I spent the day Tuesday at the Civic Media conference, put on annually by the MIT Center for Civic Media and the Knight Foundation. In addition to being a gathering of a fabulous community of civic hackers and builders, it's also where Knight announces the winners of the NewsChallenge grant contest each year (here are this year's winners, in the category of "strengthening the internet") Closing out the conference was Joi Ito, head of the Media Lab (and also on the Knight board). I always love listening to Joi speak, and reading his writing. He is like the Yoda of open innovation. The force is strong in him. In his remarks, he lays out his 9 principles for guiding the Media Lab into the future, which really double as 9 principles for open innovation. They are:
Resilience over strength (I would actually change this to "resilience over rigidity")
Pull over push
Risk over safety
Systems over objects
Compasses over maps
Practice over theory
Disobedience over compliance
Emergence over authority
Learning over education
This video is the best example of how I try to think about the world, and how I try to work, as I can think of. It's speaks to the USV investment thesis, to the ideas behind Regulation 2.0 (in particular resilience over strength and emergence over authority), and to the impacts that the web is having on every sector of the economy. Here's his talk -- it's 27 minutes worth watching, for a pure dose of Joi's philosophy of innovation and the internet:
Yesterday, the FCC met to vote on its notice of proposed rulemaking regarding the Open Internet. As was generally expected, the commission voted, along partisan lines, to move forward with their plan for Open Internet rules — a plan that, as currently designed, would allow for fast lanes and slow lanes on the Internet. (You can see the summary fact sheet here and the full notice here). There are really two issues: 1) Should we be striving for an open internet — more specifically, should we ensure that everyone has open accessto the internet, unrestricted by internet access providers; and 2) How do we achieve that On #1, I would encourage everyone to watch Chairman Wheeler’s remarks from yesterday’s meeting (embedded below). I was struck by how dead-solid he came out with a yes to that question. He spoke emphatically of “One Internet” and of enumerated all the ways he would stand up to internet access discrimination. The issue is #2. The FCC’s current plan is
Over the weekend, FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler sent a response to the letter that over 100 VCs and angel investors submitted last week. In the letter, we stressed the importance of an open internet as a foundation for the stunning levels of investment and innovation we’ve seen in the internet applications sector over the past decade.
You can read Chairman Wheeler’s response here (also embedded below). It reiterates high level support for an open internet and states that all options, including Title II reclassification of internet access providers, are on the table. The latter part is the key — with the FCC going on the record that a discussion Title II reclassification will be included in the upcoming Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM).
This letter, combined with the reports over the weekend that the FCC may be revising its approach to open internet policy, are, at the very least, a step in the right direction and an opening in the conversation. But there is still a long way to go on this issue, and a lot of work to be done over this conversation continues over the next few months. The next step is the publication of the NPRM at this Thursday’s Commission meeting.
I spent the day Tuesday at the Civic Media conference, put on annually by the MIT Center for Civic Media and the Knight Foundation. In addition to being a gathering of a fabulous community of civic hackers and builders, it's also where Knight announces the winners of the NewsChallenge grant contest each year (here are this year's winners, in the category of "strengthening the internet") Closing out the conference was Joi Ito, head of the Media Lab (and also on the Knight board). I always love listening to Joi speak, and reading his writing. He is like the Yoda of open innovation. The force is strong in him. In his remarks, he lays out his 9 principles for guiding the Media Lab into the future, which really double as 9 principles for open innovation. They are:
Resilience over strength (I would actually change this to "resilience over rigidity")
Pull over push
Risk over safety
Systems over objects
Compasses over maps
Practice over theory
Disobedience over compliance
Emergence over authority
Learning over education
This video is the best example of how I try to think about the world, and how I try to work, as I can think of. It's speaks to the USV investment thesis, to the ideas behind Regulation 2.0 (in particular resilience over strength and emergence over authority), and to the impacts that the web is having on every sector of the economy. Here's his talk -- it's 27 minutes worth watching, for a pure dose of Joi's philosophy of innovation and the internet:
Yesterday, the FCC met to vote on its notice of proposed rulemaking regarding the Open Internet. As was generally expected, the commission voted, along partisan lines, to move forward with their plan for Open Internet rules — a plan that, as currently designed, would allow for fast lanes and slow lanes on the Internet. (You can see the summary fact sheet here and the full notice here). There are really two issues: 1) Should we be striving for an open internet — more specifically, should we ensure that everyone has open accessto the internet, unrestricted by internet access providers; and 2) How do we achieve that On #1, I would encourage everyone to watch Chairman Wheeler’s remarks from yesterday’s meeting (embedded below). I was struck by how dead-solid he came out with a yes to that question. He spoke emphatically of “One Internet” and of enumerated all the ways he would stand up to internet access discrimination. The issue is #2. The FCC’s current plan is
Over the weekend, FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler sent a response to the letter that over 100 VCs and angel investors submitted last week. In the letter, we stressed the importance of an open internet as a foundation for the stunning levels of investment and innovation we’ve seen in the internet applications sector over the past decade.
You can read Chairman Wheeler’s response here (also embedded below). It reiterates high level support for an open internet and states that all options, including Title II reclassification of internet access providers, are on the table. The latter part is the key — with the FCC going on the record that a discussion Title II reclassification will be included in the upcoming Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM).
This letter, combined with the reports over the weekend that the FCC may be revising its approach to open internet policy, are, at the very least, a step in the right direction and an opening in the conversation. But there is still a long way to go on this issue, and a lot of work to be done over this conversation continues over the next few months. The next step is the publication of the NPRM at this Thursday’s Commission meeting.
The Slow Hunch by Nick Grossman
Investing @ USV. Student of cities and the internet.
The Slow Hunch by Nick Grossman
Investing @ USV. Student of cities and the internet.
. But the win, incremental as it may be, is the rather dramatic shift in tone that the Commission has taken — specifically, explicitly considering reclassifying internet access providers as “common carriers”. The pressure from
, has had an impact. After yesterdays FCC meeting, I joined a press call and gave the following statement:
Union Square Ventures is a venture capital firm that manages $1B in assets and invests in the applications layer of the internet — apps like Twitter, tumblr, Etsy, Foursquare, Kickstarter, SoundCloud, and many more. As investors in internet applications, we’ve seen firsthand how the level playing field for startups that has existed with the open internet has been critical to the explosion of innovation and investment over the past decade. And we also know how an environment controlled by gatekeepers with end-user monopolies can stifle investment and innovation. That’s why we joined over 100 other VCs and internet investors in communicating this to the FCC and Chairman Wheeler in a letter last week. Collectively, we manage billions of dollars in investment capital and have invested in internet applications with hundreds of millions of users. And every one of these services started as a tiny company with virtually no resources, and very little chance of succeeding, even before worrying about discrimination and blocking from Internet Access Providers. At today’s meeting, we were pleased to hear the passion with which the Chairman voiced his support for unfettered, open access to “one internet”. It’s clear from his remarks that he believes in the value of, and the need for simple, enforceable rules that protect a wide-open marketplace for internet applications. Clearly, the debate over the next six months will focus on how best to achieve that goal. There is substantial concern that the FCC will not be able to practically achieve its open internet goals under its section 706 authority, which means that looking closely at an approach under Title II of the communications act is a logical next step. So, we look forward to engaging in that discussion, with the FCC, with the startups and other investors we work with on a daily basis, with carriers and with the public that is building more and more of their lives on top of the open internet every day.
. But the win, incremental as it may be, is the rather dramatic shift in tone that the Commission has taken — specifically, explicitly considering reclassifying internet access providers as “common carriers”. The pressure from
, has had an impact. After yesterdays FCC meeting, I joined a press call and gave the following statement:
Union Square Ventures is a venture capital firm that manages $1B in assets and invests in the applications layer of the internet — apps like Twitter, tumblr, Etsy, Foursquare, Kickstarter, SoundCloud, and many more. As investors in internet applications, we’ve seen firsthand how the level playing field for startups that has existed with the open internet has been critical to the explosion of innovation and investment over the past decade. And we also know how an environment controlled by gatekeepers with end-user monopolies can stifle investment and innovation. That’s why we joined over 100 other VCs and internet investors in communicating this to the FCC and Chairman Wheeler in a letter last week. Collectively, we manage billions of dollars in investment capital and have invested in internet applications with hundreds of millions of users. And every one of these services started as a tiny company with virtually no resources, and very little chance of succeeding, even before worrying about discrimination and blocking from Internet Access Providers. At today’s meeting, we were pleased to hear the passion with which the Chairman voiced his support for unfettered, open access to “one internet”. It’s clear from his remarks that he believes in the value of, and the need for simple, enforceable rules that protect a wide-open marketplace for internet applications. Clearly, the debate over the next six months will focus on how best to achieve that goal. There is substantial concern that the FCC will not be able to practically achieve its open internet goals under its section 706 authority, which means that looking closely at an approach under Title II of the communications act is a logical next step. So, we look forward to engaging in that discussion, with the FCC, with the startups and other investors we work with on a daily basis, with carriers and with the public that is building more and more of their lives on top of the open internet every day.
