Living for the Moments by John J K Morris

Let's begin off topic.

I hesitated to share the link to this really informative article. It's from a new website publication called The Outline. I hesitated because the layout of the website; it't trying to be something groundbreaking when nobody asked for it to be anything else. Can it just be a great venue for the news because of its content alone?

Josh Topolsky, was previously both the editor of Engadget and The Verge, he came up with the concept. Currently I'm surviving off his tweets when he directly links to stories on his site. I can't be bothered navigating it.

Anyway besides that hinderance, here's the direct link to the article here, don't even try to navigate the site, you'll be cerebrally confused and visually paralysed for minutes on end.

The article itself is informative on the effects of live-streaming on performers taking ever increasing risks with stunts because of a willing, waiting and watching audience.

The fact people are watching in their millions is purposely pushing stunts to be ever more dazzling just for the views. The reality created by this new unquestioned type of audience participation has led to the deaths of some the individuals doing the stunts. 

That's the summary, read the rest yourself.

I found this story personally engaging, immediately because of course I live-stream as well. I can attest to this feeling and have gone out of my way to push myself to do things I wouldn't have done had I not been filming it in the first place. I'm entering a different world, a bubble with an augmented (my) self. So much so I feel uncomfortable if the phone connection dies and reality abruptly comes rushing back in.

In these live-streaming scenarios, I feel the audience is on my side and I want to entertain. I even walked into the ocean last week (the Vibrams I was wearing helped btw). I've been aware of this state for some time now because I know ordinarily what I think I'm capable of. Knowing ones true self though is already a large philosophical discussion and in short, I believe our selves are already changing. I guess in this situation, its doing more because its an extreme form of focus on the one holding the phone.

Case in point, I'm committing myself to a multi-year, live-streaming project exploring Hong Kong, because of my directly engaged and dedicated audience, this impetus can be both benign, inspiring and potentially a troublemaker. Before live-streaming I wasn't really trying to see everything Hong Kong has to offer. Now people want to be entertained I'm constantly thinking of new things to see for those viewers and importantly for myself. Quite rightly, the motivation is for me to explore Hong Kong for myself first and bring people along. Not primarily do it for fame, money etc.

I'm glad the article exists, it's part of an ongoing discussion I have with myself and where social media is taking us, it put into words something that I could relate to. I'm definitely going to read more on the topic as this medium matures. I hope people watching me can better appreciate me say I say, 'Live-streaming is life-changing'. 

The Rump on Trump by John J K Morris

We Still Aren’t Talking to Each Other.

It started with these two tweets that arrived on my timeline earlier this week.

Yes of course people overlooked racism in some form if we are to believe that is the pressing issue. We are self interested creatures. What for a moment if racism isn't everywhere across the United States, but putting food on the table is?

I replied to the second tweet; asking where are the racists shouting from the street that should be upset at Trump for immediately going back on his most infamous campaign promise to ban all Muslims from entering the country? He wants to vet them now, a position other republican candidates took earlier this year. I’m still wondering where the outcries are, they never made it to my twitter feed even when I asked for help on the topic.

Chris Cillizza (@TheFix) is right, it IS counterproductive to state everybody is racist, will fighting racism lead to paying the rent for some people? Sadly no it won't. People vote for priorities, not ideals especially if people aren't the victim of racism. The thing is, there have been people of colour who have voted for Trump.

I don’t like those tweets because they are trying to reduce a complex political outcome to one reason. One reason to explain nearly 60 million reasons for voting for Donald Trump. There is never one reason for anything, so stop it.

It contributes to a lazy mentality that is more likely applicable to a minority of those who voted. The rest of the voting base simply haven’t made it their priority because how do you find time to stamp out racism (which seems like a nebulous idea) compared to getting food on the table and looking after one's family? Hello, we are tribalistic-vote-for-my-team type of creatures!

Don't forget that all the rust belt states that voted for Trump voted FOR President Obama back in 2008 and again in 2012. As Michael Moore stated “Trump’s election is going to be the biggest fuck you ever recorded in human history”. Not a fuck you to racism, a fuck you to the system. Remember these are also the people, the media couldn't even care about, these were the people who were scared to reveal their true voting intentions incase of being labelled a racist. That reads like people were scared because they wouldn't be given a chance to explain themselves to a reasonable level. The progressive left is too quick to judge and castigate.

Labelling those 60 million voters as racists absconds us of any further action on our part because we can pretend there is nothing else to discuss. A nation isn’t going to heal itself without a proper understanding of one another through proper dialogue. Tweets don't mean shit, facebook is a minefield. 

Lets point out, the winners don’t give a fuck what you call them because they won anyway. Second, the progressive left has been calling out anybody for the slightest infraction as racist for what seems like an eternity. The word 'racist' has lost its impact. It doesn’t allow people to think anymore, it’s just another insult/label we’ve over used in our western society. It’s not even a constructive path to get someone on your side.

I'm not asking for an opening of hearts either. Just stop pouring scorn on so many people when you don't really know why they were motivated to vote Trump.

Watching the Young Turks below dismiss States in the lead up to Trump’s election on the night was ridiculous. They literally said, ‘oh have Kentucky, who cares”. They dismissed the first three states that were counting votes. That should have been a sign.

The whole exchange was gross, because of the geographies and its cherry picking towards their candidate. To me that says larger States like California will carry the people forward, we don't need those votes from those people. Those people have become easy to dismiss (just like the media and Hillary did) and we are still doing it. The losers are still dismissing the winners. Nothing is going to change unless people listen and engage.

The other line of reasoning was non-racists voted Hillary, therefore everybody voting Trump is for racism. That’s an igonrant logical fallacy if I’ve ever come across one.

Anyway, having said that, this is the wrong kind of discussion to have period. There are larger ones. Ones that keep us divided as a people. This belief that racism and sexism is running rampant across America can’t be the catch all argument from progressives.

He isn't a Racist

This focus on what Trump says is also harmful, the media ate it up for the past however many years because it brought it a wonderful ratings hit and put Trump inside a narrative that would set him up against Hillary. The media couldn’t stop reporting every single issue he held an opinion on. We all waited for his latest gaff to shoot him in the foot. Nothing happened. I read somewhere “the media took him literally, the people took him seriously”. (Just to note, I googled it afterwards and here is a decent write up on the situation.

Personally I don’t even think Trump is a racist, he’s an old man talking, that’s how they talk, we should focus on how he acts. We are wasting so much time on words instead of actions. Just a note who does he employ? Link 1, link 2, link 3. If anything he's an opportunist. So stop conflating the two.

Comment from Reddit. Ironically from someone calling themselves 'Darth Trump'.

Comment from Reddit. Ironically from someone calling themselves 'Darth Trump'.

A few weeks ago on Periscope I kept using the word ‘midget’ and everybody mentioned that it was wrong, I never knew because I'm not a day-to-day part of western culture. I can say midget all day in Hong Kong, and nobody is going to tell me otherwise, the same perceptions around that word don’t exist. I can also say oriental and nobody will find it offensive. (By the way for the record, it isn’t offensive here).

I’m living in a bubble, cut off from the West. Now imagine Trump’s bubble? He's 70 years old, set in his ways and he’s going to say stupid shit. My grandma said racist words that was part of our everyday language to describe and reference people. It was just a word to describe, not to insult. Was she a racist, by today's standards yes I guess so. The media also weren’t present in front of my grandma by the way taking her out of context either.

Not all Trump Supporters were White

When it comes to racism, the media stoked those flames and took him out of context on a number of occasions especially the 'Mexicans aren’t sending their best'. The media twisted it to make it sound like he disliked all latinos. Follow Red Pill Philosophy on Youtube, he’s a Latino and I’ve been watching him praise Trump throughout the campaign. He’s antagonising, but he’s mostly correct about the things he speaks.

We've seen the muslim woman who voted for Trump as well. Dig deeper you'll find more people of colour who voted for Trump.

But here is the thing, how many of us truly listened to those who opposed our own views and didn’t block them on social media platforms. I’m guilty of this, I block those I didn’t like.

People think I’m Pro-Trump and I know I’ve been blocked, they might have wanted a definitive answer instead of wanting to inquire, misunderstood my tweets because I’m saying we should give Trump a chance. I’m taking Trump seriously as so many people voted for him. Along the way I think we’ve gained an ability to take everybody at face value or suppose rather than ask ‘why?’. As usual we attack first, ask questions later to quote Ron Johnson.

Got to Follow the Law, Let Him Do His Thing or Go Full Godwin's Law

Let the guy take office (that means stop protesting). He’s already on the record for saying that we can throw at him later. Aside from calling Trump supporters racist I’ve seen tweets where we are cherry picking the worst parts of Hitler so they could be applied to Trump. 

People are screaming Hitler and nobody cares! Yet the holocaust is still in living memory! Crazy right? Hitler hasn’t happened yet and when it does I can get involved, but to brandish the incoming government with these traits now is far to early. Save it, otherwise it has no venom for later. Remember, Hitler killed people to get into government. Hillary killed people while IN government. Trump hasn't killed anybody, yet (and I'm talking with the socially acceptable sense like Barack Obama has).

We so desperately want Trump to fit into an established evil man narrative, we don’t want him to be a complex individual, we want him to be a complete Hitler or Emperor Palpatine figure we can dehumanise, or like before he was elected, a complete joke*. Again if we lash out all the time and he has total power in government is he going to act in your favour? Yes ridicule him some more in the hope he changes his ways. That has always worked.

From what I’ve understood, Trump doesn’t want WW3 with Russia and he doesn’t want America to continually police the world and have all its fingers in all the pies. This says a lot about my interests, I care about global issues rather than domestic. I want to see how he plays out on the world stage for everybody's benefit. Aside from WW3 I’m concerned about global warming, let’s see what happens there, especially when China of all nations have called on Trump to get America to do its part.

Second, I’d be more concerned about the people he’s surrounding himself with, all these fucking Republican dicks who were around in the 80’s. Fuck me haven’t they died of old age yet?

Trump is a man with no government experience so he’s going to look towards Newt Gringrich? Fuck me. These are establishment figures. It’s going to be the same old Republican party by the looks of it. Then there is this.

These are the things to get upset about. The best part if there is a positive takeaway, these are issues that both those who voted for and against Trump can take issue with.

Got to let go of what the media and Facebook are doing.

Last but not least (I want to be short on these points), we’ve got to get out of our collective bubbles. This goes back to the first point. Listen to the people we don’t like, ask ourselves why, and also realise we are being manipulated by algorithms (please FB question your influence) on top of news agendas at every turn now. We had the media spin us lies for the past two years on this presidential race, never mind all the other news stories ‘that bleed’.

Look at this piece from The Guardian newspaper.

The issue here isn’t that Trump inherits them, its that ANY incoming President gets their hands on these tools and sets a precedent and example for other countries to do the same. The USA has created the template.

The article focuses solely up Trump inheriting these tools while Obama failed to shut the programs down, would this article have existed under Hillary? I wish I had some sort of device that would let me play out different real life scenarios. Why didn’t people scream absolute bloody murder at Barack Obama for continuing to use them? Those screaming ‘racist’ and ‘Hitler’ at Trump on Twitter didn’t focus on Obama’s administration to the same fervour in my opinion. 

To be fair to the Guardian and the New York Times they have both published 100 articles (can’t go past ten search pages) and 1,573 articles respectively on the topic of drone strikes.

We should have shouter louder at Obama. 

Can we take a minute and remember I think we forgot he was the President when he’s part of pop culture and all those funny meme’s, mic drops and late night chat shows. We humanised him above and beyond Bush and we fucking loved him. But guess who else is part of pop culture with his own fanbase? Some of us saw it coming all along.

Personally I’m exhausted, but it goes on. Just a few tips to leave you with. 

  1. Get off Facebook and the social media sites. Don’t take them seriously, don’t rely on them as a replacement for real discussion, at least you know who you’re responding to and the engagement is true. Also oh my quad!, if you disagree with someone it isn’t the end of the world, that’s life.**

  2. It might help if you also unblock 1 person you disagreed with. Throw them back out there, give them a second chance.

  3. The media haven’t learnt anything, but we can. We have to raise that curtain together. Look at the news the day after when the media had a collective moment to wonder what happened before they went back to business. Did they decide to shine light on the real issue and report the Dakota pipeline protests so we can question government policy? No, they covered the anti-Trump protests so we can mock them.*** Again setting us up against one another, being divisive as usual. They aren’t changing. You change.**** 

  4. The media made some of the biggest fuck ups and nobody has been fired. Think about that.

  5. Stop pointing at the people and expecting them to change, change comes from the top. It’s cliched, but change comes from becoming intolerant of what we are told by the media and government. Hold them to account, not ‘Joe Blow’ as Michael Moore describes.

*Do you remember all the navel gazing we did when it comes to Game of Thrones characters? None of them are really purely evil, and none of them or really purely good. The characters set up in those books are deliberately complex and flawed so we sit and think about what it is to be human. All that flies out of the window when looking at real complex people. I'm interested in why, my current theory is we're prepared to explore the fantasy of others for an hour because we're detached personally from those people and its entertainment. Real life analysis of people isn't as mediative it seems.

**This is the reason why I don’t take Facebook seriously and neither should you. It’s been proven we all get different feeds that provide immediate value for us and sets up echo chambers.

***The media would rather cover the protests than a pipeline because of money and identity politics. They still want people to be divided, keep the heat turned up, the media are still after Trump because Trump isn’t invested in the media, he doesn’t even want a press core to follow him.

**** Give a follow to these guys on Twitter: 

JordanChariton, Mehdirhasan@IndepStream@medialens@FAIRmediawatch@AlterNet

Podcasts to note on this topic.

Podcast Grow Big Always - How culture controls our decisions

Tangentially Speaking - 210 (Primal Parenting)

Dan Carlin’s - Common Sense episode 311 - Trumped

Ghosts Haunt Us All on the Periscope App by John J K Morris

What is Ghosting?

Everyday, viewers of the popular live-streaming app 'Periscope' make reference to something called ‘ghosting’.

What this means is, the viewer can make a comment and the broadcaster won’t see the comment on their screen. In many cases the viewer has to tap out another comment again to be seen.

This has been happening on the Periscope platform for an unusually long time now. Many broadcasters with large followings including myself are left wondering why doesn’t Periscope fix this key aspect in their social network as they continually update the app with new features. Many broadcasters have even raised the issue with Periscope who flat out deny they've ever been contacted about this issue and it's the first they've heard about it. Conspiracy theorists start your engines!

Broken comments don’t seem to be an important issue while at the same time live streaming is seen as the new frontier for social media when ‘engaging’ with large audiences. Periscope almost seems contradictory for its purpose.

Live-streaming is a brand new form of media, users say its more open, honest and being present live is what makes it all that much more tantalising, probably because you can influence the camera operator as well. But it appears Periscope is kneecapping itself with a frustrating experience for those who simply want to chat to their favourite broadcasters.

Here’s some reasons as to what I think is going on. Without Periscope to comment all I can do is guess. Let’s start with the biggest and probably the most egregious reasons.

Chat Flow Moderation

Many people on Periscope don’t understand that it's very likely that comments are ‘ghosting’ by design. Tyler Hansen a Periscope developer (search for @tyhan1 on Periscope) has actually explained an algorithm Periscope have been employing since before July of 2016 (July 2016 was when Tyler made his broadcast). You can still watch the original video in Tyler’s recent broadcast list titled "Periscope Designer. I want to talk about “broadcast too full”. If he deletes it after my mentions I have a copy of the video saved.

Tyler cites various reasons for employing such an algorithm towards the betterment of busy broadcasts on the network. If there are too many comments at any given time, the ‘chat flow’ is managed and various comments disappear from the broadcaster’s view. That means they don’t see the comment, but the other viewers actually do.

Periscope through Tyler make the point that these comments that disappear are probably useless to the broadcaster anyway.

So the argument goes, the chat is far to busy for a broadcaster to reply to everyone, and the algorithm is making decisions for the broadcaster as to what they should be able to respond to. I hope many of you see some of the problems stemming from this already. As an aside, how does this even scale? I don’t have actual written proof, but Tyler had stated that only 1 comment in 30, in busy scopes are managed. Does this scale? If not, why bother? If it does scale, to what extent?

I wouldn’t call it censorship per say, but can you imagine the uproar if Twitter decided not to deliver all the tweets on their network or iMessage and Snapchat decided to actively choose what they thought was best for you?

Another part of the argument for the system to be in place is to manage foreign language comments. I agree there is no value when somebody is typing in Russian to an English speaker or vice a versa (I still get those guys though in my broadcasts). I don’t know how Periscope determines the language preferences of the broadcaster, but I would make a guess at the keyboard and language preferences on the device are being looked at

My issue with this at the moment is Periscope doesn’t know which languages I speak if I don’t set up my preferences  on the device accordingly.

My simple layman’s solution would be instead to deliver a pop-over message in the chat to a viewer that the language of the broadcaster is different to their own and any messages sent might not be understood. To me it’s more honest as the viewer understands whats happening much more clearly instead of just having their comments disappear. The experience is explained properly and they already have such a pop over when somebody types naughty words.

Removing comments doesn’t enhance the experience, it places blame on the broadcaster for being unresponsive.

There is a theory this chat management flow algorithm would benefit celebrities and gives viewers the illusion they can now communicate to their idols without hinderance. Maybe this is true, but it’s Periscope that is then actively ruining the experience for their platform. 

We are such petty creatures and it does the Periscope platform no favours if people do not have an enjoyable experience when they don’t understand why their comments are being ignored. Frustrated viewers are going to tap ‘x’.

I preferred back in the day for the chatroom to have the ‘broadcast too full’ sign, that way I knew I could relax and just watch. I don’t need to always chat, somebody would probably chat for me. As Tyler explains, Periscope have felt the pressure from many people emailing them expressing their desire to chat in ANY given broadcast. Did Periscope understand scale from the very beginning?

Periscope themselves still haven’t communicated this very important change to their platform even though their main periscope account has at the time of writing 9.2 million follows. Tyler with his 17,000 followers has been the only person on record from Periscope to discuss this. Why?

Its actually been up to Periscope broadcasters to continually inform others of these changes through their own broadcasts everyday whenever there is an issue arising in the chat when the broadcaster doesn’t see them. This is ironic given the nature of Periscope, you would think disseminating this important information in an official manner would be easy peasy.

Periscope have a history of being poor communicators, the big issue last year was not explaining the distribution of hearts to broadcasters. Broadcasters who had found out, did the work of explaining the changes to their followers. This situation didn’t concern me much, but changes to the way the chat operates is a major aspect of the apps operation. It shouldn't just be tinkered with, with hardly a mention.

This needs to be discussed to the whole community without it turning kafkaesque. 


Before we demand Periscope spill the beans on its inner workings. People need to remember all the little bugs inside Periscope. How large a part do they play? Periscope is probably more likely to have various bugs because it is so cutting edge in its application. We as viewers have to accept the app is buggier than we think. We just do okay? People complaining about frozen screens, missing audio and scopes suddenly quitting have to realise they are at the forefront of technology.

I bet many people haven't given a thought as to what is happening in the broadcast, the video stream for example operates independently of the chat stream and hearts. This is why in some cases the video and hearts continue to work even though comments don’t load or have you seen that burst of chat activity once a video connection is applied again? Something has probably caused packet loss and the app is trying to re-sync everything.  This can explain why if you save videos to your camera roll, hearts and comments aren't saved also. It's a difficult technology to sync up.

Tyler in his broadcast has assured his viewers that mutual follows are unaffected by the chat moderation. Mutual followers are never moderated/filtered for their comments.

I doubted this at first, but then even in my own private scopes with less than 20 people watching, people would disappear and report 'ghosting' when messaging me afterwards. In some cases, all the comments and hearts stopped coming on my screen. Viewers are literally typing comments to me and I can't see them. My private broadcasts can’t be moderated during these broadcasts, these are bugs pure and simple, but I had to go through a long process to believe this wasn’t part of the designed ghosting experience that Tyler discussed.

My takeaway though is the user-end experience of such bugs in conjunction with the chat management features has us confused.

Periscope should be much more open to what they are doing on the platform. Audiences are reacting in real time now, we keep being told live-streaming is new media, but does Periscope truly understand how fast we can communicate now with this new media? Hear say becomes facts so quickly now.

Now, of course no company raises the issue of software bugs unless they are truly catastrophic, no software company will publicly address all the bugs and all the time. So things are better left unsaid unless its crippling the application in a very public fashion. For example, Periscope recently updated the app and DJI drones wouldn’t work through Periscope, somehow that bug slipped by and they had to reference it in the next update because it is a tentpole feature for broadcasters.

So why wouldn’t Periscope address the ghosting issue, it IS a larger issue for the platform beyond a few drones not being able to get on the network. Here are a few ideas

  1. It’s going to remain buggy.
  2. Periscope don’t care enough to fix it as they have other priorities. 
  3. The management of comments is exactly what they want.
  4. The chat flow management isn’t actually a big issue, as it’s being applied to only busy broadcasts with an undetermined number of viewers inside, the ghosting we typically see are actually just the bugs. 
  5. We as broadcasters are encountering something called the ‘Invisible Gorilla’ affect.

The lack of a true discussion of the chat management algorithm, the various bugs on the platform and the invisible gorilla create an even larger problem for Periscope. One where we conflate these issues into one against Periscope as wholly a conspiracy that they are manipulating the chat in every single scope. 

The Invisible Gorilla

This is now possibly too famous for people not to know, but if you don’t, watch this video here.

In this video we are asked to count how many times is a ball passed between players wearing the same colour shirt. While this is happening, a gorilla comes onscreen. Many people don’t see the gorilla until it’s pointed out after what they missed.

In a second study for people who think if they concentrate hard enough they will catch all the weirdness of the first video a similar test is applied. I’m not going to spoil it so watch it here.

The second video proves that even if people concentrate, it makes things even worse. How do you feel? Knowing you are going to miss comments regardless? We collectively don’t want to feel like we don’t have control over the situation do we?

I would say a similar outcome is playing out before our eyes while broadcasting. There is no escaping the fact we are going to miss comments no matter what and then later attribute this to Periscope ‘ghosting’ the comments. Of course with this Gorilla theory put forward, we have to doubt ourselves and give Periscope some slack.

Try this mental_floss exercise, watch your own eyes actively work against you as you try to see all the dots at any given time. Ain’t happening yo. Please remember, in the last video and the mental_floss article, you're aware to this trickery now. Imagine what it was like before.

It isn’t Periscope’s job to educate us to this path of disappointment for live streaming. It isn’t normally something we should have to deal with either. We are hitting the limits of human concentration. Just like the software bugs, we are possibly placing too much on Periscope's shoulders when determining how negligent they are being towards the community. 


I don’t believe in complaining about something unless I’m providing a solution or solutions. This is what I think Periscope can do and should do. 

  1. Let broadcasters have control over the scroll speed in their own scopes, or at least slow it down in a way that’s managing the speed of the comments in real time rather than look at what comments should be there how or not.
  2. Turn off flow moderation, we can’t see all the comments even with 'help' from Periscope.
  3. Redesign the chat so the broadcaster can scroll through the comments, you don’t even need to change the visual aspects of the UI. Allow broadcasters with a swipe to go back and forth through the comments like they do on Facebook. Periscope is treating the comments as a people problem when it is actually a technical problem. This is the most baffling aspect as Facebook are using what I think is the answer even though Facebook operates at a much larger scale. What is the excuse here Periscope?
  4. Speak to the community properly and explain changes to the network otherwise hearsay runs rampant. Periscope have something that only Youtube has (From Periscope’s perspective Youtube would be a great case study in how not to piss off your community). Both social networks have love from communities in abundance, these apps should be a pleasure to use as a viewer and work like a charm for creators. Don’t make the community use your app only because there isn’t anything better out there.

These solutions should benefit everyone, if you disagree I'm listening. I didn't write this article out of dislike for anyone in particular at Periscope so please don't take this personal, especially Tyler, he's just the only one putting himself in the positions I find him in because HE also cares about the platform, we just need to understand each other better, hence my desire for Periscope to be more communicative. It can only bring benefits, again using YouTube as the case study, YouTube aren't open nearly enough towards their community and money IS involved between network providers and its creators. How annoyed are we going to be when the platform is monetized?

Periscope, you need to do what Apple does and control the message. It's one reason why I do my satirical fake features on Periscope, because I can get away with it, people believe any old shit and the rumours stick around for months on end. Some of you at PeriscopeHQ have noticed me by now, there is a serious point being served by my joke scopes.

I hope Periscope change their attitude as a whole before serious monetising of the platform occurs. If nothing else, explain comment flow moderation on your main channel and stop leaving your users in the dark. 


Airbnbers Don't Know How Good They've Got It. by John J K Morris

DISCLAIMER - I write this not as a slight against the service which at the moment seems very fashionable.

I also write this having already given up on the frustrating experience I encountered while on It didn't matter how many I hosted, my profile never seemed good enough to just be able to find myself a host for myself when I needed the service.

The system after all was based on goodwill, I thought I had plenty of it in the bank.

The odd thing is, because rejection is so high, travellers would send multiple emails to would be hosts to maximise their chances of being accepted. On the flip-side, hosts would get upset on one level or another at not enjoying a personalised handcrafted digital mail. Hosts would deliberately leave breadcrumbs in their profiles to make sure travellers read their profiles and if you made a single mistake you can be rejected again.

I know, I also did this, people just do not read profiles, and they head for the most obvious button to click that grants them access to your house with minimum of pain.

I grew sick of the rejections from hosts when I wanted to travel and ran out of patience with the constant ignorant requests from travellers. I quit this year after being on the site since 2007. By the way, I can't 'delete' my account, I can only 'deactivate' it.

Along comes Airbnb and I thought, 'Ah, money is involved, things will be different". I signed up in July 2016, I'm quitting the service as a host in August 1016.

After the third request from Airbnbers to provide a discount I thought, 'fuck this'.

Things on were certainly different compared to

I just don't understand where Airbnbers come from because: 

  • Hotels are always more expensive, so you're saving money compared to using them, even though the quality of service is so much more (article regarding Airbnb in HK - Hong Kong hoteliers may become vocal opponents of Airbnb).
  • There are smaller (safer and with established services) hotels that are equal to some random Airbnb host.
  • There are also other Airbnbs that are cheaper than mine, but aren't private (in many cases).
  • I offered a discount at the weekly (10%) and monthly (15%) levels (this was after the first request for a discount) thinking I had done something wrong and now I entered this game/lie of raising the price in order to provide a discount therefore a perception that people were getting a good deal now if they booked with me).

These things apparently aren't enough, the price needed to be even lower and whatever attributes that attracted people to my apartment were, aren't really a selling point, it's actually a starting point to enquire and claim a discount for it. Cheapskates will be cheapskates.

The thing is, I didn't do Airbnb for a profit, I did it to make the rent and because I'm open minded, I am not one of the professional renters in Hong Kong that are creating a business on top of the Airbnb platform. I was just someone open minded enough to share my modest and well located apartment in order for people to help me make rent.

I'm British, I don't haggle, it's not in my DNA, I just move on and find something else if all I'm going to do is work on price.

In Hong Kong, you build up a relationship with those you perform transactions with before even considering the discount, this notion will not work on Airbnb. It's also alien to me to ask if nothing has been established, you know something like trust, or a long term relationship.

Just asking for a discount upfront means nothing. Whats the point of setting a price in the first place only for it to be ignored? The worst part would be then allowing the cheapskates into my house that they don't value for whatever their stay would be. 

I remember, my dad dealing with suppliers to his hotel, his hotel always paid cash on the day, with that itself there's nothing special, but compared to other hotels in the same town who would pay with credit or at the end of the month. Since they paid on delivery, they gave his hotel a discount. I could understand giving a discount for repeat travellers, but the chances of that are slim, especially when everybody is operating on price alone.

So for me, instead of the overhead of dealing with multiple requests and discussing prices while travellers were completely ignoring the prices I had already set, I've decided on getting a stable long term room mate again for simplicities sake. Forgive for taking all this personally, but I thought that was part of the appeal. Forget being a host on Airbnb, it literally isn't worth it.


June Updates by John J K Morris

Two blog posts in as many days, I know, such a treat.

Let's get into it, what did I do. Aside from the podcasts, which have been held back by scheduling arrangements, I did pump out a few down below for both podcasts.

Second, I've started doing little things on my YouTube channel (link in the top corner). I'm trying to make shorter videos for a secondary audience. Shorter means edited of course and I hope it pans out. It does slow my periscoping down somewhat because of the need to record almost all the scopes I make.

JPG Podcast (Subscribe here).

These are all Game of Throne related I'm afraid. There are three episodes, 49-51.

Hello From Hong Kong (Subscribe here).

The two highlighted here were made back at the end of April, episode #8 is with Nate Wong, a local jazz artist living and working in Hong Kong, the podcast features live music as well. The video of the same podcast episode is here and as a bonus, a video of the private scope chat is here.

#9 of HFHK is part of a larger project looking at the homeless situation in Hong Kong. I chat with Jodie in what was a private scope and then made into this podcast episode. The video of this interview is here.

YouTube Videos

From a bunch of videos I've made an ever expanding set of playlists for easy grouping.

A collection of interviews from this year alone on Periscope. This includes Sam's Tailors, Jeremy Monteiro and with Eugene Po and also Mikee discussing Transgenderism.

Tours of Hong Kong. There is only one, but soon an expanded list of edited Periscopes that streamline what was a live video.

A new fun playlist 'Trolls & Roasts' where I hit back at the trolls who live under our scopes ready to pounce, This playlist works in conjunction with 'Periscope Highlights' where I edited only the funniest and incidental of events from my live streaming. I can't expect you all to watch ALL my scopes from end to end now can I?

Going back further in Time to May, did you forget John Ho and myself went to Taiwan 2016? There is a whole album of videos that not only discuss the planning of this trip, but also all the great scopes from my half of the trip.

Finally we end with a reminder of what I've done to bring awareness to the Homeless in Hong Kong. More coming soon on this topic!

Questioning the Live Streaming by John J K Morris

Another kind of break from blogging, sorry, I assure you though I love my website, in many ways it's very satisfying to write, edit, delete and write and hopefully construct something that is half intelligent. I'm comparing my blogging to live-streaming on Periscope and Facebook of course. My fingers have been getting itchy and it's just welcoming to type something out. 

Recently the viewing numbers on Periscope are getting lower and lower, either through a combination of people's apathy or boredom,  muting their phone due for reasons x, y and z*, and because Periscope can't promote good scopes, and creating some sort of useful categorisation feature to allow it's users to see the best stuff. Best is subjective I know, but YouTube doesn't have this problem and are great at recommending more content for me to watch. After a year of the app existing we still only have two generalised (and passive) ways of finding scopes. I find the editor picks are too American focused or concentrate on the same familiar scopers. 

Word of mouth is still king in my opinion, also if you haven't done so, follow stream curators like @geoffgolberg who make an effort to be a third option to finding something interesting to watch. 

I also don't necessarily believe notifications now are the best method to deliver multiple streams of video, and for iOS users especially, there needs to be a way to create rules for receiving different types of notifications. Can you imagine a notification for every tweet from those you follow, sometimes the demand for attention can feel like that.

As scopers, we had it good last year, everybody's attention was up for grabs and we milked it for what it's worth, now not so, and what I think is happening is people are muting their phones faster than new people signing up. Numbers are down, live and on replay as well as exponentially there are more scopers to watch (again not necessarily quality scopes). 

I aware 'brand influencers' and 'Apostles' have a negative impact on Periscope as people chase the money, luckily I don't watch or focus on them personally and can't comment that much on them, I do know they upset some scopers and seem to have worked beautifully to somehow stay or repeat their presence on the main feature list therefore distorting Periscope's value. That's the shop window for example; there should be a better selection on offer for users. 

Interesting to note on a personal level, even though I have 12,000 subscribers, the live views and replay views are getting so low I might as well private scope (all together I might get 250-350 views once I delete the scope, that's around 2.5% of my overall audience), that way I can stay on point without being trolled and my patreons are better serviced. When questioning the value of audiences, it's the number of random (and the chance of being featured) vs a dedicated audience who are literally investing money in watching streamed content. Oddly, my patreon sign ups are increasing as live viewers are going down. It's worth thinking about as the medium evolves and streaming isn't necessarily valuable either live (though that's the main draw people say) or people realise it's quicker and better to just read a blog post about information that's represented in a stream. 


Live Streaming Workflows by John J K Morris

I wasn't surprised when I saw that the newly released top end 9.7" iPad Pro is the same price as the top end iPhone 6s+. I'm just noodling here as I put more into live-streaming and create a device workflow around live-streaming to mitigate connectivity or image quality issues I might have. By considering either one of these screens as a secondary iOS device I want to:

  • shoot 4K footage and take decent pictures (alongside the live-streaming)
  • replace my home WiFi (old Chinese apartments are limited to 2mbps)
  • have a back up Internet device (a mobile hotspot device)

As mobile devices (can someone come up with a better name yet*) technology advances, my retro digital camera is proving itself to be a bit of a stuck in the mud. (Of course it is, it's retro!) Any new purchase would also need to replace my digital camera. 

The general utility of an iOS device isn't interested in being anchored down by cables and with work flows crossing over to a desktop computer before final upload. I'm adapting my work flow to not concern itself over Raw handling and image quality. I think the tradeoffs are there where I can say it's good enough now on a mobile device. 

Just for the record, the price of a replacement camera for my Fuji x100s is also roughly the same price as either of the two iOS devices. Amazing hey? Now which iOS device to buy?

The basic internal specs of both devices are the same with a few features leapfrogging the iPhone for the moment. A data plan is basically the same with both devices so we can ignore that. So it comes down to these basic things:

  • Battery life 
  • Portability 
  • Screen size (workflow dependent)

Battery Life

Hands down, the iPad wins and as a base station outside the house it's much better than the puny battery in the iPhone 6s+ to provide internet connectivity to say a laptop. I still hope Apple bring out a battery pack for this larger model. Periscoping hammers the battery and I've never benefitted from going from an iPhone5 to the iPhone6s+ when it comes to battery life. WINNER - iPad. 


Both devices are already super thin and this is truly a first world problem for the minimalist such as myself. But still, which one? I can easily hold two iPhones together, one streaming, one shooting 4K (some velcro will solve that). I wouldn't be drawing attention to myself too much with that set up. Now live stream with an iPad and iPhone combo, it's a bit more awkward. WINNER - iPhone. 

Screen Size

Do I want to edit my work on a 9" screen or a 5" screen? Do I want to multitask with the iPad or solo task on the iPhone? Don't forget this is a secondary device, so each device can operate independently of each other. But what is the benefit of the larger screen? WINNER - Unknown

But the iPhone 7 (Conclusion)

This basically means can I and should I wait with what I have already? What will the next generation phone bring, especially when it comes to image quality? The potential downside to waiting for an iPhone7 means I'm only six months away from another, better iPad! This throws up the issue of whether to buy now or buy for tomorrow. I would like to buy for tomorrow (with portability in mind), while the iPad does have the better battery, I do have power packs at my disposal, ready to fast charge both iPhones if I opt for that and in all honesty am I going to use both devices constantly? The screen size doesn't need to be an issue if I can multitask on two phones and of course, two iPhones are smaller than an iPad!   

* I like the German name for a mobile phone, 'handy', which they most certainly are.

UPDATE: I forgot Apple released this as well. It basically means I can plug in a USB microphone and charge both the iOS device and said microphone, not an issue for a fully charged iPad, but the iPhone itself has become a lot more flexible because of a $300HKD add-on for either my periscopes or podcasts.

UPDATE 2: No optical stabiliser on the iPad, you'd think with that bump that justified the newest protrusion to the iOS family, alas no. It's more likely I'll purchase a second iPhone.

FAQ: About Donating to my Periscope Channel @JonathanJK. by John J K Morris

There has been some criticism towards on desire to ask people to donate to my channel in order toe receive private scopes and be allowed access in Limited Broadcast scopes. I present here an FAQ on the topic so this doesn't become something I have to repeat over and over again. It also sheds light on what I want to do. If you don't want to read, you can also watch a video version here.

If you do want to donate you can donate via Patreon (I work with PayPal btw).

Questions from other members of the Periscope community are included for reference.

How much do I need to pay to get access to private scopes or limited chat broadcasts?

I have now introduced tiers, currently they are at $2 and $5, both offering different things. Newer tiers will be introduced at a later time. I tend to grandfather people in as well so the earlier someone contributes the more value they get for donating.

Since this is about me, what do I get?

Those who contribute at the $6 tier get:

  1. Private Coffee Time (private scopes generally [mostly coffee time scopes] are not saved or put on Youtube, I will say otherwise at the beginning of a private scope)
  2. A Troll/Heckler free zone.
  3. A less busier scope (which is a good thing if you want to engage with others).
  4. Access to chat in limited broadcast scopes, typically #scopechat scopes.
  5. A chance to chat with other big name Periscopers from around the world who decide to frequent the scope.
  6. I'll probably end up watching your scopes if I have the time.
  7. Early access to new guests where you can chat directly via Periscope (Public access requires submitting questions via Twitter).
  8. Heads up on any special scopes I have lined up. You can also contribute to the discussion.
  9. You're party to various other topics I don't share publically.
  10. I sketch in private scopes.

A $2 donation is different, check the Patreon page please.

Err, Jonathan, what about the 100 person chat limit for those paying?

Yes, that is interesting and is another issue. These donations I receive (with the ability to get access to the extras I just mentioned) will be limited. First come first served I guess.

Are these limited chats just for interview scopes? @technicolordreams

Currently this is just for my interview/#scopechat scopes. Interview scopes are usually only twice a month.

Will you lose viewers if you limit the chat? @SummerNorthbay

I probably will, but the quality comments from paid viewers will go up. If people are upset over this, they are basically saying their ability to comment is more important than anything I'm trying to do.

Don't you have a sense of humour?

You wouldn't ask that question if you knew me.

I disagree about limiting chats, you will lose. @SummerNorthbay

You are allowed to disagree. Time will tell. So far so good.

Your interview scopes will be dead. @jtchang

Your opinion versus my statistics tell a different story. Either way I have created a pristine piece of video (that will go on Youtube) and that is more important to my reputation in the long term.

Don't you think it is horrible? (referring to not being able to comment) @jtchang

Not as horrible if there are disgusting/stupid or pointless comments made in my scopes. Scopes which are supposed to represent my abilities to new people. Which is more important, your ability to comment or my ability to bring new people to my channel?

Delete the trolls and the sex bots then?@Classicallymish

Deleting trolls takes time. Deleting sex bots is something Periscope can do to save me time. This is about further managing my time and my Periscope channel looking professional to bring new people to the channel. Do I want to block people for the rest of my life while using Periscope? No.

This sounds like censorship. @hanseoulo

This is not censorship, do not conflate what is happening here with true censorship. If people want to comment they can use the share function inside the periscope app. Comments are not being removed they are being moved for those who do not want to contribute. 

I am your fan but why do I feel like I am being punished? @bayshore1whe

I am sorry you feel you are being punished. I can tell you I am not punishing you deliberately, but here we are talking about how you feel and how and you have reacted to my policy to make sure I can make more professional scopes. If people want to comment they can use the share function inside the Periscope app. Comments from people who do not want to pay are not being removed they are being moved for those who do not want to contribute. Contributing is an option.

They should have Auto-block for certain words. @beckseria

They could, but then that is censorship. 

Trolls can sometimes break your concentration while you are scoping. @boston_camera

Yes trolls do break our concentration which is what I do not want to have done to me any longer. Do I want my concentration broken every day for the rest of my Periscope life?

Do we have to pay you to chat in limited chat scopes? @jtchang

If people want to comment they can use the share function inside the Periscope app. Comments are not being removed they are being moved for those who do not want to contribute. YOU DO NOT NEED TO PAY.

But don't follow me back? @Classicallymish


But Jonathan you don't follow anyone so I have to pay you now? @Jdavidmcconnell

If people want to comment they can use the share function inside the periscope app. Comments are not being removed they are being moved for those who do not want to contribute. YOU DO NOT HAVE TO PAY.

Just ignore the trolls and block them. @boston_camera

I do not want to block people every day inside every periscope for the rest of my periscope career. Their comments are also publicly facing and represent my ability to control my social media environment.  

I don't believe in charging money for people to follow me. @boston_camera

Okay. But that is not what is happening here. I don’t charge for follows, I am asking for DONATIONS from people who want access to private scopes and the ability to chat in limited chat scopes. For me to offer extras, perks or incentives, yes I do need to follow them. It doesn’t mean I am charging for follows.

I will miss your interview/#scopechat scopes because you don't follow me. @Classicallymish

You will not miss any scopes if you are subscribed to my channel. Notifications are still working even for limited broadcast scopes. 

If the goal of your scope is to foster discussion you just have to be vigilant about blocking trolls @camelcameras

I do not want to block people every day inside every periscope for the rest of my periscope career. Their comments are also publicly facing and represent my ability to control my social media environment  

What if the trolls pay money @Jdavidmcconnell

Then that is a stupid idea. I have them blocked and I have their money. 

Just block the trolls @simontuitea

I do not want to block people every day inside every periscope for the rest of my periscope Korea. Their comments are also publicly facing and represent my ability to control his social media environment  

People need to have the thicker skin when it comes to trolls @boston_camera

This is not about needing thicker skin. I do not want to go through the motions of blocking people every day, inside every periscope for the rest of my periscope career.

Let me get this straight, you want a troll free internet experience? @hanseoulo

Let me tell you straight. I cannot have a troll free internet experience. This is not possible (it is if I limited ALL my scopes, but I am not doing that). You are being obtuse if you think otherwise.

It's a part of life. You can't you can't live in a bubble @boston_camera

I am not trying to live in a bubble, you can troll me via Twitter if you want from the share sheet in Periscope.

We can still watch the interviews, just not comment right? Kchoi

At the moment just the interview scopes. Only those who have contributed to the channel can comment during an interview/#scopechat, anybody else needs to send the comments to Twitter. I do read my Twitter while periscoping live. You can also comment on the video on Youtube.

Follow me so I can comment. 

No. Asking for a follow is just rude on various levels.

There was no one watching your restricted #scopechat. @jtchang1201

This is your opinion versus my statistics. You’re also thinking of the now, I’m thinking of the replay viewers who can’t comment anyway (they don’t complain) and the Youtube views.

I don't want to pay to see anyone on a free app. @boston_camera

You do not need to pay to comment. If people want to comment they can use the share function inside the Periscope app. Comments are not being removed they are being moved for those who do not want to contribute. YOU DO NOT HAVE TO PAY.

Let’s change what you said slightly and see if it makes sense - 

I also do not want to pay for photography that I see on a free app like Instagram.

I also do not want to buy services from Amazon that I see from a free web browser.

I do not want to buy music I hear on a free radio service.

Some trolls will pay to troll. @hanseoulo

Then that is a stupid idea. I have them blocked and I have their money. 

Periscope is about interaction. If you charge for interaction, it misses the point in my opinion. @Jdavidmcconnell

It's actually serves the point. The level and quality of the interaction will go up. People can also follow a chat history that isn't as busy, I would argue it's a better experience.

I wish Periscope can give a broadcaster a way to turn on and off the limited chat during a broadcast. @akidesir

This technology would be very helpful. This technology would also upset other people. This technology still only works after an irresponsible comment has been made by the way. It doesn’t solve my problem of ‘scrubbing’ comments off a piece of work (digital video).

Why are you taking responsibility for someone else's actions. @ladderman421

It is my channel and it represents me and my ambitions. Imagine I run a car dealership and anonymous people passing by threw eggs on the cars I'm trying to sell. Do I take responsibity for cleaning those cars if I want to sell them?

It's probably good to give your guests a heads up about the comments. @ames_do

I shouldn’t want to be in a position where I invite people to Periscope and then give them a warning beforehand for the kinds of cruel comments they might encounter.

I would say those who want to make money on Periscope should get a job @boston_camera

These two things are not mutually exclusive I have a job a full-time job and I Periscope. Why am I not allowed to make money on Periscope or any other social media? I'd go further and also ask why can't Periscope be a full time job?

I scope and work full-time @boston_camera

Hello so do I. What is your point?

I do understand the problem I think you could do it for interview scopes, but leave the other scopes open. @jdavidmcconnell

At the moment only the interview scopes will be limited chat.

On limited scopes people can tweet questions so not a total block for people @judithkenosha

Yes in limited scopes people can still tweet questions inside the Periscope app.

This is just for JonathanJK to make a few bucks @jtchang1201

This is what is happening, but this originally wasn’t the purpose. It is about creating value (for you and for me) and removing people who do not recognise value and want to deface a piece of work or upset people live. 

Can somebody scope without comments @djwhite

Yes somebody can scope without comments, but then that is like TV. I acknowledge Periscope is not TV. People however need to acknowledge that they don't always need to comment. If people want to comment they can use the share function inside the Periscope app. 

It sounds like you're saying you just want to be considerate and hospital to your interview guests. @blockofwood


I don't really watch interviews anyway so whatever @jtchang1201

So this will not affect you. 

I follow all of you Hong Kong guys I can't pay for all of you. @jdavidmcconnell

If people want to comment they can use the share function inside the Periscope app. Comments are not being removed they are being moved for those who do not want to contribute. YOU DO NOT HAVE TO PAY. Watching is still free to do except for private scopes.

I grew up in an environment where the ball busting is normal @boston_camera

I would like to add ball busting and trolling/heckling are two different things. Don’t try to equate the two together.

Realise that trolls sometimes are bored teenagers and you shouldn't give it so much weight @mtendstotravel

I do realise that trolls are sometimes bored teenagers, but their effects live beyond their presence in the scope.

I know how much you are earning I can see on Patreon. 

Yeah. I am not hiding this information. I wonder why.

Encourage your viewers to block and not wait for you to block. @mtendstotravel

It doesn't matter if other people block a troll or a heckler, I have to block them myself and the comments still show up on replays. 

Can you not report to the Periscope people? @ithinkimsean

So besides blocking people I now have to go and report them? This takes up EVEN more of my time. People who do not broadcast daily do not realise how repetitive these simple actions become.

So are you going to unfollow those who don't pay? @jtchang1201

No I also follow people who I think contribute to Periscope as well. This is my decision, MY subjective decision. The upside to this is some of the more famous Periscopers will frequent my private scopes. There’s value there for you as well since it’s more likely you can engage with them. Anybody I follow who hasn't paid is being followed because I find them entertaining or they have contributed in another way other than with money.

Yes when you open yourself up to the public you have to deal with criticism. @boston_camera

Criticism is valid as long as it is constructive. Trolling isn't. 

If you ignore them then they go away when they don't get any attention. @boston_camera

While I agree in principle, there would still be many comments imprinted on my videos which can mean that they are illustrating my ability to control my social media. 

Periscope is designed to allow comments on the stream, some businesses should use a different medium then. @jdavidmcconnell

The flaw is not the technology, the flaw is with people’s misuse of said technology.

That's a reflection of your customer service strategy. How are you manage your social media. @serenaLyn

Yes it is. It makes for a better periscope channel. 

Live Streaming Street Music Today - Part One by John J K Morris

I'm not an expert on music itself, my engagement with music consists of buying one album from iTunes a year and avoiding everything else I don't have time for. I mostly listen to podcasts; they take up most of my listening hours. In this piece I'm writing about music's relationship with broadcast apps like Periscope and a potential level of success that can be achieved.

On the inverse as a side note, podcasting isn't suited for broadcasting on something like Periscope, the engagement has to be really well controlled to fit into a live recording that translates into an understandable product. 

Musical performances are however, suited really well and should be taken advantage of. Engagement isn't as necessary and the experience isn't as alien because everybody has music on their phone. I've noticed a behavioural trend, (mostly on Periscope, but it shouldn't be an exclusive experience) where streaming apps are connecting musicians to a more diverse and engaging audience.

As I watch many music related streams, I'm taking note of comments in the chat, the reactions and the willingness of individuals to want to give money, to digitally 'tip' musicians for such live performances.

People can tip via web services such as Patreon, GoFundMe or PayPal. Usually a broadcaster is sharing the musicians payment information in order to help and raise awareness of that's person's talent.

There has been many times in a live stream where someone commentating is telling the broadcaster that he/she is obligated to tip. There is sometimes a brief explanation that the broadcaster already has or will and then the chat dies down until someone else arrives late and makes the same request to tip.

The sentiment with tipping is being repeated without conflict in the chat. Oddly one of the few topics on the internet where people agree. It's being recognised that someone watching should. This is a very different attitude in real life, human behaviour is different in person and nobody is pressuring anyone else to throw some coin. 

I regard it as a new phenomenon that should be monetised and looks to be one of the few ways to monetise without any resistance, the positive recognition is there is very little overhead or disadvantages for musicians. on the 25th of February published an article titled '14 Ways Musicians Can Make Money from Live Shows'. Reading the article, you realise that methods 4, 5, 6, 9, 12 and 13, (if the musician is really adept) can be taken accommodated simply with a smart phone and a URL to a payment site. 

Younger street musicians should adapt and engage with potential new audiences in this manner. The context of a live street performance changes with a live stream being included in a performer's arsenal, capturing commuters and couch viewers with minimal extra effort.

In addition, discovery branches out when another broadcaster finds your live stream on their phone and decides to share the stream or when a musician meets another broadcaster in person and is looking to stream quality content of their own for their viewers. Not only is the output staying at the same amount for musicians, but the reach is multiplied to many more viewers with a willingness to tip. If there is another benefit that can be capitalised on, the second broadcaster standing in the street can also host an impromptu interview further changing the dynamics of a performance or take requests for particular songs.

There is no reason to hold back when approaching street music while keeping live streaming in mind. The resistance of people walking past unwilling to tip is countered by a second world wide audience who are viewing comfortably in their homes or on their own commutes somewhere else. Ironically they can be a larger source of income even though they aren't on the street and can't connect with the musician in person. It's more than likely easier and more profitable to fill the mobile space than the physical space as live streaming moves more into the mainstream. 

The Things You Own, End Up 0wning You. by John J K Morris

I'm writing this on my MacBook while waiting for a 30 minute, 4k video to finish processing on my iPhone 6s+. My hope is I don't get a phone call, I also hope my phone's screen doesn't get accidentally powered off as well. The end result of these two things happening would be the same - a cancelled export process with little old me having to start again, or shock, transfer the video over to the Mac so the process won't be disturbed by someone ringing me or it can chug along easily as a background process. This destroys the idea of doing everything on the iPhone.

Let's comment on the smaller issue of the two first: iOS needs to let iMovie run in the background.

My iPhone can't do anything, not even power its screen off for convenience until the task has been completed. Being able to pause itself at the very least would be more pleasant while I commit to something in another app. I learnt the hard way with previously failed projects; once iMovie has committed to exporting a movie, YOU LET IT EXPORT A MOVIE! The iPhone doesn't multitask with iMovie, shame about iPad Pro users then, just sitting there with the same constraints. Hope you already have music playing in the background while you're twiddling your thumbs, luckily the iPhone isn't my only device.

Now I realise all the power of the A9 might not be capable of what I'm asking yet. But there needs to be a middle space in the app  to recognise what I've described is inconvenient and it needs resolving. Maybe a new update to iMovie will fix this?

The larger issue I have with the iPhone is in two pieces. The phone app, first its ability to kill a process running in another app and second, take that work away from you (of course this can depend on the developer). The behaviour of the phone app is anachronistic and ignorant of other (more) important uses of such an iOS device today. An app like Periscope for me takes precedence over everything else and we both demand each other's attention. I don't want that app or any other app to be disturbed. I actually kill phone calls while periscoping.

As per Apple's plan I am doing exactly what their marketing suggests I do; get some massive utility out of their latest and greatest. I am capable of doing more on my iPhone each year. The abilities do come with personal preferences and workflows, mine don't include the phone, so it's jarring when the phone makes itself feel present. I expect newer behaviours to appear on the iPhone to allow me to enjoy what I think is the priority application of the phone.

I know the reason why the iPhone app is allowed to kill any other processes, but I don't care, let the phone app hold up a red badge like every other app that demands my attention. Is it too much to ask for a kill switch? I don't want to use DND (doesn't work as intended) or toggle my wifi and micromanage certain usage scenarios. I just want to get on with MY work over everybody else's or worse still some robodialer.

In German, a 'mobile telephone' translates as being a 'handy', and the iPhone certainly is that, but it would be handier still if it was compliant with what I want from it and not what history is dictating.

Take the 'phone' out of iPhone.