Looks like an attempt to get rid of the negative image associated with the name Singularity Institute. I wonder if it isn’t already too late to take PR seriously.
Looks like an attempt to get rid of the negative image associated with the name Singularity Institute.
From OP:
When Singularity University (SU) acquired the Singularity Summit from us in December, we also agreed to change the name of our institute to avoid brand confusion between the Singularity Institute and Singularity University.
I’m not sure this name change is a good idea or worth whatever SU offered (or that there was a real brand issue), but there apparently was some other motivation than ‘SI now has embarrassing connotations’.
Also, when you’re trying to explain that there’s a gigantic difference between you and another organisation with a similar-sounding name, you can sound a little like the People’s Front of Judea.
My impression is that anyone who has ever heard of Singularity University doesn’t even have it in their hypothesis space that you mean something different when you say Singularity Institute.
Even when they do have it in their hypothesis space, it still gets mangled. I recently got a follow-up email from someone that still thought I was Singularity University. I had briefly explained to him about how SU had acquired the Singularity Summit from us, and his follow-up email said “now that you have acquired the Singularity Summit, you may be interested in my product...”
Rudi Hoffman confused them when I sought a quote from him and mentioned Singinst. And him you’d expect to move in the right circles to know the difference.
When I stayed with a friend in the Bay Area, I was confused that he said he knew loads of people in SingInst, but kept naming people I’d never heard of—and guess why!
There is a real brand issue. I say “Singularity Institute” to people down the pub, the ones who’ve heard the word go “ah, Kurzweil!” (I was trying to explain this site I like called LessWrong.)
Looks like an attempt to get rid of the negative image associated with the name Singularity Institute. I wonder if it isn’t already too late to take PR seriously.
From OP:
I’m not sure this name change is a good idea or worth whatever SU offered (or that there was a real brand issue), but there apparently was some other motivation than ‘SI now has embarrassing connotations’.
SU and SI kept getting confused with each other all the time.
Also, when you’re trying to explain that there’s a gigantic difference between you and another organisation with a similar-sounding name, you can sound a little like the People’s Front of Judea.
By whom? I think the only time I personally saw that happen online was in one British newspaper article.
My impression is that anyone who has ever heard of Singularity University doesn’t even have it in their hypothesis space that you mean something different when you say Singularity Institute.
Yup.
Even when they do have it in their hypothesis space, it still gets mangled. I recently got a follow-up email from someone that still thought I was Singularity University. I had briefly explained to him about how SU had acquired the Singularity Summit from us, and his follow-up email said “now that you have acquired the Singularity Summit, you may be interested in my product...”
Almost every time I spoke to anyone who wasn’t deeply familiar with either SU or SI. Including almost every press person.
Rudi Hoffman confused them when I sought a quote from him and mentioned Singinst. And him you’d expect to move in the right circles to know the difference.
When I stayed with a friend in the Bay Area, I was confused that he said he knew loads of people in SingInst, but kept naming people I’d never heard of—and guess why!
There is a real brand issue. I say “Singularity Institute” to people down the pub, the ones who’ve heard the word go “ah, Kurzweil!” (I was trying to explain this site I like called LessWrong.)
I told someone at work, and they said, “Oh, like on that Fringe episode [about Kurzweillian uploading].”