I just listened to this podcast and I thought it was a worthy listen, so I am recommending it here.

The podcast is an interview with Jim Loehr who is a psychologist that helps top athletes and high performers manage performance and life. I just thought that some of the anecdotes were interesting, but certainly also the main message where high performance can only (bar some exceptions) be really/sufficiently satisfying if we also pay attention to the hidden score card that one has in their own head.

Source (#490 of The Tim Ferris show): Dr. Jim Loehr on Mental Toughness, Energy Management, the Power of Journaling, and Olympic Gold Medals

Many books I read are interesting, but not all are “life changing”. This recent book certainly has the potential to fall in the latter category.

Overall, I like books that fall in the “productivity” category, but not all offer a leap forward in my way of working. Getting Things Done (GTD) by David Allen was a transformative book for me. It had so many good ideas bound together by a common sense process. I don’t apply it all religiously, but have benefited enormously from the book.

This latest book by Sonke Ahrens called How to Take Smart Notes is a book similar to GTD: good ideas bound together by a common sense process. Rather than focusing on personal productivity, this book’s topic is more related to knowledge management. The processes described in the book facilitate processing information and helping to advance your thinking.

The system described in the book is based on the Zettelkasten system developed by a German social scientist called Niklas Luhmann in the 20th century. He systematically processed information and included it in his second brain where he developed his thinking. This second brain was the Zettelkasten, or slip box in English.

Both GTD and Zettelkasten have things in common: the brain is great for having ideas, but very poor at holding them, and they need to be externalised into a system. For any system to work, you need to intuitively trust it. In order to intuitively trust it, it needs to be common sense and easy enough to use.

So what is a Zettelkasten system? It is composed of 3 parts:

1. Ubiquitous capture tool (which GTD also has) for fleeting notes (thoughts that come in your mind throughout the day that are interesting enough to revisit later)
2. A reference system to keep track of what you have read / seen / listened to and their related notes (1 note per source)
3. The slip box system itself for all permanent thoughts and insights, together with its index.

So how do you work with such a system?

1. Make fleeting notes, whenever they come up
2. Make reading / reference notes
3. Make permanent notes based on the fleeting notes and the recent reading/reference notes to advance your thinking and insights ( develop ideas, arguments and discussions). 1 idea per note, written in full sentences, disclosing sources, making the necessary references and being brief/precise.
4. Add permanent notes to slip box. Create an index with entry points to the slip box. For every new note, make sure it can be found by either linking to it from the index or linking to it from another note that is used as an entry point to a discussion or topic itself and is linked to the index.

The eventual objective is to develop your topics, questions and research projects bottom up from within the slip box system, following what you already have in it and adding to it.

In my experience, it is trickier to apply than GTD, but also potentially more transformative, I feel. So, I am giving it a shot and will try to revisit the topic based on progress I make.

If you are interested, I am leaving you here the link to the book on GoodReads.

This twitter thread from Chris Herd of First Base HQ about remote working and the possible implications on society and business is an interesting read.

Personally, I have been working from home for the last 9 months. It has been a very successful experience. I am certainly not saying that seeing colleagues in the office does not have some advantages, but I don’t feel it is outweighed by the disadvantages of commuting and office hours. I have worked at Kantar for quite some time and know a lot of people and the ins and outs of the company, so that makes working remotely easier, admittedly.

In any case, my ideal situation is probably working in the office 1-2 days a week. I do realise it is a personal preference though.

Source (twitter): twitter.com/chris_her…

The US elections are around the corner and we will, hopefully, soon know who the US President is for the next 4 years. The polls currently have Biden winning, but we all remember that Clinton was also winning 4 years ago. So, should we believe the polls this time around? Have they learned?

An interesting article in a Dutch newspaper argues that they have fixed the main issues and that we can be more confident in the predictive nature of the current polls:

1. They are now better representing the different population segments in the polls, such as the lower educated segment of the population that gave Trump a boost in the election 4 years ago.
2. The polls now focus less on national popular vote, but rather take into account the US voting system, where results should be measured by State. In the past, State-level polls were of worse quality, but that has improved, according to the article.

Although not necessarily related to the quality of the polls, this time around the share of undecided voters is lower, making it easier to predict the results.

So yes, it seems that the industry has reflected and fixed some of the issues that caused them to incorrectly predict a Clinton victory. Naturally, there is no guarantee, but it does seem that the results of the polls should be closer to reality.

Source (NRC Handelsblad): Biden gaat aan kop, maar kloppen de peilingen?

More and more people get their news from social media sites nowadays. This fact combined with the suspicion that the facebook site has had a notable impact on the 2016 US elections and with the 2020 elections around the corner, make the linked news article quite interesting.

As anybody in research will tell you, in order to establish a causal effect (does facebook influence elections?), any experimental research design needs to have a control and experimental group, but with just about everybody using Facebook and/or Instagram, it is rather difficult to establish the real influence as there is no real “comparable” control group.

So, Facebook has taken it upon themselves to create a control group:

According to international media reports, the company has decided to ascertain the role of social media giants and their influence and therefore Facebook has decided to offer $120 to its users to deactivate their accounts at the end of September.

It will need to closely monitor any other behaviour participants have around news gathering (do they now use twitter, youtube, … instead?), but it is an interesting angle. I am curious about the results of this research project, but do wonder how much will be shared publicly.

Source (Republic World): Facebook To Pay US Users To Stop Using Its Services Until Elections

In line with the books I mentioned yesterday about AI, the linked article from Wired discusses how Google is offering companies to help address ethical issues around AI.

The company plans to launch new AI ethics services before the end of the year. Initially, Google will offer others advice on tasks such as spotting racial bias in computer vision systems, or developing ethical guidelines that govern AI projects. Longer term, the company may offer to audit customers’ AI systems for ethical integrity, and charge for ethics advice.

Google Offers to Help Others With the Tricky Ethics of AI - WIRED

Interesting backstory to a company and product I have used for some time. The Anti-Facebook: 12 Years In, Facebook Cofounder Dustin Moskovitz’s Slow-Burn Second Act Asana Finally Has Its Moment

Lately I have read a couple of books about privacy and artificial intelligence. These subjects are quite related, as massive amounts of data are required to make artificial intelligence work and that directly leads to privacy considerations.

We all benefit one way or another in our daily lives from sharing our data, e.g. by accessing free tools (such as Facebook and Google) or by using tools that already start to benefit from AI (such as Google Assistant or Google Maps). However, there are lots of things to be worried about. Both books take a closer look at this and I just thought I’d share them here as I found both of them to a worthy read.

The Age of Surveillance capitalism by [Shoshana Zuboff] (https://twitter.com/shoshanazuboff?s=09)

A lot of the ideas in this [book] (https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/26195941-the-age-of-surveillance-capitalism) are quite interesting. Few people will argue that we are losing our privacy to tech companies. However, not everyone is equally worried about the implications of this and how these companies go about gathering the information. The book is a good eye-opener for the latter and gives food-for-thought regarding the former.

Zuboff brings to life the consequences as surveillance capitalism advances from Silicon Valley into every economic sector. According to the book, vast wealth and power are accumulated in ominous new “behavioral futures markets,” where predictions about our behavior are bought and sold, and the production of goods and services is subordinated to a new “means of behavioral modification.”

The threat has shifted from a totalitarian Big Brother state to a ubiquitous digital architecture: a “Big Other” operating in the interests of surveillance capital. Here is the crucible of an unprecedented form of power marked by extreme concentrations of knowledge and free from democratic oversight.

Should you be interested in the book - and I do recommend it if you are into this subject matter - then I suggest looking at an abridged version (the author is a bit wordy).

Summary of the book to be found [here] (https://goodbooksummary.com/the-age-of-surveillance-capitalism-by-shoshana-zuboff-book-summary-review/).

The Big Nine by [Amy Webb] (https://twitter.com/amywebb?s=09)

In this [book] (https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/41717507-the-big-nine), Amy Webb reveals the pervasive, invisible ways in which the foundations of AI – the people working on the system, their motivations, the technology itself – is broken. According to Webb, within our lifetimes, AI will, by design, begin to behave unpredictably, thinking and acting in ways which defy human logic. The big nine corporations (6 US companies and 3 Chinese companies) may be inadvertently building and enabling vast arrays of intelligent systems that don’t share our motivations, desires, or hopes for the future of humanity.

Above all, she argues for us to think very well about what we want and what role we want AI to play, as we can still make decisions to ensure that AI ends up benefiting humanity, but in order to do so the status quo needs to be broken. Specifically, in the latter part of the book she describes the near future for optimistic, realistic and pesimistic scenarios depending on how we deal with AI. They are certainly worth a read.

Summary of the book to be found [here] (https://lifeclub.org/books/the-big-nine-amy-webb-review-summary).

After reading both books, it is difficult not to be “worried” about AI. AI offers clearly many possibilities for humanity, but it is very easy for it to get out of our collective control. Reading these books has made me more aware of the issues, but The Big Nine has also made it clear that we are still in time to manage this “properly” - although that will not be easy. All in all, I think I’d recommend The Big Nine above The Age of Surveillance Capitalism. Both have interesting ideas, but The Big Nine feels like a more practical and less theoretical book and comes to the point quicker.

As was to be expected, smartphone sales dropped significantly in Q2 2020. The question is how manufacturers react in this environment. Changes can be made in the product portfolio, pricing and promotion strategy as well as sales channel strategies.

Samsung suffered most, but I would venture that their wide product range and economies of scale should have allowed them to react better. The article mentions the Note 20 as a possible saviour for Samsung, but I doubt that, even though it is a great product. It is just the wrong price at the wrong time for it make a significant impact.

Source (TechCrunch): [COVID-19 blamed as smartphone sales plummet 20% in Q2] (https://techcrunch.com/2020/08/25/covid-19-blamed-as-smartphone-sales-plummet-20-in-q2/)

Ben always writes interesting analyses and I think this article is worth reading if you want to understand what is going on between Apple and Epic Games. There is no doubt in my mind that all the pressure Apple is under will lead to some changes in their App Store policies, which is a good thing for developers and also users.

Epic is attacking every level of the iPhone stack: the company doesn’t just want a direct relationship with customers, and it doesn’t just want to use its own payment processor; it is also demanding the right to run its own App Store.

Source (Stratechery): Apple, Epic, and the App Store

We’ve known about the Surface Duo for quite some time, but Microsoft has finally made it “official”. However, rather than an actual product launch, it feels much more like a beta programme.

That is necessary to a large extend, as the foldable phone category is very young. We’ve seen many companies try different ways and we clearly haven’t settled yet on THE foldable form factor.

In the case of the Surface Duo, we are looking at two independent screens rather than a foldable screen as we’ve seen in the Galaxy Fold phones. Microsoft has some good ideas, that it has showcased, of how this is better for the user, but we’re clearly not there yet.

I don’t want to take anything away from the product, though, because it looks really well designed and thought through, and I for one am really excited, but clearly this is a .5 version. Rather than just refining it in the labs, Microsoft will allow consumers to play with it and shape the future development, I can only imagine.

Firstly, there is the hardware. It is beautifully designed with what appears to be a great working hinge, which will be important to make this work well. However, it has last year’s processor, doesn’t ship with 5G, it has incredibly large bezels, and it has a small battery. These are big “flaws” for a device that comes in at 1.400 USD and are really a result of having been in development for a long time (apparently, the hardware has been ready for some time).

Then there is the software. Microsoft is launching this with an adapted version of Android. The two-screen UI allows for apps to take up both screens, but divide the app in panes. Microsoft will have its apps ready, but developers will need to time to play with this new paradigm (if they will actually adapt their app to take advantage of the capability). Launching it early and letting people and developers play with it, is of course a great thing for the development of this new product category.

Lastly, it is only launching this phone in the US, which again indicates they want the roll-out to be small for now, so they can gather feedback. It’s not yet about market share or revenue.

As a researcher that helps companies in product development, I can only imagine what a luxurious situation this is for the product team. Microsoft does well financially and can afford to do this. They will learn a lot and it will help them building the next version. I am very excited to see this.

Source (The Verge): [Microsoft’s Surface Duo arrives on September 10th for $1.399] (https://www.theverge.com/2020/8/12/21364633/microsoft-surface-duo-release-date-pricing-features-specs)

Samsung brought out a new set of totally wireless earbuds, the Galaxy Buds Live. The most innovative aspect of the product is its design. The look is very distinctive (they look like a bean), but from the linked review it appears that Samsung did not forget about the basics. Personally, I can’t wait to try them.

Galaxy Buds Live review: good beans, no compromises

Samsung’s screens have always been best-in-class. They offered higher refresh screens a little later, but this innovation brings real benefits and I can’t wait to see how it does on the Note 20 Ultra.

Samsung Display Announces First VRR Mobile Display - Inside Note20 Ultra

The updated Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 2 is a really nice gen. 2 product. It’ll still be really expensive, but it looks like the ultimate in mobile computing! Samsung announces the Galaxy Z Fold 2 with bigger screens and better cameras - The Verge

Yesterday the European Commission (EC) announced that it will open an in-depth investigation into the proposed acquisition of Fitbit by Google. Google agreed to purchase Fitbit in November 2019, but the purchase has not yet been formalised as it is being looked at by Authorities.

Specifically, the EC’s main reason for opening this investigation is:

The data collected via wrist-worn wearable devices appears, at this stage of the Commission’s review of the transaction, to be an important advantage in the online advertising markets.

I think the advertisement angle is interesting and I suggest you read the source article linked below, but there is an additional implication of course, which has to do with how this impacts Wear OS.

Google launched Android Wear - its wearable OS - many years ago, but has frankly not been able to get real traction. Apple Watch is clearly a success and I think we can safely say that the Galaxy Watches are also doing quite well, but Wear OS (as it is called now) has never been a great success despite Android’s clear success.

There are hardware issues that need to be resolved, certainly, but there is also a software and services part. A big part of a wearable is the health tracking and Wear OS with Google Fit just does not have a great solution in place. Buying, and integrating, Fitbit is a possible solution, but that will now have to wait. The question is, how much longer can Google wait before it is just too late for Wear OS?

Source (European Commission): [Mergers: Commission opens in-depth investigation into the proposed acquisition of Fitbit by Google] (https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_20_1446)

In 2014, Google purchased Nest. After many years of product and brand strategy changes, it seems that Nest is finally within Alphabet the brand for all home tech (home assistants, thermostat, security cameras and even wireless home networking).

Yesterday, Google made an important next step for the Nest brand by investing 450 million USD in ADT, an alarm system company. This should give ADT access to smarter cameras and Google to a new sales channel. It’ll be interesting to see how far the integration between Nest cameras and ADT’s alarm system will go (pretty sure that is a subtantial technical challenge).

Personally, I have my doubts about whether Google should have done this. It seems like quite a lot of money for just accessing a new sales channel. ADT is a human resource intensive business, whereas Google with its Nest cameras focuses more on high tech cameras, good software and good solutions, but all very scaleable.

I realise that without a monitored alarm system, some would argue that Nest cameras give a false sense of security, but I wonder whether an emphasis on convenience and control could be enough to strongly position Nest. It’ll be interesting to see how this plays out and whether Google starts coming to similar agreements with other alarm companies in other countries.

Source (TechCruch): [Google to invest $450M in smart home security solutions provider ADT] (https://techcrunch.com/2020/08/03/google-to-invest-450m-in-smart-home-security-solutions-provider-adt/?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly90ZWNobWVtZS5jb20v&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAIMJGwnOnYdyKWdtwhvychwfXnfzVgSVPcKDrpuS-v9qmJzvN2RPda98OJy9YFiLNI2F_r-1JlugDB3Cj5X7iD58PeMyH3_I-3lMvBPMvlzUn-cwe6WzugAn6tEdRSzZGjiS0sJPtYwOU5fIzZ9IyNyjEfKaE_wDTNumj2pJqnse)

It is so nice to see competition heating up in this segment. After the iPhone SE, OnePlus Nord, now Google has announced the Pixel 4A. Pixel’s selling point is its still camera.

Pixel 4A review: Google’s smartphone camera for $349 - The Verge

It is pretty crazy how the mobile services industry has evolved in the last 20 years ago. Ringtones were a billion dollar industry just 20 years ago and now practically gone. This article has its history, in case you were curious.

Then, in 1998, a Finnish engineer tired of Nokia’s preset monotone interfering with his weekday hangovers (no joke) found a way to transfer audio files directly to his phone through text message and the ringtone revolution began in earnest. By 2002, 30% of all SMS traffic were requests for downloadable ringtones.

onezero.medium.com/how-the-c…

My name is Bas Heetebrij. I love anything related to tech, from hardware, to software all the way to services. I don’t work in a tech company, though, so it’s really “just” personal interest. I work in a market research company, where I help companies develop new products and services.