Founder & CEO of SlicedBrand, a global PR agency with an award winning team, she’s successfully led PR for thousands of technology companies
The pandemic has created a new thought process to reconcile when it comes to how we physically operate as a business. I immediately recognized that the fear of unleashing employees faded, if only out of necessity. Optimism grew, and ultimately everything new started to just seem normal. Now, it’s hard to even picture the days of our old office-bound lives.
Approximately six months into a forced remote office experiment, here are a few of the things I’ve learned.
My employees don’t need an office to be productive.
While I’ve been able to run a brand completely remotely, widespread adoption of a complete work-at-home workforce hasn’t been as rapid as industry leaders may have hoped.
The novel coronavirus kicked into overdrive the move to a fully or mostly remote staff. Managers may have noticed a slight downturn in productivity as employees adjusted, but everyone needs a second to acclimate. The shift from an office to your dining room table — complete with kids running amok, Amazon deliveries and breaks to take the dog outside — comes with a side of chaos.
The truth is that if you hire the right people and train the right people, then your employees will likely be productive wherever they sit. Mine are all over the world, and there is no lack of productivity or engagement with the work.
I think we’ll see that over the longer term, productivity will prove to be a benefit of a work-at-home environment. In our current experiment, I realize that we really don’t have a choice but to let workers figure it out at home. And they have been. In a survey of more than
In Tales of the Early Internet, Mashable explores online life through 2007 — back before social media and the smartphone changed everything.
“The future is here, it’s just unevenly distributed,” William Gibson famously wrote in 2003. With the benefit of 2020 hindsight, we can add this about the era he was describing: the future was also unevenly believed. Even when it was right in front of us, we couldn’t see it through our assumptions. This was especially true of the things we were most passionate about.
Everyone who was extremely online back in the late 1990s and early 2000s lost themselves to some new obsession when we got our first high-speed internet connection at home. Often it was an obsession that seemed somewhat illicit at the time, and utterly quaint now. For me, as for millions, that obsession was music — and acquiring it on Napster.
This was spring of 2000; dotcom mania was in full swing, and I’d just moved to San Francisco to cover it for Time magazine. The moment Pacific Bell hooked up my first DSL line, I couldn’t resist downloading the bad boy of music sharing — we’d just put Napster on the cover — and soon saw what the fuss was about. More than 30 million people freely sharing music collections on the same server: This was something new in the world. It was the first cultural bazaar where everything was available, instant and free. One night I asked my visiting British dad to name a tune it might not have.
“‘My Old Man’s a Dustman’ by Lonnie Donegan,” he replied gruffly, almost like he regretted making the challenge too hard. He scoffed at the likelihood of finding it. Ping! Donegan downloaded 30 seconds later.
WATCH: Revisiting the website that shaped the internet
9 min read
Opinions expressed by Entrepreneur contributors are their own.
In the last decade, decentralized platforms have taken the data world by storm. Top programmers aspire to create more efficient and effective platforms than ever, making the market for these products one of the most competitive in the world. Meet the five APAC entrepreneurs disrupting their industry, transforming the future of decentralized platforms and navigating their way towards digital transformation.
Simon Kim, Founder and CEO of Hashed
The mind behind Hashed, Simon Kim is a serial South Korean entrepreneur, blockchain thought leader, and evangelist. Previously, he served as the CPO of Knowre, an adaptive mathematics learning platform. Today, Kim balances his distinguished roles of venture partner at Softbank Ventures Asia, member of the 4th Revolution Committee of South Korea’s Parliament, and Director of the Korea Blockchain Association. He also participates in the Busan Blockchain Free Zone committee. Kim is a strong believer in the importance of consumer-centric applications in the blockchain space. Together, with a team of fellow eminent entrepreneurs, Kim co-founded Hashed in 2016.
Hashed is a leading, strategic crypto investment fund operated out of Seoul and the Silicon Valley. The fund’s stated mission is to “discover, invest in, and support innovative decentralized projects”. Hashed’s key selling point is its focus on the “protocol economy”, which it defines as “an economic system where individuals or groups can participate in the economic activities and earn rewards according to their contributions”. Hence, the venture capital fund is significantly involved in community building and developing sustainable token models for the projects it works with. Hashed has a diverse portfolio of investments, of which half are US-based projects, and half are from Asia or elsewhere. Among its Asian investments, two stand out in particular: Line’s LINK and Kakao’s Klaytn.
IBM, throughout its 109-year history, hasn’t often led technology trends. But it has adapted and eventually prospered time and again.
It is trying to go the adaptation route once again.
IBM on Thursday acknowledged the challenge and embraced the opportunity for the company in the accelerating shift to cloud computing. The company said it was spinning off its legacy technology services business to focus on cloud computing and artificial intelligence.
Arvind Krishna, who became chief executive this year, called the move “a landmark day” for IBM, “redefining the company.”
The split-up strategy reflects how decisively computing has shifted to the cloud. Today, nearly all new software is being created as a cloud service, delivered over the internet from remote data centers. The computing model affords corporate customers more flexibility and cost savings, sold as a pay-for-use service or annual subscriptions.
IBM was late to the cloud market, which was pioneered by Amazon when it began Amazon Web Services in 2006. But IBM in recent years has made a major push into cloud services and software, punctuated by its $34 billion purchase in 2018 of Red Hat, a distributor of open-source software and tools used by cloud developers.
In an interview, Ginni Rometty, IBM’s executive chair and former chief executive, said cloud computing, enhanced by artificial intelligence, “is now IBM’s enduring platform.”
IBM is tailoring its cloud strategy to help corporate customers make the transition to the new technology and thus carve out a fast-growing and healthy business amid the market leaders: Amazon Web Services, Microsoft and Google.
The main business, retaining the IBM name, will be its cloud operations, along with its hardware, software and consulting services units. They represent about three quarters of IBM’s revenue.
The business to be spun off, which is not yet named, is IBM’s basic
The Supreme Court justices appeared highly aware Wednesday that their decision in a copyright dispute between Google and Oracle could have far-reaching consequences for Silicon Valley, but after an hour and a half of arguments it was not clear which company’s dire warning they most seemed to believe.
Each of the court’s eight justices grilled attorneys representing Google and Oracle, as well as the U.S. deputy solicitor general, in a case that could upend the tech industry’s understanding of who owns small but essential chunks of code that allow different programs and platforms to connect.
Questions for Google: The justices lobbed some of their toughest questions at Google’s attorney, Tom Goldstein, scrutinizing his argument that Google copied code from Oracle because it had no other option. Google has asserted that the code is necessary for developers to create applications for its Android operating system and that these application programming interfaces, or APIs, are widely used without a license.
“Cracking the safe may be the only way to get the money that you want but that doesn’t mean you can do it,” Chief Justice John Roberts said.
Roberts added that when the code in question was first created by Sun Microsystems and later acquired by Oracle, there was more than one way to write it. He and several other justices surmised Google copied Oracle’s code because it was already popular with developers and more expedient than writings it own.
Justice Neil Gorsuch said, “The argument strikes me very much as, ‘I wish to share the facilities of a more successful rival because they’ve come up with a particularly elegant, or efficient, or successful highly adopted solution in the marketplace,’ and ride on their innovation.”
Questions for Oracle: Oracle’s attorney, Joshua Rosenkranz, pushed the idea that declaring it legal to copy