“I want to talk about the individual in the world and the world in the individual. It has been a fascinating story in that area the last decades. I’ve been an IT journalist for 20 years since i got a computer in the beginning of the 80′s, but before that i was a part of the 60′s underground movement – but to me it’s the same – it’s about the individual and it’s freedom. It’s about choices. It’s about getting away from a monoculture.

In Denmark salad in the 60′s we’re three pieces of salad and a sliced tomato – danish monoculture . An one had to go to paris if you wanted to go to a cafe or have a decent salad.

A lot has happened since.

To me it’s all about the individual’s freedom. The balance between the individual and society. Henry my dad is 93 – some amazing changes happened in his first 60 years – the availability of flights, electriticity, radio and tv. Gigantic changes in the first 50-60 years of his life.

What has happened since is digital technology. But it isn’t very visible since it isn’t physical – the changes are happening within people. Some people like to show the youth today are selfish, narcissistic, doesn’t respect others, etc. We get the picture that the world is going in the wrong direction because we’re individualistic and it all was better in the good old days.
A lot of it is piss – it was a terrible time back then. For a starter you couldn’t get decent salad . The youths don’t believe the stories one can tell from the 50′s. An example is that in 1963 i published a high school magazine with Ulla Dallerup who wrote an article stating that young girls from the age 15 should be able to go the school doctor and get prevention. It caused a great prevention debate in the media – the country was divided.
The sixties movement won. Even the Danish Premier Minister has stated to me that “I know that society wouldn’t be as fun today if it hadn’t been for the 60′s uproar”

Not that the 60′s movement hasn’t its faults – an example would be the romanticization of “the people” concept. “The people” would come and change everything. That was when there was “the people” – we’re all the people now – there’s just “us”. “The people” is a one dimensional concept. When denmark went from a monarchy to a democracy it wasn’t a big change – because the people in power was smart – they moved to the inner circle – the political and business society. And so it happened that culture changed, business and politics didn’t.
What’s new in this time is that we can’t find “power” anywhere. Working against the power is difficult, especially when the power is within yourself. Un till the 70′s that was what it was like – you had the physical fences/infrastructure to show the power – then the walls fell.
The national monopolistic capitalism had a network of doctors, rectors, judges and businessmen. It was a closed network around keeping people down – without business or politics changing.

The youths today are growing up in a free space – we’re almost seeing the emergence of “the new individual”. We lived in a society were the model was that the youths couldn’t go to the city and play in a orchestra – we kept people in the villages. It’s that logic which has been abandoned.

I saw it when computers came. The mouse – all it people laughed at the mouse and called it a play thing. What i saw when i started writing was that there was a cultural fight between the personal computer and the mainframe – it’s a constant battle. We talk a lot about decentralization – but the same technology can be used for centralization. One guy in pentagon can control a five person group across the globe. It’s both ways.
The individual is the biggest force in the world today. I don’t salute it, it’s for bad or worse. But that’s the force.

Nobody understands society today. A couple of years i sat down to try and understand the biggest theoreticians to understand what’s happening – and i only realized one thing – nobody knows it. You can’t even read science fiction – just watching CNN is way more sci-fi like. Individualism has been a negative word in intellectual circles even up in the 80′s. The change on a global level is gonna happen from grass roots organizations – like the open source movement – individuals also has societies.

The state has a serious problem. It’s vibrating so quickly now that everyone negotiates meaning with each other all the time. what’s mainstream and underground is impossible to distinguish between. We live in a “cluttered” world – the organic perspective was totally out in the 70′s, now it’s something that everyone can talk about – we take it for granted. The acceptance of gay people didn’t happen in the 60′s – it happened much later.

It’s amazing changes that has happened in the change to respect of the individuals choice. But nobody knows we’re were heading. With computer technology capitalism has reinvented itself – it’s not the power elite keeping people down. We talk about the network society – hierarchies of networks – networks of hierarchies. We have all societies at the same time.

The individuals are expressing themselves like never before whether it’s through business, culture, etc. How is it all gonna end. I don’t know.

But i’ve always seen in my own life that we life in two worlds. From we breathe for the first time we’re a part of society – but just to live is something in itself, which is not a part of society. The greatest reality is that we’re a part of our own life. That’s reality – the world can’t be frustrated or unhappy – the world can’t feel anything – we can’t see it – it’s a context – it’s only individuals who are something. I like the concept of self realization – i like the expression – even though all intellectuals as debunking it as bullshit – but it’s like when we said that babies didn’t smile – even though any parent would be able to prove them otherwise.
We aren’t just empty vessels that society can build upon – we’re built with potential. We all have an aim to realize our own potential – we try and somethings we resonate and stop for a while – but the barrier the to resonate has changed. That’s what i am seeing in business and technology. The internet has succeed not because it had the best technology – it succeeded because it was most effect full at unleashing the individuals potential.

We live in a metropolis – a city where the whole world is present. I believe that diversity is the key to richness. The new project that we need to thrive and to make money is to make the point that we are a metropolis and that we should be it.

There’s no end to this – we’re just at the beginning.”

So start small, and think about the details. Don’t think about some big picture and fancy design. If it doesn’t solve some fairly immediate need, it’s almost certainly over-designed. And don’t expect people to jump in and help you. That’s not how these things work. You need to get something half-way _useful_ first, and then others will say “hey, that _almost_ works for me”, and they’ll get involved in the project.

And if there is anything I’ve learnt from Linux, it’s that projects have a life of their own, and you should _not_ try to enforce your “vision” too strongly on them. Most often you’re wrong anyway, and if you’re not flexible and willing to take input from others (and willing to change direction when it turned out your vision was flawed), you’ll never get anything good done.

In other words, be willing to admit your mistakes, and don’t expect to get anywhere big in any kind of short timeframe. I’ve been doing Linux for thirteen years, and I expect to do it for quite some time still. If I had _expected_ to do something that big, I’d never have started. It started out small and insignificant, and that’s how I thought about it.

Amen!

– the most untraditionel opening of a prospectus. A very strong message from the founders outlining their vision for the company and how they intend to do it their way
– shares have been split into two classes to let the founders and the management retain control. A highly controversial move these days, but imho worth the respect considering how they manage the company. Also a testiment to the apparent battle the founders have had with the vc’s pressing for liquidity
– the WHOLE offering will be a dutch auction model (pioneered by Bill Hambrecht for technology offerings). This means that we won’t see any of the absurd ipo procedures we saw in the bubble and that the market truly will set the valuation. Also that the proceeds will get in Google coffers and not some friends of the investment bankers that flip their shares. But also a highly experimental thing to do with such huge demand. But respect full.
– revenue for the 2003: 961,874,000 $ with a income of 342,464,000 $ before taxes. An income margin of around 35%! Taking into account option charges that probably are temporary the income is over 500,000,000 $ – a margin of 50%.
– revenue for q1 2004: 389,638,000 $. Income: 155,232,000$ before taxes. Just extrapolating the numbers with the growth could mean revenues around 2 billion and income of around 800 million $ before taxes for year 2004.
– total assets above 1 billion $. Total assets after the disclosed estimate of 2,7 billion $ in proceeds from the offering just under 4 billion$. This could get way higher if the auction price gets high (depending on how many insiders cash out in the process – imho the only mixed signal in the offering – but probably a condition from the vc’s).
– proforma book value per share as of march 31,2004: 2,96$
– 1,907 employees.
– orkut is a subsidiary of Google Inc, Orkut LLC.
– Establishment of a Google Foundation with approx 1% equity in Google and 1% of income. Interesting move instead of the founders setting foundations up for themselves. Probably inspired by salesforce.com
– “Between February 2001 and February 2003, the registrant issued 446,000 shares of common stock as consideration for four acquisitions. The acquisition of Pyra (Blogger) is one those four.

All in all. This is the real thing. It feels like reading Netscape’s prospectus in 1995 – but 9 years later with strong values, a good business model, good incomes, true leadership from the founders, a fair distribution model for the shares, a foundation to distribute some of the wealth,etc.
It feels like we’ve come somewhere the last 9 years in terms of how business is integrated into society and humanity. Respect, Larry and Sergey! A lot of people had high expectations for how you would do this since you have a great responsibility on your shoulders since you’ll be kickstarting a new wave of innovation – and you came through – for all of us.
(Short term the media frenzy might take the stock up and down, it might open too high, etc. – but this is a long term play).

And why doesn’t anything happen in the spirit of openness in weblogs – what are the real motivations, what are the feelings and attitudes. Everything is going on in silence.

Sam Ruby might be a very nice guy – but untill proven otherwise i trust Dave Winer more. Many years of sharing his insights in openness, 20+ industry experience with standard setting bodies, what works in the real world, his contributions to soap, etc.

My simple pledge: “Show some respect “kids” and make a win-win situation for both you and Dave! You have something to learn from each other.”