Burnhams’ Beat describes The Death of Compiled Applications:

Data was the first and most logical component piece to be pulled out of applications and from that a giant industry was created, databases.  Later, client-server architectures broke applications into muliple pieces and separated applications functions, but they didn’t actually pull a lot of functionality out of compiled code.  With the birth of the web though, applications started to change dramatically.

The web browser changed applications forever by substituting a generic GUI front-end and structured text (in the form of HTML) for a compiled GUI.  In this way the browser became merely a generic execution engine.  It requested non-compiled text and then translated that text into a unique GUI according to a pre-existing industry standard.  By pulling out the presentation logic from compiled apps and making it open and accessible to not only other programmers but basically anyone who could view text, browsers launched the massive wave of innovation and creativity that in turn made the Internet a true “web”.  HTML “programmers” swapped HTML tricks and tips liberally.  They cut and pasted code from each other’s sites and as time progressed they began to use the power of HTML and HTTP to create composite sites that actually borrowed both content and styles from other sites.

Thus, in just 10 years, the presentation layer of the web has become an incredible laboratory for innovation and creativity with people using the power of HTML’s accessibility and portability to create radical new services, many of which people simply had not thought possible beforehand.

While wandering the Web, I stumbled across a company, Prime Revenue, that offers to optimize the "financial supply chain" of its customers. 

PrimeRevenue is the key to a financially optimized supply chain.  For Buyers and Suppliers.

Our program is an innovative and unparalleled solution that brings the benefits of information technology to the financial supply chain.  Our services deliver greater working capital efficiency, cost savings, and revenue growth opportunities for both Buyers and Suppliers.

With our program, Buyers provide Suppliers with transaction visibility and payment certainty around trade payables to their Suppliers, reducing the amount of cash tied up in the order-to-cash cycle.  Our services streamline AR/AP processes, link the flow of funds to the flow of transaction data and, by creating visibility into future cash flows, give corporations access to a variety of transaction level financing options at very attractive rates.

Simply stated, PrimeRevenue helps companies do more business with less working capital.

Although apparently not a new concept (there’s a link on their website
to a fairly sophisticated vision of it in an article written in 2000),
the integrated communications and software infrastructure for implementing it are
only now reaching the maturation to support it.

On another Web sojourn, I encountered Wells Fargo’s Commercial Electronic Office (CEO), a proprietary financial portal that claims to provide "cash management, credit, international, and trust and investment services all in once place with a single sign on".  Maybe so, but my experience with banks suggest that would be something of a stretch.  (Wells had even applied bankers’ bureaucratese to the term e-commerce, turning a concise word into a mouthful of multi-syllabic mush.)  My instincts and experience with online media content tell me that a proprietary business model will not stand.  For the same underlying economic reasons that it would make no sense for Yahoo, MSN or AOL to limit their available market to that of one communications company (as in cable or telco), it would make no sense for a true financial portal to limit its market to the available market of a given depository institution (even if owned by that institution). 

This is worthy of futher "focused" Web wanderings, thought and conversation.

I believe Fred Wilson nails it in this post..

That was Blogging 1.0.  We knew back then that the web was a great platform for personal expression.  All three businesses still exist.  Two of them exist inside of web portals and About.com apparently is going to get sold soon, apparently to the New York Times Company.

Blogging 1.0 paved the way for Blogging 2.0.  I see four fundamental improvements that differentiate Blogging 1.0 from Blogging 2.0.

The first is the notion of the post as the central piece of content.  About.com had some of this in its DNA, but Geocities and Tripod did not. Posts drive freshness, frequency, and syndication and make Blogging 2.0 much more exciting than Bloggin 1.0 was.

The second is related to the first.  Permalinks have changed the game fundamentally.  Linking to content was not really possible until permalinks came along.  Now each piece of content is a persistent object that has a unique identifier.  This is a huge deal and this concept did not exist in Blogging 1.0.

The third is RSS. Blogging 1.0 was a web experience.  Blogging 2.0 is a everywhere experience. Content was a solid in Blogging 1.0 and its a fluid in Blogging 2.0.

The fourth is CPC and contextual ad networks.  In Blogging 1.0, the only way to monetize the business was with banners.  And brand advertisers were not thrilled with paying high CPMs to advertise on "amateur content".  With the arrival of CPC and contextual ad networks, this is no longer the case.  Wherever advertisers can get clicks, they’ll place their ads. The result is a huge increase in the potential revenues.

From the Belmont Club comments section comes this fascinating story about a congenitally blind Turkish artist, Esref Armagan, who paints visual imagery!  Armagan’s works are described as “disarmingly realistic” and his skills characterized as “formidable”.  My interest heightened as I read that Armagan visited the US at the invitation of Harvard & Boston University neurologists, who wanted to scan the operation of his brain for further insight into the phenomenon of neural plasticity.  In an also fascinating and intellectually challenging book I recently finished, The Mind and the Brain, Jeffrey Schwartz (UCLA professor of psychiatry) articulates a deeply grounded (in science and spiritual philosophy) finding that neuroplasticity serves as the mechanism for the operation of conscious mental force, or free will. (Neural plasticity can be defined as the ability of the neurons in the brain to reorganize their interconnections and roles in response to long-term loss of neural functioning elsewhere in the brain or long-term disruptions in the nervous sytem.  In a  book, The Mind and the Brain, in which the author, Jeffrey Schwartz, describes his two decades of research into neural plasticity and his collaboration with quantum physicists to understand how a human can consciously exert mental force to direct neuroplasticity for desired purposes (overcoming obsessive-compulsive disorder, compensating for learning disabilities, regenerating neural function in response to brain or nervous system injury, etc.).  Obviously a deep and penetrating thinker, Schwartz opens his book

The painter is Esref Armagan. And he is here in Boston to see if a peek inside his brain can explain how a man who has never seen can paint pictures that the sighted easily recognise – and even admire. He paints houses and mountains and lakes and faces and butterflies, but he’s never seen any of these things. He depicts colour, shadow and perspective, but it is not clear how he could have witnessed these things either. How does he do it?

Because if Armagan can represent images in the same way a sighted person can, it raises big questions not only about how our brains construct mental images, but also about the role those images play in seeing. Do we build up mental images using just our eyes or do other senses contribute too? How much can congenitally blind people really understand about space and the layout of objects within it? How much “seeing” does a blind person actually do?

Belmont Club.

Can there be any doubt abut the geopolitical impact of communications technologies?

Russian special forces dressed in Ukrainian Special forces uniforms are in Kyiv. Ukrainian militia have been instructed by the mayor to protect the people from the Russian troops. Ukrainian militia have established a hotline for Ukrainians to report any incidents with the Russians and pledged to protect Ukrainians. These Russians flew into Ukraine this morning. They’re now surrounding the administration buildings they say “to protect Kuchma (the outgoing president and his PM Yanukovich). Following is a chain of email messages I’ve been sending by blackberry. Please pass along to others. Bob Schaffer.

Bruce Bartlett vividly illustrates PBS’s "agenda journalism by providing readers with facts regarding the astounding macroeconomic impact of Walmart on the US economy over the last decade. PBS, having been supplied the same facts during its "investigation" of the issue, chose to omit them entirely from its negative presentation about Walmart.

I also pointed out to Smith that Wal-Mart, all by itself, was responsible for a significant amount of the productivity miracle we have seen in this country over the last decade. In a 2001 report, the McKinsey Global Institute, a respected think tank, concluded that Wal-Mart’s managerial innovations had increased overall productivity by more than all the investments in computers and information technology of recent years. Wal-Mart’s innovations include large-scale (big-box) stores, economies of scale in warehouse logistics and purchasing, electronic data interchange, and wireless barcode scanning. These gave Wal-Mart a 48 percent productivity advantage over its competitors, forcing them to innovate as well, thus pushing up their productivity. The McKinsey study found that productivity improvements in wholesale and retail trade alone accounted over half of the increase in national productivity between 1995 and 1999. A new study from the prestigious National Bureau of Economic Research found that Wal-Mart has a substantial effect on reducing the rate of inflation. For example, it typically sells food for 15 percent to 25 percent less than competing supermarkets. Interestingly, this effect is not captured in official government data. Fully accounting for it would reduce the published inflation rate by as much as 0.42 percentage points or 15 percent per year.

Ignoring these beneficial macroeconomic effects, Frontline focused almost exclusively on the loss of jobs allegedly caused by Wal-Mart. Acting as what economists call a monopsony, it supposedly forced countless American manufacturers to close their domestic operations and move to Asia in order to get their costs low enough for Wal-Mart to sell their products. It is also said to have caused innumerable local retailers to go out of business, further adding to the job loss. In fact, academic research by economist Emek Basker of the University of Missouri contradicts this last point, finding that Wal-Mart permanently raises local employment.

When I first tried Firefox about six months ago – out of frustration with IE’s lack of security, I was completely underwhelmed and could not understand why the developer/programmer community was so buzzed about it.  I googled for other browers and found Maxthon, which is an overlay on IE that provides lots of nifty features, the most important of which is tabbed browsing.  While that was supposed to be Firefox’s claim to fame, at that time Maxthon beat it hands down.  Recently Maxthon stopped supporting the Google toolbar, which is the most essential feature for a browser for me (hmmm…wonder if that ever occurred to Google???).  That prompted me to revisit Firefox and upon doing so, I found a much improved tabbed browser and a far wealthier palate of extensions for it.  After a couple of weeks use, I’m hooked, however, I would only recommend it for those who don’t mind the hassles (and benefits) of beta-like software.  Firefox will only get better, but it’s still a little unwieldy for those who lack the curiosity and patience to work with something that is both new and rapidly evolving.  More on Firefox and the open-source software phenomenon later.

Time to blog about something else besides politics.  EuroTelcoblog opines that Internet and web publishing technologies are evolving in a manner that suggests a new Web-based investment research platform will surface to replace the obviously dysfunctional and outdated one provided by the investment banks.

"the message is pretty clear to me: eventually, and probably sooner than later, someone is going to pull together all these diverse angles on telecom/internet/media/hardware/applications/chips, incorporate some hard financial and technical analysis, and build a cross-sector investment research platform incorporating realtime tools (I mean blogging, IM, video conferencing and collaboration) rather than .pdfs and spam.

There is a business model here, and whether it’s the financial media who seize upon it (Reuters and Bloomberg have the infrastructure and a lot of data, but are trapped in a walled garden mentality and put their journalists in the same sector-coverage silos that the brokers do), or the brokers (I’m skeptical, because I think they tend to be dismissive of alternative points of view, risk-averse, organized in sector and region silos, and anyway are focused on trying to kill one another), or a newcomer (CNET or something that doesn’t currently exist), I feel certain that it is going to happen."

Makes sense to me.  Furthermore, if true, it would seem to follow that almost any research-intensive business would be open to similar disruption.  Wonder if Gardener, Forrester, Yankee, et al. have thought of that?