Arnold Columns: Update May 2012
May 9, 2012
We have continued to produce Stephen E Arnold’s for-fee columns. Due to some minor health excitement involving Mr. Arnold, his monthly update about what and for whom he has been writing for money has been on hold. The content continued to flow. Here’s a run down by publication of the for fee columns submitted through May 8, 2012:
Enterprise Technology Management, IMI Publishing, London, UK. ETM publishes my Google column which originally appeared in KMWorld.
- January 2012, “Google Enterprise: The Berkeley Analysis.” The article discusses why a noted university chose Google’s apps, not Microsoft’s. The point is that price cutting is playing a major role in information technology decisions.
- February 2012, “Google Enterprise: Is There a Poison Apple in Paradise?” The column reviews the new version of the Google Search Appliance. The question becomes, “Could Apple pose an alternative to Google, an alternative Google is not anticipating?”
- March 2012, “Google Privacy and Enterprise Licensing.” This write up explores how recent revelations about Google’s approach to privacy may put barriers in place which could slow or block some Google enterprise license deals.
- April 2012, ”Google’s Cloud: Building and Threatening.” The essay considers that Google has been left in the starting blocks by Amazon’s cloud services. Google may catch up, but the pricing of cloud services, regardless of vendor, can be slippery to estimate.
- May 2012, “The Google Myth: Poetics and Glass.” The story considers Mr. Page’s role with Wall Street and Mr. Brin’s assignment to promote Google’s virtual reality “glasses.” Will these modern day Romulus and Remus billionaires continue to coexist in a positive relationship?
Information Today, Information Today, Inc. The Information Today column covers search-related topics for the an information specialist, competitive intelligence researcher or database publishing professionals.
- January 2012, “Augmented Reality: I’ll Be Back”. Autonomy, best known for enterprise search and content processing, has emerged as a leader in augmented reality or AR. The column discusses Aurasma, the company’s AR solution.
- February 2012, “By Jingo: Search Catchphrases 2012.” This article considers the role and implications of marketing phrases used by enterprise search vendors. The majority of the buzzwords have more to do with competitive jockeying than communication to an organization looking for a findability solution.
- March 2012, “Health and Medical Research: Drying Up the Bones.” Web-accessible, public medical information is tough to use. The essay looks at several services, including Quertle.
- April 2012, “Are Analytics the New Way to Search?” Most users don’t search particularly well. Some do not want to formulate search queries. The write up considers the question, “Can analytics deliver search results without asking the user to formulate a query?”
- May 2012, “Google and Microsoft: Interface Flipperoos.” The story points out that the new Google interface looks more like Excite 1996 than Google in 2007. Microsoft, on the other hand, looks almost exactly like Google.com’s interface in 2007. Are flips like this the new approach to search interface innovation?
KMWorld, Information Today, Inc. The column for KMWorld discusses enterprise information from the angle of semantic technology.
- January 2012, “Insight from the Information Tsunami.” The column discusses Microsoft SharePoint and BA Insight, a software complement to SharePoint designed to address some of the “issues” associated with Microsoft’s flagship content management system.
- February 2012, “Bitext: Engaging in the Semantic Arena.” The article profiles Madrid-based Bitext, a company emerging as a leader in the enterprise semantic market.
- March 2012, “Xyte and Insight into Online Behaviors.” The write talks about Xyte’s approach to market research and discloses some interesting findings about Facebook. These items suggest Facebook is a more potent online force than some believe.
- April 2012, “Consumerizing Knowledge Management.” The essay considers that analytics programs with training wheels deliver some benefits to enterprise users. However, acting on auto-generated reports without understanding the assumptions behind the report can lead to bad decisions.
- May 2012, “Big Data, Cows, and Cadastres.” The write up looks at specific business pay offs from the analysis of big data. The biggest benefits come from analysts who understand the data and the math behind a particular numerical recipe.
Online Magazine (published six times a year). Information Today, Inc. The features written for Online Magazine focus on open source search in the enterprise. For more than a year, Mr. Arnold’s column has explored a range of subjects related to open source search.
- February 2012, “Open Source Search: Clarity with Lucid Works.” The feature discusses Lucid Imagination’s newest release of Lucid Works Enterprise 2.0.
- April 22012, “Open Source: Fascinating Uncertainty.” The feature takes a look at some of the jockeying which takes place in the open source world involving “foundations.”
If you are a public relations person, an azure chip consultant, or an unemployed middle school teacher, Mr. Arnold does not accept story suggestions for these for fee writings. His policy is to contact people with regard to a question or issue. Mr. Arnold is not a journalist. In a previous life, he indexed medieval sermons in Latin. He does not understand “real” journalism, marketing, public relations, investment bankers, private equity firm owners, and sales people.
These articles are available from the publishers who purchased work for hire. At some point, Mr. Arnold’s staff may post versions of some of the essays on one of the reference Web sites Mr. Arnold operates. For copies of these articles, please, contact the publishers. For a briefing on one of the topics addressed in Mr. Arnold’s for fee writings, please, contact us at seaky2000 at yahoo dot com.
Donald C. Anderson, May 9, 2012
Sponsored by PolySpot
No Big Deal: Beyond Search Passes 8,000 Articles
May 6, 2012
Beyond Search began in January 2008. I wanted to find a way to keep track of the most interesting news which I had been placing in my Overflight system. You can see some of the Overflight functionality at www.arnoldit.com/trax or www.arnoldit.com/taxonomy. A few days ago, Beyond Search passed the 8,000 post mark. You can search the archive of content using either the site search system, provided by Blossom.com, or the Google Custom Search Engine which indexes site content plus the links Beyond Search editors include in stories. Blossom is the search box at the top of the page. The CSE is labeled “Google.”
You can use the content to track a leading vendor; for example, enter the query “Autonomy” in the site specific search box and you see the events which we consider significant. You can also get my personal views on online products and services. Just run a query for “mysteries of online.” You can use the categories to limit a display to indexed content. No index is perfect, but you can look at a result set for a hot topic like “indexing” with a mouse click or two.
Now about the content.
First, I am not running a news operation. In fact, I don’t do news. Neither my editorial team nor I are real journalists. I am supposed to know about medieval religious sermons in Latin. The writers are mostly librarians or researchers who have been trained to produce the equivalent of a debate note card. I learned how to prepare 5×8 inch note cards when I returned to the US from Brazil and entered a wonderful American high school. Let’s see. That was in 1957 or 1958. In short, I have been doing one thing as my core research method for more than 50 years. Do you think I am going to change because a PR maven, an unemployed middle school teacher, an English major turned search expert or a Panda wants me to? In case you don’t know the answer, the answer is, “No.”
Second, we run sponsored content. We use Google AdSense. We run ads for companies who want to get a message in front of my two or three readers. I wish I knew what the business model for Beyond Search is, but the content continues to flow, seven days a week, year round. When I was in intensive care in January for more than a week, the content flowed. I know one of the editors smuggled my laptop into the hospital lock up where I was. We kept publishing. Those working on the blog just kept on going. My writing was given an extra cycle of editing because I was, quite literally close to being a gone goose. Keep in mind that the only difference between a note card content object and sponsored content is that the subject of the write up gets a chance to provide input to an editor. The ironic or cynical comments remain. If I get fascinated with a topic, I write about it or get one of the editors to produce content objects on the subject. So you will find certain topics get covered and then dropped, it is because I lose interest. You want news? Find a real journalist. Examples of what I follow and then drop range from European search systems to ways to federate the text and numeric data associated with building a fungible product like a personal computer.
Third, I am usually biased, often incorrect, and completely indifferent to the hottest trends that azure chip consultants pump out to sell consulting work. If you read the content in Beyond Search or any of the blogs which we produce, you have the obligation to think about what we present and make your own judgment about its usefulness, accuracy, or appropriateness for your particular situation.
Fourth, I use the content in Beyond Search for my columns in Enterprise Technology Management magazine, Online magazine, Information Today (a library oriented tabloid), KMWorld (an enterprise information tabloid), and Searcher magazine (a specialist publication for people who know how to use the old fashioned Dialog and Lexis systems). The content in my for fee articles is closer to the type of reports I prepare for my one or two clients. I am not a great writer. I try to look at popular or emerging technical trends and put them into the frame of my experience. If you want stories that reinforce received wisdom, you will find Beyond Search inappropriate for your needs. In my for fee columns, I knit together a number of items of information and interpret those items in a business context. The for fee columns, therefore, go beyond what is in the free blog.
My plan is to keep the information stream flowing and free. If you have a comment to make about the point of view or the information in a content object (my word for article or story), use the comments section of the blog. If you write me with spam, silly news releases, and baloney I did not specifically request—be advised: I may write about what I call “desperation marketing.” Don’t like the term? Well, I do, and it is accurate. The facile notion of “pivoting” a company is mostly marketing baloney. I don’t like baloney.
For more information about the editorial policies or how to contact us to get access to our two or three readers, navigate to the About page.
Stephen E Arnold, May 6, 2012
Sponsored by Stephen E Arnold
Murdoch Insists He Never Asked a PM for Anything in Any of those Meetings
May 4, 2012
We get a glimpse of a real journalist in action in The Sydney Morning Herald’s piece, “Murdoch’s 75 Meetings with PMs Since ’88.” Though Rupert Murdoch insists that he never leveraged the power of his British paper The Sun to gain favor from those in that country’s government, evidence presented during the Leveson Inquiry suggests otherwise. That Inquiry is examining the role of the press and the police in last year’s alarming phone-hacking scandal.
Writer Tom Wald reports:
“Rupert Murdoch shed light on his fluctuating relationships with British powerbrokers as it was revealed that he had 75 meetings with Prime Ministers over the past 24 years. The latest revelations at the Leveson inquiry included current Prime Minister David Cameron flying in on Mr. Murdoch’s son-in law’s jet for a meeting with the media tycoon on his daughter Elisabeth’s yacht on the Greek resort island of Santorini. . . .
“He met Margaret Thatcher eight times, John Major 10 times, Mr. Blair 31 times, Mr. Brown 17 times and Mr. Cameron nine times.”
So. . . I guess Murdoch and Cameron were meeting about the weather, perhaps comparing that of London unfavorably with the lovely Santorini. The trip must have been research. And the other 74 meetings, perfectly innocent as well.
Right. Keep in mind, folks, this guy owns the Wall Street Journal, too. Oh, joy.
Cynthia Murrell, May 4, 2012
Sponsored by PolySpot
One Plus One Equal a Winner
May 1, 2012
I read “Wall Street Journal remains No. 1 US newspaper.” Here’s the link but it will go dark. I won’t quote from the story. The addled goose does not need a “real” journalistic outfit chasing him for sandwiches. The big idea is that the Wall Street Journal is the top dog in US newspaperdom. Left in the dust are the New York Times and USA Today, both fine publications.
I then read “News Corp. Contrite In Wake Of Scathing Report.” I assume that the top dog of News Corp, which owns the Wall Street Journal, is the number one leader of newspaper publishing. The write up contains this statement:
“Hard truths have emerged from the [UK] Select Committee Report: that there was serious wrongdoing at the News of the World; that our response to the wrongdoing was too slow and too defensive; and that some of our employees misled the Select Committee in 2009,” it stated. The company has cited the work of its internal Management and Standards Committee, which has turned over voluminous email exchanges and other records in an effort to show authorities in the U.K. and the U.S. that it has changed its behavior and is being cooperative.
So top US newspaper and its top dog are cooperative. Does one plus one equal winning? Makes sense to me.
Stephen E Arnold, May 1, 2012
Sponsored by HighGainBlog
Scholarpedia a Valuable Resource
May 1, 2012
We’d like to share a useful resource we’ve come across: Scholarpedia.org is a searchable, peer-reviewed online scientific encyclopedia. Its contributors are respected authorities in their fields, including an impressive list of Nobel Laureates and Fields Medalists. The areas covered include: Dynamical Systems, Physics, Applied Mathematics, Computational Neuroscience, and Touch.
Articles are curated by prominent authorities who take responsibility for the contents. As trusted custodians, these shepherds are also able to sponsor new articles.
The format of Scholarpedia should look familiar. The site’s About page explains:
“Scholarpedia feels and looks like Wikipedia – the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit. Indeed, both are powered by the same program — MediaWiki. Both allow visitors to read and modify articles simply by clicking on the edit this article link. However, Scholarpedia differs from Wikipedia in some very important ways.”
Ways like a strict modification approval process, the selection of elite authors, and the curator review system. The statement goes on to emphasize the advantages the online community brings to the traditional scholarly paper:
“. . . Articles are not frozen and outdated, but dynamic, subject to an ongoing process of improvement moderated by their curators. This allows Scholarpedia to be up-to-date, yet maintain the highest quality of content.”
The site is well worth checking out for all you science types.
Cynthia Murrell, May 1, 2012
Sponsored by Augmentext
Is the End Approaching for Commercial Metadata Vendors?
April 26, 2012
This is a very interesting move, one that may have implications for the organizations which sell library metadata. Joho the Blog reports, “‘Big Data for Books’: Harvard Puts Metadata for 12M Library Items into the Public Domain.” We learn from the write up:
“Harvard University has today put into the public domain (CC0) full bibliographic information about virtually all the 12M works in its 73 libraries. This is (I believe) the largest and most comprehensive such contribution. The metadata, in the standard MARC21 format, is available for bulk download from Harvard. The University also provided the data to the Digital Public Library of America’s prototype platform for programmatic access via an API. The aim is to make rich data about this cultural heritage openly available to the Web ecosystem so that developers can innovate, and so that other sites can draw upon it.”
Wow. Now, Harvard does ask users to respect community norms, like attributing sources of metadata. Blogger David Weinberger notes that licensing issues have held up the release of library metadata, and that this move makes the metadata of many, many of the most- used library items accessible.
What will happen next? Will the sellers of library metadata fight back?
Cynthia Murrell, April 26, 2012
Sponsored by PolySpot
Is Amazon Building the Next Big Thing?
April 25, 2012
The Network Thinkers (TNT) blog believes it has discovered “The Next Big Thing:” social via Amazon. The write up posits that the information Amazon gathers from Kindle readers, which goes beyond “customers who bought this item also bought. . .” to include highlights and notes folks have made in their e-copies. The article asserts:
“It is what we specifically find interesting and useful in those books that reveals deep similarities between people — the hi-lites, bookmarks and the notes will be the connectors. Our choices reveal who we are, and who we are like! Today, Amazon introduces you to similar books. Tomorrow, they will introduce you to similar readers.”
Intriguing. What makes this post more interesting, though, are the comments; ideas presented as new strike some as covering old ground. “Anonymous” notes:
“Eh, not really that under the radar? Kindle.amazon has been recommending readers with similar profiles for quite some time. But more people take photos or have jobs than read books, so the scale will be less?”
Though his or her voice is tenuous, Anonymous makes a good point: book readers seem to be a dwindling breed (sigh), so the Kindleverse is unlikely to rival Facebook or LinkedIn anytime soon. Myspace, maybe.
Cynthia Murrell, April 25, 2012
Sponsored by PolySpot
Another Play for “Real” Content
April 25, 2012
Magazines have always been popular reads, and when Ezines broke out on the web, their popularity quickly spread as a way to enjoy reading without cluttering up your coffee table with old paper editions. Now according to, YouTube co-founders are working on a magazine publishing service called Zeen yet another online magazine is getting ready to hit the World Wide Web. We learned:
“It looks like you’ll soon be able to discover and create “beautiful” magazines online. In the last 24 hours, YouTube co-founders Chad Hurley and Steve Chen, who now run AVOS, posted a “Coming Soon” page on the website Zeen(a take on the word zine, which commonly refers to a narrowly focused self-published magazine). There are plenty of websites that allow you to create your own zine, so it should be interesting to see how the YouTube co-founders, who also own the social bookmarking service Delicious, plan to separate themselves from the rest of the pack.”
The world of online reading is vast offering readers fictional and reality based content. The internet has been flooded over the past decade with a variety of different blogs and ezines. You have to wonder if Zeen will be the beginning of an Ezine evolution, or just provide more publications to an ongoing fad in an over saturated industry. Is this just another play for ‘real’ content?
Jennifer Shockley, April 25, 2012
Sponsored by PolySpot
Fake Reviews a Growing and Tenacious Problem in Social Media
April 20, 2012
Ah, sentiment and lies. Next Gen Market Research blogger Tom H. C. Anderson interviewed data mining expert Bing Liu in anticipation of his day-before workshop for the Sentiment Analysis Symposium in New York City early next month. He has titled his interview, “Practical Sentiment Analysis and Lies.” Interesting.
Professor Liu teaches at the University of Illinois at Chicago, in the Computer Science Department. His work on text analytics and detecting online ratings fraud was recently featured in the New York Times. Anderson posed Liu with questions on the upcoming workshop as well as on his work in general.
The words that caught my eye were in Liu’s response to the issue of detecting fake reviews:
“Social media is here to stay. Its content is also being used more and more in applications.
Something has to be done to ensure the integrity of this valuable source of information before it becomes full of fake opinions, lies and deceptive information. After all, there are strong motivations for businesses and individuals to post fake reviews for profit and fame. It is also easy and cheap to do so. Writing fake reviews has already become a very cheap way of marketing and product promotion.”
Important though the issue might be, Liu admits that ratting out fake reviews is a huge challenge. Almost impossible to identify simply by reading them, misleading missives must be discovered through secondary information, like aggregate reviewer behavior and the physical origins of a post. Apparently, a reliable method has yet to be developed.
So, let this be a reminder of something my Dad used to tell me: now, perhaps more than ever, you can’t believe everything you read.
Cynthia Murrell, April 20, 2012
Sponsored by Pandia.com
Trapit: Search without Search
April 18, 2012
Trapit at www.trap.it is an automated finding system. Software “watches” what a user reads and then performs a “more like this” function. The results are not a laundry list. The presentation is similar to that used in Flipboard and Pulse. The idea borrows from iPhone and iPad apps with some DARPA money stirred into the mix. The inventors or implements worked at SRI, the blue chip technology consulting firm which used to be the Stanford Research Institute. the company is getting a little PR push, but it has been in business since January 2010.
You can read the CrunchBase profile at Chattertrap. Heavy weight real journalist John C. Dvorak covered the company in his “Trapit, the Non-Search Engine” article at PCMag.com. TechCrunch characterized the company as a Siri sibling. The reason is that Trap.it and Siri share some artificial intelligence methods.
The big news is that in January 2012, the company landed $6.2 million in addition to the US government money.
These “we will tell you what you need to know” systems are going to become more prevalent. These “smart” systems are ideal for information grazers who have neither the time, desire, or expertise to perform old fashioned research.
Will a user know when a potentially important article has been filtered out of the stream? Nah. Won’t matter. Today’s MBAs and former middle school teachers are too busy to dig for info, verify it, and assemble their own synthesis. And magazines produced the old fashioned way have zero chance to gain traction with certain demographics.
Stephen E Arnold, April 18, 2012
Sponsored by Pandia.com
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
