Box Shares Surge in the First Big IPO of 2015


Box SVP of Engineering Sam Schillace, left, with CEO Aaron Levie.

Box SVP of Engineering Sam Schillace, left, with CEO Aaron Levie. Peter Earl McCollough/WIRED



Box finally made its Wall Street debut, a year after first filing for an IPO.


Trading under the ticker symbol BOX, the online-file-sharing company opened at $20.20 on the New York Stock Exchange, about 70 percent higher than its initial public offering price of $14, and at one point, the stock rose as high as $24.73. Box sold 12.5 million shares at its initial $14 IPO price, above the expected price range of $11 to $13.


The good reception from Wall Street is a small triumph for the company, which weathered market turbulence when it first attempted to go public, as well as questions about whether or not it would be profitable, given fierce competition from a host of other players in the online storage space. Those competitors, which include tech giants like Google, Amazon and Microsoft, can afford to offer their services at rock-bottom prices.


So the company has worked to differentiate itself. Led by co-founder Aaron Levie, Box has pushed to transform its basic file-sharing services into a kind of online platform for running all sorts of other apps, both apps from Box and apps from third parties.


Now, with a market capitalization of roughly $1.6 billion, and having raised an additional $175 million, the company has more resources to continue to its expansion—and continue its battle with the Googles and the Microsofts.



Is this the Earnest, Fast-Paced Future of Science Communication?


Jason Silva plays the guinea pig during an episode of Brain Games.


 (Image:: NGT/Stephen Holtzhauser )

Jason Silva plays the guinea pig during an episode of Brain Games.


 (Image:: NGT/Stephen Holtzhauser )



It’s the quintessential college experience: late nights, pizza, and heady intellectual conversations. And then there was that one friend, whose philosophical musings would bring unconnected thoughts together into a stream of mellifluous prose; it all sounded pretty convincing at the time – even if the specifics were hazy – leaving us with the sense of fertile pastures just outside our mental grasp.


Jason Silva is the polished, better-sourced, hipper version of that roommate, one that can walk the walk in addition to talking the very frenetic talk. As the creator of the Shots of Awe video series (see an example at the end of this post) and host of National Geographic’s Brain Games , Silva has made a name for himself as a leading science evangelist and technology enthusiast.


But unlike the professorial Bill Nye or the authoritative Neil DeGrasse Tyson, Silva takes a different communications tack, guiding us through a journey of wonder rather than telling us precisely how it is. It’s a refreshing antidote to the jaded, nothing-but-the-facts approach taken by scientists who feel they have the moral high ground, an approach that only serves to propagate a culture war. “I’m interested in exultation, wonderment, inspiration, and content that acts as a decentering experience,” says Silva, using language that could just as easily apply to a religious experience. And in many ways, that’s just what the modern world is to Silva, with its delivery and continued promise of new knowledge and techno-futurism.


To Silva, the sequence of events that, as he puts it, “took a naked ape and put him on the Moon,” required a carefully calibrated balance of human instincts. We are naturally curious explorers, certainly, but unbridled wanderings without focused expertise isn’t particularly productive. On the other hand, ceaseless technical development and capacity building without an inspired objective leads to products with subpar utility. “We love security and ritual and routine,” Silva reflects, “but also mystery and danger. We need to find a way to dance between these two modes, and I think that’s a tough skill to develop. There’s got to be a functional output.”


Silva’s projects cover a wide range of subjects and flavors of “functional output.” His Shots of Awe are “a way to eternalize fleeting epiphanies,” two-minute serums meant to inspire and develop questions rather than to provide detailed explanations. Silva himself is involved with every aspect of production, from video clip curation to music selection and editing, and with a new video every week it’s an ambitious schedule. Brain Games is a larger enterprise, a surprise hit for the National Geographic Channel that has offered a glimmer of educational hope as “lifestyle” shows dumb down other corners of the cable universe. Silva credits the show’s production and writing teams, who combine “triple-vetted” science with a screenwriter’s instinct for pacing and storytelling.


If too-cool-for-school detachment seems to be on its way out as a cultural sensibility – as presaged by empathy-bolstering websites like Upworthy, and Humans of New York – then earnestness is a growth stock and Silva is a blue chip. By his own admission, Silva is “terrified of boredom,” which he characterizes as a coping mechanism to gird ourselves from the exhausting state of constant mental engagement with the world. By chasing novel connections and challenging viewers, Silva hopes to scramble previous mental models and demand a fruitful, if challenging, reconstruction. “When you lose your center, you have to reconstruct your beliefs and understanding about the world,” he notes. “Any engagement that is potent must first disrupt.”



An Ode to SkyMall After It Files For Bankruptcy


Check out my Taz hat. Not purchased from SkyMall, but pretty badass none the less.

Check out my Taz hat. Not purchased from SkyMall, but pretty badass none the less. Credit: Emily Dreyfuss



My parents didn’t love each other anymore, so at 10, 7, and 2 years old, we flew unaccompanied between Idaho and LA for visits. We may not have had chaperones or the security of an intact nuclear family, but we had one essential comfort: The SkyMall catalogue.


As the eldest sibling, it fell to me to read the descriptions to my brothers. I ad-libbed.


“THIS is the garden gnome we’d need if we lived by ourselves in the forest. We’d set this up outside our rotten out tree trunk to warn away bad guys.”


“What bad guys?” little 7-year-old Ben would ask.


“Uh, that bad guy,” I’d say, pointing to some smelly adult on the plane.


We devoured every page–even the ones with the posters of slogans we didn’t understand. Why is that cat hanging in there, we wondered?


My favorite was the convertible furniture section. I was big into playing house at the time, pretending I had no parents and was in charge of my own destiny. The centerpiece of said destiny was surely going to be that magic-looking bureau that actually opened up into what the catalogue called a liquor cabinet but looked to me more like where a witch stored her potions. I was no dummy; I knew what liquor was, and I knew people abused it and went to something called “Ah” to deal with that, so I figured instead of liquor I’d hide way better things, like makeup and food. Or magic potions if I ever came across any.


When my dad would pick us up at LAX, we’d bring our copy of SkyMall, dog-eared, poured over.


“Dad, can we get the life-size tiger for your house?”


I can only imagine how much he wanted to laugh in our faces, but divorce does a tricky thing to parents: it makes them never want to say no to you. That year, he let us pick our Christmas gifts from SkyMall. All of them. Literally. I have no memory of what we actually chose. He flew us back to Idaho so we could spend the holiday together and I just remember the elation of picking up the phone in the back of the headrest on the Delta plane and calling a human being from the air. The line cracked, but from down deep below the thin air, a woman’s voice said, “Hi, thanks for calling SkyMall.” Outside the window, smog and clouds skidded past and I was talking on the telephone to a human being who was going to send us presents!


The possibilities in life were limitless.


That was the only time I ever bought anything out of the catalogue, but Ben spent a good decade ordering Christmas presents from its pages. He did this for two reasons: first, he saw it as a sort of tradition, beginning on that trip in 1991; and second, he inevitably was flying to whichever parent we were spending the holidays with and hadn’t thought about a gift for anyone yet.


Before the Internet, before Amazon, SkyMall was the best option for slackers with no cash but a credit card furnished by family guilt.


“Mom, I bought you a bunion strap and a stepping stool for your dog!” Ben would say, never able to keep his gifts a secret until Christmas day.


“YOU bought it? How?”


“With your credit card.”


“Oh. That credit card is for emergencies, honey.”


“It was a Christmas emergency, Mom.”


There was no answering that.


SkyMall was our babysitter. Our distraction. When we got older we delighted in mocking the absurdity of it, how ridiculous and unnecessary was everything in its pages. In this way, we explained to each other that we were maturing, that we weren’t dumb little kids anymore. When I became a teenager–embarrassed by everything and everyone–I’d tease the boys for liking anything in the catalogue.


“That is SO pointless,” I’d say.


“OK, we can stop looking at it,” Ben would say.


“No, no,” I’d protest. “Harry is having fun.” Harry, wide-eyed and three years old would narrow his eyes into a look that seemed to say, “I know I’m being used.”


SkyMall was a tradition. An absurd, capitalistic embodiment of everything that was shallow and wrong with our lives, and yet it also brought us comfort. No matter if the plane was delayed, or we were stuck alone on a layover, missing whichever parent we were leaving, missing the friends and the life we were leaving behind each time we went between homes, it was there to make us laugh. To let us roll our eyes. To surprise us with a new level of novelty and frivolity.


SkyMall, that stupid wonderful completely American wonder that, with its insistence that you take your own free copy, announced it was your right as a human in the ‘90s to never not be shopping. Never not be consuming.


Of course, I didn’t think about how genius it was for them to tap into such a captive audience, stuck with nothing to do but wait. I never felt manipulated back then. I was a kid. Now it’s not hard to see how the business model wasn’t sustainable into the aughts and beyond.


When I fly now I try to write. Or sleep. Or squirm. Or, who am I kidding, look at Twitter. I haven’t noticed a SkyMall on the last 10 planes I’ve flown but I’m sure it was there, slick and expectant in the seat back flap, amid the wrappers and detritus of former travelers. Waiting for someone to notice it.


I’m sorry I paid $7 for inflight wi-fi instead of reading you, little shopping catalogue. Forgive me.



People Who Are Good at Cocktail Parties Are Also Better at the Internet


152404483

Getty Images



Some people are better at navigating cocktail parties, family gatherings, and office meetings. And, as it turns out, they are better at the internet too.

That’s the word from Anita Woolley, a professor of organizational behavior and theory at Carnegie Mellon University. She’s been studying what it takes for groups to make smart decisions online, and her latest research unearthed a surprising discovery: People who were good at reading emotional cues face-to-face also happened to be pretty good at reading these cues in online discussions.


Even without seeing the other person’s face, they were able to read other’s mental states online, where misunderstanding can easily occur. And if you include these people in your online groups, your group will be smarter too.


Scientists refer to this ability as “theory of mind.” There’s even a test for the thing. It’s called the “Reading the Mind in the Eyes” test, and it’s hard. You look at close-up photos of dozens of sets of eyes and try to determine whether the person is angry, despondent, jealous, panicked, or in some other state. “People who have this are able to represent what others are thinking or feeling based on subtle cues,” says Woolley. “What this enables somebody to do is to really fill in the blanks for somebody.”


According to researchers, if a group is filled with people who are good at this, it’s collectively smarter than groups who are not. And Woolley’s study shows this is true in the chat room as well as the board room.


This suggests that the way we figure out what other people are thinking may be deeper than we previously thought. And for managers and online group moderators, there’s a lesson here: It’s better to pad the group with good listeners rather than brainiacs.


In a sense, that’s one of the operating principles governing the online question-and-answer website, Quora, which is merciless toward trolls and even people who simply have to get the last word in during any discussion. “If you let jerks run the show, then they drive out everyone who is reasonable,” says Marc Bodnick, Quora’s community team manager.


In the online context, people who are strong at theory of mind are better at interpreting emoticon-free text, and even silence. “One of the toughest things to interpret in online communities is silence,” Woolley says. “When you don’t hear from somebody, [you wonder] ‘Are they offended by what I said, are they mad at me, do they not know the answer, or are they on vacation?'”


And beware blowhards. People who make your online groups smarter are the ones who will tend to draw colleagues out in discussions too. As the research shows, “how damaging it is if all you’re hearing from are one or two people and there are a bunch of people you’re not hearing from at all,” Woolley says.


Oh, and there’s one more important contributing factor when it comes to collective intelligence. Groups that have more women, she says, also tend to be smarter. Women, on average, score higher on the theory of mind test, Woolley says, “so when you have more women in the group, you raise the average.”



The Crowdfunding Site That Lets You Sell Shares in Your Videogame or Movie


crowdfunding

Getty Images



Mike Merrill was the world’s first publicly traded person. In 2008, he started selling shares in his life for $1 a pop.


That means he’s uniquely qualified to run his new startup, Chroma Fund, which lets you IPO your own media projects, including indie video games, films, or any other endeavor you think could make a buck. You can’t IPO yourself, but you can IPO your creativity—which is pretty close.


The new company lets accredited investors buy shares in these media projects, and it has already helped fund two projects: a new video game from Mountain Machine Studios, and an educational web show for children called The Digits , which is available online through PBS Learning Media.


Unlike with popular crowdfunding services such as Kickstarter and Indie GoGo, the investors who back projects on Chroma Fund will get a cut of that project’s revenue. Backers aren’t buying equity in the company behind a particular project, but they are buying a type of security that essentially guarantees royalties in a product, explains Chroma Fund co-founder Marcus Estes.


Along with services like FlashFunders, Chroma Fund is the latest crowd-investing system enabled by the 2012 American JOBS Act, which lets companies publicly solicit funding, including online. Though such solicitation can only happen with accredited investors today, the idea is that project will eventually solicit from the general public as well, thanks to the long-delayed Section III of the JOBS Act.


Oregon has already passed its own laws allowing the general public to invest in local startups, and the Chroma Fund team adjusting for this change in the state. Estes thinks of it as a training for when crowd-investing becomes available at the national level.


Again unlike Kickstarter, Chroma Fund is only working with a small number of companies—not just anyone can sign-up a start a funding campaign. But as more capital becomes available, Chroma fund will be able to accept more projects. And Estes thinks that many other similar funds will emerge to help creators find new ways to finance projects. “We think this model going to eat Hollywood,” Estes says.


‘Let’s Do Both’


Estes and Merrill decided to start a company together about two years ago, shortly after Estes returned to Portland after a tour with Kanye West. Estes met the singer while working for a software consultancy that specialized in luxury fashion labels, and West hired the firm to work with his own fashion line. But soon, Estes found himself on tour as a story producer for a documentary series about West.


Legal disputes tanked the documentary project, but Estes returned to Portland with a renewed interest in filmmaking. “I was complaining to Mike that no one wanted to pay me to do anything but tech, but I was more interested in content,” Estes says. “Mike said: ‘Well, let’s do both.'”


After spending a couple years working on video game projects, the two realized that while tech startups generate huge amounts of money, media projects are often neglected, despite the huge revenue potential. Video games alone are a multi-billion dollar industry, but there’s not a way to invest in individual projects, as opposed to a video game studio. They realized that Merrill’s strange idea of selling shares in himself could be applied to other endeavors as well.


The Control Issue


They envisioned Chroma Fund as a way to help creators raise money, without giving up creative control of their projects. Creators can set their own terms for the projects, such as how much of the revenue is split with investors, whether to return investors’ money if funding goals are met, and how long investors receive royalties. Chroma and its lawyers create the contracts, verify revenue and disperse payments to investors.


Merrill and Estes joined Oregon Story Board, a startup incubator for entrepreneurs involved in digital story telling, to get the company off the ground. It was there that they met the founders of Mountain Machine Studio, the company behind the first projects backed by the Chroma Fund. Nick Lambert, co-founder of the game company, says it’s an ideal working situation. “We can just focus on our work, and we have total control over the project,” he says.


Estes and Merrill imagine a world in which pension funds are investing not just in stocks and bonds, but in video games, films and other media projects. But he thinks the bulk of the funding will always come from passionate fans who want to support their favorite creators’ media projects. Only now, those fans will actually be even more passionate, and even more likely to tell their friends about new projects, since they’ll actually be getting a cut of the proceeds.


“Chroma will help you build a street team,” Estes says. “But your street team actually gets paid.”



People Who Are Good at Cocktail Parties Are Also Better at the Internet


152404483

Getty Images



Some people are better at navigating cocktail parties, family gatherings, and office meetings. And, as it turns out, they are better at the internet too.

That’s the word from Anita Woolley, a professor of organizational behavior and theory at Carnegie Mellon University. She’s been studying what it takes for groups to make smart decisions online, and her latest research unearthed a surprising discovery: People who were good at reading emotional cues face-to-face also happened to be pretty good at reading these cues in online discussions.


Even without seeing the other person’s face, they were able to read other’s mental states online, where misunderstanding can easily occur. And if you include these people in your online groups, your group will be smarter too.


Scientists refer to this ability as “theory of mind.” There’s even a test for the thing. It’s called the “Reading the Mind in the Eyes” test, and it’s hard. You look at close-up photos of dozens of sets of eyes and try to determine whether the person is angry, despondent, jealous, panicked, or in some other state. “People who have this are able to represent what others are thinking or feeling based on subtle cues,” says Woolley. “What this enables somebody to do is to really fill in the blanks for somebody.”


According to researchers, if a group is filled with people who are good at this, it’s collectively smarter than groups who are not. And Woolley’s study shows this is true in the chat room as well as the board room.


This suggests that the way we figure out what other people are thinking may be deeper than we previously thought. And for managers and online group moderators, there’s a lesson here: It’s better to pad the group with good listeners rather than brainiacs.


In a sense, that’s one of the operating principles governing the online question-and-answer website, Quora, which is merciless toward trolls and even people who simply have to get the last word in during any discussion. “If you let jerks run the show, then they drive out everyone who is reasonable,” says Marc Bodnick, Quora’s community team manager.


In the online context, people who are strong at theory of mind are better at interpreting emoticon-free text, and even silence. “One of the toughest things to interpret in online communities is silence,” Woolley says. “When you don’t hear from somebody, [you wonder] ‘Are they offended by what I said, are they mad at me, do they not know the answer, or are they on vacation?'”


And beware blowhards. People who make your online groups smarter are the ones who will tend to draw colleagues out in discussions too. As the research shows, “how damaging it is if all you’re hearing from are one or two people and there are a bunch of people you’re not hearing from at all,” Woolley says.


Oh, and there’s one more important contributing factor when it comes to collective intelligence. Groups that have more women, she says, also tend to be smarter. Women, on average, score higher on the theory of mind test, Woolley says, “so when you have more women in the group, you raise the average.”



The Week’s Best TV: Obama’s Sick Burn and Bill Cosby’s Tone-Deaf Comedy Jam


This week in TV belonged to the granddaddy of them all. Kevin Hart took on hosting duties and led the Saturday Night Live players to a double clip performance here in the roundup, and honestly, we could have added more. (Alas, variety wins out.) Jimmy Kimmel had a great showing thanks to guest work from Benedict Cumberbatch—playing everyone but himself—and also the women of Broad City. BC‘s Abbi Jacobson made the list all by herself, thanks to a magic dance number set to the dulcet tones of Lady Gaga. Some other great stuff happened too, but really, if we don’t cut to a special shout-out for sass-master President Obama we can’t call ourselves patriots. Did you see the shade he threw at the other side of the aisle?! Hey Barack, we hear Kenan Thompson is heading towards the door at SNL, and you’re gonna need a job before too long. Think about it. But in the meantime, we’ve got J.Lo and Marvel’s Falcon (Anthony Mackie) playing a heated game of Catch Phrase with Jimmy Fallon.


Saturday Night Live—Calvin Klein Ad


This sketch feels troublingly accurate. And as proof that the shoot went exactly as demonstrated by SNL, even the Biebs’ counterpart in CK’s latest “My Calvins” campaign—mega model Lara Stone—gave the sendup her endorsement! #YaBurnt


Jimmy Kimmel Live!—Abbi Jacobson & Ilana Glazer on Their Wardrobe


Abbi and Ilana are your coolest friends’ coolest friends. You can watch them keep being awesome in the second half of their Kimmel interview here.


The Nightly Show with Larry Wilmore—Bill Cosby’s Tone Deaf Comedy Jam — Mike Yard


Larry Wilmore, paid funnyman, is not kidding around with his new late night comedy show! In the premiere episode, he held a panel on the state of black protest, and for episode two he threw down on Bill Cosby. No one can replace Stephen Colbert, but at least we know Wilmore won’t be pulling any punches.


State of the Union Address—Obama’s Ad-lib


Oh, no he didn’t!


Jimmy Kimmel Live!—Meet Gary Miller: Benedict Cumberbatch Tries Out New Names


As sexy as Jeff-Jeff is, Benedict Cumberbatch still takes the Best Name Ever cake. But hey, that doesn’t mean “Gary Miller” can’t seduce us as long as he’s got that voice.


The Tonight Show Starring Jimmy Fallon—Catchphrase With Jennifer Lopez and Anthony Mackie


This would have been so much better if Anthony Mackie had punched Jimmy Fallon in the face. And even better still if Jennifer Lopez had done it! But seriously, the empathy anxiety of watching people play Catchphrase when you can’t participate is apparently awful. Good luck not crawling out of your skin as your heart rate ramps up in time with the oppressive beeping.


Saturday Night Live—Bushwick, Brooklyn 2015


In a very strong episode, this may have been the strongest sketch (we’re calling that “Calvin Klein Ad” more of a digital short). It was surprising and timely and played just perfectly by Kenan Thompson, Jay Pharoah, and host Kevin Hart.


Broad City—Abbi on the Edge of Glory


If you’ve been wondering about Abbi Jacobson’s Broad City nude scene since she talked about it in her Jimmy Kimmel interview, then wonder no longer! You know that feeling when your roommate’s significant other finally leaves the apartment? Yeah, it’s a lot like that.


The Daily Show with Jon Stewart—Majority Retort


In case you were wondering if the opposition had any comebacks after Obama’s sick burn during the State of the Union … Nah. Apparently they’re just gonna sit this one out.


The Daily Show with Jon Stewart—Anne Hathaway


And now here it is, our moment of Zen: the giddy shared laughter of Jon Stewart and Anne Hathaway.