SimCity, for Real: Measuring an Untidy Metropolis; An initiative at New York University is joining a global drive to apply modern sensor, computing and data-sifting technologies to urban environments

February 23, 2013

SimCity, for Real: Measuring an Untidy Metropolis

By STEVE LOHR

THE notion of a “science of cities” seems contradictory. Science is a realm of grand theory and precise measurement, while cities are messy agglomerations of people and human foible. But science is precisely the ambition of New York University’sCenter for Urban Science and Progress. Founded last year, the center has been getting under way in recent weeks, moving into new office space and firing off its first project proposal to the National Science Foundation.

The center’s director is Steven E. Koonin, a Brooklyn native and graduate of Stuyvesant High School, who came to N.Y.U. after a stint in the Obama administration as the under secretary for science in the Department of Energy. He is both a theoretical physicist and science policy expert. The center shouldn’t lack for intellectual rigor.

The initiative at N.Y.U. is part of a broader trend: the global drive to apply modern sensor, computing and data-sifting technologies to urban environments, in what has become known as “smart city” technology. The goals are big gains in efficiency and quality of life by using digital technology to better manage traffic and curb the consumption of water and electricity, for example. By some estimates, water and electricity use can be cut by 30 to 50 percent over the course of a decade.

Cities from Stockholm to Singapore are deep into smart city projects. The market looms as big, lucrative business for technology companies. Read more of this post

“Physically Together”: Here’s the Internal Yahoo No-Work-From-Home Memo for Remote Workers and Maybe More

“Physically Together”: Here’s the Internal Yahoo No-Work-From-Home Memo for Remote Workers and Maybe More

FEBRUARY 22, 2013 AT 10:18 PM PT

Kara Swisher

Courtesy of a plethora of very irked Yahoo employees, here is the internal memo sent to the company about a new rule rolled out today by CEO Marissa Mayer, which requires that Yahoo employees who work remotely relocate to company facilities.

“Speed and quality are often sacrificed when we work from home,” reads the memo to employees from HR head Jackie Reses. “We need to be one Yahoo!, and that starts with physically being together.”

Painfully awkward as this is phrased, it means every Yahoo get to your desks stat!

reported earlier today that the move will apparently impact only several hundred employees, such as customer service reps, who work from home full time. But numerous sources told me that the decree extends to any staffers who might have arrangements to work from home just one or two days a week, too.

The changes begin in June, according to the Yahoo memo.

After that, employees who work from home must comply without exception or quit. One top manager was told that there would be little flexibility on the issue.

The anger from impacted employees was strong today, because many felt they were initially hired with the assumption that they could work more flexibly.

In fact, even waiting for the cable guy is questionable. “And, for the rest of us who occasionally have to stay home for the cable guy, please use your best judgment in the spirit of collaboration,” wrote Reses.

The tone and tactics have infuriated some at the company. Wrote one impacted Yahoo employee to me: “Even if that was what was previously agreed to with managers and HR, or was a part of the package to take a position, tough … It’s outrageous and a morale killer.”

Most tech companies encourage workers to stay on their campuses, offering free food and other perks. But none enforce such rules beyond staff needed to operate an office.

“Our engineers would not put up with that,” said one tech exec. “So, we’d never focus on it.”

In the comments section of my first story on the HR change at Yahoo, WordPress founder Matt Mullenweg wrote:

“For anyone who enjoys working from wherever they like in the world, and is interested in WordPress, Automattic is 100% committed to being distributed. 130 of our 150 people are outside of San Francisco.”

The issue is an interesting and controversial one, with some certain that working at home is the wave of the future, while others considering it hurtful to productivity.

Well, we’ll presumably see which this way goes in time.

Earlier, when asked about the change, a Yahoo spokesperson said the company does not comment on internal matters. The memo was released after my story on the change was published this morning.

But, you don’t need any comment when you can read for yourself the new working order at the Silicon Valley Internet giant:

YAHOO! PROPRIETARY AND CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION — DO NOT FORWARD

Yahoos,

Over the past few months, we have introduced a number of great benefits and tools to make us more productive, efficient and fun. With the introduction of initiatives like FYI, Goals and PB&J, we want everyone to participate in our culture and contribute to the positive momentum. From Sunnyvale to Santa Monica, Bangalore to Beijing — I think we can all feel the energy and buzz in our offices.

To become the absolute best place to work, communication and collaboration will be important, so we need to be working side-by-side. That is why it is critical that we are all present in our offices. Some of the best decisions and insights come from hallway and cafeteria discussions, meeting new people, and impromptu team meetings. Speed and quality are often sacrificed when we work from home. We need to be one Yahoo!, and that starts with physically being together.

Beginning in June, we’re asking all employees with work-from-home arrangements to work in Yahoo! offices. If this impacts you, your management has already been in touch with next steps. And, for the rest of us who occasionally have to stay home for the cable guy, please use your best judgment in the spirit of collaboration. Being a Yahoo isn’t just about your day-to-day job, it is about the interactions and experiences that are only possible in our offices.

Thanks to all of you, we’ve already made remarkable progress as a company — and the best is yet to come.

Jackie

Visual Effects Industry Does a Disappearing Act

Updated February 22, 2013, 2:50 p.m. ET

Visual Effects Industry Does a Disappearing Act

By BEN FRITZ

A split scene from the ‘Life of Pi’ shows a digitally-crafted tiger and ocean—and the studio where live action was filmed. Financial pressures forced the effects creator into bankruptcy.

The Oscar for best visual effects on Sunday is widely expected to go to Ang Lee’s “Life of Pi,” which uses a digitally created tiger so realistic that it serves as the main character’s sole companion for most of a journey across the Pacific.

But there may not be much celebrating at the El Segundo, Calif., offices of Rhythm & Hues Studios Inc., the 26-year-old company that served as lead effects producer for the film. On Feb. 13, just eight days after “Pi” won four prizes at the annual Visual Effects Society Awards, Rhythm & Hues filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy. The same week it laid off 254 of its 718 employees in the Los Angeles area, according to court documents.

It is the second bankruptcy filing by a leading U.S. visual effects shop in the past six months, following Digital Domain Media Group Inc. DDMGQ +80.00% in September. The developments come amid skyrocketing use of computer-created robots, animals and sets in all kinds of Hollywood movies. Blockbusters like “The Amazing Spider-Man” and “The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey” often have thousands of visual effects shots. Even dramas and comedies today can include hundreds of them. The Parisian backdrops in “Les Miserables” included many digital creations. Read more of this post

DOWN ON STARTUPS: What Happens When No One Thinks You’re Worth Billions Anymore

DOWN ON STARTUPS: What Happens When No One Thinks You’re Worth Billions Anymore

Alyson Shontell | Feb. 22, 2013, 1:45 PM | 10,472 | 26

As startup prices soared in the runup to last year’s Facebook IPO, entrepreneurs, investors, and tech observers sometimes griped about lofty valuations.

Just mention Foursquare, say, or LivingSocial, and they’d go off.

These are tech companies that snagged a lot of press and tens (or hundreds) of millions of dollars before solidifying their business models. Investors say they’re worth tons of money—but in the end, that’s a gamble, and the companies may actually be worth nothing.

After a few years of massive hype in the startup sector, absurd-sounding valuations are starting to correct themselves. Startups are confronting the prospect of raising “down rounds” from investors—or rounds of financing that value the companies at less than the previous round.

LivingSocial, for example, was once valued at $5.7 billion; it’s now worth a quarter of that, or less, depending on whom you ask.

But more often, down rounds happen at a far earlier stage, a result of too-lofty valuations assigned in initial financings.

What happens when companies that were once worth billions of dollars suddenly find themselves worth much, much less? And why were they ever valued that high in the first place? Read more of this post

LivingSocial investors take “pound of flesh” in financing

LivingSocial investors take “pound of flesh” in financing

9:20pm EST

By Alistair Barr

SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) – LivingSocial was forced to make large concessions to persuade some of its biggest investors to plow another $110 million into the second-largest daily-deal company, analysts and investors said on Friday.

Analysts say those investors secured advantageous terms potentially at the expense of LivingSocial’s other backers. The nature of those terms shed new light on an investment that Chief Executive Tim O’Shaughnessy declared on Wednesday “a tremendous vote of confidence in our business.”

For their $110 million, investors got special preferred securities that pay a 3 percent annual dividend, and almost guarantee that they get money before any proceeds from a sale of the company or an initial public offering go to earlier investors, according to a recently updated certificate of incorporation for LivingSocial viewed by Reuters.

The deal also requires LivingSocial to repay some or all of the money from the latest round of financing in four years, if there has not been a liquidity event – such as a sale or IPO. That measure, which protects their investment, would require 75 percent of the holders of the new securities, known as Series G, to vote for repayment, the certificate shows.

“The investors took their pound of flesh for LivingSocial to get this money,” Sam Hamadeh of PrivCo, a research firm focused on private companies, said on Friday. Read more of this post