Well, I’ve made my contribution to the Dave Winer retirement fund and now am a fully paid-up Radio user. First time in ages that I’ve not resented paying for software.

This is a test posting — by email!

Found a good source for general information about the Weblogging phenomenon. [More.]

‘The term “Nasdaq”, it seems, has entered the language as a verb. It means to crash, or slump. “His quarterback rating”, The Denver Post wrote of a footballer recently, “has Nasdaqed”‘. From a Financial Times review of John Cassidy’s book about the Internet bubble — Dot Con: the greatest story ever sold .

There’s a new online publication — The Free Software Magazine. Foreword by You Know Who. The mag is earnest and well-intentioned, but not the world’s slickest read. And there’s a whiff of the collective navel-gazing one often sees in embattled or evangelical groups. But then most mags need time to settle down.

Ever wonder why newspaper reviews of new cars are, well, somewhat tame? Hint: it has something to do with the fact that the local dealers tend to be big advertisers. Any journalist who attempts to do really critical pieces about cars will sooner or later find him- or herself in conflict with the men in suits from the advertising department. That’s where the Web comes in — it provides a medium in which people can actually tell one another the truth about products. And they do. This interesting piece by J.D. Lasica in the Online Journalism Review looks at three sites devoted to telling the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth about industrial products and services. It’s a useful reminder of the Cluetrain Manifesto’s credo that “markets are conversations”. The Net is a powerful enabler of those conversations — which of course is why car dealers and manufacturers loathe and fear it.

XEROX Parc researchers have created some interesting software for enabling web-based group work. They call it Sparrow Web for some reason…

Quentin’s written an excellent one-page guide to the Web for absolute beginners.

I know people who know Bill Clinton and they always surprised me by the way they clearly regarded him as a formidable individual. Some months ago, the BBC invited him to give the annual Dimbleby lecture. It was a stunning performance — part sermon, part analysis, part theatre. Although he had a script, large parts of the lecture seemed to be delivered without glancing at it. The contrast with the current, grammatically-challenged incumbent of the White House was, of course, unmistakeable. Those who missed it can now find the text here.

My column about the implications of Google (held over from last week) is in today’s Observer. Phew!