<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Michael H. Goldhaber</title>
	<atom:link href="http://goldhaber.org/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://goldhaber.org</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 24 Jan 2013 00:06:57 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>My recent interview by Bitsy Knox, Eyequant</title>
		<link>http://goldhaber.org/my-recent-interview-by-bitsy-knox-eyequant/</link>
		<comments>http://goldhaber.org/my-recent-interview-by-bitsy-knox-eyequant/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Jan 2013 22:52:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Michael H. Goldhaber</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Writings]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://goldhaber.org/?p=326</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Bitsy Knox&#8217;s interview, In conversation with Michael Goldhaber: Everything you need to know about the Attention Economy is an edited version of what follows:  -How would you define now the Attention Economy now as opposed to when you first spoke about it in 1997, given its current multiple interpretations and recent mainstream popularization? Let me put this in context. <a href='http://goldhaber.org/my-recent-interview-by-bitsy-knox-eyequant/' class='excerpt-more'>[...]</a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://goldhaber.org/my-recent-interview-by-bitsy-knox-eyequant/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Debate with Esther Dyson on Attention Economy and &#8220;Fungibility&#8221;</title>
		<link>http://goldhaber.org/debate-with-esther-dyson-on-attention-economy-and-fungibility/</link>
		<comments>http://goldhaber.org/debate-with-esther-dyson-on-attention-economy-and-fungibility/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 22 Dec 2012 23:23:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Michael H. Goldhaber</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Writings]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://goldhaber.org/?p=324</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Esther Dyson briefly discusses the Attention Economy here http://bit.ly/U26kBN Here&#8217;s my comment: Esther, I’m a bit surprised you didn’t credit me with the Attention Economy idea.  Twenty years ago, you asked me to and I did write most of an issue of your “Release 1.0” on this topic. You had learned about it from my <a href='http://goldhaber.org/debate-with-esther-dyson-on-attention-economy-and-fungibility/' class='excerpt-more'>[...]</a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://goldhaber.org/debate-with-esther-dyson-on-attention-economy-and-fungibility/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Occupy Movement and the Attention Economy</title>
		<link>http://goldhaber.org/the-occupy-movement-and-the-attention-economy/</link>
		<comments>http://goldhaber.org/the-occupy-movement-and-the-attention-economy/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Jan 2012 03:47:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Michael H. Goldhaber</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Writings]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[1%]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[99%]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Attention Economy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Occupy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Wall Street]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://goldhaberorg.fatcow.com/?p=280</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[(this is a draft of a paper I&#8217;ve recently submitted for publication) Where did the Occupy Wall Street movement gather its strength, and where might it be going? Starting from a handful of people, it has captured worldwide attention in a very short time, and has had remarkably rapid effects on the political scene. While <a href='http://goldhaber.org/the-occupy-movement-and-the-attention-economy/' class='excerpt-more'>[...]</a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://goldhaber.org/the-occupy-movement-and-the-attention-economy/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>WMD inflation and the war for attention</title>
		<link>http://goldhaber.org/wmd-inflation-and-the-war-for-attention/</link>
		<comments>http://goldhaber.org/wmd-inflation-and-the-war-for-attention/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 08 Jan 2010 08:25:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Michael H. Goldhaber</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Attention Economy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Attention Epoch]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Attention Society]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[journalism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[terrorism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[war]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[WMDs]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://goldhaber.org/blog/?p=218</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I just sent the following  comment to the NYTimes: &#8220;The presumed perpetrator on the plane [i.e., the 12/25 incident on the Amsterdam -Detroit flight ] is now set to be arraigned tomorrow for &#8220;attempted use of a weapon of mass destruction&#8221;. This is an absurd and unnecessary conflation of terms. &#8220;WMD&#8221; originally meant something like <a href='http://goldhaber.org/wmd-inflation-and-the-war-for-attention/' class='excerpt-more'>[...]</a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://goldhaber.org/wmd-inflation-and-the-war-for-attention/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Missing the Forest for the Trees: A Curmudgeonly Look at the IPF Conference.</title>
		<link>http://goldhaber.org/missing-the-forest-for-the-trees-a-curmudgeonly-look-at-the-ipf-conference/</link>
		<comments>http://goldhaber.org/missing-the-forest-for-the-trees-a-curmudgeonly-look-at-the-ipf-conference/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 19 Dec 2009 07:09:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Michael H. Goldhaber</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[conference review]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Internet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[good theory]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Internet as Playground and Facotry]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://goldhaber.org/blog/?p=216</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[Note: I recently took part in a conference in New York at the New School University on "The Internet as Playground and Factory," chiefly organized by Trebor Scholz, a professor there. What follows are my reflections afterward.] As with others, if a bit belatedly, I join in offering kudos to Trebor Scholz and everyone else <a href='http://goldhaber.org/missing-the-forest-for-the-trees-a-curmudgeonly-look-at-the-ipf-conference/' class='excerpt-more'>[...]</a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://goldhaber.org/missing-the-forest-for-the-trees-a-curmudgeonly-look-at-the-ipf-conference/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>How Did  Krugman Miss So Much?</title>
		<link>http://goldhaber.org/how-did-krugman-miss-so-much/</link>
		<comments>http://goldhaber.org/how-did-krugman-miss-so-much/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Sep 2009 05:19:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Michael H. Goldhaber</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Attention Economy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Consumption]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Crash]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[equality]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Finance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Meltdown]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[economic myths]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Krugman]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Paul Krugman]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://goldhaber.org/blog/?p=214</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Paul Krugman in Sunday&#8217;s NYT has an article entitled &#8220;How Did Economists Get it so Wrong?&#8221; It&#8217;s fine as far as it goes, I think, but it misses so much, since it just focuses on financial economics. No mention of the growing wealth inequality in the US and its effects, such as forcing people to <a href='http://goldhaber.org/how-did-krugman-miss-so-much/' class='excerpt-more'>[...]</a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://goldhaber.org/how-did-krugman-miss-so-much/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Michael Jackson ?</title>
		<link>http://goldhaber.org/michael-jackson/</link>
		<comments>http://goldhaber.org/michael-jackson/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Jul 2009 09:34:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Michael H. Goldhaber</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Meaning]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Stars and Fans]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://goldhaber.org/blog/?p=211</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I wrote this years ago, and just stumbled on it: You can be a big star, or a successful achiever in any field, but still feel that no one really understands you, that no one pays attention to what you really are or what you really want to express, perhaps because you are afraid to <a href='http://goldhaber.org/michael-jackson/' class='excerpt-more'>[...]</a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://goldhaber.org/michael-jackson/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Google vs. Microsoft</title>
		<link>http://goldhaber.org/google-vs-microsoft/</link>
		<comments>http://goldhaber.org/google-vs-microsoft/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Jul 2009 08:38:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Michael H. Goldhaber</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Writings]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Google]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[translation]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://goldhaber.org/blog/?p=209</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The war between Google and Microsoft is really heating up with Google&#8217;s promise of a new operating system and Microsoft&#8217;s new bing or ping or whatever it is. Out of sheer lazniness in trying Ping, I searched an article I wrote a decade ago in Wired. In both google and bing I found a Polish <a href='http://goldhaber.org/google-vs-microsoft/' class='excerpt-more'>[...]</a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://goldhaber.org/google-vs-microsoft/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Attention and Popularity are not Necessarily the Same</title>
		<link>http://goldhaber.org/attention-and-popularity-are-not-necessarily-the-same/</link>
		<comments>http://goldhaber.org/attention-and-popularity-are-not-necessarily-the-same/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 12 May 2009 04:27:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Michael H. Goldhaber</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Attention Economy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[celebrity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Stars and Fans]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Huberman]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[popularity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Wu and Huberman]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[YouTube]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://goldhaber.org/blog/?p=207</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I am not a big fan of the numerical sociologists of the Internet , Fang Wu and Bernardo A. Huberman., but I thought for a bit they had finally come up with something interesting with their paper “Persistence and Success in the Attention Economy”. Their data reveal a seeming paradox: the more videos a person <a href='http://goldhaber.org/attention-and-popularity-are-not-necessarily-the-same/' class='excerpt-more'>[...]</a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://goldhaber.org/attention-and-popularity-are-not-necessarily-the-same/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Financiers help bring about decline and fall of money</title>
		<link>http://goldhaber.org/financiers-help-bring-about-decline-and-fall-of-money/</link>
		<comments>http://goldhaber.org/financiers-help-bring-about-decline-and-fall-of-money/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 May 2009 07:49:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Michael H. Goldhaber</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Banks]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Crash]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Facebook "Feudalism"]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Finance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Meltdown]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Money]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://goldhaber.org/blog/?p=205</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In earlier posts I noted that even if &#8220;Wall Street&#8221; is temporarily saved and more carefully regulated, it will be difficult to prevent a meltdown similar to the current one from happening soon again. The reason is that it will be impossible to prevent new risky ways of playing tricks to obtain high returns by <a href='http://goldhaber.org/financiers-help-bring-about-decline-and-fall-of-money/' class='excerpt-more'>[...]</a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://goldhaber.org/financiers-help-bring-about-decline-and-fall-of-money/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
