When we recently heard about the history of YouTube’s growth strategy from CEO Chad Hurley’s point of view, he described it as “hanging onto a rocket.”
- Liz Gannes, GigaOM.com
During this talk in 2008 with Cuong Do (an "early engineer" at YouTube), Cuong makes an "inside joke" to developers that there are "no chefs" at YouTube. This was before I was covered in the Washington Post.
This may be a reference to Steve's video "Making bruschetta" . . . but it also may be a fact that Cuong Do was told by Steve or someone else the truth about YouTube's inventor. I was a cook and then a chef for 13 years while in high school and college. I've studied formally under three chefs: one Polish who cooked Italian, one French and one Thai. Steve and Jawed use the tactic of acting like me to cover their tracks.
Michael Arrington admitted at the 2009 Davos conference that he "partied" with Chad for years before "the YouTube thing" ... ironic that he would be the only media contact who would write about me. I contacted probably two dozen different news outlets before one bit, and the one that did was in bed with my enemies.
I don't even want to post this here. Truly, typical. Justine Ezarik, a.k.a. iJustine whose actual past is not as humble as she has claimed, made this parody basically calling me a weirdo for stating my claims to the YouTube brand. She's from Pittsburgh. She knows a few of my high school classmates so I get to hear the inside dish on how materialistic she is. If it's of any consolation, she did PM me on YouTube apologizing for making fun of me right after posting her "parody" - I was as nice as I could possibly be.
She claimed her dad was a mechanic and her mom was a schoolteacher. Based on the fact that her parents' house has a separate, tiny house to keep their SUVs warm, we're pretty sure that's a load of crap. [I cannot find the video where she did,but you can dig through Wikipedia history of her extremely well manicured entry.] She looks good as a passion fruit.
Why would Chad Hurley jump from drawing logos to building Nascar teams? My theory is that he's been stalking my old employers, and their continuing efforts with Synthetic Interview. This isn't the first time Synthetic Interview has found its way into Nascar. The SI crowd first started chatting about Nascar as far back as 1998. Ironically, Chad seems to think swiping the YouTube logo, concept and strategy wasn't enough: he has to mimic everything I've done or my mentors have done in the video space. I say it, Chad says it. It's a fun copy-cat game we've got going on here.
So, Google's attorney, David Kramer, has used Rule 11 "Sanction Motions" to thwart a number of cases at Google. It's not a required motion: it is a choice, and it is a choice that has a pattern of use at Google. We think Mr. Kramer has "optimized" his legal rhetoric to 1 strategy. This is probably an indicator that he is using it because it threatens lawyers with huge fines that may or may not be recouped during a trial, by bringing up the cost of the suit during its course. Later in the same case they are permitted to request fees and such, but this is always pre-emptive - and in my case, it happened outside the normal rules of procedure. This means that they don't want to play ball (discuss settlements). By risking a minor court infraction (lying) they can sway the judge and exit the case. Look at his other cases to see what kind of stuff he is claiming Google does or doesn't do - then ask yourself, are they lying? Maybe you won't agree with the other side, but read and carefully dissect the Google arguments. Then, think about news reports you've heard about Google's actual behavior (censorship, removing unwanted materials from search results, the Italian Google Executives case, the Google click-fraud stuff).
Here's a copy of his brief, where he outlines my "fantastic claims" to having invented xyz. Yes, I wrote some of the things he quotes. Yes, I did the things I said. Though I feel time travel is possible, I have never done it myself except in the forward direction. Sadly, I aged while I did it.
Since approaching Chad Hurley, and his two friends at PayPal, Steve Chen and Jawed Karim, YouTube's creator, H. Elwood Gilliland III, has been called a variety of negative things. Obviously, the truth is an unpopular view. Who is impartial when everyone uses it?