technology

TechnoKimchi

역시 accounting 시험은 상당히 어려웠다. 한학기로 회계를 마스터하기에는 역부족인거 같으며, 다시 한번 CPA들한테 존경을 표시한다. 어떻게 이런 노가다+쫀쫀함의 극치인 일을 매일매일 할 수 있을까?

굉장히 재미있고 참신한 블로그를 오늘 웹에서 발견했다. 나도 나름대로 technology 관련된 블로그는 자주 보며 알고 있는데 왜 이 블로그를 지금까지 한번도 못 봤을까? TechnoKimchi라는 블로그인데, 아마도 TechCrunch와 같은 블로그에서 영감을 받고 블로깅을 시작한거 같다 (이름도 왠지 비슷한거 같다). 블로거는 코넬대학교 컴퓨터공학 석사 출신인 김태우씨라는 78년생 남자분이다. 블로그에 들어가보면 “Spicy Thoughts on Digital Generation in Asia” 라고 적혀있는데 이 말 또한 매우 재미있는거 같다. 아시아, 특히 한국의 Web 2.0, IT, digital activity 관련된 본인의 느낌 및 글을 잘 정리한 블로그 인거 같으며, 현재 약 5,000명의 subscriber가 있을 정도로 인기가 많은거 같다. 다음 주에 연락한번 해서 뮤직쉐이크에 대한 소개도 간단히 좀 실어 달라고 부탁해야겠다.

TechnoKimchi가 최근에 크게 알려질 수 있수 있었던 이유가 바로 CNN에 소개되었기 때문이다. 여기를 클릭하면 내가 좋아하는 CNN의 Kristy Lu Stout양과 김태우씨가 인터뷰하는 동영상을 감상할 수 있다. 김태우씨한테 한가지만 부탁하고 싶은게 있다면, contents를 조금 더 자주 update 해줬으면 좋겠다…

10 Rules for Startup Success from Loic Le Meur

eBay의 창업자인 Pierre Omidyar과 함께 프랑스를 대표하는 유명한 entrepreneur인 Loic Le Meur 선생의 벤처를 해서 성공하려면 지켜야할 10계명이 Financial Times에 올라와서 여기 소개한다. 단순히 책에서 나온 내용이 아닌, 프랑스 대통령 니콜라스 사르코지가 가끔씩 조언을 구할 정도로 노련한 사람의 실제 경험에서 우러나온 의견이다.

● Don’t wait for a revolutionary idea. It will never happen. Just focus on a simple, exciting, empty space and execute as fast as possible
● Share your idea. The more you share, the more you get advice and the more you learn. Meet and talk to your competitors.
● Build a community. Use blogging and social software to make sure people hear about you.
● Listen to your community. Answer questions and build your product with their feedback.
● Gather a great team. Select those with very different skills from you. Look for people who are better than you.
● Be the first to recognise a problem. Everyone makes mistakes. Address the issue in public, learn about and correct it.
● Don’t spend time on market research. Launch test versions as early as possible. Keep improving the product in the open.
● Don’t obsess over spreadsheet business plans. They are not going to turn out as you predict, in any case.
● Don’t plan a big marketing effort. It’s much more important and powerful that your community loves the product.
● Don’t focus on getting rich. Focus on your users. Money is a consequence of success, not a goal.

Technology / Internet Trends – Morgan Stanley

Morgan Stanley Global Technology Team의 간판 스타 Mary Meeker 여사가 2007년 10월 17-19일 San Francisco에서 열렸던 Web 2.0 Summit에서 발표한 자료의 링크를올린다. 특히 이 자료 중에서 내 눈길을 끌었던 자료는 20장에 나와 있는 중국의 Internet Market Capitalization 자료이다…중국의 상장된 인터넷 기업의 총 market cap이 $50 Billion이란다…그리고 이 숫자는 최근 4년 동안 76%의 CAGR을 이룩한 숫자이다…QUITE IMPRESSIVE!!

How to be Silicon Valley

거의 한달에 한번씩 Silicon Valley에 오는거 같다. 오늘은 Oceans International의 고객사인 Clunix 사가 실리콘 밸리에서 BlueRun Ventures라는 venture capital회사와 미팅이 있어서 왔다. Supercomputing 관련 솔루션을 제공하는 8년된 베테랑 벤처 기업인 Clunix의 권대석 사장님과 김소헌 실장님이 Lake Tahoe에서 열린 SC2007 행사를 성공적으로 마친 후 한국 들어가기전에 잠시 들리셨다.
나는 실리콘 밸리를 사랑한다. 내가 99년 미국에 와서 처음으로 정착한 곳이 이 동네라서 그런지 모르겠지만, 하여튼 이 동네에 오면 마음이 편해진다. “필라델피아에서도 몇 개월 있다보면 정이 들겠지” 라는 생각을 하지만, 실리콘 밸리와 같은 느낌은 나지 않을거 같다..자, 그러면 실리콘 밸리가 뭐가 그렇게 특별날까? 많은 지역과 나라들이 실리콘 밸리의 dynamics (자본, 기술, 우수한 인력 등..)에 대해서 연구한 후에 각자의 지역에 replicate하려는 노력들을 많이 하였지만 아직까지 실리콘 밸리를 100% 복사하는데는 실패하였다. 뉴욕의 Silicon Alley, Texas의 Silicorn Valley, 한국의 대덕 연구 단지/테헤란 밸리…흉내는 내지만, 뭔가 많이 부족하다…What is it so special about Silicon Valley and how do we become one?
Y Combinator의 창업자인 Paul Graham의 블로그에서 이 질문에 대한 답을 찾았다. 바로 How to be Silicon Valley라는 글인데, 모두들 자세히 읽어보시라고 권장하고 싶다. 이 글을 읽으면 실리콘 밸리가 왜 실리콘 밸리이며, 전세계 IT 창업자들과 엔지니어들이 뼈를 묻고 싶어하는 곳인지 5% 정도는 이해할 수 있을것이다. 나도 꼭 졸업 후 이 동네에서 살고 싶다…Man, I love this place!

Could you reproduce Silicon Valley elsewhere, or is there something unique about it?It wouldn’t be surprising if it were hard to reproduce in other countries, because you couldn’t reproduce it in most of the US either. What does it take to make a silicon valley even here?What it takes is the right people. If you could get the right ten thousand people to move from Silicon Valley to Buffalo, Buffalo would become Silicon Valley. That’s a striking departure from the past. Up till a couple decades ago, geography was destiny for cities. All great cities were located on waterways, because cities made money by trade, and water was the only economical way to ship.Now you could make a great city anywhere, if you could get the right people to move there. So the question of how to make a silicon valley becomes: who are the right people, and how do you get them to move?

Two Types
I think you only need two kinds of people to create a technology hub: rich people and nerds. They’re the limiting reagents in the reaction that produces startups, because they’re the only ones present when startups get started. Everyone else will move.Observation bears this out: within the US, towns have become startup hubs if and only if they have both rich people and nerds. Few startups happen in Miami, for example, because although it’s full of rich people, it has few nerds. It’s not the kind of place nerds like.Whereas Pittsburgh has the opposite problem: plenty of nerds, but no rich people. The top US Computer Science departments are said to be MIT, Stanford, Berkeley, and Carnegie-Mellon. MIT yielded Route 128. Stanford and Berkeley yielded Silicon Valley. But Carnegie-Mellon? The record skips at that point. Lower down the list, the University of Washington yielded a high-tech community in Seattle, and the University of Texas at Austin yielded one in Austin. But what happened in Pittsburgh? And in Ithaca, home of Cornell, which is also high on the list?I grew up in Pittsburgh and went to college at Cornell, so I can answer for both. The weather is terrible, particularly in winter, and there’s no interesting old city to make up for it, as there is in Boston. Rich people don’t want to live in Pittsburgh or Ithaca. So while there are plenty of hackers who could start startups, there’s no one to invest in them.

Not Bureaucrats
Do you really need the rich people? Wouldn’t it work to have the government invest in the nerds? No, it would not. Startup investors are a distinct type of rich people. They tend to have a lot of experience themselves in the technology business. This (a) helps them pick the right startups, and (b) means they can supply advice and connections as well as money. And the fact that they have a personal stake in the outcome makes them really pay attention.Bureaucrats by their nature are the exact opposite sort of people from startup investors. The idea of them making startup investments is comic. It would be like mathematicians running Vogue– or perhaps more accurately, Vogue editors running a math journal. Though indeed, most things bureaucrats do, they do badly. We just don’t notice usually, because they only have to compete against other bureaucrats. But as startup investors they’d have to compete against pros with a great deal more experience and motivation.Even corporations that have in-house VC groups generally forbid them to make their own investment decisions. Most are only allowed to invest in deals where some reputable private VC firm is willing to act as lead investor.

Not Buildings
If you go to see Silicon Valley, what you’ll see are buildings. But it’s the people that make it Silicon Valley, not the buildings. I read occasionally about attempts to set up “technology parks” in other places, as if the active ingredient of Silicon Valley were the office space. An article about Sophia Antipolis bragged that companies there included Cisco, Compaq, IBM, NCR, and Nortel. Don’t the French realize these aren’t startups?Building office buildings for technology companies won’t get you a silicon valley, because the key stage in the life of a startup happens before they want that kind of space. The key stage is when they’re three guys operating out of an apartment. Wherever the startup is when it gets funded, it will stay. The defining quality of Silicon Valley is not that Intel or Apple or Google have offices there, but that they were started there.So if you want to reproduce Silicon Valley, what you need to reproduce is those two or three founders sitting around a kitchen table deciding to start a company. And to reproduce that you need those people.

Universities
The exciting thing is, all you need are the people. If you could attract a critical mass of nerds and investors to live somewhere, you could reproduce Silicon Valley. And both groups are highly mobile. They’ll go where life is good. So what makes a place good to them?What nerds like is other nerds. Smart people will go wherever other smart people are. And in particular, to great universities. In theory there could be other ways to attract them, but so far universities seem to be indispensable. Within the US, there are no technology hubs without first-rate universities– or at least, first-rate computer science departments.So if you want to make a silicon valley, you not only need a university, but one of the top handful in the world. It has to be good enough to act as a magnet, drawing the best people from thousands of miles away. And that means it has to stand up to existing magnets like MIT and Stanford.This sounds hard. Actually it might be easy. My professor friends, when they’re deciding where they’d like to work, consider one thing above all: the quality of the other faculty. What attracts professors is good colleagues. So if you managed to recruit, en masse, a significant number of the best young researchers, you could create a first-rate university from nothing overnight. And you could do that for surprisingly little. If you paid 200 people hiring bonuses of $3 million apiece, you could put together a faculty that would bear comparison with any in the world. And from that point the chain reaction would be self-sustaining. So whatever it costs to establish a mediocre university, for an additional half billion or so you could have a great one.

Personality
However, merely creating a new university would not be enough to start a silicon valley. The university is just the seed. It has to be planted in the right soil, or it won’t germinate. Plant it in the wrong place, and you just create Carnegie-Mellon.To spawn startups, your university has to be in a town that has attractions other than the university. It has to be a place where investors want to live, and students want to stay after they graduate.The two like much the same things, because most startup investors are nerds themselves. So what do nerds look for in a town? Their tastes aren’t completely different from other people’s, because a lot of the towns they like most in the US are also big tourist destinations: San Francisco, Boston, Seattle. But their tastes can’t be quite mainstream either, because they dislike other big tourist destinations, like New York, Los Angeles, and Las Vegas.There has been a lot written lately about the “creative class.” The thesis seems to be that as wealth derives increasingly from ideas, cities will prosper only if they attract those who have them. That is certainly true; in fact it was the basis of Amsterdam’s prosperity 400 years ago.A lot of nerd tastes they share with the creative class in general. For example, they like well-preserved old neighborhoods instead of cookie-cutter suburbs, and locally-owned shops and restaurants instead of national chains. Like the rest of the creative class, they want to live somewhere with personality.What exactly is personality? I think it’s the feeling that each building is the work of a distinct group of people. A town with personality is one that doesn’t feel mass-produced. So if you want to make a startup hub– or any town to attract the “creative class”– you probably have to ban large development projects. When a large tract has been developed by a single organization, you can always tell. Most towns with personality are old, but they don’t have to be. Old towns have two advantages: they’re denser, because they were laid out before cars, and they’re more varied, because they were built one building at a time. You could have both now. Just have building codes that ensure density, and ban large scale developments.A corollary is that you have to keep out the biggest developer of all: the government. A government that asks “How can we build a silicon valley?” has probably ensured failure by the way they framed the question. You don’t build a silicon valley; you let one grow.

Nerds
If you want to attract nerds, you need more than a town with personality. You need a town with the right personality. Nerds are a distinct subset of the creative class, with different tastes from the rest. You can see this most clearly in New York, which attracts a lot of creative people, but few nerds. What nerds like is the kind of town where people walk around smiling. This excludes LA, where no one walks at all, and also New York, where people walk, but not smiling. When I was in grad school in Boston, a friend came to visit from New York. On the subway back from the airport she asked “Why is everyone smiling?” I looked and they weren’t smiling. They just looked like they were compared to the facial expressions she was used to.If you’ve lived in New York, you know where these facial expressions come from. It’s the kind of place where your mind may be excited, but your body knows it’s having a bad time. People don’t so much enjoy living there as endure it for the sake of the excitement. And if you like certain kinds of excitement, New York is incomparable. It’s a hub of glamour, a magnet for all the shorter half-life isotopes of style and fame.Nerds don’t care about glamour, so to them the appeal of New York is a mystery. People who like New York will pay a fortune for a small, dark, noisy apartment in order to live in a town where the cool people are really cool. A nerd looks at that deal and sees only: pay a fortune for a small, dark, noisy apartment.Nerds will pay a premium to live in a town where the smart people are really smart, but you don’t have to pay as much for that. It’s supply and demand: glamour is popular, so you have to pay a lot for it.Most nerds like quieter pleasures. They like cafes instead of clubs; used bookshops instead of fashionable clothing shops; hiking instead of dancing; sunlight instead of tall buildings. A nerd’s idea of paradise is Berkeley or Boulder.

Youth
It’s the young nerds who start startups, so it’s those specifically the city has to appeal to. The startup hubs in the US are all young-feeling towns. This doesn’t mean they have to be new. Cambridge has the oldest town plan in America, but it feels young because it’s full of students.What you can’t have, if you want to create a silicon valley, is a large, existing population of stodgy people. It would be a waste of time to try to reverse the fortunes of a declining industrial town like Detroit or Philadelphia by trying to encourage startups. Those places have too much momentum in the wrong direction. You’re better off starting with a blank slate in the form of a small town. Or better still, if there’s a town young people already flock to, that one.The Bay Area was a magnet for the young and optimistic for decades before it was associated with technology. It was a place people went in search of something new. And so it became synonymous with California nuttiness. There’s still a lot of that there. If you wanted to start a new fad– a new way to focus one’s “energy,” for example, or a new category of things not to eat– the Bay Area would be the place to do it. But a place that tolerates oddness in the search for the new is exactly what you want in a startup hub, because economically that’s what startups are. Most good startup ideas seem a little crazy; if they were obviously good ideas, someone would have done them already.(How many people are going to want computers in their houses? What, another search engine?)That’s the connection between technology and liberalism. Without exception the high-tech cities in the US are also the most liberal. But it’s not because liberals are smarter that this is so. It’s because liberal cities tolerate odd ideas, and smart people by definition have odd ideas.Conversely, a town that gets praised for being “solid” or representing “traditional values” may be a fine place to live, but it’s never going to succeed as a startup hub. The 2004 presidential election, though a disaster in other respects, conveniently supplied us with a county-by-county map of such places. To attract the young, a town must have an intact center. In most American cities the center has been abandoned, and the growth, if any, is in the suburbs. Most American cities have been turned inside out. But none of the startup hubs has: not San Francisco, or Boston, or Seattle. They all have intact centers. My guess is that no city with a dead center could be turned into a startup hub. Young people don’t want to live in the suburbs.Within the US, the two cities I think could most easily be turned into new silicon valleys are Boulder and Portland. Both have the kind of effervescent feel that attracts the young. They’re each only a great university short of becoming a silicon valley, if they wanted to.

Time
A great university near an attractive town. Is that all it takes? That was all it took to make the original Silicon Valley. Silicon Valley traces its origins to William Shockley, one of the inventors of the transistor. He did the research that won him the Nobel Prize at Bell Labs, but when he started his own company in 1956 he moved to Palo Alto to do it. At the time that was an odd thing to do. Why did he? Because he had grown up there and remembered how nice it was. Now Palo Alto is suburbia, but then it was a charming college town– a charming college town with perfect weather and San Francisco only an hour away.The companies that rule Silicon Valley now are all descended in various ways from Shockley Semiconductor. Shockley was a difficult man, and in 1957 his top people– “the traitorous eight”– left to start a new company, Fairchild Semiconductor. Among them were Gordon Moore and Robert Noyce, who went on to found Intel, and Eugene Kleiner, who founded the VC firm Kleiner Perkins. Forty-two years later, Kleiner Perkins funded Google, and the partner responsible for the deal was John Doerr, who came to Silicon Valley in 1974 to work for Intel.So although a lot of the newest companies in Silicon Valley don’t make anything out of silicon, there always seem to be multiple links back to Shockley. There’s a lesson here: startups beget startups. People who work for startups start their own. People who get rich from startups fund new ones. I suspect this kind of organic growth is the only way to produce a startup hub, because it’s the only way to grow the expertise you need.That has two important implications. The first is that you need time to grow a silicon valley. The university you could create in a couple years, but the startup community around it has to grow organically. The cycle time is limited by the time it takes a company to succeed, which probably averages about five years.The other implication of the organic growth hypothesis is that you can’t be somewhat of a startup hub. You either have a self-sustaining chain reaction, or not. Observation confirms this too: cities either have a startup scene, or they don’t. There is no middle ground. Chicago has the third largest metropolitan area in America. As source of startups it’s negligible compared to Seattle, number 15.The good news is that the initial seed can be quite small. Shockley Semiconductor, though itself not very successful, was big enough. It brought a critical mass of experts in an important new technology together in a place they liked enough to stay.

Competing
Of course, a would-be silicon valley faces an obstacle the original one didn’t: it has to compete with Silicon Valley. Can that be done? Probably.One of Silicon Valley’s biggest advantages is its venture capital firms. This was not a factor in Shockley’s day, because VC funds didn’t exist. In fact, Shockley Semiconductor and Fairchild Semiconductor were not startups at all in our sense. They were subsidiaries– of Beckman Instruments and Fairchild Camera and Instrument respectively. Those companies were apparently willing to establish subsidiaries wherever the experts wanted to live.Venture investors, however, prefer to fund startups within an hour’s drive. For one, they’re more likely to notice startups nearby. But when they do notice startups in other towns they prefer them to move. They don’t want to have to travel to attend board meetings, and in any case the odds of succeeding are higher in a startup hub.The centralizing effect of venture firms is a double one: they cause startups to form around them, and those draw in more startups through acquisitions. And although the first may be weakening because it’s now so cheap to start some startups, the second seems as strong as ever. Three of the most admired “Web 2.0” companies were started outside the usual startup hubs, but two of them have already been reeled in through acquisitions.Such centralizing forces make it harder for new silicon valleys to get started. But by no means impossible. Ultimately power rests with the founders. A startup with the best people will beat one with funding from famous VCs, and a startup that was sufficiently successful would never have to move. So a town that could exert enough pull over the right people could resist and perhaps even surpass Silicon Valley.For all its power, Silicon Valley has a great weakness: the paradise Shockley found in 1956 is now one giant parking lot. San Francisco and Berkeley are great, but they’re forty miles away. Silicon Valley proper is soul-crushing suburban sprawl. It has fabulous weather, which makes it significantly better than the soul-crushing sprawl of most other American cities. But a competitor that managed to avoid sprawl would have real leverage. All a city needs is to be the kind of place the next traitorous eight look at and say “I want to stay here,” and that would be enough to get the chain reaction started.

Interview with Milov Patel

Technology 기업들에 대한 블로그를 운영하고 있는 Milov Patel뮤직쉐이크에 대해서 인터뷰를 하였다.

I was lucky to be able to get a hold of Kihong Bae the Director of Musicshake.com on Monday. I got a chance to talk with him about the new website, and the recent US launch they just went through. Musicshake was a TechCrunch 40 finalist, and definitely deserved it. I tried out the program and messed around with it for a good amount of time, and I can say I was impressed. Read the interview to get some more information about the company.
Milov Patel: Can please provide us with some information on your personal background in business and entrepreneurship.
Kihong Bae: I am a Korean by birth, but I grew up in Spain so I was exposed to diversity ever since I was small. I did my undergrad in Korea, and master’s at Stanford which is where I was mesmerized by the dynamics of Silicon Valley. Just seeing all these entrepreneurs on campus (Jerry Yang, Larry Page etc..) stimulated my entrepreneurial juices. After school, I worked for a PKI security startup called ValiCert which later got acquire by Tumbleweed Communications. Then went back to Korea to work with friends from MIT on a Korean Supply Chain Management solutions startup that’s still around. After 3 yrs at Zionex (the Supply Chain Management Company), I decided to get some exposure to the corporate world and worked as the Senior Marketing Manager at Microsoft Korea. I am currently doing my MBA at Wharton School, and working part-time as Musicshake’s Director.
Milov Patel: Lets talk about musicshake.com – can you tell me a bit more about it?
Kihong Bae: Musicshake is the world’s first UGM (User Generated Music) creation solution developed to provide music composing solutions for the general public without any musical knowledge or expertise to create professional quality music by utilizing various pattern-combination methods. It’s the only complete end to end online music creation solution in the market today. Although there are genre specific music creation tools that enable users to combine specific beats and sounds, users still need specific knowledge about music making in order to create quality music contents. By utilizing various pattern combination methods, which are powered by the proprietary Music Pattern Database and Mu-bot (Music Robot) Algorithms, users with no previous musical education can create music online that can be utilized to increase their presence on the web. Users can play Musicshake as if they play online games and as a result of playing the game, they can create their personalized music content.
Milov Patel: What led you to creating musicshake.com?
Kihong Bae: The idea has been around for a long time. We’ve done about 5 years of R&D; on this. The pain was that we wanted to be very creative and wanted to make our own music however, the current solutions out there in the market specifically required the end user to have professional knowledge on music and we definitely were no musicians. So we decided to make a tool that any average person could use, everyday to make his/her own music with simple clicks.
Milov Patel: It seems your business model is really aligned with a Web 2.0 style. How do you guys expect to make revenue?
Kihong Bae: Not sure if you saw the presentation video, but there was a part where I specifically said that we had SEVERAL business models. End users can play around with Musicshake client and mix/make as many songs as they want and upload it on the server side. However, when they decided that they really like what they have made, and would like to download the music as mp3 file on their PC / PDA / mobile phone / iPod, that’s when you need to pay a fee. And you can use these tunes as your ringtones/ring-back tones/background music for blogs etc. We also are in discussion with music labels where we copyright music parts from existing artists and provide these as premium music patterns at a fee based plan. The truly revolutionary approach in the business model is that once you make a song and pay/download it, the end user owns the IP of the song. When somebody else downloads the song, the fee is shared between Musicshake and the original maker of the song.
Milov Patel: How many employees do you have currently? Do you feel it’s important for your employees to share the same drive that you have?
Kihong Bae: We currently have 17 full-time employees and several in-house/outsourced part-time musicians who work on making the music modules. We are a small startup based in South Korea and if there is one things that we invest heavily is our own people. We truly believe that PEOPLE is what can make or break a startup especially at the critical stage that Musicshake is at currently. We make sure we share the same feelings, share the same vision and goals about the company but at the same time make every effort to make this journey a worthwhile one for each individual. It’s like riding a rollercoaster…when you go up, everybody gets excited with butterflies in their stomach. When you go down, once again everybody feels the thrill and adrenaline rush. We definitely are one team that shares the drive that I have.
Milov Patel: What would you say are the most important elements to have a flourishing startup?
Kihong Bae: Once again, I must say that the most critical element is the people. Good people can make things happen in the worst times, bad people can break things up even in the best times. Another things that I think is critical for a flourishing startup company is the ability to execute. There are too many people out there who say too much and do nothing! I would say we need people with the ‘ready, shoot , aim’ mentality rather than ‘ready, aim, shoot’. This is a fast changing industry, you can’t spend tons of time preparing and predicting the future. You should just do it, and make modifications as you go along. I am happy Musicshake has far more people with the ‘just do it’ mentality’ than ones without it.
Milov Patel: What would you like people to remember most about musicshake.com?
Kihong Bae: When people think musicshake.com, I would like people to think of the company that truly revolutionized the music industry. Think about what you can do when you can make your own music, and what kind of earthquakes you can create by becoming an artist in just a matter of minutes -> the realization of the so-called ‘No-brainer Musician Project’ is what we strive to do