Verizon + Yahoo = #3 online advertiser, though distant

Assuming the company still wants to buy Yahoo after a massive hack of 500 million of its email users, Verizon will own properties generating about $4.6 billion a year in digital ad dollars, according to eMarketer research. That’s still just a fraction of Facebook’s $12.1 billion and Google’s $53.1 billion.

And unlike its forecasts for Facebook and Google, eMarketer projects no growth for Verizon’s piece of the pie even while the overall pie is growing—by as much as 20% a year, based on an estimate from Pew Research…. What’s worse for Armstrong, and everyone else competing for ad dollars, is Morgan Stanley’s assertion (paywall) that 85% of every new digital ad dollar in the first quarter of 2016 went to Facebook and Google.

Source: The biggest job in media is at the phone company 

RedHat selling more OpenStack, e.g., to Verizon

Whitehurst thinks no one is paying enough attention to Open Stack, the freely-available software stack. “We had three deals over a million dollars last quarter,” for Open Stack, said Whitehurst. “We are finally seeing it move into production in a pretty significant scale. Verizon [Communications] and others are running our Open Stack, and so to reach that production point is pretty exciting.”

Source: Red Hat Rising: Bulls Breathe Sigh of Relief as Linux Rebounds.

Amazon Echo owners spend 10% more

The research company found that owners of the Echo spent around 10 percent more after they bought the voice-powered smart speaker than they did before.

The NPD Group’s Checkout Tracking purchase monitor provided the data, analyzing customer spending and overall number of receipts, and found that there was also a 6 percent bump in the overall number of purchases made by Echo owners on Amazon.com when compared to their pre-Echo existence.

Source: Amazon Echo owners spend more on Amazon, says NPD.

Enterprise open source montage

I cut the below montage-y overview of the history of enterprise open source from a Register piece I’m working on. Here it is!

For me, the dawn of enterprise open source was somewhere around 2001 when IBM committed billions of dollars to shoring up Linux. Around this same time, the Eclipse Foundation (also launched by IBM) started it’s IDE market re-rigging, and the Apache Web Server was climbing the hill to market dominance piloting the way for the rest of the Apache Software Foundation.

Java’s history is representative of open source’s involvement with most infrastructure software. Java started as closed source, holding onto that model like a waterlogged man hugging floating detritus. Despite this, in the 2000s Java’s course was changed by the influence of open source with the likes of Fleury’s JBoss crew (how I miss their pirate-like antics!), Apache Tomcat, and the Spring Framework. These and so many other open source projects acted as forcing functions for innovation in Java and still do. Eventually, Sun open sourced Java, both JBoss and Spring were gobbled up by larger companies, and open source became the norm in the Java world.

To top this all off, Microsoft open sourced .Net in 2014 and now supports a wide array of open source software in its Azure cloud. Open source is the de facto standard when it comes to new infrastructure software.

Adding more individual controls to debit cards

Some interesting ideas to improve debit (and credit, one’d presume) with software-driven features:

CardGuard provides additional protection against fraud, since customers are able turn their debit card “on” or “off.” When the card is “off,” no withdrawals or purchases will be approved, with the exception of previously authorized or recurring transactions. Additionally, transaction controls can be set according to location, meaning transactions attempted outside of the geographic parameters set by the customer will be declined.

Also:

With CardGuard, customers are able to better manage their spending by establishing limits for debit card purchases based on the amount of the transaction. Additional controls can be set to manage spending in different categories by enabling or disabling transactions for certain merchant groups, such as gas, grocery or retail stores.

Source: First National Bank app comes with debit card controls

Don’t worry, computers are just causing a class war

On the contrary, as this book will argue, the digital revolution is very much like the industrial revolution. And the experience of the industrial revolution tells us that society must go through a period of wrenching political change before it can agree on a broadly acceptable social system for sharing the fruits of this new technological world. It is unfortunate, but those groups that benefit most from the changing economy tend not to willingly share their riches; social change occurs when losing groups find ways to wield social and political power, to demand a better share. The question we ought to be worried about now is not simply what policies need to be adopted to make life better in this technological future, but how to manage the fierce social battle, only just beginning, that will determine who gets what and by what mechanism.

Underlying the problem is rich people putting all their money under the mattress. Their wealth isn’t flowing down to the rest of the people. These wealthy folks have worked hard, and feel like they’re owed all that money (rather than having taken away by high taxes and redistributed); or, at least, they feel others are not deserving.

However, as the book goes into say, this mind-set ignores how a functioning society enables that success in the first place, and now sustains it:

A makers-and-takers conception of the world is one that neglects the social foundation on which wealth is built. We aren’t merely divided into makers and takers. We are participants in societies, operating according to a broad social consensus. When that consensus breaks down, the wealth goes away. Society either agrees a way to share its riches that most members find acceptable, or the system fractures and the social wealth available to everyone shrinks.

Source: The Wealth of Humans: Work, Power, and Status in the Twenty-first Century by Ryan Avent.

Think your organization is too caustic for “agile”? That actually makes it perfect

Many organizations object to the idea of doing anything remotely similar to “agile” based on the lack of communications between different groups and an overall caustic corporate culture. While more cynical than most agile adherents would like, the functional practices in agile may actually be a perfect fit for such corrupted cultures. As Grady Beaubouef ingeniously explains it:

The customer should perform a realistic assessment of the relationship between their Business and the internal IT organization. If the relationship does not foster effective collaboration or there is a known alignment challenge, then this presents a significant project risk. An iterative approach should be considered in this situation – especially when it comes to software developments for packaged software enhancements and customizations.

I finished up Beaubouef’s book on the plan today. It’s somewhat tedious to get through – the topic of planning and project managing big COTS installs isn’t exactly thrilling – it’s chock full of useful thinking.