Rules for the Upcoming Coolhunting Show

Rules for the Online Coolhunt Show:
(Updated April 13, 2007)

These are the rules the authors have accepted for their live coolhunt program, airing here every weekday at 2:00 p.m. ET USA beginning Monday, April 16 through Friday, May 11, 2007.

- Each coolhunt involves:

1 site review
1 blog post
1 comment
1 connection

The comment must be on a 3rd party blog or discussion group. We are helping link COINs, and should post about the hunt somewhere other than the site being reviewed or the authors' sites.

A connection is an attempt to link with a person behind the site being reviewed. This connection might be IM, e-mail, voicemail, Skype, etc. Coolhunting is about networking with people, not just sites or companies.

- Speakers are asked to e-mail target URLs for each day's cool hunt to the other speakers at least 10 minutes in advance of the show.

- Only 2.5 people on stage at once: Author + Author or Author + Guest. Moderator is 1/2.

- No overt selling of products or services during the hunt.

- You must finish the hunt. Even if the phone's not working and the Internet's not working, our coolhunters will make every effort to post a new coolhunt every weekday and to complete interrupted hunts as soon as possible.

- Priority is given to recruiting guests from the comment pool over outside guests who are not participating in the coolhunt. If you would like to be a guest on the program, please express your interest here on the blog.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Predicting Stock Market Indicators Through Twitter “I hope it is not as bad as I fear”

Image
We have been working on trying to predict market indicators for quite some time by analyzing Web Buzz , predicting who will win an Oscar, or how well movies do at the box office . Among other things we have correlated posts about a stock on Yahoo Finance and Motley’s Fool with the actual stock price, predicting the closing price of the stock on the next day based on what people say today on Yahoo Finance, on the Web and Blogs about a stock title. The rising popularity of twitter gives us a new great way of capturing the collective mind up to the last minute. In our current project we analyze the positive and negative mood of the masses on twitter, comparing it with broad stock market indices such as Dow Jones, S&P 500, and NASDAQ. We collected the twitter feeds from one whitelisted IP for six months from March 30, 2009 to Sept 4, 2009, ranging from 5680 to 42820 tweets per day. According to twitter this corresponds to a randomized subsample of about one hundredth of the full volum...
Read more

My life in Alternative Realities - fatherlanders and nerds don’t go well together

Image
We are all living in different alternative realities, people with different personalities see reality from very different perspectives, potentially leading to a lot of friction and misunderstandings. “Nerds” are open to change, they believe in the progress of technology and innovation. “Fatherlanders” abhor change, they like tradition and authority, valuing the fatherland above all, and would like to reestablish the good old times. “Spiritualists” believe into supernatural forces, they are religious, meditate and hope that the forces of nature will heal their ailing. “Treehuggers” believe into sustainability and global warming, they want to save nature by restricting technical progress. I experience  this friction frequently in my daily life. As a computer and technology nerd with spiritualist and treehugger inclinations, my communication with members from other tribes sometimes does not end well.  My interactions with officers of the US Department of Homeland Security and the...
Read more

How Blind Trust in Generative AI Undermines Creative Work

Image
This summer, we experienced firsthand the damage caused by blind faith in the "superhuman" capabilities of generative AI, even among otherwise intelligent individuals. Here's what happened. We submitted a research paper to an academic conference, and after it was accepted, I paid the registration fee, booked flights, and arranged accommodations. A week later, we received an abrupt email from the organizers stating that our paper had been rejected. The reason? Their AI-based plagiarism and ChatGPT-detection tool flagged it as containing both plagiarized content and text generated by ChatGPT. This accusation was entirely unfounded. Our paper presented highly original work by our team, proposing novel AI algorithms to predict animal emotions—a concept never explored before. We detailed the development of an AI model to validate this approach, something completely unique to our research. By its very nature, it was impossible for our work to be plagiarized or generated by Chat...
Read more