Techmeme’s algorithm now ‘officially’ includes an elf

Gabe Rivera has announced that Techmeme will be getting a little more “explicit” in the human-editing that takes place on the site. (For those who don’t follow these things — i.e., the vast majority of the world’s population — I highly recommend skipping this post, unless it’s late at night and you’re seeking relief from insomnia.)

Many people use Techmeme as a filter for finding breaking news related to blog posts and news articles (or, more accurately, blog posts about news articles) related primarily to the interests of new media and niche-tech geeks. Which niche-tech? Let’s see: any big (rumor or fact) related to Apple or Google hits the site pretty quickly. And, I think it’s fair to say it has an SF Bay-area bias. Mobile technology and Web 2.0 startups hit the site, as well. Really big screw-ups by large technology companies also show up. And whenever the RIAA sues some little old lady who is foster-parent to an orphan, that’s sure to make it to the top of Techmeme.

Today’s announcement by Gabe that an actual human being is going to be a part of his elf-works, will add to the conspiracy theories that abound regarding how stories get onto — and to the top of — the site.

As people who read my blog with any consistency will know, I’m a fan of Gabe. I like Techmeme, but have scaled back on my visits there (or feeds from there). However, it is the go-to place whenever I’m seeking what’s taking place real-time in geek-land and, in my opinion, no other “meme-tracking” service comes close to providing what it provides.

That said, I have always felt that the algorithms of which Gabe speaks have always received a little sprinkling of elf magic dust when necessary. I do not agree with the conspiracy theories that Techmeme skews coverage towards anything appearing on TechCrunch, however, I understand why the complaints exist — it has to do with what Gabe calls “implicit” human activity in his blog post. And implicitly, the people who point to TechCrunch stories are the bloggers who are obsessed with the kinds of news that are of interest to those who are attracted to Techmeme. (I think it has something to do with feed-back loops, but that’s a term I use only when I’m desperate to say something other than echo-chamber.)

Nonetheless, I think this is a good move and will make Techmeme better.

If it doesn’t, no one is forcing people to use it.

Like Gabe says:

“Ultimately, Techmeme will succeed based on whether it interests a significant readership. While fairness and balance probably affect this interest, I need to stress that bloggers will never agree on what’s fair. Why not? To generalize and perhaps exaggerate somewhat, many bloggers feel that in the fairest scenario, Techmeme prominently features all of their posts. So it’s hard to be fair.”

As for me, I’ll decide whether or not I like the new approach based on whether or not this post gets added to the “discussion” list underneath Gabe’s blog post headline which I feel certain is going to be at the top of Techmeme now — or momentarily.

Wait, Is Google Gears down? Or is Google gearing down? (Or, How not to write a headline)

This post has
nothing to do with
Google Gears.

I just ran across this WSJ.com headline that says, “Google Gears Down for Tougher Times.”

That shocked me. Why would Google shut down Google Gears, I wondered. It seems a bit core to what they’re trying to do to compete longterm with Microsoft, I thought. Obviously, I clicked through to the story to seek an understanding of why Google would shut down software that allows me to work on Google documents on my computer while I’m offline.

Ohhhh! I get it. Google gears down is what the headline writer means. As in, the entire Google enterprise is trying to figure out what big companies do during lean times — like by not hiring everyone who walks through the door with a ubber-high IQ.

OK. Got it.

Note to WSJ.com: That headline failed.

On books, in print and on my Kindle

Commenting on James Gleick’s New York Times piece on the future of book publishing, bibliophile and Kindle owner David Charbuck writes:

“Like Glieck, I am delighted Google is digitizing the world’s libraries, giving a second life to millions of titles doomed to acid based paper and the physical barriers of getting inside of the Widener Library at Harvard. On the other hand I envisioned myself retiring, a wealthy man, into a lavish library with a leather chair and a roaring fire, and no other responsibilities in my dotage than to read my collection while getting sipping expensive eau de vie and shuffling around in my smoking jacket, a snoring terrier at my feet. Instead I get a glowing panel casting, in the words of Tom Wolfe, a “tubercular blue glow.”

David has other keen observations on his conflicted views of his Kindle. I share his pain — and un-pain.

Traveling last week, I was able to haul along a shelf-full (in a metaphoric-virtual way) of books I’ve been wanting to read recently. And the $9.99 price of most books, even newly-published best-sellers, has broadened my reading choices for the year, as well. But I am discovering that after I spend a few days reading a wonderful book, I miss having a souvenir to remember it by.

So during my year with a Kindle, I’ve read some books I later purchased in print, including one over the weekend: Jon Meacham’s American Lion: Andrew Jackson in the White House. In fact, Meacham’s book is the first I’ve ever purchased in three different formats. First, in a spoken-word format via Audible.com. Second, as a download to my Kindle. And third, as a hardback so it could sit on a shelf next to my collection of books by Robert Remini — their patiently waiting for me to one day retire and be re-read while I’m wearing a smoking jacket.

It’s official. The economy is in a Melancholy

(Note: I made some parenthetical notes of clarification to this post about three hours after it was first published. Nothing that changes its points. Just some refinement to what I meant.)

OK. It’s official. The official recession-calling panel (The Business Cycle Dating Committee of the National Bureau of Economic Research - NBER) has met and issued the official declaration that the US has been in a recession since December 2007. For those who are confused by math, that means we are, as we speak, 12 months into a Recession.

What is a Recession? Well, most definitions say something about two consecutive quarters of declining economic activity, but according to the official Recession committee, the definition is this:

“A recession is a significant decline in economic activity spread across the economy, lasting more than a few months, normally visible in production, employment, real income and other indicators…it begins when the economy reaches a peak of activity and ends when the economy reaches its trough.”

So, let’s get this straight. According to the authority that actually decides these things, we know these two following things:

1. A Recession begins when the economy reaches a peak and ends when the economy reaches the low point.
2. The current Recession has now lasted 12 months.

So much for the backward looking data, I want to know what the future holds.

Unfortunately, according to the article I’ve linked to above, “The NBER makes no forecast on how long a recession will last, but said that in the past they have run from six to 18 months.”

Durations of previous recessions.

The NBER website actually includes information about the history of economic cycles, but unfortunately, the NBER website is currently slammed and unavailable, so I’ll link to this CNBC article from 2007 about the history of U.S. Recessions from which the accompanying chart is taken.

So, here’s what we also know:

3. The NBER indicated to at least one reporter that past recessions last from six to 18 months.
4. Data from the NBER indicates that, depending how you state it, you can claim the following:

a. During the past 100 years, Recessions have lasted from 6-43 months.
b. During the past 100 years, Recessions have lasted an average of 14.4 months.
c. Since World War II, Recessions have lasted an from 6-16 months.
d. Since World War II, Recessions have lasted an average of 10.2 months.

5. If you include data from the Great Depression, the average Recession lasts 14.4 months.
6. If you include data since World War II, the average Recession lasts 10.2 months.

(Later: Bloomberg, in this article, says this contraction already the longest since 1982 and that if it lasts for another five months, which is consistent with Fed and private forecasts, it would become the longest since the Great Depression.)

Having observed the coverage of the current economic crisis, meltdown and worst economy since the Great Depression, I feel certain that the coverage of today’s numbers will point towards something a lot worse than merely another two months of Recession. And I’m sure that some people will call me ridiculous if I suggest we’ve already hit the bottom (as in, “the end of the definition of what is officially “the end” of a Recession).

So I’ll merely predict this: I believe the Recession is nearing its end. (Later: I need to refine my definition a bit to say that I mean the contraction is closer to the end than to the beginning; that it is more than halfway to its end.) I believe that we were actually heading out of it on September 15 and it has been extended and exacerbated because of the hyper-coverage of the economy during the past three months.

I believe that this is the first time in my life that to believe as I do — to even consider that the economy is slowly improving and not crumbling — is rejecting the conventional wisdom to such a degree as to be classified a cynic. Well, I am. It may not be prosperity I see right around the corner, but it’s not a Depression either.

An additional thought: The article to which I pointed above includes this nugget: The NBER has no definition of a Depression. There’s either economic growth or economic decline.

In other words, “Depression” is not an official economic term as defined by the official economic cycle calling body. Apparently, it is a label for an emotional response to a deep Recession.

I think we should come up with a similar word to describe our emotional response to an average Recession: Perhaps, a Melancholy. Maybe what we’re going through is a worse-than-average Recession, so perhaps we should call it, a Great Melancholy.

The Mother of All List of Lists, 2008 version

Rex Sorgatz (no relation, but to whom, I just remembered, I owe a bottle of wine) has started this year’s edition of his annual list-of-lists. Here’s an interview about his list I did with Rex in 2005 and an update I did for Foliomag.com last year.