And who remembers the Desk Set with Tracy & Hepburn -- a reference librarian goes up against a computer -- and wins!

In 2000, I vaguely recall people fretting: should Google replace DMOZ, the open directory project? After all, Google's PageRank is formula-driven. You get machine-generated results -- but the Open Directory project had real humans indexing web sites. Won't DMOZ be better?

So imagine my surprise when someone expressed outrage that I ask people questions on Twitter:

And if they don't want to answer a question, they won't.

I ask questions on Twitter when I want a human to answer. And lately, when I ask a question on Google, it's for expedience. (Most of the time, Wikipedia is among the first 5 results, which leads me to believe that I should just go to Wikipedia if I want expedience.)

Other than Wikipedia, most of what Google has been delivering lately hasn't been that relevant.

Twitter isn't as speedy, but at least I'm getting relevant answers.

Where do you ask most questions online? Man or machine? Twitter or Google?

Or somewhere else entirely?

Tomorrow, I'll be celebrating my 3-year Twitterversary. To mark the occasion, I'm posting my first Tweet ever.

(By the way, I'm still wondering if participating at Twitter makes one a twit...)

What was your first Tweet ever?

So, I changed my interests to include falconry, beekeeping, and protesting against milk. (Please note that none of these are my real interests or hobbies.)

For weeks, nothing much changed. Today, however: I am finally amused.

Here is my late Friday ad:

I am delighted with this experiment. Going forward, I will be certain to add more irrelevant and goofy interests. How about you?

A solopreneur, I was too busy filing over 70 pages of income tax forms: federal, state, and local (yes, the City of Grand Rapids still collects income taxes in addition to property taxes.) Completing one more redundant page of bureaucratic information during an incredibly busy tax season may have driven me bonkers.

I rolled my eyes when I saw the pre-census postcard in my mailbox. Tragic waste, I thought. The postcard had 1) my name and 2) my address printed on it. Redundancy alert -- that's two down on the forthcoming list of ten census questions.

When I later received the actual census form, I was shocked. It's 2010, not 1980 -- yet residents cannot complete a form electronically! This is a jaw-dropper in terms of wasted time and resources.

Further, I was incredulous when I discovered that I already answered almost every census question -- on my Federal income tax return! Why not just add a few more lines to the annual income tax form and be done with the census? Why a separate mailing? Why a separate data collection agency? After all, it's the same federal government!

Now, there are those who might say, "But some people don't file their taxes!"

Please. Get real. People who don't file taxes aren't likely to file a census form, either. And if they do, it's probably not going to be accurate.

And I don't want to hear, "What's the big deal? It only takes a minute!"

Multiply that one minute by millions of people. Multiply that one mailing by 3 or 4 times to account for pre-census postcard mailings, the census itself, and the census returns. And multiply the time it takes to input all that data into its own independent silo, instead of more effectively coordinating it with other federal data collection agencies.

In business, we're concerned about creativity and productivity. Why isn't the Federal government?

Asking millions of people to complete redundant paper forms -- in 2010! -- during tax time is an insensitive productivity drain. Ignoring technology tools that improve data quality and hasten filing, collection, and tabulation is an especially egregious oversight. Sending part-time employees into the field to collect data from scofflaws is an exercise in frustration and low-quality data gathering.

We have the technology. We have the information. We have the creativity. Why not make changes to dissemination, collection, and tabulation that are likely to elicit more accurate results more quickly -- and for far less cost?

• I think...
• I feel...
• I believe...
  

You only have 140 characters. Why use the extra words?

(Unless it's a Sarbanes-Oxley, forward-looking statements kind of thing. Which would be weird on Twitter, anyway.)

I love it, I love it, I love it!

I love how it tracks my outbound / inbound calls. I love how I can have one number follow me anywhere I go. I love the push-button recording of calls. I love the free-anywhere-in-the-US feature.

And perhaps most of all, I love the voicemail transcripts that go directly to my inbox! Instead of listening to a lengthy voicemail, I can quickly scan a written transcript & get the gist of what is being communicated. What a time saver!

Of course, from time to time, the Google Voice transcript monkey types up some crazy stuff. Transcript accuracy is usually pretty good, but if a client is speaking quickly or indistinctly, it can give me some laugh-out-loud moments.

When I received this email from a client on a Friday afternoon, the Google Transcript monkey accurately portrayed her tone -- but didn't get many of her words right!

Don't worry: my client isn't psycho -- but I got the idea I needed to call her pronto!

Note: remember to speak slowly and clearly when you leave a voicemail!

Thanks, Google Voice Transcript Monkey!

To all of you who have watched, listened, posted, commented, rated, and wrote -- thank you so much for your support.

To date, one my videos cracked the half-million mark on viewership. It stands with over 1,000 comments -- and a 5-star rating with 999 people rating it.

Here's the back story:

In August 2007, I took time out to post a quickie video on YouTube. The video answered a frequently asked audience question, "Hey, how did you get those YouTube videos to play in your PowerPoint presentation?"

Instead of answering an off-topic technical question during Q & A, I thought it might be polite to answer the question in another venue -- YouTube. By posting the answer online at YouTube, I had yet another opportunity to continue a conversation after the real-world presentation was over. I could take the person's card, and point them to the video later. This also freed up my audience from listening to a five minute response that had nothing to do with the presentation's actual content.

So, I took a half hour to shoot and upload a quick how-to video. No biggee.

Within a few months of posting the video, I started to get email.

Lots of email.

Lots of NICE, positive, email.

Turns out, quite a few people wanted to know how to insert a YouTube video into a PowerPoint presentation.

Many people who watch the video have been kind enough to send me thank-you notes. I don't suppose a day has gone by in over a year where I haven't received a thank-you note from somebody, somewhere in the world for posting this cheaply produced, quickie how-to video.

Guess how great it makes you feel to get a thank-you note every single day of your life. It's an amazing, positive feeling -- one that I never imagined I'd get to feel for the duration of an entire year.

A year ago, I was embarrassed. You see, my desktop microphone was not of the highest quality, and the audio of my voice over is pathetic.

It sounds bad. Real bad.

But nonetheless-- lots of people seem to like it...even though the sound is dreadful.

I've started to think -- maybe they like it BECAUSE the sound is dreadful!

I've often thought of re-recording the audio portion with another mike, especially since so many people are viewing it. I want to give viewers a better experience. And it might make me look a little more polished and professional.

But I've thought about it some, and unless I hear otherwise, I'm going to leave the cruddy audio as-is.

The viewership and rating of this video illustrates a few points about YouTube community:

1. People are interested in useful or entertaining content. They seem willing to overlook obvious glaring flaws -- as long as you're providing something of value to them.
2. People interact with content + personality. The YouTube community is vocal -- if someone likes what you have to present, they'll tell you. (If they don't it -- they'll also tell you. I've been on that side of it, too!)

I don't plan on creating viral videos. I'll upload stuff that I think is interesting or useful to people. And I'll rate stuff that other people post -- it's all a part of building community around ideas and content.

I'm glad I took the time out to participate and help where I could. And I'm glad so many seem to find the information helpful.

Thanks again for your support.

How else can I help you?