be Normal? No.

This morning I found live bullets in the washing machine (which explained the banging noises I heard while the cycle was going). Suitable for a semi-automatic machine gun (M-16 to be exact) the bullets seemed to have enjoyed their time in the suds, came out looking quite clean and ready for “action.”

Why was I not so surprised? My oldest son, Adin, was home from the army this past Shabbat. That means laundry.  Theoretically there are washing machines on his base, but he wasn’t on his base, and anyway, he came straight home after spending  about ten days on the border with Gaza.

Now, I have been a parent for 22 years, and thus have been doing other people’s laundry for quite some time. But bullets? That’s a first.

My initial reaction was “wow, glad that all that shaking around didn’t cause the gunpowder to explode.” 

Second reaction: “hope the washing machine didn’t get damaged.”

Finally I realized I had just found machine gun bullets in the laundry. And that is not “normal.” Chewing gum – super annoying, but normal. Wrappers from various candies, ice creams, potato chips – have pulled all those things from the laundry.

Seashells, pebbles, sticks, leaves, yup all those too.

But bullets? Gevalt.

Israel has lived far too long with a level of “normal” that has hardened our senses. When I take a bus on a Sunday morning to Herzliya or Tel Aviv and I am surrounded by machine gun toting soldiers, I accept that as normal. When my kid’s youth group goes on a trip need to order a guard with a gun strapped to his wait to accompany us. OK, he also has first aid training but don’t think he is killing mosquitoes with a magnum .45.

I am not starting a discussion here on gun control laws – but there is nothing normal about a society where guns are so prevalent. Sure, statistically we have less civilian gun violence in Israel than in the US, but that’s not saying much.

The reason our soldiers carry guns with them at all times is because the “front line” is potentially every street corner. In a tiny country (land mass wise, not ego) where at the narrowest the State is less than an hour’s bike ride. We have over the past twenty years endured waves of terrorism reaching every public gathering place (malls, restaurants, beaches, etc.).  

We have “normalized” our situation (purposefully not getting into here the potential ways out of our situation) and go about our business as if 18/19 year old kids walking around with machine guns in the public sphere is  “normal.”

Our army experience is very different from the US and many other countries. Our soldiers come home on average every two weeks, sometimes every week (and there are those who are not in combat units that often live at home – but still usually carry guns). And yes, we do their laundry.

All I am saying is – it should NOT be normal to find bullets in the washing machine. 

Riding with Via (or “NE Corner of 53rd and Park, in front of Citibank”)

It is not always the first to market that successfully delivers  innovation. “Success” is measured in many ways in our business of company building. Sometimes just changing the equation slightly is what brings true disruption – and if done correctly a positive force in the world.

We all know the basic elements to success in successful hyper-growth new company creation: innovation, passion,  timing, and luck. Of course there are some other necessary ingredients, like leadership, management skills, and money.

Once in a very long time I directly touch companies that manage to pull together the above mix, and it is simply magic. The magic can be felt by all the stakeholders in the venture  -- and it is infectious. In a good way, as long as the forces stay calibrated.

In my (still somewhat new) role as part of McKinsey (more on that in a post to come) I get to play cheerleader and coach to some of the most exciting disruption going on, particularly that coming out of Start Up Nation. And I am privileged to help in the scaling up.  

When it speaks directly to issues that I feel passionate about, it’s really fun.

RidewithVia (or simply Via) is such a unique combination – determined to make a difference in the world of on-demand transportation.

 Transport is one of the major areas of life in the developed world that is crying out for serious positive disruption. Every time I watch the thousands of cars coming into downtown Tel Aviv in the morning with one person in each car I get shocked anew that in 2015 both the systems and the regulations have not moved the needle – and the result is traffic jams, pollution of many kinds,  avoidable death and injury, and poor use of our limited resources.

Uber (and it’s smaller cousins Gett and  Lyft and all the copycats around the world) basically took a very conservative view toward disrupting this space – but still are looked at as massive innovators worth tens of billions of dollars. Why conservative? They  give the same product that existed prior, but flouted regulations to make that same product slightly cheaper (at times). Reminds me of the work we did in the VoIP industry back in the 90s. We replaced circuit switch minutes with packet switched – but left the experience quite similar. An Uber driver is a car service driver with a nicer way to “call” them (button on your phone) but the experience is the same. Point to point, quite expensive, servicing one person at a time. I don’t call that disruption. If even the “Uber et al”  model made the same experience vastly cheaply I would agree to call it positive disruption. But that is not the case.

An Uber ride from JFK airport to downtown Manhattan costs similar to what a yellow cab cost BEFORE Uber came on the scene. An experience out of reach of budget conscious folks.

Uber is at best slight disruption for the elite that took cabs BU (Before Uber).  For the rest of us who consume public transportation (for reasons of budget, convenience, or ideology), AU (After Uber) and BU look the same.

Then Via comes along, and using algorithms designed to make the world’s best Humus, they create a new experience. Via demands of its users to change their behavior and accept different conditions precedent as well as travel in ways that perhaps were not part of their lexicon. Via saw the matrix – the industry spaces left untouched and the pathways to people’s consciousness that would allow for trans-formative experience.

Via takes people out of their comfort zone. It says to the multi-millionaire, “hey dude, you are heading downtown, so are a whole bunch of other folks – why not travel together?” Better for the planet, the pocket, and there is a chance to meet folks who think like you.

As Via is real disruption, the price is within reach for the average person as well, the guy with a metrocard, who knows the subways, and can appreciate paying just a little but more for a much nicer experience that takes you to where you need to be (not where the designers of the subway lines think you need to be).

Via is ride sharing without the end user needing to think about the massive logistics and computing power that go into getting it right. And more and more New Yorkers (currently VIA only operating in Manhattan) are getting hooked on the service. Initially flat priced at $5 anywhere in Manhattan, Via is used by student and stock broker, hedge fund manager and hair stylist.

In order to use Via you need to be ready to walk a block over to benefit from common sense. If you are standing on Madison and want to head south, you are asked to walk over to Park. If you are on a busy side street you will be asked to go out to the corner. You enter the car (currently all Suburbans) and chances are there will be a few people already in the car. Via requests that you do not speak on your cellphone during the trip – so often you strike up conversations with the people in car – how quaint!

Via has a lot of challenges ahead as it continues to scale (company hasn’t publicly released usage statistics yet, but when I saw down to lunch with a friend and mentioned Via, he immediately pulled out his phone and showed me the Via app in a prime spot – he and his wife use it daily).

If Via it doesn’t [quickly] figure out answers to some of the big questions it could stumble. But for now it is magic at work. Give it a try if you are in Manhattan, but be ready for a new experience. 

LinkedIn [Growth]Hacked my Account. Again. Am I now worth more?

Like many of you, I try to multi-task. While talking to someone I sometimes will scan emails to see if there is something I need to deal with...especially if I am on a call.

But I learned my lesson in the past with LinkedIn -- as their company name attests, they live and breath creating links between people. Sometimes without asking. Or against our wishes.

In Facebook I am somewhat selective with friend requests (both issuing and accepting), but somehow still have over 1000 "friends," with many of whom I have very superficial connection.

In LinkedIn, on the hand, I accept almost every request -- putting aside that are clearly spam or with a negative agenda. And sometimes issue LinkedIn requests (or as they put it, invitation to be LinkedIn). But I usually only do that with folks that I think I will have some reason to reach out to, and easier than creating new contacts.

In one of my gmail accounts, I have some default setting on that creates a contact for anyone I have been in "email connection" -- either sending or receiving email from. That's a lot of people, even for an address I rarely use.

Today while mutli-tasking an email came in with an invitation from someone I like, and relevant to my work (he is a marketing manager at a major tech company). I automatically clicked yes...and then the LinkedIn hacking started -- asking me if I wanted to enter that email into my list of associated email addresses -- I thought, why not...and clicked yes. Then was asked if I wanted to "share" to all my contacts a LinkedIn invitation. I clicked "skip this step." Then I was asked again -- and again I clicked "click this step." Finally I was asked a third time, and again clicked "skip this step."

Within seconds my phone started to buzz constantly, I looked down and saw endless push notifications from LinkedIn telling so-and-so has just "accepted my invitation."

But this was an invitation I never intended to send, because I hate spam, and had no idea who was in the default list of contacts for that email address.

How did this happen? Well, once I had agreed to associate this particular gmail address with my LinkedIn profile, LinkedIn proceeded to suck out my contacts AGAINST my choice and spam all my "contacts" with LinkedIn invitation. 

Q: Any real harm done? 
In this case, not really, apart from folks asking me who I am...and there those who say any publicity is good publicity.
But that is not the point. This easily  could have led to sharing of information that I did not want to share, or giving access to people I did not intend.

Often the term "Growth Hacking" is used to describe tactics to quickly generate users and that infamous "traction" that all are seeking.

In the end of the day, however,  growth is growth and hacking is hacking. If you need to hack -- it means you are not playing by the rules, which often are in place for good reason!

I am a big fan of real growth -- and at times I am a hacker. But I don't believe the two belong together, certainly not from multi-billion public companies like LinkedIn. Let them find real ways to grow, and leave my random assortment of gmail contacts alone.

Oh, and results of the LinkedIn spam -- I am now connected to an additional 250 people (at the time of writing this, few hours after the "incident.").Am I now worth more? 

"Configure your email client (e.g. Outlook, Eudora, Netscape Mail)": SAY WHAT??

"Configure your email client (e.g. Outlook, Eudora, Netscape Mail)": SAY WHAT??

Been a long time since I wrote a blog post, but in looking at Gmail settings today (as to why is subject for another post...) I noticed the above. 

How many of you can even remember Eudora or Netscape Mail? Anyone still using those applications? I am sure some people. Outlook has held on because people have it at work, almost noone outside of an office chooses to use it. 

And yet nobody at Google has changed the above. 

Why?

Well, it's in settings that are buried and only an explanation, not a feature itself ("e.g"). 

In addition it is not something that is broken, just awkward. 

But why did it trigger my interest? 

Because how quickly our habits change -- especially in area that is close to my heart, in communications and messaging. 

Not so long ago desktop email clients were the standard way consumers and worker bees alike managed their email traffic. In addition there were desktop applications for what we called then "Instant Messaging." (as opposed to email that was seen as less than instant and more formal as well as cluttered) 

The web/cloud picked up steam obviously for many years, but messaging remained application centered, Sure there were servers out there helping our mail move from place to place but it felt more like a traditional letter, especially if we deleted from server as we downloaded (anyone remember that?). The more geeky among us knew that even if we deleted from server chances were there still were copies somewhere, but for most consumers once email was downloaded it was only on their computer, especially for consumer email. 

Hotmail (which came before Gmail) and other webmail providers started to change the user experience paradigm. But it was only with Gmail that it went completely mainstream. And even gmail at first assumed that many, as indicated above, would continue using a desktop client to manage their email. 

Today gmail can handle it all, multiple addresses, and can even work in off-line mode. We have gmail apps on our deskptop, ipad, iphone, android, etc. 
And yet that certainly wasn't enough, Google continues to try and improve the experience, with layers like "Inbox" and third players like Sanemail try to help Gmail work better. 

On top of that even in Google, clickable from Gmail, are other products like Gchat, and then there are hangouts, Google +. 

All within Google! 

Once we leave world of Google we see Facebook Messenger (they gave up on email product). WhatsApp. Skype. Zula. 

Which of these will people still be using in 5 years? 10 years. Difficult to tell. Eudora has not been available to download for many years, and the same goes for Netscape Mail. They live on only in the buried settings of Gmail. 

However less than ten years ago they were both very much alive. 15 years ago Eudora was a major check of the email application market. 

I personally don't think Outlook will survive either. Recently tried Office 365 Online, painful experience. But in the enterprise market things live on for a long time. Heck, many big companies still have IBM mainframes and need COBOL engineers to maintain their code. 

While Zula is my direct interest in this market -- I am fascinated in general at the trends in communication, and the increasing speed at which new things come (and sometimes go). Will Snapchat be around in 5 years? I wouldn't bet too much on either possibility. Too early to tell. But I guarantee will be VERY different in 5 years. 

OK, need to go look for my Palm 5 to see my meetings for rest of the day. Peace.